Ahmad Rida Khan: Taqwiyat al-Iman Negates the Prophet’s ﷺ Knowledge of His Own Fate

We have seen in an earlier piece that in al-Dawlat al-Makkiyyah, Ahmad Rida Khan makes the following claims about Taqwiyat al-Iman:

1. Taqwiyat al-Iman negates any amount of knowledge of the ghayb for the Prophet ﷺ even if by Allah’s granting, hence it has rejected clear verses of the Qur’an (which affirm some knowledge of the ghayb for the Prophet ﷺ), thus the author (Shah Isma‘il Shahid) is a disbeliever.
2. Taqwiyat al-Iman negates the Prophet’s ﷺ knowledge of his own fate and that of his Ummah in opposition to clear verses of the Qur’an (which show the Prophet’s high rank in the next life), which is thus a further kufr in Taqwiyat al-Iman.
3. Taqwiyat al-Iman states: “Whoever claims knowledge of ghayb for a prophet, even if it be the number of a tree’s leaves, has committed shirk with Allah, whether he says that he knows it on his own or by Allah’s granting [it to him] – in all cases shirk is established.”

In this piece, we will address the second claim.

The Text of Taqwiyat al-Iman

Ahmad Rida Khan is referring to a passage of Taqwiyat al-Iman in which the author quotes a hadith from Sahih al-Bukhari. According to the hadith, the Prophet ﷺ said: “By Allah, even though I am Allah’s Messenger, I know not what will be done to me or to you!”

After citing and translating the hadith, Shah Isma‘il Shahid offers an explanation as follows:

Meaning, no one knows the true reality [i.e. the full details] of the manner in which Allah will deal with His slaves, whether in the dunya, in the grave, or in the next life, neither a prophet nor a saint, neither about his own state nor that of others. While Allah may have foretold some matters to His accepted slaves via revelation or inspiration – that ‘so-and-so’s fate is good’ or ‘bad’ – this is something nondetailed. To learn more than [what they were foretold] and finding the details of it are outside their power. (Taqwiyat al-Iman, p38)

Analysis

This passage is negating intrinsic knowledge (“to learn more than [what they were foretold]”) and affirming given knowledge. Regarding the statement, “I know not what will be done to me or you” (which is also in the Qur’an 46:9), Shah Isma‘il Shahid’s exegesis is that the Prophet ﷺ does not have detailed knowledge of what will happen to himself or others, whether in this world, the grave, or the next life. Of course, the Prophet ﷺ knows he will have a high station in the next life, and some aspects of what will transpire, but complete and detailed knowledge was not communicated to him.

The famous Tafsir al-Baydawi says in commentary of Qur’an 46:9: “‘I know not what will be done to me or to you’: in the two abodes (of dunya and akhirah), in detail, as I have no knowledge of the ghayb.” (Tafsir al-Baydawi, 5:112)

Al-Khafaji says in his super-commentary of Tafsir al-Baydawi: “As for nondetailed knowledge, it is known [to the Prophet], so there is no conflict between this and Allah’s statement: ‘to forgive you for your prior and former sins’.” (Hashiyat al-Shihab ‘ala Tafsir al-Baydawi, 8:28)

This is superior to a more common exegesis, which is the one apparently favoured by Ahmad Rida Khan (al-Fatawa al-Ridawiyyah, 29:491-2), that this declaration, “I know not what will be done to me or to you”, was abrogated by later verses. Such an exegesis implies the Prophet ﷺ did not know his fate (in a general sense) from the beginning, which, as al-Razi points out, is ba’id (farfetched). (Tafsir al-Razi, 28:8)

Shah Isma‘il Shahid’s exegesis avoids this problem by understanding “knowledge” (dirayah) here to refer to a full and complete knowledge. So while the Prophet ﷺ of course always knew he, as a prophet of Allah, will be saved from punishment and be rewarded with paradise in the next life, he is negating only a total knowledge of all details of how Allah will deal with His slaves.

Will any objective observer conclude based on seeing the full context that Shah Isma‘il Shahid has blasphemed or committed kufr? He has merely cited a hadith and offered a mainstream commentary!

Conclusion

We conclude two things from the above:

1) Ahmad Rida Khan’s claim about Taqwiyat al-Iman that it negates (completely) the Prophet’s ﷺ knowledge of his own fate is false.

2) He has thus accused the author of Taqwiyat al-Iman of kufr based on a false claim.

Do we see a pattern?

Documented Beliefs of Ahmad Rida Khan Barelwi (1856-1921 CE)

Some of the explicit beliefs of Ahmad Rida Khan (1856-1921 CE), leader and guide to tens of millions of Barelwis worldwide, are:

1. If it were in Allah’s power He would have made the Prophet ﷺ a God. (Malfuzat A‘la Hazrat)
2. It is not disbelief to believe the Prophet ﷺ has knowledge exactly equal to Allah in terms of quantity. (al-Dawlat al-Makkiyyah [footnotes])
3. For the fulfilment of needs, it is encouraged to pray a two rak‘ats prayer, then focus attention on Madina, and say: “Oh Messenger of Allah, help me, give me relief in fulfilling my need, Oh fulfiller of needs”, 11 times, and make the same request of Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani while taking 11 steps in the direction of where he is buried imagining oneself standing before his grave. (al-Fatawa al-Ridawiyyah)
4. Saints can literally and physically be present in multiple locations at the same time. (Malfuzat A‘la Hazrat)
5. The Prophet’s ﷺ power is a reflection of divine power and everything in creation is subordinate to his command. (al-Fatawa al-Ridawiyyah; I‘tiqad al-Ahbab)
6. The Prophet’s ﷺ knowledge includes every leaf on every tree, every grain of sand, every thought that cross every heart, not an iota is excluded from his encompassing knowledge and vision of all physical things from the start of the universe until the final hour. (Inba’ al-Mustafa; al-Fatawa al-Ridawiyyah)
7. The Prophet ﷺ possesses encompassing hearing, whereby there is no doubt that he hears and sees everyone sending salawat on him from anywhere in the world. (Inba’ al-Hayy; al-Fatawa al-Ridawiyyah)
8. Physical words of revelation are eternal and uncreated. (Malfuzat A‘la Hazrat)

Follow the hyperlinks for documentation and images from the original works.

It is the delusional belief of Ahmad Rida Khan’s Barelwi followers that these extreme innovated ideas represent the carried understanding of the Ummah from its inception!

See also:

Blasphemous Barelwi Belief Negating The Prophet ﷺ Is Literally Human

Analysing Ahmad Rida Khan’s Claims About Taqwiyat al-Iman in al-Dawlat al-Makkiyyah

In al-Dawlat al-Makkiyyah, a work that Barelwis revel in till today, Ahmad Rida Khan says:

Translation

Someone who negates any amount of knowledge of ghayb from the Prophet ﷺ, even if by Allah’s granting – as is stated clearly by the Wahhabis of our lands to the point that they even say the Prophet ﷺ does not know his own fate nor that of his Ummah… – has negated what Allah has affirmed in His Qur’an. His word negates his iman and is sufficient for his loss. He is a disbeliever and apostate because of his disbelief. His statement that the Prophet ﷺ does not know his own fate nor that of his Ummah is a further kufr because it denies many verses like: ‘The latter is better for you than the former’, ‘Soon your Lord will give to you until you are satisfied’, ‘The day Allah will not disgrace the Prophet nor those who believed with him’… (al-Dawlat al-Makkiyyah, pp110-2)  

He is referring to Shah Isma‘il Shahid and his Taqwiyat al-Iman, as he clarifies in a later passage:

Translation

Has not the Wahhabi of Delhi [Shah Isma‘il Shahid] said that Muhammad ﷺ doesn’t know anything, even his own fate?…Has not their Dihlawi imam [Shah Isma‘il Shahid] said in Taqwiyat al-Iman that whoever claims knowledge of ghayb for a prophet, even if it be the number of a tree’s leaves, has committed shirk with Allah, whether he says that he knows it on his own or by Allah’s granting [it to him], in all cases shirk is established?” (al-Dawlat al-Makkiyyah, pp141-2)

Analysis

Ahmad Rida Khan has made a few claims about Taqwiyat al-Iman in these passages:

1. Taqwiyat al-Iman negates any amount of knowledge of the ghayb for the Prophet ﷺ even if by Allah’s granting, hence it has rejected clear verses of the Qur’an (which affirm some knowledge of the ghayb for the Prophet ﷺ), thus the author (Shah Isma‘il Shahid) is a disbeliever.
2. Taqwiyat al-Iman negates the Prophet’s ﷺ knowledge of his own fate and that of his Ummah in opposition to clear verses of the Qur’an (which show the Prophet’s high rank in the next life), which is thus a further kufr in Taqwiyat al-Iman.
3. Taqwiyat al-Iman states: “Whoever claims knowledge of ghayb for a prophet, even if it be the number of a tree’s leaves, has committed shirk with Allah, whether he says that he knows it on his own or by Allah’s granting [it to him] – in all cases shirk is established.”

A brief reply to these claims follows:

1. Shah Isma‘il Shahid in Taqwiyat al-Iman (pp29-30) explicitly affirms that some aspects of ghayb are communicated to prophets, but only as and when Allah wills. He negates only that prophets have an innate power by which they can divine the unseen. In other words, he negates intrinsic knowledge of the ghayb and affirms granted knowledge. Hence, Ahmad Rida Khan’s accusation that Shah Isma‘il Shahid negates even granted knowledge of the ghayb (in an absolute sense) is false.
2. Shah Isma‘il Shahid in Taqwiyat al-Iman (p38) is quoting a hadith about the Prophet ﷺ negating knowledge of how he and his Ummah will be dealt with. In line with mainstream commentary, Shah Isma‘il Shahid says it is a negation of detailed knowledge but does not necessarily negate general/nondetailed knowledge (about salvation/damnation). Hence, the verses Ahmad Rida Khan quotes do not in any way contradict what Shah Isma‘il Shahid said.
3. Ahmad Rida Khan has manufactured this “quote” from two different passages (p14 and p84) of Taqwiyat al-Iman! In the first passage, Shah Isma‘il Shahid negates all-encompassing knowledge for creation, whereby nothing can be hidden from them. Whether this is affirmed as being granted by Allah or being known intrinsically, in all cases it is equating human knowledge to divine knowledge and is thus shirk. In the second passage, Shah Isma‘il Shahid is talking about using the phrase, “Allah and His Messenger know”. He said in religious matters, this is fine to say. But when it comes to questions like what is in someone’s heart, when will someone get married, the number of stars in the sky, the number of leaves on a tree, etc. this phrase should not be used because these things are from the ghayb. One should say only: “Allah knows”, not: “Allah and His Messenger know”.

The three claims are examined in more detail in three separate pieces:

1. Ahmad Rida Khan: Taqwiyat al-Iman Negates the Prophet’s ﷺ Knowledge of His Own Fate

2. Ahmad Rida Khan: Taqwiyat al-Iman Negates Any Amount of Granted Knowledge of Ghayb for the Prophet ﷺ

3. Ahmad Rida Khan: To Claim Even Granted Knowledge of Ghayb for Creation is Shirk According to Taqwiyat al-Iman

We will see clearly a pattern emerging in how Ahmad Rida Khan cites his opponents in a dishonest way.

Imam al-Alusi Refutes Extreme Barelwi Belief on the Knowledge of the Prophet ﷺ

Imam al-Alusi (1802-1854 CE) writes in Ruh al-Ma’ani:

“I believe that the Prophet ﷺ did not leave the dunya until he was given what no one from the nations was given from knowledge of Allah, His attributes and actions, and knowledge of things to know which is deemed an accomplishment. I don’t believe he loses any perfection by not knowing particular worldly events like not knowing what Zayd is doing in his house for example and what befalls him in the present or future. I don’t deem it good for someone to say that ‘the Prophet ﷺ knows the ghayb’. I deem it good that it is said instead that ‘Allah informed him of the ghayb’ or ‘taught him it’ or something like that.

“There is a refutation in the verse (46:9) of those who attribute to some saints the knowledge of everything from the universals and particulars. I heard a khatib on the mimbar of the Jami‘ Masjid named after Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Kilani, his soul be sanctified, on Friday, saying at his highest voice: ‘Oh falcon (i.e. Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani), you have more knowledge of me than I do myself!’ Someone said to me: ‘I believe that the shaykh, his soul be sanctified, knows everything of me even the roots of my hair!’ Such things should not be ascribed to Allah’s Messenger ﷺ, so how can it be ascribed to others? The slave should fear his Master.” (Ruh al-Ma‘anī, Mu’assasat al-Risalah, 25:67)

Contrast this with Ahmad Rida Khan’s (1856-1921 CE) belief about the knowledge of the Prophet ﷺ:

“It is without a doubt that the Almighty has given His Noble Beloved ﷺ the complete knowledge of earlier and later ones. From the east to the west, from the Throne till the earth, everything was shown to him. He was made witness to the Kingdom of the heavens and the earth. From the very first day till the last day all of the knowledge of what was and what shall be (mā kāna wa mā yakūn) has been told to him. From all of the above, not even an iota is outside the knowledge of the Prophet. The great knowledge of the Noble Beloved ﷺ encompasses all of these. It is not just of a summary type but what is small and big, every leaf that falls and every grain in the darkness of the earth are in their entirety known to him individually and in detail. Much praise to Allāh. In fact, that which has been discussed is not, never, the complete knowledge of the Messenger of Allāh (Allāh bless him and grant him peace and send peace on his family and companions, all of them); but this is a small part of the Prophet’s knowledge …” (Inbā’ al-Muṣṭafā; in: Fatāwā Riḍawiyyah, Riḍā Foundation, 29:487)

“From the first day till the last day, all that has happened and is happening and will happen, each and every particle – detailed knowledge of this Allāh has given to His Noble Beloved ﷺ. In a thousand darknesses, the particle or grain of sand that sits (on the earth), the knowledge of the Prophet ﷺ encompasses this. It is not just knowledge. Rather, the whole world and everything that will happen therein until Qiyāmah, he sees all of it like he sees the palm of his hand. Not a particle is hidden from his vision in the heavens and the earths. In fact, everything just mentioned is (but) a small tributary from the oceans of his knowledge. He recognises his whole Ummah better than someone who is sitting next to another. He doesn’t just recognise them, rather he sees their every action and movement. He is aware of (even) the thoughts that cross the hearts.” (al-Fatāwā al-Riḍawiyyah, 15:75)

See also: Classical Maliki Scholars Deem Barelwi Belief in Ilm Jami Ma Kana Wa Ma Yakun To Be Kufr

Ahmad Rida Khan’s Contradiction in al-Dawlat al-Makkiyyah: Is Equating the Prophet’s ﷺ Knowledge to Allah’s Knowledge Kufr?

In al-Dawlat al-Makkiyyah and its footnotes, Ahmad Rida Khan addresses the belief that the Prophet ﷺ was granted knowledge equal to Allah (in full detail and without any exceptions). He considers whether this belief – i.e. that the Prophet ﷺ possesses complete knowledge of everything known to Allah, including the full details of Allah’s essence and attributes – is kufr or not?

In one place (in his footnotes to al-Dawlat al-Makkiyyah), he defends this belief from the charge of kufr. He refutes Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari’s assertion that it constitutes obvious kufr by consensus.* Ahmad Rida Khan claims that some “saints” held this view. He disagrees with it, deeming it an error, but claims that it should not be considered disbelief because some “saints” held this view and they acknowledged the Prophet’s ﷺ knowledge is contingent as opposed to Allah’s (which is eternal). In his opinion, the mere fact that it is rationally impossible is also not a basis for deeming it to be kufr. [See Excerpt One below] He also reiterates the same in a fatwa dated only about a year before his death. (Fatawa Ridawiyyah, 14:378)

But then, in a different section of the same work, Ahmad Rida Khan explains the concept of “‘Ilm Mutlaq Tafsili,” which he says belongs exclusively to Allah. “‘Ilm Mutlaq Tafsili” means complete and detailed knowledge of all things that can possibly be known, a quality that he says cannot be affirmed for any creature. After saying ‘Ilm Mutlaq Tafsili belongs exclusively to Allah (and is negated for creation), he says: “Everything we just mentioned is established from the din by necessity whereby anyone who rejects any of it has rejected the din.” [See Excerpt Two below]

He further says that to claim encompassing knowledge like Allah is kufr. [See Excerpt Three below] He further says: “As for ‘all’ in the sense of actual encompassment of all things known to Allah in detail, we have informed you that it is undoubtedly and definitively impossible for creation, rationally and scripturally.” [See Excerpt Four below]

Hence, in one place he claims equating the Prophet’s ﷺ knowledge with Allah’s (in terms of quantity) is not kufr. In another place, he says it is kufr. Which is it? This is not a minor contradiction. If something is ma’lum min al-din bi ‘l-darurah, then to believe it is not kufr is itself kufr, as Ahmad Rida Khan and Barelwis are well aware.

A request to Barelwis to resolve this contradiction.