Do Only Salafis Categorize Tawhid?
Below is a translation of a section of Ustadh Alaa Ismail’s article, Munāqashat Daʿwat Bidʿiyyat Taqsīm Al-Tawḥīd.
It became well-known among the scholars of the Salaf to refer to the two types of tawhid based on the indications of Qur’anic texts and prophetic traditions. Among these is the ḥadith of Ibn ʿAbbās, may Allah be pleased with him, in which the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), when he sent Muʿādh to Yemen, said to him: “You are going to a People of the Book, so let the first thing you call them to be the testimony that they single out Allah (as God)...”[1] In another narration: “that they worship Allah.”[2] Al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar said:
ووجه الجمع بينها أن المراد بالعبادة: التوحيد، والمراد بالتوحيد: الإقرار بالشهادتين
"The reconciliation between the two is that what is meant by worship (Ibadah) is tawhid, and what is meant by tawhid is the acknowledgment of the two testimonies of faith."[3]
He also said elsewhere:
ويُجمع بينها بأن المراد بعبادة الله توحيده.. ووقعت البداءة بهما لأنهما أصل الدين الذي لا يصح شيء غيرهما إلا بهما
“The reconciliation is that what is intended by worshiping Allah is His tawhid... and they were mentioned first because they are the foundation of the religion, and nothing besides them is valid without them.”[4]
Thus, unsurprisingly, scholars, generation after generation, transmitted this classification into Tawhid of Rubūbiyyah (Oneness of Lordship) and Ulūhiyyah (Oneness of worthy of worship). It is widely found in the books of jurists even before Ibn Taymiyyah was born, either explicitly or implicitly. To avoid prolongation, we will limit ourselves to mentioning those who referred to this classification explicitly rather than those who alluded to it indirectly.
Ibn Baṭṭah al-Ḥanbalī al-ʿAkbarī said:
فإن الله عز وجل وصف نفسه لعباده وعرفهم ربوبيته، ودعاهم إلى توحيده وعبادته
“For Allah, the Mighty and Exalted, described Himself to His servants, made them aware of His Rubūbiyyah, and called them to His tawhid and worship.”[5]
Ibn Baṭṭah explicitly divides tawhid into three categories, stating:
وذلك أن أصل الإيمان بالله الذي يجب على الخلق اعتقاده في إثبات الإيمان به ثلاثة أشياء
أحدها: أن يعتقد العبد ربانيته؛ ليكون بذلك مباينًا لمذهب أهل التعطيل الذين لا يثبتون صانعًا
والثاني: أن يعتقد وحدانيته؛ ليكون بذلك مباينًا لأهل الشرك الذين أقروا بالصانع وأشركوا معه في العبادة غيره
والثالث: أن يعتقده موصوفًا بالصفات التي لا يجوز إلا أن يكون موصوفًا بها من العلم والقدرة والحكمة وسائر ما وصف به نفسه في كتابه؛ إذ قد علمنا أن كثيرًا ممن يقر به ويوحده بالقول المطلق قد يلحد في صفاته فيكون إلحاده في صفاته قادحًا في توحيده
ولأنَّا نجد الله تعالى قد خاطب عباده بدعائهم إلى اعتقاد كل واحدة من هذه الثلاث والإيمان بها
“And that is because the foundation of Iman in Allah, which is obligatory upon creation to affirm in establishing Iman in Him, consists of three things:
The first: That the servant believes in His Lordship, so that he thereby dissociates himself from the doctrine of those who do not affirm a Creator.
The second is that the servant believes in His Oneness, so he dissociates himself from the polytheists, who acknowledged the Creator but associated others with Him in worship.
The third is that the servant believes He is described with attributes impermissible for Him not to possess, such as Knowledge, Power, Wisdom, and all the other attributes with which He described Himself in His Book. For we know that many who affirm Him and proclaim His Oneness in unrestricted terms deviate regarding His attributes, and their deviation concerning His attributes undermines their tawhid.
And because we find that Allah, Exalted is He, addressed His servants, calling them to affirm belief in each of these three and to have Iman in them.”[6]
It is noticeable in the words of Ibn Baṭṭah that he divided tawhid into three categories: rubūbiyyah, ulūhiyyah, and ṣifāt (attributes). He mentioned that the polytheists acknowledged the Creator but associated others with Him in worship, which is the same point criticized by opponents of Ibn Taymiyyah.
Among those who also divided tawhid into three categories is al-Jurjānī, who was from the Māturīdī school.
Al-Jurjani Al-Hanafi states:
التَّوْحيدُ ثَلاثةُ أشْياءَ: مَعْرِفةُ اللهِ تَعالى بالرُّبوبيَّةِ، والإقْرارُ بالوَحْدانيَّةِ، ونَفْيُ الأنْدادِ عنه جُمْلةً
“Tawhid is comprised of three aspects: knowing Allah, the Exalted, through His rubūbiyyah, affirming His Oneness, and negating any equals to Him entirely.”[7]
Abu Mansur Al-Maturidi says:
وبعد فَإِنَّهُ لم يذكر عَن غير الإِله الَّذِي يعرفهُ أهل التَّوْحِيد دَعْوَى الإلهية، وَالإِشَارَة إِلَى أثر فعل مِنهُ يدل على ربوبيته
“Furthermore, it has not been reported that anyone other than the deity recognized by the people of tawhid has claimed ilāhiyyah, nor has any indication been made to the effect of an action from such a being that would signify rubūbiyyah.”[8]
From this, we observe that Al-Maturidi divided tawhid into two categories: ilāhiyyah, which signifies the tawhid of worship, and ascribed rubūbiyyah to the effects of Allah’s actions, which aligns with the meaning referred to by Ibn Taymiyyah.
Al-Maturidi also states:
مَجِيء الرُّسُل بِالآيَاتِ الَّتِي يضطَر من شَهدها أَنَّهَا فعل من لَو كَانَ مَعَه شريك ليمنعهم عَن إظهارها إِذ بذلك إبطَال ربوبيتهم وألوهيتهم
“The coming of the messengers with signs that compel those who witness them to acknowledge that they are acts of One, for if there had been a partner with Him, they would have prevented the manifestation of these signs, as such acts nullify their rubūbiyyah and ulūhiyyah.”[9]
He also says:
الْحَمد لله المتوحد بالقدم والإلهية، المتفرد بالدوام والربوبية
“Praise be to Allah, the One characterized by eternity and ilāhiyyah, the One distinguished by perpetuity and rubūbiyyah.”[10]
Ibn Tahir Al-Maqdisi states:
التوحيد أربعة أشياء: معرفة الوحدانيّة، والإقرار بالربوبيّة، وإخلاص الإلهيّة، والاجتهاد في العبوديّة
“Tawhid consists of four aspects: recognizing Oneness, affirming rubūbiyyah, dedicating worship exclusively to divinity, and striving in servitude.”[11]
Ibn Tahir mentioned rubūbiyyah and ulūhiyyah within a four-part categorization. In reality, the additional two aspects also relate to rubūbiyyah and ulūhiyyah. Regardless of his fourfold division, the intent is that there is no objection to the categorization itself.
Al-Qurtubi states:
الشرك على ثلاث مراتب وكله محرم، وأصله اعتقاد شريك لله في ألوهيته، وهو الشرك الأعظم وهو شرك الجاهلية، وهو المراد بقوله تعالى: {إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَغْفِرُ أَن يُشْرَكَ بِهِ وَيَغْفِرُ مَا دُونَ ذَٰلِكَ لِمَن يَشَاءُ} [النساء: 116]. ويليه في الرتبة اعتقاد شريك لله تعالى في الفعل، وهو قول من قال: إن موجودًا ما غير الله تعالى يستقلّ بإحداث فعلٍ وإيجاده، وإن لم يعتقد كونه إلهًا… ويلي هذه الرتبة الإشراك في العبادة
“Shirk has three levels, all of which are prohibited. Its root lies in believing in a partner with Allah in His ulūhiyyah, which is the greatest form of shirk, the shirk of the pre-Islamic era, and the intended meaning in His statement: {Indeed, Allah does not forgive association with Him, but He forgives what is less than that for whom He wills} [An-Nisa: 116]. Following it in rank is the belief in a partner with Allah in action, as claimed by those who say that any being other than Allah independently creates and brings forth actions, even if they do not believe it to be an ilah... Following this is shirk in worship.”[12]
It becomes clear from Al-Qurtubi’s statement that he distinguishes between shirk in rubūbiyyah and ulūhiyyah, as well as the belief in a creature’s independence in action apart from Allah, even without considering it an ilah. He regards the two forms of shirk as distinct.
Al-Qurtubi categorized association in worship as separate from association in ulūhiyyah —despite it being encompassed within it—his statement nonetheless fulfills the intended purpose. This is because he treated shirk in worship as an independent category, distinct from shirk in rubūbiyyah and the belief in the independence of action, a point of contention among some contemporaries.
Mulla Ali Al-Qari, the Hanafi Maturidi, states:
والحاصل أنه يلزم من توحيد العبودية توحيد الربوبية دون العكس في القضية لقوله تعالى: {وَلَئِن سَأَلْتَهُم مَّنْ خَلَقَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضَ لَيَقُولُنَّ اللَّهُ} [الزمر: 38]، بل غالب سور القرآن وآياته متضمنة لنوعي التوحيد، بل القرآن من أوله إلى آخره في بيانهما
“In summary, Tawhid of servitude necessitates Tawhid of rubūbiyyah, but not vice versa, as evidenced by His statement: {And if you were to ask them, ‘Who created the heavens and the earth?’ they would surely say, ‘Allah’} [Az-Zumar: 38]. In fact, the majority of the Quran’s chapters and verses include both types of tawhid, and indeed, the entire Quran, from beginning to end, expounds on these two aspects.”[13]
Reflect on Mulla Al-Qari’s statement: “Tawhid of servitude necessitates Tawhid of rubūbiyyah, but not vice versa.”—this implies that the two terms are not identical, as some contemporary Ash‘arites claim. His statement, “the majority of the Quran’s chapters and verses include both types of Tawhid,” indicates his acknowledgment of a division in tawhid and that the two types are not identical in his view.
The scholar of rational sciences, Al-Baydawi, when discussing the realization of the connections between the two types of Tawhid in Allah’s statement: {Unquestionably, His is the creation and the command} [Al-A‘raf: 54], said:
فإنه الموجد والمتصرف تبارك الله رب العالمين، تعالى بالوحدانية في الألوهية، وتعظّم بالتفرد في الربوبية… ثم أمرهم بأن يدعوه متذللين مخلصين فقال: {ادْعُوا رَبَّكُمْ تَضَرُّعًا وَخُفْيَةً} [الأعراف: 55] أي: ذوي تضرع وخفية؛ فإن الإخفاء دليل الإخلاص
“For He is the Creator and the Disposer of affairs. Blessed is Allah, Lord of the worlds, exalted in Oneness in ulūhiyyah, and glorified in exclusivity in rubūbiyyah... Then He commanded them to invoke Him with humility and sincerity, saying: {Call upon your Lord in humility and privately} [Al-A‘raf: 55], meaning as those possessing humility and secrecy; for concealment is a sign of sincerity.””[14]
Al-Kharashi, in his commentary on Khalil’s statement, “There is no partner with Him in His blessings and ulūhiyyah, nor any adversary to Him in His decrees and rubūbiyyah,” after discussing Tawhid of rubūbiyyah and the uniqueness of the One in disposition, creation, and management, says:
وكذا نقول في قوله: (وألوهيته)، ولا يقال: إن أل نائبة عن الضمير؛ لأنا نقول: ليس ذلك متفقا عليه، والإنعام من آثار الألوهية، فالمناسب تأخيره عنها إلا أنه قدمه للسجع، قوله: (وألوهيته) أي: كونه إلها أي معبودا بحق.. وقوله: (وربوبيته) أي: كونه ربًّا أي: مالكًا للعالم
“Similarly, we say regarding his statement, ‘and His ulūhiyyah,’ that it cannot be said that ‘al’ substitutes for the pronoun, for we respond that this is not agreed upon. Blessings are among the effects of ulūhiyyah, so it would have been appropriate to delay mentioning them after it. However, they were mentioned earlier for the sake of rhyming. His statement, ‘and His ulūhiyyah,’ means His being a deity, one truly worthy of worship... His statement, ‘and His rubūbiyyah,’ refers to His being a Lord, meaning the Owner of the universe.”[15]
Murtada Al-Zabidi stated:
التّوحيد توحيدان: توحيد الرّبوبيّة، وتوحيد الإلهيّة
“Tawhid is of two types: Tawhid of rubūbiyyah and Tawhid of ilāhiyyah.”[16]
Al-Maqrizi, the Shafi‘i, says:
لا ريب أنّ توحيد الرّبوبيّة لم ينكره المشركون، بل أقرّوا بأنّه سبحانه وحده خالقهم، وخالق السّموات والأرض، والقائم بمصالح العالم كلّه، وإنّما أنكروا توحيد الإلهيّة والمحبّة، كما قد حكى الله تعالى عنهم في قوله: {وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَن يَتَّخِذُ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ أَندَادًا يُحِبُّونَهُمْ كَحُبِّ اللَّه} [البقرة: 165]، فلمّا سوّوا غيره به في هذا التّوحيد كانوا مشركين، كما قال تعالى: {الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ الَّذِي خَلَقَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضَ وَجَعَلَ الظُّلُمَاتِ وَالنُّورَ ثُمَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا بِرَبِّهِمْ يَعْدِلُونَ} [الأنعام: 1]
“There is no doubt that the polytheists did not deny Tawhid of Rubūbiyyah. Rather, they acknowledged that He alone, glorified be He, is their Creator, the Creator of the heavens and the earth, and the One who manages the affairs of the entire universe. However, they denied Tawhid of Ilāhiyyah and love, as Allah, Exalted be He, mentioned about them in His statement: {And among the people are those who take other than Allah as equals [to Him]. They love them as they should love Allah} [Al-Baqara: 165]. When they equated others with Him in this type of Tawhid, they became polytheists, as Allah, Exalted be He, said: {All praise is due to Allah, who created the heavens and the earth and made darkness and light. Yet those who disbelieve equate [others] with their Lord} [Al-An‘am: 1].”[17]
The commentator Al-Alusi states:
وقد يقال: إنهم أشاروا بالجملة الأولى إلى توحيد الربوبية، وبالجملة الثانية إلى توحيد الألوهية، وهما أمران متغايران، وعبدة الأوثان لا يقولون بهذا، ويقولون بالأول
“It may be said that the first phrase refers to the Tawhid of Rubūbiyyah, and the second refers to the Tawhid of Ulūhiyyah. These are two distinct matters; idol worshipers do not affirm the latter, only the former.”[18]
Sheikh Al-Bajuri, in his explanation of Alhamdulillahi Rabbil Alamin, says:
يشير إلى تقرير توحيد الربوبية المترتب عليه توحيد الألوهية المقتضي من الخلق تحقيق العبودية
“It alludes to the affirmation of the Tawhid of Rubūbiyyah, which necessitates Tawhid of Ulūhiyyah, requiring creation to actualize servitude.”[19]
Reflect on Al-Bajuri’s statement: “the Tawhid of Rubūbiyyah, which necessitates Tawhid of Ulūhiyyah,” indicating that the concept of ulūhiyyah adds an additional meaning to rubūbiyyah. They are not identical, contrary to the claim of some contemporary Ash‘arites.
ولذلك قد ذكرنا أن معاصري ابن تيمية لم ينكروا عليه هذا التقسيم، وإنما جاء هذا الإنكار في العصور الحديثة بعد دعوة الشيخ محمد بن عبد الوهاب.
An opponent might wonder how some Ash‘arites and Maturidites could adopt the Taymiyyan division of tawhid while still adhering to Ash‘arite theology. The response to this is that dividing tawhid into rubūbiyyah) and ulūhiyyah is not viewed as conflicting with their Ash‘arite creed. Rather, they see it as a valid division in one respect, while the division used by the Mutakallimun is valid—according to their approach—in another respect.
This is why we have noted that Ibn Taymiyyah’s contemporaries did not criticize him for this division. Instead, this criticism emerged more recently, particularly after the rise of Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab’s movement.
Recommended Reading:
[1] Narrated by al-Bukhārī (6937).
[2] Narrated by al-Bukhārī (1389) and Muslim (19).
[3] Fatḥ al-Bārī (13/367).
[4] Ibid. (3/419).
[5] Ibṭāl al-Ḥiyal (p. 2).
[6] al-Ibāna ʿan Sharīʿat al-Firqa al-Nājiyya (2/172).
[7] al-Taʿrīfāt (p. 67).
[8] al-Tawhid (p. 20).
[9] Ibid. (p. 20).
[10] Ibid. (p. 221).
[11] Akhbār al-Zamān (1/75).
[12] Tafsīr al-Qurṭubī (5/181).
[13] Sharḥ al-Fiqh al-Akbar (p. 22).
[14] Tafsīr al-Bayḍāwī (1/342).
[15] Ḥāshiyat al-Kharshī ʿalá Mukhtaṣar Khalīl (1/13–14).
[16] Tāj al-ʿArūs (9/276).
[17] Tajrīd al-Tawhid by al-Maqrīzī (p. 20–21).
[18] Rūḥ al-Maʿānī (15/219).
[19] Sharḥ Jawharat al-Tawhid (p. 311).