The second half of the 1960s witnessed the emergence of a new wave of Islamism in Turkey through the proliferation of translated works of Islamist ideologues such as Sayyid Qutb and Abu Ala Mawdudi. This new wave of Islamism espoused a scripturalist/Quran-centered epistemological stance through the reinterpretation of foundational texts while advancing Islam as a comprehensive and all-embracing universal political project and worldview. The intellectual transfer of Arabic and South Indian Islamist thought to Turkey brought about the formation of a new anti-nationalist, anti-statist, revivalist, and cosmopolitan Islamist discourse. Hamza Türkmen, a leading Islamist thinker, has been the vocal exponent of this intellectual movement since the late 1980s. He is the founder of both the monthly Haksöz, an influential Islamist journal published since 1991 advocating the Qutbian perspective, and the Islamic NGO Özgür-Der one of the first faith-based organizations dedicated to human rights in Turkey. Inspired by the vanguard figures of Islamic revivalism, he calls for cleansing religion from what is perceived as the prevalence of jahiliyya—defined as the conditions related to the pre-Islamic era. He claims that Ottoman-Turkish Islamism is an extension of the system of jahiliyya and his Quran-based approach poses a direct challenge to the official orthodox conceptualizations prevalent in the Islamic intellectual field in Turkey. This paper examines Hamza Türkmen’s writings published in Haksöz Journal since 1991. It investigates how Hamza Türkmen takes a critical stance against the Islamic intellectual field in Turkey. Based on a text-based analysis of his writings, this study focuses on Hamza Türkmen’s critical approach to three key issues: the question of genuine Islam, the limits of state power, and parameters of national identity. This study argues that Hamza Türkmen articulates an anti-systemic and internationalist Islamist stance by adapting the Qutbian perspective to questions that are central to the Islamic intellectual field in Turkey. It has two interrelated dimensions. First, he depicts Kemalism as a modern form of jahiliyya. Second, he criticizes the Islamic Intellectual Field in Turkey for failing to construct a genuine Islamic revival due to its allegedly statist, nationalist, rightist, Ottomanist, and traditionalist characteristics. Thus, Hamza Türkmen’s alternative Islamic thought exemplifies how the intellectual agenda of internationalist Islamist thought provides a salient framework for contending intellectual movements in the Islamic intellectual field.