|Tuesday, 18 June 2019 Home About Us Contact Us|
You are here:
Mail to a Friend Printer friendly
Following the Extremism of Sayyid Qutb, the likes of Abdur-Rahman Abdul-Khaliq and others innovated a new category for Tawheed, called "Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah", and this was simply a stratagem through which the doctrines of Sayyid Qutb could be made palatable to a Salafi audience. When they started to propagandize for Sayyid Qutb's exaggerated doctrine of "al-Haakimiyyah", Ahl us-Sunnah took the issue to the Major Scholars. The verdicts of the Scholars started to appear from around 1996-1997, and prior to this time, many speakers in the West were propagandizing for this "fourth" category of Tawheed and explicitly stating it to be an independent fourth category of Tawheed. Ali al-Timimi was one of the movers and shakers in this regard and in 1996, he said in his theatrical performance:
Now somebody might ask, of the four types of Tawhid that they mentioned, Tawhid ur-Ruboobiyyah, Tawhid ul-Ibaadah, Tawhid ul-Asmaa' was-Sifaat and Tawhid al-Haakimiyyah, why did they pay so much attention to Tawhid ul-Haakimiyyah. What's the secret behind this. The secret behind this is because those who have falsely attributed these ideas to Salafiyyah have tried to argue that Tawhid al-Haakimiyyah is not from Tawhid, and that to state Tawhid al-Haakimiyyah, some of them have said that this is a bid'ah and some of them have said that this should be reduced to the principles of fiqh.
Here, Ali al-Timimi was commenting on a small treatise written by some Kuwaitis in which certain issues and their importance were being highlighted. Now, you have to understand what is going on here, and let us illustrate.
A Tablighi in Saudi Arabia can write a treatise in which he brings evidences for and emphasizes the importance of the kalimah, khushoo' in the prayer, knowledge and remembrance, honouring the Muslims, being sincere in one's intentions, and going out and striving in the path of Allaah, providing evidence for each issue from the texts and sayings of the Scholars of Ahl us-Sunnah. He can then take it to a Shaykh and say, "What do you say about this advice" and any Shaykh will say, "This is great advice, it contains benefit for the Muslims". Then the Tablighi can go and explain those generalized subjects upon his particular innovation and call to his innovation through this by claiming that the Shaykh supports him in both the general and specific details of what he is calling to.
And what Ali al-Timimi was reading from was precisely this, a generalized advice which no two Muslims would disagree upon. There is no mention of the label "Tawhid al-Haakimiyyah" in the tract he was reading from, but just quotations from the Scholars, like Imaam ash-Shanqiti, and Shaykh Ibn Ibraaheem, emphasizing the importance of ruling by what Allaah has revealed, and its being a part of Tawheed. With the audience unawares, he brought his own speech with certain particulars, and the audience left with the understanding, "Hey Ibn Baz speaks with Tawhid al-Haakimiyyah, as a separate category of Tawhid and so do those other scholars". And of course, Ali al-Timimi was explaining these generalized points (which no two Muslims would disagree over in their generality), upon the methodologies of al-Ikhwaan al-Muslimeen, upon the doctrines and methodologies of Sayyid Qutb and Hassan al-Banna, which came to him from the likes of Abdur-Rahman Abdul-Khaliq and others. The proof for this is extensive and firmly established and will be dealt with elsewhere, as we cannot digress here. However, it is important that the reader understand the context and what was going on here. The Qutbiyyah (see here, here, here, here and here) were responded to by the Scholars in the following verdicts:
When the Major Scholars declared such people to be Innovators, they quickly retreated to teaching just "two categories" of Tawheed and denied ever having even spoken of a fourth category of Tawheed called "Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah". This is why the more shrewd amongst the Qutbiyyah made a hasty retreat and backed off, even if some of them continued their deception by trying to use the issue of Shaykh Ibn Baz writing an introduction for a book of Abdur-Rahman Abdul-Khaliq in which the latter makes reference to "Tawheed al-Hukm", as justification for their innovation of making "Tawhid al-Haakimiyyah" into an independent fourth category. There is a difference between speaking of a certain notion and its importance (i.e. you could emphasize the importance of tawheed udh-dhabh, tawheed al-isti'aanah), and dedicating a few pages to it, and between making it an independent fourth category of Tawheed in addition to the three agreed upon by ijmaa' which comprise every aspect of Tawheed already. But this was just one of many types of deceptions of these people which will be covered elsewhere.
Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan on Tawhid al-Haakimiyah
This is from an discussion recorded on audio.
There is someone who has made a fourth category for Tawheed and called it Tawheed al-Haakimiyyah
[interjecting]... This is misguidance..., this is misguidance. This is misguidance and an [unnecessary] 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.
This person's evidence is that the basis for this categorisation...
[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.
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').
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...
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...
So this is an innovated saying, this saying [Tawheed ul-Haakimiyyah]?
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.
Reasons for the Exaggeration in al-Haakimiyyah
All of this came from the Qutbiyyah, those affected with the teachings of Sayyid Qutb, and they tried to bring this evil da'wah and evil manhaj into the ranks of the Salafis through the 80s and 90s. They took their opportunity especially after the first Gulf War in 1990. A great deal of turmoil was caused during the course of this decade as a result of these people who were really toying with the Kharijite doctrines of Sayyid Qutb. They were the likes of Safar al-Hawali, Salman al-Awdah, Abdur-Rahmaan Abdul-Khaaliq, Adnaan Ar'oor, Aa'id al-Qarnee, Muhammad al-Maghrawi and many others, and the Major scholars convicted their statements of being tantamount to mass Takfir and calls for revolutions (along the lines of what Qutb proposed as part of his ideology). Here are some articles on Qutb's revival of the madhhab of the Khawaarij, albeit with a Leninist mix.
However, by the year 2000 and just shortly after, the deviations of these people (neo-Qutbiyyah) had been convicted through the hundreds of statements of the major Scholars that crossed a wide range of issues of methodology, and which laid down a clear criterion between the Salafi aqidah, da'wah and manhaj and the Ikhwaani da'wah and manhaj, in its two strains of Bannaa'iyyah and Qutbiyyah. Bannaa'iyyah is to try and establish a khilaafah through involvement in political processes (by hook or by crook) within the existing secular political framework, and Qutbiyyah is to establish a khilaafah through the manifestos of secular atheist Jews, such as Vladimir Lenin, by staging violent revolutions, to smash and destroy all current structures and to replace them with the khilaafah. All activist movements of the twentieth century derived their methodologies from these two strains of thought.
And these methodologies are in opposition to the methodologies of the Prophets and of the righteous Salaf of this Ummah in rectifying the servant and the land. See here for a comparison.
Link to this article: Show: HTML Link Full Link Short Link
You must be registered and logged in to comment.