[Year]

AHLUSSUNNAH WAL JAMAAH AHLUSSUNNAH

[REFUTATION OF NUR ARGUMENT OF BARAILVISM]

[Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document. Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document.]

2 A NUMBER OF BARAILVIS ARGUE THAT HOLY PROPHET WAS A NU:R . SOME CROSS LIMITS BY CLAIMING THAT HE WAS NOT A HUMAN BEING [INSAN\BASHAR] BUT BELONG TO A SPECIAL SPECIES CALLED NUR WHICH APPEARED AS A HUMAN BEING YET NEVER BECOME A HUMAN BEING. SOME BELIEVE THAT HE WAS A HUMAN BEING BUT OF VERY SPECIAL TYPE WHICH WAS MADE FROM NUR. Page | 2 THE WORD NUR MEANS LIGHT YET THIS IS JUST AN ANTERNATIVE WORD. IN THIS ARTICLE THEIR ARGUMENT FROM AL MAIDAH 14 IS DISCUSSED IN DETAIL. BARAILVI ARGUMENT FROM AL MAIDAH 14:THE VERSE SAYS:-= QAD JAA ACUM MINALLAHI NU:RUN VA KITA:BUM MUBI:N. 15 AL MAIDAH. VARILY CAME INTO YOU FROM DEITY [ALLAH] NUR AND CLEAR BOOK. Barailvis argue that Va/VAU means and implies a distinction unless there is a Qarinah [Indicator ]. So Nur is not Kitab. If and Kitab is Quran. So Nur is Not Quran. If not Quran then the Holy Prophet . So he is the Nur. Some further add if nur then not a human being. ANSWER: BISMILLAHIRRAHMAANIRRAHIM. BISMILLAHIO VAL HAMDULILLAH ASSALATU VASSALAMU ALA RASULLILLAH First PREMILINAY HOLY PROPHET WAS A HUMAN BEING [BASHAR/INSAN] .THIS IS A ISLAMIC AXIOM. IF NUR CONTRADICTETH HIS HUMANITY [BASHARIAH/INSANIAH] THEN HE IS NOT NUR [GHAIR NUR], IF NOT THEN HE MAY BE A NUR BUT NOT AS A BELIEF BUT AS A PROBABLITY.
NOTE:IF NOT NU:R THEN AFDAL MIN CUL LI AN NU:R AL HADIS

DISCUSSION: IF by the Word NU:R AL CALA:M AN NAFISY is meant and by the Word KITA:B AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY is meant then the Letter [Word] VAU remains as a word of distinction since:1] ACCORDING to majority of SUNNIS who believe in AL CALA:M AN NAFSI:Y , AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY IS ETERNAL [QADI:M] and AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY IS H:ADI. There is no one among those Sunnis who believe in AL CALA:M ANNAFI:Y, that <<<<AL CALA:M AN NAFI:Y is NOT ETERNAL.>>>> . Majority of Majority Of Sunnis [ASHAIRAH AND MA:TURIDIAH] do believe that AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:I:Y is Not Eternal There is a SEPERATION [MUGHAIRAH] between AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY [not Eternal]and CALA:M AN NAFIY [Eternal].So the objection That <<the words KITA:B and Nu:r both can not be used by Deity for Qura:n , SINCE the word /letter Vau between the the word Nu:r and Kita:bun Mubi:n { Kita:bun Mubi:n[m] } [ pronounce :Kita:buMunin]demands that both Kita:b and the Nu:t must be distinct from each

other>> becomes incorrect and unsound according to Majority Of ASHARITES AND MATURIDITES. Since <<THE ETERNAL [QADIM IS]AND IS DISTINCT AND SEPARATE FROM EACH AND EVERY H:A:DI [NOT ETERNAL/TEMPORAL>>]and << EACH AND EVERY H:a:DI IS DISTINCT AND SEPARATE FROM ETERNAL>> A Minority ofMajority Of Sunnis [ASHAIRAH and MATURIDIAH] how ever believe that both of the two CALA:MS /KALA:MS id est AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY and AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY are Eternal [QADI:M]. Even in this case both of them are two different Attributes Of Deity. Al Cala:m An Nafsiy is an ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTE Of DEITY [ Nounly ALL-H SUBHA:NAHU: VA TAA:LA:] and Al Cala:m Al Lafz:iy is an ACRIVE ATTRIBUTE OF DEITY [Nounly ALL-H SUBHA:NAHU: VA TAA:LA:].The word Vau Can be used between two different Types Of Divine ATTRIBUTES say ESSENTIAL AND ACTIVE. The Claim: AL CALA:M AL LAFZIY is Active if it is Eternal. [ IF AL CALA:M AL LAFZIY is ETERNAL THEN it is ACTIVE ]

Proof of the claim:AL CALA:M AL LAFZIY is Active if it is Eternal. PROOF:- According to ASHARITES Of the Majority of Sunnis ACTIVE AFFIRMATIVE ATTRIBUTES are HADIS. [1] There are only SEVEN[or eight]AFFIRMATIVE ESSENTIAL ATTIBUTES.THEY ARE AS FOLLOW:1]HAYA:H [LIFE OF DEITY] 2]ILM [KNOWLEDGE/OMNISCIENCE OF DEITY] 3] QUDRAH [POWER/OMNIPOTENCE] 4]IRA:DAH or MASHYAH [INTENTION/WILL/VOLUTION OF DEITY] 5]BASR [ATTRIBUTE OF CAPABILITY OFSEEING/WATCHING OF DEITY] 6]SAM [ATTRIBUTE OF CAPABILITY OFHEARING/LISTENING OF DEITY ] 7]AL CALA:M AN NAFIY[SPEECH/DICTUM/DICTIONIS OF DEITY]. Any other affirmative Attribute of Deity is Active and Not Essential.

So if AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY is and Affirmative Attribute Of Deity then it must ACTIVE and Not Essential. Page If ACTIVE then Temporal.So an ASHARITE can not claim that AL CLA:M AL LAFZ:IY is an ESSSENTIAL ATTRIBUTE since:3

4 1] ONLY THE ESSENTIAL AFFERMATIVE ATTRIBUTES OF DEITY ARE ETERNAL [1]as according to them. 2]THERE ARE ONLY SEVEN AFFIRMATIVE ATTRIBUTES WHICH ARE SSENTIAL[2] as according to them. So if some one claims that AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY is Eternal then He cannot be an ASHARITE unless and Page | 4 other vise he has been influenced either by SALAPHITES [SALAFIS ONE OF THETHE MINORITIES OF AHLUSSUNNAH] OR MATURIDITES [MATURIDIAH ,A SUB DIVISION OF MAJORITY OF AHLUSSUNNAH] or both.[3] So such a person is either BELONGS TO H:ANABALAH OR BELONGS TO MATURIDIAH. Since SALAFIS do not believe in the Eternity Of CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY. So they are differ on this ISSUE from H:ANA:BALAH. IF such a person is Maturidi then he can not believe that AL CALA:M AL LAFZI:Y is ESSENTIAL AFFIRMATIVE ATTRIBUTE OF DEITY. Since Maturidiah are relatively more inclined to reason then ASHARIES and believe in only eight ESSENTIAL DIVINE ATTRIBUTES OF DEITY. SEVEN OF THEM ARE THE SAME AS STATED ABOVE. THEY ADD AN OTHER ATTRIBUTE TACVI:N. FOR CERTAIN REASONE THEY ARE GIVEN BELOW.

1]HAYA:H [LIFE OF DEITY] 2]ILM [KNOWLEDGE/OMNISCIENCE OF DEITY] 3] QUDRAH [POWER/OMNIPOTENCE] 4]IRA:DAH or MASHYAH [INTENTION/WILL/VOLUTION OF DEITY] 5]BASR [ATTRIBUTE OF CAPABILITY OFSEEING/WATCHING OF DEITY] 6]SAM [ATTRIBUTE OF CAPABILITY OFHEARING/LISTENING OF DEITY ] 7]AL CALA:M AN NAFIY[SPEECH/DICTUM/DICTIONIS OF DEITY]. 8] TAKVIN [EXISTANTIALITY,CREATIVITY,CAPABILITY TO BRING IN EXISTENCE] Any other affirmative Attribute of Deity is Active and Not Essential. AS CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY does not belong to the above CLASS of ATTRIBUTES, it is an ACTIVE ATRIBUTE. IF one how EVER claims THAT the ETERNITY OF CALA:M AL LAFZI:Y ,AND CLAIM THAT HE is MATURIDIY, he cannot believe that IT IS ESSENTIAL.[4] THIS COMPLETES THE PROOF. Q.E.D

Thus there is a difference between ESSENTIAL AND ACTIVE AFFIRMATIVE ATTRIBUTES OF DEITY.

Such a difference of ESSENTIALITY AND ACTIVITY of Divine Affirmative Attributes Of DEITY is SUFFICIENT for the used of the LETTER VAU/WAU[SINGLE LETTER WORD/LOFZ:] to be used between two different types of Divine Affirmative ATTRIBUTES. So the argument falls down and declines. The argument could only be valid if it was claimed that the word NU:R and Words KITA:BUN[m] MUBI:N Both are used one and same SUBJECT; Either both are used for AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:Y or both are used for AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY. As the objection presumes that the word NU:R and the word KITA:MUN[m]MUBI:N are used ONLY for AL CALA:M AL LAFZIY or both are used ONLY for AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY, it can be valid against a person who accepts any one of the stated above alternatives. These alternatives are mutually exclusive, BUT not MUTUALLY EXHAUSTIVE. Hence both alternatives cannot be true. How ever any one of them may be discarded. There are a number of possible choices and and any one of them may be chosen for the word NU:R even if the words KITA:MUN[m]MUBI:N are fixed for AL CALA:M AL LAFZIY. HOW EVER IF IT IS ASSUMED FOR SAKE OF AN ARGUMENT THAT BOTH OF THEM ARE ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTES OF DEITY THERE IS NO DISPUTE AMONG MAJORITY OF SUNNIS TO USE THE WORD VAU BETWEEN ANY TWO ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTES OF DIVINE ESSENCE ID EST DEITY NOUNLY ALL-H (SUBH:A:NAHU: VATA:LA:) Until now the views of Salaphites and H:ana:balites are not discussed. The discussion was delayed , and is discussed below. Salphits And H:anabalites:A large majority if<< AHLUSSUNNAH VAL JAMA:AH>> is either ASHAIRAH or MA:TURI:DIAH.Some time their union is also called ASHA:IRAH ( in extended meaning/sense).But a minority of them are called ATHARIAH which are divided into several groups. Most well known of them are SALAPHITES [Salfiah]and H:ana:balah. Salaphites deney ALCALA:M AN NAFSIY. But even according to them the Divine CALA:M is divided into two types. A] One That Is Associated With Divine Essence Of Deity.[5]. B] One That Is Not Associated With the Divine Essence stated above. There is no dispute among the Stated above Majority over the division or over the types stated above. However the dispute is upon the identification of the first type ID EST One That is Associated With The Divine Essence. According to Majority Of Sunnis It Is NAFSIY while according to the this fraction of Minority It Is Lafz:iy. So One can safely claim on this standard that THE WORD NU:R meanet THE TYPE A OF CALA:M stated above and the words KITA:BUM[m]MUBI:N is used for the type B stated Above. The H:ana:balah also agree with Salaphites on the issue ,except that they differ over the Nature of type A Of Divine Cala:m stated above. But this does not 5

Page

6 disturb the stated above commentary of the verse id est << The word NU:R In the Verse is used for The type A stated above, and the words KITA:BUM[m]MUBI:N In the Verse is used for the type B stated Above>>.[5] NOTES:Page | 6 1]Some Elders of AHARITES how ever believed in Eight ESSENTIAL AFFIRMATIVE ATTRIBUTES adding Q-dm TO THE LIST. Few added Existence /Esse TO THE LIST. Some added the attributes which are appearently parts like V-JH,YAD,EYE etc.as well. But none of them added Active Attribute to the list.They are how ever few in number. [2]May also be called AFFIRMATIVE POSATIVE ATTRIBUTES Of Deity. [3]How ever this requires a proof and an evidence. That is the REQUIRMENT OF an EXPLICIT quotation which beyond any shadow of doubt MUST SAY that<< The PERSON X in ASHARITES believeth that AL CALAM AL LAFZ:I is Eternal or Essential or Both. [4]Although Majority Maturidiah believe in the Eternity of Active Attributes in a way which is different the Eternity of Essential Attributes , IT is very unlikely that that they believe that AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY is eternal. AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IYIs Not Eternal even according to them. Since it is believed by all Muturidiah As aAudible[MASMU].If it was believed to be Eternal they would have considered it as Inaudible. Thus Cala:m Al Lafz:I constitueteth a very special case,even according to Minority Of Maturidiah which believes that There is perfect similarity between the Eternity of Active Attributes and ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTES. For details about Maturidi view about the differences between the Eternity of Active Atrributes and Essential Atributes See SH-RH: FIQH ACBAR by MULLA ALI QARI: RAH:MATULLAHI ALAIH . [5]SOME SCHOLARS believe that DEITY is NUR in the Real meaning of the word Nur and Others Believe that Deity is Nur in the Rational Vertual meaning [MAJAAZ AQLI] SINCE Essence of Deity Is Zahir Bil Qudrah And Muzhir Al Gahair Bil Qudrah. They do not include Izhar and Zahur in essential Attributes of Deity. This shall be seen latter. SECOND PREMILINAY:= It may be argued that some Mutazilite believed that the word Nu:r and the word Kita:bun[m]Mubi:n both are used for Qura:n.

But Mutazalite did not believe in AN ETERNAL CALA:M OF DEITY whether it be CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY or CALA:M AN NAFSIY. So the Argument<<>> is valid against Mutazilah and not againt AHLUSSUNNAH.Since Mutazilah believed that the word NU:R and the words KITA:BUN[M] MUBI:N both are used for the AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY, the only CALA:M of DEITY. But the same cannot be said for {MAJORITY OF}SUNNITES. How ever if it is assumed that the word Nu:r and the words Kita:bun[m]Mubi:n both are used for One and same CALA:M wheter it be LAFZ:IY or NAFSIY, then the Letter Vau is not in the original meaning of distinction. There are certain reasons to assume the probability of taking the word Vau for the Vau of Commentary/Explanation as well. There are several verses in Qura:n where the word NU:R is used for Qura:n. This negates the certainty of taking the letter Vau for a distinction between the word that preceedeth it and the word which is posterior to it. As according to the principle If certainity is lost argumentation ceaseth the argument doeth cease once for all. [IDHA: JA:AL IH:TIMA:L BAT:ALAL ISTAD-LA:L]. Thus the argument is invalidated and the claim becomes proofless.

THIRD Preliminary
There are certain objections on this answer. How ever it must be noted once for all that even the weakest Probability of this maketh the argument to cease ,the necessary condition of an argument to be valid , is that it MUST be Cetrain.So it is immaterial whether the probability is Weak or strong. Even the weakest probability is Sufficient to Annhiliate the validity Of the Argument. A NUMBER OF OBJECTIONS are made to disprove the probability and to disprove this explanation of the commentary. But if they are supposed to be valid even then this does not prove that the word Nu:r it used for the Essence Of the Prophet PeaceBe Upon Him.But if it is supposed that the Word Nu:r is used for the ESSENCE OF THE PROPHET, then it is necessary that each and every objection is true ALONG WITH OTHER NECESSARIES. In this preliminary one must discuss the objections which may be raised against this Explanation Of the Commentary Of The Verse. FIRST OBJECTION. I f the word Nu:r is used for AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY then the Word/Letter Vau cannot be used in the meaning of CALA:M ALAFZ:IY. Since in this case the real meaning of Vau is a<< distinctive and /And Of Distinction>> that implies that Cala:m Al lafz:iy Is distinct from itself ,Since the Words Kita:b un[m]Mubi:n is used for CALA:M AL LAFIY.

Page 7

8 If the word Nu:r is used for CALA:M AN NAFSIY, then this implies an impossibility. <<<< AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY is Eternal According to All the believers Of AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY.And An Eternal Can Not Come In Creations. As the Universe, Space-Time Manifold ,Human Page | 8 Beings all are creations and creatures It is Impossible and Rationally Absurd for The Eternal AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY to COME in one of the Creations , in some of the creations or in All the creations. Further it cannot assume any Non-Eternal Nature. The Divine Expression ANA:M : says that Nu:r and Kita:bun[m]Mubi:n Came among you [people]>>>>. ANSWER: This is an incorrect objection, even incorrect according to MAJORITY OF BARAILVIS.The reasons are given below:1] According to majority of Barailviah Both AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY and AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY Are Eternal. Only a minority of Barailiah believes that AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY is Not Eternal. So this objection is also upon them. It is illogical ,irrational AND, unreasonable to claim that CALA:M AL NAFSIY cannot come since it is eternal, yet Cala:m Al Lafz:y can come even it is eternal. Such a claim is incorrect. Thus this objection can be made only by the minority of Barailviah, and not from Majority of Barailviah. But they can only make it if they make an objection upon the Majority Of Their Sect. Since their Majority believes that the words KITA:BUN[M] MUBI:N is used for CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY. The official representative of Barailiah is the majority of Barailviah and not the minority of Barailviah. One who maketh such an objection cannot belong to the majority of Barailviah since if a person can believe that One Eternal[say AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY] Can Come in Created [Human] Beings, then he can not believe in the impossibility of an other Eternal[say AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY]. 2] According to The founder of the sect Maul-vi Rad:a: /Raz;a:[1856-1920/21] Of Bans Baraili, United Provinces ,British india [1858A.C-1947A.C], AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:I and AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY are one and the same; he declairs all those who believes them as two Attributes ,as in Error in a single stroke. So if in any case he is compelled to take an Eternal ATTRIBUTE. THE FOUNDER OF THE CULT CLAIMED THAT CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY and AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY both are ONE and SAME , AND IS ETERNAL .He did not claimed that there is a
NAFCIY. Non Eternal

Cala:m which is LAFZ:IY AS WELL AS

NAFSIY. HE DID NOT CLAIM THAT THERE IS ONLY ONE CALA: M THAT IS NEITHER LAFZ:IY NOR

Thus according to the stated above founder there is only ONE Divine CALA:M which is LAFZ:IY as well as NAFSIYThis Only Divine Calaam Is Eternal.So ac-

cording to his specific belief there is No Non Eternal Divine Calaam. So this objection is upon the very founder himself, since almost and atleast the founder chose the only Cala:m either for The words Kita:bun [m] Mubi:nor for the wor Nu:r. SINCE IF THERE IS ONLY ONE CALA:M WHICH IS LAFZ:IY AND NAFCIY THEN IT IS CERTAINLY ETERNAL. If he taketh it for Nu:r then he cannot say:-1] that the word Nu:r is used for the Essence Of Holy Prophet [S:AL LAL LA: HU ALAI VA SALLAMA].2] He becometh one of the denouncer of the claim that Eternal Cannot come in [Creations] [say Human Beings.] If he CHOSETH it for the words KITA:B UN[m]MUBI:N, then at least he becometh one of the denouncer of the claim that Eternal Cannot come in [Creations] [say Human Beings.].Even this is sufficient to shew that this objection is based on an Claim which is not accepted even by the founder of the sect. [[So if the Words NU:R and KITABUN[M]MUBI:N in the verse mean Quran the the word /letter VAU means A DISCTINCTIVE ANDeven then it Possible that the word Nu:r doeth mean AL CALA:M AN NAFSIY and the words KITABUN[M]MUBI:N do mean AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY. The only objection on it is that If the word Nu:r meaneth AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY then THEN IT can not come in Human beings since an Eternal Cannot Come IN CREATIONS, It is Rationally Immpossible. This objection is invalid and unsound since A large nuber of Barilvis believe that AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY is also Eternal AND DUE TO VERY SAME REASON , they cannot take the words KITABUN[M]MUBI:N in the meaning of AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY. Even their founder cannot take these sated above words for the only Divine CALA:M which is both]] AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY and AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY. Now a minute minority of Barailvis can make such an objection, ie those who believe that AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:ITY is NOT ETERNAL. But they can be responded . They shall be responded latter.

Second Objection.
As according to a number of philosophical minded Sunnis both EACH and Every ESSENTIAL AFFIRMATIVE ATTRIBUTE is Identical to DIVINE ESSENCE. That is the reason a distinctive And cannot occur between any two Such Attiributes. 9

Page

10 ANSWE TO THE SECOND OBJECTION. There are several answers to this objection. They ar given below. ANSWER TO THE SECOND OBJECTION:Page | 10 According to Majority Of Asharites and Maturidites the Essential Affirmative Attributes Of the Divine Essence Are Neither Identical Nor Separate,Associated and Communicable to the Divine Esesence. So there is no problem in using a distinctive Vau between any two Essential Affirmative Attribute Of Deity. The word And Is Used For Them. If it is accepted that AFFIRMATIVE ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTES OF DIVINE ESSENCE are Identical to the Essence then:It must be known the true believes of those who believe in Identity among Ahlussunnah. They do not deney the Divine Attributes like Philosophers .They do not say that they are just pure negations. I.e Knowledge means Not Ignorence. Etc.They say how ever that Affirmative Essential Attributes Of the Essence Of Deity are Identical in Misda:q and areNot Identical in Mafhum which the consider as abstraction [Intiza:].Some other expressions for their ideas are as Affirmative Essential Attributes Are Identical but the Mafhu:m [Concept]Of each Essential Attribute is SEPERATE. A number of other possible expressions are as follow 1] The Manashi [ORIGINATORS] Of Essential Sifa:t Are AIN Of DHA:T and The Mafahim are Ghair Of DHA:T. 2]Manashi Of Mafahim are the S:iFAT which are Identical to the Divine Essence and the Mafahim of S:IFAT are Separate [Non Idsentical]. The founder Of Khaira badi sect and an extreme critic of traditional Asharism and Maturidism who neither believed in Jal AlBasi:t nor in Jazz La tajazza , and a believer in the Identity Of Essential Attributes, accepted that If Mutacallamin means by the term La AIN Va La Ghair la AIN Bil Mafhum and La Ghair Bil Misda:q THEN they are right. See Imtina: An Nazir [ Persian work]. So the word AL AIN does not means AIN in Misdaq and Ain In Mafhum, [ABSOLUTE IDENTITY], but Ain Only In Misdaq. [Non Absolute Identity]. The believers of Identity do not believe in La Ain Vala Ghair, they disoute from the traditional ASHRAISM AND MATURISM on the following issues. They do not consider the Mafahim as sifat but the Mansha of each Mafhum AS Sifah.

They consider that the Mansha Of each Mafhum is Identical To the Divine Essence.But The believer Of La Ain Vala Ghair do not believe that the Divine Essence is the MANSHA of Sifat. Also the do not believe that Sifat is the Mansha of Mafhum of themselves. The dispute between Mutazila and these Identitist Sunnis is that the former do not believe in such a way. Some of them deney openly that No Sif-h is Affirmative . They are all negative. That is Divine Omniscience means Divine Non Ignorence, Divine Power means Divine Non Weakness etc.This is negation of Sifa:t [Attributes].Some of them term Essential Attributes as Relatives. Example. They say that the Divine Essence is Powerful and Power with reference to the Object Of Powers [Maqdur], the Divine Essence Is Knowledge and Knower with reference to Object Of Knowledge [Malum]. And so on. But these Identitist[Of Indian Sunnis] do not believe in this RELATIVE IDENTITY OR IDENTITY OF REFERENCE(S). The Mafahim are not relative the are abstracted directly from their Manashi which are Absolutely identical TO THE Divine Essence, and does not require a terminal object as is seen in references and relations. Any how what so ever be the explanation it is actually out of the original scope of this article. The actual answer is that they are Not Identical in Mafhu:m/ Mafa:hi:m. So if Cala:m Al Lafz:i and Cala:m An Nafsi are both supposed to be Essential Attributes then they are not Identical In MafahIm. The word Vau is Distinctive in regard to Mafhum. This is sufficient for Vau to be Grammatical distinctive.There is no condition of distinction in regaer to Masadiq as according to these Identitist. Sot they allow the sayings as AlIlm Val Qudrah Val IradaH Val Cala:m etc. How ever these Identitists only believe in the stated above Identity of Affirmative Essential Attributes , and not of Affirmative Active Attributes. Even the Identitist who claim them selves as Maturidiah did not say that ACTIVE ATTRIBUTES OR IDENTICAL TO DIVINE ESSENCE. So this argument that the word Vau cannot be used between Nu:r and Kitabun [m] Mubin IF THE former means AL CALA:M AN NAFSI, AND THE Latter means AL CALA:M AL LAFZIY, BECOMES INVALID. So it is accurate and valid to use the word Vau between any two Essential Attributes Of Deity even if they are consider to be Identical To Divine Essence [AIN DHA:TIL BA:RI:]

since the Mafahim of any two Essentiaal Attribute Of Divine Essence are distinct and different from the other.This doeth not require any indication or Qarinah. MAFHUM OF AN Essential Attribute is
Page 11

11

Additional to the Essence not the Misdaq

12

How ever if it is accepted that AL CALA:M AL LAFZ:IY is An Active ATTRIBUTE and Al CALA:M AN NAFSI is ESSENTIAL ATRRIBUTE then the word Vau can be used between an ACTIVE Attribute and an Essential ATTRIBUTE
Page | 12 Further they shall face a lot of problem in a number of Quranic Verses and Expressions. FOR EXAMPLE ;1] IN THE VERSE DHALICAL KITA:BU LA RAIBAFIH.(BAQARAH 2 ) In this case the meaning of the verse shall become : .. DHA LI CALLAHU LA RABAFIHI THIS IS AN INTERPOLATION IN THE DIVINE MEANING. NAUDHUBILLAH. 2)INNA: ANZALNA:HU QURA:NAN ARABIYAN. YUSUF -2. In trhis case the meaning of Verse shall become INNA ANZALNAHU ALLAHA NAUDHUBILLAH. 3) AAL H:AMDU LILLAHI ANZALA ALA: ABDIHIL KITA:B ( AL C-HF) VERSE ONE SHALL BECOME . ANZALA ALA ABDIHILLAHA. NAUDHU BILLAH 4)MA ANZALNA ALAICAL QURA:NA LI TASHQA: (T:A:HAA:, 2). The meaning of the verse shall become ALAICAL LLAH LI TASHQA . Naudhubillah 5] FI HA DHAL QURAN. [17-89] ahall mean FI HA DHALLAH , NAUDHUBILLAH. Similarly a number of verses shews that even in the case of IDENTITY OF CALAM WITH THE DIVINE ESSENCE AND DIVINE SELF THE DIFFERENCE IN THE MEANING DOETH EXIST AND THIS IS SUFFICIENT FOR THE VALIDITY OF THE WORD VAU. We have shewn a number of impossible meanings in the case which must yield if the argument is assumed to be correct. BELIEF Of Maulva Rada Of Baraili:It must be noted that Maulivi Raza Of Bans Baraili was not an Identitist and believed that the Sifa:t are QA:IM with the Essence [QAIM BIDH DHA:T (1)]. QIA:M=SUSTAINMENT, QAIM=One That is sustained [Associated] in/with the Essence. In this case there is no problem that the word Vau can be used for any two Attributes if both are in sustainment / association with the Divine Essence. (1)The word with may appear to be non grammatical in English [see the expression Sustained With instead of Sustained In] yet It is what the sense is of the Arabic Expression is.To translate as Sustained in the Essence is a distertion of the Principle Ar-

abic Expression which is conveyed by the term Qaim Fidh Dha:t. And this is not so since the Arabic Expression meaneth BIDH DHATIL BARI THIRD OBJECTION COMMENTATORS DID not discusse where the word Nur is used for Lafzi or Nafsi but only have discussed about QURAN. ANSWER. ACCORDING TO MAJORITY OF SUNNIS QURAN IS OF TWO TYPE. A] LAFZI. B] NAFCIY [NAFSIY]. THERE IS NO THIRD TYPE. NOW IF THEY HAVE USED THE WORD QURAN THEN THERE ARE THE FOLLOWING LOGICAL POSIBILITIES. A] THEY HAVE USED THE WORD FOR ALCALAAM AL LAFZI. B] THEY HAVE USED THE WORD FOR AL CALAAM AN NAFCIY. C] NON OF THEM. D] BOTH OF THEM. E] AN UNION OF THEM. OPTION D IS OUT OF QUESTION. SO THIS OPTION IS DISCARDED.

AS MAJORITY OF SUNNIS BELIEVE THAT CALAAM AL LAFZI IS HADIS AND CALAAM AN NAFCIY IS QADIM THERE IS INTRINSIC ABSURDITY OF A UNION OF HADIS AND QADIM.[HADIS AND QADIM CANNOT UNITE SINCE IT IS INTRINSICALLY ABSURD]. IF IT IS ASSUMED THAT BOTH ARE ETERNAL , THEN THERE IS NO UNIONN OF ANY TWO ETERNAL DIVINE ATTRIBUTES. IF SOME ONE CLAIMS SO THEN THIS UNION MUST ALSO BE ETERNAL AND AN ETERNAL IS EITHER THE DIVINE ESSENCE OR AN ATTRIBUTE OF DIVINE ESSENCE SO THE VERY UNION OF THESE TWO ATTRIBUTES OF DIVINE ESSENCE BECOMES AN ETERNAL ATTRIBUTE OF THE DIVINE ESSENCE. BUT IT REQUIRES CITATIONS AND QUOTATIONS FROM IMAMS OF SUNNIS, OTHER WISE THIS CLAIM IS NOT AC-

13
Page

CEPTABLE. SO THE CLAIMOF UNION IS DISCARDED AND IS INVALID. IF THE OPTION C IS ACCEPTED THEN IT IS A GENERAL WORD FOR BOTH OF THEM. IN

13

14

THIS CASE ONE HA TO DECIDE WHETHER THE WORD IS USED FOR ALCALAAM AL LAFZI OR AL CALAAM AN NAFSI. IF IT IS CLAIMED THAT IT IS USED FOR BOTH OF THEM SIMULTANIOUSLY THEN IT IS A WEAK CLAIM.
Page | 14

THUS THE ONLY POSSIBLE OPTIONS ARE A AND B. SO IT IS CERTAIN THAT ONE WHO HAVE USED THE WORD QURAN IN THE COMMENTARY HAS USED FOR ANY ONE OF THEM. IF MORE THEN ONE TIME THEN ONE HAVE TO DECIDE EACH TIME. AS MUTAZILAS DO NOT BELIEVED IN CALAAM AN NAFCIY, THEY WERE COMMELLED TO TAKE VAU AS TAFSIRY. BUT SUNNIS WHO TAKE THE WORD KITAB IN THE VERSE FOR QURAN AND THE WORD NUR FOR QURAN CAN NOT TAKE CALAAM AN NAFCIY AT BOTH PLACES, OR CALAAM AL LAFZIY AT BOTH PLACES IF VAU IS FOR DISTINCTION. SO IF THEY HAVE NOT USED WORD AL CALAM AL LAFZI OR AL CALAAM AN NAFCIY IT IS INCONTEASTABLE THAT THEY MEANT ONE OF THEM AT ONE PLACE AND OTHER OF THEM AT THE NEXT PLACE OR VICE VERCA. THERE IS NO OTHER POSSIBILITY BESIDE STATED ABOVE. IMPOSSIBILITY OF ANY OTHER POSSIBILITY IS A DEFINITE PROOF. FORTH OBJECTION. QURAN IS NOT NUR BUT THE PROPHET IS THE NUR. ANSWER. THIS IS AN ABSURD CLAIM THAT QURAN IS NOT NUIR. THERE ARE SEVERAL VERSES IN QURAN WHICH DO STATE THAT QURAN IS NUR. THE CLAIM THAT QURAN IS NOT NUR IS OBVIOUSLY AND EVIDENTLY WRONG AND INCORRECT HENCE IN IS INCORSIDERABLE ONLY AN INSOUCIANT EXTREMIST

CAN SAY SUCH A THING. THERE IS NO SUSCEPTIBILITY OF THIS SORT OF CLAIM . HENCE IT NEED NOT TO BE RESPONCED IN GREAT DETAIL.ONE MAY ASK THE FOLLOWING QUESTION AS WELL. WHAT IS THE PROOF THAT THE WORD NUUR/NUR IS USED FOR HOLY PROPHET? SINCE THE LITERAL MEANING OF THE WORD IS NEITHER A MAN NOR A PROPHET. EVEN THE HOLY PROPHET IS NOT THE MAUDU LAHU OF THE WORD NUR. SO ONE REQUIRES SOME ADDITIONAL PROOFS FOR THE CLAIM THAT THE WORD NUUR IS USED FOR THE HOLY PROPHET. IF IT IS EVER PROVIDED THIS SHALL BE A PROOF THAT THE VERSE BY ITSELF DOETH NOT IMPLY THAT ITS WORD NOR IS USED FOR THE HOLY PROPHET, SIMILARLY THE WORD NUR IN THE DIVINE VERSE ALSO DOETH NOT IMPLY THAT, IF SO THEN THIS PROVES WITH OUR ADDITIONAL PRROF THIS BY IT SELF DOES NOT SUPPORT THE CLAIM. THIS VERSE IS NOT QATIYUDDALALAH. ON THE CLAIM THAT HOLY PROPHET IS A NUR UNLESSAND OTHER WISE BY SOME ADDITIONAL ARGUMENTS IT IS SHEWN THAT THE WORD NUUR WHICH IS A NACRAH [COMMON NOUN] IS USED FOR THE HOLY PROPHET. TO SAY THAT THE WORD NUR IN THE VERSE MEANS HOLY PROPHET SINCE HOLY PROPHET IS NUR IS THE FALLACY OF BEGING THE AGUMENT. Those Commentators of the past who have preferred HOLY PROPHET as the Subject of the word NUR in this verse never claimed that they have some Proofs with certainities in them.

Page 15

15

16

FORTH PRIMILINARY Page | 16 The word NU:R meaneth MUZ:HIR LI GHAIRIHI AND Z:A:HIR BI NAFSIHI . So any thing that POSESSETH TO ADITIONAL ATTRIBUTE (1) IZ:HA:R LI GHAIRIHI (2) Z:HU:R BI NAFSIHI: is called a NU:R in ARABIC. It may not be physical visibility . One that guide to the true or correct path is also a light. As according to great SUNNI IMAM T:ABRI: the commentary and the meaning of the verse

*AL

MAIDAH -14] is as follow:-

BIN NU:RI MUHAMMAD S:ALLALLA:HU ALAIHI VA VA A:LIHI: VASALLAM LLADHI -NA:RA ALLAH BIHIL HAQQ VA AZ:HAR BIHI: -L ISLA:M VA M-HQ BIHI SH-SHIRC FAHUVA NU:R LIMAN -ST-NA:R B IHI [T-BRI-ALMA:IDAH 14]
So a human being doeth not cease to be a human being if these two additional attributes are bestowed to him , which are not bestowed to other human beings. FURTHER EXPLANATION

The literal /Real /Primary meaning of the word Nu:r is Muzhir li Ghairihi Va Zahir Binafsihi. This means any thing with these two attributes/qualities 1] Zahu:r 2] Izha:r is called Nur whether it is a Matter or it is Material or any other type of Substance .If the Essence of any human Being is associated with these two Attributes the Human Essence can be termed as Light. The Addition of these two Attributes Can Not Exclude any Human Essence from the domain of Human Beings [Insa:n/ Bashar]. Thus if the word Nu:r means any Thing whether Essence or Attribute which is Muz:hir Li Ghairihi Va Z:a:hir Bi Nafsihi then the Essence Of any human being does not cease to be the Essence of the human being if DEITY Bestowes these two attributes stated above to a human Essence.

Similarly the SIMILARITY/LIKENESS of a human Essence doesnot Cease to be from an other Human Essence just because of these to Additional Attributes. If it is insisted that some of the similarity is lost and if this is accepted just for an argument then if is the case that the Principle Similarity is preserved and conserved. It is not lost. But Holy Prophet doeth not cease to be A human being and doeth not become some being which is beyond human being by the addition of these to stated above attributes , then he continues to be a Human being and His Similarity stated above also continues and none of them ceaseth in any meaning or sense of the word TO CEASE. So if a Barailvi argues that The Essence Of the Holy Prophet is (a) Nu:r , then he cannot claim that the said Nu:r is a Non Matterial Substance with these two Additional Attributes.At best he can claimthat any thing OR ANY SUPPOSITUM OR ANY ESSENCE OR ANY SUBSTANCE OR ANY NATURE [whether an Human being or an animal being or a plant being or a material being or a spiritual being or a piece of mud or clay or a portion of liquid or a star or a planet what so ever] has only two Attributes stated above then it is a Nu:r. So if the Holy Prophet or His Essence Is Nu:r then:-a) He doeth not cease to be a human being. b)He doeth not cease to be in likeness of other human being. It may be noted that the Essence of Holy Prophet is Identical to the Holy Prophet, and Identical to the very self Of the Holy Prophet since the Essence of every Person is identical to the Person and Identical to the Self of the person.[ A suppsitum may be defined as an Essence with Its All Essential Attributes, not mere Essence] . Also it may be noted that that the words in the square brackets is just an explanation and not a disgrace,] Thus it is clear that if Holy Prophet is Nu:r then he does not cease to be a Human Being [insa:n/Bashar] and also does not cease to be in likehood/likeness of other human beings , and does not cease to be Similar to other human beings WHO do lack these two Attributes. So Nur is not some thing which is beyond human beings and has become a human being

17
Page

with out ceasing to be the nu:r, but the very human being it self. Since the word Nu:r can be used for any thing of any Nau which possess these two Attributes as stated above.

17

18 Actually to claim that Nu:r is an Immeterial Substance can be trace back to the Dogma Of Saikh AL Ashraq AND Majus. Arabic concept of Nu:r is some what different from them. Page | 18 So if the word Nu:r means any thing that is phiscal light AND NOT A HUMAN BEING THEN in this meaning Holy Prophet is CERTAINLT Not Nu:r . But If It means any thing whether a human Essence or ANY THING ELSE which has only these two additional properties then Holy Prophet may be termed as Nu:r.It is not necessary that the word Nu:r means one that is Muz:hir for physical bodies and is Z:ahir as a physical body. In physical meaning the addition of just two non essential Attributes neither implies RITHTOUSNESS or WRONGNESS of the person. How ever in some non physical meaning it may be applied to ONLY lightous persons and essences. IN WHAT MEANING SOME ANCIENT COMMENTATORS CALLED HOLY PROPHET
LAHU ALAIHI VA SALLAMA SALLA-

AS NU:R

Holy prophet exposed the TRUTH, THE TRUTH OF THE TRUE RELIGION, LAWS OF DEITY, SPEECH OF DEITY, VAH:Y etc. so He was termed as NU:R which neither contradicteth His Humanity and Of His Essence nor contradicteth his Similarity and likehood/likeness to other Human Beings and Human Essences. For an example one may quote I-MAM T-BRI:.
The same is true for those Commentaries which use the word NU:R for the Essence Of HOLY PROPHET Peace be Upon Him.

Note. It may please be noted that some scholars have ascribed a Non Existential Attribute which is negation of Heat or Hotness, in order to exclude Fire from the definition of Nur. If Nur is heatless then even the Body Heat of a Person is sufficient to exclude a person from the definition of the word Nur.

FIFTH PRIMILINARY There are several other possible options for the word NU:R like 1] ISLAM,2] VAH:Y GHAIR MATLU:3,]H:ICMAH , 4]HIDAYAH,5]NABVAH [NOTE

THE DIFEERENCE BETWEEN NABI AND NABVAH],4] HAQQ [ REALITY] 5] SIDQ [TRUTH] 6]IMAN [FAITH]7] MA-ARFAH 8]TAUHID[ABSOLUTE UNICITY OF DEITY]8] SHARIAH 9]TASDIQ UL AQAID.[TASDIQ SOME WHAT MORE GENERAL THEN FAITH].9] KNOWLEDGE10]10] VAHY QUDCI. THERE ARE ALSO SOME POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES WHICH MAY BE TERMED AS LESS PROBABLE EG .1]IMAN BIL GHAIB.2]IMAN BIRRISALAH.3] IMAN BIT TAUHID4]IMAN BILQIYAMAH 5]IMAN BITTAIHID 6] TALIM UDDIN.7] RUH [THE RUH STATED IN SURAH AL QADR]If some of them are less probable even then an argument is ceased to be if a probability exist SINCE THE NECESSARY CONDITION for an argumentation is CERTAINITY AND CIRTITUTE. Some Sufis have opine that NUR is an ETERNAL ATTRIBUTE OF ALLAH. They say that the faithful receive THE NUR OF MA-RAFAH INDEPENDENT OF HILAH [PRACTICAL REASON] AS IT IS IN ARAAIS [A BOOK ON TASAIVUF] Some Sufis say that Nur of Book and Nur Of Tauhid are due to Divine Grace. DIVINE ESSENCE GUIDETH PEOPLE TOWORDS IT SELF BY ITS ATTRIBUTES. IT MAY BE SAID THAT NUR OF QURAN IS SOME THING ADDITIONAL TO QURAN. Generalizing it may be said that NUR is some thing which is ascribed to QURAN, TAUHID,HID DIN PROPHET ETC. AND MAKETH THEM ZAHIR, YET IT IS RECONGNIZATION AND SELF EV-

19
Page

IDENT TO EACH PERSON.

19

20

NOTE. SOME OF THEM MAY BE NOT FOUND IN BOOKS YET THEY ARE POSSIBLE SINCE THEY ARE THE EXPLANATIONS OF SOME TAFASIR ,
Page | 20

IZ:A JAAA HTIMAL BATALAL IHTIMAL. CONCLUSION:NU:R ARGUMENT OF BARAILVIS IS INVALID AND INCORRRECT.
SIXTH Preliminary

Literal meaning of the word Nur is neither Human being Nor Prophet, and additionally not essence. So it requires a proof that the word nur is used for theHolyProphet Peace Be Upon Him.Uptill now all the tradions and Hadis provided are weak , and belong to mutashbihat. There are two fold problems. A] First weak traditions can not be used in the domain of beliefs. B] Mutashabihat even if are sahih or even a verse of Quran can to be used for argumentations. They can only be interpreted as according to Zaruriat ad din [Islamic Axioms] and muhcamat ect. So the traditions that the holy prophet was created from the nur of deity belongs to the set ofmutashabihat and cannot be used in arguments and argumentations. A FABRICATION

IN ORDER TO DECIEVE TRUE AHLUSSUNNAH SOME MISCHIEVEOUS MIND FABRICATED A FALSE WORK KNOWN AS AL JUZ AL MAFQUD WHICH WAS PROVED AS A FORGERY BY EMINENT SCHOLARS . Actually this was done to reinvigorate the weak traditions which informs that Holy Prophet was created from Nur., This work provided false chain of reporters, which is now proved as a fabrication and forgery . One may see these research works . to reproduce them is beyond the scope of this work. SEVENTH PRIMILINARY. It must be noted that some commentators of AlQuran[for example see Jalalain, RUH AL MA-ANI] have opined that the word Nur is used for the Holy Prophet but they do not believe in the certainity of this view but believe as a probablepreference over other possible options.But non of then deny the HUMINITY, MANHOOD ,SIMILARITY OF HOLY PROPHET AND HIS ESSENCE. So one may not be misguided if he ever find some Commentators accepting this word for Holy Prophet. An Example pof IMAM TABRIis given. See above. SOME OF THEM HAVE STATED BOTH [ EG SEE MADAAR-C AN TASNZIL VA HAQAIQ ATTAVIL]. IN MADAR-C THE COMMENTATOR SAITH. EITHER IT IS INTENDED BY THE WORD NUR << QURAN>> SINCE IT PREVEN-

21
Page

TETH FROM SHIRC AND MAKETH THE REALITY /TRUTH [HAQQ] ZAHIR

21

22

[EXPOSES] SI WHICH WAS HIDDEN [COVERED/NOT KNOWN ] OR IT IS MEANT BY THE WORD NUR [DHAT OF ] HOLY PROPHET SINCE
Page | 22

GUIDENCE [H-DAYAH WAS EXPOSED BY HIM.] No one disputes the Humanity of HolyProphet. If some one saith that the word NUR was used for HIM he means that Because the truth, reality, religion Shariah etc were made Zahir by Him. So to use the word Nur for the Holy Prophet PEACE BE UPON HIM is one thing and to claim that HE was the Nur is another thing. The first doeth not imply the second. IF SOME ONE SAITHJ THAT I DO NOT KNOW WHETHER THE HOLY PROPHET PEACE BE UPON HIM WAS A HUMAN BEING [BASHAR/INSAN] OR NOT A HUMAN BEING [GHAIR BASHAR/ GHAIR INSAN] IS CERTAINLY NOT A MUSLIM SINCE HE DENEIES TH NECESSARY ARTICLE OF FAITH [ AXIOM OF ISLAM]. IT MUST BE KNOWN THAT A NECESSARY ARTUCLE OF FAITH [DARURIAT AD DIN/ AXIOM OF ISLAM] IS NOT DEPENDED ON NASS, IT IS INDEPENDENT OF IT..None of them have saith that << HOLY PROPHET WAS not a human being or not a man or not a ABD, Or NOT SIMILAR TO OTHER HUMAN BEINGS IN HUMANITY>>. It is not some thing which is inextricable or unsolvable. EIGHT PRIMILINARY Holy Prophet was a Human Being beyond any shadow of doubt , He was NOT some thing which is nothuman yet like a human. [mithlul basher/mithlul insan] He was not some thing which was not human yet

it appeared as if it was a HUMAN BEING. SOME even believe that Nur is not even The Prophet Muhammad but the very Nur appeared as if it was the prophet Muhammad. .We take refuge in the Divinity from such believes. Others believe that Prophet was not a Human Person but a SUPPOSITUM OF NUR WHICH APPEARED AS IF IT WAS A HUMAN BEING. Some denouncers of Huminity of HOLY PROPHET do believe that He was a Human Persom Constituted and made from NUR unlike any human being.Even the clay fom which he was made was NUR. But it is stated that Hur is just the addition of two more ATTRIBUTES stated above. There fore If Holy Prophet was Nur even then Neither His Humanity ceaseth nor His Humanity ceaseth. But some extremist say that he was Not a Human Being but a MITHLUL BASHAR [ LIKE A HUMAN BEING/ HOMINOID] OR A MITH AL INSAN [HOMINID] NAUDHU BILLAH. Some extremists say that He was a nur WHICH WAS ENCLOTHED with

a human form , but in reality he was Not a human being . They use the unholy words of Libas al Bashariah or Libas Al Insaniah i.e Fabric of Humanity or Fabric Of Human hood. Both of these believes are cufr. Since it is the denial of Humanness ,humanity ,humanhood,Human Essence and human self of the HOLY

Page 23

23

PROPHET.

24

Some claim that the NURANI PERSON ASSUMED THE HUMAN NATURE . THIS IS ANALOGOUS TO THE CHRISTIAN DOGMA THAT THE DIVINE
Page | 24

PERSON ASSUMED THE HUMAN NATURE., WITH THE DIFFERENCE THAT THE CHRIASTIANS BELIEVE THE PERSON AS DIVINE AND IN GODHEAD AND THESE PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT THE PERSON IS NOT DIVINE I.E OUT OF GODHEAT. THE REST OF THE BEL;IEF IS THE SAME. THIS IS A GREAT HERESY SINSE THIS ASSIGNS THE NURANIAH OF PROPHET A PRIMARY STATUS AND HUMANITY A SECONDARY STATUS. REALLY AND ACTUALLY HOLY PROPHET IS PRIMERILY A HUMAN BEING AND IF NUR THEN SECONDARY A NUR. Further they think than Humanity of Prophet is some thing inferior to his Nuraniah [lightness]. This is a disgrace to Prophetic Humanity and Humanity of Prophethood and humanity of the Prophet. If HOLY PROPHET is Nur then His Nuraniah is Humanity [Bashariah/ Insaniah] is NOT LESS THAN HIS NURANIAH Not nin the least sense of the words ,<< LESS THAN>>. So If HOLY PROPHET is a NUR THEN HE is PRIMERLIY a
Human Being

and

Secondarily A NUR. His is NOT INCOMMENSURABLE in Humanity and Humanness. NINTH PRIMILINARY The word Vau is not used for the Difference of Essences, so the Essence of the Nur is not Different from the Essence of the Divine Book.

Some of the proves are given . 1] THE WORD BIHI IS PRESENT IN THE DIVINE TEXT WHICH IMPLIES THAT BOTH ARE THE PLACES OF AIN AL JAMA [IDENTITY OF COLLECTION] IE THE MADAN OF SIFAT [ATTRIBUTE] IS ONE AND THE

SAME [VAHID]. SOME ARGUE THAT THIS IS NOT A CERTAIN PROOF OF THE UNICITY OF THE ESSENCE OF NUR AND KITAB. TRUE YET IT IS STILL TOO STRONG TO DISCARD THE MEANING OF DIFFERENCE OF ESSENCES OF THE WORD VAU.. IT IS MORE PROBABLE THEN THE OTHER. THIS IS A RESON WE DO NOT REJECT THE TO TAKE HOLY PROPHET AS THE SUBJECT OF THE WORD NUR. YET WE DO SAY THAT THIS IS EITHER LESS PROBABLE OR MOR PROBABLE THEN A NUMBER OF OTHER OPTIONS AND ALTERNATIVES. IT IS NOT AN ARTICLE OF FAITH. BUTHUMANITHY AND HUMANHOOD OF THE HOLY PROPHET CAN NOT BE DISCARDERD , HIS SIMILARITY CAN NOT BE DISCARDED. ETC. IT IS EXPLICITLY STATED THAT IF HOLY PROPHET IS A NUR THEN HE DOETH NOT CEASE TO BE A HUMAN BEING, AND HIS SIMILARITY AND SIMILARITURE DO NOT CEASETH, ALSO HE IS PRIMERY A HUMAN BEING. If this was a CERTAIN PROOF then it would have become impossible to take this meaning.
25

Page

25

26

How ever we do say that if the STATEMENT HOLY PROPHET IS A NUR IMPLETH THE STATEMENT HOLY PROPHET IS NOT A HUMAN BEING
Page | 26

THEN HOLY PROPHET IS NOT A NUR. IF NOT A NUR THEN AFDAL MIN CULLI ANNUR AL HADIS. 12] There are several verses in QURAN WHERE THE WORD QURAN NUR IS USED FOR QURAN. SO ONE THE MEANING IS DEFINITIZE IT IS SUFFENTIENTLY STRONG TO DISCARD THE MEANING OF DIFFERENCE IS ESSENCES OF THE WORD VAU. 3] IF NOT VAU OF TAFCIR IT MAY STILL BE USED FOR DIFFERENCE OF ATTRIBUTES WHETHER THEY ARE USED FOR THE ATTRIBUTES OF SAME MADAN OR MAUSUF OR NOT. THIS MAY NOT BE INCLUDED IN VAU OF TAFCIR BUT IN THE CASE OF DIFFERNCE OR ATTRIBUTIC DIFFERENCE. BUT WE DO NOT INSIST ON THIS . SINCE IN SOME SENSE IT MAY IMPLY THE FORMER. BUT ONE MAY CONSULT VERSES LIKE VA NZALNA LAICUM NUURUM MUBIINAA etc. IN ORDER TO KNOW THE DEFINITE OR PROBABLE MEANING OF THE WORD NUR.

This is a special topic and one may see the word Nur in Quran For Quran itself. It may be discussed separately in an independent article.
How ever we have shewn that If Nur meaneth CALAM AN NAFCIY AND KKIITAB MEANETH CALAM AL LAFZIY THEN THERE IS NON PROPBLEM AND THE WORD VAU CAN BE TAKEN IN THE SENSE OF DIFFERENCE AND DISTINCTION AS DISCUSSED ABOVE. NOTR EVERY TAGHA-R SIFATI

IS TAGH-R TAFCIRI , AS THE WORD VAU CAN BE USED BETWEEN ANY TWO DIVINE ATTRIBUTE WHETHER BOTHE OF THEM ARE ACTIVE OR BIGTH OF THEM ARE ESSDENTIAL OR ANY ONE OF THEN IS ESSENTIAL THE THE OTHER ONE IS ACTIVE. ALSO THE WORD VAU CAN ALWAYES BE USED BETWEEN A QADIM AND A HADIS, AND CALAM AQL LAFZI IS HADIS AS ACCOREDING TO MAJORITY OF ASHARITES AND MATURIDITES. IF MAJORITY OF BARAILVIS CONSIDER BOTH OF THEM AS ETERNAL MAJORITY OF ASHARITES AND MAJORITY OF MATURIDITES ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR TBARAILVIS . THE IMAM OF BARAILVIS RADA SAHIB OF BANS BARAILILY AS ALSO CLAIMED THAT CALAQM AL LAFZIY AND CALAM AN NAFCI BOT ARE ONE AND THE SAME ATTRIBUTE AND CONSIDERS ALL ASHARITES AMD MATURIDITES IN ERROR WHO BELIEVES THEM AS TWO ATTRIBUTES. IN MAY PLEASE BE NOTED ONCE AGAIN THAT ALTHOGH A NUMBER OF BARAILIVIS BELIEVE THAT ATTRIBUTES OF DEITY ARE IDENTICAL TO DEITY YET THEIR IMAM DID BELIEVE THAT THEY ARWE QAAIM AND NOT IDENTICAL. WITH SUCH DISPUTES ONE CAN NEVER BE CERTAIN THAT THTE HOLY PROPHET WAS A NUR. BUT ONE THING IS CERTAIN RAITHER CERTAINITY AMONG CERTAINITIES, CERTAIN AMOMG CERTAINS THAT HE WAS A HUMAN BEING ,HE IS A HUMAN BEING AND HE SHALL BE A HUMAN BEING , HE SHALL NEVER CEASE TO BE A HUMAN BEING JUST LIKE HE
Page 27

27

SHALL NEVER CEASE TO BE A PROPHET OF ALLAH.

28

TENTH PRIMILINARY One denies that Holy Prophet is not a Human being also denies his Prophethood. May ALLAH FORBID from this belief. Since the Necessary condition for the Prophethood was the Humaneess, humanity,humanhood and hHuman Essence. So one who claimeth that Holy [Prophet was just in a Libas [FABRIC OR SUIT] of Humanity then he meaneth that Holy Prophet Was NOT a Nabui but just in the Fabric of a Nabui . Naudhubillanh. This is a pure cufr. It may be noted that Holy Prophet is the LAST prophet and no one shall ever be prophitised after him so we have used the wod was in the above sentences. It must be noted that the conditions are not sufficient. Since to claim them as a sufficient conditions is cufr. Eleventh PRIMILINARY It may be known that Vau Tfciri and T-GHA-R ASSIFATI are some what different. To Say ALLAHU QADIR VA AALIM is an example of Vau Tafciri since both are predicated to One and same Divine Essence. Simailarly to say Zaidun BASHARUN VA INSAAN is also Vau Tafciri. In general to say A is B and C is Vau tafciri if B and C are 1] Predicates Of A. 2]Both are them are tentamount in meaning. Another case is that is is more gernral then B. SOME MORE CASES MAY BE CITED.

Page | 28

But to say ALQUDRAH AND AL ILM ARE ATTRIBUTES OF DEITY is Taghair Sifati Since . 1] GRAMATTICALLY IN THIS CASE B AND C CARE NOT PREDICATED TO A. 2]B and C are not predicable on each other. Even though they have oine and same Mausuf, yet they are distinct atleast im meaning. This subtle difference does shew that it is some what controversial to claim THAT IF THE WORD VAU IS BETWEEN Kitab and Nur then it is necessarily TAFCIRI. It may be TA-GHA-R AS SIFAT. NUR AND KITAB BEING JUST TO ATTRIBUTES OF QURAN.One may say AL ILM VAL QUDRAH VAL CALAM VAL BASR CULLUHUM SIFATULLAH. How ever one need not to insist on this since if TAGHAUR ASSIFATI AND VAU TAFCIRI ARE ONE AND THE SAME as claimed by some then there is a Vau tafciri only and only if either the word Nur and Word Kitab both are ued for CALAAM AL LAFZIY or both are used for CALAAM AN NAFCIY. If one of them is used for CALAAM AL LAFZI and of then is Used For CALAAMAN NAFCIY then the Vau cannot be Tafciri with certainity unless both of them are considered as Identical i.e One And the Same. One may refer to Above preliminaries if needed. TWELVETH PRELIMINARY. But it must be noted that

One can not be Excluded from AHLUSSUNNAH WAL JAMAAH if he did

29
Page

not believe that Holy Prophet was not Nur or the word Nur in this verse

29

30

is not used for Holy Prophet. There is no disgrace in this view , no blasphemy, no apostasy ,no heresy and no heterodoxy.
Page | 30

Actually it is a heterodoxy and a heresy to make FARU USUL or USUL FARU. So this is the reason that these commentators are not excluded from AHLUSSUNNAH ,BUT the PRESENT STUNCH believers of Nur are sinse they make FARU AS USUL. This is the essence of KHARJIAH, Who were first in all sects and cults who strasmutated FARU IN USL, and began to declare who disputed them as CAFIR. NAUDHUBILLAH. To declair some one out of folds of Islaam just because He does not believe that the Holy Prophet is a Nur is a greater error then to declair such a person Out of the Folds of AHLUSSUNNAHWALJAMAAH. .Raither to believe that Holy Prophet was/is A Nur and was only in a Suit or Fabric Of human Being is some thing which Expells a person not only from the Folds Ofr Ahlussunnah Wal Jam,aah but also From The Domain of Very Islam since << Humanity Of Holy Prophet>> is an Islamic Axiom as stated above.

So if some ambiguous statements are found in some Sufic books they MUST BE INTERPRETED as according to Fundamental AXIOM OF ISLAM . CONCLUSION. HOLY PROPHET is a human being. He may be called a Nur in a meaning which doeth not Contradict HIS HUMANITY AND HIS SIMILARITY TO OTHER HUMAN BEINGS. How ever he may not be a Nur even under this condition since to deny that he is a Nur even it doeth not contradict his humanity doeth

not deny any Axiom of Islam or Any Axiom Of Ahlussunnah [DARURIAT AL AHLISSUNNAH]. It is just a case of preference of a meaning over others , which lacks certainty [YAQINIAH AND QATIAH]. The difference between some Scholars of the past who took the subject of the word of Nur as Holy Prophet either in the commentary of this verse or in some other expressions never took it as an article of faith or article of Ahlussunnah, but just in a probable meaning.S o their dispute with Barailivis is major one and with us is a minor one. Since we do accept the Possibility that the word Nur may be Applied to the Essence of Holy Prophet if It doeth not negate his Humanity, the Primacy and priority of His HOLY HUMANITY, His Similarity and other Necessary Axioms of Islam and AXIOMS OF AHLUSSUNNAH.How ever we do add that even then it is not necessary to believe Him as A Nur since IF HOLY PROPHET IS A NUR EVEN THEN HIS HOLY HUMANITY IS AFDAL THAN HIS NURANIAH.If it is assumed that Holy Prophet was a Nur then It is the HUMAN ESSENCE [ZAATULINSAN]THAT BECAME NUR WITH OUT CEASING TO BE A HUMAN ESSENCE, BY TWO ATDDITIONAL ATTRIBUTES WITH OUT CEASING TO BE THE HUMAN ESSENCE, IT IS INCORRECT TO CLAIM THAT THE NUR BECAME A HUMAN BEING WITH OR WITH OUT CEASINGING TO BE A NUR. In the end one may say If Holy Prophet is a Nur then His HOLY HUMANITY is higher then his Nuraniah, IOf He is Not Nur then He is AFDAL MIN CULL AN NUUR AL HADIS.

Books of Barailvism 1] SUBHAANUSSUBUUH BY MAULVI RAZA OF BANS BARAILI UNITED PRIVINCES INDIA

31
Page

2] VASAYA SHARIF BY MAULVI RAZA OF BANS BARAILI UNITED PRIVINCES INDIA

31

32

3] MALFUZAT BY MAULVI RAZA OF BANS BARAILI UNITED PRIVINCES INDIA

Page | 32 4] -NBA AL MUSTAFA BY MAULVI RAZA OF BANS BARAILI UNITED PRIVINCES INDIA

5] AL AMAN WAL ULA BY MAULVI RAZA OF BANS BARAILI UNITED PRIVINCES INDIA

6]CANZ AL IMAN AND AL KHAZAAIN AL IRFAN BY MAULVI RAZA OF BANS BARAILI AND MAULVI NAIIMUDDIN MURADABADI UNITED PRIVINCES INDIA 7] ADDAULATUL MAKKIAH BY MAULAVI RAZA OF BARAILI. BOOKS OF AHLUSSUNNAH SHARRAH AQAAID BY IMAM SAD UDDIN TAFTAZANI RAHMATULLAH ALAIH NABRAS BY ALLAMAH ABDUL AZIZ PERHARVI AND NOTES BY ALLAMAH BARKHURDAR RAHMATULLAH ALAIHUMA SHARAH MUVAQQIF FIQ AKBAR [ ASCRIBED TO IMAM ABU HANIFAH RAHMATULLAH ALAIH YET THIS ASCRIPTION IS DOUBT FUL YET THE ASCRIBED ARTICLES OF FAITH ARE CORRECT EVEN IF THE ASCRIPTION IS DOUBTFUL] SHARAH FIQH AL AKBAR BY MULLA ALI QARI RAHMATULLAH ALAIH AQAID TAHAVI IMAM TAHAVI RAHMATULLAH ALAIH AQIDAH OF IMAM IBN ATTAIMIAH RAHMATULLAH ALAIH

AL KHIALI ,ISAGHOJI ,SHARAH TAHZIB,QUTBI, MULLA JALAL etc.

SEE TAFASIR OF SUNNIS FOR DIFFERENT OPINIONS ABOUT THE VERSE. 1] BAGHVI, 2]BAIDAVI, 3]TABRI, 4] IBN ATHIR, 5] IBN CATHIR, 6] TAFSIR CABIR OF IMAM RAZI,7]FATHULQADIR, 8] RUH AL MAANA,9] IBN AL ATIAH,10] JALALAIN, 11] KHAZIN,12}Q-RTABI,13]M-DAR-C AT TANZIL. IT MUST BE NOTED IN THESE TAFASIR THAT VARIETY OF OPENIONS INCLUDING THE OPENION THAT NUR IS FOR [THE ESSENCE OF] PROPHET SAVS DOES MAKE IT A MATTER OF PROBABLE PREFERENCE AND NOT AN ARTICLE OF FAITH. ONE MAY ALSO CONSULT M-FRR-DAAT AR RAGHIB FOR DIFFERENT MEANINGS AND USES OF THE WORD NUUR /NUR.

Note The word DEITY is Used instead of the word GOD since this latter word is often misused by atheist and makes disgracing statements. A NUMBER OF ERRORS IN SPELLING MAY BE FOUND DUE TO TYPING PROBLEM. AS THIS IS A PROTO TYPE DOCUMENT. ALTHOUGH SLIGHTLY IMPROVED FROM THE FIRST PROTOTYPE ARTICLES IT IS STILL A PROTOPTYPE ARTICLE. YET IT IS SLIGHTLY IMPROVED WE DO APOLOGY FOR GRAMMATICAL AND SPELLING ERRORS. WE MAY GET RID OF THEM IN SOME ADVANCE VERSION OF THIS ARTICLE.

SUB HANALLAH VA BI HAMDIHI SUB HANALLAHIL AZIM

Page 33

33

34

Page | 34