AHLUSSUNNAH VS ALI MIRRZAMAAH

A CRITIQUE OF TWO FATAVA OF KUFR/CUFR

ISSUED BY ALI MIRZA OF JHELUM CITY
AHLUSSUNNAH VS ALI MIRZA
7/20/2017

Emgineer Ali: Mirza does claim that the following two believes are Kufr:=1) The belief that the Non
Eternals Do not have a Beginning. 2) The belief that Divine Essence is a Locus of Non Eternals. We have
tried to shew that Engineer Ali: Mirza: cannot prove in his system, additionally he confuses between a
Heresy and Kufr.
 Page 2 of 12

Engineer Ali: Mirza: and his claim that

To believe that Non Eternals
[H:ava:dith:/Temporals] do not have a
beginning is Kufr.
Engineer Ali Mirza: claims that the following two believes of Kufr [Infidelity].

1] To believe that Non Eternals [H:ava:dith: /Temporals] are Beginningless.

2] To believe Non Eternals are Sustained in Divine Essence [Dh:atul Ba:ri:] or are Associated With Divine Essence [Dh:a:tul
Ba:ri:] or Both .

Both of these claims are discussed one by one with some similar arguments.

First of all it is accepted that these two believes are incorrect according to Majority of Ahlussunnah Val Jama:ah. But the
Fatva: of Kufr is incorrect and therefore it cannot be issued.

As Engineer Ali: Mirza: does issue a Fat-va: of Kufr on these two believes so it is necessary to discuss the Fatva: [Verdict] .

It is an agreed upon fact that a belief can be declared as Kufr if it is contradicted be an Explicit [Qat:iyuddala:lah] Text of
1
sentence of A:yah [Verse] of Holy Qura:n .( ) or by the Explicit Text of Al H:adi:th: As:S:ah:iyah [As;S:ari:h: Vas: S:ah:i:h:].

But if there is no contradiction neither from the stated above A:yah nor from the H:adi:th: then a belief can only be declared
as Kufr if there is an Ijma: on a belief.

For example there is an Ijma: on the Kh:ilafah of Saiyiduna: Abu: Bakr RD: and Saiyiduna: Umar RD: and any one who deny
the legality of any one of the two Holy Caliphs becomes a Ka:fir. (2)

It is supposed that Engineer Ali: Mirza: does agree with this since although he is a Rafid:ite he is akin to Zaidites rather than
Twerlvers.

Now we come to the first question.

Q,1] Is there an A:yah which contradicteth the belief that Temporals/ Non Eternals have no beginning?

Let the question be explained.

It is not the belief that some Non Eternals are Eternal or Pre Existents, but it is the belief that there is a Non Eternal Prior to
each and every Non Eternal.

So there must be an A:yah which does contradict this belief. But there is none. So this leads to the next question.

Q,2] Is there an H:ADITH: which contradicteth the belief that Temporals/ Non Eternals have no beginning?

Page 2 of 12
 Page 3 of 12

So there must be an H:adith: which does contradict this belief. But there is none. So this leads to the next question.

Q,3] Is there an Ijma which contradicteth the belief that Temporals/ Non Eternals have no beginning?

But it is very difficult to prove an Ijma: which contradicteth this belief.

In such case Engineer Ali: Mirza: can claim that this belief is incorrect and wrong but cannot claim that it is Kufr.

It may be said that Semi Ahlul H:adi:th: Zubair Ali: Zai also believed in this belief. Since he was also a literalist and had a
literalist approach. So why Engineer Ali Mirza: does not declare him as Ka:fir. If he says that it requires proof then the
response is as he was a literalist it requires to be proved otherwise.

In the case if some one holds this belief Engineer Ali: Mirza: cannot declare any one how holds this belief as Ka:fir on several
grounds.

1] This belief is not contradicted by any Explicit A:yah.

2] This belief s not contradicted by any H:adi:th:.

3] This belief is no contradicted by any A:yah.

In all these cases there is no evidence at all. Not a single one .

So Engineer Ali: Mirza: is requested to provide evidences:=

1] From the Text of Sentence of A:yah. The condition is that Aya:yah Must Necessary Be Explicit [Qat:iyddala:lah].

2] From the Text of tradition of Hadi:th: (3). The condition is that H:adith: Must Necessary be S:ah:ih: and S:ari:h:.

3] From Ijma:. . From the valid sources of Ijma:.

If the Engineer Ali: Mirza: is unable to prove it as a Kufr from atleast one of the stated above source , his claim becomes
invalid.

It may be argued (By the Engineer) that:=

Each and every Non Eternal is a Creation/Creature (4), and each and very Creation Hath a beginning.

This implies each and every Non Eternal Hath a beginning.

Then he may go on proving that Divine Essence is the Creator of Every Non Eternal.

This is a valid form of Logical Syllogism.

ALL A IS B [ Major Premise /Ma P ]

ALL B IS C [ Minor Premise/Mi/P ]

There Fore ALL A IS C. [ Result/R ]

Page 3 of 12
 Page 4 of 12

[First Figure].

In this form the supposed argument of the Engineer of Jhelum may be transformed as follow:=

All Non Eternals are Creations. [MaP] (4)

All Creations are Those Which Have heginnings. [MiP]

There Fore All Non Eternals are Those Which Have Beginnings . [R]

MiP is correct and we do not ask any proof on it since we do know that it can be provided.

MaP is however controversial. This doeth require a proof. On rational Grounds we do agree that MaP of the stated and
Written above Syllogism is False and Incorrect. Yet if it is claimed that it is Kufr then it is a different case.

So it must be attempted to prove that this contradicteth any A:yah or any H:adi:th: with their respected onditions stated
above. Or if there is an Ijma: then it is the responsibility of Engineer Ali: Mirza to prove it from valid sources.

Howvwer it must be noted that:.

1] He is not allowed to use the works of Asha:irah [One of the Major Groups of Ahlussunnah].

2] He is not allowed to use the works of Ma:turi:diah [An other Major Group of Ahlussunnah].

3] He must try to prove it from the stated above Sources .

If he cannot then he must agree that he cannot prove that this belief is Kufr.

We ask him to provide his proof in this regard. If he cannot prove it then he must have to confess that he is unable to prove
that this belief is Kufr.

If he refers to Shaikh: Alba:ni: then Shaikh: Alba:ni: is not a proof in himself. We ask what is the proof which Shaikh: Alba:ni:
presented. For Taqli:d of Shaikh: Alba:ni: is not allowed.

The term Taqli:d is defined as follow:

To accept a claim of a Person/Scholar without studying the Proof (s) (whether provided by him or not).

So if Shaikh: Alba:ni did provide Proofs [at least one] so Engineer Ali: Mirza: must quote it (them) so that we may see that
this proof (these proofs) is (are) valid or invalid.

If Taqli:d of A:imah like Ima:m Abu H:ani:fah RH:, Ima:m Ma:lic RH: Ima:m Sha:fai: RH: and Ima:m H:ambal RH: is not allowed
in the matter of Fiqh, how can the Taqli:d of Shaikh: Alba:ni: be allowed in the matter of Tacfi:r/Takfi:r.

So to refer to Shaikh: Alba:ni: or else is just a Taqli:d. However if the proofs are provided , these proofs are critically and
logically studied before accepting or rejecting them.

Before ending this debate it must be noted that the Arabic Word Shai is used in several meanings.

Page 4 of 12
 Page 5 of 12

According to Ahlussunnah ts literal meaning is an Existent [One that Existeth].

But it is used in some other meanings as well.

1] In the meaning of Contingent in Existence (Possible in Existence/ Mumkin Al Vuju:d].

2] In the meaning of Created Existents.

3] In the meaning of each and every individual of Necessary, Possible (Contingent) and Absurd (Impossible/Incontingent).

4] In the Meaning of both Possible [Contingent] and Necessary Existents.

So if he claims that every Non Eternal is a SHAI [Thing] and every Shai is a Creation then he must shew that the word Shai
in the Text of the Expression Every Shai is a creation does exclude the Divine Essence and the Attributes of Divine
Essence like Speech of Qura:n.

Engineer Ali: Mirza: is not allowed to use Rational Arguments and Reasons. Since he is a Literalist. He bases all his
theological system on the literal meanings with some exceptions where he makes an exception with out statingany rule and
with out any principle like in the tradition he uses the Arabic word for father for the Paternal Uncle instead of the literal
meaning of the word Father. But suppose that this Engineer says that Only Divine Essence is Beginningless and Eternal and
not the series of Non Eternals then he attepts to prove the claim with Rational Arguments , we shall point out that he is not
allowed to use any rational argumentation [Al Istadla:l Al Aqli:] . Other wise the shall be attacked by Rational Arguments
on several issues of his faith. Further he must confess that he has no proof from the three sources stated above and there
fore he is compelled to use rational arguments and rational argumentations. An other reason is that he cannot use Reason
and Rational Arguments is as follow:

The Priniple that It is Absolute Absurd (Absolutely Absurd) that a Infinite and Beginning-less Series of Non Eternals
towards Eternity Existeth is a Rational Principle and it is neither a Divine Revelation nor a Knowledge obtained by
Observations and Experiments. Since Ali: Mirza recognizes only two sources of Knowledge, he cannot use this Principle. If
the Principle is Proved it is Proved by Reason and Rational arguments which are neither Experiments nor obtained from
Experiments, nor Observations nor obtained from Observation. Similarly Engineer Ali: Mirza: cannot prove it that this
Principle is stated Explicitly in the Text of an A:yah or in the Text of An Hadith:. So he cannot use this principle and must have
to discard it on the basis of his own arbitrary choice of sources of Knowledge. If this Principle is an Independent Axiom
then it is independent of all types of sources of Knowledge acceptable to the Engineer, and becomes a Knowledge in itself .
So what this means. This principle cannot be used to declare any one as a committer of Kufr by the Engineer.

What so ever is proved that the Engineer Ali: Mirza: cannot prove that the belief under discussion is Kufr. Further he
cannot prove even that the belief is incorrect.

Now we ask some questions which are as follow:

1] If some one says that Divine Essence is reciting Holy Qura:n [From Su:rah Al Fa:tih:ah to Su:rah An Na:s] Beginninglessly ,

is that a Kufr?

2] If some one says that Divine Essence is Talking to Himself Beginninglessly, is that a Kufr?

Page 5 of 12
 Page 6 of 12

3] If some one says that Divine Essence is Exercising the act of Istiva: beginninglessly [with out Arsh] , is that Kufr.

4] If some one says that Divine Exercising the act of N-zu:l beginninglessly [with out Sama:uddunyah] is that a Kufr?

5] If some one says that he is talking to some of the Non Existents beginninglessly , is that a Kufr. [This belief may be
declared as irrational by some rationalists but this is not the question whether this is a Rational Belief or an Irrational Belief,
the question is whether it be a Kufr or Not].

6] If some one says that Divine Essence is exercising some Intransitive acts [Acts which do not require terms and objects],
beginninglessly is that a Kufr?

7] Is it a Kufr to say that Neither Qura:n is a Creation nor it is Beginningless?

8] Is it a Kufr to say that A Beginningless is may not be Eternal?

9] Is it a Kufr to say an Infinite series of Individuals [whether Acts or Supposita/Essences or both types of them] towards
Eternity never approach to the Eternity?

It must be noted that it must also be kept in mind that there is just two alternatives. 1]The word Shai (Thing) can be
predicated to Divine Acts or 2] it cannot be predicated to Divine Acts.

It must be noted that it must also be kept in mind that there are just two alternatives. 1] The word Creation can be predicated
to Divine Acts or 2] It cannot be predicated to Divine Acts.

If these two points are noted it becomes very difficult to issue a verdict/Fatva: .

Engineer Ali: Mirza: becomes a ( Modified ) Tacfi:ri: when he issues a Fatva of Kufr on the issue which cannot be declared as
Kufr. One may also ask him is that a Kufr to so Qura:n is a Creation? If he replies in affirmation then he must admit that all
those who believe that Qura:n is a Creation are Ka:fir , who so ever they may be implying that ALL Mutzilah are Ka:fir from
his statement. If he does not believe then how can he declare those as Kafir who do not believe that Non Eternals do not have
a Beginning? Is that more Kufr then the belief in the Creation and Createdness of Holy Qura:n????

What he can do is to prove that Creations/Creatures have a Beginning and that there is at least One Created Thing Prior to
which there is no Created Thing. But he cannot prove that All Non Eternals are Creations/Creatures. So this does imply to
Claim that All Non Eternals are Creations requires proof from the Texts of A:yah, or Tradition or report of Ijma:.

He is not allowed to use any rational argument .If he wants to use a Rational Argument he must Confess that there is no
Proof From Text of A:yah, From Text Of Tradition Of H:adi:th: , and From the Text of Report Of Ijma: . If he cannot do it then
it means THAT HE CANNOT PROVE that the belief Not All Non-Eternals are Creations is Kufr/Cufr.

We have shown that the Engineer Ali: Mirza: is unable to prove a belief as Kufr even if he declares it as Kufr.

Also Ali: Mirza: never said a word against Ibn Ar Rushd Al Und-l-si: who believed in the Eternity of the World . As if he does
not know his belief in this regard. But this does shew that Engineer Ali: Mirza: remains silent on those whom he considers
useful for him in general. If a Beginningless series of Non Eternals which never approaches to Eternity and does not have
any asymptote to Eternity is Kufr /Cufr then the belief of Eternity of the World is Kufr on Primarily Basis. Did any one noted
Page 6 of 12
 Page 7 of 12

that the Engineer ever declared Ibn Ar Rushd as Ka:fir. Certainly Not. Only Divine Essence Knoweth the Reality of his Silence
in this regard or is there any one else who knoweth it?. How ever the best possible reason is that he is likely to use this
Philosopher for his believes. But after this has been pointed out , it must become very difficult for the Engineer to use the
stated above Philosopher in support of him.

For he has convinced his audiences , that what so ever he is speaking is true with certainty and certitude. In this case he has
implicitly become an infallible Ima:m of his followers just like the ima:m of Jama:atul Muslimi:n. He is an analogy of Masu:d
BSc. in his own circle.

Engineer Ali: Mirza: and his claim that

To believe that Divine Essence is a
Locus of Non Eternals is Kufr.

Now we come to the problem of Sustainment of Non Eternals in Divine Essence.

Ali: Mirza: from Jhelum city claims that the belief that Non Eternals are Sustained in Divine Essence or the are Associated
With Divine Essence or both is a Kufr.

The questions on these issues are the same.

1] Is there an A:yah whose Text Stateth that There is Absolute Impossibility of Non Eternals to be Sustained in Divine
Essence or to be Associated With It or Both?

2] Is there a H:adi:th: whose Text Stateth that There is Absolute Impossibility of Non Eternals to be Sustained in Divine
Essence or to be Associated With It or Both?

3] Is there an Report of Ijma: whose Text Saith that There is Absolute Impossibility of Non Eternals to be Sustained in
Divine Essence or to be Associated With It or Both?

If he cannot prove this from atleast one of the above stated authority/source then he cannot prove it to be Kufr.

Once again he cannot use Books of Ahlussunnah Asha:irah and Ahlussunnah Ma:turidiah. He must use his own system or
the system of his former Teacher Semi Ahlul H:adi:th: or Both.

If he can use some rational argument , rational arguments may be used against him in certain Cases.

But he does not have the right to use rational arguments to prove some thing as Kufr/Cufr.

The argument that Locus of Non Eternal is Non Eternal Itself [ M-h:-l Al H-du:th: H:adith: ] requreth Proof from the three valid
sources/authorities with the stated above conditions.

Page 7 of 12
 Page 8 of 12

It may also be asked that what does he means by Ijma:. Does his Ijma: includes the concession of each and every sect of
Isla:m? If so then Karramites does not agree with the belief and thus there is not Ijma:. If his Ijma: include only some
sects then he MUST name the sects , concession of whome constitutes an Ijma: . So it is required to define an Ijma:.

In other form it may be said as follow:=

If there is an Ijma: on the Absolute Impossibility of Sustainment of Non Eternals In Divine Essence then the question is:=

Either this Ijma: is constituted by all Sects Of Isla:m or Some Sects of Isla:m.

If it is claimed that it is constituted by all sects of Isla:m then it is incorrect. Since Karramites believe that Divine Essence is
a Locus of Non Eternals.

If it is claimed that it is constituted by some sects of Isla:m then Engineer Ali: Mirza must state the Nouns of those sects.

Also if a number of sects [at least one considering one as a number] declares an other sect as Ka:fir , is it reasonalble to
declare an Ijma: against it ?

If Engineer Ali: Mirza: claims that Karramites are Ka:fir therefore they are excluded from Ijma: then this is incorrect
technically.

If they have been excluded from Isla:m for contradicting an A:yah or a H:adith: as stated above , or an Ijma: prior to prior
to their existence and they had transgressed against at least one of them , this would have been the case. But if they did not
commit a Kufr of this type and a dispute of such time occurred and one of the Sect held a different view, and some of the
sects held the opposite view , this thing cannot become an Ijma: . Since this means that if some sects agree against one
sect then it is an Ijma: . All these questions are made to find out the concept of an Ijma: which rests in the mind of the
Engineer.

So to declare Karramkites as Ka:fir just because they believe that Divine Essence is a Locus of Non Eternals, then this claim
is incorrect for the following reasons.

1] It is required to prove that this Belief is Contradicted by a Verse .

OR [ INCLUSIVE ]

2] It is required to prove that this Belief is Contradicted by a H:adi:th: .

OR [ INCLUSIVE ]

3] It is required to prove that this belief was declared as Kufr by Ijma: and Karramites were first to deny and transgress
against this Ijma: after it was established.

4] The Priniple that It is Absolutely Absurd that Non Eternals Can Be Associated With Divine Essence is a Rational Principle
and it is neither a Divine Revelation nor a Knowledge obtained by Observations and Experiments. Since Ali: Mirza
recognizes only two sources of Knowledge, he cannot use this Principle. If the Principle is Proved it is Proved by Reason and
Rational arguments which are neither Experiments nor obtained from Experiments, nor Observations nor obtained from
Observation. Similarly Engineer Ali: Mirza: cannot prove it that this Principle is stated Explicitly in the Text of an A:yah or in

Page 8 of 12
 Page 9 of 12

the Text of An Hadith:. So he cannot use this principle and must have to discard it on the basis of his own arbitrary choice of
sources of Knowledge. If this Principle is an Independent Axiom then it is independent of all types of sources of Knowledge
acceptable to the Engineer, and becomes a Knowledge in itself . So what this means. This principle cannot be used to declare
any one as a committer of Kufr by the Engineer.

If Ali: Mirza: of Jhelum is unable to prove it , his Fatva: of Tacfi:r ceaseth.

This does shew that Engineer Ali: Mirza: claims many thing but on critical and logical analysis it appears that he deceives .

He is a modified Tacfi:ri: who does not declare the followers of different sects as Ka:fir but great scholars of these sects as
Ka:fir. This is a deliberate fallacy made to deceive all those who have not study the techniques of the Engineer thoroughly .
Using this fallacy and other some techniques [like permitting oral sex with espouses ] he attempts to attract young
generation.

PLEASE NOTE :

We believe that:=

1] It is ABSOLUTE IMPOSSIBLE THAT DIVINE ESSENCE BE LOCAS [M-H:-L] OF NON ETERNALS [H:AVA:DITH:] .

2] It is ABSOLUTE IMPOSSIBLE THAT THERE IS ABSOLUTE IMPOSSIBILITY OF INFINITE SERIES OF NON ETERNALS TOWARD
ETERNITY.

But we do not declare any one as Ka:fir just because he believes at least in one of them since these two believes may be
interpreted in several ways. Similarly the Locus-ness [M-AH-LIYAH] is also in two meanings 1) Broad 2) Strict.

The first one (which is second in the general discussion) may mean that the Sustainment or Association is not in the meaning
of Asha:irah and Ma:turi:diyah /Ma:turi:diah but in a broad meaning to which the stated above meaning is a special case.

Even if this broad meaning may not be correct yet it is not the strict meaning. ( )6
The second one (which is the first in the general discussion) is Kufr when at least one Existing Individual in the alleged
infinite beginningless series is claimed to be Eternity. If the Sempiternity doeth not intersect with Eternity then it is just a
wrong and incorrect belief yet it is not Kufr.

If no Individual of the beginningless series is Eternal then this means Eternity is Infinitely Prior to each one of the member of
the series implying that it is infinitely Prior to the very infinite series itself. We give the example of Real Number that the
Negative Infinity is Prior to each and every real number thus it is prior to the set of all real numbers. Similarly the series
tends to Eternity but neither reaches to Infinity nor approaches to Eternity.

Yet if the Engineer of Jhelum wants to declare any one who does not declare these two believes as Kufr he must provide
some proofs from the stated above sources, Otherwise his claims are invalid and unsound. To claim a thing that it is Kufr is
one thing and to prove it to be Kufr is a Second thing different from the first thing. If some one is unable to prove a Claim his
Claim is Rejected , and in the matter of Tacfi:r it is falsified.

Page 9 of 12
 Page 10 of 12

Engineer Ali: Mirza: does not have any principle to declare any one as Ka:fir , he declares according to his will and arbitrary
choice of principle when he wants to declare some one as Ka:fir. But when he does not want to declare some one as Ka:fir he
drops the principle. He chooses and drops principles arbitrarily. This is the problem which is often not detected by those
who have not studied his lectures thoroughly and comprehensively. Even in his alleged researched papers he uses some
techniques which are unreasonable and irrational , yet he incorporates them in the papers wisely cousin deliberate fallacies.

His choosing and dropping is based upon the laymen of sects available in his country. If he had faced Mutazilites , Jahmites,
Najjarites, he would have made soft corners for them, but he does not have any soft corner for Great Sunni Scholars. This
exposes his heretic Mind. It may be surprising for some but not for those who are contemplating in his mind through is
lectures and papers that he being a Rafid:I does have some soft corner for Kh:ava:rij since he hopes that one day he may
meet Aba:d:iah the present existing Kh:arjite Sub-sect. So he is a gatherer before a Rafid:ite. This may be discussed in ful

length in a separate article IN SHA:ALL-H.

Foot Notes
(1) The English WORD verse is used in the meaning of A:yah , and an A:yah is a Sentence, there fore it is correct
to say Sentence of A:yah. Also a verse in this meaning (meaning of A:yah) is a prose and not a poem/poetry that
must be noted since Entire Qura:n is in Prose and not a single sentence is a Poetry/Poem. An Ayah is not an
Stanza either. It is pure Prose.
(2) It must be saind that an Ijma: cannot be contradicted by weak traditions. The tradition which saith that Sad Bin
Ibadah RD: did not accept Saiyiduna: Abu: Bakr RD: is weak. If it is not weak then interpretable. Yet it cannot
contradict the Ijma: on the validity of Kh:ila:fah of Saiyiduna: Abu: Bakr RD: . But suppose that it does even then
there is an Ijma: on the Kh:la:fah of Saiyiduna: Umar RD:. So to deny the Kh:ila:fah of Saiyiduna: Umar RD: is a
Kufr with Certainty and Necessity.
It may be noted that there are some sects whom Engineer of Jhelum does believe to be Muslim yet they do not
believe in the validity of Ijma:. If Ijma: is so powerful then all those who deny its validity becomes Kafir.
Now either Ali: Mirza: denies that one who deny an Ijma: is Kafir or he has to declare all those who deny validity
of Ijma: as Ka:fir. A very difficult decision for The Engineer.
(3) Initially the Text of sentences of H:adith: were conveyed orally as traditions, but after they were written the words
like Text and Scripture are valid to them. That is the case that The word Text can be applied to Holy Bukh:ari: and
Holy Muslim. Similarly the word Scripture may be predicated to each one of the two Holy Books of Holy Traditions.
In fact the Textual parts of Ah:adith: are Texts. Some also apply the word Text to the Sanad [Pl: Asna:d] parts since
they also satisfy the definition of the Term Text.

(4) The word Creation and the word Creature are often used as Synonyms. So it must be noted that the word
Creature(s) is used in the meaning of Creation(s) i.e Created thing(s), and not in the meaning of any monstrous
living being in Philosophical, Theological, Dialectical, and Logical Discussions and Studies.
(5) Some Scholars have used the Rational Methods to prove Karramites as Ka:fir , on this particular belief but those
who dispute from Takri:r argue that there is not Proof With Certainty [Addali:l Al Qat:i:] to the claim that To be

Page 10 of 12
 Page 11 of 12

Locus of Non Eternal is to be Non Eternal. It is responded that it is not a Theorem which requireth a Proof but an
Axiom [Al Us:ul Al Maud:u:ah]. Some attempt so save Karramites from Takfi:r by differentiating between Lazim of
a Dictum [Qaul] and Qaul. Any how Engineer Ali: Mirza: cannot declare them as Ka:fir even if others can. The
reason is that he is a Literalist in general and cannot use Rational arguments and Reason to Declare some belief as
Kufr when it is not proved Kufr from the above three Sources. Further Engineer Ali: Mirza cannot use Rational
Arguments according to his own Engineered System.
(6) For Example when it is said that Divine Essence exercised the Act of Istiva: [Ba:b =: Iftia:l] then this means that in
broad meaning the temporal Act of Istiva: is Associated with Divine Essence. Yet it is not meant it is Associated in
the meaning Divine Omniscience or Divine Omni-Vita [Life]. Similarly the meaning of Locus is not in the meaning
generally used but in themeaning that a non Eternal Act may be ascribed to the Divine Essence in the Meaning that
the Divine Essence is the Agent [Al Fa:il] of the Act [Fil] . Similarly if the Act of N-zu:l [Vaz-n=: F-u:l] is ascribed
to the Divine Essence it may be said that the Act is Associated with the Divine Essence but not in the Strict Meaning
but in the Broad meaning.Similarly When Saiyiduna: Mu:sa: [Moses] AS said Varily My Lord [Rabb] is With Me
this implies that the Rabb [Lord] Was Not With Pharaoh [Firaun]. This means the Act of Withness With Saiyiduna:
Mu:sa: AS is Not Eternal yet it is ascribed to Divine Essence The Rabb. So one may say that the Act of Becoming
With the Prophet Mu:sa: AS is Associated With Divine Essence in broad meaning but not in strict meaning.
But when it is said that Karramites /Carramites believe that Not Eternals can be associated with Divine Essence
the mean in the Strict Meaning. But our Machine Minded Friend The Engineer of Jhelum Can Not Prove Karramites
as Ka:fir in the System he use to believe in it as it appears in his Lectures and Papers ; and in the Works of Zubair
Ali: Zai .
As for us we do not use the terms like Association, Sustainment, Locus etc. in Broad Meanings and condemn its use.
But to declare some one as Ka:fir who uses the broad meanings is entirely different thing. The scope of this article
is restricted to the Principles of Tacfi:r which Ali Mirza: uses . in general.
NOTE: There are two types of OR and in this article the Inclusive Type is used and the
Exclusive type is not used.

TO THE FOLLOWERS OF ALI:

MIRZA:
The methodology used for Takfi:r/Tacfi:r by the Engineer is discussed and is shewn that it is Cleverly Engineered
by the Engineer to help him when he wants to declare some one as Ka:fir or more cleverly as One Who Commits
Kufr.
Every thing is studied and his techniques are known. In such a case the question is as follow:=

WILL YOU STILL FOLLOW THIS HERETIC

AND ACCEPT HIm AS A MAN OF
PRINCIPLE?

Page 11 of 12
 Page 12 of 12

How many evidences do you require to drift

away from him. A Mumin cannot be deceived
from the same person twice [Sense of a
Famous Tradition].
It is our duty to inform you.
YOU ARE INFORMED.

Page 12 of 12