REFUTATION OF

ILM MACANA VA
YAKUN

HP7800

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
SUNNAT, and claimed to be the only representative of Sunnism. He declared the
rest of the SUNNI UNIVERSE as Non Sunni and some time as Non Muslim as well.

[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.]

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.

PART ONE
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.
THOUGH DIVINE KNOWLEDGE IS FOR BEYOND THIS AND IS INFINITE, ABSOLUTE
AND UNLIMITED , INFINITE AND OMNISCIENCE.
But even this knowledge [1] 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]ILM AL GHAIB AL ATAAI/ATAI [BESTOWED/GIFTED, THEN PROPOSED THE
KNOWLEDGE OF EACH 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 TO THE ESSENCE OF HOLY
PROPHET [S.A.A.V.S]. 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].
[2]
THE FOUNDER OF THE SECT [3] 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.
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 not
discussed.
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 scheme is a proto type one and may be developed
latter. That is why there is a shift of spellings at different places.
FOOT NOTES.
[1] ID EST THE KNOWLEGE ILM MA CAANA VA YA CUUN / ILM MA KAANA VA
YAKUUN.
[2] THE KNOWLEGE OF AL GHAIB IS NOT DIVISIBLE IN ESSENTIAL [DHAATI] AND
NON ESSENTIAL [GHAIR DHAATI]. THERE FORE SUCH AN ALLEGED DIVISION IS
JUST A MATTER OF THOUGHT [VAHM/WAHM]. EVEN AN INTRINSIC ABSURD MAY
BE THOUGHT TO OCCUR. EVEN THE DIVISION OF ESSENTIAL KNOWLEDGE IN
FINITENESS AND INFINITY CAN BE THOUGHT. BUT THIS DOETH NOT PROVE THAT
SUCH A DIVISION IS NOT INTRINSICALLY ABSURD.
[3 ]THIS SECT/ CULT IS CALLED BARAILVISM OR RAZAISM ]

END OF PART ONE

PART TWO BEGINS
The founder of the sect of Baraivism argues in support of his belief in the
following way. 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 translate clearly. IT is tried 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
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] of
Baya: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 ,<< VA KULLU SAGHIIRIN>> Every Great and
Small is written thing is written [on the Tablet].[ AL QAMAR 51]
The supreme deity saith :-<< VA KULLA SHAI IN>> [YAA SIIN 12].
WE HAVE COLLECTEDEVERY THING IN A LUMINOUS LEADER
[PESHVA].
The Supreme Deity Saith << VA LAA HABBATIN.>> [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 ORIGINAL ARABIC DIVINE
TEXTS BUT THE TRANLATIONS OF THESE VERSES IN URDU BY THE
STATED ABOVE 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 THESE VERSES [IN ENGLISH DIRECTLY FROM DIVINE

ARABIC TEXTS] OURSELVES BUT TRANSLATED THE [URDU/RIKHTAH]
TRANSLATIONS OF THESE VERSES BY FOUNDER OF SECT[AS THEY ARE
IN HIS BOOK UNDER DISCUSSION]. WE HAVE TRIED TO TRANSLATE IN
ENGLISH ,THE URDU TRANSLATIONS OF THESE VERSES BY THE
FOUNDER OF THE SECT AS BEST AS POSSIBLE HOW 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 that
is is never used in particular/ specific sense/meaning,(2) and general word
is certain in supporting general meaning, and clear content of text [ NS:U:S:]
ARE TAKEN IN APPEARENT MEANING, and with out any religious proof
particularization/specification and Interpretation [TAWI:L/TAVI:L] are not
permitted, 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 dissension 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 in reference to
Some Prophets << L-M NAQS

-S: HUM ALAICA / ALAIKA.>> [AN NISAA 164] , OR inregard to

hypocrates It Is Said [BY THE DEITY] << LA T-L-M H-M.>>, [ AT
TAUBAH / BARAAAT 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
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.
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
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 and
arguments 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 claim
constitute only rare cases. But they do not explain the conditions where these
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 both
and 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.

10

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 Knowledge
circumferenceth 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.
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.

11

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.
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

12

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 next consecutive one /statement..
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 is
Intrinsically 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 is
an Implication between OCCURANCIALLY POSSIBLE[CONTINGENT] and
Intrinsically/ ABDURD irrespective and regardless of LAZIM or Malzum [2].
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

13

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
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 then
it may not be an Intrinsic Absurd. But if some thing implieth a
Contradiction Intrinsically it is Certainly Intrinsically Absurd.( IF ANY
THING IMPLIES AN INTRINSIC ABSURD INTRINSICALLY THEN IT IS NOT
IN DIVINE OMNIPOTENCE BUT IF ANY THING IMPLIETH AN INTRINSIC
ABSURD EXTRINSICALLY THEN IT MAY BE IN DIVINE OMNIPOTENCE IF IT
IS ITSELF NOT A CONTRADICTION)
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.

14

If A implies B and if B is false then A is False but if B is intrinsically

ABSURD THEN IT IS NOT NECESSAY THAT A IS INTRINSICALLY ABSURD./
Thus if A occurreth then B occurreth and B doeth Not Occur that proveth
A doeth not occur.
But If A occurreth 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.
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 Dictionis
do 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.

15

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.
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 QADIIM IS BESTOWED.
It is an agreed upon Article of faith that << THE UNBESTOWNED [GHAIR AL
ATAI] ATTRIBUTES OF ETERNAL CAN NOT BECIRCUMFERENCED
[ AHATAH] BY BESTOWED ATTRIBUTES, NEITHER COLLECTIVELY NOT
INDIVIDUALLY.[2Thus any claim or inference which contradicteth ]
atleast any one of these articles of faith is wrong and false.
Up till now no follower of Maulavi Raza of Bans Baraili [UNITED PROVINCES
BRITISH INDIA] hath ever claimed any thing against STATED ABOVE ARTICLES OF
FAITH.
The ARGUMENTATION that , << If the BESTOWED KNOWLEDGE
CIRCUMFERENCETH THE ATTRIBUTES OF TABYAN AND TAFSIL, THEN IT IS IMPLIED
THAT THE BESTOWED KNOWLESDGE CIRCUMFERENCETH each and every
existing thing which is connected to these Attributes>> 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

16

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
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 ATTRIBUTE
Attribute 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

17

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

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

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

18

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 SINCE The 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 it
is not difficult at all.
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.

19

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/Baraili 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.
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 IS
INTRINSICALLY /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 be
Temporal.
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 ATRIBUTES
ARE NOT ETERNAL THEN IT IS NECESSARY [ VAJIB / WAJIB] UPON HIS

20

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 THAT VERBUM DICTIONIS IS TEMPORAL YET
BELIEVES THAT ITS ATTRIBUTES ARE BESTOWED THEN HIS BELIEF IS
TOTALLY WORNG AND ENTIRELY FALSE.SINCE NO ATTRIBURE OF
UNSESTWOED CANBE BESTOWED.
DISCUSSION ON BESTOWED KNOWLEDGE AND ATTRIBUTES OF
VERBUM DICTIONIS.
If a person beleaveth that verbum dictionis and its attributes are not
eternal yet 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] .
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 as
follow.
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

21

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 Bestowed
Attributes, 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]
[ OUR COMMENT :-THAT IS THEY BELIEVE IN THREE KINDS OF THINGS.
A] ETERNAL, B] TEMPORAL NOT CREATED, C] TEMPORAL AND CREATED.
EVEN THEY DO NOT BELIEVES IN <<NOT TEMPORAL BUT CREATED AND
ETERNAL BUT CREATED>>]
But Majority Of AHLUSSUNNAH BELIEVES that TEMPORALITY AND
CREATION are ONE and the SAME. Thus HADIS GHAIR ATAI is just an
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<
FIRST. Some Salphites do claim such a thing but there texts of books
are interpreted and reasone [ TAVIL and TAUJIH]AS ACCORDING TO
ASHARITES AND MATURIDITES.So it reverts to a verbal dispute.A detail
discussion is how ever beyond the scope of this work.
There are some works which can not be interpreted or reasoned. In
such cases the belief of the Majority is preferred [TARJI,]T he view of
such writers is rejected.Yet we give the benefit of doubt with a good
will, and hope that they were unable to EXPRESS their views correctly.
Secondly. ASHARITES AND MATURIDITES do believe that Every Temporal
is Created and Every Created is Temporal . But they do NOT believe
THAT every TEMPORAL IS BESTOWED.
Thus this objection is with out any basis [BANA].
IMAM ASHARI [RAHMATULLAH ALAIH] died in the year 991 A.C and
IMAM MATURIDI [RAHMATULLAH ALAIH] died in the year 994 A.C, just

22

three years after the death OF IMAM ASHARI RAHMATULLAH ALAIH.

From the year of death of Imam ASHARI [RAHMATULLAH ALAIH] to
present moment [ in 2013 A.C]ASHARIR.H no ASHARI have ever used
the word/term ATAI [BESTOWED] for Verbum Dictionis,Attributes Of
Verbum Dictiobnis, Acts Of Deity and active Attributes Of Deity.
Similarly From the year of death of Imam MATURIDI [RAHMATULLAH
ALAIH] to present moment [ in 2013 A.C]ASHARIR.H no MATURIDI have
ever used the word/term ATAI [BESTOWED] for Verbum
Dictionis,Attributes Of Verbum Dictiobnis,Acts Of Deity and active
Attributes Of Deity.
It is well known that a number of ASHARITES AND MATURIDITES of
latter periods did differ from their IMAMS on several issues.
For example a number of ASHARITES AND MATURIDITES IN BRITISH
INDIAN SUBCONTINENT BEGAN TO BELIEVE THAT THE Essential
Attributes Of Deity ARE IDENTICAL To The ESSENCE OF DEITY, where as
these two IMAMS [ IMAMAIN RAHMATULLAH ALAIHUMA] strongly
rejected the DOGMA OF IDENTITY OF ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTES AND THE
ESSENCE. Perhaps this deviation was due to the influence of IMAM IBN
AL HAZAM [RAHMATULLA ALAIH].But they did not claim that the Active and
Rerlative Attributes are also Identical to DIVINE ESSENCE.
A number of latter ASHARITES AND MATURIDITES rejected the DOGMA
OF JUZZ LA YATAJAZZA as well. AN OTHER DEVIATION from the central
DOGMAS OF AHARITES and Maturidites.
Some even began to believe in JAL AL MURAKKAB [Compound Making]
INSTEAD OF JAL AL BASIT[Simple Making].SOME even accepted the
DOGMA OF UNICITY OF EXISTENCE and rejected the DOGMA OF
PLURALITY OF EXISTENCES.
SOME denied the distinction between AL KALAM AN NAFSIY AND AL
KALAM AL LAFZI, probably due to the influence of SALAPHITES and
HANABALAH.
But from the periods of these two greatest theologians of all times
namely IMAM ASHARI AND IMAM MATURITDI TO PRESENT MOMENT no
one ever used the Word /Term of ATRAI / Bestowed FOR VEBUM
DICTIONIS, ITS ATTRIBUTES, AND ACTS OF DEITY.
This is a proof that there is a silent Ijma [IJMA ASSUKUTI] That these
terms ATAI or Bestowed OR HIBA can not be used forVebum
Dictionis,and Its Attributes et cetera.In theological matters the non
existence of a belief about Deity is a proof that such a belief is
incorrect.There fore the term ATAI cannot be used for every temporal.

23

If it is argued that The Deity Is The Real Agent/Doer/Actor/worker [AL

FAAIL AL HAQIQI] there fore Deity is the DOER/ACTOR/AGENT Of every
act/doing/act/activity/work
[FIL], therefore the REAL AGENT/ACTOR/DOER ETCETERA OF ACTS AND
DOINGS of Human Beings[ INSAN/BASHAR.IBAD] is also the Deity then
the acts of Deity are also ATAI/ BESTOWED, since the Acts Of Human
Beings are Bestowed/ATAI., THEN THIS IS A FALLACY. THE ANSWER
PROPER IS GIVEN BELOW.
ANSWER.THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF ACTS,DOINGS,WORKS ETC.
A] ACTS AND DOINGS OF CREATIONS AND CREATURES [CREATED BEINGS
AND CREATED EXISTENTS/ NOT- DEITY/ GHAIL AL ILAH].
B]ACTS AND DOINGS OF DEITY [UNCREATED EXISTENT].
DEITY IS THE CREATOR OF BOTH TYPES/KINDS OF THESE ACTS
,ACTIVITIES,DOINGS/WORKS.
BUT ACTS/DOINGS ETCETERA OFCREATIONS,CREATURES AND CREATED
SUPPOSITA [SAY HUMAN BEINGS] are ascribed to creatures and created
beings in the meaning of grammatical infinitive [AL-MASDAR] . THEY
ARE NOT ASCRIBED TO DEITY IN THE ABOVE MEANING AND SENSE [ID
EST GRAMMATICAL INFINITIVE] THEY ARE ASCRIBED TO DEITY IN THE
MEANING OF A CREATION ASCRIBED TO ITS
CREATOR.ACTS/DOINGS/WORKS/ACTIOVITIES OF DEITY/DIVINE
BEING.DIVINITY ARE ASCRIBED TO THE DEITY IN BOTH OF THE ABOVE
MEANINGS AND SENSES.
THUS INTHE MEANING OF GRAMMATICAL INFINITIVE ACTS/WORKS/ ET
CETERA OF NOT DEITY ARENOT ASCRIBED TO DEITY WHETHER THEY
ARE THE ACTS ETC. OF RATIONAL SUPPOSITA [say human beings,
angelic beings, jinn beings]OR IRRATIONAL SUPPOSITA[say wind, fire,
sun] etc.
EXAMPLE. If a person say Zaid worshippeth Idols, it can not be said that
THE DEITY WORSHIPETH IDOLS [NAUDHUBILLAH.MAY DEITY FORBID
TO /WRITE/PRONOUNCE IT EVEN IN NEGATION.]
IF A PERSON COMMITETH ROBERY, IT CAN NOT BE SAID THAT DEITY
COMMITETH ROBERY.
If a Jin Being incarnateth as a human being it can not be said that DEITY
INCARNATETH AS A HUMAN BEING.
If a Male human being begets no one says that<< THE DEITY BEGETS
[NAUDHU BILLAH]>>.
THUS DEITY IS A REAL AGENT IN THE MEANING DEITY IS THE REAL
CREATOR, THE ONLY CREATOR, THE OMNIFIC THE CREATIVE CAUSE, AND

24

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 fact
that 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 [AS 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
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 NOT
ETERNAL.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 From
OMNIPOTENCE OF DEITY [GHAIR MAQDUURUL BARI ]but alsofrom OMNIVOLUNTAS [OMNI-INTENTION] OF DEITY [GHAIR MASBUQ BIL
IKHTIYAAR].
Thus Voluntary Acts Of Deity Are are Temporal but not BESTOWED.
Since every MASBUQ BIL IKHTIAR IS HADIS.

25

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 Doings Of Deity Stated in Quran
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] MIRACLES 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.
None of the Divine Acts and DOIINGS Of DEITY can be ascribed to
created Supposita/ Suppositums. Otherwisw it Shall be a Manipulation
[TAHRIIF] In The Text Of Quran.
Elders of Maturidiah believe that Act[FI;L] Is An Essential Attribute Of
Deity, instead of an Act or an Active Attribute Of DEITY.ASHAIRAH
BELIEVE 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/doings
etc.
[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.]

26

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 be
ascribed to Deity, Bestowed Knowledge cannot be ascribed to Deity.
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 that
they 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.

27

ANSWER.
ONLY A DEVIANT CAN CLAIM SUCH A THING. IF not deviant from Ahlussu
nah 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 VERBAL
DICTIONIS 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
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 Existential
Attributes 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 upon Not
Bestowed 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.

28

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 { 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 and also from the ELDERS [ First Generation] of
ASHAIRAH AND MATURIDIAH.,

CASE 03

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 Kalam is Unique [VAHID] and Eternal, then
NONE of its Attributes can be BESTOWED.
Thus once again all the discussions for the ETERNAL IDEAL
DICTIONIS are valid since AL KALAAM AL VAHID [ONLY
KALAM/UNIQUE KALAM] or Unique Dictionis is ETERNAL.
One may be astonished that How can the majority of Barailvism
dispute from their leader and founder on the issue on the Unity of

29

Dictionis. The answer is quite simple. The mensioned above

[Founding ] Leader Of the Cult stated his belief in Malfuzat. Malfuzat
is not taught in MADAARIS of Barailvism of Subcontinent whether in
India Orin Pakistan. This is the reason that the latter generation of
Indo Pak Subcontinent was not informed. But the question is why a
number of Barailvi scholars of a generation earlier were not
informed. The answer is once again quite simple. The they did not
read the book since after receiving the degree of AALIM [DARS AN
NIZAMI] a Great number of Barailvi Ulma do not study the works of
their leader and founder in detail in general and in minute detail in
particular. If they had studied his works they must have believed as
according to his sayings, writings works, books, pamphlets .THE
BARAILVI SCHOLORS OF SUBCONTINENT IN TERRITORIES INCLUDED
IN PAKISTAN AND BARAILVI SCHOLORS IN TERRITORIES OF
SUBCONTINENT INCLUDED IN INDIA AFTER DIVISION OF BRITISH
IONDIA DO DISAGREE ON SEVERAL ISSUES. [5]
Note . The dogma of Unicity Of Kalam is a deviation from Great
Imams i.e Imam Ashari and Imam Maturidi.Imam Ashari him self
believeth that AL KALAM AN NAFSI is audible
CONCLUSION
This shews with perfect clarity that even based on the opinion of the
founder of the sect/cult is not possible to argue in the favour of the
belief that Bestowed Knowledge circumferences each and every
Existing Thing
With or with out the exception of the Eternal Existent[s]. Since all
the arguments and argumentations becometh invalid ,incorrect and
inaccurate.
CASE04
The case is to claim that Dictionis [Kalam ] IS NEITHER AL LAFZIY
NOR AN NAFSIY.
But uptil know no one has claimed that there is such a KALAM which
is neither AL LAFZIY nor AN NAFSIY, neither with other KALAMS nor
without other KALAMS OF DEITY.
There fore such a claim is a heresy.

30

If some one is somehow able to prove the belief in this case it is

sufficient to shew that the basis upon which the arguments and
argumentations are based is a heretical belief and there fore all the
arguments and argumentations are incorrect.
BANA AL BATIL ALAL BATIL [BASIS OF WRONG IS UPON WRONG].
Even THE FOUNDER OF THE CULT CLAIMED THAT ALKALAM AL
LAFZIY and AL KALAM AN NAFSIY both are ONE and same ,He did not
claimed that there is a Kalam which is Neither AlLafziy Nor An
Nafsiy.
There is an infinite difference in the claim <<A IS Band C>> [A IS
BOTH B and C], and THE CLAIM << A Is Neither B Nor C>>.
CASE 05
If some one does claim that there is a third Kalam which is a Union
Of TWO Distinct Kalams namely AL LAFZIY and Kalam AN NAFSIY,
AND each one of the two Mutually Distinct Kalams are the members
of 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.
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 Eternal
Attributes cannot be a Temporal Attribute. Thus this alleged Union is
Eternal. In this
Case all the discussions on ETERNAL KALAM AN NAFSI BECOME
VALID IN THIS CASE.
IF BOTH the members are Temporal then Union of Temporals cannot
be Eternal. But this is not possible as one of them is AL KALAM AN
NAFSIY which is Eternal as an agreed upon fact among all who
believe in AL KALAM AN NAFSIY.
Hence this case is discarded.

31

If one of the members Kalams of the Union Kalam is Eternal then it

must be Al Kalam An Nafsiy, since no one believes that AL KALAM AL
LAFZIY 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 AL
LAFZIY AL HADITH. B] AL KALAM AN NAFSIY AL QADIM.
One of the greatest objections on it is that there is no such union
possible [SINCE SUCH A UNION I.E UNION OF ETERNAL AND NON
ETERNAL IS INTRINSICALLY ABSURD] which is constituted by two or
more Eternal and Non Eternal members.
In other words Eternal and NON ETERNAL neither can constitute a
Union nor can form a union. Thus the constitution of Eternal and Not
Eternal is Intrinsically ABSURD.[ NEITHER ETERNAL CAN UNITE
WITH NON ETERNAL NOR NON ETERNAL CAN UNITE WITH
ETERNAL,ALSO THEY CAN NOT UNITE MUTUALLY. THESE ARE ALL
INTRINSICALLY ABSURD, HENCE NOT IN DIVINE OMNIPOTENCE.]
BUT FOR SAKE OF AN ARGUMENT IF THERE IS SUCH A UNION THEN
IT IS EITHER TEMPORAL OR ETERNAL . If temporal then all the
discussions on AL KALAM AL LAFZIY AL HADITH [ TEMPORAL
VERBUM DICTIONIS] are applicable in this case. If Eternal then all
the discussions of AL KALAM AN NAFSIY AL QADIM [ETERNAL IDEAL
DICTIONIS] are applicable. One may see them or recall them .
It is claimed by some fanatics that AL KALAM AL LAFZIY is nothing
but an aspect of TAKVIN/ TACVIN and there is no AL KALAM AN
NAFSIY probably in order to justify the unacceptable claim of the
founder that both of Al Kalam AL LAFZIYU and AL KALAM AN NAFSIY
are one. One may not discuss this claim that there is no AL KALAM
AQN NAFSIY and AL KALAM AL LAFZIY is just an aspect of
SIFATUTTAKVIN. How ever it is now generally accepted that THE
FOUNDER OF SECT OF BARAILVISM was some how influenced by
SALAPHITES and HANABALAH, at least on the issue of KALAM.
Instead of directly denying AL KALAM AN NAFSIY he denied the
distinction.[6].
CASE 06.

32

If it is claimed that the Eternal Dictionis assumed a non Eternal

Nature just like Logos of Athanasian Christianity assumed a Non
Eternal Nature with the difference that instead of temporal human
nature, The Eternal Assumed the Temporal Bookish Nature and the
copied of Quran are like Eucharistic breads, then the response is
that all such supposed events are Intrinsically Absurd and Must not
be accepted. A UNION OF TEMPORAL HUMAN NATURE AND ETERNAL
DIVINE NATURE IS INTRINSICALLY ABSURD AS THE UNION OF ANY
OTHER TEMPORAL NATURE AND DIVINE NATURE. THERE IS NO
EXCEPTION FROM THIS INTRINSIC ABSURDITY].

~~~~ 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 BANS
BARAILVI. 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 well.Some also write BARAILI AS BRELI [ Bailvi
as breli]. Also Barilee, Barailee,Barely ect.
The letter Dad is read as Zad or Zwad OR Zuad In Urdu ,hence D is read
as Z.
[Foot Noot Of page 1]
[1] Uptill now no Barailwi/Barailvi Scholor has ever claimed that AL
KALAM AN NAFSI is not etrernal.[Foot Note Of page 1]
[2]Some may also claim that Every [Existential] Attribute Of Eternal
is Eternal. This is a very strong statement. Even the [relatively]
weaker statement is sufficient to refute these arguments and

33

argumentations. There fore the strong statement is neglected . Also

this strong statement is controversial and disputed. All Sunnis who
deny Barailvism do not agree with the strong statement in General.
[3] A Bestowed Attribute is an Imperfection for Deity hence NO
ATTRIBUTE Of DEITY can be Bestowed ,WHETHER IT BE ESSENTIAL
OR ACTIVE,ABSOLUTE OR RELATIVE ,IMMENENT OR NOT IMMENENT
OR ELSE.[Foot Note Of page 2]
[4]All the Attributes,Qualities,Properties,Acts,Doings,Works Of
Created Supposita ARE CREATED, TEMPORAL and Bestowed
[MAKHLUUQ, HAADITH, AND ATAAI/ATAI] But no Act and no Attribute
Of Deity are bestowed.. THEY ARE ALL UNBESTOWED. Essential
Attributes Of DEITY are
Uncreated,Not Temporal [Eternal], AND UNBESTOWED. The Active
Attributes Of Deity Are Eternal According to Hanabalah ,Salaphites
AND A MINORITY OF Maturidiah.[But according to ASHARITES they
are Temporal but not Bestowed [ HADIS GHAIR ATAI]. Since No
Asharite has ever used the term /word Atai/Ataai/Bestowed for any
one of them. RATIONALITY AND INTELLEGENCE DEMAND THAT NO
THING CAN BE BESTOWED TO DEITY/DIVINITY. Majority of Maturidite
believe that Active Attributes are just the aspects of Essential
Attribute AT TAKVIN/AT TACVIN. Attakvin is Neither Created Nor
Temporal but Eternal. No aspect of Eternal can be Bestowed. Hence
there is an IJMAA on this issue that No Attribute whether Essential
or Active is Bestowed. The same is true for the Relative Attributes of
Deity. It may be noted that as each Essential Attribute Of Deity is
Absolute , they may be termed as ABSOLUTE Attributes as well.
Even the Relative Attribute of Deity are not Bestowed.The difference
between the Active attributes and Relative Attributes may be stated
as follow:
The opposite of Active Attributes never Occur while the Opposite of
Relative Atrribute may also occur. For example Injustice is an
opposite of Justice , As Justice is an Active Attribute injustice never
occurs, but R-DA is a Relative Attribute and its oppositte GH-D-B may
also occur. An other example of Relative Attribute is Forgiveness
[ the punishment]. Yet some may be Punished as well.

34

Deity Loveth yet Deity Doeth not love Evil.Had love been an Essential
Attribute Deity would have love Good and Not Good say Bad or Evil
All alike, with Intrinsic Necessity. {In this case it would have been
INTRINSICALLY ABSURD NOT TO LOVE ANY THING.} If Love have
been an Active Attribute Deity would have loveth Good and Evil with
Extrinsic Necessity or Relative Necessity.{ In this case it would have
been EXTRINSICALLY ABSURD NOT TO LOVE ANY THING.} If
Forgiveness would have been an Essential Attribute then Deity would
have been unable to Punish any one with Intrinsic Necessity and
would punish every one with Intrinsic Necessity . Imperfections upon
DIVINE ESSENCE IS INTRINSICALLY ABSURD.
Had it been an Active Attribute Deity would have punish every one
with Extrinsic Necerssity even if he would have the Power to Punish.
The difference between Extrinsic Absurd and Relative Absurd is that
A relative Absurd is An Extrinsic Absurd of a particular Act or event.
For example It is TO FORGIVE FIRAUN IS AN EXTRINSIC ABURD BUT
THE ACT OF FORGIVING IS NOT EXTRINSIC ABSURD. So the act of
forgiving a particular Suppostum is Relatively Absurd. But a rock so
heavy that Deity CANNOT Lift or Move is Intrinsically Absurd.
.Essential Attributes Of Divinity are LA GHAIR, Whether AIN OR LA
AIN VA LA GHAIR.
Maturidiah consider TACVIN as the MANSHA of relations between
Divine Act and TACVIN OR QUDRAH. These Relations are some time
also called Active Attributes.
[FOOT NOTE OF Page 11]
[5] Same is the case of Attributes Of Deity .In Subhan Assubbuh the]
founder of Barailvism Explitly clearifies that he believes that Divine
Attributes are LAVAZIM OF DIVINE ESSENCE. In his extremism he
even croses the limits and believes in LAZIM OF LAZIM as well. But
as few today study this work , number of scholars of latter
generations of Barailvism believes in Identity / AIN instead of Lazim
in general due to influence of Khairabadi and Rampuri cults which
are akin to Barailvism on several issues.[Foot Note Of Page 13].
Differences between Khairabadis and Barailvis is an open area of
research, and scholars are invited to study this area.

35

[6] Different uses of the word Essential.

Some time it is used against the word Active.Eg.Active Attribute and
Essential Attributes Of Deity
Some times it is used against the word Bestowed. E.g. Essential
Knowledge of Deity and Bestowed Knowledge of Created Rational
Suppositum say a human being.
Some times it is used in the meaning of Substantial.
Some time it is used in the meaning of a Direct and Intrinsic
Implication Of Essence.[TAQADAA OR IQTIDAA UDH DHAAT] In
different uses the meanings do change slightly.
The word Essence is also used in the meaning of Fundamental and
Principle reality which is the Substratum for Attributes and Nature.
The word Essence is used in the meaning Of Subsistent as well.
It may be noted that Divine Knowledge is Essential not only against
the concept of the word Bestowed but also against the concept of
Active.
Divine Active Attributes say Justice, Truth Of Statement, Mercy etc
are neither Essential Nor Bestowed. This the fundamental
sense/MEANING in which the word is used in this article.
[Foot note of page 16]

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

36

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

PRIVINCES INDIA

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
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.

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

37

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