CHAPTER IV: Features of the Ideological Formation within the Behavior of the Najd Brothers Opposition Movement

Introduction: about features of the ideological formation within the behavior of the Najd Brothers:

Firstly: the mentality of Hafiz Wahba between his teacher Muhammad Abdou and his master Abdul-Aziz Al-Saud:

1- Wahba was the prominent consultant of Abdul-Aziz; they got to know each other in 1916, when Abdul-Aziz attended the funeral of Mubarak Al-Sabah in Kuwait. Wahba was appointed by Abdul-Aziz as his close consultant, shortly before the decisive battle between Abdul-Aziz and Al-Sharif Hussein. Wahba was among the students of the imam/head of Al-Azhar institution Muhammad Abdou, who died in 1905, but Wahba was not an independent thinker like this imam; as Wahba worked in service of the Egyptian authorities and travelled a lot aboard within political missions between Egypt, turkey, India and Kuwait, until he met with Abdul-Aziz who appointed him as his consultant. Yet, Wahba retained some influence of M. Abdou in his mind, as seen in his writings; for instance, Wahba hated the stagnation of Al-Azhar and the Middle Eastern backward tyranny and oppression, and he favored being open to the West while getting rid of colonialism, within realistic point of view in approaching such issues, like anyone playing political roles (1).

2- When Wahba began working with Abdul-Aziz, the Najd Brothers were at their apogee, and signs of their political oppositions began to emerge. Despite the fact that Wahba was taught by M. Abdou and followed his school of thought in Egypt, a school that refutes and debunks Sunnite Wahabi extremism, such intellectual background never allowed him to pursue the intellectual project to cope with the modern age to reform Islamic thought. Of course, Abdul-Aziz would never have allowed any reformist thought to be applied or advocated in the KSA, as Abdul-Aziz used Wahabism to 'restore' what he thought of as his royal family lands and reign, and thus, Wahba used his efforts and intellect only to serve the interests of Abdul-Aziz without criticizing Wahabism at all, especially by replacing the Najd Brothers by the Egyptian Wahabi/Salafist Brothers, that formed the terrorist MB group later on, all over Egyptian cities and villages to make the Wahabi-engulfed Egypt a strategic depth for the KSA that will spread and propagate Wahabism all over the Arab world to protect the nascent KSA, with little cost on the part of the KSA royal family. This has been going on for 75 years now, as we are writing these lines in 2000 A.D.      

3- The contradiction within the mentality of Wahba (his being influenced partially with M. Abdou the enemy of Wahabism + his being the consultant of a Wahabi king) is traced within the writings of Wahba on the history of the Najd Brothers and their master Abdul-Aziz, and how Wahba influenced many of the royal decisions of the Wahabi king related to how he dealt with the Najd Brothers.

Secondly: some of what Wahba has written:

1- We quote Wahba in his historical tableau of the Najd Brothers: (…A great number of the Wahabi brethren from the tribe of Otaybah saw that all things related to Bedouin primitive life are linked to disbelief and that a sign of devotion to God's religion and of real faith was to get rid of any signs of disbelief; thus, they sold all their cattle and camels to immigrate to the colonies to devote their time to acts of worship, listening attentively to sermons about Prophet Muhammad's lifetime events and history of how Islam spread in Arabia at the time, and military training. They found out that their previous life was akin to pre-Islamic era, and they took comfort in learning how to read and write in order to peruse and memorize the Quranic verses and some hadiths…). Our quick comment: note well the influence of corrupt education here.

2- (…Yet, such radical change was violent and dangerous; as most of the brethren had imbued principles and teachings that lacked many things, fanatically thinking that they had owned the absolute truth about religion, disregarding anything else as they deemed it as part of disbelief and misguidance. Thus, they doubted the faith of their imam, King Abdul-Aziz, and other dwellers of cities inside the Najd region. They thought that the Wahabi headwear is part of the Sunna that must be followed, while traditional headdress was for them a novelty that must be banned, and the same applied to any sort of dress codes worn by the infidels that must be shunned. Many of the brethren began to think that there was little faith in those who did not live in the colonies and shunned desert-Arabs' lifestyle and exchanging greetings with such infidels and eating from their cattle were prohibited. Later on, the brethren thought that many sheikhs and scholars were hypocrites, obsequious and flattering to the king, eager to please him without regard to the true creed. The brethren thought that conquering and invasion must not be stopped; rather, it must include all neighboring countries to spread the creed by force on them, and they paid no heed to those scholars who called for the stopping of conquests…). Our quick comment: note well the influence of corrupt education here.

3- (…Some brethren declared their imam, King Abdul-Aziz, as an apostate because they thought him too lenient and lax as far as application of Wahabi teachings was concerned. They accused him of denying the true creed by wearing long gowns, growing a moustache, and wearing the traditional headwear of Arabs instead of the Wahabi one, among other habits of disbelief, in their opinion. The brethren used to prohibit all things that did not match their whims and views. We feel that this was because of the half-educated ignoramuses that taught Wahabism to the Bedouins in all villages and cities to gather them as the Wahabi brethren in colonies; they inculcated into them fanaticism and bigotry…). Our quick comment: note well the influence of corrupt education here.

4- (…1345 A.H. was among the most difficult years in Najd; civil strife was about to break out between the Wahabi brethren on the one hand and the (Wahabi) government and city dwellers on the other hand. The king had sent enlightened scholars to the brethren to rectify errors committed by ignorant preachers of earlier days to lessen their fanaticism and bigotry, urging the brethren to leave colonies. Yet, all this was in vain; no one could uproot such deep-seated extremism. The brethren feared only the swords and authority of the king; otherwise, they would have wreaked havoc in all Arabia soon enough…) (2). Our quick comment: corrupt education can never be corrected with education of the same category; power to impose a radical change in education is the decisive solution when corrupt education dominates.

Thirdly: analysis of this historical tableau:

1- Wahba here writes about the hatred of the Otaybah tribe, and its leader the Wahabi Brother Sultan Ibn Bajad, to all signs of pre-Islamic era of polytheism and disbelief, and how they sold everything to get rid of such 'signs', as a dangerous indication of extremism. Wahba was not in Arabia in 1910 when Abdul-Aziz established the colonies and the Najd Brothers and told them to leave their tribes, cities, or villages to follow him. Thus, Abdul-Aziz was the one responsible for such bigotry and extremism, when he collected men from the tribes of Mateer, Otaybah, Harb, etc. to make them inhabit the Wahabi colonies along with Wahabi preachers. Hence, as Wahba was a latecomer in Arabia, he knew little of the intellectual principles of the ideological formation of the Najd Brothers, set by Wahabi scholars before. Wahba blames in his writings such scholars and calls them ignoramuses that inculcated fanaticism to the Najd Brother, disregarding intentionally the role of Abdul-Aziz himself in such catastrophe. 

2- It is clear that Wahba, the former student of the reformer Egyptian sheikh M. Abdou, realized the danger and enormity of the volatile situation of the Najd Brothers and their intellectual ideology and application of it, and expressed the wish that more enlightened scholars, loyal to the king of course, would have succeeded in persuading the Najd Brothers to be less fanatical and extremist. He felt that the power, authority, and might of the king would be in use to stop the corruption of the Najd Brothers by sheer military force alone. But Wahba was pessimistic in that respect, as we detect from his lines.  

3- Wahba states clearly that such Wahabi education lacked many things in its principles and teachings, resulting in the Najd Brothers declaring all persons outside their circle as apostates and infidels that must be fought and massacred. This was the utmost level of fanaticism bigotry, and extremist thought leading to terror and havoc. The Najd Brothers declared infidels those who did not live in colonies and stick to the Wahabi dress codes. Such faulty notions were accompanied with the ardent desire to fight and massacre, as they thought of themselves as ''chosen ones'' by God on a mission to convert the world into the 'true' creed! They hated scholars who advocated the stopping of jihad. These were clear signs of utmost level of fanaticism, bigotry, and extremist thought.    

4- A worse sign of fanaticism, bigotry, and extremist thought was to coerce others to follow any religious denomination; Islam is against compulsion in religion. Such coercion by the Najd Brothers was done to Wahabis and non-Wahabis alike inside and outside Arabia. Another bad sign is to change or remove by sheer force what was deemed to be vice or sin. Fatwas of scholars within Riyadh conference in 1927 to demolish all Shiite mosques and stop Shiite rituals in Al-Ahsa region exemplified how the Najd Brothers liked very much to change anything that did not match their lifestyle and creed; even the king was criticized for his dress and moustache, as Wahba writes. Minor matters used to provoke the ire of the Najd Brothers who were eager to sue sheer force to 'change', eliminate, or eradicate what they considered as sins among Wahabis, let alone their actions with non-Wahabis.   

5- Such signs of fanaticism, bigotry, and extremist thought led to feelings of enmity, hatred, and animosity toward all non-Wahabis and all Wahabis that did not obey them by living in the colonies; they never greeted them or ate with them. Such hatred is part of Wahabi teachings advocated by Ibn Abdul-Wahab as he prohibits in his writings a great number of things permitted in Islam.

6- Hence, the opposition of the Najd Brothers to the king as linked to such ideological formation and its traits and features, as Wahba writes that they thought ill of their king and imam as he was lenient toward Shiites and befriended the infidel British forces, thus denying Wahabism, been by his dress code. When scholars took the side of the king at one point, the Najd Brothers thought of them as hypocrites who were eager to please the king instead of applying Wahabi teachings and advising the king to apply them by force.  

Lastly:

  What Wahba has briefed here in his writings is what we will discuss at length in this chapter about the features of the ideological formation of the Wahabi opposition of the Najd Brothers: these features are extremism, fanaticism, bigotry, and declaring themselves as more religious than rulers of a theocracy.   

Footnotes: 

1- Kishk (Jalal), ''The Saudis and the Islamic Solution", pages 721 and 722.

2- Wahba (Hafiz), "Arabia in the 20^th Century", pages 285:287.

Extremism: compulsion in religion by the Najd Brothers:

Firstly: extremism and compulsion in religion inside the state (removing and changing vices and sins)

1- Since the time when the scholars of the Ibn Hanbal doctrine fabricated and phrased the hadith of (anyone who sees vices must change them by his hands…), this hadith became the constitution of all fanatics who think of themselves as more pious and righteous than theocratic rulers, as removing vices and sins by force was seen as an obligatory religious duty that must be applied by any adherent, not just the rulers or the religious police. Thus, the phrasing of such hadith allows room for anything to be deemed as vice as per the brain of anyone who would use force to remove it! This was a very subjective view, linked with the ability to act and mobilize men to use force to remove or change 'vices'. If such a hadith allows room for revolt by ordinary civilians, what about military Wahabis with ideological formation of violence committed readily and suddenly anytime to spread the Word of God by the sword?! Accordingly, such hadith gave the Najd Brothers the credit and merit to deem themselves as the ''chosen ones'' to achieve God's work to guide all people by sheer force to coerce them in creed. Thus, violence of that type was internally inside the Wahabi society and outside it in times of invasion and conquest, under the pretext of removing sins.        

2- Thus, defining what was deemed to be sins or vices was based on whatever contradicts the thought of the group in authority, especially fanatical bigots of scholars. Hence, fanaticism was linked to bigotry and extremism. The Najd Brothers during the reign of Abdul-Aziz exemplified such faulty notions, as we read in the writings of Wahba: (…The brethren used to cut off, using scissors, long parts of any man's moustache in the streets of cities and villages after preaching the men in question, and did the same thing harshly if such men passed by colonies. The same policy was applied to long gowns whose cloth touched the ground, admonishing such men that long gowns would make them enter Hell in the Hereafter…). As usual, Wahba tries to clear the name of his master, Abdul-Aziz, from the extremist thought of the Najd Brother, overlooking the fact that Abdul-Aziz was the one who brainwashed the Bedouins to transform them into the Najd Brothers. (…However big the mistakes and faults of the brethren who exceeded all limits, the king and his government overlooked them at first, bearing patiently with the brethren's criticizing their imam and king…). This means that Abdul-Aziz had reared a monster that turned against him to attack him eventually, as per the above-mentioned hadith that allows revolts within all theocracies.  

3- Wahba refers slightly, without details, to the atrocities committed by the Najd Brothers in Mecca after its conquest by Abdul-Aziz: (…As for the strictness of the brethren in Mecca once they entered it, they never heeded the present government, as anything deemed by them as vice or sin in Hejaz was forcibly changed by them using sticks, guns, or his bare hands…) (3). Wahba writes about the very first Najd Brothers appointed by Abdul-Aziz within the groups of ''the promotion of virtue and the prevention of vice'', a sort of religious police formed in Hejaz after invading it. Their atrocities provoked the ire of Ihsanullah, the consul of India, who wrote to his government this letter, quoted by Wahba: (…such religious police was given unlimited authority, using a large number of Najd soldiers in service, recruiting about 20 Najd soldiers in every street to watch over everyone, and there were about 260 Najd soldiers in Mecca, who were cruel and inhumane group that committed acts of  terror against dwellers of Hejaz, without laws to govern and deter such Najd soldiers, especially when they forced men to pray in mosques regularly the five daily prayers, beating severely anyone who would dare to disobey them, whether such men were old or young, rich or poor, and some of such victims were flogged in public…) (4).

4- Of course, such atrocities led to more killings in many cases using guns as Wahba has referred to this earlier. Al-Zarkeley has written about an incident that he witnessed, when a Najd Brother in the desert ran into a man from the tribe of Anza, and noticed that this man did not wear the Wahabi headdress. The Najd Brother deemed this as a sign of apostasy, and he preached the man to urge him go to join a colony to learn 'Islam', and showed him one of the letters of Ibn Abdul-Wahab to peruse, but the tribesman refused and talked harshly to the Najd Brother, who pointed his gun to the chest of the tribesman. The latter was frightened and promised to go to a colony to renew his faith, but the infuriated Najd Brother killed him with the gun (5).

5- Corporeal punishment exacted by the Najd Brothers reached those men who were smoking, women who wore clothes in silk, and men who did not prayer five daily prayers regularly in mosques or did not fast during Ramadan. On 10^th of April, 1920, in the city of Al-Hufuf, the sister of the wife of Ibn Jalawy, the Wahabi ruler of Al-Ahsa, came to visit her sister, wearing a bright colored silk dress, and the Najd Brothers' religious policemen beat her severely in the street. Ibn Jalawy had to flog in public the man who beat her and to confiscate camels of these religious policemen, as a form of punishment for them after his men seized and chastised them. On 14^th of April, 1920, the Najd Brothers' religious policemen saw a Shiite girl walking alone in one of the streets of the city of Ta'if, wearing what they deemed as unchaste clothes, and they beat her severely in public. The relatives of the girl interfered to protect her. A march of protest followed, and Ibn Jalawy had to arrest and imprison 30 men of the Najd Brothers' religious policemen. Within another incident, in the city of Al-Jubeil, some of the Najd Brothers seized a beardless man with a long moustache, to cut it off for him by force. Some of the city dwellers fought them, killing two of the Najd Brothers' religious policemen. Of course, such opposition against the Najd Brothers' religious policemen was encouraged by the Wahabi ruler of Al-Ahsa, Ibn Jalawy, who tried to protect his people of Al-Ahsa against the brutality of the Najd Brothers, hated and despised by him. One of the British men in Kuwait noticed that Kuwaiti Bedouins wore the Wahabi headdress out of fear of the Najd Brothers, and began to smoke in private and in secret (6). This means that the terrorism of the Najd Brothers reached Kuwait at the time.

6- Since the Najd Brothers allowed themselves to meddle into the privacy and personal freedom of people, they interfered in the State affairs, giving themselves more power and authority without reference to their king and master and any governmental officials feared them very much. Wahba writes about how they cared for trivial matters of appearance in terms of dress code and moustaches, asserting that Abdul-Aziz was bearing with their aggressions patiently for a long time. An improbable, untrue story about the Najd Brothers was circulated at the time; Feisal Al-Daweesh took a pair of scissors to trim the gown of the king himself in his palace. Such propaganda was used to spread the notion that the leaders of the Najd Brothers were more pious and courageous than the king and that they deserved to share his rule and power (7).

7- Removing vices by force had become a major item of the Najd Brothers' defiance of and opposition against the government and the king, especially when the Najd Brothers forced the king to stop installing telegraphs and telegrams wires during the conquest of Hejaz. During the siege of Jeddah, Abdul-Aziz wanted to install such service from Mecca and Yathreb to his camp to know the news faster, but he had to give up the project in 1926. The Najd Brothers dared even to cut off wires of telephones as 'vice' that must be removed by force, in defiance of the State and of their king (8). Wahba repeats his defense of his king to clear his name and praise his patience with them despite their defiance: (…In 1926, the king had to stop installing wireless telegraph posts in Yathreb and elsewhere, to appease the infuriated brethren, and to demolish some mosques that contained tombs inside them. The king had no other choice but that, as he did not tend to stand before a strong current, but he used to wait for the calm after the storm to vanquish his foes when the convenient time came…) (9).

8- Removing vices by force reached an unprecedented zenith when the Najd Brothers declared their king/imam as an infidel and themselves as more pious and righties and thus fit to rule instead of him. Within the Riyadh conference in 1928, the Najd Brothers controlled the streets of the city and drove out the government officials, and their leader Sultan Ibn Bajad changed his name into ''Sultan Eddine'', and ordered his followers to chant his name in the streets of Riyadh as the forthcoming ruler in defense of faith. Residents of Riyadh were shocked and reminded the Najd Brothers that Islam in the Quran forbids taking pride in anything, but the Najd Brothers told them the hadith about the strong believer is better than a weak one. All of the Najd Brothers in Riyadh at the time brandished their arms and swords in the streets for days, declaring their rejection of the power and authority of the king. Private life was something in the past at the time, because the Najd Brothers interfered in it even to the minutest detail. Mere doubting of anyone not attending congregational prayers would induce public flogging, as occurred with a high governmental official in Riyadh. The Najd Brothers wanted to flog the Islamic leader Al-Sayed Ahmed Al-Sinoussy because he protested against the demolishing of the tomb of Khadija, Prophet Muhammad's first wife, but the king stopped them. The Najd Brothers' religious policemen beat in the streets anyone who would dare to disobey them (10). Thus, the number of vices to be removed would increase with the passage of time: beginning with dress codes until the call to remove the ruler himself as he was declared an apostate along with his ruling government, though he was the one to create the Najd Brothers.

Secondly: extremism outside the state: jihad for compulsion in religion:

1- When the Najd Brothers emerged for the first time, among their first mission was their participation in the conquest of Al-Ahsa region, confiscating for the sake of Abdul-Aziz all its wealth and riches owned formerly by its Shiite population. This was jihad for the Najd Brothers, but the Shiites there caused much trouble to the Najd Brothers who felt the immediate urge to convert all such Shiite population to Islam (i.e., Wahabism, in their view). They requested from the king on several occasions to force Al-Ahsa residents to convert or else to drive them out of Arabia. The link between jihad and removing vices by force was shown here; Al-Ahsa was the original location of Shiites in Arabia, and after it was conquered by Wahabis, its dwellers became 'sinners' to be removed, massacred, or expelled out of their homeland if they did not convert to Wahabism. The same problem was faced by the Najd Brothers after the conquest of Hejaz, as they forced its people to apply Wahabi rituals and dress codes and began to demolish all mosques that contained 'holy' tombs. Even Wahabis who never lived in colonies were urged to go there and many of the Najd Brothers advocated the notion of forcing new converts to live in the colonies for a while as a form of jihad!

2- The Najd Brothers used to send letters for others to call them to convert to Wahabism and join the Najd Brothers, or else, they were threatened to get killed. Such letters were overt and clear in its language of terrorism and threats in brief words. It is noteworthy that they never copies the letters written in the Abbasid Era, and ascribed falsely to Prophet Muhammad, as some claimed he sent them to rulers and leaders around him to call them peacefully to convert to Islam to obey God alone. The Najd Brothers sent instead letters of ultimatums and threat, terrorizing recipients of letters to be murdered in case of disobedience. John Habeeb has published among his documents some of such letters: (…In the Name of God the Compassionate, from Al-Dahasi to Al-Abboud the tribal leader, peace be upon those who follow God's guidance, we guarantee you and your tribe peace and security, provided that all of you will join us to gain God's satisfaction and all your families and possessions will be safe, as those joining us will be submitting themselves to God and enjoy the condescension and protection of Sultan Ibn Bajad and the Wahabi brethren…). (…In the Name of God the Compassionate, from Al-Dahasi to Ibn Samran, above all and before anything else, we guarantee all of your tribe, males and females, all peace and security, if you will join us to enjoy safety of yourselves and your property and families, by submitting yourselves to us, you will be submitting to God Himself, and you will enjoy the protection of  the Wahabi brethren, and the peace of God as well as protection for you possessions, houses, and camels, and so, convert all of you to Islam very soon…). (…In the Name of God the Compassionate, from Al-Dahasi to Al-Dahasa tribe, we call of your tribesmen to convert to Islam; those joining us will enjoy the protection of God and the protection of Sultan Ibn Bajad and the Wahabi brethren …). (…In the Name of God the Compassionate, from Assaf Ibn Hussein Al-Mansour to Rasheed Ibn Sameer, greetings, you know quite well that the Imam and Sovereign of all Arabs is King Abdul-Aziz Ibn Abdul-Rahman Al-Feisal Ibn Al-Saud and he ordered me to stay in Al-Jouf and to write this letter to you to inquire about your following the path of Islam led by the Imam Abdul-Aziz or not; peace will be granted only to the reasonable ones! The King and all Muslims in Arabia are posing this question to you; thus, we have warned you and you cannot blame anyone but yourself. That is all, greetings to all of you from your Wahabi brethren, 1340 A.H., Assaf Ibn Hussein…) (11).

3- In the same way, the Najd Brothers tried to invade Kuwait on 11^th of Oct., 1920, and to force the Kuwaitis to convert to Wahabism. When Al-Daweesh sieged the ruler of Kuwait, he sent him a messenger to urge this ruler to convert to 'Islam' and to prohibit smoking in his State. The Kuwaiti ruler, Salem Ibn Mubarak Al-Sabah, had to feign his agreement out of fear, and he sent a letter in response to Al-Daweesh: (…No reasonable man would refuse your requests, and we are with you with all our heart, but we beseech you to give us a two-day period to consider…). Within two days, he enlisted the aid of the British who came to the rescue immediately. Al-Daweesh felt that he was mocked and deceived by the Kuwaiti ruler, and thus sent him a letter: (…You tried to deceive us by feigning conversion to Islam in order to avoid a military confrontation…You had resorted to the infidels to protect you…One day, God willing, this account will be settled and we will get even…). Al-Rihany writes that the Najd Brothers lost a great number of their men in this war in Kuwait because of the British forces, but they never cared because of their urge for martyrdom and for subjugating the Kuwaitis to convert them forcibly to Wahabism, as a noble cause that came above everything else (12).

4- The Wahabi duty of jihad, as a notion embraced by the Najd Brothers, became a matter of dispute between them, as an opposition movement, and the king. The Najd Brothers wanted ardently to expand and invade Iraq to repeat the days of the so-called companions of Muhammad in their Arab conquests of the 7^th century. The Najd Brothers coveted very mush the fertile lands of Iraq and the Levant in northern Arabia, more than desert lands of Kuwait, Oman, and Yemen, especially that these three countries were occupied by the British 'infidels' who excelled in fighting with modern weapons that the Najd Brothers could not possibly face. GB defined borders of such countries as well as the KSA, Jordan, and Iraq, and such setting of borders stopped Abdul-Aziz from setting more expansionist plans to the north. The king had to curb the expansionist desire of the Najd Brothers; otherwise, they would have repeated the failure of the Qarmatians in the Middle Ages. GB built fortresses within borders to protect Arabs in Iraq and elsewhere against the raids of the Najd Brothers, and the fortress of Boseih was the last nail in the coffin of the loyalty of the Najd Brothers to their imam and king.  

5- Despite the ardent desire of Abdul-Aziz to annex Iraq and Jordan (countries ruled by his foes: the sons of Al-Sharif Hussein) to his kingdom, he realized that the modern age entailed certain facts that must be faced and he had to relinquish such ambitions in order to make sure that the Saudi State he established would be viable; he even got rid of the Najd Brothers for that purpose. That was what the king who used to overlook the raids of the Najd Brothers began gradually to condemn them and to stop them firmly. The king took into his consideration the reaction of GB, and his British allies realized the vital importance to stop such raids by establishing fortresses. The king felt the urgent need to curb his ambitions regarding Iraq and the Levant, but the Najd Brothers could not. Wahba writes: (…Massacres committed by the Najd Brothers in Turba in 1919 to annihilate troops of Al-Sharif Hussein had nothing to do with the king and his royal orders, and he could not have prevented such massacres unless with civil strife or revolt. The nature of Bedouins who moved to the colonies to imbibe the creed (i.e., Wahabism) had changed as they were fanatical and extremist in all their stances. The king never desired nor encouraged to commit aggressions against the neighboring countries occupied by the British, and as long as raids of the brethren kept them satisfied with loot, with the least inconvenience to him, he never had to interfere when the British would defend their occupied countries…Yet, the king used to give pieces of advice to the brethren to retain peace and never to raid neighboring countries, but they never heeded his advice, as the British troops for them were merely infidels who must be fought until victory would be gained or martyrdom, God's approval, and Paradise, within the jihad notion understood by the brethren…) (13).

6- Let us imagine that the Najd Brothers might have succeeded in conquering Iraq: the same problem of removing vice and sins would be repeated, as most Iraqis were Shiites. Atrocities would have been committed daily there to cause more trouble for the king. When Abdul-Aziz nipped their military ambition in the bud, the Najd Brothers, as time bombs, had to expose inside the KSA and turn against the king himself. Such mentality of the Najd Brothers is reflected by what Al-Daweesh had said to the king in the Riyadh conference in 1928 shortly before the battle of Sabilla: (…You have prevented us from Bedouin raids in Iraq, and we are now no longer Muslims fighting the infidels and no longer desert-Arabs fighting one another for loot…) (14). This quote shows that Bedouin nature of raids and looting would be applied with or without religious pretexts and justification of jihad. We are sorry to say that despite the fact that the Najd Brothers are now mere lines within history books, their Wahabi Sunnite creed with its faulty notions, especially jihad, still thrives and spread all over the Arab world; it is a shame that Wahabis now in the Arab world are called Islamists, as if they were representing Islam, and such lies and falsehoods were created by Abdul-Aziz and his terrorist MB group in Egypt and outside Egypt. 

Footnotes:

3- Wahba, ditto, pages 288 and 289.

4- Habeeb, ditto, pages 199 and 200.

5- Al-Zarkeley, ditto, page 362.

6- Habeeb, ditto, pages 80:84.

7- Kishk, ditto, page 629.

8- Kishk, ditto, page 623.

9- Wahba, ditto, page 290.

10- Kishk, ditto, page 628.

11- Habeeb, ditto, pages 85 and 86.

12- Al-Rihany, "Modern History of Najd'', pages 274:276.

Al-Rasheed, ''History of Kuwait'', pages 219 and 222.

13- Wahba, ditto, pages 245 and 246.

14- Habeeb, ditto, page 223.

Fanaticism and hatred of the other by the Najd Brothers:

Between religious fanaticism and extremism:

   Fanaticism and extremism share one point; the hatred of the other anyway, whether the fanatics were weak or strong. If fanatics were in power and in full authority, they would be extremists in their persecution and forcing of the other to change their creed in order to apply the notion of changing vice by force. Hence, extremism is injustice and violation of freedoms and rights of others, especially related to religious freedom. the Najd Brothers were extremists in their hatred of foreigners especially the British whom were not forced to obey them, and thus, the Najd Brothers used utmost extremism in dealing with those under their control within conquests and invasions.

A historical overview:

1- The Umayyad caliphate was fanatical but not extremist in terms of religiousness; its internal policies were based on fanaticism by favoring Arab Muslims over non-Arab Muslims like Persians, Copts, Berber, Nabataeans, etc. and within Arabs, the Umayyads favored certain tribes over others such as Qorayish and the Hashemites. In many cases, fanatics would favor certain households within closed circles within the Umayyad Dynasty and its allies. Such types of fanaticism led to the collapse and downfall of the Umayyad Dynasty later on.

2- As for the Abbasid caliphate, fanaticism in it turned into religious extremism, especially during the reign of the Abbasid caliph Al-Motawakil. Unlike the Umayyad caliphs who used to grant awards to Arab Christian poets, who used to wear crosses like the famous poet Al-Akhtal, and take heavy taxes and tributes from non-Arabs even if they converted to Islam, the Abbasid caliph Al-Motawakil was fanatically prejudiced against Arab and non-Arab Shiites, Sufis, Jews, and Christians. Before the Abbasid Dynasty, Al-Khawarij group members, during the Umayyad caliphate, were religious Shiite fanatics who persecuted those outside their circle, unlike the tribal and racial fanaticism of the Umayyads.   

Religious fanaticism of the Najd Brothers:

1- We have given the above historical overview in order to assert the fact that Arabia before Abdul-Aziz knew mostly tribal fanaticism, and Abdul-Aziz turned such tribal fanaticism into a religious one based on teachings of Ibn Abdul-Wahab of loving Wahabis and hatred of the other non-Wahabis. Such religious fanaticism was mixed with the tribal one in hatred and fighting those different in creed, doctrine, race, gender, etc. Life in desert areas, especially in Najd, makes fanaticism a necessary lifestyle, where isolation is coupled with fearing strangers, xenophobia, and lack of experience and civilized manners. Religious fanatics always resort to the zero-equation: black or white, with us or against us, without medial stance or position or any sort of compromises.     

2- This was why the Najd Brothers never greeted non-Wahabis, and we have written in a previous chapter how one leader of the Najd Brothers refused to greet back Abdul-Aziz while delivering a letter to him from Ibn Bajad shortly before the battle of Sabilla. Abdul-Aziz understood the gesture very well; it meant that he was and infidel and apostate for them, and he was furious and dismissed the messenger. the Najd Brothers used to void talking to 'infidels' and covering their faces to avoid seeing and dealing with them as well. 

3- Covering one's face out of severe hatred and extremist fanatical stances regarding religion reminds us of the people of Noah and the people of Muhammad in the Quran: "Whenever I called them to Your forgiveness, they thrust their fingers into their ears, and wrapped themselves in their garments, and insisted, and became more and more arrogant." (71:7). "They wrap their chests to hide from Him. But even as they cover themselves with their clothes, He knows what they conceal and what they reveal. He knows what lies within the hearts." (11:5).

4- Several stories about the Najd Brothers are narrated in many sources. Muhammad Al-Assad writes that he was in a journey through the desert for the sake of Abdul-Aziz, and some of the Najd Brothers saw him with his Arab servant, and despite the fact that Al-Assad wore an Arab dress, but they thought of him as a spy, until one of the Najd Brothers remembered that he saw him in the palace of the king (16). Al-Rihany writes that he met three desert-Arabs on the route, who were among the Najd Brothers, and they thought him a British spy and infidel, but he asserted to them that he was a Syrian camel merchant, but they insisted that peace greetings should be revoked verbally by him, and he did just that to avoid conflict. John Philby suffered a lot because he was a British convert to Wahabism, working under the king and dealing with many of the Najd Brothers. Even the king named him Abdullah Philby, but the Najd Brothers doubted him very much and never believed him to be a Muslim because he was a foreigner. Philby once heard some of the Najd Brothers discussing near his tent if they would stop greeting him or not, as they felt he was a ''dirty infidel''. They never responded to his greetings addressed to them, and they used to cover their faces so as not to see him, and one of them shouted at him that he hated him and Allah bears witness of that hatred! One of the Najd Brothers spat at the direction of the tent of Philby! Some of them kept watch over him to see if he would smoke like all British men, in order to expose him as a non-Wahabi spy. Of course, such acts were application of Wahabi teachings in the writings of Ibn Abdul-Wahab concerning declaring one's hatred of infidels and polytheists. some of the Najd Brothers used to warn the king, asserting that Philby would bring nothing but disasters to the kingdom.   

5- The intellectual mindset and ideological formation are essential parts of such religious fanaticism; Al-Rihany writes this story about one of the Najd Brothers who accompanied him in a trade caravan, teaching everyone Wahabi notions: (…he kept talking to us about monotheism, and its three principles: to obey Prophet Muhammad in order to go to Heaven, to avoid disobeying him in order to avoid Hell, and never to worship gods beside Allah by befriending enemies of God and His Prophet…) (17). Of course, this was a distortion of the meaning of this Quranic verse: "You will not find a people who believe in God and the Last Day, loving those who oppose God and His Messenger…" (58:22), as this verse talks about the prohibition of befriending warring aggressive enemies that fight peaceful believers. Since the Najd Brothers typically began aggressions first against peaceful ones who never declared war on them, they deserve to be hated by God as per the Quran: "And fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not commit aggression; God does not love the aggressors." (2:190). 

6- Al-Artaweiyya colony embodied religious fanaticism at large; John Habeeb writes that its ruler forced some visitors coming from Kuwait to be interrogated first, before being allowed to enter the colony, about their faith tenets. The same was applied to some of the Najd Brothers who came from Kuwait to the colony; to make sure their faith was not 'contaminated' by such contact with Kuwaitis! This is much like European inquisition, but doubled. Hamilton, a politician who was staying in Kuwait, writes in Dec. 1918 that some Kuwaitis urged the travellers not to go to the colony so as not to be put into that inquisition or religious quarantine for varying periods of time to test their adherence to Wahabism, and even ordinary Wahabis, among dwellers of cities and including Philby, used to avoid entering Al-Artaweiyya as if it were filled with lepers (18).

7- Such feelings of fanaticism did not just lead to such inquisitions but also to political opposition based on deep-seated xenophobia and hatred of the British in particular, and this led the Najd Brothers to declare their king as infidel as he dealt with foreign infidels peacefully. Abdul-Aziz understood the importance of allying himself to GB, and had to face the criticism points of the Najd Brothers, especially regarding the conquest of Hael, and disputes over that points escalated during the conquest of Hejaz. The Najd Brothers wanted to begin with Hejaz, whose ruler Al-Sharif Hussein worked for GB, and not Hael as this went with the British interests who hated leaders of the tribe of Shamar who allied itself to the Ottomans. The king retained his political vision and ordered them to conquer Hael first, to their consternation. This led the Najd Brothers to think that their king and imam had forsaken Islam by working for the interests of the infidel British (19). The more their king contacted GB, the more they felt that he became an apostate; this accusation was leveled against him in the Riyadh conference in 1927, especially regarding sending his sons to Cairo and London to study there. Things exacerbated as the British defined borders and when an Islamic conference was held in Hejaz with Egyptian and Iranian delegations attending it. The king of Egypt, the descendant of Muhammad Ali Pacha, was among the attendees, to the ire and fury of the Najd Brothers, who were prevented from attacking the Kiswah caravan coming from Cairo. Such events marked all subsequent military revolt of the Najd Brothers against the king.  

8- Religious fanaticism and xenophobia drove the Najd Brothers to hare and ear modern inventions coming from the West; however, they never objected to guns made by Europeans, because their Bedouin forefathers used them before! 

Religious fanaticism and fear of modern invention:

1- Wahabi xenophobia led to fear of modern inventions imported from the West, as they were items unfamiliar to the Najd Brothers who feared anything novel; as any novelty stirred their feelings of inability to use and cope with such inventions. And such fears could not be allayed but with denying such inventions using Wahabi teachings and swords instead of modern weapons used by GB to annihilate them later on within desert valleys near Jordan, filled with their corpses, in 1924.

2- Kishk writes about another type of fear derived from nationalistic feelings; isolated Bedouins feared and felt apprehensive against foreigners that might conquer and invade Arabia one day, especially that GB had occupied at the time Egypt like Iraq. Bedouins hated the guts of John Philby who came with such inventions like wireless, cars, and modern weapons (20). We personally disagree with this analysis of Kishk; Najd was never invaded or conquered by anyone throughout its history. People of Najd were the ones historically to initiate invasions of other regions near it in Arabia, and no one coveted to occupy Najd deserts. Thus, people of Najd had no previous experience of being conquered by Europeans, unlike the case in Egypt, Mesopotamia, and the Levant. We feel bound to say that Kishk, with his opinion, tries to impose his Egyptian culture of nationalism on the people of Najd, an obvious error of course.

3- There was economic fears part from the political ones; cars would have rendered camels and horses useless and profitless, especially during the annual pilgrimage and trade seasons. Thus, the Najd Brothers called the cars ''vehicles of the devils''. This funny stance reminds us of the stance of horse-carriages drivers when the tramway stations were built in Cairo!

When religious fanaticism turned into political opposition:

1- Thus, fear of and prejudice against modern inventions were part of fanaticism and extremism and were due to psychological, political, and economic reasons as well. Hence, the reasons and motives of Wahabi political opposition of the Najd Brothers, though seem funny and laughter-inducing to readers of today, they were serious enough at the time in the 1920s. Such political opposition included the Najd Brothers, many Wahabi scholars, and even many ordinary fanatical Wahabis outside the Najd Brothers. Each category of them had to reluctantly allow more room for modern inventions later on as per their degree of fanaticism; Abdul-Aziz was more open to novelties to draw benefits within his kingdom, with gradual introduction and usage of modern inventions so as not to shock the Najd Brothers and Bedouins in general. Yet, they protested vehemently against such things and the king had to bear with them patiently at first and tried to persuade them, until he had to punish some of them, but in vain. Reluctantly, the Najd Brothers allowed telephones to be installed only when the king made a sheikh recite the Quran through the phone to them, to refute that it was a diabolical invention (21).

2- Al-Assad writes that during his journey within the desert southern of Riyadh, accompanied by a servant and a guide from the Najd Brothers, this guide was infuriated when Al-Assad used his camera, thinking that this was a pagan thing endangering one's life and soul, and tried to leave both Al-Assad and his servant, Al-Assad tried to convince him that cameras were quite harmless and that if he left them both, they would surely lose their way and die of thirst. The guide was adamant in his view of leaving them out of fear of the camera, and Al-Assad had to threaten him at gun point to remain with them until they reach any city. Reluctantly, the guide stayed, under careful watch from Al-Assad and his servant for three days of this journey, so as not to allow him to flee. The guide complained to the judge of the city, and the judge favored the guide and commanded the punishment of Al-Assad; yet, the judge had to revoke his words when Al-Assad showed him a letter written and sealed by the king that showed that Al-Assad was the personal guest of the king and must be respected and never harmed, under the pain of death (22).

3- This story narrated by Al-Assad shows the cultural and historical background of Arabia at the time when the king and the Najd Brothers were foes; the Najd Brothers opposed the telephones and the king had to give his special guest a sealed letter for his protection. The king was forced to postpone introducing telephones to the kingdom because of the vehement protest and threat of revolt by the Najd Brothers. Wahba writes the following about the relation of the king and telephones: (…When the king saw telephones for the first time in Mecca and how they are useful in managing affairs and saving time, he wanted to have one in his tent outside Mecca to keep in touch with his men in Hidaa village, instead of using mules or camels to send written royal orders and decrees, but he had to give up the idea because of the protest of the Wahabi brethren who cut off phone lines as they deemed them vice to be removed by force. The king bore patiently with them, waiting for the passage of time to convince them later on. One of the brethren beat severely one of the servants of the king because he rode a bicycle, deemed by the brethren as ''horse of the devil'', as a diabolical novelty run by witchcraft. But the king punished that Brother severely to stop his aggression…) (23).

Footnotes:

15- Habeeb, ditto, pages 71 and 112:113.

16- Assad, ''The Path to Mecca", pages 32 and 33.

17- Kishk, ditto, pages 585, 588, and 701.

18- Habeeb, ditto, pages 103 and 104, and Kishk, ditto, page 701.

19- Kishk, ditto, pages 590 and 591.

20- Kishk, ditto, pages 589 and 735.

21- Umm Al-Qura Magazine, No. 208, 5^th year, 18^th of Dec., 1928.

22- Assad, ditto, pages 62 and 63.

23- Wahba, ditto, page 289.

From bigotry and extremism of the Najd Brothers into declaring themselves as more righteous and religious:

Firstly: the Najd Brothers declaring themselves as wiser in applying sharia:

1- Arabs before the advent of Islam knew from the Abrahamic traditions that fighting is prohibited during the four sacred months of pilgrimage, but they tried many times to manipulate the day that marked the beginning of the sacred months by postponing it: "The number of months, according to God, is twelve months-in the decree of God-since the Day He created the heavens and the earth, of which four are sacred. This is the correct religion. So do not wrong yourselves during them. And fight the polytheists collectively, as they fight you collectively, and know that God is with the righteous.Postponement is an increase in disbelief-by which those who disbelieve are led astray. They allow it one year, and forbid it another year, in order to conform to the number made sacred by God, thus permitting what God has forbidden. The evil of their deeds seems good to them. God does not guide the disbelieving people." (9:36-37).

2- Once Prophet Muhammad died, the Qorayish tribe overlooked such sacred moths within the Arab conquests, the crime they committed against God, violating the Quranic teaching and terrorizing innocent ones. This violation was worse than illegal postponement of the sacred months, prohibited by God as we read in 9:37. Later on, all Arabs fought and committed during such months for centuries inside and outside Arabia, and Wahabis were no exception to such violation of the sacred months.

3- Wahabis liked to declare themselves as wiser in applying Sunnite/Wahabi sharia texts and laws. During the lifetime of Muhammad, there was not but one source or text of sharia: the Quran. Quranic revelations have sometimes rebuked and corrected the behavior of Muhammad. Once he died, Qorayish led Arabs to commit the crimes of in Arab conquests and subsequent civil wars, resulting in the establishment of the Qorayish-led Umayyad Empire and the Qorayish-led Abbasid Empire. Such aggressions, massacres, and other atrocities committed within such periods entailed religious justifications, never found in the Quran; hence, the fabrication of hadiths (falsehoods and lies ascribed to Muhammad after his death) thrived as well as acts, history, and biography (Sirah) of Muhammad that have associated to him so many crimes and corrupt acts. In sum, a false character for Muhammad had been fabricated, which contradicts his true character mentioned in the Quranic text. Hence, new texts formulated the bases for new sharia laws that have nothing to do with the Quran and Muhammad. The Quran has been violated by countless volumes and tomes of the so-called interpretations, by distortions of its terminologies and meanings, and by fabricating narratives of reasons behind revealing such and such Quranic verses. Thus, such endless stream and shoreless and bottomless sea of vague and contradictory writings have put the Quran aside and created a new accumulated creed named Sunna. Wahabis, in their turn, added another literature of writings to the Sunna: the writings of M. Ibn Abdul-Wahab as more important than the Sunna, and sadly, more important to them than the Quran itself as well! This was a sign that Wahabis was a new creed that overwrites the Sunnite one, which is its root!        

4- Such Wahabi additions to the hallowed writings of ancient 'holy' forefathers led to more leaders among the Najd Brothers to claim themselves as wiser and more understanding of Wahabism and its texts in comparison to their master Abdul-Aziz. 

Secondly: bigotry and declaring oneself as more righteous between Islamic sharia and the Sunnite sharia:

1- Zealotry and extremism include holding religious views that prohibit the permissible (the halal), as per the culture of fanaticism and extremism. As we have read above, all new, modern inventions hated by the Wahabi fanatics were considered prohibited and devilish! 

2- Zealotry and extremism include adding things never existed before in the divine sharia of the Quran, especially by prohibiting the halal things and allowing the forbidden things. New tools and modern inventions are definitely outside this circle; they are not forbidden within any religious text. It is the use of them that should be put to question: if a knife is used for cooking, it is Ok, but when used as a tool for murder, this is definitely forbidden. Likewise, a gun is to be used for self-defense and defending the innocent and weak, not for invasions, crimes, murder, and aggressions.     

3- God prohibits adding views to the Quranic sharia: "O you who believe! Do not place your opinions above that of God and His Message, and fear God, Who is Hearing and Knowing." (49:1). Hence, the Wahabi/Salafist view of covering faces of women are against the Quran; all women must be identified within their IDs and character and faces like men, even God has told Muhammad this law specified for him alone: "Beyond that, no other women are permissible for you, nor can you exchange them for other wives, even if you admire their beauty, except those you already have. God is Watchful over all things." (33:52), which means that faces of women were NOT covered during Muhammad's lifetime; otherwise, how could he have seen their beauty? Women at Muhammad's lifetime were free to interact within all social, religious, and political circles equally with men with no niqabs (i.e., full-veil covering faces and the whole bodies as well) in goodness and in evil ways, in Yathreb city-state: "The believing men and believing women are friends of one another. They advocate virtue, forbid evil, perform the prayers, practice charity, and obey God and His Messenger. These-God will have mercy on them. God is Noble and Wise." (9:71). "The hypocrite men and hypocrite women are of one another. They advocate evil, and prohibit righteousness, and withhold their hands. They forgot God, so He forgot them. The hypocrites are the sinners." (9:67). Yet, within the Abbasid Era, the Ibn Hanbal doctrine sheikhs and scholars ordered niqabs as obligatory religious duty for women and entrapped them indoors to make them remain ignorant and backward for centuries. This falsehood began with adding lies and falsehoods and personal views to divine sharia in the Quran. The Quran commands chaste believing women to cover their chests and legs, and NOT their feet, faces, hair, necks, and arms; see 33:59 and 24:31. Hence, the Ibn Hanbal doctrine sheikhs and scholars did not like the Quranic commands and added to it wearing niqabs covering women's faces, hands, arms, and hair! 

4- A worse Sunnite and Wahabi crime is to permit prohibited things in the Quran as religious duty and to prohibit halal or permissible things in the Quran. Prohibited items in the Quran are very few exceptions in life. For instance, God specifies a certain category of women that a man cannot possibly marry and then allows a man to marry any of the women outside such circle: "…Permitted for you are those that lie outside these limits, provided you seek them in legal marriage…" (4:24). This means that permissible things in life are the rule, with few exceptions; prohibitions are not the general rule in life or in the Quran. Another is related to food items; al food items are permissible except four items: dead animals, blood of animals, flesh of pigs, and animals slaughtered for idols, gods, and saints; see 2:173, 6:145, and 16:115. Such prohibited food items are explained further in 5:3, and God allows eating such items in cases of extreme necessity and forbids prohibiting other food items outside this circle of forbidden food items; see 2:168-172, 5:87, and 10:59.         

5- Despite all this, Sunnite sharia laws add lots of details that forbids halal things (i.e., items never prohibited by God in the Quran) and allowing forbidden things and major sins mentioned in the Quran as such. For instance, Sunnite/Wahabi jihad allows aggressions, massacres, looting, invasions, rape, enslavement, and other atrocities as religious duty above all other duties; this occurred during Arab conquests of the so-called companions of the Prophet and within civil wars that followed them. Unlike the Quran that commands the capital punishment for murderers and killers, the Sunnite creed allows capital punishment for those deemed as apostates/infidels, those who stopped praying, adulterers and adulteresses, and other endless categories that fall under the Wahabi slogan of ''the promotion of virtue and the prevention of vice'', as per writings of Ibn Taymiyya.

6- Hence, fanaticism and extremism lead to adding corrupt notions to faith, by turning heinous crimes into religious duties and harmless acts into prohibited things, to the extent that most of things in life are prohibited by Sunnite Wahabis, and the halal permissible things became few exceptions! Not the other way round as per the Quran: the forbidden are exceptions to the rule of allowing all things in life. 

Thirdly: zealotry and declaring oneself more righteous between Sunnite sharia and Wahabi sharia:

1- Wahabism is an offshoot of the Sunnite Ibn Hanbal doctrine known for its fanatical and extremist stances; even Egyptians used to call any fanatic extremist as Hanbali, namely, a follower of the Ibn Hanbal doctrine. When Wahabism emerged, Wahabis applied the Ibn Hanbal doctrine with blood-shedding and violence. They even have forbidden music as the sound of the devils, except tambours and drums used during jihad wars. That was why the Najd Brothers condemned the Egyptian Kiswah caravan entering Mecca with music and singing chants within religious music, deemed by the Wahabis as forbidden things that must be removed by force, and they never allowed wedding ceremonies that lasted for weeks of musical celebrations (24).

2- Smoking as habit was never known during the Abbasid caliphate; yet, when it was known and practiced later on, Wahabis had forbidden it to the extent of killing anyone smoking in public (25). The Cairo-based Al-Azhar institution at the time represented non-Wahabi Sunnite creeds, and one of its sheikhs, named Al-Dijwi, asserted in 1935 that smoking is never mentioned in the Quran as prohibited because it is not mentioned at all, and one cannot prohibit something without a legal holy text, except ignoramuses who forgot that originally, all things are permitted with the exception of the prohibited things in the Quran (26).

3- Forbidding smoking was linked to the political interests of Abdul-Aziz after the conquest of Hejaz; despite the king's allowing of the Najd Brothers to forbid smoking, tradesmen of Jeddah beseeched the king to stop the Wahabi brethren from burning the 100.000 pounds Sterling worth of tobacco cargos. He had to oblige them so that his subjects would not lose their money in the first year of his reign over Hejaz, especially that he allowed Al-Ahsa people to dig for oil on return for paying him 2000 pounds sterling annually. The king had nothing to do but to allow them to sell the cargos in Hejaz on the condition of not importing more tobacco in the future; yet, selling it means there would be people smoking it. Hence, we see the difference between banners, mottoes and slogans raised by a theocracy and real-life situations that entailed political measures. When tradesmen felt happy at such royal decision, bearing in mind that tradesmen in all times and climes direct policies, they urged the king to remove sanctions regarding importation of tobacco, as the Saudi state would lose revenues and taxes it needed for its treasury. The king had to grant them their wish for economic reasons, to the consternation of the Najd Brothers, who prohibited taxes system of Hejaz because of tobacco. Yet, the king ordered his scholars to issue a fatwa that tobacco is not forbidden in Islam, as it is not mentioned in any Wahabi or Sunnite texts. Hence, Kishk writes that the people of Jeddah imported and smoked tobacco in spite of prohibitions of the Najd Brothers (27).

4- Thus, conquest of Hejaz caused disputes among men within the nascent kingdom; Hejaz was an area open to the world and its different cultures because of trade and pilgrimage, whereas the Najd Brothers with their isolation and close-mindedness held many inquisitions at gates of Al-Artaweiyya and insisted on prohibition of all new items never known to them before. John Habeeb writes that once a woman brought coffee beans from Kuwait and she asked the scholars of Al-Artaweiyya about if it was religiously legal to drink coffee. Habeeb writes that even as he was writing his book (i.e., March, 1968), no women were allowed to go shopping in the market of Al-Artaweiyya; instead, women would gather outside the mosque and tradesmen will show their goods to them, under the supervision of mosque imams. Habeeb writes that no woman was allowed to make her voice heard in streets; instead, they clapped their hands to draw attention of anyone. A daughter of the king Saud tried to get to the market of Al-Artaweiyya in her car, but the general public of Wahabi men smashed her car and forced her to retire to her house of residence. King Saud approved of their aggression and rebuked her daughter for violating traditions (28).

5- Smoking was an issue that forced itself on Abdul-Aziz, not just in Hejaz or Jeddah, but all over the KSA; he once sent a cigarette case as a present to Dickson when he visited Al-Ahsa in 1919 (29), and this gift had a symbolic meaning; as cigars and cigarettes entered some colonies as well. John Habeeb mentioned that within Al-Artaweiyya, smoking in public was prohibited in 1968 (30), but not in private. This means that the list of prohibited things by Wahabis has been shortened when the Najd Brothers were killed off.

Fourthly: political manipulation of fanaticism and extremism: declaring oneself as more righteous and wiser politically and religiously:

1- If fanaticism, extremism, and bigotry are derived from a political background, they are linked to declaring oneself as wiser and deserving to rule instead of a current ruler/regime, mixed with feelings of religious superiority as if the more righteous and pious ones deserve to rule the land and to assume the political authority and power within a theocracy. 

2- Here lies the ordeal of a theocratic ruler within all theocracies when faced with political opposition of persons declaring themselves as more pious within the man-made creed of the theocracy; the ruler must make some compromising between raised slogans and real-life internal and external problems. The religious and political opposition movements are usually assumed by persons that stick to the religious slogans and the literal application of them, and they gain more followers within brainwashed masses that might believe that such persons are more pious; piety within such societies consisted of more overt signs and appearance used in propaganda.       

3- Hence, the history of the third, current KSA is marked with the emergence of such Bedouin figures, previously unknown, like Al-Daweesh, Ibn Bajad, and Ibn Heithlein. If it had not been for the emergence of Abdul-Aziz to establish the third, current KSA, these three Bedouin leaders might have lived and died in obscurity like their forefathers, but they came to be known in the limelight because of their political opposition and military rebellion against Abdul-Aziz, as per the climate of a theocracy we have mentioned above. More details about the three leaders are found below.    

Footnotes:

24- Dickson, ''The Arab of the Desert'', page 128.

25- Al-Rihany, ditto, pages 141 and 142.

26- Huda Al-Islam Magazine, 1935 A.D., page 487.

Huda Al-Islam Magazine, 1349 A.H., No. 28.

27- Kishk, ditto, page 624.

28- Habeeb, ditto, pages 103 and 104.

29- Dickson, ''The Arab of the Desert'', page 127.

30- Habeeb, ditto, page 104.

Leaders of the Najd Brothers who competed with Abdul-Aziz for more power and authority:

 These three leaders among the Najd Brothers were Bedouin leaders who helped Abdul-Aziz to establish his kingdom, and they revolted against him later on; the king had fought and subjugated them before, and he taught them Wahabism in order to become the Najd Brothers who imbibed Wahabi teachings, but using the same teachings, they revolted against him as they claim themselves to be more pious and more fit to rule the kingdom. They opposed their king and militarily rebelled against him, but he defeated them eventually using the help of GB. Let us focus below on each leader and his tribe.  

Firstly: Feisal Al-Daweesh of the Mateer tribe:

The Mateer tribe:

1- This tribe was located south of Kuwait, near Al-Zulfi region. South of this tribe lived the tribes of Al-Ajman and Bani Khaled, the most famous tribes of the Eastern region. The Mateer tribe had about 1500 tent, making it a large tribe within Bedouin measures and traditions, and it included factions at the time as it used to have centuries ago (31).

2- The Mateer tribe enjoyed a high stature and fame among other tribes; if one tribesman of it was violated, the aggressor(s) would be crushed to death. Its tribesmen led armies and troops of other tribes, and they had unparalleled military prowess, which caused, along with their location, the tribe to be a point of contention between Abdul-Aziz (who conquered Al-Ahsa first at the time) and Kuwait, as both sides wanted to include the tribe within its borders (32). The Mateer tribe was a tool used to keep security in remote areas away from the reach of Abdul-Aziz, before he subjugated the whole of the Najd region later on, especially routes of caravans between Najd and Gulf ports (33).

Feisal Al-Daweesh:

1- Al-Daweesh was the messenger between the Mateer tribe and Abdul-Aziz until the whole tribe was controlled and subjugated by Abdul-Aziz by force and money (34). Al-Daweesh belonged to a faction of the tribe that was one hundred percent Bedouin, never related to cities or villages, and his faction had the most courageous men in fighting, and his father was Sultan Al-Daweesh and his mother was from the family of Al-Heithlein, from the tribe of Al-Ajman. She was the wife of a man of her tribe and family that was imprisoned for life in Turkey by the Ottomans. Her marriage was subsequently annulled by the Bedouins, as per their traditions, to allow her to marry Sultan Al-Daweesh, and she bore him his son, Feisal (35).

2- Al-Daweesh was known for being a highwayman, who was cunning, shrewd, and sly, raiding all caravans within his reach, and he used to change his allies and loyalties when this served his own interests. Al-Daweesh liked to raid and loot, until Abdul-Aziz fought him and made him repent and swear allegiance, and he was later on appointed by Abdul-Aziz as the ruler of Al-Artaweiyya colony (36). Such a post never changed the nature of Al-Daweesh; he stilled loved raids, spoils, and looting, as Abdul-Aziz said himself in an interview: (…Al-Daweesh was a Bedouin man with no religious beliefs at all, and he was one of our leaders with many disputes with us…his Bedouin mentality prevailed and his savage brutality dominated his behavior and whims…) (37).

3- The ambition of Al-Daweesh was shown when he would enter the capital, Riyadh, to meet the king, within a military procession like conquerors, according to Wahba: (…he would enter Riyadh like conquerors within a military procession of 150 armed men, and he would sit directly beside Abdul-Aziz, and never greeted any guests in the royal palace. He would not leave the palace unless the king would give him all that he wanted for himself and his tribe, such as arms, ropes for water-wells, slave-girls, clothes, and perfumes. Al-Daweesh was the only one that the king never refused anything…All people used to say that Al-Daweesh had no religion at all, he was a hypocrite who claimed to believe in Wahabism, but he was a false, very proud man…) (38). We conclude from this quote of Wahba that Abdul-Aziz had many possessions that included slave-girls or enslaved women filling his palace, and that Al-Daweesh cared to have his share of them every time he would enter the palace of his king, as Al-Daweesh considered himself as partner of Abdul-Aziz in all spoils like enslaved women, cattle, and clothes! This means that Wahabis used to enslave Muslims women!  

4- Al-Daweesh was convinced that Abdul-Aziz owed him a lot as Al-Daweesh was the reason why the king was enthroned over most of Arabia because he fought for him, and Al-Daweesh bragged the fact before everyone in all meetings he held during his military revolt against the king (39).

5- The Salafist/Wahabi ideology allows ample room for the more extremist fanatics to claim being more pious and deserving to rule, and such notion led Al-Daweesh to fire bullets at the tomb of Prophet Muhammad during the siege of Yathreb, and this act was resented by the Yathreb dwellers and drove Abdul-Aziz to dismiss him from his post as a military leader (40). Al-Daweesh wanted ardently to attack Yathreb and to massacre its dwellers to loot their possessions and to punish them for not surrendering soon enough, and Abdul-Aziz stopped him firmly, and later on, Al-Daweesh was defeated by the king twice and had to give up eventually, and he died on the 3^rd of Oct., in 1931, having been taken ill ''suddenly'' when he was placed, after his defeat, under the ''care'' of Abdul-Aziz. We suspect that he was probably poisoned by the king, but no historians wrote about that suspicion. As usual, the king took care after the family of the deceased. (41).

Secondly: Sultan Ibn Bajad Al-Otaybi:

The Otaybah tribe:

 The tribe of Otaybah was distinguished with its strong, powerful tribesmen and its countless camel. Its location allowed it to control the pilgrims' route coming from Jordan, as it was located between the middle of Najd and the east of Hejaz. It was not surpassed in number of tribesmen except by the tribe of Anza, but no tribe competed with it in controlling the middle area of the KSA. Some of the Otaybah tribesmen were Bedouins and some were city dwellers. This tribe was filled with fanatics and bigots whose extremism was not less than the tribe of Mateer. The Otaybah tribesmen had very good relations with the family of Al-Saud during the period when the Mateer tribesmen used to hold many disputes with the Otaybah tribesmen (42).

Sultan Ibn Bajad:

1- He was a descendant of the powerful tribe of Hawazen, whose mobile Bedouins moved within Riyadh and Mecca. After his tribesmen converted to Wahabism collectively, they moved to the colony of Al-Ghatghat and other colonies. Ibn Bajad was known for his tribal fanaticism, bigotry, strictness, and firmness, and thus, he joined the Najd Brothers easily as their traits of 'piety' matched his character traits. Ibn Bajad had but one trait that differed from traits of Al-Daweesh; Al-Daweesh lived within city lifestyles and moved a lot among regions like Al-Ahsa, Kuwait, Gulf ports, and Basra, and he dealt peacefully with the Ottomans and Turks. On the contrary, Ibn Bajad lived mostly within Bedouin deserts of the middle of the KSA and he used to seeing nothing but sands and rocks, until he conquered Mecca, and thus, Ibn Bajad used to attack and chase all foreigners in Mecca to kill them off, unlike Al-Daweesh who used to deal peacefully with Europeans.   

2- Hence, the savagery and brutality of Ibn Bajad won so many battles for Abdul-Aziz; Ibn Bajad used to hurl himself and his troops into battles and skirmishes without prior written permission of the king, and he used to commit massacres as in the cases of Turba and Ta'if. Later on, the king had to send him back to Najd, but Ibn Bajad expected large rewards from his imam and king, especially that his ambitions, like that of Al-Daweesh, were limitless, even before he joined the Najd Brothers; he used to led thousands of Bedouin soldiers to raid and loot caravans of pilgrims and tradesmen, massacring all of them after confiscating their money, possessions, horses, and camels (43). When Ibn Bajad converted to Wahabism and joined the Najd Brothers, his character remained just the same; he looted and massacred people of Ta'if just as he had done with caravans of pilgrims.  

3- Ibn Bajad began his revolt against his master Abdul-Aziz when he backed off from the siege of Jeddah, and he led the revolt against the king by declaring jihad in Iraq to embarrass the king with GB. Ibn Bajad attacked the Wahabi people of Al-Qassim area to loot and to confiscate their possessions. After the defeat of the Najd Brothers in the battle of Sabilla, Ibn Bajad surrendered himself to Abdul-Aziz who imprisoned him.

Didaan Ibn Heithlein and Al-Ajman tribe:

Al-Ajman tribe:

1- This tribe included many factions that used to live in the Najran area, but they moved later on to another area, named Al-Naqra deserts, near Al-Ahsa region. Al-Ajman tribesmen were more fanatical in their application of the Sunnite Ibn Hanbal doctrine, the root of Wahabism, and yet, their extremist tribal fanaticism prevented their being subjugated easily by Abdul-Aziz. They were forced to submit by the power of his sword. Whenever a chance they could get, Al-Ajman tribesmen would readily revolt against Abdul-Aziz or would let him down in times of need. The brother of Didaan Ibn Heithlein, Saad, was killed during battles between Abdul-Aziz and Al-Ajman tribesmen. When Al-Ajman tribesmen finally fought within the Najd Brothers on the side of the king, their only and primary target was to loot spoils, despite the fact that most of Al-Ajman tribesmen lived in colonies near their region, especially the colony of Al-Sirar, ruled by Didaan Ibn Heithlein, that housed 2000 men. When the conquest of Hejaz began, Al-Ajman tribesmen were reluctant to join the military forces of Abdul-Aziz. Finally, they let their animals graze within Hejaz lands for three months, unwilling to fight on his side. The king had to tell them to go home as long as they will not participate in the siege of cities of Hejaz (44).

2- Such tensions in the relationship of Al-Ajman tribesmen with the king led him to appoint a ruler over them and over Al-Ahsa, his paternal uncle's son, Abdullah Ibn Jalawy. Later on, Al-Ajman tribesmen joined readily the military forces of the Najd Brothers revolting against the king, as they bore personal grudges against him, and this resentment was expressed by their leader Didaan Ibn Heithlein against Abdul-Aziz because of his murdered brother, Saad Ibn Heithlein.  

Didaan Ibn Heithlein:

 He belonged to the biggest faction of Al-Ajman tribe, and he used to be outspoken in expressing his deep-seated hatred toward Abdul-Aziz, though the latter appointed him as the ruler of Al-Sirar, the biggest colony in Al-Ajman and Al-Ahsa. Didaan Ibn Heithlein never heeded plans of conquests set by the king, especially that he longed to avenge his murdered brother, Saad Ibn Heithlein, in 1919. His hatred of Abdul-Aziz grew more as the king punished him for being reluctant to join the siege of Hejaz, as he was a latecomer to it, by preventing him his due share of the spoils (45).

The link between the three leaders:

1- Al-Daweesh was a relative of Didaan Ibn Heithlein, because the mother of the former came from the same family of Heithlein, and the wife of Al-Daweesh was from Otaybah tribe, linking Al-Daweesh with Ibn Bajad as his one of his in-laws (46).

2- Another link between the three leaders was their ambitions, as their respective tribes controlled the most important regions and routes of the kingdom in the north-west (Mateer), the west (Otaybah), and the east (Al-Ajman) (47). The three leaders expected from their master and king to rule parts of the conquered lands in the name of Abdul-Aziz, or at least to live in them for the sake of trade; yet, to their surprise, the king appointed rulers from among his family members exclusively. When their hopes were dashed as far as political rule was concerned, they accused their king of apostasy and declared themselves more fit to rule and more pious, righteous, and loyal to the Wahabi faith than Abdul-Aziz. Sultan Ibn Bajad changed his name into Sultan Eddine, to declare himself among all tribes as sultan/caliph and supreme ruler instead of Abdul-Aziz. The followers of Ibn Bajad made military processions and took pride in their 'sultan during the conference in Riyadh. Al-Daweesh expressed outspokenly his desire to be appointed as ruler of Najd, whereas Ibn Bajad coveted to be appointed as ruler of Hejaz, and Ibn Heithlein wanted to become ruler of Al-Ahsa (47). Abdul-Aziz could never have granted them such wishes; the kingdom would have been cut to pieces. The king had nothing to do but to firmly order them to get back to Najd, and they had to revolt and to begin their military rebellion against him, under the claim that they were more pious and righteous than the infidel king who forsook Wahabism.      

Lastly:

1- We conclude this chapter with excerpt of the letter of Abdul-Aziz about the Najd Brother after the battle of Sabilla: (…For three years, some of the brethren, especially dwellers of Al-Ghatghat, people under Al-Daweesh, and other fanatical bigots who took extremist stances in religion (i.e., Wahabism) had distorted and contradicted sharia laws (i.e., Wahabi sharia laws). They were haughty and arrogant, and some of them came from the Bedouin areas, and saw that their revolt was for the love of and the sake of religion (i.e., Wahabism). Yet, with the grace of God, most Muslims (i.e., Wahabis) knew that the brethren had gone overboard and rejected Islam (i.e., Wahabism) by their love to loot and massacre and their lack of piety under the pretext of religion (i.e., Wahabism)…We have gathered here scholars of Najd to undeceive the Muslims (i.e., Wahabis) about the evil people that we have defeated, and they bear witness to the fact that we have been patient with the brethren and advised them so many times before, to relieve and ease our royal conscience before Almighty God. Yet, our advice was in vain, as the brethren attacked fortresses within our borders with Iraq, and they wanted to deceive the faithful (i.e., Wahabis) to join them in such aggression for the sake of loot. When it was transpired that they were evil people seeking the transient worldly possessions by massacring others, we had to put an end to their crimes and aggressions, by first sending to them all scholars of the sharia (i.e., Wahabi scholars) but they adamantly refused to listen. When it turned out that they would not comply with sharia laws (Wahabism) and government (of Saudis), we asked God's aid to get rid of them using the Muslims soldiers (i.e. Wahabi fighters loyal to the king) to kill them off. There were few casualties among our Muslims soldiers. Most of the survivors asked for a royal pardon, as they were misguided at first, and we have forgiven them, with the exception of Al-Daweesh and Ibn Bajad, because they deserve sharia laws punishment as they were the root of evil and corruption…Al-Daweesh is taken ill and we do not know if he should live or not, and Ibn Bajad is imprisoned, and both men submitted to sharia laws punishment as they know they violated sharia laws by committing massacres… we regret to have had to kill the brethren, but we had to do it to ensure the safety of all Muslims in the kingdom, and may God forgive us and aid us in serving Islam and Muslims…The people of Najd feel safe and secure and happy now…) April, 1929 A.D./Shawal 1347 A.H. (48).

2- Abdul-Aziz in this letter says that his foes were fanatical and extremist bigots who violated sharia laws of Wahabism, but they thought of themselves as on the right side for their love of and the sake of Wahabism. He writes that many of the Najd Brothers fought for spoils and loot and political ambition using religion as pretext or cover. He seemed to have realized that the ideology and methodology of his foes were wrong and ignorant, leading to declaring oneself as more pious and thus fit to rule and to forever fight others as infidels who deserve to die. Of course, he meant Wahabism and Wahabis all the time, as we have shown in brackets. He criticized their military raids of Iraqi borders that led them to attack and kill some innocent Wahabi subjects of the king later on. He justifies his killing them off as they posed a veritable threat to peace and security of his subjects and as they never paid heed to advice and to Wahabi scholars. A confrontation was inevitable to annihilate them.

3- Finally, we see that Abdul-Aziz did not differ much from his Najd Brothers; he confiscated to himself and his men to speak in the name of Islam, describing the ones revolting against him as violators of faith and sharia laws. This was just the same treatment he received from his Najd Brothers as they described him as tyrant and a ''vice'' that must be removed by force as per Wahabi teachings. Both parties declared itself as more pious and thus more fit to rule. The decisive element in such cases as these was the military power and prowess – a useful, important lesson to be drawn!

Footnotes:

31- Umm Al-Qura Magazine, No. 298, 6^th year, 21^st Aug., 1930.

32- Howarth, ''The Desert King'', page 155.

Armstrong, ''Lord of Arabia'', page 66.

33- Lughat Al-Arab Magazine, Vol. 7, 3^rd year, page 388, Jan. 1914.

34- Al-Muqattam, No. 12268, 41^st year, 29^th June, 1929, an interview with Abdul-Aziz Al-Saud.

35- Al-Zarkeley, ''Arabia in the Reign of Abdul-Aziz'', page 464.

36- Al-Mukhtar, ditto, page 145.

Assad, ditto, pages 262 and 263.

Al-Zarkeley, ditto, page 465

Dickson, ditto, page 281.

37- Al-Muqattam, No. 12268, 41^st year, 9^th June, 1929.

38- Wahba, ditto, page 399.

39- Al-Khateeb, ''Abdul-Aziz the Just Imam'', page 172.

40- Al-Muqattam, No. 12203, 41^st year, 11^th Apr. 1929.

Al-Zarkeley, ditto, page 471.

41- Dickson, ''Kuwait and her Neighbors'', page 326 and 327.

42- Al-Muqattam, No. 12268, 41^st year.

Al-Zarkeley, ditto, page 467.

Hamza (Fouad), '''Heart of Arabia", page 177.

Arslan (Shakib), ditto, page 141.

43- Meullen, op. cit., page 66.

Howarth, op. cit., pages 167:170.

44- Al-Heidary, "Onwan Al-Majd in Chronicles of Baghdad, Basra, and Najd", pages 204 and 205.

Al-Zarkeley, ditto, pages 465 and 466.

Qassim, "The Arabian Gulf", pages 52:55.

45- Al-Rihany, ditto, page 414.

Al-Zarkeley, ditto, page 466.

46- Armstrong, op. cit., page 215.

47- Assad, ditto, pages 262, 263, and 268.

Habeeb, ditto, pages 202, 212, and 224.

48- Wahba, ''Fifty Years in Arabia'', quoted by Jalal Kishk, pages 660 and 661.

ANNEX to CHAPTER IV: an article published before in Arabic on our website in July, 2104, that can be a commentary on the above-mentioned facts:

Zeinab, A Donkey, and ISIS

Introduction:

  We have received this question via an email message: (Why, Zeinab, the granddaughter of Prophet Muhammad, was chased from one country to another as we read in history? Had she any written will which was dictated by Prophet Muhammad? Would you kindly, with your expertise in history, please clarify this matter?). The answer to these queries is found by the end of this chapter, to link the miserable present with the more miserable past.

Firstly: Zeinab:

1- This historical character, descendant of Fatima, Muhammad's daughter, and Ali Ibn Abou Talib, is mentioned within the historical accounts of the Karbala battle, within the well-known audience between her and the second Umayyad caliph Yazeed Ibn Mu'aweiya, in Damascus. She later on returned to her birth-place, Yathreb, along with her remaining relatives who survived the Karbala massacre. It is claimed that she brought with her the severed head of Al-Hussein, which was buried in the area of Al-Biqee' area in Yathreb. Later on, a revolt against the Umayyads broke out in Yathreb. An Umayyad army was sent there, and it crushed and quelled this revolt, after episodes of mass-killings, rape, robbing, stealing, among other crimes, in Yathreb. This battle is called in history, the battle of Al-Hurrah, a year after the Karbala battle. We have referred to such events in detail in other articles on our website. We, as a researcher specialized in history, assert that Zeinab is never mentioned in history after the Karbala battle and massacre; no historical account of her is written after this battle is to be found at all after her return to Yathreb. Even historical accounts that narrate the battle of Al-Hurrah events never mention her name at all. We conclude that she had no role to be registered at the time by historians, who were shocked like the rest of Arabs after the Karbala massacre events.

2- All of the above-mentioned facts are in contrast with the myths written and propagated centuries after the battle of Karbala; when the cult of worshipping and sanctifying and deifying Al-Hussein (as a deity or a saint) and his sister Zeinab (as a goddess or a saint) became a major feature in the three earthly, fabricated, man-made creeds of the Muhammadans: the Sunnite, the Shiite, and the Sufi creeds. Some liars made up the myth that Zeinab fled Yathreb to Damascus, or to Iraq, or as some others claim, she fled to Egypt. In every location we mention here, i.e., Iraq, the Levant, and Egypt, shrines and mausoleums have been erected to revere and worship her. She became a cult of worship by the Muhammadans. This is polytheism and of course against the Quranic verses. The same cult included the worship and sanctification of the severed head of her brother Al-Hussein, which has its separate shrines and mausoleums. Hence, we have several tombs for Zeinab and the head of her brother! Of course, she had but one body, and her brother had but one head, buried in Al-Biqee' area in Yathreb. Hence, such several mausoleums and myths about Zeinab and her brother are mere falsehoods and a punch of lies that persist until today, just like the falsehoods of the three man-made creeds of Shiites, Sunnites, and Sufis, ascribed falsely to Islam.

3- Strange enough, Egypt never witnessed throughout the centuries of the Umayyad, Abbasid, and Mameluke eras the establishment of a mausoleum dedicated to Zeinab. However it has been established in Cairo, Egypt, in the Ottoman era, by an Ottoman governor in the 19^th century, when a Sufi person claimed that he had seen a dream that the soul of Zeinab had descended in that spot in Cairo! The mosque bearing her name was erected at the same spot! We have discussed and written this within two books we have included in the curricula of students in the History Department, Azhar University, in 1982. The titles of these two books are as follows: "Research in Sources of Religious History: A Practical Study" and "The Character of Egypt after the Arab Conquest". 

4- The first title, unpublished here yet on our website, is an unprecedented work in the field of history research, establishing a new methodology of history research in religious history of the Muhammadans; we are the first researcher to create such methodology. The book tackles the Muhammadans' religious history sources and offers analytical study of them, along with practical application concerning how to glean and draw historical facts from them. Such sources are mostly unknown to most researchers, and they include books of Sufi feats of saints, books of pilgrimage spots of 'holy' saints' tombs, and books of social and religious aspects of life around such tombs. Among such books in the Mameluke era in Egypt the one titled "Al-Kawakib Al-Sayyarah" by Ibn Al-Zayyat and the other one titled "Tohfat Al-Ahbab" by the Sufi author Al-Sakhawy. We have written the following about these two books: both books mention all famous and all less-than-famous shrines or mausoleums and all the stories connected with its buried male or female saint, especially if the dead ones claimed to be descendants of Prophet Muhammad's progeny. Yet, both books never mention any mausoleum for Zeinab. It is never mentioned in other ancient historical books like "Al-Intessar" by Ibn Daqmaq and "Khetat Al-Makrizi" by Al-Makrizi, and both tomes describe meticulously each area in Cairo and in Egypt. The reason: the so-called mausoleum ascribed to Zeinab has been a fabricated tale in the Ottoman era, based on a vision or a dream by a Sufi in 955 A.H. (1548 A.D.), and this mosque/mausoleum had been restored and renovated in 1173 A.H. (1759 A.D.), and then the Ministry of Religious Endowments (i.e. Awqaf, in Arabic) in Egypt built the current mosque in 1940 A.D. on the ruins of the old one. The myth has it that Zeinab, the daughter of Ali Ibn Abou Talib, came to Egypt in the last days of her lifetime. Yet, all history books and accounts written before and during the Mameluke era never mention her arrival to Egypt at all. Her assumed arrival would never have been ignored by historians of course, especially that Al-Makrizi in his books mentions all those who came to Egypt among the so-called prophet's companions and their later generations. The same was done by Al-Siyouti in his book titled "Husn Al-Muhadarah", in alphabetical order as well. Both historians never mentioned Zeinab at all, despite their keen interest in registering all names of Arabs who came to Egypt, especially those who claimed to be among the prophet's progeny.

5- In our book, published here on our website, titled "The Character of Egypt after the Arab Conquest", we assert and prove the fact that the Arab conquest of Egypt did not offer anything new to Egypt in the political and strategic aspects concerning its geographic location, nor such a conquest brought anything new in the religious aspect of Egyptian life. It is the Egyptians who had Egyptianized the creed of the Arabs; old Pharaonic notions and creed tenets were restored dressed into Islamic terminology, especially the cult of worshipping the goddess Isis. Our book proves that in the Pharaonic cults lie the origins of the deification and worship of Zeinab, or any 'holy' female figure, for that matter. Zeinab has been described using the same epithets given to the goddesses Isis and Maat, and later on Mary the mother of Christ, by our ancestors, the ancient Egyptians. Among such epithets are the following: The Lady, Our Lady, Judge of the Court, and Guardian of the Weak Ones. We have written in this book the following paragraph.

6- The holy trinity of the ancient Egyptians that held its influence over most non-Egyptians in the ancient world consists of Osiris, Isis, and Horus. This trinity went on during the Ptolemy dynasty in Egypt; the formal solemn oath in the Ptolemaic Era was as follows: "I swear by Osiris, Isis, Horus, and the rest of the gods…etc." and this trinity and the Isis cult spread in ancient Greece even before Alexander the Great's conquest of Egypt. Divine and sacred secrets of the Isis cult were dressed in Greek attire; Dionysius is akin to Osiris, and holy goddesses and female figures in Greek mythology resemble Isis. It is noteworthy that the Egyptian holy trinity was linked later on with Zeus, in the form of the god Serapis, who replaced Osiris, as the Greco-Egyptian god in Alexandria, along with the Isis cult of worship. Isis had its unique stature and reverence in the deep inner recesses of the collective minds of Egyptians for centuries; she is the mother of a god, Horus, and the one who suffered a lot for her husband and child against forces of evil. Isis cult spread in Rome as well and throughout the Roman Empire that united all countries around the Mediterranean Sea and the rest of the ancient known world by politics and trade routes. Icons and cult of Isis spread very fast that way by ships of trade roaming different seas. We remember the famous papyrus discovered in Al-Bahnassa, in Upper Egypt El-Minya Governorate, that goes back to the 2^nd century A.D. and mention all locations of the cult of worshipping Isis in the ancient world, and in Egypt. This papyrus mentions 67 cities in the Nile Delta alone, and 55 cities outside Egypt, arranged in relation to their countries' geographical location. The domain of the Isis cult extended to India, Arabia, Sinop port of the Black Sea, and Rome. Horus of course was linked to Isis myths as her son-god. Both were deemed the precursors of the cult of worshipping statues and icons of Madonna and child: Mary and her son Jesus. Another female trinity of goddesses is mentioned in the Quran as being worshiped before Islam in Arabia: Al-Lat, Al-Uzza, and Manat; see 53:18-19. It is clear that the second Arab goddess, Al-Uzza, had derived its name from Isis, pronounced in the Pharaonic tongue as Iza or Izzet, and then within slight changes in pronunciation by the Greeks and their adding the last /s/ sound, it had become Isis, and the Arab named her Uzza. Rome conveyed the cult of Isis to the rest of Europe, only adding more of the ancient rites of the goddesses and rituals, hymns, and feasts of the abbesses and clergymen given formerly to honor other holy female figures and goddesses of Europe. Hence, the Egyptian trinity was practically worshiped in the whole area of North Africa, France, England, Italy, Germany, etc. until the end of the 2^ndcentury A.D., when Isis was replaced by Mary and the cult of Mariology. The image/icon of Mary carrying baby Jesus, an assumed god/ son of the Most High, a falsehood refuted in the Quran, resembles statues of Isis carrying baby Horus, ad this Mariology cult contains the clear mark and influence of the Egyptian Pharaonic mythology. A European historian talks in his book about the icon of Isis spread into the world from Egypt, and mentions that Isis is reflected in many European goddesses as the Holy Mater: Demeter, Venus, and Aphrodite, Artemis, Cynthia etc. and that the stature of Isis carrying Horus inside a crescent mood relates the sacred feminine to the moon and to Mary carrying the holy child/god Jesus, inside and outside Egypt. Isis statues, altars, icons, and temples spread all over Europe and votive candles used to burn before them, with bald celibate male clergymen served Isis and her altars. Isis was a virgin goddess carrying her holy child; likewise, Egypt has given the world the image of the virgin goddess Mary carrying the holy child/god Jesus, replacing Isis in all temples turned into tens of convents and churches inside and outside Egypt. Al-Makrizi tells us in his book that tens of churches and convents held the name of the Virgin Mary during and before the Mameluke Era, with statues of her and Jesus along with haloes. Annual ceremonies to celebrate her birthday were attended by both Muhammadans and the Coptic Orthodox Christians, in the same manner when all Egyptians used to worship Isis centuries before. Coptic Orthodox Christians celebrate a certain myth that Mary and her baby son fled to Egypt to avoid the persecution of Herod, the Jewish Roman ruler of Judea, and they assume that in her journey, she passed through certain locations turned into churches and convents centuries later. Hence, the Egyptian collective mind linked Isis to Mary for centuries and Egyptianized the figure of Mary and moved it to the rest of Christendom especially in Europe and Asia. Hence, the same cult of the sacred feminine figure was repeated in the character of Zeinab, who reincarnated Isis when the Sufi creed dominated the minds of the Egyptians. "The Lady" was then title of Isis and Mary that was given to Zeinab as well after the so-called Sufi vision of establishing her assumed mausoleum in the Ottoman Era. All these facts refute the myth of the journey of Zeinab coming to Egypt carrying with her the severed head of her brother, Al-Hussein, to live in peace in Egypt till her death. Other history books assert that Zeinab returned to Yathreb to take care for the surviving progeny of her dead brothers, Al-Hussein and Al-Hassan, after the battle of Karbala, and that she died and was buried in Al-Biqee' area outside Yathreb in 62 A.H. and all books written in eras of Arab rule or dynasties in Egypt never mention the assumed coming of Zeinab to Egypt at all, despite the utmost care of historians to register all hagiology or history of the so-called saints, and the locations of their shrines in Egypt, in the Fatimid and Mameluke eras. Let us remember that Al-Siyouti died in 911 A.H. toward the end of the Mameluke Era, and that Al-Makrizi died in 845 A.H. All these facts assert that the origin of the Zeinab myth in the Ottoman Era was due to the assumed vision or dream of a Sufi charlatan, and the Ottoman ruler built her mausoleum in 995 A.H. and it was renovated in 1173 A.H. (1759 A.D.) by the ruler Abdel-Rahman Katukhtha, and later on in 1940 in modern times. Such mausoleum is nearly 450 years old; yet, it enjoys until now countless pilgrims in Cairo! It has become a major rite in the Egyptian religious life now! Zeinab has been later on called the Lady of the Divan, a title similar to the title of Isis in the afterlife visions of the Pharaonic Era: Judge of the Court. That is why the Cairene district that houses currently the Zeinab mausoleum is called Al-Sayeda District; namely, the Arabic word for the epithet given to Isis and Zeinab: The Lady. The Egyptians have made Zeinab the Queen of Heaven, Queen of the Dead, Goddess of all gods and saints, just like Isis and Mary. It is a historical fact that Zeinab never came to Egypt.

Secondly: A Donkey:

1- In 1984, A.D., we were giving a lecture to the students at Al-Azhar University. A student asked us: Did the Prophet's granddaughter, Zeinab come to Egypt? We told him that the definite answer is no, and that anyone who says otherwise is a donkey! The student told us that Professor Dr. Al-Tayeb Al-Najjar asserts her coming to Egypt as a historical fact. We replied fast: Then he is a donkey! We did not intend to verbally abuse any professor; rather, we assert that the donkey is used in the Quran to describe those who specialize in ancient volumes, tomes, and books, carrying them over his shoulders without understanding any of their contents. This description is used in the Quran to refer to errant ones of the Israelites. "The example of those who were entrusted with the Torah, but then failed to uphold it, is like the donkey carrying works of literature. Miserable is the example of the people who denounce God's revelations. God does not guide the wrongdoing people." (62:5). Such misguided ones among scholars or theologians are described in worse terms in another Quranic context: "And relate to them the story of him to whom We delivered Our signs, but he detached himself from them, so Satan went after him, and he became one of the perverts. Had We willed, We could have elevated him through them; but he clung to the ground, and followed his desires. His metaphor is that of a dog: if you chase it, it pants; and if you leave it alone, it pants. Such is the metaphor of the people who deny Our signs. So tell the tale, so that they may ponder. Evil is the metaphor of the people who reject Our signs and wrong themselves. Whomever God guides is the guided one. And whomever He sends astray-these are the losers. We have destined for Hell multitudes of jinn and humans. They have hearts with which they do not understand. They have eyes with which they do not see. They have ears with which they do not hear. These are like cattle. In fact, they are further astray. These are the heedless." (7:175-179). When the student asked us his question, Dr. Al-Najjar used to hold great authority and power within Azhar University. We repeat here that we did not intend to slander him or to verbally abuse him; rather, we described him as we saw fit to him: one is either to be a real researcher in history and ancient tomes or to be a donkey or jack-ass. This is not linked to posts or positions but to efficiency and creative scientific research methodology. Without all that, experts in history resemble donkeys! Such type of donkeys spread in millions within the so-called researchers and University professors in the countries of the Muhammadans, and they spread ignorance disguised as facts believed by the common gullible people.

2- Dr. Al-Najjar was among the typical Azharite people who held high positions. He used to be our teacher in the First Year, History Department, Azhar University, in 1969 A.D. Once we read his book titled "History of Prophets", we deiced never to attend his lectures, and later on all other lectures in the Department. We returned at the time to our governorate to work as a private-school teacher in the Delta city of Hehya, Al-Sharqiyah Governorate, then the headmaster of a primary school in our village, Abou Herez, from 1971 to 1973. We returned to Cairo when we were appointed as a teacher in the History Department, Azhar University, after graduating with honors and high grades, in December 1973. We were thoroughly shocked by the ignorance of Dr. Al-Najjar and the rest of the staff in the Department. We saw at the time that it was a waste of time to attend their lectures and to stay in Cairo. That is why we returned to our governorate to work during the years mentioned above. We decided that it was enough to buy the curricula books and to study them before exams. We used to get high grades/scores with honors and became the highest students in degrees upon graduation, and that is why we were appointed in the staff of the Department, whose head was Dr. Al-Najjar (from 1969 to 1973). Late Egyptian President Sadat chose Dr. Al-Najjar as the Deputy of Azhar University in 1978, during which we were in a dilemma concerning our Ph.D. thesis, ending in a compromise: they wanted us to omit two thirds of the thesis and to discuss the remainder one-third alone in the viva. Dr. Al-Najjar was among the panel of Azharite scholars who discussed our Ph.D. thesis in October 1980. He praised us by saying: "You will cause trouble to researchers who will come after you", because we narrated an improvised synopsis of our thesis in flawless classical Arabic. Dr. Al-Najjar decided to impose this type of oral synopsis on others who will discuss their theses. Dr. Al-Najjar later on became the Head of Azhar University and was chosen in 1984 as a Member in the prestigious Academy of the Arabic Language in Cairo.

3- In our first year in the Department, in 1969, Dr. Al-Najjar put a book of his in our curricula titled "History of Prophets'', which we disliked very much and deemed it filled with errors exposing his ignorance. To our dismay, the same book was put in the post-graduate studies curricula. We felt insulted by this act; we were at the time a young teacher at the Department who had to study such ignorance to pass exams. Dr. Al-Najjar monopolized his specialization; he was the only professor who taught it, and he never cared for anything except to sell his scandal of a book to students! Other professors used to impose his book on undergraduate students to flatter him, fearing his authority especially after he left his post as the Head off Azhar University and concentrated his work in Islamic Civilization and History Department. When Dr. Al-Najjar commissioned us to teach his scandal of a book, we adamantly refused. We told him that we used to feel ashamed of ourselves to study and read it as a student, and we can never teach it as an assistant lecturer! We wrote our first book to teach it in our lectures, titled "Prophets in the Quran: An Analytical Study", along with other four books. Hell gates opened suddenly before us at the Department! We were suspended from work, interrogated formally, prevented from promotion, and banned from traveling abroad! We were questioned thoroughly in an inquisition-like court held in Azhar University with the usual accusation leveled against us: denying facts of Islam! Another accusation was defaming the stature of Azharite scholars! For them, contemplating the Quranic verses is a shame and a guilt that tarnished Azhar University! In our opinion, my endeavor was the embodiment of Azharite laws that stipulate the mission of Azharite scholars to elucidate facts and tenets of Islam.

4- Dr. Al-Najjar used to be among our chief foes in that affair, and he used to incite others against us. At the time, relations between Egypt and the KSA were cut due to Saddam Hussein's insult to Egypt when he held a conference for all Arabs and ignored Egypt altogether. The KSA-based and -sponsored Wahabi body called "The Union of the Islamic World" urged Azharite scholars to incite the Egyptian government to imprison or hang us, under the pretext of being an apostate or disbeliever! A conference held in Islamabad presided by the Pakistani (Wahabi) President M. Zia-ul-Haq in 1987, under the auspices of  "The Union of the Islamic World", and attended by a group of Azharite scholars including Dr. Al-Najjar. Attendees of the conference discussed his scandal of a book and our book of analytical study on prophets in the Quran. The attendees gave Dr. Al-Najjar a prize and accused us of being a disbelieving infidel! The Egyptian attendees mentioned this accusation against us to President Mubarak. The same Wahabi union held another conference in Jeddah, attended of course by Dr. Al-Najjar, with the same accusations repeated against us and the call of our being punished somehow. We were the scapegoat to restore the cordial relations between Egypt and the KSA! Dr. Al-Najjar became later on the President of the International Center for Al-Sirah and the Sunna of the Prophet in the Egyptian Ministry of Religious Endowments in 1987, a center established by the KSA in Egypt to refute Quranism advocated by us. The KSA donated four million Egyptian pounds to this center, according to what is published by the Cairo-based newspaper "Al-Lowaa' Al-Islami". Such a center was never to be heard of ever again until now! It had no activities whatsoever. It seems that the four million Egyptian pounds went into the pockets of the Azharite sheikhs and scholars!

Lastly: ISIS

1- Eventually, mountains of religious ignorance begot ISIS terrorist organization.

2- ISIS apply what all were dreamed of by the Najd Brothers of Abdul-Aziz Al-Saud.

3- The Wahabi culture of ISIS is maintained, propagated, and defended by all Azharite sheikhs and scholars. For more than 30 years, Azharite students imbibed ISIS Wahabi culture; that is why some turned into terrorists who kill and destroy, thinking they serve God!  It is ironic that Egyptian governments spend on them billions of Egyptian pounds to teach them the ISIS Wahabi culture and then chase them to imprison and punish them when they apply this culture, the ISIS religion, in real life!

4- Those who attack and refute the culture and religion of ISIS in Egypt is put to prison once accused by contempt of Islam, or rather, by daring to refute the Wahabi religion of ISIS!

5- Even if ISIS ends, more ISIS-like terrorist organizations will emerge, as long as Wahabism thrives!

References and sources to this article in this ANNEX:

1) Al-Abaady, "Egypt from the Days of Alexander the Great to the Arab Conquest", pages 50 and 274.

2) Ahmed Badawi, "A Social History of Egypt", pages 28, 95, and 96.

3) Arman, "Religion of Ancient Egypt", a chapter titled ''The Egyptian Religion in Europe", pages 17:19, 101, 479, 483, 487, and 487.

4) Menassi Al-Qumus, "History of the Coptic Church", 3^rd edition, 1982, page 20, about the goddess Isis in the history of GB.

5) Wells (H. G.), "A Short History of the World", pages 168:169, from the chapter titled "Religious Developments within the Roman Empire".

6) Al-Makrizi, "Khetat Al-Makrizi", Vol. 3, pages 551, 554, 558, 559, 560, 561, 563, 565, 568, 580:583, and 599.