refutation of ilm makaana va yakun [all 4 parts complete and improved]

7/29/2019 Refutation Of Ilm Makaana Va Yakun [ALL 4 PARTS COMPLETE AND IMPROVED]

1/36

1

BIS MILLA HIR RAH MAANIR RA HIIM

Introduction

MAULAVI RAZA/RADA OF BANS BARAILI UNITED PROVINCES BRITISH INDIA

invented a new cult yet he called himself a Sunni. He named his sect as AHL E

REFUTATION OFILM MACANA VAYAKUN

HP7800

[REFUTATION OF ILM

MA KANA VA YAKUN.]

A REFUTATION OF

ARGUMENTS AND

ARGUMENTATIONS OF

MAULAVI RAZA OF

BARAILI ABOUT THE

ILM MA KANA VA

YACUN[Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short

summary of the contents of the document. Type the abstract of the document

here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document.]


2/36

1

SUNNAT, and claimed to be the only representative of Sunnism. He declaired the

rest of the SUNNI UNIVERSE as Non Sunni and some time as Non Muslim as well.

He held some special believes and these new believes became the criteria of

Sunnism as according to his followers.

One of his belief is the belief of ILM MA KAANA VA YAKUUN.

THE KNOWLEDGE OF what Has OCCURED AND WHAT SHALL OCCUR AND WHAT

DOES OCCUR .

According to Sunnism such a Knowledge is only ascribe to Deity Nounly ALLAH

the RABB OF UNIVERSE AND COSMOS.

THOUTH DIVINE KNOWLEDGE IS FOR BEYOND THIS AND IS INFINITE, ABSOLUTE

AND UNLIMITED , INFINITE AND OMNISCIENCE.

But even this knowledge is not known to any one EXCEPT ALLAH SUB HANAHU

VA TA ALA.

This knowledge is included in ILM AL GHAIB and no one Doeth know Al Ghaib

EXCEPT ALLAH.

Thus negation of Al Ghaib implieth the negation of this knowledge.

The founder of the sect stated above first disputed over the belief That no one

Knoweth AlGhaib Except ALLAH, by supposing a division of two types of ILM AL

GHAIB A] DHATI[ESSENTIAL]

2]N ATAAI/ATAI [BESTOWED/GIFTED, THEN PROPOSED THE kNOWLEDGE OFEACH AND EVEY THING

AND EACH AND EVRY EVENT WHICH DID OCCUR,DO OCCU AND SHALL OCCUR

FROM THE BEGINING OF THE COSMIC WORLD TO THE VERY END OF WORLDY

COSMOS. This supposed Bestowed knowledge was named as ILM MA CAANA VA

YACUUN , THE KNOWLEDGE OF ALL THAT DID OCCUR, AND ALL THAT SHALL

OCCUR [ LITERALLY ALL WHICH DID BE AND ALL WHICH DO BE /SHALL BE].

THE FOUNDER OF THE SECT WHICH IS OFTEN CALLED BARAILVISM OR RAZAISM

ATTEMPTED TO PROVE HIS BELIEF BY ARGUING FROM THE TEXT OF A NUMBER

OF AAYAAT AND AHADITH.

HIS CERTRAL ARGUMENTATIONS AND ARGUMENTS FOR THIS SORT OF BELIEF IS

FROM THE FOLLOWING VERSES.

AN N-H-L 89,AL AN AAM38,AND YUSUF 111

He also used the verses AL ANAAM 59, AL QAMAR 51, AND YAA SIIN 12 IN HIS

ARGUMENTATIONS AND ARGUMENTS.

In this article /work it is tried to refute his arguments and argumentations by the

HELP OF ALLAH SUBHAANAHU VATA ALA.


3/36

1

If the central arguments are proved to be incorrect then it is useless to discuss

the peripheral arguments and argumentations, since the validity of peripheral

arguments and argumentations do depend upon the Validity of Central

Arguments and argumentations.

So the Verses and Ahadis upon which the peripheral arguments depend are notdiscussed.

Only the verses upon which the central arguments and argumentations depend

are discussed in this article. Sooner or latter they shall also be discussed IN SHAA

ALLAH.

NOTE IN THIS ARTICLE THE LETTER C IS OFTEN USED FOR LETTER K, LETTTER V

IS OFTEN USED FOR LETTER K, AND LETTER I AND Y MAY BE USED

ALTERNATIVELY FOR EXAMPLE KALAM IS ALSO WRITTEN AS CALAM. C IS USED AS

A SUBSTITUTE OF K AT TIMES WHEN A,O,U,OR ANY CONSONENT COMES AFTER

IT , AND C MAY BE USED AS A SUBSTITUTE OF S IFAFTER I,E Y.

There are several technical and non technical reasons of it. For example we

consider that K is not a correct approximation of Arabic Kaf, and that S is often

pronounced as Z . So ISLAM is unfortunately pronounced as IZLAM, and Muslim

as MUZLIM [NAUZU BILLAH]. So one may respell Islam as ICELAM, WHERE SAMS

OF S IS CONSERVED,INSTEAD OF S WHERE VOCAL SOUND OF Z replaces the

hissing sound of S. But this sceme is a proto type one and may be developed

latter. That is why there is a shift of spellings at different places.

END OF PART ONEPART TWO BEGINS

The founder of the sect of Baraivism argues in support of his believe in the

following may. The quotations are given from the work BNAA AL

MUSTAFHA. The most basic work of Barailvism on this particular issue.

His arguments and argumentations are divided into 5 parts for sake of

simplicity and are tried to be translated clearly.I is triedn to remain

faithful to the original Urdu/Rikhtah text even if there is some problem

according to the Grammar of English language.

I]`When/As Furqa:n e H:ami:d is the Description/EXPSOSITION [Baya:n] of

Every Thing [Shai]

And Description of what type [Kesa] Luminous [Roshan] ,and Luminous of

What degree [ Darajah] EXPLAINED [Mufass-l\detail Explaination] , and

according to the Supersect [Madh-hab] of Sunnites [Ahlussunnah] the


4/36

1

word Thing [ Shai] is said for every Existent /Being [Mauju:d](1) ; then from

the Throne [Arsh] to

Floor/Hades [Farsh] , all the Universe/ Cosmos and all the Existents

/Beings [Maujuda:t] are included in the circumference [AH:A:TAH] ofBaya:n [Description] of It [id est Al Qur-a:n]; and among all the

Existents/Beings writings on the Conserved Tablet [Lauh: Mah:fu:z:] also

belong to.Hence these Explanations [Bayana:t] in circumference [ Muh:i:t]

to these Writings [with full explanation].

II] Now ask it also from QURA:N THE GREAT [ THE GREAT

QURA:N/QURA:N AZ:I:M] , WHAT IS WRITTEN ON THE CONSERVED

TABLET?.

The Supreme Deity Saith ,> Every Great and

Small is written thing is written [on the Tablet].[ AL QAMAR 51]

The supreme deity saith :-> [YAA SIIN 12].

WE HAVE COLLECTEDEVERY THING IN A LUMINOUS LEADER

[PESHVA].

The Supreme Deity Saith > [AL AN AAM 59]

Not a (single) grain in darkness (es) of earth; and any wet nor any dry

EXCEPT All things written in A Luminous Book [ id est Tablet].

[VERSES ARE NOT TRANSLATED FROM THEIR ORIGINA;TEXT BUT THE

TRANLATION OF THE FOUNDER ARE TRANSLATED INSTEAD.THOSE WHO

ARE INTERESTED TO SEE THE DIRECT TRANSLATION MAY CONSULT AN

AUTHENTIC TRANSLATION THEMSELVES. WE DO NOT TAKE ANY

RESPONSIBILITY IN THIS REGARD IF THE TRANSLATIONS ARE NOT

FAITHFUL TO THE DIVINE ARABIC TEXT SINCE WE HAVE NOT

TRANSLATED THE VERSE OURSELVES BUT TRANSLATED THE

TRANSLATION OF THE FOUNDER OF SECT. WE HAVE TRIED TO

TRANSLATE IN ENGLISH ,THE URDU TRANSLATION OF THESE VERESE

BY THE FOUNDER OF THE SECT AS BEST AS POSSIBLEHOW EVER WE DO

OPINE THAT HIS TRANSLATION ARE NOT AUTHENTIC IN GENERAL.]

III]It has been proved in Principles that Common Noun [Nakrah] in place

of Negation Supports Generalization [ Mufi:d ul Umu:m] { see verse 38 -

N-A:M] AND THE WORD Kull/Cull [ All/Every] is so general [ a:m] that thatis is never used in particular/ specific sense/meaning,(2) and general word


5/36

1

is certain in supporting general meaning, and clear content of text [ N-

S:U:S:]

ARE TAKEN IN APPEARENT MEANING, and with out any religious proof

particularization/specification and Interpretation [TAWI:L/TAVI:L] are notpermitted, otherwise confidence upon Divine Law [Shariah] ceaseth to be;

Neither AH:A:D H:ADI:TH can particularize a Generalization of Qura:n ,

even if it is correct /SAHIH to highest degree. Raither Particularization is a

delay [TARAKHI] in Naskh [Cancellation/ABOGRATION] .

[One may translate the sense as follow. Particularization is a twin of Naskh]]

And Rational Particularization [ and Rational Exception] does [do] not

make descension of General [so that] based upon it [them] , a

particularization can be made by [using] an Uncertain [Z:ANNI:]

IV] So by Divine Grace it is illuminated from clear explicit texts that Deity

Gave knowledge of All that did occur and that shall occur [MA: KA:NA VA

YA KU:NU/ THAT DID BE AND THAT SHALL BE], and not s single (point)

(1)particle in east, in west,in sky, on throne,on floor[hades?/Farsh]

remaineth excluded from the [bestowed] knowledge of Holy Prophet

[H:UD:U:R] [[S.A.A.V.S]

V]And as this [Bestowed] knowledge is bestowed by Qura:n the Great as

being the Explanation of every thing [Shai] and it is [crystal] clear that

this is the Attribute of Entire [Tama:m] Qura:n and not of every verse [or

of every chapter/Su:rah], so if the Supreme Deity Did Say about some

Prophets , [ AN NISA 164 AND YA:SI:N 101] IT IS CERTAINLY NOT IN

NEGATION TO THESE THREE VERSES AND NOT IN NAGATION TO THE

[BESTOWED] KNOWLEDGE OF PROPHET.

AS these arguments are extraordinary lengthy it is necessary to summarise

these in brief with strict wordings.

SUMMERY

Qura:n has three Attributes . Two of them are Existential Attributes

namely TABYA:N[EXPOSITION] AND TAFS:i:L [EXPLAINATION], and one of


6/36

1

them is Non Existential Attribute namely Adam ut Tafri:t [NON

DEFCIENCY].

These attributes of Qura:n are connected to every existing thing.

The bestowed knowledge of Prophet [P.B.U.H] CIRCUMFERENCES all

these three attributes. ( First implication)

This implieth that the Bestowed Knowledge also CIRCUMFERENCES each

and evey existing thing to which these Attributes are connected. . ( second

implication)

This implieth that the stated above Bestowed knowledge

CIRCUMFERENCES the Heavenly Conserved Tablet. (Third implication)

This implied that the Bestowed Knowledge CIRCUMFERENCES each and

every information written on the stated above Tablet. (FORTH implication)

As every act which hath occur ,which does occur and which shall occur from

the very beginning of the Cosmos to the very end of the universe is written on

the tablet the BESTOWED KNOWLEDGE OF THE PROPHET CIRCUMFERENCES

each and every event, act etcetera written on the stated above Tablet. Each and

every thing which has existed in past or which does exist in present or which

shall exist in future is written on the tablet.

As the Bestowed Knowledge circumferences every thing written on the tablet it

circumferences each and every thing which existed in past, which does exist in

present or which shall exist in future.

ANALYSYS:

This argument is of the form an implied B, B implied C, C implied D, D implied E.

If it is some how proved that A doeth not Imply B, or B doeth not implied C.

etcetera the argument failed.

If it is some how proved that any one of A, B, C, D, E is Rationally Absurd then

the whole Proof failed

Logicians agree that if Lazio is Rationally Absurd then the Malzu:m is either

Rationally Absurd or Rationally Possible. In the case it is Rationally Possible it is

Occurancially Absurd.


7/36

1

How ever a number of Logicians believe that if Malzu:m is Rationally Absurd then

Lazim is also Rationally Absurd.

An other number believe that if the Malzu:m is rationally Absurd then Lazim is

either Ratiionally Possible or Rationally Absurd. In the case it is rationally

Possible it is Occurrencially Absurd. In any case LAVA:ZIM Of Absurd are Absurd .

In any case the arguments and argumentations do become incorrect, and invalid

if the first one is somehow proved to be Absurd whether Rationally or

Occurancially. It is tried to prove that atleast one of the claim is RATIONALLAY

ABSURD.

The counter claim is IS AS FOLLOWS:-

THE BESLOWED KNOWLEDGE CANNOT ENCIRCLUMFERENCE THE ATTRIBUTES

OF TABYA:N,TAFS:I:L ( Existential Attributes) and ADAM UT TAFRI:T ( Non

Existential Attribute).It is Absurd.

If an Absurd Implieth B,and Bimplieth C and so on the proof becomes invalid and

incorrect.

In the following pages it is proved that the original claim is based on absurdity

rather rational Absurdity.

General Discussion

There are three verses in the text of qura:n opon which the auther of Abna; al

Mustafa: made his argumentations. The verses are correct beyond doubt but the

argumentations and reasonings based on the verses are in correct beyond

doubt.These Verses are AL ANAAM 38,AN NAHL 89 aNd YUSUF 111.

IT MAY BE NOTED THAT SOME OF THE LATTER FOLLOWES OF mAULVI rAZA

AMENDED HIS ARGUMENTATIONS AND ARGUMENTS BY ADDING AND

SUBSTRACTING REASONINGS.

In general they do not take the meaning of ARABIC WORD ASHAI as Existent or

Existing Thing and avoid the arguments based upon the Heavenly Tablet. As a

result their argument becomes more general then their claims. A student of Said

Kazimi of KATKOI/ CATCOI AMROHAHUPPER UNITED PROVINCES [ BRITISH]INDIA namely GHULAM RASUL SAIIDII OF PAKISTAN CARACHI PAKISTANI PART OF

SUBCONTINENT accepted that these generalizations are of kind AL ISTAGHRAQ

AL URFI and not of kind AL ISTAGHRAQ AL HAQIQI.HOW EVER THIS WEAKENS

THE ARGUMENTATION AND ARGUMENTS TO THE HIGHEST DEGREE OF

WEAKNESS.

HOW EVER The official arguments of Barailism FROM THESE THREE

VERSES are the arguments of Maulavi RAZA Barailvi himself.If some

followers of the cult of Baraivism differ from their ULTIMATE leader and

founder [IMAM of cult/sect] THE FIRST THIS TO COMPARE their argument

by the Arguments and argumentations of their Imam.The second thing is


8/36

1

to reject their differences and to accept the arguments and argumentation

of their founder and Ultimate leader [i.e Imam of Barailvism]

If their arguments are not in harmany to the arguments of their Imam then

they must be asked whether they consider the argumentationas andarguments of their Imam as correct or not. If they consider the arguments

and argumentations of their Imam as correct then it is sufficient to

discuss the arguments and argumentations of their Imam.Since their

arguments are immaterial in compare to the arguments of their Imam. If

their arguments and argumentations can be interpreted as according to

their Imam namely MAULAVI RAZA SB OF BANS BARAILI S/O MALAVI

NAQI ALI SB then they must be interpreted as according to his arguments

and argumentations. If they cannot be interpreted then they must be

rejected as official argumentations and arguments of the cult Barailvism.

NOTES:

(1) THE LITERAL MEANING OF THW WORD SHAI IS AN EXISTANT OR AN

EXISTING THING.

(2)In logical form it may be restated as follow:-

NO USE OF THE WORLD KULL\CULL IS PARTICAULAR.

Its negation is:-

SOME USES FOR THE WORD KULL\CULL IS PARTICULAR.

END OF PART 2

PART THREE BEGINS

Both the original statement and the negation can not be true ,since the

contradict each other. The Law of contradiction or law of non contradiction is

valid.

It can be proved that this Negation is true hence the original statement is false.

Yet it is not required since the falsification of the claim and Invalidity these

arguments does not depend on this claim. There fore no discussion is made on

it.For sake of an argument this false statement is supposed to be true. The entire

discussion is based on this supposition in order to refute a supposed strong case

instead of an actual weak case. Some Barailvi scholars do accept that the

original claim is false yet the opine that Examples which falsify this claimconstitute only rare cases. But they do not explain the conditions where these


9/36

1

rare cases occur. SOME also do accept that the Umum[ Generalization/

Universality] of the word CULL/KULL is AL ISTAGHRAQ AL URFI AND NOT AL

ISTAGHRAQ AL HAQIQI. Since Al Istaghraq al Haqidi implies an equlity of Eternal

Knowledge and Not Eternal Knowledge, which even they do not consider as

Islamic. How ever the founder of the cult Maulavi RAZA SAHIB strongly claim

that if some one claims the Equality of Eternal Knowledge Of Deity and Temporal

Knowledge of Prophet, HE STILL REMAINS IN GROUP OF Urfa.[Nau dhu billah.]

See the FootNotes of ADDAULATU MAKKIAH by the founder of sect.

THE ENTIRE DISCUSSION IS BEYOND THE SCOPE OF PRESENT DISCUSSION .

Note@ According to a great Philosopher [MATURIDI-ASHARI ]Of India The

heavenly Tablet is a Great Cosmic Brain or mind. Years before the invention of

computers and their hard drives, the concept of a Supreme intelligent Brain or

mind was proposed by ASHARITE-MATURIDITE AMULGUM IN INDIA.

[A number of Indian Sunnis ar both Asharite and Maturidite since the study bothand dotry to make hormony between these two Sunni Majority Sects and

consider them as one single sect. Some even use the word ASHAIRAH not in the

meaning of Pure Asharites but for the collection of ASHAIRAH AND MATURIDIAH.]

SUMMERY OF ARGUMENTS AND ARGUMENTATIONS.

The Argumentations and arguments stated by the Author Of -bna Al

Mustafaconsists of the following preliminaries.

1]TABYAN/ TABIAN ,TAFSIL and ADAM TAFRIT are the ATTRIBUTES OF QURAAN.

2] These Attributes are connected and are related to each and every Existing

Thing/Existent.

3] The Bestowed Knowledge circumferenceth each one of the stated Attribute Of

QURAAN Stated Above

4]This IMPLIETH THAT the Bestowed Knowledge [Of Holy Essence (DHAAT) Of

Holy Prophet S.A.V.S] each and every thing to which these Attributes are

connected, related and Pertain to.5]This implieth that the Bestowed Knowledgecircumferenceth the Heavenly Conserved [MAHFUUZ]Tablet and the informations

written on the Tablet[ or recorded in the memory of the Tablet.]

Since they are existing things.

5]This Implieth that the Bestowed Knowledge circumferenceth all the things

which were created in the Past ,Which are created in Present and which shall be

created in future from the beginning of the Cosmos to the very end of the

Cosmos, each and every event which has occurred in the Past, which is occurring

in Present and which Shall occur in future from the very Beginning of the

Universe/Multiverse to the very end of the Universe/Multiverse.


10/36

1

Since All Of them are written On the Tablet [Recorded on in the memory of the

table]

6]This implieth that the created essence which does posses this Bestowed

Knowledge does know all these things and events stated above from the very

beginning of the universe [Multiverse] to the very end of it

This is a bounded omniscience.

7]The author used the following verses to shew all these thing are written

on the Tablet.

1] AL AN AAM 59

2]ALQAMAR 51

3]YA SIIN 12

8] Using these preliminaries the said author attempted to negate the

verses

AN NISA 164 and ATTAUBAH [BARA T] 101.

How ever he did not confess that he negates each one of them. In Real

what he attempts to Prove by all his arguments and argumentations do

negate these two verses.

COMMENTS AND REMARKS.

I some one claims that he can prove this belief form these three verses

then he must have to choose at least one of the following statements as

article of belief of his sect/cult what so ever.

A] AN ATTRIBUTE OF ETERNAL CAN BE BESTOWED.

B] ACTS OF DEITY ARE BESTOWED.

C] A BESTOWED ATTRIBUTE [ OR SOME BESTOWED ATTRIBUTES] CAN

CIRCUMHERENCE A NON BESTOWED ATTRIBUTE [OF DEITY].

D]A NON ETERNAL ATTRIBUTE OR NON ETERNAL ACT OF ETERNAL IS

BESTOWED.

E]AL KALAM AL LAFZIYV IS ATAAI [BESTOWED].

F]AN ETERNAL CAN BE ATAAI.


11/36

1

G]WHEN DEITY CREATETH A THING HE BESTOWETH THE THING TO HIS

DIVINE SELF. [NA UDHUBILLAQH]

H]ACTS OF CREATED SUPPOSITA ARE THE ACTS OFN DEITY.

I] TO CREATE AN ACT IS TO DO THE ACT IN THE GERAMMATICAL

INFINITIVE SENSE. EG TO CREAT THE ACT OF STEALING OF A RATIONAL

SUPPOSITUM IS TO STEAL HIMSELF BY THE UNCREATED CREATER OF

THE ACT [NA UDHUBILLAQH].

NOTE THAT IF SOME ONE REFUSES TO ACCEPT ANY ONE OF THEM

ACTUALLY CONTRADICTS IMSELF SOME WHERE IT IS ARGUMENTATIONS

AND ARGUMENTS EITHER IN INTIAL STEPS OR IN MIDVIAL STEPS OR IN

FINAL STEPS OR ELSE.

[ALL THESE STATEMENT ARE NOT NECESSARY INDEPENDENT OF EACH

OTHER]

ANALYSIS OF THE ARGUMENTS AND ARGUMENTATIONS IN THE SO CALLED

PROOF

The form of the argument in the alleged proof is as follow#

A implieth B

B Implieth C

C implieth D

D implieth E

And E is the desired belief

Q.E.D

If it is shewn that A Doeth Not Imply B , then all the alleged proof falls

down and declines.There is a series of implications among the

occurrances of different events and things./

If it is shewn that any one of them can not occur or is intrinsically Absurd

to occur ,the entire proof becomes wrong, incorrect, invalid and unsound.

To attack this form of proof it is sufficient to shew that any one of a,b,c,d

doeth not imply the the next consecutive one /statement..


12/36

1

Logicians do agree that if Active Participle of L-zuum [Lazim] is

Rationally/Intrinsically absurd[1]then the massive participle Malzuum is

either Intrinsically /Rationally Possible or Intrinsically/Rationally Absurd

depending upon the kind,type,nature,intrinsic properties,charecterstics,of

the IMPLICATION[ L-ZUUM].

Logicians are how ever divided what if MALZUUM is

Rationally/Intrinsically Absurd .Some holds the opinion that if Malzuum is

Intrinsically Absurd then Lazim is either Intrinsically absurd/Rationally

Absurd or Intrinsically /Rationally Possible depending upon the

Nature,Type etc of Implication as stated in the former case stated

immediately above.

Some hold the view that If MALZUM is Intrinsically Absurd then Lazim isIntrinsically absurd.

Some do go in minute detains. A majority of Excogitators

[Muhaqqiqin/Researchers in logic/M-NAT-QAH] believe that Intrinsic

Implication is either between an Intrinsic Absurds or between Intrinsic

Possibles.But Extrinsic Implication may be between an INTRINSIC

ABSURD AND INTRINSIC POSSIBLE.

In any case all agree that it is Rationally/Intrinsically Absurd that there isan Implication between OCCURANCIALLY POSSIBLE[CONTINGENT] and

Intrinsically/ ABDURD irrespective and regardless of LAZIM or Malzum [2].

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

FOOT NOTES.

[1] In general Rationally Absurd and Intrinsic Absurd are used as

alternative terms ,yet some do make some distinction between these two

terms. A CONTRADICTION is an Intrinsic Absurd.Some may use the term

Logical Absurd for an Intrinsic ABSURD. AS FOR WE, We consider

ANNHILIATION OF DIVINE ESSENCE ,INCARNATION OF DEITY in animal or

human Natures and forms as Intrinsically and logically ABSURD. A

number of theologians use the word Rationally absurds even for those

Intrinsic Possibles which Imply antrinsic Absurd and there are some

rational arguments on the Implication.It must be noted that this type of

implication s Extrinsic but Rational id est there are some Rational Proofs


13/36

1

on the Extrinsic Implication. How ever in this work both terms i.e

Intrinsically Absurd and Rationally Absurd are used as alternatives unless

and other wise stated explicitly.

It may be noted that if some thing externally implies a Contradiction thenit may not be an Intrinsic Absurd.But if some thing implieth a

Contradiction Intrinsically it is Certainly Intrinsically Absurd.

It must be noted that an intrinsically absurd is also logically absurd.So

death of Deity is logically absurd since DEITY IS INTRINSICALLY AND

LOGICALLY NECESSARY. There is a saying of a great logician of India that

logic begans with the Necessity of Divine Essence.

[2] If A implies B then B is Lazim Of A.Active and Passive participles are

according to ARABIC LANGUAGE.The word ISTALZAM is however more

close to modern logicians then the words L-ZUUM,LAZIM OR MALZUM.

A number of Logicians opine that Malzum cannot be with out Lazim but

Lazim can be with out Malzuum. That is if A implies B IT MAY BE THE

CASE

THAT B may be implied by some thing else say C.

If A implies B and if B is false then A is False but if B is intrinsicallyABSURD THEN IT IS NOT NECESSAY THAT A IS INTRINSICALLY ABSURD./

Thus if A occurred then B occurred and B doeth Not Occur that poverty A

doeth not occur.

But If A occurred then B occureth and B is Intrinsically Absurd, it Doeth

not prove that A is Intrinsically Absurd.

A definition of L-zoom may give a more clear idea but not necessary the

only definition.

If the meaning of a word coined for it can not be with out an Eternal thing

then it is an Implication.

NOTES/ . THE WORD KALAM/CALAM MEANS SPEACH AND NOT WORD.

SO KALAM IS NOT A WORD BUT A SPEECH [DICTIONIS/DICTUM]But this speech is Simple [BASIIT]

and an ATTRIBUTE, NOT CONSTITUTED OF WORDS [LAFZ OR KALMAH]. IF LOGOS STANDS FOR

WORD THEN IT IS NOT A LOGOS IN MEANING. SPEECH IS NOT A HYPOSTASIS BUT AN ATTRIBUTE IN

THEOLOGY. EVEN IF LOGOS WAS BELIEVED TO BE AN ATTRIBUTE AND NOT A HYPOSTASIS EVEN

THEN SPEECH IS NOT WORD.


14/36

1

NEITHER THE LOGOS IS BELIEVED TO BE CONSTINUTED OF LETTERS NOR THE SPEECH IS

CONSTITUTED OF LETTERS.

BUT THIS IS AN KALAM AN NAFSIY. BUT IF KALAM AL LAFZIY IS NOT ETERNAL THEN IT IS

CONSTITUTED OF WORDS OTHERWISE NOT.

END OF PART 3

PART 4 BEGINS

CASE 01

DISCUSSION ON KALAM AN NAFSIY.

If by the Word QURA~N IDEAL DICTIONIS / IDEAL DICTUM [ AL KALAM AN NAFSI]

IS MEANT THEN All toAhlusunnah Wal Jamaah who do believe in Ideal Dictionisdo believe that it is ETERNAL.

The founder of the cult Maulivi Rada/Raza Sahib Of Bans Baraili [United Provinces

British India

1857 to 1947~~] denies that AL KALAM AL LAFZI AND AL KALAM AN NAFSI as

two Attributes and consider them as One., he did not deny the Eternity of this

Single Kalam /Dictionis /LALIA.

Thus Kalam An Nafsiy Al Qadim is meant.

IF KALAM An NafsiyAlQadim is meant in these verses then TABYAN [EXPLOSURE],

TAFSIL [EXPLAINATION] AND ADAM AT TAFRIT [NO DEFIENCY IN STATING

THINGS] are the Attributes of KALAM AN NAFIS [IDEAL DICTIONIS].

Two of these Attributes are Existential Attributes [ ASSIFATUL VUJUDIAH]and One

of them is Non Existential Attribute [Assifatul Adamiah pl. ASSIFATUL ADAMIAH].

DISCUSSUION ON EXISTENCIAL ATTRIBUTES.

TABYAN AND TAFSIL ARE THE EXISTENTIAL ATTRIBVUTES. If Tabyan and Tafsil

are the existential Attributes of Ideal Dictionis then they cannot be BESTOWED

[GIFTES/ ATAI/ATAIAH].SINCE IT IS AN AGREED UPON ARTICLE OF FAITH THAT NO

ATTRIBUTE OF ETERNAL CAN BE BESTOWD AND IT IS ALSO AGREED UPON

ARTICLE OF FAITH THAT AL KALAM AN NAFSI IS ETERNAL.From the death of

Maulvi Rza of bans baraili India in 1930 ac to the year 2013ac not a single

Barailvi Alim has ever claimed that Some Attributes of Eternal [QADIM] CAN BE

ATAI[ BESTOWED].

ALSO It is Rationally and Intrinsically Absurd for an Attibute of Eternal to be

Bestowed.


15/36

1

Similarly not a single Barailvii Alim of Indian Subcontinent [TARROTARIES

INCLUDING India and Pakistan both before and after 1947 A.C] HAS CLAIMED

THAT AL KALAM AN NAFSI IS NOT ETERNAL.

THUS BOTH OF THESE ATTRIBUTES ORE NOT BESTOWED. [1]

ALSO NO TYPE/KIND [ QISM ] of QDIM IS BESTOWED.

It is an agreed upon Article of faith that does become

incorrect and invalid. Since it is INTRINSICALLY ABSURD AND RATIONALLY

ABSURDFOR BESTOWED KNOWLEDGE TO CIRCUMFERENCE THE STATED ABOVE

ATTRIBTES OF THE ETERNAL AL KALAM AN NAFSI. THE entire argumentation is

based upon the implication of the supposed occurrence of Circumference , which

is Intrinsically/Rationally Absurd .Not even the Circumference of a single finite

existing thing is implied, since the very implication is from the [SUPPOSED ]

occurrence of a thing which is Intrinsically/Rationally Absurd to Occur

To claim the circumference [AHATAH] OF MORE THAN ONE THING IS PRIMARILY

ABSURD ON THE SAME GROUNDS OF ARGUMENTATION AND REASONING. ALSO

TO CLAIM THE CIRCUMFERENCING OF MORE THAN ONE EXISTING THING [IN THIS

WAY] IS NOTHING BUT MORE THAN ONE INTRINSIC/RATIONAL ABSURDS

[IMPOSSIBLES].

Thus the arguments from the implication of supposed occurrences of things

which are impossible to occur do become invalid and wrong.

DISCUSSION ON NON EXISTENTIAL ATTRIBUTES

Non Existential Attribute is the Non Existence [Negation/ Lackness] of an

Existential Attribute. One may say that NON EXITENTIAL ATTRIBVUTES are NO

ATTRIBUTES OR NOT ATTRIBUTES, but this is a verbal dispute. A non Existential

Attribute cannot be empty [Cannot Exclude] from ONE of the the TWO Mutually

Exhaustive,Mutially Exclusive and Mutually Contradicting cased.

A] It is an Attribute of Perfection. B] It is Not an Attribute of Perfection.

If a Non existential Attribute of denied [Negateth] an [EXISTENTIAL] Attribute of

Perfection then it is Not an Attribute of Perfection.If a NON EXISTENTIAL


16/36

1

ATTRIBUTE DENIETH [ NEGATETH] an [Attribute Of] Imperfection then it is an

ATTRIBUTE oF PERFECTION IFF it is based on an[Existential] Attribute Of

Perfection.[There are two sub cases but to discuss them is beyond the scope of

present topic]

EXAMPLES. NOT DYING OF DEITY [ LA YAMUTU] is a NON EXISTENTIAL ATTRIBUTEAttribute Of Deity , AND IS BASED [MABNI] UPON THE EXISTENTIAL ATTRIBUTE

OF LIFE OF DETY , WHICH IS AN ATTRIBUTE OF PERFECTION [ OF DEITY].But Not

Dying of some thing which doeth not exist or is impossible to exist is not an

Attribute of Perfection even in apparent it is the denial of an IMPERFECTION say

DYING.

SINCE THERE IS NO BASIS [ BANA] which is the Attribute of Perfection.

It is an Article of faith that each and every Attribute of Deity is an Attribute of

Perfection whether it be an Existential Attribute or Non Existential Attribute.[3]

As TAFRIT [DEFIENCY [of mentioning things in SPEACH]] is an Attribute of

Imperfection, Non Existence [Negation] [ ADAM AT TAFRIT] is a Non Existential

Attribute. As the ADAM AT TAFRIT IS THE ATTRIBUTE OF ETERNAL It is an

Attribute Of Perfection [SINCE IT IS AN ATTRIBUTE OF IDEAL DICTIONIS AND

IDEAL DICTIONIS IS ETERNAL AND ATTRIBUTE OF ETERNAL [ESSENCE OF

DEITY]].As this NON EXISTENTIAL ATTRIBUTE IS AN ATTRIBUTE OF ETERNAL IT

MUST BE BASED UPON SOME [EXISTENTIAL] ATTRIBUTE OF PERFECTION OF

[ THE] ETERNAL, WHERE IT BE TABYAN OR TAFSIL OR SH.MUL or ELSE.

It is an article of faith that no Attribute of Eternal can be CIRCUMFERENCED BY

BESTOWED KNOWLEDGE neither individually nor collectively, whether the

Attribute of the Eternal is Existential or Non Existential. Since this is

INTRINSCALLY /Rationally Absurd.

THUS NOT ONLY ADAM ATTAFRIT BUT THE BASIS [BINA] UPON WHICH IT IS

BASED [MABNI] CANNOT BE CIRCUMFERENCED BY BESTOWED KNOWLEDGE,

Since this is Intrinsically/Rationally Absurd for CREATED BESTOWED KNOWLEDGE

to Circumference the Attributes of UNCREATED [and] ETERNAL.

CONCLUSION OF DISCUSSIONS OF BOTH TYPES OF ATTRIBUTES.

Any argument or any argumentation based upon the implication of the

occurrence of CIRCUMFERENCE of NON EXISGTENTIAL ATTRIBUTE OF ETERNAL[5]

in support of said belief is incorrect,invalid,unsound and wrong , Since this

circumference stated above is Rationally/Intrinsically ABSURD.

IT IS WELL KNOWN TO LOGICIANS THAT IF OCCURRANCE OF A IS CLAIMED TO

IMPLY THE OCCURRANCE OF B , BUT A IS IMPOSSIBLE TO OCCUR , THE

ARGUMENT[ATUION] BECOMETH INVALID AND THE INFERENCE IS WRONG.

EXPLAINATION


17/36

1

If some one tries to prove the occurrence ofB as an implication of occurrence of

A,he has to prove two things. 1] Occurrence ofA 2] An Implication between the

Occurrence ofA and Occurrence Of B.

If some one refutes him by shewing that A is RATIONALLY/ INTRINSICALLY

ABSURD TO OCCUR [ THAST IS A CANNOT OCCUR] then the entire proof with allits arguments and argumentations based upon the SUPPOSED Occurrence of the

UNOCCURABLE falls down, declines and is broken.

As the Necessary consequence the claim [result] is falsified.

Thus all the tree Attributes Prove that the argument is incorrect and wrong.

Since it is based on a false supposition.

CASE 02

DISCUSSION ON KALAM AL LAFZIY..

Majority of followers of Maulavi RAZA OF BANS BARAILY UNITED PROVINCES

INDIA believe that AL KALAM AL LAFZIY [ VERBUM DICTIONIS] Is Eternal. A small

Minority of his followers however believe that Kalam AL Lafziy is Not Eternal [i.e

it is Temporal]

Maulivi Raza Of Uniterd Provinces India himself believes that both KALAM AL

LAFZIY and AL KALAM AN NAFSIY are One and Same, But he does not deny The

Eternity Of Verbum Dictionis.

Let it be supposed that AL KALAM AL LAFZIY Is Eternal [QADIM]

DISCUSSION ON KALAM AL LAFZIYAL AL QADIM.

If by the Word QURA~N VERBUM DICTIONIS / IDEAL DICTUM [ AL KALAM AL

LAFZIY] IS MEANT THEN According to a larger majority of the cult AL KALAM AL

LAFZIY AL QADIM is meant.

If Kalam Al Lafziy Al Qadim iS MEANT THEN then the ATTRIBUTES of TABIAN[exposition] ,TAFSIL [explanation] and ADAM TAFRIT are the Attributes of the

Eternal, and no Attribute of ETERNAL eIther Existential or Non

EXISTENTIALCANBE CIRCUMFERENCED BY DESTOWED ATTRBIBUTES ,NEITHER

COLLECTIVELY NOR INDIVIDUALLY.Thus all the arguments and argumentations

based upon the OCCURRANCE Of The Circumference do become invalid and

incorrect SINCEThe Occurrance Of The CIRCUNFERENCE is IMPOSSIBLE

[ Rationally/Intrinsically Absurd].As every aspect in the case of ETERNITY OF

VERBUM DICTIONIS is Similar tom the Case Of Eternity Of IDEAL DICTIONIS,

readers are requested to recall the former discussion upon IDEAL DICTIONIS [ AL

KALAM AN NAFSIY] and apply it in the present case as a mental exercise, since itis not difficult at all.


18/36

1

CONCLUSION

IF IN THE VERSES [ AN NAHL 89.YUSUF 111 AND AL ANAM 38] KALAM AL LAFZIY

IS MEANT AND IF AL KALAM AL LAFZIY IS ETERNAL THEN KALAM AL AL LAFZIY AL

QADIM IS MEANT IN THESE VERSES ANDALL THE ARGUMENTATION AND

ARGUMENTS DO BECOME INVALID.

DISCUSSION ON KALAM AL LAFZIYAL AL HADITH.

If KALAM AL LAFZIY [ VERBUM DICTIONIS] is HADIS [ NOT QADIM/TEMPORAL/NOT

ETERNAL] then this is the only case in which there are appearently some rooms

for the validity of arguments and argumentations in this regard./

Since Majority of the followers of the founder of the sect/cult believes in the

Eternity [ OF VERBUM DICTIONIS ]and rejects the openion of there minority, who

believe in the temporality [Not Eternity/ HUDUS] of Verbum Dictionis, ONE MAY

LEAVE THE DISCUSSION ON IT. The Minority of The followers of the sect has to

combat not only the MAJORITY OF THE followers OF THEIR SECT BUT ALSO THEIR

FOUNDER since They all believe in the ETERNITY OF VERBUM DICTIONIS. As

opposed by the MAJORITY AND THE IMAM [FOUNDING LEADER] the opinion of

minority can not be the official dogma of the entire sect.

If it is supposed that these arguments and argumentations are valid if Verbum

Dictionis is supposed to be Temporal[ not eternal] , even then the Majority can

not argue, and the arguments of the Majority against the minority in support of

Eternity is an other problem for the minority.

SINCE the Minority of the followers of Mailavi RAZA of baraili of Indian

Subcontinent must have to refute the MAJORITY OF THE FOLLOWERS OF THEIR

IMAM before making any argument or argumentation under the supposition that

AL KALM AL LAFZIY is Not ETERNAL.

Further they have to claim that the leader and the founder of the sect is is wrong

and is in error when he claims the UNITY OF DICTIONIS [ VAHDATUL KALAM], AND

DECLAIRS ALL THOSE who do not believe in the Unity as in ERROR. [ SEE

MALFUZAT PART IV]It may be noted that what so ever is said by the Founder Of

The Sect Namely Maulavi RAZA of Baraily cannot be contradicted easily by his

followers.The official Dogmas and Articles Of Faith of the sect are first the

believes of the founder iof the sect as he himself stated in VASAYAH SHARIF. In

case if he is silent on an issue the OFIICIAL DOGMAS AND BELIEVES OF THE SECT

ARE THE DOGMAS AND THE BELIEVES OF THE MAJORITY OF THE SECT. That is in

this case the MAJORITY OF THE SECT is the Official representative of the sect.

There fore one may safely neglect the minority of the sect , and it is not

necessary no discuss them at all. But it is well known that not necessary does

not mean necessary not. Therefore it is discussed below in order to complete the

discussion.


19/36

1

Discussion On AL KALAM AL LAFZI IF IT IS NOT ETERNAL [TEMPORAL].

Let it be supposed that Verbal Dictionis /Verbum Dictionis [Al Kalam Al Lafziy / Al

Calam Al Lafziy] is NOT ETERNAL [ GHAIR AL QADIM]. IF VERBUM DICTIONIS IS

NOT ETERNAL the each and every Attribute [SIFH] Of Verbum Dictionis Is Not

ETERNAL. Any thing which is Not Eternal Is Temporal Since IT ISINTRINSICALLY /RATIONALLY ABSURD FOR AN ATTRIBUTE OF A HADIS /HADIS TO

BE ETERNAL [QADIM].Hadith [Temporal] meaneth NOT ETERNAL.

Thus VERBUM DICTIONIS and All Of Its Attributes Are Temporal [NOT ETERNAL].If

Verbum Dictionis [Verbal Speach] and Its Attributes Are TEMPORAL then THERE

IS A MIDDLE / MEDIUM [WASITAH /VASITAH] Between ADH DHATI [ The

Essential]] and AL ATAI[ The Bestowed].

But if there is No MIDDLE / MEDIUM between ESSENTIAL and BESTOWED,N and

Principle Of Exclusion Of Middle / Medium [ Usul Kharij Al Vast] IS v alid valid

between the Essential and the Bestowed, then AL KALAM AL LAFZI can not beTemporal.

If it can not be Temporal then it is not temporal. If it is not temporal then it i

must be Eternal.If it must be eternal then it is Eternal.

If It Is Eternal then Each and Every Attribute Of It Is NOT BESTOWED [ GHAIR AL

ATAI]..

CONCLUSION

IF SOME ONE BELIEVETH THAT VERBUM DICTIONIS AND ITS ATRIBUTESARE NOT ETERNAL THEN IT IS NECESSARY [ VAJIB / WAJIB] UPON HIS

BELIEF THAT THEY ARE NEITHER ESSENTIAL NOR BESTOWED. [ LA DHATI

WALA ATAI].

IF SOME ONE BELIEVETH THAT LAW OF EXCLUSION OF MIDDLE IS

APPLICABLE BETWEEN AD DHATI AND AL ATAI AND THAT THERE IS NO

MIDDLE AND NO MEDIUM BETWEEN ESSENTIAL AND BESTOWED, THEN

THAT PERSON CAN NOT BELIEVE THAT VERBUM DICTIONIS IS

TEMPORAL.

IF SOME ONE BELIEVE TYHAT VERBUM DICTIONIS IS TEMPORAL YETBELIEVES THAT ITS ATTRIBUTES ARE BESTOWED THENHIS BELIEF IS

TOTALLY WORNG AND ENTIRELY FALSE.

DISCUSSION ON BESTOWED KNOWLEDGE AND ATTRIBUTES OFVERBUM DICTIONIS.If a person beleaveth that verbum dictionis and its attributes areare not

eternalyet believeth that they can be circumference d by bestowed

knowledge [immensely or not] then such a person can not be excluded

from two states /cases [ ahval] .


20/36

1

1] He believeth that Verbum Dictionis Verbum Dictionisand Its

Attributes are Bestowed.

2] He believeth that Verbum Dictionis and Its Attributes are Neither

Essential nor Bestowed.

If he believeth in the first then he is a denouncer of the following

agreed upon ARTICLES of FAITH.

NO BESTOWED [ATAI] THING CAN BE ASCRIBED TO THE

ETERNAL[ QADIM] NEITHER ATTRIBUTIVELYU NOR ACTIVELY [ SIFTAN

WA FILAN] irrespective of any interpretation [TAVI] and any Reasoning

[TAUJIH].

If he believeth in the second , yet still believeth that BESTOWED

KNOWLEDGE can CIRCUMFERENCE/ ENCIRCLE these Attributes then he

is a denier of AN Agreed Upon Article Of Faith which may be stated asfollow.

ONE THAT IS NOT BESTOWED CAN NOT BE CIRCUMFERENCED BY ONE

THAT IS BESTOWED.

In any case any argumentation [ISTADLAL] Which is based [ MABNI]

upon on the negation of the article of faith stated just above is support

of Bestowing Of Knowledge from the very beginning of the Cosmos to

the very end of the Universe is based upon a false article of a false faith

. Certainly not the true faith,.

It is not required to falsify such an argumentation with additional

proves, evidences, arguments,argumentations,reasonings etcetera, but

it is sufficient to to prove that such an argumentation, or such an

argument or such an alleged proof is based upon this wrong article of

heresy or heretic claim.

Epilogue

If Velum Dictions is Temporal [NOT ETERNAL]then Verbum Dictions Of

Deity and Its Attributes are Neither Essential Nor Bestowed, hence

Attributes Of Verbum Dictions can not be Circumference edgy BestowedAttributes, irrespective and regardless of number of things to which

Verbum Dictions and Its Attributes Are Connected.

OBJECTIONS AND THEIR ANSWERS.

OBJECTION1

Minority of Ahlussunnah say Salaphites believe s in Temporal but Not

Created[HADITH GHAIR MAKHLIQ]

But Majority Of AHLUSSUNNAH BELIEVES that TEMPORALITY ANDCREATION are ONE and the SAME. Thus HADIS GHAIR ATAI is just an


21/36

1

influence of Minority Of AHLUSSUNNAH WAL JAMAAH over the Majority

of AHLUSSUNNA WAL JAMAAH.

Hence those Ahlussunnah who belong to Majority and are not

influenced by the Minority can not accept this influence.

ANSWER.

THUS DEITY IS A REAL AGENT IN THE MEANING DEITY IS THE REAL

CREATOR, THE ONLY CREATOR, THE OMNIFIC THE CREATIVE CAUSE, AND

NOTHING CAN OCCUR WITH OUT THE ACT OF CREATION OF DEITY.BUT

NOT IN THE MEANING THAT THE ACTS AND DOINGS OF CREATED

SUPPOSITA /SUPPOSITUM ARE THE ACT OF THE DEITY IN THE

GRAMMATICAL INFINITIVE [ MANI AL MASDARI] irrespective of the factthat the are VOLUNTARY ACTS OR DOINGS ETC OR INVOLUNTARY ACTS

OR DOINGS OF THE SUPPOSITUM WHETHER RATIONAL OR NOT.

IN FACT THIS WAS A DOUBT PRESENTED BY MUTAZILA.

VA QAD YATAMASSAC BI INNAHU LAU CANA KHALIQAN LI AF AAL AL

IBAAD LA CANA HUVA AL QAAIM VA ASH SHAARIB VA AZZANUI ILAA

GHAIR DHALIC.

SHARH AQAID IMAM TAFTAZANI ALAIHIRRAHMAH DIED IN 793 A.H

AND VARILY THEY ARGUE THAT IF HE [THE DEITY] IS THE CREATOR OF

ACTS OF HUMAN BEINGS THEN HE [ THE DEITY] IS THE STANDER,SITTER,

DRINKER,FORNICATOR ETC. [NAUDHUBILLAH.]

IMAM TAFTAZANI R.H IN HIS FAMOUS BOOK/WORK FIRST QUOTETH

THIS MUTAZILITE DOUBT THEN HE ANSWERETH THEM BY VERY STRONG

AND INFINITELY POWERFUL ARGUMENT. ONE MAY SEE SHARH AL AQAID

HIMSELF TO SEE THE AREA FACE TO FACE. HOW EVER ONE CAN ALSO

RESPONCE AS FOLLOW AQS WELL, SINCE PLURALITY OF ANSWERS AND

RESPONCES EXIST.ACTS OF RATIONAL SUPPOSITA [SAY HUMAN

BEINGS ,JIN BEINGS ETC.] ARE BESTOWED AND CREATED, AND ACTS OF

DEITY ARE CREATED BUT NOT BESTOWED. THUS IN ORDER TO ASCRIBE


24/36

1

A TEMPORAL ACT TO DEITY THE NECESSARY CONDITION IS THAT IT IS

TEMPORAL AND CREATED BUT NOT BESTOWED.

IT IS WELL KNOWN THAT THE ATTRIBUTE OF CREATIVITY [ATTRIBUTE OF

VERB TOBE /TACVIN/TAKVIN] IS ETERNAL BUT ITS RELATIONS AND

CONNECTIONS [ACTS OF ATTRIBUTE OF CREATIVITY] ARE NOTETERNAL.YET THEY ARE ASCRIBED TO DEITY.

BUT THE CONNECTED ONES OR RELATED ONES [ GRAMMATICAL OBJECTS

OF CONNECTIONSI.E CREATED ACTS AND SUPPOSITA] CANNOT BE

ASCRIBED TO DEITY AS ACTS OF DEITY OR ATTRIBUTES OF DEITY OR

BOTH BUT AS CREATURES AND CREATIONS OF DEITY.

NOW IT IS NECESSARY TO DISCUSS VOLUNTARY ACTS OF DEITY.

A Voluntary Act/Doing Of DEITY Is Not Eternal[ GHAIR AL QADIIM] since

It Is Necessary for an Etrernal to be Excluded Not Only FromOMNIPOTENCE OF DEITY [GHAIR MAQDUURUL BARI ]but alsofrom OMNI-

VOLUNTAS [OMNI-INTENTION] OF DEITY [GHAIR MASBUQ BIL

IKHTIYAAR].

Thus Voluntary Acts Of Deity Are are Temporal but not BESTOWED.

HOW EVER SALPHITES MAKE AN ERROR/MISTAKE at this point when

they claim TEMPORAL YET NOT CREATED;, unless and otherwise they

are interpreted as according to ASHARITES AND MATURIDITES.

There are several Voluntary Acts and DoingsOf Deity Stated in Qur.an

1[ DEITY SHAPETH see 104/3

2] DEITY RAISETH see 13/2

3]DEITY SUMMONETH see 10/25

4] DEITY HONOURETH 17/70

5] DEITY GUIDETH 17/97

6] DEITY CHARGETH 4/11

7] DEITY HELPETH/ ASSISTETH 3/121-3

N.B [1]THE VERBS ARE WRITTEN IN FORM OF PRESENT TENSE AND IN

FORM OF GRAMMATICAL THIRD PERSON. IT IS NOT NECESSAY THAT

THWEY ARE IN THIS FORMS IN THE DIVINE VERSES.[2] MARACLES WERE

ALSO THE WORK OF DEITY AND CAN NOT BE ASCRIBED TO ANY

CREATION EVEN IF THEY WERE MADE TO BE SHEWN ON THE HANDS OF

CREATED PROPHETS.


25/36

1

None of the Divine Acts and DOIINGS Of DEITY can be ascribed to

created Supposita/ Suppositums. Otherwisw it Shall be a Manupolation

[TAHRIIF] In The Text Of Qur;aan.

Elders of Maturidiah believe that Act[FI;L] Is An Essential Attribute Of

Deity, instead of an Act or an Active Attribute Of DEITY.ASHAIRAHBELIEVE THAT AN ACT IS NOT AN ATTRIBUTE.

They argue that if ACTS are Eternal then they SELF- CEASETHJ to be

Voluntary.Latter Muturidites used the word Tacvin/TAKVIN/TAKWIN for

the very same Attribute.

But this doeth shew Act Of Deity cannot be termed as Bestowed, in

there terminology.

The word Act is just a name for the Attribute Since this Essential

Attribute is the MANSHA [Originater] of temporal voluntary acts/doingsetc.

[The correct term for this Attribute may be Generator or Source of

Act/Work/Doing/Acticity Of Deity. Thus the Generator of Act et cetera is

neither a Divine Act nor an Active Attribute Of Deity but An ESSENTIAL

ATTRIBUTE OF DEITY.]

If it is assumed that THIS Attribute Of Originator OF ACTS/DOINGS is not

tacvin, then the total number of KNOWN ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTE

increases up to nine [ atleast].

How ever this is an ambiguous term since it maketh confusion between

an Act and an [ESSENTIAL ]ATTRIBUTE Of Deity.Neither ASHARITES NOR

MATURIDITES EVER USED THE TERM OF ATAI FOR ANY TEMPORAL AND

VOLUNTARY ACT/DOING OF DEITY.

EVEN SALAPHITES/SALAFITES and Hanbalites never use this term for

them.

The same is true for CALAM AL LAFZIY and Its Attributes , since they

are included in divine Acts,

If they are included in DIVINE ACTS/DOINGS, they are not Bestowed.

But if they are not included in Divine Acts they are still not Bestowed.

ALL THOSE ASHARITES AND MATURIDITES WHO CONSTITUTE A VERY

LARGE MAJORITY OF THEM BELIEVE THAT AL KALAM AL LAFZIY Is

Temporal but never use they word Bestowed for AL KALAM AL LAFZIY

and ITS ATTRIBUTES.

IF VERBAL SPEACH/ DICTIONIS OF DEITY ARE BESTOWED, then it can not

be scribed to Deity just as Verbal Speech Of human beings cannot beascribed to Deity, Bestowed Knowledge cannot be ascribed to Deity.


26/36

1

acts of eating etc. Can not be ascribed to DEITY EXCEPT they are

Creation [and Creatures] Of Deity.

Sufies of Sunnism often use the terms ZAHURAT [CALMINATION] and

TAJALLIYAT [MENIFESTATION]. They consider them as Temporal and not

Eternal. Yet it is not seen in any authentic work of Sunni Sufism thatthey uses the wor Bestowing ATAI for these TAJALLIYAT AND ZAHURAT.

If culmination s and manifestations are Divine Acts then they are

certainly not Bestowed. If they are not then either they are higher then

Divine Acts or equal to Divine Acts or lower than Divine acts. That is

tracheotomy is applicable in regard to theological issues. But Divine

acts can not be lower then them .Thus in any case if they can not be

termed as ATAI / BESTOWED, DIVINE ACTS CAN ALSO NOT BE TERMED

AS Atai or Bestowed.

IT IS HOPED BY THE DIVINE GRACE THAT THE OBJECTION AFTER THIS

DETAILED ANSWER IS CEASED TO BE INSHAA ALLAH[4]

OBJECTION 2

It may be the case that all the ASHARITES AND MATURIDITES ARE IN

ERROR.

ANSWER.

ONLY A DEVIANT CAN CLAIM SUCH A THING. IF not deviant from Ahlussunah then a deviant from the Majority of Ahlussunnah.

Maulavi Raza was a deviant since he did declair all Asharites and

Maturidites in error since they believe that AL CALAM AL LAFZIY and AL

CALAM AN NAFSIY are two Attributes ,and not One Attribute.This does

prove that the founder of sect was a deviant from the Majority Of

Sunnism. This shall be discussed latter.

EPILOGUE..

A] IF by the word QURAN ~VERBAL DICTIONIS~ is meant then VERBALDICTIONIS Is either Eternal or Not Eternal. If It is Not Eternal then It is

Either BESTOWED or NOT-BESTOWED. If It Is Eternal then No Attribute

Of Verbal Dictionis Can Be Bestowed.If Attributres Of Verbal Dictionis

like TABYAAN,TAFSIIL,SIDQ[Truth of Assertive or Negative

statements]etc are Exitential Attribute Of Verbal Dictionis and are NOT

BESTOWED.

NO bestowed Attribute can circumference any one of the Non Bestowed

Attributes , neither collectively nor individually,irrespective to their

connections and pertaining to All Existing Things or Some Existing

Things.The Non Existential Attributes of Verbum Dictionis is based on

some Existential Attribute Of Verbum Dictioniswhich cannot be


27/36

1

Circumferenced by Bestowed Attributes [Neither collectively Nor

Individually].HENCE NEITHER THE NON EXISTENTIAL ATTRIBUTE NOR

THE EXISTENTIAL ATTRIBUTE upon which the Non Existential Attribute

is based can be circumference by the Bestowed Knowledge.

B If the Verbum Dictionis Of Deity Is Temporalthen All Of Its ExistentialAttributes Are Temporal. Since NoExistential Attribute Of Non Eternal Is

ETERNAL , AND No Attribute Of Eternal Can be Non Eternal.

But in this case None Of Them Can Be Bestowed. SinceThey are

Ascribed to the Eternal Deityand No BESTOWED ATTRIBUTE can be

ascribed to Deity in the meaning and sense, in which DIVINE VERBAL

DICTIONIS and Its Attributes Are Ascribed To Deity,

C]The Non Existential Attributes in this case are based uponNotBestowed Temporal Attributes As the Existential Bases of Non

Existential Attribute Of Not Bestowed VERBUM DICTIONIS can not be

circumference by Bestowed Attributes say Bestowed Knowledge, the

Non Existential Attibibutes can not be circumference by Bestowed

Attrbutes.

D] It is stated above that no NOT-BESTOWED ATTRIBUTE whether

Eternal Or Temporal can be circumference by Bestowed Attributes.

Up till now no Follower of Maulvi Raza Of Baraili has claimed that a Non

Bestowed Attribute can be circunferenced by BESTOWED ATTRIBUTES.SINCE the Non Bestoweness excludes the Bestowing/Bestowness just

like eternal excludes the Non Eternal.

E] If Deity Createth a Thing it can not be said in any sense of the

grammatical infinitive o TO BESTOW that Deity hath bestowed the thing

to His Divine Self.

Since no thing can be bestowed to Deity, No one can bestow any thing

to Deity Not even The Great Deity Himself since these are all Intrinsic

Absurd just like stealing of any thing is Intrinsically Absurd for Deity.

But it may be noted that the ACTIVE ATTRIBUTES Of DEITY are neither

Essential Not Bestowed Not only according to the standard of

Maturidiah but also according to the standard of Aashairah, and the

Philosophical Deviants Of Ashairah and Maturidian in Indian

Subcontinent who disputed from IMAM ASHARI AND IMAM MATURIDI on

several Issues or the ELDERS of ASHAIRAH AND MATURIDIAH.,

CASE 03


28/36

1

THE DOGMA OF UNICITY OF KALAM

The founder of the cult of Baraivism himself believed that there is

ONLY ON KALAM [DICTIONIS/DICTUM]

This ONLY KALAM is NAFSIY as well as Lafziy. In other words it is both

AL LAFZIY AND NAFSIY.

This Calam/Kalam cannot be Not-Eternal, otherwise there cannot be any

Eternal Kalam. If this Klam is Unique [VAHID] and E, then NONE of itsAttributes can be BESTOWED.Thus once again all the discussions for the ETERNAL IDEALDICTIONIS are validsince AL KALAAM AL VAHID [ONLYKALAM/UNIQUE KALAM] or Unique Dictionis is ETERNAL.One may be astonished that How can the majority of Barailvismdispute from their leader and founder on the issue on the Unity ofDictionis. The answer is quite simple. The reader stated his belief inMalfuzat. Malfuzat is not tought in MADAARIS of Barailvism ofSubcontinent whether in India Orin Pakistan. This is the reason thatthe latter generation of Indo Pak Subcontinent was not informed. Butthe question is why a number of Barailvi scholers of a generationearlier were not informed. The answer is once again quite simple.Thethey did not read the book since after receiving the degree of AALIM[DARS AN NIZAMI] a Great number of Barailvi Ulma do not study theworks of their leader and founder in detail in general and in minutedetail in particular. If they had studied his works they must havebelieved as according to his sayings, writings works, books,pamphlets .THE BARAILVI SCHOLORS OF SUBCONTINENT INTERRITORIES INCLUDED IN PAKISTAN AND BARAILVI SCHOLORS INTERRITORIES OF SUBCONTINENT INCLUDED IN INDIA AFTERDIVISION OF BRITISH IONDIA DO DISAGREE ON SEVERAL ISSUES.[5]Note . The dogma of Unicity Of Kalam is a deviation from GreatImams i.e Imam Ashari and Imam Maturidi.Imam Ashari him selfbelieveth that AL KALAM AN NAFSI is audibleCONCLUSION


29/36

1

This shews with perfect clarity that even based on the opinion of thefounder of the sect/cult is not possible to argue in the favour of thebelief that Bestowed Knowledge circumferences each and everyExisting ThingWith or with out the exception of the Eternal Existent[s]. Since allthe arguments and argumentations becometh invalid ,incorrect andinaccurate.CASE04The case is to claim that Dictionis [Kalam ] IS NEITHER AL LAFZIYNOR AN NAFSIY.But uptil know no one has claimed that there is such a KALAM whichis neither AL LAFZIY nor AN NAFSIY, neither with other KALAMS norwithout other KALAMS OF DEITY.There fore such a claim is a heresy.If some one is somehow able to prove the belief in this case it issufficient to shew that the basis upon which the arguments andargumentations are based is a heretical belief and there fore all thearguments and argumentations are incorrect.BANA AL BATIL ALAL BATIL [BASIS OF WRONG IS UPON WRONG].Even THE FOUNDER OF THE CULT CLAIMED THAT ALKALAM ALLAFZIY and AL KALAM AN NAFSIY both are ONE and same ,He did notclaimed that there is a Kalam which is Neither AlLafziy Nor AnNafsiy.There is an infinite difference in the claim A IS Band C [A IS BOTH Band C], and A Is Neither B Nor C.CASE 05If some one does claim that there is a third Kalam which is a UnionOf TWO Distinct Kalams namely AL LAFZIY and Kalam AN NAFSIY,AND each one of the two Mutually Distinct Kalams are the membersof the Union, then there are the following cases.1]Both the members of the Union are Eternal.2] Both the members of the Union are Not Eternal.


30/36

1

3] Any one of the member is Eternal and the other one is Not.In the first case the Union Kalam constituted by Not Union Kalams[say member Kalams] can not be Not Eternal, since Union Of EternalAttributes cannot be a Temporal Attribute. Thus this alleged Union isEternal. In thisCase all the discussions on ETERNAL KALAM AN NAFSI BECOMEVALID IN THIS CASE.IF BOTH the members are Temporal then Union of Temporals cannotbe Eternal. But this is not possible as one of them is AL KALAM ANNAFSIY which is Eternal as an agreed upon fact among all whobelieve in AL KALAM AN NAFSIY.Hence this case is discarded.If one of the members Kalams of the Union Kalam is Eternal then itmust be Al Kalam An Nafsiy, since no one believes that AL KALAM ALLAFZIY IS ETERNAL AND AL KALAM AN NAFSIY IS NOT ETERNAL.Thus the only logical option is that a person [Rational Suppositum]may claim that There is a Union of two members a] AL KALAM ALLAFZIY AL HADITH. B] AL KALAM AN NAFSIY AL QADIM.One of the greatest objections on it is that there is no such unionpossible which is constituted by two or more Eternal and Non Eternalmembers.In other words Eternal and NON ETERNAL neither can constitute aUnion nor can form a union. Thus the constitution of Eternal and NotEternal is Intrinsically ABSURD.[ NEITHER ETERNAL CAN UNITEWITH NON ETERNAL NOR NON ETERNAL CAN UNITE WITHETERNAL,ALSO THEY CAN NOT UNITE MUTUALLY. THESE ARE ALLINTRINSICALLY ABSURD]BUT FOR SAKE OF AN ARGUMENT IF THERE IS SUCH A UNION THENIT IS EITHER TEMPORAL OR ETERNAL . If temporal then all thediscussions on AL KALAM AL LAFZIY AL HADITH [ TEMPORALVERBUM DICTIONIS] are applicable in this case. If Eternal then allthe discussions of AL KALAM AN NAFSIY AL QADIM [ETERNAL IDEALDICTIONIS] are applicable. One may see them or recall them .


31/36

1

It is claimed by some fanatics that AL KALAM AL LAFZIY is nothingbut an aspect of TAKVIN/ TACVIN and there is no AL KALAM ANNAFSIY probably in order to justify the unacceptable claim of thefounder that both of Al Kalam AL LAFZIYU and AL KALAM AN NAFSIYare one. One may not discuss this claim that there is no AL KALAMAQN NAFSIY and AL KALAM AL LAFZIY is just an aspect ofSIFATUTTAKVIN. How ever it is now generally accepted that THEFOUNDER OF SECT OF BARAILVISM was some how influenced bySALAPHITES and HANABALAH, at least on the issue of KALAM.Instead of directly denying AL KALAM AN NAFSIY he denied thedistinction.[6].CASE 06.If it is claimed that the Eternal Dictionis assumed a non EternalNature just like Logos of Athanasian Christianity assumed a NonEternal Nature with the difference that instead of temporal humannature,The Eternl Assumed the Temporal Bookish Nature and thecopied of Quran are like Euchristic breads, then the responce is thatall such supposed events are Intrinsically Absurd and Must not beaccepted.

~~~~ There are two Barailis [i.e two places of same name] in United

Provinces[India] A] RAI BARAILI. 2] BANS BARAILI. Citizen of both Barailis

are called Barailvis /Barilwis. But this generates ambiguity. So one may

make a distinction by calling the citizen of Rai Baraili AS Rai Barailvi, and

the citizen of Bans Baraili as Bans Barailvi.But the very same word is now

used for a sect or cult which dio claim to be only Sunnite group on the

globe .This sect or cult was founded by Maulvi RAZA/RADA BANSBARAILVI. The name of the sect/cult is Barailiah, Barailviah , Barailvism,

Barailviat. Some use the letter V and other use the letter W in Languages

using Latin Alphabets and Latin script. As their is no confusion as a sect

or ascribed to sect the word Bans is not used for a follower of the cult and

for the sect. The sect/cult is also known as RAZA KHANIAH or RAZA

KHANISM or RAZAIAH or RAZAISM. The words derived from the noun Raza

[RADA] the proper noun of the founder of the sect. A follower of the

sect/cult is called Razai as wel

The letter Dad is read as Zad ,hence D is read as Z.


32/36

1

[Foot Noot Of page 1]

[1] Uptill now no Barailwi/Barailvi Scholor has ever claimed that ALKALAM AN NAFSI is not etrernal.[Foot Note Of page 1][2]Some may also claim that Every [Existential] Attribute Of Eternalis Eternal. This is a very strong statement. Even the [relatively]weaker statement is sufficient to refute these arguments andargumentations. There fore the strong statement is neglected . Alsothis strong statement is controversial and disputed. All Sunnis whodeny Barailvism do not agree with the strong statement in General.[3] A Bestowed Attribute is an Imperfection for Deity hence NOATTRIBUTE Of DEITY can be Bestowed.[Foot Note Of page 2][4]All the Attributes,Qualities,Properties,Acts,Doings,Works OfCreated SuppositaARE CREATED, TEMPORAL and Bestowed[MAKHLUUQ, HAADITH, AND ATAAI/ATAI]But no Act and no AttributeOf Deity are bestowed.. THEY ARE ALL UNBESTOWED. EssentialAttributes Of DEITY are uUncreated,Not Temporal [Eternal], AND UNBESTOWED. The ActiveAttributes Of Deity Are Eternal According to Hanabalah ,SalaphitesAND A MINORITY OF Maturidiah.[But according to ASHARITES theyare Temporal but not Bestowed [ HADIS GHAIR ATAI]. Since NoAsharite has ever used the tern/word Atai/Ataai/Bestowed for any oneof them. RATIONALITY AND INTELLEGENCE DEMAND THAT NOTHING CAN BE BESTOWED TO DEITY/DIVINITY. Majority of Maturiditebelieve that Active Attributes are just the aspects of EssentialAttribute AT TAKVIN/AT TACVIN. Attakvin is Neither Created NorTemporal but Eternal. No aspect of Eternal can be Bestowed. Hncetheir is an IJMAA on this issue that No Attribute whether Essential orActive is Bestowed. The same is true for the relative Attributes ofDeity. It may be noted that as each Essential Attribute Of Deity isAbsolute , they may be termed as ABSOLUTE Attributes as well.Even the Relative Attribute of Deity are not Bestowed.The differencebetween the Active attributes and Relative Attributes may be statedas follow:

The opposite of Active Attributes never Occur while the Opposite ofactive Atrribute may also occur. For example Injustice is a n


33/36

1

opposite of Justice , As Justice is an Active Attribute injustice neveroccurs, but R-DA is an relative Attribute and its oppositte GH-D-Bmay also occur. An other example of Relative Attribute isForgiveness [ the punishment]. Yet some may be Punished as well.Deity Loveth yet Deity Doeth not love Evil.Had love been an EssentialAttribute Deity would have love Good and Not Good say Bad or EvilAll alike, with Intrinsic Necessity. If Love have been an ActiveAttribute Deity would have loveth Good and Evil with ExtrinsicNecessity or Relative Necessity. If Forgiveness would have been anEssential Attribute then Deity would have been unable to Punish anyone with Intrinsic Necessity and would punish every one withIntrinsic Necessity .Had it been an Active Attribute Deity would have punish every onewith Extrinsic Necerssity even if he would have the Power to Punish..Essential Attributes Of Divinity are LA GHAIR, Whether AIN OR LAAIN VA LA GHAIR.Maturidiah consider TACVIN as the MANSHA of relations betweenDivine Act and TACVIN OR QUDRAH. These These relations are sometime also called Active Attributes.[FOOT NOTE OF Page 11]

[5] Same is the case of Attributes Of Deity .In Subhan Assubbuhthe]founder of Barailvism Explitly clearifies that he believes thatDivine Attributes are LAVAZIM OF DIVINE ESSENCE. In his extremismhe even croses the limits and believes in LAZIM OF LAZIM as well.But as few today study this work the latter generation of Barailvismbelieves in Identity / AIN instead of Lazim in general due to influenceof Khairabadi and Rampuri cults which are akin to Barailvism onseveral issues.[Foot Note Of Page 13].[6] Different uses of the word Essential.Some time it is used against the word Active.Eg.Active Attribute andEssential Attributes Of DeitySome times it is used against the word Bestowed. E.g. EssentialKnowledge of Deity and Bestowed Knowledge of Created RationalSuppositum say a human being.


34/36

1

Some times it is used in the meaning of Substantial.Some time it is used in the meaning of a Direct and IntrinsicImplication Of Essence.[TAQADAA OR IQTIDAA UDH DHAAT] Indifferent uses the meanings do change slightly.It may be noted that Divine Knowledge is Essential not only againstthe concept of the word Bestowed but also against the concept ofActive.Divine active Attributes say Justice, Truth Of Statement, Mercy etcare neither Essential Nor Bestowed. This the the fundamental sensein which the word is used in this article.[Foot note of page 16]

Books of Barailvism1] SUBHAANUSSUBUUH BY MAULVI RAZA OF BANS BARAILI UNITEDPRIVINCES INDIA2] VASAYA SHARIF BY MAULVI RAZA OF BANS BARAILI UNITEDPRIVINCES INDIA

3] MALFUZAT BY MAULVI RAZA OF BANS BARAILI UNITEDPRIVINCES INDIA

4] -BNA AL MUSTAFA BY MAULVI RAZA OF BANS BARAILI UNITEDPRIVINCES INDIA

5] AL AMAN WAL ULA BY MAULVI RAZA OF BANS BARAILI UNITEDPRIVINCES INDIA

6]CANZ AL IMAN AND AL KHAZAAIN AL IRFAN BY MAULVI RAZA OFBANS BARAILI AND MAULVI NAIIMUDDIN MURADABADI UNITEDPRIVINCES INDIA


35/36

1

BOOKS OF AHLUSSUNNAHSHARRAH AQAAID BY IMAM SAD UDDIN TAFTAZANI RAHMATULLAHALAIHNABRAS BY ALLAMAH ABDUL AZIZ PERHARVI AND NOTES BYALLAMAH BARKHURDAR RAHMATULLAH ALAIHUMASHARAH MUVAQQIFFIQ AKBAR [ ASCRIBED TO IMAM ABU HANIFAH RAHMATULLAHALAIH YET THIS ASCRIPTION IS DOUBT FUL YET THE ASCRIBEDARTICLES OF FAITH ARE CORRECT EVEN IF THE ASCRIPTION ISDOUBTFUL]SHARAH FIQH AL AKBAR BY MULLA ALI QARI RAHMATULLAH ALAIHAQAID TAHAVI IMAM TAHAVI RAHMATULLAH ALAIHAQIDAH OF IMAM IBN ATTAIMIAH RAHMATULLAH ALAIH

AL KHIALI ,ISAGHOJI ,SHARAH TAHZIB,QUTBI, MULLA JALAL etc.Note The word DEITY is Used instead of the word GOD since thislatter word is often misused by atheist and makes disgracingstatements.A NUMBER OF ERRORS IN SPELLING MAY BE FOUND DUE TO TYPINGPROBLEM. AS THIS IS A PROTO TYPE DOCUMENT. ALTHOUGHSLIGHTLY IMPROVED FROM THE FIRST PROTOTYPE ARTICLES IT ISSTILL A PROTOPTYPE ARTICLE. YET IT IS SLIGHTLY IMPROVED WEDO APOLOGY FOR GRAMMATICAL AND SPELLING ERRORS. WE MAYGET RID OF THEM IN SOME ADVANCE VERSION OF THIS ARTICLE.

.


36/36

1

refutation of ilm makaana va yakun [all 4 parts complete and improved]

Documents