`ilm al-saa`at [Mawlana Soofi Saheb & Tullab]

[salman]

salamu `alaykum wa rahmatullah

I was doing my daily stipulated reading of Imam Sawi's Hashiyat `ala Tafsir al-Jalalayn and underneath verse 33:63 wherein Allah Most High states, "They ask you concerning the hour," Imam Sawi states:

- "...and our Prophet (Allah bless him him and grant him peace) did not leave this world until Allah informed him of all the unseen (`ala jami` al-mughibaat) and from it the [knowledge of the] Hour (jumlatiha al-saa`at), but he was commanded to conceal it." (Vol 3, pg: 489 ed. al-Maktaba al-Asriyyat)

I know other scholars said the above also - including many of the muta'akhirin - such as Imam Bajuri, and Ibn `Allan relates this opinion in his commentary Dalil al-Falihin Sharh Riyadh al-Salihin (Vol 1, Pg: 160. `Ilmiyya Ed. 1995). However, Shaykh Muhammad Ya`qoubi's recent statement and the above kind of pushed me to ask this question.

Basically whether [1] Is this is valid opinion or aberrant? [2] Would holding this opinion be considered a bida` or is there room for allowance? [3] Those who state this would argue that authentic narrations establish this as established both `aqlan and naqlan and that the khabar wahid is admissible in furu` al-`aqa'id such as issues of prophetology. As Sh. Nuh said, "The texts from the Qur’an and hadith about the Prophet’s not knowing things (Allah bless him and give him peace) do indeed bear the possible interpretation that they refer to an earlier part of his life before Allah revealed to him the vast knowledge attested to by other rigorously authenticated texts, so they are invalid as evidence for the limitariness of the prophetic knowledge..." Is this argument sound or not?

I ma not looking for counter arguments per se but specific answers to the above. I myself am more convinced of the majority opinion but as a student who comes across this questions naturally arise.

Wasalam
Salman

PS: Sidi Abu Hajira, is there any way to send detailed questions to Mufti Ebrahim via fax?

[Muawiyah]

Al-Sawi (d. 1241/1825)

[salman]

Al-Sawi (d. 1241/1825)

salamu `alaykum

The first person I have seen mentioning the above as a possibility was Imam Razi (d: 606/1209) in his exegesis:

{على غيبه } ليس فيه صيغة عموم فيكفي في العمل بمقتضاه أن لا يظهر تعالى خلقه
على غيب واحد من غيوبه فنحمله على وقت وقوع القيامة فيكون المراد من الآية
أنه تعالى لا يظهر هذا الغيب لأحد فلا يبقى في الآية دلالة على أنه لا يظهر شيئا
من الغيوب لأحد، والذي يؤكد هذا التأويل أنه تعالى إنما ذكر هذه الآية عقيب
قوله: {إن أدرى أقريب ما توعدون أم يجعل له ربى أمدا } (الجن: 25) يعني لا
أدري وقت وقوع القيامة، ثم قال بعده: {عـالم الغيب فلا يظهر على غيبه أحدا }
أي وقت وقوع القيامة من الغيب الذي لا يظهره الله لأحد، وبالجملة فقوله: {على
غيبه } لفظ مفرد مضاف، فيكفي في العمل به حمله على غيب واحد، فأما العموم
فليس في اللفظ دلالة عليه.

فإن قيل: فإذا حملتم ذلك على القيامة فكيف قال: {إلا من ارتضى من رسول } مع
أنه لا يظهر هذا الغيب لأحد من رسله؟ قلنا: بل يظهره عند القرب من إقامة
القيامة، وكيف لا وقد قال: {ويوم تشقق السماء بالغمـام ونزل الملـائكة
تنزيلا } (الفرقان: 25) ولا شك أن الملائكة
يعلمون في ذلك الوقت قيام القيامة، وأيضا يحتمل أن يكون هذا الاستثناء
منقطعا، كأنه قال: عالم الغيب فلا يظهر على غيبه المخصوص وهو قيام القيامة
أحدا، ثم قال بعده: لكن من ارتضى من رسول: {فإنه يسلك من بين يديه ومن خلفه
} حفظة يحفظونه من شر مردة الإنس والجن، لأنه تعالى إنما ذكر هذا الكلام جوابا
لسؤال من سأله عن وقت وقوع القيامة على سبيل الاستهزاء به، والاستحقار
لدينه ومقالته.

واعلم أنه لا بد من القطع بأنه ليس مراد الله من هذه الآية أن لا يطلع أحدا
على شيء من المغيبات إلا الرسل، والذي يدل عليه وجوه

[...]

And, Imam Suyuti mentions the difference explicitly also in his Khasa'is.

Wasalam
Salman

[Saad]

Muhaqqiq Allamah Sarfraz Khan Safdar has mentioned that Tafsir of Sawi is not reliable at all. He was "half-baked Shia". Same is the case with Ruh-ul-Bayan , Baijuri, Usmawi and other tasafirs of few Sufi who entered false beliefs in their tafsirs which are contrary to qat'i ayaats of the Quran and mutawattir ahadith, and belief of the Sahaba.

[Hamood]

You said it yourself that its an 'ikhtilaafi' matter then why blame Maulana for opposing it? 'Ikhtilaafi' means that some people will disagree with it. Perhaps, a better point would be made by analyzing Maulana's position to see if it conforms to the principles of Hanafi jurisprudence. In other words, provide a scholarly critique of his position. Deobandi or not, Maulana is a recognized senior 'alim and wouldn't just make things up that suit his fancies! But I really doubt that we, as laymen, are capable of doing that....

Just for the record, I have no problem with 'zikr-bil-jahr' as practiced by Deobandi Chishtis.

Excellent point.

I don't understand why some people can't get over this fact?

Nevertheless, I'm disappointed that people who uphold the sanctity of scholars would utter such disrespectful words for such a senior and great 'alim as Shaykh al-Hadith Mawlana Sarfraz Khan Safdar. Let's not let our differences on issues blind us so much that we adopt a disparaging tone towards the 'Ulama.

[Husain]

The first person I have seen mentioning the above as a possibility was Imam Razi (d: 606/1209) in his exegesis:

And, Imam Suyuti mentions the difference explicitly also in his Khasa'is.

Where in the quote from Imam Razi does it state Nabi has knowledge of the five?
or the possibility of it?

[Saad]

Where in the quote from Imam Razi does it state Nabi has knowledge of the five?
or the possibility of it?

Mufti Sahib this is what Imam Razi (may Allah have mercy on him) and Khatib Sharbainaini (may Allah have mercy on him) says:

فان قيل اليس انه صلى الله عليه وسلم قال بعثت انا والساعة كهاتين فكان عالما بقرب
وقوع القيامه فكيفقال هٰهنا لا ادرى اقريب ام بعيد اجيب بان المراد بقرب وقوعه هو ان ما بقى من الدنيا اقل مما انقضى فهذه القدر من القرب معلوم فاما معرفة مقدار القرب فغير معلوم

Basically, Holy Prophet (may Allah him and give him peace) knows that the remaining life of the World is shorter than what has passed but doesnt know the exact amount of time.]

[Tafsir Kabir, 8:343; Siraj al-Munir,4:408]

And Imam Razi also says:

- قل انما علمها عنداللّه لا يتبين لكم فانا للّه اخفاها لحكمه

Allah has kept hidden the knowledge of Qiyamat from Holy Prophet and there is hikmah behind it.

[Tafsir Kabir, 6:537]

And Imam Razi says:

المراد ان العلم بلوقوع غير العلم بوقت الوقوع فا لعلم الاول حاصل عندى وهو كاف فى الانزار والتحذير واما العلم الثانى فليس الا لله ولا حاجة فى كونى نذيرامبينًا اليه

Holy Prophet doesn't have the knowledge of waquh of Qiyamat.

[Tafsir Kabir, 8:191]

[tazkiyyah]

Khanbaba..Are you a salafi?

What happened to istihsaan..isharat an nass...ibarat an nass...dalalat an nass etc etc
We are ahnaaf...ahl ar ra'ee...We deduce from the texts using logical principles often.
We use the books of the ahnaaf..
We are not wahhabi/ahlul hadeeth
Bring the words of the fuqaha...
Thank you!

[al_Zayn]

I have a few questions on the Arabic word "Alim ul Ghayb"

1] Is this a name of Allah [Azza Wa Jal] i.e. His Sifaat [99 names]??

2] Can it be attributed to anyone else?

3] What is the meaning of this word in its context?

[If the mods wish to close this topic down, please answer my queries and close it down, or atleast let someone answer me in full and then you can close it, its really important i need info on this topic]

Below verses are from Surah Hashr:

هو الله الذي لا اله الا هو علم الغيب والشهاد هو الرحمن الرحيم

Translated:

He is Allah, besides Whom there is no god; the Knower of the unseen and the seen; He is the Beneficent, the Merciful

Is it correct to say from the above mentioned verse Allah says He is the all Alimul Ghayb, non Ghayb, ar-Rahman and ar-Raheem hence this is His Sifaat and names of His attributes [Asmaa al Husna]?

So my point being, no one can take from His Sifaat and attribute it to any one else, like you can't attribute His name, ar-Rahman, to anyone but Allah? is this understanding correct?

Please can some Thalibul Ilms help me.

for any help.

[Shuayb Ahmed]

Greetings,

In Islamic metaphysics the Alam al-Ghayb (the supra-formal world) is the world of the Archetypes (al-ayn ath-thabitah) of all created things as they exist in the formal world (Alam ash-Shahadah). These are thought to be the same realities (haqa'iq) spoken about by Plato in his doctrine of the forms or ideas (eidos) which are coagulated or congealed into that gross matter that comprises the material, sensorial world.

Also, the Divine attributes can find as their medium our human agency, but they are rightfully God's and we have no right to claim them.

And God knows best...