Militant Political Islam: Syed Qutub - I

Syed Abul Ala Mawdudi [Jamaat-e-Islami]

Taha Hussein [Egyptian Scholar - Committed Blasphemy against the Companions of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH)]

Hassan Al Banna [Egypt - Ikhwanul Muslimeen]

Syed Qutub [Egypt - Ikhwanul Muslimeen]

Syed Qutub [Egypt], Hassan Al Banna [Egypt], Syed Abul Ala Maudoodi [India-Pakistan] , Ikhwanul Muslimoon [Egypt], Jamat-e-Islami [Pakistan], Hizb-e-Islami [Afghanistan. Core of so-called Afghan Mujahideen or Warlords came from Hizb-e-Islami prominent is Gulbadin Hikmatyaar] are ideologically same, their literature contain deviant beliefs, bad mouthing Prophets [PBUT], bad mouthing Companions [RA] of the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH], innvoations [Bida'at], destructive and violent methodology which has destroyed the basic fabric of faith/peace/ norms in Egypt, Pakistan and Afghanistan. They are very qucik to declare anybody Infidel [Kafir] who is not in their party and they are even more qucik in declaring war against their own Muslim Rulers and that too in a very wrong way by wrongfully killing and looting.


"QUOTE"


Al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun (The Muslim Brotherhood) was founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hasan al-Banna (1906-1949), a Sufi revivalist thinker and activist. A group founded by Hassan al-Banna and which serves as an umbrella organisation to accommodate all and sundry, regardless of deviation in creed and methodology.

Following Britain's military occupation of Egypt, al-Banna's sensitivity towards Western imperialism was heightened due to his country's economic exploitation and cultural domination. Consequently, al-Banna saw fit to create an Islamic group which would oppose the secularist tendencies and corruption of state and society which existed by asserting a return to Islamic values and ways of life. He introduced this organization into Egyptian society by relying on pre-existing social networks. The group consistently attracted new recruits and established numerous businesses, clinics and schools. Appealing to a variety of constituencies, al-Banna recruited followers from a vast cross-section of Egyptian society by addressing issues such as colonialism, public health, educational policy, natural resources' management, Marxism, social inequalities, Arab nationalism, the weakness of the Islamic world and the growing conflict in Palestine.

Al-Banna did not begin or end his call with the basic tenet of Islam, tawhid (singling out Allah in all forms of worship), as was the way of the Prophets. Al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun have consistently overlooked the principal aspect of calling their followers to tawhid and forbidding them from polytheism, because these are matters which require time and effort to change, matters which people do not find easy to accept. Al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun were more concerned with amassing groups of people together rather than calling the people to the way of the Prophet (may Allah raise his rank and grant him peace).

Consequently, they accommodate every kind of religious innovator in their ranks, giving them a platform to openly call to their various contradicting beliefs. Amongst al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun can be found followers of Sufism, the Jahmiyyah (those who deny that Allah has any Attributes), the Shee'ah, the Mu'tazilah (a philosophical school of thought that also denies Allah's Attributes), the Khawarij (those who expel people from the fold of Islam due to their sins), modernists, and many others. This methodology of political expediency results in Islam's clarity being replaced with something that is bewildering and blurred. Allah has said,

"You consider them to be united, but their hearts are divided. That is because they are a people who understand not." Quran 59:14

As the group expanded during the 1930s, it quickly transformed into an entity which would become directly active in the Egyptian political scene. Directly confronting the rulers, the organization became highly clandestine. This religious innovation of secrecy can now be found in the other more dangerous sects such as al-Qaeda and Jamaa'atul-Jihaad. After a series of back and forth assassinations between group members and the government, Prime Minister Nuqrashi Pasha disbanded al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun in December 1948. Although it has pursued a considerably more peaceful approach to its call since the 1970s, they set the stage for the other Qutbist groups that would take up where they had left off.

It is from the fundamental principles of al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun that they consider the lands, possessions and blood of the Muslim nations to be theirs, as if these nations which they preside in were places of experimentation. Accordingly, they sacrifice generations and generations of people for the attainment of rule. They believe that they can attempt to search for different ways to establish the religion of Islam, as if the texts of Islam do not actually contain an outline and divinely set method in which to do this. Directly contravening the methodology of the Prophets in calling to Allah, they have yet to experience anything resembling success.

============ ========= ========= ===

Syed Qutub

Source: Baraa'ah Ulamaa il-Ummah Min Tazkiyah Ahl il-Bid'ah (by Isaam bin Abdullah as-Sinaanee)

Prologue

Over the past years, the Qutubiyyah have tried relentlessly to defend their leader and Imaam, Sayyid Qutb and to hide his great errors and calamitous statements. To this end they presented to the common-folk what they portrayed as Tazkiyaat (praises or certifications) of some of the Ulamaa and Mashayikh for Sayyid Qutb – whilst being ignorant, or pretending to be ignorant - of the principles of al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel. The true reality, however, was that this was a ploy to justify their innovated methodology and its repugnant principles and as a plot to introduce the concepts of Bidah and Qutubiyyah amongst the ranks of the Salafis and to prey upon the ignorance of the
common-folk.

This paper is a refutation of those Qutubis who try to make the mediation of Imaam Ibn Baaz for Sayyid Qutb prior to his death a justification of Qutb’s deviant creed and methodology and as a way of praising and propagating his misguided and heretical writings. Comprising the statements and refutations of the Imaams of the Salafi Da’wah and its Mashayikh against Sayyid Qutb and those with his affectations, this paper consists of excerpts from the book "Baraa’ah Ulamaa il-Ummah Min Tazkiyat Ahl il-Bid’ah wal-Mudhammah" , checked by Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan who made additional comments and notes and read over the book twice. The book was also read by Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Uthaimeen who praised it and made some minor changes to his own words that were quoted therein.

1. Fatwaa of Shaikh Nasir ud-Deen al-Albani

The Muhaddith and Imaam, al-Albani – rahimahullaah – said, commenting upon the book ‘al-Awaasim Mimmaa Fee Kutub Sayyid Qutub Min al-Qawasim’ of Shaikh Rabee’ bin Haadee, "Everything with which you have refuted Sayyid Qutb is the truth (haqq) and is correct (sawab). And it will become sufficiently clear from this refutation to every one who has read anything from "The Islamic Heritage" that Sayyid Qutb had no knowledge of the Usool (fundamentals) or the Furoo’ (subsidiary matters) of Islaam. So may Allaah reward you with the best of reward, O brother Rabee’ for fulfilling the obligation of explaining and uncovering his ignorance and deviation from Islaam."

Source:

From the Shaikh’s own handwritten letter which he wrote prior to his death in 1999. A photocopy of the original is included in the book itself as an appendix.

View of a Saudi Scholar

Some parts of the book of Sayyid Qutb ‘at-Tasweer al-Fannee fil-Qur’aan’ were read to him such as his speech about Moosaa - ‘alaihis-Salaam - upon whom he said: "Let us take Moosaa - as the example of the leader of excitable nature - and this excitable impulse quickly passes away and he regains his composure, as is the case with the excitable folk." Then he said with regard to the Saying of Allah – the Most High - "Fa as-ba-hu fil madinati kha bi fan..." :- "This is the description of a well known state: the restlessness or fear of one expecting evil at every turn - and this is the characteristic of the excitable folk." [‘at-Tasweer al-Fannee fil-Qur’aan’: p.200,201,203. 13th ....]

So the Shaikh replied to this: "Mockery of the Prophets is apostasy in its own."[*]

And is was said to him that Shaikh Rabee’ al-Madhkhalee has written a refutation of Sayyid Qutb, so the Shaikh said: "Rebuttal of him is good."

[*] And unfortunately the Qutubi movement clothing itself as Salafiyyah, has not only gone to the extremes in Takfir but has also fallen into the extremes of Irjaa’ in that it seeks to defend, nay even promote, the books and writings of their leaders and mentors which contain statements of disbelief and apostasy (examples will be given in Part 2, inshaa’allaah) . Shaikh Rabee’ bin Haadee said, commenting upon Imaam al-Albani’s description of the Qutubiyyah as "The Khawarij of the Era", that "it is more befitting that they be called Murji’ah of the Era before they are called Khawarij of the Era". Refer to al-Asalah (Vol. 24)

Source: During a lesson of Shaikh ‘Abdul - ‘Azeez ibn Baaz - hafizahullaah - in his house in Riyaadh 1413H, ‘Minhaajus-Sunnah tapes of ar-Riyaadh

3. Fatwaa of Shaikh ‘Abdul-Azeez Ibn Baz

A section of the book "Kutub wa Shakhsiyaat" (p.242) was read out to the Shaikh and in which Sayyid Qutb accuses of Mu’awiyah and Amr Ibn al-Aas of lying (kadhib), deception (ghish), treachery or trickery (khadee’ah), hypocrisy (nifaaq), and taking bribes (rishwah).

So he replied: "These are repugnant words!! These are repugnant words. Revilement of Mu’awiyah and of Amr Ibn al-Aas. All of this is repugnant and evil words. Mu’awiyah and Amr and whoever was with them made ijtihaad and erred[*], and those who perform ijtihaad and erred then may Allaah pardon us and them.

[*] Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan in checking through this made the comment, "Being resolved that they erred is not clearly apparent, but if it was said, "They were mujtahidoon, if they were correct they have two rewards and if they erred they have one reward, yet their error is forgiven", it would have been much better and more just."

The questioner then said, "What about his statement that there is hypocrisy (nifaq) in them both, is that not takfir of them?"

Shaikh Ibn Baaz replied, "This is an error and a mistake which is not disbelief. For his revilement of some of the Companions or just one of them is evil (munkar) and sinfulness (fisq) and he deserves to be given exemplary punishment for it – we ask Allaah to pardon him – however, if he reviled most of them and declared them sinners then he would become an apostate, because they are the Carriers of the Revelation. When he reviles them then this means that he is reviling the legislation. "

The questioner then said, "Should not these books in which these statements exist be forbidden?"

Shaikh Ibn Baaz replied, "It is necessary for them to be torn to pieces".

Then the Shaikh said, "Is this in a newspaper?"

The questioner said, "In a book, may Allaah be benevolent to you."

The Shaikh asked, "Whose book?"

The questioner said, "Sayyid Qutb…".

The Shaikh said, "These are repugnant words".

The questioner, continuing, "… in ‘Kutub wa Shakhsiyaat’"

Source: The cassette ‘Sharh Riyaad us-Saaliheen’ dated 18/7/1418H.

4. Fatwaa of Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Uthaimeen

Question: "What is your saying concerning a man who advises the Sunni youth to read the books of Sayyid Qutb, especially ‘Fee Dhilaal il-Qur’aan’ and ‘Ma’aalim Fit-Taareeq’, without warning about any of the errors and deviations present in these books?"

Answer: "My statement – may Allaah bless you – is that whoever gives sincerity of purpose to Allaah, His Messenger, and his brother Muslims, that he should encourage the people to read the books of those who have preceded us from the books of tafsir and other than tafsir. These books contain more blessings, are more beneficial and are much better than the books of the later ones. As for the tafsir of Sayyid Qutb – may Allaah have mercy upon him – then it contains great calamities, however we hope that Allaah pardons him. In it are great calamities, such as his tafsir of Istiwaa and his tafsir of "Qul Huwallaahu Ahad", and similarly, his description of one of the Messengers with something unbefitting. "

Source: From the Cassette: Aqwaal ul-Ulamaa Fee Ibtaal Qawaa’id wa Maqaalaat Adnaan Ar’oor, and checked by Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen himself on 24/4/1421H, with one slight revision who changed the phrase "Anaa Ra’yee…" to "Anaa Qawlee…".

5. Fatwaa of Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan

Question: "[Adnaan Ar’oor] said, "Why is Imaam Ahmad not reproached for his takfir of the one who abandons prayer and yet Sayyid Qutb is reproached merely because some of these expressions occurred from him (i.e. his takfir of Muslim societies). So we say: This one performed takfir of the Muslim societies (i.e. Qutb), and yet Imaam Ahmad – may Allaah have mercy upon him – is not reproached despite his judgement of kufr against all these societies [meaning that the majority of them do not pray]."

So what is your comment upon this?"

Answer: Imaam Ahmad is a scholar and a sage (erudite, sagacious) who knows the evidences and the manner of extracting proof from them and Sayyid Qutb is an ignoramus (jaahil) who has no knowledge or cognisance and neither does he have any evidences for what he says. Hence, equating between Imaam Ahmad and Sayyid Qutb is injustice (dhulm) [because Imaam Ahmad has many evidences from the Book and the Sunnah for the one who deliberately abandons the prayer whereas Sayyid does not have a single piece of evidence for his takfir of the Muslims in general. Rather the evidences are in opposition to what he says]."


Question: "Likewise he (Adnaan Ar’oor) says, "I do not know of anyone who has spoken about the affairs of Manhaj in the manner that Sayyid Qutb has spoken of them. And he is correct in the vast majority of what he has written." He (Ar’oor) was asked about this statement of his and he replied, "By the word minhaaj here I mean the issues of reform, elections and assassinations. And by "in his time" I mean the Fifties."

Answer: "He (Ar’oor) does not know because he is ignorant. As for us, then we know – and all praise is due to Allaah – that the scholars both prior to and after Sayyid Qutb, opposed him."

Source: From the Cassette: Aqwaal ul-Ulamaa Fee Ibtaal Qawaa’id wa Maqaalaat Adnaan Ar’oor. What is in square brackets was added by Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan himself as a further clarification.

Note: This is only a small selection of the quotations from the Ulamaa which number around 25 or so. All of the above quotations are found in the cassette "Aqwaal ul-Ulamaa Fee Sayyid Qutb", published by Tasjeelaat Minhaaj us-Sunnah of Riyaadh.

Summary

Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Baaz (rahimahullaah) was asked, "The one who praises Ahl ul-Bid’ah, is he to be counted amongst them?" So he replied, "Yes, there is no doubt about this, the one who praises them is one who actually calls to them". [Cassette: Aqwaal ul-Ulamaa Fee Sayyid Qutb]

Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah) said, "It is obligatory to punish everyone who ascribes himself to them – the people of innovation – or who defends them, or who praises them, or who reveres their books, or who detests that they should be talked about, or who begins to make excuses for them by saying he does not understand what these words mean or by saying that this person also authored another book and what is similar to these types of excuses, which are not made except by an ignoramus or a hypocrite. Rather, it is obligatory to punish everyone who knows of their condition and did not assist in repelling their evil, for repelling their evil is one of the greatest of obligations. " [Majmoo ul-Fataawaa (2/132)]

Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah also said: "And in the face of those who perform takfir in falsehood are a people who do not know the Aqeedah of Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah as it truly should be known, or they know some of it but are ignorant of some of it. Yet whatever they do know of it, they do not always explain it to the people but conceal it. And they do not forbid the innovations that oppose the Book and the Sunnah, nor do they rebuke the People of Innovations and neither do they punish them. In fact, they may even criticise absolutely any talk of the Sunnah and the fundamental principles of the religion [i.e. Tawhid etc.]. Or they may accommodate everyone, with all their varying madhhabs… This approach has overcome many of the Murji’ah, some of the Jurists, Sufis and Philosophers. And both of these two approaches (i.e. that of the Takfiris and the Murji’ah and those with them) are deviant, and outside the [confines of the] Book and the Sunnah." [Majmu’ ul-Fatawa (16/427)]

Epilogue

So dear brother and sister for the sake of Allaah, flee from the books of Sayyid Qutb and flee from those who promote or recommend his books and flee also from those who defend and promote the books of Sayyid Qutb – fearing for your religion and your Aqeedah and your manhaj and the repugnant Irjaa that has overcome many of the Qutubiyyah.

And if a Qutubi Revivalist comes to you and says, "Shaikh al-Albani encouraged everyone to read a chapter in Milestones", then reply to such a one:

"O Qutubi! This is a very old saying, uttered when the true nature and extent of Qutb’s deviations and heresies were not known to Shaikh al-Albani (save the affair of Wahdat ul-Wujood). And then the Noble Shaikh Rabee’ bin Haadee exposed the affair of Sayyid Qutb, - giving sincerity of purpose to Allaah, His Messenger and the Muslims in all of that – and so when the affair became abundantly clear – and especially in more recent times - the Noble Imaam, al-Albani made the statement above to Shaikh Rabee’ "Everything with which you have refuted Sayyid Qutb is the truth (haqq) and is correct (sawab)… So may Allaah reward you with the best of reward, O brother Rabee’ for fulfilling the obligation of explaining and uncovering his ignorance and deviation from Islaam". And are you ignorant or merely pretending to be ignorant of the principle of al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel that the specific criticism takes precedence over the general praise!!

And O Qutubi, would you like us to become blind-followers of men and abandon researching the proofs and evidences? And O Qutubi, has not your fraud become uncovered already in that Al-Karaabeesee and al-Muhaasibee were more superior and knowledgeable than Sayyid Qutb and they had works that contained "admonitions and lessons" more powerful and far reaching than the sentimental writings of Qutb, but alongside that Imaam Ahmad forbade them severely, with great harshness and reprimanded the one who tried to argue that they contain benefit?! So may Allaah restrain you O Qutubi, we are people of evidence and proof and implementers of the manhaj of the Salaf – by the permission and praise of Allaah and not merely blind-followers of individuals and personalities. Salaaman!!"

The Extremist Murji’ah who have emerged in the current times have no precedence before them in the history of Islaam in their defence of those who assault the Messengers of Allaah, make mockery of them, and who perform takfir of the Companions of Allaah’s Messenger and accuse them of hypocrisy and treachery and slander and make mockery of Uthmaan (radiallaahu anhu) and who call for the abolition of parts of the Islamic Sharee’ah because it is not suitable for the times.

So when their Sayyid and Imaam is refuted by the Mashayikh of Ahl us-Sunnah and foremost amongst them Shaikh Rabee’ bin Haadee al-Madkhalee – may Allaah preserve him, it only increases them in their rage and hatred – not for the sake of the Islaamic Aqeedah and the honour of the Prophets and Companions, but for the sake of their Sayyid and Imaam. But mockery of the Prophets and takfir of the Sahabah does not enrage them, and refuge is from Allaah from such vile and filthy Irjaa’ which necessitates silence in the face of statements of disbelief and apostasy.

This paper is the second part of a refutation of those Qutubis who try to make the mediation of Imaam Ibn Baaz for Sayyid Qutb prior to his death a justification of Qutb’s deviant creed and methodology and as way of praising and propagating his misguided and heretical writings. Comprising the statements and refutations of the Imaams of the Salafi Da’wah and its Mashayikh against Sayyid Qutb and those with his affectations, this paper consists of excerpts from the book "Baraa’ah Ulamaa il-Ummah Min Tazkiyat Ahl il-Bid’ah wal-Mudhammah" , checked by Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan who made additional comments and notes and read over the book twice. The book was also read by Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Uthaimeen who praised it and made some minor changes to his own words that were quoted therein.

1. Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan

Sayyid Qutb said concerning slavery, "And concerning the slaves, that was when slavery was a world-wide structure and which was conducted amongst the Muslims and their enemies in the form of enslaving of prisoners of war. And it was necessary for Islam to adopt a similar line of practice until the world devised a new code of practice, other than enslavement. " [in ‘az-Zilal’, Surah Tawbah (3/1669), found also in tafsir of Surah Baqarah (/230), tafsir of Surah Mu’minoon (4/2455), tafsir of Surah Muhammad (6/3285)]

Questioner: "O respected Shaikh, one of the contemporary writers is of the view that this religion, at its inception, was compelled to accept the institution of slavery of the days of ignorance."

Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan: "I seek refuge in Allaah"

Questioner: [Completing his question] "However, he has come from the angle that the doors to the various expiations and other matters which involve the liberation of slaves should be opened (i.e. that these affairs should be encouraged) gradually, until slavery finally ends. And following on from this, that the intent of the Legislator is to gradually end this institution of slavery. So what is your view on this?"

Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan: "These are words of falsehood (baatil) – and refuge is from Allaah – despite the fact that many of the writers and thinkers – and we do not say scholars - repeat these words. Rather we say that they are thinkers (mufakkireen) , just as they call them. And it is unfortunate, that they also call them ‘Du’at’ (callers). And this (type of statement) is found in the tafsir of Sayyid Qutb in Dhilaal ul-Qura’aan. He says, "Islaam does not affirm slavery, but it only allowed it to remain out of fear that the people may turn to despotism, that they may disapprove of it’s abolition since they had been accustomed to it. Hence Islaam has allowed it to continue out of courtesy to the people" Meaning, as if Allaah was being courteous to the people, and then he alluded to its gradual removal until it is completely finished.

These words are falsehood and (constitute) deviation (ilhaad) – and refuge is from Allaah. This is deviation and a false accusation against Islaam. And if it had not been for the excuse of ignorance [because] we excuse them on account of (their) ignorance, so we do not say that they are Unbelievers because they are ignorant and are blind followers who have merely quoted this saying without reflecting upon it, hence we excuse them on account of ignorance. Otherwise, these statements are very dangerous and if a person said them deliberately he would become apostate and leave Islaam. However, we say that they are ignorant people because they are but literary writers who have not learnt the knowledge. So they found this statement and rejoiced on account of it and then refuted the Unbelievers by it. Since the Unbelievers say that Islaam empowers some people (over others) and that it enslaves the people and that it… and that it… So they intended to refute them with this ignorance. And when the ignoramus refutes the enemy then he only increases the enemy in evil and hence the enemy holds more tightly to his falsehood. Refutation occurs by way of knowledge. It does no occur by way of sentiments or by ignorance. Rather it occurs by knowledge and evidence. Otherwise, it is obligatory for a person to remain quiet and not to speak in dangerous matters about which he has no knowledge.

So these words are falsehood and whoever says them deliberately then he is an Unbeliever. As for the one who says them out of ignorance or due to blind following (of others), then he is to be excused due to his ignorance. And ignorance is a killing catastrophe – and refuge is from Allaah. Islaam has affirmed slavery and slavery is ancient and existed prior to Islaam and was present in the revealed religions prior to it. And it will continue so long as Jihaad in the path of Allaah exists."

Source: Cassette Recording dated 4/8/1416 and subsequently verified by the Shaikh himself with a few minor alterations to the wording.

2. Fatwaa of the Muhaddith Hammaad bin Muhammad al-Ansaaree

The Shaikh – rahimahullaah - was asked about the statement of Sayyid Qutb, "And it is necessary for Islaam to judge, since it is a unique, constructive and positivist Aqeedah which has been moulded and shaped from Christianity and Communism together, in the most perfect of ways and which comprises all of their (i.e Christianity and Communism’s) objectives and adds in addition to them harmony, balance and justice." (Ma’rakat ar-Ra’samaaliyyah wal-Islaam).

The Shaikh replied, "If the one who said these words was alive, then his repentance should be sought, so if he repents (then so) otherwise he is to be killed as an apostate. And if he has died then it is obligatory to explain that these words are falsehood. However we do not perform takfir of him since we have not established the proof against him."

Source: From the book of Shaikh Rabee’ ‘al-Awaasim Mimmaa Fee Kutub Sayyid Qutub Minal-Qawaasim’ (p. 24) and who read it out to Shaikh Hammaad himself on the night of 3/1/1415 in order to corroborate it.

3. Fatwaa of Shaikh ‘Abdul-Azeez Ibn Baz

Some parts of the book of Sayyid Qutb ‘at-Tasweer al-Fannee fil-Qur’aan’ were read to him such as his speech about Moosaa - ‘alaihis-Salaam - upon whom he said: "Let us take Moosaa - as the example of the leader of excitable nature - and this excitable impulse quickly passes away and he regains his composure, as is the case with the excitable folk." Then he said with regard to the Saying of Allah – the Most High - "Fa as-ba-hu fil madinati kha bi fan..." :- "This is the description of a well known state: the restlessness or fear of one expecting evil at every turn - and this is the characteristic of the excitable folk." [‘at-Tasweer al-Fannee fil-Qur’aan’: p.200,201,203. 13th ....]

So the Shaikh replied to this: "Mockery of the Prophets is apostasy in its own."

And is was said to him that Shaikh Rabee’ al-Madhkhalee has written a refutation of Sayyid Qutb, so the Shaikh said: "Rebuttal of him is good."

Source: During a lesson of Shaikh ‘Abdul - ‘Azeez ibn Baaz - hafizahullaah - in his house in Riyaadh: 1413H, ‘Minhaajus-Sunnah tapes of ar-Riyaadh

Summary

Shaikh ul-Islaam, Imaam Ibn Baaz was asked, "The one who praises Ahl ul-Bid’ah, is he to be counted amongst them?" So he replied, "Yes, there is no doubt about this, the one who praises them is one who actually calls to them". [Cassette: Aqwaal ul-Ulamaa Fee Sayyid Qutb]

Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah) said, "It is obligatory to punish everyone who ascribes himself to them – the people of innovation – or who defends them, or who praises them, or who reveres their books, or who detests that they should be talked about, or who begins to make excuses for them by saying he does not understand what these words mean or by saying that this person also authored another book and what is similar to these types of excuses, which are not made except by an ignoramus or a hypocrite. Rather, it is obligatory to punish everyone who knows of their condition and did not assist in repelling their evil, for repelling their evil is one of the greatest of obligations. " Majmoo ul-Fataawaa (2/132)

Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah also said: "And in the face of those who perform takfir in falsehood are a people who do not know the aqidah of Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah as it truly should be known, or they know some of it but are ignorant of some of it. Yet whatever they do know of it, they do not always explain it to the people but conceal it. And they do not forbid the innovations that oppose the Book and the Sunnah, nor do they rebuke the People of Innovations and neither do they punish them. In fact, they may even criticise absolutely any talk of the
Sunnah and the fundamental principles of the religion [i.e. Tawhid etc.]. Or they may accommodate everyone, with all their varying madhhabs… This approach has overcome many of the Murji’ah, some of the Jurists, Sufis and Philosophers. And both of these two approaches (i.e. that of the Takfiris and the Murji’ah and those with them) are deviant, and outside the [confines of the] Book and the Sunnah." Majmu’ ul-Fatawa (16/427)

Epilogue

Beware O Brother and Sister Muslim from this sect – may Allaah sever it - which accuses the Imaam and Muhaddith, Imaam of Ahl us-Sunnah and Shaikh ul-Islaam, Muhammad Nasir ud-Deen al-Albani with the Irjaa’ of Jahm Ibn Safwaan – and may Allaah free him from this mighty slander and exonerate him – and know that this sect itself wallows in the extremes of Irjaa, for when, according to its own teachings and principles, takfir ought to be performed, it refrains from it and instead makes excuses and pleas of justification for the statements of kufr and apostasy that emanate from its leading founders and mentors, and from Allaah is the refuge. And it hates and detests that its mentors and leaders and their statements of kufr and apostasy are exposed, refuted and demolished!!

And know that anyone who promotes the books of Sayyid Qutb, portraying him as a Scholar and Imaam, equal to the likes of Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (!!) and Shaikh ul-Islaam Muhammad bin Abdul-Wahhaab( !!) and Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Baaz(!!) and one worthy to be followed in his Khariji methodology[ *], then know that either he is an ignoramus with compound ignorance or he is a person of desires, who feigns the gown of Salafiyyah, deceives the common-folk and who stands at the gates of Hellfire, inviting you to become one of its inhabitants, and from Allaah is the refuge.

[*] "And it was in this period that the books of the Shaheed, Sayyid Qutb appeared, the books that represented his final thoughts (in ideology, before his death). Those which justified the takfir of (whole) societies… the breaking of all sentimental attachments to society, breaking off ties with others, and the announcement of a destructive jihad against the whole of mankind. And showing contempt against the du’at who call for lenience and softness, accusing them of idiocy, and being defeatist. [Saying all of this], in front of the western civilisation. He made this manifest, in the most clear manner in the tafsir, "Fee Zilaal il-Qur’aan", in the 2nd edition and in ‘Ma’alim fit-Tariq’ (Milestones) , and the bulk of it is taken from ‘Zilal’ and ‘Al-Islam wa Mushkilat al-Hadaarah’ and others…"Yusuf al-Qaradawi, one of the Leaders of Ikhwan, in ‘Priorities of the Islamic Movement (p.110)’

"We have pointed out in what has preceded that the spread of the ideology of takfir occurred amongst the youth of the Ikhwaan who were imprisoned in the late fifties and early sixties, and that they were influenced by the ideology of the Shaheed Sayyid Qutb and his writings. They derived from these writings that the society had fallen into Jahiliyyah (of kufr), and that he had performed takfir of the rulers who had rejected the Hakimiyyah of Allaah by not ruling by what Allaah has revealed, and also takfir of those ruled over (i.e. civilians), when they became satisfied with this." Fareed ‘Abdul-Khaliq, one of the Murshids of Ikhwaan, in ‘Ikhwan ul-Muslimoon Fee Mizanil-Haqq’ (p.115)

All Praise is due to Allaah who made it sufficient honour for His servants to defend the honour and integrity of the Prophets of Allaah and His Messengers and their Companions. And all praise is due to Allaah who made it sufficient disgrace and ignominy for the biased partisans that they defend and aggrandize the Mockers of the Messengers and the Slanderers of Caliphs and Companions, declaring some of them to be disbelievers, others to be pathetic and senile, and yet others guilty of deception and treachery – let alone their defence of the writings of falsehood which contain but the innovations of the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah, Ash'ariyyah, Khawarij, the despicable Rafidah and others - displaying the extremism of their Irjaa' in all of that - and then affirming the affair by calling such a one to be "Shaheed" without making the exception (Istithnaa).

We present to you the some samples of the handwritten notes of both Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen and Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan on the book, "Baraa'ah Ulamaa il-Ummah Min Tazkiyaat Ahl ul-Bid'ah wal-Mudhammah" as well as Shaikh al-Albani's commendation and praise of Shaikh Rabee's efforts in exposing the deviation and ignorance of Sayyid Qutb.

This book is a specific refutation of those who use the intercession of Shaikh Ibn Baaz for Sayyid Qutb prior to his death as a justification for the defence of his heretical beliefs and writings.

IMPORTANT NOTE: We see that if a Qutubi reads this he will soon interject and claim: Why do you not also take the words of Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan or the Committee in criticism of those besides Sayyid Qutb? - then we say because all of the Ulamaa have refuted Qutb, from Imaam al-Albani, Imaam Ibn Baz, Shaikh Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbaad, Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan, Shaikh Mahmood Shakir (as far back as 1952, when he refuted Qutb four times publicly, for his scathing attacks on the Companions - despite that he still oversaw the printing of his book of Rafd, al-Adaalah al-Ijtimaa'iyyah up until his death, and it continues to be published by his brother Mohamamd Qutb to this day, the while it is not free from revilement of some of the Companions), Shaikh Ubayd al-Jaabiree, Shaikh al-Lahaydaan, Shaikh Hammad al-Ansaree, Shaikh Rabee' Bin Haadee, Shaikh Abdullah ad-Dawaish, Shaikh Salih as-Suhaymee, Shaikh Abdul-Azeez Aal-Shaikh, let alone scores of others, both from Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah, and from outside of it, such as the Innovators of Ikhwaan such as Qaradawi and the likes. There has always been a unanimous concensus on the heresy, deviation and Kharijism of Sayyid Qutb - denied only by those engrossed and infatuated with Qutubism and its ideals - but in all that while never did you show sincerity of purpose Oh Qutubi, and accept them and their verdicts! Rather, you bemused yourself because the proponents of Qutubism of our times labelled the above scholars as being "the scholars of womens menses and impurities", "ignorant of fiqh ul-waqi'", "the scholars of the desert" and what is worse than all of that.

But despite all of that you found fault with those who merely narrated their verdicts and who brought these verdicts to the attention of the people – advising them for the sake of Allaah - to flee from this man and his teachings, and then you reviled them and cursed them, showing anger and hatred for the sake of your sayyid, Sayyid Qutb - but you did not show hatred and anger for Moosa (alaihi-salaam) and nor for Uthmaan (radiyallaahu anhu) and nor for Bani Umayyah, and nor for the sake of the Islamic Sharee'ah when your sayyid called for parts of it to be abolished, because it is not suitable and relevant for the times - showing the extremism of your Irjaa' in all of that. So do not preach to us, O Qutubi about the verdicts of the Scholars, when you are the one's who have been most in need of such a preaching, with respect to your sayyid and his heretical beliefs and teachings, ever since 1952, when Shaikh Mahmood Shakir exposed his poisonous Rafd and exposed his heretical beliefs.

So we say, exposing the great fraud and deception of Qutubism:

ONE: Shaikh al-Albani's Written Communication to Shaikh Rabee' This was written after the Shaikh completed a reading of 'al-Awaasim Minal-Qawaasim' shortly before his death. And this is also an uncovering of that Qutubi who used some very old words of Shaikh al-Albani to defend Sayyid Qutb and his heretical writings. It is abundantly clear that at that particular time Shaikh al-Albani had not made a thorough study of all the works of Qutb and hence did not speak in criticism of him. However, when the affair became clear to him at the hands of Shaikh Rabee' then he wrote the communication below. A translation of it can be found in Part 1 of this series.

TWO: Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan's Adjustments to the Title

The Shaikh making some adjustments to the naming of the series and also changing the title of the book by adding the word "Wal-Mudhammah" to the end of the title.

THREE: The Letter Sent by the Compiler of the Book to the Defender of Sayyid Qutb

This is the letter sent by the compiler of this particular book (Isaam bin Abdullaah as-Sinaani) to a Qutubi who had attempted to defend Sayyid Qutb by the intercession of Imaam Ibn Baaz. Shaikh Fawzaan makes some additional notes to it. The text of the letter mentions that Qutb had very great and serious errors and that this type of reasoning only deceives the youth, who will be led astray by his heresies. Shaikh Fawzaan adds "Then, the Shaikh (i.e. Bin Baz) did that (i.e. interceded for Qutb) before it became clear from Sayyid Qutb what was clear in his books", and some other brief notes further down.

FOUR: Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan Adjusting His Own Words Here Shaikh Fawzaan makes a few adjustments to his own words in refutation of Adnaan Ar'oor (who is now pushing his own form of insidious Qutubism). Shaikh Fawzaan describes Qutb as a Jaahil, ignoramus, with no knowledge, and of course this is indeed true in the case of Sayyid Qutb. The translation of this is found in Part 1 of this series.

FIVE: Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen Advising A Change Related to the Ordering of Content Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen asking for the section titled "The Salafi Manhaj" to be put first, before "The Qutubi Manhaj". And it is here that we confirm, once again, that Qutubism and the Qutubi Methodology is a real and tangible reality and exists - even though the well-known Qutubists of the West such as Ali Timimi and Idris Palmer have been trying to deny their own existence for numerous years. Closet-Qutubism is now officially dead. The title of the page reads "Two Ways That Do Not Meet, Separated By the East and the West", and the first three quotations are from Sayyid Qutb's 'Zilaal' in which he performs takfir of the whole of mankind and every Muslim society and also in which he says that what Islam requires is revolutions (inqilaab) in every place and location in order to forcefully impose the Sharee'ah - and that this is the highest and most lofty goal (Zilaal 3/1451) and inshaa'allaah we will translate this for all to see that this man and his writings are but the legacy of Dhul-Khuwaisarah at-Tameemi - and from Allaah is the refuge. Note, Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen praised the book, after reading it.

Closing Remarks

It is important that the Qutubis address the issue of following the verdicts of the Salafi Ulamaa - concerning which they have had clear problems with over the last 8 years - before they begin to display love and affection for the same scholars who – in their view - used to be the "the scholars of women's menses and impurities". When they have come to terms with this, then inshaa'allaah we can open up a discussion concerning Imaam, Takfir, Irjaa and the position of Imaam al-Albani and Imaam Ibn Baaz – both of whom the Qutubis accuse of being Murji'ah, and having the Irjaa' of Jahm Ibn Safwaan - due to their position on ruling by other than what Allaah has revealed.

Then continuing in unveiling the ignorance and deception of the Straying Qutubis who continue to defend the mockery of the Prophets of Allaah, and the slandering of the Caliphs of Islaam and the belittling and ridiculing of the Companions of Allaah’s Messenger, and the takfir of the whole of mankind, let alone of Banu Umayyah, and the innovations of the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah, Ash'ariyyah, Khawarij, the Despicable Rafidah and other than them – by their despicable action of accommodating, applauding, aggrandising, glorifying and raising the Innovators – using what they call "one of the chains of evidences" the very unfortunate and hasty four pages that came from Shaikh Bakr Abu Zaid, who has since shown remorse for what he wrote, and who reviles the one who spreads them and calls for the curse of Allaah upon the one who distributes them – then we present to them and to those deceived by them – the reality of the matter, as it truly transpired – so that they withdraw, andrepent from their deception of the common-folk:

fooling them and deceiving them with matters concerning which they are not in a position to verify and ascertain - just like their deception with the very old praise of Imaam al-Albani for Qutb, which has since been abrogated, for Imaam al-Albani praised and commended the efforts of Shaikh Rabee’ in refuting and exposing the "ignorance and deviation" of Sayyid Qutb as we have outlined in part 3 of this series.

Statement 1

Shaikh Rabee Ibn Haadee wrote:

"In the Name of Allaah, Full of Mercy, Ever-Merciful (to His Believing Servants). All praise is due to Allaah and prayers and peace upon the Messenger of Allaah, his companions and whoever follows his guidance. To proceed: Then the people upon falsehood have attached themselves to the letter of Shaikh Bakr Abu Zaid in such a severe manner, like the drowning person holds onto a splinter (of wood).

However, in truth these papers are devoid of truth and only aid falsehood, without (containing) any knowledge, guidance or (having any basis in) the Illuminating Book. Rather to the one who acquires his understanding from Allaah and His Messenger and who respects his own intelligence and who respects the truth, they are more feeble than the house of a spider. And these papers do not suit the one to whom they are described (i.e. the author), due to what they contain of false lies.

It is for this reason that you see him fleeing from them. And some of the people of nobility, excellence and erudition rejected these writings, amongst the Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan and Shaikh Sa’d al-Hussain, and he wrote a refutation of this letter. Rather I say that anyone who respects the Salafi manhaj will reject what this letter contains. And I also mention that amongst those who checked over this letter after me was Shaikh Zaid Muhammad Haadee Madhkhalee. And (eventually) Shaikh Bakr Abu Zaid disliked that his letter should be distributed, rather he reviled the one who distributed it.

And also amongst those who followed him (Shaikh Bakr Abu Zaid) up and who requested him to make an apology was Shaikh Alee Hasan ‘Abdul-Hameed. So Shaikh Bakr Abu Zaid promised him that he would make an apology but he has not yet done so.

And what gives evidence to the fact that he was annoyed and dissatisfied with his letter is that he was not pleased that it should be distributed, neither did he have it printed and nor did he give it a title. However, the foolish minded, the aiders of falsehood, and of wahdatul-wujood and hulool and ta’teel of the Attributes and revilement of the Companions, rather the revilement of the Noble Messengers and attacking them and other such heresies which the books of Sayyid Qutb contain –they are the ones who printed and distributed it.

And Rabee’ bin Haadee Umayr al-Madkhalee refuted them (i.e. the books of Qutb) in four books, assisting the deen of Allaah and His Messengers in all of that and defending the Companions of the Seal of the Noble Messengers. Hence, it is sufficient dignity for Rabee’ that he defends the deen of Allaah and the those who carried and conveyed it. And it is sufficient humiliation and ignominy for the defenders of Sayyid that they have contested the truth and its carriers from among the Prophets and their Companions.

Written by:

Rabee’ bin Haadee ‘Umayr al-Madkhalee. Stamped and Dated 14/3/1421H

Statement 2

The Noble Shaikh Rabee' also said, a few months later, in his introduction to ‘al-Hadd ul-Faasil’ which is a refutation of Shaikh Bakr Abu Zaid’s letter:

"In the Name of Allaah, Full of Mercy, Ever-Merciful (to His Believing Servants). All praise is due to Allaah and prayers and peace upon best of creation, Muhammad Bin Abdullaah, his family, his companions and whoever follows his guidance. To proceed: A few years ago four pages (of writings) came out and which were attributed to Shaikh Bakr Abu Zaid. So when I asked him about them, he became annoyed about them and also about those who had distributed them and he said to me, "These people want to cause separation between those who love each other".


And likewise, Shaikh Zaid bin Muhammad bin Haadee al-Madkhalee also asked him about these papers and so he reviled those who spread these papers. And also in front of others, [the Shaikh] made excuses and said that these papers were stolen from him and were spread without his consent and satisfaction.

And up until now, he has not officially and openly acknowledged them, and neither is he happy about them being printed and distributed, and hence, these papers are tantamount to a foundling (abandoned baby), with no legal father (as its claimant).

It is deserving for every sensible person that he should become ashamed on account of them, because the very one to whom they are attributed refuses to acknowledge them. And it is also deserving for the one who to whom they are attributed to be ashamed on account of them, since they defend falsehood and they also defend a very great strayer who gathered together the greatest of strayings and disgraces, amongst them: reviling the Messenger of Allaah from amongst the greatest of the messengers of Allaah, and from the greatest of the resolute (oulil-azm) is the Kaleem of Allaah Moosa (salallaahu alaihi wasallam), and amongst them: reviling the greatest of the companions of Allaah’s Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam), chief amongst them, Uthmaan (radiallaahu anhu) – rather Takfir of some of them and accusing others with hypocrisy, lying, bribery, buying the various (material) stocks and liabilities (from the Bayt ul-Maal) to the end of his despicable revilement of the companions of Muhammad (salallaahu alaihi wasallam) and may Allaah be pleased with them.

So say whatever you like in reprimand of these papers which have falsely been labelled "An-Nasihah adh-Dhahabiyyah" (The Golden Advice) and which have been distributed across the world with all intensity. And amongst their flaws is that they are more flimsy than the house of a spider due to their being devoid of truth, knowledge and justice. They do not do justice for those who were reviled by Sayyid Qutb amongst the Prophets and companions of Allaahs’ Messenger (salallaahu alaihi wasallam), and neither do they do justice to Islaam when Sayyid Qutb attributes the most evil of beliefs to it, the most astray of them being the belief of Wahdat ul-Wujood (Physical Unity of Existence) and that of Hulool (indwelling of Allaah) and denial (ta’teel) of Allaah’s attributes and belittling the miracles of the Muhammad (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam), and also his ascription of Marxist Socialism to Islaam, and also his belittlement of Islaam by saying:

"And it is necessary for Islaam to judge, since it is a unique, constructive and positivist aqidah which has been moulded and shaped from Christianity and Communism together, in the most perfect of ways and which comprises all of their (i.e Christianity and Communism’s) objectives and adds in addition to them harmony, balance and justice."

And other such misguidance.

However, the followers of every so and so make him revered and raised and so they grant him the position of the one who cannot be questioned as to what he does. And then they show loyalty and enmity for his sake and so they place themselves in the lowest of the levels of mankind, such that they have not sense or intelligence that will prevent them from this. So they do not follow the methodology of Islaam in their loyalty and disownment and in their rulings and their positions.

This is in fact the characteristic of the rowdy hooligans of every age and place, and it is with the likes of these such people that the Messengers, the righteous and the callers to truth are warred against in every time and place. And then from them emerge the lowly ones who then occupy the rank of the great ones – and then they become tawaagheet (who are obeyed and listened beyond their sharee’ah limits) on account of whom the true religion of Allaah and its callers are fought against.

And finally, I find myself compelled to grant the permission for the printing of this book, ‘al-Hadd al-Faasil’ as a clarification of the truth, and as a means of aiding it and demolishing the falsehood of Sayyid Qutb, which is spread in the name of Islaam, and in order to repel the oppression of his awliyaa, the aiders of falsehood and those who defend its people.

And this occurs from me after a very long wait for Bakr Abu Zaid to show some sense of justice and to announce the conviction (of crime) of whoever spreads and distributes his papers, and in the name of ‘adh-Dhahabiyyah’ , and who brags about them. However, he has not yet done so, and hence I have been compelled to spread my refutation of him, after I had made many excuses for him and after many others had also censured him.

Written by

Rabee’ bin Haadee ‘Umayr al-Madkhalee 14/5/1421H.

Statement 3

Stated Shaikh Usaamah al-Qoosee:

"It is important to make a notification here of what has been distributed in the past couple of years with the title ‘al-Khitaab adh-Dhahabee’ , belonging to Shaikh Bakr bin Abdullaah Abu Zaid. This world has been filled by this short discourse by the biased partisans and activists, and they claim that it is decisive proof after which there can be no other decisive proof.

Firstly: Shaikh Bakr Abu Zaid – may Allaah preserve him – and guide him and us, when Shaikh Rabee’ spoke to him directly, saying, "I sent you a draft copy of my book ‘Adwaa Islaamiyyah alaa Aqeedah Sayyid Qutb wa Fikrihi’ but you did not refute my book, you did not refute the drat copy…" meaning Shaikh Bakr Abu Zaid did not originally send a refutation to Shaikh Rabee
from the very beginning.

Shaikh Rabee’ sent a copy of the draft to a group of the scholars. Some of them wrote introductions to the book, others praised it and others lavishly commended it. The important point here is that what was Shaikh Bakr Abu Zaid’s position towards it? He did not refute the book, nor did he comment upon it.

So then Shaikh Rabee’ was taken by surprise, especially when he did not receive a refutation from Shaikh Bakr, so he was taken by surprise by this discourse entitled ‘al-Khitaab adh-Dhahabee’ (The Golden Discourse), which had been spread in every part of the world. Shaikh Rabee’ then got on the phone with Shaikh Bakr and said, "What is this?!" He replied, "By Allaah, I do not have any knowledge about this matter. About this, I say may Allaah curse the one who
distributes this discourse."

And Shaikh Rabee’ personally told this to me that he, Bakr Abu Zaid, said, "May Allaah curse the one who distributes this discourse." So he supplicated against such a one with a curse and we say ‘Aameen’.

Secondly: Shaikh Ali al-Halabi – may Allaah preserve him – informed me that he asked Shaikh Bakr Abu Zaid in his own house about this discourse and he said, "By Allaah these were words that I had written and I was hoping to send them to Shaikh Rabee’ however, I put them away since they were in need of improvement. However, they were then taken from my office without my knowledge and distributed. And I do not know who did that."

The important thing is that whatever the case, it is binding upon Shaikh Bakr that he frees himself from this discourse in the same manner that his discourse was actually spread (in the first place) (i.e. openly and publicly).

However he has not done so??!! He has not done so.

So I say, for the purpose of refuting this falsehood which has been spread under the name, "al-Khitaab adh-Dhahabee" , "al-Khitaab adh-Dhahabee" , "al-Khitaab adh-Dhahabee" , that firstly, our Shaikh, Shaikh Rabee’ did not receive any reply from Shaikh Bakr to this day of ours, against this book (of Shaikh Rabee’ refuting Qutb), no comments, no observations, no pieces of advice. And for this reason our Shaikh, Shaikh Rabee’ felt compelled to write a book in which he refutes all these claims – even if Shaikh Bakr says that the discourse was taken from him or even if he curses the one who distributes it, or … or …

However this discourse requires a separate refutation in another book called, ‘al-Hadd al-Faasil Bayn al-Haqq wal-Baatil’, which is actually a refutation of this so called discourse. Therefore, whoever reads the so called "Golden Discourse", and it is not golden at all, and indeed, as we have mentioned its author says, "May Allaah curse the one who distributes it" and we say "Aameen", we say Ameen to the supplication of the one who authored this discourse. So when you read this discourse, then you should also read along with it the refutation of it so that you be from the just people…

And all praise is due to Allaah, the Lord of all the Worlds, for the truth has surely appeared since the our Shaikh wrote ‘al-Hadd al-Faasil Bayn al-Haqq wal-Baatil’."

Cassette Lecture.

Explanation of the book of Shaikh Rabee’ ‘The Methodology of the Prophets in Calling to Allaah’ (15th-19th/Rabee’ al-Awwal/1421H)

A Teaser from ‘al-Hadd al-Faasil’

And then to give you a small sample of the reply of Shaikh Rabee’ in ‘al-Hadd al-Faasil’ to the four pages that have become the debris that the drowning Qutubi reaches for, we leave you with the following:

All the points below are derived from ‘Al-Hadd al-Fasil bain al-Haqq wal-Batil’ (1st edition):

1. The Shaikh speaks directly to Shaikh Bakr Abu Zaid informing him that the four page letter that he had written dated 20/1/1414H had actually been received by him on 14/9/1414H, which is seven months and twenty-four days after it had been written. And also that he had not received it directly from the Shaikh himself, but through the biased partisans, the Qutubis and their brothers from amongst the straying Innovators. (p.3)

2. The Shaikh states that it is an extremely sad story that the likes of Shaikh Bakr who had aided the Sunnah and had waged Jihad against the Innovators with his works, and who had aforetime refuted the likes of Abu Ghuddah and as-Saboonee, has now come out to defend the Innovators with his writings, the first of which was his book ‘Laa Jadeed fis-Salaat’, and then ‘Tasneef un-Naas’ and then finally this little letter of his, which was worse than what came before it. (p.4-5)

3. The Shaikh said, that he refrained from refuting Shaikh Bakr due to these writings of his, despite the fact that he was requested by some of the Mashayikh to do so – and instead he told them that Shaikh Bakr is our brother and is from amongst us and that they ought to have patience. He also explains that he had scolded Shaikh Bakr in the Shaikh’s own study in Taif who subsequently said that he did not actually intend this or that with his writings (i.e. the first two works mentioned above) and that he promised that he will soon issue a clarification that those whom he intended by his writings were not from Ahl us-Sunnah. But, as Shaikh Rabee’ notes, he did not fulfil his promise, despite his knowledge that the mischief-makers amongst the biased-partisans and Qutubis, the helpers of the people of Innovation were using his works to attack
Ahl us-Sunnah. (p.6)

4. The Shaikh then notes that Shaikh Bakr’s four page letter completely lack any knowledge and any display of the mannerisms of the Scholars when they reply on a firm knowledge-based basis. And secondly, that Shaikh Bakr had depended merely upon generalisations and absolutions, without going into any detail, or actually quoting any of the contested texts from Sayyid Qutb. (p.7)

5. Then the Shaikh mentions that he did not wish to write his current work in refutation of Shaikh Bakr, and due to this he actually phoned up Shaikh Bakr and asked him about this letter of his, whether he had written it or whether someone else had written them. And that if he had written them, then he ought to apologise and if it was someone else, then he ought to free himself from it publicly. The Shaikh said he granted Shaikh Bakr two weeks to respond to this request. After this, a number of the people of knowledge got in touch with Shaikh Bakr in order to encourage him to recant, and amongst them Shaikh Salih al-Fawzan, Shaikh Zaid Muhammad Haadee, and Shaikh Ali Hasan. When all of this failed and when the evil effects of the writings of Shaikh Bakr had become apparent – from that which was witnessed in the Saudi Kingdom, Kuwait, the Emirates, Qatar, Algeria and elsewhere – and after the Shaikh’s time was taken upon in phone calls from everywhere, he saw that it was necessary to refute this letter and to make the truth manifest. (p.8)

6. The Shaikh mentions that he sent his book ‘Adwaa Islaamiyyah ‘alaa ‘Aqidah Sayyid Qutb wa Fikrihi’ to numerous people of knowledge, amongst them Shaikh ‘Abdul-Aziz bin Baz, Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen, Shaikh Salih al-Fawzan, Shaikh al-Albani, Shaikh ‘Abdul-Muhsin al-‘Abbad amongst numerous others – including Shaikh Bakr himself. He did this with the hope that they might pick out any errors and offer their advice, because of the reason that all of the sons of Aadam err, and it may have been possible for him to have fallen into error on some matters. The result of all of that was that where was very strong support from numerous scholars for his work and that every Salafi rejoiced with the book.(p.11-12)

7. The Shaikh reminds Shaikh Bakr how he himself had said to him that he had been given the book ‘az-Zilal’ (the tafsir of Sayyid Qutb) whilst on one of his journeys, yet he did not bother reading it and instead put it on the shelf, where it had remained since that time. And Shaikh Rabee’ also reminds Shaikh Bakr about his own words in the letter of his, "I seek your apologies for the delay in my response since I had not previously had any engagement in reading the books of this man, despite the fact that they are distributed amongst the people". (p.21)

8. Shaikh Rabee’ reminds Shaikh Bakr that his book refuting Sayyid Qutb was read by many persons of knowledge, who are far superior than him in knowledg, perception and cognisance, yet none of them showed the rejection he showed. And he stated that many of these phoned him directly, from within and outside of the Kingdom to express their thanks and commendations for this work.(p.26)

9. Shaikh Rabee’ reminds Shaikh Bakr, that in light of what he has written in his letter, it is necessary for Shaikh Bakr himself to repent and show remorse for writing his refutations against Abu Ghuddah (who reviled Ibn Taymiyyah) and as-Saaboonee (who denied and distorted the Attributes of Allaah in the way of the Ash’ariyyah). [In fact, his need to repent in this regard is greater since the mistakes and errors of these two do not even come near to the level of those of Qutb]. (p.30)

10. The Shaikh reminds Shaikh Bakr that he had finished writing his book ‘Adwaa Islaamiyyah’ right at the end of Dhul-Qa’ada 1413 (around 26/11/1413H) . Then after a short while, just prior to the days of Hajj, he sent the book to the people of knowledge, amongst the Shaikh Bakr himself. He then waited a while but the reply of Shaikh Bakr to acknowledge receipt of the book was not forthcoming. So the Shaikh says that he rang up Shaikh Bakr and asked whether he had received it or not, the reply being that he had not received it. So then Shaikh Rabee’ asked Shaikh Bakr’s brother, to send the book the Shaikh Bakr again. After this the Shaikh says that he cannot be certain as to when exactly Shaikh Bakr actually received the book, or when he read it and when he had time or complete it or when he had time to read it many times over and also perform his research as he claimed. This is because the letter of Shaikh Bakr in reply to Shaikh Rabee’ is dated 20/1/1414H so this gives very little time for Shaikh Bakr to have researched properly (no more than 4 weeks maximum). And this seems evident since Shaikh Bakr himself admits that he only read two sections from two chapters (of Shaikh Rabee’s book). So Shaikh Rabee’ states that what the Shaikh is claiming (of numerous readings and research) does not seem plausible and seems unusual, unless he read all the books of Sayyid Qutb like the Soofee who claimed he read the Qur’an 70,000 times whilst doing tawaf?! (p.119-120)

11. The Shaikh mentions that along with his son, Ahmad, he met up with Shaikh Bakr in Madinah. With the Shaikh was someone else, perhaps his eldest son. In this gathering they had a debate over one of the titles used by Shaikh Rabee’ "Sayyid Qutb speaks with the opinion of the creation of the Qur’an". Shaikh Bakr alleged that Shaikh Rabee’ had been unjust in this. Yet in the course of the debate, Shaikh Bakr admitted he had only read a portion of the chapter (of Shaikh Rabee’s book). So Shaikh Rabee said to him, "then let us read the remainder of it" and this was because the Shaikh had actually give two examples of how Sayyid Qutb made it permissible for someone besides Allaah to legislate rules and laws [referring here to the abolition of slavery and introducing Socialism into Islam]. Yet Shaikh Bakr did not read them and he refused to read them and became very angry, his anger being for Sayyid Qutb – yet what Qutb had committed with respect to the right of Allaah, the right of the Companions and the Islamic Ummah did not anger him. So when the Shaikh observed this very strange and doubtful behaviour from him he said to Shaikh Bakr "You have taken for yourself the highest position of making judgements, so is it permissible for you to make a judgement against the whole of my book just because you have read two small sections from two chapters?" And all he did in reply was to laugh!!! P.45)

Conclusion

And perhaps in what we have mentioned there is sufficiency for the seeker of truth and there is also sufficiency for the defender of falsehood from amongst those who have loyalty for the sake of Innovation and its people, and for the sake of a Rafidi, who let loose his tongue on the Kaleem of Allaah, Uthmaan and other notables amongst the Companions of Allaah's Messenger.

So it is upon every Qutubi who spread the discourse of Shaikh Bakr Abu Zaid to repent from it and to withhold from mentioning it, lest the curse of its author fall upon him and lest he be led into humiliation and disgrace on account of this curse. And we repeat, "Aameen, Aameen" to the supplication of the author of the so called "Golden Discourse".

And we say to every Qutubi who has loyalty and disownment for the sake of Sayyid Qutb, especially to the Qutubis of the US and their Muqallidah from the UK, who have never ceased showing their hatred and disdain for the defenders of the honour of the Companions of Allaah and the Prophets of Allaah:

Know that our madhdhab is but the concensus of the Ahl ul-Ilm, As.haabul-Athar, Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, from amongst among those in the presence of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) up until this day of ours. And know that your madhhab is in opposition to ours, rather, your mode of conduct and despicable behaviour, is but the madhdhab of Ahl ul-Bid’ah – whose love and hate is for other than Allaah's Messengers and for other than the Companions.

And here is the evidence:

Ibn al-Qayyim says in his book Haadi ul-Arwaah ilaa Bilaad il-Afraah:

"And we shall quote their concensus (i.e. that of the Salaf) just as Harb, the companion of Imaam Ahmad, has quoted from them in his own wording in his well known al-Masaa’il. He said: "This is the madhhab of the People of Knowledge, the Ashaabul-Athar (People of the Narrations), Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, those who stick fast to it [Ahl us-Sunnah] and who seek to guide themselves by [them i.e. the Ahl us-Sunnah] from among those in the presence of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) up until this day of ours. And I met whomever I met from among the Scholars of the people of Hijaaz and Shaam and others besides them. Whoever differs with and opposes a single matter from the madhaahib [of these People of Knowledge] or contests and defames them or criticises the one who speaks [by what they speak with], then he is a mukhaalif (opposer), a mubtadi’ (an innovator) and one who has left the Jamaa’ah, who has ceased to be upon the manhaj of the Sunnah and the Path of Truth.

And this [i.e. the path of the People of Knowledge] is the madhhab of Ahmad, Ishaaq bin Ibraaheem, Abdullaah bin Zubair al-Humaidee, Sa’eed bin Mansoor and others besides them amongst those with whom we have sat and taken knowledge from…" And then he lists the points of their aqeedah, amongst them: "…And the mentioning of the good qualities and deeds of the Companions of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) and refraining from mentioning their shortcomings and mistakes, those which occurred between them. Whoever reviles the Companions of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam), or a single one amongst them, or reduces [their worth and status] or insults them or exposes their faults or criticises a single one amongst them then he is a mubtadi’ (an innovator), a raafidee (an extreme shi’ite), a khabeeth (vile and repugnant) and a mukhaalif (an opposer) and Allaah will not accept from him any of his efforts nor his fair dealings. Rather loving them is a sunnah, supplicating for them is nearness (Allaah), taking them as a model for guidance is a means (of nearness to Allaah) and accepting and taking from their narrations is an excellence."

Ibn al-Qayyim referred here, to Harb bin Ismaa’eel al-Kirmaanee (one of the companions of Imaam Ahmad) who summarised the creed of the Ahl us-Sunnah. This creed is contained in the book: "Masaa’il Harb bin Ismaa’eel al-Kirmaanee an il-Imaam Ahmad", regarding which adh-Dhahabee (d. 748H) said: "It is one of the most precious of the books of the Hanaabilah."

And know that the only methodology that unites all of the groups of bid'ah into a single pot is the methodology of Sayyid Qutb. For how many of the groups of innovation subscribe to Qutubism and its teachings? So you find amongst the Qutubiyyah one who is a Jahmi, another a Sufi, another an Ash'ari, another a Muqallid, another a Mu'tazili, another an Aqlaani, another an outright Khariji - and then another who has the creed of the Salaf in the issues of Asmaa was-Sifaat and thinks he can remain upon the way of the Salaf by choosing the methodology of Qutubism. Know that even the Iranian Rafidis print the books of Sayyid Qutb - which but call for revolutions and rebellions, assassinations and coups - and they gave them to Hikmatyar to be distributed amongst his Jamaa'ah in order to give it strength and numbers - the very Jamaa'ah that assassinated the Salafi Shaikh Jameel ur-Rahmaan and put an end to the Islamic state he set up, built upon Tawheed, with the Hudood and other than that. This Rafidi and his teachings – and your love and hate for his sake - is one that unites you with all the groups of Bid'ah in your hatred and your battle against Ahl us-Sunnah, Ahl ul-Hadeeth wal-Athar and your labelling them with the most despicable of titles.

And from Allaah is the refuge.

May prayers and peace be upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family and companions.

"UNQUOTE"