Critique of Brahmu Samaj Answered

It is objected that all the verities of Divine knowledge cannot be comprehended in any one Book, then how can it be expected that imperfect books can guide a person to complete understanding?

The answer is that this objection would be worthy of attention if one of the Brahmu Samajists were to put forward on the basis of his reason some new verity relating to the recognition of God or other such matter which is not mentioned in the Holy Qur’an. In such case the Brahmu Samajists could claim with pride that all the verities relating to the hereafter and to the recognition of God are not comprised in the revealed Book, and that such and such a verity has been left out which they have discovered. If they were to do so, they might succeed in misguiding some ignorant persons. The Holy Qur’an claims:

… That is to say: No verity relating to Divine knowledge which is needed by man has been left out from the Holy Qur’an. al-An‘am, 6:39

Again it is said:

…. That is to say: The Messenger of God recites holy scriptures comprising all perfect verities and the knowledge granted to people of the earlier ages and those of the latter days. al-Bayyinah, 98:3-4

Again it is said:

…. This means that: This Book has two qualities: one is that the All-Wise One has set it out in a firm and wellargued manner, that is to say, in the way of wisdom and not merely as a story; and, secondly, it sets forth all that is needed about the hereafter.  Hud, 11:2

Again it is said:

That is to say: This Book resolves all the contentions that might arise with regard to the hereafter and is not just vain talk. al-Tariq, 86:14-15

Again, it is said:
 

al-Nahl, 16:65
…. That is to say: This Book has been revealed so that the differences that have been created by defective reasoning, or by deliberate excess, may be removed and the straight path might be indicated for the believers. 

 

There is also an indication here that the mischief that has been wrought by differences in human compositions can be set right only by the Word which is free from all defects. It is obvious that he who has been misled by words can be brought to the straight path only through the Divine Word. Indications contained in the law of nature cannot decide between differences of composition, nor can they convince a misguided one of his error. If a judge does not record the pleas of the plaintiff nor meets the objections of the defendant with strong arguments, then how is it possible that the parties should discover the answer to their questions, objections and pleas in the hints contained in his judgement, and how can a final judgement be propounded on the basis of confused hints which do not satisfy either side? In the same way, the commandments of God are conclusively established to the satisfaction of His servants when He informs them of their error into which they have fallen by the false statements of people, through His perfect and true speech, and makes known to them their falling into misguidance by a reasoned and clear statement, so that if they do not mend their ways even after being informed and do not give up their error, they might be condemned to chastisement. Would it be just on the part of God Almighty that He should seize a person as an offender and should be ready to punish him, without proving the error of his arguments in support of his innocence by a clear statement removinghis doubts by His express Words?