AHLUSSUNNAH WAL JAMAAH

Further Studies in the

Principle Of Ta’:li:q Bil
Muh:a:l -2
Refuting Ali Mirza, Refuting Mirza Jhelumi
Refuting Ahlesunnatpak , a sect founded by
Mirza Jhelumi
Talat Zahrah Naqvi

Further Studies in the Principle of Ta’li:q Bil Muh:a:l

 Page 1 of 10

PRELIMINARY 1

It is Certainly Impossible that any Person shall be made a Prophet after Holy Prophet.

In another sentence the same meaning can be presented as follow.

It is Certainly Impossible that a Person is Prophetised after Holy Prophet.

Page 1 of 10
 Page 2 of 10

Now there are some more Impossibilities discussed below:

It is Impossible that a Person P1 believes that there is a Person who is Prophetiesed After Holy Prophet
and is a Muslim.

Since If a Person say P1 believes claims that he is a Muslim yet believes that here is a Person P2 who is
Prophetised after Holy Prophet then he is a Ca:fir.

So this person is a Ca:fir.

His claim is Wrong and Incorrect.

It is impossible that the claim of a Person say P2 that he ( i.e P2) is a Prophet is True and denier of his (i.e
P2)’sClaim is a Muslim.

In another form of sentence the same meaning may be conveyed as follow.

It is impossible that the claim of a Person P2 that he (P2) is a Prophet is True and the denier of his (i.e
P2’s) claim is not a Ca:fir.

But there is another problem.

It is contingent that a person P1 believes that the claim of a Person P2 that he (i.e P2) is a Prophet is True
and the denier of his (i.e P2’s) claim is a Muslim.

It is contingent that a person P1 believes that the claim of a Person P2 that he (i.e P2) is a Prophet is True
and the denier of his (i.e P2’s) claim is not a Ca:fir.

Let consider the following case more Logically.

Let it be Impossible that a Person P2 is a Prophet and a Person P3 who denies his Prophethood is a
Muslim.

Let it be Necessary that a Person P2 is not a Prophet if a Person P3 denies that the Person P2 is a Prophet
and does not cease to be a Muslim.

Another formation of the same meaning is as follow:

Let it be Necessary that a Person P2 is not a Prophet if a Person P3 denies that the Person P2 is a Prophet
and does continue to be a Muslim.

But suppose that there is a Person P1 who does not believe in it.

So P1 may believe that a Person 2 is a Prophet and the denier P3 of Prophethood of P2 is Muslim.

This is not impossible..

Page 2 of 10
 Page 3 of 10

Since even if it is claimed that it is Impossible that the Person P2 is a Prophet and him (P2) as a Prophet is
a Muslim.

In other words it is expressed in the following sentence.

A Person P2 cannot be a Prophet if a distinct Person P3 denies that P2 is a Prophet and (the Person P3) is
a Muslim.

The Word CANNOT represents IMPOSSIBILITY.

This very sentence can be expressed without any mutation in meaning and with conservation of meaning
in the following sentence.

It is IMPOSSIBLE that a Person P2 is a Prophet is a distinct Person P3 denies that P2 is a Prophet and

(the Person P3) is a Muslim.

But it is not impossible that a Person P1 does not believe that ‘It is IMPOSSIBLE that a Person P2 is a
Prophet is a distinct Person P3 denies that P2 is a Prophet and

(the Person P3) is a Muslim’.

This is irrespective of the truth or falsehood of the following belief:=

“It is IMPOSSIBLE that a Person P2 is a Prophet is a distinct Person P3 denies that P2 is a Prophet and

(the Person P3) is a Muslim.”

So this is a problem which MUSTNOT be confused since the confusion makes a fallacy.

Mirza: Jhelumi: is a Master in Fallacy Making .

He is deliberately making such fallacies to vail and cover his Apostasies and Heresies.

He has hinged or suspended [Ta’:li:q] on the thing which is not Impossible but Contingent.

Since if a thing is not Impossible then it is Possible. But if the Possible is not Necessary then it is Certainly
Contingent. All the definitions are provided in the part 1 of the “Further Studies”.

Now this clever Mirza Jhelumi tries to defend his Apostasy and Heresy BY THE Principle of Ta’:li:q Bil
Muh:a:l.

But what the game he is playing with his audiences who are not the students of such subjects , is that he
is declaring that the following as Muh:a:l i.e Impossible]:

A Person P1 believes that a distinct Person P3 disbelieves

in the claim of Propherhood of a Person P2 and P3
continues to be a Muslim.
Page 3 of 10
 Page 4 of 10

This is not Impossible but a belief of Cufr. Curf is not Impossible but Contingent.

The thing which is Impossible is as follow:-

A Person P2 is a Prophet and the Person P3 who denies the that P2 is a Prophet is a Muslim.

These are the complex cases of Impossibles.

So this is clear that Mirza: Jhelumi: commits two Fallacies.

First he deliberately Confused between the Impossiblity of an Act / Event /Attribute/ a Thing and belief
of a Person P1 about about the Impossibility that it is not Impossible.

Second he Suspended the cessation of Tacfi:r not on the Impossible but on the Contingent by confusing
between the two by neglecting the differences between the two.

If further Analysed it is found that Mirza: Jhelumi: is not Suspending the cessation of the declaration of
Cufr of Mah:mu:di: Mirza:’is by saying that “If the begin to believe in the finality of Holy Prophet then he
shall cease to declare them as Ca:fir”.

On the contrary he is hinging the cessation of Tacfi:r not on the cessation of there belief in Mirza:
Jhelumi: but on the cessation of Tacfi:r exercised by them . This is a Proof that Mirza:
Jhelumi: does not believe that one of the Basic Cufr of them is the denial of the Finality of Holy Prophet.

So he is not hinging and suspending their cessation of Tacfi:r on it but on he is suspending and hinging
the cessation of their Tacfi:r on an other thing and that is the Tacfi:r of the deniers of Mirza: Qa:diani’s
claim of Prophethood.

PRELIMINARY 2

Mirza: Jhelumi: has said the very same thing for Nus:airiah as Well.

According to Mirza: Jhelumi: if Nus:airiah cease to declare those who disbelieve that Saiyiduna: ‘:Ali: RD:
is a Divine Incarnation , as Ca:fir then Mirza: Jhelumi: shall cease to declare Naus:airiah as Ca:fir.

This means that he does not consider the belief of of Divine Incarnation as Cufr and Shirc. Even if it is
Impossible (according to Mirza: Of Jhelum) that a believer in the Incarnation of D-ity cease to declare
those who disbelieve in the dogma of Incarnation Of G-d as Cufr and Shirc.

This means that a thing is just impossible according to Mirza: Jhelumi: but to believe in it is not Cufr.

On the contrary Mirza: Jhelumi: should have said that Nus:airiah are Primarily Ca:fir and Mushric due to
their belief in Divine Incarnation. Whether it is impossible for them to disbelieve in Divine Incarnation or
not.

Now coming back to the Problem of Mah:mu:dites.

It is Impossible that Mirza: Qa:diani: be a Prophet. To believe in this particular Impossibility is a Cufr.

Page 4 of 10
 Page 5 of 10

But to believe in this Impossibility is Not Impossible. That is why Mah:mu:dites disbelieve in this
Impossibility. Mirza: Jhelumi: does not base the Cufr of Mah:mudites on the belief of this Impossibility as
not Impossible. But on the Tacfi:r of denier s of Mirza: Qa:diani: .

Then he hinges the cessation of Tacfi:r of Mah:mudites on the Cessation of Tacfi:r of Disbelievers of
Mirza: by Mah:mudites.

Finally he Hinges the cessation of Tacfi:r of disbelievers in Mirza: Qa:diani by Mah:mu:dites on the
supposed impossibility of belief in the claim of Prophethood of Mirza: .

In all this network he makes the Impossibility of disbelieve in the claim of Mirza: Qa:diani: by
Mah:mu:dites as a basis upon which he hinges the Cessation of Tacfi:r of Mah:mu:dites.

Why he is doing that.

He is simply doing it because he considers that to disbelieve in the Claim of Mirza: is Impossible by a
Mah:mu:di Mirza:’I as long as he is a Mah:mu:di: Mirza:’i. So he hinges the cessation of Tacfi:r on this
impossible.

But if so he is not declaring this as Cufr but just Impossible.

On the contrary if a person believes in two or more Cufrs , then to say that if the person cease to believe
in any one of the two Cufrs , one should cease to declare the person as Ca:fir, then such a Saying is a Cufr
ITSELF. Even if one uses the Principle of Ta’:li:q Bil Muh:a:l and claims that it is impossible for the person
to disbelieve in one of the two Cufr stated above.

This makes the faith of Mirza: Jhelumi: to cease .

Preliminary 3

There are AT LEAST two Cufrs of Mah:mu:dite Mirza:’is according to Muslims.

1] To believe that Mirza: Q:diani: is a Prophet. [‘Astaghfarullah Va: Na’:u:dh:ubillah]

2] To declare disbelievers in Mirza: Qa:diani as Ca:fir.

If some one say P1 says that if a Mah:mu:di: Mirza:’i: P2 ceases to declare Disbelievers in Mirza: Qa:diani
as Ca:fir , he shall cease to declare him as a Ca:fir, then this clearly means that according to P1 the first
belief of P2 is not Curf.

So P1 is also a Ca:fir.

Now P1 tries to defend himself by saying that if P2 ceases to declare disbelievers in Mirza: Qa:diani as
Ca:fir then it is Impossible that Mirza: Qa:diani: Mirza: Qa:dia ni: is a Prophet then P1 is trying to prove
the Impossibility of cessation of Tacfi:r of Disbelievers in Claim of Prophethood of Mirza: by P2 , so that

Page 5 of 10
 Page 6 of 10

P1 may continue to declare P2 as Ca:fir on the basis of second belief, but P1 is not declaring P2 as Ca:fir
on the first belief.

This proves that he is using the first belief of P2 as a proof of impossibility of the cessation of the second
Cufr of P1 but it self as an Independent Cufr of P2.

What P1 is doing is exactly the same ,what Mirza: Jhelumi: as done.

So This Principle Of Ta’li:q Bil Muh:a:l is not only wrongly used by Mirza: of Jhelum to defend his own
Cufr but deliberately used to make a great fallacy.

As his listeners are not aware of such discussions he is saying that he is using this Principle, with the
surety that his students shall not study the subject in proper detail.

As for us , we say that if Mah:mudites cease to believe in all Cufrs and accept ‘Isla:m only then they shall
become Muslim. Whether it is Impossible or Contingent that they shall do it or not.

It is an independent matter.

Mirza: Jhelumi: is to cleaver to suggest dependency between independents as well and this shall be
discussed in an independent article.

Preliminary 4

A person must believe in the Necessaries of a religion id he belongs to it.

For example a Hindu must believe in Vedas . If a man claims to be a Hindu and disbelieve in Vedas then
his claim that a Hindu: is incorrect , even according to Non-Hindu:s.

Similarly if a Jew disbelieve in Torah of Tanakh he ceases to be a Jew. If he still claims so his claim is
incorrect.

An other example is of Sikhs . If a Sikh disbelieves in Na:nac he ceases to be a Sikh.

Now there are some Necessaries of Mah:mu:dites.

If a Person disbelieves in the Mah:mu:di belief that “Mirza: Qadiani is a prophet [‘Astagh:farullah]”

He cease to be a Mah:mu:di:.

So what is impossible that a person is a Mah:mu:di: Mirza:’i: and disbelieve in this Necessary Mah:mu:di:
Mirza:’I belief. But this belief is Cufr according to ‘Isla:m.

So we declare them as Ca:fir on the basis of this belief.

So if it is Impossible by Supposition that a person remains a Mah:mu:di and denies the claim of Mirza:
Qa:diani, it does not mean that this belief that “Mirza: Qa:diani: is a prophet [‘Astaghfarullah]” is not
Cufr.

Page 6 of 10
 Page 7 of 10

So what Mirza: Jhelumi ought to do but he did not was to say clearly that he shall cease to declare
Mah:mudites as Ca:fir if they cease to believe that Mirza: Qa:diani: is a prophet regardless of
Impossibility or Contingency of the cessation of belief in Mirza: Qa:diani: .

Even this was problematic since this is not the Only Cufr of Mirza: Jhelumi: .

There are others.

We have provided the example of Laho:ri: Mirza:’is that they disbelieve that Mirza: is a prophet, yet
other Cufrs are present in them, So they are declared as Ca:fir by Muslims.

Preliminary 4

There are atleast two beliefs of Cufr which are believed by Ma:mu:di: Mirza:’i:s .

1] The First belief is “ Mirza: Qa:dia:ni: is a Prophet” . [Na’:udh:ubillah]

2] The second belief is “All those who do not believe that Mirza: Qa:dinani: is a Prophet are Ca:fir”.

The negation of the latter belief implies the negation of the first belief.

That is if those who deny that Mirza: Qa:diani: is a Prophet are Not Ca:fir then it is implied that Mirza:
Qa:dinani: is NOT a Prophet.

This means that it is impossible “Mirza: is a Prophet and those who deny him as a Prophet are Not Ca:fir.

This implies that it is Impossible that “Mirza: is a Prophet and those who deny him as a Prophet are
Muslim/Muslims.

Mirza: Jhelumi: deliberately hinges [Ta’:li:q] the negation of second belief of Mah:mudi: Mirzai: on the
first Impossibility or Second Impossibility or both.

If the act of hinging is correct then this means that it is Impossible that Mah:mu:di: Mirza:’i: shall cease
to declare Muslims as Ca:fir.

So Mirza: Jhelumi: is declaring that it is Impossible that the Mah:mu:di: Mirza:’is quit their second belief.

But he is not declaring them as Ca:fir on their First Belief. Rather he is trying to use their First Belief in
the first and second Impossibilities .

Since if for sake of an argument , it is assumed that Mirza: Qa:diani is a prophet [May ALL-H Forbid For
writing these words] and if the deniers of Mirza: are Muslim then it is an Impossibility . But to be an
Impossibility or a part of Impossibility is one thing and to be a Cufr is another thing. So it means that
Mirza: Jhelumi: is not declaring Mah:mu:di: Mirza:’is as Ca:fir due to their First Belief ,but due to their
Second Belief and is using their First Belief in an Impossibility.

Page 7 of 10
 Page 8 of 10

On the Other hand all the Muslims say that if Mah:mu:di: Mirza:’is cease to declare all those who do not
believe in the claim of Prophethood Of Mirza: Qa:diani: as Ca:fir, even then Mh:mu:di: Mirza:’is are Ca:fir
since they Deny the Finality and Lasthood of the Holy Prophet [571CE-632 CE] .

So Mirza: Jhelumi:’s defense by using the Principle of Suspension with Impossible does not save Mirza:
Jhelumi: from the Cufr for not declaring Mah:mu:di: Mirza:’is as Ca:fir on denying the Finality and
Lasthood of Holy Prophet, and for believing Mirza: as a prophet.

Conclusion

If a person or a group of people believe in more than one beliefs of Cufr then it is Cufr for declaring them
as Ca:fir on ONLY one belief of Cufr and using all the other beliefs of Cufr to prove the Impossibility of
Cessation of the chosen Cufr.

This means that the person considers only one of the several beliefs of Cufr as Cufr and does not
condider the rest of them as Cufr. This proves that this person is also a Ca:fir.

One must declare such persons or a groups on each and every belief of Cufr in which they do believe.

It is hoped that even the followers of Mirza: Jhelumi: shall understand the Cufr of Mirza: Jhelumi:.
INSHA:’ALL-H

Slaves of G-d and Servants of Prophet are always there to defend ‘Isla:m from Apostates like Mirzas of
Qa:dian and Jhelum etc.

Page 8 of 10
Page 9 of 10

Page 9 of 10