Ali Mirza Exposed Due to Maulvi Ishaq Faisalabadi [d:2013]

1

SOME QUESTIONS TO “ALI: MIRZA: IN REGARD TO RA:FID:I ‘ISH:A:Q JHA:L of Fais:Al ‘Aba:d [Former Layallpur] (D:2013 CE) Engineer “Ali: Mirza: is also a student in of Ra:fid: ‘Ish:aq Jhal of Fais:al ‘Aba:d Panja:b.

‘Ish:a:q was an open Ra:fi:d:i: who advocated Enemy of Saiyiduna: ‘Abu Bakr RD:, Saiyiduna: “Umar Saiyiduna: “Uth:ma:n RD: and Saiyidatuna: “A:’ishah RD:.

According to him := 1] It is not Kufr to declare Saiyidyna: ‘Abu Bakr RD: as Ka:fir or Ghair Mu’min. {Naudhbillah} He held the same view for the other stated above Holy Personalities Naudhbillah. Now the question is whether “Ali: Mirza: Agrees with ‘Ish:a:q Ra:fid:i: on this view or not. If not then does “Ali Mirza: Considers ‘Ish:aq Jhal Wala as Rafid:i:. If yes then why he has presented his questions and answers on his site? If not then “Ali: Mirza: is exposed that he often declares Many ‘Ahlul H:adi:th: “Ulma:’ as Na:s:ibi:, why did he not declare This Rafid:i: as a Ra:fid:i:? In either case “Ali: Mirza: is exposed of his tendencies towards Enemies of S:ah:a:bah.

2] Jha:l Wala advocated that the enemies of Saiyiduna: Abu Bakr RD: and other stated above Holy Personalities make objections on them due to some tradition Naudhbillah s . According to this Rafid:i: Whether these traditions are right or wrong this is a saperate issue , but if some one accept them even if they are wrong and incorrect then he has a right to become their enemy Naudhbillah and such a person cannot be condemned Naudhbillah . Ish:Aq Jha:l wala was refuted by great scholars and finally Jha:l Wala accepted that all the Sunnis including All the ‘Ahlul H:adi:th: are wrong and only he is correct. He was unable to respond great Sunni and ‘Ahlul H:adi:th: scholars like ‘Irsha:d ‘Al H:aqq ‘Ath:ari: and others.

The question is to what degree this Engineer of Jhelum agrees with his Analogy of Fais:al’Aba:d in Enmity of S:ah:bah.

If “Ali Mirza: accepts that the enemies of ‘Abu: Bakr RD: Have this right [Na”u:dh:billah] then “Ali: Mirza is exposed and his Taqaiyah is evident. If he rejects then why he uploaded his questions-answers on internet with such a Rafid:i: . Once again “Ali: Mirza: is exposed.

3] Even Zubair “Ali Zai the former teacher of “Ali Mirza: refuted ‘Ish:a:q of Jhelum , he was so against this person that he did not want to hear his name.

1

2 ‘Isha:q Jha:l Wala was not only defended those who condemn Saiyiduna: Mu”a:viah RD: but also those who Condemn Saiyiduna: ‘Abu: Bakr and other stated above personalities. What does this means , he was a Rafid:i: . By uploading the videos of this person “Ali: Mirza: is exposed once for all times.

Although cunning ‘Ish:a:q of former Layallpur claimed and confessed that he did not agree with Rafid:i: objections and even admitted that even he refutes them ,but he said that due to the existence of such traditions and their interpretations , he thinks that Rava:fid: have a right to deny their Faith [‘I:ma:n] and to declare them as enemies of ‘Isla:m [Na”u:dh:u Billah]. He termed it as an error of interpretation [Kh:at:a ‘ut: T:a’vi:l]. I my self made some objections on him that: 1] There are some verses in Qur’a:n which in there literal meanings make the concepts that Divine Knowledge is Temporal [H:a:dith:], Divine Will is Temporal and Divine Speech [Qur’a:n] is made hence not Eternal then does it mean that these are the Errors of Interpretations ?

The Rafid:i: did not answer.

2] If some one use the same method used by Rava:fid: against Saiyiduna:”Ali:, Saiyiduna: H:asan RD, Saiyidatuna Fa:t:imah, etc, then is he going to give same benefit of doubt of errors of interpretation or he has two different standards for two different Classes of S:ah:a:bah RD: .

The response was he did not want to enter in academic discussions since there is no one of such believes in the country. When responded that these questions are on his principles, he answered that he is neither a Logician nor a Principlist [‘Us:uli, one who makes /sets Principles] . When asked , did he used the word ‘Us:uli for the subsect of Rava:fid:, he said no , but in the literal meaning.

3] When enquired what is his own believes about S:ah:a:bah he replied he is ‘Ahlul H:adi:th: and follow them in this regard but only gives benefit of doubt to Rava:fid:.

4] When asked what is his view about the fact that Rava:fid: disbelieve Bukh:ari and Muslim and the rest of S:ah:a:h: as not reliable , and “whether to deny the whole Holy Bukh:ari and Holy Muslim is not Kufr according to him” he said he did not want to discuss the topic .

Any how ‘Ishj:aq of former Layallpur was a Rafid:I as “Ali Mirza of Jhelum is.

2

3

TO THE FOLLOWERS AND AUDIANCES OF ENGINEER “ALI MIRZA: DO YOU STILL REQUIRE PROOFS TO CONVINCE YOU THAT “ALI MIRZA: IS A RAFID:I WHO MISGUIDES MUSLIMS . ARE YOU STILL IN DOUBT? HOW MANY EVIDENCES YOU REQUIRE TO BE CONVINCED THAT HE IS NOT ONLY A FA:FID:I BUT AN ACUTE AND CRONICLE CASE OF RA:FID:M

i

3