AHLUSSUNNAH WAL

JAMAAH
AHLUSSUNNAH

[REFUTATION OF NUR
ARGUMENT OF
BARAILVISM]
[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.]

Page

A NUMBER OF BARAILVIS ARGUE THAT HOLY PROPHET WAS A NU:R . SOME CROSS
LIMITS BY CLAIMING THAT HE WAS NOT A HUMAN BEING [INSAN\BASHAR] BUT
BELONG TO A SPECIAL SPECIES CALLED NUR WHICH APPEARED AS A HUMAN BEING
YET NEVER BECOME A HUMAN BEING. SOME BELIEVE THAT HE WAS A HUMAN BEING
BUT OF VERY SPECIAL TYPE WHICH WAS MADE FROM NUR.
THE WORD NUR MEANS LIGHT YET THIS IS JUST AN ANTERNATIVE WORD. IN THIS
ARTICLE THEIR ARGUMENT FROM AL MAIDAH 14 IS DISCUSSED IN DETAIL.
BARAILVI ARGUMENT FROM AL MAIDAH 14:THE VERSE SAYS:-=
QAD JAA ACUM MINALLAHI NU:RUN VA KITA:BUM MUBI:N. 15 AL MAIDAH.
VARILY CAME INTO YOU FROM DEITY [ALLAH] NUR AND CLEAR BOOK. Barailvis argue
that Va/VAU means and implies a distinction unless there is a Qarinah [Indicator ]. So
Nur is not Kitab. If and Kitab is Quran. So Nur is Not Quran. If not Quran then the
Holy Prophet . So he is the Nur. Some further add if nur then not a human being.
ANSWER: BISMILLAHIRRAHMAANIRRAHIM. BISMILLAHIO VAL HAMDULILLAH
ASSALATU VASSALAMU ALA RASULLILLAH
First PREMILINAY
HOLY PROPHET WAS A HUMAN BEING [BASHAR/INSAN] .THIS IS A ISLAMIC AXIOM.
IF NUR CONTRADICTETH HIS HUMANITY [BASHARIAH/INSANIAH] THEN HE IS NOT
NUR [GHAIR NUR], IF NOT THEN HE MAY BE A NUR BUT NOT AS A BELIEF BUT AS A
PROBABLITY.
NOTE:IF NOT NU:R THEN AFDAL MIN CUL LI AN NU:R AL HADIS

DISCUSSION:
IF by the Word NU:R AL CALA:M AN NAFISY is meant and by the Word KITA:B AL
CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY is meant then the Letter [Word] VAU remains as a word of
distinction since:1] ACCORDING to majority of SUNNIS who believe in AL CALA:M AN NAFSI:Y , AL
CALA:M AN NAFSIY IS ETERNAL [QADI:M] and AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY IS H:ADI.
There is no one among those Sunnis who believe in AL CALA:M ANNAFI:Y, that
<<<<AL CALA:M AN NAFI:Y is NOT ETERNAL.>>>> .
Majority of Majority Of Sunnis [ASHAIRAH AND MA:TURIDIAH] do believe that AL
CALA:M AL LAFZ:I:Y is Not Eternal
There is a SEPERATION [MUGHAIRAH] between AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY [not
Eternal]and CALA:M AN NAFIY [Eternal].So the objection That <<the words KITA:B
2

Page

and Nu:r both can not be used by Deity for Qura:n , SINCE the word /letter Vau
between the the word Nu:r and Kita:bun Mubi:n { Kita:bun Mubi:n [m] }
[ pronounce :Kita:buMunin]demands that both Kita:b and the Nu:t must be distinct
from each other>> becomes incorrect and unsound according to Majority Of
ASHARITES AND MATURIDITES. Since <<THE ETERNAL [QADIM IS]AND IS DISTINCT
AND SEPARATE FROM EACH AND EVERY H:A:DI [NOT ETERNAL/TEMPORAL>>]and
<< EACH AND EVERY H:a:DI IS DISTINCT AND SEPARATE FROM ETERNAL>>
A Minority ofMajority Of Sunnis [ASHAIRAH and MATURIDIAH] how ever believe that
both of the two CALA:MS /KALA:MS id est AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY and AL CALA:M
AN NAFSIY are Eternal [QADI:M].
Even in this case both of them are two different Attributes Of Deity. Al Cala:m An
Nafsiy is an ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTE Of DEITY [ Nounly ALL-H SUBHA:NAHU: VA
TAA:LA:] and Al Cala:m Al Lafz:iy is an ACRIVE ATTRIBUTE OF DEITY [Nounly ALL-H
SUBHA:NAHU: VA TAA:LA:].The word Vau Can be used between two different Types
Of Divine ATTRIBUTES say ESSENTIAL AND ACTIVE.
The Claim: AL CALA:M AL LAFZIY is Active if it is Eternal.
[ IF AL CALA:M AL LAFZIY is ETERNAL THEN it is ACTIVE ]

Proof of the claim:AL CALA:M AL LAFZIY is Active if it is Eternal.

PROOF:- According to ASHARITES Of the Majority of Sunnis ACTIVE AFFIRMATIVE
ATTRIBUTES are HADIS. [1]
There are only SEVEN[or eight]AFFIRMATIVE ESSENTIAL ATTIBUTES.THEY ARE AS
FOLLOW:1]HAYA:H [LIFE OF DEITY]
2]ILM [KNOWLEDGE/OMNISCIENCE OF DEITY]
3] QUDRAH [POWER/OMNIPOTENCE]
4]IRA:DAH or MASHYAH [INTENTION/WILL/VOLUTION OF DEITY]
5]BASR [ATTRIBUTE OF CAPABILITY OFSEEING/WATCHING OF DEITY]
6]SAM [ATTRIBUTE OF CAPABILITY OFHEARING/LISTENING OF DEITY ]
7]AL CALA:M AN NAFIY[SPEECH/DICTUM/DICTIONIS OF DEITY].
Any other affirmative Attribute of Deity is Active and Not Essential.

Page | 4
4
So if AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY is and Affirmative Attribute Of Deity then it must
ACTIVE and Not Essential.
If ACTIVE then Temporal.So an ASHARITE can not claim that AL CLA:M AL LAFZ:IY is
an ESSSENTIAL ATTRIBUTE since:1] ONLY THE ESSENTIAL AFFERMATIVE ATTRIBUTES OF DEITY ARE ETERNAL [1]as
according to them.
2]THERE ARE ONLY SEVEN AFFIRMATIVE ATTRIBUTES WHICH ARE SSENTIAL[2] as
according to them.
So if some one claims that AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY is Eternal then He cannot be an
ASHARITE unless and other vise he has been influenced either by SALAPHITES
[SALAFIS ONE OF THETHE MINORITIES OF AHLUSSUNNAH] OR MATURIDITES
[MATURIDIAH ,A SUB DIVISION OF MAJORITY OF AHLUSSUNNAH] or both.[3]
So such a person is either BELONGS TO H:ANABALAH OR BELONGS TO MATURIDIAH.
Since SALAFIS do not believe in the Eternity Of CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY. So they are
differ on this ISSUE from H:ANA:BALAH.
IF such a person is Maturidi then he can not believe that AL CALA:M AL LAFZI:Y is
ESSENTIAL AFFIRMATIVE ATTRIBUTE OF DEITY. Since Maturidiah are relatively more
inclined to reason then ASHARIES and believe in only eight ESSENTIAL DIVINE
ATTRIBUTES OF DEITY. SEVEN OF THEM ARE THE SAME AS STATED ABOVE. THEY
ADD AN OTHER ATTRIBUTE TACVI:N. FOR CERTAIN REASONE THEY ARE GIVEN
BELOW.

1]HAYA:H [LIFE OF DEITY]

2]ILM [KNOWLEDGE/OMNISCIENCE OF DEITY]
3] QUDRAH [POWER/OMNIPOTENCE]
4]IRA:DAH or MASHYAH [INTENTION/WILL/VOLUTION OF DEITY]
5]BASR [ATTRIBUTE OF CAPABILITY OFSEEING/WATCHING OF DEITY]
6]SAM [ATTRIBUTE OF CAPABILITY OFHEARING/LISTENING OF DEITY ]
7]AL CALA:M AN NAFIY[SPEECH/DICTUM/DICTIONIS OF DEITY].
8] TAKVIN [EXISTANTIALITY,CREATIVITY,CAPABILITY TO BRING IN EXISTENCE]
Any other affirmative Attribute of Deity is Active and Not Essential.

Page

AS CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY does not belong to the above CLASS of ATTRIBUTES, it is an

ACTIVE ATRIBUTE.
IF one how EVER claims THAT the ETERNITY OF CALA:M AL LAFZI:Y ,AND CLAIM
THAT HE is MATURIDIY, he cannot believe that IT IS ESSENTIAL.[4]
THIS COMPLETES THE PROOF.

Q.E.D

Thus there is a difference between ESSENTIAL AND ACTIVE AFFIRMATIVE

ATTRIBUTES OF DEITY.
Such a difference of ESSENTIALITY AND ACTIVITY of Divine Affirmative Attributes Of
DEITY is SUFFICIENT for the used of the LETTER VAU/WAU[SINGLE LETTER
WORD/LOFZ:] to be used between two different types of Divine Affirmative
ATTRIBUTES.
So the argument falls down and declines.
The argument could only be valid if it was claimed that the word NU:R and Words
KITA:BUN[m] MUBI:N
Both are used one and same SUBJECT; Either both are used for AL CALA:M AL
LAFZ:Y or both are used for AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY.
As the objection presumes that the word NU:R and the word KITA:MUN[m]MUBI:N
are used ONLY for AL CALA:M AL LAFZIY or both are used ONLY for AL CALA:M AN
NAFSIY, it can be valid against a person who accepts any one of the stated above
alternatives. These alternatives are mutually exclusive, BUT not MUTUALLY
EXHAUSTIVE. Hence both alternatives cannot be true. How ever any one of them
may be discarded. There are a number of possible choices and and any one of them
may be chosen for the word NU:R even if the words KITA:MUN[m]MUBI:N are
fixed for AL CALA:M AL LAFZIY.
HOW EVER IF IT IS ASSUMED FOR SAKE OF AN ARGUMENT THAT BOTH OF THEM
ARE ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTES OF DEITY THERE IS NO DISPUTE AMONG MAJORITY OF
SUNNIS TO USE THE WORD VAU BETWEEN ANY TWO ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTES OF
DIVINE ESSENCE ID EST DEITY NOUNLY ALL-H (SUBH:A:NAHU: VATA:LA:)
Until now the views of Salaphites and H:ana:balites are not discussed. The discussion
was delayed , and is discussed below.
Salphits And H:anabalites:A large majority if<< AHLUSSUNNAH VAL JAMA:AH>> is either ASHAIRAH or
MA:TURI:DIAH.Some time their union is also called ASHA:IRAH ( in extended

Page | 6
6
meaning/sense).But a minority of them are called ATHARIAH which are divided into
several groups. Most well known of them are SALAPHITES [Salfiah]and H:ana:balah.
Salaphites deney ALCALA:M AN NAFSIY. But even according to them the Divine
CALA:M is divided into two types. A] One That Is Associated With Divine Essence Of
Deity.[5]. B] One That Is Not Associated With the Divine Essence stated above.
There is no dispute among the Stated above Majority over the division or over the types
stated above. However the dispute is upon the identification of the first type ID EST
One That is Associated With The Divine Essence. According to Majority Of Sunnis It Is
NAFSIY while according to the this fraction of Minority It Is Lafz:iy.
So One can safely claim on this standard that THE WORD NU:R meanet THE TYPE A
OF CALA:M stated above and the words KITA:BUM[m]MUBI:N is used for the type B
stated Above. The H:ana:balah also agree with Salaphites on the issue ,except that
they differ over the Nature of type A Of Divine Cala:m stated above. But this does not
disturb the stated above commentary of the verse id est << The word NU:R In the
Verse is used for The type A stated above, and the words KITA:BUM[m]MUBI:N In
the Verse is used for the type B stated Above>>.[5]
NOTES:1]Some Elders of AHARITES how ever believed in Eight ESSENTIAL AFFIRMATIVE
ATTRIBUTES adding Q-dm TO THE LIST. Few added Existence /Esse TO THE LIST.
Some added the attributes which are appearently parts like V-JH,YAD,EYE etc.as
well.
But none of them added Active Attribute to the list.They are how ever few in
number.
[2]May also be called AFFIRMATIVE POSATIVE ATTRIBUTES Of Deity.
[3]How ever this requires a proof and an evidence. That is the REQUIRMENT OF an
EXPLICIT quotation which beyond any shadow of doubt MUST SAY that<< The
PERSON X in ASHARITES believeth that AL CALAM AL LAFZ:I is Eternal or Essential
or Both.
[4]Although Majority Maturidiah believe in the Eternity of Active Attributes in a way
which is different the Eternity of Essential Attributes , IT is very unlikely that that
they believe that AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY is eternal. AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IYIs Not
Eternal even according to them. Since it is believed by all Muturidiah
As aAudible[MASMU].If it was believed to be Eternal they would have considered it
as

Page

Inaudible. Thus Cala:m Al Lafz:I constitueteth a very special case,even according

to Minority Of Maturidiah which believes that There is perfect similarity between
the Eternity of Active Attributes and ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTES.
For details about Maturidi view about the differences between the Eternity of Active
Atrributes and Essential Atributes See SH-RH: FIQH ACBAR by MULLA ALI QARI:
RAH:MATULLAHI ALAIH .
[5]SOME SCHOLARS believe that DEITY is NUR in the Real meaning of the word Nur
and Others Believe that Deity is Nur in the Rational Vertual meaning [MAJAAZ
AQLI] SINCE Essence of Deity Is Zahir Bil Qudrah And Muzhir Al Gahair Bil Qudrah.
They do not include Izhar and Zahur in essential Attributes of Deity. This shall be
seen latter.
SECOND PREMILINAY:=
It may be argued that some Mutazilite believed that the word Nu:r and the word
Kita:bun[m]Mubi:n both are used for Qura:n.
But Mutazalite did not believe in AN ETERNAL CALA:M OF DEITY whether it be
CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY or CALA:M AN NAFSIY. So the Argument<<>> is valid against
Mutazilah and not againt AHLUSSUNNAH.Since Mutazilah believed that the word
NU:R and the words KITA:BUN[M] MUBI:N both are used for the AL CALA:M AL
LAFZ:IY, the only CALA:M of DEITY. But the same cannot be said for {MAJORITY
OF}SUNNITES. How ever if it is assumed that the word Nu:r and the words
Kita:bun[m]Mubi:n both are used for One and same CALA:M wheter it be LAFZ:IY or
NAFSIY, then the Letter Vau is not in the original meaning of distinction.
There are certain reasons to assume the probability of taking the word Vau for the
Vau of Commentary/Explanation as well.
There are several verses in Qura:n where the word NU:R is used for Qura:n.
This negates the certainty of taking the letter Vau for a distinction between the
word that preceedeth it and the word which is posterior to it.
As according to the principle If certainity is lost argumentation ceaseth the
argument doeth cease once for all. [IDHA: JA:AL IH:TIMA:L BAT:ALAL ISTAD-LA:L].
Thus the argument is invalidated and the claim becomes proofless.

THIRD Preliminary
There are certain objections on this answer. How ever it must be noted once for all
that even the weakest Probability of this maketh the argument to cease ,the
necessary condition of an argument to be valid , is that it MUST be Cetrain.So it is
immaterial whether the probability is Weak or strong. Even the weakest probability
is Sufficient to Annhiliate the validity Of the Argument.
7

Page | 8
8
A NUMBER OF OBJECTIONS are made to disprove the probability and to disprove this
explanation of the commentary.
But if they are supposed to be valid even then this does not prove that the word
Nu:r it used for the Essence Of the Prophet PeaceBe Upon Him.But if it is supposed
that the Word Nu:r is used for the ESSENCE OF THE PROPHET, then it is necessary
that each and every objection is true ALONG WITH OTHER NECESSARIES.
In this preliminary one must discuss the objections which may be raised against this
Explanation Of the Commentary Of The Verse.
FIRST OBJECTION.
I f the word Nu:r is used for AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY then the Word/Letter Vau
cannot be used in the meaning of CALA:M ALAFZ:IY. Since in this case the real
meaning of Vau is a<< distinctive and /And Of Distinction>> that implies that
Cala:m Al lafz:iy Is distinct from itself ,Since the Words Kita:b un [m]Mubi:n is used
for CALA:M AL LAFIY.
If the word Nu:r is used for CALA:M AN NAFSIY, then this implies an impossibility.
<<<< AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY is Eternal According to All the believers Of AL
CALA:M AN NAFSIY.And An Eternal Can Not Come In Creations. As the Universe,
Space-Time Manifold ,Human Beings all are creations and creatures It is Impossible
and Rationally Absurd for The Eternal AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY to COME in one of
the Creations , in some of the creations or in All the creations. Further it cannot
assume any Non-Eternal Nature. The Divine Expression ANA:M : says that Nu:r and
Kita:bun[m]Mubi:n Came among you [people]>>>>.
ANSWER: This is an incorrect objection, even incorrect according to MAJORITY OF
BARAILVIS.The reasons are given below:1] According to majority of Barailviah Both AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY and AL CALA:M
AN NAFSIY Are Eternal. Only a minority of Barailiah believes that AL CALA:M AL
LAFZ:IY is Not Eternal. So this objection is also upon them. It is illogical ,irrational
AND, unreasonable to claim that CALA:M AL NAFSIY cannot come since it is eternal,
yet Cala:m Al Lafz:y can come even it is eternal. Such a claim is incorrect.
Thus this objection can be made only by the minority of Barailviah, and not from
Majority of Barailviah. But they can only make it if they make an objection upon the
Majority Of Their Sect. Since their Majority believes that the words KITA:BUN[M]
MUBI:N is used for CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY.
The official representative of Barailiah is the majority of Barailviah and not the
minority of Barailviah. One who maketh such an objection cannot belong to the

majority of Barailviah since if a person can believe that One Eternal[say AL CALA:M
Page

AL LAFZ:IY] Can Come in Created [Human] Beings, then he can not believe in the
impossibility of an other Eternal[say AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY].
2] According to The founder of the sect Maul-vi Rad:a: /Raz;a:[1856-1920/21] Of
Bans Baraili, United Provinces ,British india [1858A.C-1947A.C], AL CALA:M AL
LAFZ:I and AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY are one and the same; he declairs all those who
believes them as two Attributes ,as in Error in a single stroke.
So if in any case he is compelled to take an Eternal ATTRIBUTE.
THE FOUNDER OF THE CULT CLAIMED THAT CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY and
AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY both are ONE and SAME , AND IS ETERNAL .He
did not claimed that there is a
WELL AS NAFSIY .

Non Eternal

Cala:m which is LAFZ:IY AS

HE DID NOT CLAIM THAT THERE IS ONLY ONE CALA: M THAT IS NEITHER

LAFZ:IY NOR NAFCIY .

Thus according to the stated above founder there is only ONE Divine
CALA:M which is LAFZ:IY as well as NAFSIYThis Only Divine Calaam Is
Eternal.So according to his specific belief there is No Non Eternal
Divine Calaam. So this objection is upon the very founder himself, since
almost and atleast the founder chose the only Cala:m either for The
words Kita:bun [m] Mubi:nor for the wor Nu:r.
SINCE IF THERE IS ONLY ONE CALA:M WHICH IS LAFZ:IY AND NAFCIY THEN IT IS
CERTAINLY ETERNAL.
If he taketh it for Nu:r then he cannot say:-1] that the word Nu:r is used
for the Essence Of Holy Prophet [S:AL LAL LA: HU ALAI VA
SALLAMA].2] He becometh one of the denouncer of the claim that
Eternal Cannot come in [Creations] [say Human Beings.]
If he CHOSETH it for the words KITA:B UN[ m]MUBI:N, then at least he
becometh one of the denouncer of the claim that Eternal Cannot come
in [Creations] [say Human Beings.].Even this is sufficient to shew that
this objection is based on an Claim which is not accepted even by the
founder of the sect.
[[So if the Words NU:R and KITABUN[M]MUBI:N in the verse mean Quran
the the word /letter VAU means A DISCTINCTIVE ANDeven then it Possible
9

Page | 10
10
that the word Nu:r doeth mean AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY and the words
KITABUN[M]MUBI:N do mean AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY.
The only objection on it is that If the word Nu:r meaneth AL CALA:M AL
LAFZ:IY then THEN IT can not come in Human beings since an Eternal
Cannot Come IN CREATIONS, It is Rationally Immpossible.
This objection is invalid and unsound since A large nuber of Barilvis
believe that AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY is also Eternal AND DUE TO VERY
SAME REASON , they cannot take the words
KITABUN[M]MUBI:N in the meaning of AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY.
Even their founder cannot take these sated above words for the only
Divine CALA:M which is both]]
AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY and AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY.
Now a minute minority of Barailvis can make such an objection, ie those
who believe that AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:ITY is NOT ETERNAL.
But they can be responded . They shall be responded latter.

Second Objection.
As according to a number of philosophical minded Sunnis both EACH and
Every ESSENTIAL AFFIRMATIVE ATTRIBUTE is Identical to DIVINE ESSENCE.
That is the reason a distinctive And cannot occur between any two Such
Attiributes.
ANSWE TO THE SECOND OBJECTION.
There are several answers to this objection. They ar given below.
ANSWER TO THE SECOND OBJECTION:According to Majority Of Asharites and Maturidites the Essential
Affirmative Attributes Of the Divine Essence Are Neither Identical Nor
Separate,Associated and Communicable to the Divine Esesence.
So there is no problem in using a distinctive Vau between any two
Essential Affirmative Attribute Of Deity. The word And Is Used For Them.
If it is accepted that AFFIRMATIVE ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTES OF DIVINE
ESSENCE are Identical to the Essence then:It must be known the true
believes of those who believe in Identity among Ahlussunnah. They do not
deney the Divine Attributes like Philosophers .They do not say that they
are just pure negations. I.e Knowledge means Not Ignorence. Etc.They say

Page

11

how ever that Affirmative Essential Attributes Of the Essence Of Deity are
Identical in Misda:q and areNot Identical in Mafhum which the consider as
abstraction [Intiza:].Some other expressions for their ideas are as
Affirmative Essential Attributes Are Identical but the Mafhu:m [Concept]Of
each Essential Attribute is SEPERATE. A number of other possible
expressions are as follow
1] The Manashi [ORIGINATORS] Of Essential Sifa:t Are AIN Of DHA:T and
The Mafahim are Ghair Of DHA:T.
2]Manashi Of Mafahim are the S:iFAT which are Identical to the Divine
Essence and the Mafahim of S:IFAT are Separate [Non Idsentical].
The founder Of Khaira badi sect and an extreme critic of traditional
Asharism and Maturidism who neither believed in Jal AlBasi:t nor in Jazz
La tajazza , and a believer in the Identity Of Essential Attributes, accepted
that If Mutacallamin means by the term La AIN Va La Ghair la AIN Bil
Mafhum and La Ghair Bil Misda:q THEN they are right. See Imtina: An Nazir
[ Persian work].
So the word AL AIN does not means AIN in Misdaq and Ain In Mafhum,
[ABSOLUTE IDENTITY], but Ain Only In Misdaq.
[Non Absolute Identity].
The believers of Identity do not believe in La Ain Vala Ghair, they disoute
from the traditional ASHRAISM AND MATURISM on the following issues.
They do not consider the Mafahim as sifat but the Mansha of each Mafhum
AS Sifah.
They consider that the Mansha Of each Mafhum is Identical To the Divine
Essence.But The believer Of La Ain Vala Ghair do not believe that the
Divine Essence is the MANSHA of Sifat. Also the do not believe that Sifat is
the Mansha of Mafhum of themselves.
The dispute between Mutazila and these Identitist Sunnis is that the
former do not believe in such a way. Some of them deney openly that No
Sif-h is Affirmative . They are all negative. That is Divine Omniscience
means Divine Non Ignorence, Divine Power means Divine Non Weakness
etc.This is negation of Sifa:t [Attributes].Some of them term Essential
Attributes as Relatives. Example. They say that the Divine Essence is
Powerful and Power with reference to the Object Of Powers [Maqdur], the
Divine Essence Is Knowledge and Knower with reference to Object Of
Knowledge [Malum]. And so on.
But these Identitist[Of Indian Sunnis] do not believe in this RELATIVE
IDENTITY OR IDENTITY OF REFERENCE(S). The Mafahim are not relative the
11

Page | 12
12
are abstracted directly from their Manashi which are Absolutely identical
TO THE Divine Essence, and does not require a terminal object as is seen
in references and relations.
Any how what so ever be the explanation it is actually out of the original
scope of this article.
The actual answer is that they are Not Identical in Mafhu:m/ Mafa:hi:m.
So if Cala:m Al Lafz:i and Cala:m An Nafsi are both supposed to be
Essential Attributes then they are not Identical In MafahIm. The word Vau
is Distinctive in regard to Mafhum. This is sufficient for Vau to be
Grammatical distinctive.There is no condition of distinction in regaer to
Masadiq as according to these Identitist. Sot they allow the sayings as
AlIlm Val Qudrah Val IradaH Val Cala:m etc. How ever these Identitists
only believe in the stated above Identity of Affirmative Essential
Attributes , and not of Affirmative Active Attributes. Even the Identitist
who claim them selves as Maturidiah did not say that ACTIVE ATTRIBUTES
OR IDENTICAL TO DIVINE ESSENCE.
So this argument that the word Vau cannot be used between Nu:r and
Kitabun [m] Mubin IF THE former means AL CALA:M AN NAFSI, AND THE
Latter means AL CALA:M AL LAFZIY, BECOMES INVALID.
So it is accurate and valid to use the word Vau between any two Essential
Attributes Of Deity even if they are consider to be Identical To Divine
Essence [AIN DHA:TIL BA:RI:]

since the Mafahim of any two

Essentiaal Attribute Of Divine Essence are distinct
and different from the other.This doeth not require
any indication or Qarinah. MAFHUM OF AN Essential Attribute
is Additional to the Essence not the Misdaq

How ever if it is accepted that AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY is An

Active ATTRIBUTE and Al CALA:M AN NAFSI is ESSENTIAL
ATRRIBUTE then the word Vau can be used between an
ACTIVE Attribute and an Essential ATTRIBUTE
Further they shall face a lot of problem in a number of Quranic Verses and
Expressions. FOR EXAMPLE
;1] IN THE VERSE DHALICAL KITA:BU LA RAIBAFIH.(BAQARAH 2
) In this case the meaning of the verse shall become :

Page

13

.. DHA LI CALLAHU LA RABAFIHI THIS IS AN INTERPOLATION IN THE

DIVINE MEANING. NAUDHUBILLAH.
2)INNA: ANZALNA:HU QURA:NAN ARABIYAN. YUSUF -2.
In trhis case the meaning of Verse shall become INNA ANZALNAHU ALLAHA
NAUDHUBILLAH.
3) AAL H:AMDU LILLAHI ANZALA ALA: ABDIHIL KITA:B ( AL C-HF) VERSE
ONE SHALL BECOME . ANZALA ALA ABDIHILLAHA. NAUDHU BILLAH
4)MA ANZALNA ALAICAL QURA:NA LI TASHQA: (T:A:HAA:, 2).
The meaning of the verse shall become ALAICAL LLAH LI TASHQA .
Naudhubillah
5] FI HA DHAL QURAN. [17-89] ahall mean FI HA DHALLAH ,
NAUDHUBILLAH.
Similarly a number of verses shews that even in the case of IDENTITY OF
CALAM WITH THE DIVINE ESSENCE AND DIVINE SELF THE DIFFERENCE IN
THE MEANING DOETH EXIST AND THIS IS SUFFICIENT FOR THE VALIDITY OF
THE WORD VAU. We have shewn a number of impossible meanings in the
case which must yield if the argument is assumed to be correct.
BELIEF Of Maulva Rada Of Baraili:It must be noted that Maulivi Raza Of Bans Baraili was not an Identitist
and believed that the Sifa:t are QA:IM with the Essence [QAIM BIDH
DHA:T (1)]. QIA:M=SUSTAINMENT, QAIM=One That is sustained
[Associated] in/with the Essence. In this case there is no problem that the
word Vau can be used for any two Attributes if both are in sustainment /
association with the Divine Essence.
(1)The word with may appear to be non grammatical in English [see the
expression Sustained With instead of Sustained In] yet It is what the
sense is of the Arabic Expression is.To translate as Sustained in the
Essence is a distertion of the Principle Arabic Expression which is
conveyed by the term Qaim Fidh Dha:t. And this is not so since the Arabic
Expression meaneth BIDH DHATIL BARI
THIRD OBJECTION
COMMENTATORS DID not discusse where the word Nur is used for Lafzi or
Nafsi but only have discussed about QURAN.
ANSWER. ACCORDING TO MAJORITY OF SUNNIS QURAN IS OF TWO TYPE. A]
LAFZI. B] NAFCIY [NAFSIY]. THERE IS NO THIRD TYPE.
13

Page | 14
14
NOW IF THEY HAVE USED THE WORD QURAN THEN THERE ARE THE
FOLLOWING LOGICAL POSIBILITIES.
A] THEY HAVE USED THE WORD FOR ALCALAAM AL LAFZI.
B] THEY HAVE USED THE WORD FOR AL CALAAM AN NAFCIY.
C] NON OF THEM.
D] BOTH OF THEM.
E] AN UNION OF THEM.
OPTION D IS OUT OF QUESTION. SO THIS OPTION IS DISCARDED.

AS MAJORITY OF SUNNIS BELIEVE THAT CALAAM AL LAFZI IS HADIS

AND CALAAM AN NAFCIY IS QADIM THERE IS INTRINSIC ABSURDITY
OF A UNION OF HADIS AND QADIM.[HADIS AND QADIM CANNOT
UNITE SINCE IT IS INTRINSICALLY ABSURD]. IF IT IS ASSUMED THAT
BOTH ARE ETERNAL , THEN THERE IS NO UNIONN OF ANY TWO
ETERNAL DIVINE ATTRIBUTES. IF SOME ONE CLAIMS SO THEN THIS
UNION MUST ALSO BE ETERNAL AND AN ETERNAL IS EITHER THE
DIVINE ESSENCE OR AN ATTRIBUTE OF DIVINE ESSENCE SO THE VERY
UNION OF THESE TWO ATTRIBUTES OF DIVINE ESSENCE BECOMES
AN ETERNAL ATTRIBUTE OF THE DIVINE ESSENCE. BUT IT REQUIRES
CITATIONS AND QUOTATIONS FROM IMAMS OF SUNNIS, OTHER WISE
THIS CLAIM IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. SO THE CLAIMOF UNION IS
DISCARDED AND IS INVALID. IF THE OPTION C IS ACCEPTED THEN IT
IS A GENERAL WORD FOR BOTH OF THEM. IN THIS CASE ONE HA TO
DECIDE WHETHER THE WORD IS USED FOR ALCALAAM AL LAFZI OR
AL CALAAM AN NAFSI. IF IT IS CLAIMED THAT IT IS USED FOR BOTH
OF THEM SIMULTANIOUSLY THEN IT IS A WEAK CLAIM.
THUS THE ONLY POSSIBLE OPTIONS ARE A AND B. SO IT IS CERTAIN
THAT ONE WHO HAVE USED THE WORD QURAN IN THE COMMENTARY
HAS USED FOR ANY ONE OF THEM. IF MORE THEN ONE TIME THEN
ONE HAVE TO DECIDE EACH TIME.
AS MUTAZILAS DO NOT BELIEVED IN CALAAM AN NAFCIY, THEY WERE
COMMELLED TO TAKE VAU AS TAFSIRY.
BUT SUNNIS WHO TAKE THE WORD KITAB IN THE VERSE FOR QURAN
AND THE WORD NUR FOR QURAN CAN NOT TAKE CALAAM AN NAFCIY

Page

15

AT BOTH PLACES, OR CALAAM AL LAFZIY AT BOTH PLACES IF VAU IS

FOR DISTINCTION.
SO IF THEY HAVE NOT USED WORD AL CALAM AL LAFZI OR AL
CALAAM AN NAFCIY IT IS INCONTEASTABLE THAT THEY MEANT ONE
OF THEM AT ONE PLACE AND OTHER OF THEM AT THE NEXT PLACE
OR VICE VERCA.
THERE IS NO OTHER POSSIBILITY BESIDE STATED ABOVE.
IMPOSSIBILITY OF ANY OTHER POSSIBILITY IS A DEFINITE PROOF.
FORTH OBJECTION.
QURAN IS NOT NUR BUT THE PROPHET IS THE NUR.
ANSWER. THIS IS AN ABSURD CLAIM THAT QURAN IS NOT NUIR.
THERE ARE SEVERAL VERSES IN QURAN WHICH DO STATE THAT
QURAN IS NUR. THE CLAIM THAT QURAN IS NOT NUR IS OBVIOUSLY
AND EVIDENTLY WRONG AND INCORRECT HENCE IN IS
INCORSIDERABLE ONLY AN INSOUCIANT EXTREMIST CAN SAY SUCH A
THING. THERE IS NO SUSCEPTIBILITY OF THIS SORT OF CLAIM .
HENCE IT NEED NOT TO BE RESPONCED IN GREAT DETAIL.ONE MAY
ASK THE FOLLOWING QUESTION AS WELL.
WHAT IS THE PROOF THAT THE WORD NUUR/NUR IS USED FOR HOLY
PROPHET? SINCE THE LITERAL MEANING OF THE WORD IS NEITHER A
MAN NOR A PROPHET. EVEN THE HOLY PROPHET IS NOT THE MAUDU
LAHU OF THE WORD NUR.
SO ONE REQUIRES SOME ADDITIONAL PROOFS FOR THE CLAIM THAT
THE WORD NUUR IS USED FOR THE HOLY PROPHET.
IF IT IS EVER PROVIDED THIS SHALL BE A PROOF THAT THE VERSE BY
ITSELF DOETH NOT IMPLY THAT ITS WORD NOR IS USED FOR THE
HOLY PROPHET, SIMILARLY THE WORD NUR IN THE DIVINE VERSE
ALSO DOETH NOT IMPLY THAT, IF SO THEN THIS PROVES WITH OUR
ADDITIONAL PRROF THIS BY IT SELF DOES NOT SUPPORT THE CLAIM.
THIS VERSE IS NOT QATIYUDDALALAH. ON THE CLAIM THAT HOLY
PROPHET IS A NUR UNLESSAND OTHER WISE BY SOME ADDITIONAL
ARGUMENTS IT IS SHEWN THAT THE WORD NUUR WHICH IS A
NACRAH [COMMON NOUN] IS USED FOR THE HOLY PROPHET. TO SAY
THAT THE WORD NUR IN THE VERSE MEANS HOLY PROPHET SINCE
HOLY PROPHET IS NUR IS THE FALLACY OF BEGING THE AGUMENT.
15

Page | 16
16

Those Commentators of the past who have preferred HOLY PROPHET

as the Subject of the word NUR in this verse never claimed that they
have some Proofs with certainities in them.

FORTH PRIMILINARY
The word NU:R meaneth MUZ:HIR LI GHAIRIHI AND Z:A:HIR BI NAFSIHI .
So any thing that POSESSETH TO ADITIONAL ATTRIBUTE (1) IZ:HA:R LI
GHAIRIHI (2) Z:-HU:R BI NAFSIHI: is called a NU:R in ARABIC.
It may not be physical visibility . One that guide to the true or correct path
is also a light.
As according to great SUNNI IMAM T:ABRI: the commentary and the
meaning of the verse

[AL MAIDAH -14] is as follow:-

BIN NU:RI MUHAMMAD S:ALLALLA:HU ALAIHI VA VA A:LIHI:

VASALLAM
LLADHI -NA:RA ALLAH BIHIL HAQQ VA AZ:HAR BIHI: -L ISLA:M VA
M-HQ BIHI SH-SHIRC FAHUVA NU:R LIMAN -ST-NA:R B IHI [T-BRIALMA:IDAH 14]
So a human being doeth not cease to be a human being if these two additional
attributes are bestowed to him , which are not bestowed to other human
beings.
FURTHER EXPLANATION

The literal /Real /Primary meaning of the word Nu:r is Muzhir li Ghairihi Va Zahir
Binafsihi.

Page

17

This means any thing with these two attributes/qualities 1] Zahu:r 2] Izha:r is called
Nur whether it is a Matter or it is Material or any other type of Substance .If the
Essence of any human Being is associated with these two Attributes the Human
Essence can be termed as Light.
The Addition of these two Attributes Can Not Exclude any Human Essence from the
domain of Human Beings [Insa:n/ Bashar]. Thus if the word Nu:r means any Thing
whether Essence or Attribute which is Muz:hir Li Ghairihi Va Z:a:hir Bi Nafsihi then
the Essence Of any human being does not cease to be the Essence of the human being if
DEITY Bestowes these two attributes stated above to a human Essence.
Similarly the SIMILARITY/LIKENESS of a human Essence doesnot Cease to be from an other
Human Essence just because of these to Additional Attributes.
If it is insisted that some of the similarity is lost and if this is accepted just for an argument
then if is the case that the Principle Similarity is preserved and conserved. It is not lost. But
Holy Prophet doeth not cease to be A human being and doeth not become some being which
is beyond human being by the addition of these to stated above attributes , then he continues
to be a Human being and His Similarity stated above also continues and none of them ceaseth
in any meaning or sense of the word TO CEASE.
So if a Barailvi argues that The Essence Of the Holy Prophet is (a) Nu:r , then he cannot claim
that the said Nu:r is a Non Matterial Substance with these two Additional Attributes.At best he
can claimthat any thing OR ANY SUPPOSITUM OR ANY ESSENCE OR ANY SUBSTANCE OR
ANY NATURE [whether an Human being or an animal being or a plant being or a material
being or a spiritual being or a piece of mud or clay or a portion of liquid or a star or a planet
what so ever] has only two Attributes stated above then it is a Nu:r.
So if the Holy Prophet or His Essence Is Nu:r then:-a)
He doeth not cease to be a human being.
b)He doeth not cease to be in likeness of other human being.
It may be noted that the Essence of Holy Prophet is Identical to the Holy Prophet,
and Identical to the very self Of the Holy Prophet since the Essence of every Person
is identical to the Person and Identical to the Self of the person.[ A suppsitum may
be defined as an Essence with Its All Essential Attributes, not mere Essence] . Also it
may be noted that that the words in the square brackets is just an explanation and
not a disgrace,]
Thus it is clear that if Holy Prophet is Nu:r then he does not cease to be a Human
Being [insa:n/Bashar] and also does not cease to be in likehood/likeness of other
human beings , and does not cease to be Similar to other human beings WHO do
lack these two Attributes.
17

Page | 18
18
So Nur is not some thing which is beyond human beings and has become a human
being with out ceasing to be the nu:r, but the very human being it self. Since the
word Nu:r can be used for any thing of any Nau which possess these two Attributes
as stated above.
Actually to claim that Nu:r is an Immeterial Substance can be trace back to the
Dogma Of Saikh AL Ashraq AND Majus.
Arabic concept of Nu:r is some what different from them.
So if the word Nu:r means any thing that is phiscal light AND NOT A HUMAN BEING
THEN in this meaning Holy Prophet is CERTAINLT Not Nu:r . But If It means any thing
whether a human Essence or ANY THING ELSE which has only these two additional
properties then Holy Prophet may be termed as Nu:r.It is not necessary that the
word Nu:r means one that is Muz:hir for physical bodies and is Z:ahir as a physical
body.
In physical meaning the addition of just two non essential Attributes neither implies
RITHTOUSNESS or WRONGNESS of the person. How ever in some non physical
meaning it may be applied to ONLY lightous persons and essences.
IN WHAT MEANING SOME ANCIENT COMMENTATORS CALLED HOLY
PROPHET SALLALAHU ALAIHI VA SALLAMA AS NU:R
Holy prophet exposed the TRUTH, THE TRUTH OF THE TRUE RELIGION, LAWS OF
DEITY, SPEECH OF DEITY, VAH:Y etc. so He was termed as NU:R which neither
contradicteth His Humanity and Of His Essence nor contradicteth his Similarity and
likehood/likeness to other Human Beings and Human Essences. For an example one
may quote I-MAM T-BRI:.
The same is true for those Commentaries which use the word NU:R for the Essence Of HOLY PROPHET Peace be
Upon Him.

Note. It may please be noted that some scholars have ascribed a Non
Existential Attribute which is negation of Heat or Hotness, in order to exclude
Fire from the definition of Nur. If Nur is heatless then even the Body Heat of a
Person is sufficient to exclude a person from the definition of the word Nur.

FIFTH PRIMILINARY
There are several other possible options for the word NU:R like 1]
ISLAM,2] VAH:Y GHAIR MATLU:3,]H:ICMAH , 4]HIDAYAH,5]NABVAH
[NOTE THE DIFEERENCE BETWEEN NABI AND NABVAH],4] HAQQ
[ REALITY] 5] SIDQ [TRUTH] 6]IMAN [FAITH]7] MA-ARFAH
8]TAUHID[ABSOLUTE UNICITY OF DEITY]8] SHARIAH 9]TASDIQ UL

Page

19

AQAID.[TASDIQ SOME WHAT MORE GENERAL THEN FAITH].9]

KNOWLEDGE10]10] VAHY QUDCI. THERE ARE ALSO SOME
POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES WHICH MAY BE TERMED AS LESS
PROBABLE EG .1]IMAN BIL GHAIB.2]IMAN BIRRISALAH.3] IMAN BIT
TAUHID4]IMAN BILQIYAMAH 5]IMAN BITTAIHID 6] TALIM UDDIN.7]
RUH [THE RUH STATED IN SURAH AL QADR]If some of them are
less probable even then an argument is ceased to be if a
probability exist SINCE THE NECESSARY CONDITION for an
argumentation is CERTAINITY AND CIRTITUTE.
Some Sufis have opine that NUR is an ETERNAL ATTRIBUTE OF
ALLAH. They say that the faithful receive THE NUR OF MA-RAFAH
INDEPENDENT OF HILAH [PRACTICAL REASON] AS IT IS IN ARAAIS
[A BOOK ON TASAIVUF]
Some Sufis say that Nur of Book and Nur Of Tauhid are due to
Divine Grace. DIVINE ESSENCE GUIDETH PEOPLE TOWORDS IT
SELF BY ITS ATTRIBUTES. IT MAY BE SAID THAT NUR OF QURAN IS
SOME THING ADDITIONAL TO QURAN. Generalizing it may be said
that NUR is some thing which is ascribed to QURAN, TAUHID,HID
DIN PROPHET ETC. AND MAKETH THEM ZAHIR, YET IT IS
RECONGNIZATION AND SELF EVIDENT TO EACH PERSON.
NOTE. SOME OF THEM MAY BE NOT FOUND IN BOOKS YET THEY
ARE POSSIBLE SINCE THEY ARE THE EXPLANATIONS OF SOME
TAFASIR ,
IZ:A JAAA HTIMAL BATALAL IHTIMAL.
CONCLUSION:NU:R ARGUMENT OF BARAILVIS IS INVALID AND INCORRRECT.
SIXTH Preliminary

Literal meaning of the word Nur is neither Human being Nor

Prophet, and additionally not essence.

19

Page | 20
20

So it requires a proof that the word nur is used for theHolyProphet

Peace Be Upon Him.Uptill now all the tradions and Hadis provided
are weak , and belong to mutashbihat.
There are two fold problems.
A] First weak traditions can not be used in the domain of beliefs.
B] Mutashabihat even if are sahih or even a verse of Quran can to
be used for argumentations. They can only be interpreted as
according to Zaruriat ad din [Islamic Axioms] and muhcamat ect.
So the traditions that the holy prophet was created from the nur
of deity belongs to the set ofmutashabihat and cannot be used in
arguments and argumentations.
A FABRICATION
IN ORDER TO DECIEVE TRUE AHLUSSUNNAH SOME MISCHIEVEOUS
MIND FABRICATED A FALSE WORK KNOWN AS AL JUZ AL MAFQUD
WHICH WAS PROVED AS A FORGERY BY EMINENT SCHOLARS .
Actually this was done to reinvigorate the weak traditions which
informs that Holy Prophet was created from Nur., This work
provided false chain of reporters, which is now proved as a
fabrication and forgery .
One may see these research works . to reproduce them is beyond
the scope of this work.
SEVENTH PRIMILINARY.
It must be noted that some commentators of AlQuran[for example
see Jalalain, RUH AL MA-ANI] have opined that the word Nur is
used for the Holy Prophet but they do not believe in the certainity
of this view but believe as a probablepreference over other
possible options.But non of then deny the HUMINITY,
MANHOOD ,SIMILARITY OF HOLY PROPHET AND HIS ESSENCE. So
one may not be misguided if he ever find some Commentators

Page

21

accepting this word for Holy Prophet. An Example pof IMAM

TABRIis given. See above.
SOME OF THEM HAVE STATED BOTH [ EG SEE MADAAR-C AN
TASNZIL VA HAQAIQ ATTAVIL]. IN MADAR-C THE COMMENTATOR
SAITH. EITHER IT IS INTENDED BY THE WORD NUR << QURAN>>
SINCE IT PREVENTETH FROM SHIRC AND MAKETH THE REALITY
/TRUTH [HAQQ] ZAHIR [EXPOSES] SI WHICH WAS HIDDEN
[COVERED/NOT KNOWN ] OR IT IS MEANT BY THE WORD NUR
[DHAT OF ] HOLY PROPHET SINCE GUIDENCE [H-DAYAH WAS
EXPOSED BY HIM.] No one disputes the Humanity of HolyProphet.
If some one saith that the word NUR was used for HIM he means
that Because the truth, reality, religion Shariah etc were made
Zahir by Him. So to use the word Nur for the Holy Prophet PEACE
BE UPON HIM is one thing and to claim that HE was the Nur is
another thing. The first doeth not imply the second. IF SOME ONE
SAITHJ THAT I DO NOT KNOW WHETHER THE HOLY PROPHET
PEACE BE UPON HIM WAS A HUMAN BEING [BASHAR/INSAN] OR
NOT A HUMAN BEING [GHAIR BASHAR/ GHAIR INSAN] IS
CERTAINLY NOT A MUSLIM SINCE HE DENEIES TH NECESSARY
ARTICLE OF FAITH [ AXIOM OF ISLAM]. IT MUST BE KNOWN THAT A
NECESSARY ARTUCLE OF FAITH [DARURIAT AD DIN/ AXIOM OF
ISLAM] IS NOT DEPENDED ON NASS, IT IS INDEPENDENT OF
IT..None of them have saith that << HOLY PROPHET WAS not a
human being or not a man or not a ABD, Or NOT SIMILAR TO
OTHER HUMAN BEINGS IN HUMANITY>>. It is not some thing
which is inextricable or unsolvable.
EIGHT PRIMILINARY
Holy Prophet was a Human Being beyond any shadow of doubt ,
He was NOT some thing which is nothuman yet like a human.
[mithlul basher/mithlul insan] He was not some thing which was
not human yet it appeared as if it was a HUMAN BEING. SOME
even believe that Nur is not even The Prophet Muhammad but the
very Nur appeared as if it was the prophet Muhammad. .We take
21

Page | 22
22

refuge in the Divinity from such believes. Others believe that

Prophet was not a Human Person but a SUPPOSITUM OF NUR
WHICH APPEARED AS IF IT WAS A HUMAN BEING. Some
denouncers of Huminity of HOLY PROPHET do believe that He was
a Human Persom Constituted and made from NUR unlike any
human being.Even the clay fom which he was made was NUR. But
it is stated that Hur is just the addition of two more ATTRIBUTES
stated above. There fore If Holy Prophet was Nur even then
Neither His Humanity ceaseth nor His Humanity ceaseth.
But some extremist say that he was Not a Human Being but a
MITHLUL BASHAR [ LIKE A HUMAN BEING/ HOMINOID] OR A MITH
AL INSAN [HOMINID] NAUDHU BILLAH.
Some extremists say that He was a nur WHICH WAS ENCLOTHED
with a human form , but in reality he was Not a human being .
They use the unholy words of Libas al Bashariah or Libas Al
Insaniah i.e Fabric of Humanity or Fabric Of Human hood.
Both of these believes are cufr. Since it is the denial of
Humanness ,humanity ,humanhood,Human Essence and human
self of the HOLY PROPHET.
Some claim that the NURANI PERSON ASSUMED THE HUMAN
NATURE . THIS IS ANALOGOUS TO THE CHRISTIAN DOGMA THAT
THE DIVINE PERSON ASSUMED THE HUMAN NATURE., WITH THE
DIFFERENCE THAT THE CHRIASTIANS BELIEVE THE PERSON AS
DIVINE AND IN GODHEAD AND THESE PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT THE
PERSON IS NOT DIVINE I.E OUT OF GODHEAT. THE REST OF THE
BEL;IEF IS THE SAME.
THIS IS A GREAT HERESY SINSE THIS ASSIGNS THE NURANIAH OF
PROPHET A PRIMARY STATUS AND HUMANITY A SECONDARY
STATUS. REALLY AND ACTUALLY HOLY PROPHET IS PRIMERILY A
HUMAN BEING AND IF NUR THEN SECONDARY A NUR. Further they
think than Humanity of Prophet is some thing inferior to his
Nuraniah [lightness]. This is a disgrace to Prophetic Humanity and

Page

23

Humanity of Prophethood and humanity of the Prophet. If HOLY

PROPHET is Nur then His Nuraniah is Humanity [Bashariah/
Insaniah] is NOT LESS THAN HIS NURANIAH Not nin the least
sense of the words ,<< LESS THAN>>.
So If HOLY PROPHET is a NUR THEN HE is PRIMERLIY a Human Being
and Secondarily A NUR. His is NOT INCOMMENSURABLE in
Humanity and Humanness.
NINTH PRIMILINARY
The word Vau is not used for the Difference of Essences, so the
Essence of the Nur is not Different from the Essence of the Divine
Book.
Some of the proves are given .
1] THE WORD BIHI IS PRESENT IN THE DIVINE TEXT WHICH
IMPLIES THAT BOTH ARE THE PLACES OF AIN AL JAMA [IDENTITY
OF COLLECTION]
IE THE MADAN OF SIFAT [ATTRIBUTE] IS ONE
AND THE SAME [VAHID].
SOME ARGUE THAT THIS IS NOT A CERTAIN PROOF OF THE
UNICITY OF THE ESSENCE OF NUR AND KITAB.
TRUE YET IT IS STILL TOO STRONG TO DISCARD THE MEANING OF
DIFFERENCE OF ESSENCES OF THE WORD VAU.. IT IS MORE
PROBABLE THEN THE OTHER. THIS IS A RESON WE DO NOT
REJECT THE TO TAKE HOLY PROPHET AS THE SUBJECT OF THE
WORD NUR. YET WE DO SAY THAT THIS IS EITHER LESS PROBABLE
OR MOR PROBABLE THEN A NUMBER OF OTHER OPTIONS AND
ALTERNATIVES. IT IS NOT AN ARTICLE OF FAITH.
BUTHUMANITHY AND HUMANHOOD OF THE HOLY PROPHET CAN
NOT BE DISCARDERD , HIS SIMILARITY CAN NOT BE DISCARDED.
ETC. IT IS EXPLICITLY STATED THAT IF HOLY PROPHET IS A NUR
THEN HE DOETH NOT CEASE TO BE A HUMAN BEING, AND HIS

23

Page | 24
24

SIMILARITY AND SIMILARITURE DO NOT CEASETH, ALSO HE IS

PRIMERY A HUMAN BEING.
If this was a CERTAIN PROOF then it would have become
impossible to take this meaning.
How ever we do say that if the STATEMENT HOLY PROPHET IS A
NUR IMPLETH THE STATEMENT HOLY PROPHET IS NOT A HUMAN
BEING THEN HOLY PROPHET IS NOT A NUR. IF NOT A NUR THEN
AFDAL MIN CULLI ANNUR AL HADIS.
12] There are several verses in QURAN WHERE THE WORD QURAN
NUR IS USED FOR QURAN. SO ONE THE MEANING IS DEFINITIZE IT
IS SUFFENTIENTLY STRONG TO DISCARD THE MEANING OF
DIFFERENCE IS ESSENCES OF THE WORD VAU.
3] IF NOT VAU OF TAFCIR IT MAY STILL BE USED FOR DIFFERENCE
OF ATTRIBUTES WHETHER THEY ARE USED FOR THE ATTRIBUTES
OF SAME MADAN OR MAUSUF OR NOT. THIS MAY NOT BE
INCLUDED IN VAU OF TAFCIR BUT IN THE CASE OF DIFFERNCE OR
ATTRIBUTIC DIFFERENCE. BUT WE DO NOT INSIST ON THIS . SINCE
IN SOME SENSE IT MAY IMPLY THE FORMER. BUT ONE MAY
CONSULT VERSES LIKE
VA NZALNA LAICUM NUURUM MUBIINAA etc. IN ORDER TO
KNOW THE DEFINITE OR PROBABLE MEANING OF THE WORD NUR.

This is a special topic and one may see the word Nur in
Quran For Quran itself. It may be discussed separately in
an independent article.
How ever we have shewn that If Nur meaneth CALAM AN NAFCIY
AND KKIITAB MEANETH CALAM AL LAFZIY THEN THERE IS NON
PROPBLEM AND THE WORD VAU CAN BE TAKEN IN THE SENSE OF
DIFFERENCE AND DISTINCTION AS DISCUSSED ABOVE. NOTR
EVERY TAGHA-R SIFATI IS TAGH-R TAFCIRI , AS THE WORD VAU
CAN BE USED BETWEEN ANY TWO DIVINE ATTRIBUTE WHETHER

Page

25

BOTHE OF THEM ARE ACTIVE OR BIGTH OF THEM ARE

ESSDENTIAL OR ANY ONE OF THEN IS ESSENTIAL THE THE OTHER
ONE IS ACTIVE. ALSO THE WORD VAU CAN ALWAYES BE USED
BETWEEN A QADIM AND A HADIS, AND CALAM AQL LAFZI IS
HADIS AS ACCOREDING TO MAJORITY OF ASHARITES AND
MATURIDITES. IF MAJORITY OF BARAILVIS CONSIDER BOTH OF
THEM AS ETERNAL MAJORITY OF ASHARITES AND MAJORITY OF
MATURIDITES ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR TBARAILVIS . THE IMAM
OF BARAILVIS RADA SAHIB OF BANS BARAILILY AS ALSO CLAIMED
THAT CALAQM AL LAFZIY AND CALAM AN NAFCI BOT ARE ONE
AND THE SAME ATTRIBUTE AND CONSIDERS ALL ASHARITES AMD
MATURIDITES IN ERROR WHO BELIEVES THEM AS TWO
ATTRIBUTES. IN MAY PLEASE BE NOTED ONCE AGAIN THAT
ALTHOGH A NUMBER OF BARAILIVIS BELIEVE THAT ATTRIBUTES OF
DEITY ARE IDENTICAL TO DEITY YET THEIR IMAM DID BELIEVE
THAT THEY ARWE QAAIM AND NOT IDENTICAL.
WITH SUCH DISPUTES ONE CAN NEVER BE CERTAIN THAT THTE
HOLY PROPHET WAS A NUR. BUT ONE THING IS CERTAIN RAITHER
CERTAINITY AMONG CERTAINITIES, CERTAIN AMOMG CERTAINS
THAT HE WAS A HUMAN BEING ,HE IS A HUMAN BEING AND HE
SHALL BE A HUMAN BEING , HE SHALL NEVER CEASE TO BE A
HUMAN BEING JUST LIKE HE SHALL NEVER CEASE TO BE A
PROPHET OF ALLAH.

TENTH PRIMILINARY
One denies that Holy Prophet is not a Human being also
denies his Prophethood. May ALLAH FORBID from this
belief. Since the Necessary condition for the Prophethood
was the Humaneess, humanity,humanhood and hHuman
Essence. So one who claimeth that Holy [Prophet was just
in a Libas [FABRIC OR SUIT] of Humanity then he meaneth

25

Page | 26
26

that Holy Prophet Was NOT a Nabui but just in the Fabric
of a Nabui . Naudhubillanh.
This is a pure cufr. It may be noted that Holy Prophet is
the LAST prophet and no one shall ever be prophitised
after him so we have used the wod was in the above
sentences. It must be noted that the conditions are not
sufficient. Since to claim them as a sufficient conditions is
cufr.
Eleventh PRIMILINARY
It may be known that Vau Tfciri and T-GHA-R ASSIFATI are
some what different.
To Say ALLAHU QADIR VA AALIM is an example of Vau Tafciri
since both are predicated to One and same Divine Essence.
Simailarly to say Zaidun BASHARUN VA INSAAN is also Vau
Tafciri.
In general to say A is B and C is Vau tafciri if B and C are
1] Predicates Of A.
2]Both are them are tentamount in meaning.
Another case is that is is more gernral then B.
SOME MORE CASES MAY BE CITED.
But to say ALQUDRAH AND AL ILM ARE ATTRIBUTES OF
DEITY is Taghair Sifati Since . 1] GRAMATTICALLY IN THIS
CASE B AND C CARE NOT PREDICATED TO A. 2]B and C are
not predicable on each other. Even though they have oine and
same Mausuf, yet they are distinct atleast im meaning. This subtle

Page

27

difference does shew that it is some what controversial to claim

THAT IF THE WORD VAU IS BETWEEN Kitab and Nur then it is
necessarily TAFCIRI. It may be TA-GHA-R AS SIFAT. NUR AND
KITAB BEING JUST TO ATTRIBUTES OF QURAN.One may say
AL ILM VAL QUDRAH VAL CALAM VAL BASR CULLUHUM
SIFATULLAH.
How ever one need not to insist on this since if TAGHAUR
ASSIFATI AND VAU TAFCIRI ARE ONE AND THE SAME as
claimed by some then there is a Vau tafciri only and only if either
the word Nur and Word Kitab both are ued for CALAAM AL
LAFZIY or both are used for CALAAM AN NAFCIY. If one of them
is used for CALAAM AL LAFZI and of then is Used For
CALAAMAN NAFCIY then the Vau cannot be Tafciri with
certainity unless both of them are considered as Identical i.e One
And the Same.
One may refer to Above preliminaries if needed.
TWELVETH PRELIMINARY.
But it must be noted that

One can not be Excluded from AHLUSSUNNAH WAL JAMAAH if he

did not believe that Holy Prophet was not Nur or the word Nur in
this verse is not used for Holy Prophet. There is no disgrace in this
view , no blasphemy, no apostasy ,no heresy and no heterodoxy.
Actually it is a heterodoxy and a heresy to make FARU USUL or
USUL FARU.

27

Page | 28
28

So this is the reason that these commentators are not excluded

from AHLUSSUNNAH ,BUT the PRESENT STUNCH believers of Nur
are sinse they make FARU AS USUL. This is the essence of
KHARJIAH, Who were first in all sects and cults who strasmutated
FARU IN USL, and began to declare who disputed them as CAFIR.
NAUDHUBILLAH. To declair some one out of folds of Islaam just
because He does not believe that the Holy Prophet is a Nur is a
greater error then to declair such a person Out of the Folds of
AHLUSSUNNAHWALJAMAAH. .Raither to believe that Holy Prophet
was/is A Nur and was only in a Suit or Fabric Of human Being is
some thing which Expells a person not only from the Folds Ofr
Ahlussunnah Wal Jam,aah but also From The Domain of Very Islam
since << Humanity Of Holy Prophet>> is an Islamic Axiom as
stated above. So if some ambiguous statements are found in
some Sufic books they MUST BE INTERPRETED as according to
Fundamental AXIOM OF ISLAM .
CONCLUSION.
HOLY PROPHET is a human being. He may be called a Nur in a
meaning which doeth not Contradict HIS HUMANITY AND HIS
SIMILARITY TO OTHER HUMAN BEINGS. How ever he may not be a
Nur even under this condition since to deny that he is a Nur even
it doeth not contradict his humanity doeth not deny any Axiom of
Islam or Any Axiom Of Ahlussunnah [DARURIAT AL
AHLISSUNNAH]. It is just a case of preference of a meaning over
others , which lacks certainty [YAQINIAH AND QATIAH]. The
difference between some Scholars of the past who took the
subject of the word of Nur as Holy Prophet either in the
commentary of this verse or in some other expressions never took
it as an article of faith or article of Ahlussunnah, but just in a
probable meaning.S o their dispute with Barailivis is major one
and with us is a minor one. Since we do accept the Possibility that
the word Nur may be Applied to the Essence of Holy Prophet if It
doeth not negate his Humanity, the Primacy and priority of His

Page

29

HOLY HUMANITY, His Similarity and other Necessary Axioms of

Islam and AXIOMS OF AHLUSSUNNAH.How ever we do add that
even then it is not necessary to believe Him as A Nur since IF
HOLY PROPHET IS A NUR EVEN THEN HIS HOLY HUMANITY IS
AFDAL THAN HIS NURANIAH.If it is assumed that Holy Prophet was
a Nur then It is the HUMAN ESSENCE [ZAATULINSAN]THAT
BECAME NUR WITH OUT CEASING TO BE A HUMAN ESSENCE, BY
TWO ATDDITIONAL ATTRIBUTES WITH OUT CEASING TO BE THE
HUMAN ESSENCE, IT IS INCORRECT TO CLAIM THAT THE NUR
BECAME A HUMAN BEING WITH OR WITH OUT CEASINGING TO BE
A NUR.
In the end one may say If Holy Prophet is a Nur then His HOLY
HUMANITY is higher then his Nuraniah, IOf He is Not Nur then He
is AFDAL MIN CULL AN NUUR AL HADIS.

Books of Barailvism
1] SUBHAANUSSUBUUH BY MAULVI RAZA OF BANS BARAILI UNITED
PRIVINCES INDIA
2] VASAYA SHARIF BY MAULVI RAZA OF BANS BARAILI UNITED
PRIVINCES INDIA

3] MALFUZAT BY MAULVI RAZA OF BANS BARAILI UNITED PRIVINCES

INDIA

4] -NBA AL MUSTAFA BY MAULVI RAZA OF BANS BARAILI UNITED

PRIVINCES INDIA

29

Page | 30
30

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

PRIVINCES INDIA

6]CANZ AL IMAN AND AL KHAZAAIN AL IRFAN BY MAULVI RAZA OF

BANS BARAILI AND MAULVI NAIIMUDDIN MURADABADI UNITED
PRIVINCES INDIA
7] ADDAULATUL MAKKIAH BY MAULAVI RAZA OF BARAILI.
BOOKS OF AHLUSSUNNAH
SHARRAH AQAAID BY IMAM SAD UDDIN TAFTAZANI RAHMATULLAH
ALAIH
NABRAS BY ALLAMAH ABDUL AZIZ PERHARVI AND NOTES BY ALLAMAH
BARKHURDAR RAHMATULLAH ALAIHUMA
SHARAH MUVAQQIF
FIQ AKBAR [ ASCRIBED TO IMAM ABU HANIFAH RAHMATULLAH ALAIH
YET THIS ASCRIPTION IS DOUBT FUL YET THE ASCRIBED ARTICLES OF
FAITH ARE CORRECT EVEN IF THE ASCRIPTION IS DOUBTFUL]
SHARAH FIQH AL AKBAR BY MULLA ALI QARI RAHMATULLAH ALAIH
AQAID TAHAVI IMAM TAHAVI RAHMATULLAH ALAIH
AQIDAH OF IMAM IBN ATTAIMIAH RAHMATULLAH ALAIH

AL KHIALI ,ISAGHOJI ,SHARAH TAHZIB,QUTBI, MULLA JALAL etc.

SEE TAFASIR OF SUNNIS FOR DIFFERENT OPINIONS ABOUT THE
VERSE.
1] BAGHVI, 2]BAIDAVI, 3]TABRI, 4] IBN ATHIR, 5] IBN CATHIR, 6] TAFSIR
CABIR OF IMAM RAZI,7]FATHULQADIR, 8] RUH AL MAANA,9] IBN AL
ATIAH,10] JALALAIN, 11] KHAZIN,12}Q-RTABI,13]M-DAR-C AT TANZIL.

Page

31

IT MUST BE NOTED IN THESE TAFASIR THAT VARIETY OF OPENIONS

INCLUDING THE OPENION THAT NUR IS FOR [THE ESSENCE OF] PROPHET
SAVS DOES MAKE IT A MATTER OF PROBABLE PREFERENCE AND NOT AN
ARTICLE OF FAITH. ONE MAY ALSO CONSULT M-FRR-DAAT AR RAGHIB FOR
DIFFERENT MEANINGS AND USES OF THE WORD NUUR /NUR.

Note The word DEITY is Used instead of the word GOD since this latter
word is often misused by atheist and makes disgracing statements.
A NUMBER OF ERRORS IN SPELLING MAY BE FOUND DUE TO TYPING
PROBLEM. AS THIS IS A PROTO TYPE DOCUMENT. ALTHOUGH SLIGHTLY
IMPROVED FROM THE FIRST PROTOTYPE ARTICLES IT IS STILL A
PROTOPTYPE ARTICLE. YET IT IS SLIGHTLY IMPROVED WE DO
APOLOGY FOR GRAMMATICAL AND SPELLING ERRORS. WE MAY GET
RID OF THEM IN SOME ADVANCE VERSION OF THIS ARTICLE.

SUB HANALLAH VA BI HAMDIHI

SUB HANALLAHIL AZIM

31

Page | 32
32