By Dr Osama Al-Azhari
Since the seed of takfir (labeling someone as an apostate) first emerged in the contemporary thought at the hands of Hasaan al-Banna in the early 1940s, the idea has continued to produce thinkers, theorists, and proponents who revolve within its orbit. Takifir (labelling someone as an apostate) ideology is inherently fragmentary; each day it is capable of generating a new faction that declares all those before it to be apostates – even those within its own ranks – and labelling the general public as apostates. Thus, within takfiri circles, one finds groups declaring each other apostates, giving rise to ever-new formulations of takfir.
There remain intellectual shackles represented by writings that deepen and expand the concept of takfir, such as al-’Umda fi I’dad al-’Uddah (The Exemplar for Religious Preparation) by Dr Sayyid Imam (known as Dr. Fadl), while he is deeply immersed in takfir to an unusually extreme degree, as well as ‘Abd al-Majid al-Shadhli, Rifa’i Surur, and others who did not themselves engage in armed activity, yet became one of the intellectual shackles that drive one deeper into the practice of takfir.
We have already pointed out that, the seeds of takfir first emerged with Hasan al-Banna, developed into a fully formed theory with Sayyid Qutb, and later became a daily operational method applied by al-Qaeda, ISIS, Boko Haram, and similar groups. The peak of the maturation of the takfir project was with Sayyid Qutb. This eloquent pen who is unfamiliar with rigorous, well-founded scholarly principles and precise methodological structuring, yet he let himself dive into loose, literary expressions–steeped in ambiguity and generality. His imagination, his fervent pen, and his perceptive gaze enabled him to turn the idea of takfir into a passion, an obsession, and a firm resolve–a trait shared by the Kharijites without distinction. Thus, even when he is intellectually convinced to leave the practice of takfir, he remains emotionally attached to it.
It is also narrated that one of the early Kharijites, who he used to declare ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib an apostate, was asked by a group of people: “Did you listen to his knowledge?” He replied: “No.” They told him: “He is delivering a sermon in the mosque today.” So, he entered and listened to that radiant, lofty, crystal‑clear knowledge and was astonished by the depth of what he heard regarding the noble Shari’a. Yet he left exclaiming: “How knowledgeable this apostate is!”
After research and reflection, I concluded that takfir is, in essence, a distorted psychological tendency and a sharp, vengeful, and violent temperament. Even if the person finds no basis or justification for takfir, he remains aggressive in nature, constantly seeking a pretext or cover to convince himself that his impulse towards retaliation and eruption against others has an intellectual foundation.
There are several foundations upon which Sayyid Qutb built his takfir project.
The first foundation is that hakimiyyah (governorship) is among the most exclusive attributes of divinity. This statement in itself is flawed and was not mentioned by any Muslim thinker or scholar before him. The meaning of hakimiyyah (governorship) is that Allah Almighty is alone entitled to determine rulings. In this sense, there is no issue; rather, it is agreed upon: Allah alone declares what is halal (lawful), haram (forbidden), mandub (recommended), or ja’iz (permissible).
He started from the idea that hakimiyyah (governorship) is an exclusive divine attribute to constructing a deep, dialectical relationship between contemporary legal systems applied in courts and the Islamic legal framework (fiqh rulings). On this basis, he declared others to be apostates, considering any action taken by a parliament to legislate laws – even if it involves transforming a juristic ruling into a binding legal code – as legislation independent of Allah. In his view, this constitutes sharing with Allah in His right of governorship and in establishing rulings.
He based this on his flawed interpretation of the Qur’anic verse: “And whoever does not judge according to what Allah has sent down, then those are they (who are) the disbelievers.” [Quran 5:44] and “decidedly the judgment is with none except Allah” [Quran 6:57], interpreting them in a mistaken manner, along with other foundations of takfir such people rely upon.
Sayyid Qutb says in Fi Zilal al-Qur’an (Under the Shade of Qur’an):
“These regulations and rulings originate from Allah, and they are a requirement of His divinity. The most exclusive characteristic of divinity, as we have repeated at the beginning of the surah, is hakimiyyah (governorship) and legislation for humankind, and the establishment of the foundations upon which their lives and relationships are built.”
Furthermore, in page 88, he says: “It is that ruling by what Allah has revealed is an affirmation of Allah’s divinity, and a negation of partners to this divinity and its attributes besides Him. This is Islam in its linguistic meaning: submission, and in its technical meaning as brought by the divine religions: submission (Islam) is devoted to Allah, and renouncing the claim of divinity alongside Him, as well as the claim to the most exclusive characteristic of divinity, which is authority, governorship, and the right to subjugate and bind people through [modern] law and legislation.”
Thus, the phrase “hakimiyyah (governorship) is the most exclusive attribute of divinity” is an invented expression with no basis in the statements of recognised scholars. This is because the most exclusive attributes of divinity are perfection and self-subsistence (al-kamal wa al-qayyumiyyah). This is the general understanding that Muslim scholars derived from the Qur’an through broad inference and deep comprehension, as reflected in the verses: “Say, ‘He is Allah, The Only One. Allah, The Everlasting Sovereign. He has not begotten and has not been begotten. And to Him none could be co-equal.” [Quran 112: 1:4] meaning that He is not in need of anything else. The Qur’an confirms, “Allah. There is no god except He, The Ever-Living, The Superb Upright Sustainer.” [Quran 2: 255] meaning the One who sustains all His servants, being independent of them and transcendent above any need. He does not require a spouse, a child, food, or drink.
Thus, divine legislation – and the fact that Allah is the source of legislation – is a consequence of His perfection. The major problem in takfiri thought is that it builds all its judgments upon the issue of hakimiyyah (governorship), declaring people unbelievers on the claim that they do not uphold it. And it assumes for itself the authority to pass judgments on human beings and on all existence, until it goes so far as to pass judgments upon Allah Almighty out of arrogance.
It is reported that a man came to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and said: “O Muhammad, be just, for you have not been just.” The Prophet (PBUH) replied: “Woe to you! Who would be just if I am not? Would Allah entrust me with what comes from the heavens while you do not trust me with a dirham or a dinar?”
Regarding this man, the Prophet (PBUH) also said: “From his progeny will emerge a people young in age and foolish in understanding; they will leave the fold of religion as an arrow passes through its quarry.”
This approach to takfir makes the concepts of justice not about adhering to what the Shari’ah and its Lawgiver have brought. Instead, my own conception of justice is made to be justice itself; so, if something does not conform to the image in my mind, it is deemed incorrect. Thus, this ideology is fundamentally based on the idea that its adherent grants himself alone the right to judge everyone as believers or disbelievers. Its earliest roots began with overstepping the bounds of respect towards the statue of prophethood itself, when they said: “Be just, for you have not been just.”
I once visited one of the senior leaders of Islamist groups who had undergone a process of (reconsideration) and developed a critical stance towards these currents. I asked him: “Is there a particular book you trust as having caused a kind of intellectual earthquake for you, leading you to adopt this reconsideration?” He said: “Yes, a compact book by the late Professor Dr Muhammad Sa’id Ramadan al-Buti, a scholar of the Levant who was assassinated by terrorism while he was explaining the Qur’an. The book is titled Batin al-Ithm (The Inner Sin). In it, he interprets the Qur’anic verse: “And leave behind the outward vice and the inward.”
[Quran: 6: 120] The outward sin is well known – lying, theft, killing – but the inward sin is kibr (arrogance). He concludes that the root of all extremist movements is arrogance, manifested in a person granting himself the authority to declare others unbelievers, then to act upon that judgment, and finally to legislate for it after carrying out killing.”
With deeper immersion in this mindset – and with increasing indulgence in this form of arrogance – it does not stop at overstepping the bounds of respect towards the statue of the prophethood, but extends further to the realm of divinity itself. Therefore, I say – echoing what a number of scholars and thinkers before me have said – that terrorism and atheism are two sides of the same coin.
Dr Osama Al-Azhari
Minister of Awqaf
(Charitable Endowments)
