This paper examines contestation within the Wahhabi stream of Salafi discourse over the notion of al-wala' wa-l-bara' (loyalty to God, Islam and Muslims and disavowal of everything else) in two historical contexts. The first episode of contestation arose during a conflict between two Saudi princes, ‘Abdallah and Sa‘ud, during the 1860s and 1870s. This conflict caused a heated debate among Wahhabi scholars because ‘Abdallah tried to fend off Sa‘ud’s challenge to his power by asking the Ottoman Empire for help. Since the Ottomans were considered to be infidels by Wahhabi scholars, ‘Abdallah’s call amounted to isti‘ana bi-l-kuffar, asking the “unbelievers” for help in fighting other Muslims. Although the majority of scholars sided with ‘Abdallah, a small but vocal minority claimed that al-wala’ wa-l-bara’ dictated that the rulers keep their distance from infidels. The collapse of the second Saudi state, partly caused by the lack of unity among the ‘ulama’ , was an important reason for future generations of scholars to adopt an attitude of subservience to the state. Because of this submission to the rulers, the notion of al-wala’ wa-l-bara’ as developed by most 20th-century Saudi scholars dealt only with social issues and aspects of personal conduct, incorporating the concept in their broader discourse of a strictly quietist Wahhabism. A recent episode of contestation emerged in response to the Saudi decision to allow US “infidel” troops on its soil as a precautionary measure against a possible attack by Iraq in 1990. From that time onward, several Wahhabi scholars have used the scholarly debate surrounding the 19th-century conflict to criticise the Saudi state in its own, Wahhabi terms. The Palestinian-Jordanian Jihadi-Salafi ideologue Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi (b. 1959) has been particularly instrumental in reviving an uncompromising interpretation of al-wala’ wa-l-bara’. By invoking the 19th-century scholars who had sided with prince Sa‘ud, al-Maqdisi not only turned one aspect of Wahhabi discourse against Saudi Arabia but also showed that al-wala’ wa-l-bara’ may not simply be the quietist doctrine that many Saudi scholars claim it is. In fact, Al-Maqdisi’s writings on this issue later became an important part of the anti-Saudi discourse used by Al-Qa‘ida on the Arabian Peninsula. This shows that the Wahhabi tradition is, at least in some of its aspects, a highly contested one and not a doctrinal core that is interpreted unambiguously among Wahhabis.