IT IS COMMUNICABLE TO THE DIVINE ESSENCE, AND IS NEITHER IDENTICAL NOR SEPARATE [LA: AIN WA LA: GHAIR] .

THEY DO NOT BELIEVE THAT AN ATTRIBUTE OF ATTRIBUTE OF GOD IS SUSTAINED WITH THE ATTRIBUTE OF GOD. AN ATTRIBUTE OF AN ATTRIBUTE OF GOD[A POSATIVE ATTRIBUTE OF AN ATTRIBUTE OF GOD] IS EITHER A RELATIVE ATTRIBUTE OR AN ACTIVE ATTRIBUTE OF GOD. THEY ALSO BELIEVE THAT STATMENTNESS IS AN ACTIVE ATTRIBUTE OR A RELATIVE ATTRIBUTE. 3]MODERATE MINDED AHLUSSUNNAH WAL JAMA:-AH OF DEOBAND TRY TO UNIFY BOTH BELIEVES BY CLAIMING THAT IT MODERATE IS JUST A VERBAL DISBUTE. ATTRIBUTE IS IDENTICAL TO THE DIVINE ESSENCE IN THE SENSE /MEANING OF NON-ABSOLUTE IDENTITY, AND NOT IDENTICAL TO THE ESSENCE IN THE SENSE /MEANING OF ABSOLUTE IDENTITY] SIMILARLY IT IS NOT SEPARATE IN THE SENSE/MEANING OF ABSOLUTE SEPERATION, AND BUT SEPARATE IN THE SENSE /MEANING OF NON ABSOLUTE SEPERATION/SEPEBERABLITY] HOW EVER ESSENCE OF GOD IS ABSOLUTELY IDENTICAL TO GOD [ THAT IS IDENTICAL IN MISDA:Q/SUBJECT AND MAFHUM/MANA:/MEANING/SENSE} An other term is self identical. Absolute separate means separate in misdaq and mafhum. Non Absolute Identity means identical im MISDA:Q and separate in mafhum. Which is also Non Absolute Seperation/seperablity. Absolute separation means separate inboth mafhum and misdaq. IN THESE SENSES/MEANING THE DISPUTE IS CLEARLY A VERBAL ONE. OBJECTION:A NUMBER OF THEOLOGIANS/THEOLOGISTS BELIEVE THAT DIVINE SPEECH IS AN ETERNAL STATEMENT. SO IF IT IS NOT TRUE THEN IT IS FALSE. AND THAT IS KUFR. ANSWER TO THIS OBJECTION. is as follow: A LARGE NUBBER OF AHLUSSUNNAH WAL JAMAA_AH do believe that ETERNAL SPEECH IS NEITHER AN INSHA [NON STATMENTAL SPEECH] NOR A KHABAR[STATEMENT]. SO BOTH INSHA:IAH AND KHABARIAH ARE RELATIVE ATTRIBUTES. THERE IS NO TRUTH OR FALSEHOOD WHICH IS SELF POSSIBLE WITH OUT KABAR. SO ETERNAL SPEECH IS NEITHER FALSE NOR TRUE IN ETERNITY SINCE IT IS NOT A STATEMENT. A SMALL MINORITY DOES BELIEVE THAT ETERNAL SPEECH IS AN STATEMENT. IF SOME ONE DOES HOLD THIS OPENION THEN ACCORDING TO THIS OPENION THE RESPONSE HAS BEEB GIVIEN IT IN OTHER ARTICLES IN THIS SITE . IN A NUT SHELL THE RESPONSE IS AS FOLLOW. IF IT IS A STATEMENT THEN IN REGARD TO ETERNAL REALITIES AND SELF POSSIBILITY OF FALSEHOOD IS IN REGARD TO NON ETERNITY. THIS IS A SELF POSSIBILITY OF NON ETERNAL CONNECTION ,NOT IN ACCORDANCE TO

OCCURRANCES . THE ACTUALIZATION OR EXISTENCE OF THESE CONNECTIONS AT MOST IMPLY THE ANNHALIATION OF TRUTH OF THE SUPPOSED ETERNAL STATEMENT IN REGARD TO ETERNAL REALITIES AND NON TEMPORAL TRUTHS.
BUT

THIS IMPLICATION IS NOT A SELF IMPLICATION [LUZUM BIDH DHAN OR IST-LZAM BIDH DHA:T] BUT IS LUZUM GHAIR ADH DHA:TI AND ISTLZAM GHAIR ADH DHA:TI:.[ A NON SELF IMPLICATION ] SO EXISTENCE OF THESE CONNECTIONS ARE ABSURD WITH SEPARATE. IF OCCURRENCE OF A SEPARATE IMPLIES A SELF ABSURD AND IMPLICATION IS NOT A SELF IMPLICATION THEN THE SELF ABSUDITY OF ONE THAT DOES OMPLY CAN NOT BE PROVED. SO IF FALSHOOD IN REGARD TO ETERNAL REALITIES IS SELF ABSURD THE SAID CONNECTIONS CAN NOT BE PROVED AS SELF ABSURD. EVEN THE AUTHOR OF SUBH:AN ASUUBBU:H: ACCEPT THIS FACT.

IS BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THIS ARTICLE ,HOW EVER IT SHALL BE DISCUSSED LATTER. A GOOD PORTION OF THE MATTER IS DISCUSSED IN SOME OF THE PREVIOUS ANSWER. IT IS ADVISED TO SEE THEM the reason the present article is SOME DISCUSSIONS ARE LEFT DUE TO not supposed to be a detailed discussion. THERE FORE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT KALAM AL ALAFZI AND KALAM AN NAFSI ARE LEFT BEHIND. ONE OF THE BASIC REASON IS THAT THE AUTHOR OF SUBHAN AS SUBBU:H: DID NOT BELIEVED IN DISTICTION B/W KALAM AL LAFZI AND KALAM AN NAFSI AS HE HAS CONFESSED IN MALFUZAAT PART 04. THAT IS A REASON AMONG SOME OTHER REASON THAT WE HAVE ALSO NOT DISCUSSED THEM . HOW EVER A DETAIL DISCUSSION SHALL SOON BE ON LINE INSHA ALLAH.

A DETAIL DISCUSSION