AHLUSSUNNAH WAL JAMA:’:AH

Mirza: Jhelumi and Deniers

Mutvatir Tradition
Refuting Mirza Jhelumi.
Ahlussunnah
03-Oct-19

Refuting the Objection Of Mirza: Jhelumi:

Page 1 of 8

Page 1 of 8
Page 2 of 8

Mirza: (b:1977 CE) has heretic tendencies and he is a person with out any Principle.

In this article it is intended to prove that this person of Jhelum is very cunning in presenting his
contradictory and contrary ideas in such a way that his audiences and listeners are unable to detect his
fallacies which are deliberately embedded in his lectures.

This lecture consist of some Preliminaries , some results and an epilogue.

Preliminary One

In one of his lectures Mirza: Jhelumi: claimed that ‘Ima:m ‘Ibn Taimiah RH: committed a Cufr [Na’:u:dh:u
Billah] . He claimed that ‘Ima:m ‘Ibn Taimiah RH: rejected a Mutva:tir H:adi:th: . The H:adi:th: of Man
Cuntu Maula:….. .

We have by the grace of ‘ALL-H refuted Mirza: Jhelumi:’s claim that this tradition is Mutva:tir. We have
written several articles that this Tradition is not Mutva:tir. If Zubair “:Ali: Zai has claimed that this
tradition is Mutva:tir then this is his Mistake. By any definition of Tava:tur this tradition is not a
Mutva:tir Tradition.

But Mirza: Jhelumi attempted to ascribe a Cufr to Saiyiduna: ‘Ima:m ‘Ibn Taimiah RH: .

The Cufr of denying a Mutva:tir Tradition.

How ever Mirza: Jhelumi: purported to give a benefit of doubt to ‘Ima:m ‘Ibn Taimiah RH: so that his
listener may not begin to drift from him on declaring such a Great Person as Ca:fir.

But these are the other issues. The basic issue at this point is that according to this man from
Jhelum . “To deny a Mutva:tir H:adi:th: is Cufr”.

Mirza: Jhelumi: attempted to use this Principle against ‘Ima:m ‘Ibn Taimiah RH: .

Second Preliminary

But Mirza: Jhelumi: himself did not consider the denying of a Mutva:tir H:adith: as Cufr.

Page 2 of 8
Page 3 of 8

In this portion of his lecture a very important lecture Mirza: .

Mirza: Jhelumi: does not declare deniers of Parousia of Christ [N-zu:l ‘Al Masi:h:] as Ca:fir . In this portion

Mirza: Jhelumi: denied that a person if denies a Mutva:tir H:adi:th: is Ca:fir.

Mirza: Jhelumi: was asked by one of his audience about three events namely:-

1] Parousia Of Christ ( N-zu:l ‘Al Mas:h:)

2] Advent of Mah:di:

3] Advent of Dajja:l

The question is in incorrect Urdu as if the enquirer cannot speak correct grammatical Urdu.

So an exact translation in English becomes very problematic. If we correct the sentences spoken by the
enquirer , one may say that there is an interpolation in the text of sentences. On the contrary if we
translate the incorrect Urdu exactly then the English translation becomes itself very problematic.

Any how we try to convey the meaning to the best of our knowledge.

The Question:-
Many people say that the Parousia of Had:rat ‘:Isa: ,Advent of ‘Ima:m
Mahdi: and Temptation of Dajja:l [Fitnah of Dajja:l] and Coming of Mahdi:
are great events , so why they are not mentioned in Qur’a:n Maji:d?

If there mentioning is not in Qur’a:n Maji:d , so on the basis of Traditions

which are many ‘Ah:adi:th: and they are Succesive ‘Ah:a:di:th: [‘Ah:a:di:th:
Mutva:tirah] ,but they deny . How can we believe on the basis of traditions.

The Answer by Mirza: Jhelumi:

“ Yes! See If some one accepts a Tradition as Mutva:tir and then

deny it then we shall apply the Order of Shari:’:ah on him, and one
who does not accept it as Mutva:tir or say that the tradition does not
approach to the limits/boundaries [H:ADD] of Tava:tur [Succession]
, evidently he is interpreting his saying [Ba:t] , no Fatva: shall be
issued against him [Coi Fat-va: nahi: Laga:’ein ge].

Page 3 of 8
Page 4 of 8

The rest is that I have recorded the Problem 12 , I do have told my Proofs
[D-la:’il] , I am a believer of the Personality of Leader [‘Ima:m ] Mahdi: .

If some one denies these thing , and denies by accepting these traditions as
S:ah:i:h: then he is a Strayer [Gumra:h].

If he considers that these ‘Ah:a:di:th: are not approaching to the degree of

S:-h:ah [Correctness , the first degree of ‘Ah:a:d] , according to his sensibility
they are not on the level , then we cannot say him as Ca:fir, cannot expel
them from ‘Isla:m , at most you can say that they are Strayers [Those who
have gone Astray] in your opinion [Naz:ar] , do not make a decision of Cufr

ans ‘Isla:m .”
Time

1:00 to 1:45
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHTRpZDLnMk

Now we shall discuss only the sentences spoken by Mirza: Jhelumi: written in Red Sakkal Majalla.

This is a pure Cufr uttered by the speak of the portion of the speech in the video.

Since to deny a Mutva:tir H:adi:th: if it a Mutva:tir Tradition is pure Cufr whether the denier denies it
with an interpretation [Ta’vi:l] or without it.

So this is a evident proof that Mirza: Jhelumi: is a Apostate and a Heterodox, and has said some thing
which is Purest Form Of Cufr ‫كفر‬

Since either a H:adi:th: is Mutva:tir or it is not.

If it is then any one who denies it either with some interpretations or without any Interpretation , the
person is Ca:fir with certainty.

One who denies this Principle is also not a Muslim.

We are not discussing on any individual Mutva:tir Tradition but on the Principle and on the person who
denies this Principle.

Third Preliminary

There is an inconsistency in the system of Mirza: Jhelumi: .

Page 4 of 8
Page 5 of 8

If ‘Ima:m ‘Ibn Taimiah denied the Tradition “Man Cuntu Maula…..” by saying this tradition is not
Mutva:tir then Mirza: Jhelumi cannot claim that ‘Ima:m ‘Ibn Taimiah has Committed Cufr, according to
the standard of his own religious system.

Since if some one doesdeny the tradition “Man Cuntu Maula: ……..” by arguing that it is not Mutva:tir
then according to his own saying such a person does not commit any Cufr.

We once again produce the sentences of Mirza: Jhelumi: as follows:-

“ Yes! See If some one accepts a Tradition as Mutva:tir and then

deny it then we shall apply the Order of Shari:’:ah on him, and one
who does not accept it as Mutva:tir or say that the tradition does not
approach to the limits/boundaries [H:ADD] of Tava:tur [Succession]
, evidently he is interpreting his saying [Ba:t] , no Fatva: shall be
issued against him [Coi Fat-va: nahi: Laga:’ein ge]………………..”
Why Mirza: Standard has multi-standard? The answer is very clear , that he is a person without
any principle. He is Heterodox and Heretic. On one hand he is not just a Ra:fid:i: but an Enemy
of S:ah:abah , so he wants to declare all those who defend S:ah:a:bah as committer of Cufr, and
on other hand he want to declare deniers of Mutva:tir ‘Ah:a:di:th: as Muslims. So he
contradicts himself either directly or indirectly , making his own religious system as
Inconsistent, Self -Contradicting and Paradoxical.

It must be noted that the Mirza: Jhelumi: may try to deceive his disciples by confusing the two
types of Interpretations.

1] FIRST CASE

To accept the Text of a Mutva:tir Tradition as Mutva:tir , yet to take the Metaphorical or
Figurative or Allegorical Meaning [Virtual Meanings] of the Mutva:tir Text. In some cases

Interpretations of the Text of a Mutva:tir Tradition based on Proper Principles of Hermeneutic

Interpretations may be as Correct and Right. In some cases that the Literal Meaning is correct
and right.

2] SECOND CASE

Page 5 of 8
Page 6 of 8

To make interpretations that a Mutva:tir Tradition is not Mutva:tir. Some time such
interpretations are right and some time such interpretations are wrong. In this case ,

The second one is certainly and definitely Cufr. The first one is not. But Mirza: Jhelumi: is
discussing the second case. So if he attempts to make an apology that he saying about the the
first case then he is just deceiving , and vailing and covering the Cufr which he has stated in his
lecture.

He is too cleaver , and deceives his audience from detecting his Inconsistencies etc. by saying
conflicting things in different lectures. So it requires a Critical ,Logical , Rational and Religious
studies of His lectures to find Heterodoxies and Heresies cleverly embedded in his apostate
lectures.

By the grace of ‘ALL-H he has been proved as Heretic and Heterodox in regard to his views of
‘Ah:adi:th: .

Forth Preliminary

Why the claim of committing of Cufr ascribed to ‘Ima:m ‘Ibn Taimiah RH: due to denying a
Mutva:tir Tradition is incorrect and wrong.

Mirza: Jhelumi: has ascribed three Cufrs to ‘Ima:m ‘Ibn Taimiah RH:

1] The belief that G-d is Locus of Non-Eternals [H:va:dith:].

2] The belief that the Tradition “ Man Cuntu Maula: … “is not Mutva:tir.

3] There is an Infinite Back Ward series of Non-Eternals [H:ava:dith:].

Mirza: Jhelumi: ascribes some other alleged incorrect beliefs towards him. But those which are
mentioned above are the major ones according to the Mirza: Of Jhelum.

In this article we are going to provide a very precise and brief summary of our long answers to
this false allegation coined by Mirza: Jhelumi: on ‘Ima:m ‘Ibn Taimiah RH: .

The Tradition “Man Cuntu Maula: is claimed by Zubair ‘:Ali: Zai as Mutva:tir. But is is not so. His
literalism compelled his to say so.

This tradition is not Mutva:tir . There is no proof from any book of Principle of H:adi:th: that five
or seven or nine or twelve or sixteen ‘Al‘Ah:a:d ‘As:s:h:i:yah can constitute a Mutva:tir
Tradition. So if Shaikh: Zubair ‘A:li Zai of H:-d:ru said such a thing he committed a Great Grant
Mistake .

Page 6 of 8
Page 7 of 8

As for the claim that ‘Ima:m ‘Ibn Taimiah RH: believed that G-d is the Locus [M-h:-l] of
H:ava:dith: [Nom-Eternals] , the sentence if ‘Ima:m ‘Ibn Taimiah RH: are explained and proper
commentaries are shown ,and thus no objection can be made on the Great Sunni: ‘Ima:m.

How ever there as Mirza: Jhelumi: is accustomed to declare every thing from Ah:a:di:th: , so he
is required to present a Single S:ah:i:h: H:adi:th: which explicitly stateth that it is Cufr to believe
that G-d is the Locus of Non Eternals [H:ava:dith:] . We do not believe that ‘Ima:m ‘Ibn Taimiah
RH: held this belief, and interpret his sentences, yet we do say that Mirza: Jhelumi: cannot
prove this claim that it is Cufr to believe that G-d is the Locus of H:ava:dith: according to his
own system of religion. Similarly whether the Non Eternals have Beginnings or not is another
problem and there are different commentaries of ‘Ima:m ‘Ibn Taimiah RH: . How ever once
again .

Fifth Preliminary

Some time due to the plurality of S:ah:i:h: Traditions with common Text or Similar Text is called
Mutva:tir. But this is not the Technical use of the term but it is used in Non-technical meaning.

So such Traditions if they are called Mutva:tir they are called in lower meanings or in
metaphorical meaning but not in the Strict meaning. The difference between Virtual Mutva:tir
and not in the Real Meaning . So Mutva:tir in Virtual Meaning is not Mutva:tir in Real Meaning
in regard to the word Muta:tir , taken as a Term.

In much better sentence one may say that if a Tradition is not Mutva:tir in the Prime Meaning .

In the secondary meaning if a Tradition is called Mutvatir then it is certainly not in Primary
Meaning. So if some one have declared Traditions like “Man Kuntu Maula: ………” as Mutva:tir
they have said it so in the Secondary Meaning.

Epliogue

1]If a Person incorrectly claims that THAT a Tradition is Mutva:tir yet it is not in reality then this
is an Error , regardless of his error whether he commits this error with some interpretations or
with out any interpretation.

2]If a Person wrongly claims THAT a Tradition is Not Mutva:tir yet it is then this is a Cufr,

regardless of his error whether he commits this error with some interpretations or with out any
interpretation.

3] If a Person accepts that the Text of a Mutva:tir Tradition is Mutva:tir and interpret the Text in
virtual meaning then it is not Cufr unless and other wise it contradicts Necessities if ‘Isla:m or

Page 7 of 8
Page 8 of 8

Certainties of ‘Isla:m [D:aru:riya:tul ‘Isla:m and Qat’:iya:tul ‘Isla:m”. Insome cases the
Interpretation may be incorrect.

4] There are some possible cases that a person accepts the Text of a Mutva:tir Tradition as
Mutva:tir but Interpret it in Virtual Meaning and he is correct in interpretation.

The interpretations based on Proper Principles of Hermeneutic Interpretations are some time
accepted as Correct and Right.

Mirza: Jhelumi has transgressed against the Mutva:tir H:adith: .

More Discussions may be uploaded latter.

Page 8 of 8