In 1162 AH, the Ottoman-appointed Sharīf of Makkah, Masʾūd b. Saʾīd. imprisoned the Wahhābī pilgrims that had come from Najd for ḥajj, based on a fatwā from his scholars that the Wahhābīs were disbelievers.
I repeat: This was in 1162 AH, the First Saudi State during this time was still a tiny political base in al-Dirʿiyyah. There was no huge empire, there was no expansion, there was no conquest, the Wahhābīs posed zero military threat to the Ḥijāz during this time.
Gerald de Gaury said: “During the rule of Sharīf Masʿūd, the people in Makkah regarded the fundamentalist Wahhābīs as fanatics and as having gone outside the religion. They had asked to be permitted to perform the pilgrimage, but this request of theirs was refused. The judge of Makkah repeatedly declared, openly and in public, that these people were not believers.” (Rulers of Makkah p. 214-215)
Muḥammad b. ʿAlī al-Shawkānī testified to that, saying: “As for the people of Makkah, they began declaring him a disbeliever and applying to him the name ‘the disbeliever.’” (Al-Badr al-Ṭāliʿ bi-Maḥāsin Man Baʿd al-Qarn al-Sābiʿ 2/7)
The well-known liar and enemy of the daʾwah, Aḥmad Zaynī Daḥlān, said: “After they established proof and evidence against them, Sharīf Masʿūd ordered the judge of the Sacred Law to write a document proving their manifest disbelief, so that the first and the last would know of it. He ordered those vile heretical disbelievers to be imprisoned and placed in chains and shackles. He imprisoned some of them, while the rest fled and reached al-Dirʿiyyah, where they reported what they had witnessed.” (Khulāṣat al-Kalām Fī Bayān Umarāʾ al-Balad al-Ḥarām p. 7)
In the account of the Najdī historian Muḥammad b. ʿUmar al-Fākhirī, he states: “In the year 1162 AH Sharīf Masʿūd imprisoned the pilgrims of Najd, and many of them died in prison.” (Tārīkh al-Fākhirī p. 133)
Sh Muḥammad b. ʿAbd al-Wahhāb said: “Yet the letters that the scholars of the Two Sanctuaries sent with al-Mazyūdī in the year of the imprisonment are still with us until now, and they explicitly stated in them that whoever affirms pure monotheism has disbelieved, that his wealth and blood are lawful, and that he is to be killed both outside the sacred precinct and within it.” (Al-Durar al-Saniyyah Fī Ajwibat al-Najdiyyah 10/77)
Sh ʿAbd al-Raḥman b. Ḥasan Āl al-Shaykh said: “What occurred of lessons in the war of the Sharīfs of Makkah against this Islāmic call and Muḥammadan path: they were among the first to begin hostility against the Muslims. They imprisoned their pilgrims, and many of them died in prison. They prevented the Muslims from performing the pilgrimage for more than 60 years.” (Al-Durar al-Saniyyah 12/20)
Wahhabis argue that Ibn Abd al-Wahhab's mass takfir of the Ottomans is justified because the Ottomans takfired the Wahhabis first.
In support of their stance, Wahhabis quote the Egyptian religious scholar Abd al-Rahman ibn Hasan al-Jabarti (1753–1825).
Al-Jabarti reports that the Ottoman army went to Arabia and expelled the Wahhabis from the Hijaz. This was after the Ottoman mufti declared the Wahhabis to be Kharijites and kafirs.
Al-Jabarti writes:
"A royal decree arrived in Cairo ordering the preachers in the mosques on Friday, from the pulpits, to proclaim: 'The Sultan, son of the Sultan'—repeating the word Sultan three times—'Maḥmūd Khān, son of Sultan ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd Khān, son of Sultan Aḥmad Khān, the Ghāzī, Servant of the Two Noble Sanctuaries.' He deserved to be described by these titles because his armies had conquered the lands of the Two Sanctuaries, subdued the Khārijites, and expelled them from those lands, since the Mufti had given them a legal ruling that they were unbelievers because they declared Muslims to be unbelievers, considered them polytheists, rebelled against the Sultan, and killed people. Whoever fights them is considered a ghāzī (holy warrior), a mujāhid, and, if killed, a martyr."
Unfortunately for the Wahhabis, al-Jabarti's report does not benefit the Wahhabi position.
In fact, all the scholars of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab's era considered him to be a deviant, and most also labelled him a kharijite.
This was because he takfired the world's Muslims, labeled them mushriks, and sought to kill them through jihad. Prominent scholars with this view included the Ottoman Mufti, Ibn Abidin, and al-Sawi.
The scholars of Ahl al-Sunna have two well-known opinions on the Kharijites.. The majority opinion is that they are heretics, but still Muslims. The minority opinion is that they are kafirs.
This is based on the hadith in Bukhari which indicates that they will pass out of Islam like an arrow.
Were the Ottomans right to takfir the Wahhabis? I don't think so.
But is the Ottoman takfir of the Wahhabis, comparable to the Wahhabi takfir of the Ottomans?
Not at all.
As indicated by the Ottoman mufti's fatwa, the Ottomans takfired the Wahhabis AFTER they exhibited classical kharijite behavior by takfiring all other Muslims as mushriks, and started killing them.
As indicated by the Ottoman mufti's fatwa, the Ottomans takfired the Wahhabis AFTER they exhibited classical kharijite behavior by takfiring all other Muslims as mushriks, and started killing them.
The Wahhabis did not takfir the Ottomans on these grounds. Rather they takfired them for following the positions of the four madhhabs on tawassul, istighatha, and ziyara.
The truth is that Wahhabis have never fought non-Muslims in their entire history.
Rather they takfired and fought the Ottomans, and eventually cooperated with the British in their genocidal campaign to destroy the Ottoman empire.
Then the Wahhabis supported the US and Israel in their genocide in Iraq, after takfiring the country.
More recently the Wahhabis have carried out a genocide in Yemen.
The truth is that the Wahhabis have cooperated in the killing of millions of Muslims, in these and other wars.
How many other groups have killed as many Muslims as Wahhabis?
When will Muslims hold these kharijite dogs of hellfire accountable for their crimes?