OBJECTION EXPLAINED – Jannat, Jahannam aur Morality ke Objection ka Asal Background
Ek atheist ne Mufti Yasir se sawaal kiya: “Agar kisi ko physical ya mental harm hota hai, to kya ye bura nahi hota?” Usne hell (Jahannam) ke concept ko unjust kaha, kyunke wahan pain diya jata hai bina kisi physical harm ke pehle step ke. Uska kehna tha ke agar consequences bura hai (jaise punishment in Jahannam), to wo kaise justified ho sakta hai? Usne ye bhi kaha ke morality ka base consequences hone chahiye — aur Allah ke hukm sirf is wajah se follow karna ke wo ‘manifestation of justice’ hai, ye kaafi nahi hai.
SHORT ANSWER – Morality ka matlab sirf pain ya pleasure nahi hota
Mufti Yasir ne clear kiya ke morality ka base consequences nahi, creator ki law and justice hoti hai. Agar aap Allah ke system ko reject karte ho, uski authority ko nahi maante, to wo logical buraai ban jaata hai. Jahannam koi zulm nahi hai — wo rejection of ultimate truth ka logical result hai.
DETAILED ANSWER – Mufti Yasir ka Jawab: Morality aur Divine Justice ka Logical Link
Mufti Yasir ne pehle sawal ko root level par expose kiya: agar aap sirf consequences ko good/bad ka base banate ho, to aap kabhi bhi morality ko objectively define nahi kar sakte. Kyun? Kyunke har insaan ke liye pain aur pleasure alag hota hai. Agar ek qatil ko punishment milti hai, aur usse takleef hoti hai, to kya aap punishment ko morally bura kehoge?
Mufti ne bataya ke Allah ka system koi man-made democracy nahi, balki ultimate authority ka nizaam hai. Agar koi shakhs us authority ko reject karta hai — Allah, His law, His messengers — to wo uski kingdom me rebellion hai. Jaise kisi mulk me rahta hua shakhs bole: “Main is country ka law nahi maanta,” to kya ye neutral rahega? Nahi — ye defiance hai.
To agar Allah ke system me rehkar koi uske hukm ko reject karta hai, to punishment natural hai. Jahannam is not revenge — it is the outcome of rejection. Aur ye bhi bataya gaya ke good and evil ko define karne ke liye, aapko ek objective, divine source chahiye, warna har banda apni definition banata rahega.
OBJECTION FLAWS – Is Argument Me Maujood Logical Ghaltiyan
Fallacy 1: Morality = Consequences Assumption
Atheist ne assume kiya ke agar kisi ko harm ho raha hai to wo automatically immoral hai. Jabke punishment ka logic context-based hota hai.
Fallacy 2: Mixing Legal and Moral Frameworks
Legal justice (jaise death penalty) ko compare kiya gaya eternal hellfire se, bina spiritual rebellion samjhe.
Fallacy 3: Ignoring Divine Sovereignty
Allah ki authority ko reject kar ke bhi uske rewards expect karna logical contradiction hai.
Fallacy 4: Defining Good & Evil Without Standard
Atheist ne khud koi universal morality define nahi ki, phir bhi Allah ke hukm ko unjust bola.
Fallacy 5: Selective Emotional Logic
Hell ke concept par sirf emotional discomfort dikhaya gaya, jabke iske behind rational reasoning completely ignore ki gayi.
FINAL THOUGHTS – Morality Sirf Dard Se Nahi, Haq Se Define Hoti Hai
Agar morality ka base sirf pleasure ya pain ho, to duniya me justice possible hi nahi hota. Mufti Yasir ne logically prove kiya ke jab tak aap good and evil ko divine law se relate nahi karoge, aap har cheez ko apni marzi se define karte rahoge. Jahannam ek divine system ka logical conclusion hai — na ke emotional reaction.
