The Clarification of Contemporary Sects

Sayyid Quṭb took the basic ideas of al-Mawdūdī and developed them into a fully developed doctrine coupled with a practical methodology. This became the idelogical springboard and fountain for all Takfīrī-Jihādī Khārijite factions in the 20th century. He accused all contemporary Muslim societies of pre-Islāmic society, denied the existence of an actual Islāmic society, accused all rulers, governments and societies of apostacy on account of their alleged ignorance of the meaning of the declaration of faith and called for general worldwide revolutions to topple the authorities.

We have documented extensively with proofs in other places that Sayyid Qutb was "gulping" down the Western materialist (secular atheistic) philosophies for 15 years of his life between 1925 and 1940 (see here); that when he started turning to Islam, this past nurturing affected his ideology and doctrine; that a major influence upon him was Marxist-Socialism; that he considered Islam to be made up in part of Communism (see here and also here); that on the basis of a Communist perspective of "Social Justice" and a [Communist] critique of Capitalism (see here), Sayyid Qutb reviled and attacked Uthmaan, Mu'awiyah, Amr bin al-Aas (radiallaahu anhum) and negated Islam from Bani Umayyah (see this series), continuing to publish his attacks upon Uthman and Bani Umayyah right until his death; that he launched a Socialist revolution in 1952 along with the Free Officers, helping Jamal Abdul-Nasser coming to power as a result, (this revolution being planned in Qutb's own house); that despite being refuted by Shaykh Mahmood Shakir in 1952 for his attacks upon the Companions he persisted upon displaying the Communist-Marxist-Socialist ideologically motivated attacks upon some of the Companions right up until his death (see here, here and here); that Qutb, having already been behind one Leninist type Socialist revolution in 1952, began to pen down the ideology of revolution in the late 1950s, along with the takfiri fikr in the late 1950s and early 1960s in his works az-Zilal and Milestones (a Leninist Manifesto for Muslims) - see this article.

There are those who try to excuse Usamah Bin Laden these days by using his express denial that he and those with him are from the Khawaarij and that they make Takfir of the sinners. And we do not take a man by his words alone until we see that the rest of his speech and action concords with what he claims. Below is evidence that this man (and his followers) are from the Kharijites and worse than the Kharijites of old, because the Kharijites of old did not praise the killing of innocent women and children (Muslim or non-Muslim) by bombings and terrorist activities, whereas these contemporary Kharijites (such as Bin Laden) consider the killing of innocent men women and children (Muslim or non-Muslim) as something praiseworthy, this has been verbally stated by Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan as occurs in this audio (see 7:00 onwards) and see this article for a translation.

The late Shaykh Ahmad bin Yahyaa an-Najmee (rahimahullaah) was asked:

Some people claim that Bin Ladin is the awaited mahdee (leader) and they grant him the title "Chief of the Believers". So what is your advice in this [matter]?

The Shaykh responded:

These (ones) are the devils (shayaateen). They are the devils. Bin Ladin is a Shaytaan Khabeeth (a filthy devil), a Kharijite (a renegade revolter). It is not permissible for anyone to praise him. Anyone who praises him, then this is evidence that he is a Kharijite just like him ... anyone who praises him, then this is evidence that he is a Kharijite just like him.

In the journal, Bin Laden offers answers to a series of questions about the ideas and movements that influenced him. For example, he lists the Muslim Brotherhood as an organisation that shaped some of his thinking in the early days of his radicalisation. More astonishingly, he reveals an unexpected and hitherto unknown source of inspiration: Necmettin Erbakan, the former prime minister of Turkey who could be regarded as the father of modern Turkish Islamism.

Bin Laden's membership of the Muslim Brotherhood was first confirmed by the current leader of Al Qaeda, Ayman Al Zawahiri, in a video released in 2014. "Sheikh Osama Bin Laden was part of the Muslim Brotherhood organisation in the Arabian Peninsula," Zawahiri said in the video. "When the Russian invasion of Afghanistan happened, the sheikh travelled immediately to Pakistan, met the mujahideen and started helping them."

Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi Isaam Barqawi is a key figure in the 20th and 21st century Leninist Takfiri movement spawned by the later works of Sayyid Qutb in which he penned down the Leninist Manifesto as a means of "snatching the Haakimiyyah of Allaah" from "jaahiliyy" (barbaric, socially unjust) societies that had usurped it and "giving it back to Allaah". To learn more about Qutb's Leninist methodological framework, please refer to this article.

This revolutionary ideology is what spawned the variety of political and revolutionary movements in the latter half of the 20th century starting from Egypt, spreading to the Middle East and then finally, finding their way into the Western lands - inclusive of a devious and innovated understanding of "Jihaad" within the context of Muslim societies primarily, and then in non-Muslim lands secondly. See this article for more on this.

Throughout his dark history, the Khārijite Qaʿdī terrorist, Abū Muḥammad al-Maqdisī, has repeatedly fallen out with other Khārijites. Whilst in Kuwait, he studied with Muḥammad Surūr for a while before differing and splitting with him. The Surūrites expelled him from their circles. Likewise he joined the circles of the Juhaymānites for a while before having disputes with them and splitting with them. It was during his time with the Juhaymānites that he authored most of his works outlining the Khārijite doctrine on the back of the core ideas of Quṭb and Mawdūdī that focus on legislation and rulership. The Juhaymānites also made him outcast due to his hastiness in takfīr, and he retaliated by writing a tract against them, accusing them of being ‘minor tāghūts’. [Tabdīd Kawāshif al-ʿAnīd (1428H) pp. 22-26]. He fell out with another Khārijite, Abū Muṣʿab al-Zarqāwī (a student of al-Maqdisī) who wrote rebuttals of al-Maqdisī and his self-centredness. After the emergence of the Khārijites of ISIS and their deeds (no doubt influenced through his ideological writings), he started distancing himself from them and claiming that “amongst them are Khārijites” without actually applying the label to them as a whole. Over the past couple of years, al-Maqdisī has numerous letters of protest against the leadership of ISIS such as al-Baghdādī and al-ʿAdnānī. However, one should never be deceived by this vile Qaʿdī terrorist and take lessons from history.

This individual has a hand in much of the blood that has been shed in the Islamic world - and the Islamic world alone. This individual beautifies his actions in the name of the religion, however he does not do that openly. It is done by indirect means.

He went to the Afghani jihad but only caught its back end and with the ideology of takfir on his table cloth, he sought refuge in London where he found shade, a refuge and place to speak openly. He managed to obtain political asylum, and thus having found his lost haven began in earnest with his tragedies.

It is extremely unfortunate that Britain accommodated him and his likes, preparing for them a repose from which to spread their poison of takfir into the Muslim lands. Indeed, it was from Britain that he mobilised his pashas in the Muslim lands to perform takfir and bombings. In addition to Abu Qatada we have the likes of Muhammad al-Mis'aree, Sa'd al-Faqih and other dissidents whose extremist methodologies are not unknown to the well-informed.

In the excellent publication by Shaikh Abdul-Malik ar-Ramadaanee (teacher in Madinah, Saudi Arabia) entitled, "Liberating the Servants From the Barbarity of Abu Qatad[a] Who Calls For the Killing of Women and Children", the author provides textual documentation of the barbaric verdicts given by this beast on two legs, advocating and justifying the killing of women and children.

The verdict was also published in al-Ansar magazine, no. 90 in 1995 and in which Abu Qatada concludes:

There it becomes clear that threatening the offspring and wives of the apostates with death, as is done by the Armed Islamic Resistance in Algeria, in order to weaken (lessen) the oppression of women, prisoners and brothers, is a legislated act and there is no doubt surrounding it.

The reference here to "apostates" are those Muslims whom the extremist takfiris (kharijites) have expelled from the fold of Islam on account of standard takfiri dogma. Abu Qatada called for the deliberate killing of the wives and children of such people they judged with disbelief.

Abu Hamza al-Misree: Abu Hamza al-Misree is another takfiri upon the thought of Sayyid Qutb. He holds the doctrine of takfir (excommunication) of contemporary Muslim nation states and their governments and he has been involved in the organization and facilitation of subversive activities in these Muslim lands - all from the comfort of London. He set up an organization in the 1990s called "Supporters of the Shariah" following the general trend in the thought of Sayyid Qutb, al-Nabahani, al-Mawdudi. The goal of all of these takfiri Kharijites is to establish the Shariah as they claim upon a corrupted understanding of jihad into which they have fused the methodologies of Socialist Communists such as Marx and Lenin which are the real foundation of their activities: the concept of revolution to establish social justice (see more details here).

Abu Hamza has many remarks glorifying acts of terrorism where innocent men, women and children have been killed and he states that these actions are respectable and that their perpetrators are "martyrs" even though he "does not condone them". We believe that these qualifications made by some of these extremist preachers "we do not condone this act", "we do not support such actions" are merely a veil by which they aim to protect themselves from a legal point of view, since by glorifying the perpetrators of these actions, you are stating that you agree wholeheartedly with the legitimacy of these actions, otherwise it is a contradiction to say that you do not condone these actions and then praise and glorify the ones who did the actions.

Omar Bakri: In order to understand Omar Bakri and Anjem Choudary (see below) we have to really understand the man upon whose books these deviant extremists have been nurtured. This man is Taqi al-Din al-Nabahani. He was a Ba'thist Communist in the late 1940s and was involved in nationalist movements in Palestine. The political party he later set up in the early 1950s was founded upon the organizational structure of those Ba'thist underground movements and it followed the Marxist-Leninist revolutionary discourse as its program, and imposed this discourse onto a new (futile) reading of the seerah (biography) of the Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).

Omar Bakri came on the university scene in the early 1990s where he was traveling frequently to the universities in London and the South of England. In those days Bakri was propagating the Mu'tazili aqidah, and he remained upon this for most of that decade. Propagation of innovatory creeds would only be natural for an ignoramus who never studied with any scholars and faked his credentials. Bakri is from the generality of the Leninist Kharijites and Leninist Takfiris of the 20th century that were spawned from the 1960s Communist Revolutionary doctrines penned by Sayyid Qutb in his Milestones and az-Zilal (see a detailed article on that here), and which became the spring and fountain for all subsequent takfiri-revolutionary movements. This ideology also penetrated the arena of Jihad, that's the subject of another article.

The Bakri Cult found a great deal of opposition and polemic against them during this period in the 1990s and their views on certain issues such as whether aahaad hadeeth amount to knowledge, and affairs of creed such as the punishment of the Grave were damaging to them. Unable to defend this baatil in part, Bakri began proclaiming repentance from his doctrines and attachment to the Salafi aqidah by the turn of the century. This was without shaking off the Leninist-Takfiri-Revolutionary manifesto that is common to all 20th Century Kharijites.

What has been discussed so far shows the intellectual dishonesty of the mentally deranged such as Abdullah al-Faisal, the Jamaican Takfiri, whose motto and slogan is "the Kafir Apostate rulers who have abolished the Sharee'ah" - and the blind dog does not realise that these rulers did not abolish the Sharee'ah as he claims - so this is simply an intellectually dishonest deluded dog, who is blinded from reality, and who leads mobs of the blind along with him. In a modern context, the only individual about whom it can be said, abolished most of the Sharee'ah, or what from it existed, and replaced it with something else was the Doenmeh Jew going under the name of Mustafa Kamal Ataturk in early 20th century Turkey. So these people like Abdullah al-Faisal are ignoramuses, and dishonest ones at that. It will be amongst the remnants of these types of deluded, ignorant people that the one-eyed liar himself, the Dajjaal will appear (see here) - so be not deceived by these blind dogs coming out and speaking with "the best speech of creation", as the Messenger (alayhis salaam) said about them, misleading, deceiving and misguiding the people.

In recent times, especially post “9-11”, academics have started to write about the growth of Salafi Da’wah in the West since the early 90’s, trying to find a link between Salafism and the radicalisation of Muslim youth in the West. The truth however is that extremist ideologues of that era tried to infiltrate the Muslim minds, they did not focus solely upon young practising Salafis, but upon all Muslims. The point that is missed by most academics is the response of Muslim groups to these alien ideologies. So what was the response, for example of the Salafis in the West, before “9-11”, to the influences of Omar Abdur-Rahmaan (Jamatul-Jihaad, Egypt), or Omar Bakri (Hizbut-Tahreer, al-Muhajiroun), or Muhammad al-Mas’aree, or Muhammad Suroor, or Faisal Abdullaah (Jamaican Jihadist), or Ali Tamimi, or Anwar Awlakee, etc, as compared to the response of other groups?

Imam: “There are certain signs and signals that you can see in someone who’s trying to radicalize others. Let me list a few of the clearest signs of an extremist: 1) He will constantly focus upon the political situation of the Muslim regimes in the Middle-East, and make that the centre-point of his discussion as if it is the most important affair in Islam. 2) He will abuse the Muslim rulers declaring them to be unbelievers and apostates; and then justify violent revolution in Muslim countries under the banner of “judgement is for Allāh!” A phrase misappropriated by the extremists and misused. 3) He will praise the leaders of extremist ideologies such as Sayyid Qutb (died 1966). Qutb is revered by extremists all around the world from Ibn Laden to Anwar Al-Awlaki. He was a prominent leader of the Egyptian group, The Muslim Brotherhood. His writings are widespread and translated into dozens of languages including English. The US-born Yemeni terrorist, Anwar Al-Awlaki once boasted that he was so immersed in the writings of Sayyid Qutb that he felt the presence of Qutb with him in his prison cell! 4) He will declare all Muslims who contradict his political world-view as unbelievers. 5) He will quite often glorify the acts of violence perpetrated by terrorists whether it be suicide bombings, beheading of hostages, killing of non-Muslims, kidnappings, etc. You will not hear condemnation of violent extremism or its figureheads from him.”

The Messenger Muhammad (alayhis salaam) described the Kharijites as "Dogs of Hellfire" in what is authentically related from him through the companion Abu Umaamah al-Bahilee, and there is no doubt that Sayyid Qutb (see here, here, here, here and here) and those who followed him in making Takfir of nation states, societies, or the rulers of the Muslims upon other than the usool of Islam and calling for revolutions enter into these labels, descriptions and revilements which have come in the Sunnah which were made againsts the Khawaarij despite their apparent piety and exaggeration in fear - it was ignorance, sentiments and desires that led them astray.

I mentioned to the father, Shaykh Abd al-Muhsin al-Abbaad (hafidhahullaah) about what has occurred from some of the fools in the Land of the Haramayn of giving the pledge of allegiance to al-Baghdadi and they say "He is the khalifah of the Muslims." He replied, "They have pledged allegiance to the devil."

Note: Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is a Takfiri murderer who has been responsible over the past few years for overseeing, if not directly participating in, terrorist attacks in and around Baghdad, targeting those deemed to be "apostates" and this includes Sunnis who have been forced in the aftermath of war, to work in the army or the police or other bodies connected to government (as a means of feeding their families). Genuine scholars of Islam, Sunnah and Salafiyyah do not pass judgement upon these people as disbelievers in this way, this is the way of the Takfiri Kharijites whose alleged "jihad" is killing those deemed "apostates" because they have connections with the government. There are circumstances in Iraq, in the aftermath of war, where Sunnis are trying to get on with their lives after two decades of hardships (this includes finding employment) and one cannot summarily judge all such people as "apostates" in this blanket manner. These affairs should be returned back to genuine major Scholars. All of this shows the truly evil nature of what these people are doing and what they are upon.

This group is takfiri Kharijite which makes takfir (excommunicates) other Muslims merely because they belong to other factions (in Iraq/Syria). Other factions (al-Nusrah) are similar, but ISIS are more evil.

The claim of al-Bagdhadi being a khalifah was spoken against a few days ago and as for what they are calling to, it is the violation of the bai'ah (loyalty, pledge of allegiance) that already exists for the amir (leader) in this country (Saudi Arabia) and you know the ruling upon one who calls to violation of a bai'ah. This is treachery.

Lashkar-e-Taiba is a Takfiri Khariji organization whose manhaj identifies with the writings and methodologies of Sayyid Qutb, Mohammad Qutb, Abu A'laa Mawdudi, Hasan al-Banna and other figureheads who were poisoned with that 20th century fikr which gave birth to destructive political movements that brought nothing but vile partisanship and a burdensome toil upon the hearts, minds and bodies of millions of Muslims in their lands. This organization shows the face of Ahl al-Sunnah but is in reality an Ikhwani, Aqlaani, Khaariji organization which does not guide itself by the Scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah and simply uses the issue of Kashmir as a means to garner support from the average Muslim (most of whom are ignorant of important matters of Tawhid and are left that way) in order to serve its own political ends.

In the above two pages of the book of Haafidh Sa'eed (the leader of Lashkar-e-Taiba) we see him following the way of Qutb, Mawdudi, Adnan Ar'oor, Abdar-Rahman Abd al-Khaliq and other wandering strayers in making al-Haakimiyyah the most special meaning of "Laa ilaaha illallaaha" and making it appear as there is no shirk except shirk in Haakimiyyah and what is similar to the way of the 20th century Leninist Takfiris in ideologically justifying the practical manifestos of secular atheist Jews (revolution in the name of social justice) as the only means of bringing justice to the servant and the land. We read (bottom of p.114), "The Qur'an has made clear that Allaah is only one deity, to Him belongs worship. To give the right of Haakimiyyah to other than Allaah means taking him as a lord (rabb) and deity (ilah). Today, in Muslim countries, the choices have been given to the parliaments..." And this is elaborated upon over the next page.