What is Wahabism?

wahabism is a idiology that was created by Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab Ibn Sulaiman Ibn Ali Attamimi in Najd , Najd Plateu central Arabia during 17th Century, He Created his new Doctrine based on Ibn Taymiyah Al Haarrani's Teaching, we can Say that Wahabism is a branch of Hambali Madhab many Follower of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab denied to called as "Wahabi" or in other word they rejected that terminology, because according to the wahabi teaching they're doesnt make any new teaching but purrifying Islam by okly following Quran and Sunnah, but that's only a claim, in fact the Wahabi teaching is Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab's own interpretation on the two Islamic Sources, many Wahabi Teaching contradicted the scholar's exegis for centuries, or in the other word Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab have simmiliarity with rhe Quranis or what we know as the rejector of sunnah , in the sense that he doesn't folllow the generations of older scholar and make his own interpreation , Quranis does reject Sunnah and make their own interpration on Quran, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab make his own interpretation on The Quran but still using hadith , why we cannot doubt Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab's interpretation? the claim of reviving the tawheed is one sided, and the claim of what his own understanding of tawheed, he make his own interpretation and claimed that is the purest Tawheed? can we simply believe it because he is bringing few verses of The Quran and Few Hadith from the Sunnah, can we checking what older scholar interpretation on that verses and hadith? we can compare this to shiism in the Ilkhanate Mongol, a Mongolian Dyansty that Ruled Persia after the destruction of Baghdad, one Day the ruler of the Mongolian Dynasty want to know Islam, he want to revert to Islam but he is confused by the four Madhab, so he invited representativr of the four madhab to his court, and also a representative of the Shia, the four scholar from the four sunni madhab come to the Mongol court on time, and as the etique during that time they left behind their sandals outside the court, but the shia representative (some source said he is a shia scholar al Hilli) enter the court late and bring his own sandals to the court, the Mongol Khan become angry and ask him, "why do you coming late, and why do you bringing your sandals in? al Hilli said " i was Doubtfull to left my sandals outside, then i decided to bring it with me here, because i heard, Imam Shafi'i stole the sandals of propeth Muhammad PBUH", the Shafi'i Madhab Representative was so angry and said " you has slandered Imam Shafi'i, how can he stole the sandlas of Propeth PBUH, he doesn't even born during his PBUH's time" , then the shia accusing Imam Hanafi, the Hanafi Madhab representative respnd wtih simmiliar manner to the Shafi one , then the shia change his accusation toward Iman Ahmad and Imam Malik, whose representative also responded with simmiliar manner, then the Shia laugh, the Four sunni madhad representstive got confused, the shia then talking to Mongol khan he ,said "now His Majesty knew that their teacher even doesn't exist during the time of Propeth Muhammad PBUH, i , a shia is a follower of Imam Ali , cousin and son in law of the propeth Muhammad shalallahu alaihi wasallam" then the khan become a shia, and persecuting the Sunni, can we simply believe that shia? no , so we also cannot simply believe Muhammad ibn Abduk wahab is the recifer of tawheed and sunnah based on his claim for the Wahabi , in their rejection on the wahabi term they are arguing that Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab name is Muhammad not Abdul wahab , Abdul Wahab that argumentation is invalid because Imam Ahmad Ibn Hambal name is Ahmad but his Madhab is Named After his Father , that also happened on the Shafi'i Madhab , also in the Asharism, those all name being named upon the father, and ancestry of their founder not it's founder personal name other wahabi arguing that Wahabi is from al asma al husna , so it is sin ful to call someone with that term becasue that term has negative context, that argumentation is also invalid because the Qadariyah and Jabariyyah is also use name that taken from al asma al husna, also the sufi Order Qadiriyah that named after Shayikh Abdul Qadir Al Jailani, we know that sufi must be have bad sounding in the Wahabi's ears In fact Shaykh Abdurrahman Ibn Sahman, a relatives of Sulaiman ibn Sahman said in one of his book " al hadiyyah al saniyyah" that Wahabi is name for the Followre of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab, other simmiliar Statement are found in Al Duras Al Saniyah, and other wahabi book from 1800s-early 1900, the recently Shayikh bin Baz also said that Wahabi is a good name because it come from al asma al husna By the Way, the debate on the Wahabi term is a technicality , some Wahabi also said that wahabi is a sect from Morrocco , but that statement is anachronism , The Wahabi in Morocco or Tunisia has died long time ago, but the Wahabi that Emerge in Najd is known to the Ottoman Empire, even Sulaiman Ibn Abdul wahab , the older brother of Muhammad ibn Abdul wahab was the first who invented that term, they claimed that his brother has been "repented" but that's a controversies, because his brother only "repent" after being defeated in a two years war and after he got cught after fled to other region for years, we can suspcet that he his "forced " to repent by the Army of Ad Dar'iyya other technical argument that being use by the wahabi is they're right simply becuse they're still control Mecca and Medina, and many muslim in the west also think that the university of Madinah is the best University in the world, this argument is childish , because the sufi during the Ottoman and Sharifian rule, or from the Abbasid rule 😵 also controled the two city, salafi also never control Jerusalem, the sufi can control Three City, Baitul Maqdis is also the place that Dajjal cannot enter, and today it is under Jordanian Hashemite and it's surrounding area under the Zionist, if Wahabi are right because they control places that Dajjal cannot enter can we said that Zionist and Hashemite from Jordanian are Right ?, don't forget that the Jordanian Hashemite was the Sharifian Dynasty that rule 😵 Hejaz before Saud , so can the wahabi admir that back than sufism was right ? don't forget that the Ismaili Bathini Shia even took over Mecca during the Abbassid era, the Qarmathian broke away from the mainstream Ismailism of the Fatimid Egypt and do the worst behavior ever after the army of al Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, back then we know that the meccan are kufar during the Jahiliyah,the Wahabi Scholar in 1800s, when Mecca is still at the Sharifian and The Ottoman hand, Hamad Ibn 'Atiq once wrote a book about Mecca can be a Darul Harb or the land of Kuffar, but wahabi today using their control over Mecca and Medina as proof of their teaching?