Part C – Takfeer in the Modern Times & its Sources

Some of the Senior Leaders of Ikhwaan Acknowledge Making Takfeer Without Evidence & They Confirm This in Their Books

 

From the Chapter

 

The Beginning of the Formation of Making Takfeer without Evidence & its

Causes in the Ummah

 

 

Part C

 

By Shaykh

Ibraheem bin ‘Amir ar-Ruhaylee

 

Taken from his book

‘at-Takfeer and its Principles’

 

Translated by

Abbas Abu Yahya

 

Al-Qardawi says:

“At this stage the books of Sayyid Qutb the martyr appeared, which represent the last stage of him making Takfeer that overflowed into making Takfeer of the whole society and breaking away from the others by declaring an offensive Jihad against all the people.”[i]

 

Fareed AbdulKhaaliq says:

“We have understood from what has preceded that the rise of the ideology of Takfeer began amongst the youth of some of the Ikhwaan in the prison of al-Qannatir towards the late 50’s and early 60’s.

 

They were affected by the ideology of Sayyid Qutb the martyr and his writings.  They took from his writings the idea that the present society is in pre-Islaamic ignorance and that Sayyid made Takfeer of the rulers and those ruled, that they disliked the rulership of Allaah since they were not judging with what Allaah had revealed and were pleased with doing that.”[ii]

 

Salim Bahansawee says in his book: (The law and the issue of making Takfeer of a Muslim):

“Indeed Sayyid Qutb quoted some of the sayings of Mawdudi, and some of the most prominent ones are in his writings, especially in volume 7 of ‘Dhilaal’ (In the Shade).

 

Then came a group of people who determined from this, and other statements, that the Muslims had become kuffar, since they pronounce a testification (la illah ill Allaah) but they don’t know its meaning or know what it contains. So no matter how much they pray, fast, perform Hajj and claim they are Muslims, this will not change anything of their disbelief (kufr).”[iii]

 

‘Alee Juraysha affirmed: “That these Takfeeriyeen are originally from the organization of the Ikhwaan, but they broke away from them, and made Takfeer of Ikhwaan.”

 

He mentions:

“Regarding this discussion, a group broke away from the major Islaamic group and in spite of them being in prison, this group resorted to making Takfeer of the major Islaamic group from whom they broke away from, because they continued upon their opinion of making Takfeer of the ruler and his helpers and, subsequently, of the whole society.  This group then broke up into lots of little groups all of them making Takfeer of each other.”[iv]

 

al-Bahansawee explains how this Jamaah divided itself in dealing with the Muslims. He said:

“At that point the people who had this ideology divided into two groups:

 

1- A group which made clear that it did not make Takfeer upon those who opposed them. Subsequently, those who didn’t believe in this ideology were not kuffar and it was held permissible to pray behind them. Also, that the wives of those who held onto this ideology were not kuffar, therefore it was not necessary to cancel their marital contracts.

 

2- The other group which held onto clear separation and proclaimed that their brothers, who did not hold the opinion that those who opposed them were kuffar, then they were also kuffar.  From among those who they make Takfeer of is the Jammah al-Ikhwaan and they even make Takfeer of their own fathers and mothers.

 

This group is called the group of ‘Takfeer wal-Hijrah’, although they call themselves: ‘Jammah al-Mumineen’ or ‘al-Jammah al-Muminaah’.

 

As for the first group, they preferred not to make their methodologies apparent, acting on two of their principles: spiritual separation and the period of weakness (Makkan period).”[v]

 

However, in reality, this ideology which al-Bahansawee tries to restrict to Jammat Takfeer and Hijra, is exactly the ideology of Jammat al-Ikhwaan, rather it is the ideology and ‘Aqeedah of Sayyid Qutb.

 

That which causes al- Bahansawee to say this is his great love and passion for Sayyid Qutb – which is clear from his book when he tries to free Sayyid Qutb from the ‘Aqeedah of Takfeer. [vi]  This is despite the fact that he previously acknowledged that this ‘Aqeedah was taken from the books of Sayyid and that Sayyid Qutb himself took it from Mawdudi.

 

What clearly shows this is Sayyid himself; he holds it obligatory to boycott the Muslim community -which he calls the ‘Society of Jahileeyah‘- and keep away from even the masajid which he calls ‘Temples of Jahileeyah‘.

 

He says:

“And here Allaah directs us to keep ourselves away from the temples of Jahileeyah and to take the houses of the Muslim group as masajid in which you can experience detachment from the Society of Jahileeyah.”[vii]

 

He also says:

“Indeed there is no salvation for the Muslim group in any of the lands where the punishment falls unless you separate from the people of Jahileeyah of your own community with your ‘Aqeedah, feelings and methodology of life, until Allaah permits the establishment of the land of Islaam and adherence to it.”[viii]

 

In reality, the ‘Aqeedah of the contemporary Islaamic communities of making Takfeer and behaving with the Muslims as though they are the disbelieving communities of Jahileeyah, is not limited to Jammah Takfeer and Hijra, nor to Sayyid Qutb alone.  Rather this ‘Aqeedah is deeply rooted and widely disseminated among many of the leaders of the Ikhwaan.

 

Perhaps from the most prominent of those who carry this ideology, openly calling to it, is Muhammad Qutb who singled out this topic in his famous book: ‘Jahileeyah of the 20th century.’  He openly made Takfeer of the contemporary Islaamic communities and different groups of the community in many parts of his book.

He says:

“As for the situation in what is called ‘The Islaamic world’ then it differs somewhat from the situation in Europe.  However, in the end it unites with it.  Just as Jahileeyah unites with the Jahileeyah that is in every part of the earth and in every passage from the passages of history, even if the features that distinguish this Jahileeyah from that one differ a little and the circumstances are distinguished from the circumstances of that one.

 

Islaam in this Islaamic world is strange to the people just like it was strange the day it began in the Jahileeyah of the Peninsula, the strangeness now is above that one, disliked by many.

 

Step by step in this chapter we will travel with different groups of people so that we can explain why they dislike Islaam.”[ix]

 

Then he mentions that from these groups who – he claims – dislike Islaam is the group ‘at-Tughaat’ (tyrant rulers) and he means by them the rulers!!  Also the group of educated people, artists, writers, story-tellers, radio presenters, boys, girls.[x]

 

Then he says:

“Those who are proud and arrogant and those who are weak are equal in this disliking.”[xi]

 

Then he asks by saying: “So, what then remains from the Muslims?!”[xii]

 

Then he lists the result:

“Indeed the people have fallen into kufr in this era, according to the light of knowledge.”[xiii]

 

Then he says optimistically at the end of the page:

“So, light and the glad tidings of this light will be due because of the amount of contemporary kufr, the amount of suffering of the people and the amount of oppression of the tyrant rulers.  (This light will be) Visible in darkness and tomorrow the Deen of Allaah will rise.”

 

The books of the other leaders of Ikhwaan are in no better state than the books of Sayyid and his brother.  This is not surprising since, according to them, Sayyid Qutb is the revered Imam, shaykh ul-Islaam, the reviver of the religion of this era in their eyes and the eyes of those who follow them so how can they oppose him.

 

The condition of Mawdudi and his followers in Pakistan, India and in other places is not any better than that of the Jamaah of Ikhwaan. Some analysts and researchers of Mawdudi’s books mention that Sayyid absorbed his ideology and methodology of Takfeer from Mawdudi, as was mentioned in the previous statements of al-Bahansawee.

 

Finally, I do indeed warn every person who has concern about his Deen against reading these books of ideology whose very titles indicate how far away from the religion they are.

 

So they are, as they are called, ideological books which means that they contain the ideas and opinions of their authors.

 

These books are no less dangerous than the books of the Philosopherswhich the Salaf used to warn against.  Rather these books are more severe; they are not based upon evidence, nor are they enlightened by the understanding of the Salaf of this Ummah. Rather, they make you go astray with Bida’ and misguidance. 

 

Their most prominent feature is that they lead the Ummah to their call of rebellion and disobedience to the rulers by claiming that the rulers have disbelieved and apostatised from the Deen.  This causes the youth to then abstain from the knowledge of the Sharia’ and the scholars and busies them with politics and entering into Fitn, so much so, that the evil of these books is widespread and its danger becomes great and through them many, many people are caused to deviate. No one knows the amount except Allaah. Indeed we belong to Allaah and to Him is our return.

 

 

All Praise belongs to Allaah, may His peace

and blessings be upon our final

Prophet Muhammad, his

family, his companions

and all those who

follow his

guidance.

 

 




[i] Ooleeyaat al-Haraka al-Islaameeyah p.110

[ii] Al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon fee Meezan al-Haq p.115

[iii] Al-Hukm wa Qadeeyat Takfeer al-Muslim p.50

[iv] Al-Iteejahaat al-Fikreeyah al-Muaasirah p.279

[v] Al-Hukm wa Qadeeyat Takfeer al-Muslim p.34, 35

[vi] See : Al-Hukm wa Qadeeyat Takfeer al-Muslim p.50,56,66,73,74,76,112

[vii] Fee Dhilaal al-Qur’aan 3/1816

[viii] Fee Dhilaal al-Qur’aan 4/2122

[ix] Jahileeyat al-Qarn al-Ashreen P. 328-329

[x] Jahileeyat al-Qarn al-Ashreen p.329-331

[xi] Jahileeyat al-Qarn al-Ashreen p.337

[xii] Jahileeyat al-Qarn al-Ashreen p.337

[xiii] Jahileeyat al-Qarn al-Ashreen p.351

%d bloggers like this: