Perhaps this very sermon of Abū Ghuddah furnishes conclusive proof that the man is merely putting on a show. In it, for instance, he declares tawassul (seeking Allah’s favor through intermediaries) to be permissible—a practice that the Imam whose palpable authority he so proudly upholds had in fact rejected, following the position of the other three Imams, as has already been mentioned. Yet when I questioned him about this among the seven questions, he refused to state that he agreed, for he knows full well that if he were to do so the people of his own town would say, “He has apostatized and become a Wahhābī!” And were he to announce its permissibility in the country where he is employed, as openly as he did in his hometown sermon, it would be clear to anyone with eyes that he is … and he might even be dismissed from his post!

Third: His persistence in making the accusation

Abū Ghuddah is still adamant in accusing the Salafis of what I previously attributed to him in the Introduction ⦗44⦘, where he said in one of his sermons in Aleppo:

“These Wahhābīs feel revulsion—indeed, disgust—whenever the name of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) is mentioned.”

It is obvious that, while delivering his sermon in Aleppo, by “Wahhābīs” he meant the Salafis in Aleppo and in other Saudi lands—those whose call to the Quran and Sunnah and whose fight against polytheism and innovation have deprived him of sleep. Accordingly, Abū Ghuddah set about vilifying and defaming them with slander and fabrication that, had it been true of anyone—Allah forbid—would have amounted to apostasy from the faith; Allah’s refuge is sought.

Nevertheless, Abū Ghuddah—may Allah deal with him as he deserves—has persisted in this false accusation, employing a little craftiness and circumlocution but a great deal of malice and ill intent. In his remarks ⦗7⦘ he reproduces what had already been attributed to him from the very source I cited, yet he adds two lines that I had omitted for brevity, then cites them together with the quoted line in order to rebut me. In doing so he is like a man digging his own grave with his own hoof. They are: