Sharhul Aqaid 009 - The Report of the Messenger

 

Sharhul Aqaid 
Author : Sa'ad al-Din Masud ibn Umar ibn Abd Allah al-Taftazani
Translated to English by : Muhammad Sajeer Bukhari

Part : 009 

The Report of the Messenger

Text: 

والنوع الثانى: خبر الرسول المؤيد بالمعجزة وهو يوجب العلم الاستدلالى والعلم الثابت به يضاهى العلم الثابت بالضرورة فى التيقن والثبات

The second type is the report of the Messenger supported by miracles. It necessitates inferential knowledge. The knowledge established thereby resembles to the knowledge established necessarily, in certainty and constancy.

Commentary 

(والنوع الثانى: خبر الرسول المؤيد) أى الثابت رسالته (بالمعجزة) والرسول: انسان بعثه الله تعالى الى الخلق لتبليغ الأحكام. وقد يشترط فيه الكتاب، بخلاف النبي فانه أعم. والمعجزة: أمر خارق للعادة قصد به اظهار صدق من ادعى أنه رسول الله تعالى (وهو) أى خبر الرسول (يوجب العلم الاستدلالى) أى الحاصل بالاستدلال، أى النظر فى الدليل. وهو الّذي يمكن التوصل بصحيح النظر فيه الى العلم بمطلوب خبرى. وقيل: قول مؤلف من قضايا يستلزم لذاته قولا آخر. فعلى الأول الدليل على وجود الصانع: هو العالم. وعلى الثانى: قولنا العالم حادث، وكل حادث فله صانع. وأما قولهم: الدليل هو الّذي يلزم من العلم به، العلم بشيء آخر، فبالثانى أوفق.

(The second type [of the truthful report] is the report of the Messenger supported), i.e., his prophethood is established (by miracles). 

The Messenger (ar-rasūl) is a person whom Allah has sent to humanity to convey judgments. A book may be a condition in his case, unlike the Prophet (al-nabī), as it is more general. A miracle (al-muʿjizah) is an extraordinary event intended to demonstrate the truthfulness of the one claiming to be the Messenger of Allah. 

(This report), i.e., the report of the Messenger (necessitates inferential knowledge), i.e., knowledge obtained through inference, i.e., contemplating the evidence. 

Inferential knowledge is what enables one to arrive at the knowledge of the required report through proper contemplation of the evidence. And it has been said: It is a statement composed of propositions that implies another statement by its very nature. 

According to the first view, the evidence for the existence of the Creator is the universe itself. According to the second view, it is our statement: 'The world has an origin, and everything that has an origin has a creator.' 

As for their statement: 'The evidence is what, through knowledge of it, necessarily leads to knowledge of something else,' the second view is more appropriate.

أما كونه موجبا للعلم، فللقطع بأن من أظهر الله المعجزة على يده، تصديقا فى دعوى الرسالة، كان صادقا فيما أتى به من الأحكام. واذا كان صادقا يقع العلم بمضمونها قطعا. وأما أنه استدلالى، فلتوقفه على الاستدلال، واستحضار أنه خبر من ثبتت رسالته بالمعجزات. وكل خبر هذا شأنه، فهو صادق ومضمونه واقع

As for its necessitating certain knowledge, it is due to the certainty that whoever Allah manifests miracles by his hand, as a confirmation of his claim to prophethood, is truthful in what he brings forth of commands. And if he is truthful, then certain knowledge of their contents also occurs. As for it being inferential, it is because it depends on inference and recalling that it is a report from someone whose prophethood is established by miracles. And every report of this nature is truthful and its content is reality.

(والعلم الثابت به) أى بخبر الرسول (يضاهى) أى يشابه (العلم الثابت بالضرورة) كالمحسوسات والبديهيات والمتواترات (فى التيقن) أى عدم احتمال النقيض (والثبات) أى عدم احتمال الزوال بتشكيك المشكك فهو علم بمعنى الاعتقاد المطابق الجازم الثابت. والا لكان جهلا أو ظنا أو تقليدا فان قيل: هذا انما يكون فى المتواتر فقط فيرجع الى القسم الأول. قلنا: الكلام فيما علم أنه خبر الرسول بأن سمع من فيه أو تواتر عنه ذلك أو بغير ذلك، ان أمكن. وأما خبر الواحد فانما لم يفد العلم لعروض الشبهة فى كونه خبر الرسول.

(And the knowledge established by it) i.e., by the report of the Messenger (resembles) i.e., is similar to (the knowledge established by necessity), such as sensory perceptions, self-evident truths, and recurrent reports (in certainty), i.e., the absence of the possibility of contradiction (and stability), i.e., the absence of the possibility of being shaken by the act of raising doubts by a doubt monger. Thus, it is certain knowledge in the sense of compatible, unshaken, and established belief. Otherwise, it would be ignorance, conjecture, or imitation.

If it is said: This only applies to the recurrent reports, thus reverting to the first category. We say: The discussion is about what is known to be the report of the Messenger, whether it is heard directly from him, or transmitted recurrently, or through any other means, if possible. As for the solitary report (khabar al-wahid), it does not yield certain knowledge due to the potential doubt regarding its being a report of the Messenger.

فان قيل: فان كان متواترا أو مسموعا من فى رسول الله عليه السلام كان العلم الحاصل به ضروريا كما هو حكم
سائر المتواترات والحسيات، لا استدلاليا. قلنا: العلم الضرورى فى المتواتر عن الرسول هو العلم بكونه خبر الرسول عليه الصلاة والسلام لأن هذا المعنى هو الّذي تواتر الاخبار به. وفى المسموع من فى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم هو ادراك الألفاظ، وكونها كلام رسول الله عليه الصلاة والسلام. والاستدلالى: هو العلم بمضمونه وثبوت مدلوله. مثلا: قوله عليه الصلاة والسلام “البينة على المدعى، واليمين على من أنكر” علم بالتواتر أنه خبر الرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم وهو ضرورى. ثم علم منه أنه يجب أن يكون البينة على المدعى, وهو استدلالى.

If someone says: If it is recurrent or heard directly from the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, then the knowledge obtained thereby is necessary, just like the status of all other recurrent reports and sensory perceptions, not inferential.

We say: Necessary knowledge in the case of recurrent reports from the Messenger is the knowledge that it is indeed the report of the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, because this is the meaning that the reports are recurrently transmitting. As for what is directly heard from the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, it is the comprehension of the words and their being the words of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him.

And inferential knowledge is the knowledge of its content and the establishment of its implication. For example, regarding the statement of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, 'The burden of proof is on the claimant, and the oath is on the one who denies,' it is known through recurrent reports that it is a report from the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, and it is necessary. Then, it is known from it that the burden of proof must be on the claimant, which is inferential.

فان قيل: الخبر الصادق المفيد للعلم، لا ينحصر فى النوعين، بل قد يكون خبر الله تعالى، أو خبر الملك أو خبر أهل الاجماع، أو الخبر المقرون بما يرفع احتمال الكذب. كالخبر بقدوم «زيد» عند تسارع قومه الى داره. قلنا: المراد بالخبر خبر يكون سبب العلم لعامة الخلق، بمجرد كونه خبرا، مع قطع النظر عن القرائن المفيدة لليقين بدلالة العقل. فخبر الله تعالى أو خبر الملك، انما يكون مفيدا للعلم بالنسبة الى عامة الخلق، اذا وصل إليهم من جهة الرسول عليه السلام، فحكمه حكم خبر الرسول. وخبر أهل الاجماع فى حكم المتواتر. وقد يجاب بأنه لا يفيد بمجرده، بل فى النظر فى الأدلة الدالة على كون الاجماع حجة. قلنا: وكذلك خبر الرسول، لهذا جعل استدلاليا.

If it is argued: The truthful report which yields certain knowledge is not limited to the two types, but rather it could be the report of Allah, the report of the angel, the report of people of consensus, or a report accompanied by what negates the possibility of lying, such as the report of the arrival of "Zaid" when his people hasten to his house.

We respond: What is meant by the report is something that becomes a cause of knowledge for the general people merely by being a report, disregarding the accompanying evidences that indicate certainty through rational reasoning. Thus, the report of Allah Almighty or a report from an angel can only be a means of knowledge for the general people if it reaches them through the Messenger, peace be upon him, and its status is the same as the status of the Messenger's report. And a report from the people of consensus is like a recurrent report.

It may be countered that it does not provide knowledge by itself, but rather by considering the evidences indicating that consensus is a proof. We say: And so is the report from the Messenger, and that is why it was considered inferential.