Did Sayyid Qutb Repent From Abusing and Attacking the Companions? Refuting the Intellectual Fraud of the Extremist Qutbiyyah - Part 1|
Friday, January 29 2010 - by Admin
Read more articles at TheMadkhalis.Com
Understanding the Propensity of the Extremist Qutbiyyah in Defending Falsehood
The Qutbiyyah are claiming that Sayyid Qutb repented from his attacks upon the Sahaabah, which is an empty claim, devoid of evidences, and the reason why this claim is fraudulent and cannot be sustained is because Qutb's attacks upon the Companions Uthmaan, Mu'awiyah, Amr bin al-Aas and the Bani Umayyah were from an ideological conviction derived from the notion of "Social Justice", which came from his Marxist-Socialist-Communist background. So they have no proof unless they bring something that meets the guidelines of a proper repentance (see below).
Requirements of a True Repentance
Qutb's response to Mahmood Shakir and his persistence upon his ideological conviction regarding those Companions proves that Qutb did not change, and he did not remove the malice in his heart. Further, if the Qutbiyyah are claiming he repented, then altering some words does not constitute repentance, rather a true repentance is characterized in:
That's a sign of a true repentance. We will give the Qutbiyyah three years from today's date, 29th January 2010 to provide us with this Sharee'ah repentance that is ascribed to Sayyid Qutb from his attacks against the Companions.
Part 1: First Example of Change in Wording
In the 5th edition of "al-Adaalah al-Ijtimaa'iyyah fil-Islaam" (Social Justice in Islaam), Qutb said on page 189 of the 5th edition:
وأخيرًا ثارت الثائرة على عثمان ، واختلط فيها الحقُّ بالباطل ، والخير بالشر ، ولكن لا بدّ لمن ينظر إلى الأمور بعين الإسلام ويستشعر الأمور بروح الإسلام أن يقرّر أن تلك الثورة في عمومها كانت أقربَ إلى روح الإسلام واتجاهه من موقف عثمان ، أو بالأدق من موقف مروان ومِن ورائه بنو أمية
And towards the end, tumult was stirred up against Uthmaan, and in which truth became mixed with falsehood, and good with evil. However, it is vital for the one who looks at the affairs through the eye of Islaam, and perceives the affairs through the spirit of Islaam that he affirms that that revolution, in its generality, was closer to the spirit of Islaam and it's (Islaam's) orientation, than the position of Uthmaan, or to be more precise, than the position of Marwan and whoever was behind him [of] the Bani Umayyah.
This is what he said in the 5th edition.
In the book "al-Adaalah al-Ijtimaa'iyyah" (1993CE/1413H, Dar ash-Shurooq), there is a small introduction (p. 5) by Sayyid Qutb, which is signed and dated March 1954CE, and in this edition there were some changes in wording. It should be noted that the last edition before Qutb's death was the 6th edition, and that is the one that has continued to be reprinted as further editions. We have with us the 13th edition at this point in time.
Qutb writes (p. 160-161):
And towards the end, tumult was stirred up against Uthmaan, and in which truth became mixed with falsehood, and good with evil. However, it is vital for the one who looks at the affairs through the eye of Islaam, and perceives the affairs through the spirit of Islaam that he affirms that that revolution, in its generality, was an outburst of the spirit of Islaam, and this is without ignoring the plot of Ibn Saba' - upon him be the curse of Allaah - that was behind it.
Here, Qutb describes the revolution that Ibn Saba' al-Yahudi instigated, ideologically and practically, against Uthmaan, as something that was a manifestation of the real and true spirit of Islaam - which is that spirit fused with Marxist Communist notions of "Social Justice" with a (مزيجا كاملا), and the spectacles of which Qutb is looking through towards the Companions when he speaks about them - and Qutb described it as such whilst making full admission that it was a revolution instigated by Ibn Saba'. So while he avers the fact that it was plotted by Ibn Saba' he actually agrees with it and is content with it, and considers it in line with the Islamic spirit (of justice). And instead of pouring his scorn upon those vagabonds who made the revolution against Uthmaan, he is actually justifying it and describing it as "an outburst of the spirit of Islaam", which means that this revolution is closer to the spirit of Islam than the actions of Uthmaan - so we so no change in meaning at all.
And he also says a little later in this same edition (p. 161)
Uthmaan passed to the mercy of his Lord, and he left the Amawi State in power, by virtue of [his] placing them [in authority] upon the land, and particularly in Shaam, and by virtue of what he had put in place of the Amawi foundations that were alien to the spirit of Islam, of establishing hereditary kingship, and monopolization of maghaanim (war-booties), wealth and other utilities, from those things that brought about a convulsion in the general Islamic spirit.
You can see here Qutb's choice of words which contain nothing but a continued belittlement of Uthman, Mu'awiyah, Bani Umayyah and glorification of those souls who were stirred by what they saw and were led to revolt, with his full knowledge that it was all instigated by Abdullah bin Saba al-Yahudi. And note his statement "whether in truth or falsehood" and this is a statement that a person whose soul is pure towards the Companions would never make. Qutb took these stances because of the influence of his Communist Socialist Marxist background, and because of that notion of [Communist] "Social Justice" which led him to transgress against the Companions and you will then understand why Mahmood Shakir, when refuting Qutb described Qutb's attacks as "the resentments of the idolatrous western civilization manifesting explosively in the heart of one proclaiming defence of Islam and Jihad in its path" (see here).
Note the fact that Qutb did not show anger towards the revolution led towards Uthmaan (radiallaahu anhu) and nor the vagabonds who were behind it, rather he praised it, and so his ideological conviction prior to when Mahmood Shakir refuted Qutb in 1952 remained with him, and on account of it he continued his attacks and belittlements upon Uthmaan (radiallahu anhu) as you can clearly see from what is above (by way of example only).
And this occured from Qutb after Mahmood Shakir refuted him (in 1952), and Qutb refused to back down in his stance, and these statements and many others remained in his book until it reached six editions prior to his death, and they continue to be published by his brother, Mohammad Qutb, decades on.
Shaykh Rabee, the Qutbiyyah and their Hypocrisy
Shaykh Rabee', in his documentation of Sayyid Qutb's revilements against the Companions quoted both the 5th and the 12th editions whenever he quoted from Qutb in his book "Mataa'in Sayyid Qutb fee As.haabi Rasoolillaah", showing his scrupulousness, fairness, justice and integrity, and through that he established that Qutb did not change his view, rather he persisted upon. Update to article: The PDF in the link above is the 13th edition.
So they found a few remarks, a few of which were valid criticisms against what were mere slips of the tongue, and the rest were just lies and fabrications. To see an example of how these people lie and fabricate in broad daylight against Shaykh Rabee' see this article. Even if you have hatred against someone, it does not justify lying in broad daylight through your back teeth. In any case, Shaykh Rabee' clarified those statements and made a proper Sharee'ah clarification inclusive of all the conditions of a tawbah and we shall document that separately inshaa'Allaah.