AHLUSSUNNAH VAL JAMA:’:AH

EXPLAINING HADITH
3597 OF MUSLIM TO
MIRZA JHELUMI
ACCORDING TO SHAIKH
AL BANI AND SHAIKH
ZUBAIR ALI ZAI
REFUTING MIRZA JHELUMI THE ENGINEER
Talat Zahrah Naqvi
07-Aug-19

Engineer ‘:Ali: Mirza: Jhelumi has alleged that the H:adi:th: No. 3597 of S:ah:i:h: Muslim is about
Corruption in Sacred Qur’a:n. In this paper it shall be tried to explain the tradition according to Shaikh:
‘Al Ba:ni: and Shaikh: Zubair ‘:Ali: Zai. Mr Mirza Jhelumi still considers these two scholars as Muslim and
use there agreement on the categorization of Tradition. It is likely that his followers after studying this
article shall know the conspiracy of Mirza: Jhelumi: the Engineer, against the Truth of Holy Muslim.
 Page 1 of 8

Engineer ‘:Ali: Mirza who shall be referred as Mirza: Jhelumi [b:1977 CE] in this article , claimed in one of
his deceiving lectures that Saiyidatuna: ‘:A:’ishah RD:, ‘Imam Muslim and S:ah:i:h: Muslim report a
tradition on the Tah:ri:f [Corruption] of Sacred Qur’a:n.

This tradition is certainly false and has been refuted.

But it is necessary to discuss and explain this tradition i.e 3597 Muslim according to the believes of
Shaikh: ‘Alba:ni: and Shaikh: Zubair ‘:Ali: Zai , since these two persons are still believed to be Muslim by
Mirza: Jhelumi.

The basic reason why Mirza: Jhelumi who in his extremism has gone to far that he ascribes atleast three
Kufr and five heresies to ‘Ima:m ‘Ibn Taimiah RH: , does continues to declare these two scholars as
Muslim, is that Mirza: Jhelumi uses these agreement on the judgement of the status of a Tradition as an
Authority with the exception if they declare a Tradition about the Virtues of Saiyiduna: Mu’:a:viah RD:
as H:asan. This is his extreme Enmity of S:ah:a:bah RD: .

This discussion shall consist of some prerequisites and an Explainations.

First Prerequisite

The Tradition 3597 of Holy Muslim saith that initially it was revealed that if a woman feeds a baby then
times then the relation of Milk is established.

This law was abrogated and replaced by a verse [in Sacred Qura’:n] which reduced the number ten to
the number five.

Holy Prophet died and this verse was read among the verses of Sacred Qur’a:n.

Page 1 of 8
 Page 2 of 8

Second Prerequisite

Mirza: Jhelumi [b:1977 CE] claims that as this verse was recited with the verses of Holy Qur’a:n even
after the death of Holy Prophet , it cannot be an abrogated verse. But it is absent from the Text of
Sacred Qur’a:n.

So the only option left is that it is a verse which is a Tah:ri:f or it proves the Corruption of Holy Qur’a:n as
claimed by ‘Akh:ba:ris and some of the common elders of of ‘Us:uliah and ‘Akh:ba:riah.

Third Prerequisite.

Mirza: Jhelumi has borrowed this objection from H:a:mid H:usain , an ‘Ith:na: ‘Ashri: Debater who made
an objection on a Tradition ascribed to Saiyiduna: ‘Ibn ‘:Umar RD: . The basic axiom on which his
objection depends is given as follow:

If a Verse of Qur’a:n is Abrogated from recitation then it ceaseth to be a Verse of Sacred Qur’a:n.

Mirza: Jhelumi borrowed this false Axiom from Istaqs:a:’al ‘Ifha:m and then applied to the Tradition of
Holy Muslim, Tradition No:3597.

This objection has been answered. How ever in the present article this false Axiom and the objection
shall be discussed according to the beliefs of Shaikh: ‘Al Ba:ni: RH: and Shaikh: Zubair ‘:Ali: Zai.

There two scholars were strict Salafites and did hold the Salafi belief in regard to Sacred Qur’a:n.

As these two scholars are considered as Muslims by the Mirza: Jhelumi, it should be extremely difficult
for him to declare any explanation of the Tradition 3597 which is based on the common belief of these
two scholars in regard to the Sacred Qur’a:n.

It must be noted that the word Ta’vi:l in this article is used in the meaning of Interpretation and not in
the meaning of Explanation. The word Interpretation is used in the meaning of hermeneutic meanings
that is to take a meaning of the text of a sentence that is not literal .

Forth Prerequisite

According to these two scholars a Word or a Sentence or a Verse or a Speech that is Spoken by D-ity
[Deity]/ G-d [God] Himself is Uncreated [Gh:air Makh:lu:q].

If a thing is Uncreated [Gh:air Makh:lu:q] then there are the following Cases:-

1] Either It is G-d /D-ity Himself [ i.e It is Identical to Divine Per Se Subsistent Essence].

2] Or it is an Attribute and Deity [i.e Divine Per Se Subsistent Essence] is the Locus [M-h:-l] of It.

3] Or It is an Attribute, D-ity is Locus of an Attribute which is the Locus of this Attribute.

Page 2 of 8
 Page 3 of 8

These are the only Possible cases if a thing is Gh:air Makh:luq.

Since Deity , Attribute of D-ity and Attribute of an Attribute of D-ity [if any] are Gh:air Makh:luq and are
the Only Gh:air Makh:luq according to Salafites.

If an D-ity is Locus of an Attribute then the Attribute is the Attribute Of G-d.

If an Attribute Of G-d is Locus of an Attribute then the latter Attribute is the Attribute of An Attribute Of
G-d. [How ever Majority does not believe in this type of Attribute but we have included this type of
Attribute in our discussion for the sake of completeness of the discussion in the first stage].

As both of the stated above Scholars i.e Shaikh: ‘Al Ba:ni: RH: and Shaikh: Zubair ‘:Ali: Zai believed that
any thing that is Spoken by D-ity (whether It be a Word or a Sentence or a Verse or a Speech) is
Uncreated they Must Have believed that the Spoken one by D-ity must be any one of the Stated above
three Divine Notions [i.e Either D-ity Himeself or An Attribute of D-ity or an Attribute Of an Attribute of
D-ity] and Only One of them.

Further is there is some existing thing which does not belong to any one of the above Divine Notions
stated above is Separate From D-ity [i.e Gh:airullah].

It is certainly Kufr and Shirk to believe that a Gh:airullah is Gh:air Makhlu:q and a Gh:air Makh:lu:q is
Gh:airullah. So it is not possible to ascribe this belief to any one of the two scholars. If Mirza: Jhelumi
ascribes this belief to any one of the two or to both of them then he ascribes Kufr and Shirk, beyond any
shadow of doubt.

Fifth Prerequisite

There is a difference between a verse recited by a Created Rational Suppositum [whether the
Suppositum is an Angel Being or a Human Being or a Jinn Being] and Spoken By D-ity Himself.

However a Created Rational Suppositum can recite a Verse Which is Spoken By D-ity Himself.

If a Verse is Spoken by D-ity It is a Speech Of D-ity , if the same verse is recited by a Created Rational
Suppositum say a Human Being it continueth to be the Speech Of D-ity. As Sacred Qur’a:n is the Speech
Of G-d [i.e Divine Speech] then each ane every Verse Of Sacred Qur’a:n is Spoken By G-d
Himself.

As each and every verse of Sacred Qur’a:n is Spoken by D-ity then D-ity is the Locus of each and every
Verse of Sacred Qur’a:n.

But it is Absolutely Impossible For G-d to Cease to be a Locus of some thing if G-d is the Locus of the
thing.

So if D-ity is Locus of a Verse then D-ity then it is Absolutely Impossible that D-ity Cease to be the Locus
of the Verse. This is not Relatively Impossible but Absolutely Impossible.

Page 3 of 8
 Page 4 of 8

This shews that if a Holy Verse of Sacred Qur’a:n is Abrogated From reading/recitation [Mansu:kh: ‘Att-
la:vah] , it is still Associated with Divine Essence [i.e G-d/D-ity] i.e D-ity is still the Locus of the Verse.

So this means that a Mansu:kh: ‘Att-la:vah verse is Continues to be Qur’a:n in regard to its Association
[Q-ya:m] with Divine Essence and in regard to M-h:liah [Locality ].

So if a verse of Sacred Qur’a:n is Abrogated in regard to Reading it only means that it is now prohibited
by the Divine Law [Shar’:] to read this verse with other verses of Sacred Qur’a:n, It is Prohibited to write
this Verse among Unabrogated Verses of Sacred Qu’a:n [Unabrogated in regard to Reading i.e Gh:air
Mansu:kh: ‘Att-la:vah ‘A:ya:t] , etc. but It doeth not mean its Association with Divine Essence and
Mah:liah of Divine Essence It is Ceased .In regard to Divine Essence [Dh:atul Ba:ri:] it is Absolutely
Impossible that the M-h:liah [Locality] and Association [Q-ya:m] is Ceased.

So Abrogation in Regard to Reading does not Imply Cessation in Regard to Association With D-ity.

Second Discussion

In the Tradition 3597 of Holy Muslim Saiyiduna: ‘:A:’ishah RD: is saying Minal Qur’a:n in regard to the
Association of the Abrogated Verse [Abrogated in regard to Reading] in Regard to Divine Essence.

Since this Verse is Still Associated With Divine Essence [Deity/D-ity] and the Divine Essence is Still

The M-h:l [Locus] the Verse. Since G-d Himself Spoke this Verse.

Since a Verse Abrogated in Regard to Reading is Still Qir’a:n in Regard to the Divine Essence.

Since the Abrogated in Regard to Reading is also Spoken By G-d and is Associated With the D-ity.

This is the Explanation of the Tradition 3597 in Holy Muslim as according to the Believes of these two
scholars. Since they both did not believe in ‘Al Kala:m ‘An Nafsi: ; both did believe in Kala:m ‘Al Lafz:i: .

Both believed that the Verses of Sacred Qur’a:n Spoken by G-d are Uncreated and Associated with
Divine Essence.

For Example the verse:

1)Of some apostles We have already told thee the story; of others We have not;- and to Moses Allah
spake direct;- (Surah An-Nisa’, 164)

According to both of the scholars what so ever G-d Spoke to Mu:sa: was Uncreated and was Ka:la: m ‘Al
Lafz:i: .

Similarly According to both of the Scholars the Sentences of G-d heard by Saiyiduna: Mus:sa: ‘:AS were
Uncreated [Gh:air Makh:lu:q].

They do not consider them as Created and hastily declare any one who consider them as Created as
Mu’:tazili: or Jahmi: .

Page 4 of 8
 Page 5 of 8

So this is the reason it is clear that the consider each and every verse of Holy Qur’a:n asUncreated.

2) When Moses came to the place appointed by Us, and his Lord addressed him, He said: "O my Lord!
show (Thyself) to me, that I may look upon thee." Allah said: "By no means canst thou see Me (direct); But look
upon the mount; if it abide in its place, then shalt thou see Me." When his Lord manifested His glory on the Mount,
He made it as dust.And Moses fell down in a swoon.When he recovered his senses he said: "Glory be to
Thee! to Thee I turn in repentance, and I am the first to believe." (Surah Al-A‘raf, 143)

The Sentence of G-d heard by Saiyiduna: Mu:sa: RD: in the verse 143 ‘Al ‘A’:ra:f is also believed to be

Uncreated by these two Scholars.

These two examples are sufficient to explain the Tradition 3597 of Holy Muslim according to these two
scholars.

Third Discussion

That is Saiyidatuna: ‘A:’ishah RD: meant the Sacred Qur’a:n and Its Verses in Regard to Divine Essence
and Laws of Shar’: [Laws Of Divine Law] and not applicable to D-ity Himself, they are Applicable to
Human and Jinn Beings.

The tradition can be interpreted as follow:

Minal Qura:n means From Sacred Quran which is associated with Divine Essence.

It has been stated that any Human Being or any Jin Being or any Angel Being who reciteth any verse of
Holy Qur’a:n actually reciteth the Verse Spoken by G-d Himself.

It must also be noted that if a Verse is Spoken by is Qur’a:n in regard to Divine Essence it continueth to
be Verse of Qur’a:n in Regard to Divine Essence even if it is Abrogated from Reading in the Law of G-d
and is not written in the Text of Qur’anic Copies.

It is incorrect to say that a Verse of Qur’a:n Associated With the Divine Essence continueth to be a
Speech of G-d yet Cease to be Qur’a:n even in regard to Divine Essence.

Since this means that there is a Mutation in Gh:air Makh:luq Kala:m [Uncreated Speech] that it became
Gh:airul Qur’a:n from Qur’a:n. Such a Mutation is Absolutely Impossible. None of the two can be
ascribed by such a belief.

Any one who claims so should provide an evidence since such a belief is purely heretical and innovation.

Forth Discussion

If a person recites Holy Verses of Qur’a:n then the recited Qur’a:n is not Associated With Divine Essence
but this person is reciting the Verses of Qur’a:n Spoken by G-d which are Associated With G-d.

This is a subtle distinction between the two.

Page 5 of 8
 Page 6 of 8

But many elders disliked to call the Qur’a:n recited by Created Beings as Creation.

A Possible Response Of Mirza: Jhelumi:

Mirza: Jhelumi may say that Verses of Qur’a:n are not Attributes of D-ity but Attributes of Attribute of D-
ty that is Attribute of Divine Speech which is in turn an Attribute of D-ity.

So a Speech of G-d can become Gh:air Qur’a:n from Qur’a:n yet remaining Gh:air Makhlu:q and
continuing to be Speech Of G-d.

But such a claim requires evidence. Since the belief of Attribute of Attribute of G-d is held by a very
small minority. ‘Ah:mad Rad:a: of Bans Baraili declared Truth as Lazim of Lazim of G-d , that is Attribute
of Attribute of G-d.Since he believed Qur’a:n as La:zim of G-d and Truth (Of Qur’a:n) as La:zim of
Qur’a:n. That is why he believed that the Falsehood in regard to Divine Speech is Absolutely Impossible
and denied the very idea that it is Relatively Impossible. Since Relative Impossibility implies Absolute
Contingency of Falsehood which negates his belief of Lazim of Lazim.

But if any one of the two scholars believed in Attribute Of Attribute Of Deity , it is more unlikely that he
believed as La:zim of La:zim.

Perhaps it is the only case in which Mirza: Jhelumi: can say that An Attribute of an Attribute of D-ity is
Absolutely Possible to Cease to Exist.

But was such belief held by Shaikh: ‘al Ba:ni RH: and Shaikh: Zubair ‘:Ali: Zai or any one of them? It is up
to Mirza Jhelumi to prove with evidence that at least one of these two scholars believed that the Verses
of Qur’a:n are Attributes of a Divine Attribute i.e Attribute of Divine Speech.

Similarly if Mirza: Jhelumi claims that each one of the two scholars did believe that each and every
spoken verse of Qur’a:n is Divine Essence it Self then this means that no verse can cease to be Qur’a:n
EVEN if it is abrogated from reading.

How ever he claims so he must provide Proof Texts .

Further this implies the cessation of the Divine Essence Itself , which is the Annihilation of very

Deity/D-ity Himself, which is Absolutely and Logically Impossible.

Note that we ask for evidences only in the case a rare belief , if a rare is ascribed to any one of the two
or both of them .

So if a Sentence of Deity/D-ity is Uncreated then there are only three logically Possible cases.

Either it is the very Deity Himself i.e the very Divine Essence Itself or it is an Attribute of Deity or It is an
Attribute of an Attribute of Deity/D-ity.

In the First Case Abrogation from Reading does not imply Cessation of It from Being Qur’a:n since this is
at most Annihilation of G-d Himself and at least a Mutation of G-d , .Both of them are Absolutely

Page 6 of 8
 Page 7 of 8

Impossible. If any one of the two is implied this means that Abrogation of Verses is At least Relatively
Impossible and at most Absolutely Impossible. But this is incorrect and wrong. In nutshell “One That
Implieth an Impossible Is Impossible”.

In the Last case Mirza: Jhelumi needs so shew evidences from the works of these scholars since this is a
rare belief and cannot be ascribed to any one with out strong evidences.

The Second case has been discussed and on the basis of this case any verse which Abrogated in regard
to Reading may be called Qur’a:n or From Qur’a:n in Regard to Its Association With Divine Essence and
Its Ascertainment to Divine Essence.

Conclusion

We have explained the verse mentioned in Tradition 3597 [Holy Muslim] according to the beliefs of
these two scholars who are still considered as Muslims by Mirza: Jhelumi: the Engineer.

Even if he dislike this explanation based on the beliefs of these two schoalrs , he can neither declare it as
Kufr nor declare it as heresy.

Evidence.

In the case of Sh:aikh: ‘Alba:ni: he has clearly stated his beliefs while answering a Student Of Shaikh: ‘al
Kauth:ari: .It shall be discussed in detail if required.

In case of Shaikh: Zubair ‘:Ali: Zai there are many students still alive to witness his believes in regard to
Sacred Qur’a:n and his hostility against the ‘Ash’:arite and Maturite beliefs in regard to Sacred Qur’a:n.

Further there is no dispute in beliefs in regard to Sacred Qur’a:n between these two Shaikh:s , as for as
my information is concern.

ABOUT THE AUTHORESS

THE AUTHORESS IS A RVERTED AHLUSSUNNAH FROM ITHNA ASHRITE SECT , AND IS ASHARI MATURIDI ,

AND HAS ITEREST IN SALAFISM.

SHE HOLDS ASHARITE AND MATURIDINTE BELIEVES AND NOT SALAFITE YET SHE CONSIDER THEM AS
SUNNIS.

A CRITIC OF THE MIRZA JHELUMI THE FOUNDER OF JHELUMITE SECT.

DISCLAIMER

Page 7 of 8
 Page 8 of 8

AUTHORESS IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DISTORTION INMEANING DUE TO TYPIST AND ANY SPELLING
MISTAKE DUE TO THE SAME.

Page 8 of 8