The fourth Shirk is the keeping up of superstitious customs, such as the Istikhára—seeking guidance from beads
&c., trusting to omens, good or bad, believing in lucky and unlucky days, adopting such names as 'Abd-un-Nabi (slave of the Prophet), and so on. In fact, the denouncing of such practices and calling them Shirk brings Wahhábíism into daily contact with the other sects, for scarcely any people in the world are such profound believers in the virtue of charms and the power of astrologers as Musalmáns. The difference between the first and fourth Shirk, the Shirk-ul-'Ilm and the Shirk-ul-'ádat, seems to be that the first is the belief, say in the knowledge of a soothsayer, and the second the habit of consulting him.
To swear by the name of the Prophet, of 'Alí, of the Imáms, or of Pírs (Leaders) is to give them the honour due to God alone. It is Ishrák fi'l adab—'Shirk in association.'
Another common belief which Wahhábís oppose is that Musalmáns can perform the Hajj (pilgrimage to Mecca), say prayers, read the Qurán, abide in meditation, give alms, and do other good works, the reward of which shall be credited to a person already dead.[[93]] Amongst other Musalmáns it is a common practice to read the Qurán in the belief that, if done with such an intention, the reward will pass to the deceased object of the desire. Wahábís entirely object to this.
The above technical exposition of Wahhábí tenets shows how much stress they lay on a rigid adherence to the doctrine of the "Unity." "Lá-il-láha, Il-lal-lá-hu" (there is no God but God) is an eternal truth. Yet to the Musalmán God is a Being afar off. In rejecting the Fatherhood of God he has accepted as the object of his worship, hardly of his affections, a Being despotic in all He does, arbitrary in all His ways. He has accepted the position of a slave instead of that of a son. Wahhábíism emphasizes the ideas which flow from the first article of the Muslim creed. But
on this subject we prefer to let Palgrave speak. He of all men knew the Wahhábí best, and he, at least, can be accused of no sectarian bias. The extract is rather long, but will repay perusal; indeed, the whole passage from which this extract is taken should be read.
"'There is no God but God,' are words simply tantamount in English to the negation of any deity save one alone; and thus much they certainly mean in Arabic, but they imply much more also. Their full sense is, not only to deny absolutely and unreservedly all plurality whether of nature or of person in the Supreme Being, not only to establish the unity of the Unbegetting and the Unbegot, in all its simple and incommunicable oneness, but besides this, the words, in Arabic and among Arabs, imply that this one Supreme Being is the only Agent, the only Force, the only Act existing throughout the universe, and leave to all beings else, matter or spirit, instinct or intelligence, physical or moral, nothing but pure unconditional passiveness, alike in movement or in quiescence, in action or in capacity. Hence in this one sentence is summed up a system which, for want of a better name, I may be permitted to call the 'Pantheism of Force.' 'God is One in the totality of omnipotent and omnipresent action, which acknowledges no rule, standard, or limit, save one sole and absolute will. He communicates nothing to His creatures, for their seeming power and act ever remain His alone, and in return He receives nothing from them.' 'It is His singular satisfaction to let created beings continually feel that they are nothing else than His slaves, that they may the better acknowledge His superiority.' 'He Himself, sterile in His inaccessible height, neither loving nor enjoying aught save His own and self-measured decree, without son, companion, or councillor, is no less barren for Himself than for His creatures, and His own barrenness and lone egoism in Himself is the cause and rule of His indifferent and unregarding despotism around.'[[94]]
Palgrave allows that such a notion of the Deity is monstrous, but maintains that it is the "truest mirror of the mind and scope of the writer of the Book" (Qurán), and that, as such, it is confirmed by authentic Tradition and learned commentaries. At all events, Palgrave possessed
the two essential qualifications for a critic of Islam—a knowledge of the literature, and intercourse with the people. So far as my experience goes I have never seen any reason to differ from Palgrave's statement. Men are often better than their creeds. Even the Prophet was not always consistent. There are some redeeming points in Islám. But the root idea of the whole is as described above, and from it no system can be deduced which will grow in grace and beauty as age after age rolls by.
The Arab proverb states that "The worshipper models himself on what he worships."[[95]] Thus a return to "first principles," sometimes proclaimed as the hope of Turkey, is but the "putting back the hour-hand of Islám" to the place where indeed Muhammad always meant it to stay, for