ALI MIRZA CHALLANGED TO EXPLAIN A VERSE OF SURAH T:A:HA:

Page 1 of 5

(Aaron) replied: "O son of my mother! Seize (me) not by my beard nor by my head! Truly I feared lest thou shouldst say, ´Thou has caused a division among the children of Israel, and thou didst not respect my word!´"

;

TA: HA: There are several questions in regard to this verse.

These are in regard to the acts of Prophets.

1]The question is whether Saiyiduna: Mu:sa did seize the beard and head of Saiyiduna Ha:ru:n or he did not seize them and this is just a Metaphor or a Figure.

If “Ali: Mirza: takes the verse as a Metaphor or a Figure then he must state the principles of discarding the literal meaning in favour of Metaphorical of Figurative meaning. Otherwise he is unable to take the verse otherwise the literal meaning.

2]If he accepts that Holy Prophet Mu:sa: “AS did as the verse saith in Literal meaning then the questions are: Were these acts of Saiyiduna: Mu:sa: AS correct or they were wrong?

If they were correct acts then this implies that Saiyiduna: Ha:ru:n did commit an Error. Is this Error is of Ijtiha:d or this was not by Ijtiha:d. If not by ‘Ijtiha:d then was it a transgression or it was by Vah:y?

2] If Saiyiduna: Ha:ru:n was correct then this implies that both of the acts of Saiyiduna: Mu:sa: were incorrect and wrong.

So this implies that the act of Saiyiduna: Mu:sa: was based on ‘Ijtiha:d. In this case this implies an error of Ijtiha:d to Saiyiduna: Musa: 2] If Saiyiduna: Mu:sa: was correct then this implies that both of the act of Saiyiduna: Ha:ru:n “AS was incorrect and wrong.

So this implies that the act of Saiyiduna: Ha:ru:n was based on ‘Ijtiha:d. In this case this implies an error of Ijtiha:d to Saiyiduna: Haru:n.

Page | 1

Page 2 of 5

Engineer “Ali: Mirza: Must have to reply the nature of the act of each prophet stated above.

If he is unable to decide then it is very clear that he is an apostate who has no rules and no principle.

If Ijtiha:d of two Prophets can differ then why the ‘ijtiha:d of S:ah:abah cannot differ?

This shews that not only Zubair “Ali: Zai but his telephonic and telepathic student of Jhelum as well,both were/are in error in regard to the Nature of ‘jtiha:d.

Additionally this shews that even Prophets could dispute with one another . But none of them is to be accused. This is a proof that even the Divine Essence Doeth not accuse on the Errors of ‘ijtiha:d.

If “Ali Mirza saiththat both of them were correct then he had to accept plurality of truths. Plurality of Truths can only be in the case each one of the truths is relative and non of them is absolute.

POINTS TO BE NOTED:= 1]Prophet could not do any act which imply Non Existence of “As:mah.

2] S:ah:abah could not do any act which imply Non Existence of “Ada:lah.

So any act ascribed to any Prophet if is against “As:mah must necessarily be interpreted in the case the Text is reliable , and the text shall be discarded if it is not reliable.Similarly any act ascribed to any S:ah:a:bi if is against “Ada:lah must necessarily be interpreted in the case the Text is reliable , and the text shall be discarded if it is not reliable.

Neither a Prophet nor a S:h:a:bi can be criticized for an error in ‘Ijtiha:d.

The ‘Ijtiha:d of Nabi and the ‘Ijtiha:d of S:ah:a:bi need not to follow the rules and principles established

by F-qha:’ .

We have given the example of a dispute between two Prophets ,each one of the two was a Ma”s:u:m [Infallible and Innocent]. Yet they not only disputed but quarreled on a n issue of ‘Ijtiha:d. But none of them can be condemned. The same is true in case of S:h:a:bah and then for Muh:addith:i:n and F-qha:’.

In the dispute none of the disputers are condemn IF it is a Dispute Of ‘Ijtiha:d.

But like all Rava:fid: and those who have Ra:fid:i: Tendencies consider the Errors of ‘Ijtiha:d of S:ah:abah as Transgressive Errors or Errors of Transgrassion [Na”udh:uBillah and ‘Astagh:farullah].

POWER OF ‘IJTIH:AD If an ‘Ijtiha:d is incorrect even then it is Neither a Sin Nor a Transgression, even it is apparently close to an act of Transgression of Law. These Ra:fid:i: minded people terms such Errors of ‘ijtiha:d a Kh:at:aya:’ Munkirah [Errors of Transgression].

Page | 2

Page 3 of 5 So they are exposed from their tendencies.

Family of Mirza has Rafid:i: Tendencies, and this does shew that son of Mirza: Family namely “Ali: Mirza did have the Rafid:i: tendencies when he was a Barailvi and when he became ‘Ahlussunnah Deoband he did have the same tendencies. These tendencies urged him to become ‘Ith:na”Ashri. Then he met people like ‘ish:aq Jhal etc. and he followed them Finally he came to simple minded Zubair “Ali: Zai .

But regular students of Semi ‘Ahlul H:adi:th: Zubair did recognized “Ali Mirza as a deceiver. So they warned him. Finally Engineer was discarded from his circle.So he found his own circle. A cunning student of a simple minded did try to put his own word in the mouth of his teacher. But even a simple minded person did discover this scheme and discarded him from being his student.

A PROOF A CERTAIN PROOF OF RA:FID:IYAH OF THESE PERSONS IS THAT THEY ASCRIBE KH:AT:A:YA’ MUNK-RAH TO SOME OF THE S:AH:ABAH AND DO NOT ASCRIBE EVEN KH:AT:A:YAH ‘IJTIHA:DIAH TO THOSE S:AH:A:BAH WHO ARE SUPPORTED BY RAFID:IYAH. Even Engineer “Ali: Mirza does ascribe errors to Saiyiduna: “Uth:ma:n RD: and does not ascribe errors to Saiyiduna: “Ali: . According to him “ to ascribe Errors of ‘Ijtiha:d to Saiyiduna “Ali: is Page | 3

Page 4 of 5

Na:s:ibiah [Tanas:s:um] but to ascribe errors to Saiyiduna: “Uth:ma:n is Not Ra:fid:iyah”.

This is the proof that This Engineer is an extreme case of Ra:fid:ism.

A CHALLANCE At any rate we challenge Engineer “Ali Mirza to Explain the above verse of Holy Qur’a:n Su:rah T:aha: according to his own principles if he has some.

A REQUEST TO THE FOLLOWERS OF THE ENGINEER OF JHELUM Will you still follow the this heretic?

Do you still need some evidences that he is a Rafid:i: who is trying to destroy the credibility of S:ah:abah in your hearts?

Page | 4

Page 5 of 5

How many proofs and evidences do you need to be convinced that Engineer is not the Brother of You but the brother of Rava:fid: [‘Akh:ur Rava:fid:]?

For sake of ‘ALL=H,HIS RASU:L,HOLY QUR’AN, ‘AH:ADI:TH: AND S:AH:A:BAH PLEASE DO NOT LISTENT TO THIS PERSON UNLESS AND OTHERWISE YOU HAVE FULL KNOWLEDGE TO DETECT HIS CONSPERACY SCHEMES BEHIND HIS LECTURES.

Page | 5