The Clarification of Contemporary Sects

In 1995, the da’wah landscape was very different to what it is today. JIMAS was the dominant “Salafi” da’wah of the time. JIMAS stood for “Jam’iyyah Ihyaa Minhaaj As-Sunnah”. It had been around for several years, and had organised some very successful conferences. The leader of Jimas was Abu Muntasir Munawar Ali, of Bangladeshi origin. Abu Muntasir was perceived by those around him and knew him well, to be very dictatorial, manipulative and controlling. He was also astute enough to keep enough people close to him so as to maintain a hold on the da’wah and control key daw’ah regions around the country.

As for his methodology, then Abu Muntasir could at times be a Qutubist (follower of Sayyid Qutb), with intermittent moments of conversion to more moderate approaches. Abu Muntasir’s fear of being isolated and alienated by the Salafis led him to keep his radical opinions hidden, as he made clear when Jimas eventually imploded in 1996. The Qutubist streak of Abu Muntasir eventually came out at the end of 1995, when he ended up openly siding with Ali Tamimi’s extremist ideology (who is currently serving a life sentence in the USA). Safar al-Hawali, Salmaan al-Awdah and Sayyid Qutb all became ideologues for Abu Muntasir. It was this ‘aqeedah-based (doctrinal) differing that was truly the dismantling of Jimas which led to the eventual isolation of Abu Muntasir. The more Abu Muntasir made apparent his political activism, the more myself and the other du’aat distanced themselves from him. Jimas as a group remains till this day, but now its pendulum has swung in the opposite direction, claiming to be non-Jihadist and non-radical, but still very distance and aloof from the Salafis and the Salafi creed.

On his return, I met Abu Muntasir in Manchester. He told me how unimpressed he was with Shaikh al-Albaanee (due to him not giving “importance” to the political situation of the Muslims), and was particularly irate after being advised by Al-Albaanee that the manner in which he had wrapped his turban opposed the Prophetic Sunnah.

He was, however, very impressed with Muhammad Ismail in Egypt, as he was much more “aware” of the plight of the Muslims worldwide and their political situation. He also informed me in the same conversation that there was a plot to oust him as the leader of JIMAS headed by Abu Aliyah, and he would resist all attempts, since now it was no longer personal but doctrinal. He spoke of the attempts of Abu Sufyaan Abdul-Kareem McDowell to dislodge the status of Syed Abul-Ala Maududi, Hasan al-Banna and Sayyid Qutb as great Islamic scholars and reformers, and he found this offensive to his vision of Islam.

To further underline this doctrine, Ali Timimi was invited by Abu Muntasir in the spring of 1996. He delivered a lecture in East London that really drew the line in the sand entitled: “A Word of Advice to the Salafis in the UK.” In this lecture, he spoke of Tawheed al-Haakimiyah as a distinct fourth category of Tawheed (regarded by the Salafi scholars to be a doctrinal innovation), parliamentary elections, Jihad and political agitation.

In this sitting, Tamimi re-iterated much of his paranoid ideas revolving around the New World Order and it had overtaken and infiltrated the Salafi da’wah. He told us that we should not be surprised if he (Tamimi) was assassinated in the near future by the forces of evil due to him uncovering these realities and their effect upon the da’wah of ahlus-Sunnah. He said that he had been holding these views for a few years, but didn’t feel it was the right time to speak… until now.

The Qutbiyyah (see here, here, here, here and here for proof that the Scholars recognize them and label them as a faction with this name and methodology) are boasting these days that Ali al-Timimi was "spoon-feeding" aqidah to the youth in the United Kingdom in the early 90s. This was when he had not fully transitioned to the da'wah of Sayyid Qutb, and in those days he did speak a lot of truth, even if influences of the Qutbiyyah were clearly manifest in some of his speech even at that time. What destroyed Ali al-Timimi was a number of factors, the most important of them being firstly his attachments to and infatuation with Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq, the Egyptian, through which he eventually got poisoned and overtaken by Qutb's exaggerated doctrines of Haakimiyyah. And secondly his long standing commitments towards the Innovators of IANA and his associations with Salaah as-Saawee and other unsavouries amongst the Qutbiyyah. Signs of this affectation could be seen in the early 90s but it wasn't till after the mid-90s that his affair became manifest, and unfortunately it deteriorated from that point onwards after he turned his back upon many of the usool he was previously "spoon-feeding" to others before the mid-90s, and took a portion of the youth towards the Ikhwani methodologies of Abdur-Rahman Abdul-Khaliq and his likes. This shows that guidance is in Allaah's hands and having plenty of knowledge and understanding of issues does not actually equate to guidance in and of itself.

I had spoken with Abu Aliyah Surkhil extensively in the days leading up to the meeting, and he had assured myself and others that “this time” he would take a firm and vocal stance against Jimas and Abu Muntasir. On the day, however, he entered the boardroom, embraced Abu Muntasir before all of us in the meeting room and sat right next to him, and hardly said a word throughout the meeting, let alone against the Qutubist methodology of Abu Muntasir. In the following year or two, this behaviour of appeasement of counter-Salafi Creeds would become a trademark of Abu Aliyah and his handful of followers.

He progressively became antagonistic towards the Salafi Methodology, even showing bitterness towards the Salafi scholars. By 1997, he had isolated himself from most of the Salafis, retaining links with small pockets here and there such as Brixton Mosque.

Unfortunately, many of those public speakers who opposed Abu Muntasir in that era, ended up either returning back to him and cooperating with him, or they just chose another methodology in opposition to the Salafi Methodology. From them: Abu Aliyah Surkhil (left the Salafi da’wah and found affinity with Sufism), Usamah Hasan (took a Modernist Mu’atazilite approach and later claimed that the Prophet Adam evolved from an ape), Abdur-Raheem Green (chose the Ikhwaanee approach, now an associate of Yusuf Estes, Zakir Naik, Bilal Philips, etc), Ilyas Kirmani (associated with Green Lane Mosque, now an elected representative of the Socialist Respect Party in Bradford), Abdul-Haqq Baker (of Brixton Mosque, who are promoters of the methodology of Ali al-Halabi).

Suhaib Hasan at that time was respected by most of the Salafi speakers including ourselves due to his age and studies, but cracks started appearing as early as 1995. His lack of connection to the Scholars, his self-appointed status as the “mufti” of the UK, his short-temper and quick rage, his cooperation with, and promotion of Sufi and Ash’aree speakers (such as Said Darsh, an open critic of Salafiyyah) raised eye-brows, his willingness to sit on stage with any sectarian that invited him were all matters of concern. As the Salafis entered the internet era, information such as this started to be readily available through advertised talks of Suhaib Hasan. By the end of 1996, Suhaib Hasan, like Abu Muntasir, isolated himself due to his numerous oppositions.

Meanwhile Suhaib Hasan had decided upon his path of appeasing the innovated groups such as Ikhwaan al-Muslimoon. Look at this conference flier, where Suhaib Hasan appears in the list of speakers alongside misguided individuals such a Rashid Ghanouchi:

I remember in early 1997, in my home in Birmingham, Shaikh Muhammad b. Haadee recorded an audio tape advising Suhaib Hasan to openly free himself from such people and groups who are upon misguidance, specifically focussing upon this conference flier. Also present was my good brother Abu Ubaidah Amar Bashir and Shaikh Abdus-Salaam Burjiss (rahimahullaah). Amar Bashir delivered the tape to Suhaib Hasan and advised him to take the advice of Shaikh Muhammad b. Haadee (hafidhahullaah), which he refused. Instead, he let off a tirade of abuse towards some of the Salafi sheikhs and the students of knowledge who dare question his authority and functions as a “scholar”. It is this same stubborn pride that has led him in recent times to be forcibly removed from the very Mosque he himself established in Leyton, East London nearly 20 years ago; ousted by his onetime most ardent supporters.