باسمك
اللهم
وصلاتك
وسلامك على نبيك وعبدك محمد
وعلى
آله وازواجه وذريته
Sayyid
Qutb was among those who introduced the dangerous concept of the
non-existence of the Muslim Ummah, in part to justify his innovated
political fikr which assumes the Muslim world is steeped in a
state of jahiliyah. It is this idea which gives rise to the
phenomenon of wholesale takfir, Kharijism, violence and
terrorism. Qutb writes:
وجود
الامة المسلمة يعتبر قد انقطع منذ قرون
كثيرة
“The
Muslim Ummah has been extinct for many generations”
وهذه
الامة بهذه الواصفات قد انقطع وجودها منذ
انقطاع الحكم بشريعة الله من فوق ظهر
الارض جميعا
“The
Muslim Ummah with these characteristics vanished the moment judgment of the
Shari’ah of Allah ceased completely upon the face of the Earth”
فقد
غابت الامة المسلمة عن وجود وعن شهود دهرا
طويلا
“The
Muslim Ummah has vanished from existence and observation for a long
time” (Ma’alim fit-Tariq, pp.5-6):
Contrary
to such a foolish notion, the Apostle of Allah صلى
الله عليه وآله وسلم reportedly
said:
نَحْنُ
آخِرُ الأُمَمِ
“We
are the last of the Umam”
وَأَنَا
آخِرُ الأَنْبِيَاءِ وَأَنْتُمْ آخِرُ
الأُمَمِ
“I
am the last of the Prophets and you are the last of the Umam”
Now
logically, if the Ummah of Prophet Muhammad صلى
الله عليه وآله وسلم has
ceased to exist, for a long time (as Qutb claims), then according to
the Prophetic tradition it cannot be reconstituted. If the Ummah
ceased to exist absolutely, then the reconstitution of the Ummah
ultimately means the creation of a new Ummah, which would falsify the
Hadith “We are the last Ummah” and “You are the last Ummah”.
Obviously, what he meant by "Ummah" was a Muslim society not governed by Shariah, and that in the present time Muslims are dispersed around the world and there is not a coherent Muslim nation (Ummah). He did not mean the word "Ummah" in the sense used by the Prophetﷺ. Your interpretation of his words is ridiculous, since what does "The Muslim Ummah has vanished" even mean according to it? How can the Ummah of Muhammadﷺ vanish, unless all the Muslims apostate or die, which is impossible. The Ummah of Muhammadﷺ as used by the Prophetﷺ meant the people who worship Allah and follow Muhammadﷺ, not Isaرضي الله عنه or Moosaرضي الله عنه. You are accusing Syed Qutb of takfeering the entirety of the Muslim Ummah according to your interpretation.
ReplyDeleteQutb was infamous for making mass takfir of Muslim society, which he claimed is living in a state of Jahiliyyah. He did not make takfir on all Muslim individuals, but he said the Ummah is non-existent, Ummah in the istilahi/terminological sense.
DeleteSo then why are you lying and slandering Qutb, saying that he used the term Ummah in the same sense that the Prophet(PBUH) used it you Qadiani kafir?
DeleteBecause he did use the word Ummah in the istilahi sense, and then claimed the Ummah is absent or non-existent.
DeleteHe didn't use it in the same sense as the Prophet(PBUH). Again, why are you lying and slandering him you Qadiani kafir?
DeleteMuslim society is indeed a kafir society because it is not based upon Shariah. And he also used Ummah not in the way you claimed he used and and not in the way the Prophet (PBUH) used it.
ReplyDeleteQutb did use the term Ummah in the technical or Istilahi sense, as have you when you claim "Muslim society is indeed a kafir society". Just because Muslim society is not 100% in perfect accord with the Shari'ah doesn't mean it is a kafir society. To declare a society a kafir society is takfir.
DeleteIt does mean it is a kafir society you murji.
DeleteLook here you Qadiani kafir-murtadd, you are either lying and slandering the shaheed Syed Qutbؒ, who did not stop speaking the truth even if it costed it his life, did not rescind anything he said even though the kuffar told them he would be spared if he did so, or you are doing something far worse, which is lying and blaspheming against the Prophetﷺ and the Qur’an, by saying that the Prophetﷺ would approve of the society Qutbؒ lived in as a Muslim society, a society ruled by secular atheist dictators who killed Muslim scholars, where not a single hudud was enforced and riba and everything un-Islamic was rampant. Are you saying the Prophetﷺ would approve of this society as a Muslim society? The man who said he would cut off the hand of his own daughter if she stole? Kafir-murtadd, are you saying that a society where something other than the Qur’an is used to judge is a Muslim society and government? Are you going against both the Prophetﷺ and the Qur’an you murtadd? It seems instead of admitting you lied and slandered Qutbؒ, you are adamant choosing to become a blasphemous kafir-murtadd, though you probably already are one.
Deleteإِنَّآ أَنزَلْنَا ٱلتَّوْرَىٰةَ فِيهَا هُدًى وَنُورٌ ۚ يَحْكُمُ بِهَا ٱلنَّبِيُّونَ ٱلَّذِينَ أَسْلَمُوا۟ لِلَّذِينَ هَادُوا۟ وَٱلرَّبَّـٰنِيُّونَ وَٱلْأَحْبَارُ بِمَا ٱسْتُحْفِظُوا۟ مِن كِتَـٰبِ ٱللَّـهِ وَكَانُوا۟ عَلَيْهِ شُهَدَآءَ ۚ فَلَا تَخْشَوُا۟ ٱلنَّاسَ وَٱخْشَوْنِ وَلَا تَشْتَرُوا۟ بِـَٔايَـٰتِى ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا ۚ وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّـهُ فَأُو۟لَـٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْكَـٰفِرُونَ
Your emotional rant reveals you aren't interested in the truth, just blind following Syed Qutb's fatal blunders. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم would certainly not approve of contemporary Muslim society, but he wouldn't declare it kafir either, nor would he say the Ummah is non-existent. You are obviously a takfiri Kharijite, remember, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said that the Khawarij are the كلاب النار "Dogs of Hell" so beware
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteA society which is not ruled by Shariah is not Islamic neither Muslims. This is obvious. Bring your proof if you are truthful that the Prophet(PBUH) wouldn't declare it kafir. I have presented clear verses saying that such a society is kafir, yet you ignore them for your own twisted interpretation not found in the Qur'an and Sunnah.
Deleteإِنَّآ أَنزَلْنَا ٱلتَّوْرَىٰةَ فِيهَا هُدًى وَنُورٌ ۚ يَحْكُمُ بِهَا ٱلنَّبِيُّونَ ٱلَّذِينَ أَسْلَمُوا۟ لِلَّذِينَ هَادُوا۟ وَٱلرَّبَّـٰنِيُّونَ وَٱلْأَحْبَارُ بِمَا ٱسْتُحْفِظُوا۟ مِن كِتَـٰبِ ٱللَّـهِ وَكَانُوا۟ عَلَيْهِ شُهَدَآءَ ۚ فَلَا تَخْشَوُا۟ ٱلنَّاسَ وَٱخْشَوْنِ وَلَا تَشْتَرُوا۟ بِـَٔايَـٰتِى ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا ۚ وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّـهُ فَأُو۟لَـٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْكَـٰفِرُونَ
This entire blog reveals you are probably slightly mentally insane and you spend your time poring over books to take out of context quotes to justify your kufr.
Sheikh ul-Islam ibn Taymiyyah (ra) stated:
Deleteقال شيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية رحمه الله تعالى: ‘والإنسان متى حلّل الحرام المجمع عليه أو حرّم الحلال المجمع عليه أو بدّل الشرع المجمع عليه؛ كان كافراً باتّفاق الفقهاء
“Whenever a person makes Halaal what is Haraam by consensus or makes Haraam what is Halaal by consensus or replaces the Shari’ah that is agreed upon by consensus, then he is a Kafir by the agreement of the scholars of Fiqh.” [Majmu al-Fatawa, 3/267]
And al-Imam ibn Hazam (ra) stated:
قال ابن حزم رحمه الله تعالى: ‘من حكم بحكم الإنجيل ممّا لم يأت بالنص عليه وحيٌ في شريعة الإسلام؛ فإنّه كافر مشرك خارج عن الإسلام
“Whoever rules by torah and injil in issues where there is no text from revelation in the Shari’ah of Islam; then he is a Kafir Mushrik outside of Islam. With the consensus of the Fuqaha [scholars of Fiqh].” [Ihkaam al-Ahkaam fi Usuol Al-Ahkaam, 5/153]
Subhana’Allah! al-Imam ibn Hazam (ra) states a consensus of the Fuqaha regarding the kufr of those who rule with [the true] Torah and Gospel [because those were only for the children of Israel]. So what about those today, who rule with the Laws of the Jews and Christians, and the accursed among the people [Atheists, democrats, secularists]?
And what is the ruling regarding those who rule with Christians policies, the Laws of the UN, or the laws of the UN Security Council [the Sheikh calls it’s UN KUFR Council]. What is the ruling regarding this people?
“Those are more Kafir than Iblis [satan], and more pernicious.”
Ibn Hazam says that the one who rules with the TRUE Gospel and Torah, and leaves the Quran is a Kafir with the consensus of the Fuqaha. And those who rule with the policies of Bush and the policies of the accursed among people [Nato, UN] they don’t become Kafir??
This is called KUFR AKBAR! If a person removes parts of the Shari’ah, or doesn’t implement it at all, this is called Kufr Akbar [disbelief which takes you out of the fold of islam].
And that’s why al-Hafith ibn Kathir (ra) says in Al-Bidayyah wa’l Nihayyah Book 13, about Genkis Khan, when he speaks about those who ruled with Al-Yaasiq [the laws of the Tartars]:
قال الحافظ ابن كثير رحمه الله: ‘فمن ترك الشرع المحكم، المنزل على محمد بن عبد الله خاتم الأنبياء وتحاكم إلى غيره من الشرائع المنسوخة كفر فكيف بمن تحاكم إلى الياسق وقدمها عليه؟ من فعل ذلك كفر بإجماع المسلمين
“Whoever does that, he has disbelieved by the Ijmaa of the Muslims.” [al-Bidayyah Wa’l Nihayyah, 13/118-119]
We have the consensus of the scholars. So we have Ibn Hazam (ra) who stated with consensus, the same for Sheikh ul-Islam ibn Taymiyyah (ra) and al-Hafith ibn Kathir (ra). So what remains, is misguidance, deviation, irjaa and playing with the Book of Allah (سبحانه وتعالى) and the Sunna of His Messenger (صلى الله عليه و سلم).