TUKANG JAGAL DARI BAHRAIN AKHIRNYA TEWAS
http://cahyono-adi.blogspot.com/2013/04/tukang-jagal-dari-bahrain-akhirnya-tewas.html#.UXUmUFIxVkg
Ini adalah bukti kuat keterlibatan zionisme internasional, dalam kasus
ini adalah Inggris, dengan praktik-praktik ilegal di negara-negara yang
dipimpin diktator-diktator keji.
Bukan di Syria, negara yang presidennya
(ketika belum terjadi kerusuhan) bisa ditemui langsung oleh rakyatnya
di jalanan, yang suka mentraktir anak-anak kecil dan membawanya
jalan-jalan di mobil pribadinya, yang menggratiskan biaya pendidikan
hingga kuliah dan menggratiskan biaya perawatan di rumah-rumah sakit.
Melainkan di Bahrain, negara yang dipimpin orang-orang Arab badui yang
membenci rakyatnya sendiri hanya karena bermazhab Shiah dan mereka
adalah wahabi-salafi.
Penguasa Bahrain kini tengah berduka, karena orang kepercayaannya dalam hal menindas rakyat sendiri baru saja meninggal dunia. Orang itu adalah Ian Henderson, mantan perwira inteligen Inggris yang dijuluki "Tukang Jagal dari Bahrain" yang dari dekade 1970-an hingga 1990-an menjadi kepala dinas keamanan dan inteligen Bahrain (SIS). Ia meninggal di Bahrain hari Minggu (14/4).
Selain terkenal sebagai tukang jagal di Bahrain, Henderson juga dikenal sebagai tukang siksa atas para aktifis kelompok politik Mau Mau di Kenya. Meski telah meninggal di Bahrain (ia tidak bisa kembali ke negeri asalnya yang telah mengirimnya ke Bahrain, karena standar moral di Inggris telah lebih baik sehingga ia terancam hukuman penjara), namun teknik-teknik penyiksaan yang dikembangkannya tidak pernah mati.
Pada tahun 2011 regim Khalifa di Bahrain membebaskan 300 tahanan politik setelah menghadapi gelombang aksi demonstrasi rakyat menuntut reformasi politik setelah jenuh dengan pemerintahan represif yang dilakukan pemerintah selama 40 tahun lebih. Para tahanan politik yang dibebaskan itu meliputi akademisi, aktifis kemanusiaan, blogger hingga ulama. Mereka semua menuduh Inggris turut bertanggungjawab atas penindasan yang dilakukan penguasa Bahrain, terutama karena keberadaan Henderson.
"Pemerintah Inggris bertanggungjawab penuh atas penindasan yang terjadi di Bahrain. Apa yang kami dapati di sini adalah aparat negara yang kejam yang dibentuk dan diperintah oleh personil keamanan Inggris," kata Abduljalil al-Singace, seorang professor teknik mesin University of Bahrain yang turut dibebaskan.
Menurut para mantan tahanan metode interogasi yang mereka alami identik dengan metode yang dilakukan selama dinas keamanan dan inteligen Bahrain dipimpin oleh Ian Henderson. Hampir dari mereka semua menunjuk Henderson sebagai orang yang paling bertanggungjawab atas kekejaman yang mereka alami hingga menjulukinya sebagai “torturer-in-chief”.
Di antara "metode" interogasi yang mereka alami adalah penyetruman pada alat kelamin, memasukkan botol ke dalam anus, atau menggantung tahanan dengan satu tangan dan satu kaki sambil dipukuli dengan selang karet.
Henderson yang mendapat penghargaan George Cross dari pemerintah Inggris karena keberhasilannya "menghabisi" gerakan Mau Mau di Kenya selama tahun 1950-an, selanjutnya dikirimkan ke Bahrain untuk membantu regim boneka mereka pada tahun 1968. Saat itu Bahrain adalah wilayah protektorat Inggris dengan penguasanya adalah keluarga Khalifa yang memiliki hubungan kekerabatan dengan keluarga kerajaan Arab Saudi. Mayoritas penduduk Bahrain adalah penganut Shiah namun prosentasenya semakin berkurang karena penguasa melakukan program rahasia mendatangkan ribuan orang-orang Sunni dari berbagai negara untuk menjadi pegawai dan aparat keamanan pemerintah.
Penguasa Bahrain kini tengah berduka, karena orang kepercayaannya dalam hal menindas rakyat sendiri baru saja meninggal dunia. Orang itu adalah Ian Henderson, mantan perwira inteligen Inggris yang dijuluki "Tukang Jagal dari Bahrain" yang dari dekade 1970-an hingga 1990-an menjadi kepala dinas keamanan dan inteligen Bahrain (SIS). Ia meninggal di Bahrain hari Minggu (14/4).
Selain terkenal sebagai tukang jagal di Bahrain, Henderson juga dikenal sebagai tukang siksa atas para aktifis kelompok politik Mau Mau di Kenya. Meski telah meninggal di Bahrain (ia tidak bisa kembali ke negeri asalnya yang telah mengirimnya ke Bahrain, karena standar moral di Inggris telah lebih baik sehingga ia terancam hukuman penjara), namun teknik-teknik penyiksaan yang dikembangkannya tidak pernah mati.
Pada tahun 2011 regim Khalifa di Bahrain membebaskan 300 tahanan politik setelah menghadapi gelombang aksi demonstrasi rakyat menuntut reformasi politik setelah jenuh dengan pemerintahan represif yang dilakukan pemerintah selama 40 tahun lebih. Para tahanan politik yang dibebaskan itu meliputi akademisi, aktifis kemanusiaan, blogger hingga ulama. Mereka semua menuduh Inggris turut bertanggungjawab atas penindasan yang dilakukan penguasa Bahrain, terutama karena keberadaan Henderson.
"Pemerintah Inggris bertanggungjawab penuh atas penindasan yang terjadi di Bahrain. Apa yang kami dapati di sini adalah aparat negara yang kejam yang dibentuk dan diperintah oleh personil keamanan Inggris," kata Abduljalil al-Singace, seorang professor teknik mesin University of Bahrain yang turut dibebaskan.
Menurut para mantan tahanan metode interogasi yang mereka alami identik dengan metode yang dilakukan selama dinas keamanan dan inteligen Bahrain dipimpin oleh Ian Henderson. Hampir dari mereka semua menunjuk Henderson sebagai orang yang paling bertanggungjawab atas kekejaman yang mereka alami hingga menjulukinya sebagai “torturer-in-chief”.
Di antara "metode" interogasi yang mereka alami adalah penyetruman pada alat kelamin, memasukkan botol ke dalam anus, atau menggantung tahanan dengan satu tangan dan satu kaki sambil dipukuli dengan selang karet.
Henderson yang mendapat penghargaan George Cross dari pemerintah Inggris karena keberhasilannya "menghabisi" gerakan Mau Mau di Kenya selama tahun 1950-an, selanjutnya dikirimkan ke Bahrain untuk membantu regim boneka mereka pada tahun 1968. Saat itu Bahrain adalah wilayah protektorat Inggris dengan penguasanya adalah keluarga Khalifa yang memiliki hubungan kekerabatan dengan keluarga kerajaan Arab Saudi. Mayoritas penduduk Bahrain adalah penganut Shiah namun prosentasenya semakin berkurang karena penguasa melakukan program rahasia mendatangkan ribuan orang-orang Sunni dari berbagai negara untuk menjadi pegawai dan aparat keamanan pemerintah.
Para
mantan tanahan politik mengakui sejak Henderson diangkat sebagai kepala
inteligen dan keamanan Bahrain pada tahun 1970-an (jabatan tersebut
dipegangnya selama 30 tahun) terdapat peningkatan intensitas penyiksaan
yang dialami mereka dengan berbagai inovasinya.
Pada tahun 1986, atau setelah puluhan ribu warga Bahrain mengalami penyiksaan yang dilakukan Henderson dan aparatnya, ia menerima penghargaan CBE Award dari pemerintah Inggris.
REF:
"British officer Henderson, known as the Butcher of Bahrain, dies"; almanar.com.lb; 15 April 2013Pada tahun 1986, atau setelah puluhan ribu warga Bahrain mengalami penyiksaan yang dilakukan Henderson dan aparatnya, ia menerima penghargaan CBE Award dari pemerintah Inggris.
REF:
“Lawrence Of Arabia” di Balik Berdirinya Kerajaan Saudi
http://www.eramuslim.com/berita/tahukah-anda/lawrence-of-arabia-di-balik-berdirinya-kerajaan-saudi.htm#.UXUkf1IxVkg
Redaksi – Kamis, 23 Jumadil Awwal 1434 H / 4 April 2013 07:59 WIB
Rizki Ridyasmara
Menurut logika yang sehat, seharusnyalah Kerajaan Saudi Arabia menjadi pemimpin bagi Dunia Islam dalam segala hal yang menyangkut keIslaman. Pemimpin dalam menyebarkan dakwah Islam, sekaligus pemimpin Dunia Islam dalam menghadapi serangan kaum kuffar yang terus-menerus melakukan serangan terhadap agama Allah SWT ini dalam berbagai bentuk, baik dalam hal Al-Ghawz Al-Fikri(serangan pemikiran dan kebudayaan) maupun serangan Qital.
Seharusnyalah Saudi Arabia menjadi pelindung bagi Muslim Palestina,
Muslim Afghanistan, Muslim Irak, Muslim Pattani, Muslim Rohingya, Muslim
Bosnia, Muslim Azebaijan, dan kaum Muslimin di seluruh dunia. Tapi yang
terjadi dalam realitas sesungguhnya, mungkin masih jadi pertanyaan
banyak pihak. Karena harapan itu masih jauh dari kenyataan.
Craig Unger, mantan deputi director New York Observer di dalam karyanya yang sangat berani berjudul“Dinasti Bush Dinasti Saud” (2004)
memaparkan kelakuan beberapa oknum di dalam tubuh kerajaan negeri itu,
bahkan di antaranya termasuk para pangeran dari keluarga kerajaan.
“Pangeran Bandar yang dikenal sebagai ‘Saudi Gatsby’ dengan
ciri khas janggut dan jas rapih, adalah anggota kerajaan Dinasti Saudi
yang bergaya hidup Barat, berada di kalangan jetset, dan belajar di
Barat. Bandar selalu mengadakan jamuan makan mewah di rumahnya yang
megah di seluruh dunia. Kapan pun ia bisa pergi dengan aman dari Arab
Saudi dan dengan entengnya melabrak batas-batas aturan seorang Muslim.
Ia biasa minum Brandy dan menghisap cerutu Cohiba, ” tulis Unger.
Bandar, tambah Unger, merupakan contoh perilaku dan gaya hidup
sejumlah syaikh yang berada di lingkungan kerajaan Arab Saudi. “Dalam
hal gaya hidup Baratnya, ia bisa mengalahkan orang Barat paling
fundamentalis sekali pun. ”
Bandar adalah putera dari Pangeran Sultan, Menteri Pertahanan Saudi.
Dia juga kemenakan dari Raja Fahd dan orang kedua yang berhak mewarisi
mahkota kerajaan, sekaligus cucu dari (alm) King Abdul Aziz, pendiri
Kerajaan Saudi modern.
Bukan hanya Pangeran Bandar yang begitu, beberapa kebijakan
dan sikap kerajaan terkadang juga agak membingungkan. Siapa pun tak kan
bisa menyangkal bahwa Kerajaan Saudi amat dekat—jika tidak bisa
dikatakan sekutu terdekat—Amerika Serikat. Di mulut, para syaikh-syaikh
itu biasa mencaci maki Zionis-Israel dan Amerika, tetapi mata dunia
melihat banyak di antara mereka yang berkawan akrab dan bersekutu
dengannya.
Barangkali kenyataan inilah yang bisa menjawab mengapa Kerajaan Saudi
menyerahkan penjagaan keamanan bagi negerinya—termasuk Makkah dan
Madinah—kepada tentara Zionis Amerika.
Bahkan dikabarkan bahwa Saudi pula yang mengontak Vinnel Corporation
di tahun 1970-an untuk melatih tentaranya, Saudi Arabian National Guard
(SANG) dan mengadakan logistik tempur bagi tentaranya. Vinnel merupakan
salah satu Privat Military Company (PMC) terbesar di Amerika Serikat
yang bisa disamakan dengan perusahaan penyedia tentara bayaran.
Ketika umat Islam dunia melihat pasukan Amerika Serikat yang hendak
mendirikan pangkalan militer utama AS dalam menghadapi invasi Irak atas
Kuwait beberapa tahun lalu, maka hal itu tidak lepas dari kebijakan
orang-orang yang berada dalam kerajaan tersebut.
Langkah-langkah mengejutkan yang diambil pihak Kerajaan Saudi
tersebut sesungguhnya tidak mengejutkan bagi yang tahu latar belakang
berdirinya Kerajaan Saudi Arabia itu sendiri. Tidak perlu susah-sudah
mencari tahu tentang hal ini dan tidak perlu membaca buku-buku yang
tebal atau bertanya kepada profesor yang sangat pakar.
Pergilah ke tempat penyewaan VCD atau DVD, cari sebuah film yang dirilis tahun 1962 berjudul ‘Lawrence of Arabia’
dan tontonlah. Di dalam film yang banyak mendapatkan penghargaan
internasional tersebut, dikisahkan tentang peranan seorang letnan dari
pasukan Inggris bernama lengkap Thomas Edward Lawrence, anak buah dari
Jenderal Allenby (jenderal ini ketika merebut Yerusalem menginjakkan
kakinya di atas makam Salahuddin Al-Ayyubi dan dengan lantang berkata,
“Hai Saladin, hari ini telah kubalaskan dendam kaumku dan telah berakhir
Perang Salib dengan kemenangan kami!”).
Film ini memang agak kontroversial, ada yang membenarkan namun ada
juga yang menampiknya. Namun produser mengaku bahwa film ini diangkat
dari kejadian nyata, yang bertutur dengan jujur tentang siapa yang
berada di balik berdirinya Kerajaan Saudi Arabia.
Konon kala itu Jazirah Arab merupakan bagian dari wilayah kekuasaan
Kekhalifahan Turki Utsmaniyah, sebuah kekhalifahan umat Islam dunia yang
wilayahnya sampai ke Aceh. Lalu dengan bantuan Lawrence dan
jaringannya, suatu suku atau klan melakukan pemberontakan (bughot) terhadap Kekhalifahan Turki Utsmaniyah dan mendirikan kerajaan yang terpisah, lepas, dari wilayah kekhalifahan Islam itu.
Bahkan
di film itu digambarkan bahwa klanSaud dengan bantuan Lawrence
mendirikan kerajaan sendiri yang terpisah dari khilfah Turki Utsmani.
Sejarahwan Inggris, Martin Gilbert, di dalam tulisannya“Lawrence of Arabia was a Zionist” seperti yang dimuat di Jerusalem Post edisi 22 Februari 2007, menyebut Lawrence sebagai agen Zionisme.
Sejarah pun menyatakan, hancurnya Kekhalifahan Turki Utsmani ini pada
tahun 1924 merupakan akibat dari infiltrasi Zionisme setelah Sultan
Mahmud II menolak keinginan Theodore Hertzl untuk menyerahkan wilayah
Palestina untuk bangsa Zionis-Yahudi. Operasi penghancuran Kekhalifahan
Turki Utsmani dilakukan Zionis bersamaan waktunya dengan mendukung
pembrontakan Klan Saud terhadap Kekalifahan Utsmaniyah, lewat Lawrence
of Arabia.
Entah apa yang terjadi, namun hingga detik ini, Kerajaan Saudi
Arabia, walau Makkah al-Mukaramah dan Madinah ada di dalam wilayahnya,
tetap menjadi sekutu terdekat Amerika Serikat. Mereka tetap menjadi
sahabat yang manis bagi Amerika.
Selain film ‘Lawrence of Arabia’, ada beberapa buku yang bisa menggambarkan hal ini yang sudah diterjemahkan ke dalam bahasa Indonesia. Antara lain:
- Wa’du Kissinger (Belitan Amerika di Tanah Suci, Membongkar Strategi AS Menguasai Timur Tengah, karya DR. Safar Al-Hawali—mantan Dekan Fakultas Akidah Universitas Ummul Quro Makkah, yang dipecat dan ditahan setelah menulis buku ini, yang edisi Indonesianya diterbitkan Jazeera, 2005)
- Dinasti Bush Dinasti Saud, Hubungan Rahasia Antara Dua Dinasti Terkuat Dunia (Craig Unger, 2004, edisi Indonesianya diterbitkan oleh Diwan, 2006)
- Timur Tengah di Tengah Kancah Dunia (George Lenczowski, 1992)
- History oh the Arabs (Philip K. Hitti, 2006)
Sebab itu, banyak kalangan yang berasumsi bawah berdirinya Kerajaan
Saudi Arabia adalah akibat “pemberontakan” terhadap Kekhalifahan Islam
Turki Utsmani dan diback-up oleh Lawrence, seorang agen Zionis
dan bawahan Jenderal Allenby yang sangat Islamofobia. Mungkin realitas
ini juga yang sering dijadikan alasan, mengapa Arab Saudi sampai
sekarang kurang perannya sebagai pelindung utama bagi kekuatan Dunia
Islam, wallahu a’lam. (Rz)
Antara Saudi dan Lawrence Arabiya
http://abisyakir.wordpress.com/2012/01/09/antara-saudi-dan-lawrence-arabiya/
Bismillahirrahmaanirrahiim.
Di kalangan perbukuan di Indonesia, nama Rizki Ridyasmara
bukan nama yang asing. Beliau dikenal sebagai ahli seputar isu
Zionisme, konspirasi, freemasonry, dan lainnya. Dia juga mempunyai
perhatian terhadap dominasi perusahaan-perusahaan kapitalis dunia di
Nusantara. Tulisan beliau yang berjudul “The Knight Templar, The Knight of Chris” sempat menjadi best seller, ketika sedang merebak isu seputar “The Davinci Code”.
Lawrence Arabiya: Serpihan Sejarah yang Kerap Dipakai untuk Menutupi Jasa Muhammad bin Saud (Pendiri Saudi, 1737-1765 M).
Saya pernah bertanya kepada beliau tentang aliran Kristen
Magdalenian, yang meyakini bahwa Yesus memiliki wanita simpanan (yaitu
Magdalena itu sendiri). Dari rahim Magdalena ini diyakini lahir
keturunan Yesus yang terus beranak-pinak sampai saat ini.
Katanya,
gereja Katholik Kepausan selalu memusuhi anak-keturunan Yesus dari
Magdalena ini. Mereka selalu dikejar-kejar, dibunuh, ditangkap, dsb.
Nah, untuk melindungi keturunan Yesus itu, maka dibentuklah kesatuan
para kesatria, Knights Of Chris. Di bagian akhir penjelasannya, Bang Rizki menyimpulkan, bahwa Kestria Kristus itu sama saja dengan Knight Templar atau Freemasonry (di kemudian hari).
Ada satu pembahasan dalam sebagian buku Rizki yang tampaknya tidak
obyektif, atau terkesan hanya berlandaskan sentimen. Ia adalah
menyangkut peranan seorang kolonel Inggris, Thomas E. Lawrence. Atau
kerap disebut Lawrence Arabiya. Dalam tulisan Rizki disebutkan, bahwa berdirinya Kerajaan Saudi adalah bagian dari konspirasi Zionis Internasional.
Dalam tulisan A. Hakim di eramuslim.com, disebutkan pernyataan dari Rizki Ridyasmara sebagai berikut:
Hal senada juga disampaikan Rizki Ridyasmara, sekalu penulis Novel-novel Konspirasi. Ia menyatakan bahwa Mekkah tengah dijadikan lahan mega proyek pemerintah Saudi. Tidak heran kini disamping Ka’bah telah dibangun hotel-hotel mewah, bahkan gerai makanan yang menyangga dana zionis seperti Mc Donald pun telah bermunculan di sekitar Mekkah. “Bisa kita bayangkan bagaimana kita bisa khusyuk beribadah jika kita dikelilingi oleh kemenawahan seperti itu,” terangnya.
Rizki Ridyasmara menyatakan bahwa penetrasi Jaringan Zionis Yahudi Internasional di Arab Saudi telah berlangsung lama. Baginya, lepasnya Arab Saudi dari Kekhilafahan Turki Utsmani tidak lepas dari permainan Zionis Internasional. Salah satunya adalah ketika perwira Yahudi Inggris, Letnan Terrecen Edward Lawrence disusupkan untuk mengendalikan Pasukan Saudi. (Ke Depan, Kita Mungkin Tak Bisa Naik Haji).
Singkat kata, sebelum Saudi berdiri, Inggris menerjunkan seorang
kolonel yang bernama Thomas Edward Lawrence untuk memprovokasi keluarga
Ibnu Saudi agar memberontak terhadap Khilafah Turki Utsmani. Ternyata,
gerakan Lawrence sukses besar, sehingga Saudi berdiri, dan akhirnya
Khilafah Utsmaniyyah runtuh. Dapat disimpulkan, Lawrence berhasil
menghasut berdirinya Kerajaan Saudi, dengan konsekuensi (resiko)
runtuhnya Khilafah Utsmani. Karena Saudi dibentuk oleh Lawrence yang
berasal dari agen Inggris (Zionis), disimpulkan bahwa Kerajaan Saudi
adalah bentukan Zionis, atau bahkan diyakini sebagai Zionis itu sendiri.
Kalau ada pengamat, sejarawan, atau penulis berpikir dengan logika
seperti di atas, wah sangat disayangkan. Ia bukan logika yang benar. Ia
tidak sesuai dengan fakta-fakta sejarah. Ia mencampur-adukkan realitas
sejarah secara gegabah. Sebaiknya kita tidak menulis sejarah dengan cara
seperti itu.
Tidak dipungkiri, bahwa kondisi Kerajaan Saudi tidak ideal, seperti
yang diharapkan. Banyak kelemahan-kelemahan di dalamnya. Hal itu bukan
saja disadari oleh kaum Muslimin di luar Saudi, di dalam Saudi pun
banyak yang prihatin. Hal ini terjadi karena memang kondisi kaum
Muslimin di seluruh dunia sedang lemah. Andaikan negara-negara Muslim
lain seperti Mesir, Suriah, Pakistan, Indonesia, Turki, dll. dalam
keadaan kuat; niscaya Saudi juga akan kuat. Tetapi ya itulah yang
terjadi…kita begitu detail dalam mengeritik Saudi, sementara kita lupa
dengan kondisi bangsa kita sendiri.
Kesimpulan bahwa Kerajaan Saudi didirikan oleh Lawrence Arabiya, atau
didirikan oleh Zionis Israel, adalah kesimpulan SESAT. Begitu juga,
berdirinya Kerajaan Saudi berakibat meruntuhkan Khilafah Turki Utsmani,
juga merupakan kesimpulan SESAT. Hal-hal demikian hanya akan diyakini
oleh mereka yang apriori, sentimen, dan tidak obyektif.
Bantahannya sebagai berikut:
[1]. Akar Kerajaan Saudi adalah kekuasaan Emir
Muhammad bin Saud di Dir’iyyah, Najd. Inilah pendiri Dinasti Saudi.
Beliau menjadi Emir pada periode tahun 1737-1765 M (Lihat buku: Sejarah
Islam, Ahmad Al Usairy, hal. 380-381). Lihatlah dengan mata hati,
keluarga Dinasti Saud sudah muncul sejak tahun 1737 H, bahkan sejak
sebelumnya. Sedangkan, runtuhnya Khilafah Utsmani baru terjadi tahun
1924.
[2]. Sudah merupakan hal biasa ketika dalam
Dinasti-dinasti Islam selalu ada perebutan kekuasaan. Secara fakta
sejarah, itu sudah terjadi sejak era Muawiyyah Ra, era Dinasti Umayyah,
era Dinasti Abbasiyyah, era Andalusia, Dinasti Mamalik, Dinasti
Ayyubiyyah, hingga akhirnya Dinasti Turki Utsmani. Bagi yang membaca
sejarah, perebutan kekuasaan antar keluarga bangsawan, bukan hal asing
dalam sejarah dinasti-dinasti Muslim.
[3]. Keadaan yang terjadi antara Keluarga Dinasti
Saud dengan Khilafah Turki Ustmani ada dalam konteks konflik perebutan
kekuasaan. Akibat dari konflik ini, Kerajaan Saudi jatuh-bangun sampai
ada 3 periode kekuasaan Saudi. Hal-hal demikian jarang
diperhatikan oleh pemerhati yang sentimen. Pihak-pihak yang ingin
merdeka dari Turki Utsmani, atau ingin memiliki wilayah sendiri, bukan
hanya Dinasti Saudi di Najd, tetapi banyak. Ada yang dari wilayah Irak,
Mesir, Afrika Utara, Asia Tengah, Eropa, dll. Jadi tidak adil, jika
dalam konflik politik ini, hanya Kerajaan Saudi yang dipojokkan. (Ingin
tahu fakta lebih banyak, baca tulisan Dr. Ali Muhammad Shalabi, tentang Daulah Ustmaniyyah).
[4]. Dalam literatur sejarah dituliskan fakta Zionisme Internasional: “Pada tahun 1897, diselenggarakan Konferensi Zionisme Pertama di Basel, Swiss, dibawah pimpinan Theodore Hertzl.”
Lihatlah fakta ini dengan mata terbuka. Kalau belum terbuka, cobalah
membuka mata di ember berisi air penuh, agar hilang rasa kantuk.
Wallahi, Zionisme yang sering dituduhkan itu merancang gerakan
politiknya di konferensi Basel ini. Nantinya, Theodore Hertzl akan
datang ke Sultan Abdul Hamid II untuk meminta tanah Palestina dengan
imbalan uang emas jutaan gulden. Sedangkan, Kerajaan Dinasti Saudi sudah
muncul sebelum itu, sejak era Muhammad bin Saud (1737-1765). Ia sudah
muncul lebih dari 100 tahun sebelumnya.
[5]. Kalau membaca buku Road To Mecca karya Ustadz Muhammad Asad (Leopold Weiss), disana dijelaskan kronologi berdirinya Kerajaan Saudi Jilid III
di Riyadh. Gerakan itu dipimpin Abdul ‘Aziz bin Abdurrahman bin Faishal
Al Saud. Dia bergerak bersama 40 pemuda-pemuda dari suku Badui Najd
untuk merebut kekuasaan Ibnu Rasyid di Riyadh. Disini sama sekali tidak
ada peranan Lawrence Arabiya. Lawrence baru muncul kemudian, setelah
Kerajaan Saudi memiliki fondasi di Riyadh dan Hijaz (Makkah-Madinah).
[6]. Adalah kenyataan tak terbantahkan, bahwa
kondisi Khilafah Turki Utsmani semakin melemah di awal abad ke-20.
Banyak wilayah-wilayah Turki di Eropa yang melepaskan diri, seperti
Rumania, Bulgaria, Polandia, dll. Di sisi lain, gerakan politik Abdul
Aziz Al Saud tidak pernah menyentuh wilayah Turki. Bagaimana hal itu
bisa dianggap sebagai pemicu kehancuran. Bahkan karena lemahnya Turki
Utsmani, mereka tak sanggup menghadapi pasukan Kerajaan Saudi, sehingga
harus meminta bantuan Gubernur Mesir, M. Ali Pasha. Kerajaan lemah
dimanapun, ia akan kehilangan wibawa dan wilayahnya. Hal ini sudah
menjadi RAHASIA SEJARAH yang sangat umum. Jadi kalau
wilayah-wilayah itu melepaskan diri, yang disalahkan ialah kekuasaan
induknya. Mengapa mereka lemah dan tidak berwibawa?
[7]. Banyak orang begitu senang mengungkap peranan Lawrence Arabiya,
tetapi mereka tidak mau mendengar penuturan dari saudara-saudaranya
sendiri sesama Muslim. Mengapa mereka begitu nafsu menonjolkan peranan
Lawrence, dan mengecilkan peranan kaum Muslimin sendiri?
Singkat kata, Lawrence Arabiya itu muncul belakangan setelah fondasi
Kerajaan Saudi di Riyadh dan Hijaz terbentuk. Begitu juga konflik antara
Dinasti Saudi dengan Khilafah Turki Utsmani adalah sejenis konflik politik
(perebutan kekuasaan) yang sudah biasa terjadi dalam sejarah Islam. Dan
hal itu sudah muncul lebih dari 100 tahun sebelum Zionisme
internasional membuat konferensi pertama di Basel, Swiss.
Kalau menulis, hendaknya kita berhati-hati. Jangan sampai mau
menerangi Ummat, malah akibatnya menyebarkan fitnah. Fitnah yang
tersebar itu sangat berat timbangannya di sisi Allah Al Khabir.
Walhamdulillahi Rabbil ‘alamiin.
Siapakah Wahabi yang Sebenarnya ?
Pada kurun yang ke dua belas (12) hijrah telah lahir satu golongan yang
menyempal dari manhaj (pegangan Ahli Sunnah) yang sebenar. Mereka ini
dikenali dengan AL-WAHHABIAH yaitu pengikut Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab
an-Najdi, dia merupakan pengasas kumpulan ini. Permulaan kelahiran
kumpulan ini pada tahun 1143 hijrah, ia membawa fikrah/fahaman yang
kononnya berdasarkan kepada al-Quran dan Sunnah tetapi sebenarnya mereka
ini jauh terpesong dari fahaman ahli Sunnah yang sebenar.
Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab ini telah mengambil fahaman-fahaman dari
Ibnu Taimiyyah dan ibn Qaiyyim aj-Jauziah yang sesat dan bercanggah
dengan ijmak ulamak, Abu Zur’ah al-Iraqi berkata dalam kitabnya
al-ajwibah marziah ‘Ibnu Taimiah telah melanggar 60 masalah yang telah
disepakati oleh ulamak dalam bidang usul dan furuk’. Perkara ini
disedari oleh ulamak pada ketika itu dan mereka telah mengambil tindakan
dengan menulis buku melawan hujjah fikrah@fahaman Muhammad bin Abdul
Wahab tersebut. Antara mereka yang menulis buku menolak dan melawan
hujjah(fahaman) Muhammad bin Abdul wahab ini ialah Syaikh Muhammad bin
Sulaiman al-Kurdi dalam kitabnya ‘Hawashi Syarah Ibnu Hajar ala Matan
Biafzal’ begitu juga Kakak Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab turut menulis buku
menolak fikrahnya dengan begitu keras dan tegas dalam bukunya ‘Sowaikh
Ilahiyyah fi Raddi ala Wahhabiah’ dan satu lagi buku ‘Fasal Khitab fi
Raddi ala Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab’.
Golongan wahhabiah ini telah merebak ke serata dunia dan menyebarkan
ajaran mereka tetapi menerima kegagalan kerana disana ramai golongan
ahlussunnah menolak dan menghentam fahaman sesat mereka, akan tetapi
pada akhir ini mereka telah bersembunyi disebalik nama as-Salafiah
(iaitu mereka yang hidup 3 kurun pertama selepas kewafatan Rasullullah
seperti yang ditafsirkan oleh ibn Asakir) untuk menyebarkan ajaran sesat
mereka, maka kita sebagai umat islam yang berada dilandasan ahlussunnah
hendaklah melawan dan memberi amaran kepada umum bahayanya golongan
ini.
Di sini saya akan beri beberapa perkara yang dibawa oleh
golongan wahabi bercanggah dengan fahaman ahlussunnah waljamaah sebagai
peringatan untuk kita semua:-
1-Membawa fahaman tasybih dan tajsim, mereka
menganggap bahawa Allah duduk diatas Arash sedangkan sifat
duduk(berjisim) sifat bagi makhluk, maka kita tidak boleh mengatakan
Allah itu duduk, sedangkan Imam Abu Hassan as-Syaari dalam kitabnya
an-Nawadir mengatakan ‘sesiapa yang beriktikad bahawa Allah itu berjisim
maka sesungguhnya dia tidak kenal tuhannya dan dia jatuh kufur(murtad)
beriktikad sedemikian’ begitu juga Imam Ahmad bin Salamah ataupun lebih
dikenali dengan Abu Jaafar at-Thohawi dalam kitabnya Akidah
at-Thohawiyyah yang telah diiktiraf oleh ulamak sebagai Akidah Ahli
Sunnah Waljamaah mengatakan ‘sesiapa yang menyifatkan Allah seperti
sifat-sifat makhluk jatuh kufur(murtad) ‘.
2-Mereka mengatakan ziarah pada hari raya adalah
bid’ah sesat, sedangkan rasullullah menyuruh kita menziarah kaum kerabat
pada hari tersebut seperti yang diriwayatkan oleh Imam Ahmad.
3-Mereka menfatwakan haram menuturkan perkataan
‘sodaqallah hulazim’ selepas membaca al-Quran, sedangkan Allah Taala
berfirman dalam surah ali-Imran ayat 95 mafhumnya “katakanlah
‘sodaqallah’ iaitu Allah maha benar”.
4-Mereka juga mengatakan sesugguhnya menggunakan
tasbih, solawat keatas nabi selepas azan, doa qunut, sembahyang sunat
sebelum Jumaat dan kuliah sebelum Jumaat adalah bid’ah. Mereka
mengatakan bahawa sesiapa yang berselawat keatas Rasul selepas azan
seperti orang yang berzina dengan ibunya sendiri semua ini tersebut
dalam kitab ‘Tarikh al-Sultanah al-Osmaniah’ , kitab ‘ad-Dalilul Kafi’
dan kitab ‘Fitnah al-Wahhabiah’ .
5-Mereka tidak bersependapat dengan umat islam yang
lain dan mengatakan selain mereka adalah sesat kerana mengharuskan
bacaan al-Qur’an keatas jenazah seperti mana yang tersebut dalam kitab
mereka ‘fatawa muhimmah’ sedangkan syaikh mereka iaitu Ibn Qayyim
al-Jauziyyah menganggap bahawa ianya adalah perbuatan yang baik yang
disepakati oleh ulamak dalam
kitabnya ‘ar-ruh’. Maka adakah mereka ini (wahabi) menghukumkan keatas syaikh mereka ini dengan kufur ataupun sesat?
6-Mereka mengatakan sesungguhnya Abu Jahal dan Abu
Lahab lebih mentauhidkan Allah dan ikhlas imannya daripada orang-orang
Islam yang mana mereka mengucapkan dua kalimah syahadah, tetapi mereka
bertawasul dengan nabi-nabi dan wali-wali seperti mana yang terdapat
dalam kitab mereka ‘kaifa nafham tauhid’
7-Mereka menganggap kubah hijau yang terdapat di
Masjid Nabi sebagai lambang kesyirikan dan cuba hendak meruntuhkannya
seperti mana yang tersebut dalam kitab mereka ‘Tahzirus Sajid’. Nas kata
mereka dalam kitab tersebut ialah ‘tidaklah tinggal dari lambang
berhala kecuali kubah hijau’. Sedangkan dibawah Kubah Hijau tersebut ada
Makam Rasullullah.
8-Mereka menganggap ziarah kubur Rasul adalah syirik
yang tersebut dalam kitab mereka ‘al-Fatawa al-kubra’ sedangkan Rasul
bersabda “sesiapa yang telah menziarahi kuburku wajib baginya mendapat
syafaat dari aku” diriwayatkan oleh Imam Addarul Qutni dan Imam
as-Subki.
9-Mereka menyesatkan semua orang islam yang
mengadakan majlis maulidul rasul dan menganggapnya sebagai haram seperti
tersebut dalam kitab mereka ‘Fatawa Muhimmah’ sedangkan syaikh mereka
iaitu Ibnu Taimiah telah berkata dalam kitabnya ‘iqtidhok sirat
al-mustaqim’ bahawasanya sesiapa mengadakan majlis maulud mungkin diberi
ganjarannya oleh Allah Taala.
Maka! apakah hukuman kepada syaikh
mereka ini? Dalam waktu yang sama mereka membid’ahkan diri mereka
sendiri dengan berhimpun untuk mempelajari dan mengingati sejarah
hidupnya (Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab) dan mereka mengadakan
seminar-seminar serta mengeluarkan wang yang banyak untuk tujuan
tersebut seperti mana tersebut dalam kitab mereka ‘haza waladi’.
10-Mereka menghukumkan keatas ahli Syam, Yaman,
Maghrib, Iraq dan Mesir dengan syirik dalam kitab mereka ‘fathul majid’
yang dikupas oleh Ibn Baz sedangkan disana Rasullullah bersabda dalam
hadis yang diriwayatkan oleh Imam Bukhari mafhumnya ‘ya Allah berkatilah
bumi Syam dan bumi Yaman’. Jika sangkaan mereka semua ahli negara
tersebut adalah kufur maka siapakah yang sebenarnya islam?. 11-Mereka
telah mengkufurkan golongan Syiah dan juga Jamaah Tabligh di dalam kitab
‘At-Tahzir Min Jamaah al-Tabligh’, juga mengatakan akidah Al-Azhar
adalah akidah syirik di dalam majalah ‘al-Zikro’.
12-Di dalam majalah ‘Al-majallah’ bilangan (830)
tahun ?(1996) mereka telah mengatakan Syaikh Hasan Al-Banna musyrik
serta menganggap dia penyeru kepada syirik dan kesesatan .
13-Didalam majalah ‘Alliwak’ bertarikh (7.8.1992)
berfatwa bahawa haram bagi penduduk Palestin tinggal tetap di bumi
Palestin dan mereka wajib keluar daripadanya. Disebut juga didalam kitab
‘Fatawa al-Albani’. Daripada mana mereka mengambil fatwa (keputusan)
seperti ini? Sedangkan dalam masa yang lain mengeluarkan fatwa
membolehkan penggunaan tentera Amerika untuk membunuh umat Islam dengan
menyerang Iraq.
14-Pada tahun (1220 hijrah) mereka telah mengepung
Mekah sehinggakan penduduknya memakan daging anjing kerana kelaparan.
Mereka juga memasuki Madinah dan meruntuhkan bilik Nabi di Masjid Nabi.
Semua ini di sebut didalam kitab – kitab tarikh (buku sejarah) seperti
‘Fitnah Al-Wahhabiah’ oleh Syaikh Zaini Dahlan, ‘Kitab Kasyful Irtiyab’
oleh Sayid Muhsin
Al-Amin Al-Husaini, Kitab ‘Raudah Al-Muhtajin’
oleh Syaikh Ridwan Al-Adli dan banyak lagi yang menceritakan sejarah
bagi waktu tersebut.
Begitulah sedikit sebanyak yang dapat dipaparkan disini kesesatan dan
penyelewengan yang dibawa oleh pengikut Muhammmad bin Abdul Wahab, maka
jelaslah kepada kita betapa bahayanya golongan ini, sewajarnyalah kita
memberi peringatan dan menjauhkan diri dari golongan ini, ulamak pernah
berkata “kita mengetahui keburukan dan kejahatan bukannya kita hendak
mengikuti kejahatan dan keburukan tersebut tetapi kita mengambilnya
sebagai peringatan dan menjauhkan diri darinya”. Wallahu a’lam wa ahkam
Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab dan Gerakan Al-Wahabiyah:
Kebanyakan mereka yang menulis tentang wahabi dan kemudian
menyanjung golongan ini mengambil sumber-sumber tentang wahabi dari
golongan yang datang selepas dari zaman Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab
(pengasas mazhab Wahabi).
Sebaliknya tulisan-tulisan orang yang hidup sezaman dengan Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab ini dikesampingkan begitu sahaja.
Tidakkah penyokong golongan wahabi itu tahu bahawa abang Muhammad bin
Abdul Wahab yang bernama Syaikh Sulaiman Abdul Wahab turut menentang
beliau dan mengarang dua buah kitab yang berjudul Faslul Khitob Fi Raddi
‘Ala Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab dan juga kitab As-Sawa’iq Al-Ilahiyah Fi
Raddi ‘Ala Al-Wahhabiah?
Tidakkah penyokong-penyokong golongan Wahabi ini tahu bahawa bapa
Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab yang bernama Syaikh Abdul Wahab (salah seorang
ulama mazhab Hanbali) turut menentang beliau dan bapanya mengatakan:
“Lihatlah kejahatan yang bakal datang dari Muhammad ini” seperti yang
dinyatakan oleh Syaikh Muhammad bin Abdullah Humaid An-Najdi Al-Hanbali
dalam kitabnya As-Suhub Al-Wabilah (kitab biografi ulama-ulama dalam
mazhab Hanbali).
Dalam kitab ini juga disebutkan bahawa Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab ini
jika tidak dapat membunuh orang yang menentangnya pada waktu siang dia
akan menghantar utusannya untuk membunuh orang tersebut pada waktu malam
sama ada di pasar atau ditempat tidurnya. Bahkan antara orang yang
hampir menjadi mangsanya ialah abang kandungnya sendiri iaiatu Syaikh
Sulaiman.
Benar seperti yang dikatakan bahawa Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab ini
terpengaruh dengan kitab-kitab Ibnu Taimiyah dan juga Ibnul Qayyim
Al-Jauziyah. Hal ini turut dinyatakan oleh pengarang kitab As-Suhub
Al-Wabilah di mana beliau mengatakan bahawa Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab ini
terlalu menyanjung Ibnu Taimiyah dan Ibnul Qayyim seolah kata-kata dua
orang tersebut seperti nas kitab yang tidak boleh disanggah.
Maka tidak pelik jika Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab mengulang apa
yang diperkatakan oleh Ibnu Taimiyah antaranya tidak boleh bertawassul
dengan orang yang sudah mati, ziarah kubur nabi syirik, ayat-ayat
mutasyabihat perlu diambil secara ZAHIR tanpa perlu ditakwilkan dengan
dakwaan ini adalah mazhab salafus soleh sedangkan akidah salafus soleh
yang sebenar berbeza dengan apa yang didakwa oleh Ibnu Taimiyah.
Sebenarnya gerakan Wahabi sejak awal memang sudah menjadi gerakan
yang ekstrim bukan seperti yang didakwa bahawa pengaruh ekstrimisme ini
berkembang terkemudian. Bagaimana tidak dikatakan ekstrim jika Muhammad
bin Abdul Wahab ini mengatakan bahawa umat Islam sejak 600 tahun sebelum
beliau, berada dalam keadaan syirik dan beliau datang untuk membawa
umat Islam masuk semula ke dalam ajaran tauhid.
Adakah sepanjang 600 tahun tersebut tidak ada ulama yang faham agama
melainkan selepas kedatangan Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab sahaja barulah
agama ini dapat difahami dengan sempurna? Tidak adakah ulama yang faham
agama sepanjang 600 tahun tersebut sehingga membiarkan umat Islam berada
dalam syirik?
Keganasan (irhab) yang dilakukan oleh beliau dan para pengikutnya
yang berterusan hingga ke hari ini tidak lain tidak bukan kerana idea
ekstrim yang dibawa oleh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab sejak mula lagi.Orang
yang tergamak mengatakan bahawa umat Islam ini berada dalam syirik dan
jahiliyyah selama 600 tahun tidak teragak-agak untuk menghalalkan darah
umat Islam yang tidak sealiran dengannya dengan anggapan bahawa mereka
adalah kaum musyrikin.
Bukti yang dapat menunjukkan bahawa ajaran Wahabi ini memandang orang
Islam lain yang tidak sealiran dengannya sebagai kafir ialah seperti
yang dilakukan oleh Abdul Aziz Bin Baz dalam ulasannya terhadap kitab
Fathul Majid (yang merupakan kitab akidah golongan Wahabi) di mana
beliau mengatakan bahawa orang Mesir TUHAN mereka adalah Ahmad Badawi
(seorang wali), orang-orang Iraq tuhan mereka adalah Syaikh Abdul Qadir
Al-Jailani, orang-orang Syam pula tuhan mereka adalah Ibnu Arabi!!
Adakah disebabkan umat Islam menziarahi kubur para wali tersebut maka
mereka terus dilabel sebagai menyembahnya? !!
Lihatlah bagaimana tokoh Wahabi ini mengkafirkan umat Islam yang
berada di negara-negara tersebut secara umum dan keseluruhan! . Tindakan
yang Abdul Aziz bin Baz lakukan ini tidak pelik dan tidak menghairankan
kerana pengasas gerakan Wahabi ini sudah mendahului beliau sejak dahulu
lagi dengan iktikadnya bahawa umat Islam berada dalam syirik sejak 600
tahun sebelum beliau.
Pengikut-pengikut Wahabi tidak boleh menipu sejarah. Syaikh Ahamd
Zaini Dahlan dalam kitabnya Al-Fitnatul Wahabiyah menceritakan kekejaman
dan penumpahan darah yang dilakukan oleh golongan wahabi terhadap orang
yang tidak selairan dengannya. Mereka pernah mengepung penduduk Taif
sehingga penduduk Taif terpaksa makan anjing untuk mengelakkan
kebuluran.
Kemudian diceritakan pula bahawa seorang buta yang berselawat ke atas
nabi selepas azan diperintahkan oleh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab supaya
dibunuh. Namun cerita ini dinafikan oleh pengikut golongan Wahabi dengan
dakwaan dalam mazhab Hanbali selawat ke atas nabi adalah wajib, jadi
bagaiman mereka membunuh orang yang berselawat ke atas nabi. Alangkah
jauh qias yang dibuat oleh mereka. Masalahnya golongan wahabi menganggap
barangsiapa yang berselawat ke atas nabi selepas azan dengan
menyaringkan suara maka orang tersebut telah melakukan bid’ah yang
sesat!. Kita bukan bercerita tentang orang berselawat ke atas nabi dalam
solat wahai pengikut wahabi! cubalah gunakan akal untuk memahami
sesuatu dengan baik!
Rupanya cerita ini tidak berakhir di zaman Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab
sahaja bahkan berulang semula pada awal kurun ke 20 di Syria. Cuma yang
berbeza kali ini, tiada nyawa yang melayang. Salah seorang pengikut
Muhammad Nasiruddin Al-Albani (salah seorang tokoh wahabi moden yang
degil dan tegas dengan kewahabiannya) ketika mendengar muazzin
berselawat ke atas nabi selepas azan terus menyatakan:” Kamu sama
seperti orang yang berzina dengan ibunya sendiri!”.
Adakah orang yang berselawat ke atas nabi dosanya seperi berzina
dengan ibunya sendiri?!!.Maka mufti Syria pada waktu itu yang bernama
Abul Yusr Abidin mengeluarkan amaran keras kepada Al-Albani supaya
berhenti menyebarkan kesesatannya atau beliau akan dipenjarakan.
Begitu juga pada tahun 1924, berlaku serangan wahabi ke atas
penduduk-penduduk di selatan Jordan. Antara kawasan yang diserang oleh
golongan wahabi ini ialah Ma’an, Madaba dan kawasan-kawasan lain di
bahagian selatan Jordan. Peristiwa ini dicatatkan dalam sejarah Jordan
dan tidak dapat diubah oleh wahabi walaupun mereka cuba menafikan tarikh
mereka yang hitam tersebut. Dan kalau ditanya kepada pengikut wahabi
mengapa mereka menyerang umat Islam tersebut, mereka akan menjawab:
“Untuk menyelamatkan kaum tersebut dari syirik!!”. Tidakkah ini
menunjukkan bahawa golongan wahabi menganggap bahawa semua umat Islam
ini telah syirik dan kafir melainkan yang menjadi pengikut mereka sahaja
tidak kafir?.
Bahkan Al-Albani sendiri seolahnya berbangga dengan gerakan dakwah
Wahabi yang menggunakan senjata dan penumpahan darah di mana dinyatakan
dalam kitabnya Fatawa Al-Albani: “Dakwah Wahabiah ialah dakwah yang
menggabungkan antara ilmu dan PEDANG!!!”. Di sini dapat dilihat bahawa
memangnya golongan wahabi menganggap orang selain mereka sebagai musyrik
kafir kerana jikalau mereka tidak menganggap yang demikian, mengapa
mereka menyatakan:” Dakwah wahabiah ialah dakwah yang menggabungkan ilmu
dan pedang”. Adakah dakwah sesama umat Islam perlu menggunakan pedang
ataupun dakwah menggunakan pedang ini untuk orang yang sudah murtad dan
kafir?
Saya berharap sesiapa yang memuji Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab
ini menoleh semula ke belakang dan merenung sejarah gerakan wahabi ini.
Masalah wahabi bukan setakat yang digemburkan oleh sesetengah orang
bahawa mereka mahu umat Islam meninggalkan taqlid mazhab yang membabi
buta, bahkan lebih dari tu.
Barangsiapa yang menyelidiki akidah go mewajibkan rakyat untuk patuh secara mutlak kepada pemimpin-pemimpin mereka.
- melarang mendirikan bioskop sama sekali.
- menerapkan hukum Islam hanya atas rakyat jelata, dan membebaskan hukum atas kaum bangsawan, kecuali karena alasan politis.
- mengizinkan perbudakan sampai tahun ’60-an.
Mereka juga menyebarkan mata-mata atau agen rahasia yang selama 24 jam memonitor demi mencegah munculnya gerakan anti-kerajaan.
Wahabisme juga sangat tidak toleran terhadap paham Islam lainnya,
seperti terhadap Syi’ah dan Sufisme (Tasawuf). Wahabisme juga
menumbuhkan rasialisme Arab pada pengikut mereka. Tentu saja rasialisme
bertentangan dengan konsep Ummah Wahidah di dalam Islam.
Wahhabisme juga memproklamirkan bahwa hanya dia saja-lah ajaran yang
paling benar dari semua ajaran-ajaran Islam yang ada, dan siapapun yang
menentang Wahabisme dianggap telah melakukan BID’AH dan KAFIR!
Lahir-nya ajaran Wahabi/Salafi/Manhaj Salaf
Wahhabisme atau ajaran Wahabi muncul pada pertengahan abad 18 di
Dir’iyyah sebuah dusun terpencil di Jazirah Arab, di daerah Najd.
Kata Wahabi sendiri diambil dari nama pendirinya, Muhammad Ibn
Abdul-Wahhab (1703-92). Laki-laki ini lahir di Najd, di sebuah dusun
kecil Uyayna. Ibn Abdul-Wahhab adalah seorang mubaligh yang fanatik, dan
telah menikahi lebih dari 20 wanita (tidak lebih dari 4 pada waktu
bersamaan) dan mempunyai 18 orang anak. Sebelum menjadi seorang
mubaligh, Ibn Abdul-Wahhab secara ekstensif mengadakan perjalanan untuk
keperluan bisnis, pelesiran, dan memperdalam agama ke Hijaz, Mesir,
Siria, Irak, Iran, dan India.
Walaupun Ibn Abdul-Wahhab dianggap sebagai Bapak Wahabisme,
namun aktualnya Kerajaan Inggeris-lah yang membidani kelahirannya dengan
gagasan-gagasan Wahabisme dan merekayasa Ibn Abdul-Wahhab sebagai Imam
dan Pendiri Wahabisme, untuk tujuan menghancurkan Islam dari dalam dan
meruntuhkan Daulah Utsmaniyyah yang berpusat di Turki. Seluk-beluk dan
rincian tentang konspirasi Inggeris dengan Ibn Abdul-Wahhab ini dapat
Anda temukan di dalam memoar Mr. Hempher : “Confessions of a British
Spy”
Selagi di Basra, Iraq, Ibn
Abdul-Wahhab muda jatuh dalam pengaruh dan kendali seorang mata-mata
Inggeris yang dipanggil dengan nama Hempher yang sedang menyamar
(undercover), salah seorang mata-mata yang dikirim London untuk
negeri-negeri Muslim (di Timur Tengah) dengan tujuan menggoyang
Kekhalifahan Utsmaniyyah dan menciptakan konflik di antara sesama kaum
Muslim. Hempher pura-pura menjadi seorang Muslim, dan memakai nama
Muhammad, dan dengan cara yang licik, ia melakukan pendekatan dan
persahabatan dengan Ibn Abdul-Wahhab dalam waktu yang relatif lama.
Hempher, yang memberikan Ibn Abdul-Wahhab uang dan hadiah-hadiah
lainnya, mencuci-otak Ibn Abdul-Wahhab dengan meyakinkannya bahwa :
Orang-orang Islam mesti dibunuh, karena mereka telah melakukan
penyimpangan yang berbahaya, mereka – kaum Muslim – telah keluar dari
prinsip-prinsip Islam yang mendasar, mereka semua telah melakukan
perbuatan-perbuatan bid’ah dan syirik.
Hempher juga membuat-buat sebuah mimpi liar (wild dream) dan
mengatakan bahwa dia bermimpi Nabi Muhammad Saw mencium kening (di
antara kedua mata) Ibn Abdul-Wahhab, dan mengatakan kepada Ibn
Abdul-Wahhab, bahwa dia akan jadi orang besar, dan meminta kepadanya
untuk menjadi orang yang dapat menyelamatkan Islam dari berbagai bid’ah
dan takhayul.
Setelah mendengar mimpi liar Hempher, Ibn Abdul-Wahhab jadi ge-er
(wild with joy) dan menjadi terobsesi, merasa bertanggung jawab untuk
melahirkan suatu aliran baru di dalam Islam yang bertujuan memurnikan
dan mereformasi Islam.
Di dalam memoarnya, Hempher menggambarkan Ibn Abdul-Wahhab sebagai
orang yang berjiwa “sangat tidak stabil” (extremely unstable), “sangat
kasar” (extremely rude), berakhlak bejat (morally depraved), selalu
gelisah (nervous), congkak (arrogant), dan dungu (ignorant).
Wanita pertama adalah seorang wanita beragama Kristen dengan
panggilan Safiyya. Wanita ini tinggal bersama Ibn Abdul Wahhab di Basra.
Wanita satunya lagi adalah seorang wanita Yahudi yang punya nama
panggilan Asiya. Mereka menikah di Shiraz, Iran.
BENARKAH MR.HAMPER BERADA DI BALIK BERDIRINYA WAHHABI ? WALLAHU A’LAM
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Siapa Sebenarnya Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab?
Paham Wahabi dinisbatkan kepada Muhammad putra Abdul Wahhab dari
Najd. Penisbatan ini diturunkan dari nama ayahnya yaitu Abdul Wahab.
Sebagaimana para ilmuwan menempatkannya, hal ini menjadi alasan mengapa
paham ini tidak disandarkan kepada Ibn Abdul Wahhab sendiri dan tidak
dinamakan “Muhammadiyah” karena kekhawatiran atas pengikut keyakinan ini
kalau menganggap sekte ini memiliki hubungan dengan nama Nabi Muhammad
Saw dan bisa menyalahgunakan penisbatan ini. [1]
Ibn Abdul Wahhab lahir pada tahun 1115 H di kota ‘Uyaynah yang
terletak di wilayah Najd. Ayahnya adalah seorang kadi (hakim agama) di
kota itu. Sejak masa kecilnya, Ibn Abdul Wahhab memiliki minat yang
sangat besar terhadap buku-buku tafsir, hadis, dan prinsip-prinsip
keimanan (akidah).
Dia mempelajari fikih mazhab Hanbali dari ayahnya yang merupakan
salah seorang ulama mazhab Hanbali. Sejak perkembangan usianya yang
masih remaja, Ibn Abdul Wahhab memandang kegiatan-kegiatan ibadah
keagamaan penduduk kota Najd saat itu sebagai hal yang menyimpang.
Usai melaksanakan haji di Makkah, dia melanjutkan pergi ke Madinah.
Di sana Ibn Abdul Wahhab menentang praktik kaum Muslim yang bertawasul
kepada Rasulullah Saw yang terletak bersebelahan dengan makam suci
beliau.
Kemudian dia kembali ke Najd, lalu dari sana dia berangkat lagi ke
Basrah dengan maksud di mana setelah itu akan meninggalkan Basrah menuju
ke Damaskus.
Ibn Abdul Wahhab menetap beberapa lama di Basrah dan mulai menentang
praktik keagamaan yang dilakukan penduduk setempat. Akan tetapi,
penduduk Basrah mengusirnya dari kota mereka.
Selama dalam perjalanan dari Basrah menuju kota Zubayr, dia hampir
saja binasa karena panas yang menyengat, rasa haus, dan jalan yang
panjang sejauh mata memandang di gurun tandus padang pasir.
Tetapi seseorang dari kota Zubayr, dengan melihat penampilan pakaian
jubah Ibn Abdil Wahhab seperti seorang ulama, berusaha menyelamatkan
hidupnya. Dia memberi Ibn Abdil Wahhab seteguk air, membopong lalu
membawanya ke kota Zubayr.
Ibn Abdil Wahhab berkeinginan melanjutkan perjalanan dari Zubayr ke
Damaskus, namun dia tidak mempunyai bekal yang memadai dan tidak dapat
mengusahakan biaya selama perjalanan, lalu mengubah tujuannya dan menuju
ke arah kota Al-’Ahsa. Dari sana dia memutuskan pergi ke Huraymalah,
salah satu dari kota-kota di wilayah Najd.
Saat itu tahun 1139 H, ayahnya, Abdul Wahab telah dipindahkan dari
kota Uyainah ke kota Huraymalah. Ibn Abdul Wahhab menemani ayahnya dan
mempelajari isi buku-buku dari ayahnya.
Dia berencana mulai menyebarkan pahamnya dengan menyampaikan
penolakan terhadap keyakinan penduduk Najd. Karena alasan ini, timbul
ketidaksetujuan serta argumentasi dan perdebatan yang panas antara anak
dan ayah.
Dalam persoalan yang sama, pertengkaran serius dan keras meledak
antara dia dan penduduk Najd. Kejadian ini berlangsung selama beberapa
tahun sampai ayah Ibn Abdul Wahhab, yaitu Syekh Abdul Wahab, meninggal
dunia pada tahun 1153 H. [2]
Sejak ayahnya wafat, Ibn Abdul Wahhab mulai bergerak menyebarkan
keyakinan agamanya sendiri serta menolak praktik keagamaan para penduduk
yang mayoritas Muslim Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah. Sekelompok orang dari
Huraymalah mengikutinya dan kegiatan dakwahnya mendapatkan popularitas
dan terkenal. Kemudian dia berangkat dari Huraymalah menuju kota
Uyaynah. Pada masa itu, Utsman bin Hamid adalah kepala daerah kota
Uyaynah. Utsman menerima Ibn Abdil Wahhab dan menghormatinya serta
membuat keputusan untuk membantunya. Sebaliknya Ibn Abdil Wahhab juga
mengungkapkan harapan agar seluruh penduduk kota Najd akan patuh kepada
Utsman bin Ahmad. Berita tentang seruan dan kegiatan dakwah Ibn Abdil
Wahhab sampai kepada penguasa kota Al-’Ahsa. Penguasa menulis sepucuk
surat kepada Utsman.
Konsekuensi dari penulisan surat itu ialah bahwa Utsman menyampaikan
perintah agar Ibn Abdil Wahhab membubarkan aktivitas dakwahnya. Ibn
Abdil Wahhab dalam balasannya menjawab bahwa “Jika engkau menolong saya,
maka engkau akan kami jadikan pemimpin seluruh wilayah Najd”. Akan
tetapi, Utsman menghindar darinya serta mengusirnya keluar dari kota
Uyaynah.
Pada 1160 H, setelah dipaksa keluar dari kota Uyaynah, Ibn Abdil
Wahhab berangkat menuju kota Duriyyah (al-Dar’iyyah), salah satu kota
yang termasyhur di wilayah Najd. Saat itu Muhammad bin Sa’ud (datuk dari
raja-raja Saudi Arabia) adalah amir (penguasa) kota Duriyyah.
Dia pergi menemui Ibn Abdil Wahhab dan memuliakan serta bersikap
sangat baik kepadanya. Ibn Abdil Wahhab juga memberi janji kekuasan
serta dominasi kepadanya atas seluruh kota di Wilayah Najd. Dengan cara
inilah, hubungan antara Ibn Abdil Wahhab dan Ibn Sa’ud terjalin. [3]
Ketika Ibn Abdil Wahhab pergi ke Duriyyah dan membuat kesepakatan
dengan Muhammad bin Sa’ud, penduduk kota Duriyyah hampir seluruhnya
hidup dalam kemelaratan dan sangat membutuhkan bantuan uluran tangan.
Dari informasi Utsman Ibn Bisyr al- Najdi, sejarawan al-Alusi mencatat bahwa :
“Saya (Ibn Bisyr) pada awalnya menyaksikan kemiskinan penduduk kota
Duriyyah. Dia telah melihat kota itu pada masa Sa’ud, ketika penduduknya
telah menikmati kemakmuran yang berlimpah, senjata-senjata mereka
dihiasi dengan emas dan perak serta mereka menunggang kuda-kuda
peranakan keturunan murni. Memakai pakaian mewah dan dilengkapi dengan
segala sesuatu yang menandakan kemakmurannya, sebegitu berlimpah-ruahnya
harta benda mereka sehingga tidak bisa diungkapkan dengan kata-kata.
Suatu hari di pasar rakyat dalam kota Duriyyah, saya melihat seorang
pria dan wanita jalan bergandengan. Di pasar itu terdapat banyak sekali
emas, perak senjata-senjata dan sejumlah besar unta, domba, kuda,
pakaian mewah, daging yang bertumpuk-tumpuk, terigu, serta bahan
makanan, di mana-mana bertebaran sehingga tidak mungkin bisa dihitung
satu per satu. Lokasi pasar rakyat terhampar sejauh mata memandang. Dan
saya dapat mendengar suara para pembeli dan penjual, suara yang
berdengung seperti suara dengungan lebah. Salah seorang dari mereka
biasa berkata, “Saya jual (barang-barang saya), “ dan yang lain akan
berkata, “Saya beli.” [4]
Tentu saja Ibn Bisyr tidak memperhitungkan dengan cara bagaimana dan
dari mana semua kemakmuran yang luar biasa ini diperoleh. Tetapi banyak
catatan sejarah mengindikasikan bahwa itu semua dikumpulkan dengan cara
merampok dan menyerang kaum Muslim dari kabilah-kabilah lain serta
daerah-daerah perkotaan yang tidak bersedia mengubah atau menerima
keyakinan mereka. Menyangkut harta rampasan perang yang diambil Ibn
Abdil Wahhab dari kaum Muslim di daerah itu, fatwanya adalah menggunakan
harta itu dengan cara sesuka hatinya.
Pada masanya, dia menghadiahkan hanya kepada 2 atau 3 orang saja dari
semua harta rampasan perang, padahal jumlahnya sangat banyak. Tak
peduli apa harta rampasan perang itu, semuanya berada dalam kepemilikan
Ibn Abdil Wahhab. Dan Ibn Sa’ud sebagai Amir Najd bisa mendapatkan
bagian dari harta rampasan perang itu hanya dengan seizin Ibn Abdil
Wahhab. Salah satu kerusakan yang terbesar selama masa kehidupan Ibn
Abdil Wahhab adalah suatu hal sangat nyata, bahwa dia menganggap kafir
kepada siapa pun termasuk kaum Muslim lainnya yang tidak mengikuti
keyakinannya dan menghalalkan darah mereka, sehingga kaum Muslim yang
tidak sepaham dengannya harus diperangi!
Singkatnya, Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab menyerukan kepada masyarakat
tentang tauhid namun tauhid yang dia serukan adalah tauhid yang keliru.
Siapa saja yang taat maka akan memiliki jaminan kekebalan sepanjang
hidupnya, dan harta miliknya akan aman Sementara itu, orang yang melarat
kehidupannya harus dibunuh seperti orang kafir dan harta miliknya boleh
diambil karena sesuai ajaran agama adalah halal dan diperbolehkan.
Peperangan-peperangan yang dilancarkan kaum Wahabi adalah perang di
dalam dan di luar wilayah Najd, seperti Yaman, Hijaz, daerah sekitar
Suriah dan Irak yang merupakan basisnya. Setiap kota yang mereka
taklukkan lewat perang dan berada dalam kekuasaan mereka, adalah halal
dan sah menurut pandangan “agama” mereka. Jika mereka mampu menaklukkan,
maka akan ditetapkan sebagai hak milik mereka. Bila tidak, maka mereka
membawa pulang harta rampasan yang mereka jarah. [5]
Siapa yang taat kepada ajarannya dan mendengarkan seruannya maka
harus berbaiat (berjanji setia) kepadanya. Bila melawan, maka harus
dibunuh dan harta miliknya dibagi-bagikan. Atas dasar politik ini,
contohnya, mereka membantai 300 laki-laki dari suatu perkampungan yang
bernama Al-Fusul, yang terletak dalam wilayah kota Al-’Ahsa dan menjarah
harta milik mereka. [6] (Bersambung)
Catatan Kaki:
[1] Farid Wajdi, Da’irat al-ma’arif al-qarn al-‘ishrin, Jil. 10, hlm.
871, quoting from the magazine Al-Muqtataf, Jil. 27, hlm. 893.
[2] Ringkasan dari Kitab Ta’rikh Najd karya al-‘Alusi, hlm. 111-113.
[3] Ta’rikh Baghdad, hlm. 152, di sana tercatat asala muasal
terjadinya hubungan antara Ibn Abdil Wahhab dengan Keluarga Ibn Sa’ud
dengan jalan lain
[4] Al-‘Alusi, Ta’rikh Najd, hlm. 117-118.
[5] Jazirat Al-‘Arab Fi Al-Qarn Al-‘Ishrin, hlm. 341.
[6] Ta’rikh Al-Mamlakat Al-‘Arabiyyah Al-Sa’udiyyah, Jil. 1, hlm. 51.
http://qitori.wordpress.com/2008/06/20/siapa-sebenarnya-muhammad-ibn-abdul-wahhab/
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Wajah Asli Dinasti Saudi
Diterjemahkan dari publikasi hasil penelitian Muhammad Sahir
versi bahasa inggris dengan judul: “The Saudi Dynasty: From where is it?
And who is the real ancestor of this family?”. Rezim Saudi telah
memerintahkan untuk membunuhnya karena dia telah mengungkapkan siapa
sebenarnya keluarga Saudi itu; apa agama mereka sebenarnya; dan apakah
mereka benar2 asli orang Arab?
Inilah terjemahan bebas saya atas hasil penelitian itu.
Pada tahun 851 H, sebuah rombongan kafilah dari Kabilah Al-Masalih,
salah satu kabilah dari Bani Anza, mengadakan perjalanan ke Irak dalam
rangka membeli kebutuhan pangan seperti gandum, jagung dll. untuk dibawa
kembali ke Najd. Kafilah itu dipimpin oleh Sahmi bin Hathlul.
Ketika rombongan kafilah sampai di Basra mereka bertemu dengan
saudagar Yahudi yang kaya bernama Murdahai bin Ibrahim bin Musa yang
menjual bahan2 kebutuhan pangan yang mereka perlukan. Disela-sela tawar
menawar, saudagar Yahudi itu menanyakan mereka darimana dan dijawab
bahwa mereka adalah Kabilah Al-Masalih dari Bani Anza. Mendengar hal
ini, saudagar Yahudi ini kemudian memeluk satu persatu semua anggota
rombongan itu sambil mengatakan bahwa dia juga berasal dari Kabilah
Al-Masalih yang terpaksa pindah ke Basra karena perselisihan antara
ayahnya dengan anggota Bani Anza lainnya.
Mengiringi cerita bohong tersebut, dia memerintahkan pelayannya untuk
memenuhi seluruh onta2 mereka dengan tepung gandum, kurma, tamman dan
bahan2 kebutuhan pangan mereka lainnya. Kebaikan ini sangat berkesan dan
sekaligus membuat mereka bangga karena bertemu “saudara” sendiri yang
menjadi saudagar kaya di Irak. Mereka tidak saja sangat menyukainya
tetapi juga sangat mempercayainya.
Ketika rombongan akan kembali ke Najd, saudagar Yahudi yang
berpura-pura sebagai bagian dari Kabilah Al-Masalih itu meminta agar dia
diperkenankan ikut rombongan itu pulang ke Najd. Dengan senang hati
permintaan itu dipenuhi.
Sesampainya di Najd, saudagar Yahudi itu dengan dukungan penuh
“saudara-saudaranya” mulai mempropagandakan dirinya. Namun
pandangan-pandangannya ditentang masyarakat Al-Qasim dibawah pimpinan
Syekh Saleh Salman Abdullah Al Tamimi, seorang ulama Muslim terkemuka.
Dakwahnya meliputi kawasan Najd, Yaman dan Hijaz. Akibat penentangan ini
dia pindah dari Al-Qasim ke Al- Ihsa dan mengganti namanya dengan
Marhan bin Ibrahim Musa.
Dia kemudian tinggal ditempat yang bernama Dir’iya dekat Al-Qatif. Di
sini dia mulai menyebarkan cerita bohong tentang Perisai Nabi Muhammad
saw bahwa perisai tersebut diambil oleh Kafir Quraisy pada waktu Perang
Uhud dan kemudian dijual kepada sebuah kabilah Yahudi bernama Bani
Qunaiqa’ yang menyimpannya sebagai pusaka. Dia secara bertahap menaikkan
posisinya dimata kaum Badui dengan cerita2 bohong seperti itu dan
sekaligus secara halus tersamar mempengaruhi orang2 Badui agar
beranggapan bahwa orang Yahudi telah ikut berjasa menjaga peninggalan
Islam yang sangat bersejarah.
Dengan semakin kuat posisi dan pengaruhnya dimata kaum Badui Arab,
dia kemudian memutuskan untuk menjadikan Dir’iya sebagai ibukota
kerajaan Yahudi di tanah Arab dan memproklamirkan dirinya sebagai raja
mereka.
Sementara itu Bani Ajaman bersama dengan Bani Khalid menyadari bahaya
dari Marhan setelah mereka mengetahui siapa dia sebenarnya dan rencana
jahatnya. Mereka kemudian menyerang Dir’iya dan berhasil mendudukinya
tetapi tidak berhasil menangkap Marhan karena keburu melarikan diri.
Dalam pelariannya, Marhan bin Ibrahim Musa yang nama aslinya Murdahai
bin Ibrahim Musa yang adalah orang Yahudi ini, sampai disebuah tanah
pertanian yang waktu itu disebut Al-Malibid Ghusaiba dekat Al-Arid, yang
dikemudian hari dan sampai sekarang disebut Al-Riyadh.
Dia meminta kepada pemilik tanah pertanian itu agar diperbolehkan
tinggal disitu. Dengan baik hati dan penuh keramahtamahan pemilik tanah
pertanian tersebut memperkenankannya. Tetapi, kurang lebih satu bulan
setelah ia tinggal disitu, pemilik tanah pertanian yang baik hati itu
beserta seluruh keluarganya ia bunuh, dan berpura-pura bahwa pemilik
tanah pertanian beserta seluruh keluarganya dibunuh oleh perampok.
Kekejian dan kebohongannya tidak sampai disitu saja, ia juga menyebarkan
berita bahwa ia sudah membeli seluruh tanah pertanian itu dari
pemiliknya sebelum peristiwa tragis itu terjadi. Karenanya sekarang dia
berhak atas tanah pertanian itu dan mengubah namanya menjadi Al-Dir’iya,
sama dengan nama tempat sebelumnya yang lepas dari tangannya.
Di situ ia kemudian membangun sebuah Tempat Persinggahan yang diberi
nama Madaffa, dan bersama-sama dengan para pengikutnya kembali
menyebarkan propaganda yang menyesatkan bahwa dia adalah seorang Syeikh
Arab tulen dan agung. Dia kemudian membunuh Syeikh Saleh Salman Abdullah
Al-Tamimi, musuh bebuyutannya, di sebuah masjid di kota yang disebut
Al-Zalafi.
Setelah puas dapat melenyapkan Syeikh Saleh, dia kemudian menjadikan
tempat yang namanya sudah diubahnya menjadi Al-Dir’iya tersebut sebagai
pusat kegiatannya. Dia mengawini banyak wanita dan memperoleh banyak
anak yang semuanya dia beri nama-nama Arab. Salah satu anak lelakinya
dia beri nama Al-Maqaran (berakar dari nama Yahudi: Mack-Ren) yang
kemudian mempunyai anak lelaki yang diberi nama Muhammad. Anak lelakinya
yang lain dia beri nama Saud, dan nama inilah yang kemudian dan sampai
sekarang menjadi nama Dinasti Saudi.
Dengan berjalannya waktu, keturunan Marhan si Yahudi ini telah
berkembang biak semakin banyak dan semakin kuat di bawah nama Keluarga
Saudi. Mengikuti jejak pendahulunya mereka meneruskan gerakan bawah
tanah dan konspirasinya menentang Negeri/Bangsa Arab. Secara illegal
mereka memperluas wilayahnya dan membunuh setiap orang yang menentang
mereka. Mereka menghalalkan segala cara untuk meraih ambisi mereka.
Mereka tidak saja menggunakan uang mereka tetapi juga para wanita mereka
untuk membeli pengaruh, khususnya terhadap mereka yang mau menulis
biografi asli dari Keluarga Yahudi ini. Mereka menyewa penulis bayaran
untuk merekayasa biografi mereka, yang sekaligus menyembunyikan
keturunan siapa mereka sebenarnya, dengan mengaitkan mereka dengan
kabilah-kabilah Arab terkenal seperti Rabi’a, Anza dan Al-Masalikh.
Sebagai contoh rekayasa penulis bayaran ditahun 1362 H atau 1943-an
misalnya seperti Muhammad Amin Al-Tamimi, Direktur Perpustakaan
Kerajaaan Saudi, membuatkan silsilah yang menyambung kepada Nabi Besar
Kita Muhammad Rasulullah saw. Untuk itu ia mendapat hadiah 35.000 Pound
Mesir dari Duta Besar Saudi untuk Mesir yang waktu itu dijabat oleh
Ibrahim Al-Fadil.
Dalam Buku Sejarah Keluarga Saudi halaman 98 – 101 penulis sejarah
bayaran mereka menyatakan bahwa Dinasti Saudi menganggap seluruh
penduduk Najd adalah kafir dan karenanya wajib dibunuh, hartanya
dirampas, dan para wanitanya dijadikan budak. Tidak ada seorang
muslim/muslimah pun yang keyakinannya murni kecuali mereka mengikuti
paham Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab. Doktrinnya memberi kekuasaan kepada
Keluarga Saudi untuk menghancurkan kota-kota, desa-desa, perkampungan
beserta seluruh isinya, membunuh para lelaki dan anak-anak, memperkosa
para wanitanya, merobek perut para wanita yang sedang hamil dan kemudian
memotong tangan anak-anak mereka lalu membakar mereka. Doktrin
brutalnya juga memberi kekuasaan kepada Keluarga Saudi untuk merampas
dan menguasai seluruh harta benda dan kekayaan penduduk yang mereka
anggap sesat (yaitu mereka yang tidak mengikuti paham Wahabi).
Keturunan Saud (sekarang dikenal dengan Keluarga Saudi)
mengkampanyekan pembunuhan terhadap para pemimpin kabilah-kabilah Arab
dengan menuduhnya sebagai kaum kafir dan musyrik .
Keluarga Saudi yang sejatinya adalah Keluarga Yahudi ini benar-benar telah melakukan segala macam perbuatan keji atas nama ajaran sesat mereka yaitu Wahabisme, dan benar-benar telah menimbulkan teror dihati para penduduk kota-kota dan desa-desa sejak tahun 1163 H. Mereka menamakan seluruh jazirah Arab yakni Negeri Rasulullah saw dengan nama keluarga mereka yaitu Saudi Arabia seakan seluruh kawasan di jazirah Arab adalah milik pribadi keluarga mereka, dan seluruh penduduk lainnya dianggap sebagai para pelayan dan budak mereka yang harus bekerja keras untuk kesenangan majikan mereka yakni Keluarga Saudi.
Keluarga Saudi yang sejatinya adalah Keluarga Yahudi ini benar-benar telah melakukan segala macam perbuatan keji atas nama ajaran sesat mereka yaitu Wahabisme, dan benar-benar telah menimbulkan teror dihati para penduduk kota-kota dan desa-desa sejak tahun 1163 H. Mereka menamakan seluruh jazirah Arab yakni Negeri Rasulullah saw dengan nama keluarga mereka yaitu Saudi Arabia seakan seluruh kawasan di jazirah Arab adalah milik pribadi keluarga mereka, dan seluruh penduduk lainnya dianggap sebagai para pelayan dan budak mereka yang harus bekerja keras untuk kesenangan majikan mereka yakni Keluarga Saudi.
Mereka benar-benar menguasai seluruh kekayaan alam sebagai milik
pribadi mereka dan bila ada orang yang memprotes kelakuan Dinasti Yahudi
ini maka orang tersebut akan dipancung didepan umum. Pernah salah
seorang putri mereka pergi ke Florida, Amerika Serikat, dengan segala
kebesarannya menyewa 90 (sembilan puluh) Suite Rooms di Grand Hotel
dengan harga sewa US$ 1 juta per malam. Tidak ada yang berani memprotes
kemewahan dan pemborosan ini karena takut akan dipancung didepan umum.
Kesaksian atas Darah Yahudi dari Keluarga Saudi
Pada tahun 1960, Radio Sawt Al Arab di Kairo Mesir dan Radio Yaman di
Sana’a mengkonfirmasikan kebenaran Darah Yahudi dari Keluarga Saudi.
Raja Faisal Al-Saud waktu itu tidak bisa menolak kenyataan Darah
Yahudi dari Keluarga Saudi ketika dia menyatakan kepada Washington Post
pada 17 September 1969 dengan berkata: ”Kami, Keluarga Saudi adalah
saudara sepupu (cousins) Yahudi. Kami sama sekali tidak setuju kepada
sebarang Pemerintah Negara Arab atau Pemerintah Negara Muslim yang
menunjukkan kebencian kepada Yahudi, tetapi kita harus hidup
berdampingan secara damai dengan mereka. Negara kami (Arabia) adalah
asal muasal darimana orang Yahudi pertama muncul, dan kemudian
keturunannya menyebar keseluruh penjuru dunia”. Demikianlah deklarasi
Raja Faisal Al-Saud bin Abdul Aziz.
Hafiz Wahbi, Penasehat Kerajaan Saudi, menyebutkan dalam bukunya yang
berjudul ”Peninsula of Arabia” bahwa Raja Abdul Aziz Al Saud yang
meninggal tahun 1953 telah berkata: ”Pesan kami (Pesan Saudi) kepada
seluruh kabilah Arab yang menentang kami: Kakek saya, Saud Awal, pernah
menawan sejumlah Sheikh dari Kabilah Mathir dan ketika serombongan orang
dari kabilah yang sama datang menuntut pembebasan mereka, Saud Awal
memerintahkan kepada para pengawalnya untuk memenggal kepala semua
tawanan itu, kemudian, dia ingin menghinakan para penuntut itu dengan
mengundang mereka untuk memakan daging korbannya yang sudah dimasak
sementara potongan kepalanya ditaruh di atas nampan. Para penuntut itu
sangat terkejut dan menolak untuk memakan daging keluarganya sendiri;
dan karena penolakannya itu, dia memerintahkan kepada para pengawalnya
untuk memenggal kepala mereka juga”.
Hafiz Wahbi mengatakan lebih jauh bahwa maksud Raja Abdul Aziz Al
Saud menceritakan kisah berdarah itu agar delegasi dari Kabilah Mathir
yang saat itu sedang datang untuk menuntut pembebasan pemimpin mereka
saat itu, yakni Sheikh Faisal Al Darwish, untuk tidak meneruskan niat
mereka. Karena bila tidak mereka akan mengalami nasib yang sama. Dia
membunuh Sheikh itu dan menggunakan darahnya untuk wudhu tepat sebelum
ia melakukan sholat (sesuai dengan fatwa sesat paham Wahabi ).
Kesalahan Sheikh Faisal Al Darwish saat itu adalah karena dia
mengkritik Raja Abdul Aziz Al Saud yang telah menandatangi dokumen yang
disiapkan pemerintah Inggris sebagai sebuah Deklarasi untuk memberikan
Palestina kepada Yahudi. Penandatanganan itu dilakukan di sebuah
konferensi yang diselenggarakan di Al Aqeer pada tahun 1922.
Begitulah dan hal itu berlanjut terus sampai sekarang dalam sistem
kekuasaan rezim Keluarga Saudi atau tepatnya Keluarga Yahudi ini. Semua
tujuannya adalah: menguasai semua kekayaan dan keberkahan negeri
Rasulullah saw; dengan cara merampok dan segala macam perbuatan keji
lainnya, penyesatan, pengkafiran, mengeksekusi semua yang menentangnya
dengan tuduhan kafir dan musyrik yang semuanya itu didasarkan atas
doktrin paham wahabi.
http://wildwestwahabi.wordpress.com/2009/02/11/wajah-asli-dinasti-saudi/
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab; Pengantar Singkat Studi Kritis Ideologi Pemikirannya
Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab; Pengantar Singkat Studi Kritis Ideologi Pemikirannya
(Warning: Sebelum membaca artikel ini siapkan kopi dan pastel di meja
anda karena butuh waktu setengah jam untuk menghabiskan artikel ini.
Yang gak tahan baca lama2 sebaiknya mundur dari sekarang biar gak
pingsan di tengah jalan. Dan yang suka emosian sediakan kipas angin biar
gak kepanasan. Dan kalau mau buat bantahannya buat bantahan yang
berbobot, jangan suka buat bantahan yang tak mengena & tak
berhubungan sebagaimana buku2 bantahan yang sudah ada.)
Bismillah…selamat menikmati.
Oleh: Al Ustadz Al Fadhil Muhammad Hidayatullah Lc.
*Penulis adalah sarjana alumnus Universitas Al Azhar Kairo Fak.
Lughah Arabiyah. Saat ini sedang menyelesaikan pendidikannya di program
pascasarjana Jur. Syari’ah Darul Ifta’ Kairo.
Prolog
Sekitar tiga abad silam, kaum muslimin di Jazirah Arab pada
khususnya, dan di seluruh belahan dunia islam pada umumnya, digemparkan
dengan munculnya sosok seorang teolog yang bernama Syekh Muhammad bin
Abdul Wahab. Pandangan-pandangan barunya telah berhasil mengusik tatanan
ideologi kaum muslimin yang mapan pada saat itu. Dalam dakwahnya, ia
mengangkat jargon purifikasi akidah dari segala hal yang ia pandang
telah menyimpang dari aturan-aturan agama. Kaum muslimin di masanya, ia
pandang tak jauh berbeda dengan kaum musyrikin di era Nabi saw.. Dengan
pandangan yang sedemikian ekstrim ini, ia tidak segan menggerakkan
masanya untuk mengangkat senjata demi memerangi kaum muslimin yang tidak
seideologi dengannya.
Sikap ekstrim tersebut menuai banyak kecaman dari para ulama saat
itu. Bahkan fakta adanya banyak peperangan yang terjadi antara Ibnu
Abdil Wahab (IAW) dan kaum muslimin saat itu semakin menegaskan betapa
sengitnya bentrok ideologi saat itu, sehingga perang kata-kata pun tidak
cukup dan harus diselesaikan dengan kontak fisik.
Gerakan dakwah yang dipelopori oleh IAW dalam dunia islam dikenal
dengan sebutan “Wahabi”[1]. Semenjak pertama kali muncul, dakwah ini
selalu saja menjadi momok bagi sebagian besar kaum muslimin.
Pandangan-pandangan keagamaannya yang kaku dan kurang bisa berkompromi
dengan perbedaan menjadikannya “Common enemy” bagi berbagai madzhab yang
berkembang dalam Islam. Namun, gerakan dakwah ini masih sangat eksis
hingga saat ini, lantaran disokong oleh penguasa kerajaan Saudi.
Membicarakan sosok IAW akan selalu menuai pro dan kontra. Hal itu
sangatlah wajar mengingat setiap tokoh pasti akan dibela habis-habisan
oleh para pengikut fanatiknya. Sementara di kutub yang berlawanan,
dipastikan akan ada wacana tandingan yang tidak kalah pedasnya dalam
mengkritisi seluruh pemikirannya. Dalam tulisan singkat ini, penulis
mencoba untuk lebih fokus pada kajian kritis terhadap
pemikiran-pemikiran IAW yang teruraikan secara gamblang di berbagai buku
dan risalahnya. Penulis hanya akan menyinggung seperlunya saja mengenai
hal-hal yang berkaitan dengan sejarah. Karena sejarah yang seharusnya
hitam kelam akan tersulap menjadi putih dan jernih di tangan sejarawan
wahabi. Pun demikian pula, sejarah jerih payah purifikasi akidah yang
mungkin perlu diapresiasi akan hilang tak berbekas di tangan sejarawan
lawan teologi wahabi. Karena tema ini begitu pelik dan banyak sub
pembahasan di dalam, maka penulis tidak akan banyak bertele-tele dalam
membahas setiap permasalahan, dan lebih mengedepankan informasi rujukan,
dengan harapan para pembaca yang budiman bisa menelitinya lebih luas
dan dalam dari yang penulis lakukan.
Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab bin Sulaiman bin Ali bin Muhammad bin Ahmad
bin Rasyid bin Barid bin Muhammad bin Barid bin Musyarraf at Tamimi
lahir pada tahun 1115 H/ 1703 M di daerah Uyainah yang merupakan bagian
dari Najd, terletak 70 km di utara Riyadl. Semenjak kecil ia belajar
agama kepada para ulama yang berada di Makkah dan Madinah serta ke
beberapa daerah seperti Ihsa` dan Basrah[2].
Menurut sejarawan wahabi Ibnu Ghannam, kondisi mayoritas kaum
muslimin di awal abad ke-12, sebelum dakwah IAW telah bergelimang dengan
kesyirikan dan kembali ke era jahiliyah. Hal itu disebabkan karena
kebodohan mereka dan semaraknya para juru dakwah yang mengajak kepada
kesesatan dan kesyirikan. Demikian juga –dalam pandangan Ibnu Ghannam-
mereka berpaling dari tauhid dan menyembah kaum shalihin, baik yang
masih hidup maupun yang telah meninggal dunia, serta menyembah
kuburan-kuburan mereka. Bahkan kesesatan kaum muslimin tersebut
sebenarnya telah terjadi berabad-abad yang silam[3].
Pandangan Ibnu Ghannam di atas tentunya sangat berlebihan. Karena
pernyataan tersebut bertentangan dengan fakta yang ada. Kondisi kaum
muslimin saat itu tidak berbeda dengan kondisi kaum muslimin di zaman
kita sekarang ini. Ziarah kuburan kaum shalihin dan bertabarruk dengan
mereka adalah aktivitas ritual kaum muslimin semenjak zaman Nabi hingga
saat ini. Hanya saja, ritual semacam ini tidak cocok dengan ide dasar
ideologi wahabi sehingga harus dikatakan sebagai penyembahan terhadap
kuburan. Tentunya saja, bagi orang yang paham agama, ziarah dan
bertabarruk dengan kuburan maknanya sangat jauh sekali dengan
penyembahan terhadap kuburan. Berangkat dari pemahaman yang salah inilah
IAW dan para pengikutnya sampai sekarang memvonis aktivitas tersebut
sebagai bentuk kesyirikan.
Menurut cacatan Ibnu Ghannam, Ibnu Abdil Wahab adalah sosok yang
sangat luar biasa. Ia telah hafal Al Quran sebelum berumur sepuluh
tahun. Orang tuanya pun sangat kagum dengan putranya tersebut lantaran
kecerdasan dan pemahamannya meskipun ia masih kecil. Bahkan orang tuanya
banyak belajar hukum islam kepada anaknya tersebut[4]. Namun hal ini
bertentangan dengan penuturan Syekh Muhammad bin Abdullah an-Najdi
al-Hambali, seorang mufti madzhab hambali di Mekkah (W 1295 H), beliau
menuturkan dalam kitabnya yang berjudul “As Suhub Al Waabilah ‘Ala
Dlaraaihil Hanaabilah” bahwa Ibnu Abdil Wahab baru berani memulai
dakwahnya secara terang-terangan pasca orang tuanya wafat. Bahkan orang
tuanya sangat marah kepadanya karena ia tidak mau belajar ilmu fikih
sebagaimana para pendahulunya[5]. Lebih jauh lagi, Syekh Ahmad Zaini
Dahlan, mufti madzhab Syafi’I di Mekkah di era akhir kekhilafahan
ustmaniyyah mendedahkan dalam tarikhnya, beliau berkata “Awalnya Ibnu
Abdil Wahab adalah seorang penuntut ilmu di Madinah Munawwarah. Ayah dan
saudaranya Sulaiman bin Abdul Wahab adalah orang shaleh dan termasuk
ulama. Ayah, saudara dan guru-gurunya mempunyai firasat buruk bahwa ia
(IAW) akan tersesat. Hal itu setelah mereka melihat perkataan, perbuatan
dan kecenderungannya di berbagai permasalahan agama” (al Futuhaat al
Islamiyyah: 2/66)[6].
Ibnu Abdil Wahab adalah sosok yang independen dan tidak mau berkiblat
pemahaman kepada siapa pun, bahkan kepada gurunya. Kalau pun ada yang
mempengaruhi gaya berpikirannya bisa jadi itu adalah Ibnu Taimiyah dan
Ibnu Qayyim. Karena pandangan IAW dalam masalah tauhid dekat dengan
kedua tokoh abad ke-7 tersebut. Akan tetapi saudaranya yang bernama
Sulaiman bin Abdil Wahab nampaknya tidak setuju dengan hal ini. Oleh
karenanya dalam menulis bantahan terhadap saudara kandungnya tersebut
dalam kitab yang berjudul “Ash Shawaiq Al Ilahiyyah Fi Roddi ‘Ala
Wahabiyyah” Syekh Sulaiman memakai argumentasi-argumentasi Ibnu Taimiyah
untuk mematahkan argumentasi saudaranya tersebut, khususnya dalam
masalah takfir.
Independensi berpikir ini bisa kita pahami dari beberapa statemen Ibnu Abdil Wahab itu sendiri. Diantaranya ia berkata:
“Alhamdulillah aku tidak mengajak kepada madzhab sufi, ahli fikih,
ahli kalam atau seorang imam dari imam-imam yang aku agungkan seperti
Ibnu Qayyim, Dzhabi, Ibnu Katsir dan lainnya. Akan tetapi aku mengajak
kepada Allah yang tiada sekutu bagi-Nya dan kepada sunnah Rasulullah
saw.”[7].
Demikian juga, ia pernah berkata:
“Aku telah mencari ilmu dan orang-orang yang mengenalku menyangka
bahwa aku telah memiliki ilmu. Padahal saat itu aku tidak mengetahui
makna “Laa Ilaaha Illallah” dan tidak mengetahui agama Islam, sebelum
anugerah (pemahaman) yang telah dikaruniakan Allah kepadaku ini.
Demikian juga guru-guruku, tidak ada seorang pun dari mereka mengetahui
hal itu (makna laa ilaaha illallah dan Islam). Barang siapa dari
kalangan ulama sekarang mengira bahwa ia telah mengetahui makna laa
ilaaha illallah, atau mengetahui makna Islam sebelum saat ini, atau
mengira guru-gurunya atau seseorang mengetahui hal itu maka sungguh ia
telah berdusta dan mengaku-ngaku, serta mengelabuhi manusia dan memuji
dirinya dengan sesuatu yang tidak ada pada dirinya”. (ad Durar as
Saniyyah: 10/51)[8].
Konon menurut sebagian para ulama, Ibnu Abdil Wahab ini begitu gemar
membaca sejarah orang-orang yang pernah mengaku nabi, seperti Musailamah
Al Kaddzab, Al Aswad Al Unsi, dan Tulaihah Al Asdi. Oleh sebab itu,
sebagian orang mengatakan bahwa sebenarnya ia mempunyai maksud untuk
mengikuti jejak orang-orang yang pernah mengaku menjadi nabi
tersebut[9]. Dari spirit inilah, maka tidak heran jika statemen-statemen
agama yang ia lontarkan dianggap keluar dari konsensus ulama saat itu.
Tidak pelak, bantahan dan sikap penolakan atas ajaran yang ditawarkan
oleh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab inipun mengalir deras dari para ulama
Makkah dan Madinah, sampai akhirnya dia terusir ke daerah Najd pada
tahun 1142 H,dan di daerah inilah dia berusaha mengatur siasat dakwah
yang dia yakini[10].
Dalam literatur-literatur islam klasik, bantahan yang paling terkenal
justru datang dari saudara kandungnya sendiri yang bernama Syekh
Sulaiman bin Abdul Wahab. Dalam rangka menasehati saudaranya itu, Syekh
Sulaiman menulis sebuah risalah yang sangat kesohor yang bertajuk “As
Shawâiq Al Ilâhiyah Fi Raddi ‘Ala Wahâbiyah”. Tidak hanya saudaranya
yang mempunyai kekhawatiran akan pemahaman ekstrimnya. Akan tetapi Syekh
Muhammad Sulaiman Al Kurdi, salah satu gurunya juga ikut menasehatinya.
Dalam sebuah sumber, Syekh Sulaiman Al Kurdi pernah berpesan kepada
muridnya itu:
“Wahai Ibn Abdil Wahab, keselamatan adalah teruntuk orang yang
mengikuti jalan yang benar. Sungguh aku ingin menasehatimu agar segera
menghentikan lisanmu dari mencela kaum muslimin. Jika kamu mendengar ada
orang yang berkeyakinan bahwa ada kekuatan selain kekuatan Allah, maka
kafirkanlah dia saja, dan jangan kafirkan sawadul a’dzam (mayoritas)
kaum muslimin. Kamu adalah orang yang menyimpang dari golongan mayoritas
kaum muslimin. Maka sesungguhnya memvonis kafir orang yang menyimpang
dari golongan mayoritas itu lebih pantas, karena dia telah keluar dari
jalan kaum muslimin”[11].
Karena cara berpikirnya yang dipandang ekstrim tersebut, IAW
mengalami kesulitan untuk menyebarkan dakwahnya. Setelah terusir dari
Najd, ia pergi menuju Irak. Di Irak pun ia tidak diterima hingga harus
mengungsi ke Mesir. Namun keadaannya di Mesir tidak berbeda dengan di
dua tempat sebelumnya. Akhirnya ia pun diusir dan memutuskan pergi ke
Syam. Setelah di Syam mengalami pengusiran serupa maka ia kembali lagi
ke Uyainah tempat kelahirannya. Akan tetapi pimpinan Uyainah saat itu
Ustman bin Mu’ammar senantiasa mengawasi segala gerak-geriknya dengan
sangat ketat sehingga terpaksa ia harus meninggalkan Uyainah menuju
Dar’iyyah. Di Dar’iyyah inilah ia bak menemukan telaga di padang pasir.
Di sini ia bertemu dengan Muhammad bin Sa’ud yang saat itu menjadi
pemimpin di daerah tersebut. Pertemuan tersebut dirasa sangat tepat,
karena keduanya saling membutuhkan; Ibnu Sa’ud membutuhkan agamawan
untuk menguatkan basis dukungan politiknya, sementara Ibnu Abdil Wahab
membutuhkan penguasa untuk menjamin proses penyebaran ideologinya[12].
Abdul Aziz Ibnu Saud & Saudara2nya
Dakwah aliran Wahabi mulai mengalami perubahan yang lumayan
signifikan ketika memanfaatkan kekuatan politik tersebut. Dengan adanya
kesepakatan saling menguntungkan, maka sang pimpinan Dar’iyyah, Ibnu
Sa’ud memerintahkan seluruh penduduk Dar’iyyah untuk mendukung dakwah
yang disebarkan oleh Ibnu Abdil Wahab tersebut[13]. Oleh sebab itu
kesepakatan bahwa pemegang kekuasaan politik harus dari keturunan Ibnu
Su’ud dan kekuasaan paham agama harus dari keturunan Ibnu Abdil Wahab
masih sangat kentara dan terlestarikan sampai di zaman kita sekarang
ini.
Menurut sebagian ulama, peperangan yang terjadi antara aliran wahabi
dengan pemimpin daerah Makkah Syarif Mas’ud serta pemimpin Mesir
Muhammad Ali Basya dan anaknya Ibrahim Basya tidak murni perang akibat
perebutan wilayah. Akan tetapi hal itu lebih kepada sebuah peperangan
ideologi agama[14].
B. Spirit “Takfir” Ibnu Abdil Wahab; Statemen “Takfiri” Dalam Kitab dan Risalahnya.
Nampaknya Ibnu Abdil Wahab terlalu berlebihan dalam mewujudkan
keinginannya untuk melakukan purifikasi tauhid dalam setiap ritme
dakwahnya. Hal ini menyebabkan adanya pengkafiran terhadap kaum muslimin
secara besar-besaran yang dengan sengaja maupun tidak telah ia lakukan
dalam beberapa kitab dan risalahnya. Sikap takfiri (suka mengkafirkan)
merupakan sikap paling mashur yang disematkan para ulama kepada IAW.
Oleh karenanya, sebagian ulama menyamakan kelompok wahabi dengan
kelompok Khawarij yang terkenal suka mengkafirkan di era sahabat. Vonis
takfir merupakan legalisasi awal bagi para pengikutnya untuk membantai
kaum muslimin yang tidak sepaham dalam banyak peperangan yang terjadi
antara kelompok wahabi dengan kaum muslimin. Takfir dan perang ibarat
dua sisi mata uang yang tidak bisa dipisahkan dan menjadi pilihan IAW
dalam menyebarkan ideologinya. Hal ini sangat kentara jika kita membaca
pesan-pesannya dalam beberapa tulisannya, seperti Al Qawaaid Al Arba’ah,
Kasyfu Asy Syubhat, Kitab Tauhid dan lain-lain. Dalam kitab-kitabnya
tersebut, setiap kali ia selesai mensejajarkan identitas kaum muslimin
(non-wahabi) dengan kaum musyrikin di zaman Nabi, ia senantiasa
menutupnya dengan informasi bahwa Nabi saw. memerangi kaum musyrikin
tersebut. Hal ini untuk mendoktrin para pengikutnya agar tidak gentar
untuk memerangi kaum muslimin yang tidak seideologi. Karena dalam
pandangannya, hakekat perang tersebut adalah jihad di jalan Allah demi
menegakkan agama-Nya[15].
Sikap ekstrim tersebut mendapat kecaman dari berbagai kalangan ulama,
baik yang menentang maupun yang mendukung dakwahnya secara umum.
Diantara ulama yang memuji dakwah IAW, namun mengkritik manhaj
takfirinya adalah Asy Syaukani. Meskipun Syaukani memuji dakwahnya
secara umum, namun ia pun menyayangkan sikap takfiri yang menjangkiti
manhaj dan para pengikutnya, ia berkata, “Akan tetapi mereka berpendapat
bahwa orang yang tidak tunduk kepada pemimpin Najd dan mematuhi segala
perintahnya maka orang tersebut telah keluar dari agama Islam” (al Badr
ath Thaali’: 2/ 5). Demikian pula Manshur al Hazimi, meskipun ia memuji
dakwahnya secara umum, namun ia mengkritisinya dalam dua hal; (1)
Pengkafiran terhadap kaum muslimin hanya karena adanya perbedaan, (2)
memerangi kaum muslimin tanpa dibarengi hujjah dan burhan (Abjadul Ulum:
3/ 194). Syekh Shiddiq Hasan Khan juga menyatakan bahwa para ahli
hadits berlepas diri dari pemahaman wahabiyyah. Karena yang mereka tahu
hanyalah pertumpahan darah[16].
Sedangkan dari kalangan ulama yang berseberangan pemikiran dengannya,
sebut saja Syekh Ibnu Afaliq al Hambali yang pernah mengomentari sosok
IAW dengan berkata, “Dia (IAW) telah bersumpah dengan sumpah yang keji
bahwa orang-orang yahudi dan kaum musyrikin lebih baik dari pada umat
ini”[17]. Syekh Saulaiman bin Suhaim al Hambali juga pernah berkomentar,
“Barang siapa yang tidak sepakat dengan segala apa yang ia (IAW)
katakan dan bersaksi bahwa perkataannya itu benar, maka pasti akan
divonis kafir. Dan barang siapa yang sepakat dan membenarkan segala
perkataannya maka ia akan berkata kepada orang tersebut, “Kamu orang
yang bertauhid”. Meskipun orang tersebut jelas-jelas fasiq”[18]. Syekh
Ustman bin Manshur al Hambali as Salafy an Najdi yang merupakan salah
satu hakim pada pemerintahan para amir Daulah Su’udiyyah II, ia pernah
berkata, “Allah telah memberi ujian kepada penduduk Najd, bahkan kepada
penduduk Jazirah Arab, dengan adanya orang yang keluar kepada mereka dan
melakukan pengkafiran atas umat Islam, baik yang khusus (ulama) maupun
orang awam, dan memerangi mereka secara umum, kecuali orang yang sepakat
dengan perkataannya”. Beliau juga berkata, “Akan tetapi lelaki ini
(IAW) telah menjadikan ketaatan kepadanya sebagai rukun keenam dalam
rukun Islam”[19]. Bahkan saudaranya sendiri, Syekh Sulaiman bin Abdul
Wahab pernah berkata, “Wahai Muhammad ibn Abdil Wahab, berapa rukun
Islam?”. Ia menjawab, “Lima”. Syekh Sulaiman berkata, “Kamu
menjadikannya enam. Yang keenam: orang yang tidak mengikutimu maka tidak
dihukumi sebagai muslim. Ini menurutmu adalah rukun Islam yang
keenam”[20].
Ungkapan beberapa ulama di atas mengenai sosok Ibnu Abdil Wahab
bukanlah isapan jempol belaka. Statemen-statemen takfiri dengan mudah
dapat dijumpai di dalam kitab atau risalah-risalah yang ia tulis. Agar
hal ini tidak dianggap sebagai tuduhan belaka, maka penulis akan
menukilkan secara langsung statemen-statemen takfiri tersebut dari
kitab-kitab IAW atau dari beberapa kitab yang menukilnya. Penulis hanya
akan sedikit memberi komentar terhadap statemen-statemen tersebut,
karena sebenarnya statemen takfiri tersebut tanpa dikomentari pun sudah
sangat gamblang maksud dan tujuannya sehingga mudah dicerna oleh seorang
akademisi yang melek ilmu syariat.
Kasyfu Asy Syubhaat dan Doktrin Takfir
Kitab “Kasyfu asy Syubhaat” adalah salah satu kitab Ibnu Abdil Wahab
yang sangat gamblang menjelaskan kerangka berpikirnya. Meskipun kitab
ini sangat kecil, namun berisi detail mengenai doktrin ideologi IAW
kepada para pengikutnya. Secara global buku ini didiktekan kepada para
pengikutnya agar mereka memahami sifat-sifat kaum musyrikin dan
sifat-sifat kaum muslimin menurut versinya sendiri. Dalam buku ini ia
berusaha mensejajarkan kaum muslimin yang mengamalkan tabarruk, tawasul
dan sejenisnya dengan kaum musyrikin di era Nabi saw.. Pensejajaran ini
merupakan langkah awal untuk menghalalkan darah dan harta kaum muslimin,
sebagaimana halalnya darah dan harta kaum musyrikin yang menentang
dakwah Nabi saw.. Oleh karena itu, IAW tidak segan-segan memakai jalur
kekerasan atau perang untuk menyebarkan dakwahnya ini di kalangan kaum
muslimin.
Dalam permulaan kitab “Kasyfu Syubhaat” ini Ibnu Abdil Wahab berkata:
“Ketahuilah –semoga Allah merahmatimu- bahwa tauhid adalah mengesakan
Allah dalam beribadah. Itu adalah agama para rasul yang telah diutus
oleh Allah kepada para hamba-Nya. Rasul pertama adalah Nuh a.s. yang
telah Allah utus kepada kaumnya tatkala kaumnya ghuluww (berlebihan)
pada kaum shalihin; Waddan, Suwa’an, Yaghuts, Ya’uq dan Nasr”[21].
Pernyataan pembuka ini begitu sangat manis dan halus untuk dijadikan
langkah awal takfir kaum muslimin yang berbeda ideologi, sebagaimana
dalam statemen-statemen setelahnya. Sebagaimana telah disinggung
sebelumnya bahwa aktivitas seperti tabaruk, tawasul dan sejenisnya dalam
pandangan IAW merupakan bentuk “ghuluww” kepada kaum shalihin. Bahkan
ia menganggapnya sebagai bentuk ibadah kepada mereka. Oleh karenanya hal
itu ia vonis sebagai sebuah kesyirikan. Terkait dengan statemen IAW di
atas, ia berusaha memberikan sebuah doktrin perdana kepada para
pengikutnya bahwa Nabi Nuh a.s. mendakwahkan tauhid kepada suatu kaum
yang berbuat “ghuluww” kepada kaum shalihin. Dari doktrin perdana ini ia
berharap tercipta sebuah gambaran yang sama di benak setiap pengikutnya
bahwa keberadaanya di tengah kaum muslimin (yang tidak seideologi) saat
itu sama persis dengan keberadaan Nuh a.s. di tengah kaum musyrikin di
masanya. Jika harapan itu terwujud maka dengan sangat mudah sekali para
pengikutnya dapat digerakkan untuk memerangi kaum muslimin yang tidak
sepaham dengannya, karena kaum muslimin saat itu akan secara otomatis
tervonis musyrik dan halal untuk diperangi.
Kondisi kaum Nabi Nuh a.s. saat itu tentunya sangat berbeda 180%
dengan kaum muslimin yang hidup di jaman IAW. Karena kaum Nabi Nuh a.s.
saat itu tidak hanya sekedar ghuluww terhadap kaum shalihin. Akan tetapi
mereka secara terang-terangan telah menyatakan menyembah
berhala-berhala kaum shalihin yang mereka pahat sendiri. Pernyataannya
IAW di atas secara tidak langsung merupakan takfir terhadap kaum
muslimin yang berseberangan dengan pola pikirnya.
Tidak berhenti sampai di situ, IAW mencoba untuk mendeskripsikan
sifat-sifat kaum musyrikin di era Nabi saw. dan secara paksa
menyamakannya dengan sifat-sifat kaum muslimin di eranya, ia berkata:
“Dan rasul yang terakhir adalah Muhammad saw., dialah yang
menghancurkan gambar-gambar kaum shalihin itu. Allah mengutusnya kepada
suatu kaum yang beribadah, menunaikan haji, bersedekah dan banyak
berdzikir kepada Allah. Akan tetapi mereka (kaum kafir Quraisy)
menjadikan sebagian makhluk sebagai perantara antara mereka dengan
Allah”[22].
Dari statement di atas kita dapat memahami bahwa IAW ingin menggiring
pemahaman para pengikutnya agar berkesimpulan bahwa kaum muslimin tak
ubahnya seperti kaum musyrikin. Dan jika Nabi Muhammad saw. memerangi
kaum musyrikin dengan sifat-sifat yang telah disebutkan maka kita pun
harus memerangi kaum muslimin yang telah musyrik karena memiliki
kesesuaian sifat dengan kaum musyrikin di zaman Nabi. Padahal secara
tinjauan historis klaim sifat-sifat tersebut tidak dapat dibenarkan.
Kita tidak menemukan catatan sejarah yang menyatakan bahwa kaum
musyrikin beribadah, banyak berdzikir dan menunaikan haji sebagaimana
cara kaum muslimin di era IAW menunaikannya. Yang kita temukan justru
kaum musyrikin tersebut menyembah berhala, tidak mengimani hari kiamat
dan hari kebangkitan, serta mengingkari risalah para nabi secara
keseluruhan. Bagaimana bisa disejajarkan antara kaum muslimin yang
mengimani nubuwwah (kenabian) dengan kaum musyrikin yang tidak
mengimaninya sama sekali?!. Adakah sifat-sifat pengingkaran tersebut
dalam diri kaum muslimin yang menyelisihi ajaran IAW?. Tentu jawabannya
tidak ada. Permasalahan khilafiyyah semisal tabarruk, istighatsah dan
tawassul menjerumuskan IAW ke jurang yang sama dengan apa yang ia
tuduhkan kepada lawan ideologinya; ghuluww. Ia sangat berlebihan dalam
mensikapi permasalahan ini. Padahal seluruh permasalahan yang ia ingkari
terhadap kaum muslimin saat itu telah menjadi amalan mayoritas umat ini
dan memiliki landasan argumentasi yang kuat, baik secara historis
maupun empiris.
Setelah mencoba mensejajarkan sifat kaum muslimin dengan sifat kaum musyrikin, IAW menutupnya dengan pernyataan demikian:
“Jika telah terbukti bahwa mereka (kaum musyrikin) mengakui semua
ini, namun tidak menjadikan mereka masuk dalam tauhid yang didakwahkan
oleh Rasulullah saw., maka kamu telah mengetahui bahwa tauhid yang
mereka ingkari adalah tauhid ibadah (uluhiyyah) yang disebut oleh kaum
musyrikin di zaman kita dengan sebutan i’tiqad”[23].
Pernyataan di atas begitu sangat gamblang bahwa IAW telah memvonis
kaum muslimin yang berseberangan dengannya sebagai kaum musyrikin.
Karena kata i’tiqad sering dipakai oleh para ulama dalam mengarang kitab
tauhid, seperti kitab I’tiqaad wal Hidaayah ila Sabiil ar Rasyaad karya
Imam Baihaqi, al Iqtishaad fil I’tiqaad karya Imam al Ghazali dan masih
banyak lagi.
Lebih gamblang lagi, IAW mengatakan:
“Wahai orang musyrik! Aku tidak mengetahui makna Al Quran dan Hadits Nabi saw. yang kamu gunakan untuk berdalil kepadaku”[24].
Dari pernyataan di atas kita patut mempertanyakan: adakah kaum
musyrikin yang melawan IAW dengan berdalil dari Al Quran dan Sunnah?.
Pernyataan di atas semakin mempertegas bahwa yang ia maksud dengan
orang-orang musyrik itu adalah kaum muslimin yang tidak mau mengamini
dakwah yang ia tawarkan. Tentunya sudah jamak diketahui bahwa benturan
ideologi yang terjadi antara IAW dan lawan-lawannya sebenarnya benturan
pemahaman ideologi antara sesama kaum muslimin. Bukan benturan antara
IAW dengan kaum non-muslim. Hanya saja IAW terlalu berlebihan dalam
memvonis syirik kaum muslimin yang berseberangan dengannya.
Statemen-statemen di atas hanyalah sedikit dari sekian banyak
statemen pengkafiran yang bertaburan rata dari awal sampai akhir risalah
kecil itu. Dalam penelitiannya, Syekh Hasan bin Farhan, menemukan
banyak sekali sebuah statemen pengkafiran dalam beberapa risalah IAW
yang terkumpul dalam sebuah kitab yang berjudul “Ad Durar As Sunniyyah”.
Diantara statemen-statemen tersebut ada yang langsung disematkan kepada
orang tertentu, ada juga yang dipukulkan secara merata. Di dalam kitab
tersebut terdapat pengkafiran IAW terhadap para ulama Najd dan para
hakimnya, bahwa mereka tidak mengetahui ajaran Islam, dia berkata:
“Sungguh aku telah menuntut ilmu sampai orang-orang yang mengenalku
berkeyakinan bahwa aku telah menjadi alim. Padahal saat itu aku belum
mengetahui makna “Laa Ilaaha Illallah”, juga tidak tahu tentang agama
Islam, sebelum anugerah yang diberikan oleh Allah ini. Begitu juga para
guruku, tidak ada seorangpun yang mengetahui hal itu (makna Laa Ilaaha
Illallah). Maka barang siapa yang mengira bahwa ada ulama yang
mengetahui makna “Laa Ilaaha Illallah” atau mengetahui makna islam
sebelum saat ini, atau mengira bahwa salah satu diantara para guruku
mengetahuinya, maka sungguh dia telah berdusta dan mengada-ada, serta
menipu manusia dan memuji dirinya dengan hal yang tidak pantas baginya”.
(Ad Durar As Sunniyah: 10/ 51)[25].
Vonis kafir juga disematkan secara personal, Syekh Sulaiman
bin Suhaim Al Hambali adalah salah satu korban vonis sadis itu. Dalam
risalahnya IAW berkata:
“Kami sebutkan kepadamu bahwasannya kamu dan bapakmu secara
terang-terangan telah terjerumus ke dalam kekafiran, kesyirikan, dan
kemunafikan…kamu dan bapakmu senantiasa bersungguh-sungguh memusuhi
agama ini, baik malam maupun siang!!..kamu adalah seorang penentang yang
sesat dari ilmu yang terpilih, kafir terhadap islam!!…dan ini buktinya
kitab-kitab kalian isinya penuh dengan kekufuran kalian!!”. (Ad Durar As
Sunniyah: 10/ 31)[26].
Dalam beberapa halaman setelahnya, IAW berkata:
“Adapun Ibnu Abdil Lathif, Ibnu ‘Afaliq dan Ibnu Mutthaliq, mereka
itu adalah para penghina tauhid!… dan Ibnu Fairuz adalah orang yang
paling dekat dengan islam dari kalangan mereka”. (Ad Durar As Sunniyah:
10/ 78)[27].
Dari ketiga statemen yang dinukil oleh Syekh Hasan bin Farhan di atas
semakin menambah dan memperkuat sebuah asumsi bahwa sebenarnya IAW
memang benar-benar ingin merombak agama ini dari akarnya. Bahkan kalau
kita cermati dari setiap alur tulisannya, ia berusaha menggiring
pemahaman kaum baduwi yang menjadi obyek dakwahnya untuk berkeyakinan
penuh bahwa perbuatan-perbuatan yang dilakukan oleh kaum muslimin kala
itu tidak lebih dari perbuatan kaum musyrikin di zaman Nabi Saw. Jika
pemahaman ini sudah dapat diterima, maka konsekwuensi yang harus
dilakukan adalah memerangi mereka dengan senjata karena darah dan harta
mereka hukumnya sudah halal, sebagaimana Nabi saw. memerangi kaum
musyrikin.
Ajakan untuk memerangi kaum muslimin itu begitu jelas dalam
statemen-statemen IAW setiap kali selesai mendeskripsikan persamaan
antara kaum muslimin dan kaum musyrikin di era Nabi saw.. Diantaranya
adalah perkataannya:
“Dan kamu mengetahui bahwa Rasulullah saw. telah memerangi mereka karena kesyirikan ini”[28].
Dalam catatannya, Syekh Hasan bin Farhan juga tidak meninggalkan
sifat keobyektifitasannya. Beliau juga menukil statemen-statemen IAW
yang menepis sikap “takfiri” yang disematkan pada dirinya. Bahkan ia
menuduh balik bahwa itu hanyalah propaganda lawan ideologinya. IAW
mengingkari bahwa telah memberhangus kitab-kitab empat madzhab (Ad Durar
As Sunniyah: 1/ 34, 10/ 13), padahal di tempat yang lain ia mengatakan
bahwa kitab-kitab tersebut adalah “’ainus syirk” (wujud kesyirikan) (Ad
Durar: 2/ 59), juga mengingkari bahwa ia telah mengkafirkan orang-orang
yang bertawassul dengan orang-orang shaleh (Ad Durar: 10/ 13). Juga
mengingkari telah mengkafirkan Imam Al Busyiri sebab perkataannya dalam
“nida’” (memanggil) Nabi Saw dengan sebutan “Yaa akramal khalq” (Ad
Durar: 9/ 34), padahal ia mengkafirkan orang yang menyakini hal itu
meskipun tidak menyebutkan nama Imam Al Busyiri. Juga mengingkari
pengkafiran terhadap Ibnu Farid (Ad Durar: 9/ 34), Ibnu Arabi (Ad Durar:
9/ 34) padahal di tempat yang lain ia mengatakan bahwa Ibnu Arabi
adalah lebih kafir dari pada Fir’aun. Bahkan dia juga mengkafirkan orang
yang tidak mengkafirkan Ibnu Arabi dan kelompoknya (Ad Durar: 10/ 2,
25/ 45). Dia juga mengingkari bahwa telah mengkafirkan orang yang
bersumpah (al half) dengan selain Allah (Ad Durar: 9/ 34, 10/ 13). Juga
mengingkari bahwa telah membakar kitab “Dalaailul Khairat” (9/ 80, 34),
padahal tatkala mereka (orang-orang wahabi) memasuki kota Makkah mereka
membakar kitab tersebut (1/ 228)[29].
Dalam menyikapi sikap “tanaqudh” (kontradiktif) ini, Syekh Hasan bin Farhan memberikan sebuah kesimpulan bahwa:
1. Dalam kitab-kitab dan kumpulan risalahnya, sering ditemukan
statemen kontradiktif. IAW sering mengingkari sesuatu yang ada di kitab
dan risalahnya sendiri, serta berbalik menuduh orang lain telah berdusta
atas dirinya.
2. Karena segala yang dituduhkan oleh lawan-lawan ideologinya itu ada
di dalam kitab dan risalahnya sendiri. Hal ini menunjukkan betapa kuat
dan telitinya lawan-lawan IAW dalam mengkritisi manhaj dakwahnya.
3. Adanya kontradiksi statemen itu bisa jadi terjadi karena IAW lupa
statemen-statemen sebelumnya, atau hal itu lahir karena alasan politis
semata.
4. Boleh jadi orang-orang wahabi kotemporer yang mencetak kitab-kitab
dan risalah-risalah IAW telah berdusta atas namanya. Tapi hal ini
sangat kecil kemungkinannya, karena dalam kitab dan risalah yang
terdapat pengingkaran akan “takfir” justru ditemukan sikap “takfir” itu
sendiri meskipun secara tersirat.
Sikap “Takfiri” Para Pengikut dan Perpecahan Intern
Warisan sikap suka memvonis kafir kelompok dan orang yang
bersebrangan pendapat tetap terabadikan sampai sekarang. Hanya saja
menurut Syekh Hasan bin Farhan tensi umbar “takfir” terkesan
kondisional, tergantung kondisi politik yang berkembang[30]. Bahkan
dalam perkembangannya pun sikap umbar “takfir” ini tidak diterapkan oleh
semua kelompok atau orang yang mengikuti manhaj dakwah Ibnu Abdil
Wahab. Mungkin hal ini disebabkan adanya sikap kontradiktif yang
terkandung dalam kitab dan risalah IAW. Hal ini tentunya akan
berpengaruh sekali pada generasi aliran wahabi setelahnya. Pasca era
IAW, orang-orang yang masih gemar menebar vonis “takfir” ini seperti
Sulaiman bin Abdullah bin Muhmmad, Hamd bin Abdul Aziz, Abdul Lathif bin
Abdur Rahman, Abdullah bin Abdur Rahman Al Babiti, Ibnu Sahman,
Abdullah bin Abdil Lathif dan lainnya[31].
Karena di dalam intern aliran wahabi masih ada pro dan kontra tentang
parameter penerapan sikap “takfir”, maka perpecahan tidak dapat
dihindari lagi. Dalam keterangannya, Syekh Hasan bin Farhan menyatakan
bahwa aliran wahabi pasca meletusnya perang teluk ke II, terbagi menjadi
4 golongan. Masing-masing dari keempat golongan itu saling memvonis
sesat kepada yang lain[32]. Akan tetapi sangat disayangkan sekali beliau
tidak menegaskan dengan gamblang keempat kelompok tersebut. Perpecahan
itu juga diamini oleh DR. Yusuf Al Qaradhawi yang dituangkan di
sela-sela bukunya yang berjudul “As Shahwah Al Islamiyah Minal Murahaqah
Ilar Rusyd”. Dalam buku ini DR. Yusuf Al Qaradhawi membagi afiliasi
aliran wahabi menjadi tiga bagian[33].
1. Sururiyyun (siyasiyyun)
Sempalan aliran wahabi ini dinisbatkan kepada seorang dai dari Syiria
yang bernama Surur Zainul Abidin. Pada awalnya dia masuk dalam barisan
pergerakan Ikhwanul Muslimin, kemudian menyempal dan membuat gerakan
sendiri. Kelompok ini mempunyai ambisi politik yang sangat kuat,
sebagaimana ambisi mereka dalam dakwah tauhid. Kelompok ini menentang
keras ikut campur Amerika dalam perang teluk ke II, serta menentang
kebijakan politik Kerajaan Saudi Arabiah yang terkesan lamban. Oleh
sebab itu, para tokoh gerakan ini acap kali keluar-masuk penjara sebab
arogansi politik itu. Dalam wilayah Saudi Arabiah tokoh-tokoh seperti
Salman Audah, Safar Hawali, Aid Al Qarni dan lainnya yang termasuk
sealur dengan sempalan aliran wahabi ini mengalami pencekalan dari
pemerintah dan ulama setempat.
Syaikh Nashiruddin Albani rahimahullah
2. Al Baniyyun
Kelompok ini dinisbatkan kepada Syekh Muhammad Nasiruddin Al Albani.
Garapan yang menjadi titik tekan kelompok ini adalah “harbu tamadzhub”
(memerangi tradisi bermadzhab) atau taklid dengan satu madzhab tertentu
meskipun orang awam. Akan tetapi, uniknya, para pengikut kelompok ini
justru bertaklid kepada Syekh Al Bani, dan hal itu seakan-akan menjadi
madzhab yang ke lima dalam pandangan mereka.
3. Jamiyyun (Madkhaliyun)
Kelompok ini dinisbatkan kepada Syekh Aman Al Jami. Tokoh yang sangat
berpengaruh dan kesohor dalam kalangan generasi sempalan aliran wahabi
yang ini justru murid beliau yang bernama Rabi’ bin Hadi Al Madkhali.
Oleh sebab itu banyak kalangan yang menyebutkan Madkhaliyun sebagai
pengganti dari Jamiyyun. Generasi sempalan inilah yang dengan
terang-terangan melestarikan budaya takfir[34] yang menjadi ciri khas
aliran wahabi semenjak kemunculannya. Seakan menghina para ulama baik
ulama klasik maupun kontemporer adalah tugas suci utama dan pertama
mereka. Hampir tidak ada ulama umat ini yang selamat dari lisan mereka.
Taruhlah contohnya seperti Imam Nawawi pensyarah terbaik kitab shahih
Muslim dan Al Hafidz Ibnu Hajar Al Asqani[35] pensyarah terbaik kitab
shahih Bukhari. Keduanya telah tervonis sesat karena dalam masalah
akidah keduanya berafiliasi kepada Asy’ariah. Kalangan ulama kontemporer
seperti Hasan Al Banna, Sayyid Qutub, Muhammad Al Ghazali, Yusuf Al
Qardhawi, Muhammad Imarah, Fahmi Huwaidi, Ali At Thanthawi dan lainnya
tidak terlepas dari vonis sesat mereka[36].
Hasil kajian Syekh Hasan bin Farhan dan DR. Yusuf Al Qaradhawi di
atas juga dikuatkan dengan data yang berhasil dikumpulkan oleh Syekh
Abdul Ghani Ar Rifa’i. Dalam bukunya, beliau menuliskan akan adanya
sikap “takfir” yang dilakukan oleh para pengikut aliran wahabi.
Sebagaimana yang dilakukan oleh Syekh Al Qonuji dalam bukunya “Ad- Diin
al Khalish” (1/ 140), dia menyatakan bahwa taklid kepada madzhab-madzhab
yang ada merupakan bentuk dari kesyirikan. Dia juga memvonis syirik
Siti Hawa di kitab yang sama (hal: 160). Demikian juga dengan Syekh Ali
bin Muhammad bin Sinan seorang pengajar di Masjid Nabawi dan Islamic
University of Madenah dalam kitabnya “al Majmu’ al Mufid min Aqidatit
Tauhid” (hal: 55), dimana dia menyeruhkan kepada kaum muslimin untuk
memerangi tarekat-tarekat sufi sebelum akhirnya memerangi Yahudi dan
Majusi. Pengkafiran dilakukan juga oleh mereka terhadap mayoritas ulama
dunia sebagaimana yang tertera dalam kitab “Fathul Majid” (hal: 190),
juga terhadap penduduk Mesir karena mereka dianggap telah menyembah
Ahmad Al Badawi, penduduk Iraq dan sekitarnya seperti Oman dikarenakan
mereka dianggap telah menyembah Abdul Qadir Al Jailani, penduduk Syam
(Syiria) karena mereka telah dianggap menyembah Ibnu Arabi, juga
penduduk Najd dan Hijaz serta Yaman sebelum datangnya dakwah wahabi[37].
Demikian juga komentar Bin Baz dalam menanggapi tawassul seorang
sahabat Nabi yang bernama Bilal bin Al Harist Al Muzani. Dalam
komentarnya, Bin Baz mengatakan bahwa yang dilakukan sahabat tersebut
adalah termasuk hal yang menjurus kepada kesyirikan[38]. Tidak mau
ketinggalan Syekh Ibnu Utsaimin dalam kitabnya “Liqaul Babil Maftuh”
telah mengeluarkan Al Hafidz Ibnu Hajar Al Asqalani dan Imam Nawawi dari
barisan ahlussunnah wal jama’ah. Dan masih banyak lagi spirit-spirit
takfir yang diperagakan oleh para punggawa aliran wahabi dari zaman ke
zaman.
Bukan hanya di dunia Arab, ternyata fenomena takfir dewasa ini juga
laris bak kacang goreng di pasaran wacana tanah air kita. Baru-baru ini
telah terjadi perang takfiri antar sesama generasi wahabi sendiri. Hal
ini bermula dari sebuah buku yang dikarang oleh Imam Samudra yang
merupakan salah satu pelaku bom Bali yang berjudul “Aku Melawan
Teroris”. Buku ini dapat bantahan sangat keras dari salah seorang
generasi wahabi tanah air yang beraliran keras yang bernama Luqman bin
Muhammad Ba’abduh[39] dalam bukunya “Mereka Adalah Teroris; Sebuah
Tinjauan Syari’at”. Ternyata, tulisan yang mulanya ingin ditujukan
kepada Imam Samudra melebar kemana-mana, sehingga banyak kalangan dari
kalangan wahabi sendiri yang kebakaran jenggot, karena tersinggung. Oleh
sebab itu, tergeraklah seorang Abduh Zulfidar Akaha –yang sebenarnya
juga termasuk generasi aliran wahabi- untuk mengangkat penanya guna
membantah buku Luqman tersebut dalam sebuah buku yang berjudul “Siapa
Teroris? Siapa Khawarij?”. Dalam nukilannya di tengah mengkritisi
tulisan Luqman, Abduh Zulfidar mengutip sebuah pernyataan Luqman yang
bernada takfiri, yang berbunyi:
“Perlu pembaca sekalian mengetahui, bahwa penduduk Iraq itu ada dua model:
1. Rafidhah Ja’fariyyah, yang umat telah sepakat mereka itu kafir.
Kebanyakan kaum muslimin di Iraq itu fasik, khamr di kalangan mereka tak
ubahnya seperti air saja. Mereka itu bukan orang-orang shalih.
2. Sedangkan model lainnya adalah Kaum Ba’tsiyyah, yang siang dan malam selalu menyatakan:
آمنت بالبعث ربا لا شريك له
وبالعروبة دينا ما له ثانى
وبالعروبة دينا ما له ثانى
“Aku beriman kepada (kebenaran) Partai Ba’ts sebagai Rabb yang tiada
sekutunya. Dan (aku beriman kepada) Nasionalisme arab sebagai agamaku
yang tidak ada tandingannya”.
Mereka tidak memiliki agama![40].
Karena Luqman telah membatasi model penduduk Iraq itu hanya dua saja,
dan ternyata yang pertama divonis kafir sedangkan yang kedua divonis
tidak beragama. Jadi, kesimpulan yang dapat kita tangkap adalah bahwa
penduduk Iraq itu tidak ada satupun yang muslim. Dan ini tentunya hanya
sebuah lelucon atau dagelan yang selalu dijajakan tanpa adanya
penelitian yang cermat. Lebih dari itu, pernyataan semacam itu secara
jelas merupakan bentuk pangkafiran terhadap seluruh penduduk Iraq-
Na’udzubillah-. Saling serang antar sesama generasi wahabi inipun banyak
sekali bertebaran di berbagai forum diskusi di dunia maya.
Nampaknya Luqman Ba’abduh tidak rela bukunya dibantah, oleh sebab itu
dia mengeluarkan bantahan balik dengan judul buku “Menebar Dusta
Membela Teroris Khawarij”. Berita terkini mengatakan bahwa Luqman
Ba’abduh tidak berani datang saat ditantang debat terbuka oleh Abduh
Zulfidar Akaha. Akankah saling hujat antar generasi wahabi terus
berlanjut? Kita simak saja berita-berita menarik tersebut dalam layar
kaca internet dan buku-buku yang akan terbit.
C. Segi Tiga Tauhid; Rububiyyah, Uluhiyyah, Asma` Sifat
Pengkafiran yang acap kali dilontarkan oleh Syekh Ibnu Abdil Wahab
tidak terlepas dari klasifikasi tauhid yang ia terapkan. Klasifikasi
tauhid menjadi tiga; rububiyyah, uluhiyyah dan asma` sifat, sebenarnya
bukan merupakan ijtihad IAW. Akan tetapi ia hanya sekedar mengikuti apa
yang telah digagas oleh Ibnu Taimiyah jauh hari sebelumnya. Bahkan ia
bukanlah orang pertama yang mengikuti gagasan pembagian tauhid tersebut.
Sebelumnya sudah ada Ibnu Qayyim yang bisa dikatakan adalah foto copy
Ibnu Taimiyah karena hampir tidak ditemukan pendapatnya yang
bertentangan dengan gurunya tersebut. Demikian juga, Ibnu Abil ‘Izz
dalam syarah akidah tahawiyahnya[41].
Dengan pembagian tauhid menjadi tiga ini, Ibnu Taimiyah sebagai bapak
dari pembagian ini -yang selanjutkan diikuti oleh IAW- menyatakan bahwa
kaum musyrikin Quraisy sebenarnya mengakui tauhid rububiyah, yaitu
mengakui bahwa Allah adalah Sang Pencipta. Hal ia buktikan dengan
beberapa ayat, seperti firman Allah swt. yang artinya, “Kami tidak
menyembah mereka melainkan supaya mereka mendekatkan kami kepada Allah
dengan sedekat- dekatnya”. Sesungguhnya Allah akan memutuskan di antara
mereka tentang apa yang mereka berselisih padanya. Sesungguhnya Allah
tidak memberi petunjuk kepada orang-orang yang pendusta dan sangat kafir
(ingkar)”. (az Zumar: 3). Juga firman-Nya, “Dan sungguh jika kamu
bertanya kepada mereka: “Siapakah yang menciptakan langit dan bumi?”,
niscaya mereka menjawab: “Allah”.” (az Zumar: 38). Juga firman-Nya, “Dan
Sesungguhnya jika kamu tanyakan kepada mereka: “Siapakah yang
menciptakan langit dan bumi?” tentu mereka akan menjawab: “Allah”.
Katakanlah : “Segala puji bagi Allah”; tetapi kebanyakan mereka tidak
Mengetahui”. (Luqman: 25).
Satu hal penting yang ingin ditegaskan oleh Ibnu Taimiyah berdasarkan
ketiga ayat di atas, yaitu bahwa kaum musyrikin telah meyakini bahwa
Allah sebagai Tuhan (Pencipta). Dengan demikian, dalam tataran ini kaum
muslimin dan musyrikin tidak ada bedanya. Oleh sebab itu, kaum muslimin
membutuhkan dua kriteria tauhid yang lain agar benar-benar bisa
dikatakan telah masuk Islam. Kedua tauhid itu adalah tauhid uluhiyyah
dan tauhid asma` sifat. Pendapat inilah yang pada gilirannya melahirkan
sikap takfir terhadap kaum muslimin yang dipandang telah berbuat
kesyirikan karena aktivitas tabaruk dan sejenisnya. Padahal kalau kita
teliti lebih jauh, sebenarnya jawaban kaum musyrikin Quraisy dalam
ketiga ayat tersebut merupakan sebuah keterpaksaan karena tidak bisa
menjawab yang lain saat Nabi saw. mendebat mereka. Sudah jamak diketahui
bahwa Nabi saw. diperintah oleh Allah swt. untuk mendebat kaum
musyrikin dalam rangka menyebarkan agama tauhid ini, sebagaimana firman
Allah swt. yang artinya, “Dan bantahlah mereka dengan cara yang baik”.
(an Nahl: 125).
Jawaban kaum Quraisy bahwa mereka tidak menyembah berhal-berhala
melainkan hanya menjadikannya untuk mendekatkan diri kepada Allah adalah
sebuah kedustaan[42]. Jika mereka telah benar-benar mengimani bahwa
Allah adalah Tuhan atau Sang Pencipta niscaya Allah tidak akan menyuruh
mereka untuk berpikir mengenai alam semesta agar mereka beriman akan
eksistensi Allah. Itu sebagaimana perintah Allah swt. dalam firman-Nya,
“Maka apakah mereka tidak memperhatikan unta bagaimana dia diciptakan.
Dan langit, bagaimana ia ditinggikan?. Dan gunung-gunung bagaimana ia
ditegakkan?. Dan bumi bagaimana ia dihamparkan?. Maka berilah
peringatan, Karena Sesungguhnya kamu hanyalah orang yang memberi
peringatan. Kamu bukanlah orang yang berkuasa atas mereka”. (al
Ghaasyiyah: 17-22).
Bahkan sebenarnya Allah swt. pun telah menyatakan bahwa pernyataan
mereka itu adalah kedustaan, sebagaimana di akhir ayat 3 surat az Zumar
di atas yang menyatakan bahwa mereka adalah pendusta dan sangat ingkar
(kafir). Kaum musyrikin sudah biasa berdusta untuk menutupi sifat buruk
mereka. Hal ini telah dinyatakan oleh Allah swt. dalam firman-Nya,
“Mereka menyenangkan hatimu dengan mulut mereka, sedang hati mereka
menolak”. (at Taubah: 8). Bahkan kita banyak menemui ayat-ayat yang
menunjukkan bahwa kaum musyrikin tersebut sama sekali tidak mempercayai
bahwa Allah adalah Tuhan. Diantara ayat-ayat tersebut adalah firman
Allah swt., “Mereka mengambil sembahan-sembahan selain Allah, agar
mereka mendapat pertolongan”. (Yaasiin: 74), “Dan mereka berkata:
“Kehidupan Ini tidak lain hanyalah kehidupan di dunia saja, kita mati
dan kita hidup dan tidak ada yang akan membinasakan kita selain masa”,
dan mereka sekali-kali tidak mempunyai pengetahuan tentang itu, mereka
tidak lain hanyalah menduga-duga saja”. (al Jaatsiyah: 24). Dengan
banyaknya ayat yang menjelaskan bahwa kaum musyrikin telah mengingkari
adanya Allah, maka sangatlah tidak patut ada orang yang mengatakan bahwa
kaum musyrikin tersebut sebenarnya beriman akan eksistensi Allah swt..
Terkhusus masalah asma` sifat, sebenarnya Syekh Ibnu Abdil Wahab
tidak begitu banyak berbicara masalah ini. Karena sejatinya masalah ini
begitu sangat pelik dan membutuhkan energi super dan napas panjang untuk
membicarakannya. Menjelaskan ke orang awam masalah ini tidak semudah
menjelaskan masalah tauhid rububiyah dan uluhiyah dalam istilah IAW.
Namun menurut Syekh Abdul Aziz hal itu disebabkan karena penduduk Najd
tidak mengalami penyimpangan dalam tauhid asma` sifat ini[43]. Oleh
sebab itu tidak ditemukan pernyataan IAW sangat terperinci dalam hal ini
sebagaimana dalam masalah yang disebut tauhid rububiyyah dan uluhiyyah
sebelumnya. Akan tetapi demi melengkapi pembahasan ini, penulis mencoba
untuk memahami masalah ini dari para pengikutnya.
Syaikh Abdul Aziz bin Baz rahimahullah
Meskipun permasalahan ini nyaris kurang nyaring suaranya di era Ibnu
Abdil Wahab. Akan tetapi, pasca munculnya trio imam wahabi; Abdul Aziz
bin Baz, Muhammad bin Shaleh Al Utsaimin dan Muhammad Nashiruddin Al
Albani diskusi panas masalah asma` sifat lumayan cukup terangkat ke
permukaan. Bahkan dakwah dibidang ini nampaknya sudah menjadi menu utama
para pengikut wahabi. Banyak sekali buku mengenai hal ini dikarang oleh
generasi wahabi desawa ini, baik itu oleh para ulamanya maupun oleh
para pemudanya. Umumnya tulisan-tulisan mereka tersebut tidak memiliki
perbedaan signifikan antara satu dan lainnya. Bisa kita katakan sebanyak
apapun kitab yang dicetak dengan judul yang berbeda, intinya tetap sama
saja. Hal itu dikarenakan muara subtansi tulisan-tulisan itu tidak
keluar dari apa yang digagas oleh Ibnu Taimiyah dalam kitab-kitabnya
semisal Al Aqidah Al Wasithiyyah, Ar Risalah Ad Tadmuriyyah, Al Aqidah
Al Hamawiyyah, dan Dar’ut Ta’arudl (plus kumpulan fatwa dan risalahnya).
Dalam pembahasan singkat beberapa paragraf di bawah ini penulis
berusaha meringkas seraya mengkritisi pemahaman IAW pada khususnya, dan
seluruh pengikut wahabi pada umumnya, terkait masalah asma` sifat atau
lebih dikenal dengan sifat khabariyyah ini. Dalam pembahasan masalah
ini, sering sekali kita dengar dari kalangan salafi (wahabi) mengenai
dikotomi salaf dan khalaf. Salaf dalam pandangan mereka bersikap
“isbat”[44] sebagaimana yang mereka imani, sedangkan khalaf bersikap
“takwil” atau “tafwidl”. Secara garis besar, setidaknya ada 4 poin kredo
mereka dalam berinteraksi dengan ayat dan hadis sifat:
1. Menggolongkan ayat dan hadis sifat tersebut ke dalam golongan ayat dan hadis muhkamât.
2. Boleh mentafsirkan ayat dan hadis sifat.
3. Memahami ayat dan hadis sifat itu sesuai dhahirnya.
4. Tidak mentafwidl dan mentakwilkannya.
2. Boleh mentafsirkan ayat dan hadis sifat.
3. Memahami ayat dan hadis sifat itu sesuai dhahirnya.
4. Tidak mentafwidl dan mentakwilkannya.
Dari keempat kredo dasar tersebut, kita akan mencoba untuk
mengkritisinya dengan cara merujuk keabsahannya dari berbagai kitab dan
disiplin ilmu keislaman. Dalam beberapa literatur, mereka selalu
mengklaim bahwa kredo dasar mereka inilah merupakan kredo dasar salaf
dan ahlussunnah. Benarkah klaim semacam itu dapat teruji secara ilmiah?.
Jawabannya akan penulis jelentrehkan perpoin.
Kredo Pertama
Dalam kredo pertamanya, aliran wahabi menggolongkan ayat dan hadis
sifat ke dalam golongan ayat dan hadis muhkamat. Keputusan ini nampaknya
berlawanan dengan apa yang dipaparkan oleh para ahli ulumul Quran,
seperti Zarkasyi dalam Al Burhan[45], Suyuthi dalam Al Itqan[46],
Zurqani dalam Manahilul ‘Irfan[47]. Begitu juga bersebrangan dengan para
ulama hadis seperti Imam Al Khattabi dalam Ma’alim Sunan, Imam Al
Baihaqi dalam Asma’ Wa Sifat[48] dan Imam Ibnu Hajar dalam Fathul
Bari[49]. Demikian juga dengan pakar usul fikih semisal As Syathibi
dalam muwafaqatnya[50], pakar sejarah Ibnu Khaldun dalam
Muqaddimahnya[51] dan masih banyak lagi.
Kredo Kedua
Dalam masalah bolehnya mentafsiri ayat dan hadis sifat tersebut.
Ternyata aliran wahabi juga bersebrangan dengan riwayat-riwayat dari
generasi salaf. Kredo Aimmah Salaf justru tidak memperbolehkan untuk
mentafsiri ayat dan hadis sifat tersebut. Mereka mencukupkan diri untuk
mengimani tanpa mencari maknanya. Hal ini sebagaimana yang diriwayatkan
oleh Imam At Turmudzi dari Sufyan At Tsauri, Malik bin Anas, Ibnu
Mubarak, Ibnu ‘Uyainah, Waki’ dan lainnya[52]. Imam Ad Dzahabi juga
meriwayatkan hal yang sama dari Imam Malik[53]. Hal serupa juga diamini
oleh Imam Al Baihaqi[54]. Pendapat ini dipertajam oleh Imam Al Qurthubi
dalam tafsirnya dengan menyatakan bahwa mayoritas aimmah salaf termasuk
di dalamnya Imam Malik, tidak mentafsirkannya. Bahkan beliau memvonis
orang yang mentafsirkannya sesuai makna dhahir bahasa arab, mereka
adalah golongan musyabbihah[55]. Ketegasan yang diambil oleh Imam Al
Qurthubi ini juga sama persis dengan yang didedahkan oleh Imam
Zarkasyi[56].
Kredo Ketiga
Memahami ayat dan hadis sifat secara dhahir ada dua kemungkinan dan
pengertian. Pertama, jika yang dimaksud adalah membiarkankan ayat dan
hadis sifat itu sesuai zhahirnya (ijra’ ‘ala dzawahiriha) dengan
dibarengi sikap diam (sukut) tanpa tafsir, maka itulah sikap mayoritas
para aimmah salaf yang sering disebut tafwidl. Kedua, jika yang dimaksud
adalah membiarkan ayat dan hadis sifat itu sesuai zhahirnya dengan
dibarengi penafsiran secara tekstual bahasa arab, maka itulah yang
divonis oleh Imam Al Qurthubi dan Imam Zarkasyi sebagai sikap golongan
musyabbihah. Dan ternyata sikap aliran wahabi dalam masalah ini secara
jelas mengimani pengertian yang kedua dan secara otomatis sudah tervonis
sebagai sikap golongan kaum musyabbihah, kalau kita mengacu pada
pendapat Imam Al Qurthubi dan Imam Zarkasyi. Bahkan Imam Syatibi dalam
Al I’tishamnya ketika menjelaskan mengenai macam-macam sebab masuknya
bid’ah dalam syari’at Islam, beliau memvonis ahli bid’ah terhadap
orang-orang yang berpaham zhahiri dalam ayat dan hadis sifat ini[57].
Kredo Keempat
Dalam kredo dasar yang keempat ini mereka menolak untuk mentakwil dan
mentafwidl dalam menyikapi ayat dan hadis sifat tersebut. Mereka
memandang kedua sikap itu adalah bentuk dari sebuah kekufuran, kedustaan
dan penyimpangan. Dalam salah satu fatwanya Ibnu Taimiyah yang
merupakan sumber ide dan pikiran aliran wahabi mengeluarkan vonis bahwa
kedua sikap tersebut merupakan kekufuran dan kedustaan[58]. Tidak kalah
ekstrimnya, dalam kitabnya yang lain “Dar`u Ta’arudlil ‘Aqli Wan Naql”
Ibnu Taimiyah juga memvonis sikap tafwidl adalah sejelek-jelek perkataan
para ahli bid’ah dan atheism (ilhâd)[59]. Sikap ektrim ini diterima
dengan tanpa kritik oleh semua pengikut aliran wahabi baik yang klasik
maupun yang kontemporer.
Dalam berbagai tulisan, baik yang berwujud kitab/buku, ataupun yang
bergentayangan di situs-situs internet, mereka sering mengklaim bahwa
pemahaman mereka inilah yang sesuai dengan generasi salaf. Padahal
justru mereka inilah yang menghidupkan lagi paham-paham kaum mujassimah
dan musyabbihah yang sejak generasi salaf telah divonis sesat. Mereka
sering melabelkan beberapa cap kepada ahlussunnah yang memakai metode
takwil dengan jahmiyyah[60] dan mu’atthilah, karena telah mentakwil atau
mentafwidlkan makna asma’ wa sifat. Dalam beberapa paragraf berikut
akan kita bahas bahwa paham takwil dan tafwidl merupakan dua paham
ahlussunnah yang selalu dipakai oleh generasi salaf maupun khalaf. Hal
ini sebagaimana dijelaskan oleh Imam Nawawi[61].
a) Takwil
Takwil dalam permasalahan ayat dan hadis sifat merupakan hal yang
boleh dilakukan selagi tidak keluar dari pemahaman dan aturan gramatikal
bahasa arab itu sendiri. Karena kalau kita teliti ulang teks-teks para
ulama ahlussunnah baik salaf maupun khalaf ternyata banyak sekali yang
masih memegang sikap ini. Bahkan Ibnu Abbas yang mendapat keutamaan doa
Baginda Sayyidina Rasulillah Saw agar diberikan pemahaman atas Al
Quran[62], juga ternyata memakai metode takwil dalam beberapa kasus. Hal
ini sebagaimana takwilan beliau terhadap kata “sâq” ditakwilkan dengan
kata “syiddah”[63]. Imam Nawawi ketika menjelaskan tentang hadis “nuzul”
(turun)nya Allah di sepertiga malam terakhir menukil bahwasannya Imam
Malik –rahimahullah- mentakwilkannya bahwa yang turun adalah rahmat,
perkara dan malaikat-Nya[64].
Demikian juga, Al Hafidz Ibnu Katsir dalam kitabnya “Al Bidayah Wa An
Nihayah” menukil takwil Imam Ahmad bin Hambal mengenai permasalahan
maji’ (datang)nya Allah swt. yang tertera dalam surat Al Fajr: 22
ditakwilkan dengan tsawab (pahala)[65]. Tatkala mengomentari sebuah ayat
dalam surat Al Qashash yang berbunyi “kullu syain hâlik illa wajhahu”
Imam Bukhari mentakwilkan kata “wajhahu” dalam ayat tersebut dengan
“mulkahu”[66].Dalam kitab “al Asma’ wa ash Shifat” Imam Al Bahaqi juga
menukil pentakwilan Imam Bukhari terhadap kata “dhahak” dengan
“rahmah”[67]. Dan masih banyak lagi para pembesar ulama umat ini yang
memakai metode takwil dalam beberapa tempat yang berkaitan dengan asma’
wa sifat. Bahkan dalam masalah hadis Jariyah yang menyatakan bahwa Allah
itu berada di langit[68], Imam Nawawi menukil perkataan Qadli ‘Iyadl
yang menegaskan bahwa kaum muslimin telah berijma’ (bersepakat) dalam
mentakwilkan hadis tersebut[69]. Imam At Tirmidzi dalam kitab sunannya
juga memakai metode takwil ini ketika mengomentari hadis yang berbunyi
“lau adla ahadukum bihablin lahabatha ‘alallah” (hadis nomor: 3298),
beliau mentakwilkannya dengan “ilmullah”[70]. Pentakwilan Imam Tirmidzi
ini divonis oleh Ibnu Taimiyah sebagai sebuah pentakwilan yang sangat
fatal kesalahannya (dhahirul fasad) karena sejenis dengan takwil sekte
Jahmiyyah[71]. Vonis serupa diikuti oleh murid yang setia mengikutinya
Ibnu Qoyyim Al Jauziyyah, dalam kitabnya “As Shawaiq Al Mursalah”[72].
Sebenarnya masih banyak para ulama baik klasik (salaf) ataupun
kontemporer (khalaf) yang masih melakukan metode takwil ini dalam
beberapa tempat, seperti Imam Nadlar bin Syumail, Hisyam bin ‘Ubaid,
Sufyan At Tsauri, Sufyan bin ‘Uyainah, Ibnu Jarir At Thabari, Ibnu
Hibban, Abu Hasan Al Asy’ari, Imam Baihaqi, Ibnul Jauzi, Imam Nawawi, Al
Hafidz Ibnu Hajar dan seabrek ulama tafsir, hadis dan fikih lainnya.
b) Tafwidl
Metode pensikapan kedua yang sangat getol diperangi oleh aliran
wahabi adalah tafwidl. Ciri metode ini adalah tidak mentafsirkan ayat
atau hadis sifat tersebut secara harfiyyah (tekstual). Akan tetapi
mengimani dan membenarkan teks-teks itu seraya menyerahkan maknanya
kepada Allah swt.. Sebenarnya banyak sekali para ulama yang juga
berpegang teguh dengan metode ini dibeberapa tempat. Dalam syarah shahih
muslim, Imam Nawawi mengatakan bahwa mayoritas ulama generasi salaf
menggunakan metode ini dalam berinteraksi dengan ayat dan hadis
sifat[73]. Dengan adanya pernyataan Imam Nawawi ini rasanya agak
mengherankan jika Ibnu Taimiyah dan para pengikutnya (aliran wahabi),
memvonisnya kafir dan mulhid (atheis).
Ibnu Qudamah dalam “Lum’atul I’tiqad” menukil dua riwayat imam umat
ini; Imam Syafi’I dan Imam Ahmad, mengenai permasalahan teks-teks ayat
dan hadis sifat. Setelah penukilan perkataan kedua imam tersebut, Ibnu
Qudamah memberikan kesimpulan bahwa ayat dan hadis sifat tersebut harus
diimani dan diterima, tidak ditakwil, serta diriwayatkan lafadlnya saja
tanpa harus menentukan maknanya seraya menyerahkan maknanya kepada Dzat
yang berfirman[74]. Pengertian serupa juga dijelaskan oleh Imam Al
Baihaqi ketika menjelaskan akidah ahli hadis dalam kitab I’tiqadnya[75],
Imam Al Ghazali dalam Qowaidul ‘Aqaid[76] dan Iljamul Awwam ‘an ilmi
kalam[77], Imam Fakhruddin Ar Razi dalam Asasus Taqdis[78], Ma’alim fi
Usuliddin[79], dan kitab Arba’innya[80]. Tidak mau ketinggalan Imam
Dzahabi yang merupakan salah satu murid Ibnu Taimiyah yang berbeda dari
pemahaman gurunya juga mengeluarkan statemen tafwidl ini dalam kitab
Siyar A’lam Nubala[81]. Imam Suyuthi dalam Al Itqan mengeluarkan
statemen yang tidak berbeda dengan apa yang dikatakan oleh para ulama
ahlussunnah pendahulunya bahwa madzhab tafwidl ini merupakan madzhab
mayoritas ahlussunnah dari generasi salaf dan ahlu hadis[82]. Dan
seabrek ulama ahlussunnah lainnya.
Jama’ah Salafi Ust. Mahrus Ali
Imam Abu Zahrah dalam tarikhnya ketika membicarakan aliran wahabiyyah
beliau menyatakan dalam poin ke-7 bahwa aliran wahabiyah telah
memperluas cakupan makna bid’ah. Perluasan makna bid’ah itu beliau
katakan sebagai sebuah tindakan yang aneh[83]. Hal ini memang sangat
wajar ketika melihat berbagai pendapat yang dikeluarkan oleh kelompok
ini. Bahkan tidak jarang beberapa pendapat yang menyalahi jumhur ulama.
Satu kasus yang selama ini getol sekali diperangi oleh mereka adalah
pembagian pengertian bid’ah menjadi dua; hasanah (baik) dan sayyi’ah
(jelek). Mereka sangat alergi sekali dengan pembagian makna bid’ah ini.
Padahal kalau kita mau me-rechek pemahaman ini secara seksama di
beberapa literatur islam klasik, maka kita akan menemukan bahwa para
pembesar umat ini baik salaf maupun khalaf seakan sepakat untuk
membaginya menjadi dua atau bahkan lebih.
Yang paling sangat mashur dalam pembagian bid’ah menjadi dua ini
adalah Imam Syafii –rahimahullah-. Pendapat Imam Syafii ini dinukil oleh
Imam Baihaqi dengan sanad muttasil dalam manaqib Syafii. Juga oleh Al
Hafidz Ibnu Asakir dalam tabyinnya[84] dan Imam Suyuthi dalam husnul
maqsid[85]. Pembagian yang dilakukan oleh Imam Syafii ini berlandaskan
pada perkataan Sayyidina Umar r.a[86] dalam permasalahan shalat tarawih
berjama’ah[87]. Pembagian pengertian seperti yang dipahami oleh Imam
Syafii inipun banyak sekali dianut oleh jumhur ulama umat ini seperti
Imam Al Ghazali, Ibnu Atsir[88], Al Hafidz Badruddin Al Aini[89], Al
Hafidz Ibnu Hajar Al Asqalani[90], Imam Al Karmani[91]. Bahkan Imam Izz
bin Abdussalam memperluas lagi pembagian bid’ah tersebut sesuai
pembagian hukum taklifiyyah; wajib, sunnah, haram, makruh dan mubah[92].
Pendapat Imam Izz bin Abdussalam ini diikuti oleh Imam Nawawi dalam
beberapa kitabnya[93].
E. Para Penentang Aliran Wahabi
Pemahaman yang sangat ektrim ini memicu timbulnya para penentang baik
dari kalangan yang tidak kalah ekstrimnya maupun yang masih berpegang
pada sikap wasathiyyah (moderat). Diantara nama-nama penentang gerakan
dakwah yang diprakarsai oleh Syekh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab ini adalah:
1. Sulaiman bin Ahmad bin Suhaim Al Hambali An Najdi (1130- 1181 H).
Beliau adalah seorang ahli fikih daerah Riyadl. Ayah beliau juga
termasuk barisan para ulama yang menentang dakwah wahabi ini. Beliau
termasuk keturunan Kabilah ‘Unzah. Pasca berkuasanya sekte wahabi di
daerah Riyadl, beliau mengungsi di daerah Az Zubair sampai wafat di
sana. Beliau termasuk deretan ulama yang dikafirkan oleh Syekh Muhammad
bin Abdul Wahab.
2. Sulaiman bin Abdul Wahab At Tamimi An Najdi (1208 H) saudara
kandung Syekh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab. Kapabilitas keilmuan agama Syekh
Sulaiman melebihi saudaranya tersebut. Beliau sangat pakar dalam fikih
madzhab hambali, dan termasuk qadli (hakim) daerah Najd. Beliau
dilahirkan di daerah ‘Uyainah, menuntut ilmu di daerah Huraimala’ semasa
orang tuanya masih belum wafat. Pasca jatuhnya daerah Huraimala’ ke
tangan sekte wahabi, beliau mengungsi ke daerah Sadir. Sebelum adanya
dakwah wahabi ini, beliau mempunyai banyak pengikut di daerah ‘Uyainah
dan Dar’iyyah. Tidak jarang beliau mengirim surat kepada para
pengikutnya untuk menghindari dakwah takfiri yang ditawarkan oleh
Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab.
3. Muhammad bin Abdur Rahman bin ‘Afaliq Al Hambali Al Ahsai (1100-
1164 H). Beliau merupakan salah satu ulama daerah Ahsa’. Beliau adalah
seorang pakar fikih serta mempunyai wawasan keagamaan yang sangat luas.
Beliau mempunyai banyak karangan kitab di bidang fikih dan ilmu falak.
Karena dakwah beliaulah pimpinan daerah ‘Uyainah Ustman bin Mu’ammar
berpaling dari dakwah Syekh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab, padahal beliau
selalu berada di samping sang pemimpin. Hal ini disebabkan oleh kekuatan
argumentasi yang diberikan Ibnu ‘Afaliq, sehingga dapat membuat Ibnu
Mu’ammar berpaling dan enggan untuk menolong dakwah Muhammad bin Abdul
Wahab. Beberapa risalah Ibnu ‘Afaliq yang dikirim kepada Ibnu Mu’ammar
dapat membungkam argumen-argumen Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab. Oleh sebab
itu, Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab mengkafirkannya.
4. Abdullah Al Muwais (1175 H). Beliau seorang ahli fikih daerah
Hurmah yang terletak ditengah-tengah kawasan Najd. Nama lengkap beliau
adalah Abdullah bin Isa At Tamimi yang lebih dikenal dengan sebutan Al
Muwaisi atau Al Muwais. Beliau termasuk deretan para pembesar ulama
Najd, dan ini diakui juga oleh Syekh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab.
Perjalanan keilmuan, beliau mulai dari daerah Najd kemudian mengembara
ke daerah Syam untuk belajar kepada Syekh As Safarini. Dengan keluasan
ilmu yang beliau memiliki, beliau dapat menyakinkan Abdullah bin
Suhaim[94] untuk tidak mendukung dakwah yang diprakarsai oleh Syekh
Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab. Oleh sebab itulah Sykeh Muhammad bin Abdul
Wahab mengkafirkan beliau (lihat: ulama Najd 4/ 365).
5. Abdullah bin Ahmad bin Suhaim (1175 H), seorang ulama ahli fikih
di daerah Mujma’ah yang terletak di kawasan Al Qashim. Beliau adalah
ahli fikih madzhab hambali yang bertugas sebagai qadli (hakim) di
seluruh kawasan Sadir. Sebenarnya beliau tidak terlalu getol menolak
dakwah sekte wahabi ini. Akan tetapi dipermasalahan keliaran dalam vonis
kafir, beliau sangat menentang.
6. Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Abdul Lathif Al Ahsai. Beliau termasuk
deretan guru Syekh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab. Beliau juga termasuk dalam
deretan para penentang dakwah wahabi ini[95].
Dan masih banyak lagi para ulama yang menentang dakwah wahabi ini,
baik yang sezaman dengan Syekh Muhammad seperti yang sudah kami sebutkan
di atas[1] ataupun para ulama setelahnya.
F. Neo-Khawarij dan Nubuwwah
Paparan di atas adalah sedikit gambaran sikap keberagamaan Syekh Ibnu
Abdil Wahab dan para pengikutnya yang kelihatan sangat ekstrim dan
cenderung menyalahi konsensus dakwah jumhur ulama. Dengan adanya sebuah
sikap yang demikian ektrim, maka tidak heran jika para ulama sering
menyebutnya sebagai neo-khawarij dalam masalah takfir, dan
neo-mujassimah musyabbihah dalam masalah akidah.
Kesimpulan bahwa sebenarnya aliran wahabi ini merupakan neo-khawarij
jauh hari sudah disinyalir oleh Syekh Sulaiman bin Abdul Wahab dalam
kitabnya “As Shawaiq Al Ilahiyyah Fi Raddi ‘Alal Wahabiyyah”. Kesimpulan
yang sama diambil oleh Sayyid Ahmad bin Zaini Dahlan dalam “Ad Durar As
Sunniyyah Fi Raddi ‘Alal Wahabiyyah”[97], Imam As Shawi dalam
tafsirnya[98]. Juga Ibnu ‘Abidin dalam hasyiyahnya[99], serta Imam Abu
Zahrah dalam tarikhnya[100]. Tidak mau ketinggalan ulama ahlussunnah
kontemporer juga semakin meramekan untuk ikut-ikutan menstempel aliran
wahabi ini dengan sebutan neo-khawarij, seperti DR. Abdullah Umar Kamil
yang menulis risalah kecil bertajuk “Al Khawarij Al Judud”. Tidak mau
ketinggalan Sayyid Muhammad Zaki Ibrahim juga menulis risalah kecil
berjudul “As Salafiyyah Al Mu’ashirah Ila Aina? Wa Man Hum
Ahlussunnah?”[101]. Dan masih banyak lagi.
Hal yang unik menggelitik adalah bahwa di sana juga ada tuduhan bahwa
Syekh Ibnu Abdil Wahab ini sebenarnya menyimpan misi pengakuan dirinya
sebagai nabi. Tuduhan ini bisa dikategorikan menjadi dua kelompok; (1)
orang-orang yang menuduh bahwa IAW benar-benar mengaku sebagai nabi, dan
(2) orang-orang yang mengatakan bahwa gerak-gerik IAW baik berupa
pendapat maupun gerakannya seakan-akan ia sedang memposisikan layaknya
seorang nabi. Kelompok pertama jelas tidak berdasar, karena IAW dengan
sangat jelas menyatakan bahwa Nabi Muhammad saw. adalah penutup para
nabi. Dalam hal ini IAW berkata: “Dan aku beriman bahwa Nabi kita
Muhammad saw. adalah penutup para nabi dan para rasul. Tidaklah sah iman
seorang hamba hingga ia beriman kepada risalahnya dan bersaksi akan
kenabiannya”[102]. Sedangkan pendapat kelompok kedua bisa diterima
karena memang nyatanya dari berbagai pendapat seperti yang telah
dipaparkan, seakan-akan IAW memposisikan diri di tengah kaum muslimin
layaknya posisi Nabi saw. di tengah kaum musyrikin Quraisy.
G. Penutup
Tidak dapat dipungkiri bahwasannya kewajiban melestarikan ajaran
Islam adalah tugas setiap insan muslim. Akan tetapi proses penyampaian
ajaran itu harus melalui cara yang benar dan sesuai dengan wasathiyyah
(kemoderatan) Islam itu sendiri. Dalam sejarah Islam klasik, tervonisnya
sekte Khawarij bukan lantaran meninggalkan ibadah. Akan tetapi justru
mereka berlebihan (ekstrim) dalam memahami Islam itu sendiri, sehingga
kran toleransi dan kemoderatan Islam nyaris ditutup rapat. Bahkan spirit
takfir terdasyat dalam sejarah islam klasik diperankan oleh aliran
Khawarij ini.
Tentunya kita semua mengatahui betapa ngerinya vonis sesat yang
disematkan kepada kaum Khawarij. Oleh sebab itu, para pengikut aliran
wahabi seharusnya lebih kritis lagi dalam melihat pemahaman-pemahaman
ektrim yang terkandung di dalam literatur-literatur wahabi, baik klasik
maupun kontemporer. Demikian juga penulis tidak sepakat dengan
ektrimisme yang juga diperagakan oleh sebagian kalangan sunni sehingga
mengkafirkan aliran wahabi ini. Hal yang perlu kita yakini bersama bahwa
Syekh Muhammad bin Abdil Wahab berpendapat dan berperilaku sedemikian
rupa tidak lepas dari ijtihad beliau. Sepanjang pembacaan penulis, IAW
tidak mempunyai kepentingan politis dalam dakwahnya melainkan hanya
ingin membebaskan umat ini dari perbuatan yang ia anggap sebuah
kesyirikan.
Kewajiban kita sebagai generasi sekarang adalah belajar dari semangat
IAW dalam menyerukan umat ini untuk kembali kepada Al Quran dan Sunnah
dengan pemahaman salaf shaleh. Semangat ini tentunya harus terus menyala
dalam sanubari setiap generasi muslim. Namun hal itu jangan hanya
berhenti pada tataran semangat, melainkan harus dipahami dengan seksama
dan merujuk kepada keterangan para ulama. Demikian juga bagi para
pengikut aliran wahabi ini seyogyanya tidak menutup diri untuk lebih
meluaskan bacaan sehingga bisa keluar dari kubangan fanatik buta yang
hal ini sangat dibenci oleh IAW itu sendiri. Taklid adalah sikap yang
paling diperangi oleh IAW, akan tetapi entah mengapa para pengikutnya
justu bertaqlid buta kepadanya. Bahkan para pengikutnya pun memberikan
berbagai gelar kepada IAW, seperti imam dan syaikhul islam. Lebih unik
lagi, IAW mendapat gelar yang belum pernah disandang oleh para ulama
bahkan oleh para sahabat sekalipun, yaitu Imam Tauhid. Penulis tidak
mengetahui apakah gelar terakhir itu juga pernah disandang oleh Nabi
saw.. Tentunya hal ini bentuk ghuluww kepada seorang ulama yang mana
sikap ini begitu getol diperangi oleh IAW.
Karena keterbatasan spaces, maka penulis cukupkan pembahasan tema
yang sangat luas ini dalam beberapa paragraf singkat di atas. Semoga
pembahasan singkat ini dapat menjadi bahan kajian serius, baik bagi
orang-orang yang sedang berada dalam posisi membela aliran wahabi maupun
mereka yang menolak dakwah ini.
Wa salamun limanittaba’al Huda..!!!
Allahummah dina wahdi bina waj’alna sababan limanih tada!!
Umat Nabi Muhammad Shallallahu alaihi wa sallam umat yang bertauhid
[1] Istilah “Wahabi” ini digugat oleh para pengikut aliran wahabi
kontemporer, yang sekarang lebih dikenal dengan sebutan salafi. Berbagai
alasan telah ditulis dan dikemukan oleh para punggawa wahabi salafi
kontemporer mengenai penisbatan gerakan dakwah ini kepada Muhammad bin
Abdul Wahab. Sebenarnya, penolakan ini hanyalah merupakan upaya pelarian
agar madzhab mereka tidak terkesan berhenti pada sosok Muhammad bin
Abdul Wahab saja. Karena di beberapa kesempatan, mereka mengeklaim bahwa
dakwah mereka adalah dakwah Nabi saw. pun juga dakwah seluruh nabi
hingga nabi Adam a.s.. Jika penamaan “wahabi” ini berhasil mereka hapus
dari ingatan kaum muslimin, maka dengan mudah mereka akan mampu
mentasbihkan diri sebagai representasi yang paling absah dari generasi
salaf, atau bahkan dari agama Islam itu sendiri. Oleh karenanya, saat
ini, dengan bermandikan keringat mereka berupaya sekuat tenaga untuk
mempropagandakan nama baru bagi kelompok mereka dengan sebutan yang
lebih elegan; salafi.
Dalam upaya menghapus nama wahabi ini, para pengikut menyatakan bahwa
dari segi penamaan saja sudah salah. Orang yang mempelopori gerakan
dakwah ini bernama Muhammad bukan Abdul Wahab, mengapa penisbatannya
wahabiyah dan bukannya malah muhammadiyah?. Tentunya pernyataan dan
pertanyaan semacam ini terkesan lucu dalam pandangan para Thalibul Ilmi
dan para ulama. Sebab dalam tradisi arab, penisbatan bukan kepada nama
asli pendiri sebuah madzhab itu sudah biasa. Seseorang dikatakan Syafi’i
ketika dia berkiblat pemahaman fikihnya kepada Imam Syafi’I, meskipun
nama asli beliau adalah Muhammad bin Idris. Begitu juga penisbatan
seperti Hambali, Hanafi, Asy’ari dll. Lebih lucu lagi, mereka
mewanti-wanti kaum muslimin yang menghina kelompok wahabi ini. Karena,
menurut mereka wahabi adalah penisbatan kepada “Al Wahhab” yang
merupakan salah satu nama Allah swt.. Pernyataan yang terlalu dipaksakan
ini sungguh sangat menggelikan. Karena tidak satu pun kaum muslimin
bermaksud menisbatkan sekte yang lahir 3 abad silam kepada Dzat Yang
Maha Agung dan Mulia, Allah swt.. Bahkan logika semacam ini pun tidak
pernah dipakai oleh kelompok manapun selain wahabi ini. Madzhab adz
Dzahiri yang dipelopori oleh Daud adz Dzahiri tidak pernah mewanti-wanti
lawan madzhabnya, meskipun salah satu nama Allah adalah Adz Dzahir.
Penolakan penisbatan ulama wahabi kontemporer ini mengakibatkan
pergantian nama dari wahabi ke salafi. Oleh sebab itu, golongan salafi
yang sedang menjamur sekarang ini, tidak lain adalah generasi penerus
dari gerakan dakwah wahabi yang sudah dikenal semenjak kurang lebih 3
abad yang silam. Penggunaan istilah salafi ini telah mendapat vonis
bid’ah dari Al Allamah DR. Muhammad Said Ramadhan Al Buthi dalam kitab
beliau “As Salafiah Marhalah Zamaniyyah Mubarakah Laa Madzhabun
Islamiyyun” (lihat hal: 221).
Sebenarnya kalau kita lacak lebih jauh, penamaan aliran ini dengan
nama “wahabi” sudah diterima dengan bangga oleh para pengikut wahabi
generasi awal. Bahkan Sulaiman bin Sahman an Najdi salah satu pelopor
kelompok ini menulis sebuah kitab dengan judul “Al Hadiyyah As Saniyyah
Wa At Tuhfah Al Wahabiyyah An Najdiyyah”, judul kitab tersebut sudah
sangat jelas menggunakan diksi atau istilah wahabiyah. Hal ini juga
diamini oleh para pengikut yang lainnya semisal Muhammad bin Abdul
Lathif, Hamid Al Faqihi, Muhammad Rasyid Ridlo, Abdullah Al Qosimi,
Sulaiman Ad Dakhil, Ahmad bin Hajar Abu Thami, Mas’ud An Nadawi, Ibrahim
bin Ubaid dan lainnya. Hanya saja, Hamid al Faqihi memberi tawaran
istilah yang menurutnya lebih pas untuk para pengikut dakwah Ibnu Abdil
Wahab ini, yaitu dengan sebutan “ad Dakwah al Muhammadiyah”. Tawaran ini
pun diamini oleh Shaleh Fauzan saat mengkritik Syekh Abu Zahrah yang
menggunakan istilah wahabi dan memasukkannya dalam daftar
kelompok-kelompok baru (al Firaq al Haditsah). Jadi dari segi penerimaan
istilah wahabi ini telah terjadi perbedaan presepsi antara generasi
awal dan akhir. Akan tetapi kitab karangan Sulaiman bin Sahman adalah
satu bukti konkrit dan bantahan atas para pengikut dakwah wahabi yang
enggan untuk disebut wahabi.
[3] Lih: Tarikh Najd Ibnu Ghannam, hal: 13-14.
[4] Ibid: 13.
[5] Lihat: Al Maqaalaat As Sunniyyah, hal: 56.
[6] Lih: Al Maqalaat As Saniyyah, hal: 51.
[7] Lihat: Da’awa Munaafi`iin, karya Abdul Aziz Muhammad bin Ali al Abd al Lathif, hal: 5. Kitab ini merupakan disertasi doctoral di Universitas Imam Muhammad ibn Sa’ud al Islamiah Riyadl. Kitab ini ditulis untuk mencoba mengcounter permasalahan-permasalahan yang acap kali disematkan kepada Muhammad dan para pengikutnya.
[8] Lihat: Daiyan Walaisa Nabiyyan, hal: 82. Dalam perkataannya ini jelas terdapat takfir kepada para ulama sebelum IAW. Karena orang yang tidak mengetahui makna laa ilaha illah dan agama Islam sudah pasti ia adalah orang kafir.
[9] Mengenai polemik masalah pengakuan Ibnu Abdil Wahab menjadi nabi akan penulis bahas dalam sub pembahasan tersendiri.
[10] Lihat: Al Maqâlât Al Wafiyyah Syekh Hasan Khazbik, hal: 128
[11] Ibid, hal: 130.
[12] Lihat: Tarikh Ali Sa’ud, hal: 9.
[13] Al Maqâlât Al Wafiyyah Syekh Hasan Khazbik, hal: 128.
[14] Ibid, hal: 129.
[15] Sejarawan wahabi yang bernama Ibnu Ghannam dalam tarikhnya menyebutkan ada sekitar 300 perang lebih yang terjadi. Di setiap perang tersebut Ibnu Ghannam berkata, “Di tahun ini kaum muslimin memerangi kaum kafir”. Perlu dicatat bahwa itu sebenarnya adalah perang antara kaum wahabi dengan kaum muslimin yang tidak seideologi dengan mereka.
[16] Lihat: Daa’iyan Walaisa Nabiyyan, hal: 133.
[17] Lihat: Da’aawa al Munaawi`iin, hal: 163. Komentar Ibnu Afaliq itu kiranya tidak berlebihan mengingat dalam “Al Qawaaid Al Arba’ah” Ibnu Abdil Wahab pernah menyatakan pada kaedah yang keempat, “Sesungguhnya kaum musyrikin di zaman kita lebih parah kesyirikannya dibandingkan kaum musyrikin terdahulu” (al Qawaaid Al Arba’ah: 47). Perlu dicatat bahwa yang ia maksud dengan kaum musyrikin di zamannya itu adalah kaum muslimin yang tidak seideologi dengannya.
[18] Ibid: 164.
[19] Ibid: 166.
[20] Ibid: 166-167. Pernyataan Syekh Sulaiman dan Syekh Ustman tersebut merupakan “Ilzaam” atau konsekwensi logis dari berbagai persyaratan njelimet yang disyaratkan oleh IAW untuk kriteria seorang muslim dalam pandangannya. Karena tentunya IAW tidak mungkin mengatakan bahwa rukun Islam ada enam.
[21] Kasyfu asy Syubhat, hal: 49.
[22] Kasyfu asy Syubhaat, hal: 49-50.
[23] Ibid: 53.
[24] Ibid: 66-67.
[25] Lihat: Dâ’iyah Walaisa Nabiyyan, hal: 82
[26] Ibid, hal: 83.
[27] Ibid, hal: 84. Dalam komentarnya Syekh Hasan menjelaskan bahwa Muhammad bin Fairuz adalah ulama pengikut madzhab Hambali, dan dia banyak taklid kepada pandangan-pandangan Ibnu Taimiyah dan Ibnu Qayyim. Hal ini juga diakui oleh IAW sendiri bahwa Ibnu Fairuz adalah seorang ulama dari kalangan madzhab Hambali yang taqlid buta kepada Ibnu Taimiyah dan Ibnu Qayyim. Jika seorang ulama madzhab Hambali yang bertaklid kepada Ibnu Taimiyah dan Ibnu Qayyim saja tidak dapat dikatakan telah masuk Islam, maka bagaimana dengan lainnya??. Bahkan ditempat yang lain IAW secara terang-terangan memvonis Ibnu Fairuz bahwa dia telah kafir dengan kekafiran besar yang membuatnya keluar dari agama Islam (Ad Durar As Sunniyah: 10/ 63).
[28] Kasyfu Syubhat, hal: 54.
[29] Lihat: Daa’iyah Walaisa Nabiyyan, hal: (108- 111).
[30] Ibid, hal: 137.
[31] Ibid, hal: 113- 114.
[32] Ibid, hal: 124. Fenomena saling memvonis ahli bid’ah, fasik, sesat, bahkan kafir, sekarang ini sedang panas-panasnya dalam intern aliran wahabi. Dari sekian fenomena yang ada, nampaknya pemvonisan sesat dan ahli bid’ah Rabi’ Madkhli terhadap Bakar Abu Zaid menjadi fenomena ternyaring dalam wacana kewahabian. Persetruan keduanya terjadi akibat perbedaan presepsi tentang menghukumi Sayyid Qutub. Bakar Abu Zaid cenderung membelanya, sedangkan Rabi’ Madkhali dengan tanpa ampun harus memvonis Sayyid Qutub sesat. Bahkan tidak tanggung-tanggung Bakar Abu Zaid yang membelanyapun harus menerima vonis yang sama. Pemvonisan Rabi’ Madkhali terhadap Bakar Abu Zaid ini dapat dibaca dalam kitab beliau yang berjudul “Al Haddul Fasil Bainal Haq Wal Bathil”. Manhaj takfiri yang diperankan oleh Rabi’ Madkahli ini dapat respon balik dari sesama wahabinya Shaleh bin Abdul Lathif An Najdi dalam risalah kecilnya yang berjudul “Ar Raddul Jali ‘Ala Rabi’ Al Madkhali”. Begitu juga kasus yang terjadi pada Syekh Abdullah bin Abdur Rahman Al Jibrin yang juga termasuk pengikut aliran wahabi. Pasca beliau membela Hasan Al Banna, Sayyid Qutub dan Abdur Rahman Abdul Khaliq serta mengkritik Rabi’ Al Madkhali, beliau mendapat sebuah kritikan yang sangat pedas dari Syekh Abdullah bin Shafiq Adz Dzafiri dalam bukunya yang bertajuk “Malhudzat Wa Tanbihat”. Buku ini diberi pengantar oleh Syekh ‘Ubaid bin Abdullah Al Jabiri salah seorang mantan dosen di Madinah University.
[33] Ini disimpulkan dari istilah yang menyebar di kalangan umum. Sedangkan para pengikut Syekh Abdur Rahman Abdul Khaliq di Kuwait, pengikut Syekh Ibnu Baz dan Syekh Ibnu Utsaimin tidak tertata secara istansi atau kelompok tersendiri, mereka bisa diterima oleh semua kalangan dan pengikut aliran wahabi lainnya.
[34] Ini bukan berarti sempalan yang lain terbebas dari budaya takfir ini. Hanya saja budaya itu terlihat dengan jelas dan sangat liar di sempalan Jamiyyun/ madkhaliyyun ini.
[35] Khusus mengenai vonis sesat terhadap Ibnu Hajar ini ada sebuah buku kecil yang mencoba mengkritisi satu per satu kesalahan akidah Ibnu Hajar. Buku ini diberi judul “Akhta’ Fathil Bari Fil Aqidah” (kesalahan-kesalahan kitab Fathul Bari dari segi akidah). Buku ini disusun oleh Abu Yusuf bin Yahya Al Marzuqi dari dua risalah pelopor wahabi Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Ahmad Ad Duwaisy dan Abdullah bin Sa’di Al Ghamidi Al ‘Abdali. Juga ditambahkan komentar dua pelopor wahabi lainnya Abdul Aziz bin Baz dan Muhibbuddin Al Khathib. Pada risalah pertama tertera sebuah statemen takfir terhadap Ibnu Hajar yang berbunyi: “Al Akhtha’ Al Asasiyah Fil Aqidah Wa Tauhidil Uluhiyyah Min Kitab Fathil Bari Bi Syarhi Shahihil Bukhari” (Kesalahan-kesalahan prinsip dalam hal akidah dan tauhid uluhiyah dari kitab Fathul Bari syarah Shahih Bukhari) [lihat: Akhtha, hal: 3]. Sudah jamak diketahui bahwa dalam kredo bangunan ideologi wahabi akidah dibagi menjadi 3; rububiyah, uluhiyah dan asma’ wa sifat. Orang kafir Quraisy dalam pandangan mereka mempunyai atau percaya dengan akidah rububiyah (percaya Allah sebagai Tuhan), namun mengingkari akidah uluhiyyah (menyembah Allah) dan asma’ wa sifat (mengimani nama dan sifat Allah). Dari kredo dasar ideologi ini berarti jika Ibnu Hajar sudah salah pada dasar-dasar akidah uluhiyyah, maka dapat dikatakan beliau tidak ada bedanya dengan orang-orang kafir Quraisy di zaman Nabi Saw. Dan hal ini jelas merupakan pangkafiran terhadap Al Hafidz Ibnu Hajar Al Asqalani.
[36] Disarikan dari kitab “As Shahwah Al Islamiyah Minal Murahaqah Ilar Rusyd”, hal: 203- 204.
[37] Lihat: Fadhaihul Wahabiyyah, hal: 19-26.
[38] Lihat komentar Bin Baz atas Fathul Bari (2/ 704).
[39] Dia adalah salah seorang alumni Syekh Muqbil bin Hadi Al Wadi’i Yaman. Dia belajar selama 6 tahun kepada Syekh Muqbil bin Hadi Al Wadi’i hingga Syekh Muqbil meninggal dunia.
[40] Kami ambil nukilan ini dari buku “siapa teroris? Siapa khawarij?” hal: 168, yang mana sang penulis buku tersebut langsung menukil dari buku aslinya “Mereka Adalah Teroris” hal: 422.
[41] Perlu penulis sedikit informasikan di sini bahwa syarah akidah thahawiyah karya Ibnu Abil ‘Izz ini telah banyak mereduksi isi dari matan akidah thahawiyah itu sendiri. Akidah Thahawiyah adalah akidah yang sangat representatif dalam menjelaskan akidah salaf atau ahlussunnah wal jama’ah. Hal ini telah disepakati oleh para ulama ahlussunnah wal jama’ah. Namun terkhusus syarahnya yang dikarang Ibnu Abil ‘Izz tersebut para ulama Ahlussunnah tidak sepakat, bahkan membantahnya. [42] Biasanya dalam menyeret orang-orang yang bertawassul untuk disamakan dengan kaum kafir quraisy, kalangan wahabi menyetir dan mempelintir ayat yang berbunyi “Mâ Na’buduhum Illa Li yuqarribunâ Ilallahi Zulfâ”. Padahal di ayat tersebut sudah sangat jelas, bahwa orang-orang kafir quraisy itu bukan hanya bertawassul, akan tetapi sudah berikrar menyembah (na’buduhum) patung-patung tersebut. Sedangkan kaum muslimin dalam bertawassul sama sekali tidak menyembah Nabi atau orang-orang shaleh yang dibuat tawassul. Dan perbuatan tawassul mempunyai landasan syar’I yang kuat sebagaimana banyak dijelaskan oleh para ulama salaf dan khalaf. Untuk lebih jelas mengenai hal ini dapat dirujuk kitab-kitab tafsir, seperti tafsir Al Quran Al Adzim karya Al Hafidz Ibnu katsir (1/ 508- 509), Al Jami’ Li Ahkamil Quran karya Al Imam Al Qurthubi (5/ 232- 233) tepatnya dalam mentafsiri ayat ke 64 dari surat An Nisa’. Di sana disebutkan kisah tentang seorang baduwi yang datang ke makam Rasul dan bertawassul dengan beliau. Begitu juga kisah tawassul seorang sahabat yang bernama Bilal bin Harist Al Muzni pada saat terjadi paceklik di masa Umar (Fathul Bari: 2/ 704), (Al Bidayah Wa An Nihayah: 7/ 86- 87), dan masih banyak lagi dalil-dalil tentang tawassul ini. Namun menurut ulama kontemporer semisal Sayyid Muhammad Alawi Al Maliki dan Syekh Yusuf Al Qaradlawi, sebenarnya Syekh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab tidak mengingkari beberapa permasalahan yang selama ini dituduhkan kepadanya, seperti pengingkaran terhadap tawassul. Dalam kitab “Mafahim Yajibu an Tushahhah” Sayyid Muhammad menukil sebuah pernyataan Syekh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab, bahwa dia tidak mengingkari tawassul. Teks serupa juga dinukil oleh Syekh Yusuf Al Qardlawi dalam fushulnya (lih: 265) . Akan tetapi, seorang ulama asal Saudi Arabiyah yang bernama Syekh Hasan bin Farhan mencoba meneliti lebih jauh tentang butir-butir pemikiran pelopor wahabi tersebut. Di akhir pembahasannya beliau menyatakan bahwa telah terjadi banyak “tanaqudhot” (kontradiksi) dalam alur pemikiran dan keputusan sikap keagamaan Syekh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab. Kontradiksi tersebut kembali kepada keempat kemungkinan sebagaimana yang telah penulis sebutkan sebelumnya.
[43] Lihat: Da’aawa Munaawi`iin: 114.
[44] Penulis kurang sepakat dengan istilah “isbat” (menetapkan) ini. Karena hal ini mengesankan bahwa kalangan ahlussunnah yang memakai metode takwil maupun tafwidl tidak menetapkan sifat-sifat khabariyah (asma` sifat) tersebut. Sejati ketiga metode tersebut sama-sama menetapkan, akan tetapi cara penetapannya saja yang berbeda. Metode isbat menetapkan sifat dengan makna zhahir lughawi, atau makna yang sesuai dengan kamus. Sedangkan metode takwil menetapkan sifat dengan makna majazi, dan metode tafwidl menetapkan sifat dengan makna yang hanya diketahui oleh Allah.
[45] Lihat: Al Burhan Fi ‘Ulumil Quran, hal: 376.
[46] Lihat: Al Itqan Fi ‘Ulumil Quran (3/ 12).
[47] Lihat: Manahilul ‘Irfan (2/ 238).
[48] Lihat: Al Asma’ Wa Sifat, hal: 446. Beliau (Imam Al Baihaqi) menukil klasifikasi itu dari Imam Al Khattabi dalam kitab Ma’alim Sunannya.
[49] Lihat: Muqaddimah Fathul Bari (Hadyus Sari), hal: 220.
[50] Lihat: Al Muwafaqat Fi Usulis Syari’ah (3/ 77).
[51] Lihat: Muqaddimah Ibnu Khaladun hal: 568.
[52] Lihat: Sunan At Turmudzi (4/ 692).
[53] Lihat: Siyar A’lam Nubala’ (8/ 105).
[54] Lihat: Asma’ Wa Sifat, hal: 410- 411.
[55] Lihat: Al Jami’ Li Ahkamil Qur’an (1/ 250).
[56] Lihat: Al Burhan Fi ‘Ulumil Quran, hal: 376.
[57] Lihat: Al I’tisham, hal: 555-562.
[58] Lihat: Majmu’atul Fatawa Ibnu Taimiyyah, bagian Al Asma’ Was Sifat (5/ 10).
[59] Lihat: Daru Ta’arudlil ‘Aqli Wan Naql (1/ 180).
[60] Penisbatan kepada Jahm bin Shafwan, pimpinan madzhab Jahmiyah yang mengatakan Quran itu adalah mahkluk.
[61] Lihat: Syarah Shahih Muslim Imam Nawawi (6/ 383), Majmu’ Syarah Muhadzdzab Imam Nawawi (lihat juz 1 bab aqsâm ilmi asy syar’i).
[62] Doa beliau berbunyi “Allahumma ‘Allimhu Kitab” (lihat: Fathul Bari: 1/ 248).
[63] Lihat: Tafsir Thabari (14/46).
[64] Lihat: Syarah Shahih Muslim Imam Nawawi (6/ 383). Sebelum Imam Nawawi ternyata jauh hari Ibnu Abdil Bar salah satu ahli hadis terkemuka dalam madzhab Maliki menukil riwayat ini dalam kitabnya At Tamhid (7/ 143). Dan hal ini juga dinukil oleh Imam Adz Dzahabi dalam siyar (8/ 105).
[65] Lihat: Al Bidayah Wa An Nihayah (10/ 354). Imam Al Baihaqi mengomentari sanad riwayat ini dengan perkataan “Lâ ghubâra ‘alaih” (tidak ada masalah).
[66] Lihat: Fathul Bari (8/ 501).
[67] Lihat: Al Asma’ Wa As Sifat, hal: 459.
[68] Perlu diketahui dalam akidah ahlussunnah wal jama’ah ada sebuah konsensus bahwa Allah Swt tidak terbatas oleh ruang dan waktu.
[69] Lihat: Syarah Shahih Muslim Imam Nawawi (5/ 197).
[70] Lihat: Tuhfatul Ahwadzi Syarah Sunan Tirmizi (9/ 152- 154).
[71] Lihat: Majmu’atul Fatawa Ibni Taimiyyah (6/ 343). Para pengikut Wahabi kontemporer juga gemar memvonis para ulama ahlussunnah dengan istilah kaum Jahmiyyah, Mu’aththilah dll. Hal ini memang mereka warisi dari moyang mereka; Ibnu Taimiyyah, yang baru muncul di abad ke- 7 H jauh setelah Imam At Tirmidzi.
[72] Lihat: As Shawaiq Al Mursalah (2/ 275).
[73] Lihat: Syarah Shahih Muslim (6/ 383).
[74] Lihat: Lum’atul I’tiqad, hal: 15.
[75] Lihat: Al I’tiqad, hal: 89.
[76] Lihat: Majmu’ Rasail Imam Al Ghazali, bagian kitab Qowaidul ‘Aqaid Fi Tauhid, hal: 161.
[77] Lihat: Iljâmul ‘Awwam ‘an Ilmil Kalam, hal: 31- 69.
[78] Lihat: Asasus Taqdis, hal: 207.
[79] Lihat: Ma’alim Fi Usuliddin, hal: 44.
[80] Lihat: Kitabul Arba’in, hal: 112-113.
[81] Lihat: Siyar A’lam Nubala (8/ 105).
[82] Lihat: Al Itqan Fi ‘Ulumil Qur’an (3/ 12).
[83] Lihat: Tarikh Al Madzahib Al Islamiyyah, hal: 213.
[84] Lihat: Tabyin Kadzbil Muftari, hal: 97.
[85] Lihat: Husnul Maqshid Fi ‘Amalil Maulid, hal: 52.
[86] Perkataan Sayydina Umar itu berbunyi “Nikmatil Bid’ah Hadzih” (Sebaik-baik bid’ah adalah ini).
[87] Lihat: Hadis Bukhari no: 2010, Fathul Bari (4/ 358).
[88] Lihat: An Nihayah Fi Gharibil Hadis (1/ 106- 107).
[89] Lihat: Umdatul Qari Syarah Shahih Bukhari (11/ 126).
[90] Lihat: Fathul Bari (4/ 362).
[91] Lihat: Syarah Karmani (9/ 154).
[92] Lihat: Qawaidul Ahkam (2/ 133).
[93] Lihat: Tahdibul Asma’ Wal Lughah (3/ 22-23), Syarah Shahih Muslim (6/ 470).
[94] Perlu menjadi catatan bahwa sebelum Ibnu Suhaim berada dalam barisan para ulama yang menentang dakwah wahabi, beliau termasuk para pendukung setia dakwah tersebut.
[95] Lihat: Daiyah Walaisa Nabiyyan, hal: 127- 133.
[96] Selain nama-nama yang sudah kami sebutkan ada deretan nama lain seperti Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Fairuz Al Ahsai (1216 H), Muhammad bin Ali bin Salum, ‘Utsman bin Mansur An Nashiri, Muhammad bin Sulaiman Al Kurdi, Utsman bin Sanad Al Bashri, Mirbad bin Ahmad At Tamimi, Saif bin Ahmad Al ‘Athiqi, Shaleh bin Abdullah Ash Shâig, Ahmad bin Ali Al Qabbani, Abdullah bin Dawud Az Zubairi, Alawi bin Ahmad Al Haddad Al Hadrami, Umar bin Qasim bin Mahjub At Tunisi, Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Kairan Al Magribi, Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Humaid, Abdul Aziz bin Abdur Rahman bin ‘Adwan, Hasan bin Umar Asy Syiththi Ad Dimasyqi dll. (lihat: ibid).
[97] Lihat: Ad Durar As Sunniyyah, hal 169- 187.
[98] Ini sebagaimana yang dinukil oleh Syekh Abdullah Harari dalam maqalatnya. Lihat: Al Maqalat As Sunniyyah, hal: 58.
[99] Lihat: Raddu Al Muhtar (4/ 262).
[100] Lihat: Tarikh Al Madzahib Al Islamiyyah, hal: 212.
[101] Lihat: As Salafiyyah Al Mu’ashirah Ila Aina, hal 7- 8.
[102] Lihat: Da’awaa Munaawi`iin, hal: 78.
Daftar Pustaka
1- Al Quran Al Karim
2- Tafsir At Thabari, karya Imam At Thabari, cet. Darul Fikr. Beirut- Lebanon.
3- Tafsir Al Quran Al Adzim, karya Al Hafidz Ibnu Katsir, cet. Muassasatul Mukhtar. Kairo- Mesir.
4- Al Jami’ Li Ahkamil Quran, karya Imam Al Qurthubi, cet. Al Maktabah At Taufiqiyah. Kairo- Mesir.
5- Al Burhan Fi ‘Ulumil Quran, karya Imam Az Zarkasyi, cet. Darul Hadis. Kairo- Mesir.
6- Al Itqan Fi ‘Ulumil Quran, karya Al Imam Al Hafidz Jalaluddin As Suyuthi, cet. Maktabah Darut Turast. Kairo- Mesir.
7- Manahilul ‘Irfan Fi ‘Ulumil Quran, karya Syekh Muhammad Abdul Adzim Az Zurqani, cet. Darul Hadis. Kairo- Mesir.
8- Syarah Shahih Muslim, karya Imam Nawawi, cet. Darul Manar. Kairo- Mesir.
9- An Nihayah Fi Ghoribil Hadis Wal Atsar, karya Imam Ibnu Atsir. Cet Daru Ihyâil Kutub Al ‘Arabiyah Isa Baby Halaby.
10- Fathul Bari Syarah Shahih Bukhari, karya Al Hafidz Ibnu Hajar Al Qalani, cet. Dar Misr Lit Thiba’ah. Kairo- Mesir.
11- Shahih Bukhari Syarah Karmani, Karya Imam Karmani. Cet Daru Ihyâ Turâst Al ‘Arabi, Beirut- Libanon.
12- ‘Umdatul Qori Syarah Shahih Bukhari, Karya Imam Al Aini. Cet Darul Fikr, Beirut- Libanon.
13- Tuhfatul Ahwadzi Syarah Sunan Tirmidzi, karya Imam Al Mubarak Furi, cet. Darul Fikr. Beirut- Lebanon.
14- Majmu’ Syarah Muhadzdzab, karya Imam Nawawi, cet. Darul Kutub Al Ilmiah. Beirut- Lebanon.
15- Majmu’atul Fatawa Ibn Taimiyyah, takhrij ‘Amir Jazzâr dan Anwar Baz, cet. Darul Wafa. Kairo- Mesir.
16- Al Muwafaqat Fi Usulisy Syari’ah, karya Al Imam Asy Syathibi, cet. Al Maktabah At Taufiqiyyah. Kairo- Mesir.
17- Qawaidul Ahkam Fi Mashalihil Anam, karya Imam Izz bin Abdus Salam, cet. Darul Bayan El Araby, Kairo- Mesir.
18- Tahdibul Asma’ Wal Lughât, karya Imam Nawawi. Cet Darul Kutub Al ‘Ilmiah, Beirut- Libanon.
19- Muqaddimah Ibni Khaldun, karya Abdurrahman ibnu Khaldun, cet. Darul Fajr. Kairo- Mesir.
20- Siyar A’lam Nubala, karya Al Imam Adz Dzahabi, cet. Al Muassasah Ar Risalah.
21- Al Bidayah Wa An Nihayah, karya Al Hafidz Ibnu Katsir, cet. Darul Hadis. Kairo- Mesir.
22- Tarikh Ali Sa’ud, karya Nashir as Sa’dy, cet.______________.
23- Tarikh Najd, karya Ibnu Ghannam, cet. Dar Syuruq. Beirut. Cetakan IV 1994.
24- Ad Daulah Al Utsmaniyyah; Awaamil an Nuhuud Wa Asbaab as Suquuth, karya DR. Ali Muhammad Muhammad Ash Shalaby, cet. Maktabah Bait as Salam. Riyadl- Saudi Arabiah.
25- Tarikh Al Madzahib Al Islamiyyah, karya Imam Abu Zahrah, cet. Darul Fikr Arabi. Kairo- Mesir.
26- Tabyin Kadzbil Muftari Fima Nusiba Ila Imam Abil Hasan Al Asya’ri, cet. Darul Fikr. Beirut- Lebanon.
27- Lum’atul I’tiqad Al Hadi Ila Sabilir Rasyad, karya Imam Ibnu Qudamah Al Maqdisi, cet. Maktabah Al Ilmi. Kairo- Mesir.
28- Al I’tiqôd wal Hidayah Ila Sabîlir Rasyâd ‘Ala Madzhabis Salaf Wa Ashâbil Hadist, karya Imam Al Baihaqi cet. Dârel Kitab el ‘Arabi.
29- Majmu’ Rasail Imam Al Ghozali, cet. Darul Fikr, Beirut- Libanon. Cetakan pertama 2006.
30- Iljâmul ‘Awwam ‘An ‘Ilmil Kalâm. Karya Imam Al Ghozali. Cet. Darul Haram Li At Turast. Kairo- Mesir. Cetakan pertama mei 2004.
31- Kitâb al Arba’in Fi Usuluddin, karya Imam Fakhruddin Ar Rozi cet. Dârul Jîl- Beirut- Lebanon.
32- Ma’alim Fi Usuluddin, karya Imam Fakhruddin Ar Rozi cet. Al Maktabah al Azhariyah Lit Turâst. Kairo- Mesir
33- Asâsus Taqdîs, karya Imam Fakhruddin Ar Rozi cet. Dârul Jîl- Beirut- Lebanon.
34- Al Asma’ Wa Sifat, karya Al Imam Al Hafidz Abu Bakr Al Baihaqi, cet. Darul Hadis. Kairo- Mesir.
35- Al I’tisham, karya Imam Asy Syatibi, cet. Darul Bayan. Kairo- Mesir.
36- ‘Inayatul Malik Abdul Aziz Bil Aqidah As Salafiah Wa Difa’I ‘Anha, karya DR. Muhammad bin Abdurahman Al Khumayyis, cet.___________
37- Kasyfus Syubhât, karya Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab, cet. Darus Salam. Kairo- Mesir.
38- As Shahwah Al Islamiyah Minal Murahaqah Ilar Rusyd, karya DR. Yusuf Al Qaradhawi, cet. Darus Syuruq. Kairo- Mesir.
39- Akhthau Fathil Bari Fil Aqidah, karya Abu Yusuf ibn Yahya Al Marzuqi, cet. Maktabah Asadus Sunnah. Kairo- Mesir.
40- Al Haddul Fasil Bainal Haq Wal Bathil, karya Rabi’ bin Hadi Al Madkhali, cet _________.
41- Ar Raddul Jali ‘Ala Rabi’ Al Madkhali, karya Shaleh Abdul Lathif An Najdi, cet. Darul Haramain. Kairo-Mesir.
42- Malhudzat Wa Tanbihat, karya Abdullah bin Shalfiq Adz Dzafiri, cet. Darul Minhaj. Kairo- Mesir.
43- As Salafiyyah Marhalah Zamaniyyah Mubarakah Lâ Madzhabun Islamiyyun, karya DR. Muhammad Said Ramadhan Al Buthi, cet. Darul Fikr. Beirut- Lebanon.
44- Siapa Teroris? Siapa Khawarij?, karya Abduh Zulfidar Akaha, cet. Pustaka Al Kautsar. Jakarta- Indonesia.
45- Al Maqâlât As Sunniyyah, karya Syekh Abdullah Al Harari, cet. Darul Masyari’ (2004).
46- Husnul Maqshid Fi ‘Amalil Maulid, karya Imam Suyuthi. Cet. Darul Kutub Al ‘Ilmiah, Beirut- Libanon. 47- As Showaiq Al Ilahiyyah Fi Raddi ‘Alal Wahabiah, karya Syekh Sulaiman bin Abdul Wahab, cet. ___________________
48- Al Maqâlât Al Wafiyyah, karya Syekh Hasan Khazbik, cet._______________
49- Fushulun Fil Aqidah Baina Salaf Wal Khalaf, karya DR. Yusuf Al Qaradlawi, cet. Maktabah Wahbah. Kairo- Mesir.
50- Daiyah Walaisa Nabiyyan, karya Syekh Hasan bin Farhan, cet. Dar er Rozi. Aman- Yordania.
51- Ad Durar As Sunniyyah Fi Raddi ‘Alal Wahabiyyah, karya Sayyid Ahmad bin Sayyid Zaini Dahlan, cet. Darul Jawami’ul Kalim. Kairo- Mesir.
52- As Salafiyyah Al Mu’ashirah Ila Aina? Wa Man Hum Ahlussunnah?, karya Sayyid Muhammad Zaki Ibrahim,cet. Muassasah Ihyaut Turast As Shufi. Kairo- Mesir.
53- Raddu Al Muhtar ‘Ala Ad Durri Al Mukhtar, karya Imam Ibnu ‘Abidin, cet. Maktabah Musthafa Al Babi Al Halaby. Kairo- Mesir.
54- Fadhaihul Wahabiyyah, karya Syekh Abul Fadlail Abdul Ghani Ar Rifa’I, cet. Darul Masyari’. Yordania.
55- Da’aawa al Munaawi`iin, karya Abdul Aziz Muhammad bin Ali al Abd al Lathif, cet. Dar Theebah. Riyadl.
Confessions of a British spy and British enmity against Islam
http://www.sunna.info/antiwahabies/wahhabies/htm/spy1.htm
Memoirs Of Mr. Hempher, The British Spy To The Middle East is the title of a document that was published in series (episodes) in the German paper Spiegel and later on in a prominent French paper. A Lebanese doctor translated the document to the Arabic language and from there on it was translated to English and other languages. Waqf Ikhlas publications put out and circulated the document in English in hard copy and electronically under the title: Confessions of a British spy and British enmity against Islam. This document reveals the true background of the Wahhabi movement which was innovated by Mohammad bin abdul Wahhab and explains the numerous falsehood they spread in the name of Islam and exposes their role of enmity towards the religion of Islam and towards prophet Mohammad sallallahu ^alayhi wa sallam and towards Muslims at large. No wonder the Wahhabis today stand as the backbone of terrorism allowing and financing and planning shedding the blood of Muslims and other innocent people. Their well known history of terrorism as documented in Fitnatul Wahhabiyyah by the mufti of Makkah, Sheikh Ahmad Zayni Dahlan, and their current assassinations and contravention is due to their ill belief that all are blasphemers save themselves. May Allah protect our nation from their evils.
Memoirs Of Mr. Hempher, The British Spy To The Middle East
Page 1 of 2
PART ONE
Hempher says:
Our Great Britain is very vast. The sun rises over its seas, and sets, again, below its seas. Our State is relatively weak yet in its colonies in India, China and Middle East. These countries are not entirely under our domination. However, we have been carrying on a very active and successful policy in these places. We shall be in full possession of all of them very soon. Two things are of importance:
1- To try to retain the places we have already obtained;
2- To try to take possession of those places we have not obtained yet.
The Ministry of Colonies assigned a commission from each of the colonies for the execution of these two tasks. As soon as I entered the Ministry of Colonies, the Minister put his trust in me and appointed me the administrator of the company of East India. Outwardly it was a company of trade. But its real task was to search for ways of taking control of the very vast lands of India.
Our government was not at all nervous about India. India was a country where people from various nationalities, speaking different languages, and having contrasting interests lived together. Nor were we afraid of China. For the religions dominant in China were Buddhism and Confucianism, neither of which was much of a threat. Both of them were dead religions that instituted no concern for life and which were no more than forms of addresses. For this reason, the people living in these two countries were hardly likely to have any feelings of patriotism. These two countries did not worry us, the British government. Yet the events that might occur later were not out of consideration for us. Therefore, we were designing long term plans to wage discord, ignorance, poverty, and even diseases in these countries. We were imitating the customs and traditions of these two countries, thus easily concealing our intentions.
What frazzled our nerves most was the Islamic countries. We had already made some agreements, all of which were to our advantage, with the Sick Man (the Ottoman Empire). Experienced members of the Ministry of Colonies predicted that this sick man would pass away in less than a century. In addition, we had made some secret agreements with the Iranian government and placed in these two countries statesmen whom we had made masons. Such corruptions as bribery, incompetent administration and inadequate religious education, which in its turn led to busying with pretty women and consequently to neglect of duty, broke the backbones of these two countries. In spite of all these, we were anxious that our activities should not yield the results we expected, for reasons I am going to cite below:
1- Muslims are extremely devoted to Islam.
Every individual Muslims is as strongly attached to Islam as a priest or monk to Christianity, if not more. As it is known, priests and monks would rather die than give up Christianity. The most dangerous of such people are the Shiites in Iran. For they put down people who are not Shiites as disbelievers and foul people. Christians are like noxious dirt according to Shiites. Naturally, one would do one's best to get rid of dirt. I once asked a Shiite this: Why do you look on Christians as such? The answer I was given was this: "The Prophet of Islam was a very wise person. He put Christians under a spiritual oppression in order to make them find the right way by joining Allah's religion, Islam. As a matter of fact, it is a State policy to keep a person found dangerous under a spiritual oppression until he pledges obedience. The dirt I am speaking about is not material; it is a spiritual oppression which is not peculiar to Christians alone. It involves Sunnites and all disbelievers. Even our ancient Magian Iranian ancestors are foul according to Shiites."
I said to him: "Well! Sunnites and Christians believe in Allah, in Prophets, and in the Judgment Day, too; why should they be foul, then?" He replied, "They are foul for two reasons: They impute mendacity to our Prophet, Hadrat Muhammad may Allah protect us against such an act! (1)* And we, in response to this atrocious imputation, follow the rule expressed in the saying, If a person torments you, you can torment him in return', and say to them: 'You are foul.' Second; Christians make offensive allegations about the Prophets of Allah. For instance, they say: Isaa (Jesus) 'alaihis-salaam' would take (hard) drinks. Because he was accursed, he was crucified."
In consternation, I said to the man that Christians did not say so. "Yes, they do," was the answer, "and you don't know. It is written so in the Holy Bible." I became quite. For the man was right in the first respect, if not in the second respect. I did not want to continue the dispute any longer. Otherwise they might be suspicious of me in an Islamic attire as I was. I therefore avoided such disputes.
2- Islam was once a religion of administration and authority.
And Muslims were respected. It would be difficult to tell these respectable people that they are slaves now. Nor would it be possible to falsify the Islamic history and say to Muslims: The honor and respect you obtained at one time was the result of some (favorable) conditions. Those days are gone now, and they will never come back.
3- We were very anxious that the Ottomans and Iranians might notice our plots and foil them.
Despite the fact that these two States had already been debilitated considerably, we still did not feel certain because they had a central government with property, weaponry, and authority.
4- We were extremely uneasy about the Islamic scholars.
For the scholars of Istanbul and Al-adh-har, the Iraqi and Damascene scholars were insurmountable obstacles in front of our purposes. For they were the kind of people who would never compromise their principles to the tiniest extent because they had turned against the transient pleasures and adornments of the world and fixed their eyes on the Paradise promised by Qur'aan al-kereem. The people followed them. Even the Sultan was afraid of them. Sunnites were not so strongly adherent to scholars as were Shiites. For Shiites did not read books; they only recognized scholars, and did not show due respect to the Sultan. Sunnites, on the other hand, read books, and respected scholars and the Sultan.
We therefore prepared a series of conferences. Yet each time we tried we saw with disappointment that the road was closed for us. The reports we received from our spies were always frustrating, and the conferences came to naught. We did not give up hope, though. For we are the sort of people who have developed the habit of taking a deep breath and being patient.
The Minister himself, the highest priestly orders, and a few specialists attended one of our conferences. There were twenty of us. Our conference lasted three hours, and the final session was closed without reaching a fruitful conclusion. Yet a priest said, "Do not worry! For the Messiah and his companions obtained authority only after a persecution that lasted three hundred years. It is hoped that, from the world of the unknown, he will cast an eye on us and grant us the good luck of evicting the unbelievers, (he means Muslims), from their centers, be it three hundred years later. With a strong belief and long-term patience, we must arm ourselves! In order to obtain authority, we must take possession of all sorts of media, try all possible methods. We must try to spread Christianity among Muslims. It will be good for us to realize our goal, even if it will be after centuries. For fathers work for their children."
A conference was held, and diplomats and religious men from Russia and France as well as from England attended. I was very lucky. I, too, attended because I and the Minister were in very good terms. In the conference, plans of breaking Muslims into groups and making them abandon their faith and bringing them round to belief (Christianizing them) like in Spain was discussed. Yet the conclusions reached were not as had been expected. I have written all the talks held in that conference in my book "Ilaa Melekoot-il-Meseeh."
It is difficult to suddenly uproot a tree that has sent out its roots to the depths of the earth. But we must make hardships easy and overcome them. Christianity came to spread. Our Lord the Messiah promised us this. The bad conditions that the east and the west were in, helped Muhammad. Those conditions being gone, have taken away the nuisances (he means Islam) that accompanied them. We observe with pleasure today that the situation has changed completely. As a result of great works and endeavors of our ministry and other Christian governments Muslims are on the decline now. Christians, on the other hand, are gaining ascendancy. It is time we retook the places we lost throughout centuries. The powerful State of Great Britain pioneers this blessed task [of annihilating Islam].
PART TWO
In the Hijree year 1122, C.E. 1710, the Minister of Colonies sent me to Egypt, Iraq, Hidjaz and Istanbul to act as a spy and to obtain information necessary and sufficient for the breaking up of Muslims. The Ministry appointed nine more people, full of agility and courage, for the same mission and at the same time. In addition to the money, information and maps we would need, we were given a list containing names of statesmen, scholars, and chiefs of tribes. I can never forget! When I said farewell to the secretary, he said, "The future of our State is dependent on your success. Therefore you should exert your utmost energy."
I set out on a voyage to Istanbul, the center of the Islamic caliphate. Besides my primary duty, I was to learn very well Turkish, the native language of the Muslims being there. I had already learned in London a considerable amount of Turkish, Arabic (the language of the Qur'aan) and Persian, the Iranian language. Yet learning a language was quite different from speaking that language like its native speakers. While the former skill can be acquired in a matter of a few years, the latter requires a duration of time several times as long as this. I had to learn Turkish with all its subtleties lest the people should suspect me.
I was not anxious that they should suspect me. For Muslims are tolerant, open-hearted, benevolent, as they have learnt from their Prophet Muhammad 'alai-his-salaam'. They are not skeptical like us. After all, at that time the Turkish government did not have an organization to arrest spies.
After a very tiresome voyage I arrived in Istanbul. I said my name was Muhammad and began to go to the mosque, Muslims' temple. I liked the way Muslims observed discipline, cleanliness and obedience. For a moment I said to myself: Why are we fighting these innocent people? Is this what our Lord the Messiah advised us? But I at once recovered from this diabolical [!] thought, and decided to carry out my duty in the best manner.
In Istanbul I met an old scholar named "Ahmed Efendi." With his elegant manners, open-heartedness, spiritual limpidity, and benevolence, none of our religious men I had seen could have equalled him. This person endeavored day and night to make himself like the Prophet Muhammad. According to him, Muhammad was the most perfect, the highest man. Whenever he mentioned his name his eyes would become wet. I must have been very lucky, for he did not even ask who I was or where I was from. He would address me as "Muhammad Efendi." He would answer my questions and treat me with tenderness and with compassion. For he considered me a guest who had come to Istanbul to work in Turkey and to live in the shadow of the Khaleefa, the representative of the Prophet Muhammad. Indeed, this was the pretext I used to stay in Istanbul
One day I said to Ahmed Efendi: "My parents are dead. I don't have any brothers or sisters, and I haven't inherited any property. I came to the center of Islam to work for a living and to learn Qur'aan al-kereem and the Sunnat, that is, to earn both my worldly needs and my life in the Hereafter." He was very delighted with these words of mine, and said, "You deserve to be respected for these three reasons." I am writing down exactly what he said:
"1- You are a Muslim. All Muslims are brothers.
2- You are a guest. Rasoolullah 'sall-allaahu alaihi wa sallam' declared: 'Offer kind hospitality to your guests!'
3- You want to work. There is a hadeeth-i shereef stating that 'a person who works is beloved to Allah.' "
These words pleased me very much. I said to myself, "Would that there were such bright truths in Christianity, too! It's a shame there aren't any." What surprised me was the fact that Islam, such a noble religion as it was, was being degenerated in the hands of these conceited people who were quite unaware of what was going on in life.
I said to Ahmed Efendi that I wanted to learn Qur'aan al-kereem. He replied that he would teach me with pleasure, and began to teach me (Faatiha soora). He would explain the meanings as we read. I had great difficulty pronouncing some words. In two years' time I read through the whole Qur'aan al-kereem. Before each lesson he would make ablution himself and also command me to make ablution. He would sit towards the qibla (Ka'ba) and then begin teaching.
What Muslims call ablution consisted of a series of washings, as follows:
1) Washing the face;
2) Washing the right arm from fingers to elbows;
3) Washing the left arm from fingers to elbows;
4) Making masah of (moistening both hands and rubbing them gently on) the head, backs of ears, (back of) neck;
5) Washing both feet.
Having to use the miswaak vexed me very much. "Miswaak" is a twig with which they (Muslims) clean their mouth and teeth. I thought this piece of wood was harmful for the mouth and teeth. Sometimes it would hurt my mouth and cause bleeding. Yet I had to use it. For, according to them, using the "miswaak" was a muakkad sunnat of the Prophet. They said this wood was very useful. Indeed, the bleeding of my teeth came to an end. And the foul breath that I had till that time, and which most British people have, was gone.
During my stay in Istanbul I spent the nights in a room I had rented from a man responsible for the service in a mosque. This servant's name was "Marwaan Efendi". Marwaan is the name of one of the Sahaaba (Companions) of the Prophet Muhammad. The servant was a very nervous man. He would boast about his name and tell me that if I should have a son in the future I should "name him Marwaan, because Marwaan is one of Islam's greatest warriors."
"Marwaan Efendi" would prepare the evening dinner. I would not go to work on Friday, a holiday for Muslims. On the other days of the week I worked for a carpenter named Khaalid, being paid on a weekly basis. Because I worked part time, from morning till noon, that is, he would give me half the wage he gave the other employees. This carpenter would spend much of his free time telling about the virtues of "Khaalid bin Waleed." Khaalid bin Waleed, one of the Sahaaba of the Prophet Muhammad, is a great mujaahid (a warrior for Islam). He accomplished various Islamic conquests. Yet his (Khaalid bin Waleed's) dismissal from office by 'Umar bin Hattaab during the latter's caliphate chafed the carpenter's heart(2)*.
"Khaalid", the carpenter for whom I worked, was an immoral and extremely neurotic person. He somehow trusted me very much. I do not know why, but perhaps it was because I always obeyed him. He ignored the Sharee'at (Islaam's commandments) in his secret manners. Yet when he was with his friends he would display obedience to the commandments of the Sharee'at. He would attend the Friday prayers, but I am not sure about the other (daily) prayers.
I would have breakfast in the shop. After work I would go to the mosque for noon prayer and would stay there till afternoon prayer. After the afternoon prayer I would go to Ahmed Efendi's place, where he would teach me such lessons as (reading) Qur'aan al-kereem, Arabic and Turkish languages for two hours. Every Friday I would give him my weekly earnings because he taught me very well. Indeed, he taught me very well how to read Qur'aan al-kereem, requirements of the Islamic religion and the subtleties of Arabic and Turkish languages.
When "Ahmed Efendi" knew that I was single, he wanted to marry me to one of his daughters. I refused his offer. But he insisted, saying that marriage is a sunnat of the Prophet's and the Prophet had stated that "A person who turns away from my sunnat is not with me." Apprehending that this event might put an end to our personal dealings, I had to lie to him, saying that I lacked sexual power. Thus I ensured the continuance of our acquaintance and friendship.
When my two-year stay in Istanbul was over, I told "Ahmed Efendi" I wanted to go back home. He said, "No, don't go. Why are you going? You can find anything you might look for in Istanbul. Allaahu ta'aalaa has given both the religion and the world at the same time in this city. You say that your parents are dead and you have no brothers or sisters. Why don't you settle down in Istanbul?..." "Ahmed Efendi" had formed a compulsive dependence upon my company. For this reason he did not want to part company with me and insisted that I should make my home in Istanbul. But my patriotic sense of duty compelled me to go back to London, to deliver a detailed report concerning the center of the caliphate, and to take new orders.
Throughout my stay in Istanbul I sent reports of my observations monthly to the Ministry of Colonies. I remember asking in one of my reports what I was to do should the person I was working for ask me to practice sodomy with him. The reply was: You can do it if it will help you attain your goal. I was very much indignant over this answer. I felt as if the whole world had fallen down on my head. I already knew that this vicious deed was very common in England. Yet it had never occurred to me that my superiors would command me to commit it. What could I do? I had no other way than to empty the drug to the dregs. So I kept quiet and went on with my duty.
As I said farewell to "Ahmed Efendi", his eyes became wet and he said to me, "My son! May Allaahu ta'aalaa be with you! If you should come back to Istanbul and see that I am dead, remember me. Say the (soora) Faatiha for my soul! We will meet on the Judgement Day in front of 'Rasoolullah'." Indeed, I felt very sad, too; so much so that I shed warm tears. However, my sense of duty was naturally stronger.
PART THREE
My friends had returned to London before I did and they had already received new commands from the Ministry. I, too, was given new commands upon returning. Unfortunately, only six of us were back.
One of the other four people, the secretary said, had become a Muslim and remained in Egypt. Yet the secretary was still glad because, he said, he (the person who had remained in Egypt) had not betrayed any secrets. The second one had gone to Russia and remained there. He was Russian in origin. The secretary was very sorry about him, not because he had gone back to his homeland, but because perhaps he had been spying on the Ministry of Colonies for Russia and had gone back home because his mission had been over. The third one, as the secretary related, had died of plague in a town named "Imara" in the neighborhood of Baghdaad. The fourth person had been traced by the Ministry up to the city of San'aa in the Yemen and they had received his reports for one year, and thereafter his reporting had come to an end and no trail of him had been found despite all sorts of efforts. The Ministry put down the disappearance of these four men as a catastrophe. For we are a nation with great duties versus a small population. We therefore do very fine calculations on every man.
After a few of my reports, the secretary held a meeting to scrutinize the reports given by four of us. When my friends submitted their reports pertaining to their tasks, I, too, submitted my report. They took some notes from my report. The Minister, the secretary, and some of those who attended the meeting praised my work. Nevertheless I was the third best. The first grade was won by my friend "George Belcoude", and "Henry Fanse" was the second best.
I had doubtlessly been greatly successful in learning Turkish and Arabic languages, the Qur'aan and the Sharee'at. Yet I had not managed to prepare for the Ministry a report revealing the weak aspects of the Ottoman Empire. After the two-hour meeting, the secretary asked me the reason for my failure. I said, "My essential duty was to learn languages and the Qur'aan and the Sharee'at. I could not spare time for anything in addition. But I shall please you this time if you trust me." The secretary said I was certainly successful but he wished I had won the first grade. (And he went on):
"O Hempher, your next mission comprises these two tasks:
1- To discover Muslims' weak points and the points through which we can enter their bodies and disjoin their limbs. Indeed, this is the way to beat the enemy.
2- The moment you have detected these points and done what I have told you to, [in other words, when you manage to sow discord among Muslims and set them at loggerheads with one another], you will be the most successful agent and earn a medal from the Ministry."
I stayed in London for six months. I married my paternal first cousin, "Maria Shvay". At that time I was 22 years old, and she was 23. "Maria Shvay was a very pretty girl, with average intelligence and an ordinary cultural background. The happiest and the most cheerful days of my life were those that I spent with her. My wife was pregnant. We were expecting our new guest, when I received the message containing the order that I should leave for Iraq.
Receiving this order at a time while I was awaiting the birth of my son made me sad. However, the importance I attached to my country, doubled with my ambition to attain fame by being chosen the best one among my colleagues, was above my emotions as a husband and as a father. So I accepted the task without hesitation. My wife wanted me to postpone the mission till after the child's birth. Yet I ignored what she said. We were both weeping as we said farewell to each other. My wife said, "Don't stop writing to me! I shall write you letters about our new home, which is as valuable as gold." These words of hers stirred up storms in my heart. I almost cancelled the travel. Yet I managed to take control of my emotions. Extending my farewell to her, I left for the ministry to receive the final instructions.
Six months later I found myself in the city of Basra, Iraq. The city people were partly Sunnite and partly Shiite. Basra was a city of tribes with a mixed population of Arabs, Persians and a relatively small number of Christians. It was the first time in my life that I met with the Persians. By the way, let me touch upon Shi'ism and Sunnism.
Shiites say that they follow 'Alee bin Aboo Taalib, who was the husband of Muhammad's 'alaihis-salaam' daughter Faatima and at the same time Muhammad's 'alaihis-salaam' paternal first cousin. They say that Muhammad 'alaihis-salaam' appointed Alee, and the twelve imaams, 'Alee's descendants to succeed him as the Khaleefa.
In my opinion, the Shi'ees are right in the matter pertaining to the caliphate of 'Alee, Hasan, and Huseyn. For, as far as I understand from the Islamic history, Alee was a person with the distinguished and high qualifications required for caliphate. Nor do I find it alien for Muhammad 'alaihis-salaam' to have appointed Hasan and Huseyn as Khaleefas. What makes me suspect, however, is Muhammad's 'alaihis-salaam' having appointed Huseyn's son and eight of his grandsons as Khaleefas. For Huseyn was a child at Muhammad's 'alaihis-salaam' death. How did he know he would have eight grandsons. If Muhammad 'alaihis-salaam' was really a Prophet, it was possible for him to know the future by being informed by Allaahu ta'aalaa, as the Messiah had divined about the future. Yet Muhammad's 'alaihis-salaam' Prophethood is a matter of doubt to us Christians.
Muslims say that "There are many proofs for Muhammad's 'alaihis-salaam' Prophethood. One of them is the Qur'aan (Koran)." I have read the Qur'aan. Indeed, it is a very high book. It is even higher than the Torah (Taurah) and the Bible. For it contains principles, regulations, moral rules, etc.
It has been a wonder to me how an illiterate person such as Muhammad 'alaihis-salaam' could have brought such a lofty book, and how could he have had all those moral, intellectual and personal qualifications which could not be possessed even by a man who has read and travelled very much. I wonder if these facts were the proofs for Muhammad's 'alaihis-salaam' Prophethood?
I always made observations and research in order to elicit the truth about Muhammad's 'alaihis-salaam' Prophethood. Once I brought out my interest to a priest in London. His answer was fanatical and obdurate, and was not convincing at all. I asked Ahmed Efendi several times when I was in Turkey, yet I did not receive a satisfactory answer from him, either. To tell the truth, I avoided asking Ahmed Efendi questions directly related to the matter lest they should become suspicious about my espionage.
I think very much of Muhammad 'alaihis-salaam'. No doubt, he is one of Allah's Prophets about whom we have read in books. Yet, being a Christian, I have not believed in his Prophethood yet. It is doubtless that he was very much superior to geniuses.
The Sunnites, on the other hand, say that "After the Prophet's passing away, Muslims considered Aboo Bekr and 'Umar and 'Uthmaan and 'Alee suitable for the caliphate."
Controversies of this sort exist in all religions, most abundantly in Christianity. Since both 'Umar and 'Alee are dead today, maintaining these controversies would serve no useful purpose. To me, if Muslims are reasonable, they should think of today, not of those very old days(3)*.
One day in the Ministry of Colonies I made a reference to the difference between the Sunnites and the Shiites, saying, "If Muslims knew something about life, they would resolve this Shiite-Sunnite difference among themselves and come together." Someone interrupted me and remonstrated, "Your duty is to provoke this difference, not to think of how to bring Muslims together."
Before I set out for my travel to Iraq, the secretary said, "O Hempher, you should know that there has been natural differences among human beings since God created Abel and Cain. These controversies shall continue until the return of the Messiah. So is the case with racial, tribal, territorial, national, and religious controversies.
"Your duty this time is to diagnose these controversies well and to report to the ministry. The more successful you are in aggravating the differences among Muslims the greater will be your service to England.
"We, the English people, have to make mischief and arouse schism in all our colonies in order that we may live in welfare and luxury. Only by means of such instigations will we be able to demolish the Ottoman Empire. Otherwise, how could a nation with a small population bring another nation with a greater population under its sway? Look for the mouth of the chasm with all your might, and get in as soon as you find it. You should know that the Ottoman and Iranian Empires have reached the nadir of their lives. Therefore, your first duty is to instigate the people against the administration! History has shown that 'The source of all sorts of revolutions is public rebellions.' When the unity of Muslims is broken and the common sympathy among them is impaired, their forces will be dissolved and thus we shall easily destroy them."
PART FOUR
When I arrived in Basra, I settled in a mosque. The imaam of the mosque was a Sunnite person of Arabic origin named Shaikh 'Umar Taaee. When I met him I began to chat with him. Yet he suspected me at the very beginning and subjected me to a shower of questions. I managed to survive this dangerous chat as follows: "I am from Turkey's Igdir region. I was a disciple of Ahmed Efendi of Istanbul. I worked for a carpenter named Khaali (Haalid)." I gave him some information about Turkey, which I had acquired during my stay there. Also, I said a few sentences in Turkish. The imaam made an eye signal to one of the people there and asked him if I spoke Turkish correctly. The answer was positive. Having convinced the imaam, I was very happy. Yet I was wrong. For a few days later, I saw to my disappointment that the imaam suspected that I was a Turkish spy. Afterwards, I found out that there was some disagreement and hostility between him and the governor appointed by the (Ottoman) Sultan.
Having been compelled to leave Shaikh 'Umar Efendi's mosque, I rented a room in an inn for travellers and foreigners and moved there. The owner of the inn was an idiot named Murshid Efendi. Every morning he would disturb me by knocking hard at my door to wake me up as soon as the adhaan for morning prayer was called. I had to obey him. So I would get up and perform the morning prayer. Then he would say, "You shall read Qur'aan-al kereem after morning prayer." When I told him that it was not fard (an act commanded by Islam) to read Qur'aan al-kereem and asked him why he should insist so much, he would answer, "Sleeping at this time of day will bring poverty and misfortune to the inn and the inmates." I had to carry out this command of his. For he said otherwise he would send me out of the inn. Therefore, as soon as the adhaan was called, I would perform morning prayer and then read Qur'aan al-kereem for one hour.
One day Murshid Efendi came to me and said, "Since you rented this room misfortunes have been befalling me. I put it down to your ominousness. For you are single. Being single (unmarried) portends ill omen. You shall either get married or leave the inn." I told him I did not have property enough to get married. I could not tell him what I had told Ahmed Efendi. For Murshid Efendi was the kind of person who would undress me and examine my genitals to see whether I was telling the truth.
When I said so, Murshid Efendi reproved me, saying, "What a weak belief you have! Haven't you read Allah's aayat purporting, If they are poor, Allaahu ta'aalaa will make them rich with His kindness'?" I was stupefied. At last I said, "All right, I shall get married. But are you ready to provide the necessary money? Or can you find a girl who will cost me little?"
After reflecting for a while, Murshid Efendi said, "I don't care! Either get married by the beginning of Rajab month, or leave the inn." There were only twenty-five days before the beginning of the month of Rajab.
Incidentally, let me mention the Arabic months; Muharram, Safar, Rabi'ul-awwal, Rabi'ul-aakhir, Jemaaziy-ul-awwal, Jemaaziy-ul-aakhir, Rajab, Sha'baan, Ramadaan, Shawwaal, Zilqa'da, Zilhijja. Their months are neither more than thirty days, nor below twenty-nine. They are based on lunar calculations.
Taking a job as an assistant to a carpenter, I left Murshid Efendi's inn. We made an agreement on a very low wage, but my lodging and food were to be at the employer's expense. I moved my belongings to the carpenter's shop well before the month of Rajab. The carpenter was a manly person. He treated me as if I were his son. He was a Shiite from Khorassan, Iran, and his name was Abd-ur- Ridaa. Taking the advantage of his company, I began to learn Persian. Every afternoon Iranian Shiites would meet at his place and talk on various subjects from politics to economy. Most often than not they would speak ill of their own government and also of the Khaleefa in Istanbul. Whenever a stranger came in they would change the subject and begin to talk on personal matters.
They trusted me very much. However, as I found out later on, they though I was an Azerbaijani because I spoke Turkish.
From time to time a young man would call at our carpenter's shop. His attirement was that of a student doing scientific research, and he understood Arabic, Persian, and Turkish. His name was Muhammad bin Abd-ul-wahhaab Najdee. This youngster was an extremely rude and very nervous person. While abusing the Ottoman government very much, he would never speak ill of the Iranian government. The common ground which made him and the shop-owner Abd-ur-Ridaa so friendly was that both were inimical towards the Khaleefa in Istanbul. But how was it possible that this young man, who was a Sunnee, understood Persian and was friends with Abd-ur-Ridaa, who was a Shi'ee? In this city Sunnites pretended to be friendly and even brotherly with Shiites. Most of the city's inhabitants understood both Arabic and Persian. And most people understood Turkish as well.
Muhammad of Najd was a Sunnee outwardly. Although most Sunnites censured Shiites, in fact, they say that Shiites are disbelievers this man never would revile Shiites. According to Muhammad of Najd, there was no reason for Sunnites to adapt themselves to one of the four madh-habs; he would say, "Allah's Book does not contain any evidence pertaining to these madh-habs." He purposefully ignored the aayet-i-kereemas in this subject and slighted the hadeeth-i-shereefs.
Concerning the matter of four madh-habs: A century after the death of their Prophet Muhammad 'alaihis- salaam', four scholars came forward from among Sunnite Muslims: Aboo Haneefa, Ahmad bin Hanbal, Maalik bin Anas, and Muhammad bin Idris Shaafi'ee. Some Khaleefas forced the Sunnites to imitate one of these four scholars. They said no one except these four scholars could do ijtihaad in Qur'aan al-kereem or in the Sunna. This movement closed the gates of knowledge and understanding to Muslims. This prohibition of ijtihaad is considered to have been the reason for Islam's standstill.
Shiites exploited these erroneous statements to promulgate their sect. The number of Shiites was smaller than one-tenth that of Sunnites. But now they have increased and become equal with Sunnites in number. This result is natural. For ijtihaad is like a weapon. It will improve Islam's fiqh and renovate the understanding of Qur'aan al-kereem and Sunna. Prohibition of ijtihaad, on the other hand, is like a rotten weapon. It will confine the madh-hab within a certain framework. And this, in its turn, means to close the gates of inference and to disregard the time's requirements. If your weapon is rotten and your enemy is perfect, you are doomed to be beaten by your enemy sooner or later. I think, the clever ones of the Sunnites will reopen the gate of ijtihaad in future. If they do not do this, they will become the minority and the Shiites will receive a majority in a few centuries.
[However, the imaams (leaders) of the four madh-habs hold the same creed, the same belief. There is no difference among them. Their difference is only in worships. And this, in turn, is a facility for Muslims. The Shiites, on the other hand, parted into twelve sects, thus becoming a rotten weapon. There is detailed information in this respect in the book Milal wa Nihal].
The arrogant youngster, Muhammad of Najd, would follow his nafs (his sensuous desires) in understanding the Qur'aan and the Sunna. He would completely ignore the views of scholars, not only those of the scholars of his time and the leaders of the four madh-habs, but also those of the notable Sahaabees such as Aboo Bakr and 'Umar. Whenever he came across a Koranic (Qur'aan) verse which he thought was contradictory with the views of those people, he would say, "The Prophet said: I have left the Qur'aan and the Sunna for you.' He did not say, I have left the Qur'aan, the Sunna, the Sahaaba, and the imaams of madh-habs for you.' Therefore, the thing which is fard is to follow the Qur'aan and the Sunna no matter how contrary they may seem to be to the views of the madh-habs or to the statements of the Sahaaba and scholars."
During a dinner conversation at Abd-ur-Ridaa's place, the following dispute took place between Muhammad of Najd and a guest from Kum, a Shiite scholar named Shaikh Jawad:
Shaikh Jawad. Since you accept that 'Alee was a mujtahid, why don't you follow him like Shiites?
Muhammad of Najd Alee is no different from 'Umar or other Sahaabees. His statements cannot be of a documentary capacity. Only the Qur'aan and the Sunna are authentic documents. [The fact is that statements made by any of the As-haab-i kiraam are of a documentary capacity. Our Prophet commanded us to follow any one of them].
Shaikh Jawaad Since our Prophet said, "I am the city of knowledge, and 'Alee is its gate," shouldn't there be difference between 'Alee and the other Sahaaba?
Muhammad of Najd, If 'Alee's statements were of a documentary capacity, would not the Prophet have said, "I have left you the Qur'aan, the Sunna, and 'Alee"?
Shaikh Jawaad Yes, we can assume that he (the Prophet) said so. For the stated in a hadeeth-i-shereef, "I leave (behind me) Allah's Book and my Ahl-i-Bayt." And 'Alee, in his turn, is the greatest member of the Ahl-i-Bayt.
Muhammad of Najd denied that the Prophet had said so.
Shaikh Jawaad confuted Muhammad of Najd with convincing proofs.
However, Muhammad of Najd objected to this and said, "You assert that the Prophet said, I leave you Allah's Book and my Ahl-i-Bayt." Then, what has become of the Prophet's Sunna?"
Shaikh Jawad. The Sunna of the Messenger of Allah is the explanation of the Qur'aan. The Messenger of Allah said, "I leave (you) Allah's Book and my Ahl-i-Bayt." The phrase 'Allah's Book' includes the 'Sunna', which is an explanation of the former.
Muhammad of Najd. Inasmuch as the statements of the Ahl-i-Bayt are the explanations of the Qur'aan, why should it be necessary to explain it by hadeeths?
Shaikh Jawaad When hadrat Prophet passed away, his Ummat (Muslims) considered that there should be an explanation of the Qur'aan which would satisfy the time's requirements. It was for this reason that hadrat Prophet commanded his Ummat to follow the Qur'aan, which is the original, and his Ahl-i-Bayt, who were to explain the Qur'aan in a manner to satisfy the time's requirements.
I liked this dispute very much. Muhammad of Najd was motionless in front of Shaikh Jawaad, like a house-sparrow in the hands of a hunter.
Muhammad of Najd was the sort I had been looking for. For his scorn for the time's scholars, his slighting even the (earliest) four Khaleefas, his having an independent view in understanding the Qur'aan and the Sunna were his most vulnerable points to hunt and obtain him. So different this conceited youngster was from that Ahmed Efendi who had taught me in Istanbul! That scholar, like his predecessors, was reminiscent of a mountain. No power would be able to move him. Whenever he mentioned the name of Aboo Haneefa, he would stand up, go and make ablution. Whenever he meant to hold the book of Hadeeth named Bukhaaree, he would, again, make ablution. The Sunnees trust this book very much.
Muhammad of Najd, on the other hand, disdained Aboo Haneefa very much. He would say, "I know better than Aboo Haneefa did." In addition, according to him, half of the book of Bukhaaree was wrong.
[As I was translating these confessions of Hempher's into Turkish, I remembered the following event: I was a teacher in a high school. During a lesson one of my students asked, "Sir, if a Muslim is killed in a war, will he become a martyr?" "Yes, he will," I said. "Did the Prophet say so?" "Yes, he did." "Will he become a martyr if he is drowned in sea, too?" "Yes," was my answer. "And in this case he will attain more thawaab." Then he asked, "Will he become a martyr if he falls down from an aeroplane?" "Yes, he will," I said. "Did our Prophet state these, too?" "Yes, he did." Upon this, he smiled in a triumphant air and said, "Sir! Were there aeroplanes in those days?" My answer to him was as follows: "My son! Our Prophet has ninety-nine names. Each of his names stands for a beautiful attribute he was endowed with. One of his names is Jaami'ul-kalim. He would state many facts in one word. For example, he said, 'He who falls from a height will become a martyr.' " The child admitted this answer of mine with admiration and gratitude. By the same token, Qur'aan al-kereem and hadeeth-i-shereefs contain many words, rules, commandments and prohibitions each of which denotes various other meanings. The scientific work carried on to explore these meanings and to apply the right ones to the right cases, is called Ijtihaad. Performing ijtihaad requires having profound knowledge. For this reason, the Sunnees prohibited ignorant people from doing ijtihaad. This does not mean to prohibit ijtihaad. After the fourth century of the Hegiral Era, no scholars were educated so highly as to reach the grade of an absolute mujtahid [scholar profoundly learned (enough to perform ijtihaad)]; therefore, no one performed ijtihad, which in turn naturally meant the closure of the gates of ijtihaad. Towards the end of the world, Isaa (Jesus) 'alaihis-salaam' shall descend from heaven and Mahdee (the expected Islamic hero) shall appear; these people shall perform ijtihaad.
Our Prophet 'sall-allaahu alaihi wa sallam' stated, "After me Muslims shall part into seventy-three groups. Only one of these groups shall enter Paradise." When he was asked who were to be in that group, he answered, "Those who adapt themselves to me and my Ashaab." In another hadeeth-i-shereef he stated, "My As-haab are like celestial stars. You will attain hidaayat if you follow any one of them!" In other words, he said, "You will attain the way leading to Paradise." A Jew of Yemen, Abdullah bin Saba, by name, instigated hostility against the As-haab among Muslims. Those ignorant people who believed this Jew and bore enmity against the As-haab were called Shi'ee (Shiite). And people who obeyed the hadeeth-shereefs, loved and followed the As-haab-i-kiraam were called Sunnee (Sunnite).]
I established a very intimate friendship with Muhammad bin Abd-ul-wahhaab of Najd. I launched a campaign of praising him everywhere. One day I said to him: "You are greater than 'Umar and 'Alee. If the Prophet were alive now, he would appoint you as his Khaleefa instead of them. I expect that Islam will be renovated and improved in your hands. You are the only scholar who will spread Islam all over the world."
Muhammad the son of Abd-ul-wahhaab and I decided to make a new interpretation of the Qur'aan; this new interpretation was to reflect only our points of view and would be entirely contrary to those explanations made by the Sahaaba, by the imaams of madh-habs and by the mufassirs (deeply learned scholars specialized in the explanation of the Qur'aan). We were reading the Qur'aan and talking on some of the aayats. My purpose in doing this was to mislead Muhammad. After all, he was trying to present himself as a revolutionist and would therefore accept my views and ideas with pleasure so that I should trust him all the more.
On one occasion I said to him, "Jihaad (fighting, struggling for Islam) is not fard."
He protested, "Why shouldn't it be despite Allah's commandment, 'Make war against unbelievers.'?"
I said, "Then why didn't the Prophet make war against the munaafiqs despite Allah's commandment, 'Make Jihaad against unbelievers and munaafiqs." [On the other hand, it is written in Mawaahibu ladunniyya that twenty- seven Jihaads were performed against unbelievers. Their swords are exhibited in Istanbul's museums. Munaafiqs would pretend to be Muslims. They would perform namaaz with the Messenger of Allah in the Masjeed-i- Nabawee during the days. Rasoolullah 'sall-allaahu alaihi wasallam' knew them. Yet he did not say, " You are a munaafiq," to any of them. If he had made war against them and killed them, people would say, "Muhammad 'alaihis- salaam' killed people who believed in him." Therefore he made verbal Jihaad against them. For Jihaad, which is fard, is performed with one's body and/or with one's property and/or with one's speech. The aayat-i-kareema quoted above commands to perform Jihaad against unbelievers. It does not define the type of the Jihaad to be performed. For Jihaad against unbelievers must be performed by fighting, and Jihaad against munaafiqs is to be performed by preaching and advice. This aayat-i-kereema covers these types of Jihaad].
He said, "The Prophet made Jihaad against them with his speech."
I said, "Is the Jihaad which is fard (commanded), the one which is to be done with one's speech?"
He said, "Rasoolullah made war against the unbelievers."
I said, "The Prophet made war against the unbelievers in order to defend himself. For the unbelievers intended to kill him."
He nodded.
At another time I said to him, "Mut'a nikaah is permissible."
He objected, "No, it is not."
I said, "Allah declares, In return for the use you make of them, give them the mehr you have decided upon'."
He said, "'Umar prohibited two examples of mut'a practice existent in his time and said he would punish anyone who practiced it."
I said, "You both say that you are superior to 'Umar and follow him. In addition, 'Umar said he prohibited it though he knew that the Prophet had permitted it. Why do you leave aside the Prophet's word and obey 'Umar's word?"
He did not answer. I knew that he was convinced.
I sensed that Muhammad of Najd desired a woman at that moment; he was single. I said to him, "Come on, let us each get a woman by mut'a nikaah. We will have a good time with them. He accepted with a nod. This was a great opportunity for me, so I promised to find a woman for him to amuse himself. My aim was to ally the timidity he had about people. But he stated it a condition that the matter be kept as a secret between us and that the woman not even be told what his name was. I hurriedly went to the Christian women who had been sent forth by the Ministry of Colonies with the task of seducing the Muslim youth there. I explained the matter to one of them. She accepted to help, so I gave her the nickname Safiyya. I took Muhammad of Najd to her house. Safiyya was at home, alone. We made a one-week marriage contract for Muhammad of Najd, who gave the woman some gold in the name of "Mehr." Thus we began to mislead Muhammad of Najd, Safiyya from within, and I from without.
Muhammad of Najd was thoroughly in Safiyya's hands now. Besides, he had tasted the pleasure of disobeying the commandments of the Sharee'at under the pretext of freedom of ijtihaad and ideas.
The third day of the mut'a nikaah I had a long dispute with him over that hard drinks were not haraam (forbidden by Islam). Although he quoted many aayats and hadeeths showing that it was haraam to have hard drinks, I cancelled all of them and finally said, "It is a fact that Yezeed and the Umayyad and Abbasid Khaleefas had hard drinks. Were they all miscreant people and you are the only adherent of the right way? They doubtless knew the Qur'aan and the Sunna better than you do. They inferred from the Qur'aan and the Sunna that the hard drink is makrooh, not haraam. Also, it is written in Jewish and Christian books that alcohol is mubaah (permitted). All religions are Allah's commandments. In fact, according to a narrative, 'Umar had hard drinks until the revelation of the aayat, 'You have all given it up, haven't you?" If it had been haraam, the Prophet would have chastised him. Since the Prophet did not punish him, hard drink is halaal." [The fact is that 'Umar 'radiy-allaahu anh' used to take hard drinks before they were made haraam. He never drank after the prohibition was declared. If some of the Umayyad and Abbasid Khaleefas took alcoholic drinks, this would not show that drinks with alcohol are makrooh. It would show that they were sinners, that they committed haraam. For the aayat-i-kereema quoted by the spy, as well as other aayat-i-kereemas and hadeeth-i-shereefs, shows that drinks with alcohol are haraam. It is stated in Riyaad-un-naasiheen, "Formerly it was permissible to drink wine. Hadrat 'Umar, Sa'd ibni Waqqas, and some other Sahaabees used to drink wine. Later the two hundred and nineteenth aayat of Baqara soora was revealed to declare that it was a grave sin. Sometime later the forty-second aayat of Nisaa soora was revealed and it was declared, 'Do not approach the namaaz when you are drunk!'" Eventually, the ninety-third aayat of Maaida soora came and wine was made haraam. It was stated as follows in hadeeth-i- shereefs: "If something would intoxicate in case it were taken in a large amount, it is haraam to take it even in a small amount." and "Wine is the gravest of sins." and "Do not make friends with a person who drinks wine! Do not attend his funeral (when he dies)! Do not form a matrimonial relationship with him!" and "Drinking wine is like worshipping idols." and "May Allaahu ta'aalaa curse him who drinks wine, sells it, makes it, or gives it."] ***
Muhammad of Najd said, "According to some narratives, 'Umar drank alcoholic spirits after mixing it with water and said it was not haraam unless it had an intoxicating effect. 'Umar's view is correct, for it is declared in the Qur'aan, 'The devil wants to stir up enmity and grudge among you and to keep you from doing dhikr of Allah and from namaaz by means of drinks and gambling. You will give these up now, won't you?' Alcoholic spirits will not cause the sins defined in the aayat when it does not intoxicate. Therefore, hard drinks are not haraam when they don't have an intoxicating effect."
I told Safiyya about this dispute we had on drinks and instructed her to make him drink a very strong spirit. Afterwards, she said, "I did as you said and made him drink. He danced and united with me several times that night." From them on Safiyya and I completely took control of Muhammad of Najd. In our farewell talk the Minister of Colonies had said to me, "We captured Spain from the disbelievers [he means Muslims] by means of alcohol and fornication. Let us take all our lands back by using these two great forces again." Now I know how true a statement it was.
One day I broached the topic of fasting to Muhammad of Najd: "It is stated in the Qur'aan, 'Your fasting is more auspicious for you.' It is not stated that fasting is fard (a plain commandment). Then, fasting is sunna, not fard, in the Islamic religion." He protested and said, "Are you trying to lead me out of my faith?" I replied, "One's faith consists of the purity of one's heart, the salvation of one's soul, and not committing a transgression against others' rights. Did not the Prophet state, 'Faith is love'? Did not Allah declare in Qur'aan al-kereem, 'Worship thine Rab (Allah) until yaqeen comes to thee? Then, when one has attained yaqeen pertaining to Allah and the Day of Judgement and beautified one's heart and purified one's deeds, one will become the most virtuous of mankind." He shook his head in reply to these words of mine.
Once I said to him, "Namaaz is not fard." "How is it not fard?" "Allah declares in the Qur'aan, 'Perform namaaz to remember Me.' Then, the aim of namaaz is to remember Allah. Therefore, you might as well remember Allah without performing namaaz."
He said, "Yes. I have heard that some people do dhikr of Allah instead of performing namaaz.' I was very much pleased with this statement of his. I tried hard to develop this notion and capture his heart. Then I noticed that he did not attach much importance to namaaz and was performing it quite sporadically. He was very negligent especially with the morning prayer. For I would keep him from going to bed by talking with him until midnight. So he would be too exhausted to get up for morning prayer.
I began to pull down the shawl of belief slowly off the shoulders of Muhammad of Najd. One day I wanted to dispute with him about the Prophet, too. "From now on, if you talk with me on these topics, our relation will be spoilt and I shall put an end to my friendship with you." Upon this I gave up speaking about the Prophet for fear of ruining all my endeavors once and for all.
I advised him to pursue a course quite different from those of Sunnites and Shiites. He favored this idea of mine. For he was a conceited person. Thanks to Safiyya, I put an halter on him.
On one occasion I said, "I have heard that the Prophet made his As-haab brothers to one another. Is it true?" Upon his positive reply, I wanted to know if this Islamic rule was temporary or permanent. He explained, "It is permanent. For the Prophet Muhammad's halaal is halaal till the end of the world, and his haraam is haraam till the end of the world." Then I offered him to be my brother. So we were brothers.
From that day on I never left him alone. We were together even in his travels. He was very important for me. For the tree that I had planted and grown, spending the most valuable days of my youth, was now beginning to yield its fruit.
I was sending monthly reports to the Ministry of Colonies in London. The answers I received were very encouraging and reassuring. Muhammad of Najd was following the path I had drawn for him.
My duty was to imbue him with feelings of independence, freedom and skepticism. I always praised him, saying that a brilliant future was awaiting him.
One day I fabricated the following dream: "Last night I dreamed of our Prophet. I addressed him with the attributes I had learnt from hodjas. He was seated on a dais. Around him were scholars that I did not know. You entered. Your face was as bright as haloes. You walked towards the Prophet, and when you were close enough the Prophet stood up and kissed between your both eyes. He said, 'You are my namesake, the heir to my knowledge, my deputy in worldly and religious matters.' You said, 'O Messenger of Allah! I am afraid to explain my knowledge to people.' 'You are the greatest. Don't be afraid,' replied the Prophet."
Muhammad bin Abd-ul-Wahhaab was wild with joy when he heard the dream. He asked several times if what I had told him was true, and received a positive answer each time he asked. Finally he was sure I had told him the truth. I think, from then on, he was resolved to publicize the ideas I had imbued him with and to establish a new sect
PART
FIVE
Hempher says:
It was on one of those days when Muhammad of Najd and I had become very intimate friends that I received a message from London ordering me to leave for the cities of Kerbelaa and Najaf, the two most popular Shiite centers of knowledge and spirituality. So I had to put an end to my company with Muhammad of Najd and leave Basra. Yet I was happy because I was sure that this ignorant and morally depraved man was going to establish a new sect, which in turn would demolish Islam from within, and that I was the composer of the heretical tenets of this new sect.
'Alee, the fourth Khaleefa of the Sunnites, and the first one according to the Shiites, was buried in Najaf. The city of Koofa, which was a distance of one fersah (league), i.e., an hour's walk from Najaf, was the capital of 'Alee's caliphate. When 'Alee was killed, his sons Hasan and Huseyn buried him outside Koofa at a place called Najaf today. In the course of time, Najaf began to grow, while Koofa gradually fell into decay. The Shiite men of religion came together in Najaf. Houses, markets, madrasas (Islamic schools and universities) were built.
The Khaleefa in Istanbul was kind and generous to them for the following reasons:
1- The Shiite administration in Iran was supporting the Shiites. The Khaleefa's interfering with them would cause tension between the states, which in turn could lead to warfare.
2- The inhabitants of Najaf included a number of armed tribes supporting the Shiites. Although they did not have much significance in terms of weaponry and organization, it would be unwise for the Khaleefa to run the risk of getting into trouble with them.
3- The Shiites in Najaf had authority over the Shiites all over the world, particularly those in Africa and India. If the Khaleefa disturbed them, all the Shiites would rise against him.
Huseyn bin 'Alee, the Prophet's grandson, i.e., his daughter Faatima's son, was martyred in Kerbelaa. The people of Iraq had sent for Huseyn in Medina and invited him to Iraq to elect him their Khaleefa. Huseyn and his family were in the territory called Kerbelaa when the Iraqis gave up their former intention and, acting upon the order given by Yazeed bin Muaawiya, the Umayyad Khaleefa living in Damascus, set out with the intention of arresting him. Huseyn and his family put up a heroic last-ditch fight against the Iraqi army. The battle ended in their death, so the Iraqi army was the winning side. Since that day, the Shiites have accepted Kerbelaa as their spiritual center, so that Shiites from all over the world come here and form such a huge crowd that our religion of Christianity does not have a likeness to it.
Kerbelaa, a Shiite city, contains Shiite madrasas. This city and Najaf support each other. Upon receiving the order to go to these two cities, I left Basra for Baghdad, and thence to a city named 'Hulla' situated alongside the Euphrates.
The Tigris and Euphrates come from Turkey, cut through Iraq, and flow into the Persian Gulf. Iraq's agriculture and welfare are due to these two rivers.
When I was back in London, I proposed to the Ministry of Colonies that a project could be drawn up to change the beds of these two rivers in order to make Iraq accept our proposals. When the water was cut off, Iraq would have to satisfy our demands.
From Hulla to Najaf I travelled in the guise of an Azerbaijani tradesman. Establishing close friendships with Shiite men of religion, I began to mislead them. I joined their circles of religious instruction. I saw that they did not study science like the Sunnites, nor did they have the beautiful moral qualities possessed by the Sunnites. For example:
1- They were extremely inimical towards the Ottoman State. For they were Shiites and the Turks were Sunnites. They said that the Sunnites were disbelievers.
2- The Shiite scholars were entirely absorbed in religious teachings and had very little interest in worldly knowledge, as was the case with priests during the period of standstill in our history.
3- They were quite unaware of Islam's inner essence and sublime character, nor did they have the smallest notion of the time's scientific and technical improvements.
I said to myself: What a wretched sort of people these Shiites are. They are sound asleep when the whole world is awake. One day a flood will come and take them all away. Several times I attempted to entice them to revolt against the Khaleefa. Unfortunately, no one would even listen to me. Some of them laughed at me as though I had told them to destroy the earth. For they looked on the Khaleefa as a fortress impossible to capture. According to them, they would get rid of the caliphate with the advent of the promised Mahdi.
According to them, Mahdi was their twelfth imaam, who was a descendant of Islam's Prophet and who disappeared in the Hijree year 255. They believed he was still alive and would one day reappear and rescue the world from this state of utter cruelty and injustice, filling it with justice.
It is consternating! How come these Shiite people believe in these superstitions! It was like the superstitious doctrine, "Jesus Christ will come back and fill the world with justice," held by our Christians.
One day I said to one of them: "Isn't it fard for you to prevent injustice like the Islamic Prophet did?" His reply was: "He managed to prevent injustice because Allah helped him." When I said, "It is written in the Qur'aan, If you help Allah's religion, He will help you in return.' "If you revolt against the torture of your shaahs, Allah will help you" He answered, "You are a tradesman. These are scientific matters. You cannot understand this."
The mausoleum of Alee the Emeer-ul-mu'mineen was profusely decorated. It had a splendid yard, a gold-covered dome, and two tall minarets. Every day great numbers of Shiites visited this mausoleum. They performed namaaz in jamaa'at in it. Every visitor first stooped in front of the threshold, kissed it, and then greeted the grave. They asked for permission and then entered. The mausoleum had a vast yard, which contained numerous rooms for men of religion and visitors.
There were two mausoleums similar to that of 'Alee's in Kerbelaa. One of them belonged to Huseyn and the other belonged his brother Abbaas, who had been martyred with him in Kerbelaa. In Kerbelaa the Shiites repeated the same practices as they did in Najaf. The climate of Kerbelaa was better than that of Najaf. It was surrounded with graceful orchards and lovely brooks.
During my mission to Iraq I met with a scene that gave relief to my heart. Some events heralded the end of the Ottoman Empire. For one thing, the governor appointed by the administration in Istanbul was an uneducated and cruel person. He acted as he wished. The people did not like him. The Sunnites were uneasy because the governor restricted their freedom and did not value them, and the Shiites felt indignant over being governed by a Turk while among them there were sayyeds and shareefs, the Prophet's descendants, who would have been a much better choice for governorship.
The Shiites were in an utterly woebegone situation. They lived in squalid and dilapidated environments. The roads were not safe. Highwaymen always awaited caravans, and attacked whenever they saw that there were no soldiers escorting them. For this reason, convoys would not set out unless the government would appoint a detachment to escort them.
The Shiite tribes were mostly warlike with one another. They killed and plundered one another daily. Ignorance and illiteracy were dreadfully widespread. This state of the Shiites reminded me of the time when Europe had been under an ecclesiastical invasion. With the exclusion of the religious leaders living in Najaf and Kerbelaa and a small minority, who were their votaries, not even one out of every thousand Shiites knew how to read or write.
The economy had collapsed entirely, and the people were suffering utter poverty. The administrative system was quite out of order. The Shiites committed treasons against the government.
The State and the people viewed each other with suspicion. As a result, there was no mutual aid between them. The Shiite religious leaders, totally given to vituperating the Sunnites, had already relinquished knowledge; business, religious and worldly alike.
I stayed in Kerbelaa and in Najaf for four months. I suffered a very serious illness in Najaf. I felt so bad that I completely gave up hope of recovery. My illness lasted three weeks. I went to a doctor. He gave me a prescription. Using the medicine, I began to recover. Throughout my illness I stayed in an underground room. Because I was ill, my host prepared my medicine and food in return for an insignificant sum of money and expected great thawaab for serving me. For I was, so to speak, a visitor of 'Alee the Emeer-ul-mu'mineen. The doctor advised me to have only chicken broth during the first few days. Later on he permitted me to eat chicken as well. The third week I had rice soup. After becoming well again I left for Baghdad. I prepared a report of one hundred pages on my observations in Najaf, Hulla, and Baghdad and while on the way. I submitted the report to the Baghdad representative of the Ministry of Colonies. I waited for the Ministry's order on whether I should remain in Iraq or return to London.
I wished to go back to London. For I had been abroad for a long time. I missed my homeland and my family. Especially, I wanted to see my son Rasputin, who had been born after my departure. For this reason, I appended to my report a petition for permission to return to London for a short time at least. I wanted to give an oral report of impressions about my three years' mission in Iraq and to get some rest in the meantime. The Iraq representative of the Ministry advised me not to call on him often lest I should arouse suspicion. He also advised to rent a room in one of the inns alongside the Tigris River, and said, "I shall inform you of the Ministry's answer when we receive the mail from London." During my stay in Baghdad I observed the spiritual distance between Istanbul, the capital of the caliphate, and Baghdad.
When I left Basra for Kerbelaa and Najaf, I was very much anxious that Muhammad of Najd would swerve from the direction I had led him. For he was an extremely unstable and nervous person. I feared that the aims I had built upon him might be spoilt.
As I left him he was thinking of going to Istanbul. I did my best to dissuade him from the notion. I said, "I am very anxious that when you go there you may make a statement whereby they will pronounce you a heretic and kill you."
My apprehension was quite the other way round. I was anxious that upon going there he should meet profound scholars capable of setting his fallacies right and converting him to the Sunnee creed and thus all my dreams should come to naught. For there was knowledge and Islam's beautiful morality in Istanbul.
When I found out that Muhammad of Najd did not want to stay in Basra, I recommended that he go to Isfahan and Sheeraaz. For these two cities were lovely. And their inhabitants were Shiites. And Shiites, in their turn, could not possibly influence Muhammad of Najd. For Shiites were inefficient in knowledge and ethics. Thus I made it certain that he would not change the course I had charted for him.
As we parted I said to him, "Do you believe in Taqiyya?" "Yes, I do," he replied. "The unbelievers arrested one of the Sahaaba and tormented him and killed his parents. Upon this he made Taqiyya, that is, he said openly that he was a polytheist. (When he came back and said what had happened), the Prophet did not reproach him at all." I advised him, "When you live among the Shiites, make Taqiyya; do not tell them that you are Sunnee lest they become a nuisance for you. Utilize their country and scholars! Learn their customs and traditions. For they are ignorant and stubborn people."
As I left, I gave him some money as zakaat. Zakaat is an Islamic tax collected in order to be dealt out to the needy people. In addition, I gave him a saddled animal as a present. So we parted.
After my departure I lost contact with him. This made me utterly uneasy. When we parted we decided that both of us were to return to Basra and whichever party was back first and did not find the other party was to write a letter and leave it with Abd-ur-Reedaa.
PART SIX
I stayed in Baghdad for a time. Then, receiving the message ordering me to return to London, I left. In London, I talked with the secretary and some officials of the Ministry. I told them of my activities and observations during my long mission. They rejoiced greatly at the information I gave about Iraq and said that they were pleased. On the other hand, Safiyya, the girl friend of Muhammad of Najd, sent a report agreeing with mine. I found out also that throughout my mission I had been followed by men from the Ministry. These men also sent reports concurrent with the reports I had sent and with the account I had given to the secretary.
The secretary made an appointment for me to meet the Minister. When I visited the Minister, he met me in a manner that he had not shown towards me upon my arrival from Istanbul. I knew that I occupied an exceptional place in his heart now.
The minister was very pleased to know that I had obtained Muhammad of Najd. "He is a weapon our Ministry has been looking for. Give him all sorts of promises. It would be worth while if you spent all your time indoctrinating him," he said. When I said, "I have been anxious about Muhammad of Najd. He may have changed his mind," he replied, "Don't worry. He has not given up the ideas he had when you left him. The spies of our Ministry met him in Isfahan and reported to our Ministry that he had not changed." I said to myself, "How could Muhammad of Najd reveal his secrets to a stranger?" I did not dare to ask this question to the Minister. However, when I met Muhammad of Najd later, I found out that in Isfahan a man named Abd-ul-kereem had met him and ferreted out his secrets by saying, "I am Shaikh Muhammad's [meaning me] brother. He told me all that he knew about you."
Muhammad of Najd said to me, "Safiyya went with me to Isfahan and we cohabited with mut'a nikaah for two more months. Abd-ul-kereem accompanied me to Sheeraaz and found me a woman named Asiya, who was prettier and more attractive than Safiyya. Making mut'a nikaah with that woman, I spent the most delightful moments of my life with her."
I found out later that Abd-ul-kereem was a Christian agent living in the Jelfa district of Isfahan and working for the Ministry. And Asiya, a Jewess living in Sheeraaz, was another agent for the Ministry. All four of us coordinated to train Muhammad of Najd in such a way that in future he would do what was excepted from him in the best way.
When I related the events in the presence of the Minister, the secretary, and two other members of the Ministry whom I did not know, the Minister said to me, "You have deserved to receive the greatest award of the Ministry. For you are the best one among the most significant agents of the ministry. The secretary will tell you some State secrets, which will help you in your mission."
Then they gave me a ten-day leave during which I could see my family. So I went home right away and spent some of my sweetest moments with my son, who resembled me very much. My son spoke a few words, and walked so elegantly that I felt as if he were a piece from my own body. I spent this ten-day leave so cheerfully, so happily. I felt as if I were going to fly from joy. It was such a great pleasure to be back home, to be with my family. During this ten-day leave I visited my old paternal aunt, who loved me very much. It was wise of me to visit my paternal aunt. For she passed away after my departure for my third mission. I felt so sad about her decease.
This ten-day leave elapsed as fast as an hour. Whereas cheerful days such as these go by as quickly as an hour, days of grief seem to take centuries. I remembered the days when I had suffered that illness in Najaf. Those days of affliction had seemed like years to me.
When I went to the Ministry to receive new orders, I met the secretary with this cheerful face and tall stature. He shook my hand so warmly that his affection was perceptible. He said to me, "With the command of our minister and the committee in charge of Colonies, I shall tell you two State secrets. Later you will benefit very much from these two secrets. No one except a couple of confidential people know these two secrets."
Holding my hand, he took me to a room in the Ministry. I met with something very attractive in this room. Ten men were sitting around a round table. The first man was in the guise of the Ottoman Emperor. He spoke Turkish and English. The second one was dressed in the attire of the Shaikh-ul-islaam (Chief of Islamic Matters) in Istanbul. The third one was dressed in an attirement identical with that of the Shah of Iran. The fourth one was in the attire of the vizier in the Iranian palace. The fifth one was dressed like the great scholar leading the Shiites in Najaf. The last three of these people spoke Persian and English. Each of these five people had a clerk sitting beside him to write down whatever they would say. These clerks were imparting to the five men the information collected by spies about their archetypes in Istanbul, Iran, and Najaf.
The secretary said, "These five people represent the five people there. In order to know what their archetypes think, we have educated and trained these people exactly like their archetypes. We intimate the information we have obtained about their originals in Istanbul, Teheran and Najaf to these men. And these men, in their turn, imagine themselves to be their originals in those places. Then we ask them and they answer us. We have determined that the answers given by these people are seventy-percent agreeable with the answers that their originals would give.
"If you like, you may ask questions for assessment. You have already met the scholar of Najaf." I replied in the affirmative, for I had met the great Shiite scholar in Najaf and asked him about some matters. Now I approached his copy and said, "Dear teacher, would it be permissible for us to wage war against the government because it is Sunnee and fanatical?" He reflected for a while, and said, "No, it is not permissible for us to wage war against the government because it is Sunnee. For all Muslims are brothers. We could declare war on them (Sunnite Muslims) only if they perpetrated cruelty and persecution on the Ummat (Muslims). And even in this case we would observe the principles of Amr-i-bi-l-ma'roof and Nahy-i-ani-l-munkar. We would stop interfering with them as soon as they stopped their persecution."
I said, "Dear teacher, may I have your opinion concerning the matter that Jews and Christians are foul?" "Yes, they are foul," he said. "It is necessary to keep away from them." When I asked the reason why, he replied, "It is done so in retaliation for an insult. For they look on us as disbelievers and deny our Prophet Muhammad 'alaihis-salaam'. We therefore retaliate for this." I said to him, "Dear teacher, isn't cleanliness an issue of eemaan? Despite this fact, the avenues and streets around the Sahn-i-shareef [the area surrounding hadrat 'Alee's mausoleum] are not clean. Even the madrasas, which are the places of knowledge, cannot be said to be clean." He replied, "Yes, it is true; cleanliness is from eemaan. Yet it cannot be helped because the Shiites are negligent over cleanliness."
The answers given by this man in the Ministry were precisely concurrent with the answers I had received from the Shiite scholar in Najaf. Such accurate identity between this man and the scholar in Najaf amazed me utterly. In addition, this man spoke Persian.
The secretary said, "If you had met the archetypes of the other four personages, you would talk to their imitations now and see how identical they are with their originals." When I said, "I know how the Shaikh-ul-islaam thinks. For Ahmad Efendi, my hodja in Istanbul, gave a detailed description of the Shaikh-ul-islaam to me," the secretary said, "Then you can go ahead and talk with his model."
I went near the Shaikh-ul-islaam's model and said to him, "Is it fard to obey the Khaleefa?" "Yes, it is waajib," he replied. "It is waajib, as it is fard to obey Allah and the Prophet." When I asked what evidence he had to prove this, he answered, "Didn't you hear about Janaab-i-Allah's aayat, 'Obey Allah, His Prophet, and the Ulul amr from among you'?" I said, "Does this mean that Allah commands us to obey the Khaleefa Yazeed, who permitted his army to plunder Medeena and who killed our Prophet's grandson Huseyn, and Waleed who drank alcoholic spirits?" His answer was this: "My son! Yazeed was the Ameer-ul-mu'mineen with Allah's permission. He did not command the killing of Huseyn. Do not believe in the Shiite lies! Read the books well! He made a mistake. Then he made tawba for this (he repented and begged for Allah's forgiveness and mercy). He was right about his ordering Medina-i-munawwara plundered. For the inhabitants of Medina had become quite unbridled and disobedient. As for Waleed; yes, he was a sinner. It is waajib not to imitate the Khaleefa, but to obey his commandments compatible with the Sharee'at." I had asked these same questions to my hodja Ahmed Efendi and received identical answers with slight differences. Then I asked the secretary, "What are the ultimate reasons for preparing these models?" He said, "With this method we are assessing the mental capacities of the (Ottoman) Sultan and the Muslim scholars, be they Shi'ee or Sunnee. We are searching for the measures that will help us cope with them. For instance, if you know what direction the enemy forces will come from, you will make preparations accordingly, post your forces at suitable positions, and thus rout the enemy. On the other hand, if you aren't sure about the direction of the enemy assault you will spread your forces here and there in a haphazard way and suffer a defeat. ... By the same token, if you know the evidences Muslims will furnish to prove that their faith, their madh-hab is right, it will be possible for you to prepare the counter-evidences to rebut their evidences and shock their belief with those counter-evidences."
Then he gave me a book of one thousand pages containing the results of the observations and projects carried out by the aforenamed five representative men in areas such as military, finance, education, and religion. He said, "Please read this book and return it to us." I took the book home with me. I read through it with utmost attention during my three-week holiday.
The book was of a wonderful sort. For the important answers and the delicate observations it contained sounded genuine. I think that the answers given by the representative five men were more than seventy percent agreeable with the answers that their archetypes would have given. Indeed, the secretary had said that the answers were seventy percent correct.
Having read the book, I now had more confidence in my State and I knew for certain that the plans for demolishing the Ottoman Empire in time shorter than a century had already been prepared. The secretary also said, "In other similar rooms we have identical tables intended for countries we have been colonizing as well as for those we are planning to colonize." When I asked the secretary where they found such diligent and talented men, he replied, "Our agents all over the world are providing us intelligence continuously. As you see, these representatives are experts in their work. Naturally, if you were furnished with all the information possessed by a particular person, you would be able to think like him and to make the decisions he would make. For you would be his substitute now."
The secretary went on, "So this was the first secret I was ordered by the Ministry to give you.
"I shall tell you the second secret a month later, when you return the book of one thousand pages."
I read the book part by part from the beginning to the end, focusing all my attention on it. It increased my information about the Muhammadans. Now I knew how they thought, what their weaknesses were, what made them powerful, and how to transform their powerful qualities into vulnerable spots.
Muslims' weak spots as recorded in the book were as follows:
1- Islam commands unity and cooperation and prohibits disunion. It is stated in the Qur'aan, "Hold fast to Allah's rope altogether."
2- Islam commands being educated and being conscious. It is stated in the Qur'aan, "Travel on the earth."
3- Islam commands to acquire knowledge. It is stated in a hadeeth, "Learning knowledge is fard for every Muslim, male and female alike." 4- Islam commands to work for the world. It is stated in the Qur'aan, "Some of them: O our Allah! Allot to us whatever is beautiful both in the world and in the Hereafter."
5- Islam commands consultation. It is stated in the Qur'aan, "Their deeds are (done) upon consultation among themselves."
6- Islam commands to build roads. It is stated in the Qur'aan, "Walk on the earth."
7- Islam commands Muslims to maintain their health. It is stated in a hadeeth, "Knowledge is (made up) of four (parts): 1) The knowledge of Fiqh for the maintenance of faith; 2) The knowledge of Medicine for the maintenance of health; 3) The knowledge of Sarf and Nahw (Arabic grammar) for the maintenance of language; 4) The knowledge of Astronomy so as to be aware of the times."
8- Islam commands development. It is stated in the Qur'aan, "Allah created everything on the earth for you."
9- Islam commands orderliness. It is stated in the Qur'aan, "Everything is based on calculations, orders."
10- Islam commands to be strong economically. It is stated in a hadeeth. "Work for your world as though you would never die. And work for your hereafter as if you were going to die tomorrow."
11- Islam commands to establish an army equipped with powerful weapons. It is stated in the Qur'aan, "Prepare as many forces as you can against them."
12- Islam commands to observe women's rights and to value them. It is stated in the Qur'aan, "As men legally have (rights) over women, so women have rights over them."
13- Islam commands cleanliness. It is stated in a hadeeth, "Cleanliness is from eemaan."
The book recommended to degenerate and to impair the following power sources:
It advised the following steps for popularizing their vulnerable spots:
When I read through the book, which was entitled How Can We Demolish Islam, I found it really excellent. It was a peerless guide for the studies I was going to carry on. When I returned the book to the secretary and told him that it afforded me great pleasure to read it, he said, "You can be sure that you are not alone in this field. We have lots of men doing the same job as you have been carrying on. Our Ministry has assigned over five thousand men to this mission. The Ministry is considering increasing this number to one hundred thousand. When we reach this number we shall have brought all Muslims under our sway and obtained all Muslim countries."
Sometime later the secretary said: "Good news to you! Our Ministry needs one century at the most to realize this program. We may not live to see those happy days, but our children will. What a beautiful saying this is: I have eaten what others sowed. So I am sowing for others.' When the British manage this they will have pleased the whole Christian world and will have rescued them from a twelve-century-old nuisance."
The secretary went on as follows: "The crusading expeditions which continued for centuries were of no use. Nor can the Mongols [armies of Dzengiz] be said to have done anything to extirpate Islam. For their work was sudden, unsystematic, and ungrounded. They carried on military expeditions so as to reveal their enmity. Consequently, they became tired in a short time. But now our valuable administrators are trying to demolish Islam by means of a very subtle plan and a long-range patience. We must use military force, too. Yet this should be the final phase, that is, after we have completely consumed Islam, after we have hammered it from all directions and rendered it into a miserable state from which it will never recover again and fight against us." The secretary's final words were these: "Our superiors in Istanbul must have been very wise and intelligent. They executed our plan precisely. What did they do? They mixed with the Muhammadans and opened madrasas for their children. They built churches. They were perfectly successful in popularizing alcoholic spirits, gambling, indecencies, and breaking them into groups by means of instigation [and football clubs.] They aroused doubts in the minds of young Muslims. They inserted controversies and oppositions into their governments. They spread mischief everywhere. They depraved administrators, directors, and statesmen by filling their houses with Christian women. With activities of this sort they broke their forces, shocked their adherence to their faith, corrupted them morally, and disrupted their unity and communication. Now the time has come to commence a sudden war and extirpate Islam."
PART SEVEN
Having enjoyed the first secret, I was looking forward to knowing the second secret. Eventually one day the secretary explained the second secret he had promised. The second secret was a fifty page scheme prepared for the high ranking officials working in the Ministry for annihilating Islam altogether within a century's time. The scheme was comprised of fourteen articles. The scheme was closely guarded for fear that it might be obtained by Muslims. The following are the articles of the scheme:
After a month's stay in London, I received a message from the Ministry ordering me to go to Iraq to see Muhammad of Najd again. As I was leaving for my mission, the secretary said to me, "Never be negligent about Muhammad of Najd! As it is understood from the reports sent by our spies up until now, Muhammad of Najd is a typical fool very convenient for the realization of our purposes.
"Talk frankly with Muhammad of Najd. Our agents talked with him frankly in Isfahaan, and he accepted our wishes on terms. The terms he stipulated are: He would be supported with adequate property and weaponry to protect himself against states and scholars who would certainly attack him upon his announcing his ideas and views. A principality would be established in his country, be it a small one. The Ministry accepted these terms."
I felt as if I were going to fly from joy when I heard this news. I asked the secretary what I was supposed to do about this. His reply was, "The Ministry has devised a subtle scheme for Muhammad of Najd to carry out, as follows:
"1- He is to declare all Muslims as disbelievers and announce that it is halaal to kill them, to seize their property, to violate their chastity, to make their men slaves and their women concubines and to sell them at slave markets.
"2- He is to state that Ka'ba is an idol and therefore it must be demolished. In order to do away with the worship of hajj, he is to provoke tribes to raid groups of hadjis (Muslim pilgrims), to plunder their belongings and to kill them.
"3- He is to strive to dissuade Muslims from obeying the Khaleefa. He is to provoke them to revolt against him. He is to prepare armies for this purpose. He is to exploit every opportunity to spread the conviction that it is necessary to fight against the notables of Hedjaz and bring disgrace on them.
"4- He is to allege that the mausoleums, domes and sacred places in Muslim countries are idols and polytheistic milieus and must therefore be demolished. He is to do his best to produce occasions for insulting Prophet Muhammad, his Khaleefas, and all prominent scholars of madh-habs.
"5- He is to do his utmost to encourage insurrections, oppressions and anarchy in Muslim countries.
"6- He is to try to publish a copy of the Qur'aan interpolated with additions and excisions, as is the case with hadeeths."
After explaining this six-paragraph scheme, the secretary added, "Do not panic at this huge programma. For our duty is to sow the seeds for annihilating Islam. There will come generations to complete this job. The British government has formed it a habit to be patient and to advance step by step. Wasn't Prophet Muhammad, the performer of the great and bewildering Islamic revolution, a human being after all? And this Muhammad of Najd of ours has promised to accomplish this revolution of ours like his Prophet."
A couple of days later, I took permission from the Minister and the Secretary, bid farewell to my family and friends, and set out for Basra. As I left home my little son said, "Come back soon daddy!" My eyes became wet. I could not conceal my sorrow from my wife. After a tiresome journey I arrived in Basra at night. I went to Abd-ur-Ridaa's home. He was asleep. He was very pleased when he woke up and saw me. He offered me warm hospitality. I spent the night there. The next morning he said to me, "Muhammad of Najd called on me, left this letter for you, and left." I opened the letter. He wrote the was leaving for his country, Najd, and gave his address there. I at once set out to go there, too. After an extremely onerous journey I arrived there. I found Muhammad of Najd in his home. He had lost a lot of weight. I did not say anything this concerning this to him. Afterwards, I learned that he had gotten married.
We decided between us that he was to tell other people that I was his slave and was back from some place he had sent me. He introduced me as such.
I stayed with Muhammad of Najd for two years. We made a programma to announce his call. Eventually I fomented his resolution in 1143 Hijri [A.D. 1730]. Hence by collecting supporters around himself, he insinuated his call by making covert statements to those who were very close to him. Then, day by day, he expanded his call. I put guards around him in order to protect him against his enemies. I gave them as much property and money as they wanted. Whenever the enemies of Muhammad of Najd wanted to attack him, I inspirited and heartened them. As his call spread wider, the number of his adversaries increased. From time to time he attempted to give up his call, especially when he was overwhelmed by the multitude of the attacks made on him. Yet I never left him alone and always encouraged him. I would say to him, "O Muhammad, the Prophet suffered more persecution than you have so far. You know, this is a way of honor. Like any other revolutionist, you would have to endure some difficulty!"
Enemy attack was likely any moment. I therefore hired spies on his adversaries. Whenever his enemies meant harm to him, the spies would report to me and so I would neutralize their harm. Once I was informed that the enemies were to kill him. I immediately took the precautions to thwart their preparations. When the people (around Muhammad of Najd) heard about this plot of their enemies, they began to hate them all the more. They fell into the trap they had laid.
Muhammad of Najd promised me that he would implement all the six articles of the scheme and added, "For the time being I can execute them only partly." He was right in this word of his. At that time it was impossible for him to carry out all of them.
He found it impossible to have Ka'ba demolished. And he gave up the idea of announcing that it (Ka'ba) is an idol. In addition, he refused to publish an interpolated copy of the Qur'aan. Most of his fears in this respect were from the Shereefs in Mekka and the Istanbul government. He told me that "If we made these two announcements we would be attacked by a powerful army." I accepted his excuse. For he was right. The conditions were not favorable at all.
A couple of years later the Ministry of Commonwealth managed to cajole Muhammad bin Su'ood, the Ameer of Der'iyya, into joining our lines. They sent me a messenger to inform me about this and to establish a mutual affection and cooperation between the two Muhammads. For earning Muslims' hearts and trusts, we exploited our Muhammad of Najd religiously, and Muhammad bin Su'ood politically. It is an historical fact that states based on religion have lived longer and have been more powerful and more imposing.
Thus we continuously became more and more powerful. We made Der'iyya city our capital. And we named our new religion the WAHHABI religion. The Ministry supported and reinforced the Wahhaabee government in an underhanded way. The new government bought eleven British officers, very well learned in the Arabic language and desert warfare, under the name of slaves. We prepared our plans in cooperation with these officers. Both Muhammads followed the way we showed them. When we did not receive any orders from the Ministry we made our own decisions.
We all married girls from tribes. We enjoyed the pleasure of a Muslim wife's devotion to her husband. Thus we had stronger relations with tribes. Everything goes well now. Our centralization is becoming more and more vigorous each day. Unless an unexpected catastrophe takes place, we shall eat the fruit we have prepared. For we have done whatever is necessary and sown the seeds.
Hempher says:
It was on one of those days when Muhammad of Najd and I had become very intimate friends that I received a message from London ordering me to leave for the cities of Kerbelaa and Najaf, the two most popular Shiite centers of knowledge and spirituality. So I had to put an end to my company with Muhammad of Najd and leave Basra. Yet I was happy because I was sure that this ignorant and morally depraved man was going to establish a new sect, which in turn would demolish Islam from within, and that I was the composer of the heretical tenets of this new sect.
'Alee, the fourth Khaleefa of the Sunnites, and the first one according to the Shiites, was buried in Najaf. The city of Koofa, which was a distance of one fersah (league), i.e., an hour's walk from Najaf, was the capital of 'Alee's caliphate. When 'Alee was killed, his sons Hasan and Huseyn buried him outside Koofa at a place called Najaf today. In the course of time, Najaf began to grow, while Koofa gradually fell into decay. The Shiite men of religion came together in Najaf. Houses, markets, madrasas (Islamic schools and universities) were built.
The Khaleefa in Istanbul was kind and generous to them for the following reasons:
1- The Shiite administration in Iran was supporting the Shiites. The Khaleefa's interfering with them would cause tension between the states, which in turn could lead to warfare.
2- The inhabitants of Najaf included a number of armed tribes supporting the Shiites. Although they did not have much significance in terms of weaponry and organization, it would be unwise for the Khaleefa to run the risk of getting into trouble with them.
3- The Shiites in Najaf had authority over the Shiites all over the world, particularly those in Africa and India. If the Khaleefa disturbed them, all the Shiites would rise against him.
Huseyn bin 'Alee, the Prophet's grandson, i.e., his daughter Faatima's son, was martyred in Kerbelaa. The people of Iraq had sent for Huseyn in Medina and invited him to Iraq to elect him their Khaleefa. Huseyn and his family were in the territory called Kerbelaa when the Iraqis gave up their former intention and, acting upon the order given by Yazeed bin Muaawiya, the Umayyad Khaleefa living in Damascus, set out with the intention of arresting him. Huseyn and his family put up a heroic last-ditch fight against the Iraqi army. The battle ended in their death, so the Iraqi army was the winning side. Since that day, the Shiites have accepted Kerbelaa as their spiritual center, so that Shiites from all over the world come here and form such a huge crowd that our religion of Christianity does not have a likeness to it.
Kerbelaa, a Shiite city, contains Shiite madrasas. This city and Najaf support each other. Upon receiving the order to go to these two cities, I left Basra for Baghdad, and thence to a city named 'Hulla' situated alongside the Euphrates.
The Tigris and Euphrates come from Turkey, cut through Iraq, and flow into the Persian Gulf. Iraq's agriculture and welfare are due to these two rivers.
When I was back in London, I proposed to the Ministry of Colonies that a project could be drawn up to change the beds of these two rivers in order to make Iraq accept our proposals. When the water was cut off, Iraq would have to satisfy our demands.
From Hulla to Najaf I travelled in the guise of an Azerbaijani tradesman. Establishing close friendships with Shiite men of religion, I began to mislead them. I joined their circles of religious instruction. I saw that they did not study science like the Sunnites, nor did they have the beautiful moral qualities possessed by the Sunnites. For example:
1- They were extremely inimical towards the Ottoman State. For they were Shiites and the Turks were Sunnites. They said that the Sunnites were disbelievers.
2- The Shiite scholars were entirely absorbed in religious teachings and had very little interest in worldly knowledge, as was the case with priests during the period of standstill in our history.
3- They were quite unaware of Islam's inner essence and sublime character, nor did they have the smallest notion of the time's scientific and technical improvements.
I said to myself: What a wretched sort of people these Shiites are. They are sound asleep when the whole world is awake. One day a flood will come and take them all away. Several times I attempted to entice them to revolt against the Khaleefa. Unfortunately, no one would even listen to me. Some of them laughed at me as though I had told them to destroy the earth. For they looked on the Khaleefa as a fortress impossible to capture. According to them, they would get rid of the caliphate with the advent of the promised Mahdi.
According to them, Mahdi was their twelfth imaam, who was a descendant of Islam's Prophet and who disappeared in the Hijree year 255. They believed he was still alive and would one day reappear and rescue the world from this state of utter cruelty and injustice, filling it with justice.
It is consternating! How come these Shiite people believe in these superstitions! It was like the superstitious doctrine, "Jesus Christ will come back and fill the world with justice," held by our Christians.
One day I said to one of them: "Isn't it fard for you to prevent injustice like the Islamic Prophet did?" His reply was: "He managed to prevent injustice because Allah helped him." When I said, "It is written in the Qur'aan, If you help Allah's religion, He will help you in return.' "If you revolt against the torture of your shaahs, Allah will help you" He answered, "You are a tradesman. These are scientific matters. You cannot understand this."
The mausoleum of Alee the Emeer-ul-mu'mineen was profusely decorated. It had a splendid yard, a gold-covered dome, and two tall minarets. Every day great numbers of Shiites visited this mausoleum. They performed namaaz in jamaa'at in it. Every visitor first stooped in front of the threshold, kissed it, and then greeted the grave. They asked for permission and then entered. The mausoleum had a vast yard, which contained numerous rooms for men of religion and visitors.
There were two mausoleums similar to that of 'Alee's in Kerbelaa. One of them belonged to Huseyn and the other belonged his brother Abbaas, who had been martyred with him in Kerbelaa. In Kerbelaa the Shiites repeated the same practices as they did in Najaf. The climate of Kerbelaa was better than that of Najaf. It was surrounded with graceful orchards and lovely brooks.
During my mission to Iraq I met with a scene that gave relief to my heart. Some events heralded the end of the Ottoman Empire. For one thing, the governor appointed by the administration in Istanbul was an uneducated and cruel person. He acted as he wished. The people did not like him. The Sunnites were uneasy because the governor restricted their freedom and did not value them, and the Shiites felt indignant over being governed by a Turk while among them there were sayyeds and shareefs, the Prophet's descendants, who would have been a much better choice for governorship.
The Shiites were in an utterly woebegone situation. They lived in squalid and dilapidated environments. The roads were not safe. Highwaymen always awaited caravans, and attacked whenever they saw that there were no soldiers escorting them. For this reason, convoys would not set out unless the government would appoint a detachment to escort them.
The Shiite tribes were mostly warlike with one another. They killed and plundered one another daily. Ignorance and illiteracy were dreadfully widespread. This state of the Shiites reminded me of the time when Europe had been under an ecclesiastical invasion. With the exclusion of the religious leaders living in Najaf and Kerbelaa and a small minority, who were their votaries, not even one out of every thousand Shiites knew how to read or write.
The economy had collapsed entirely, and the people were suffering utter poverty. The administrative system was quite out of order. The Shiites committed treasons against the government.
The State and the people viewed each other with suspicion. As a result, there was no mutual aid between them. The Shiite religious leaders, totally given to vituperating the Sunnites, had already relinquished knowledge; business, religious and worldly alike.
I stayed in Kerbelaa and in Najaf for four months. I suffered a very serious illness in Najaf. I felt so bad that I completely gave up hope of recovery. My illness lasted three weeks. I went to a doctor. He gave me a prescription. Using the medicine, I began to recover. Throughout my illness I stayed in an underground room. Because I was ill, my host prepared my medicine and food in return for an insignificant sum of money and expected great thawaab for serving me. For I was, so to speak, a visitor of 'Alee the Emeer-ul-mu'mineen. The doctor advised me to have only chicken broth during the first few days. Later on he permitted me to eat chicken as well. The third week I had rice soup. After becoming well again I left for Baghdad. I prepared a report of one hundred pages on my observations in Najaf, Hulla, and Baghdad and while on the way. I submitted the report to the Baghdad representative of the Ministry of Colonies. I waited for the Ministry's order on whether I should remain in Iraq or return to London.
I wished to go back to London. For I had been abroad for a long time. I missed my homeland and my family. Especially, I wanted to see my son Rasputin, who had been born after my departure. For this reason, I appended to my report a petition for permission to return to London for a short time at least. I wanted to give an oral report of impressions about my three years' mission in Iraq and to get some rest in the meantime. The Iraq representative of the Ministry advised me not to call on him often lest I should arouse suspicion. He also advised to rent a room in one of the inns alongside the Tigris River, and said, "I shall inform you of the Ministry's answer when we receive the mail from London." During my stay in Baghdad I observed the spiritual distance between Istanbul, the capital of the caliphate, and Baghdad.
When I left Basra for Kerbelaa and Najaf, I was very much anxious that Muhammad of Najd would swerve from the direction I had led him. For he was an extremely unstable and nervous person. I feared that the aims I had built upon him might be spoilt.
As I left him he was thinking of going to Istanbul. I did my best to dissuade him from the notion. I said, "I am very anxious that when you go there you may make a statement whereby they will pronounce you a heretic and kill you."
My apprehension was quite the other way round. I was anxious that upon going there he should meet profound scholars capable of setting his fallacies right and converting him to the Sunnee creed and thus all my dreams should come to naught. For there was knowledge and Islam's beautiful morality in Istanbul.
When I found out that Muhammad of Najd did not want to stay in Basra, I recommended that he go to Isfahan and Sheeraaz. For these two cities were lovely. And their inhabitants were Shiites. And Shiites, in their turn, could not possibly influence Muhammad of Najd. For Shiites were inefficient in knowledge and ethics. Thus I made it certain that he would not change the course I had charted for him.
As we parted I said to him, "Do you believe in Taqiyya?" "Yes, I do," he replied. "The unbelievers arrested one of the Sahaaba and tormented him and killed his parents. Upon this he made Taqiyya, that is, he said openly that he was a polytheist. (When he came back and said what had happened), the Prophet did not reproach him at all." I advised him, "When you live among the Shiites, make Taqiyya; do not tell them that you are Sunnee lest they become a nuisance for you. Utilize their country and scholars! Learn their customs and traditions. For they are ignorant and stubborn people."
As I left, I gave him some money as zakaat. Zakaat is an Islamic tax collected in order to be dealt out to the needy people. In addition, I gave him a saddled animal as a present. So we parted.
After my departure I lost contact with him. This made me utterly uneasy. When we parted we decided that both of us were to return to Basra and whichever party was back first and did not find the other party was to write a letter and leave it with Abd-ur-Reedaa.
PART SIX
I stayed in Baghdad for a time. Then, receiving the message ordering me to return to London, I left. In London, I talked with the secretary and some officials of the Ministry. I told them of my activities and observations during my long mission. They rejoiced greatly at the information I gave about Iraq and said that they were pleased. On the other hand, Safiyya, the girl friend of Muhammad of Najd, sent a report agreeing with mine. I found out also that throughout my mission I had been followed by men from the Ministry. These men also sent reports concurrent with the reports I had sent and with the account I had given to the secretary.
The secretary made an appointment for me to meet the Minister. When I visited the Minister, he met me in a manner that he had not shown towards me upon my arrival from Istanbul. I knew that I occupied an exceptional place in his heart now.
The minister was very pleased to know that I had obtained Muhammad of Najd. "He is a weapon our Ministry has been looking for. Give him all sorts of promises. It would be worth while if you spent all your time indoctrinating him," he said. When I said, "I have been anxious about Muhammad of Najd. He may have changed his mind," he replied, "Don't worry. He has not given up the ideas he had when you left him. The spies of our Ministry met him in Isfahan and reported to our Ministry that he had not changed." I said to myself, "How could Muhammad of Najd reveal his secrets to a stranger?" I did not dare to ask this question to the Minister. However, when I met Muhammad of Najd later, I found out that in Isfahan a man named Abd-ul-kereem had met him and ferreted out his secrets by saying, "I am Shaikh Muhammad's [meaning me] brother. He told me all that he knew about you."
Muhammad of Najd said to me, "Safiyya went with me to Isfahan and we cohabited with mut'a nikaah for two more months. Abd-ul-kereem accompanied me to Sheeraaz and found me a woman named Asiya, who was prettier and more attractive than Safiyya. Making mut'a nikaah with that woman, I spent the most delightful moments of my life with her."
I found out later that Abd-ul-kereem was a Christian agent living in the Jelfa district of Isfahan and working for the Ministry. And Asiya, a Jewess living in Sheeraaz, was another agent for the Ministry. All four of us coordinated to train Muhammad of Najd in such a way that in future he would do what was excepted from him in the best way.
When I related the events in the presence of the Minister, the secretary, and two other members of the Ministry whom I did not know, the Minister said to me, "You have deserved to receive the greatest award of the Ministry. For you are the best one among the most significant agents of the ministry. The secretary will tell you some State secrets, which will help you in your mission."
Then they gave me a ten-day leave during which I could see my family. So I went home right away and spent some of my sweetest moments with my son, who resembled me very much. My son spoke a few words, and walked so elegantly that I felt as if he were a piece from my own body. I spent this ten-day leave so cheerfully, so happily. I felt as if I were going to fly from joy. It was such a great pleasure to be back home, to be with my family. During this ten-day leave I visited my old paternal aunt, who loved me very much. It was wise of me to visit my paternal aunt. For she passed away after my departure for my third mission. I felt so sad about her decease.
This ten-day leave elapsed as fast as an hour. Whereas cheerful days such as these go by as quickly as an hour, days of grief seem to take centuries. I remembered the days when I had suffered that illness in Najaf. Those days of affliction had seemed like years to me.
When I went to the Ministry to receive new orders, I met the secretary with this cheerful face and tall stature. He shook my hand so warmly that his affection was perceptible. He said to me, "With the command of our minister and the committee in charge of Colonies, I shall tell you two State secrets. Later you will benefit very much from these two secrets. No one except a couple of confidential people know these two secrets."
Holding my hand, he took me to a room in the Ministry. I met with something very attractive in this room. Ten men were sitting around a round table. The first man was in the guise of the Ottoman Emperor. He spoke Turkish and English. The second one was dressed in the attire of the Shaikh-ul-islaam (Chief of Islamic Matters) in Istanbul. The third one was dressed in an attirement identical with that of the Shah of Iran. The fourth one was in the attire of the vizier in the Iranian palace. The fifth one was dressed like the great scholar leading the Shiites in Najaf. The last three of these people spoke Persian and English. Each of these five people had a clerk sitting beside him to write down whatever they would say. These clerks were imparting to the five men the information collected by spies about their archetypes in Istanbul, Iran, and Najaf.
The secretary said, "These five people represent the five people there. In order to know what their archetypes think, we have educated and trained these people exactly like their archetypes. We intimate the information we have obtained about their originals in Istanbul, Teheran and Najaf to these men. And these men, in their turn, imagine themselves to be their originals in those places. Then we ask them and they answer us. We have determined that the answers given by these people are seventy-percent agreeable with the answers that their originals would give.
"If you like, you may ask questions for assessment. You have already met the scholar of Najaf." I replied in the affirmative, for I had met the great Shiite scholar in Najaf and asked him about some matters. Now I approached his copy and said, "Dear teacher, would it be permissible for us to wage war against the government because it is Sunnee and fanatical?" He reflected for a while, and said, "No, it is not permissible for us to wage war against the government because it is Sunnee. For all Muslims are brothers. We could declare war on them (Sunnite Muslims) only if they perpetrated cruelty and persecution on the Ummat (Muslims). And even in this case we would observe the principles of Amr-i-bi-l-ma'roof and Nahy-i-ani-l-munkar. We would stop interfering with them as soon as they stopped their persecution."
I said, "Dear teacher, may I have your opinion concerning the matter that Jews and Christians are foul?" "Yes, they are foul," he said. "It is necessary to keep away from them." When I asked the reason why, he replied, "It is done so in retaliation for an insult. For they look on us as disbelievers and deny our Prophet Muhammad 'alaihis-salaam'. We therefore retaliate for this." I said to him, "Dear teacher, isn't cleanliness an issue of eemaan? Despite this fact, the avenues and streets around the Sahn-i-shareef [the area surrounding hadrat 'Alee's mausoleum] are not clean. Even the madrasas, which are the places of knowledge, cannot be said to be clean." He replied, "Yes, it is true; cleanliness is from eemaan. Yet it cannot be helped because the Shiites are negligent over cleanliness."
The answers given by this man in the Ministry were precisely concurrent with the answers I had received from the Shiite scholar in Najaf. Such accurate identity between this man and the scholar in Najaf amazed me utterly. In addition, this man spoke Persian.
The secretary said, "If you had met the archetypes of the other four personages, you would talk to their imitations now and see how identical they are with their originals." When I said, "I know how the Shaikh-ul-islaam thinks. For Ahmad Efendi, my hodja in Istanbul, gave a detailed description of the Shaikh-ul-islaam to me," the secretary said, "Then you can go ahead and talk with his model."
I went near the Shaikh-ul-islaam's model and said to him, "Is it fard to obey the Khaleefa?" "Yes, it is waajib," he replied. "It is waajib, as it is fard to obey Allah and the Prophet." When I asked what evidence he had to prove this, he answered, "Didn't you hear about Janaab-i-Allah's aayat, 'Obey Allah, His Prophet, and the Ulul amr from among you'?" I said, "Does this mean that Allah commands us to obey the Khaleefa Yazeed, who permitted his army to plunder Medeena and who killed our Prophet's grandson Huseyn, and Waleed who drank alcoholic spirits?" His answer was this: "My son! Yazeed was the Ameer-ul-mu'mineen with Allah's permission. He did not command the killing of Huseyn. Do not believe in the Shiite lies! Read the books well! He made a mistake. Then he made tawba for this (he repented and begged for Allah's forgiveness and mercy). He was right about his ordering Medina-i-munawwara plundered. For the inhabitants of Medina had become quite unbridled and disobedient. As for Waleed; yes, he was a sinner. It is waajib not to imitate the Khaleefa, but to obey his commandments compatible with the Sharee'at." I had asked these same questions to my hodja Ahmed Efendi and received identical answers with slight differences. Then I asked the secretary, "What are the ultimate reasons for preparing these models?" He said, "With this method we are assessing the mental capacities of the (Ottoman) Sultan and the Muslim scholars, be they Shi'ee or Sunnee. We are searching for the measures that will help us cope with them. For instance, if you know what direction the enemy forces will come from, you will make preparations accordingly, post your forces at suitable positions, and thus rout the enemy. On the other hand, if you aren't sure about the direction of the enemy assault you will spread your forces here and there in a haphazard way and suffer a defeat. ... By the same token, if you know the evidences Muslims will furnish to prove that their faith, their madh-hab is right, it will be possible for you to prepare the counter-evidences to rebut their evidences and shock their belief with those counter-evidences."
Then he gave me a book of one thousand pages containing the results of the observations and projects carried out by the aforenamed five representative men in areas such as military, finance, education, and religion. He said, "Please read this book and return it to us." I took the book home with me. I read through it with utmost attention during my three-week holiday.
The book was of a wonderful sort. For the important answers and the delicate observations it contained sounded genuine. I think that the answers given by the representative five men were more than seventy percent agreeable with the answers that their archetypes would have given. Indeed, the secretary had said that the answers were seventy percent correct.
Having read the book, I now had more confidence in my State and I knew for certain that the plans for demolishing the Ottoman Empire in time shorter than a century had already been prepared. The secretary also said, "In other similar rooms we have identical tables intended for countries we have been colonizing as well as for those we are planning to colonize." When I asked the secretary where they found such diligent and talented men, he replied, "Our agents all over the world are providing us intelligence continuously. As you see, these representatives are experts in their work. Naturally, if you were furnished with all the information possessed by a particular person, you would be able to think like him and to make the decisions he would make. For you would be his substitute now."
The secretary went on, "So this was the first secret I was ordered by the Ministry to give you.
"I shall tell you the second secret a month later, when you return the book of one thousand pages."
I read the book part by part from the beginning to the end, focusing all my attention on it. It increased my information about the Muhammadans. Now I knew how they thought, what their weaknesses were, what made them powerful, and how to transform their powerful qualities into vulnerable spots.
Muslims' weak spots as recorded in the book were as follows:
1- The Sunnite-Shiite controversy; the sovereign-people controversy; the Turkish-Iranian controversy; the tribal controversy; and the scholars-states controversy.After citing what was considered as Muslims' vulnerable spots in the paragraphs paraphrased above, the book advised to cause Muslims to remain oblivious of the material and spiritual superiority of their faith, Islam. Then, it gave the following information about Islam:
2- With very few exceptions, Muslims are ignorant and illiterate.
3- Lack of spirituality, knowledge, and conscience. 4- They have completely ceased from worldly business and are absorbed in matters pertaining to the Hereafter.
5- The emperors are cruel dictators.
6- The roads are unsafe, transportation and travels are sporadic.
7- No precaution is taken against epidemics such as plague and cholera, which kill tens of thousands of people each year; hygiene is altogether ignored.
8- The cities are in ruins, and there is no system of supplying water.
9- The administration is unable to cope with rebels and insurgents, there is a general disorderliness, rules of the Qur'aan, of which they are so proud, are almost never put into practice.
10- Economical collapse, poverty, and retrogression.
11- There is not an orderly army, nor adequate weaponry; and the weapons in stock are classical and friable. [Are they unaware of the systematic army established by Orhan Ghaazee, who ascended to the (Ottoman) throne in 726 (C.E. 1326), Yildirim (The Thunderbolt) Baayezeed Khan's immaculate army, which routed the great army of crusaders in Nighbolu in 799 (C.E. 1399)?]
12- Violation of women's right.
13- Lack of environmental health and cleanliness(42).
1- Islam commands unity and cooperation and prohibits disunion. It is stated in the Qur'aan, "Hold fast to Allah's rope altogether."
2- Islam commands being educated and being conscious. It is stated in the Qur'aan, "Travel on the earth."
3- Islam commands to acquire knowledge. It is stated in a hadeeth, "Learning knowledge is fard for every Muslim, male and female alike." 4- Islam commands to work for the world. It is stated in the Qur'aan, "Some of them: O our Allah! Allot to us whatever is beautiful both in the world and in the Hereafter."
5- Islam commands consultation. It is stated in the Qur'aan, "Their deeds are (done) upon consultation among themselves."
6- Islam commands to build roads. It is stated in the Qur'aan, "Walk on the earth."
7- Islam commands Muslims to maintain their health. It is stated in a hadeeth, "Knowledge is (made up) of four (parts): 1) The knowledge of Fiqh for the maintenance of faith; 2) The knowledge of Medicine for the maintenance of health; 3) The knowledge of Sarf and Nahw (Arabic grammar) for the maintenance of language; 4) The knowledge of Astronomy so as to be aware of the times."
8- Islam commands development. It is stated in the Qur'aan, "Allah created everything on the earth for you."
9- Islam commands orderliness. It is stated in the Qur'aan, "Everything is based on calculations, orders."
10- Islam commands to be strong economically. It is stated in a hadeeth. "Work for your world as though you would never die. And work for your hereafter as if you were going to die tomorrow."
11- Islam commands to establish an army equipped with powerful weapons. It is stated in the Qur'aan, "Prepare as many forces as you can against them."
12- Islam commands to observe women's rights and to value them. It is stated in the Qur'aan, "As men legally have (rights) over women, so women have rights over them."
13- Islam commands cleanliness. It is stated in a hadeeth, "Cleanliness is from eemaan."
The book recommended to degenerate and to impair the following power sources:
1- Islam has negated racial, lingual, traditional, conventional, and national bigotry.
2- Interest, profiteering, fornication, alcoholic spirits, and pork are forbidden.
3- Muslims are firmly adherent to their 'Ulamaa (religious scholars).
4- Most of the Sunnee Muslims accept the Khaleefa as the Prophet's representative. They believe that it is fard to show him the same respect as must be shown to Allah and the Prophet.
5- Jihaad is fard.
6- According to the Shee'ee Muslims, all non-Muslims and Sunnee Muslims are foul people.
7- All Muslims believe that Islam is the only true religion.
8- Most Muslims believe that it is fard to expel the Jews and Christians from the Arab peninsula.
9- They perform their worships, (such as namaaz, fast, hajj...), in the most beautiful way.
10- The Shi'ee Muslims believe that it is haraam (forbidden) to build churches in Muslim countries.
11- Muslims hold fast to the principles of the Islamic belief.
12- The Shi'ee Muslims consider it fard to give one-fifth of the Humus, i.e. booties taken in Holy War, to the 'Ulamaa.
13- Muslims raise their children with such education that they are not likely to abandon the way followed by their ancestors.
14- Muslim women cover themselves so well that mischief can by no means act on them.
15- Muslims make namaaz in jamaa'at, which brings them together five times daily.
16- Because the Prophet's grave and those of Alee and other pious Muslims are sacred according to them, they assemble at these places.
17- There are a number of people descending from the Prophet, [who are called Sayyeds and Shereefs]; these people who remind of the Prophet and who keep Him always remain alive in the eyes of Muslims.
18- When Muslims assemble, preachers consolidate their eemaan and motivate them to do pious acts.
19- It is fard to perform Amr-i-bi-l-ma'roof [Advising piety] and nahy-i-ani-l-munkar [admonishing against wrongdoing].
20- It is sunnat to marry more than one women in order to contribute to the increase of Muslim population.
21- Converting one person to Islam is more valuable to a Muslim than possessing the whole world.
22- The hadeeth, "If a person opens an auspicious way, he will attain the thawaabs of people who follow that way as well as the thawaab for having attained it," is well known among Muslims.
23- Muslims hold the Qur'aan and hadeeths in very profound reverence. They believe that obeying these sources is the only way of attaining Paradise.The book recommends to vitiate Muslims' staunch spots and to popularize their weaknesses, and it prescribed the methods for accomplishing this.
It advised the following steps for popularizing their vulnerable spots:
1- Establish controversies by inducing animosity among disputing groups, inoculating mistrust, and by publishing literature to further incite controversies.
2- Obstruct schooling and publications, and burn literature whenever possible. Make sure that Muslim children remain ignorant by casting various aspersions on religious authorities and thus preventing Muslim parents from sending their children to religious schools. [This British method has been very harmful to Islam].
3-4- Praise Paradise in their presence and convince them that they need not work for a worldly life. Enlarge the circles of Tasawwuf. Keep them in an unconscious state by encouraging them to read books advising Zuhd, such as Ihyaa-ul-'uloom-id-deen, by Ghazaalee, Mesnevee, by Mawlaanaa, and various books written by Muhyiddeen Arabee.
5- Wheedle the emperors into cruelty and dictatorship by the following demagogic falsifications: You are Allah's shadows on the earth. In fact, Aboo Bakr, 'Umar, 'Uthmaan, 'Alee, Umayyads and Abbasids came to seize power by sheer force and the sword, and each of them was a sovereign. For example, Aboo Bakr assumed power with the help of 'Umar's sword and by setting fire to the houses of those who would not obey him, such as Faatima's house. And 'Umar became Khaleefa upon Aboo Bakr's commendation. 'Uthmaan, on the other hand, became the president with 'Umar's order. As for 'Alee; he became head of the State by an election held among bandits. Muaawiya assumed power by the sword. Then, in the time of the Umayyads, sovereignty was turned into an inheritance transferred through paternal chain. So was the case with the Abbasids. These are the evidences for the fact that in Islam sovereignty is a form of dictatorship.
6- Delete death penalty for homicide from the penal code. [Death punishment is the only deterrent to homicide and banditry. Anarchy and banditry cannot be prevented without death penalty]. Hinder the administration in punishing highwaymen and robbers. Make sure that traveling is unsafe by supporting and arming them.
7- We can make them lead an unhealthy life with the following scheme: Everything is dependent on Allah's foreordination. Medical treatment will have no role in restoring health. Does not Allah say in the Qur'aan, "My Rab (Allah) makes me eat and drink. He cures me when I am ill. He alone will kill me and then resurrect me." Then, no one will recover from an illness or escape death outside Allah's will.
8- Make the following statements for encouraging cruelty: Islam is a religion of worship. It has no interest in State matters. Therefore, Muhammad and his Khaleefas did not have any ministers or laws.
9- Economic decline is a natural consequence of the injurious activities advised so far. We can add to the atrophy by rotting the crops, sinking the trade ships, setting fire to the market places, destroying dams and barrages and thus leaving agricultural areas and industrial centers under water, and finally by contaminating their networks of drinking water.
10- Accustom statesmen to such indulgences as [sex, sports,] alcohol, gambling, corruption which cause sedition and intriguing, and spending the State property for their personal advantages. Encourage the civil servants to do things of this sort and reward those who serve us in this way. Then the book added the following advice: The British spies assigned this duty must be protected secretly or openly, and no expense must be spared to rescue the ones arrested by Muslims.
11- Popularize all sorts of interest. For interest not only ruins national economy, but also accustoms Muslims to disobeying the Koranic rules. Once a person has violated one article of law, it will be easy for him to violate the other articles, too. They must be told that "interest is haraam when in multiples, for it is stated in the Qur'aan, 'Do not receive interest in multiples.'Therefore, not every form of interest is haraam." [The pay-off time of a loan must not be appointed in advance. Any extra payment agreed on (at the time of lending) is interest. This type of interest is a grave sin, be the extra payment stipulated worth only a dirham. If it is stipulated that the same amount (borrowed) must be repaid after a certain time, this is interest according to the Hanafee madh-hab. In sales on credit, time of repayment must be appointed; yet if the debtor cannot pay off at the appointed time and the time is protracted and an extra payment is stipulated, this kind of interest is called Mudaa'af. The aayat-i-kareema quoted above states this type of interest in trade].
12- Spread false charges of atrocity against scholars, cast sordid aspersions against them and thus alienate Muslims from them. We shall disguise some of our spies as them. Then we shall have them commit squalid deeds. Thus they will be confused with scholars and every scholar will be looked upon with suspicion. It is a must to infiltrate these spies into Al-Az-har, Istanbul, Najaf, and Kerbelaa. We shall open schools, colleges for estranging Muslims from scholars. In these schools we shall educate Byzantine, Greek and Armenian children and bring them up as the enemies of Muslims. As for Muslim children; we shall imbue them with the conviction that their ancestors were ignorant people. In order to make these children hostile towards Khaleefas, scholars, and statesmen, we shall tell them about their errors and convince them that they were busy with their sensuous pleasures, that Khaleefas spent their time having fun with concubines, that they misused the people's property, that they did not obey the Prophet in anything they did.
13- In order to spread the calumniation that Islam abhors womankind, we shall quote the aayat, "Men are dominant over women," and the hadeeth, "The woman is an evil altogether."The book advised the following steps for destroying Muslims' strongholds:
14- Dirtiness is the result of lack of water. Therefore, we must deter the increasing of the water supplies under various schemes.
1- Induce such chauvinistic devotions as racism and nationalism among Muslims so as to retract their attention towards their pre-Islamic heroisms. Rejuvenate the Pharaoh period in Egypt, the Magi period in Iran, the Babylonian period in Iraq, the Attila and Dzengiz era[tyrannisms] in the Ottomans. [They contained a long list on this subject].
2- The following vices must be done secretly or publicly: Alcoholic spirits, gambling, fornication, pork, [and fights among sports clubs.] In doing this, Christians, Jews, Magians, and other non-Muslims living in Muslim countries should be utilized to a maximum, and those who work for this purpose should be awarded high salaries by the treasury department of the Ministry of the Commonwealth.
3- Sow suspicion among them concerning Jihaad; convince them that Jihaad was a temporary commandment and that it has been outdated.
4- Dispel the notion that "disbelievers are foul" from the hearts of Shiites. Quote the Koranic verse, "As the food of those given a (heavenly) Book is halaal for you, so is your food halaal for them," and tell them that the Prophet had a Jewish wife named Safiyya and a Christian wife named Maariya and that the Prophet's wives were not foul at all.
5- Imbue Muslims with the belief that "what the Prophet meant by Islam' was 'a perfect religion' and therefore this religion could be Judaism or Christianity as well as Islam." Substantiate this with the following reasoning: The Qur'aan gives the name 'Muslim' to members of all religions. For instance, it quotes the Prophet Joseph (Yoosuf 'alaihis-salaam') as having invoked, "Kill me as a Muslim," and the Prophets Ibraaheem and Ismaa'eel as having prayed, "O our Rab (Allah)! Make us Muslims for Yourself and make a Muslim people for Yourself from among our offspring,"and the Prophet Ya'qoob as having said to his sons, "Die only and only as Muslims."
6- Repeat frequently that it is not haraam to build churches, that the Prophet and his Khaleefas did not demolish them, that on the contrary they respected them, that the Qur'aan states, "If Allah had not dispelled some people by means of others, monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques wherein Allah's name is mentioned very much would have been annihilated (by now)," that Islam respects temples, that it does not demolish them, and that it prevents those who would otherwise demolish them.
7- Confuse Muslims about the hadeeths, "Deport the Jews from the Arabic Peninsula," and, "Two religions cannot coexist on the Arabic peninsula." Say that "If these two hadeeths were true, the Prophet would not have had a Jew wife and a Christian one. Nor would he have made an agreement with the Najran Christians."
8- Try to hamper Muslims in their worships and make them falter about the usefulness of worships by saying that "Allah does not need men's worships." Prevent them from their worship of Hajj as well as from any sort of worship that will bring them together. Likewise, try to obstruct construction of mosques, mausoleums and madrasas and the restoration of Ka'ba.
9- Mystify the Shiites about the rule that one-fifth of the ghaneema property taken from the enemy in combat is to be given to the 'Ulamaa and explain that this one-fifth belongs to the ghaneema property taken from (Daar-ul-harb) and that it has nothing to do with commercial earnings. Then add that "Humus (the one-fifth mentioned above) is to be given to the Prophet or to the Khaleefa, not to the 'Ulamaa. For the 'Ulamaa are given houses, palaces, animals, and orchards. Therefore, it is not permissible to give them the (Humus)."
10- Insert heresies into Muslims' creedal tenets and then criticize Islam for being a religion of terror. Assert that Muslim countries are retrogressive and that they have undergone shocks, thus impairing their adherence to Islam. [On the other hand, Muslims established the greatest and the most civilized empire of the world. They declined as their adherence to Islam deteriorated].
11- Very important! Alienate children from their fathers, thus depriving them of their elders' education. We shall educate them. Consequently, the moment children have parted from their fathers' education, there will no longer be any possibility for them to maintain contact with their belief, faith, or religious scholars.
12- Provoke the womenfolk to get rid of their traditional covers. Fabricate such falsifications as "Covering is not a genuine Islamic commandment. It is a tradition established in the time of the Abbasids. Formerly, other people would see the Prophet's wives and women would join all sorts of social activities." After stripping the woman of her traditional cover, tempt the youth towards her and cause indecencies between them! This is a very effective method for annihilating Islam. First use non-Muslim women for this purpose. In the course of time the Muslim woman will automatically degenerate and will begin to follow their example.
13- Exploit every opportunity to put an end to performing namaaz in jamaa'at by casting aspersions on the imaams in mosques, by revealing their mistakes, and by sowing discord and adversity between them and the jamaa'ats (groups of Muslims) who perform their daily prayers of namaaz behind them.
14- Say that all mausoleums must be demolished to the ground, that they did not exist in the Prophet's time. In addition, deter Muslims from visiting the graves of Prophets, Khaleefas and pious Muslims by arising doubts about visiting graves. For instance say, "The Prophet was buried by his mother and Aboo Bekr and 'Umar were buried in the cemetery called Baakee'.'Uthmaan's grave is unknown. Huseyn's head was buried at (a place called) Hannana. It is not known where his body was buried. The graves in Kaazimiyya belong to two caliphs. They do not belong to Kaazim and Jawaad, two descendants of the Prophet. As to the one in Tus (city); that grave belongs to Haarun, not to Ridaa, a member of the Ahl-i-Bayt (the Prophet's Family). The graves in Samerra belong to the Abbasids. They do not belong to Haadee, Askeree, and Mahdee, members of the Ahl-i-Bayt. As it is fard to demolish all the mausoleums and domes in Muslim countries, so is it a must to bulldoze the cemetery called Baakee'."
15- Make people feel skeptical about the fact that Sayyeds are the Prophet's descendants. Mix Sayyeds with other people by making non-Sayyeds wear black and green turbans. Thus people will be perplexed in this matter and will consequently begin to distrust Sayyeds. Strip religious authorities and Sayyeds of their turbans so that the Prophetic pedigree will be lost and religious authorities will not be respected any more.
16- Say that it is fard to demolish the places where Shiites mourn, that this practice is a heresy and aberration. People should be prevented from visiting those places, the number of preachers should be decreased and taxes should be levied on preachers and owners of the places for mourning.
17- Under the pretext of love of freedom, convince all Muslims that "Everyone is free to do whatever he likes. It is not fard to perform Amr-i-bi-l-ma'roof and Nahy-i-anil-munkar or to teach the Islamic principles." [On the contrary, it is fard to learn and teach Islam. It is a Muslim's first duty]. In addition, imbue them with this conviction: "Christians are to remain in their own faith (Christianity) and Jews are to abide by theirs (Judaism). No one will enter another person's heart. Amr-i-ma'roof and Nahy-i-anil-munkar are the Khaleefa's duties."
18- In order to impede Muslims from increasing in number, births must be limited and polygamy must be prohibited. Marriage must be subjected to restrictions. For instance, it must be said that an Arab cannot marry an Iranian, an Iranian cannot marry an Arab, a Turk cannot marry an Arab.
19- Make sure to stop Islamic propagations and conversions to Islam. Broadcast the conception that Islam is a religion peculiar to the Arabs only. As an evidence for this, put forward the Qur'aanic verse which reads, "This is a Dhikr for thee and thine people."
20- Pious institutions must be restricted and confined to the State monopoly, to the extent that individuals must be unable to establish madrasas or other similar pious institutions. 21- Arouse doubts as to the authenticity of the Qur'aan in Muslims' minds; publish Koranic translations containing excisions, additions, and interpolations, and then say, "The Qur'aan has been defiled. Its copies are incongruous. A verse one of them contains does not exist in another." Excise the verses insulting Jews, Christians and all other non-Muslims and those commanding Jihaad, Amr-i-bi-l-ma'roof and Nahy-i-anil munkar.Translate the Qur'aan into other languages such as Turkish, Persian, Indian, thus to prevent Arabic from being learned and read outside Arabic countries, and again, prevent the (Ad-haan), (Namaaz), and (Duaa) from being done in Arabic outside Arabic countries.Likewise, Muslims will be made to feel doubts about hadeeths. The translations, criticisms and interpolations planned for the Qur'aan should be applied to hadeeths as well.
When I read through the book, which was entitled How Can We Demolish Islam, I found it really excellent. It was a peerless guide for the studies I was going to carry on. When I returned the book to the secretary and told him that it afforded me great pleasure to read it, he said, "You can be sure that you are not alone in this field. We have lots of men doing the same job as you have been carrying on. Our Ministry has assigned over five thousand men to this mission. The Ministry is considering increasing this number to one hundred thousand. When we reach this number we shall have brought all Muslims under our sway and obtained all Muslim countries."
Sometime later the secretary said: "Good news to you! Our Ministry needs one century at the most to realize this program. We may not live to see those happy days, but our children will. What a beautiful saying this is: I have eaten what others sowed. So I am sowing for others.' When the British manage this they will have pleased the whole Christian world and will have rescued them from a twelve-century-old nuisance."
The secretary went on as follows: "The crusading expeditions which continued for centuries were of no use. Nor can the Mongols [armies of Dzengiz] be said to have done anything to extirpate Islam. For their work was sudden, unsystematic, and ungrounded. They carried on military expeditions so as to reveal their enmity. Consequently, they became tired in a short time. But now our valuable administrators are trying to demolish Islam by means of a very subtle plan and a long-range patience. We must use military force, too. Yet this should be the final phase, that is, after we have completely consumed Islam, after we have hammered it from all directions and rendered it into a miserable state from which it will never recover again and fight against us." The secretary's final words were these: "Our superiors in Istanbul must have been very wise and intelligent. They executed our plan precisely. What did they do? They mixed with the Muhammadans and opened madrasas for their children. They built churches. They were perfectly successful in popularizing alcoholic spirits, gambling, indecencies, and breaking them into groups by means of instigation [and football clubs.] They aroused doubts in the minds of young Muslims. They inserted controversies and oppositions into their governments. They spread mischief everywhere. They depraved administrators, directors, and statesmen by filling their houses with Christian women. With activities of this sort they broke their forces, shocked their adherence to their faith, corrupted them morally, and disrupted their unity and communication. Now the time has come to commence a sudden war and extirpate Islam."
PART SEVEN
Having enjoyed the first secret, I was looking forward to knowing the second secret. Eventually one day the secretary explained the second secret he had promised. The second secret was a fifty page scheme prepared for the high ranking officials working in the Ministry for annihilating Islam altogether within a century's time. The scheme was comprised of fourteen articles. The scheme was closely guarded for fear that it might be obtained by Muslims. The following are the articles of the scheme:
1- We have to form a well-established alliance and an agreement of mutual help with the Russian Tsar in order to invade Bukhaara, Taajikistaan, Armenia, Khorasan and its neighborhood. Again, a sound agreement must be established with Russians in order to invade their neighbor, Turkey.
2- We must establish cooperation with France in demolishing the Islamic world both from within and from without.
3- We must sow very ardent rows and controversies between the Turkish and Iranian governments and emphasize nationalistic and racist feelings in both parties. In addition, all the Muslim tribes, nations and countries neighboring one another must be set against one another. All the religious sects, including the extinct ones, must be recovered and set against one another.
4- Parts from Muslim countries must be handed over to non-Muslim communities. For example, Medina must be given to the Jews, Alexandria to the Christians, Imaara to the Saaiba, Kermanshah to the Nusayriya group, who have divinized 'Alee, Mousul to the Yazeedees, the Iranian gulf to Hindus, Tripoli to the Druzis, Kars to the Alawees, and Masqat to the Khaarijee group. The next step should be to arm these groups so that each of them will be a thorn on the body of Islam. Their areas must be widened till Islam has collapsed and perished.
5- A schedule must be concocted to divide the Muslim and Ottoman States into, as small as possible, local states that are always at loggerheads with one another. An example of this is today's India. For the following theory is common: "Break, and you will dominate," and "Break, and you will destroy."
6- It is necessary to adulterate Islam's essence by adding interpolated religions and sects into it, and this we must devise in such a subtle manner that the religions we are to invent should be compatible with the sensuous tastes and aspirations of the people among whom we are going to spread them. We shall invent four different religions in the Shiite countries:
1- A religion that divinizes hadrat Huseyn;7- Seeds of mischief and malice, such as fornication, pederasty, alcoholic spirits and gambling, will be scattered among Muslims. Non-Muslims living in the countries concerned will be used for this purpose. A tremendous army of people of this sort is on requisition for the realization of this goal.
2- A religion that divinizes Ja'fer Saadiq;
3- A religion divinizing Mahdi;
4- A religion divinizing Alee Ridaa. The first one is suitable for Kerbelaa, the second one for Isfahaan, the third one for Samarra, and the fourth one for Khoraasaan. In the meantime, we must degenerate the existing four Sunnite madh-habs into four self-standing religions. After doing this, we shall establish an altogether new Islamic sect in Najd, and then instigate bloody rows among all these groups. We shall annihilate the books belonging to the four madh-habs, so that each of these groups will consider themselves to be the only Muslim group and will look on the other groups as heretics that are to be killed.
8- We should spare no effort to train and educate vicious leaders and cruel commanders in Muslim countries, to bring them into power and thus to pass laws prohibiting obedience to the Sharee'at (religious injunctions). We should put them to use, to the extent that they should be subservient enough to do whatever the Ministry (of the Commonwealth) asks them to do, and vice versa. Through them we should be able to impose our wishes on Muslims and Muslim countries by using laws as an enforcement. We should establish a social way of life, an atmosphere wherein obeying the Shari'at will be looked on as a guilt and worshipping as an act of regression. We should trick Muslims into electing their leaders from among non-Muslims. For doing this, we should disguise some of our agents as Islamic authorities and bring them into high positions so that they may execute our wishes.
9- Do your best to prevent the learning of Arabic. Popularize languages other than Arabic, such as Persian, Kurdish, and Pushtu (Pashto). Resuscitate foreign languages in the Arabic countries and popularize the local dialects in order to annihilate literary, eloquent Arabic, which is the language of the Qur'aan and the Sunna.
10- Placing our men around statesmen, we should gradually make them secretaries of these statesmen and through them we should carry out the desires of the Ministry. The easiest way of doing this is the slave trade: First of all we must adequately train the spies we are to send forth in the guise of slaves and concubines. Then we must sell them to the close relatives of Muslim statesmen, for instance, to their children or wives, or to other people liked or respected by them. These slaves, after we have sold them, will gradually approach the statesmen. Becoming their mothers and governesses, they will encircle Muslim statesmen like a bracelet girding a wrist.
11- Missionary areas must be widened so as to penetrate into all social classes and vocations, especially into such professions as medicine, engineering, and book-keeping. We must open centers of propaganda and publication under such names as churches, schools, hospitals, libraries and charity institutions in the Islamic countries and spread them far and near. We must distribute millions of Christian book free of charge. We must publish the Christian history and intergovernmental law alongside the Islamic history. We must disguise our spies as monks and nuns and place them in churches and monasteries. We must use them as leaders of Christian movements. These people will at the same time detect all the movements and trends in the Islamic world and report to us instantaneously. We must institute an army of Christians who will, under such names as 'professor', 'scientist', and 'researcher', distort and defile the Islamic history, learn all the facts about Muslims' ways, behavior, and religious principles, and then destroy all their books and eradicate the Islamic teachings.
12- We must confuse the minds of the Islamic youth, boys and girls alike, and arouse doubts and hesitations in their minds as to Islam. We must completely strip them of their moral values by means of schools, books, magazines [sports clubs, publications, motion pictures, television], and our own agents trained for this job. It is a prerequisite to open clandestine societies to educate and train Jewish, Christian and other non-Muslim youngsters and use them as decoys to trap the Muslim youngsters.
13- Civil wars and insurrections must be provoked; Muslims must always be struggling with one another as well as against non-Muslims so that their energies will be wasted and improvement and unity will be impossible for them. Their mental dynamisms and financial sources must be annihilated. Young and active ones must be done away with. Their orders must be rendered into terror and anarchy.
14- Their economy must be razed in all areas, their sources of income and agricultural areas must be spoilt, their irrigation channels and lines must be devastated and rivers dried up, the people must be made to hate the performance of namaaz and working, and sloth must be made as widespread as possible. Playgrounds must be opened for lazy people. Narcotics and alcoholic spirits must be made common.[The articles we have cited above were explained very clearly with such aids as maps, pictures and charts]. I thanked the secretary for giving me a copy of this magnificent document.
After a month's stay in London, I received a message from the Ministry ordering me to go to Iraq to see Muhammad of Najd again. As I was leaving for my mission, the secretary said to me, "Never be negligent about Muhammad of Najd! As it is understood from the reports sent by our spies up until now, Muhammad of Najd is a typical fool very convenient for the realization of our purposes.
"Talk frankly with Muhammad of Najd. Our agents talked with him frankly in Isfahaan, and he accepted our wishes on terms. The terms he stipulated are: He would be supported with adequate property and weaponry to protect himself against states and scholars who would certainly attack him upon his announcing his ideas and views. A principality would be established in his country, be it a small one. The Ministry accepted these terms."
I felt as if I were going to fly from joy when I heard this news. I asked the secretary what I was supposed to do about this. His reply was, "The Ministry has devised a subtle scheme for Muhammad of Najd to carry out, as follows:
"1- He is to declare all Muslims as disbelievers and announce that it is halaal to kill them, to seize their property, to violate their chastity, to make their men slaves and their women concubines and to sell them at slave markets.
"2- He is to state that Ka'ba is an idol and therefore it must be demolished. In order to do away with the worship of hajj, he is to provoke tribes to raid groups of hadjis (Muslim pilgrims), to plunder their belongings and to kill them.
"3- He is to strive to dissuade Muslims from obeying the Khaleefa. He is to provoke them to revolt against him. He is to prepare armies for this purpose. He is to exploit every opportunity to spread the conviction that it is necessary to fight against the notables of Hedjaz and bring disgrace on them.
"4- He is to allege that the mausoleums, domes and sacred places in Muslim countries are idols and polytheistic milieus and must therefore be demolished. He is to do his best to produce occasions for insulting Prophet Muhammad, his Khaleefas, and all prominent scholars of madh-habs.
"5- He is to do his utmost to encourage insurrections, oppressions and anarchy in Muslim countries.
"6- He is to try to publish a copy of the Qur'aan interpolated with additions and excisions, as is the case with hadeeths."
After explaining this six-paragraph scheme, the secretary added, "Do not panic at this huge programma. For our duty is to sow the seeds for annihilating Islam. There will come generations to complete this job. The British government has formed it a habit to be patient and to advance step by step. Wasn't Prophet Muhammad, the performer of the great and bewildering Islamic revolution, a human being after all? And this Muhammad of Najd of ours has promised to accomplish this revolution of ours like his Prophet."
A couple of days later, I took permission from the Minister and the Secretary, bid farewell to my family and friends, and set out for Basra. As I left home my little son said, "Come back soon daddy!" My eyes became wet. I could not conceal my sorrow from my wife. After a tiresome journey I arrived in Basra at night. I went to Abd-ur-Ridaa's home. He was asleep. He was very pleased when he woke up and saw me. He offered me warm hospitality. I spent the night there. The next morning he said to me, "Muhammad of Najd called on me, left this letter for you, and left." I opened the letter. He wrote the was leaving for his country, Najd, and gave his address there. I at once set out to go there, too. After an extremely onerous journey I arrived there. I found Muhammad of Najd in his home. He had lost a lot of weight. I did not say anything this concerning this to him. Afterwards, I learned that he had gotten married.
We decided between us that he was to tell other people that I was his slave and was back from some place he had sent me. He introduced me as such.
I stayed with Muhammad of Najd for two years. We made a programma to announce his call. Eventually I fomented his resolution in 1143 Hijri [A.D. 1730]. Hence by collecting supporters around himself, he insinuated his call by making covert statements to those who were very close to him. Then, day by day, he expanded his call. I put guards around him in order to protect him against his enemies. I gave them as much property and money as they wanted. Whenever the enemies of Muhammad of Najd wanted to attack him, I inspirited and heartened them. As his call spread wider, the number of his adversaries increased. From time to time he attempted to give up his call, especially when he was overwhelmed by the multitude of the attacks made on him. Yet I never left him alone and always encouraged him. I would say to him, "O Muhammad, the Prophet suffered more persecution than you have so far. You know, this is a way of honor. Like any other revolutionist, you would have to endure some difficulty!"
Enemy attack was likely any moment. I therefore hired spies on his adversaries. Whenever his enemies meant harm to him, the spies would report to me and so I would neutralize their harm. Once I was informed that the enemies were to kill him. I immediately took the precautions to thwart their preparations. When the people (around Muhammad of Najd) heard about this plot of their enemies, they began to hate them all the more. They fell into the trap they had laid.
Muhammad of Najd promised me that he would implement all the six articles of the scheme and added, "For the time being I can execute them only partly." He was right in this word of his. At that time it was impossible for him to carry out all of them.
He found it impossible to have Ka'ba demolished. And he gave up the idea of announcing that it (Ka'ba) is an idol. In addition, he refused to publish an interpolated copy of the Qur'aan. Most of his fears in this respect were from the Shereefs in Mekka and the Istanbul government. He told me that "If we made these two announcements we would be attacked by a powerful army." I accepted his excuse. For he was right. The conditions were not favorable at all.
A couple of years later the Ministry of Commonwealth managed to cajole Muhammad bin Su'ood, the Ameer of Der'iyya, into joining our lines. They sent me a messenger to inform me about this and to establish a mutual affection and cooperation between the two Muhammads. For earning Muslims' hearts and trusts, we exploited our Muhammad of Najd religiously, and Muhammad bin Su'ood politically. It is an historical fact that states based on religion have lived longer and have been more powerful and more imposing.
Thus we continuously became more and more powerful. We made Der'iyya city our capital. And we named our new religion the WAHHABI religion. The Ministry supported and reinforced the Wahhaabee government in an underhanded way. The new government bought eleven British officers, very well learned in the Arabic language and desert warfare, under the name of slaves. We prepared our plans in cooperation with these officers. Both Muhammads followed the way we showed them. When we did not receive any orders from the Ministry we made our own decisions.
We all married girls from tribes. We enjoyed the pleasure of a Muslim wife's devotion to her husband. Thus we had stronger relations with tribes. Everything goes well now. Our centralization is becoming more and more vigorous each day. Unless an unexpected catastrophe takes place, we shall eat the fruit we have prepared. For we have done whatever is necessary and sown the seeds.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar