Sayyid Qutb and the Aqidah of the Raafidah: Part 3 - Mahmood Shakir's Defence of the Companions Against the Attacks of Sayyid Qutb - Third Installment - Takfir of Bani Umayyah
Tuesday, January 12 2010 - by Admin
Read more articles at TheMadkhalis.Com
Mahmood Shakir Refuting and Establishing the Hujjah Upon The Propounders of the aqidah of the Rafidah of Hatred and Revilement of the Companions

Mahmood Shakir wrote five articles in defence of the Companions of Allaah's Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). Four of them appeared in the magazine "al-Muslimoon" which was edited by Sa'eed Ramadan al-Misree, who was one of the prominent figureheads of al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimeen, and the fifth was published in "ar-Risaalah", a magazine by Ahmad Hasan az-Zayyaat. These are the five articles:

  • (حكم بلا بينة) "Hukmum bilaa Bayyinah" (Judgement without proof), published in the first edition of "al-Muslimoon", 1952

  • (تاريخ بلا إيمان) "Taareekh bilaa Eemaan" (History Without Faith), published in the second edition of "al-Muslimoon", 1952

  • (لا تسبوا أصحابي) "Laa Tasubboo Ashaabee" (Do not Revile My Companions), published in the third edition of "al-Muslimoon", 1952

  • (ألسنة المفترين) "Alsinat al-Muftareen" (Tongues of the Liars), published in the fourth edition of "al-Muslimoon", 1952

  • (ذو العقل يشقى) "Dhul-Aql Yashqaa" (Possessor of Intellect Becomes Miserable), published in "ar-Risaalah" in 1952

Do Not Revile My Companions! Third Installment

لا تسبوا أصحابي للأستاذ محمود محمد شاكر

"Do Not Revile my Companions" by Mahmood Muhammad Shakir [A Refutation of Sayyid Qutb]

After mentioning how the malice and hatreds of the idolatrous western civilization, that you would expect from the likes of the Orientalists and other haters, actually show up, explosively, in the heart of one who proclaims defense of Islam and Jihad in its path, Shaykh Mahmood Shakir, then goes on to document, from the books of Qutb, examples of this his explosive hate-filled rhetoric:

فلما جاء معاوية ، وصير الخلافة الإسلامية ملكاً عضوضاً في بني أمية ؛ لم يكن ذلك من وحي الإسلام ، إنما كان من وحي الجاهلية

ولم يكتف بهذا ، بل شمل بني أمية جميعاً ، فقال:

فأمية بصفة عامة لم يعمر الإيمان قلوبهم ، وما كان الإسلام لها إلا رداء تخلعه وتلبسه حسب المصالح والملابسات

[Qutb says]:
So when Mu'aawiyah came, and he turned the Islamic Khilaafah into biting kingship amongst Bani Umayyah, then that was not from the spirit of Islaam, verily, it was from the spirit of jaahiliyyah.

And he [Qutb] did not suffice with this, rather, he included the whole of Bani Umayyah, so he [Qutb] said:

[Bani] Umayyah, as a general characteristic, eemaan did not populate their hearts, and Islaam was nothing but a cloak which they donned and removed in accordance with the [prevailing] self-interests (masaalih) and relations.

As for these two quotes that Mahmood Shakir has quoted from Qutb, then firstly, regarding the khilaafah becoming kingship, then Mu'aawiyah was the first and the best of the kings, and kingship, although it is not the ideal situation as regards to the rule, it is permissible in Islaam. Further, that the Khilaafah would turn into a kingship is something that the Messenger (alayhis salaam) foretold - refer to this article.

As for what Qutb says about Bani Umayyah, then that is Takfir of them. And then Mahmood Shakir continues to bring the next quote:

ثم يذكر يزيد بن معاوية بأسوأ الذكر ، ثم يقول:

وهذا هو الخليفة الذي يفرضه معاوية على الناس ، مدفوعاً إلى ذلك بدافع لا يعرفه الإسلام ، دافع العصبية العائلية القبلية ، وما هي بكثيرة على معاوية ولا بغريبة عليه؛ فمعاوية هو ابن أبي سفيان وابن هند بنت عتبة ، وهو وريث أحد قومه جميعاً ، وأشبه شيء بهم في بعد روحه عن حقيقة الإسلام ؛ فلا يأخذ أحد الإسلام بمعاوية أو بني أمية؛ فهو منه ومنهم بريء

Then he mentions Yazeed bin Mu'awiyah with the most evil of mentions, then he says:

And this is the khalifah that Mu'awiyah imposed upon the people, [being led] to that with an incentive that is unknown to Islam, the incentive of family and tribal partisanship, and it is not too much or too strange for Mu'awiyah, for Mu'awiyah is the son of Abu Sufyan and the son of Hind bint Utbah, and he is single heir of all of his people, and the most resembling thing to them in his spirit [being] far-removed from the reality of Islaam. So no one takes Islam with Mu'awiyah or Bani Umayyah for it (Islaam) is free, innocent from him (Mu'aawiyah) and them (Bani Umayyah).

This is Takfir of Bani Umayyah. And Mahmood Shakir (rahimahullaah) pointed this out forty years ago and so what was the crime of Shaykh Rabee' forty years later that when a people showed treachery to the Ummah and to Ahl us-Sunnah, by propagandizing Qutb as "an Imaam of Guidance" on a par with the Shaykhs of Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Abdul-Wahhaab (thanks Salman al-Awdah), the Shaykh began to show the spuriousness of this claim - so what was his crime?

Related Articles: