AHLUSSUNNAH WAL JAMAAH

The Divine Omnipotence

and the Interpretation of a
Tradition made by Mirza
Jhelumi
Mirza Jhelumi Declares Major Cufr asMinor Cufr
Ahlussunnah Apologetics
23-Nov-19

Mirza Jhelumi has tried to misinterpret a H:adi:th: in order tp support his Apostate belief that some Cufr
are forgivable. In this ARTICLE this Apostate belief is refuted an a proper discussion is made on the
Tradition.
Page 1 of 10

Page 1 of 10
 Page 2 of 10

The Divine
Omnipotence and the
Apostate Explanation
of a Tradition made by
Mirza Jhelumi
Introduction
If some one studies the theological and religious system of Mirza Jhelumi: [b:1978 CE] , it s found that
his system is like a Jigsaw puzzle. Different parts of a belief are mentioned in different lectures. This
makes Mirza: Jhelumi: a cunning preacher rather than a scholar.

He uses to discuss a topic in a lecture , then he all of the sudden shifts to a new topic and then shifts
back to the original topic.

The grafted topic is almost independent if not exactly independent of the mother topic.

Mirza: Jhelumi: leaves the adopted topic incomplete and then he completes it in some other lecture of
another major topic, which has same conditions and constrains.

This shews that Mirza: Jhelumi: is slowly attempting to poison the minds of innocent Muslims.

He tries to get people from the sub-sects of Sunnism.

He has openly crossed all the limits of ‘Isla:m.

He does not consider Cufr as Cufr.

He divides Cufr in two types 1] Partial Cufr [ ‘Al Cufr ‘Al J-z’i] 2] Total Cufr [‘Al Cufr ‘Al Culli:]

Similarly he tries to make Major Shirc as Minor Shirc.

Before discussing his Apostasy and refuting is opinions about Cufr and Shic , one thing is necessary that
we should declare :-

For the first time we openly declare that it has become impossible to consider this person as a Muslim.

Page 2 of 10
 Page 3 of 10

Also that it is not correct for a Muslim male to marry a female who follows Mirza: Jhelumi: .

Such a marriage is impossible .

Similarly it is impossible for a Muslim female [Muslimah] to Marry a male person who is a follower or a
disciple of Mirza: Jhelumi: .

THE CASE OF SHIRC

Mirza: Jhelumi: divides Shirc into two types.

They are as follow:-

1] Major Shirc. , 2] Minor Shirc.

But he never mentions the definitions of each one of them.

After listening his lectures , it becomes very clear that the only Shirc which he considers as the Major
Shirc is the plurality of G-ds /g-ds.

Any belief other than the belief of plurality of G-ds/g-ds is not Shirc according to the person of Jhelum i.e
Mirza Jhelumi.

For example if some one believes that G-d incarnates in a human being or becomes a human being then
such a person is neither a Ca:fir nor a Muslim on the basis of this particular belief but if the person is a
declares Mirza: Jhelumi: and his followers as Ca:fir then he is a Ca:fir. But if he ceases to declare the
mentioned above people as Ca:fir , Mirza: Jhelumi: is fully prepared to declare such a person as Muslim.

He does not even using the principle of Hinging from Impossibility [Ta’:li:q Bil Muh:a:l] , which he used
for Mah:mu:di: Mirzais [His spiritual twin Mirza: Bashi:ruddi:n Mah:mu:d ].

MISUSE OF A TRADITION

Mirza: Jhelumi: misused a tradition in the clip :-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66Q_WslAh-I&t=1200s

Time Scale 3:31 to 5:36

There is a tradition about a person who was a great transgressor of Divine Law of his time.

At the time of his death he said to his siblings to burn his corporeal body and to scatter its ashes in the
atmosphere at different places so that G-d cannot make him to resurrect of for eschatological questions.

Page 3 of 10
 Page 4 of 10

He was so afraid that he thought that if G-d found him in a single piece , G-d shall not for forgive him
due to his transgressions.

What the Apostate of Jhelum concluded from this tradition is pure Cufr and plain Shirc.

Mirza: Jhelumi: concluded the following from the beliefs:-

1) The person under discussion did not believe in the Divine Power to resurrect a person when he
is made ashes by burning and spreading the ashes in the atmosphere at different places .
2) This belief is a Partial Cufr .
3) Yet According to the Tradition , G-d Did Forgive the person after resurrecting him by the Divine
Power.

Mirza: Jhelumi: said that such a belief is Cufr since G-d is Omnipotent and any one who doubts in the
Divine Omnipotence immediately becomes a Ca:fir.

But G-d did forgive the person which implies that G-d shall for give some Cufr in the Day of
Judgement .

Such Cufr are termed as Minor Cufr , or Partial Cufr by the Apostate of Jhelum namely Mirza:
Jhelumi: .

Refutation Of the ARGUMENTS Of Mirza: Jhelumi:

1] It is the Axiom of ‘Isla:m that G-d Hath Power over each and every Absolutely Contingent with the
exclusion of Divine Eternal Attributes.

2] One who denies the Divine Omnipotence on a Single uncluded Absolutely Contingent then the
person is not a Muslim.

But there are some scholars who committed a mistake.

The erroneously believed about some Absolutely Contingent Acts/Events as Absolutely Impossible.

So they deny the Divine Power over them . But they did not said that a thing is Absolutely
Contingent and not an Eternal Attribute even then it is not in Divine Omnipotence.

They only declared a number of things as Absolutely Impossible when they were Absolutely
Contingent.

So this is the difference between the two.

For example deniers of Divine Power over the Replica of Holy Prophets do not say that it Replica of
Prophets are Absolutely Contingent yet they are not in Divine Omnipotence. On the contrary they
say that their Replica are Absolutely Impossible.

Page 4 of 10
 Page 5 of 10

Gh:ula:m Rasu:l Sa’:i:di: has crossed all the limits when he claims that Replica of each and every
person is Absolutely Impossible [Muh:a:l] . See Sharh: Muslim Vol 03.

But the correct and right view is that they are Absolutely Contingent and Are in Divine Power.

If the person was a Theologian then the person erroneously considered an Absolutely Contingent
act as Absolutely Impossible Act.

In this case he committed a Mistake of Considering an Absolutely CONTINGENT Event as Absolutely

Impossible Event.

But the person did not said that The Act or Event is Absolutely Contingent yet G-d Doeth Not Have
Power Over it.

What Mirza: Jhelumi is doing is just playing with the faith of Muslim by interpreting the Tradition
according to his apostate ideas which occupy his mind.

If the person was not a theologian of his time then it may be said that at the time of his death , he
was not fully in his senses , and he thought incompletely that by doing this G-d shall not resurrect
him. But as he was not in full senses , this is a perfect excuse , since if a person is not in senses then
no Cufr can be ascribed to the person whose senses are not functioning properly. But the Merciful
G-d forgave him , Since his senses though were not functioning properly , which was sufficient to
save him from declaration of Cufr, but not an absolute malfunction which could exclude him from
DIVINE MERCY.

If a person is not in his proper senses and utters a sentence of Cufr, he or she cannot be declared as
a Ca:fir.

To be a Ca:fir , it is necessary to be in complete senses.

In the terms of S:ufiah , one can say that this was a type of Sucr /Sukr .

Since in the state of Sucr a person is not in his senses at all. If a person is not in his senses at all , the
person cannot be declared as a Ca:fir even if in this state of mind , he or she utters a sentence which
is Cufr in literal meaning.

It is some what analogous to insanity if not insanity .

If a person has taken a drug which has made the person out of his proper senses then any sentence
uttered by the person how so ever the sentence is Cufriah, the person cannot be declared as a
Ca:fir.

Dispute upon the Divine Power :

1] It is accepted that G-d cannot commit suicide that is G-d cannot kill Himself.

The word cannot means “ Not in Divine Power”.

Page 5 of 10
 Page 6 of 10

Since death and Self Killing, Suicide are Absolutely Impossible Upon Divine Per Se Subsistent
Essence. Any thing , Any Attribute, Any Act, Any Event , Any Doing that is an Imperfection [N-qs:]
upon Divine Per Se Subsistent Essence of Deity , is Absolutely Impossible and Divine Omnipotence is
not over Absolutely Impossibles.

But G-d Hath the Power to kill the Souls, Spirits etc.

2] It is not in Divine Power that G-d can Create an other G-d like Him [i.e His Replica]. Since Divine
Replica is Absolutely Impossible. But there is a dispute among Scholars whether G-d Hath Power to
Create a Replica of Holy Prophet or not. Those who claim that the Replica of Holy Prophet is
Absolutely Impossible believe that it is not in Divine Power, and those who believe that it is
Relatively Impossible believe that it is in Divine Omnipotence.

3] Shaikh: Zubair ‘:Ali: Zai himself agreed with some extremist Kh:airabadi:s that G-d Doeth not have
Power to send a person who died as a Ca:fir to Paradise . He had stated his belief in the ellipse of his
Stunch followers. For example it is reported that Zubair ‘:Ali: Zai did not believe that G-d Hath the
Power to send ‘Abu: Jahl, Ha:ma:n , ‘Shadda:d , Ja:lu:t etc. in heavenly paradise. But he was not
declared as a Ca:fir.

As he was not well versed in Theology , so he used to say that to Say that G-d Hath Power to send
Pharaoh [Fir’:au:n] in Paradise is Blasphemy [Shatm].

But it is strange that he did not say that to say “G-d Doeth Not Have the Power to Send the
Pharaoh to the Paradise” is a Blasphemy.

This means that he was in perfect agreement with those scholars of Khairabadi: Cult who believed
that G-d Doeth not Have Power to Send any one who died as a Ca:fir to Paradise.

Since according to them it was Rationally Impossible [‘Al Muh:a:l ‘Al ‘:Aqli:].

Any how they are on same page.

4] Some Scholars of Kh:airaba:di: cult also believed that it is not in Divine Omnipotence to send a an
Infallible Rational Suppositum say an Angel or a Sinless person [S:a:lih: Mah:d:] to the Heavenly Hell.

Since they consider it Rationally Impossible and according to them there is an exact equality
between Rationally Impossible and Absolutely Impossible.

It is very likely that Shaikh: Zubair ‘:Ali: Zai was also of this view.

5] In our several objections we have asked this question to different scholars , whether “ ‘Istiva:’ ” of
G-d on Throne is Eternal or Not, and if Not then then ‘Istiva:’ is a Creation’ beyond doubt.

Silmilarly if “ ‘Istiva:’ of G-d on ‘:Arsh ” is Absolutely Possible then is it Absolutely Possible on Farsh
or ‘Ard: ??

Page 6 of 10
 Page 7 of 10

6] Is G-d in every space Eternally , if so than all he Spaces are Eternal and if No Space is Eternal and
all Spaces are Creation of G-d than G-d is neither in all spaces Eternally nor is in some Space
Eternally , but is Without any Space Eternally.

So the Divine WITHNESS “ Ma:’:iah ”cannot be Eternal, and if Not Eternal and Non Eternal then a
Creation. If Creation then it is Absolutely Impossible for the Attribute of Divine Withness to be
Associated With Divine Per Se Subsistent Essence. So not in Divine Omnipotence.

But moderate scholars do not declare any one as Ca:fir since the dispute is over Particular Things
that whether they are Absolutely Possible or Absolutely Impossible.

There is no dispute over the issue that a Non Eternal Absolutely Possible is In Divine
Omnipotence/Power.

So there is no Cufr in such beliefs according to moderates .

So it is a Logical Contingency that the person erroneously thought that it is Absolutely Impossible for
G-d to regenerate or re construct a person after his corporeal body is burned to Ashes and his Ashes
are dispersed in Atmosphere at different places on the Earth.

So in such a case the Person did no believed in a Cufr but erroneously declared an Absolutely
Possible as an Absolutely Impossible.

A number of scholars were unable to distinguish and to differentiate between Intrinsic Implication
of Impossibility [‘Istih:a:lah Na:shi: ‘:Anidh: Dh:a:t] and Extrinsic Implication [‘Istiha:a:lah ‘:A:rid:
‘:Anil Gh:air]. So if the person thought that Recreation of such a person implies the Negation of
Divine Wisdom , which he erroneously thought as Absolutely Impossible , so he may commit the
same type of error which was once committed by Some Scholars of Kh:airaba:di: and Shaikh: Zubair
‘:Ali: Zai Himself.

But due to such errors it is not correct according to Moderate ‘Ahlussunnah , that it is Cufr.

It is just a Heresy but not Cufr.

Two Claims Of Mirza: Refuted.

Mirza Jhelumi did say that the person mentioned in the H:adi:th: :-

1] Believed that G-d Hath the Power to resurrect a person from death if his body is in a single piece .

2] Believed that G-d Doeth not have the Power to resurrect a person if after the death of the person
his corporeal body was burned into aches and scattered at different places.

3] This belief of the person is Cufr. But G-d shall forgive the Cufr.

4] From this Mirza Jhelumi: concluded that sometime a Person believes in a Cufr that is certainly a
Cufr yet the believer of the Cufr is not a Ca:fir.

Page 7 of 10
 Page 8 of 10

Now it is necessary to answer ,question by question.

Mirza: Jhelumi said: The person mentioned in H:adi:th: Believed that G-d Hath the Power to
resurrect a person from death if his body is in a single piece .

Answer:

The person did believe in the Divine Power and consider that to Resurrect a person if the Corporeal
Body of a deceased person is in single piece .

Also that he believed that such an event is Absolutely Contingent.

Mirza: Jhelumi says that the person mentioned in the Tradition , Believed that G-d Doeth not have
the Power to resurrect a person if after the death of the person his corporeal body was burned into
aches and scattered at different places.

Answer:

If the person was a layman then one must interpret that the person was not in his full senses , and
so he was in a state of Insanity .

Due to mental state at the time of his death , the mental insanity was of a severe nature that the
person was unable distinguish between some thing in Divine Power and Some thing not in Divine
Power, could speak sensibly , and was a subject to uncontrollable impulsive behavior. Insanity is a
concept discussed among Fuqha:’ in order to distinguish Cufr and some Irregular Sentences which
may have meanings of Cufr.

If the person was a Theologian or a Philosopher then it may be the case that he considered a thing
that was Absolutely Contingent as Absolutely Possible.

We have presented several examples like the belief of Shaikh: Zubair ‘:Ali: Zai etc.

My mother narrates that once her father i.e my Maternal Grand Father , who was a great
Theologian, while discussing on the topic with a Kh:airabadi: minded scholar, whether G-d Hath the
Power to Speak a False Sentence , faced a question, that If G-d Hath Power to Speak a False
Sentence then G-d should have Power to become Nescience since both Divine Knowledge and
Divine Truth both are Divine Attributes.

My Maternal Grand Father replied that the Objection maker had made a mistake between that
“Attributes of G-d” and “Attributes of Attributes Of G-d”. When my Maternal Grand Father replied
his rival at the time did not hesitate but declared my Maternal Grand Father as a Ca:fir immediately.

But my Maternal Grand Father did not declared his rival as Ca:fir. He said to the person. “ Sir thou
art confused between an Attribute of G-d and an Attribute of an Attribute of G-d.”

Then he further explained to the person.

Page 8 of 10
 Page 9 of 10

“There is a difference between an Attribute of G-d and an Attribute of a Spoken Sentence of G-d.”

Then he asked his opponent “Shalt thou tell me , Doeth G-d Hath Power to Speak a True Sentence?”

If thou saith in affirmation then this meaneth that Divine Sentence and its Attribute of Truth both
are in Divine Power implying both are Creation Of G-d.

If thou saith in negation then this meaneth that thou believest that G-d Cannot speak a True
sentence Either.

The discussion was over.

My Mather narrates that when she asked that “Is this person a Ca:fir” .

She saith that her Father replied. No the person committed a Heresy but not a Cufr. He incorrectly
believed that a Self Contingent is Self Absurd

Here we say the same thing. If the person commits a mustake by considering a Logically Contingent
as a Logically Impossible this is not Cufr by moderate Sunnites in general.

So this is not Cufr if this is the case.

What Mirza: Jhelumi is trying to say that this belief of the merson stated in H:adi:th: was a Cufr yet
G-d Forgave the Cufr.

No ! This is Certainly NOT the case.

It is reported that even Mirza: Jhelumi: does not believe that G-d Hath Power to send the Pharaoh to
the Heavenly Paradise and not to send Pharaoh [Of Moses [‘:AS]] TO THE Heavenly Hell.

What he says about himself. [If the report is incorrect then this is not incorrect in regard to his
former Telephonic teacher “Zubair ‘:Ali: Zai” . Is Mirza: Jhelumi: is ready to declare that he believed
in Cufr like the person mentioned in the tradition stated Above?

Any How if this would have been a Cufr then G-d would not have forgiven the person stated above .

Mirza: Jhelumi: says :-“ This belief of the person is Cufr. But G-d shall forgive the Cufr.”

Answer

This belief is a Heresy. If this belief is a Cufr then G-d Would Not Have Forgiven the Person.

If this belief of the person is really a Cufr then then the tradition cannot be correct in the literal
meaning and then MUST BE INTERPRETED in some Non-Literal Meaning .

Page 9 of 10
 Page 10 of 10

Any How the belief of Mirza: Jhelumi is a Cufr that a person believed in Cufr but Gd did Forgive the
person. This is a Cufr , and one who believes what Mirza: Jhelumi: believes is certainly not a Muslim.

Mirza: Jhelumi: concludes in his lecture that sometime a Person believes in a Cufr that is certainly a
Cufr yet the believer of the Cufr is not a Ca:fir.

Answer

This is a wrong and incorrect conclusion, Rather this conclusion is Cufr and one who believes in this
conclusion is not a Muslim at all, and any one who gives a benefit of doubt to such a person is also
not a Muslim.

Page 10 of 10