Now we are in the 20^th century, the century of democracy. Hajjaj and Jazzar are no longer in power. Today we can convey our opinions to the media, we praise humanitarian groups and condemn those who are not. We are free to adhere to our beliefs. We live in the world of telecommunication and information. Man is undertaking expeditions in space and attaching ladders to the Moon.

Scientists are making their utmost efforts to ensure health and comfort for man so that he may lead his entire life comfortably with regard to his food, his clothing, his shelter and his movement. But the Saudi Government still wishes that the people should lead a nomadic life.

It is interesting to note that the Saudis - like the present-day nomads - rode camels and drank their milk, prepared their clothes from their wool/hair, and made their shoes out of their skins. They sat on the ground in their tents and were faced with thousands of hardships. The Saudis married only their cousins and other girls of their tribe.

Now their life has changed and taken the present shape. Their wealth increased after the petroleum boom. The Saudi elites now live in magnificent Arabian Night palaces, enjoy all sorts of luxuries and travel by huge, air-conditioned cars and aircraft. Every day is a festival for them. In short, a revolution has taken place in the lives of the Saudis. But all these are temporal.

They have not yet forsaken the mentality of nomadism and ignorance. Their intellect and morals, civility, and social intercourse with different tribes and races are the same. There is no change in their outlook. There is a lack of broad-mindedness among them. They are still not having cordial relations with other communities and tribes. And they remain stuck to their ancient attitude.

This statement makes one thing clear and that is the lack of order between the materialism and the spirituality of the Saudi State. There should either be the desert and the camels or civilized life and thinking because separating intellectual civilization from temporal civilization amounts to contradiction. It becomes clear from the following proofs that although the bodies of the Saudis are in Wall Street,1 their thoughts are centred in Rub’al Khali.2

A well-informed friend narrated to me the following surprising facts about Saudi Arabia:

1. If a Shi’a is the plaintiff, his evidence is not accepted but the evidence given by anybody against a Shi’a is accepted. Thus, a Shi’a has to pay damages but does not receive compensation if his rights are violated. Indeed, the hardship would have been lesser if both the evidence against him and in his favour had not been accepted totally. What is surprising is that they think that Shi’as are liars, and the evidence given by the Shi’as is inadmissible. They make it a condition that the witness should be righteous and when his righteousness is proved, his evidence is also proved, although a nomad may give evidence against a townsman, whereas the Hanbalis say: “The evidence of a nomad against a townsman is not acceptable except when the nomad is a Najdi and the townsman is a non-Najdi.”3 While it is mentioned in traditions that: “Allah has declared that in the organization of the unjust, the evidence of his friends should not be accepted on any account.”

2. In Saudi Arabia a government Sunni judge is provided, like other judges with a courtroom, salary, carpet and writing materials. However, a Shi’a judge does not get any of these. He retains only the title of 'judge', although in Kuwait, Bahrain, Iraq and Lebanon, the Sunni and Shi’a judges enjoy equal privileges. This Saudi attitude can only be attributed to bigotry and nomadic thinking.

3. The best work Saudi Arabia performs is in respect to masjid’s and graveyards and their repairs and maintenance, on which the State spends large amounts of money. However, this is only for Sunni masjid’s. The masjid’s and graveyards of Shi’as do not get any such monetary benefit, although masjid’s and graveyards are undoubtedly for Allah, the Qur’an, and Islam. Would that the Saudi government had not rendered assistance, but at the same time not destroy the graveyards of Ahsa and the al-Matira Masjid?

The Shi’as had obtained a formal permission from the governor of Ibn Jaludi district and from the municipal committee to construct the masjid and constructed it on their own expense. But the Saudi Authority cancelled the permission, and after the masjid was constructed, they announced: “Allah will build a palace in Paradise for one who removes a single brick of the masjid!” Hearing this, the over-zealous 'believers' arrived with spades and shovels and razed the masjid in a just few moments.

(4) The Saudi Government does not allow import of books written by Shi’as although they deal with religious, historical, literary, philosophical, and other similar subjects, and do not have the least connection with Saudi politics. Also, the Shi’a authors of Saudi Arabia are given vile treatment by the government. Their only offence is that they love the descendants of the prophet of Allah, and that they do so in compliance with the command of Allah.

There is no denying the fact that restraining a nation from acquiring education results in the restriction of its spiritual life. It is for this reason that most governments and universities publish books in various languages and attach special importance to this task. They also sponsor students and send them to distant places to acquire knowledge. It is shameful that the Israeli Hadasa Printing Press publishes these books in Arabic, whereas the Saudi Government prohibits it.

The Holy Prophet said: “Acquire knowledge even if it is found in China.”

Imam Ali (‘a) says: “The most learned person is he who increases the knowledge of others with his own knowledge.”

The Jews and others like them act upon this Islamic and human reality whereas the people who say that knowledge is restricted to the desert of Najd and especially to the Wahhabis - and more specifically - to their fanatic chiefs, consider all others to be infidels and only themselves to be true believers. This matter becomes clear by the incident of Ibrahim Pasha and the Wahhabi chiefs at the time of their entry into the city of Darayyah. This incident will be narrated soon.

Even if we suppose that knowledge is restricted to the desert areas and especially to the desert of Najd, why should religious books - dealing with Islam - be banned, while the entry of the books published by the colonialists be permitted? Why should obscene books be available behind the Saudi shop windows, whereas the books and periodicals of mujtahids be banned?

Why are those books that teach the people anarchy, mischief, and infidelity - preventing them from understanding the needs of life and from achieving perfection – be allowed entry into Saudi Arabia? The Saudi Government granted complete freedom to the magazine Rayat ul-Islam to abuse the imams of Muslims and descendants of the Holy Prophet. Why has it published a verdict that shedding blood of Shi’as is permissible? Why do they instigate people to oppress Shi’a Muslims, while they believe in Allah, His Prophet, and the Judgment Day?

On the other hand, why does the Saudi Government ban the entry of Al-Irfan magazine, which has been campaigning against colonialism and corruption for the last 50 years4, when it has done great service to the nation, the Muslims, and the Arabic language? This magazine has remained neutral between East and West, and its contents and policies have always been based on reason. Al-Irfan supports the independence of Palestine and Algeria.5 It rekindled the spirit of freedom amongst the people. It is widely circulated in Cuba, Congo, Laos, and Angola, but its entry into Saudi Arabia is prohibited.

Is it not a matter of shame that the Shi’as of Bahrain are treated by the British there a thousand times better than Shi’as of Ahsa and Qatif are by Saudis? Is not a shame for Islam that the Shi’as of Bahrain and Saudi Arabia should be treated differently? Are the Shi’as of Ahsa and Qatif not entitled to demand that they may also be granted the freedom to perform their religious duties like the Shi’as of Bahrain are?

Is it not a matter of shame that Shi’as are not be entitled to construct their masjids and graveyards and should not be allowed to read the books and periodicals of their choice? I have said this and cursed the colonial rulers of the East and the West and their agents. I also curse those who have obliged me to say these things.

The descendants of Saud rule in the name of Islam6 and they have written: La ilaha illa Allah Muhammadun Rasulullah7 on their national flag in bold letters. However, their behaviour towards the Shi’as contradicts Islamic teachings.8

Though the Shi’as of Lebanon, Iraq, Iran etc are aware of the matter, they have chosen to feign ignorance and they think that there are no Shi’as at all in Saudi Arabia. Of course, we should bring these to the attention of the people of the East and West and tell them how the Saudi regime has adopted discriminative policies against our brothers in faith.

What has astonished us more is that the Wahhabis follow Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and the sayings of Muhammad Ibn Abd ul-Wahhab, and the latter says that the pillars of Islam are five: First, to acknowledge that there is no god but Allah, and that Muhammad is His Messenger. Second, prayers. Third, fasting in Ramadan. Fourth, hajj and fifth, zakat.

These pillars are the same which Shi’as believe. The Imamiyah scholars also say that: one who abandons the performance any of these five - while believing that it is allowed to omit them - is an infidel and one who neglects - or lazy about these things - is a sinner. And one who persists in this attitude and does not repent is liable for execution.

The author of Al-Mughni9 writes:

One of the beliefs of the Khawarij is that they consider many companions of the prophet and companions of companions to be infidels. They consider killing them and usurping their property to be lawful and believe that as a result of killing them they acquire proximity to Allah. Despite these beliefs of theirs, jurists do not consider them to be infidels, because it is argued that they performed ijtihad in what they say. On this basis, they are like those who consider Shi’as to be infidels and similar to the Khawarij who consider some companions and companions of companions to be infidels and hold that their killing is lawful for the pleasure of Allah, and that though they are not infidels, they have certainly erred.

Muhammad Ibn Abd ul-Wahhab and Ibn Taimmiyyah were also accused of heresy. Ibn Taimmiyyah was imprisoned on account of his beliefs, and he died in prison.

Ahl Al-Sunna have said before, and they still say that the Wahhabi cult is heretical and has no connection with Islam.

The views of Ibn Taimiyyah are contrary to those of the scholars of the salaf,10 the pre-khalaf 11 and post-khalaf after the fifth century, although he claimed himself to be the trustee of the Salaf-e-Saliheen. The ulama of Ahlus-Sunnh had rebutted the views of Ibn Taimiyyah and pronounced him to be an infidel. Wahhabism is based on the views of Ibn Taimiyyah and its followers are busy only in propagating his ideas.

In the present age, the Saudi Government is in the forefront in spreading the ideology of Ibn Taimiyyah and spends millions of Riyals every year for this goal.

Ibrahim Pasha

Like Shi’as, Wahhabis have also suffered persecutions because of their beliefs. They have also been killed. Pierre Kirbitis writes in his book, Ibrahim Pasha12:

When Ibrahim Pasha defeated the Saudis, conquered their cities, and arrived in their capital Dariyah, all Saudi commanders surrendered to him. He summoned the Wahhabi ulama - about 500 of them - and said to them: A delegation from among you will accompany me to Cairo and hold discussions with Sunni scholars to clarify the differences between your beliefs and those of the Sunnis.

As ordered by Ibrahim, representatives of the two groups held discussions for three days and brought to light the differences between the two schools. During these three days, Ibrahim sat quietly and did not even go to sleep.

On the fourth day he brought the discussion to an end and asked the head of the Wahhabis: Do you believe that Allah is One and the true faith is one and that your faith is the only true one?

The Shaykh replied in the affirmative.

Pasha said: You swine! What is your belief about Paradise and its breadth?

The Shaykh replied: It is like the breadth of the sky and the earth, and it has been made ready for the virtuous.

Ibrahim said: If Paradise is so spacious, you and your followers will stay under the shade of one tree, then what is the remaining area for, and why has Allah created such a big Paradise?

The Shaykh and his followers cast down their heads in defeat. Ibrahim Pasha ordered his soldiers to cut off their heads.

Followers of different religions pursue their religious obligations every time and in every place till an impediment emerges, and they have a special entity in the governmental organization. However, such a position does not exist in the Saudi Government because contrary to the expectations of Shi’as - who do not interfere with the affairs of the people and the policies of the State - they are prohibited from performing many of their religious rites.

We all know that the policy of hatred, intrigue, and bloodshed is about to end, and the Sun of freedom of opinion and faith is about to rise. Indeed, only that government, which is anxious for the well-being, security, and comfort of all the citizens of the State will survive.

Someone has truly said that a illegitimate government is temporary whereas a true government lasts forever.

• 1. In New York.
• 2. The Rub’al Khali is the sand desert encompassing most of the southern third of the Arabian Peninsula. The desert covers an area of some 650,000 square kilometers. [Note of al-Islam.org]
• 3. Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal says: I am afraid of the fact that the testimony of a Bedouin should not be accepted against a villager. (Mizan Ash-Sherani, Chapter of Witnessing, Al-Mughni, Vol. 9, Pg. 67. Al-Mughni is a reliable book of the Hanbalis).
• 4. It is now a hundred years.
• 5. It was during the war of Algerian independence. After the Algerian independence from France in 1962, Ahmed Ben Bella became the first Prime Minister of Algeria. Alas, Palestine has still not gained independence from the clutches of the Jews, and it is attacked everyday by Israel. But the Intifada movement of brave Palestinians still continues.
• 6. In order to propagate Wahhabism, they are sending millions of Riyals as donation and free Wahhabi literature to various Islamic organizations, mosques and madrasa’s all over the world.
• 7. Meaning: There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is His prophet.
• 8. Ridha’ Aslan, the author of No God but God writes in the chapter of ''An Awakening in the East”:
  The facts of the alliance between Ibn Saud and Abd al-Wahhab have given way to legend. The two men first met as Abd al-Wahhab and his disciples were tearing through the Arabian Peninsula, demolishing tombs, cutting down sacred trees, and massacring any Muslim who did not accept their uncompromising, puritanical vision of Islam. They were expelled from an oasis where they had received shelter. The horrified villagers demanded that Abd al­Wahhab leave after he publicly stoned a woman to death. They later made their way towards the oasis of Dariyah. Its Shaykh, Muhammad Ibn Saud, who was more than happy to give Abd al-Wahhab and his ‘holy warriors’ his unconditional protection.
  “This oasis is yours,” Ibn Saud promised; “do not fear your enemies.”
  Abd al-Wahhab replied with an unusual demand. “I want you to grant me an oath,” he said, “that you will perform jihad against the unbelievers (non-Wahhabi Muslims). In return you will be the leader of the Muslim community, and I will be the leader in religious matters.”
  Ibn Saud agreed. And an alliance was formed that would not only alter the course of the Islamic history but would also change the geopolitical balance of the world. Abd al-Wahhab's ‘holy warriors’ burst into the Hijaz, conquering Mecca and Medina, and expelling the Sharif. Once established in the holy cities, they set about destroying the tombs of the prophet and his companions, including those pilgrimage sites that marked the birthplace of Muhammad and his family. They sacked the treasury of the Prophet's Mosque in Medina and set fire to every book they could find, save the Qur’an. They banned music and flowers from the sacred cities and outlawed tobacco smoking and drinking of coffee. With death penalty, they forced the men to grow beards and the women to be veiled and secluded.
  The Wahhabis deliberately connected their movement with the first extremists in the Muslim world, the Kharijites, and like their fanatical predecessors, they focused their wrath inward against what they considered to be the failings of the Muslim community. Thus, with Hijaz firmly under their control, they marched north to spread the message to the Sufi and Shi’ite ‘infidels’. In 1802, on the holy day of ‘Ashura, they scaled the walls of Karbala and massacred two thousand Shi’ite worshippers as the latter were commemorating Muharram. In an uncontrolled rage, they smashed the tombs of Ali, Husayn, and the imams, giving particular vent to their anger at the tomb of the prophet's daughter, Fatimah. With Karbala sacked, the Wahhabis turned north toward Mesopotamia and the heart of the Ottoman Empire. Only then did they get the attention of the Caliph.
  In 1818, the Egyptian Khedive, Muhammad Ali (1769-1849), at the behest of the Ottoman Caliph, sent a massive contingent of heavily armed soldiers into the Peninsula. The Egyptian army easily overwhelmed the ill-equipped and poorly trained Wahhabis. Mecca and Medina were once again placed under the care of the Sharif and the Wahhabis were forcefully sent back into the Najd. By the time the Egyptian troops withdrew, the Saudis had learned a valuable lesson: they could not take on the Ottoman Empire on their own. They needed a far stronger alliance than the one they had with the Wahhabis.
  The opportunity to form just such an alliance presented itself with the Anglo-Saudi Treaty in 1915. The British, who were eager to control the Persian Gulf, encouraged the Saudis to recapture the Arabian Peninsula from Ottoman control. To assist them in their rebellion, the British provided regular shipments of weapons and money. Under the command of Ibn Saud's heir, Abd al-Aziz (1880-1953), the plan worked.
  At the close of the First World War, when the Ottoman Empire had been dismantled and the caliphate abolished, Ibn Saud reconquered Mecca and Medina and once again expelled the Sharif. After publicly executing forty thousand men and reimposing Wahhabism over the entire population, Abd al-Aziz ibn Saud renamed the Arabian Peninsula “the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia”. The primitive tribe of the Najd and their fundamentalist allies had become the ‘Wardens of the Sanctuary, the Keepers of the Keys’.
  Almost immediately, the sacred land where Muhammad had received the gift of revelation miraculously burst forth with another gift from God. With abundant petroleum reserves, the tiny Saudi clan suddenly gained dominion over the world economy. They now felt it was up to them to respond to this blessing from God by spreading their puritanical doctrine to the rest of the world and purging the Muslim faith once and for all of its religious and ethnic diversity.
  The Muslim Brothers arrived in Saudi Arabia at an opportune time. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia remained the sole Muslim country in which the ulama had not lost their grip over the society. On the contrary, Saudi Arabia was both an utterly totalitarian an uncompromisingly Wahhabist state. Here there was no debate whatsoever between the modernists and the Islamists. Nationalism, Pan-Arabism Pan-Islamism, Islamic socialism - none of these vibrant and influential movements in the Muslim world had a significant voice in the Saudi kingdom. The only doctrine that was tolerated was the Wahhabi doctrine; the only ideology is Islamic fundamentalism. Any deviation was violently suppressed.
  Hoping to curb Nasser's growing influence in the Muslim world, the Saudi monarchy opened its arms to the radicalized Muslim Brotherhood, not just to those who had been exiled from Egypt, but also those from other secular Arab states like Syria and Iraq. The Saudis offered all the money, support, and security that the group needed to fight back against secular nationalism in their home countries. But the Muslim Brothers discovered more than mere shelter in Saudi Arabia. They discovered Wahhabism; and they were not alone. Hundreds of thousands of poor workers from all over the Muslim world began pouring into Saudi Arabia to work the oil fields. By the time they returned to their homes, they were fully indoctrinated in Saudi religiosity.
  In the fall of 1996, a group of ethnic Pashtun religious students from the poorest, most conservative, and the least literate provinces of Afghanistan and Pakistan rolled uncontested into Kabul, hoisting their trademark white flag representing purity. The students stormed the United Nations compound where the Afghanistan's president was hiding, dragged him into the streets, pummelled him to death, and, at dawn, hung his bloated body from a lamp post. In this way, the Taliban made its fearsome presence known to the world.
  The Taliban first entered the global stage, along with a massive contingent of Muslim militants - known as the Mujahidin (or ‘those who wage jihad’) from the Middle East, Far East, Central Asia, Southeast Asia, North Africa, and East Africa, who, from 1982 to 1992 were recruited and armed by the CIA to take part in a jihadist insurrection against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. With Saudi funding, the Mujahidin were sent to Pakistan, where, with the assistance of Zia al­Haq's fundamentalist regime, they were trained in terror tactics and indoctrinated with a militant combination of Shah Waliyyullah's religiopolitical ideology and Wahhabism’s radical puritanism, all under the supervision of the then CIA chief William Casey.
  The United States had long considered Wahhabism to be an important ally in the 'great game” being played out against ‘godless communism’. In fact, to solidify Saudi support, the United States encouraged wealthy Saudis with intimate ties to the government and royal family, like Osama Ibn Laden, to finance and oversee the insurrection in Afghanistan. Called ‘freedom fighters’ by the CIA, and compared to America's founding fathers by President Ronald Reagan, the combined force of the foreign Mujahidin fighters and the Afghani and Pakistani religious students forced the Soviet army to pull out of Afghanistan. They also ushered in the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War.
  Their mission in Afghanistan accomplished, the triumphant Mujahidin took their Pakistani training, their Saudi fundamentalism, and their American weapons back to their home countries in order to launch their own jihad in places like Palestine, Chechnya, Morocco, and Indonesia. The Taliban returned to their homes in the Pashtun regions near the Afghanistan-Pakistan border to continue their religious education. And Afghanistan, abandoned by a United States flushed with victory in the Cold War, was left in the hands of lawless warlords who ran the country like competing Mafia gangs -killing, torturing, and raping indiscriminately in their quest for control.
  In 1992, when the Taliban decided to reunite under the leadership of their spiritual teacher, Mullah Omar, and retake Afghanistan, this time from the hands of the feuding warlords, they were again supported by the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan. With the assistance of Pakistan’s ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence Agency), the Taliban secured their home region of Kandahar in 1993. Two years later, they captured the Shi'ite city of Herat, and by 1996 they controlled the capital city of Kabul. With more than three fourths of the country under their control, they then began a now infamous Wahhabization process throughout Afghanistan. All religious sites – Muslims’ and non-Muslims’ alike - were destroyed (like the Bamiyan and Mazar Sharif etc.). Tobacco and coffee were outlawed. Men were compelled to grow beards and women were forced into seclusion. The country's substantial Shi'ite and Sufi populations were massacred.
• 9. Vol. 8, Pg. 132.
• 10. The term ‘Salaf’ refers to the earliest few generations of the Muslims [note of al-Islam.org].
• 11. Khalaf refers to the later generations that continued with the practices [note of al-Islam.org].
• 12. Pg. 40, 1937 Edition.