Está en la página 1de 6

AHLUSSUNNAH WAL JAMAAH

Mirza Jhelumi and the


Principle Of Ta’liq bil
Muhal: Refutation of an
attempt to defend Mirza Of
Jhelum
Refuting Mirza Jhelum, Refuting Ali Mirza
Abu Muhib
27-Aug-19

[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 1 of 5

There is a Supporter of Mirza: Jhelumi: who


have tried to defend an apostasy of Mirza:
Jhelumi:
Before discussing the problem it is necessary to provide some prerequisites of the Problem.

Mirza: Jhelumi: is greatly influenced by Laho:ri: Mirza:’ism. It was proved long before that he is a
Lahorite.

Page 1 of 5
Page 2 of 5

Lahorism is a cult of Mirza:’ism . After the death of the founder of Mirza:’ism , Mirza:’ism was devided
into two basic sects.

1] Mah:mu:di: Mirza:’ism or Qa:dianism

2] Laho:rism or Paigh:amism.

The first sect of Mirza:’ism was founded be the son of Mirza: Qa:diani: namely Mirza: Bashi:ruddi:n
Mah:mu:d.

The second sect was founded by Muh:ammad ‘:Ali: Laho:ri: , who was a disciple of Mirza: Qa:diani: .

Mirza: Jhelumi: has supported Qa:diani: sect . But actually he is trying to save Laho:rism from the Takfi:r.

This shews that he has strong inclinations and tendencies towards La:ho:rism.

There are certain evidences for this claim.

1] On one hand La:ho:rites claim that Mirza: Gh:ula:m Qa:diani: did not claim prophethood, and on the
other hand they accuse Great Scholars of ‘isla:m for claiming prophethoods for themselves.

This is exactly what the Mirza: Jhelumi does.

This is a weak La:ho:ri: argument in support of Mirza: Qa:diani: .

2] La:ho:ri: Mirzai were first who denied that Mirza: Qa:diani: claimed Prophethood. Mr Gh:amidi: just
borrowed their belief belief. But he was unable to present any new argument for his false claim “Mirza:
Qa:diani: did not claimed Prophethood”. He only repeated the arguments of Muh:ammad ‘:Ali: Laho:ri: .

So inclinations and tendencies of Mirza: Jhelumi: and Gh:a:midi: shews that both of the two are two
representatives of Lho:rism.

3] La:ho:rism is in consistency with Ra:fid:ism. This means that a person can be a La:ho:riite as well as a
Ra:fid:ite.

4] Mirza: Jhelumi: has claimed that he declares Qa:dianis as Ka:fir just because they declare him and his
followers as Ka:fir and not due to the reason they deny the finality and lasthood of Holy Prophet.

How ever he argues that they shall never declare Mirza: Jhelumi: and his followers as Muslims.

But in his strange argument , he finds a secret way to declare La:horites as Muslims [‘Astagh:farullah Va
Na’:u:dh:ubillah].

Since La:ho:rites apparently deny that Mirza: Qa:diani: claimed Prophethood and hey do not declare
those who deny the claims of Mirza: Qa:diani: as Ka:fir , unless and otherwise they declare Mirza:
Qa:diani: as Ka:fir.

Page 2 of 5
Page 3 of 5

This Principle is borrowed by Mirza: Jhelumi, with the modification that any one who declares Mirza:
Jhelumi: and his deciples as Ka:fir is not a Muslim. This declaration is independent of the believes of the
declarer .

It is clear that if a La:ho:ri: Mirza:’i: does not declare Mirza: Jhelumi: as Ka:fir then Mirza: Khelumi: and
Jhelumite Disciples , then Mirza: Jhelumi and his Disciples shall not declare the La:ho:ri: Mirzai: as Ka:fir.

What does this means? This means that Mirza Jhelumi: is in perfect harmony with La:ho:rism.

5] The apparent Monotheistic Tendencies of Mirza: Jhelumi: were just to attract youth of ‘Ahlul
H:adi:th: . But Mirza: Jhelumi: did not declare any one as Ka:fir and Mushrik if he or she holds some
beliefs of Shirk. That is the reason he does not declare Nus:airiah of Sha:m as Ka:fir and
Mushric/Mushrik because they believe that Saiyiduna: ‘:Ali: is an Incarnation and a Menifestation of G-
d.

But this is also borrowed from Mirza:’ism. Since both of the sects of Mirza:’ism deceived Muslims by
shewing Monotheistic Tendencies. Even Mirza: Qadiani attempted to refute Unity Of Existence , in order
to deceive Muslims who reject Unity Of Existence.

So it is clear that Mirza: Jhelumi has learnt many things from Mirza: Qa:diani: and his disciple
Muh:ammad ‘:Ali: Laho:ri: .

There is a Supporter of Mirza: Jhelumi: who have tried to defend an


apostasy of Mirza: Jhelumi:

In this article this support shall be refuted ‘Insha:’All-h.

It is made clear that Mirza: Jhelumi declares Mah:mu:di: Mirza’is as Ka:fir just because they declare
Mirza: Jhelumi: and his disciples as Ka:fir. If they cease to declare him and his disciples as Ca:fir, he shall
immediately cease to declare them as Ca:fir.

Several objections were made on this View of Mirza: Jhelum: .

One of them was that this means that Mirza: Jhelumi: does not comsider that Mah:mudi: Mirza’ites are
Ca:fir , since they deny the Finality of Holy Prophet [PBUH].

This further means that Mirza: Jhelumi: does not believe in the Finality of Holy Prophet as a Certainty
but as a Probability [A type of Uncertainty].

Now a defender of Mirza: has advocated him by the principles of Suspension from Impossible and
Suspending an Impossible.

They say that it is Impossible that a Mah:mu:di: Mirza’i: continue to believe in in Mirza: Qa:diani: as a
Prophet and at the same time begin to believe that Muslims are Muslims.

So he says that what Mirza: Jhelumi: said is something that either is suspended from an Impossible or
itself suspends an impossible. Both are impossible.

Page 3 of 5
Page 4 of 5

So it is impossible for Mirza: Jhelumi: to declare Mahmudites as Muslim.

Ta’:li:q Bil Muha:l and Mu’:allq ‘:Alal Mumkin are well known Principles.

Let the both principles may be discussed as follow:

1] If One that is Per Se Absurd [Absolutely Impossible] suspendeth a thing then the thing is Absolutely
Impossible.

2] If a thing suspendeth an Absolutely Imposible then the thing is Absolutely Impossible.

On the contrary if a thing is suspended on an Absolute Contingent then it is Absolutely Contingent.

Similarly if a thing suspends an Absolute Contingent then the thing is absolutely Contingent.

For Example it is written in Holy Qur’a:n:-

And when Moses came to Our appointed tryst and his Lord had spoken
unto him, he said: My Lord! Show me (Thy Self), that I may gaze upon Thee.
He said: Thou wilt not see Me, but gaze upon the mountain! If it stand still
in its place, then thou wilt see Me. And when his Lord revealed (His) glory
to the mountain He sent it crashing down. And Moses fell down senseless.
And when he woke he said: Glory unto Thee! I turn unto Thee repentant,
and I am the first of (true) believers.

7: 147 Qur’a:n

This verse is about the Beatific Vision Of G-d. Mu’:tazilah and Shiites believe that Beatific Vision is
Absolutely Impossible. But according to Sunniites it is Absolutely Possible.

The argument is that the Divine Vision is Suspended on the Rest State of the Mountain and that the
Mountain remain firm at its place.

As the it is Absolutely Contingent that the mountain to remain firm and still , so any thing which is
suspended on it is also Absolutely Contingent.

So Beatific Vision which is suspended on it is Absolutely Contingent. However if Beatific Vision is


Relatively Impossible in this World then is another case.

But What the supporter of Mirza Jhelumi is doing, he is trying to prove that it is Absolutely Impossible
for a Mahmu:di: Mirza’I to cease to declare Muslims as Ca:fir.

But this cannot be the case.

Perhaps Mirza: Jhelumi: does not know what an Absolutely Impossible is.

An Absolutely Impossible is one whose very self intrinsically Implieth its Non Existence.

Page 4 of 5
Page 5 of 5

For example an other G-d i.e Shari:c ‘Alba:ri: is Absolutely Impossible.

An Absolutely Impossible is beyond Divine Omnipotence. So it is incorrect to say Deity Hath


Omnipotence to Create Shari:c ‘Al Ba:ri: i.e Replica of G-d Himself.

So what game this person is playing.

1] He is Suspending the supposed Cessation of Declaration of Cufr of Mah:mudites by Mirza: on the


Cessation of declaration of CUFR of Muslims by Mah:mudites.

2] The claim of Suspension of one on another is just based on the claim of Mirza: of Jhelum.

So the Argument from Ta’:li:q Bil Muh:a:l is invalid.

Page 5 of 5