So if you are not an Abdul Deoband, how do you know what the deobandis are annoyed with me about is baseless. I have not been asking questions, although the case can be made that I should be. I can not do such a thing because I do not vouch for the trustworthiness of deobandis
You have said you do not take everything from them, so this means they are not a trustworthy source even to yourself. How about you refute yourself first? Or admit they give out deviant beliefs, like imkan e kadhib, something already admitted by Psyah
On more serious issues and conspiracies you, like me, will have to get the labels out if they persist [and they have persisted]
In that video link I provided above please listen to section 2:20 to 3:10 … This is what we are allowed to do - Talfeeq, joining between the schools.
So long as the final act can be said to be acceptable to any faqih of the two madh’habs then it can be done … and here we are not even talking about two different madh’habs we are talking about two different schools of the same hanafi madh’hab …
Elitism and separation to this degree with two close schools Barelvi and Deobandi should be rejected we are brothers … it also prevents adjustments to be made … rather than accepting the fluidity of two schools growing and improving in time, you see the two schools as fixed and unchanging that we must select our beliefs from one or the other … but if there are issues in both then what?
You will see classically many opinions have become merged and many schools shift their positions from their Imam … There are many things that various schools have eventually accepted from the other madh’habs on the strength of the arguments presented resulting in the school’s position differing from the position of the forerunners … The same thing can be allowed to happen in Deobandi and Barelvi schools - of course there will be things that we differ on but those differences will be either unacceptable or acceptable … the scholars of both schools should be open to entertaining deviation from their forerunners - there is taqlid and then there is “zidd” … and we should avoid the latter.
If Deobandis have not already removed the concept of “the possibility of Divine lie” among our own ulema - I think you will find many who do not hold this to be true. But even if it is not removed - at least the Barelvi brothers are obliged to give our 'alims the benefit of the doubt … i.e. at least such 'alim do not say that Allah (SWT) actually lies … Auzdubillah … Instead the possibility is an open door to a problem which means it should be a huge warning - but is in itself the same belief as Barelvis that “God does not lie” … So there are way to be kind and compassionate and these ways should be expressed even moreso at this level - because when your ikhlaq is high then acceptance of your point of view will be high … by elitism and separation we will alienate others, by inclusion and tolerance we will win the hearts of others. And our job is to care for each other …
I think you have problem in understanding that fiqh (i.e Hanafi Fiqh) does not mean sect, it means laws, and two diferent sects can follow same laws (sometime sects could even modify laws to suit their needs). It is just like Muslims living in UK follow British laws (many of it contradicts or goes opposite to Islamic laws, even Christian laws), but that does not mean Muslims living in UK left Islam. Actually, Muslims modify or go round some laws to suit them and in many cases they could not, but while following British laws they still retain their religion and religious beliefs.
Same with Deobandis and Sunnis, who both claim to follow Hanafi Fiqh, but that does not means Deobandis and Sunnis are of same sect, as sect depends on beliefs (faith) and acts, not from what laws one follow.
As far as beliefs and acts are concerned, Sunnis and Deobandis are completely different sect. Sometime even what they do, if it looks same, they have different intention and beleifs behind the act (for instance, visiting graves for fatiha and prayers, if deobandi would perform that act, his belief behind that act would be different than Sunnis).
In other words, though, both are Muslims just like many various sects are Muslims, as all sects believe on Kalma-e-Shahadah [give witness that Allah is one, and prophet (SAW) is prophet of Allah], many beliefs of Sunni and Deobandi are different … well, a lot different from each other.
Unfortunately, most Sunnis have lay-back attitude towards Islamic knowledge, and rarely preach, argue or answer. Result is that, not knowing the difference, pitfalls, and not having access to knowledge, many young Sunnis are becoming Deobandis and Salafis. So, we can find same household, with people of both sects.
The beliefs of both Deobandi and Barelvi schools is Maturidiyya …
However, the Deobandi veer towards Azhari whereas the Barelvi veer towards ‘Ashari … All three are accepted belief systems of the Ahl-us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ - I don’t know which ‘sect’ you see the Deobandis following … There are minor differences in belief yet the degree of sectarianism present between the followers is hugely disproportionate - this is a result of political/elitist affiliations rather than dogmatic and creedal ones …
Just like some of the Barelvi want to have nothing to do with Deobandis … similarly Salafis also try to oust Deobandis … This link clears up what is the definition of Ahl-us-Sunnah wal-Jama’
“…whoever is upon a path other than the path of Ahl al-Sunna wa l-Jama’a, Ahl al-Sunna wa l-Jama’a meaning the followers of Sheikh Abul Hasan Ash’ari and Abu Mansur Maturidi, the two Imams of Ahl al-Sunna.” (Haytami, al-Fatawa al-hadithiyya, 280)
I would hope that we learn to overcome simple differences and understand them for being simple differences … regarding the beliefs of Barelvi common people I cannot say - only that the ulema-e-Barelvi should educate their followers … however, conversely Deobandi common people are more in touch with their belief system from an academic point of view. The differences in beliefs should never be gauged from the awam or the followers of the groups - but by their books … I hope you agree.
Brother … when you talk about Ashari, Maturidi, Athari, or various theological school of thought … I think you are just trying to confuse people.
These belief systems (or theological school of thoughts) are way of looking at things, but it does not determine beliefs, nor make beliefs differences same, neither give answer to major belief differences between sects. Actually, all these theological schools were non-existent at the time of Prophet (SAW) or Sahabas, when beliefs were already developed and were there for all to follow.
Let me give you some (from many) differences between beliefs/aqeedahs of Sunnis, Deobandis and Wahabis from what I understand, as concisely as possible, without justifying or refuting any beliefs or sects. You can see how different they are from each other.
[TABLE]
Without defending or refuting any beliefs … I am putting down some (from many) differences between beliefs (or Aqeedah) of Sunni, Deobandi and Wahabi.
Sunni
(Suffi or Barelvi)
Deobandi
Wahabi
(Salafi, Ahle-hadith)
Death means cover-up. Once a person dies, distance becomes meaningless, so soul can be present at any place soul desires. Soul senses what is happening in this world. Can hear and see us and can act accordingly. Could pray for us. Soul has connection with this world and his grave.
Person once dead, soul is send to a place where it gets isolated. Soul has little link to this world. Has little connection with his grave. Cannot do anything for people alive.
After death, soul has no link with this world, rather is as good as dead. Soul cannot hear or see people alive. Has no connection with own grave nor can do anything for people who are alive.
Sunnis beleive that dead can hear calls, especially Prophet (SAW) and Saints cannot only hear, but give response too that we cannot hear or feel. Thus, they give calls like Ya Rasul-Allah …Ya-Ali, Ya-Ghaus-e-Pak … and these are common calls Sunni regularly make, especially at times of need or rememberance.
Deobandis do not believe on this, and think that such calls are shirk.
Wahabis have similar beliefs in this respect as Deobandis.
Sunni believe that Prophet (SAW) is alive, present at whatever place he is remembered, hears us, and can pray for us. Prophet (SAW) can become waseela at anytime for anything, and can help us in many ways.
Visiting grave of Prophet (SAW) gives us plenty of reward and it is as if one is visiting him while he was alive.
Deobandis believe that Prophet (SAW) was as human as any person, except that Allah chose him to be prophet.
Some deobandi may visit grave of prophet (SAW), but in general, they have no regards in this matter. Most consider that praying at grave of Prophet (SAW) or any person is not allowed (in their belief system)
Wahabis think Prophet (SAW) was a human just like any person. Consider visiting grave of Prophet (SAW) or any person as shirk, especially praying there.
Many Wahabi thinks that grave or Prophet (SAW) should be demolished, as people (Sunni and Shia) visit and do dua at the graves of prophet (SAW), thus it is cause shirk.
Sunnis believe that birthday of Prophet (SAW) is auspicious day, that Muslims should celebrate … and they do celebrate as Eid-Milad-ul-Nabi with much more happiness than any other day.
Deobandi do not believe that Prophet (SAW) birthday should be celebrated, considering it as innovation in Islam, and sin.
Wahabi have similar belief like Deobandis
Sunnis think that on judgment day, no person would be safe from hell fire just because of deeds, but Waseela if found, would be most important in saving a person from hell fire. Consider that the waseela could come from Prophet (SAW) and/or people who are close to Allah (Saints)
Thus, Sunnis try to develop spiritual relationship with people close to Allah, by creating love in them for Prophet (SAW) and people close to Allah.
Deobandi believe that it is only deed that can save a person from hell fire.
Wahabis have similar belief like Deobandi.
Sunni believe that progeny of Prophet (SAW) has special status and we should revere them, as revering them is revering Prophet (SAW) and through them one can find waseela of Prophet (SAW).
For deobandi, some do revere them, but think that there is no benefit but it is personal matter, and all human being are same.
Wahabi damn care, rather show hate towards people who may show love and respect towards progeny of Prophet (SAW).
Actually, there are many differnces in belief/aqeedah of Sunnis, Deobandis and Wahabis, I have put down few.
Ya-Ilahi - How do I get myself in these discussions … Sa1eem some of these issues are misunderstandings, falsehoods and wishful separators that do not exist or do exist without the level of importance you are giving them - it is a result of politicising difference and elitism …
In a nutshell …
[TABLE=“width: 1024”]
All 3 believe in human souls and that they will be judged - it is a small matter about what they each believe
what the souls can themselves do
All 3 believe in RasoolAllah (SAW) as final prophet - it is a small matter regarding how they believe in his
current nature and state
All believe in the Mercy resulting from the birth of RasoolAllah (SAW) - it is a small matter if they choose to
differ in how or whether it should be celebrated
All 3 believe in a Day of Judgement and all believe that none shall enter paradise except from Divine Mercy -
it is a small matter about waseela
All 3 believe and recite the durood which includes the Aal and Sahba -
it is a small matter of how they express their respects
When I say small matter - I don’t mean unimportant - I mean these matters do not take people
out of Ahl-us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’
Also I would like to say I am not making things complicated by citing the Maturidi aqeedah … The purpose of this aqeedah was to establish what is within Islam and what is not … There are many differences within this fold where different groups give different rulings of the importance and rank of certain things - but what happened in the case of Barelviya vs Deobandiya was that they started to treat smaller differences as though they are “bigger” differences.
So the greater complexity comes from Barelvi and Deobandi beliefs not from the Maturidi belief - In fact there is Imam At-Tahawiyya whose book on aqeedah is so expansive that it allows so much diversity … but at the same time retains its purity away from Jahmiya, Mujasamiya, Mu’tazzilya, Khawarijiya, etc …
Ahl-us-Sunnah Wal-Jamaa’ is not a term coined by the Barelvis and they don’t have explicit claim over this despite the insistence of some of their members. One way to ascertain how much “jamaa’” there really is in any group’s interpretation is to see their position on difference of opinion. If there is no tolerance for even slight difference then that group resembles a “cult” … it is not in our system of belief to conclude that the majority of Muslims are kafir or deviant … If that happens to be the case based on the strictness of our belief then we know that something is wrong … Depending on where you draw your boundary line it needs to be such that it includes the majority whilst excluding the toxic beliefs … and to find those out is to look for internal consistency and evidence. Imam At-Tahawi did just that … If you want to say anything worthy of saying - you can indeed say that such and such school’s opinion is greater and better for x,y, z reason and so on and then treat each other like brothers.
Deoband are not ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah, perhaps on many issues they can be included, and on many they can not, overall they are not. This is my opinion. Barelvis on the hand are Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah, perhaps there is others in the world that could be brought forward as more Ahlus Sunnah then Barelvis but between Barelvis and deobandis, its the Barelvis who are Ahlus Sunnah ‘wal Jamaah’. The deobandi claim is more like the salafi claim, its deceptive. its actually based on a lot of anti jamaah activity
Of course there is the element that it is actually anti Islamic, and certainly there is that. At least for its scholars and early important people. Its a fact that they were ruled to be Kaffirs, not deviant, not upon kufr, or any lesser term but Kaffirs. For this reason even 50 years ago the Mosques were being washed after a deobandi had spoke in them, even these days the more blessed communities are rejecting deobandi advances
There is nothing wrong in strictness, its right and wrong which is more important. And the lay people would be ripped to shreds by any interpretation of Islam. They often have been. One can become a cult by being too lax, or allowing your own to do certain things, terrorism for example. Actually the deobandis are good candidates for this, I have seen some of them include allegations of kufr and shirk for standard Sunni gatherings. Must have far reaching consequences on who they are
Actually deobandis and the salafis are the interpretations that tend to produce terrorism. All the nawasib are there with them…and all the things i can not recall right now
Such people (from Deobandiya) who make these allegations about others are equally to blame … Takfir is such an evil, it makes us believe we are doing it for the sake of Allah (SWT) … There is nothing Sufi about this …
That was the type of things we heard from deobandi elders, why do you think they were different!. The people its all about. So not Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah
Takfir is good and essential but has to be made correctly
It seems (to a layperson) that the differences are over things we would never know until we die and then we cannot come back and tell others what happened! In that sense, I don’t think these differences can ever be resolved. But it also seems that these differences are more to do with our relationship with God and Prophet (PBUH) and not about our relationships with those around us. I suspect that a vast majority of people would inherit a belief system from their parents anyways.
Declaring people Kafir based on such issues seems extreme.
Thank you.
As long as basic ideas are same, why not live and let live without bringing out pitchforks and going after each others’ throats?
some people claiming here that so and so is not “sunni” and “that sect” is out of ahl-e-sunnah wal-jama’a, fine.
lets accept all your claims. one of the reason behind these claims is that they believe “sunni” and “ahl-e-sunnah wal-jama’a” is the only one group which is guided, rest are deviants, that is, slightly less harsh way to say kafir.
so my question is, how is that any different from the same ulema and sects you call takfiri all the time? you are doing exactly same.
Then make it correctly … Against which of the points in Aqeedah At-Tahawiya do you deem kufr on Deobandis? Number of the aqeedah point required please … If you wish to use another aqeedah book then please provide the reference and the 'ijma position on it, not singular opinions … I want one point only and we can deal with it one at a time - inshaAllah you will see that there is little to no basis for takfir on the matters that you state. However, I agree with many of your points and I have accepted them - but I did it without doing takfir on our Muslim brothers.
You may use a Barelvi source to prove your point also … but on the condition that it is not an interpolation or interpretation unique to Barelvis - you need to show that such interpretations have widespread or 'aam understandings among the Hanafi ulema of other places … this is not an easy task I understand … but this is my requirement to accept your position on Deobandis.
Now the first point you can help me out on is the correct manner in doing takfir:
I think it should be avoided and only on clear disbelief should it be done:
These are points in the Aqeedah At-Tahawiya - the commentary is by Shaykh Muhammad bin Yahya Al-Ninowy (A famous Sufi scholar - who is one of our teachers in tariqah also)
***107 – We lean to validate doing the prayer behind any of the people of the qiblah (Muslims) whether pious or sinful, and doing the funeral prayer over any of them when they die.
108 – We do not declare anyone of them will categorically go to either paradise or Hellfire, and we do not accuse any of them of blasphemy (kufr), disbelief (associating anything with Allah), or hypocrisy (nifaaq), as long as they have not openly demonstrated any of those things. We leave their hidden characters to Allah Ta’ala.
I am not here to argue or defend my beliefs (though I can argue and defend both), but since you mentioned, here is something to ponder.
What brother ‘Psyah’ has given in his post, 5 points, where Sunnis, Deobandis and Wahabi stand same, thus all should be considered Sunnis.
Here, I think, his argument is wrong, because basic beliefs in one form or other, including believes mentioned by ‘Psyah’ are accepted by all Muslim sects (including Shias, Agha-Khani, and probably many Quaidians), and thus saying that whoever has these believes are Sunnis, means there is no sects or division in Islam.
On the other hand, you are right that differences would be only known after death, so why fight. That is not just true about differences amongst Muslims, but that is true for all religions. There is nothing in any religion that people would know for sure as true until they die. That is why it is stupid (and misguidance) to fight or kill human beings purely on basis of religious beliefs (Islam never allows that), but misguided people (or in Islamic words, people under the influence of Shaitan) do fight and kill, because of their ego, that tells them what they interpret, believe or think is right and what others interpret, believe or think is wrong … so fight and kill to eliminate them and their thinking unless they accept beliefs of these misguided people.
Here is a verse in Quran that says not to fight on religious or sectarian beliefs, as no one know for sure what they believe is right or wrong, and that after death Allah will tell them if they were right or wrong.
Quran 6:104 (Yusuf Ali): “Now have come to you, from your Lord, proofs (to open your eyes): if any will see, it will be for (the good of) his own soul; if any will be blind, it will be to his own (harm): I am not (here) to watch over your doings.”
[People should preach, but as all soul are responsible of their own beliefs and deeds, one should not become watchman, or should not watch what others do, believe or practice]
Quran 6:106 (Yusuf Ali): Follow what thou art taught by inspiration from thy Lord: there is no god but He: and turn aside from those who join gods with Allah.
[One should follow what one is taught by inspiration from Allah, and turn aside from those who join gods with Allah (or turn aside from those who believe differently from you … not fight or kill, but turn aside).
Quran 6:107 (Yusuf Ali): If it had been Allah’s plan, they would not have taken false gods: but We made thee not one to watch over their doings, nor art thou set over them to dispose of their affairs.
[This is message to those who like to fight and kill on basis of beliefs that, do not do that, as it is Allah’s plan that people have different beliefs (even Mushriks), and Allah warns them that Allah has not made these misguided (thugs who fight and kill for their beliefs) to watch over what they (even Mushrik) do … nor anyone is in this world (even Prophets) to dispose of the affairs of others (even Mushrik)].
Quran 6: 108 (Yusuf Ali): Revile not ye those whom they call upon besides Allah, lest they out of spite revile Allah in their ignorance. Thus have We made alluring to each people its own doings. In the end will they return to their Lord, and We shall then tell them the truth of all that they did.
[Here again, Allah tells believers that one should not even revile (insult, abuse, condemn, etc) those who other people (even Mushrik and kafirs) worship, as that only would create fitna (they would do the same in return, and fight or arguments would start). Then Allah tells Muslims that in the end, all (including they and others) would return to Allah, who would tell them the truth of what they used to do and believe. … Hence, all would know about their belief after death].
Unfortunately, people who in present period (18[SUP]th[/SUP], 19[SUP]th[/SUP], 20[SUP]th[/SUP] and 21[SUP]st[/SUP] century) are/were killing other Muslims in organised way on basis of belief differences, are Wahabis (Salafis/Ahle-hadith). Deobandis joined Wahabis in 20[SUP]th[/SUP] century and started their killing spree of Sunnis and Shias. Few Misguided amongst other groups (Sunnis and Shias) are also there in this killing, but few in between and mostly at individual level or for sake of revenge.
Anyhow, one have to accept that big differences are there in beliefs and practices of Sunnis and Wahabis/Deobandis. Even differences between Sunnis and Shias are very little compared to differences between Sunnis and Wahabis/Deobandis.
Differences between Sunni and Deobandi/Wahabi are there in how these sects looks at and have beliefs about Allah, Prophet (AS), Prophet (SAW), Death, Soul, Destiny, Deeds, Intercession, Graves, Milad-ul-Nabi, Urs day (day of death), and many more. Surprisingly, there are little differences between Sunnis and Shias in all these respect, but big differences between Sunnis and Deobandis/Wahabis though differences between Sunni and Deobandis are less than Sunnis and Wahabis.
Just imagine … Simple consequence of differences in belief: …Take translation of Quran done by a Sunni and Deobandi of Ayah 50:16. Sunni would do translation that Allah is closer to a person than his jugular vein, without any brackets or explanation, as Sunnis believe that Allah is everywhere and what is written in Quran is acceptable. A Deobandi translator would do same translation but would add in brackets (through Angels … or through knowledge), because Deobandi belief is that Allah is not everywhere, hence if he is closer to jugular vein, it has to be through Angels or knowledge, and not in any other way, and just writing what is there in Quran would misguide people, hence addition in brackets.
For information only … let me give you belief differences between major sects (from what I know as ture) regarding Allah that shows even differences in ‘concept of Allah’ is such that Deobandis/Wahabis can be considered as following different religion than majority of Muslims.
[TABLE]
Beliefs
Sunnis
Shias
Deobandis
Wahabis
Differences regarding
Allah
Sitting on throne is metaphorical. Has no place or direction.
Sitting on throne is metaphorical. Has no place or direction.
Is literally sitting on throne. Has place and direction
Is literally sitting on throne. Has place and direction
Allah does not move or change position with time
Allah does not move or change position with time
Allah moves and change position with time
Allah moves and change position with time
Allah does not have body parts. Any mention of body parts related to Allah is metaphorical.
Allah does not have body parts. Any mention of body parts related to Allah is metaphorical.
Similar to Sunni belief, though some are influenced by Wahabi belief.
Allah has body parts … eyes, shins, fingers, face, legs, foots, thighs, etc
Allah is present everywhere.
Allah is present everywhere.
Allah is not present everywhere.
Allah is not present everywhere.
And this is not the end, as there are many other differences related to Allah.
As for differences related to other beliefs like Prophet (AS), Prophet (SAW), Death, Soul, Destiny, Deeds, Intercession, Graves, Milad-ul-Nabi, Urs day (day of death), and many more … that is separate issue.
Obviously, that does not mean, people should demean, fight and kill each other on basis of religious or sectarian differences.
These differences are not true at all and in fact the first line is completely wrong for all of the Sunni beliefs … None of the Sunnis believe that Allah (SWT) is everywhere … This is why I urge our Barelvi brothers to learn aqeedah very well - from your own sources …
***Allah (SWT) is not contained in space, He cannot be everywhere and He cannot be in a specific place - He is neither within His Creation nor outside His Creation … ***
Regarding your post suggesting that ‘Qadianis’ and ‘Shi’ia’ can be part of Ahl-us-Sunnah is also wrong … I stated that the belief of “Finality of Prophethood” is necessary - so this eliminates the Ahmadiya and I stated that we should look to Aqeedah At-Tahawiya which shows that we believe in the legitimacy of the 4 caliphs - which eliminates the Shi’ia from the Ahl-us-Sunnah.
Brother, you are wrong. I think, I know my aqeedah better than you.
Sunnis (i am not talking about Deobandies or Wahabis) believe that Allah is present everywhere. Even though I am not here to argue, explain or proof anything, since you asked, I am giving you a short argument regarding our (Sunni … rather, Muslim’s) belief.
We believe that material world is illusion with space, time and distance as components. In real or spiritual world, space or distance do not exists as we perceive. Existence of Allah is not material nor his presence is material, and thus he is present everywhere as he himself mentioned at various places in Quran.
Quran Ayah 2:115 tells that clearly, in whichever direction one sees, presence of Allah would be there.
Quran 2:115 (Yusuf Ali): To Allah belong the east and the West: Whithersoever ye turn, there is the presence of Allah. For Allah is all-Pervading, all-Knowing.
[It literally means, in whatever direction … that is, east, west, north, south, right, left, front, back, up, down, in, out … whatever direction one turns, we will see Allah is present (or, our face would be in front of Allah) … and this is not dependent on where we stand … that means, presence of Allah is everywhere]
Though one cannot give similitude of Allah, one can give close similitude of Allah with time itself. In this material world, time is present everywhere, and as it is not material thing, one cannot say that time is in or out of anything, rather it engulfs everything.
On the other hand, if one believes that Allah is not everywhere than the person is committing Shrik, rather, could not be even Muslim.
Reason is simple, that is, if Allah is not present everywhere than Allah with perimeter (a body) is present at one place and not present at other place. If that is the case then Allah is sharing space with whoever is present where Allah is not present, and that is shirk, as it would mean, Allah shares something with others, even if that is space.
Another thing is that, if Allah is not everywhere than Allah would be at some place. That some place would have direction and that direction could be up or down, right or left, and so on … and as those who have this deviant belief thinks that Allah is above us, than it means Allah is below those who are on other side of the earth (opposite to us). For instance, if Allah is above Saudi Arabia than Allah would be below California, and as world is round and rotating all the time, the position would change in 12 hours, that is, Allah would be below Saudi Arabia and above California, and in middle hours, direction where is Allah would keep changing. This belief is ridiculous and against Quran as well as all logic.
Actually, only those people believe that Allah is not everywhere, who believe that Allah has body parts, and thus need space to exist and is confined in space. Obviously, to exists at one place and not at other place means, Allah having perimeter confined in space, where at one place Allah is there and at other place Allah is not there. Things that has perimeter needs space to exist, and that means, space was before Allah and is not creation of Allah. Only a non-Muslim would believe that, as it would mean, Allah not only depend on space, but is not creator of space.
Another thing is that, Allah having perimeter of his own, believe that Allah moves or change position becomes real, because there is space bigger than Allah and Allah changing position in space can be acceptable. It also shows that Allah with perimeter depends on space to move, hence existence of Allah is dependent on space … when we Muslims believe that Allah do not depends on anything.
