The Sunni Creed regarding the Knowledge of Allah and His Messenger ﷺ

Discussion in 'Aqidah/Kalam' started by Umar99, Mar 6, 2020.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    the final word from dawlah-al-makkiayh shareef (leaving for someone to translate), not be gainsaid and a fitting reply to all rabble rousers:

  2. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    wow, just wow.

    So in your haste to prove your point you forgot that the subject of our discussion is RasulAllah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) himself - and not just "anybody". It helps to keep the context always in sight. That quote from shifa shareef does not help your case a whit.
  3. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    so owaisi sahab has made 22 posts on our forums so far - his first was in Dec 2018. One may run through them and see that he has mostly posted in threads dealing with sunni-devbandi issues and his opinions display a studied ambivalence towards ridawi scholars.

    Then this is a line of reasoning I have only ever heard from gumrah muqarrirs who try to hide their hypocrisy behind claims of 'greater good':

    and now this person has the audacity to impute it to Alahazrat.

    Now the odds are tilting in favor of him being a devbandi troll...
  4. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    @Tariq Owaisi - if I assume that you are a sincere sunni (which I shall for the present) I have to say that you are confused and would like to caution you that throwing around the word "barabari" is not safe and drawing conclusions without first gaining relevant information (as you have done in the post to which I replied) is not safe either.

    As a matter of fact, I was going to present some quotes from Dawlah-al-Makkiyah shareef myself - but helpfully, you have quoted sidi abu Hasan's translations of the same and saved me the trouble. However, you are still not out of danger and I recommend that you read the chapter on the difference between 'atai and dhati knowledge and all chapters leading upto it - and you will know why I stress that you should be thrifty with the word 'barabari'.

    On the other hand, if you are one of those devbandi (or kellerian) trolls who regularly pay homage to our forums (I hope you are not), then I would like to disabuse you that you are fooling no one but yourself by playing with the word 'barabari'. You might have to re-register yourself under a different pseudonym.

    you might be tone-deaf to Urdu words which are used for emphasis - please read that fatwa again with some learned brother who is also a native urdu speaker.

    You did not understand me correctly (not sure if that was deliberate). I don't hold it as a rational or shara'i possibility (excuse the poor phrasing - it was typed in a hurry) and you may read Dawlah al Makkiyah (Urdu translation by Mawlana Hamid Raza Khan sahib ('alayhirraHmah)) for the real reasons as to why (hint: it's not the same as yours).

    That question was asked to get some clarification regarding your method of reasoning and it served the purpose well.

    wa's salaam
  5. Tariq Owaisi

    Tariq Owaisi Active Member

    Thank you for being patient with me. I have reached a point where I am satisfied that I have reasonable understanding of the fatwa through a hint in TKM

    Yes, the claim of even a speck of knowledge for anyone without being given by Allāh táālā is certainly kufr. It is also an invalid belief that the knowledge of [anyone in the] creation can encompass the knowledge of Allāh táālā, and is against the opinion of most scholars. However, the knowledge about everything from the first day to the final day of judgement – that which has happened and shall happen, mā kāna wa mā yakūn – is only a small fragment from the infinite knowledge of Allāh táālā. This fragment is not comparable even to a billionth part of a drop of water in relation to a billion oceans. Indeed, this ‘part’ is itself a small part of the knowledge of Sayyidunā Muĥammad . I have described all these issues in Dawlatu’l Makkiyyah and other books. 333

    Page 71

    In the fatwa the Imam did not say it was not shirk, nor that it was unreasonable to say it was Shirk but he said that takfir won't be made and this has previous precedent which he was following. One name in particular Ibn Arabi but probably others as well who have been spared in the past. I think he was protecting these scholars.

    Allah knows best it could be a deed the like of Prophet Haroon Alayhis Salam who did not want to split the jamaah but Allah willing people do not try to find justification for the belief of barabari. In truth it needs to be rejected like the Imam said.

    I am satisfied with this understanding

    May Allah protect us
  6. Tariq Owaisi

    Tariq Owaisi Active Member

    There is no such definition which accommodates barabari as not shirk.

    Peer Irfan Shah Mash'hadi has taught that barabari is the definition "Shariat e paak mai shirk kehte hain barabari ko" ("the shariah definition of shirk is equality")
    See here at 42 mins

    He mentions to always remember verse 98 of Surah Ash-Shura (26) in this matter of barabari. See attached tafsir of the ayah

    I agree with the statement of Abu Hasan which was written in the context of ata'i/haadith and not eternal in mind, that any claim suggestive of Ilm Mutlaq of Allah is undoubtedly Shirk.

    Attached Files:

  7. Tariq Owaisi

    Tariq Owaisi Active Member


    Excellent read on the sunni deobandi conflict. Keller was exposed on everything he said in his IKT.

    For the subject of this thread most of the content of TKM is relevant. I made some particular notes of content which I felt is most relevant to our topic at hand. However it would be helpful to know what in particular you were pointing me towards.

    As for my observations there is a subject almost identical to our topic running throughout the book but it supports and refirms my own view that barabari is a claim of disbelief/shirk and merely attributing it as ata'i does not make it not kufr/shirk. It is still kufr and shirk because making (near) equal the slave through ata'i means has always been shirk and not just shirk but always the most common form of shirk chosen by mushrikeen.

    Here are the statements I found in this regard in TKM:

    This much is evident from Keller’s own translation. 469 By introducing “incomparably vaster,” Keller alters the meaning, which implies that Khalīl was talking about knowledge far more than that of creation, and suggestive of ílm muţlaq of the Almighty, which is undoubtedly shirk.
    Page 102 - Abu Hasan explaining Keller’s altering of the words and undoubtedly shirk of suggestive ilm mutlaq of the Almighty for creation.

    1a Ílm al-Muţlaq al-Tafşīlī Absolute Knowledge: Comprehensive, Total All-encompassing, entire, perfect, infinite, conclusive, precise, factual and unlimited which includes everything completely, and every detail recursively. This belongs only to Allāh; it is impossible for anyone in the creation to encompass the knowledge of Allāh; rather the comparison of the knowledge of everything and everyone in the creation to the knowledge of Allāh is like that of a millionth of a drop of water to that of million oceans, but even lesser – because millions of oceans are finite and the knowledge of Allāh táālā is infinite
    Page 97 with ref to Alahazrat’s Categorisation of Knowledge in Dawlatu’l Makkiyah

    It is kufr to claim that anybody has more knowledge than RasūlAllāh , let alone the accursed Devil as Khafājī has said in his commentary of Shifā: {Know may Allāh táālā give guidance to us and you} to recognise the right of the Prophet  and the obligations to fulfil it {everything that is insulting to the Prophet} that is, disrespecting him {or faulted him} which is even more generic than insult; so if anyone says: “such a person is more knowledgeable than him ,” verily, he has faulted him and denigrated him – even if he has not insulted him {or adduced a flaw in his person} that is in his physical appearance or in his character... 467
    The citation ends with the ruling concerning such a person that, regardless of its proportion, it is apostasy and the person is judged under the rule of blasphemy – punishable by death.

    Page 101- even kufr to say anybody more knowledgeable then Rasoolullah (May Allah give him abundant peace and blessings) (and I ask equal to him? Then how about the absolute kufr of equating with Allah)

    There is other notes I have taken for discussion but these are most worthy of being discussed first. What I am saying is basically the same as what I understood from your words quoted from page 102. Even the suggestive equality with Allah is undoubtedly shirk so how about a person who claims barabari.
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2019
  8. Tariq Owaisi

    Tariq Owaisi Active Member

    Any progress?
    If its going to take a while please post an overview first.
    Or if you no longer have the time to write it just let me know, it's OK I will move on.
  9. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    This boils down to not knowing the definition of shirk.
  10. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    am a bit busy so will make a detailed response in a few days time - however, the change in the tone of your speech makes my proverbial sixth eye flicker ...
  11. Tariq Owaisi

    Tariq Owaisi Active Member

    Ata'ee barabari is both rationally impossible and shara'i impossible, proof is Allah does not create equals and we are not to set up equals with Allah

    It is equality in a rank or wujud as both are equal/barabari in knowledge

    I gave details of what I meant when people (including myself) are confronted with this allegation we do not contest it being association we say we believe in less than a drop from the oceans in comparison. I have never previously seen anyone contest this.

    What I said and meant was 1/4, half or full barabari are all blasphemous terms/comparisons. Further ata'ee barabari does not exist and could not be a basis for not doing takfir. This last point is the subject of discussion if ata'ee barabari is the key qualification and basis for not doing takfir.

    There is however a few possible explanations as to what the basis for not doing takfir is.

    If I understood correctly your explanation is: ata'ee barabari (in knowledge) exists as a rational or shara'i possibility, it is not association and is the basis of not doing takfir.
  12. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    rationally impossible or is it a shara'i impossibility? and what are your proofs for or against either of them?

    How does ata'ee knowledge (even when incorrectly assumed to be equal) lead to equality of rank or wujud?

    First prove the existence of 'association' and then explain who contests negation of association and where.

    that is an assertion devoid of proof - and logic. Us sunnis don't equate or compare the knowledge of any created being to that of the Creator - but your statement above is seeking to do away with the key qualification which is the basis for not doing takfir - and without any rhyme or reason. Just why?
  13. Tariq Owaisi

    Tariq Owaisi Active Member

    Thank you, which angle should I focus on?

    For example it says if you hear a statement of kufr we should write to a mufti. I see the statement of barabari as a statement of kufr. However when this was posted on Facebook from the argument that ensued between some brothers one person said "so what if Allah shared ALL His Knowledge" so from that angle he is looking at it as a valid position not to be seen as kufr statement at all.
    Another angle is that it is a statement of kufr but Takfir was not made due to caution or other factors.

    Sometimes it would be sufficient for even great bestowals just to say bestowed or granted but here we are talking about barabari (equality)

    Attaee barabari is muhaal (impossible)
    Allah does not have equals. The fact that He is pure from such association is not normally contested by anyone

    For example when the accusers accuse Ahle Sunnah of shirk the reply is that in comparison to Allah "the combined knowledge of the first and last of all prophets and messengers and angels isn't even comparable to a billionth part of a drop compared to billions of oceans in relation to the knowledge of Allah.'
    This is Ahle Sunnah position and it is believed to be Attaee. The above granted knowledge is vast and bestowed by Allah.

    When we start getting onto ridiculous comparisons such as 1/4 or half or full barabari (equality) then there is no Attaee in this.

    I didn't want to make a post like this explaining my view but I suppose it might help me by making it easier for others to see what I am missing and educating me.

    Of course the other possibility is what I have said is reasonable but the takfir is withheld due to some technical Sharii pearl (insanity, ignorance etc)
  14. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    read tkm
  15. IslamIsTheTruth

    IslamIsTheTruth Well-Known Member

    There’s your answer.
  16. Tariq Owaisi

    Tariq Owaisi Active Member


    Can anyone give further insight into this.

    Peer Irfan Shah was running his shariah course at the same time as when this was posted and described the definition of shirk as equality (barabari) but here Alahazrat has not made takfir on the one who believes in barabari if its believed to be attaee (bestowed).
  17. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    Imam Ahmad Rida Khan Baraylawi (d.1340 H) writes:

    'Allah ta'ala has given His beloved ﷺ detailed knowledge of every particle from the first day till the last - whatever has happened, whatever is happening and whatever will happen. In a thousand darknesses, if there is a speck or a particle of sand existing, the knowledge of RasulAllah ﷺ encompasses that.

    And not just knowledge, rather, whatever is happening in the world and will do so till judgement day, RasulAllah ﷺ sees it like he sees the palm of his hand. There isn't a particle in the heavens and the earth that is hidden from his vision. In fact, this is just a small tributary from his oceans of knowledge.

    He knows his entire nation better than a man recognises the one who sits next to him. And not just knows them, but he sees their every action and each movement. If a thought passes in their heart, he is aware of it.

    And in relation to the knowledge of Allah, then all the oceans of knowledge of RasulAllah ﷺ and combined knowledge of the first and the last put together aren't even comparable to a part of a drop compared to tens of millions of oceans.

    وَمَا قَدَرُوا اللَّهَ حَقَّ قَدْرِهِ
    The oppressors didn't recognise the rank of Allah. Whatever has happened and will happen till judgement day, when we said that 'Allah granted it to His beloved', it was said that 'you have made equality with God and become polytheists.'

    Insolent people! Is the knowledge of Allah only this much that can be contained between two limits? This is even gifted by RasulAllah ﷺ to his chosen servants. All this is proven from the Quran, authentic hadith and sayings of imams, scholars and saints, details of which can be read in our books, al-Dawlah al-Makkiyyah and Inbā' al-Mustafa and Khālis al-Iýtiqād, etc.'

    [al-Áţāyā al-Nabawyyah fi al-Fatāwā al-Riđawiyyah, 15:74]

    Original Urdu:

    Elsewhere he writes:

    'Claiming equality with the knowledge of Allah is certainly wrong and rejected but takfir won't be made even on this when the claimant believes it to be by the granting of Allah.

    And without doubt, the truth is that the combined knowledge of the first and last of all prophets and messengers and angels isn't even comparable to a billionth part of a drop compared to billions of oceans in relation to the knowledge of Allah.'

    [al-Áţāyā al-Nabawyyah fi al-Fatāwā al-Riđawiyyah, 14:377]

    Original Urdu:
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2021

Share This Page