Part One
On October 8/ 2011, I presented an article on the Ahbash’s accusation
of the sect they call “Wahhabiya” (written in Amharic). In that article, I was
sharing only few insights about the book which Al-Ahbash members provide as
evidence in order to invalidate the “Wahhabi” and its mythological founder
called “Muhammad ibn Abdulwahhab of Najd”. I argued that the book, titled “The
Confession of the British Spy” (also called “The Memoirs of Mr. Hempher, the
British Spy to the Middle East”), has been discredited by the western historians.
They say “it was as a forgery of a Turkish naval officer called Ayub Sabri
Psaha”. (Refer to Wikipedia for the details and visit every links supplementing
the arguments presented there. Click this link to go to the Wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memoirs_Of_Mr._Hempher,_The_British_Spy_To_The_Middle_East
)
It is not only the westerns who claimed the book was a forgery.
From the east, the Shi’a Historian Hamid
Algar and many others also discredited the book. (I don’t have the copy of
Hamid Algar’s book titled “Wahhabism: A crtical Essay”. You
may get it from the internet. But be sure that Hamid Algar himself was too
biased when he attacked the so called “Wahhabi” in his book. However, he was
some what better than Ahbash’s blind hate and propaganda against “Wahhabi”).
I also have the same stance. That is, I believe definitely
that the aforementioned book is a forgery. However, when I wrote this, some
Ahbash members counter argued me that it is a truthful book which described the
start and spread of Wahhabism from the Arabian Desert. So I decided to show the
members of our group some forged narrations and inconsistencies I found in the
book. (You can get the full book on the following link
Historical Inconsistencies
1.
The publishers of the book described in the
preface section that a British spy called Mr. Hemper met a man by a name Muhammad
Ibn Abdulwahab Najdi in the city of Basra in 1713 and mislead him to create a
new sect which the Westerns call now “Wahhabi” (page 3). But Muhammad Ibn
AbdulWahhab was only 10 years old in the year mentioned (1793). His
biographical data describes that he had never been out of Uyana (his home town)
until he reached the age of 20. He left Nejd only in 1922.
2.
On the same page (the preface on page 3), it is
also described that Mr Hempher (the British Spy) and Ibn Abdulwahhab announced
the Wahhabi sect in 1150 A. H. (earlier
than 1738 if we changed the year to the Hijra calendar) . But the “Spy” tells
“I
stayed with Mohammed of Najd for two years. We made a program to announce his
call. Eventually, I fomented his resolution in 1143 year of Hijra (1730 A.D)”
(page 72). This doesn’t match with the publishers’ claim made in the preface
(page 3). From this, we can infer that the publishers hadn’t read the book
thoroughly. They were interested in the political value of the book and
published it hurriedly.
Let us say this is an editorial error. But
could any of those years match the actual years we know about the start of the
campaigns of Ibn Abdulwahhab? The answer is “No”.
Ibn
Abdulwahhab hadn’t started his long “anti-Shirk”(anti-polytheism) and “anti-bid’a”
(against innovations) campaigns until 1740. When he started his struggle in
1940 in his home town (Uyanah), he was expelled by the chiefs of the town and took
a refuge in Dar’iyyah which was then governed by Muhammad Ibn Saud.
3.
The so called “spy” began his narration by the
famous British propaganda slogan of the colonial era. He said
"Our great Britain is so vast. The sun
rises within its seas and sets again below its seas. Yet our state is
relatively very weak concerning its colonies in India, China and the Middle
East”. (page.6)
Is this true? Did Britain have colonies in India,
China and the Middle East in early 18th century? Nobody can bring a proof for this. During
that era (for example the 17years where Mr Hampher stayed indoctrinating
Muhammad ibn Abdulwahhab beginning from 1713-1730), Britain had colonies only
in the Americas. There was no British colony in Asia and Africa until the
second half of 19th century.
Logical inconsistencies
1.
On page 17, the spy tells us that he married his
paternal cousin called Mary Shvay who was a 22 years old woman.
Can a British man marry his own cousin? This
is not allowed in western culture as far as we know. It’s only a Muslim culture
and some traditional cultures that allow to marry one’s cousin.
2.
On page 18, Mr. Hampher said
“I read the Qur’an indeed. It is very high
book. It is even higher than the Torah (Torah) and the Bible. For it contains
principles, regulations, moral rules etc”
Indeed, Qur’an is higher than any religious
and non-religious book. But had a Christian who was appointed to spoil Islamic
beliefs and demolish the Muslim unity gave this kind of witness? It’s
unbelievable. Some readers may argue with me by saying “the man was giving a confession.
That was why he spoke the truth about Qur’an”. But I say to them “No He
wasn’t confessing for his fault. He was addressing the Turkish propaganda. You
can clearly understand this from the way the book was set up. The writer was
very careful not to slander the Holy Qur’an and the Prophet (s.a.w). He did so
only indirectly. This can make a sense if we assume the writer was a Muslim
unsatisfied by the new revolution of Ibn Abdul Wahhab and Ibn Saud.
3.
On page 19, Mr. Hampher gave a big advice for
Muslims. He said both Shi’a and Sunni should come to one community. He continued
“Since both Umar and Ali are dead today, maintaining
those controversies would serve no useful purposes. To me, if Muslims are
reasonable, they should think of today, not of those very old days”.
So funny! How can a man with a devil
mission dared to give this kind of advice for Muslims? Can we accept this?
4.
On the other hand, you can understand that the
“spy” had mastered the history of Islam. But he missed some easy facts. For
example, on 37-38 while he was narrating about the atmosphere of the shi’a
dominated areas in Iraq, the spy says the following.
“There were two mausoleums similar to that
of Ali’s in Karbala. One of them belonged to Huseyn the other one belonged to
his brother Abbas”.
Who was this Abbas? Was he truly a brother
of Huseyn Ibn Ali ibn Abu Talib? Did Ali ibn Abu Talib fathered a boy called
Abbas? Was “Mr. Hempher” referring to Abbas Ibn Abdul Mutalib (the uncle of the
Prophet-s.a.w)? Or what?
I am sure the grave of Abbas was not in
Karbala. And Ali ibn Talib had no boy
called “Abas”.
Conclusion
I presented some of unbelievable and non-logical narrations
of “Mr. Hmepher’s” book as you read above. The book is filled by many
mythological narrations which I will discuss in the second part of this
article.
As I said, I read this book recently. But I heard about its
existence many years ago. This amazing book is one of Al-Ahbash’s propaganda
tools. But when you read it in detail, you will find it to be a political
weapon in which the old Turks try to invalidate the legitimacy of the House of
the Saud (the ruling dynasty of Saudi Arabia). Al-Ahbash adherents turned this
political tool to the religious one and say “read this book if you want to know
the truth about Wahhabi”. Do they forget
that Allah will Jude on the wrongdoers? It seems so.
I will come with more critiques in part two of this article.
Peace be up on those who follow the right path.
Where is part 2?
ReplyDelete