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.

Fatwa of the Permanent Committee That Repels the Doubts and Assumptions of the Harakiyyeen (Activists)

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 ý 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?

Tawheed is of three categories: Tawheed ur-Ruboobiyyah, Tawheed ul-Uloohiyyah and Tawheed ul-Asmaa was-Sifaat, and there is no fourth category. And judging by what Allaah sent down comes under Tawheed ul-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 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 divestment (ta'teel) of the Names and Attributes (of Allaah) 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 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 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

The Permanent Committee For Research and Verdicts

Member: Bakr Abu Zayd
Member: Salih al-Fawzan
Member: Abdullaah al-Ghudayan
Deputy Head: Abdul-Aziz Aal as-Shaykh
Head: Abdul-Aziz bin Baz

This fatwa refutes the Qutbiyyah (Abdur-Rahman Abdul-Khaliq and followers) and Surooriyyah (Muhammad Suroor) and their likes who built their da'wah upon the assumption that the "Shirk of the Quboor" (Shirk of the graves) has been replaced by "Shirk of the Qusoor" (Shirk of the palaces, i.e. rulers, not ruling by what Allaah has revealed) - and recruited their followers upon these false claims.

As you can see, the Scholars have comprehensively and sufficiently rebutted the reasoning and argumentation presented in the question.