By Francesco Bergoglio Errico
September 6, 2018
The concept of Takfir – declaring a Muslim
a disbeliever – is a very modern propaganda weapon of al-Qaeda and Daesh. But
its origins are to be found in distant times. Indeed, in order to better
understand this concept, it is essential to travel all the way back to the 7th
Century roots – the Khawarij and Murji’a groups.
The Khawarij emerged from the battle of
Siffin in 657 AD, where the fourth caliph ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib and his successor
Mu’awiya bin Abi Sufyan clashed. During the battle, Mu’awiya’s troops,
outnumbered and facing almost certain defeat, called on ‘Ali and his troops to
accept arbitration between the two parties. ‘Ali took up the offer, but some of
his own troops rejected it. They thought that ‘Ali had been swayed by Mu’awiya
rather than divine guidance and that such an action should actually be seen as
an affront to God’s order. These troops then seceded from ‘Ali’s camp and
became the Khawarij group, the name they also applied to themselves.
The group’s first distinctive tenet
concerned the possibility of revolt against Muslim rulers who had been deemed
insufficiently pious. When ‘Ali agreed to arbitration with Mu’awiya, the
separatists, the people later known as Khawarij, reportedly shouted “La Hukm
Illa Li-Llah”, “judgement is God’s alone”. Only God has the authority to
arbitrate, they held, not human beings. Not even the caliph ‘Ali, in fact.
Later on, the slogan came to represent
their broad view that all judgements and rulings should be left to God.
Applying Qur’anic rulings very strictly, they fought Muslims who were deemed
guilty of major sins and expelled them from their community.
The consequences could not be more serious.
Since they believed sinful Muslims to be Kuffar (disbelievers), they
immediately applied Qur’anic lines concerning jihad against non-Muslims. This
meant that, according to the Khawarij, the application of jihad was not just
limited to ordinary people. If necessary, it could even include the caliph.
Indeed, they assassinated ‘Ali in 661 AD.
The second tenet of Khawarij ideology
addressed their conception of Iman (faith) and disbelief. In particular, what
is faith? And when does a Muslim become a Kafir, a disbeliever? One of the
greatest questions was whether A’mal, or deeds, acts or works, were an integral
part of the faith or not. Some theologians of Islam’s early years, including
Abu Hanifa, believed they were not a part of it. As a result, he equated Iman
with the belief residing in the heart and its profession by tongue.
Conversely, other scholars, including
Mu’tazilites and Hanabalites, believed that deeds, acts or works were indeed an
integral part of Iman and that this Iman would not be complete without them.
Among other outcomes, this dispute led to
what may be called the orthodox Sunni view, as well as almost all Salafi views,
according to which Iman consists of assent to the Iman in the heart, its verbal
confirmation by the tongue, and corresponding acts with the limbs.
Respectively, Tasdeeq Bi-L-Qalb, Iqrar Bi-L-Lisan and A’mal Bi-L-Jawarih
As for the Khawarij themselves, even though
they too believed that Iman consisted of these three elements and others, they
placed more emphasis on A’mal than mainstream Sunnism does.
The question of what actually constitutes
Iman is very important when defining enemies as unbelievers. On the one hand,
if A’mal is not an integral part of Iman, sinful acts cannot undermine that
Iman by themselves. On the other, if A’mal is an integral part of the Iman,
sinful acts can definitely compromise faith.
Moreover, while Sunni scholars have
separated major sins, Kaba’ir, from less severe ones, the Khawarij have
included A’mal among major sins, such as killing one’s child, adultery
and especially polytheism and idolatry, or shirk.
Scholars later separated shirk from other Kaba’ir,
establishing that only an act of shirk would immediately turn a Muslim into an
unbeliever, or Kafir, and therefore justify his or her excommunication from
Islam, Takfir. Additionally, any further proof of a person’s unbelief through
verbal confirmation was not necessary. Other major sins were certainly still
considered serious and deserving of punishment, but they were not enough to
turn a believer into a disbeliever – further proof was needed.
The Khawarij disagreed with this last point
since, according to their beliefs; a Muslim culpable of any Kaba’ir
should be avowed a Kafir, with or without further proof. This creed thus
heightened ordinary major sins to the level of Kufr, making its adherents
swifter to apply Takfir than those endorsing the movement later known as
The last relevant point about the concepts
of Iman and Kufr concerns the effects of sinful acts on a person’s Iman. Not
considering sins as equal to shirk, many scholars believed faith to be
diminished by sinful acts and increased by good ones. This led to an
understanding of Iman as flexible. The Khawarij, by contrast, believed that
iman could not fluctuate. It was either present or lost as a whole through
major sins. This made the Khawarij radically different from other groups, and
this was reflected in their use of jihad against other Muslims holding what the
Khawarij saw as aberrant ideas of iman, which made them legitimate targets, up
to and including the rulers and the caliph.
Another important group criticized the
beliefs of Khawarij – the Murji’a. According to most scholars, the genesis of
the Murji’a can traced back to the conflicts between the third caliph, ‘Uthman
bin ‘Affan, and his successor ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib. At that time, the Murji’a
refused to take sides and opted for postponement of judgement, irja’, in such
matters. In their view, only God could decide on these subjects. Before taking
the name of Murji’a, this group were called Ahl-Al-‘Adl Wa-L-Sunna, or
“the people of justice and Sunna”.
The Irja’ “postponers” concept was later
dated back to the Qur’an itself by the Murji’a, in particular by referring to
Sura 9:106. This verse provided them with a conceptual basis for avoiding
taking sides in the conflict. In time, the Irja’ term became the most
important tenet of the Murji’a.
In that regard, there are two important
relevant points. The first is the development of the term Irja’. While
it was initially applied to political conflicts such as the battle between
‘Uthman and ‘Ali, between the 18th and 19th Centuries it acquired a theological
meaning. In particular, Irja’ was applied to people’s Iman; in
other words, judgments on anyone’s faith was postponed and left to God. For
that reason, unlike the Khawarij, adherents were generally loyal to rulers and
only rarely supported riots against them.
The second point regards their conception
of what constitutes faith and disbelief. Once again, unlike the Khawarij, they
felt that Iman only consisted of the belief residing in the heart and
its confirmation by the tongue, not concrete acts. Consequently, acts alone do
not establish whether an individual is a believer or a disbeliever. When the
takfir of such an individual was justified, then, they could ask.
In fact, from the Murji’a perspective, the Kaba’ir
intrinsically could not throw someone out from Islam, except in the case of a
sinner verbally confirming his disbelief, including shirk. Additionally, unlike
the Khawarij and orthodox Sunni, they didn’t believe that faith could be
altered by sinful acts and therefore excluded A’mal from Iman.
All of this contested history of the Takfir
concept flows down to our own times.
Al-Qaeda and Daesh both use the ancient concept to justify their goals
and their jihadi attacks on Muslims they see as disbelievers, including rulers.
In their view, these people are enemies who are destroying the true Islam and
the whole Ummah (community of believers), so jihad is warranted, indeed
mandated. They defend this position by manipulating many passages of the Qu’ran
It is very important to underline this,
because an increasingly high number of people now take the manipulations as
truth, radicalizing themselves, embracing jihad, and becoming fascinated and
indoctrinated by terrorist propaganda that promises salvation of the soul and
access to paradise to those who embrace the “true way” or the “true Islam”.
This makes it crucial to understand what Takfir
is and how the concepts of Takfir and jihad are used by the terrorist groups,
not only to better comprehend how they justify their existence and their
bloodshed, but also, above all, in fact, to improve strategies of disengagement
Kafir/ Mushrik/ Munafiq-Manufacturing Factories, Says Sultan Shahin, Defending
New Age Islam against Talibani Onslaught
public has believed in the mother of all miracles of not one, but three WTC
buildings, collapsing to the ground on their foot-print, in the manner of a
perfectly executed job of controlled demolition, and not in the manner of a
demolition job gone awry as it should have been, is hardly surprising. The government went
about its business taking the gullibility of the people for granted. To crown
it all, WTC7 was not even hit by a plane, and it is the only building in the
world, that collapsed because of an office fire, if are to believe what we are
told! To uncover the falsehoods takes very little knowledge, but even this very
little knowledge is too much for most people. The government knows this and cynically
makes use of this weakness.
economists and evolutionary psychologists have demonstrated that most human
decisions are based on emotional reactions and heuristic shortcuts rather than
on rational analysis. Not only rationality, but individuality too is a myth.
People rarely think for themselves. Rather, they think in groups.
they know a lot, because they treat knowledge in the minds of others and in the
books as if it were their own. This is the illusion of knowledge. We rely on
the expertise of others for most of our needs. This is the result of extreme
specialization facilitated by globalization. We consume very little of what we
produce and most of what we consume, is produced by others. Most people know
very little beyond what they produce. We have progressed as a civilization by
developing the ability to place our trust in others and cooperate with them. From
an evolutionary perspective, trusting in the knowledge of others has worked
extremely well for us
of the people – inability to think for themselves from lack of knowledge and their
complete reliance on groupthink placing their trust in experts, is cynically
exploited by the powerful government supported by the media and the establishment
experts. The gullible public unsurprisingly consumes whatever the government backed
by its crony “experts” produces. After all, they put their trust in the
government by voting it to power, and they would not like to appear stupid by
being proved wrong. To distrust the government or their parents or other loved
ones is extremely painful for people, and they will rather believe in delusional
myths, than face the truth.
suffer from conspiracy phobia are fond of saying: “Do you actually think
there’s a group of people sitting around in a room plotting things?” For some
reason that image is assumed to be so patently absurd as to invite only
disclaimers. But where else would people of power get together – on park
benches or carousels? Indeed, they meet in rooms: corporate boardrooms,
Pentagon command rooms, at the Bohemian Grove, in the choice dining rooms at
the best restaurants, resorts, hotels, and estates, in the many conference
rooms at the White House, the NSA, the CIA, or wherever. And, yes, they
consciously plot – though they call it “planning” and “strategizing” – and they
do so in great secrecy, often resisting all efforts at public disclosure. No
one confabulates and plans more than political and corporate elites and their
hired specialists. To make the world safe for those who own it, politically
active elements of the owning class have created a national security state that
expends billions of dollars and enlists the efforts of vast numbers of people.”
― Michael Parenti,
American political scientist, historian and culture critic.
normally refers to a controlled demolition technique. However, this theory has
also been forwarded to explain the collapse. The collapse of a floor drew the
outer columns inward causing an implosion is how they try to explain. It is a
strange theory. The collapse of one floor was enough to cause an implosion while
the remaining 109 floors could not prevent it! Even if such an impossible event
did take place, you would still have the 59 columns 362 feet high in one piece
collapsing on the neighbouring buildings and not breaking into hundreds of smaller pieces
and collapsing in a heap on the footprint of the building. The difference
between a controlled demolition and an unplanned collapse caused by a disaster
is precisely in the way the building collapses.
buildings, are destroyed by building implosion using explosives. This is very
fast—the collapse itself only takes seconds and it is as fast as a free fall—and
an expert can ensure that the structure falls into its own footprint, so as not
to damage neighboring structures. A dangerous scenario is the partial failure of an attempted
implosion. When a building fails to collapse completely the structure may be
unstable, tilting at a dangerous angle.
worst that could have happened to the WTC building is that the top floors above
the floor that was hit, tilting. Nothing can cause the steel columns to break
in smaller pieces except cutting them with oxy acetylene torch with temperature
of 3773 degrees centigrade which takes considerable time, or faster with explosives.
Just try cutting structural steel by a
fire caused by aviation fuel or kerosene. No amount of burning will have any significant
effect as the temperature will never cross 300 degrees centigrade. Steel loses
half its strength only at 600 degrees. Also, the fire affected only a few floors
and not the entire building and only for an hour before the edifice crumbled. A controlled demolition is the only plausible
explanation else what explains the floors unaffected by fire crumbling as they
WTC collapse, is the most perfect example of a controlled demolition and
nothing else can explain the very orderly collapse on its own footprint in just
a few seconds (in exactly the time that it takes an object falling through thin
air from the top of the building hitting the ground) without leaving any part
of the building standing or any of the 59 steel columns 360 feet long not cut
into hundreds of pieces. A steel column may be melted completely (only
theoretically because this is practically impossible) but how can it get cut
into several pieces? Only by cutting them with oxy acetylene torches (very slow
process) or explosives (extremely fast) as in a controlled demolition.
is a waste of time to discuss anything with GM Sb. He goes by groupthink on
every subject - not this alone, since he lacks the skills and knowledge to think
for himself. In this case, it may not even be groupthink but group position. The
group of American Muslims kowtowing to their new masters can only faithfully parrot the
term Free-fall and Implosion is often juxtaposed. It is highly
technical, scientific, engineering and art skill of using explosives
to collapse a tall building in controlled manner on the ground in
sequence to fall within its own footprint.
1988 two years before 9/11 al Qaida or its affiliates claimed to have
bombed the US Embassies in Nairobi and Dares-salaam; the softest
targets in the world for them at the time. The damage there to the
buildings could hardly be said as skilfully carried out but the loss
of lives of the innocent citizens was phenomenal in comparison!
just in short period of time, for them to belatedly claim to have
acquired the unbelievable skills to accomplished 9/11, seven seas
away can only be accepted by those who believe that Moses
miraculously split the Red Sea just by hitting it with his walking
stick, the Rod/A'saa.
GM Sb says “By the way the best
explanation for the free fall of the World Trade Center was given by Osama bin
Laden himself in a videotape which Naseer sahib should see if he has not seen
it already. As you know Osama was an engineer.”
That is a lie. Can GM sb provide the
proof? Where is the need for Osama to explain the free fall? If at all, he may have
liked to take credit for the attack to bolster his image and go along with the official
story which was giving him full credit for the attack and the collapse. Stop
fooling around GM sb!
The videos/audios of Osama however
appear to have been fabricated en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Videos_and_audio_recordings_of_Osama_bin_Laden
but this is beside the point. The
attack on WTC is a fact, and what is being discussed is not who did it, but whether
the plane crashing into the building could have caused the buildings to
collapse in the manner of a free fall as they did, or whether such a collapse is
possible only by a controlled demolition. If could have been caused by only a
controlled demolition, then the plane crashing into the building although true,
is only a red herring to camouflage the controlled demolition.
Apparently, even school level physics is beyond GM sb . The
experts in the video and I have talked about the lies in the official report to
explain the WTC collapse which the US government and its loyal supporters such
as GM dismiss as “Conspiracy theory”.
There is a very simple way for the US government to settle
the question if they are telling the truth. High rise buildings are demolished
every now and then. For the next high rise building they plan to demolish, let
them create the same situation by stocking a floor with as much aviation fuel
as the plane that crashed into the WTC had or even more, and hitting this floor
with a missile to create an identical or even much greater physical impact and
show to the world why their WTC story is not a lie. This is feasible but the US
government will never allow it as their lies will stand exposed.