Rububiyyah and Ubudiyyah

[ahsanirfan]

n/a

[Omar HH]

From LivingIslam.org:


His Invention of a Double or Triple Tawh.îd

Also among Ibn Taymiyya's kalâm innovations was his division of tawh.îd into two types: tawh.îd al-rubûbiyya and tawh.îd al-ulûhiyya, respectively, Oneness of Lordship and Oneness of Godhead. fn80 The first, he said, consisted in the acknowledgment of Allâh as the Creator of all, a belief shared by believers and non-believers alike. The second, he said, was the affirmation of Allâh as the one true deity and only object of worship, a belief exclusive to believers. His natural conclusion was that "whoever does not know tawh.îd al-ulûhiyya, his knowledge of tawh.îd al-rubûbiyya is not taken into account because the idolaters also had such knowledge." He then compared the scholars of kalâm to the Arab idol-worshippers who accepted tawh.îd al-rubûbiyya but ignored tawh.îd al-ulûhiyya! This dialectic was imitated by Ibn Abî al-`Izz in his commentary on al-T.ah.âwî's `Aqîda. fn81

Al-Tubbânî's Refutation of His Multiple Tawh.îds

Abû H.âmid Ibn Marzûq [Imâm al-`Arabî al-Tubbânî] wrote:

Tawh.îd al-rubûbiyya and tawh.îd al-ulûhiyya were invented by Ibn Taymiyya who claimed that all Muslims among the mutakallimûn worshipped other than Allâh due to their ignorance of tawh.îd al-ulûhiyya; he claimed that the only tawh.îd they knew was tawh.îd al-rubûbiyya. The latter consists in affirming that Allâh is the Creator of all things, as, he says, the polytheists conceded. He then declared all Muslims to be unbelievers. Muh.ammad ibn Abd al-Wahhâb imitated him in this, and others imitated Muh.ammad ibn Abdul Wahhâb. The late erudite scholar al-Sayyid Ah.mad ibn Zaynî Dah.lân (d. 1304) looked into this matter in a small section of his treatise al-Durar al-Saniyya fî al-Radd `alâ al-Wahhâbiyya ("The Resplendent Pearls in Refuting the Wahhâbîs"). fn82 So did the savant al-Shaykh Ibrâhîm al-Samannûdî al-Mans.ûrî (d. 1314) who spoke excellently in his book Sa`âdat al-Dârayn fî al-Radd `alâ al-Firqatayn al-Wahhâbiyya wa al-Z.âhiriyya ("The Bliss of the Two Abodes in the Refutation of the Two Sects: Wahhâbîs and Z.âhirîsî). The late erudite scholar al-Shaykh Salâmat al-`Azzâmî (d. 1376) also wrote valuable words about it in his book al-Barâhin al-Sât.i`a fî Radd Ba`d. al-Bida` al-Shâ'i`a ("The Radiant Proofs in Refuting Certain Widespread Innovations")...

Imâm Ah.mad ibn H.anbal... never said that tawh.îd consisted in two parts, one being tawh.îd al-rubûbiyya and the other tawh.îd al-ulûhiyya. Nor did he ever say that "whoever does not know tawh.îd al-ulûhiyya, his knowledge of tawh.îd al-rubûbiyya is not taken into account because the idolaters also had such knowledge."... None of the followers of the Followers... none of the Successors... none of the Companions of the Prophet ever said that tawh.îd consisted in two parts, one being tawh.îd al-rubûbiyya and the other tawh.îd al-ulûhiyya, nor did any of them ever say that "whoever does not know tawh.îd al-ulûhiyya, his knowledge of tawh.îd al-rubûbiyya is not taken into account because the idolaters also had such knowledge."... Nowhere in all the Sunna of the Prophet ... is it related that the Prophet ever said or ever taught his Companions that tawh.îd consists in two parts, one being tawh.îd al-rubûbiyya and the other tawh.îd al-ulûhiyya, nor that "whoever does not know tawh.îd al-ulûhiyya, his knowledge of tawh.îd al-rubûbiyya is not taken into account because the idolaters also had such knowledge." If mankind and jinn joined together to establish that the Prophet ever said such a thing, even with an inauthentic chain of transmission, they would not succeed.

The books of the Sunna of the Prophet overflow with the fact that the call of the Prophet to the people unto Allâh was in order that they witness that there is no God except Allâh alone and that Muh.ammad is the Messenger of Allâh, and in order that they repudiate idol-worship. One of the most famous illustrations of this is the narration of Mu`âdh ibn Jabal when the Prophet sent him to Yemen and said to him: "Invite them to the testimony that there is no God but Allâh and Muh.ammad is the Messenger of Allâh...." And it is narrated in five of the six books of authentic traditions - and Ibn H.ibbân declared it sound - that a Bedouin Arab reported the sighting of the new moon to the Prophet and the latter ordered the people to fast without asking this man other than to confirm his testimony of faith. According to this drivel of Ibn Taymiyya, it would have been necessary for the Prophet to call all people to the tawh.îd al-ulûhiyya of which they were ignorant - since tawh.îd al-rubûbiyya they knew already - and he should have said to Mu`âdh: "Invite them to tawh.îd al-ulûhiyyaî; and he should have asked the Bedouin who had sighted the new moon of Ramadan: "Do you know tawh.îd al-ulûhiyya?"

Finally, in His precious Book which falsehood cannot approach whether from the front or from the back, Allâh never ordered tawh.îd al-ulûhiyya to His servants, nor did He ever say that "whoever does not know this tawh.îd, his knowledge of tawh.îd al-rubûbiyya is not taken into account." fn83

Ibn Marzûq is the pseudonym of Shaykh Muh.ammad ibn `Alawî's Shaykh, Muh.ammad al-`Arabî ibn al-Tubbânî al-Maghribî al-Mâlikî al-Makkî (d. 1390) who authored both Barâ'at al-Ash`ariyyîn and al-Ta`qîb al-Mufîd `alâ Hady al-Zura`î al-Shadîd in refutation of Ibn Taymiyya, Ibn al-Qayyim, and the Wahhâbî movement's insinuations against the Ash`arîs. fn84

http://www.livingislam.org/n/itay_e.html

[Omar HH]

I don't know Ahsan,

If you want my take on it. In an opinion in the Ashari school (as Shaykh Abu Qanit al-Hassani introduced me to) we have something called a "conceptual monotheist" which is basically:

"If you ask them who created the heaven and the earth they will say 'Allah'"

An opinion in the Ashari school states that, in contrast to the Imam al-Ghazali opinion, only those conceptual monotheists who were unreached by the message can be granted divine amnesty. The opinion says that if you have time to think, and you are an intelligent person, you must be able to figure that much out.

So there are those who are conceptual monotheists and there are those who are Islamic monotheists.

But as for Tawhid al-Rububiyyah and Ubudiyyah, I just take Dr. Gibril Haddad's words at face value and do not pay any attention to it.

Jazakallahu Khayrun

[fnaeem]

even Dr Mokhtar Mogharoui, whom I respect, refers to these terms in his lectures. Catch his videos on aswatalislam.net. you will be impressed.
I think he is traditional, due to his often quotations of Sh Jilani and Imam ghazali.

:jazak:

Faisal

[Azzam]

When I asked Sh. Abdullah bin Bayyah about Sh. Muhammad ibn Abdil Wahhab, he responded with some of this terminology about Tawhid and dividing it. I do not remember exactly what he said, but it was nothing negative.

Now please read this.

Question :

I hear from some knowledgable brothers concerning Tawheed and its categories that Shaykh ul Islaam Taqi`ud deen Ibn Taymiyyaah (Rahimahullaah) held 2 catergories of Tawheed (ie; Tawheed Ar-Ruboobiyyaah and Tawheed Al Asmaa Was Sifaat) How true are these statements? Did Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Ibraheem (rahimahullaah) hold 4 catergories? and finally does Shaykh Saleeh Al Fawzaan (may Allaah preserve him) hold 4 catergories of Tawheed?.


Answer :

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

We must understand the principle which says that there is nothing wrong with using new terminology. This principle is well-known among the fuqaha’ and scholars of usool. Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

There is nothing wrong with new concepts and new words, unless there is something bad about them.

Madaarij al-Saalikeen, 3/306

Secondly:

From early times the scholars have categorized the rulings of sharee’ah. This has only been done to make it easier to understand the texts and rulings of sharee’ah, especially as time goes by and knowledge of Arabic language becomes weaker and the language gets mixed with foreign languages.

The scholars thought it wise to set out principles, issues and categories to make it easier to understand. There is nothing wrong with this, in fact it is a good thing because it makes knowledge more accessible to the Muslims. Al-Shaafa’i set out the principles of fiqh and his categorization was well-received and was followed by the scholars of usool who wrote commentaries on what he said and added to it. This was done in all branches of Islamic knowledge such as tajweed (recitation of Qur’aan), Qur’aan and others, including Tawheed.

Thirdly:

With regard to what the questioner mentions, that Shaykh al-Islam divided Tawheed into two categories and Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibraaheem divided it into four, as did Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan, there is nothing wrong with that. We will explain this to you.

Some of the scholars said that Tawheed can be divided into two categories:

[I]Tawheed al-Ma’rifah wa’l-Ithbaat (Oneness of knowledge and affirmation): which includes believing in the existence of Allaah and in His Lordship and His names and attributes.

Tawheed al-Qasd wa’l-Talab (Oneness of object and aim), which includes believing in the divine nature of Allaah.

With regard to those who divided Tawheed into three categories, they explained the previous categorization in more detail and made it easier to understand. So they said that Tawheed is divided into three categories:

Tawheed al-Ruboobiyyah (Oneness of divine Lordship): which includes belief in the existence of Allaah.

Tawheed al-Uloohiyyah (Oneness of the Divine nature) or Tawheed al-‘Ibaadah (Oneness of worship) – which mean the same thing.

Tawheed al-Asma’ wa’l-Sifaat (Oneness of the Divine names and attributes)

Then some of the scholars added to this categorization and said that Tawheed may be divided into four categories:

Belief in the existence of Allaah.

Belief in the Lordship of Allaah.

Belief in the Divinity of Allaah.

Belief in the names and attributes of Allaah.

As we see, there is nothing wrong with this categorization so long as it does not point to anything false, and there is nothing wrong with the terminology. This categorization is only to make it easier to understand. The more time passes, the less people understand, and the scholars need to make things easier and simpler.

To sum up, there is nothing wrong with what the questioner mentioned, because dividing Tawheed into two categories includes everything that is explained in detail by the others. Those who divided it into three or four categories explained in detail that which was mentioned in concise fashion by those who divided it into two.

But all are agreed that Tawheed includes all the things that they mentioned.

There is nothing wrong with this categorization and this use of terminology, on condition that it does not lead to any problems, such as leaving out some of the concepts that are part of Tawheed, or introducing ideas that have nothing to do with it.

There may come a time when it needs to be explained further, so the scholars will explain it with more categories in order to make it easier to understand.

This is a brief explanation of what is meant by the three categories of Tawheed:

Belief in Divine Lordship (ruboobiyyah): This means believing that Allaah is the only One Who creates, gives life and death, etc.

Belief in the Divine nature (uloohiyyah): This means believing that Allaah is the only One Who to whom the people should devote their words and actions, both inward and outward. So none is to be worshipped but Him, may He be glorified and exalted.

Belief in the names and attributes of Allaah (al-asma’ wa’l-sifaat): which means affirming what Allaah has affirmed for Himself of names and attributes, and denying any attributes that Allaah has said are not His, without denying any of His attributes or likening any of His attributes to the attributes of any of His creation.

Fourthly:

The scholars’ dividing Tawheed into these categories is nothing new, rather it was known in the third and fourth centuries AH, as was mentioned by Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd, a member of the Council of Senior Scholars, in his book al-Radd ‘ala al-Mukhaalif. This categorization was also narrated from Ibn Jareer al-Tabari and other scholars.

Note: what the questioner mentioned, that Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah divided Tawheed into two categories – Tawheed al-Ruboobiyyah (Oneness of divine Lordship) and Tawheed al-Asmaa’ wa’l-Sifaat (Oneness of the divine names and attributes) – is not correct. Rather he divided it into two categories which were Tawheed al-Ma’rifah wa’l-Ithbaat (Oneness of knowledge and affirmation) and Tawheed al-Qasd wa’l-Talab (Oneness of object and aim), the first of which includes Tawheed al-Ruboobiyyah and Tawheed al-Asma’ wa’l-Sifaat.

See Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 15/164; al-Fataawa al-Kubra, 5/250

And Allaah knows best.

[Azzam]

I have noticed a mistake in the title. Ubudiyyah is not from the categories. I just realised the person who started this thread used ubudiyyah instead of uluhiyyah.

Ubudiyyah is Servitude. Having to do with reaching the maqam or station of an abd of Allah.

[Omar HH]

I have a question for Azzam,

did you get that from ************* ?

Jazakallahu Khayrun

[Mossy]

There is nothing wrong with new concepts and new words, unless there is something bad about them.

Bidah hasanah ;)

[Azzam]

its also ubudiyyah.. i know uluhiyyah refers to the same thing.. its the same concept....i did not make a mistake :jazak: anyway

Yes it means the same thing, but when the three categories are presented in most cases, it is not termed ubudiyyah to my knowledge.

Yes to the other brother its from Islam-qa. I think its a comprehensive answer. I also mentioned that Sh. Abdullah bin Bayyah was mentioning these terms when I ask him about Sh. Muhammad ibn Abdil Wahhab and that nothing negative was said. I can try to get more information if you wish.

It is not a form of worship that is being introduced here. Therefore it cannot be said as a bida. Bida occurs when there is innovation in the deen in matters of worship, which only the Prophet SAW can show us. The fact of the matter is that the criteria of Tawhid has existed all the time, it is just broken down for people to understand it better. Nothing new except the names to categorized the theory or to break it down so people can understand it. So many terms in fiqh have been used this way.

[faqir]

I find it odd how some of these "salafis" were up in arms - shouting bidah bidah - when some other "salafis" began to talk about another division called Tawhid ul-Hakimiyah.

[Abul Hasan]

I find it odd how some of these "salafis" were up in arms - shouting bidah bidah - when some other "salafis" began to talk about another division called Tawhid ul-Hakimiyah.


:salam:

Na'am akhi. These people claim to be on the way of the Salaf in all affairs! But they fail to name just one major Sahabi, Tabi'i or Taba Tabi'i who divided Tawhid into 3 or 4 subdivisions! It is very convenient for them to justify dividing Tawhid by saying that it helps to facilitate the understanding of Tawhid, just as the Ulama of the Salaf categorised other branches of knowledge like Hadith or Usul al-Fiqh to facilitate a specific aim.

But!

They conveniently fail to recognise and state convincingly that the Salaf did categorise various branches of Ilm, but there doesn't appear to be any names they can pull out the bag to justify the division of Tawhid into 3 or 4 areas. This is why it is a Bid'a as the late great Shaykh: Abu Hamid ibn Marzuq (d. 1970/1390 AH) said in his 2 volume work: Bara'atul Ashariyyin (in refutation of the pseudo-Salafiyya and in defence of the Asha'ira).

The pseudo-Salafiyya do not recognise the concept of Bid'a Hasana, and if they were too they would have to admit that the division of Tawhid into 3 or 4 areas, is at least a Bid'a Hasana to their Ulama like Ibn Taymiyya onwards...

Imagine what response a pseudo-Salafi would have to the technical terms introduced by the Sufi Masters to facilitate the understanding of Tasawwuf, from the Salaf via the Khalaf. I doubt if they would hesitate to call these terms to be a heretical and so on...


This issue indicates that the pseudo-Salafiyya are shallow in their manhaj and lack a definite and concrete Usul in aqeeda and other affairs! Let us see how these people are divided on this issue of "Tawhid al-Hakimiyya". I will quote from their own websites and scholars below.
--------------------------------------------------


Pseudo-Salafiyya are divided on "Tawhid al-Hakimiyya":

1) Salih al-Fawzan

Questioner 1: There is someone who has made a fourth category for Tawheed and called it Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah

Shaikh Fawzaan: [interjecting]... This is misguidance..., this is misguidance. This is misguidance and an addition, which the people of knowledge have not affirmed. Tawheed is but two or three categories... this is contradictory, one person says Tawheed is only one category and another says it is four categories. All of this is misguidance.

Questioner 1: This person's evidence is that the basis for this categorisation...

Shaikh Fawzaan: [interjecting]... [words unclear].. Tawheed ul-Haakimiyyah an independent category and it does not enter into Tawheed ul-Uloohiyyah? It enters into Tawheed ul-Uloohiyyah! It is a type of worship and is a type of devotion to Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic.

Questioner 2: He says that these three categorisations, al-Uloohiyyah, ar-Ruboobiyyah and al-Asmaa was-Sifaat, he says that this is a matter which is arrived at by the ijtihaad of the scholars, or by way of investigation and analysis (istiqraa').

Shaikh Fawzaan: That is sufficient for us, we will not add to what they have unanimously agreed upon, and they agree upon this.. [then] there comes an ignoramus in the twentieth century... he says 'I am a Mujtahid and I will add to what the People of Knowledge have agreed upon'. This is misguidance...

Questioner 2: [interjecting]...

Shaikh Fawzaan:This is clear error! Because al-Haakimiyyah enters into Tawheed ul-Uloohiyyah. Who has made it another category or made it an independent category? Will he make the prayer into a fifth or sixth category and jihaad a seventh category? [Because] all of the types of worship are from the types of Tawheed? This is not correct...

Questioner 2: So this is an innovated saying, this saying [Tawheed ul-Haakimiyyah]?

Shaikh Fawzaan: Yes, there is no doubt in this, it is in opposition to the Ijmaa [of Ahl us-Sunnah]. None of the people of knowledge have ever spoken with it. It is in opposition to the Ijmaa." End

Comments: The Ruwaibidah have attempted on numerous occasions to distort the concepts of Sunnah and Salafiyyah and spread cancerous teachings within the body of the Ummah, introducing innovations and newly-invented matters under the guise of rectification and the fiqh of priorities.

When the Salafi Imaams and Mashayikh stood to refute this innovation, the political activists, then refrained from using the term "Tawheed ul-Haakimiyyah" and spoke just of "al-Haakimiyyah", but never did they repent and recant from this innovation - (the while the whole Ummah to them is apostate merely because of the absence of total Sharee'ah rule - and such was their absolution and generalisation - having derived this teaching from their sayyid, Sayyid Qutb) [1].

And Despite the fact that there was unanimous agreement on this issue amongst the major and senior scholars, another one of their well known ploys was unleashed. To portray this issue as one of ijtihaad in which the people of knowledge differ. To this end they used the words of Shaikh Ibn Ghunayman which they thought supported them but which were in reality against them – as we shall see further below. So they made it permissible for themselves to depart from the Ijmaa of Ahl us-Sunnah, to deviate from the muhkam and instead to follow what was other than that and which was but ambiguous.

The Statement of Shaikh al-Ghunayman

One of those upon whose words the Qutubiyyah relied upon is Shaikh al-Ghunayman. The Shaikh stated when asked about Tawhid ul-Haakimiyyah, "It is not permissible to deny Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah, for it is from the types of Tawheed. But it falls under Tawheed al-‘Ibaadah with regards to the ruler himself as a person. With regards to it meaning Tawheed, then it falls under ar-Ruboobeeyyah, because the Ruler is Allaah. So it should be that the Rabb is the Muttasarrif (Controller of affairs), He is the One who has the Hukm, so it falls under Tawheed Ar-Ruboobiyyah with regards to ruling, ordering, prohibiting, and carrying out, whereas regards to application and action then the slave is responsible for following the Hukm of Allaah, so then it is from Tawheed Al-‘Ibaadah in this sense. And making it into a fourth category doesn’t make sense because it falls into the three categories. And the division without a reason is a cause of extra words which are not needed, and it is a simple matter anyway. If he makes it a separate category then he is being redundant, and there is no harm it."

------------------------------------------
ii) Ibn Uthaymin:
Shaikh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-'Uthaimeen was asked concerning this, and he replied that:


"Whoever claims that there is a fourth category of tawheed under the title 'Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah' is to be counted as an[U] innovator (mubtadi'). So this is an innovated categorisation which emanates from an ignorant person who does not understand anything of the affairs of 'aqeedah and the deen. This is because 'al-Haakimiyyah' falls within Tawheedur-Ruboobiyyah from the aspect that Allaah decrees whatever He wills.

It also enters under Tawheedur-Ruboobiyyah in that the servant must worship Allaah according to what He has decreed. So it does not fall outside the three categories of tawheed, which are: Tawheedur-Ruboobiyyah, Tawheedul-Uloohiyyah and Tawheedul-Asmaa was-Sifaat."

Then, when asked, 'How are we to rebut them?' he replied:

"We rebut them by saying to them, 'What does 'al-Haakimiyyah' mean?' It does not mean except their saying that judgement/decree is for Allaah alone ' and that is Tawheedur-Ruboobiyyah. So Allaah, He is the Lord, the Creator, the Sovereign Owner, the One in control of the affairs. But as for what they intend by it and an explanation of the danger of this idea of theirs, then we do not know their intentions and desire, so therefore we cannot estimate the seriousness of this matter.'

Taken from 'al-Muslimoon,' no. 639, 25th of Dhul-Hijjah 1417H which corresponds to Friday the 2nd of May 1997.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
iii) Al-Albani:

Shaikh Muhammad Naasiruddeen al-Albaanee was asked, "Our Shaikh, may Allaah bless you, the scholars of the Salaf, may Allaah have mercy upon them, mention that Tawheed is of three types: 'ar-Ruboobiyyah,' 'al-Uloohiyyah' and 'al-Asmaa was-Sifaat,' so is it correct for us to say that there is a fourth Tawheed that is 'Tawheedul-Haakimiyyah' or 'Tawheed of Judgement?' So he replied:

"'Al-Haakimiyyah' is a branch of the branches of Tawheedul-Uloohiyyah, and those who focus their attention upon this newly invented saying in the present age use it as a weapon not to teach the Muslims the Tawheed that all of the Prophets and Messengers came with, but rather as apolitical weapon. So if you wish I will establish for you what I have just said, even though this question has repeatedly been answered by me, many times - or if you wish we will continue upon our topic.

I have said in similar circumstances, as support for what I have just said, that usage of the word 'al-Haakimyyah' is part of the political da'wah that is particular to some of the parties present today; and I will mention here something that occurred between myself and someone who gave the khutbah in one of the mosques of Damascus. So on the day of Jumu'ah he gave a khutbah which was all about judgement/decree being for Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic. But this person made an error with regard to a matter of fiqh. So after he had finished the prayer I went forward to him and gave him 'salaam,' and said to him, 'O my brother, you did so and so, and that is contrary to the Sunnah.' So he said to me, 'I am a Hanafee, and the Hanafee madhhab says what I have done.' So I said, 'Subhaanallaah! You have given khutbah that judgement/decree is just for Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, but you only use this word to attack those rulers whom you think are Unbelievers because they do not rule according to the Islamic Sharee'ah. But you have forgotten about yourselves - that Allaah's decree/judgement covers every Muslim. So why, when I say to you that the Messenger did so and so, why do you say, 'But my madhhab is such and such.' Then you have contradicted that which you call the people to.'

So if it were not for the fact that they use this saying as a tool for political propaganda of theirs, then we would say, 'This is our merchandise that has been returned to us.'

So the da'wah that we call the people to contains 'al-Haakimiyyah' and other than 'al-Haakimiyyah': Tawheedul-Uloohiyyah and Tawheed of worship - that which you concentrate upon enters within it. We are the ones who propagated what you mention whilst you are focusing upon 'al-Haakimiyyah,' the hadeeth of Hudhayfah ibn al-Yamaan, that when the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa-sallam) recited this ayah to his noble Companions:

They (the Jews and the Christians) took the Rabbis and learned men as lords besides Allaah. Soorah at-Tawbah (9):31

then 'Adiyy ibn Haatim at-Taa'ee said, 'By Allaah, O Messenger of Allaah, we did not take them as lords besides Allaah.' So he said, 'When they made something lawful forbidden for you, had you not used to declare it forbidden; and when they made lawful something forbidden, had you not used to take it as being lawful?' He said, 'As for that, then it did used to happen.' He said, 'Then that is your taking them as lords besides Allaah.'

So we are the ones who propagated this hadeeth, and then it reached the others. Then they advanced one part of Tawheedul-Uloohiyyah or worship, with this innovated title for political aims.

So I do not see anything (wrong) in a terminology such as this if only they had not left it as mere propaganda without their acting as it requires. So it is, as I have just mentioned, a part of Tawheed of worship - but you will see them worshipping Allaah in whatever manner each of them feels like, and if it is said, as we have just mentioned in the incident of the man who gave the khutbah, 'that someone is acting contrary to the Sunnah,' or 'this is something contrary to the saying of the Messenger (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa-sallam),' then he says, 'My madhhab is such and such.'

That judgement/decree is for Allaah alone is not just a proof against the Unbelievers and the mushriks, but also against anyone who transgresses against Allaah by contradicting what came from Allaah in His Book, and from His Prophet (sallallaahu 'alaihi wa-sallam) in his Sunnah. This is what I have as a reply to the likes of this question."

Taken from 'al-Muslimoon,' no. 639, 25th of Dhul-Hijjah 1417H which corresponds to Friday the 2nd of May 1997
-----------------------------------------------------------

iv) The Committee of "Major Scholars" on Tawhid al-Hakimiyyah


Question: "Some people, from the callers, have begun giving importance to mentioning 'Tawheedul-Haakimiyyah' in addition to the three well-known categories of Tawheed. So does this fourth category enter within the three categories? or not ' such that we make it a separate category which we must give (extra) importance to?

And it is said that Shaikh Muhammad ibn 'Abdul-Wahhaab gave attention to Tawheedul-Uloohiyyah in his time when he saw that the people fell short of Tawheed in that aspect, and that Imaam Ahmad in his time gave attention to Tawheedul-Asmaa was-Sifaat when he saw the people falling short of Tawheed in that aspect. But as for today then the people fall short with regard to Tawheedul-Haakimiyyah, so therefore we must give attention to it. So how correct is this saying?"

Answer: "Tahweed is of three categories: Tawheedur-Ruboobiyyah, Tawheedul-Uloohiyyah and Tawheedul-Asmaa was-Sifaat, and there is no fourth category. And judging by what Allaah sent down comes under Tawheedul-Uloohiyyah since it is from the types of worship due to Allaah, the One free of all imperfections, and all of the types of worship fall under Tawheedul-Uloohiyyah. Then making 'al-Haakimiyyah' a separate category is an innovated matter, which has not been the saying of any of the scholars as far as we know.

However there were some of them who generalised and said that Tawheed is of two classes: Tawheed of things known and affirmed (al-Ma'rifah wal-Ithbaat) - and it is Tawheedur-Ruboobiyyah and Tawheedul-Asmaa was-Sifaat; and Tawheed of purpose and intentions (at-Talab wal-Qasd) - and it is Tawheedul-Uloohiyyah. Then there are others who particularise and so place Tawheed in three categories, as has preceded, and Allaah knows best.

So it is obligatory to give attention to all of Tawheedul-Uloohiyyah, and to begin by forbidding shirk, since it is the greatest of sins and annuls all of the deeds, and a person upon it will remain for ever in the Fire. Also all of the Prophets began with the command to worship Allaah alone and the forbiddance of shirk; and Allaah has commanded us to follow their way and to proceed upon their methodology in da'wah and the rest of the affairs of the deen. So giving attention to tawheed with its three categories is obligatory in every time, since shirk and denial/divestment (ta'teel) of the names and attributes are still found, indeed they occur very often and their danger increases towards the end of time, and the seriousness of these two is a matter hidden from many of the Muslims, and those who call to these two are many and active. So occurrence of shirk is not something restricted to the time of Shaikh Muhammad ibn 'Abdul-Wahhaab, nor is denial/divestment (ta'teel) of the names and attributes restricted to the time of Imaam Ahmad, rahimahullaah, as occurs in the question. Rather their danger has increased and their prevalence has grown in Muslim societies today. So they are in the greatest need of those who will forbid from falling into them and who will make clear their danger. Whilst knowing that being upright upon the commands of Allaah and avoidance of what He forbids and applying/judging by His Sharee'ah, all of that falls under realisation of Tawheed and remaining free from shirk.

And may Allaah extol and send peace upon our Prophet Muhammad and his true followers and his Companions.

Taken from 'al-Muslimoon,' no. 639, 25th of Dhul-Hijjah 1417H which corresponds to Friday the 2nd of May 1997.

---------------------------------------------------------

[Abul Hasan]

continued...........

NOW! Let us see those from this camp of pseudo-Salafiyyism who affirm Tawhid al-Hakimiyya:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah a Bid'ah?
Prepared by Abu Huthayfah Yusuf al-Canadee


It should be understood that the current terminology and classification of the different Sharee'ah sciences mostly were not used by either of the first three generations or "the Salaf us-Saalih " at all. It would be rare to find any of them using some of the terms that are so common today such as "Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah" or "Tawheed Ar-Rooboobiyyah" or "Tawheed Asmaa' wa Sifaat". Rather, we see them referring to Tawheed generally as one subject. However, later generations divided these classifications of Tawheed for the purposes of teaching and categorizing the different aspects of Allaah's Tawheed. Some of them, such as Ibn Al-Qayyim, only referred to two categories of Tawheed as he said, in his explanation of the Tawheed as it has come from the Qur'aan in Surat Al-Kaafiroon and Al-Ikhlaas:

"…and they have both covered the two types of Tawheed, for which there is no salvation nor any success without them. And they are Tawheed Al-'Ilm wa'l-'Atiqaad…(i.e. the Tawheed of Knowledge and Beliefs)" - and he, may Allaah be merciful to him, goes on to explain this category, until he said, - "…and the second, is Tawheed Al-Qasd wa'l-Iraadah…(i.e. Tawheed of Intention and Purpose.)" - and likewise, he goes on to explain this category. ["Badaa'a Al-Fawaa'id ", Vol. 1/145-146]

And the point here is that Tawheed Al-'Ilm wa'l-'Atiqaad includes His Names and Attributes from the point of view of what we know and believe concerning Allah. And the Tawheed Al-Qasd wa'l-Iraadah includes them as well from the point of view of how we worship Allaah according to His Names and Attributes. So this was an alternate way of explaining and classifying Tawheed while giving emphasis to two aspects instead of three.

And likewise, Ibn Abee Al-'Izz, may Allaah be merciful to him, said in his chapter of Tawheed:

"Further, the Tawheed to which the Messengers invited and which was the main context of the revealed Books are of two kinds:

i) Tawheed fi'l-Ithbaat wa'l-Maa'ifah (Tawheed of Acknowledgement and Knowledge): The first is to acknowledge the Being (and existence) of Allaah, the Most High, along with all His Attributes, Acts and Names. In this, He is unique. There is none like Him in all these characteristics - as Allaah Himself and His Messengers informed us. And ii) Tawheed fi'l-Talib wa'l-Qasd (Tawheed of Solicitation and Intent): The second, the Tawheed of Solicitation and Intent, has been well defined by the following short chapter from the Qur'aan: [Say: O you disbelievers… (Al-Kaafiroon, 1)] And: [Say: O People of the Book, come to an equitable term between yourselves and us, that we shall worship none but Allaah… (Aal-'Imraan, 64)] [Look to "Sharh' Al-'Aqeedah At-Tahawiyyah" eng. Trans. Pg. 8-9, published by Al-Attique]

And it is worth mentioning that Ibn Abee Al-'Izz mentioned this classification of two categories, only a few pages after explaining Tawheed with the three common categories; "Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah" and "Tawheed Ar-Rooboobiyyah" and "Tawheed Asmaa' wa Sifaat". But it was not strange for him to classify Tawheed in one manner and explain it using these categories and then explain it an alternate way with the use of only two categories as they both aid the understanding of Tawheed and that which it covers. And this occurs within the same precise chapter! It is also interesting to point out that Ibn Abee Al-'Izz spends much of this chapter in refuting the people of Bid'ah who have denied certain aspects of Tawheed. And this was due to their understanding of what Tawheed includes and implies, yet the classification and categorization of Tawheed was not important as he, himself used two alternate methods of classification for the purpose of explaining and emphasizing its implications and components.

Similarly, after dividing Tawheed into the three common categories, Dr. Na'eem Yaseen mentioned in a footnote to his chapter on Tawheed:

"However, some scholars have reduced these three types of Tawheed to two; One in knowledge and belief, which include Tawheed of Allaah in His Lordship and Names and Attributes, and one type in Al-Iraadah and Al-Qasd (Will and Intention) which is Tawheed of Allaah in His Worship. See: "Sharh Al-Aqeedah At-Tahawiyyah" Pg. 88 and "Fat'h Al-Majeed", Pg. 15 and "Sharh Qaseedat Ibn Al-Qayyim", Vol. 2/259 and "Tatheer Al-I'tiqaad", Pg. 3" ["Kitaab Al-Eemaan " eng. Trans. Pg. 14-15 ff., published by Al-Firdous Ltd, London]

So although the most common and perhaps the best division of the different aspects of Tawheed are these three (i.e. Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah, Tawheed Ar-Rooboobiyyah and Tawheed Asmaa' wa Sifaat ) this does not mean that these terms and classifications are from the legislated terminology of what Allaah, the Most High, revealed to His Messenger or what was taught to the companions or passed to the succeeding generations at all. Rather, these terms do not even exist in the Book of Allaah or in the Sunnah or the Prophet or the statements of the companions in the first place. So how can someone claim that using a fourth or fifth classification of Tawheed for the purposes of explaining and categorizing the science of Tawheed is an innovation (Bid'ah)?! Especially when we see that many of the early scholars have only used two categories of Tawheed to explain and identify their importance.

Similar to this, in Mustaalih Al-Hadeeth (the classification and terminology of Hadeeth sciences) the earliest scholars did not use the word "Shaath" (incorrect), when referring to narrations or parts of narrations, which were in contradiction to more reliable reports. Rather, the earliest Hadeeth scholars classified these narrations as "Munkar" (objectionable) and the word Shaath became used later to identify these reports. So is this an innovation (Bid'ah)?

So if someone is to say that the term "Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah" is an innovation (Bid'ah) because it was not used by the first three generations (Salaf us-Saalih) then it is upon them to show any of the first three generations using these three categories (i.e. Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah, Tawheed Ar-Rooboobiyyah and Tawheed Asmaa' wa Sifaat ) in their terminology as they are used today. This is because the burden of proof is upon the one who has alleged the infraction and not the other way around.

So the author of the message quotes the statement of Shaykh Saalih Al-Fawzaan saying:

"In order to say this, they relay [sic] on the idea that dividing Tawheed is just a traditional way of explaining it, not something restricted. Based on this assumption, there is nothing preventing us from adding another category. So it should be said to such a person, "This division is not a traditional explanation, rather it goes back to the Book and the Sunnah, and the Salaf took these three categories directly from the Book and the Sunnah."

Firstly, and after declaring our love and respect for the noble Shaykh Saalih Al-Fawzaan, may Allaah preserve him, we say that this response is ambiguous. This is because a person could quite rightly say in response, "The Tawheed of Allaah's Haakimiyyah also goes back to the Book and the Sunnah," and as we have stated earlier, the one who says that any of the first three generations (Salaf us-Saalih) used the terminology of the three more common divisions of Tawheed must prove this by bringing their statements wherein they actually use the terms Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah, Tawheed Ar-Rooboobiyyah and Tawheed Asmaa' wa Sifaat. And until now, we have not been presented with a single narration of this nature.

Next, the author brings some quotations from some of the scholars who held that separating the division of Tawheed into four categories; one being Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah, is a reprehensible innovation (Bid'ah) and therefore is objectionable. However, as we've discussed earlier, these terms were not narrated in the Book of Allaah or in the Sunnah of His Messenger or in the terminology of the companions anyway so the arguments of those who call this term an innovation (Bid'ah) are in need of evidence, which was not presented by the author.

However, in the course of quoting these scholars, the author touches upon a relevant fact. Again, quoting from Shaykh Saalih Al-Fawzaan, we read:

"As for Haakimiyyah, then it is true. It is obligatory for us to rule by the Sharee'ah of Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic. However this is included in Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah because it is obedience to Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic."

And this is true and correct because taking ones judgments to Allaah's Sharee'ah is a form of singling out Allaah for worship just as making one's sacrifice and prayer for Allaah, alone, are both singling out Allaah for worship. And all of these aspects are covered in the category of Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah already.

So the second question is: "If Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah is already covered within Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah, then what is the point of making it into a fourth distinct category of Tawheed?"

To answer this, we must reflect upon some historical realities. During the recent eras of colonialism and imperialism and the subsequent bombardment of secularist concepts, several Muslims had been influenced by these ideas and many began to ascribe to the ideology of removing the religion from politics and legislation. This led to wholesale adoption of non-Islaamic laws and accepting and ruling with a multitude of man-made constitutions and fabricated legislations. So it was not uncommon for a person to take his judgments to the laws of France or Britain and being comfortable in doing that, while believing that he was still upon Tawheed. And this was because the essential components of Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah were not all clear to such people. These people understood that prayer and fasting and slaughtering were all to be done for Allaah, alone; however, they did not feel the least bit shy from taking their judgments to, and basing their rulings upon the laws of man, instead of the Sharee'ah of Allaah.

For example, Shaykh Ahmad Shaakir, may Allaah be merciful to him said, "So look, O Muslims, in all of the Islaamic countries or the ones which claim to be Islaamic, in all the parts of the Earth, to what your enemies from the missionaries and colonists have done to you! They have put upon the Muslims, laws of misguidance, which destroy the etiquettes and the Deen. European law, which are idols, which were never based upon any Sharee'ah or Deen, rather they were based upon rules that were made by the Kaafir who refused to believe in the Messenger of their era, 'Eesa, 'alayhee salaam. And he remained upon his paganism with what he had from Fisq and Fujoor (i.e. oppression). This person was Justinyaan, the father of the laws and the one who established the basis - so they claim - and an important man from Egypt who - due to oppression - attributes himself to Islaam, and who did not feel too ashamed to translate the laws of that transgressing pagan and he called it 'The Code of Justinyaan,' insulting "The code of Maalik," one of the encyclopedias of Islaamic Jurisprudence, which was based upon the Book and the Sunnah, and which is attributed to the Imaam of Dar Al-Hijjrah (i.e. Madinah)! So look at the level of absurdity and shamefulness and recklessness of that man!

"These laws, which the enemies of Islaam imposed upon the Muslims due to enmity; in reality it is another religion and they made it a Deen for the Muslims in replacement of their pure Deen because they made it obligatory upon them to follow it and obey it. And they put into the hearts, love and adoration for it to the point where you see upon the tongues and the pens, words like, 'The holiness of the judgments,' or 'The holiness of the courts,' or 'The holiness of the laws,' and words like these, which they refuse to describe the Islaamic Sharee'ah or the opinions of the Jurists of Islaam with! Instead, they describe it (i.e. the Sharee'ah) with words such as, 'Reactionism,' or 'Stagnant,' or 'Priesthood,' or 'the Sharee'ah of the Jungle,' or other than that from the evils that you see in the newspapers or the magazines or modern books, which are written by the followers of those pagans.

"Then they started to label these (fabricated) laws and the studies of those (fabricated) laws with the word, 'Al-Fiqh,' and 'Al-Faqee',' and 'At-Tashree',' and 'Al-Mushaara',' and other words that the 'Ulaama of Islaam used to describe the Sharee'ah and its 'Ulaama. Then they go (even) further and to the degree where they compare the Deen of Islaam and its Sharee'ah with their modern Deen - until he said - and this modern Deen became the basis which the Muslims take their Hukm to and they judge with it, in most of the Islaamic countries whether it is in something that complies with the laws of the Sharee'ah or contradicts it. And all of this is falsehood and rebellion because whatever complied with it coincidentally and not out of due to following it and not out of obedience to the command of Allaah or the command to His Messenger. So whatever complies and whatever contradicts; both are stuck in the mud of misguidance and it leads the one who follows it to the Fire and it is not allowed for a Muslim to be submissive to it or be pleased with it. And we will add to this meaning under the words of Al-Haafidh Ibn Katheer under the Tafseer of the fiftieth verse of Surat Al-Maa'idah, inshaa'Allaah." [" 'Umdaat At-Tafseer Mukhtaasir Tafseer Ibn Katheer of Ahmad Shaakir ", Vol. 3/214-215]

So due to these realities and due to the fact that the Muslims became virtually swallowed within these laws of Kufr and their courts and legislations; taking their judgments to these fabricated man-made laws whilst not being aware of the Shirk of this action, some of the people of knowledge began to speak with the term "Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah" in order to stress its importance and emphasize the tie between legislation and Tawheed itself, even though they understood that Haakimiyyah was already within the category of Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah. And this was similar, historically, to the development of the term Tawheed Al-Asmaa' wa Sifaat, due to the people's denial of the Attributes of Allaah, even though this aspect of Tawheed is included within Tawheed Al-'Ilm wa'l-'Atiqaad, as we pointed out earlier in our discussion of the division of Tawheed by Ibn Al-Qayyim.

So even though it is clear that Al-Haakimiyyah is included within Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah (as well as Rooboobiyyah and Asmaa' wa Sifaat to a lesser degree), this is a mere classification for emphasis, due to its necessity and due to the negligence of the common people, for the purpose of stressing its importance. And we do not see it as an innovation (Bid'ah), but rather as a redundancy, which assisted the 'Ulamaa in teaching and reforming the people. Shaykh 'Abdullah bin Muhammad Al-Ghunaymaan was asked:
?: ?? ????? ?? ????? ????? ????????? ??? ?????? ???? ????? ???? ?? ???? ?????? ??? ?? ????? ??????? ???? ??? ????? ?

"What is your opinion concerning the rejection of Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah, and is singling it out as a separate category leaving the Meth'haab of the Salaf, and under which type of Tawheed would this category enter under?"

To which he replied:

"It is not permissible to deny Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah, for it is from the types of Tawheed. But it falls under Tawheed al-'Ibaadah (i.e. an alternate phrasing of 'Uloohiyyah) with regards to the ruler himself as a person. With regards to it meaning Tawheed, then it falls under Ar-Ruboobiyyah, because the Ruler is Allaah. So it should be that the Lord is the Muttasarrif (Controller of affairs), He is the One who has the judgment (Hukm), so it falls under Tawheed Ar-Ruboobiyyah with regards to ruling, ordering, prohibiting, and carrying out, whereas regards to application and action then the slave is responsible for following the Hukm of Allaah, so then it is from Tawheed Al-'Ibaadah in this sense. And making it into a fourth category doesn't make sense because it falls into the three categories. And the division without a reason is a cause of extra words, which are not needed, and it is a simple matter anyway. If he makes it a separate category then he is being redundant, and there is no harm it." [From the Questions and answers with Shaykh 'Abdullah Al-Ghunaymaan - Eng. Trans. from the brothers on the Internet]

Shaykh 'Abdur-Rahmaan Ibn 'Abdul-Khaaliq said, in his refutation of those who deny Tawheed Al-Asmaa' wa Sifaat:

"…And these names and terminologies; there is no doubt that they are names and terminologies, which neither Allaah nor His Messenger spoke with their likes. However, the 'Ulamaa of the Salaf, may Allaah be pleased with them, used them. And this was not from the invented Bid'ah, rather it was from the categorization of knowledge, which simplifies the understanding. As it is said, 'the science of Tafseer' and 'the principles of Tafseer' and 'the science of Hadeeth' and the terminology of 'classification of Hadeeth' and 'Jurisprudence' and 'the principles of Jurisprudence' and 'the science of Tawheed' and none of these various categories are found in the Qur'aan nor the Sunnah.

And the Messenger did not teach the Ummah their religion through categories like this in the sense that he would give them a lesson in Tafseer and another in Hadeeth and a third in Seerah, rather, the legislated knowledge was one component and then these categories and branches and terminologies were developed to simplify learning these sciences. And like that, is the issue of our saying 'the Tawheed of Asmaa' wa Sifaat' and 'the Tawheed of 'Uloohiyyah' and 'the Tawheed of Rooboobiyyah'. They are merely classifications within one science and it is the matters of Eemaan in Allaah and because the Eemaan in Allaah contains within it, several classifications.

And due to that, the 'Ulamaa were in need of these terminologies. So they said 'Tawheed Al-Asmaa wa Sifaat' and 'Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah' and 'Tawheed Al-Rooboobiyyah'. And it has also come, that some have said 'Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah' and this was when - from the Muslims, came those who differentiated between the matters of the Deen and the matters of this life - assuming that the Muslims were free to choose between taking the rulings to the legislation of Allaah or taking it to the legislation of other than His.

So from the Muhadditheen (Hadeeth scholars), of the 'Ulamaa, have come and said that Eemaan in Allah necessitates that we believe that there is no judgment except for Him. As He, the Most High, said: "And verily, for Him was the creation and the command." And He said: "And Allaah judges and there is none to reject His judgment." So it was derived from these verses and others like them and it was called 'a new category' from the categories and it is Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah. And there is no doubt that the meaning, which was intended by those who used this phrase, was correct even if this terminology itself and this phase was invented. And as we have said earlier, this is not from the invented Bid'ah, rather it is from the Sharee'ah-based benefits, in order to bring closer the meanings to the mind and to classify the sciences and to clarify the meaning."

Conclusions:

So from what we have discussed above, in the course of this clarification, we understand the following:

1. The terminology, which was developed from the scholars in order to explain and classify the different sciences of the Sharee'ah knowledge, is not from the legislated terminology that Allaah and His Messenger came with. And due to this, it cannot be restricted to particular methods of explanation.

2. The above rule extends to the categorization and classification of Tawheed, as we have seen that some of the scholars and the Salaf, such as Ibn Al-Qayyim and Ibn 'Abee Al-'Izz and other than them, used two categories of Tawheed or explained Tawheed interchangeably between three categories and two for the benefits of explaining and emphasizing its aspects and their importance.

3. Those who claim that using the term Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah is an innovation (Bid'ah); it is upon them to bring the evidence that these terms: Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah, Tawheed Ar-Rooboobiyyah and Tawheed Asmaa' wa Sifaat were used by the first three generations of Muslims (i.e. Salaf As-Saalih), otherwise the claim has no basis.

4. Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah is not a separate independent category of Tawheed with no link to any other classification, rather it falls beneath the category of Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah as parts of it fall beneath Ar-Rooboobiyyah and Al-Asmaa' wa Sifaat.

5. Due to historical events, some of the people of knowledge began using the term Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah in order to give emphasis to this aspect of Tawheed and demonstrate its importance and its essential link to the overall Tawheed of Allaah.

And Allaah, the Most High, knows best. And may the Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon our Messenger Muhammad, and his family and his companions and those who follow them in truth, until the last day.
------------------------------------------------


Let us see what Abu Baseer - currently in the UK has to say:-

----------------------------------------------------

[Abul Hasan]

What is Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah

by Shaykh Abu Baseer Mustafa Haleemah at-Tartoosee


Question:

Is it possible for you to clarify for me the meaning of Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah? It seems to me that it is half of Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah?! As I have heard that Shaykh Muhammad bin Ibraheem - the Shaykh of Ibn Baaz - was from those who taught the people Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah and then this phrase was rejected by many of the Saudi Salafees and they considered it as a Bid'ah. So is this correct?! Then is it possible for you to refer me to the books, which discuss this side of Tawheed?

Please Note:The name "Saudi Salafees" used in the question by the questioner was referring only to the Jaamees and the Madkhalees

Answer:

Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah means unifying Allaah, the Most High, alone; One in His judgement (Hukm) and His legislation (Tashree'). So just as He, the Most High, has no partner in his Dominion and in controlling the affairs of the creation, likewise, He has no partner in the judgement (Hukm) and legislation (Tashree').

As He, the Most High, said: "The Hukm (judgment) is for none but Allâh. He has commanded that you worship none but Him, that is the (true) straight religion, but most men know not." [al-Qur'aan 12:40]

And He, the Most High, said: "And Allaah judges and there is none to reject His Hukm (judgment)." [13:41]

And He, the Most High, said: "And there are none who associate with Him in His Hukm (judgment)."

And He, the Most High, said: "Is it the Hukm (judgment) of Jaahiliyyah, which they seek? And who is better than Allaah in ruling for a people of certainty?"

And "And in whatsoever you disagree about, then its Hukm (judgment) is to Allaah."

And He, the Most High, said: "And if you obey them, then you would be Mushrikoon."

...as well as other than these from the clear (Muhkam) verses, which indicate this category of Tawheed and with which the Eemaan of a person is not correct except with it.

And the Hadeeth, which is authentic (Saheeh) from the Prophet , that he said: "Verily, Allaah is the Hakam (ruler or judge) and to Him is the Hukm (judgment)."

But is this category of Tawheed from the Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah (also called Tawheed al-Ebaadah) or is it the other half of it?

I say: It is not another category besides Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah, however; is enters beneath Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah. And from it is what enters beneath Tawheed Ar-Rooboobiyyah and from it is what enters beneath the Tawheed of Allaah, the Most High, in His Asmaa' wa Sifaat.

But when the Shirk in the Ummah increased in its ruling by other than what Allaah revealed and its taking the rulings to the legislations of Kufr and the Taaghoot, it was necessary to specify this important category of Tawheed by mentioning it on its own to draw to sight of the people towards its importance and that without it, they have not brought the Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah as it must be and is obligatory.

And the likes of that would be if you found a people who committed Shirk from the point of obedience. So you would say to them, "It is obligatory that you come with the Tawheed At-Taa'aah (Obedience) and that you do not obey anyone, for himself, except Allaah."

So this statement of yours would be correct and it is not allowed to object to you or to say to you, "You have come with a new Tawheed, which you have labeled 'Tawheed At-Taa'aah' or with a Tawheed other than Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah!!"

And like that, is if you found a people who associated with Allaah, other intermediaries from the aspect of love (Mahabbah) and allegiance and disavowal (Al-Walaa' wa'l-Baraa').

So you would find it necessary upon yourself to point to the Tawheed of Love (Mahabbah) and that the loved one, for himself, is Allaah alone. But this Tawheed is not a new Tawheed besides Tawheed Al-'Uloohiyyah, just as your saying about Tawheed Al-Mu'habbah is not an invention or an innovation (Bid'ah) in any way.

….So if you know this, then you know that this movement that is being propagated against this category of Tawheed by the opposition, has no justification except that they wish to belittle this type of Tawheed and so that they can justify what comes from the intentional shortcomings from the Tawagheet (plural of Taaghoot) of the ruling (Hukm) from their rejection and objection of this important aspect of Tawheed.

And as for your question about the books, which discuss this aspect of Tawheed, they are very many. The most important and highest and greatest is the Noble Qur'aan and then the books of the Prophetic Sunnah and the books of beliefs ('Aqeedah) such as the books of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Al-Qayyim and Ibn 'Abdul-Wahhab and his grandsons. And from the contemporaries, the books of Sayyid Qutb, may Allaah, the Most High, be merciful to him. And from them, especially, his book "Al-Thilaal" and "Al-Ma'aalim" and "Khasaa'is Al-Tasawwur" and "Muqawimaat At-Tasawwur Al-Islaamee".

And also, the books of his brother Muhammad Qutb and from the books, that are specific to this aspect such as the book "Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah" by our brother the Shaykh Abee Ithaar and also the books and letters of our brother, the Shaykh Abu Muhammad Al-Maqdisee. And if you looked also, to our books and projects, then you would not be lacking any additional benefits from this point, inshaa'Allaah. The books are many, but where are the readers and those who act (upon them)??!"

-----------------------------------------------------------

Let us see what the currently imprisoned inmate of Belmarsh prison, London, by the name of Abu Qatada had to say:

Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah and the Divisions of Tawheed

Question:

Asalaamu Alaykum Warahmatullah Wabarakatuh,

I hope that you can clarify for me the meaning of Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah and is it part of Tawheed al-Uluhiyyah?

I heard that Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Ibraheem said that Shaykh Bin Baz use to teach the knowledge of 'Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah' but the 'Saudi Salafis' rejected it and considered it an innovation, is that true? Are there any books or articles in Arabic or English with regards to this issue? Can you please guide me?

Answer:

In the Name of Allaah, Most Merciful, and Most Kind.

And with Him we seek assistance,

Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah is part of Tawheed al-Uluhiyyah, which is the Tawheed of seeking and intention, and this is from the point of view that the slave of Allaah [al-Ubudiyyah] is agreeing to His worthiness of worship and abiding by that.

And it is also from Tawheed ar-Rububiyyah, which is the Tawheed of knowing and establishment of His existence and lordship, and this is from the point of view that the Lord does, i.e. that Allaah is the judge and legislator for his creation and legislates for them the regulations and laws.

And this Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah, a Muslim will not reject it as a subject, but some have differed in matters of terminology, via different methods, such as:

They say that this Tawheed was not mentioned by the righteous Salaf and the Salaf only had two views:

1. Either they believed in the splitting of Tawheed into two, which was the Tawheed of establishing His existence and attributes and the Tawheed of intention and purpose.

2. Or they believed in splitting the categories of Tawheed into three, which was Tawheed al-Uluhiyyah, Tawheed ar-Rububiyyah and Tawheed Asmaa wa Sifaat.

And the reply to that is straight forward and simple, which is that these two categories are based on categorization based on analysis and it is not categorization based on solid proof [i.e., proof from Quran and Sunnah that dividing the Tawheed into such categories], rather it is only an matter of ijtihaad and not a textual issue, so it can not be said that addition of categories is an innovation.

Then it is also said to them: Why do we need to mention Tawheed Asmaa wa Sifaat as it is already from Tawheed ar-Rububiyyah?

And if they say; it is a necessity to make it a subcategory in order to facilitate refuting the one who differs in this issue.

We reply to them: And that is the very same reason for which we make mention of Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah, for it is mentioned only due to this reason, to facilitate the refutation of those who differ in this issue.

And they also have other excuses which are in their saying.

Also their other proof to reject this type of Tawheed: That this type of Tawheed [al-Haakimiyyah] has stages in it and not every stage, which if differed in will nullify the Tawheed.

It is replied to them: And similarly with those who differ in the issue of Tawheed ar-Rububiyyah and Tawheed al-Uluhiyyah that does not necessarily nullify their core of Tawheed, for example, showing off [riyaa] is differing towards Tawheed al-Uluhiyyah, yet that does not nullify the core of Tawheed for the perpetrator of such act.

The point is that this type of Tawheed, the Shariah has come with it along with the Quran and Sunnah,which is evident with very clear proof, only an ignorant person will reject it.

As for its subject and its meaning, it is basically to establish that ruling and legislation is only for Allaah, the lord of the universe and removing that right of ruling and legislation from other than Him [negating all false deities by the sword].

This is what is suitable for this stance, and I have delivered a long lecture on this issue previously. I ask that Allaah make it easy for it to be distributed for benefit.

And Allah is indeed the granter of success.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, i had the following saved from a poster called "Jibreel" dated around the year 2000 as posted on a forum headed by the currently imprisoned Abdullah Faysal

------------------------------------------------------

Bismillah

Before reading I would advise people with poor eyes to save and print this essay because it is lengthy and reading from a monitor for extended periods may aggravate your eyes. Because the essay was large it had to be spread into two separate parts.

The categorisation of Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah as a separate branch of Tawheed is not, contrary to common belief, a thing invented by the students of knowledge or the callers to Islaam. Ibn Al-Uthaymeen, Al-Albaanee and Ibn Al-Ghunaymaan are three people who are heralded as three of the 'Ulema Al-Kibaar' (Elite Scholars) of the Saudi Salafi Movement. Ibn Al-Uthaymeen has declared as evil cursed innovators the people who claim that Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah is a separate category of Tawheed. He has also claimed that people who categorise Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah as a separate category are ignorant of the Islamic Aqeedah. Below I have quoted his exact words:

"Whoever claims that there is a fourth category of tawheed under the title 'Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah' is to be counted as a mubtadi' (cursed innovator). So this is an innovated categorisation which emanates from an ignorant person who does not understand anything of the affairs of 'aqeedah and the deen." Source: 'Al-Muslimoon' No.639, 25th of Dhul-Hijjah 1417H (Friday the 2nd May 1997) or

http://www.******************.com/intranet/mnj0014b.htm

In this message I would like to give you the names, a partial biography and some quotes from the works of just a few of the great scholars who believe in Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah and categorise it as a separate branch of Tawheed, i.e. an aspect of Tawheed in its own right. And these Sheikhs are most certainly not, as Ibn Al-Uthaymeen put it, 'ignorant people who don't know anything about the affairs of Aqeedah and the Deen'. In fact, most of the scholars that will be mentioned have taken the acquisition, memorisation and comprehension of knowledge to the extremes.
Before you, the reader, proceed to learn about a few of these beautiful men, I would advise you to read an earlier message on this notice board entitled, 'Are Al-Haakimiyyah and Ar-Rububiyyah The Same Thing?'. In that message the evidences are provided for the statement that Al-Haakimiyyah should not be slipped under the definition of Ar-Rububiyyah. Once you have read that essay, then and only then read this one insha Allaah.

1. Sheikh Al-'Efaafi Ahmad Taahaa is one of the major members of Jamaatul Islaamiyyah in Egypt and he is currently the Amir of this organisation. He is quoted as saying that Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah is indeed Tawheed and whoever judges by other than the Shariah of Islaam is to be classified as a Taaghoot. And Allah has informed us that these people and their institutions who work for their cause are the friends of Satan and Allah has commanded us to kill these evil criminals, 'Those who believe fight in the way of Allah whereas those who disbelieve fight in the cause of the Taaghoot. So fight against the friends (Auliya) of Satan, indeed the plot of Satan is weak.' (Koran 4:76).

Allah has said in His Book that whoever takes a person as an 'Auliya' then he becomes of that person (Koran 5:51). So Allah has informed us that the Taghoot and their helpers who work in their cause have taken Satan as their 'Auliya'. Since these evil criminals have taken Satan as their Auliya, then indeed they have become Satans and they are the human Satans walking on the face of the earth who have taken control of the Holy Lands.
And when you listen to the first hand accounts of torture some Muslims have experienced at the hands of these people, then you will know that indeed these people are human Satans because no human in their right mind could inflict some of the sexually orientated torture on Muslims the way these people can.

2. Sheikh Ahmad Al-Mahalaawee. This scholar held similar beliefs as Sheikh Al-'Efaafi and he also classified Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah as a separate category of Tawheed. This scholars was killed because of his views.

3. Sheikh Saalih Abu Ismaaeel of Egypt also classified Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah as a separate branch of Tawheed. He made a ruling declaring as a Mushrik whoever made a judgemet which violated Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah giving as evidence Allah's words, 'And He does not allow anyone to share in His judgement and rule.' (Koran 18:26) Because of his stance against those who judge with other than Islamic Shariah he is being severely persecuted by the authorities.

4. Sheikh Abdul Hameed Kishk of Cairo is man who had suffered so much torture that it exceeds the bounds of belief. He was repeatedly arrested and tortured without justification.
On one occasion the authorities were pressing him to back down from his beliefs which coincided with the beliefs of the Sheikhs previously mentioned. He refused to back down and for his refusal he was tortured to the level where they stabbed him several times in the face which led to the loss of his eyesight. But they did not leave him after that. They had so much hatred for the beliefs he held and propagated that during his imprisonment they physically sealed his penis so that he would not be able to urinate. This form of punishment has caused many strong Mujaahideen in Saudi jails to psychologically break down. But this mighty Sheikh lived through all these ordeals never ever bowing to government pressure and he died in the position of Sajdah during prayer in Ramadhan.

5. Sheikh Omar Abdur Rahmaan of Egypt is a great scholar who classifies Tawheed Al-Haakimiyyah as a separate branch of Tawheed. This Sheikh is one of the extremely rare scholars in our time who has taken the acquisition, memorisation and comprehension of knowledge to the extremes, despite the fact, I might add, that he has been blind since childhood and he suffers from diabetes. So this Sheikh's life is a lesson to all of us who may think we have difficulties acquiring knowledge.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


CONCLUSION:

The pseudo-Salafiyya are totally divided on the issue of Tawhid and its branches, especially on the issue of al-Hakimiyya they are bitterly at odds with each other, to the extent they make Tabdi (calling someone an innovator) over the affirmation or denial of this concept. May Allah guide them and keep us safe from their innovatory ways. Amin.


Wassalam

Abul Hasan

[muslim786]

:jazak: for the info akhi. But I am still confused, should we or should we not believe in the how-many-ever categories of Tawheed there seem to be?
From my understanding, I think we should not believe in this thing, and thats what the scholars seem to imply. But it initself may not necessarily be a bad thing but it certainyl is a bida be it hasana or not.

[iqadeer]

This division seem to appear overtly as a matter of fiqh but I see it as a political one only. Apparently, the ones who are for this fourth type, i.e., Haakimiyah are against the Saudi regime for collaborating with the kuffar whilst the other ones prudently choose to remain on government's side. Please correct me if I am wrong in my understanding.

[faqir]

:salam:

Na'am akhi. These people claim to be on the way of the Salaf in all affairs! But they fail to name just one major Sahabi, Tabi'i or Taba Tabi'i who divided Tawhid into 3 or 4 subdivisions! It is very convenient for them to justify dividing Tawhid by saying that it helps to facilitate the understanding of Tawhid, just as the Ulama of the Salaf categorised other branches of knowledge like Hadith or Usul al-Fiqh to facilitate a specific aim.

But!

They conveniently fail to recognise and state convincingly that the Salaf did categorise various branches of Ilm, but there doesn't appear to be any names they can pull out the bag to justify the division of Tawhid into 3 or 4 areas. This is why it is a Bid'a as the late great Shaykh: Abu Hamid ibn Marzuq (d. 1970/1390 AH) said in his 2 volume work: Bara'atul Ashariyyin (in refutation of the pseudo-Salafiyya and in defence of the Asha'ira).

The pseudo-Salafiyya do not recognise the concept of Bid'a Hasana, and if they were too they would have to admit that the division of Tawhid into 3 or 4 areas, is at least a Bid'a Hasana to their Ulama like Ibn Taymiyya onwards...

Imagine what response a pseudo-Salafi would have to the technical terms introduced by the Sufi Masters to facilitate the understanding of Tasawwuf, from the Salaf via the Khalaf. I doubt if they would hesitate to call these terms to be heretical and so on...


This issue indicates that the pseudo-Salafiyya are shallow in their manhaj and lack a definite and concrete Usul in aqeeda and other affairs! Let us see how these people are divided on this issue of "Tawhid al-Hakimiyya". I will quote from their own websites and scholars below.
--------------------------------------------------


:salam:

JazakAllah khair Akhi.

I always wonder why the "salafis" don't uphold the same standards upon themselves [with regards to the other divisions of Tawhid they accept and propagate] before shouting "bid'ah bid'ah" at the camp in favour of this Tawhid al-Hakimiyah division...

It would seem, at least on the face of it, rather hypocritical, no?

Akhi Abul hasan, I was wondering, to your knowledge, did any of the more widely accepted scholars of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah ever make such divisions?

Wasalam.