God, Logic and Lies: Intra-Ḥanafī Polemics on Divine Omnipotence in Colonial India

Abstract

This article is the first logical exploration of a major Islamic theological controversy regarding divine omnipotence (qudra) emerging in early 19th century northern India and persists today. The controversy involved two interconnected propositions. The first is known as ‘imkān-e naẓīr’, which is the proposition that God is able to create another identical Prophet Muḥammad. The second dubbed ‘ikmān-e kidhb’, is the possibility of God being able to lie or say untruths. The article will examine the arguments of two formidable scholars. The first is the one who detonated the controversy Shah Ismail Dihlawi (d. 1831) who argues for the possibility of God to actualise an identical Muḥammad and to lie and the second is his opponent and archnemesis Fazl-e Haqq Khayrabadi (d. 1861), who vehemently rejects both possibilities. The focus of the article is a detailed logical analysis of the structure and premises of the arguments as well as the core modal concepts assumed in the debate.