Intresting Article...

The one and only free public forum for Bohras. The focus of this forum is the reform movement, the Dawoodi Bohra faith and, of course, the corrupt priesthood. But the discussion is in no way restricted to the Bohras alone.
truebohra
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 5:01 am

Intresting Article...

#1

Unread post by truebohra » Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:49 am

This paper examines the authority of the "ecclesiastical" hierarchy, that is the teaching, spiritual and temporal hierarchy, in Medieval Ismailism. My aim is to establish a relationship between this hierarchy and the cosmological doctrines of Medieval Ismailism. Even though Ismailism is not the only Shi'i group in Islam to exibit both an ecclesiastical hierarchy and a related cosmological structure (medieval Druze and Nusayri groups are two further examples), it has been chosen here because of the high degree of sophistication and the clarity in which these doctrines have been expressed.

The Ismailis are a Shii group which originated during the 9th century and developed in some provinces of Iraq, Syria and Iran. They belong to the Sevener branch of the Shia (as opposed to the majority Shii branch of the Twelvers) and recognize the authority of a series of 7 imams, the last of whom is - according to the majority Nizari branch, the present Aga Khan Karim, the 49th in the line of Nizari Ismaili imams. The total number of Ismailis today is uncertain, varying according to different sources, from 1 million to 20 million. They are distributed in several countries in the Middle East as well as in Asia and Africa; in the present century, as a result of political and economic emigration, they also settled in America, especially Canada, and Europe. The Ismaili community in the UK is the largest in Europe (ca. 10,000) <1>.

Ismaili doctrinal and political influence reached its climax between the 10th and 12th centuries, and is mainly represented by two Ismaili dynasties which ruled over Egypt, Tunisia, regions of Syria, Iran and the Yemen. They are the well-known Fatimid dynasty based in Cairo (909-1171) and the lesser-known Sulayhi dynasty in the Yemen (1038-1138).

As a branch of Shiism, Ismailism recognizes the authority of the Imam, who, after the Prophet Muhammad, is the representative of God on earth. The imam is both the spiritual and political leader of the community, he is appointed either by the Prophet (as in the case of Ali), or by the preceding imam. He has to be male, pious, and of a specific descent. He is infallible and the only official interpreter of Scripture.
When the Fatimid dynasty was in its hey-day, the imam was the political and religious figure-head of an articulated hierarchical structure every member of which was responsible to his own superior and thus directly to the imam. Changes, however, did occur and, in the case of Tayyibi Yemen, the dignitary below the imam, the Da'i Mutlaq, did in practise become the head of the hierarchy, while the imam was doctrinally still referred to, but declared to be "in hiding".

The Ismaili ecclesiastical hierarchy was not believed to be a man-made organization, invented solely to meet some specific needs of the Ismaili community; it was felt to be part of a whole structure of beings and things which reflected the harmony and the order of the universe. According to a widespread medieval "ideology", in the Middle East as well as in Europe down to Elizabethan times, there was a pervasive sympathy between the various components of the universe. Order, and therefore hierarchy, were to be found in the structure of the skies, in the organs of the human body and in society. One hierarchy reflected the other and parallels were often drawn between metaphysical, theological and social structures <2>.

For this paper I am going to concentrate on the cosmologies elaborated mainly by two Ismaili scholars, Hamid al-din al-Kirmani (d. 1021) and al-Mu`ayyad fi`l-din al-Shirazi (d. 1077); both are representative of the ideology of the Fatimid dynasty and therefore of its spiritual and political authority.

Ismaili cosmologies in general, and the cosmologies of al-Kirmani and al-Shirazi in particular, are Neoplatonic. It seems that Neoplatonism was introduced into Ismaili doctrine as early as the end of 9th century, by one al-Nasafi (d. 943) and was then widely adopted by the Iranian branch of Ismaili intellectuals.

This early Neoplatonism consisted of a hierarchical system to explain the relation between the One and the existence of multiplicity. At the top of the hierarchy was the One, which was transcendent and beyond qualification, and it was followed by the Intellect and then the Soul, which, with its imperfection, was the cause for the material world. In Plotinus the whole process was one of emanation: from the overflow of the One derived the Intellect, and so on, in a process which was neither active nor intentional.

But this passivity could not be accepted by a prophetic religion of salvation like Islam. Consequently, Ismaili scholars modified the Neoplatonic system by starting the emanative process not at the level of the One, but at that of the Intellect. So the Intellect became the cause of emanation, but did itself not emanate from the One, it was instead originated by the One atemporally through the Divine Word. Emanation then occurred from the Intellect to the Soul, from the Soul to Nature, and to the elemental qualities. The hierarchy of emanation was a hierarchy of value and perfection, the Intellect was perfect, but the Soul was less so, imperfection (evil) being caused by distance from the source of origination <3>.

Kirmani followed the distinction between origination from the One and emanation from the Intellect; he called the One in more theological terms (al-muta'ali), that is the Highest/ the Transcendent [See TABLE I] <4>. However, he modified the early Neoplatonic scheme by getting rid of the soul and multiplying the Intellect. From the One, through origination, occurred the First Intellect, and from this, through emanation, the second Intellect. From the Second Intellect emanated the Third, which was the origin of the material world. The emanative process was complete with the 10th Intellect.

This scheme is not as artificial as it may seem to us. For Kirmani and his contemporaries, such a "philosophical" hierarchy fitted very well with the current version of Ptolemaic cosmology, according to which the Universe was made of nine or ten concentric spheres, arranged in hierarchical order, from coarse (the earth) to subtle (the sphere of the spheres) [See TABLE II] <5>.

So far we have seen two hierarchies, that is two schemes, whether the language was philosophical or cosmological, by which value was assigned to specific members as parts of a whole <6>. These hierarchies reflect a universal harmony and order which is ordained by God. Order is achieved when everything is put in its natural place, that is in the place intended by and assigned to it by God. Knowledge is nothing else but knowing the natural place of things and beings. Order and harmony were to be found in the universe as a whole and in every one of its elements. Order was in the heavens, as we saw, in nature, where the generations from mineral to vegetal to animal culminate in the human being. Order was in the human body with a hierarchy of organs (from leading organs like the heart and the brain to servant organs) as well as in society, with a leader on the one hand and his followers on the other.

In these hierarchies of beings, where does man stand? And how can he know his natural place? As culmination of the animal generation man embodies all the generations below it, his body being made of mineral, and vegetal elements. At the same time, through his soul, man partakes of the spiritual, divine world and it is towards this world that his aim ought to rest. However, because, alone among all creatures, man is endowed with rationality and has the power to choose, he needs a guide to direct him to his natural place.

Such guidance is provided by religion, which is the link between the spiritual and the material world, between God and man. In particular, guidance occurs through the religious institution of persons whose task is to regulate the affairs of mankind and to implement the divine-natural law. For the Ismailis, this institution is represented by the Ismaili da'wa <7>.

Historically, the Ismaili da'wa was instrumental in paving the way to the establishment of the Fatimid dynasty. When in power, the dynasty, unlike other dynasties before it (such as the Abbasids), did not get rid of its propaganda organization, but still relied on it especially with regards to education (training of religious ranks, but also collection of religious taxes) and propaganda itself (which was never for mass conversion, but functioned as external relation of the dynasty, including trade) <8>.

During Kirmani's lifetime, the Fatimid imam al-Hakim (reign. 996-1021) relied heavily on the da'wa to maintain his authority, by expanding its organization and making it separate (almost independent) from the administrative and judicial authority. A new title was created for its leader: the da'i al-du'at <9>.

Doctrinally, this emphasis on the da'wa is reflected in the elaboration of a neat hierarchical system which represented the link between the philosophical/metaphysical world and the physical, material world. This link was called by scholars "the world of religion", which was structured according to the hierarchy of the Ismaili da'wa. Kirmani was one of those Ismaili intellectuals (and da'is) responsible for the doctrinal elaboration of such an intermediary world.

Following the divine, universal order and harmony, the ecclesiastical hierarchy mirrored all other hierarchies; it was composed of 10 ranks and was a hierarchy of value where each rank had its rationale in the rank above itself. [See TABLE III: ecclesiastical hierarchy] <10>

Ranks 1,2,3, are comprehensive ranks, like the outer spheres of the universe are comprehensive spheres (sphere of the fixed stars, sphere of the spheres and the embracing sphere), while the remaining ranks are equated with the 7 planets.

The first rank, the Prophet of the present cycle, Muhammad, is the lawgiver and the Scripture giver, while the Asas, Ali, is the interpreter of both law and Scripture. In the philosophical hierarchy the first rank (first Intellect) was the cause for the existence of the other intellects. Similarly, in the ecclesiastical hierarchy, the Prophet is the cause for the existence of all the other ranks (which are called the natural intellects).

In the philosophical hierarchy there was a difference of coming-into-being between the First Intellect (originated) and the other Intellects (emanated). Similarly, in the ecclesiastical hierarchy, the Prophet is chosen by God, while all the other ranks are appointed by the preceding rank. Therefore, emanation is equated to the appointment of imams <11>.

Kirmani himself gives a graphic example of this parallelism, as well as others, in a scheme of superior ranks and inferior ones. [See TABLE IV] <12>. The categories are philosophical in the first column, cosmological in the second, ecclesiastical in the third and theological/doctrinal in the last column. Every rank of the ecclesiastical hierarchy has a specific task to carry out within his/her own doctrinal capabilities.

It is unclear to what extent these ecclesiastical ranks actually reflected existing ranks at any given time or in any particular area of Ismaili propaganda. These terms do occurr in several Ismaili and non-Ismaili texts from an early date not necessarily in the same order as the one provided by Kirmani. Moreover, several synonyms existed for some of the ranks (f. e. janah/da'i).

What is of relevance here is that a hierarchy did exist from early times (well before the establishment of the Fatimid dynasty) and that the principle underlying the whole system was the concept of obedience.

Every Ismaili author makes this point very clear; Kirmani, for example, says that obedience to the highest living authority, that is the imam, is equivalent to obedience to God <13> Furthermore, obedience to the ranks as a whole is also equivalent to obedience to God <14>.

Authority and obedience in Ismailism are related concepts; this relation is familiar for scholars of religion. Authority, that is the right to command and to be obeyed, is according to Ismailism, of divine origin. Ultimate authority lies with God and, at the same time, the existing authority was instituted by God itself.

In Ismaili terms, all hierarchies in the universe come from God and the ecclesiastical hierarchy, the da'wa, is - as we saw- the essential link between God and the individual believer. To resist the authority of the da'wa or to rebel against it, is to rebel against God.

Christian scripture describes in similar terms authority and obedience: "Whoever rejects you rejects me, and whoever rejects me, rejects the One who sent me" (Luke 10.16). Medieval Christian monastic orders made obedience to the superior the basic element of life within monastic communities. There, as in Ismailism, obedience served the purpose of strenghtening the cohesion of the community under the authority of a representative of the divine <15>.

Al-Mu`ayyad fi'l-din al-Shirazi (d. 1077) was another leading da'i of the Fatimid dynasty. His doctrinal system differs slightly from Kirmani's, especially with regards to the number of hierarchical ranks and the function of the philosophical hierarchy. However, he develops the concept of obedience already present in Kirmani and takes it a step forward: each rank of the ecclesiastical hierarchy hides, in potentiality, a superior rank. In particular, each rank is potentially the imam, the highest living authority. As a result, rebellion to any rank, even the lowest, is like rebelling against the Imam and, ultimately, God itself <16>.

This concept of obedience to the rank above became the key to the cosmology and authority structure of Yemeni Tayyibi Ismailism (1131-1539). During the last years of the Sulayhi dynasty in Yemen, Queen Arwa broke her allegiance to the Fatimid line of Imams, thereby making her da'wa independent from that of Fatimid Egypt. The imam Tayyib was declared to be in hiding in 1130 and Queen Arwa appointed a da'i mutlaq (Missionary general) to represent him and to look after the da'wa and the community. After the death of Queen Arwa and the end of the Sulayhid dynasty, the Missionary General became the highest living rank and his position became hereditary.

Doctrinally, Tayyibi scholars make the concept of obedience to the rank superior to one's own of paramount importance. Obedience to one's superior is obedience to God: he who does not acknowledge the superiority of the rank above one's self, falls from his position and descends to lower levels <17>.

Cosmologically and philosophically, obedience is the key to the understanding of the origin of the material world. This is exemplified by the so-called drama in heaven (of gnostic origin): the Third Intellect, while acknowledging the excellence of the First Intellect, hesitated in recognizing the precedence of the Second Intellect. This hesitation was the cause of its deficiency. Because the First Intellect was hidden in the Second Intellect, this hesitation became disobedience and caused the Third Intellect to fall from its position. From it derived the nine spheres, while from the Second Intellect derived the other Seven Intellects <18>.

It is interesting here to note the relationship between a new minority group and the elaboration of an appropriate cosmology. What is at stake is the preservation and the identity of a minority group, which needs a strong social grip to continue and exist. The group exercises this grip on its members by developing a strong sense of hierarchy and duty.
The same happened in Ismailism when it needed to maintain its identity within Islam. It also happened in Tayyibi Ismailism when it wanted to differentiate itself from Fatimid Ismailism.

A final comment needs to be made about this relationship between the concept of authority within a community and the elaboration of its cosmologies <19>. We have seen that in the case of Fatimid and Tayyibi Ismailism such a relationship did indeed exist. But which influenced which? Did the community, and therefore the concept of authority, influence cosmology? Or vice-versa?

Sociologists would support the first argument: they would take the community and its social structure as the prototype for the elaboration of cosmology.

truebohra
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 5:01 am

Re: Intresting Article...

#2

Unread post by truebohra » Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:54 am

In Ismaili terms, all hierarchies in the universe come from God and the ecclesiastical hierarchy, the da'wa, is - as we saw- the essential link between God and the individual believer. To resist the authority of the da'wa or to rebel against it, is to rebel against God.

Al-Mu`ayyad fi'l-din al-Shirazi (d. 1077) was another leading da'i of the Fatimid dynasty. His doctrinal system differs slightly from Kirmani's, especially with regards to the number of hierarchical ranks and the function of the philosophical hierarchy. However, he develops the concept of obedience already present in Kirmani and takes it a step forward: each rank of the ecclesiastical hierarchy hides, in potentiality, a superior rank. In particular, each rank is potentially the imam, the highest living authority. As a result, rebellion to any rank, even the lowest, is like rebelling against the Imam and, ultimately, God itself <16>.

Doctrinally, Tayyibi scholars make the concept of obedience to the rank superior to one's own of paramount importance. Obedience to one's superior is obedience to God: he who does not acknowledge the superiority of the rank above one's self, falls from his position and descends to lower levels <17>.

truebohra
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 5:01 am

Re: Intresting Article...

#3

Unread post by truebohra » Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:56 am


Safiuddin
Posts: 546
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 4:01 am

Re: Intresting Article...

#4

Unread post by Safiuddin » Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:44 pm

[QUOTE] Every Ismaili author makes this point very clear; Kirmani, for example, says that obedience to the highest living authority, that is the imam, is equivalent to obedience to God <13> [Quote]

A very convenient philosophy if your goal is to control, manipulate, and profit from people's fears and beliefs of the hereafter. In this way, any shrewd despot or charismatic leader can sway the thoughts of thousands - ultimately resulting in huge power and money.

And obedience to the majority is equivalent to obedience to God? So going with the flow, agreeing with majority rule means you go with God? It seems like this was another rule invented just so that a people can be enslaved into an organization and brainwashed.

Smart
Posts: 1388
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 4:01 am

Re: Intresting Article...

#5

Unread post by Smart » Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:59 pm

In any society the social conditions reflect the cosmological and ideological underpinnings. In tribal societies, we have the belief in multiple deities, none of whom is all encompassing, so their theology is mostly animistic.

When monarchical systems became the norm, we had the phenomenon of monotheism, reflecting the social relationships. in these societies, the norm was the loyalty to the individual, because regime was equivalent to the individual.

When human society evolved over a period of time, the ideologies started questioning loyalty to individuals as anachronic, because individuals had a propensity to be corrupted, so the idea of loyalty to principles and concepts have come forth.

These principles are usually debated, tested and then accepted and then over time even, superseded. This whole methodology is now accepted. The whole concept of democracy is based on this approach.

Thus we see that as human beings have evolved, in terms of knowledge, social systems, ideologies and theology / metaphysics etc. changes have been brought in by social forces which are beyond the control of any one human being. Systems and ideologies have a choice of adapting or perishing.

The social systems and therefore the cosmologies and philosophical underpinnings are very different today than what they were 1200 years ago. What was valid then may not be acceptable now.

Today the Universe as we understand is very different from what was the concept then.

Muslim First
Posts: 6893
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 4:01 am

Re: Intresting Article...

#6

Unread post by Muslim First » Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:29 pm

Saifuddin wrote:

Every Ismaili author makes this point very clear; Kirmani, for example, says that obedience to the highest living authority, that is the imam, is equivalent to obedience to God <13>

A very convenient philosophy if your goal is to control, manipulate, and profit from people's fears and beliefs of the hereafter. In this way, any shrewd despot or charismatic leader can sway the thoughts of thousands - ultimately resulting in huge power and money.
Which organized religion is exception to this Philosophy?

Thai
Posts: 182
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 4:01 am

Re: Intresting Article...

#7

Unread post by Thai » Thu Sep 04, 2008 3:50 am

smart makes some interesting points

It is my understanding that Imam al-Hakim ruled during a rather turbulant time both economically and politically and it was necessary that there exist a doctrine to strengthen his "position" in the minds of the people he ruled. Today, some politicians use tactics such as "cold-war", "war on terror" ...etc to control the population. There is always the "other", the "enemy" ---Rwanda, Darfur, Bosnia are other examples.

Thai
Posts: 182
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 4:01 am

Re: Intresting Article...

#8

Unread post by Thai » Thu Sep 04, 2008 4:11 am

the 9th, 10, and 11th centuries were certainly a brilliant time when many inspiring ideas and debates originated. These ideas had a lot of influence in the development of Christian and Jewish Theology. However, these ideas about the relationship between cosmology and theology were also matters of concern and debate in earlier theologies such as those of the chineese and the aryans.

In Zoarastinaism this philosophy of emanation/avatar/manifestation is expressed similarly but with 6 instead of 10. The "one" is the divine creator Ahura Mazda, with his 6 manifestations or emanations as Asha vahishta (good mind), Vohu mano (ethical thought) Kshhathra vairya (Supreme power) Spenta Armaiti (holy devotion) and the twins Amesha-spenta or Harvatat (wholeness) and Ameretat (Immortality)

The goal of humans is to attain Amesha-spenta (wholeness and Immortality) through the practice of the various "perfections" and thus get close to the divine. (---or something like that)

Smart
Posts: 1388
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 4:01 am

Re: Intresting Article...

#9

Unread post by Smart » Thu Sep 04, 2008 2:05 pm

@thai
i agree with you that Imam Hakim's times were turbulent. What he did was tactical, but if it becomes the strategy for all times to come, then it becomes the source of wrong doing.

There are lot of people who thrive on paranoia. As you have rightly mentioned, Bush is one, Modi is the other, Syedna is the third and the prime example is Hitler.

Danish
Posts: 1106
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2003 5:01 am

Re: Intresting Article...

#10

Unread post by Danish » Thu Sep 04, 2008 3:01 pm

Smart, please check your PM. Sorry for the late reply since I rarely visit my profile. Thanks.

Thai
Posts: 182
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 4:01 am

Re: Intresting Article...

#11

Unread post by Thai » Fri Sep 05, 2008 5:51 am

I am not against all hierarchies or the concept of obedience---A teacher is above a student in knowledge and this creates a hierarchy of sorts. A leader is above his followers in leadership---and followers, as the word implies give obedience to the leader. The Quran gives the example of Parents. We are to give obedience and respect to Parents except in those instances that contradict the Quran. I think this general rule can apply to many situations. For example, if a country is flouting Allah's principles of justice---then the citizens have the right (and duty) to protest.

Therefore while faith and obedience are important for social harmony, the Quran cautions us that BLIND faith and obedience are harmful. The Quran tells us to use the guidance given by Allah and our intellectual faculties.---elsewhere it tells us that we cannot simply blindly follow what our fathers did. That such an excuse will not be acceptable at judgement time (sorry---I cannot find the verses in the Quran yet.)

In one interesting conversation I had with a christian, the person said that their concept of God was that of a father, that the christians were like the children and were to obey God, who would punish them (out of love) if they did not do so. In the Quran,it seems to me, we are treated not like children, but as responsible adults who have been given every facility to make the right choices and decisions and it is entirely upto us how we proceed.

feelgud
Posts: 725
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 5:01 am

Re: Intresting Article...

#12

Unread post by feelgud » Fri Sep 05, 2008 12:31 pm

...
the Quran cautions us that BLIND faith and obedience are harmful. The Quran tells us to use the guidance given by Allah and our intellectual faculties.---elsewhere it tells us that we cannot simply blindly follow what our fathers did. That such an excuse will not be acceptable at judgement time (sorry---I cannot find the verses in the Quran yet.)
2:170 But when they are told, "Follow what God has bestowed from on high," some answer, "Nay, we shall follow [only] that which we found our forefathers believing in and doing." Why, even if their forefathers did not use their reason at all, and were devoid of all guidance?

وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمُ اتَّبِعُوا مَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ قَالُواْ بَلْ نَتَّبِعُ مَا أَلْفَيْنَا عَلَيْهِ آبَاءنَا أَوَلَوْ كَانَ آبَاؤُهُمْ لاَ يَعْقِلُونَ شَيْئاً وَلاَ يَهْتَدُونَ (2:170)

5:104 for when they are told, "Come unto that which God has bestowed from on high, and unto the Apostle" - they answer, "Enough for us is that which we found our forefathers believing in and doing." Why, even though their forefathers knew nothing, and were devoid of all guidance?

وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمْ تَعَالَوْاْ إِلَى مَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ وَإِلَى الرَّسُولِ قَالُواْ حَسْبُنَا مَا وَجَدْنَا عَلَيْهِ آبَاءنَا أَوَلَوْ كَانَ آبَاؤُهُمْ لاَ يَعْلَمُونَ شَيْئًا وَلاَ يَهْتَدُونَ (5:104)

6:91 For, no true understanding of God have they when they say, "Never has God revealed anything unto man." Say: "Who has bestowed from on high the divine writ which Moses brought unto men as a light and a guidance, [and] which you treat as [72] [mere] leaves of paper, making a show of them the while you conceal [so] much - although you have been taught [by it] what neither you nor your forefathers had ever known?" [73] Say: "God [has revealed that divine writ]!" - and then leave them to play at their vain talk.

وَمَا قَدَرُواْ اللّهَ حَقَّ قَدْرِهِ إِذْ قَالُواْ مَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ عَلَى بَشَرٍ مِّن شَيْءٍ قُلْ مَنْ أَنزَلَ الْكِتَابَ الَّذِي جَاء بِهِ مُوسَى نُورًا وَهُدًى لِّلنَّاسِ تَجْعَلُونَهُ قَرَاطِيسَ تُبْدُونَهَا وَتُخْفُونَ كَثِيرًا وَعُلِّمْتُم مَّا لَمْ تَعْلَمُواْ أَنتُمْ وَلاَ آبَاؤُكُمْ قُلِ اللّهُ ثُمَّ ذَرْهُمْ فِي خَوْضِهِمْ يَلْعَبُونَ (6:91)

Thai
Posts: 182
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 4:01 am

Re: Intresting Article...

#13

Unread post by Thai » Sat Sep 06, 2008 1:14 am

feelgud---Thankyou for the verses.

It is an interesting social phenomenon as to why people tend to gravitate towards authoritarianism? Even in the west, as shown by the Iraq war fiasco
--people would rather blindly believe rather than think for themselves. Is aquiring knowledge such a chore? Why do people find it easier to be followers rather than participants? In Christianity---the followers of Jesus are called sheep. Have we become too "christianized"?

Surah 90--verse 5-11
5 Thinks he that none have power over him?
6 He may boast "wealth have I squandered in abundance!
7 Does he think he is beholden to none?
8 Have we not made for him a pair of eyes?
9 And a tongue, and a pair of lips?
10 And shown him the two highways?
11 But he does not hasten to the one that is steep.

truebohra
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 5:01 am

Re: Intresting Article...

#14

Unread post by truebohra » Sun Sep 07, 2008 10:05 am

Originally posted by Smart:
@thai
i agree with you that Imam Hakim's times were turbulent. What he did was tactical, but if it becomes the strategy for all times to come, then it becomes the source of wrong doing.

There are lot of people who thrive on paranoia. As you have rightly mentioned, Bush is one, Modi is the other, Syedna is the third and the prime example is Hitler.
Smart,
Again you did the mistake of wrong comparison. Dawoodi bohras are not paranoid and we dont have any perceived threat as used by the others u hv mentioned.

Smart
Posts: 1388
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 4:01 am

Re: Intresting Article...

#15

Unread post by Smart » Sun Sep 07, 2008 12:04 pm

@tb
If the Bohra priesthood is not paranoid, then:
1. Why do they control all the knowledge and don't allow themselves to be questioned?
2. Why do control all the finances? Why are even orthodox bohras not stakeholders in the community property?
3. Why do they not account for whatever they collect?
4. Why do they pay ransom to likes of Thackeray and Modi?
5. Why did the 51st occupant of the Syedna's position take away all books lying with bohras?

More questions can be asked. But try and answer at least these.

My observation is that not only are they paranoid, they are also delusional. Do you want examples of this?