So the Shaikh used the term ‘Tawhid al-Haakimiyyah’ saying it must not be denied (remember, at this stage he has not discussed it in the context of a fourth category) and that it actually comes under Ruboobiyyah and Uluhiyyah –but then the Shaikh said that making it a "fourth category" does not "make sense" because it falls into the well known "three categories". Which is what we maintain – following the Ulamaa in that.

So the Qutubis jumped upon this and took it to mean a tazkiyah for their methodology. But as we have always preached to the Qutubiyyah for many years, that it is necessary to take all of the words of the Ulamaa together, to reconcile them and not to strike them one against the other and to give rise to repugnant and harmful differences, which separate the hearts and cause disarray in the ranks. But even in the words of Shaikh Ghunayman there is a refutation of them, if they but knew. For he stated, "And making it into a fourth category doesn’t make sense because it falls into the three categories", which is in conformity to the remainder of the Imaams and Mashayikhs of our time. Then he said, emphasising again, "And the division without a reason is a cause of extra words which are not needed". And he finished by saying, … "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".

And it is here that the Qutubiyyah will consider these words. "and there is no harm in it" to mean a victory and a tazkiyah for their manhaj.

Yet the follower of truth, will reflect and see the harm caused by those who raised the banner of al-Haakimiyyah, intending by it purely political agendas and what is attached to it of violent and bloody revolutions and a destructive jihad against the Muslims themselves, let alone the non-Muslims. And in the works of Qutb, Mawudi and those upon their thought and methodology there is sufficient evidence of that. Rather, in the disaster of Algeria, there is a proof that the words of the Shaikh "and there is no harm it" are not entirely accurate, for those poisoned with Qutubism (through the books of Sayyid Qutb), the Khawarij of the Era, raised high the banner of al-Haakimiyyah, leading to the takfir of all and sundry, and eventually leading to the death and slaughter of innocent men, women and children.

Further, one who carefully ponders on the words of Shaikh Ghunayman will actually realise that they are in perfect agreement with the words of all of those Mashayikh who declared this matter to be an innovation. From the point of view of the foundation, asl, of his words, then it is clear that "making it into a fourth category doesn’t make sense because it falls into the three categories" and that it is "not needed" and that it is "redundant". So a just person would say, ‘Yes, so making it a fourth and separate, independent category is an innovation if we reconcile this with the words of the other scholars, for that is how they described the making of Tawhid al-Haakimiyyah as an independent category, outside of Uluhiyyah and Ruboobiyyah.

Further, the words of the Shaikh, "there is no harm in it" in no way contradict the foundation of his statement that the division is "not needed", it is merely his view or opinion that such an affair brings about no harm. And it is here that there is a difference of opinion – not in the fundamental aspect of the issue - but in a subsidiary matter, which is whether there is any harm in making Tawhid ul-Haakimiyyah an additional category.