The aqidah of the Jahmiyyah and Mu'tazilah is Based Around Expressing The Negation of Innovated Terms

The Salaf declared as kafirs those who appeared in the early to mid second century hijri and initially did not explicitly reveal that their greatest goal was to reject Allaah is above the heaven, above the Throne. The Salaf however, due to their perspicacity figured out their evil intentions and as early as 129H, Ayyub as-Sakhtiyaanee, from the Taabi'een, had started exposing their saying which revolved around kufr.

The Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah and whoever followed them (the later Ash'ariyyah and the Maturidiyyah), used the language of negation to deny that Allaah is separate and distinct from the creation, above the heaven, above the Throne, and so they started saying, "He is not above, below, right left, he is not in a Makaan (location), and not in a hayyiz (space), and not in a Jihah (direction), and does not have a hadd (limit)" and so on, and this became the hallmark of the deen of the Jahmites, through the centuries, and of the enemies of the deen of the Messengers, such as the likes of the kafir, Ibn Sina (see here).

The aqidah of the Jahmiyyah in the Commentary of Qutb Upon The Qur'an, "az-Zilal" For Whose Propaganda al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimeen Expend The Greatest of Efforts, Being Treacherous to the Ummah In That

Sayyid Qutb said:

How does this connection occur between the eternal essence [without beginning or end] (adh-dhaat al-azaliyyah, al-abadiyyah) and which has no hayyiz (spatial occupation) in a Makaan (location), and nor any hayyiz in zamaan (time), and which encompasses everything, and in regards to which there is nothing which is a likeness of it. How does this connection occur between this lofty essence, and the essence of a human (insaan) that occupies space in location and time, which is mahdoodah (confined, limited) with the hudood (limits, confines) of the created things, [and who is] from the perishing people. Further, how does this connection exemplify the meanings, words and expressions?

Qutb is talking about the revelation, since the verse he is commenting upon is the saying of Allaah (in meaning), "It is not given to any human being that Allah should speak to him unless (it be) by Inspiration, or from behind a veil, or (that) He sends a Messenger to reveal what He wills by His Leave. Verily, He is Most High, Most Wise." (Ash-Shura 42:51), and he is speaking of how this revelation and its meanings are conveyed. As we will see in other places, Qutb, is upon the doctrine of the Kullaabi Ash'arites of affirming kalaam as an eternal existent with Allaah. But here, he speaks about Allaah's Essence, and he has spoken with the language of the Jahmiyyah of negating Makaan, hayyiz, and hadd for Allaah. And as for Allaah's uluww and istiwaa then Qutb, as we have seen in numerous other articles previously, makes Ta'weel of them to mean "isti'laa" which means "superiority (in rank)" and not loftiness, highness, with the Essence.

And the way of Ahl us-Sunnah regarding these terms is to neither affirm them nor speak with their negation since both of these are innovated methodologies.

Immediately after he says:

And how is a perishing, limited essence (dhaat mahdoodah) able to acquire the eternal (without beginning or end) speech of Allaah, for which there is no hayyiz and no hudood.

Here Qutb has expressed the doctrine of the Kullaabi Ash'arites of holding Allaah's speech to be an eternal meaning, and he does not mean here the naw' ul-kalaam (speech in general, in type) as an attribute being eternal, he means here the actual instances of speech, and he holds them to be eternal - upon the principle of negating hawaadith (events, occurrences) from Allaah, as we have outlined in previous articles - where Qutb propounds this great foundation of the deen of the Jahmites, of negating what they deem to be hawaadith (i.e. Allaah's actions tied to His will and power) as being from Tawheed.

Then a few lines later:

Are you with me, [in] trying to imagine [this]? This revelation [that] arose from "there (hunaak)". Do I say "there (hunaak)"?! Never. For there is no "there (hunaak)"! [The revelation] [came] from without a Makaan (location) and without time (zamaan), and with no hayyiz (space occupation), and no hadd (limit), and no Jihah (direction), and no dharf (enveloping circumstance)...

Qutb, then completed the deen of the Jahmiyyah in expressing negation of a "there (hunaak)", and he means by this to deny the revelation came from Allaah from above the heavens, above the Throne, and at the same time, he speaks upon the style and way of the Ash'ariyyah in claiming Allaah does not speak according to His will and power, that His speech is eternal (in all respects), and Qutb expresses bewilderment as to how can such a communication take place between Allaah and His creation (meaning the Prophets). As we will see, Qutb, also negates that Allaah's revelation was heard, so all of this is a complete conception of the deen of the Jahmiyyah, it is not an "isolated" error or mistake. Rather Tajahhum, as a way of thinking, is what is being propounded here. And this Tajahhum is what is being propagated and propagandized to millions of people by al-Ikwhaan al-Muslimeen, who no doubt are treacherous to the Ummah.

As for the odd isolated statement that the Qutbo-Leninists have found from some of our Scholars, which allow for the students of knowledge who can distinguish between truth and falsehood, to benefit from some of the literary beauty of expression that may be found in parts of the book, then that really is clutching on to straws, and clutching to the flotsam of the sinking ship to prevent oneself from drowning, and it actually is a sign of dishonesty and hypocrisy. This is especially the case when some of these people make an open display of chivalry in refuting the "Ash'ariyyah" and their "doctrines of kufr" of the Qur'an being created and negating al-Uluww for Allaah the Most High! And this is besides the fact that many of these Qutbo-Leninists consider this particular Scholar whose words they employ to be a kaafir, apostate in the first place, and for argument's sake, if he is a kaafir apostate, then since when has the saying of a kaafir apostate been acceptable as hujjah in religious affairs? So they abandoned all of this, for the saying of one who in the view of many of these people is a kaafir apostate! Indeed their sincerity has been put to trial and Allaah has exposed their allegiance for falsehood.

Most people sincerely desire the truth, they are sincere seekers of truth. However, it is often the case that the truth is veiled from them for a while, but most people are not evil, they sincerely desire the truth, with good intentions, and we ask Allaah that He guides such people to see the truth and to see the falsehood, treachery and hypocrisy of the people who keep them in such confusion away from the true aqidah and methodologies of the Salaf, through a variety of types of deceptions - which are being uncovered one by one, walhamdulillaah.

For it is not possible for these people to detest and hate that these affairs are pointed out, and for them to slander and revile those who give sincerity of purpose to Allaah in defending the Salafi aqidah from the deviations found in the books of the As'harites, except because of their aversion to the aqidah of the Salaf itself, and except because it clashes with the Leninist aqidah of violent revolution. Further to this, if you take out all of the innovations and deviations out of the books of Sayyid Qutb, what do you have left that allows you to understand exactly what it is that these people are infatuated with, for which they are prepared to traverse the lands, conquer mountains and fare the violent oceans?

Its only one of two things.

• Either it is the literary expressions which make them feel good.
• Or its the Leninist revolutionary methodology

We'll leave the reader to judge in accordance to what Allaah has revealed (of affairs of creed, methodologies, means of rectification and so on) in relation to this matter - i.e. for what reason are these people attached to the books of Qutb and for what reason do they propagandize for them?

Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan said, as occurs in the book (الإجابات المهمة فى المشاكل الملمة) in response to a question by some students pertaining to those who revile a particular Scholar who refuted Qutb and then advise the students to read the books of Sayyid Qutb:

As for him specifying reading the books of so and so only, then this indicates he is a person of desire ... and when we read the books of Sayyid Qutb or other than them, [with what] shall we benefit? Will be benefit in knowing Tawheed? Will we benefit in knowing Shirk? Will we benefit in knowing the acts of worship? Will we benefit in knowing the rulings of the mu'aamalaat and fiqh? I do not think we will benefit from these great types of knowledge. Rather, we will benefit from them [only with] empty sentiments, Takfir of the generality of the Muslims, and revolutionary ideologies (i.e. rebellions and snatches of power). So the advisor [ought to] advise the students to read the books beneficial to them in their aqidah, their [acts of] worship, their dealings. This is the one who is the [sincere] advisor.

And this statement shows that these people are not attached to the books of Qutb except because they contain Takfir of the Muslims and calls for violent revolutions. This is now a known truth, its out in the open, and it is not possible for any drowning Qutbi to claim excuses any more, the doors have been shut, the hujjah has been established, and no one persists in propagandizing for Qutb after this, or going out of their way to defend him whilst slandering, reviling, abusing and attacking those who defend the aqidah from Qutb's excesses except a vile astray innovator.