AHLUSSUNNAH VAL JAMAAH

Scholar Ilyas Ghumman

Interpreted in Regard to
His sentences that G-d is in
all Spaces .
Defending and Interpreting Scholar Ilyas
Ghumman from some misconceptions
Abu Muhib
11-Jul-19

G-d is beyond all Spaces and all Spaces are Creations , yet Scholar Ilyas Ghumman says God is in all
Spaces, So it it tried to interpret his sentences.
Ilyas Ghumman is one of the greatest Sunni reformer of fifteenth century CE.

How ever he has repeatedly said that G-d is in every Space [Maka:n/Jag-h].

This statement is inconsistent with the proper Sunni Theology apparently that G-d is beyond all spaces.

This is that G-d is neither in each and every space nor in some spaces but is Beyond all Space.

So it is required to interpret his words and sentences in regard to the present topic.

Ash’:ari :and Muturidi: belief :-

According to correct theology of Majority of Sinnites and they are ‘Asha:’:rah and Mutu:ridiah that All
the Spaces are creations of De-ty [Deity] and All the Spaces are some Creations of D-ity.

So G-d/ D-ity cannot be in any one of these spaces , D-ity /G-d is not in each and every space and D-ity/
G-d is not in some of the Spaces [‘Amkanah/’Amcanah].

So the only answer is that D-ity/G-d is BEYOND all Spaces without any Exception.

If this is so then this implieth that D-ity /G-d Transcendenteth all Spaces without Exception.

It is required to proof this claim before investigating the sentences uttered by the Great Scholar
Maula:na: ‘Ilya:s Ghumman.

Haiyiz is more general then Maka:n and Jahah is the ‘At:ra:f [ Directions] of Maka:n.

But take any meaning or definition of these terms there are the following things necessary for the
validity of them.

1] These are Neither Per Se Necessay in Existence nor Per Se Absurd but Per Se Contingent.

2] They are H:a:dith [Non-Eternal].

3] These are Creations of D-ity/G-d.

4] These are Finite and Limited.

So it is Crear that the Divine Existent can not be in some spaces and cannot be in all spaces.

So Deity /God is Beyond all Spaces.

If G-d is Eternally in all spaces then these spaces are also Eternal.

If all the spaces are Non Eternal then the Eternal G-d is without all spaces and without any space in
Eternity.

So how the Eternal Spacelessness of Deity ceaseth after Eternity.

This is Mumtana’: Bidh: Dh:a:t [Per Se Absurd] and not in Omnipotence of Deity.

So this is a proof that the Phrases like G-d in All Spaces needs to be explained or interpreted or both.

The Ahlussunnah of Deoband are Vuju:diah and Unicity of Existence may be explained as follow:

G-d is the only Existent that Existeth with Existence , and hence is Per Se Existent.

[Mauju:d Bidh: Dh:a:t].

So Muaju:d Bidh: Dh:a:t is one that Existeth With Existence [Mauju:d Bil Vuju:d] and all the Gh:airullah [

Separate from Deity] Exists without Existences [Vuju:da:t]. This is not Unicity of Existents but Unity of
Existence.

So the Spaces do exist yet their Mansha:’ and Mabda:’ is the Divine Existence Itself.

[Originater and Source].

So G-d is said to be in every space in the meaning that G-d is the Originator and Source of all spaces and
not in the meaning that G-d occupieth all Spaces in any meaning.

But some scholars have also gone to the extent that there are two types of Spaces, one is known and
other is Unknown.

The Unknown one is actually undefined and is an Active Attribute of G-d.

Some may equate it with a unique ‘Al‘:Aun ‘Ath: th:a:bit. So in some cases the meaning may also be
taken.

But one MUST NOT confuse between two type of Spaces.

The word Space is common but this may cause confusions.

So to annihilate such ambiguities it is stated once for all that the Unknown one is undefined and the
known one is defined.

The unknown one is the Divine Attribute while the known one is a Divine Creation.

As it is clarified once for all then the commonness of the word space cannot make ANY CONFUSION
from now on.

But according to my self if this is the case then as it is not ‘As:S:iftudh Dh:a:tiah [Essential Attribute] of
Deity then its Mabda: or Mansha:’ is Tacvi:n or Qudrah.

So Space in this meaning may be called Eternal that is the Mansha:’ of All Spaces are Eternal.
How ever I myself believe that the words Space and Spaces must be used in only one meaning and one
should not suggest an Attribute of Deity of this noun due to reason . So all the Spaces have a common
Mansha:’ and that is Tacvi:n or Qudrah but one must not suggest a Divine Attribute of this Noun.

But if some Mystics suggests they cannot be excluded from pure Sunnism due to belief on an
unscriptural Attribute.

The source of Withness and Encirclement.

Any how coming back to Ilyas Ghumman he does not differ from Majority of Sunnism when he saith that
G-d is in all Spaces since Either he is talking in regard to the reason that Divine Existence or Divine
Tacvi:n is the Originator of all spaces if he is considering all the Spaces as H:a:dith: and Makh:luq .

But he is taking in the Unknown and Undefined meaning then it is a Divine Attribute . But in this case it
is an Active Attribute and not an Essential Attribute.

SO God is Muqa:rin Bil Maka:n bu Mavara:’al Maka:n.

God is not Muqa:rin Fil Maka:n.

The word Fi implieth Z:arf [Container].

G-d is neither embedded in all spaces nor G-d occupieth all Spaces nor G-d embraces all Spaces.

Since the word Fi: [In is taken in spatial meaning or Containerial meaning].

But if the word Fi: is taken in other meanings unique to the Divine Essence then it may be used for Deity
and Divine Essence.

The Problem Of Urdu Language

Urdu language does cause certain pseudo Problems in the translations and in original Urdu sentences,
and when translated in to ‘:Arabic or other languages these are conserved unless and other wise treated
with care.

In the language some say Khuda Har Jagah Hae.

In such sentences there is a Preposition which is omitted.

There are two possible Prepositions which are missing.

1] Par [On/Upon/Above]

2] Main [In]

In the second case the sentence can be translated in English as follow:-

G-d is in all Spaces.

In the first case the translation in English is as follow:=

G-d is on/above all Spaces.

In ‘:Ara bic in may be translated as Fi:

‘All-hu fi: Kulli Maka:n

If translates as Above the word ‘:Ala:

‘All-hu ‘:Ala: Kulli Maka:n.

So in the translation of ‘:Ala: or Above there is no problem.

All the problems are in the meaning of Fi:

So if the expressions of the Scholar Ghumman are taken in the meaning of ‘:Ala: [Above] then there is no
problem.

Scholar Ghumman objection on the expression.

Some say that G-d is in Heavens and his Knowledge is in all spaces.

To such expressions the Scholar Ghumman makes the following objection.

As the Attributes are inseparable from the Essence then if Divine Knowledge in all Spaces then the
Divine Essence is in all Spaces.

But actually if G-d is in Above/Beyond all spaces then the Divine Knowledge is also Above/Beyond all
Spaces.

But this is just an objection on a weak sentence which is Ascribed to Great Sunni Ima:ms with weak
chains of Narrators.

But even in such cases one can explain the Great Ghumman as we have explained about about the
discussions about Spaces [‘Amkanah].

As G-d is Beyond all Created Spaces without any Exception in the proper meanings/definitions of space
and spaces then one can interpret Scholar Ghumman as we have interpreted above.

On the contrary if it is suggested that Great Scholar Ghumman is talking about the Unknown Space ,
which is the Divine Attribute and Originator [Mansha:’] of all Spaces then this is an Uncreated Divine
Attribute .

One may suggest that there are infinite many ‘A’:yan which are the Divine Attributes and the spaces are
there cooresponding Creations even then one have a proper solutions for Ghumman’s Expressions.
Any how it is generally held that the Latent Realities [‘Al ‘A’:yan ‘Ath:th:a:bitah] are Divine Attributes
and the ‘A’:ya:n ‘Al Kh:a:riah [External Entities] are there representations in Externity [Kh:arij]

Then there is no proper objection is possible on Scholar Ghumman.

The Word In

In many cases the word In does not imply Containment

For example if some one says G-d is in Existence , it only means that G-d Existeth. In more accurate
sentence I meaneth that G-d/D-ity is in Existence.

The difference between the two sentence i.e G-d Existeth and G-d is in Existence is that the former is a
dynamic approach [Ipsum Esse] while the latter is a static approach of one and the same concept and
one and the same meaning.

So G-d is in Existence really meaneth G-d is Attributed by the Attribute of Existence.

Similarly one may say G-d is in Knowledge meaneth nothing but that G-d is attributed by the Attribute of
Knowledge . Or in strict and rigid meaning Knowledge is as Attribute of G-d.

So one may say that G-d is in Attribute A meaneth A is an Attribute of G-d.

So the word IN does not imply its real meaning of any thing that is prior to the preposition IN/FI: is
contained in any thing that is posterior to the Preposition under discussion.

So to say G-d is in Every Space can also mean that Space is an Attribute Of G-d.

But how can Space be a Divine Attribute?There are some classical and Modern Objections upon the
explanation.

So there are some answers as according to some S:ufis and Sunni Mystics who say so.

1] The word space in there Nomenclature is not defined as defined by Philosophers , Theologians etc.

2] It may be considered as an Active Attribute , which has a Source or Originator and that is an Essential
Attribute.

In more accurate sentence the Source [Mabda:’] of all spaces is a Divine Attribute.

So this interpretation is more perfect than the claim that there is a Latent Reality which is an Attribute
corresponding to each and every Per Se Contingent Space.

As no created space is per se subsistent and Divine Existence is the Originator/Mansha of the respective
spaces WITHOUT EXCEPTION one may say G-d is all spaces in this particular meaning.

But each of these concept/explanation can defend Scholar ‘Ilya:s Ghumman from the objection stated
above.
So the question is why the Great Scholar Ghumman emphasizes that G-d is every where instead of
saying G-d is Beyond all Created Spaces and is neither in all Created Spaces nor in some Created Spaces
but in no Created Space?

The answer is simple. He follows the creed of S:ufiah who did use such expressions .

So he want not only to use these expressions but also claim that the meaning is neither imaginary nor
virtual.

But in the Divine Case the meaning is called Real even if it doeth not contradict the Divine Beyondness
and Divine Transcendence from all Created Spaces.

CONCLUSION

Space is a Creation of G-d and all spaces are Creations of G-d.

All Spaces are some Creations and not all creations are spaces.

So Uncreated G-d cannot be in all Spaces and cannot be in some spaces, since all spaces are Created.

But the word space is also used for an undefined concept which is not the known space but the source
of all existing Contingent spaces.

This source is either a Divine Attribute or a sub Attribute.

So G-d in neither in all spaces , nor in some spaces and is in not in any space in one meaning of the
words space and spaces and G-d is in all spaces in an other meaning.

Scholar Ghumman emphasizes the second meaning yet does not deny the first meaning.