Omniscience and the Author of Reconstruction

1

Iqbal and OMNISCIENCE of ALL-H Introduction:-

SIR DOCTOR IQBAL is one of the greatest denouncer of the Omniscience of ALLH. Unfortunately the union of Pakistan has defended this great denouncer of Omniscience of ALL-H at any cost since he was selected as the official poet of the republic. In this article a critical analysis of views of DR MUHAMMAD IQBAL IS done not as an alleged Poet of East but as a heretic who distorts the traditional ISLAM OF PROPHET MUHAMMAD [ PEACE BE UPON HIM]. A part from his works in poetries and poems the said author has attempted to deny the DIVINE OMNISCIENCE OF GOD in his lectures namely Reconstructions Of Thoughts in Islam. In this controversial work Sir Doctor Iqbal the alleged poet of East has denied the Divine Attribute Omniscience in the Third Lecture. Doctor Iqbal does believe that ALL-H is Ignorant (JAHIL) of the Events of the Future and All the Possible Ways of an event or an act at a given time and gradually some how cometh to know the Possible ways and Possibilities as time passes from t1 t2. How ever GOD ALL-H [ARABIC TETERAGRAMMATION ] / IAHUVAH [HEBRAIC TETERAGRAMMATION] DOETH NOT KNOW an event of future unless and other wise it occurs as present. History: Sir Doctor Iqbal is not the first heretic who denied the Divine Omniscience but a number of sects who ascribed them selves to Islam denied the OMNISCIENCE OF ALL-H [SUBHANAHU WA TA'ALA:]. Among them three are of special attention. The FOURTH one is the sect of Philosophers which is beyond the scope of our present discussion. 1] EXTREME DETERMINISTS: This sect was founded by Jahm and also called Jahmiah(1) after the name of the founder of the sect. The technical term is JABARIAH GHALIAH. This sect denied the Very Will / Intention/ Involution Of Human Beings . 2] Extreme Liberalists:-

This sect was founded by Mabad (2). This sect believed in the Perfect freedom of human Will/ Intention/Involution. The technical term for them is QADARIAH GHALIAH. BOTH of them are apparently arch rival of each other. One denies the very Will of Created RATIONAL SUPOSSITUMS/SUPPOSITA and the other affirms a perfect WILL FOR THEM independent OF ALL-H. But it is one of the wonders of religious world that both these arch rivals agree on one article of faith and that is THE DINIAL OF OMNISCIENCE OF ALL-H THE GOD OF MUHAMMAD. 3 ]MUSUVIAH: A NUMBER OF Shiites who claimed to Follow Ja'far Bin Muhammad Bin Ali believe in the Dogma of Buda'. This may be defined as CHANGING OF MIND OF G-D. THIS IMPLIES NON OMNISCIENCE AND IAGNORENCE OF G-D. How ever due to influence of ORTHODOX SUNNIITES a number of Musavites interpreted the Dogma of Buda' as according to the future Knowledge Of ALL-H. History Of Buda'. A number of Shiite sects who believed that Jafar Bin Muhammad is the 6th Imam disputed over the 7th Imam after the death Of the Jafar Bin Muhammad. Initially the all agreed that the first born son Ismail Bin Jafar is informed to be the seventh Imam by God Of Shiism. But this information was falsified by the death of Ismail Bin Jafar. So a number of those Shiites sects who believed that Jafar Bin Muhammad is their sixth Imam proposed the Dogma Of Buda that GOD ERRED AND HIS KNOWLIDGE WAS FALSIFIED. So GOD SELECTED Musa Bin Jafar The last born son of Jafar Bin Muhammad as the sevent Imam after His Knowledge Erred. Latter Musuvites how ever interpreted this Dogma Of Buda' such that it may become in harmony with fore Knowledge Of Musuvite GOD. But this is just a latter interpretation . The initial DOGMA was nothing but the Possibility AND 1

2

Occurrence of Changing the Divine Knowledge and Non Eternity Of Divine Knowledge. Doctor Iqbal Seconds their agreement. VEDIC INTERPRETATION: DOCTOR IQBBAL is influenced by Sanskrit Scriptures, eg Vedas and Upnishads. the Dogma of Ego [ana/khudi/ighu] is a reincarnation of Self Of Upnishads with some modifications. THE Hymn Of Creation in the First Veda makes some doubt in the Divine Eternal Knowledge. A number of Vedic scholars consider this doubt as poetical and do not take it literally. But Sir Doctor Iqbal appears to take the Vedic doubt literally. He may have taken his Dogma Of Divine NON-OMNISCIENCE /IGNORENCE FROM THE LITERAL Meaning of VEDIC TEXT. It is interesting to

note that Jahm was also influenced by Indian Doubts probably by Vedic Literalists*(3). How ever it is very clear that Doctor Iqbal has borrowed the common belief of the first two rival sects . He appears to be influenced by UN INTERPRETED DOGMA OF BUDA'. He also appears to be influenced

by Vedic Literalists. How ever He goes beyond the ancient heretics. Doctor Iqbal not only denied the DIVINE KNOWLIDGE OF FUTURE BUT THE KNOWLIGE OF POSSIBILITIES AS WELL. Cantor Theorem:- It may be the case that Doctor Iqbal may have conceived the consequences of Cantor 's Theorem as they are presented by Atheists in order to refute Divine Omniscience by supposing that Divine Omniscience is a Set Of All Sets WHICH DOES NOT EXIST IN RFC. But their is no evidence that Doctor Iqbal certainly concieved the consiquences of Cantor's Theorem. This is at best and at worst a suggestion. At best a good suggestion and at worst a bad suggestion. But as for as ancient heretics are concerned it appears that they believed that Knowledge of God is constant about possibilities. Even it may be said that Jahm did believe that God was Knowlidgeless in Eternity but once gaining Knowledge about Possibilities His Knowledge was constant for Possibilities. How ever once again information about Jahm about possibilities is not conveyed to us. So it may be the case that Jahm and Iqbal are in agreement on the Issue of Knowledge of Possibilities. But with the possible [ not necessary] exception of Jahm one may say that Iqbal's view about knowledge Of God is a view which does not appear to be held even by heretics of ancient era. Extreme Jabaraites believed that God was unconscious [ Gha:fil] in Eternity. But after Eternity GOD ATTAINED some knowledge’s. Possibly the knowledge of possibilities but not the knowledge of future events.

Extreme Liberalists believed that VOLUNTARY ACTS of Rational Suppositum/ Supposita are unknown to ALL-H [SUBH:ANAHU WA TA'ALA] BEFORE their occurrence. COMBINING and Composing the two rival sects Doctor Iqbal denied the knowledge of Possibilities at any time and proposed that as time passes ALL-H Doeth Know more and more Possibilities and Contingencies.

THE EXTREME LIBERALISTS thought that Omniscience and Future Knowledge Of ALL-H do contradict freedom of Will Of Rational Suppositums / Supposita. It can be suggested that Extreme Determinists might have thought that Omniscience is a greater problem for Divine Will then it is For Non Divine Rational Beings. So they may have this reason as one of the several reasons for denying Divine Omniscience and Eternal Absolute Knowledge of ALL-H. But Doctor Iqbal DOES use this reason in his third lecture to refute the DIVINE OMNISCIENCE Explicitly. DOGTOR IQBAL FURTHER EVOLUTED THE DOGMAS into the dogma of Impossibility of Knowledge OF Possibilities at a given time says t0.

2

3

One may explain it follows. EXPLANATION AND ANALYZATION:

Let it be supposed that An Event E

is Possible.. Let it can be done in P different ways.

LET IT BE SUPPOSED THAT the event E IS POSSIBE. ( ID EST Pnis NOT an IMPOSSIBLE Event.)

Then according to the Doctor Poet at time 0 God does not know the event OR POSSIBILITY OF EVENT since it is impossible at time 0.

But as time passes from t0 to t1 God become to know the event as a crude possibility which he terms as a Complex Whole. This means that GOD Doeth not Know all the POSSIBLE WAYS OF THE EVENT doeth know THAT EVENT E IS POSSIBLE. at time t1. Iqbalian God only knoweth thatE is Possible without any Knowledge of Possible Ways.

as TIME PASSES from 1 to 2 God Becometh to Know more and more Possible ways of the Event .

HOW EVER ONE THING IQBALIAN GOD NEVER KNOWS IS the practical Occurrence of the Event before it has Actually OCCURED. Thus Iqbalian God doeth Not know an event in the line of Actualization before it has occurred. But Iqbalian God even doeth not know the Event E in the line of Possible WAYS if the Event E is Possible. In addition God DOETH NOT Know some of the Possibilities at a Given time say 0. This implieth that GOD NOT ONLY DOETH NOT KNOW all the POSSIBILITIES AND CONTINGENCIES at a given time τ but the IQBALIAN G-D ALSO DOETH NOT KNOW THE PROBABILITY OF AN EVENT AS WELL. Let the following example be

Considered as an example. Let there be ᴕ possible ways of an event ᴕ .

Let only one way is possible at a given time. So probability of a possible way is 1/ᴕ, where 0<1/ᴕ<1

But as G-D DOETH NOT KNOW ALL THE POSSIBLE out comes at time 0 God doeth not know the probability of any particular way. At worst the Iqbalian God is Ignorant Of a the probability and at 3

4

best Iqbalian God has incorect knowledge of the probability. One can take a trivial example of a dice.

If A dice is thrown there are six possible out comes say 1,2,3,4,5,6. As Iqbalian God doeth not know all the Possible out comes at a given time say τ0 IQBALIAN GOD DOETH NOT Know the correct probability of any Possible out come in the case of dice. How ever Iqbal claims that as time passes from τ0 to τ1 God begins to know more and more possibilities. Thus the knowledge of GOD about probabilities becomes more and more accurate as time passes. But The Doctor of East does not mention that whether A time comes when God doeth know all the possible ways of an Event or all the possible outcomes of an Experiment with more than one possible outcome or this is impossible even if the number of Possible outcomes or number of possible ways are finite and definite. How ever one can see that in the case of all the Possible Events in the Universe the possibilities are infinite and It is Impossible rather Absurd For Iqbalian G-d to know all the POSSIBILITIES AND CONTINGENCIES of the Universe which are Infinite. Thus Iqbalian God is an Ignorant\ Jahil(NAUZUBILLAH MIN ZALILIK) God how ever Doctor Iqbal does not consider this sort of Ignorance (JAHL) as a defect or a demerit or an imperfection. OBJECTIONS ON IQBALIAN GOD:1] This does mean beyond any shadow of doubt AND MIRAGE OF FALLACY that as we go back in time Divine knowledge become less and less . Ultimately GOD BECOMESETH A COMPLETE IGNORENT BEING\EXISTENT [NAUDHU BILLAH]. 2] As one does go forward in time God becomesth to know more and more Possibilities and contingencies yet at each possible \contingent time there are always infinite possible and contingents out of the Divine knowledge. Conclusion:- Divine knowledge is purely time dependent which increases with increase of time and decreases with the decrees of time. 3] The Doctor poet did not mention about the Divine Knowledge Of Impossibilities and Absurdities. But one may deduce that if Iqbalian God does not know all the Possibilities at a given time , the very same Deity can not know all the impossibilities, in contingencies and absurdities , since they are much greater in number then possibilities. Mathematically the set of all Impossibilities is cardinally greater than set of of all possibilities as in RFC SYSTEM. But if it is assumed that both are cardinally equal even then one may say that GOD DOETH NOT KNOW ALL THE IMPOSSIBILITIES AT A GIVEN TIME τ0. 4] It appears that Divine Knowledge as according to Sir Iqbal is limited and it may be the case that Eternally GOD Doeth not know even Himself . SINCE IG IQBALIAN G-D DOETH NOT Know all the possibilities it may be the case that This Iqbalian Deity also Doeth not Know all His ATTRIBUTES, QAULITIES AND PROPERTIES, AND CONSIQENTLY HIS OWN DIVINE ESSENCE,SELF,SUBSTANCE , NATURE AND SUPPOSITUM . This is very close to the belief of Jahm who believed that GOD IS UNCONCIOUS [ GHAFIL] in Eternity. 5] It is also clear that if a possibility can come in the Dvine Knowledge it is also Possible that it can be erraised from the Divine knowledge. One can not claim that once a Possibility some how comes in Divine Knowledge it becomes impossible to go out of It. The Possibility of coming a Possible in Divine Knowledge and impossibility of going the possible out of Divine Knowledge after coming in It is it self an Absurd claim RAITHER THAN JUST AN IMPOSSIBLE CLAIM. IN crude words this means that it is possible that God may forget things or Divine memory can be arraised at least in possibility.In refine words the DIVINE KNOWLEDGE contracteth and expandeth , and EXPANTION AND CONTRACTION OF DIVINE KNOWLIDGE IS POSSIBLE IN IT SELF. If the Possibility Of going out of a Possibility from Divine Knowledge’s NOT in Power of GOD it is still possible. So if GOD Doth Not Have the POWER To Annihilate His Knowledge about Possibilities Contingencies, Annihilation of Knowledge is still possible and Contingent. But according to all the Sunni Subsets say Asharites, Salaphites, and 4

5

Maturidites, Divine Knowledge Is Absolute(4), Eternal,Infinite and Omniscience. GOD KNOWLIDGE IS UPON EACH AND EVERY POSSIBLE,CONTINGENT,NECESSARY,IMPOSSIBLE, INCONTINGENT SURD AND ABSURD.SCAPING OF ANY ONE OF THE INDIVIDUALS OF STATED ABOVE THINGS IS ABSURD AND IMPOSSIBLE. So Doctor Iqbal is correctly charged for believing in An Ignorant GOD. How ever Iqbal attempts to defend his position by claiming that the negation of Omnipotence is Not an Imperfection. But IT IS JUST TO CLAIM THAT KNOWLIDGELESSNESS OF GOD IS NOT AN IMPERFECTION AND IS NECESSARY IN THE DIVINE CASE that is in the case of GOD. This position of Iqbal the denouncer of Absolute Knowledge of ALL-H SUBH:A:NAHU WA TA'ALA: CAN NEVER BE DEFENDED. 6]Iqbal failed to prove that if knowledge of a certain Possibility is Impossible at a given time τ 0 then How can this Impossibility be converted into a possibility or a Necessity at any other time τ1. Conversion of necessity or impossibility into possibility is it self an Impossible AND Self Absurd idea which the philosopher poet accepts as Possible. 7] A number of sects of atheism and religions which deny Divine knowledge claim that Divine Omniscience Doeth Contradict Divine Attribute of Will/Intention. But they say one of the two Imperfections is necessary for GOD. Iqbal cleverly tries to escape this conclusion just by claiming the Impossibility of Knowing Possibilities at a given time

Τ Just by claiming that not knowing a Possible due to the [Iqbalian] Impossibility is not an IMPERFECTION. ON THE OTHER HAND IT IS JUST THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF PERFECTION AND NECESSASITY OF IMPERFECTION. So the alleged Doctor of Philosophy and so called Poet of East MAKES A FALLACY to defend the charge of Divine Ignorance and Divine Knowledgelessness by claiming that an imperfection is not an perfection rather it is a Perfection changing the concepts of Imperfection and Perfection . 8] All the orthodox sects of SEMETIC RELIGIONS believe that DIVINE OMNISCIENCE AND OMNIINTENTION DO NOT CONTRADICT EACH OTHER. IQBAL stands against them . Unfortunately the concept of IQBALIAN WILL \INTENTION is nothing but randomness of will. But after denying Divine Omniscience in the name of Divine Will Iqbal bounds the DIVINE WILL by the DIVINE WISDOM. Since spontaniousness or arbetrariness or randomness of DIVINE WILL is not only against the human perception , but also this denies the order in the universe and order in DIVINE ACTS,ACTIVITIES,WORKS , DOINGS AND ACTIONS. These orders can not be explained by Iqbalian Will. So in order to regulate ,regularize ,organize and negate the CHEOTIC ACTIVITIES Of Will , Iqbal has no option but to limit the DIVINE FREEDOM BY DIVINE WISDOM.It is strange to see that this poet who denies Divine Omniscience in the name of Divine Will and Freedom of Divine Will does not deny Divine Wisdom. If Divine Omniscience doeth contradict Freedom of Will then Wisdom of the Very Same DEITY also Doeth Contradict Freedom of will Of the Stated above DEITY. Since If Divine Will is so free then it can select an event which must not be selected according to DIVINE WISDOM. If DIVINE WILL DOETH CHOOSE AN EVENT WHICH IS AGAINST DIVINE WISDOM THEN SOME ACTS OF GOD ARE AGAINST DIVINE WISDOM. RATHER It is implied that some of the Divine Acts Contradicts Divine WISDOM. But if such a case is impossible then Divine Freedom atmost limit the freedom of Divine Will and Atleast is the cause of the selection of the Divine Will. A true freedom of Divine Will as according to Iqbalian Theological system is only possible if Divine Will freely selects and chooses Acts not only according to Divine Wisdom but also against Divine Wisdom. CONCEPT OF FREEDOM OF DIVINE WILL:FREEDOM OF 5

6

WILL OF GOD is never defined by Iqbal in any one of His Works .How ever he has used the concept of Freedom Of Will With Out Defining It. There are two different concepts of FREEDOM of Will. 1] The Attribute Of Will Can Select Only One Of the SEVERAL Possible Events With Out Any EXTERNAL and INTERNAL CAUSE,REASON,CONDITION. This Canhood OF will is independent Of Time , states of Mind, thoughts, experiences, experiments believes. One may further subdivide it in to two kinds. 1] Keeping every thing constant ,like mind, mental acts,wants desires,mental activities,reasonings,believes, etc . a Rational Suppositum selects different event from a set of mutually distinct events [ and mutually exhaustive] events with out any cause and reason. But The same Will Can choose one and the same event at some of the different times.[ IT MAY BE SAID THAT A SET OF EVENTS SUCH THAT EACH ELEMENT IS MUTUALLY EXHAUSTIVE AND MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE AT MOST CAN HAVE TWO ELEMENTS] 2]Keeping them variables the act of Selection is independent from each one of them. The act of choosing Of Will is CAUSELESS and Reasonless. But this means that WILL selects and chooses ACTS AND EVENTS CHEOTICALLY ,RANDOMLY AND ARBETRTARILY. The Order and the System of Nature IN THE UNIVERSE can not be EXPLAINED. In both kinds there is no constraint or obstacle which prevent the Will to choose a possible act a contingent event. Further it is NOT the case that the WILL can not choose or select ANY ONE OF THE members of the set of Mutually exhaustive events and acts. 3] WILL chooses and selects due to causes and reasons . In this case if causes and reasons are constant The Will shall Choose and Select the same. 4] There are no external causes of the will but their are internal causes of the Will. This is more suitable to Iqbalian Divine Will since THE DIVINE WISDOM IS THE NOT ANY THY THING EXTERNAL TO THE DEITY SINCE IT IS ASOCIATED WITH THE DEITY AND IS INFINTELY COMMUNICABLE TO THE ESSENCE OF DEITY (THAT ESENCE IS THE SELF OF DEITY ITSELF) .. But if it is correct then due to the same reason Iqbal should not have denied Divine Omniscience. Since Divine OMNISCIENCE is not any thing external to the Deity. Iqbal assumed that as Divine Will can not choose an act or an event about which Deity doeth know eternally that HE SHALL NOT CHOOSE , THIS MEANS THAT Omniscience Contradicteth Divine Will. But this is a wrong conception Of Divine Omniscience concieved in Iqbalian pragmatic mind , rather a miss-conception. If GOD DOETH KNOW THAT HIS WILL SHALL CHOOSE AN ACT WITH FREEDOM AND DIVINE KNOWLIDGE IS NOT A CAUSE OF ITS CHOICE THEN THE CONTRADICTION IS IMPLIED IF THE WILL DOETH NOT CHOOSE WITH FREEDOM OR IF DIVINE KNOWLIDGE IS A CAUSE OF

ITS ACT OF CHOOSING. KNOWING A THING IS NOT THE CAUSE OF THE THING. Divine Knowledge is NOT a constrain or an obstacle between an event and act of choosing it by Divine Will. To make it more clear suppose to kind of GODS. (1) Having free Will but no for knowledge of His Own Actions.

(2)Having both foreknowledge of His actions and free Will. If the will of the first supposed God is Perfectly free it can choose any thing The same is true in the case of second supposed God. Supposes that A and B are two mutually exclusive Events and the first supposed GOD CHOOSETH A by Perfectly Free Will. There is no thing which makes the unmade Freedom of will unfree OR BOUNDED. The same is true in the case of second supposed GOD .BUT the question is if the second supposed GOD know that DIVINE WILL SHALL NOT CHOOSE A then divine Foreknowledge is an obstacle in the freedom of Divine Will. But things are deeper then this simple representation. Since GOD DOETH NOT KNOW DIVINE WILL DOETH NOT CHOOSE A BUT GOD DOEH KNOW " DIVINE 6

7

FREE WILL DOETH NOT CHOOSE A BY ITS INTRINSIC FREEDOM. Once again the problem of freedom of Will comes in Question. The best possible expression of Freedom of Divine Will is INDEPENDENT OF Internal and external causes and reasons, Interior and exterior reasons.

EXPLANATION:1 Not selecting A is not due to the reason that a God Doeth Know that the Will doeth not Choose A. If the Divine Will Doeth not chooseth some thing which God Doeth know Divine Will Doeth not choose the Knowledge Doeth Not become a cause. If Divine will Doeth CHOOSE B it is not due to the reason that Divine Knowledge is a CAUSE of the Choice Of the Will. Act of the choosing is independent of Knowledge as IF there is no Knowledge AT ALL as in the case of first supposed God. But considerthe case that Divine Will chooseth A about which/that THE SECOND SUPPOSED GOD Doeth know that A shall Not Be chosen By Free Divine Will.

This is not the Bounding of the Divine Will BUT Error in the Knowledge. A Correct Knowledge and selection OF WILL against the correct knowledge is impossible but this doeth not implies NONFREEDOM/UNFREEDOM OF DIVINE WILL but incorrectness in the Divine Knowledge.

EXPLANATION2: LET IT BE SUPPOSED THAT A OR B ARE TWO MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE AND MUTUALLY EXHAUSTIVE POSSIBILITIES. IF THE PERFECT FREE WILL CHOOSES A IT IS DUE TO ITS FREEDOM. IF THE PERFECT FREE WILL SELECTS B THEN IT IS DUE TO ITS PERFECTS FREEDOM. IF IT IS IN THE DIVINE KNOWLIDGE THAT '' THE THE PERFECT WILL SHALL CHOOSE A AT ANY TIME t'' THEN IT IS ALSO IN THE KNOWLIDGE THAT '' THE WILL SHALL CHOOSE IT WITH ITS FREEDOM. DELETING THIS FROM DIVINE KNOWLIDGE IS NO THING BUT TO MAKE DIVININE KNOWLIDGE IMPERFECT. NOW SUPPOSE THAT THE WILL CHOOSETH A WITH ITS FREEDOM THEN IT IS IN ACCORDANCE AND IN CONCORDANCE TO THE FOREKNOWLIDGE. IF it chooseth/selecteth B THEN it doeh not lose its freedom but the Knowledge loseth its Correctness and correctivity. Not loosing of correctness of Knowledge doeth not imply the loosing of freedom of Will. There is no implication of any kind at all between them.(IF FREE WILL OR FREE INTENTION OF DEITY CHOSETH B FREELY AND IT IS IN DIVINE KNOWLEDGE that It Shall Not Chosose Bfreely then this meaneth Incorrectness in the Divine Knowledge .The compound Impossibility i.e free Will choosing against Correct Knowledge Doth Not Imply Free Will Is Not Free But Implieth Correct Knowledge is Not Correct.) From these examples it is clear Iqbal does confuses between the incorrectness of fore knowledge and non - freedom of will and due to which he does believe that in Divine Omniscience. It may be thought that A Non Omniscient God Can Not be the GOD OF ANY SEMETIC RELIGION . Hence Iqbalian God Is Not the GOD OF MUHAMMAD {S:AWA}. Iqbal's greatest crime is that he ascribes a Non semetic and Non Omniscient God to Qur'a: n, which is one of the greatest heresies in the history of religions.

Even the Iqbalian GOD can not be ascribed to Hebraic Bible,LXX and books of New Testament.

Speaking truly the Vedic GOD is also Not Non-Omniscient. POEMS AND PROSE OF THE POET: It is known to a reader of poems and poetries of Doctor Iqbal that he dislikes Attributes and Qualities like intellect, intellegence, Knowlidge and prefers love and affection over them. It is some what in shadow for a reader who has not studied HIS LECTURES that he includes Divine Knowledge as well

7

8

while disgracing Knowledge and intelligence in general. How ever Iqbal never explains the supposed relation between these two Attributes id est.

Knowledge and Intelligence / intellect \ RATIONALITY. Similarly The very same Poet never mentions the relation between Love and Taste [ affection/Dhauq].(6)

Luck how ever has favored Iqbal that a number of ancient heretic sects have tried the same , and Iqbal is not a unique person to claim that QURANIC GOD IS NON -OMNISCIENCT. But it is the worst heresy in the world of Islam- logy and Islamic Theology. As a national Poet Of state of Pakistan Iqbal can not be criticized on national level of the state.

The students of Iqbaliat [ a subject invented in Pakistan to study Iqbal(5) and his works] never criticise Iqban on his this Heretic belief. How even a number of them who disagree with Iqbal remain silent, and those who discuss this view agree with Iqbal. Out side Pakistan some criticism is found but the book Reconstruction of Islamic Thoughts does need to be refuted and responded completely. Strangely the religious circles in Pakistan who often quote Iqbal on religious views do not highlight this belief of Iqbal which is PURELY UNISLAMIC and Non Semitic.

FOOT NOTES/.

(1) Jabariyyah was founded

by Jahm ibn Safwan (127A.H/745A.C).

(2) Qadariyyah was founded by Ma'bad ibn Khalid al-Juhani (b. 699A.C ~76

A.H). . Qadariyyah believed that a Rational suppositum say a human being absolutely independent in his actions from divine intention and omniscience and reject the role of any other power or powers. Jabariyyah, on the other hand, believed that a RATIONAL SUPPOSITUM HAS NO WILL AND NO INTENTION at All. (3) SEE VEDIC HYMN OF CREATION. (4) IMAM UL MAQULIAH QASIM NANAUTAVI OF NANAUTA ( UNITED PROVINCES INDIA) STATETH A LAW TO EACH AND EVERY NON ABSOLUTE THERE IS AN ABSOLUTE. 8

9

THIS IS KNOWN AS LAW\PRINCIPLE OF ABSOLUTENESS. THE POET DID NOT BELIEVE IN THIS LAW AS IT IS EVIDENT AND OBVIOUS FROM HIS WRITINGS. ALSO AN OTHER PRONCIPLE IMPLICITLY STATED BY HIM IS THAT DIVINE OMNISCIENCE KNOWETH NOT ANY EXCEPTION. SEE QIBLA NUMA. AN OTHER PRINCIPLE IS TO EACH AND EVERY FNON ABSOLUTE INTIZAA THERE IS AN ABSOLUTE MANSHA. DIVINE ESSENTIAL AND NECESSARY ATTRIBUTE OF NECESSARY EXISTENT ARE ESSENTIAL AND ETERNAL MANASHI OF INTIZAA’AT. (5) PROBEBLY THE ONLY CASE AFTER CHRISTOLOGY ,WHERE AN ENTIRE SUBJECT IS INVENTED IN THE NAME OF A SINGLE HUMAN BEING. (6) tHE pOET DISGRCES iMAM rAZI r.h since He is a SYMBOL Of Knowledge,Intellegence,Rationalithy,Intellect,Logic,Philosophy and Mathematics. All these must be studied in light of his enimity of DIVINE OMNISCIENCE. NOTES. A] CANTOR THEOREM MAY BE STATED AS FOLLOW? LET µ BE A SET µ≠ø AND P(µ ) = SET OF ALL SUB SETS OF µ THEN | µ| IS LESS THAN | P(µ )| Antor theorem is not proveable in MORSE KELLEY CLASS THEORY BUT IN RFC SETS..

THIS THEOREM IS NOT APPLICABLE ON GROTHENDIECK UNIVERSE. GROTHENDIECK UNIVERSE SATISFIETH THE FOLLOWING LAWS. 1* µϾϓϓϾϨ THEN µϾϨ 2*øϾϨ 3* µϾϨ THEN p(µ) 4* ᴧ ϾϨ ,µ|:________>Ϩ,ᴄ then ᴧ ϾϨ ,µi|:________>,iϾ ᴧ 5* ᴟ,ᴞ ϾϨthen * ᴟUᴞϾϨ IT IS CLEAR THAT CANTOR THEOREM IS NOT APPLICABLE ON Ϩ (haa) SUPPOSITUM A SUPPOSITUM IS AN ESSENCE WITH SOME ATTRIBUTES AND QUALITIES ASOCIATED WITH IT. A SUPPOSITUM WITH THE ATTRIBUTE OF RATIONALITY IS A PERSON. PROBEBLITY “ 9

10

IF Λis a non empty finite set λ is a subset of it then probability of any subset is 0 >|λ|ᴧ|>1 If a set is infinite then probability of any element is zero.

EXAMPLE. THE PROBABLITY TO CHOSE A NUMBER FRONM SET OF ALL NATURAL NUMBER IS ZERO. REFERENCES 1)Nabras 2)Sharah al aqaid.

30SHARAH AL MUWAQQIF 4)KHIALI 5)QUTBI)Sharah Atrtahzib.

6)maibizi 7) HISTORY OF MUTAZILAH. 9) QIBLAH NUMA BY QASIM NANAUTAVI. 10) RECONSTRUCTION OF THOUGHTS IN ISLAM 10) BOOKS ON SET THEORIES, RFC,MKS ETC. 11) Books on Probability 12)ISLAM AND HINDUNISM BY qasim nanautavi 13) hadiah saeedia By Fdl Haqq Khairabadi.

14)ALJUNNAH LI AHLISUNNAH BY MAULANA ABDUL GHANI 15) AL ILM WAL MALUM BY MUEENUDDIN AJMAIRI

../.’

10

11

11

12

12