The Hempher British Spy Confessions – A Reliable Source?

In regards to this comment:

1. We do not have to even use the British Spy Confession to refute Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, I never have and never will have too

2. The book most likely was a strawman argument the the Wahhabiyyah cooked up so they could refute it and make it look like they won the day. They are known historically to do stuff like this, like for example the blatant admittance of distorting Tafseer Ibn Katheer, sunan Abu Dawud and even the sharh of Imaam Nawawi’s Saheeh Muslim.

3. He says theres no record of a Hempher! Well of course, if he did exist an agent would not be using his real name would he, unless he was Bond, James Bond! I am sure the British would fully give details of all their secret agents in public documentation! Hey Russia !

4. Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab may not have abandoned the five daily prayers, drunk wife and got funky with a British Christian, but he certainly argues that the majority of Muslims are ignorant of tawheed, Abu Jahl understands the kalimah better than most muslims of today, the pagans of the Prophet’s time are upon more tawheed than the Muslims of today and the Muslims of today are in the worsest depths of shirk like never before

5. With the new stipulations laid down in the Wahhabis understanding of tawheed, Muhammad Ibn abdul Wahhab argued it is permisable fo fight and kill such Muslims as Abu Bakr as-Sideeq waged war on those who said the kalimah but denied zakat. You see from history threre was a pact made between Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab that they would wage jihaad against the Muslims of the hijaaz [Makkah and Madinah] and Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhabs family would retain all religious authority whilst the Saudis would control the government. It was a clear Khawaarij plan to fight and overthrow the khalifah and ameer of that time.

6. In 1802, after the death of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab , on the first of Muharram, his son Abdullah and a Wahhabi army disguised as ihraamis requested that the gates to masjid al-haram be opened so they can perform the umrah. What the guards of the ka’bah did not know is that this large group had weapons concealed under their ihraams ready to takeover Makkah.

Of course all of these facts are not made up is some quick straw-man argument of a book called The British Spy Confessions but are in fact from the Wahhabi-Saudis very own books on theology and history. Refuting Hempher does not prove Wahhabism to be correct, it just refutes Hempher, which is a very un-needed source.

Donate to the Wahhabi Threat Project – Education and Research

Bismillah ar-Rahmaan ar-Raheem 
As-salamu Alaykum Dear Readers.

Saladin Publishing is dedicated to defending the faith, whether it is against the attack of false cults such as the Wahhabiyyah or attacks made against the holy Prophet [sal allahu alayhi wasallam], Qur’an or any other aspect of Islam. This is our mission statement. Defending the faith however consists of much effort and time, and also incurs costs. At times the lack of finance hinders much needed work and many good ideas efforts go to waste. Saladin Publishing not only wishes to offer translations of much needed Sunni Aqeedah texts, refutation of cultists, Muslim “apologetics” [the Greek word for defending the faith] and other educational ventures,  but wishes to advance in social media and make top quality professional websites, videos etc.

Please do consider that Wahhabis spend billions of pounds on da’wah materials, books, videos, TV channels, masjids, colleges. The Jews and Christians also spend bilions of pounds on media and other resources to defame the Prophet and religion of Islam.  No matter the odds, whether people choose to donate of not, it is the life mission of Saladin Publishing to defend the faith by whatever means we have.  We require donations small or large to help pay for the following

  • Research & Books
  • Professional translation & Proofreading
  • Graphic and Design, Video production & other media efforts
  • Website & Domain costs
  • Equipment
  • Printing & Publication of books and pamphlets

please do donate your rizq, skills or time generously

JazakAllah Khayr

in Uncategorized .

6 thoughts on “The Hempher British Spy Confessions – A Reliable Source?

  1. Well it has been proven that they were Jewish I am not so sure about the blood thing
    I don’t believe there is such thing as a Jewish blood, maybe Hebrew but not Jewish.
    well Several sources claim that Mohamed Ibn AbdelWahhab married one of the Ibn Saud’s daughters.
    I was actually answering Ali Hussain
    Well Zorg isn’t my name either lol
    But to show that we have been spoon-fed lies for generations unfortunately
    Thanks for your reply :-)

    • Well it has been proven that they were Jewish I am not so sure about the blood thing

      ans: Salam, I am intersted in evidence, it would certianly help my research.

      I don’t believe there is such thing as a Jewish blood, maybe Hebrew but not Jewish.

      Judaism comes from the Hebrew word Yehudim, which simply means tribe of Judah in English. Judah was simply one of leaders of the twelve tribes of Israel [i.e. Prophet Yaqub alayhis salam , hence why all the tribes are refered to as Yaa Bani Isra’eel] Yahud was the oldeerst son, it was his idea to sell Prophet Yusuf alayhis salam into slavery. The religion of the Jews has been named after the tribe of Yahud which – and Allah certainly knows best – is the most oppressive tribe of them all, as they banished and killed those from the other 11 tribes. Jewish blood simply means that somebody has the blood of Judah as ancesory, although the term Jew and Judaism is now loosely applied to anybody that follows Judaism, whereas tradtionally, your mother had to be a Jew to be a Jew. But now, accoring to the Yahudi agenda, they accept converts to compete with Islam and try and destroy Bayt ul-Maqdis and the Dome of the rock so they can buold their so called third temple.

      well Several sources claim that Mohamed Ibn AbdelWahhab married one of the Ibn Saud’s daughters.

      I hope to see these several sources in sha Allah. They would be helpful, although not entirely important. We know that Safia, the mother of the believers was a Jew in religion, but descended from the tribe of Moses, hence from the Israeli tribe of Levi. The very same bloodline that Esa alayhis salam is from. We should therefore have no problem with the actual bloodline. But none the less it is still interesting information and could connect dot to dot concerning freemasons and linage.

      I was actually answering Ali Hussain
      Well Zorg isn’t my name either lol

      no worries

      But to show that we have been spoon-fed lies for generations unfortunately
      Thanks for your reply :-)

      JazakAllah khayr

      • It is wrong for you to ignore the Hempher Spy altogether since it would seem you are giving no credence to it. Please read my analysis below:

        Abdul Wahhab and the British Spy
        ‘The Confessions of a British Spy’ is a book written by a British Spy named Hempher, one of many British spies, working in the early 1700s disguised himself as a Muslim, infiltrating the Ottoman Empire with the goal of weakening it and destroying Islam. He meets a young person in Basra by the name of Abd al-Wahhab whom he corrupts and flatters which leads Abd al-Wahhab to express his own views on Islam and found his own sect. Hempher recounts how he set about corrupting Abd al-Wahhab.
        According to Hempher, he is one of thousands of British agents with the assignment of weakening Muslims, to bring Muslims under sway and render Islam “into a miserable state from which it will never recover again.”
        As the sordid details of many of Abdul Wahhab’s actions, such as his inducement into many other unIslamic actions and practices such as Muta’ (a temporary marriage) and by Hempher, “to mislead Muhammad of Najd, Safiyya from within, and I from without“ have not been palatable to the Wahhabi/Salafis, they have put forward some arguments that the book is work of fiction. George Packer has characterised Hempher’s Memoirs as “probably the labour of a Sunni Muslim author Ayyub Sabri Pasha whose intent is to present Muslims as both too holy and too weak to organize anything as destructive as Wahhabism.” Bernard Haykel of Harvard’s Olin Institute for Strategic Studies describes the document as an anti-Wahhabi forgery, “probably fabricated by one Turkish naval officer”. A Wahhabi author Abul Haarith states that he finds no evidence of Hempher in computer database searches of libraries and books and mentions discrepancy in Abdul Wahhab’s date of birth mentioned in the book.
        It is advisable for the reader to read through, ‘Confessions of a British Spy’ which is available on a few sites on internet. Hakikat Kitabevi of Istanbul have published the book. It is published on its website mentioned below. The page numbers mentioned in this article refer to those in this book: confessionsOf%20ABritishSpy.pdf
        However, the book cannot be simply brushed aside as a work of fiction for the following reasons, all or the majority of them have not been considered before and are published here for the first time.
        1. The book does not exclusively concern Abdul Wahhab as his first mention is on page 23 of 73 pages of the book. Having read the book, the reader will conclude the author’s intention was to record Muslims’ weak points and how Islam could be weakened.
        2. ‘Hempher’s Memoirs as “probably the labour of a Sunni Muslim author Ayyub Sabri Pasha .’ This surmise is not correct. If the Sunni author wished to criticise Abdul Wahhab, Abdul Wahhab’s views were well known and there were numerous books and references available at that time to which he could refer to and mention which he could publish. There would have been no need for him to concoct the long introduction on British Government’s plans and intentions towards Islam before mentioning Abdul Wahhab. It is convenient for the Wahhabis to blame Ayyub Sabri Pasha for the publication since he did mention Abdul Wahhab and his beliefs in his book, Mir’at al-Haramain..
        3, The Wahhabite contend that there is no mention of Hempher in computer database of libraries. The reason for this is obvious. Since coming into power with the help of the British Government, the Wahhabi/Saudi regime, would have requested British Government for removal of any information about their leader and the British Government would oblige for political and financial reasons. Further, in all probability, a spy would not consider using his real name during his operations.
        4.. Ayyub Sabri Pasha was a staunch Sunni Muslim. The question arises if one wished to criticise Abdul Wahhab, why would he mention the following in his book at the expense of denigrating and destroying Islam:
        a. Some practices and beliefs of Muslims. How to adopt and avoid certain aspects of Islam as to avoid suspicion being found out and also endangering the insurgency plans. Pages 7-10.
        b. Details of 13 weaknesses and weak points of Muslims:” how they thought, what their weaknesses were, what made them powerful, and how to transform their powerful qualities into vulnerable spots” No Muslim, least of all a Sunni Muslim, would detail these just to expose Abdul Wahhab. Pages 46-48.
        c. Detailing a list of 23 beliefs and power sources of Islam recommended for degenerating and impairing. Would any Muslim do this? Pages 49-50.
        d. The book recommended to vitiate Muslims’ staunch spots and to popularize their weaknesses, and it prescribed the methods for accomplishing this. It advised on 14 methods, steps and actions to undertake in order to meet their objectives. Pages 50-55.
        e. The book advised on 21 steps for destroying Muslims’ stronghold. Pages 55-63.
        f. The book listed 14 articles from 50 page British Ministry scheme prepared for high ranking officials working in the Ministry for annihilating Islam altogether within a century’s time. Pages 66-69.
        If one reads through the plans and actions, he would come to the conclusion that no Muslim would even think of these let alone put pen to paper to destroy Islam in order to criticise Abdul Wahhab. Hempher happen to come across Abdul Wahhab and he took advantage of him and fell vulnerable to Hempher’s plans. So to suggest that a Sunni scholar wrote the book is preposterous.
        Further, it is obvious that such a thorough and detailed scheme for an individual to draw up even today would seem impossible and has to be the work of an organisation hell bent on damaging Islam.
        5. The detailed knowledge of history, geography and politics of the vast area would only be accessible to a large organisation and not to an individual to which the book is purported to have been written by.
        6. Critics mentioned some accuracy in Hempher’s account. This is bound to happen when we look at the history of that period today. The inaccuracies could have come from information gathered by the spies and some of it came from that they obtained from their contacts that could have been unreliable. In the overall context these inaccuracies are of minor nature such as a few years difference in relating an incident such as when Hempher went set out for the Middle East but at the same time choose to ignore vast information that support Hempher’s story.
        7. The Secretary at British Ministry had devised Hempher a subtle scheme for Abdul Wahhab to carry out, as follows:
        “1- He is to declare all Muslims as disbelievers and announce that it is halâl to kill them, to seize their property, to violate their chastity, to make their men slaves and their women concubines and to sell them at slave markets.
        “2- He is to state that Ka’ba an idol and therefore it must be demolished.[1] In order to do away with the worship of hajj, he is to provoke tribes to raid groups of hajjis (Muslim pilgrims), to plunder their belongings and to kill them.
        “3- He is to strive to dissuade Muslims from obeying the Khalîfa. He is to provoke them to revolt against him. He is to prepare armies for this purpose. He is to exploit every opportunity to spread the conviction that it is necessary to fight against the notables of Hedjaz and bring disgrace on them. “4- He is to allege that the mausoleums, domes and sacred places in Muslim countries are idols and polytheistic milieus and must therefore be demolished. He is to do his best to produce occasions for insulting Prophet Muhammad, his Khalîfas, and all prominent scholars of madh-habs.
        “5- He is to do his utmost to encourage insurrections, oppressions and anarchy in Muslim countries. “6- He is to try to publish a copy of the Qur’ân interpolated with additions and excisions, as is the case with hadîths.”
        After explaining this six-paragraph scheme, the secretary added, “Do not panic at this huge programme. For our duty is to sow the seeds for annihilating Islam. There will come generations to complete this job. The British government has formed it a habit to be patient and to advance step by step. Wasn’t Prophet Muhammad, the performer of the great and bewildering Islamic revolution, a human being after all? And this Muhammad of Najd of ours has promised to accomplish this revolution of ours like his Prophet.” Pages 70-71.
        If one looks at the result of the scheme, it becomes obvious that the Wahhabi regime today has put into practice and follows all actions mentioned above. Have these been as a result of a Sunni scholar’s plans or the plan of the British Government and its spies with inadvertent help of people like Abdul Wahhab and the Saudi Wahhabi regime in propagating their beliefs, dividing Muslims and harming Islam?

        • Thank you for your analysis, but there is very good reason why I do not give it any credence. Firstly, let us look at this source from a standpoint of Usul al-hadeeth. There is no chain for the book, no evidence in the British open source information for this book, the author is historically unknown and there is no proof that such a character ever existed, and the information therein, travel dates, etc places this Hempher character in a totally different generation from Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdil Wahhab. So, in effect, we are dealing with a unverivable document that has came out of nowhere, the author is unknown and the information is highly inaccurate. Should we use such a source or follow the principle laid down in the hadeeth of the Messenger of Allah, sal Allahu ‘alayhi wasallam, which stipulates that “whoever repeats whatever he hears, it suffices one to consider him a liar”. On this ground alone, I am not wrong to deem this as an invalid witness against Wahhabism. Unless I be unfair, solely wishing to chuck any odd brick at the cult no matter if I was right or wrong. In all fairness, I try my best to do justice to the truth and try my best not to make such blunders that would only undermine the veracity of the message of truth that I am delivering. I only stand on the bedrock on sincere research and there is no way that I am going to let anybody so I am wrong for that. A lot of the information you have given in your post also demonstrates good reason why the book should be brushed aside. Even the counter arguments would be invalid and would not at all be given any credence in a court of law. You see, the British have a thing called the Freedom of information act, and such works that would have been property of the British would have been catalogued, and especially this book, would have been kept in script within a museum. Yet we do not find such historical data to confirm this book. One can rave conspiracy all day long, but the facts remain, we have other documents in the British catalogue that clearly display the British’s dislike to the Ottomans and they have made no efforts whatsoever to bury this information. It can also be seen from documents of Winston Churchill that he was an enemy of Islam. Why should I refer to such a weak, if historical, book that has no supporting evidence to hold it up as a reliable source when we have enough authentic documentation from other historians, eye witnesses and Islamic scholars to tell the story. Seriously, would you as a judge, feel the need accept the one witness who truth is doubted when you have fifteen other sound witnesses? It just does not make sense. That’s why I find that those who tend to brandish the Hempher spy sources and an evidence against Wahhabism to be those people who are just looking for any odd stone or brick to throw at Wahhabism. If the Shaytaan wrote a book containing forty percent truth, should we adopt it? I think not, because if so then we would also be strong believers of the Bible, in which, I hope, we are not. I do thank you for your input and hope you do not get offended by my answer. I hope you can see eye to eye with me on this issue and understand why I cannot and will not use this as a source. JazakAllah khayr and wa ‘alaykum as-salam

  2. Ok let’s assume that this Hempher did not exist ? We do not need to prove whether he existed or not.
    Did Mohamed Ibn AbdelWahhab marry one of their daughters ?
    Are the Saudis Jews or not ?
    Did Prophet Mohammad saws warn us about the horns of Shaytan to come out of Najd or not ?
    Did the British put and help put the Saudis in power to serve the British interests or not ?
    Did Mohammed Ibn AbdelWahhab fall out with his father or not ?
    Was his father a great Scholar or not ?
    How much evidence do you need ?
    Just take a look at what they did with Mecca and Medina they turned them into a Masonic cities and the whole of the Arab Peninsula.
    And finally why is the country named after them ? Under which authority ?
    Are they using his doctrine yes or no ?
    We don’t need Hempher and yes you won’t find his name because spies have fictitious names, just like the name on your credit card is not your real name, it is a straw man.

    • Did Mohamed Ibn AbdelWahhab marry one of their daughters ?

      not proven

      Are the Saudis Jews or not ?

      Possibly Jewish by blood, it has been speculated that it could be possible for Ibn Saud

      Did Prophet Mohammad saws warn us about the horns of Shaytan to come out of Najd or not ?

      Yes, and even Ibn Taymiyyah accepts this hadeeth as being Najd and not Iraq

      Did the British put and help put the Saudis in power to serve the British interests or not ?

      Yes, it is well documented in several Encyclopedias that give historical accounts to Wahhabism, they also admit supplying them with guns and that Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab was the first ‘Arab to use guns as well as traditional swords

      Did Mohammed Ibn AbdelWahhab fall out with his father or not ?

      Yes, it is mentioned

      Was his father a great Scholar or not ?

      His father was a great scholar, but Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab had problems at early age learning under his father or any of the scholars of Najd as he deemed them polytheistic

      How much evidence do you need ?

      One, because we only have to be right once for the Wahhabiyyah to be deemed wrong and rendered as a false cult.

      Just take a look at what they did with Mecca and Medina they turned them into a Masonic cities and the whole of the Arab Peninsula.

      I have

      And finally why is the country named after them ? Under which authority ?

      It is indeed an occupation of the holy lands in line with the Picot agreement

      Are they using his doctrine yes or no ?

      Yes, it is clear from their sources that Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab and Ibn Sa’ud made a pact in that they would wage jihad against the Muslims and that the religious authority would be that of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s doctrine.

      We don’t need Hempher and yes you won’t find his name because spies have fictitious names, just like the name on your credit card is not your real name, it is a straw man.

      Well I do not know about that, but I will tell you that my name is not really Andrew Sanders at all. It is only a pen name

You are welcome to comment and ask a valid questions, however there are a few guidelines and conditions to your comments being approved. Messages like "your a heretic, you do not know what you are talking about, you have no knowledge, you are an enemy of Islam, stupid Sufi" are usually rejected. Consider your words carefully..

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s