Some Questions For Engineer Ali Mirza About Literal Meanings of Divine Nearness And Divine Withness

Page 1 of 19

A Questionnair e to Engineer “Ali Mirza In Regard To His Claim That Attributes of Divine Nearness and Divine Withness Must Be Taken Literally and Really.

A number of questions are asked to contemplate in the mind of the Engineer of Jhelum (who is called Engineer “Ali Mirza of Jhelum, and is considered as the founder of a sect/cult which is called Jhelumiah or Engineeriah ir Alimirzaiah etc.) about his concept about non interpreting the Attributes of Nearness and Withness ascribed to Deity.

By AHLUSSUNNA H VS ALI MIRZA

Page 1 of 19

Page 2 of 19

A Questionnaire to Engineer “Ali Mirza In Regard To His Claim That Attributes of Divine Nearness and Divine Withness Must Be Taken Literally and Really.

There are some questions asked and it is requested that Engineer “Ali: Of Jhelum reply them according to following Conditions.

1] Answers and Replies Must be in Explicit Sentences.

2] No Questions is asked in the answers. He is asked not to use Counter Questions which he calls as Phakki. Since we want proper answers and excogitating replies. He must not use satyres.

Page 2 of 19

Page 3 of 19

3] Engineer “Ali: Mirza: must answer as according to his believes and must not skip any question.

4]He must not answer irrelevantly.

5] He must not use the views of Muh:addithu:n , since Taqli:d in articles of faith and in Divine Attributes is not allowed even according to Muqallidu:n .

[His answers must be uploaded so that the whole world may see the questions and answers].

Preliminary Engineer “Ali: Mirza: believes that it is Kufr [Infidelity] or Heresy [Bid”ah] to interpret the Divine Attributes of “Withness” [Ma”iah] and “Nearness” [Q-R-B] (

1)

So he analogues Nearness and Withness with the Attributes like “ ‘Istiva: ” (

2) and N-zu:l (3) .

So it is our right to ask him some questions about his believes in regard to the Attributes of Nearness and Withness which he refuses to interpret , and insists that they must be taken in Real and Literal Meanings as that of ‘Istiva:’ .

Question 1 What are the meanings of the words Q-r-b and Ma”iah ? It is asked to support the literal meanings from reliable “Arabic Lexicons and Dictionaries?

Page 3 of 19

Page 4 of 19

Question 2 If Deity is Mustavi: on “Arsh [Throne] then this means that He is Neither with some Created Individuals Nor Near any Created Individual? How does Engineer say that these two Attributes which are Contrary to the ‘Istiva: can be in Literal Meaning then?

The response that Deity is Near to Some Created Individuals [Slaves and Bound Men / “Iba:d] and With them according to His Sha’n is incorrect since Contrary Attributes cannot become Non Contrary in accordance to Divine Sha’n.

(4)

If Contradictory Attributes becomes Non Contradictory, Contrary Attributes become Non Contrary in Accordance to Divine Sha’n [Sh-yu:n] then this means that Divine Sha’n is Self Contradictory [Na”u:dh:ubillah and ‘Astaghfarullah].

Question 3 a) Does Engineer “Ali: Mirza: believe that Deity [Divine Essence] is With some of the Created Individuals and Not With Some Individuals?

If the answer is in negation then there are only two alternatives. a)

He either believes that Either Deity Is With each and every Created Individual or b) Deity is NOT With Any One of Created Individual. In the first case he accepts the View if S:ufis who believe that Deity is With Each and every Created Individual What so it be, in the second case he accepts that he does not take the word Ma”iah [With-ness] in Real/ Literal Meaning.

How does he response to the implications which he does not accept in the case his answer is negative.

If the answer is in Affirmation then “Ali: Mirza: does believe that Deity is Not With Some of the Created Individuals.

In this case it is asked that whether it is in Divine Power to become With with each and Every Individual as believed by S:ufies or it is not in Divine Power? b)Does Engineer “Ali: Mirza: believe that Deity [Divine Essence] is With some of the Created Individuals and Not With Some Individuals?

If the answer is in negation then there are only two alternatives.

He either believes that Either Deity Is Near each and every Created Individual or Deity is NOT Any Near One of Created Individual. In the first case he accepts the View if S:ufis who believe that Deity is Near to Each and every Created Individual What so it be, in the second case he accepts that he does not take the word Near [Nearness] in Real/ Literal Meaning.

How does he response to the implications which he does not accept in the case his answer is negative.

If the answer is in Affirmation then “Ali: Mirza: does believe that Deity is Not Near Some of the Created Individuals.

In this case it is asked that whether it is in Divine Power to become Near to each and Every Individual as believed by S:ufies or it is not in Divine Power?

Page 4 of 19

Page 5 of 19

Question 4 If Engineer “Ali: Mirza: Of Jhelum considers it Kufr or Heresy or Both to interpret Divine Nearness and Divine Withness then why he interpret ‘Ah:at:ah [Comprehension / Circumference] . Why he does not take it un-interpreted?

Question 5 Does Engineer “Ali: Mirza: interpret the Attribute M-K-R or he takes in un-interpreted? If he takes it un-interpretedly then what is his criteria to interpret and not to interpret an Attribute of Deity? If ‘Ahsanal Kh:aliqi:n implies Deity is Kh:aliq, why Kh:air ‘Al Ma:kiri:n does not imply the Active Participle [Noun Of Agent /’Ism ‘Al Fa:”il] Ma:kir to be predicated to Deity? Does Engineer interpret it or not.

Question 6 6.1)Does Engineer “Ali: Mirza: believe that it is in Power of Deity to become Near to those , he is not Near to?

If yes

then

6.11) Does it not mean that to become Near [To be near] is Non Eternal? If to become Near is Non Eternal then the question is whether To Become Near [To Be Near] to any Created Individual [Created Suppositum] is Intentional or Unintentional, Voluntary or Involuntary ?

If he believes that to become Near is Voluntary then he must accept that The Deity Hath Power to Become Near to those He is Not Near, and The Deity Hath Power to Become Not Near to those He is Near. Does the Engineer Believes in this?

If he believes that to become Near is Involuntary then this implies that he believes that when some Individuals are Created The Deity Becomes Near to them with out any Divine Will. Some thing which is Non- Eternal and Occurs neither Intentionally nor Voluntarily . Does The Engineer “Ali: Mirza: believe that to become Near is neither Eternal Nor Voluntary?

6.12)Does Engineer “Ali: Mirza: believe that it is in Power of Deity to become With with those , he is not With with? If yes then does it not mean that to become With [To be With] is Non Eternal? If to become With is Non Eternal then the question is whether To Become With [To Be With] to any Created Individual [Created Suppositum] is Intentional or Unintentional, Voluntary or Involuntary ?

If he believes that to become With is Voluntary then he must accept that The Deity Hath Power to Become With with those He is Not With, and The Deity Hath Power to Become Not With to those He is With with. Does the Engineer Believes in this?

If he believes that to become With is Involuntary then this implies that he believes that when some Individuals are Created The Deity Becomes With with them with out any Divine Will. Some thing which is Non- Eternal and Occurs neither Intentionally nor Voluntarily . Does The Engineer “Ali: Mirza: believes to become With is Neither Eternal Nor Voluntary?

6.21)If Divine Nearness is a Non Eternal Attribute then the question is , “Does it either Subsists in Divine Essence or is Associated With Divine Essence or Both. In any Case Engineer “Ali: Mirza: accepts that Non Eternals Subsists in Divine Essence or Non Eternals Are Associated with Divine Essence or Both?

Page 5 of 19

Page 6 of 19 If it neither Subsisteth in Divine Essence nor is associated with Divine Essence then it is Separate from Divine Essence. This implies that Divine Nearness is a Creation.

If the Divine Nearness is Eternal then the Question is Deity is equally Near to each and every thing. Since Eternal cannot be changed neither by Mutation nor by Becoming.

6.22)If Divine Withness is a Non Eternal Attribute then the question is , “Does it either Subsists in Divine Essence or is Associated With Divine Essence or Both. In any Case Engineer “Ali: Mirza: accepts that Non Eternals Subsists in Divine Essence or Non Eternals Are Associated with Divine Essence or Both?

If it neither Subsisteth in Divine Essence nor is associated with Divine Essence then it is Separate from Divine Essence. This implies that Divine Withness is a Creation.

If the Divine Withness is Eternal then the Question is Deity is equally With each and every thing. Since Eternal cannot be changed neither by Mutation nor by Becoming.

How ever Withness and Nearness cannot be Eternal Attributes since Deity become With and Near to some of His Created Rational Individuals after their respective Creations, and neither became With nor Became Near to some [other] Created Individuals. This does prove with certainty that none of the two Attributes are Eternal.

[Note: In this question due to some theological problems the English is some what irregular, for example phrases like “To Become Near” , “To Become With”, “ To Become With with” are written deliberately because regular English sentences may cause loss of Theological Meanings .]

Question 7 Is it not Shirk for Deity to be With , To be Near to His Created Individuals? If Yes then the Attributes of Withness and Nearness Must Be Interpreted and Must Not Be Taken In Real and Literal Meanings. It it is not Shirk then it is requested to provide detail why it is not Shirk when Basic Axiom of ‘Islam is that Deity is Beyond and Transcendent to Creations. The Nearness and Withness do contradict Divine Beyond-ness and Divine Transcedence.

The answer that Deity is With and Near to His Created Individuals according to Divine Sha’n is not acceptable. Since an article or belief of Shirk cannot be claimed to be Not-Shirk or Tauh:i:d just by saying that it is not according to the way of creations but according to the Sha’n of Deity.

If it is not Shirk then why S:ufi:s are accused of Shirk , when they claim that Deity is Near/Close to each and every Created Thing , Deity is With each and every Created Thing, Deity is With the Created Universe and Deity is Near to the Created Universe?

If Engineer “Ali: Mirza: claims that he does not declare this belief as Shirk but only reject this belief then the question is why he rejects this belief the Deity is With Every Created Thing and Near Every Created Thing.

Page 6 of 19

Page 7 of 19 It must be noted that some S:ufis sometime says that “Deity is IN each and every Created Thing and IN the Created Universe according to the Divine Sha’n”. So in this case Engineer “Ali: Mirza: cannot reject this dogma of some S:ufis since on the very same grounds which he uses to save himself also saves them. So the question is how and why he rejects them.

The word In does shew the superlative degree of Nearness and Withness in S:ufic dogmas.

It must be noted that If := A is a Created Individual and is in “Created Time” and “Created Space” [or in “Created Time and Space Manifold”] and B is an Individual that is Near A then B is also in them (it).

[I.e B is in Created Time and Created Space, otherwise B is Not Near to A] A is a Created Individual and is in Created Time and Created Space [or in Created Time and Space Manifold] and B is an Individual that is With A then B is also in them (it).

[I.e B is in Created Time and Created Space, otherwise B is Not With A]

If the Dogma of S:ufis is of General/Total H:-lu:l then WHY the Dogma of the Engineer of Jhelum is not of Particular/Partial H:-lu:l?

[If the Dogma of S:ufis is of General/Total H:-lu:l then the Dogma of the Engineer of Jhelum is of Particular/Partial H:-lu:l]

Question 8 8.1)The Engineer of Jhelum “Ali: Mirza: believes that Deity is Mustavi: on “Arsh yet Deity is With some of Created Individuals on Earth and Near to some of His Creations on Earth.

But ‘Istiva: upon “Arsh does contradict these two Attributes stated as above in question Eight; and that is one of the reasons that these two attributes are not taken literally.

If these two Attributes are taken literally then ‘Istiva:’ Upon/On “Arsh cannot be taken Literally.

So to say that these two Attributes are according to Sha’n of Deity, and therefore ‘Istiva: is also according to the Sha’n of Deity there fore these two do not contradict ‘Istiva:’ and intern ‘Istiva:’ doeth not contradict them is just to say that “Contradictory Attributes become Non Contradictory in accordance to Divine Sha’n” Na”udh:ubillah. If this is accepted then some day Engineer “Ali Mirza: shall accept the belief that H:aiy: La H:aiy, Qa:dir La Qa:dir etc.as non contradictory if according to some Engineered and Self Claimed Sha’n [‘Astagh:farullah ] .

8.2) The question is “ If Deity is Mustavi: on “Arsh then Is Deity also Near to “Arsh and With “Arsh, according to the Engineer of Jhelum?”

If Deity is Neither Near to “Arsh Nor With “Arsh so if ‘Istiva:’ upon / on “Arsh Doeth Not Imply Nearness and Withness how can No Istiva:’ on the Created Individuals implieth Nearness and Withness? If ‘Istiva upon/on “Arsh implies Withness and Nearness in regard to “Arsh then it is the indispensible implication (Lazim) of ‘Istiva:’, and if so then if Deity is Not Mustavi on Created Individuals on Planet Earth Deity is neither Near to them nor With them in Real and Literal Meanings.

(6) Page 7 of 19

Page 8 of 19

Question 9 If Deity Was Beyond Time and Space then did Deity Become in Time and Space when Deity became Near to some of the Created Individuals and With some of the Created Individuals. If yes then this means that Deity is IN some of His Created Individuals and in Created Time and Created Space . This is against ‘Islamic Concept of Tauh:id. The Basic AXIOM of ‘Isla:m is that Creator is Not in Any Creation and Creation is Not in Creator. To say that Creation is in the Divinity or Divinity is in Creations is not allowed to believe in.

To say that It is not in the ordinary way but in way that that is unknown and according to Divine Sha’n is not a proper reply. Since it is like to say that A Shirk that is in accordance to Divine Sha’n is allowed [‘Astagh:farullah]. If Deity Was in Time and Space before becoming Near to the Created Individuals on Earth then the Deity Became Near to them then this is movement in Time and Space in addition. Does Engineer “Ali: Mirza: accepts a Movement of Deity from one period of time to an other period of time in Time and from one space to an other space in Space?

Also Does Engineer consider Question 10 What Engineer must say what Twelvers Commentators say about the ‘Aya:t which say about the Attributes of Withness and Nearness? He must quote some of the Twelveite Commentaries and then comment on their Commentaries on these verses which mention Divine Nearness and Divine Withness. Do they interpret such verses or do not? Do they accept Engineer’s view that Nearness and Withness are in literal meanings but according to Divine Sha’n? If not then what Fatava he issues to their commentators? [A very difficult question indeed. Engineer ‘Insha:’All-h must have wished that this question would never been asked].

Engineer is requested to quote different commentaries of Twelvers’ Commentators in regard to such ‘Aya:t and state his Fatva: on each one of them separately so that his views may be seen and learned and criticized.

Question 11 Engineer “Ali: Mirza did quote a Fourteenth Century ‘Ahlul H:adi:th: Scholar in defend of Literal Meanings of Withness and Nearness. This means that before this fourteenth century scholar he was not able to find any AhlulH:adi:th: Scholar who held this view. Does this not mean that the so called scholar drifted from the main stream of ‘Ahlul H:adi:th: ? (7)

Question 12 If The Holy Deity was with His Prophet “I:sa: “AS then why did He say:= Verily They killed Him Not ; ‘ALL-H Exalted Him [Iesus/”I:SA:] Unto [/Towards] Himself [i.e Deity] If Deity was With the stated Apostle and Near to Him what is the meaning to Exalt Towards/Unto Himself? Does this not

8

shew that the Prophet/Apostle Was Lifted up to become Near and to become With?( )

Page 8 of 19

Page 9 of 19

Question 13 Is ‘ALL-H Deity [‘ILA:H] in heaven and in Earth.

13.1) If ‘ALL-H is then the literal meaning implies that ‘ALL-H Existeth IN Heaven and IN Earth.(

9) This

means ‘ALL-H Existeth in His Created Heaven and Created Earth. If ‘ALL-H Doeth Not Exist in any one of His Creation and Existeth in His Divine Self Only then this means one need an interpretation of the belief that ‘ALL-H is Deity in Earth. We ask Engineer of Jhelum, If ‘ALL-H is Deity in Earth then Deity Existeth In Created

10

Earth. Since Earth is Created and Not Uncreated.( ) If ‘ALL-His Not Deity in Earth then this means atleast Engineer is an atheist in regard to Earth and consider Earth as Deity-Less. Otherwise an interpretation is Necessary. The Non-Existence of Deity in Earth if does not imply Atheism them this means that the concept of Deity In Earth implies interpretation.(

11 )

How the Engineer deals with this problem.

[ It is a very powerful question and the Engineer and all his Engines are likely not to be able to respond it Properly. It is speculated that the Engineer shall try to use a Counter Question instead , which he re-terms by a horrible word Phakki. He is likely to ask “Is ‘ALL-H DEITY IN HEAVEN [SAMA:’] . The answer for this speculated counter question is that when some ‘Ahlul H:adi:th: scholars say such a sentence [‘ALL-HU FIS SAMA:’] it means “Deity is Mustavi Upon “Arsh, and ‘Istiva:’ Upon “Arsh Doeth not Contradict Beyondness. Any How one must distinguish the difference between the interpretation of Qur’a:n and ‘Ah:adi:th: ; and Interpretation of Sentences of Scholars .To neglect the differences of Sentences ‘Ahlul H:adi:th: Scholars from the Sentences of Holy Qu’a:n ahd Holy ‘Ah:adi:th: is a fallacy and this fallacy cannot be used by any one when pointed out.]

13.2) If a Created Individual A exists then either it is in Power/Omnipotence of Deity to become Near to the Created Individual and Not to become Near to It or it is Neither In Divine Power/ Omnipotence to become Near to It Nor it is in Divine Power/ Omnipotence to become Not Near to It. In the first case Nearness is Not Eternal. If Not Eternal then Created. If Created then Creation/ Creature. If Created / Creature then Not a Divine Attribute.

In the second case If Near to it then Near to it without Power, If Not Near to it then Not Near to it With Out Power.

If Near to it with out Power then Deity is compelled to become Near to it Mechanically with an intrinsic mechanism , If Not Near to it with out Power then Deity is compelled to become Near to it Mechanically with an intrinsic mechanism , But as Deity cannot be Near to It Prior to Its Creation since there is no concept/conception of becoming Near to a Non Existing Individual, this implies that some Non Eternals occur with out Divine Power.

If so then why a Deity’s Power is required at all?, why can it be not the case that entire world came with out the Divine Power?

If so then why a Deity’s Power is required at all?, why can it be not the case that entire world came with out the Divine Power?

Page 9 of 19

Page 10 of 19 But as Deity cannot be Near to It Prior to Its Creation since there is no concept/conception of becoming Near to a Non Existing Individual, this implies that some Non Eternals occur with out Divine Power.

13.2) If a Created Individual A exists then either it is in Power/Omnipotence of Deity to become With with the Created Individual and Not to become With with It or it is Neither In Divine Power/ Omnipotence to become Near to It Nor it is in Divine Power/ Omnipotence to become Not With with to It. If With with it with out Power then Deity is compelled to become With with it Mechanically with an intrinsic mechanism , In the second case If With with it then With with it Without Power, If Not With with it then Not With with it With Out Power.

In the first case Withness is Not Eternal. If Not Eternal then Created. If Created then Creation/ Creature. If Created / Creature then Not a Divine Attribute.

If Not Withness with it with out Power then Deity is compelled to become With with it Mechanically with an intrinsic mechanism , But as Deity cannot be With with It Prior to Its Creation since there is no concept/conception of becoming With with a Non Existing Individual, this implies that some Non Eternals occur with out Divine Power/Omnipotence.

If so then why a Deity’s Power is required at all?, why can it be not the case that entire world came with out the Divine Power?

[Note: Due to some Theological and Grammatical problems the words “With with” may appear as obscure and irregular in Emglish Grammar and Usage. But as stated earlier, in order to convey the correct meaning it is required . The first “With” is used in the meaning of One That Possesseth the Attribute of Withness while the second “with” is just a preposition which is opined to be necessary in these theological argumentations. Any how it is deliberate and not due to ignorance. It is reminded once more. How ever it it causes problem one is advised to read the entire content of text of sentences by ignoring the with which is used as a preposition. It is hoped that it may solve the problem.]

Question 14 How do the Engineer responds to the arguments of S:ufis who believe that Deity is every where in the [ Created] World and Diety is With every Created thing in the Created World.

Engineer “Ali: Mirza: is asked to quote at least some of their arguments from Qur’a:nic Verses and then try to answer those arguments which they try to make from the verses.(12) Page 10 of 19

Page 11 of 19

======================================================= ======================================================= ======================================================= ======================================================= ======================================================= ======================================================= =======================================================

(1) Q-R-B is translated as Nearness instead of closeness since the word Closeness is used in Real/Literal and Vertual/Figurative meaning almost equally , on the contrary Nearness is less used in Vertual [ Figurative/Metaphorica] meanings.

(2) This “Arabic word is used in several meaning. If it is translated in English it is possible that it is said in response that this meaning is incorrect. So the word is not translated and is borrowed at it is.

(3) The translation of the word N-ZU:L is To descend , Descension , Descending .

(4) The “Arabic word Sha’n is adopted as it is for it may be translated differently and one gets a chance to deny any translation , the word is borrowed at it is.

(5) Space and Time are two Creations of Deity. So the word “Them” which is a plural Pronoun is used. But when the Word Manifold is used it is a Single thing with two components there fore the singular Pronoun is used for it.

Page 11 of 19

Page 12 of 19

If it is said that a Manifold cannot be a created thing then there is no Space-Time Manifold.

(6) Indispensible Implication means “If A then B and If Not A then Not B” . Some thing analogous to Necessary and Sufficient Condition in this regard in modern terms.

(7) A very IMPORTANT Question indeed, since the Engineer Uses this argument to confuse the youth by the mistake of just one person.

(8) Similarly in the Event of Ascension [Mi”ra:j] Did Holy Prophet became near to Deity when he Ascended above towards heavens or he remaind as he was and the event of ascension did not made him near. When Holy Prophet Descended and Came back did this nearness that was during the event of Ascension ceased or continued. Engineer must keep in mind that the word Near is used in the Literal and Real Meaning and not in Virtual or Metaphrical or Figurative Meanings. Similarly the word Exalted is used in the meaning of Ascension or lifting up in real meanings.

(9) The word “In” is used in Literal meaning . The “ARABIC WORD for the word IN is Fi: [One of the “Arabic Prepositions]. The Attribute in regard to the word “In” is used as inness if any.

(10) Similarly when it is Said Deity is in Heaven [Sama:’/Sky] It means Deity is in Created Heaven since Heaven is also Created. So in these cases it appears that such statements contradict the Axiom Of ‘Isla:m Creator is not in Creations/Creatures [Makh:lu:qa:t] Page 12 of 19

Page 13 of 19

(11) Either Absence and Not-Presence are Synonyms or not. If Synonyms then If Deity is not Present on Earth then Deity is Absent from Earth.

If they are Not Synonyms then either Not Presence implies Absence or it does not. If it implies then If Not Prensence then absence. If it does not imply then either Absence imply Not Presence or it does not. If it implies then Absence implies Not Presence but Not Presence may or may not imply Absence. If Neither of the two imply one an other then neither Not Presence imply absence not absence imply Not Presence [“ADAM ‘AL H:D:U:R].

Any how If Not Presence In/On Earth then Nearness and Withness require interpretations and literal meanings are discarded.

(12)A number of S:ufies uses the Divine Attributive Nouns like Z:a:hir and Ba:t:in with out interpretation. We ask the Engineer of Jhelum that Does he interpret these two Divine Attributive Nouns or Takes there Literal Meanings. Suppose that Z:ahir is the Noun [Noun of Agent or Active Participle /’Ismul Fa:”il]. So its Mas:dar is Z:-hu:r. Then what is Maz:har. For if a thing is Z:a:hir then this implies thatb there is a Maz:har. The question is AS FOLLOW: Is Maz:har Separate From Z:a:hir or Identical to Z:a:hir.

If it is Identical to Z:a:hir then there is No Z:-hu:r. If no Z:-hu:r then no Z:-a:hir. So S:ufies declared that each and every Creation is a Maz:har of Deity. Some declare that Ba:t:in and Z:a:hir are opposites and there fore both are interpretable. So they mean that Deity is neither Z:a:hir in Literal Meaning nor Ba:t:in in Literal meaning. But some assume that Deity is Z:a:hir and Ba:t:in in Literal Meaning. But if Deity is Ba:t:in in literal meaning then Deity cannot be Z:a:hir in Literal Meaning . So some may say Deity is Z:a:hir in Literal meaning but Ba:t:in in Figurative meaning.

Page 13 of 19

a Page 14 of 19

Some may say just the opposite. Let us see what the Engineer of Jhelum does?

AHLUSSUNNAH VS ALI MIRZA HUSAMULLAH

Some time interpretations are inevitable.

We may ask some more questions about these two Attributes and shall see some possible replies of the Engineer of Jhelum and shall attempt to refute them.

But even these questions are sufficient and serves the purpose.

Page 14 of 19

Page 15 of 19

[ A QUESTIONNAIRE TO ENGINEER “ALI MIRZA IN REGARD TO HIS CLAIM THAT ATTRIBUTES OF DIVINE NEARNESS AND DIVINE WITHNESS MUST BE TAKEN LITERALLY AND REALLY.]

A number of questions are asked to contemplate in the mind of the Engineer of Jhelum (who is called Engineer “Ali Mirza of Jhelum, and is considered as the founder of a sect/cult which is called Jhelumiah or Engineeriah ir Alimirzaiah etc.) about his concept about non interpreting the Attributes of Nearness and Withness ascribed to Deity.

Page 15 of 19

Page 16 of 19

‘=

‫ﭐﺀ‬ ,

B,b=

T,t=

‫ﺏ‬

‫ﺕ‬

Th:,th:=

J,j=

‫ﺚ‬

‫ﺝ‬

H:,h:=

‫ﺡ‬

Kh:,kh:=

D,d=

‫ﺥ‬

‫ﺪ‬

Dh:,dh:=

R,r=

Z,z=

‫ﺫ‬

‫ﺭ‬

‫ﺯ‬ Page 16 of 19

Page 17 of 19

S,s=

‫ﺱ‬

Sh,sh.Sch,sch,=

S:,s:=

‫ﺹ‬

D:,d:=

T:,t:=

‫ﺽ‬

‫ﻂ‬

Z:,z:=

“=

‫ﺵ‬

‫ﻅ‬

‫ﻉ‬

Gh:,gh:=

‫ﻍ‬

F,f,Ph,ph=

Q,q=

‫ﻑ‬

‫ﻕ‬

K,k,C,c=

‫ﻚ‬ Page 17 of 19

Page 18 of 19

L,l=

‫ﻝ‬

M,m=

‫ﻣ‬

N,n=

‫ﻥ‬

H,h=

‫ﻩﻫ‬

T,t/h,H

=

‫ﺓ‬ V,v,W,w=

Y,y=

‫ﻮ‬

‫ﻱ‬

Vowels Short

A,a [as A/a in Sugar, E,e in Per, as U,u in But, as I/I in Sir] =

‫ﹷ‬ Page 18 of 19

Page 19 of 19

I,i [as I/i in Pin,Tin,] =

‫ﹻ‬

U,u [As U/u in Put, as oo in Book] =

‫ﹹ‬

Long Vowel

A: ,a:[As A/a in Car,Father] =

‫ﹷﺍ‬

I:,i: [As I in Police, as ee in Week] =

U:,u: [As U in Rude, as oo in Cool] =

‫ﹿﹻ ﻱ‬ ‫ﹿﻮﹹ‬

The symbols on case of vowels in red colour are optional Some time the symbol “-“ is used to omit a Marked Vowel for example Kita:b may be written as K-ta:b, sometime this is used to denote an Accent, eg ‘Akbaru may be written as ‘Ak-baru, some time it is used to present both of the stated above in a single transliterated “Arabic Word as follow: ‘Ak-b-ru or Ak-b-r- and so one.

Page 19 of 19