Can anyone explain Wahhabism to me and how it's relationship with the House of Saud actually works?

>They altered the Quran removing verses that they accuse of idol worship of Muhammad.
So basically they treated the Quran like Mohammed treated the Bible?

I lived in America for 3 years and it was the shittiest experience of my long, wonderful life.

I appreciate you filtering me though, made it easier to avoid your lies.

Muslims always tell me it was created by the British to bring down the Ottoman Empire. They had spies all around the Muslim countries trying to find weaknesses in Islam. They would send women to subdue young Muslim men and fornicate with them. They'd have spies pretend to be Muslims and learn as much as they could. Some even converted and said fuck Britain.

Wahhabism was created by a spy feeding this young kid a bunch of misinformation about Islam, questioning everything making him think Shia Muslims were Pagans among other things.

How this spread to be what it is today I have no clue. Wahabbist books are banned from Islamic schools in most of the West, but is still taught in the Middle East, hence they're a fucking shithole. I have no clue if the story is even true. It's just what many Scholars and Imams tell me when I ask.

>They would send women to subdue young Muslim men and fornicate with them.
I believe that this may have not have been their goal, rather, that they were looking for military intelligence and the honey pot is one of the most common HUMINT tools.

They were basically race mixing. These women were Christian and would pretend to be Muslim marrying men and then slowly began swaying them against their beliefs.

The relationship between Wahhabism and the house of Saud started out as a political alliance between two nobodies - a petty Arabian princeling and a fringe scholar. Both needed each otherand neither of them would be capable of anything without the other.Bin Saud provided a small starting base and some prestige as a hereditary leader rooted in the fabric of Arabian clan society, while bin Abdul-Wahhab provided a convenient ideologythat could be used as a banner.

We should digress a bit by saying that in Islamic world political maneuveringswere, and still largelyare, disguised as religious movements. States were built around dynasties that were able to maintain their hold on power just as long as they were able to retain their legitimacy which stemmed from their piety. I know I am oversimplifying, but the main challenge to Islamic states came very often from religious reform movements that claimed that the rulers became decadent and steered away from religion. More than one Islamic dynasty was overthrown by such religious revolution.

Cont.

Cont.

The banner of religious reform provided by bin Wahhab gave bin Saud ability to punch way above his nominal weight. He was able to draw manpower from various dissatisfied groups that were always abundant among nomads and seminomads. Bin Wahhab's radicalism was doubling the numbers of available warriors. By labeling everyone else as idolaters, he made it legitimate to plunder them indiscriminately.

As we know, bin Saud's descendants managed, after several ebbs and flows, to succeed and build a state we now know as Saudi Arabia. This opened a new chapter of relationship between the Hause of Saud and the descendants of bin Wahhab. The latter are de facto the second ruling house of the state. They maintain almost interrupted hold on the country's most important religious offices and keep considerable influence on several ministries and other state organisations. The internal politics of the Saudi state are notoriously murky, but it is pretty safe to assume that the descendants of bin Wahhab play significant role.

It is conceivable that the Wahhabis might, in some undefined future, attempt to depose the Saudis. Their sway of religious offices makes them potentially extremely dangerous. It is no doubt then that the Saudi constantly bribe the Wahhabis with money, even more offices and state support of their mission to export their ideology. This had the unintended consequence of radicalizing lots of Muslims against the Saudis, including many at home.

This looks like someone throwing food to a giant snake in order to save himself from being eaten, while making the snake even bigger and more hungry. How big food supply do the Saudis have?

Purely the economics of this scenario makes me think it's Muslim anti-Colonial propaganda.

It was basically another plot by the Eternal Anglo to destabilize the Middle East, spread influence and acquire territory, and undermine the Ottoman Turks.

Hmm...
Makes a lot of cogent, well-argued points, but
is appealing to my anti-English bias.

/thread

/board

Whenever I see a Saudi I ask if he's wahhabi/sulafi and if he says yes I spit in his face. They are cancer not only to Islam but to this world.

I wouldn't pretend to understand the many intricacies of mulsim infighting
One of my good buddies was born in Iran (assimilated to the US nicely) some of his family is shia and some of his family observes zoroastrianism as does my friend, but he claims to not be so religious

in his words "the sunnis are just butthurt" because they don't have a direct blood relation to Mohammed.
>I kek'd

>pan arabism
>not a meme
What do arab shitskins have in common with nordic mesopotamian and egyptian people?

>nordic
?

He probably meant people from the northern parts of mesopotamia.

Let's not turn this into wewuz.

The language
The religion
The culture (although not the same, but very very similar)

>client state
>tip-toeing around a land mine whose only purpose is to absorb human volatility (refugees) in exchange for outside funding
>wealthy still have slave labor in the form of sri lankans, ethiopians, etc
>proud of barely keeping your nose above water

why

Fuck you i visit my grandparents in jordan for a month of every year and that places is fun as fuck

So this... is the power... of Wahhabism...

Anyway, Ibn Saud and Abdul Wahhab had an alliance. Abdul wanted to expand his "reform" and Ibn Saud wanted turf and money. The dream team started conquering their neighbors, till the Ottoman Caliphate put a stop to it. Thanks to a certain foreign power, the movement recovered and yada yada we have the modern puppet state known as Saudi Arabia.

Great post.

The Saudis export Wahhabism to keep it from building up in their own country.

The Saudi ruling family likes to travel to other countries and pay the local prostitutes to eat dog feces and similar things. They're pretty much manchildren.

And they support a movement/ideology/faction/sect/whatever-you-want-to-call-it-you-asspie that will gladly slaughter every last member of the House of Saud if the money ever stops.

Why does the anglo and its spiritual successor the US always ally with the most undesirable of partners?

Saudi's are Salafism, which is basically a political spin off of Wahhabism during the 20th century. It's still Wahhabism but they just changed the name for political purpose because Wahhabism has been hated on by Muslims since it's inception. Wahhabism rebranded itself as Salafism knowing it could not "spread in the modern Muslim world" as Wahhabism. They are exporting it to spread it, not to keep it out. They're basically the cause of all the civil wars, all the terrorist groups, and all the attacks like 9/11. And the west still gives them foreign aid. According to theorists, Wahhabism was created by the British ministry as a way to divide Islam and make them fight each other, making the Ottoman Empire weaker so they could fight. In Modern days it would still make sense that the UK and western allies would continue funding the growth of Wahhabi growth and terrorism. Kill off most of the Muslims, then sweep in and kill the rest including the Wahhabists and gain control of the Middle East and energy supply for most of the world. Also seems why Russia is opposed to helping the west because they had spies in the British Ministry and knew what was going on. That's why they are fighting the Wahhabists but have no problem with allowing Muslims in their country in general. They know Islam isn't bad, but the west's creation of Wahhabism is.

>Can anyone explain Wahhabism to me
It's a radical reactionary movement started by named agter it's founder Ibn Wahhab

>and how it's relationship with the House of Saud actually works?
The house of Saud gained power with the help of Wahabbis. Wahabbis have the power to fuck KSA up big time so KSA bribes them with positions in education and the justice system, as well as sending them abroad.

The Saudi monarchy themselves are not the biggest fans of Islamism from an ideological standpoint, given the fact that they are decadent billionaires. Qatar are the real cunts in this instance, and Turkey to a lesser extent.

Saudis did nothing wrong.

>oil

>no resources at all

Venezuela has oil too. Look what they did with it with their precious socialism of the 21st century, which was supported by every single intellectual in Western Europe and Latin America.

Except wahabs build shit out of some need to fucking show off.

Commies are more utilitarian. Sure China does that as well, but a good number of their projects actually does something more than just the worthless need to show off.

This sounds like the sort of scenario that would make one attempt to dispose of the other long ago

>China.
>Commies.
China ended gommienism for the same reasons as to what is happening in Penisuela right now.

It was supported because people thought they were going to implement socialism. They didn't. It's state capitalism.

This really isn't that hard.

I was under the impression it was just Chavez and Maduro doing Populism - Native American Edition while robbing everything not nailed down and on fire at the time
t. huehuehue

I'm old enough to remember 2006 and intellectuals like Noam Chomsky and Tariq Ali singing praises to Hugo Chávez.

It was considered socialism when it was going "well". It's not surprising that now that everything went to shit, they pretend they never supported it in the first place, and that it was just "state capitalism".

>HDI means everything

Imagine if the US gave Jehovah's Witnesses their own country.

Well, they did give Mormons their own state, and it turned out quite fine.

Mormons are like Sikhs. They're so divergant from Christianity that they can't be considered a part of it.

Wahhabi's are Ultra-conservative and take a very literal approach to the Koran.

Those who ride a tiger, and all that.

Such a relevant comparison

>bans idol worship
>still builds the most haram looking buildings that might aswell be pagan idols
>that one building that looks like a jewish dreidel

MUSLIM PROTESTANTISM

Maybe it had elements of both and could have gone either way.

Salafism=/=Wahhabism

Salafism is pure Islam. Wahhabism is pro-Saud bs

Salafism is wahhabism. The scholars and schools all teach from writings of older wahhabist scholars. Salafism is wahhabism. Not all wahhabism is salfism

Salafism and Wahabbism are the same thing. All wahabbists will call themselves salafists. They see the term Wahabbist as an insult.

There is no such thing as """pure islam"""(tm)

I work for the government and have a fairly good grasp on Arab/Islamic culture.

From my understanding, the two are completely intertwined. For the House of Saud, they get a religious legitimacy afforded to them by the Wahhabi clerics. Think of the "Divine Right of Kings", that sort of deal. The clerics back up the family's divine right to the throne. In return, the royal family gives the Wahhabis funding and a voice in the government, so that they can increase their reach, even outside of Saudi Arabia.

Wahhabism isn't Islam. Technically they follow the Qur'an and certain hadith but they don't account for verses that go against their ideologies and consider them forgeries. They ignore the Islamic history of the caliphate after Muhammad such as Umar and Ali which Muslims base a lot of their ideology on as well. They consider Shia Muslims idolators and kill them and think Sunni Muslims that aren't wahhabists are no different than Christians and Jews.

You can't really call them Muslims. Itd be about the same analogy as calling Mormons and Christians the same group of people.

It's a power sharing game between the Al-Sauds and the Al-Sheikh (their patriarch founded Wahhabism).

I thought Wahhab/Salafi spread due to some Turk writing a book about "Western decadence and degeneracy"?

Are you american? Why do US politicians support Saudi Arabia instead of pursuing detente with Iran? Why are they such hypocrits?

Cardinal Richelieu funded protestants everywhere except in France, where he harshly repressed it. In stranger lands they were a useful bunch to weaken his enemies, but a threat to his power at home.

Now imagine if protestantism had it's origin in France and Richelieu owed his power to the protestants without being explicitly one of them or the leader of the movement. Those are just even more reasons to try to weaken them.

the term Salafi was used long before Wahhab

He was based in the sense of being a fearless man capable of anything, including physical self-sacrifice, in order to defend his dream.

His dream itself was in hindsight pretty shitty.

people try to discredit Salafis, Deobandis etc by bringing up Wahhab who was basically a heretic.

And the term democrat existed long before the democratic party

>They altered the Quran removing verses that they accuse of idol worship of Muhammad.
which verses?

How is it heretic when salafi schools in Saudi Arabia and other countries teach from wahhabist works such as Kitab at-Tawhid?

I don't know of them removing verses like he said but wahhab ignored context and teachings of scholars throughout Islamic history. He basically had an outsider approach and made up his own ideologies. There's tons of writings and fatwas issued over the lifetime of him telling Muslims that His school is kaffir. That's why wahhabists today find the term derogatory and prefer to he called salafi. But its no different.

>More than one Islamic dynasty was overthrown by such religious revolution.

this sentence makes it look like it haven't been that many to support the claim in the sentence before that. I'm not sure if it's my english that lacks or your writing. I assume you mean that many dynasties have been overthrown for these reasons but I'm not entirely sure. Thanks for the post though, it explains a lot in a concise and seemingly educated manner.

>This looks like someone throwing food to a giant snake in order to save himself from being eaten, while making the snake even bigger and more hungry. How big food supply do the Saudis have?

I like the metaphor, but I'll add that this person feeds the snake with other people, and mostly his own kin to make it worst.

The original qurans opening chapter that Muslims recite during prayer reads :Guide us to the straight path, / The path of those whom You have favored, / Not of those who have incurred Your wrath, / Nor of those who have gone astray.

The Wahhabi Koran renders these lines:Guide us to the Straight Way. / The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who have earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians).

The Wahhabi Koran prints this translation alongside the Arabic text, which contains no reference to either Jews or Christians.

Just an example.

The original verse 5:65 says of the Jews and Christians:If they observe the Torah and the Gospel and what is revealed to them from their Lord, they shall enjoy abundance.

The Wahhabi edition adds that, in addition to Jews' observing the Torah and Christians' the New Testament, both must accept the Koran--that is, become Muslims--which nowhere appears in the Arabic text and conflicts with traditional Islamic theology. Mainstream Islam treats the Torah, the New Testament, and the Koran as different books. Wahhabism, by contrast, treats the Jewish and Christian scriptures as primitive editions of the Islamic text.

Because the meme of the underdog being a good boy is almost always false. Yet you need to make the underdog powerful if you want the big boy to fall. And more often than not that's exactly what you want if you're trying to exercise world hegemony.

that's the Muhsin Khan translation

Because it's a meme that american states are comparable to countries. Specially fucking Utah.

More than one = many

It's happened often enough that Ibn Khaldun made it the basis of his historiography.

This is so interesting to read about.

These two guys actually came together to form an interesting alliance, both political and religious in order to legitimise the other and their dynasties remain today.

You've got to have some kind of admiration for such a feat.

Is there any more to this?

Wahhabism was formed by Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab in the 18th century.

Unlike Sunni/Shia Islam which beliefs and practices are made mostly upon Hadiths and Sunna (narrations during the Prophet's time) and the Quran as confirmation,

Wahhab disagreed. He considered following the actions of Muhammad and his successors to be idolating. So he started making his own sect based upon the Quran alone and the teachings of a scholar Ibn Taymiyyah who was accused of anthropomorphism and insulting the Prophet. His ideology of Islam was criticized by every one, including his family. He had little followers and died leaving his book Al-Tawhid. Muhammad bin Saud married one of Wahhab's daughters and was a follower of Wahhabism. His successor, Abdul Aziz ibn Muhammad bin Saud, launched an attack on Hejaz in 1811. When Medina fell, the soldiers of tore down the sacred tombs belonging to Muhammad's friends and family and the residents of the city were killed. They practically killed a bunch of Muslims. They got BTFO by the Ottoman Empire when they heard about it. However, with the help of the British forces during a power vacuum, they reclaimed Hejaz and all of Arabia in 1918. In 1924 the Ottomans were exiled and the Saud family took over. Wahhabism was established as the official religion. Imams and Muslim judges belong to Wahhabism. They deemed it the Salafi Movement. Now, Wahhabism is spread through the press and education systems. Though it's called Salifsm, they're teachings come from the Al-Tawhid of Wahhab and the teachings of Ibn Taymiyyah that Wahhab followed.

Under conventional Islamic tradition, their beliefs and practices are contradictory and considered Innovators by the majority of Muslims. However to them and outsiders who also consider Islam to be the Quran and nothing else consider it pure Islam.

>Islam is based on Hadiths and Sunna confirming the context of the Quran
>/pol/ fag studying to become scholar because family is scholars
>comes across books of a retarded scholar that thought the Quran doesn't need context and interpreted at this will
>scholar thinks following the prophet's narrations and the scholars and practices of the first caliphate was idol worshiping
>/pol/ fag sucks all this shit in believing it
>family of /pol/ fags were actual scholars and Islamic judges and thinks he's fucking retarded and lets the whole village know
>/pol/ fag is butthurt and runs away after Father dies
>goes village to village trying to spread his autism but mostly got ran out after getting fucked in ass by swords and spears
>ends up in village ruled by Muhammad ibn Saud that follows a false prophet Musaylimah instead of Muhammad
>village absorbs his autism and spreads it
>successor of Saud starts the Salafi Movement. It's the same teachings of retard scholar that /pol/ fag followed but changed the name of Wahhabism because it had a bad taste in the mouth among Muslims
>kill bunch of Muslims
>help west kill Ottoman Empire
>rewarded with Saudi Arabia

Wahhabism is literally autism. It was created by a faggot who believed in a retarded scholar and was spread by retards who previously believed in a false prophet.

>they altered the quran
Found the retard

>The language

Please, Arabic "dialects" are far more diverged than Romance languages. There are also several pidgin languages that are still labeled "Arabic" for political reasons.

>The religion

There are millions of Arab Christian and Druzes. Muslims are split between a myriad of Shia sects and various Sunni schools.

>The culture (although not the same, but very very similar)

There's few in common between an Arab from Marocco and a Gulf Arab. What they do have in common comes from Egyptian TV.

>Impliying it isn't.

+1

Is this from Yemen Civil War?

It's a pride thing, which the U.S. should be over by now, but whatever.

We only have allies that insult us AFTER we're allied to them, not before. Also Iran, Russia, and China are all not afraid of calling the U.S. out on its imperial behavior, which makes the politicians angry in an "Ah! I've been found out! Shut it down!" sort of way and makes Americans angry because living in what they're told is a democracy makes it hard for them to distinguish between a people and their government, including in their case.

Not him, but I'd say it's less pride and more general ignorance leaving the administration vulnerable to special interests, plus bureaucratic momentum that's incredibly difficult to reverse once institutionalized. If our policies were strictly pragmatic then we'd have reached some kind of deal with the Iranians long ago. However the influence of Israeli and Saudi lobbying on top of important senators courting the Jewish-American and Iranian-American (i.e. refugees fleeing Iran's regime) vote. This was all set in motion decades ago, when Iran was attempting to gain regional hegemony over the Arab states by declaring itself Israel's biggest enemy and clashing with OPEC and the Ibn Sauds. Since then private energy and military contractors with some very powerful lobbies have worked their way into the Israeli and Saudi economies while the State department has geared itself towards diplomatic isolation of Iran, and just changing all of that overnight is next to impossible without mass coordination and popular will.

Same. Such a svenario is beyond retarded, not to mention doomed to failure and utterly undocumented, and it's just the sandnig variant of "we dindu nuffin"

Ignore everything this guy says.

Wahhabism was a Salafist reform movement started by Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab to cleanse the central region of Saudi of perceived paganism in local religious life. There really is nothing that separates Wahhabi doctrine from Salafism.

Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab wasn't well received by many tribes due to his extreme religious beliefs, but the Al Sa'ud tribe formed an alliance with him to give their tribe a religious mandate to subdue and "convert" the other tribes.

Nothing he said was wrong though. The Salfi Movement has been killing Shia Muslims up until even today. They are considered idol worshipers. Also any Sunni Muslim that doesn't convert Salifism is considered kaffir. No Shia or other Sunni sect follows these doctrines. And Salafis do punish for committing sins, unlike every other Islamic sect. Committing a sin is kaffir to them and people are flogged for it.

Everything he said was true besides altering the Quran. They interpret it very differently. Conventional Islam follows Hadith and Sunna confirmed by the Quran. Salifism interprets the Quran mostly without any context from Hadiths. They are pure Quranists but that isn't necessarily pure Islam. Pure Islam is arguably following the teachings of Muhammad, which inherently means using Hadith to confirm the context in the Quran as well as the practices of the first caliphate as they were close companions to Muhammad, and it wasn't until the 2nd caliph that the Quran was actually written and distributed.

Which is a contradiction because Wahhabism/Salafism consider the companions of Muhammad idolators because they asked for intercession and still practice to this day intercession from Muhammad. Yet Muhammad couldn't write and verbally reciting the Quran. Everything was written down in diaries and further ended up leading to the written Quran by the 2nd caliph. Yet all of these are idolaters, meaning they supposedly follow a religion that is against polytheism and idolators yet follow a book written by one. It's a paradox.

>Pure Islam is arguably following the teachings of Muhammad, which inherently means using Hadith to confirm the context in the Quran as well as the practices of the first caliphate as they were close companions to Muhammad
That's what the Mushin Khan translation does...

The mourning of a lost loved one is shirk because you idolate them by mourning, and will be killed.
A lot of Islamic militant groups make eulogy videos for member who have been killed. Would that mean they aren't Wahhabi? They also make reference to Hadith in their media publications.

meant to greentext that quote

They should make it a sitcom or comedy movie. Call it "Saud and Wahhab's excellent adventure".

So the meme that quranists are bros is just that, a meme?

Or for some reason they're different from wahhabist/salafists despite also folloing only the quran?

But saudis constantly shit on the USA and it's imperialism. America is the great Satan in Arabia just like in Iran, if not more.

If the sect doesn't allow jurisprudence and theology you can bet it's some autistic shit. Hanafi sect allows most jurisprudence and theology.

It's not that simple. Wahhabism isn't anti-Hadith at all, and in fact carry their literalism over into their application of the Hadith. The disagreement between other Sunnis and Wahhabis/Salafis comes down to their approach to the Quran and Sunnah and the styles of interpretation they prefer. They reject other Sunni jurisprudence and theology except their own, not jurisprudence and theology altogether.

Quranists are completely different.

Censorship is bad, except when we do it
t. West