Imam, Imamat and Bohras

[fayyaaz]

What he actually says, and Adam will confirm this, is that "I pronounce nass on so-and-so ba-ilham-e-Imamuz zamaan". He says that he is inspired by Imam but as far as I know he never elaborates on the mechanism of receiving an inspiration from the Hidden Imam. How does one even do that? How was Einstein inspired to create the Theory of Relativity? Even Einstein could not articulate that mechanism.

[ghulam muhammed]

He says that he is inspired by Imam

Which also means that he is guided by the Imam, doesn't it ? He doesn't say he is inspired by Allah (swt) or Prophet (s.a.w.) hence Imam is the central character in doing Nass.

[fayyaaz]

He says that he is inspired by Imam

Which also means that he is guided by the Imam, doesn't it ? He doesn't say he is inspired by Allah (swt) or Prophet (s.a.w.) hence Imam is the central character in doing Nass.

The difference is that "inspiration" comes from within the person. People may be inspired by others but that is because they have 'internalized' some aspects of the character who is their inspiration. The said character does not physically, verbally or mentally (hypnosis?) inspire. Inspiration is not external. It is internal. That applies to the Dai too. I am sure you know this. Guiding is more external and as Imam is in purdah, he cannot thus guide.

So, where does the inspiration come from? It is from within the person getting inspired.

[anajmi]

Now,

He says that he is inspired by Imam

before,

Imam is in purdah and that is all there is to it. He is not involved in Nass

Hey, tell me what your own words taste like when you eat them?

How was Einstein inspired to create the Theory of Relativity?

He said - I create the theory of Relativity ba ilhaame so and so.

[anajmi]

Inspiration is not external. It is internal. That applies to the Dai too.

So we agree that the Dai's have been lying to the bohras all along eh?

Apparently the inspiration received by the Dai's from the likes of great Imam's like Ali and Hussain has actually been of no use to these con men. They gave their lives and these people will take your very last dime from you!!

[ghulam muhammed]

Guiding is more external and as Imam is in purdah, he cannot thus guide.

The Dai says he is in direct communication with Imam and whatever he does is as per Imam's wish. I have even heard his sons saying that the Mohurrum vayez venue (which is always decided at the nth hour) is decided by the Imam.

[fayyaaz]

Guiding is more external and as Imam is in purdah, he cannot thus guide.

The Dai says he is in direct communication with Imam and whatever he does is as per Imam's wish. I have even heard his sons saying that the Mohurrum vayez venue (which is always decided at the nth hour) is decided by the Imam.

I would discount Dai's sons utterances about this. I would be interested in hearing a Dai or anything written by him in which he says that he is in direct physical communication with the Hidden Imam. He may claim that he is doing whatever he is doing through inspiration from the Imam but, to repeat, this is internal not external. I do not have anything to add to this. Until to-morrow then.

[humanbeing]

I would discount Dai's sons utterances about this. I would be interested in hearing a Dai or anything written by him in which he says that he is in direct physical communication with the Hidden Imam. He may claim that he is doing whatever he is doing through inspiration from the Imam but, to repeat, this is internal not external. I do not have anything to add to this. Until to-morrow then.

I have heard in countless bayaans by amils and SMB, that Dai acts only with the permission of Imam-uz-zaman, Not a leaf ( figurative speech) moves without permission of Imam. Dai’s every action are with permission of Imam-uz-zaman. After this rule, these are handed down as authority in the administration as raza-na-saheb’s farman, which are eventually coming from Imam-uz-zaman. Also why do bohras celebrate Milad of Imam-uz-zaman, usually it is the same day of the year, it is a fanatastic co-incidence that All the hidden Imam-uz-zaman have their birthdays fall on same day.

I agree with fayaaz, that inspiration is from within. One can take inspiration from any Imams, specially and importantly the known and identified ones such as Prophet Muhammed (pbuh), Imam Ali, Imam Hussein and Imam Hassan and thereafter. Atleast their life story are more inspiring and guiding than obscure secluded hidden imam from many centuries.

It is also believed that, the names of Imam and Duaats until ta-roze-qayamat are written by Imam Ali in some book, that means they are pre-ordained and ghaib-na-jaankar imam and dai knows who the next Imam and Dai will be. Also it is believed that Imam-uz-Zaman will do zuhoor on Roze-qayamat or when number of Imam-uz-zaman reaches 100 or some era of 50 000 or 7000 years cycle are completed, like dau-us-satr or daur-us-kashf similar to kalyug, satyug or swarnyug in hindus.


There must be some way Imam-uz-zaman communicates with DAI. The mode of communication could be beyond our understanding as commoners. Anything is possible !

[Humsafar]

I suggest you deal with what is in front of you right now. Choose SMS or SKQ. Or choose neither. Be happy.

Choosing SMS or SKQ is not the solution to the problem I'm highlighting. We can put out the fire now but we know from experience that this fire will start again. Isn't it foolish to just go about putting out the fire but never investigate the source of fire? Surely, it's not against the law to do so.

[SBM]

I suggest you deal with what is in front of you right now. Choose SMS or SKQ. Or choose neither. Be happy.

Why rush now to choose, We can wait for the Hindu Judge to decide and who knows that the Dai chosen by that Hindu Judge will decide and identify that Hindu Judge as the Imam. Case solved since Dai is the one who will identify the Imam, So this can be worked out between the Dai and the Judge, " You rub my back and I rub yours"

[alam]

"Ilhaam, Taa'eed, fayz". . . As Coming from Imam Uzzamaan toward Dai-zamaan?
Can someone give definitions from the POV of those who use these terms ?
Humble request to Please refrain from sarcasm and cynicism. Just trying to understand from their POV or rather Point of Faith.

[Humsafar]

Speaking generally, and concluding the argument I've been making, the doctrine of Imamat (when scrutinised in the light of history, and measured against principles and standards it sets out for itself) comes under serious doubt. The foundation on which the Ismaili/Fatimid belief system is based is shaky. The bedrock on which Bohra Dais have built their empire of wealth and power is made of dust. And I say this not lightly, for I know the far-reaching implication it cam have, if pursued to its logical end. And of course, this is not a seminal idea. We all have come to this conclusion before. But it bears repeating.

It is obvious that Sayedna Taher Saifuddin was speaking the truth when he is said to have dismissed the Imam as fiction. But the doctrine of Imamat is the keystone of our belief structure and we are reluctant to let go of it. Our Dais' lives and their extravagant lifestyle is founded on it, and they keep it in place by hook or crook - or rather by more palatable devices such as hikma and ilhaam. But hikma and ilhaam - wisdom and inspiration - are not the monopoly of Dais. Deep down in the interior of our being we all operate by wisdom and inspiration that comes from the Beyond. Most of us would like to call that God. The Dais choose to call that Imam. God trumps Imam anytime. But I do not want to be facetious, all I want to point out is that hikma and ilhaam are pathetically weak pillars to hold up the doctrine of Imamat. And that, unfortuantely, is all Imamat has going for it.

Personally I find the doctrine of Imamat - in essence and principle - good. Masses of people do need a guide (as opposed to a leader) to show them the way to God. Some may even argue this as even necessary. Who in the right mind would have a problem with such a beautiful concept? Who would have a problem if the Imam did his job - as promised - or the Dai who acts in his name was not corrupt and devious. But the reality is that this beautiful theory falls apart terribly in practice. The concept of Imamat is beautiful but it has failed the test of time. The truth is that there is no Imam. A truth that most of have known deep down but have been reluctant to let it out, verbalise it for one reason or the other. But mainly because admitting it would cast us adrift, with the anchor of our faith gone.

But all is not lost, our faith in Imamat and Imam can be restored, if for noting else then at least for the sake of continuity and tradition.

First, the two dais must negotiate and resolve the dispute (admitting full well that neither has the benefit of the Imam's authority). The dispute is about prestige, property and ego. It is important for them to come to a compromise not just for the sake of the community but for their own sakes, that is if they have any interest in preserving the foundational belief on which their empire rests.

Second, the new Dai should act and behave the way the Imam, the Ahl ul Bayt and the Prophet expect him to act and behave. In other words shun the life wealth and ostentation, and guide the community in the way of Allah in a true spirit of compassion, charity and egalitarianism and justice that the Quran teaches.

Realistically speaking though, the two imposters will do no such thing. They know that ordinary Bohras do not care about the Imam or Imamat. All Bohras care about is their traditions and a way of life which the Dai and his administration have made possible for them. Yes, it is a corrupt and vile system but a system that Bohras have come to willy nilly accept and live with. The majority of Bohras are with Mufaddal Saifuddin not because he is right or true successor but because he commands the physical and material infrastructure that can ensure the continuity of Bohra life. They are also with him because the majority is with him. Bohras are too timid to go out on a limb. They find security in numbers. Ultimately what will happen, or has already happened, is that the community will split yet again and the two Dais will have carved out their respective fiefdoms and followers.

But is this is the only denouement possible? No. There is a third way. Insisting that we pick a Dai is a false choice. Every thinking Bohra must refuse to play this shell game. They must tell the two contenders they resolve the dispute among themselves, and quickly; that all this Nass business is sham; that they will not be allowed to divide the community and set people against each other for their selfish ambitions; that we know the truth that there is no Imam uz Zaman, so they better stop invoking his name and stop acting in his name; that they have no divine authority to rule over the community; that they are the helm only by accident of birth; that we have had enough of Qasr e Aali and Bait e Zaini and all the other royal dynastic nonsense. All thinking Bohras - especially those who are rooting for Khuzema Qutbuddin - must refuse to play this game. Instead of spending effort and energy to build their chosen Dai's case they should work for the unity of the community, for a reasonable compromise, and for much needed reforms that can make the community progressive, equitable and Islamic. We are one community. We do not have to fight among ourselves. This is not our fight.

Disclaimer: The above is my personal opinion and in no way or form reflects the official reformist position.

[Ozdundee]

Very interesting the philosophical concept or figment of imagination..the jury is still out ...does he exists in one, many or none , yet that concept is the basis of a small revenue called Nazral Makam, Silat....we even celebrate his birthday in pomp. May be it is like the magic trick that easy cope out way when the situation places in a corner to explain a situation and like a kid one says it's not my intention I was told by so and so and since he is not here at present let us stop discussing it. Last time I expereinced this in a small way was when the Ayan gave me a run around until I gave up !

At present I am leaning towards Humsafar points...may be when bring all the flavours of Diais on stage...In alphabetical order and not by importance

Alawi , Mufadali, Qutbi, Suleimani and ask them please provide valid JP certified passport copies of your Imams that you communicate with. If they are not on this planet and in spirit world please provide last time you communicated with him and what was the discussion ...whether the Diai was in the middle of aiming a rifle for the hunt , preparing Nass, deciding to take matters to court, listening to Arzi. Now there is someone who says well why hide I am present and I have not appointed any Diai as I don't need him at present . Another group says our will return when the world is about to end...if one listens to scientists after 1400 years either global warming, Ebola or asteroid will hit us in next few years so the wait will end soon

[fayyaaz]

Hunsafar,

You said Imam is different from God and angels because God and angels are 'abstract' and Imam was a historical figure? You have not said what you meant by 'abstract'? I assume you meant in contrast that they are not historical figures but merely figments of imagination.

In your 'thesis' you are now close to saying that Imam is also a figment of imagination. Can you tell me why you can live with the idea of God and angels and not with the idea of Imam? You can deal with idea of one God and many religions. God by the way is not all that abstract in some religions. He also was present among the faithful at one time too.

I think you can live with the idea of one Imam and multiple Dais too. Imam is as relevant to Bohras as God and angels. They ultimately are of no concern except to invoke their names in prayers and to be focus for those prayers.

That leaves you with the situation here and now to go with one Dai or another or none. Your choice will not at all be illegal.

All these 'philosophical' musings are for naught!

[anajmi]

The equating of the Imam with God is the reason why we both agreed that the bohras indulge in shirk, kufr and idol-worship in the first place didn't we? From the Islamic point of view that is shirk, kufr and idol-worship 101.

[zinger]

Hunsafar,

You said Imam is different from God and angels because God and angels are 'abstract' and Imam was a historical figure? You have not said what you meant by 'abstract'? I assume you meant in contrast that they are not historical figures but merely figments of imagination.

In your 'thesis' you are now close to saying that Imam is also a figment of imagination. Can you tell me why you can live with the idea of God and angels and not with the idea of Imam? You can deal with idea of one God and many religions. God by the way is not all that abstract in some religions. He also was present among the faithful at one time too.

I think you can live with the idea of one Imam and multiple Dais too. Imam is as relevant to Bohras as God and angels. They ultimately are of no concern except to invoke their names in prayers and to be focus for those prayers.

That leaves you with the situation here and now to go with one Dai or another or none. Your choice will not at all be illegal.

All these 'philosophical' musings are for naught!

Fayyaazbhai, i think you have read humsafar wrong and i think i have, perhaps, for the first time, read him right

what he is saying is not that Imam is/was imaginary, but that he does not exist in this day and age, or perhaps he hold no power in the scheme of things.
while i will disagree with him on both points, he has been gracious enough to add that these are his personal POVs

now coming to what you said, figment of imagination would basically mean something that never existed to begin with, that it was made up from the beginning.
what humsafar is saying that Imams did exist once upon a time but perhaps they dont now, and hence what we are basically living by, is their memory and their essence.
ofcourse i choose to disagree with him on this too, but then peoples faith evolve in different ways and i respect his position, moreso that he has clarified that this is his personal opinion.

humsafar saab, please do correct me if im wrong in interpreting what you meant

[fayyaaz]

Hunsafar,

You said Imam is different from God and angels because God and angels are 'abstract' and Imam was a historical figure? You have not said what you meant by 'abstract'? I assume you meant in contrast that they are not historical figures but merely figments of imagination.

In your 'thesis' you are now close to saying that Imam is also a figment of imagination. Can you tell me why you can live with the idea of God and angels and not with the idea of Imam? You can deal with idea of one God and many religions. God by the way is not all that abstract in some religions. He also was present among the faithful at one time too.

I think you can live with the idea of one Imam and multiple Dais too. Imam is as relevant to Bohras as God and angels. They ultimately are of no concern except to invoke their names in prayers and to be focus for those prayers.

That leaves you with the situation here and now to go with one Dai or another or none. Your choice will not at all be illegal.

All these 'philosophical' musings are for naught!

Fayyaazbhai, i think you have read humsafar wrong and i think i have, perhaps, for the first time, read him right

what he is saying is not that Imam is/was imaginary, but that he does not exist in this day and age, or perhaps he hold no power in the scheme of things.
while i will disagree with him on both points, he has been gracious enough to add that these are his personal POVs

now coming to what you said, figment of imagination would basically mean something that never existed to begin with, that it was made up from the beginning.
what humsafar is saying that Imams did exist once upon a time but perhaps they dont now, and hence what we are basically living by, is their memory and their essence.
ofcourse i choose to disagree with him on this too, but then peoples faith evolve in different ways and i respect his position, moreso that he has clarified that this is his personal opinion.

humsafar saab, please do correct me if im wrong in interpreting what you meant

zinger,

I am not saying anything different. I acknowledged that, in contrast to God and angels in the religion of Bohras, Imam indeed was a historical figure. Whether Imam now exists and ought to be guiding the community is not an issue relevant to Bohras now.

Let us distinguish 'folk' religion, the religion of unsophisticated Bohra masses untutored in their religion in a scholarly way from the religion understood by the adepts of the religion. Folk religion is mostly legends mixed up with superstition which would not exist written down in authentic books of the religion. That Imam exists is part of religion but that he communicates with the Dai is definitely a folk tale and the educated among Bohras will not give much credence to that idea.

So the foundations of the Bohra religion comprising of God, angels and Imam are considered 'authentic' but currently share the characteristic of them being 'absent' with no one having any idea about how they 'operate' in the real world of Bohras.

My suggestion to Humsafar then is that just as he is comfortable with the idea of one God and His angels which is shared by many religions and their different leaders, he should consider being comfortable with the idea of one Imam shared by multiple Dais and their followers.

In practical day-to-day affairs of Bohras God, His angels and Imam are just not a consideration to which anyone gives much, if any, thought. Just as he would choose a religion with no idea of how God and His angels operate in the world, he should choose a Dai with no idea of how Imam operates in the world, or indeed if, like God and His angels, he exists at all.

In conclusion, religious schism is a normal modus operandi among 'believers'. If we accept that no 'one is true' or 'everyone is true' then we will stop giving much attention to the purely 'religious' with their 'pristine' religion accusing everyone else of being deviant and purveying mayhem around the globe.

[zinger]

See Fayyaaz, its so much more refreshing to have a conversation that does not involve categotization

Now, coming back to what you write:--------

zinger,

I am not saying anything different. I acknowledged that, in contrast to God and angels in the religion of Bohras, Imam indeed was a historical figure. Whether Imam now exists and ought to be guiding the community is not an issue relevant to Bohras now.

You are right, it not relevant to us from the point of view that the Dai is representing the Imam and all that he does is in accordance with the wishes of the Imam. Off late i have begun to suspect it, but if this what the faith believes in, then so be it

Let us distinguish 'folk' religion, the religion of unsophisticated Bohra masses untutored in their religion in a scholarly way from the religion understood by the adepts of the religion. Folk religion is mostly legends mixed up with superstition which would not exist written down in authentic books of the religion. That Imam exists is part of religion but that he communicates with the Dai is definitely a folk tale and the educated among Bohras will not give much credence to that idea.

Im not sure how many of the educated amongst Bohras you have interacted with. if you are using your conversations and experiences here as yardsticks, then i would suspect you are strongly mistaken. Education does not necessarily override belief. Just because i am reasonably educated does not mean that i believe the Imam communicating with the Dai is a fairy tale (although i am wondering now, again)

My suggestion to Humsafar then is that just as he is comfortable with the idea of one God and His angels which is shared by many religions and their different leaders, he should consider being comfortable with the idea of one Imam shared by multiple Dais and their followers.

In practical day-to-day affairs of Bohras God, His angels and Imam are just not a consideration to which anyone gives much, if any, thought. Just as he would choose a religion with no idea of how God and His angels operate in the world, he should choose a Dai with no idea of how Imam operates in the world, or indeed if, like God and His angels, he exists at all.

i will not comment on this

In conclusion, religious schism is a normal modus operandi among 'believers'. If we accept that no 'one is true' or 'everyone is true' then we will stop giving much attention to the purely 'religious' with their 'pristine' religion accusing everyone else of being deviant and purveying mayhem around the globe.

i know who you are pointing at but i didnt understand what you are trying to say here

[fayyaaz]

See Fayyaaz, its so much more refreshing to have a conversation that does not involve categotization

Categorization is a fundamental human activity. All learning is preceded by categorization. At its most fundamental level, it is the contrast between one and another that allows us to distinguish and name entities. You recognize your brother because you are able to distinguish him from others and you have mentally categorized him. In nature, some animals camouflage themselves as a survival mechanism against predators. If you do not categorize then you lump everything together and you are unable to make sense of your world.

Even the most obdurate on this board against my categorization like AZ, perhaps unconsciously, categorize those who are supporters of 'Muftlal' and others.

Classification or Categorization makes knowledge to be easily accessible. How would you 'google' if search engines would not classify. Tomes could be written about it, and categorization is useful on this board because clearly not all who participate are same and their posts can be categorized like I have done.

In conclusion, religious schism is a normal modus operandi among 'believers'. If we accept that no 'one is true' or 'everyone is true' then we will stop giving much attention to the purely 'religious' with their 'pristine' religion accusing everyone else of being deviant and purveying mayhem around the globe.

i know who you are pointing at but i didnt understand what you are trying to say here

I am saying that schism is normal among religions as there will always be disagreements in interpretations of teachings of religious leaders after they are gone. This has happened so often in the past in all religions that we should have by now learned not to quarrel because others disagree and we should not impose our interpretation on others using violence. Let us learn to respect and enjoy diversity.

[anajmi]

he should consider being comfortable with the idea of one Imam shared by multiple Dais and their followers.

Humsafar is comfortable with the idea of one Imam shared by multiple Dais. In fact he is suggesting that you should give this same advice to the two dawedaars fighting in court.

[fayyaaz]

he should consider being comfortable with the idea of one Imam shared by multiple Dais and their followers.

Humsafar is comfortable with the idea of one Imam shared by multiple Dais. In fact he is suggesting that you should give this same advice to the two dawedaars fighting in court.

They are fighting for the loot. The two Dais are a fact and schism is reality. The two will not, indeed cannot, compromise or come to an agreement about who will withdraw his claim to be the Dai. Reality is simply such that you must choose one, the other or neither. The notion that the cult should remain intact is a pipe dream. Get on with the real world!

[anajmi]

You are a moron aren't you? The two idiots fighting each other in court is impacting a million bohras. And you want Humsafar to move on!!

[SBM]

For once I agree with Fayyaz
They are definitely fighting for the loot and if there is going to be a compromise it is going to be about power sharing and the loot will be divided amongst them and Bohra Abdes will be supporting two different factions. just like Alavis and Sulemanis are doing

[Humsafar]

The burden of my "thesis" is this:

• Imams have existed historically. But the Tayebbi/Bohra Imams by all available evidence - and inference - do not exist.
• In the absence of the Imam the doctrine of Imamat has no leg to stand on.
• In the absence of the Imam the Bohra Dai/Dais have no doctrinal legitimacy to claim the Dai ul Mutlaq status.
• The Bohra Dai/Dais have no doctrinal authority to rule in the name of the Imam.
• Carried to its logical end, since the Imam does not exist to give legitimacy to the Dais, the Dais don't have to exist either.

That said, we are still left with the competing Dais and the doctrine of Imamat sans the Imam. Where do we go from here?

Personally I have no problem accepting the concept of Imamat as a cute historical artifact so long as the Dais live up to the ideals of that doctrine - and by extension the ideals of the Quran. But this is not the case. I've a problem with the Dai who exploits and oppresses the community in the name of Imam uz Zaman who does not exist. When that Dai invokes Imam uz Zaman and exploits and oppresses the community in his name then he is not only lying but is also being devious. So, yes I have no problem with Imamat or the absentee Imam so long as they are not used to legitimise the cult of the Dai and his evil regime.

On the other hand, I would have no problem if the Dai ruled on his own without reference to the Imam. I would still oppose him for his corrupt practices and demand justice but would not call him out as a lying, devious person. I have no problem with multiple Dais sharing one Imam, or multiple Imams sharing one Dai or any combination and permutation thereof so long as none of our chosen creed is used to - I repeat - legitimise the cult of the Dai and his evil regime. In fact, as I said above, for the sake of tradition and continuity I would want Imamat and Dai to humour us and be part of our folk religion (as fayyaz aptly put it).

The question can be asked, why not accept a corrupt Dai who acts in the name of a non-existent Imam, when all sorts of creeds and doctrines and laws are accepted in the name of a "non-existent" God or "non-existent" angles?

My answer would be, they should not be accepted if they are unjust, inhumane and violate your rights and dignity. Secondly, as I have argued above, the Imam on account of being a historical, concrete entity cannot be equated with the abstract, mystical entities like God and angles. We know that Imam does not exist. But we cannot with any certainty say that God and angles do not exist. If you act in the name of God I will give you the benefit of the doubt. But if you act in the name of the Imam I know you're a fraud.

fayyaz, zinger I hope the above answers your questions. I don't think I've anything more to add on the subject.

[SBM]

Questions in regards to Imam
How does the Ayatullahs of Iran and Iraq deal with this issue. Does any one knows if they invoke Imam in regards to their worldly life? Do they collect Najwas for the Imam or do they say that they get their guidance from the Imam, I have not read or heard if Ayatullah Khamanei has ever invoked Imam or Ilham from the Imamk regarding Iran's right to own Nuclear capabilities
Note I know this Dawoodi Bohra forum and we are dealing with Dawoodi Bohra issue but Imam is central figure for all Shias and would help how other factions deal with them Agha Khani have a living Imam who guides the community but rest have Imam in Purdah so it may help us understand the entire concept of dealing with hidden Imam

[zinger]

The burden of my "thesis" is this:

• Imams have existed historically. But the Tayebbi/Bohra Imams by all available evidence - and inference - do not exist. I WOULD RATHER PROPOSE THAT THEY DO EXIST. JUST BECAUSE WE DONT SEE THEM DOES NOT MEAN THEY DONT, LIKE I SAID, ITS AN ARTICLE OF FAITH
• In the absence of the Imam the doctrine of Imamat has no leg to stand on. AGAIN, WILL DISAGREE IN VIEW OF MY REASON ABOVE
• In the absence of the Imam the Bohra Dai/Dais have no doctrinal legitimacy to claim the Dai ul Mutlaq status.SAME AS ABOVE
• The Bohra Dai/Dais have no doctrinal authority to rule in the name of the Imam.I THNK THEY DO. UNLESS YOU ARE SAYING THIS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE IMAM NOT EXISTING, IN WHICH CASE, FINE, THAT YOUR POV
• Carried to its logical end, since the Imam does not exist to give legitimacy to the Dais, the Dais don't have to exist either..I THNK THEY DO. UNLESS YOU ARE SAYING THIS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE IMAM NOT EXISTING, IN WHICH CASE, FINE, THAT YOUR POV

That said, we are still left with the competing Dais and the doctrine of Imamat sans the Imam. Where do we go from here?

Personally I have no problem accepting the concept of Imamat as a cute historical artifact so long as the Dais live up to the ideals of that doctrine - and by extension the ideals of the Quran. But this is not the case. .AGREEDI've a problem with the Dai who exploits and oppresses the community in the name of Imam uz Zaman who does not exist. When that Dai invokes Imam uz Zaman and exploits and oppresses the community in his name then he is not only lying but is also being devious. So, yes I have no problem with Imamat or the absentee Imam so long as they are not used to legitimise the cult of the Dai and his evil regime.

On the other hand, I would have no problem if the Dai ruled on his own without reference to the Imam .A VERY VALID POINT, ONE TO CERTAINLY THINK ABOUT I FEEL. I would still oppose him for his corrupt practices and demand justice but would not call him out as a lying, devious person. I have no problem with multiple Dais sharing one Imam, or multiple Imams sharing one Dai or any combination and permutation thereof so long as none of our chosen creed is used to - I repeat - legitimise the cult of the Dai and his evil regime. In fact, as I said above, for the sake of tradition and continuity I would want Imamat and Dai to humour us and be part of our folk religion (as fayyaz aptly put it).

The question can be asked, why not accept a corrupt Dai who acts in the name of a non-existent Imam, when all sorts of creeds and doctrines and laws are accepted in the name of a "non-existent" God or "non-existent" angles?

My answer would be, they should not be accepted if they are unjust, inhumane and violate your rights and dignity. Secondly, as I have argued above, the Imam on account of being a historical, concrete entity cannot be equated with the abstract, mystical entities like God and angles. We know that Imam does not exist. But we cannot with any certainty say that God and angles do not exist. If you act in the name of God I will give you the benefit of the doubt. But if you act in the name of the Imam I know you're a fraud.

fayyaz, zinger I hope the above answers your questions. I don't think I've anything more to add on the subject.

yes you have, quite clearly. i have however, added my comments to your post, but please, by all means, you may disregard them. im not asking you a question, im just pointing out my views on this. i from my end, with you am closing this chapter too.