The Heresies of Sayyid Qutb in Light of the Statements of the Ulamaa


 The Heresies of Sayyid Qutb in Light of the Statements of the Ulamaa 
Author: SalafiPublications.Com
Source: Baraa’ah Ulamaa il-Ummah Min Tazkiyah Ahl il-Bid’ah (by Isaam bin Abdullah as-Sinaanee)
Article ID : NDV010009  

Prologue
Over the past years, the Qutubiyyah have tried relentlessly to defend their leader and Imaam, Sayyid Qutb and to hide his great errors and calamitous statements. To this end they presented to the common-folk what they portrayed as Tazkiyaat (praises or certifications) of some of the Ulamaa and Mashayikh for Sayyid Qutb – whilst being ignorant, or pretending to be ignorant – of the principles of al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel. The true reality, however, was that this was a ploy to justify their innovated methodology and its repugnant principles and as a plot to introduce the concepts of Bidah and Qutubiyyah amongst the ranks of the Salafis and to prey upon the ignorance of the common-folk.
This paper is a refutation of those Qutubis who try to make the mediation of Imaam Ibn Baaz for Sayyid Qutb prior to his death a justification of Qutb’s deviant creed and methodology and as a way of praising and propagating his misguided and heretical writings. Comprising the statements and refutations of the Imaams of the Salafi Da’wah and its Mashayikh against Sayyid Qutb and those with his affectations, this paper consists of excerpts from the book “Baraa’ah Ulamaa il-Ummah Min Tazkiyat Ahl il-Bid’ah wal-Mudhammah”, checked by Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan who made additional comments and notes and read over the book twice. The book was also read by Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Uthaimeen who praised it and made some minor changes to his own words that were quoted therein.
1. Fatwaa of Shaikh Nasir ud-Deen al-Albani
The Muhaddith and Imaam, al-Albani – rahimahullaah – said, commenting upon the book ‘al-Awaasim Mimmaa Fee Kutub Sayyid Qutub Min al-Qawasim’ of Shaikh Rabee’ bin Haadee, “Everything with which you have refuted Sayyid Qutb is the truth (haqq) and is correct (sawab). And it will become sufficiently clear from this refutation to every one who has read anything from “The Islamic Heritage” that Sayyid Qutb had no knowledge of the Usool (fundamentals) or the Furoo’ (subsidiary matters) of Islaam. So may Allaah reward you with the best of reward, O brother Rabee’ for fulfilling the obligation of explaining and uncovering his ignorance and deviation from Islaam.”
Source:
From the Shaikh’s own handwritten letter which he wrote prior to his death in 1999. A photocopy of the original is included in the book itself as an appendix.
2. Fatwaa of Shaikh ‘Abdul-Azeez Ibn Baz
Some parts of the book of Sayyid Qutb ‘at-Tasweer al-Fannee fil-Qur’aan’ were read to him such as his speech about Moosaa – ‘alaihis-Salaam – upon whom he said: “Let us take Moosaa – as the example of the leader of excitable nature – and this excitable impulse quickly passes away and he regains his composure, as is the case with the excitable folk.” Then he said with regard to the Saying of Allah – the Most High – “Fa as-ba-hu fil madinati kha bi fan…” :- “This is the description of a well known state: the restlessness or fear of one expecting evil at every turn – and this is the characteristic of the excitable folk.” [‘at-Tasweer al-Fannee fil-Qur’aan’: p.200,201,203. 13th ….]
So the Shaikh replied to this:
Mockery of the Prophets is apostasy in its own.”[*]
And is was said to him that Shaikh Rabee’ al-Madhkhalee has written a refutation of Sayyid Qutb, so the Shaikh said: “Rebuttal of him is good.”
[*] And unfortunately the Qutubi movement clothing itself as Salafiyyah, has not only gone to the extremes in Takfir but has also fallen into the extremes of Irjaa’ in that it seeks to defend, nay even promote, the books and writings of their leaders and mentors which contain statements of disbelief and apostasy (examples will be given in Part 2, inshaa’allaah). Shaikh Rabee’ bin Haadee said, commenting upon Imaam al-Albani’s description of the Qutubiyyah as “The Khawarij of the Era”, that “it is more befitting that they be called Murji’ah of the Era before they are called Khawarij of the Era”. Refer to al-Asalah (Vol. 24)
Source:
During a lesson of Shaikh ‘Abdul – ‘Azeez ibn Baaz – hafizahullaah – in his house in Riyaadh 1413H, ‘Minhaajus-Sunnah tapes of ar-Riyaadh
3. Fatwaa of Shaikh ‘Abdul-Azeez Ibn Baz
A section of the book “Kutub wa Shakhsiyaat” (p.242) was read out to the Shaikh and in which Sayyid Qutb accuses of Mu’awiyah and Amr Ibn al-Aas of lying (kadhib), deception (ghish), treachery or trickery (khadee’ah), hypocrisy (nifaaq), and taking bribes (rishwah).
So he replied: “These are repugnant words!! These are repugnant words. Revilement of Mu’awiyah and of Amr Ibn al-Aas. All of this is repugnant and evil words. Mu’awiyah and Amr and whoever was with them made ijtihaad and erred[*], and those who perform ijtihaad and err then may Allaah pardon us and them.
[*] Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan in checking through this made the comment, “Being resolved that they erred is not clearly apparent, but if it was said, “They were mujtahidoon, if they were correct they have two rewards and if they erred they have one reward, yet their error is forgiven”, it would have been much better and more just.”
The questioner then said, “What about his statement that there is hypocrisy (nifaq) in them both, is that not takfir of them?”
Shaikh Ibn Baaz replied, “This is an error and a mistake which is not disbelief. For his revilement of some of the Companions or just one of them is evil (munkar) and sinfulness (fisq) and he deserves to be given exemplary punishment for it – we ask Allaah to pardon him – however, if he reviled most of them and declared them sinners then he would become an apostate, because they are the Carriers of the Revelation. When he reviles them then this means that he is reviling the legislation.”
The questioner then said, “Should not these books in which these statements exist be forbidden?”
Shaikh Ibn Baaz replied, “It is necessary for them to be torn to pieces”.
Then the Shaikh said, “Is this in a newspaper?”
The questioner said, “In a book, may Allaah be benevolent to you.”
The Shaikh asked, “Whose book?”
The questioner said, “Sayyid Qutb…”.
The Shaikh said, “These are repugnant words”.
The questioner, continuing, “… in ‘Kutub wa Shakhsiyaat’”
Source:
The cassette ‘Sharh Riyaad us-Saaliheen’ dated 18/7/1418H.
4. Fatwaa of Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Uthaimeen
Question: “What is your saying concerning a man who advises the Sunni youth to read the books of Sayyid Qutb, especially ‘Fee Dhilaal il-Qur’aan’ and ‘Ma’aalim Fit-Taareeq’, without warning about any of the errors and deviations present in these books?”
Answer: “My statement – may Allaah bless you – is that whoever gives sincerity of purpose to Allaah, His Messenger, and his brother Muslims, that he should encourage the people to read the books of those who have preceded us from the books of tafsir and other than tafsir. These books contain more blessings, are more beneficial and are much better than the books of the later ones. As for the tafsir of Sayyid Qutb – may Allaah have mercy upon him – then it contains great calamities, however we hope that Allaah pardons him. In it are great calamities, such as his tafsir of Istiwaa and his tafsir of “Qul Huwallaahu Ahad”, and similarly, his description of one of the Messengers with something unbefitting.”
Source:
From the Cassette: Aqwaal ul-Ulamaa Fee Ibtaal Qawaa’id wa Maqaalaat Adnaan Ar’oor, and checked by Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen himself on 24/4/1421H, with one slight revision who changed the phrase “Anaa Ra’yee…” to “Anaa Qawlee…”.
5. Fatwaa of Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan
Question: “[Adnaan Ar’oor] said, “Why is Imaam Ahmad not reproached for his takfir of the one who abandons prayer and yet Sayyid Qutb is reproached merely because some of these expressions occurred from him (i.e. his takfir of Muslim societies). So we say: This one performed takfir of the Muslim societies (i.e. Qutb), and yet Imaam Ahmad – may Allaah have mercy upon him – is not reproached despite his judgement of kufr against all these societies [meaning that the majority of them do not pray].”
So what is your comment upon this?”
Answer: Imaam Ahmad is a scholar and a sage (erudite, sagacious) who knows the evidences and the manner of extracting proof from them and Sayyid Qutb is an ignoramus (jaahil) who has no knowledge or cognisance and neither does he have any evidences for what he says. Hence, equating between Imaam Ahmad and Sayyid Qutb is injustice (dhulm) [because Imaam Ahmad has many evidences from the Book and the Sunnah for the one who deliberately abandons the prayer whereas Sayyid does not have a single piece of evidence for his takfir of the Muslims in general. Rather the evidences are in opposition to what he says].”
Question: “Likewise he (Adnaan Ar’oor) says, “I do not know of anyone who has spoken about the affairs of Manhaj in the manner that Sayyid Qutb has spoken of them. And he is correct in the vast majority of what he has written.” He (Ar’oor) was asked about this statement of his and he replied, “By the word minhaaj here I mean the issues of reform, elections and assassinations. And by “in his time” I mean the Fifties.”
Answer: “He (Ar’oor) does not know because he is ignorant. As for us, then we know – and all praise is due to Allaah – that the scholars both prior to and after Sayyid Qutb, opposed him.”
Source:
From the Cassette: Aqwaal ul-Ulamaa Fee Ibtaal Qawaa’id wa Maqaalaat Adnaan Ar’oor. What is in square brackets was added by Shaikh Salih al-Fawzaan himself as a further clarification.
Note
This is only a small selection of the quotations from the Ulamaa which number around 25 or so. All of the above quotations are found in the cassette “Aqwaal ul-Ulamaa Fee Sayyid Qutb”, published by Tasjeelaat Minhaaj us-Sunnah of Riyaadh.
Summary
Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Baaz (rahimahullaah) was asked, “The one who praises Ahl ul-Bid’ah, is he to be counted amongst them?” So he replied, “Yes, there is no doubt about this, the one who praises them is one who actually calls to them“. [Cassette: Aqwaal ul-Ulamaa Fee Sayyid Qutb]

Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah) said, “It is obligatory to punish everyone who ascribes himself to them – the people of innovation – or who defends them, or who praises them, or who reveres their books, or who detests that they should be talked about, or who begins to make excuses for them by saying he does not understand what these words mean or by saying that this person also authored another book and what is similar to these types of excuses, which are not made except by an ignoramus or a hypocrite. Rather, it is obligatory to punish everyone who knows of their condition and did not assist in repelling their evil, for repelling their evil is one of the greatest of obligations.” Majmoo ul-Fataawaa (2/132)

Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah also said: “And in the face of those who perform takfir in falsehood are a people who do not know the aqidah of Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah as it truly should be known, or they know some of it but are ignorant of some of it. Yet whatever they do know of it, they do not always explain it to the people but conceal it. And they do not forbid the innovations that oppose the Book and the Sunnah, nor do they rebuke the People of Innovations and neither do they punish them. In fact, they may even criticise absolutely any talk of the Sunnah and the fundamental principles of the religion [i.e. Tawhid etc.]. Or they may accommodate everyone, with all their varying madhhabs… This approach has overcome many of the Murji’ah, some of the Jurists, Sufis and Philosophers. And both of these two approaches (i.e. that of the Takfiris and the Murji’ah and those with them) are deviant, and outside the [confines of the] Book and the Sunnah.” Majmu’ ul-Fatawa (16/427)
Epilogue
So dear brother and sister for the sake of Allaah, flee from the books of Sayyid Qutb and flee from those who promote or recommend his books and flee also from those who defend and promote those who defend and promote the books of Sayyid Qutb – fearing for your religion and your aqidah and your manhaj and the repugnant Irjaa that has overcome many of the Qutubiyyah.
And if a Qutubi Revivalist comes to you and says, “Shaikh al-Albani encouraged everyone to read a chapter in Milestones”, then reply to such a one:
“O Qutubi! This is a very old saying, uttered when the true nature and extent of Qutb’s deviations and heresies were not known to Shaikh al-Albani (save the affair of Wahdat ul-Wujood). And then the Noble Shaikh Rabee’ bin Haadee exposed the affair of Sayyid Qutb, – giving sincerity of purpose to Allaah, His Messenger and the Muslims in all of that – and so when the affair became abundantly clear – and especially in more recent times – the Noble Imaam, al-Albani made the statement above to Shaikh Rabee’ “Everything with which you have refuted Sayyid Qutb is the truth (haqq) and is correct (sawab)… So may Allaah reward you with the best of reward, O brother Rabee’ for fulfilling the obligation of explaining and uncovering his ignorance and deviation from Islaam“. And are you ignorant or merely pretending to be ignorant of the principle of al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel that the specific criticism takes precedence over the general praise!! And O Qutubi, would you like us to become blind-followers of men and abandon researching the proofs and evidences? And O Qutubi, has not your fraud become uncovered already in that Al-Karaabeesee and al-Muhaasibee were more superior and knowledgeable than Sayyid Qutb and they had works that contained “admonitions and lessons” more powerful and far reaching than the sentimental writings of Qutb, but alongside that Imaam Ahmad forbade them severely, with great harshness and reprimanded the one who tried to argue that they contain benefit?! So may Allaah restrain you O Qutubi, we are people of evidence and proof and implementers of the manhaj of the Salaf – by the permission and praise of Allaah and not merely blind-followers of individuals and personalities. Salaaman!!” 

Advertisements

The Mistakes and Innovations of Sayyid Qutb


  The Mistakes and Innovations of Sayyid Qutb
Article ID : NDV010008  

Amongst those who have criticised Sayyid Qutb include:

     

  1. Shaikh Abdullaah ad-Dawaish – may Allaah have mercy upon him. He criticised ‘az-Zilaal’ a number of years ago and recorded over 180 mistakes in the matters of ‘aqeedah and manhaj in his book ‘al-Mawrid az-Zalaal fit -Tanbeeh alaa Akhtaa az-Zilaal’
  2. And for his takfeer of the whole Ummah he was even criticised by some of the prominent figureheads of Ikhwaan, indicating that at his time, his ideas were not really widely accepted.
  3. Shaikh Mahmood Muhammad Shaakir and others criticised him in his lifetime and refuted him regarding his reviling and slander of Uthmaan (ra) and the other Companions such as az-Zubair, Sa’d, Abdur-Rahmaan bin ‘Awf and also some of the taabi’een.
  4. Shaikh Muhammad Hamood an-Najdi in his book ‘al-Qawl ul-Mukhtasir al-Mubeen fee Manhaahij al-Mufassireen’ regarding his position on the Sifaat…
  5. Muhammad Tawfeeq Barakaat in his book ‘Sayyid Qutb Khulaasatu Hayaatihi’ (p.176-177) said:In these pages we shall try – with the help of Allaah – to state the most important criticisms that have been directed at Sayyid Qutb – may Allaah have mercy upon him – whether it is positive or negative, trying to do that to the best of our capability. And to the extent of my knowledge, there has not appeared any Muslim writer who has been promoted to such a high level, or whose position has been disparaged and reduced to a low level as the likes of Sayyid Qutb – and we are not festering this second aspect [i.e Qutb’s disparagement]. Let us then look at some of the things that have been said about him, generally:
    1. It has been said: That he is a new prophet for a specific Jamaa’ah of the Muslims
    2. It has been said: That he does not know what comes out of his head, the strong sentiments and fluency of the language led him to words which are but useless [no meaning behind them]
    3. It has been said: That he is a man of imaginations/ideas, he makes his rulings upon whims and he flies in the wind/breeze of the soul therefore he does not correctly know the true state of affairs
    4. It has been said: That he used to speak about the ahkaam (rulings) of the Sharee’ah without having any knowledge whatsoever of fiqh
    5. It has been said: That he desires to bring about a massive barrier between the Muslims and the Islamic fiqh
    6. It has been said: That he desired to cut the people off from the books of tafseer with the use of sentimental words in his Zilaal
    7. It has been said: That he declared all the Muslims to be disbelievers and did not leave save a few people who were still revolving around Islam.
    8. And many more things have been said about him
  6.  

  7. Shaikh Muhammad Naasir ud-Deen al-Albaanee who criticised him for his speaking with ‘wahdatul-wujood’ and said that he was merely a writer [adeeb], who was ignorant, with no knowledge, and that he did not call to the Tawheed of Allaah.

It is not correct therefore to claim that Sayyid Qutb is being criticised and disparaged now, in the Nineties by a single or perhaps two or three scholars. Rather a fair number of scholars have criticised him for many things and additionally he was criticised during his lifetimes very heavily for many matters in which he made grave and serious errors.
Amongst them are:
His rebuke and censure of the Prophet of Allaah, Moosaa (alaihis-salaam) and making him the object of ridicule.

Sayyid Qutb said, in at-Tasweer al-Fannee fil-Qur’aan: “Let us take Moosaa – he is the example of the fiery, excitable leader [quotes Qasas 28:15] and here his zealous , excitable spirit appeared, just as his emotions in favour of his nation were shown; but this emotional impulse quickly passed away – and he regained his composure – and this is what happens with the excitable folk. [Quotes Qasas 28:15-17, 18] – and this change shows a well-known manifestation, that of one who is afraid, distressed and expecting evil in every moment – and this is also the sign of the excitable (folk). Then along with this and along with the fact that he promissed that he would not aid the wrongdoers – then let us see what he did [quotes Qasas 28:18]. He desired to attack the other man just as he did the day before, and his zeal and emotion led him to forget his having sought forgiveness, his regret, his fear and his anxious watchfulness… So let us leave him here, to meet him again, at a second period in his life, ten years later. So perhaps he had calmed down and became a man who was of calm nature and gentle-natured. No indeed! So here he was, being called from the right hand side of the mountain: that he should throw down his staff, so he threw it down and it became a snake – moving quickly, he hardly saw it before he jumped and ran, not looking back and not turning aside… he was the same highly strung youth… …”

His rebuke and censure of the Companions of Allaah’s Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) , especially Uthmaan (radiallaahu anhu). [The way of the Rawaafid] On this issue he was corrected and refuted by Mahmood Shaakir in his lifetime but he maintained his position and did not recant. His refusal is in the magazine ar-Risaalah vol 977 in the year 1952. This was after Mahmood Shaakir wrote four treatise against him the titles of three of them being: hukmun bilaa bayyinah, laa tasubboo ashaabee, al-alsinatu al-muftireen. They were published in the magazine al-Muslimoon starting in Muharram of the year 1372 hijri.In spite of this he still allowed the book ‘Al-Adaalat ul-Ijtimaa’iyyah’ to be published before his death.
He said in the aforementioned book for example:
“Indeed, it was a truly a trial that Alee was not the third of the Rightly Guided Caliphs” (p.191 5th edn & p.162 12th edn.)
“And we tend to the opinion that the khilaafah of Alee was the natural extension of the khilaafah of the two shaikhs [i.e. Abu Bakr and Umar] and that the era of Uthmaan was merely a gap in between” (p.206 5th edn.)
“And it is unfortunate that the khilaafah came to Uthmaan when he was an old man; his determination had weakened and did not reach the goals intended by Islaam; and his resolve was too weak to steadfastly face the plots of Marwaan and plots of Umayyah beyond that.” (p.186 5th edn.)
“The Companions saw this deviation from the spirit of Islaam, and would call one another to al-Madeenah to save Islaam and to save Islaam from the trial; and the khalifah – in his old age, and his state brought about by advanced age – did not possess control of his affair to the expense of Marwaan. It is difficult to accuse the spirit of Islaam in the person of Islaam, but it is likewise difficult to pardon him for the error of the unfortunate occurrence of his taking the khilaafah whilst he was a weakened old man, who was surrounded by evil courtiers from Banu Umayyah…” (p.189 5th edn and its meaning is on p.161 of the 12th edn.)
His declaration of all societies to be disbelievers without exception. [The way of the Khawaarij]
And this is confirmed by Yoosuf al-Qardaawi in his book – The Priorities of the Islamic Movement (p.110) where he explains that the books of Sayyid Qutb appeared in which Qutb performs takfeer of all societies and in which he announces a destructive jihaad against the whole of mankind.
His saying that the Qur’aan is created. [The saying of the Jahmiyyah].
His saying that existence is one (wahdatul wujood). [The way of the Soofiyyah]
In his explanations of Surah Ikhlaas and also the beginning of Surah Hashr. He said, for example, in his Zilaal (6/4002): “Verily it is a single existence, and there is no other reality save that of His, and there is no true and real existence save His – and every other existing thing then its existence is an extension of His existence … and when this perception becomes firmly established, the one which sees nothing in existence except the reality of Allaah…”
And in some of his other books, Sayyid Qutb affirms this and also praises the Soofees and their actions
He said in his Zilaal (6/3291): “And there are a people who worship Allaah, because they thank him for His favours which they cannot count – and behind this worship, they do not look for Paradise or Hellfire, nor to pleasure or punishment at all…”
His saying of the divine indwelling (hulool) and also Jabr (mankind having no free will – being compelled to act). [The way of the Jabariyyah].
His denial of some of the Attributes of Allaah in the way and style of the Jahmiyyah. [The way of the Mu’attilah]
For example his denial of Istiwaa by explaining it away – that it is merely an allegorical expression as he said in his Zilaal (3/1762) and also in many other places such as: (1/53), (/1/54), (3/1296), (4/2045), (5/2807)
And likewise his denial of the Meezaan (Scales) in the way and style of the Jahmiyyah (4/2481).
His attacks on the Miracles of the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) .
His refusal of the acceptance of ahaad hadeeth in matters of Aqeedah. [The way of the Mu’tazilah]
He said in his Zilaal (6/4008): “And the Aahaad hadeeth are not to be taken in the matters of aqeedah, the source is the Qur’aan – and something being mutawaatir is a condition [that has to be fulfilled] in accepting hadeeth in the issues of belief…” And in this he is more astray than the Ash’arees
His denial of the magic that was practiced upon the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) .
His denial that Eesaa (as) was raised to the heaven
His claim that the point of dispute between the Messenger and the Pagans was with respect to Tawheed ur-Ruboobiyyah only and that Tawheed ul-Uloohiyyah is but Tawheed ur-Ruboobiyyah.
He said in his Zilaal (4/1846): “Then the issue of Uloohiyyah was not the point of difference, indeed, it was the issue of Ruboobiyyah which the messages (of the Messengers) addressed. And this was what the final message was addressing also.”
His claim that the Sifaat (Attributes of Allaah) are but mere imaginations (takhyeel).
And for those who call for Haakimiyyah and raise its banner high, then it is well known to the lowest student of knowledge that the Haakimiyyah of Allaah Azzawajall applies even more so to His Essence, His Names and Attributes [as well as His Sharee’ah etc.] So the one who does not judge – in the matters related to knowledge about Allaah – by what Allaah has revealed – then it is more befitting for him to be labelled a rejector of the Haakimiyyah of Allaah Azzawajall. What is required is justice and fair speech and speaking the truth, even if it be against one’s own soul – and applying the fundamental principles of Islamic Belief justly and fairly to every individual that they apply to – and this is a sign of a Muslims honesty, integrity and love for the Revelation of Allaah.
His refusal to pray Salaatul-Jumu’ah with the justification that there is no khilaafah at the present time.
Alee Ashmaawee says in his book: “The Secret History of Ikhwaan ul-Muslimeen” (at-Taareekh as-Sirree li-Jamaa’atil-Ikhwaan il-Muslimeen): “And the time for the Jumu’ah prayer arrived so I said to him: ‘Let us leave and pray’ and it was a surprise that I came to know – and for the first time – that he did not used to pray Jumu’ah” (p.112)
His speaking with “Hurriyatul-I’tiqaad” [The Freedom of Belief] – meaning that people can be left upon the religion that they are upon. [So Christians should be left as Christians – Jews as Jews etc…] – Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen was asked ‘What do you say about the one who speaks with Hurriyatul-I’tiqaad?’ The Shaikh replied: ‘The one who allows Hurriyatul I’tiqaad – that a person can believe in whatever religion he wishes is a Kaafir…’. NOTE: TAKFEER IS NOT BEING MADE HERE – Since even though someone utters something which necessitates disbelief, the conditions have to be fulfilled and the preventive barriers [mawaani’] have to be removed before the verdict of disbelief can be issued and that is for the Ulamaa’ alone – BUT THIS IS TO SHOW THE NATURE OF QUTB’S IGNORANCE OF FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES OF THE RELIGION. Shaikh al-Albaanee commented about Qutb that he is merely a writer (adeeb), lacking in Islamic knowledge.
“For Islam does not desire the freedom of worship for its followers only, rather it affirms this right for all the different religions and it tasks the Muslims to fight and defend this right for all people and it [even] allows them to fight under this flag, the flag which guarantees the freedom of worship for the adherents of all other religions…so that it is realised that it is a free world order… (Nahwa Mujtami’ Islaamee p.105)
“And Islaam does not feel uneasy about the differences of mankind in aqeedah and manhaj, rather it considers this as something necessitated by natural disposition and a goal from ahgher will in life amongst the people…(Nahwa Mujtami’ Islamee p.103)”
His speaking about the Qur’an with mere personal opinion. There are 181 mistakes in matters of aqeedah and issues of knowledge in his Fi zilaal il-Quraan as pointed out by Shaik Abdullaah bin Muhammad as-Dawaish in his book, Al-Mawrid uz-Zilaal fit-Tanbeeh alaa Akhtaa’a az-Zilaal and as the saying goes: Al-Lamsu wal-Basar khairun min as-Sam’i wal-khabr.
For a full and excellent refutation of Sayyid Qutb refer to the following books by the Shaikh Rabee’ bin Haadee al-Madkhalee, which have been recommended by Shaikh Ibn Uthaimin, Shaikh Bin Baz and others.
1. Adwaa al-Islaamiyyah alaa Aqeedati Sayyid Qutb
2. Mataa’in Sayyid Qutb fis-Sahaabah
3. Al-Awaasim mimmaa fee kutub Sayyid Qutb minal-Qawaasim
4. Al-Hadd ul-Faasil bainal-Haqq wal-Baatil

After reading these it should become clear to the one who is free from ta’assub and hizbiyyah that Sayyid Qutub is most certainly not a mujaddid, in the league of the likes of Ibn Taymiyyah as is ignorantly propagated by many.