The previous article explained one of the features of the systematic change when Sayyid Qutb through the ideology of jihad, which he wrote in his increments to the second edition of the book "In the Shadows of the Qur'an", and how the polar perception of jihad was founded on a political concept of religion based on the concepts of revolution and coup, and then turned Sayyid al-Din into a radical project to change the world, in which he linked the nature of this political religion and the motives and goals of jihad, until the concept of jihad became a permanent coup struggle aimed at changing the world, and destroying pre-Islamic regimes Menu.
This new formulation of the concept of jihad has left a great impact on violent groups, or what one of its theorists called the "jihadi project", and to show this impact that Sayyid left on these groups, I will address 3 things:
- The intellectual foundations of the contemporary jihadist current,
- And the impact that Sayed left in the formation of theorists and leaders of violent groups,
- A number of Western scholars captured the influence of Sayyid in violent groups.
These three things reinforce each other, to confirm the clarity of Sayyid's ideas and their impact on the contemporary jihadist project, away from the apologies of the Qutbists that he did not mean this or that the problem lies -only- in his readers and not in his texts himself, and I will devote this article to the statement of the first thing only, provided that I devote an article later to the second and third things, God willing.
The similarities and differences between Sayyid and violent groups can be observed through two main axes: Sayyid's position on the map of the "contemporary jihadist project", and the applications of Sayyid's kinetic approach by moving from the jihad of papers to the jihad of the movement.
Sayyid Qutb's website from the Contemporary Jihad Project
Abu Musab al-Suri, one of those who chronicled the violence and was a member of the Fighting Vanguard organization founded by Marwan Hadid in Syria in the seventies, concluded that the "intellectual structure of the contemporary jihadist current" is represented in "the basics of the thought of the Muslim Brotherhood + the kinetic approach of the martyr Sayyid Qutb + the legal political jurisprudence of Imam Ibn Taymiyyah and the Salafi school + the doctrinal jurisprudential heritage of the Wahhabi call ← the legitimate political approach of the jihadist movement." In fact, this equation involves 3 stages of so-called "jihadist thought" and I will call it here "violent groups" to distinguish between legitimate jihad and violence. These three stages are as follows:
- The first phase extends until the mid-sixties, in which Sayyid Qutb laid "the intellectual foundations of the contemporary jihadist current" in the words of Abu Musab. The additions of the Muslim Brotherhood, according to Abu Musab, were "just repetition, interpretation and reformulation," and "were not – for the most part – the same jihadist," a meaning also confirmed by the book "On the Wealth of Damascus" by Ayman al-Shurbaji, who led the organization of the Fighting Vanguard (Damascus Sector) in the eighties, and confirmed the idea of a separation between the Fighting Vanguard and the Brotherhood.
- The second stage: The late seventies began when the Egyptian Jihad Organization and the Islamic Group in Egypt introduced detailed jurisprudential additions adapted from the books of Sheikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, which constituted - according to Abu Musab - "the basis of jihadi jurisprudence." In my book "Violence Al-Mustabah", I discussed some of these quotations and showed how they were reinterpreted in line with jihadist thought, because the historical separation between Ibn Taymiyyah and violent groups is very large, in addition to the fact that the context of Ibn Taymiyyah's hadith is completely different from the context of the hadith of violent groups, which made its summons to Ibn Taymiyyah an interpretive summons unlike its summons to Sayyid Qutb, because Sayyid was looking at the common reality between him and the violent groups.
- The third stage: It was formed in the late eighties with what was "put forward by the library of Arab Afghans", and was - according to Abu Musab - "a repetition of the kinetic polar thought, and Salafi jurisprudence from the heritage of the Wahhabi school."
The first and third phases are based on the kinetic approach formulated by Sayyid, and then inspired the ideologues of violent groups, without implying a perfect match between Sayyid and these groups, as will become clear later. Violent groups have accumulated, over decades, theoretical literature and practical experience until they take the later than the previous, and have formed for themselves thinkers, symbols and jurists, who rely on each other and praise each other.
Abu Bakr Naji, for example, praises Abu Qatada and Abu Musab and quotes Sayyid Qutb and others. Abu Musab quotes Sayyid Qutb and calls him "the martyr of Islam" or "the martyr teacher", and at the same time quotes Abdullah Azzam and calls him "the martyr imam" and celebrates his heritage, and also acknowledges the great intellectual credit of the Egyptian Jihad group for him personally. Abdullah Azzam, in turn, celebrates Sayyid Qutb and calls him "the giant of Islamic thought," and so on.
We are in front of a continuous support of personalities, ideas and organizations that brought together common experiences and unity of source, with some developments that affected ideas and theories, as well as reality and battles, but the impact of Sayed in developing the theoretical framework or the kinetic project is prominent and no one can mistake it, thanks to his revolutionary and protest energy, so that its impact affected groups of different stripes and orientations such as the fighting vanguard in Syria, the Iranian Shiite Islamic Revolution, violent groups and some Islamic resistance movements in Palestine, and even its impact extended To Indonesia as we find in the interpretation of Wan Sabri Wan Yusof, known as "Hamka".
Applications of the kinetic approach and developments of reality
We have seen in previous articles how Sayyid's kinetic approach involved an expanded concept of jihad and sedition about religion, and an exceptional centrality to the concept of governance, and I will only focus here on the concept of jihad and how it was a servant of the rest of the polar intellectual structure. The expansion of the concept of jihad necessitated the expansion of the concept of "sedition from religion" to include simply living under existing regimes that legitimize themselves, and therefore combat jihad must be eliminated. The concept of governance, which led to the argument that Islam ceased to exist and the Muslim community was absent, also necessitated jihad as a dynamic method to restore governance by removing regimes and changing the world.
Jihad – according to the polar perspective – is a permanent "coup struggle" with the sword and the statement, and this coup includes the political and social meanings, and whoever realizes the nature of this religion – which is a revolution and a coup – "realizes with it the inevitability of the kinetic launch of Islam in the form of jihad with the sword along with jihad with the statement, and realizes that this was not a defensive movement in the narrow sense."
To illustrate "the depth and authenticity of the element of jihad in the Islamic faith, in the Islamic system, and in the realistic requirements of this divine approach," Sayyid says, "The Shiites considered it a pillar of Islam, and they have the power of texts and the power of reality that explains their trend, had it not been for what was stated in the hadith: "Islam was built on five..." But the power of the mandate of jihad, the authenticity of this element in the danger of Islamic life, and the emergence of its necessity at all times and in every land, a necessity based on innate exigencies rather than temporal circumstances: all support this deep sense of the seriousness and authenticity of this element" (2: 746). Jihad, then, is a coup and inevitable struggle, not defensive, and is inherent in the Islamic faith and system, and is imposed by the realism of the divine method, which is an innate necessity not a temporal one. Indeed, the strength, originality and necessity of its assignment almost led to its pillar in Islam had it not been for the limitation of the pillars to five, but this does not prevent it from being considered part of the being of Islam and its system according to Sayyid.
As for violent groups, they have adopted and developed this new concept of jihad, and we can talk about 4 components of their concept of jihad founded on the thought of Sayyid with some differences, which are as follows:
Mohamed Abd al-Salam Faraj, for example, says that jihad is "the only way to return and raise the edifice of Islam again," and "Muslims are unanimous on the hypothesis of establishing an Islamic caliphate. The declaration of the caliphate depends on the existence of the nucleus, which is the Islamic State." This is the practical application of the kinetic approach developed by Sayyid, who formulated a revolutionary concept of religion even in its devotional and doctrinal aspects based on the concepts of governance, jihad and sedition about religion as above. But there is a small difference here, which is that Sida sees jihad as a declaration that combines movement and statement in the face of human reality in all its aspects "by means equivalent to all its aspects" yesterday, today and tomorrow, while the jihadists were limited to the combat aspect only.
The beginnings of this understanding and the citation of the hadiths "I sent with the sword" and "I brought you with slaughter" go back to Muhammad Abd al-Salam Faraj, whose message on jihad was foundational in theorizing violence, which began with a separation from the thinking of Sayyid Qutb, who did not see the severity and harshness, but took a conservative position on it. Sayyid says: "We should know and that people - all of us - know that it is the toughness of those who would fight alone - and within the limits of the public morals of this religion - and it is not the absolute harshness of all restriction and politeness!" Sayed presented a different and decisive picture of Islam's approach to fighting its enemies, in which he says: "Thus, the news is repeated in the general and clear line of the level of the Islamic approach in fighting its enemies, in its high morals, and in caring for human dignity. And in limiting the fight to the material forces that prevent people from going out of worship to worship God alone. And in the ease with which he treats even his enemies. As for the toughness, it is the roughness in the fight and the severity, not the brutality with children, women, the elderly and the infirm who are not already combatants, and it is not a representation of corpses and body parts in the manner of the barbarians who call themselves civilized in this time. Islam has included sufficient commands to protect non-combatants, and to respect the humanity of combatants. What is meant is roughness that does not dilute the battle, and this is necessary for people who have ordered mercy and mercy in emphasis and repetition, so the state of war must be excluded, as much as the state of war requires without a desire to torture, mutilate and abuse."
- The first is theoretical, which is to determine that the reality of this kinetic religion lies in the fact that it confronts every human reality with its equivalent means, which is what Abu Musab took from him when he decided that the means of jihad are changing.
- The second thing is diagnostic, which is that contemporary societies are ignorant and therefore illegitimate. Sayyid argues that in the last two centuries "the face of the earth has been devoid of the true existence of Islam" as "the laws of mankind have replaced the law of God" (4: 2013), and thus the kinetic method confronts a conceptual ignorance of belief based on realistic systems supported by authorities. Sayed says: "This religion does not recognize – initially – the legitimacy of the existence of these pre-Islamic societies, and does not accept their survival," and that the labyrinth in which the mujtahids fall to apply the provisions of Sharia in this existing society is "the assumption that these existing societies are Islamic societies, and that it will bring the provisions of Islamic jurisprudence from the papers to apply to them," while "working in the field of jurisprudence and regulatory provisions is just a deception of the soul," and "which prevents the transformation of these pre-Islamic societies to the Islamic system." It is the existence of tyrants who refuse to be the rulers of God... and thus leave Islam completely" (4: 2009-2013).
- The third thing is kinetic and practical, which is that in light of the two previous things: the theoretical basis and the realistic diagnosis, the "Islamic Movement" must confront this reality with two things: the call to correct perceptions, and "force and jihad to remove the regimes and authorities based on them" (3: 1432), because the tyrants, as before, are the biggest obstacle to governance, which is the key to the solution, and here the doctrine of the priority of fighting near over far arose among violent groups, as mentioned above.
Thus, the master of the existing reality: systems and societies, and also rejects his jurisprudence, as it is necessary to create an Islamic society first and then ijtihad for it, and this can only be done by removing the existing systems and creating a Muslim society that is based on governance, which is what theorists of violence have adhered to.
Faraj sees – for example – that "the rulers of the era have multiplied the doors of infidelity that they came out of the sect of Islam," and that "fighting the near enemy is the first of fighting the distant enemy," and Ayman al-Zawahiri and the Egyptian Jihad Group confirmed this meaning, they said that the jihad of the rulers "is ahead of the jihad of the Jews, for two reasons: proximity and apostasy, but the Jews do not settle them in Palestine except in the custody of these rulers tyrants apostates." Abu Musab has based – in a statement of the premise of jihad on every eye – that the countries of Islam today are in a state of direct or indirect occupation, and the governments of Muslim countries today are apostates infidels, and breaking with them is imposed on Muslims unanimously, and the provisions of Sharia unanimously decide the infidelity of Warda who cooperated with the infidels and helped them against Muslims and must be fought, and that the provisions of Sharia determine that it is obligatory or permissible to fight the assailant on the religion of Muslims, themselves, their symptoms or their money, even if he is a Muslim. Sayyid Imam said, "The jihad of these rulers is an obligation on every Muslim, because they are an infidel enemy among Muslims, and this is one of the places where jihad in kind is obligatory according to the agreement of the scholars." Based on this legacy, Al-Adnani came and said that "the solution is to declare one caliph on all earth, declaring his disbelief in the tyrant and repudiating disbelief, polytheism and his family," and made the title "This is our medicine and our medicine."
This is how Sayed laid the intellectual foundations of contemporary jihadism, although there are differences between it and subsequent developments in so-called "jihadist thought." I hope that I will discuss these statements critically and show the problematic aspects in a later article that will be the conclusion of this series to which the discussion on the first edition of the shadows led me, so each article led me beyond without prior management or planning, but thought is a symptom that arises and disappears, so I liked to limit it, and God is responsible to be protected from slippage.