[*] 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.