THE PROBLEM OF SELF POSSIBILITY OF NAZ:I:R

The word Nazir is often translated as Identical Copy of a thing. But actually it
does not means a copy but plurality of Exaxtly alike things such that each
one of them is genuine or original or both.
According to Khairabadi School of Thought the Naz:i:r of Holy Prophet is
Muh:a:; Bidh" Dh:a:t and not In Power of Omnipotence of 'ALL-H.
On the Contrary according to Ahlussunnah Naz:a:'ir [Pl of Naz:i:r] are Self
Possible [Mumkin Bidh:Dh:a:t].
There are two arguments advanced by Khairaba:di School of Thought.
1] Holy Prophet is First of All Creations and Last of All Prophets.
If a Naz:i:r of Holy Prophet is Supposed then There are the following Logically
Possible Cases.
1.1] The Naz:ir Doeth have these to properties, But this is Self Absurd.
Since two first of all means that each one of the two is prior to the other this
is Muh:a:l Bidh: Dh:a:t [Self Absurd].
Similarly two Last of all means two things each posterior to the other and This
is Self Absurd.
1,2] The Naz:i:r does lack either one of the two Attributes stated above or
both of them then it ceaseh to be a Naz:i:r.
2] A Naz:i:t implies Kidh:b of Deity and that is Muh:a:l Bidh:dh:a:t.
Discussion on the first argument of Khairabadis.
'Auvalul Makhlu:qa:t doeth mean :=a ]Created Existent Prior to that one
Infinite Existents are Self Possible yet not Created. Even the very self of
Priority is Self Possible [Per Se Possible].
b] Neither Prior Nor Posterior to that one Infinite Existents are Possible Yet Not
Created.
Similarly Khatim 'An Nabiyi:n Meaneth that:=a] Posterior to that one Infinite
Prophets are Self Possible yet never to be Created [With Certainty].
b] Neither Prior Nor Posterior to That One Infinite Prophets are Self Possible
Yet Never to be Created.
In more explicit deduction a Khatim is One whoese Neither Posterior is Created
Nor " Neither Posterior not Prior Is Created.

As Naz:i:r is an Special Case of Neither Posterior nor Prior , KHATIM is one

Whose Naz:i:r is not Created INSPITE if Its Self Possibility.
It is not the Case that its Posterir or "Neither Posterior Nor Prior" is Self
Absurd.
So in any case a Naz:ir of Holy Prophet is Self Possible Since the Possibility of
Naz:i:r is one of the Self Possibilities Stated above.
So If a Naz:i:r Of Holy Prophet is Supposed to Exist then in the Case of:=
a] 'Auvalul Makhluqa:t it is the Self Possibility of an Existent that is Prior to all Created Existents
except the first Created One of Created Existent to which it is Neither Posterior Nor Prior.
b] Kha:tim 'An Nabiyi:n it is the Self Possibility of an Existent that is Posterir to all Created Except
the Last Created One of Created Prophets to which it is Neither Posterior Nor Prior.
So to argue that the Naz:i:r of Holy Prophet Must have these to Attributes is a fallacy.
Since it Self- Implieth that Naz:i:r of a thing With out Naz:i:r must be With out a Naz:i:r.
This condition is incorrect and invalid.
So the Naz:i:r of Holy Prophet does not Existeth Since Rasu:liullah Is Kha:tim 'An Nabiyi:n and a
Kha:tim 'An Nabiyi:n is one Whose Naz:ir 'ALL-H Doeth Not Create even if It is Self Possible.
So the Word Kha:tim is the Non Occurance of a Self Possible act of 'ALL-H [i.e Creation of Naz:i:r]
and not the Self Absurdity of the Naz:i:r.
Similarly the Word 'Auval is the Non Occurance of a Self Possible act of 'ALL-H [i.e Creation of
Naz:i:r] and not the Self Absudity of the Naz:i:r.
So this is the fallacy that Maulvi Fad:l H:aqq Khairabadi confused to Self Possibility and
Occurance.
He confused the Act of Qudrah and act of Takvi:n.
In 'Ash"arite system his fallacy is that he confused two types of Acts of Qudrah [Omnipotence] of
'ALL-H. A] Self Possible Acts.
b] Excercised Acts.
When Deity Excercised the First act it did means that there were infinite act Self Possible prior to
it and Infinite acts Self Possible which were Neither Prior to It Nor Posterior to It.
To each Possible Act there are finite act which are Prior to It and there are infinite acts which are
Neither Posterior to it nor Prior to it.

It doethnot mean that any act prior to it was Self Absurd or any act neither prior to it not
posterior to it was self absurd or both.
Similrly When Deity Excercised the First act of akind [ Creating Prophets] it did means that there
were infinite act Self Possible posterior to it and Infinite acts Self Possible which were Neither
Prior to It Nor Posterior to It.
It doethnot mean that any act posterior to it was Self Absurd or any act neither prior to it not
posterior to it was self absurd or both.
Also even the posteririty and priority are Self Possible and to each excercised or possible [or
both] priority or posteriority there are infinite Self Possible Posteriorities and Priorities.
Divine Omnipotence and Divine Omniscience are Upon each one of them.
Also Eternity is infinitely Prior to each one of the stated above Posteriority.
So this discussion excludes Priority of Eternity and Eternals with Self Necessity and Rational
Necessity.
SUMMARY:=
There is No Self Possible Prior to which a Self Possible is Self Absurd.[This discussion excludes
Divine Attributes if they are considered as Self Possible as Necessary Exception].
There is No Self Possible POSTERIOR to which a Self Possible is Self Absurd.[This discussion
excludes Divine Attributes if they are considered as Self Possible as Necessary Exception].
There is No Self Possible NEITHER Prior to which Nor Posterior to it a Self Possible is Self Absurd.
[This discussion excludes Divine Attributes if they are considered as Self Possible as Necessary
Exception].
Holy Prophet is the Last Of Prophets in Regard to Divine Act of Creativity.
So Not Creating a Naz:i:r is an Act of Deity and this act is a relative Attribute of Holy Prophet.
Note : Some Scholars of H:adi:th: have pointed out that Pen is the First Created Existent and Holy
Prophet is the Last Created Prophet.
In this case a similar problem occurs for the Naz:i:r of Pen.
So the answer to the problem is that Negation of a Self Possibility of Naz:ir is one thing and
Negation of Excercise of a Possibility is an other thing. In the second case 'Auval and 'A:khir
[Kha:tim] are the Non Ocuurances of Infinite Possible Acts, and not the Non Occurances of Self
Absurd Acts. in the present case under discussion.
THE CASES ARE THAT:=

1]A CREATED EXISTENT IS FIRST OF ALL CREATED EXISTENTS WHOSE PRIOR EXISTENT IS SELF POSSIBLE
YET NOT CREATED , WHOSE NEITHER POSTERIOR NOR PRIOR EXISTENT IS SELF POSSIBLE YET NOT
CREATED . AND WHOSE NAZ:I:R IS SELF POSSIBLE YET NOT CREATED.
2] A CREATED PROPHET IS LAST AND FINAL OF ALL CREATED PROPHETS WHOSE POSTERIOR PROPHET IS
SELF POSSIBLE YET NOT CREATED , WHOSE NEITHER POSTERIOR NOR PRIOR PROPHET IS SELF POSSIBLE
YET NOT CREATED . AND WHOSE NAZ:I:R IS SELF POSSIBLE YET NOT CREATED.
THE CASES NOT THAT:=
1]
A CREATED EXISTENT IS FIRST OF ALL CREATED EXISTENTS WHOSE PRIOR EXISTENT IS SELF ABSURD
HENCE NOT CREATED , WHOSE NEITHER POSTERIOR NOR PRIOR EXISTENT IS SELF ANSURD HENCE NOT
CREATED . AND WHOSE NAZ:I:R IS SELF ABSURD HENCE NOT CREATED.
2]
A CREATED PROPHET IS LAST AND FINAL OF ALL CREATED PROPHETS WHOSE POSTERIOR PROPHET IS
SELF PSELF ABSURD HENCE NOT CREATED , WHOSE NEITHER POSTERIOR NOR PRIOR PROPHET IS SELF
ABSURD HENCE NOT CREATED . AND WHOSE NAZ:I:R IS SELF ABSURD HENCE NOT CREATED.
HENCE THE FIRST ARGUMENT IS A FALLACY. BASED ON INCORRECT DEFINATIONS OF SELF POSSIBLE FIRST
AND LAST.
That is why scholars, logicians, philosophers, and dialectics all agree that Maulivi Fad:l Haqq
Khairabadi errerd in the concepts of Self Possible of first and last.

2] As for the second argument it is stated that Kidhb is Muh:a:l Bil Ghair therefore one may see a
number of thse discussions in this Scribd form. So it is not necessary to discuss it further.
REASON WHY THIS DEBATE CEASED TO BE EXCERCISED.
It is very evident that Khairaba:di: school realised that this debate is based just on the Verbal
Disputes and not upon real disputes and there is no need to discuss it since they agree with the
'Ahlussunnah on the Essence , Substance and Reality.

But 'Ah:mad Rad:a: of Bans Baraili continued this debate and did not consider it as a verbal
dispute.

More discussion may be added LATTER.

This is one of the several responses to there arguments.
1] TAH:QI:Q AL FATVA
[ALLEGELY WRITTEN BY FAD:L H:AQQ KHAIRABADI
2] IMTINA:" 'AN NAZ:I:R
[ALLEGELY WRITTEN BY FAD:L H:AQQ KHAIRABADI]
https://www.scribd.com/user/8469278/sunnivoice