Is it allowed for us to say tawhid is divided into
four and include the tawhid of hakimiyyah – meaning, to single out Allah
with rule/judgment?
The concern with the tawhid of hakimiyyah
and singling it with mention did not exist except in the last centuries,
it being the thirteenth-century hijri. It was only singled out when
man-made laws were established; thus some spoke about it and that rule
belongs solely to Allah, even though its beginnings appeared in the time
of ibn Taymiyyah and ibn Kathir regarding the Yasiq of the Tatar.
We
say here that there are some who have a particular position concerning
whoever speaks about the tawhid of hakimiyyah based on criticism of a
particular movement (the Sahwah movement) or based on specific
occurrences, none of which is based on looking at the issue from a
scientific lens. Thus verdicts were passed declaring whoever singles out
hakimiyyah as a type of tawhid as an innovator.
But the correct
view is that there isn’t an issue adding the tawhid of hakimiyyah. It’s
not said he is an innovator and declaring him one for this is a mistake.
There are those who divided tawhid into two categories, then came those
who divided it into three; he would be an innovator according to that
view. There are also some people of knowledge that divided tawhid into
five categories, adding the tawhid of following. Is he an innovator as
well? The rule (qa’idah) is that there is no problem with terminology if
it is correct. If reality requires highlighting and paying attention to
a certain tawhid and making it an independent category, even if it is
within the categories before it, there is no objection; and there are
many parallels for that.
Hakimiyyah enters into the tawhid of
asma and sifat, based on the name al-Hakam as in the hadith: “Verily,
Allah is the judge and the rule belongs to Him.” And it is based on the
effects, i.e., one of the meanings of rububiyyah: the act of ordering
and forbidding. Where is the bid’ah in that? The one who declared
another an innovator for this is either a mistaken mujtahid, and this is
said about those known for being honest, or a misguided jahil or one
trying to patch up rulers that substituted the law of Allah and a
trumpet for them.
We say here as well that from the people of
knowledge are those that made the conditions of ‘la ilaha illallah’ to
be seven. While some of them extracted eight and mentioned the condition
of kufr in the taghut, although it is present within the seven
conditions. However, due to its importance, it was separated from the
condition of love and made independent. Are they innovators? Similar to
this is the issue of iman. Some of the Salaf made it two statements:
statements (qawl) and action (‘amal). But when people of innovation
appeared and began to speak, some of them said it is: qawl, ‘amal, and
belief (i’tiqad). And when the Murjiah spoke concerning action, the
Salaf said iman is: i’tiqad, qawl, and acting on the pillars (‘amal
bil-arkan). Thus they included the word ‘arkan’ to clarify. And some
made it: qawl, ‘amal, i’tiqad, and intention (niyyah). And some of
included: following (itba’).
All of the foregone is correct. Each
that required clarification or importance the Salaf increased by that
amount. They are not invented additions, as they were present and
contained in the speech of those who preceded in general. Based on the
rule of some people, whoever added to the two words concerning iman is
an innovator.
[By Shaykh ‘Ali al-Khudayr (hafidhahullah): Al-Wasit fi Sharh Awwal Risalah fi Majmu’ah at-Tawhid, pp. 27-8]
No comments:
Post a Comment