Esoteric sermons of Maulana Ali

If you have questions or want to share knowledge about Dawoodi Bohra religions and rituals please post them here. Any discussion outside the framework of Dawoodi Bohra beliefs and tradition is not allowed. This forum is primarily for sharing of information and knowledge.
qutub_mamajiwala
Posts: 992
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 4:17 am

Re: Esoteric sermons of Maulana Ali

#31

Unread post by qutub_mamajiwala » Tue Nov 29, 2016 8:59 am

anajmi wrote:
How can "seed" testify to anything? Where did this event happen? Why would Allah ask "them" to testify even before humans were created? The system of taawil and haqaaiq aims to answer such questions.




The seed doesn't testify to anything. It is our prior life that is being referred to over here. We go somewhere after we die. We were there before we were born. That is where we testified. If you read surah Mulk it talks about death before life. We have died once before to come to this life and will die again to go back to the Lord.

.

is this the same as punar janam according to hindu philosophy or different?
just from the quranic and academic point of view?



Biradar
Posts: 826
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#32

Unread post by Biradar » Tue Nov 29, 2016 2:51 pm

Humsafar wrote:The Prophet himself never talked about hidden meanings (except for the secrets he confided in Ali).
This is not true.

The Prophet brought the Qur'an, and, in fact, the Qur'an itself indicates that even to prophets like Moses, things may not be obvious at first. This is most apparent in the story of Moses and "a servant among our Servants", i.e. Khidr. (See Q 18:65 onwards). Q 18:65 says that [Khidr was] "... granted a mercy from Us and whom We had taught knowledge from Our Presence".

This is widely regarded as being knowledge of the Unseen, and esoteric knowledge of inner realities of things and of universal truths revealed directly to him, without human teacher. If you think that this "direct knowledge of divine secrets" is not possible, then explain how the Prophet himself was able to reveal the Qur'an, which is the ultimate and greatest esoteric scripture ever revealed. How did the non-verbal, abstract Qur'an descend into the heart of the Prophet, and what was the process of its transformation into the verbal expression into Arabic?

In any case, Khidr tells Moses that "you [Moses] will not be able to bear patiently with me. And how can you bear patiently that which you do not encompass in awareness?" (Q 18:67-68), which indicates that even a prophet like Moses won't be able to understand Khidr's actions (which he actually does not) for he is not aware of the "taweel" of Khidr's actions.

Khidr proceeds to do strange things: punch a hole in a boat, kill a young boy and and not take wages for fixing a wall. Each time, Moses is exasperated by Khidr's actions, and finally Khidr tells Moses that they can no longer travel together, and that Moses must go his own way.

The very fact that Moses takes up with Khidr is strange, but it also indicates that even a prophet like Moses is not aware of things which someone more exalted than himself is. How can we, as ordinary people, believe that there is no deeper significance of say the actions of shaaria or the verses of the Qur'an? Also see Q 12:76 which ends with "over every possessor of knowledge is one [more] knowing."

Taweel and then haqaaiq is meant to provide the deeper significance of things, closing the circle which is started by uncomprehended actions and ends in a state in which one understands divine realties without human intervention.

Now, don't get me wrong. I am not suggesting that one rush to the nearest mad-mullah and take lessons on taweel from him. He is very likely equally ignorant and more interested in what is in your pocket. However, my suggestion is to learn and contemplate.

Humsafar wrote: Biradar asked what is wrong with elitism. It is an attitude which privileges higher learning, class and a certain kind of lifestyle over ordinary folks. A superiority complex, in other words. The majority of people do not have the time to examine life (as Socrates had suggested) and to look down upon them for lack of knowledge or intellectual finesse is elitism. Everything is wrong with it, because it creates divisions and rifts. I'm I guilty of it? Sure, I'm, A flawed human that I am.
I am sorry to say this, but higher learning is a good thing, not something to be ashamed of. In fact, we all should strive for it. In reality, even you are an elite, given your education and eloquent language and understanding of many things. Yes, one should not feel superior and stay humble, but higher learning or intellectual finesse is good thing. We need to have more of it, not less.

I agree that it is not always possible to live an examined life, as Socrates encourages us to do. However, we should try, and not drown ourselves in every day hubbub, forgetting that there is more to life that sleep, work and food. As I keep saying: if one loves dal, chavaal and palidu above all else, then one has no hope for betterment of oneself.

Humsafar wrote: Sorry, I can't participate as often as I would like to, but you can surely expect me back soon. :-)
I am glad you can participate. My goal in this (and also future posts) is to be provocative and make people think. Not that I want to cause fasaad, but I believe sincere exchange of ideas is needed to get to better understanding and perhaps less fanaticism amongst the rotund jamaan eaters and "More-la More-la" shouters.



Humsafar
Posts: 2497
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2000 5:01 am

#33

Unread post by Humsafar » Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:11 pm

Biradar,
I think you misunderstood me. Of course, the Prophet had the knowledge of inner truths and the Quran naturally is a proof of that. What I'm asserting is that he never talked about esoteric stuff or preached it in public life. He was more concerned with the social and political matters of building a just and fair society.

It is not my contention that
"direct knowledge of divine secrets" is not possible, then explain how the Prophet himself was able to reveal the Qur'an"
On the contrary I'm asserting exactly the opposite, that only direct knowledge to divine secrets is possible - what is commonly called as awakening or self-realisation. And I said that to explain that such divine secrets cannot be handed down from Master to Student - except in rare cases and that too not through physical passing of secrets by way of human language, but more by of divine grace, by way of the mere presence of the Master that can enlighten a Student in an instant. There is no sitting down and poring over the book of secrets and explaining the taawil of verses. Divine knowledge does not work that way, at leas this what mystics have reported to us.

The story of Khizr and Moses is interesting, and I did not know of the particulars. Again it illustrates what I've been trying to say, that you can't beat divine knowledge in another person. We each have to carry the cross of our own salvation. Yes, the Masters like Khizr are known to have acted in strange and even cruel ways, and the purpose being that their acts will stun the student, make his mind stop for a moment so that God's light can enter them. The Khizr-Moses story is entirely believable.

About elitism, you again misunderstood me. I'm all for higher learning and refined appreciation of the arts and culture. What I object to is the attitude of elitism which looks down upon the rabble as ignorant and less worthy. I maybe counted among the elite, who knows, but I'm not elitist. At least I would like to think so.



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#34

Unread post by anajmi » Tue Nov 29, 2016 11:59 pm

Each time, Moses is exasperated by Khidr's actions, and finally Khidr tells Moses that they can no longer travel together, and that Moses must go his own way.
The piece that you forgot to mention is that before khidr and Musa (as) part ways, khidr reveals the "taawil" of his actions to Musa and it is available in the Qu'ran for all. The taawil wasn't the end of it all. It was the lessons being taught to Musa (as) and even though Musa(as) displayed impatience he was given the meaning of the taawil, unlike Ali who has taken the taawil of the quran to his grave or has given it to the, as Humsafar calls them, "elite".



Biradar
Posts: 826
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#35

Unread post by Biradar » Wed Nov 30, 2016 1:59 pm

anajmi wrote:
Each time, Moses is exasperated by Khidr's actions, and finally Khidr tells Moses that they can no longer travel together, and that Moses must go his own way.
The piece that you forgot to mention is that before khidr and Musa (as) part ways, khidr reveals the "taawil" of his actions to Musa and it is available in the Qu'ran for all. The taawil wasn't the end of it all. It was the lessons being taught to Musa (as) and even though Musa(as) displayed impatience he was given the meaning of the taawil, unlike Ali who has taken the taawil of the quran to his grave or has given it to the, as Humsafar calls them, "elite".
Not forgot to mention: it is in the Qur'an for all to read. However, I want to caution: the explanations which Khidr gave Musa themselves need explanations! In fact, Khidr's explanations do not make complete sense. In many ways, one can consider this to be a tongue-in-cheek humor of the Qur'an. We see this already when first time Musa can't keep his mouth shut and blurts out "Did you make a hole in it [the boat] in order to drown the people? You have done a monstrous thing!" (Q 18:71) To which Khidr replies, in an amused manner, "Did I not tell you that you would not be able to bear patiently with me?" (Q 18:72).

Take the example of Khidr fixing the wall, and not asking for anything in return even after the townsfolk had not shown Musa and Khidr any hospitality. Khidr's explanation to Musa is that the wall "belonged to two orphan boys in the city, and beneath it as a treasure belonging to them." This treasure was left by their father who wished they find it when they reached maturity. (Q 18:82).

Here, the question is: what really is the treasure, and what is the wall? One explanation here is that the treasure is divine knowledge ("ilm ladduni", which means "knowledge from Us", the Us referring to God himself. Note that this is the word used to describe Khidr's knowledge in Q 18:65). This knowledge is only possible to obtain once one becomes "mature", i.e. the heart is made soft by trials and becomes receptive to it. (See the Surah of Joseph). This is the real meaning of Khidr's act of fixing the wall, i.e. removing the obstructions to obtain this divine knowledge.

Now, in a very subtle and clever way, this act (i.e. fixing the wall) actually reflect's Khidr's actions with Musa. I.e. Musa's outward vision was "buried" by his lack of understanding of the inner dimensions of reality, which Khidr attempted to repair. Does Musa find the hidden treasure left behind by the "father", the Qur'an does not tell.



Biradar
Posts: 826
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#36

Unread post by Biradar » Wed Nov 30, 2016 2:10 pm

Humsafar wrote:Biradar,
I think you misunderstood me.
...

About elitism, you again misunderstood me. I'm all for higher learning and refined appreciation of the arts and culture. What I object to is the attitude of elitism which looks down upon the rabble as ignorant and less worthy. I maybe counted among the elite, who knows, but I'm not elitist. At least I would like to think so.
Thank you for clarifying. Yes, elitism is not good, yet one should strive to be among the elites. I agree that one should not look down upon the "rabble", but, sadly, one is human and one often fails at maintaining such high principles. But one must try. I believe we are in agreement over many things.

It is an interesting question as to why Ali is the central pivot of esoteric interpretation, and not the Prophet himself directly. The explanation is that in each prophetic cycle there is one who reveals the letter of the scripture (i.e. its outward form, the tanzeel) and his waasi who reveals the taweel. In the current cycle, Muhammad is the vessel of revelation, while Ali is the vessel of taweel. However, this does not mean that Muhammad was not a master of inner spiritual knowledge. His extraordinary life itself is an expression of taweel, i.e. within his own person is embodied the inner meaning of the Qur'an.



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#37

Unread post by anajmi » Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:08 pm

However, I want to caution: the explanations which Khidr gave Musa themselves need explanations!
And those will be given to us by who? Ali? Was Ali Khidr's teacher too?
Khidr's explanations do not make complete sense.
They make complete sense. He gives explanation for his acts and that is it. People can look for hidden meaning in why I need to have a cigarette every morning before going for a dump, but there isn't any.
"Did you make a hole in it [the boat] in order to drown the people? You have done a monstrous thing!" (Q 18:71)
Yes and if Musa (as) had remained patient, he might've learned more, but he did not. The explanation given for creating a hole in the boat by Khidr is what? That the king was taking control of all the boats and he would leave a boat with a hole alone since it was the livelihood of the workers. As simple as that. You can look for hidden meaning

As far as the wall is concerned. Did Khidr build a real wall or a wall of taawil? If it was a real wall, then is the "divine knowledge" something that can be protected by an actual wall? Now before you say it was not a real wall, remember Musa (as) asked why they shouldn't get paid for repairing a wall for the people of the village who weren't even good to them. So if it was a real wall, then it was actual treasure. Something that can be protected by an actual wall. It could've been a book with divine knowledge, or it could've been a chest filled with gold coins. But it certainly wasn't hocus pocus. Besides, if khidr hadn't built a wall, the village people would've gotten to the treasure and stolen it from the kids. Can divine knowledge be stolen? Unless it is that possessed by the bohras!!!
This is the real meaning of Khidr's act of fixing the wall, i.e. removing the obstructions to obtain this divine knowledge.
A symbolic gesture of removing obstructions to obtaining divine knowledge would be breaking a wall and not fixing it. But as we know bohras like to build walls around their "divine" knowledge. By the way, what is this divine knowledge?
Does Musa find the hidden treasure left behind by the "father", the Qur'an does not tell.
The hidden treasure was for the two orphans and not Musa (as). Unless the Quran is a cipher and the key to the cipher is with Ali. And Musa (as) might actually not be a prohet (saw) and the red sea didn't actually part and there was no Pharoah but it was all symbolic and it refers to the evil within us. Oh Man!!!



Biradar
Posts: 826
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#38

Unread post by Biradar » Wed Nov 30, 2016 4:01 pm

As I said in the very start: there are some who choose to just chew on the skin and not eat the fruit. These are called goats and sheep, even if they appear human. Sadly, there are plenty of them. These people have taken upon themselves to limit the word of Allah to only what they understand with their limited and ignorant intellects. Obviously, they seem to think they know exactly what Allah is thinking and trying to say in the Qur'an! Meanwhile, the Qur'an itself says that it contains everything in itself, and that its meanings can never be exhausted. See Q 31:27. Enough said.



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#39

Unread post by anajmi » Wed Nov 30, 2016 4:41 pm

Obviously, they seem to think they know exactly what Allah is thinking and trying to say in the Qur'an!
You are joking right? Allah says in the Quran - Build a wall to protect the treasure of the two orphans. That is what Allah is saying in the Quran. Then along comes Biradar and he says no, that is not what Allah is saying, the treasure is actually divine knowledge and the building of the wall is....well whatever you were saying. So who is it again who thinks they know exactly what Allah is thinking and trying to say in the Quran?

Whenever I ask a question to Biradar, like what is this "divine knowledge", what is the meaning of the dot under the ba of bismillah as explained by Ali, or anything else, the only tired response from him is the skin and the fruit. If he mentions the skin and the fruit, that means he has no clue. I mean seriously man. Is that all you can come up with after getting so much tawili knowledge? How about just throwing me a freaking bone? Here is what Ali said about the dot under the ba of bismillah. Is that asking for too much? Either it is or the whole thing is just a big load of bull.

By the way, I am going to purchase that book he recommended on kindle and I am going to analyze every paragraph in that book on this forum. Let us see how much "divine knowledge" we acquire from it.



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#40

Unread post by anajmi » Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:26 pm

Meanwhile, the Qur'an itself says that it contains everything in itself, and that its meanings can never be exhausted. See Q 31:27. Enough said.
Faulty translation. Allah says in the Quran that the words of Allah can never be exhausted. It doesn't say meanings of the Quran can never be exhausted.

Q 31:27
وَلَوْ أَنَّمَا فِي الْأَرْضِ مِن شَجَرَةٍ أَقْلَامٌ وَالْبَحْرُ يَمُدُّهُ مِن بَعْدِهِ سَبْعَةُ أَبْحُرٍ مَّا نَفِدَتْ كَلِمَاتُ اللَّهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ

The relationship between كَلِمَاتُ and اللَّهِ is that of "After of" or mudhaf and mudhaf ilaihi. The words of Allah can never be exhausted.



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#41

Unread post by anajmi » Sat Dec 03, 2016 12:55 pm

I have purchased and started reading the book recommended by Biradar. I am going to nit-pick the hell out of it.

First - It is not free. I can go on and on about it but won't.

Second - In the acknowledgements section, the lady acknowledges everyone and their brothers except....guess who....
The Lord Almighty Allah (swt) himself.



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#42

Unread post by anajmi » Sat Dec 03, 2016 1:18 pm

Found this interesting link while searching for Ali's discussion about the dot under the ba.

http://www.revivingalislam.com/2012/04/ ... ba_21.html

This is the hadith supposedly said by Ali.

و اعلم أن جميع أسرار الله تعالى في الكتب السماوية و جميع أسرار الكتب السماوية في القرآن ، وجميع ما في القرآن في الفاتحة ، وجميع ما في الفاتحة في بسم الله، وجميع ما في بسم الله في باء بسم الله، وجميع ما في باء بسم الله في النقطة التي هي تحت الباء . قال الإمام علي : أنا النقطة التي تحت الباء
And know that all of Allāh’s (تعالى) secrets are in the heavenly books, and all of the secrets of the heavenly books are in the Qur’ān. And all of which is in the Qur’ān is in al-Fātiḥah, and all of which is in al-Fātiḥah is in bismillah, and all of which is in bismillah is in the bā’ of bismillah, and all of which is in the bā’ in bismillah is the dot (nuqṭah) which is under the bā’. Imām `Alī (عليه السلام) said: “I am the dot which is under the bā’”

This is not a ḥadīth of Imām `Alī (عليه السلام), rather this is a saying of Sūfīs that has been attributed to Imām `Alī (عليه السلام). This saying is not found in our classical books of Islām, either Sunnī or Shī`ah.

When looking through the books of both the Shī`ah and Sunnī, you actually find this phrase “I am the dot which is under the Bā’”[1] being attributed to another person and not Imām `Alī (عليه السلام). The earliest book that I could find that has this phrase is a book by the famous Sūfī, al-Ghazālī (b.450/1058-d.505/1111)[2]. In his book Iḥyā’ `Ulūm al-Dīn (Rebirth of the Sciences of Religion), which is said to be authored when he was influenced by the Sūfīs, he states:

وجاء رجل إلى الشبلي رحمه الله فقال له ما أنت وكان هذا دأبه وعادته فقال أنا النقطة التي تحت الباء
A man came to al-Shiblī[3], may Allāh have mercy on him, and he said to him, ‘Who are you?’ and this was his habit and custom. So he (al-Shiblī) said: ‘I am the dot (nuqṭah) which is under the bā’’[4]



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#43

Unread post by anajmi » Sat Dec 03, 2016 1:28 pm

Someone's explanation about Ali's above claim about being the dot under the Ba. Mind you, this is not Ali's explanation. I am still trying to find out what he explained the whole night.

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/180 ... bismillah/

The writer makes a couple of good points in the beginning, but then takes a lot of liberties with the words of Allah.



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#44

Unread post by anajmi » Sat Dec 03, 2016 1:35 pm

Someone commented somewhere

HERE IS THE POETRY OF SHAUKAT RAZA SHAUKAT SAHAB ON THIS

mera ALI ba ka nukta hai Baa Hukme Kibriya,
Taake Iss ko mazhare zaat e jalli kehna Padhe
Iss Liye "Bismallah" wajib ker diya pehle her kaam se
taake jo bashar Allah Kahe, pehlay ALI KEHNA PADHE

If this is not pure Shirk than I need to find the taawili meaning of shirk.



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#45

Unread post by anajmi » Sat Dec 03, 2016 2:17 pm

Some beautiful sayings attributed to Ali (ra)

Ali said - the world is a place of barren deceptions and ephemeral embellishments. It is a fast disappearing shade and a keeling support. It destroys whomsoever wants more of it, and harms any who try to benefit from it. How many place their trust in it, depend upon it. But it oppresses them with its bonds, binds them with its tethers, overcomes them with its strangling rope, and enmeshes them in its cords.

Ali said - Blessed are the people who reject worldliness, who place their desires in the hereafter. They takes God's earth as bed, its dust as bedding, its water as perfume, the book as garment, and prayer as robe. They sever all bonds with the world just as the Messiah, son of Mary did.

And then these are some other words attributed to Ali

I found that endurance thereon was wiser. So I adopted patience although there was pricking in the eye and suffocation (of mortification) in the throat. I watched the plundering of my inheritance till the first one went his way but handed over the Caliphate to Ibn al-Khattab after himself.

If I speak out they would call me greedy towards power but if I keep quiet they would say I was afraid of death. It is a pity that after all the ups and downs (I have been through). By Allah, the son of Abu Talib2 is more familiar with death than an infant with the breast of its mother. I have hidden knowledge, if I disclose it you will start trembling like ropes in deep wells.


Wouldn't that be good? Give them the hidden knowledge so they come back to the right path trembling with fear!!!

By Allah I have been continually deprived of my right, with others being given preference to me, from the day the Prophet died till today.



Biradar
Posts: 826
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#46

Unread post by Biradar » Mon Dec 05, 2016 2:57 pm

Obviously, the enemies of Ali have their inward eye blinded, and inner hearts sealed. Hence, they are unable to see or understand. I don't have anything more to add for such people.



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#47

Unread post by anajmi » Sat Dec 10, 2016 4:49 pm

"Enemies of Ali" is a key word used by the idol worshippers when they have no answers to explain their stupidity. I am posting not my words but Ali's own words (as per the idol worshippers of Ali) where he is demonstrating his own contradictory personalities. Unless of course we need taawil to explain Ali's words too.

By the way, I browsed through the book and found no taawil anywhere of any ayah of the Quran. And I have also demonstrated that the "dot of ba" story has been written and spread by the idol worshippers of Ali.

What have you shown lately?



kimanumanu
Posts: 607
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2014 2:16 pm

#48

Unread post by kimanumanu » Sun Dec 11, 2016 8:38 pm

anajmi wrote:
Each time, Moses is exasperated by Khidr's actions, and finally Khidr tells Moses that they can no longer travel together, and that Moses must go his own way.
The piece that you forgot to mention is that before khidr and Musa (as) part ways, khidr reveals the "taawil" of his actions to Musa and it is available in the Qu'ran for all. The taawil wasn't the end of it all. It was the lessons being taught to Musa (as) and even though Musa(as) displayed impatience he was given the meaning of the taawil, unlike Ali who has taken the taawil of the quran to his grave or has given it to the, as Humsafar calls them, "elite".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYs8rVtIzKI



Biradar
Posts: 826
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#49

Unread post by Biradar » Mon Dec 12, 2016 4:13 pm

kimanumanu wrote:
anajmi wrote:
The piece that you forgot to mention is that before khidr and Musa (as) part ways, khidr reveals the "taawil" of his actions to Musa and it is available in the Qu'ran for all. The taawil wasn't the end of it all. It was the lessons being taught to Musa (as) and even though Musa(as) displayed impatience he was given the meaning of the taawil, unlike Ali who has taken the taawil of the quran to his grave or has given it to the, as Humsafar calls them, "elite".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYs8rVtIzKI
It is interesting that Hussain BS (brother of STF) is talking about the same verses we have been discussing here. He does not give the taweel meaning of these verses, though, but only makes the case that the zaahir meaning can not be the correct one.

This is exactly the point I was making: the "taweel" which Khidr gives to Musa needs taweel to understand. This is basically a feature of parts of the Qur'an in that it displays layers, in which the external actions have an external "logical" meaning which in reality is not what is meant at all.

Extreme examples of such verses are the opening verse of many surahs, i.e. the unconnected letters found at the start. For example, Quran 2:1 is "Alif, Lam, Meem". What do these mean? Are they meaningless? Do they have a mundane meaning? Are they initials of the scribe? What else?



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#50

Unread post by anajmi » Mon Dec 12, 2016 10:05 pm

That was a fantastic video. My eyes have been opened. The gentleman has clearly explained the taawil of the ayah of the Quran....... wait..... actually he did not. He says there is taawil. The Imam of the time explained why there is taawil but when asked what is the taawil, the Imam smiled and said "another time". Well, what else do I expect of Bohra Imams? Another 11 minutes of my life wasted searching for bohra taawil.

First, the explanation about why the zaahir meaning is inapplicable is wrong. The gentleman talks about shariah not allowing killing people because of disobedience to parents. Whose Shariah are we talking about? The shariah has been different during different times and different prophets. Are we talking about the "Aalim" or Khidr (as) following our shariah? Second, Musa(as)'s impatience and anger as implied in the Quran.. what was that for if there was no innocent killing involved? Sorry your taawil has too many holes.

Coming to Alif, Laam, Meem. If any of your Imams has explained the taawili meaning of Alif, Laam and Meem please share.



Biradar
Posts: 826
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#51

Unread post by Biradar » Mon Dec 12, 2016 11:01 pm

anajmi wrote: The gentleman talks about shariah not allowing killing people because of disobedience to parents. Whose Shariah are we talking about? The shariah has been different during different times and different prophets.
This is a very good point. (I know, I am not supposed to agree with anajmi, but sometimes ....). That was exactly my question as in Leviticus it is clearly stated that "For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him." (Leviticus 20:9). This is also repeated in Deuteronomy and elsewhere. Hence, it is possible that this was a perfectly fine thing to do during the time of Musa. However, the incident of meeting Khidr (who Hussain BS does not name [and neither does the Qur'an BTW]) is supposed to have occurred before the prophethood of Musa, and in that case one would need to examine the pre-Moses Old Testament prophets to see their views on this.

It is also interesting that Hussain BS does not actually explain the taweel significance of this verse. At first I thought he would say something about this, but he left it out. What an anti-climax to those waiting with baited breath!

However, the earlier video in this series did give a short explanation of part of another verse. i.e. Qur'an 21:30, where he explains the word "water" as divine knowledge and "life" as eternal life (i.e. in the hereafter). Hence, the interpretation that "we [Allah] have created all eternal life by divine knowledge". Of course, the ones to give this divine knowledge (i.e. bring one into the eternal life) are those who are "firmly grounded in knowledge" (see Q 3:7), as they, besides Allah himself, are the ones who know taweel.

Often, the key to taweel interpretation is to come up with a dictionary of Qur'anic terms and their corresponding taweel meanings. For example, often "water" is "knowledge". This key varies based on interpretation being sought. Larger segments of text (i.e longer than a word) also often have corresponding taweel meanings. At first this seems rather arbitrary, but there is a very specific logic behind this.

Incidentally, I am overall pretty happy with this new series from FD. At least they are giving a glimpse into the world of Ismaili and Tayebbi Qur'an interpretation, even if they do not fully reveal things openly. It allows interested parties to understand the basic foundations and then seek more learning through self-study or joining some sabaq/classes.



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#52

Unread post by anajmi » Tue Dec 13, 2016 11:07 pm

However, the earlier video in this series did give a short explanation of part of another verse. i.e. Qur'an 21:30, where he explains the word "water" as divine knowledge and "life" as eternal life (i.e. in the hereafter). Hence, the interpretation that "we [Allah] have created all eternal life by divine knowledge". Of course, the ones to give this divine knowledge (i.e. bring one into the eternal life) are those who are "firmly grounded in knowledge" (see Q 3:7), as they, besides Allah himself, are the ones who know taweel.
Sorry, but that doesn't make much sense to me. All knowledge in Allah's possession is divine knowledge. He doesn't have any other kind of knowledge. So if he created all things, they are obviously created by divine knowledge. Eternal life, life on this earth any other kind of life, if it has been created by Allah, then it has been created with divine knowledge.

Now we come to the ones to give this divine knowledge "those who are firmly grounded in knowledge". What kind of knowledge are they firmly grounded in? Divine Knowledge? How can they be firmly ground in divine knowledge if they were given divine knowledge after they were firmly grounded in knowledge.

Bohras quote 3:7 wrong and on purpose choose not to mention a certain part of that ayah which says that only those who have darkness in their hearts dwell on the taawil of ayahs. And the portion quoted by Bridar is quoted wrong. It says that only Allah knows taawil of ayahs and those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say we believe in it. Doesn't mean those who are firmly grounded in knowledge also know taawil. It means those who are firmly grounded in knowledge, say they believe in it. Besides, we know that no Imam has ever given any taawil of any ayah. No one can even show me the taawil of any ayah as per Ali, the supposed greatest taawiler of all. The translation of water into divine knowledge isn't taawil. It's just wishful thinking and imagination gone wild.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the translation that all life is created with water. God could've simply said created with divine knowledge instead. This isn't National Treasure - Taawil of the Quran - starring Nicolas Cage!!!



Biradar
Posts: 826
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#53

Unread post by Biradar » Wed Dec 14, 2016 1:51 am

anajmi wrote: Sorry, but that doesn't make much sense to me. All knowledge in Allah's possession is divine knowledge. He doesn't have any other kind of knowledge. So if he created all things, they are obviously created by divine knowledge. Eternal life, life on this earth any other kind of life, if it has been created by Allah, then it has been created with divine knowledge.
The meaning of "divine knowledge" here is that of knowledge which is deeper than the mere surface meanings of verses and external reality. What is meant, for example, is the significance of certain actions (say the way of praying namaaz). Perhaps a more clear term would be "deeper knowledge", something one can only attain on recognition of one's own limits and the seeking out of the one authorized to teach. Again, like Musa attaches himself to Khidr to learn from him.

anajmi wrote: Bohras quote 3:7 wrong and on purpose choose not to mention a certain part of that ayah which says that only those who have darkness in their hearts dwell on the taawil of ayahs. And the portion quoted by Bridar is quoted wrong. It says that only Allah knows taawil of ayahs and those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say we believe in it.
Obviously, those who are firmly grounded in knowledge are not the ones who have darkness in their hearts, and hence the omission.

The location of the stop is a matter of controversy. The placement of the stop in the ayat is disputed. It is true that in the printed version of the Qur'an there is a compulsory stop at the point which you say. However, the ayah does not end there and is actually a continuos sequence of words. According to Shia there is not stop where you say. Hence, the knowledge of taweel is with Allah and those firmly grounded in knowledge. In fact, in many places in the Qur'an Allah says that he has granted special knowledge to those he chooses. We saw an example in the incident we are discussing here, i.e. between Musa and the "aalim" (i.e. Khidr). Also, such special abilities are granted by Allah, for example, to Yusuf as is evident in Q 12:6 which says "And thus will your Lord choose you and teach you the interpretation of narratives ...". The exact word in this verse for "interpretation" is "taweel". Hence, obviously, taweel can not simply be for Allah as here Allah clearly states that he has taught taweel to Yusuf too. Many other examples can be adduced, including of the Prophet.

BTW: If you examine any complete tafsir of the Qur'an you will notice that every single verse is throughly explained. So, if the meaning of some verses was only with Allah, how come the interpreter who has composed the tafsir explained every single verse?

An interesting point: if one gets a chance, one should here a recitation by a Sunni qaari and a Shia qaari of this same verse. The former will stop at the place anajmi has pointed out, while the latter will not stop there. Such subtle things are rather interesting as they change the meaning of the verse completely. Perhaps all these mysteries will be finally clear once one reaches the divine presence. For now, we must do our best to make sense the best we can.




anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#54

Unread post by anajmi » Sat Dec 17, 2016 12:01 pm

The meaning of "divine knowledge" here is that of knowledge which is deeper than the mere surface meanings of verses and external reality.
Then do not refer to it as divine knowledge. Do you know the reason why you refer to it as divine knowledge? To make your own selves divine. That is utter blasphemy. No one has divine knowledge save the Divine Himself.
Obviously, those who are firmly grounded in knowledge are not the ones who have darkness in their hearts, and hence the omission.
Those who are firmly grounded in knowledge would not dwell on Taawil. Hence those who dwell on Taawil cannot be firmly grounded in knowledge. Hence we come to the "full stop". If the ayah is read in its entirety, it becomes clear where the full stop should be.
According to Shia there is not stop where you say. Hence, the knowledge of taweel is with Allah and those firmly grounded in knowledge.
I have said it many times on this board. The Shia seek out interpretations and taawil in a way that elevates the status of humans to that of the divine. Hence the moving around of the full stop and the quotation of half ayahs, half hadiths and half truths.

The examples you quote are also not valid. The narratives referred to in 12:6 are the dreams. Yusuf (as) had the ability to interpret dreams.

Also, all the taawil that these gentlemen possessed has been discussed in the Quran. And that taawili knowledge is available to all. Where is the taawili knowledge of the Shia? Is there taawil of a single ayah of the Quran as per Ali available in the Nahjul Balagha?



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#55

Unread post by anajmi » Sat Dec 17, 2016 12:19 pm

And the reason bohra clergy refuses to put down the taawil in writing because they don't want to be called out on it. They have been fooling bohras with their taawil for decades. None of the bohras are actually firmly grounded in knowledge and hence it is really easy to fool them. For example,

look at this post by porus many years ago

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7763&p=104408&hilit=rivers#p104408

This is what he says.
Let me give you one example of this taawl from him. In describing the four rivers of paradise mentioned in the Quran, he said that one of the rivers points to the chain of Duaat Mutlaqeen. This is oblique and personal interpretation (tawil with lower case t). An intellectual scholar would put this up to his peers for comment. However, he puts it to his followers who are not in position to discuss it with him. And who is to say, who wrote that?

This is also from porus. viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1339&p=22858&hilit= ... ers#p22858
47:15 (My, almost literal,translation)

Paradise that has been promised for the devout (muttaqun) is like one in which there are rivers of water which never goes stale, rivers of milk whose taste never changes, rivers of wine which is delicious for the drinkers, rivers of purified honey...

**************

From Sayedna Muhammad Burhanuddin

The baatin of the four rivers mentioned in this ayat is that they refer to Nabi Muhammad, Wasi Ali, Imams and the Dais.

The first type of river refers to Nabi's Shariat, which is always fresh. Some people object and ask how 1400 years old shariat can be as fresh today. Nabi's sahriat will remain fresh till Qayamat. In our own time, Shariat is holding sway. That is because of all shariats, rasulullah's shariat is supreme. Just like his family (aal) is supreme, in that all the supreme beings (Muhammad, Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Husain) were present on earth at the same time. That is because Allah has declared these five pure. Those who do not follow these five are indeed in grave loss.

The second type of river, that of milk, refers to the knowledge of Wasi, Ali ibn Abi Talib. This is the knowledge of taawil. Tanzil (Quran) cannot be understood without taawil. Tanzil is zaahir and taawil is baatin. Sayedna Taher Saifuddin was asked if Imams were mentioned in the Quran. He pointed to ayat 'Kul shay ahshaynahu fi imamin mubeen'. People objected and said that means 'clear writing'. Sayedna asked what the original word in Arabic is. Ali is the repository of taawil

Once Rasulullah was seated amongst his companions, while Ali was cleaning his (Rasulullah's) shoes. He asked them if anyone among them could instruct taawil? Awwal (Abu Bakr), haughtily asked if it was him. Rasul said no. Thani (Umar) asked if it was him. Rasul again said no. The third (Usman), out of shame, did not ask if it was him but he asked Rasul to point out who it might be. Rasul said "It is he who cleans my shoes. It is Ali. Taawil in this is that Ali is the one who will uncover the inner meaning of tanzil (quran), which I have brought to you. Thus Muhammad without Ali and Ali without Muhammad canot be. Both Tanzil and taawil are essential."

The milk whose taste never changes also refers to steadfastness of Ali through innumerable tests which befell him during his life in order to protect Islam.

The third type of river is the river of seeds or source from which imbibers will experience bliss. (It does not mean any alcoholic drink. That would not be in the character of the Quran). The meaning of khamr is not wine, but khameerah, which means source. Source is Fatima and the river of source is the imams which came from her seed. In connection with this ayat, Rasulullah called Imam Husain "lazzatin lil-shabireen", one with the most delicious drink.

The fourth type of river is the river of Duaat Mutlaqeen. It is through them that Shariat of Rasululla is kept pure. The Dais are, in effect, mustawda Imams (Mustawda means appointed as trustee).

***************
So you see, as I said before, bohra taawil is for the elevation of the human status to that of the divine. Was this the taawil of this ayah as per Ali (ra)? Or was this created by the bohra Dai?



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#56

Unread post by anajmi » Sun Dec 18, 2016 12:28 pm

BTW: If you examine any complete tafsir of the Qur'an you will notice that every single verse is throughly explained. So, if the meaning of some verses was only with Allah, how come the interpreter who has composed the tafsir explained every single verse?
There is a difference between tafseer and taawil and I am sure I don't have to explain the difference. Forget about the interpreter, the first people who were taught the Quran were those that already knew Arabic. You could ask the same question about the Arabic version of the Quran. If only Allah knew their meanings then how did they understand it?

That is a good question. Consider for example people Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, who apparently had no clue about the taawil cause the prophet (saw) never explained it and Ali never would, considering they were his enemies number 1, 2 and 3.

So what happened when they heard the ayah 21:30?

أَوَلَمْ يَرَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا أَنَّ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضَ كَانَتَا رَتْقًا فَفَتَقْنَاهُمَا وَجَعَلْنَا مِنَ الْمَاء كُلَّ شَيْءٍ حَيٍّ أَفَلَا يُؤْمِنُونَ

Did they dwell on the meaning of the ayah? Did they question what the meaning of "water" is over here? Or were they just so firmly grounded in knowledge that they knew this was divine inspiration and not to question the word of the Almighty? Of course this ayah would've made them think (cause Allah orders us to ponder over his ayahs). Every living thing made out of water? And then elsewhere Allah says man is made from clay and then from dust. How is that possible they might've thought. But since they were firmly grounded in knowledge, they believed in it. Now of course we know that "Every living thing is made out of water" is a valid statement.

Similarly, if there are ayahs that we have to ponder over, then do that. But do not dwell on the taawil. The truth of the word of the Quran is crystal clear when you look at the dawoodi bohra clergy. They dwell on the taawil and they have darkness in their hearts.



fayyaaz
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2014 5:40 pm

#57

Unread post by fayyaaz » Mon Dec 19, 2016 9:30 pm

anajmi wrote: Now of course we know that "Every living thing is made out of water" is a valid statement.
Anyone who has the benefit of a high school education knows that the primary component of life is Carbon. Water, as every one knows, is Hydrogen and Oxygen only. So the statement is not valid.

On the other hand, water with impurities may contain Carbon. So the taawil is that Human Beings were made out of unclean water. That is why they have the propensity for deviousness as well as stupidity as our resident Wahabi amply demonstrates.



fayyaaz
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2014 5:40 pm

#58

Unread post by fayyaaz » Mon Dec 19, 2016 10:29 pm

Taawil comes from God who informs His chosen ones about it. This Taawil is specific. It is not a creation of human beings. Human interpretations of Quran are ordinary taawil. They can be many versions of it and are often the origins of disputes.

Taawil that God lets know to whoever He wills may or may not be shared with others in words but may become apparent in actions which are interpreted by other humans.

Nabi Yusuf, in revealing Taawil behind the dreams of his fellow prisoners, had another purpose in mind. He wanted to impress upon them the lesson of Tawhid. In fact, Yusuf does not to claim to have created the Taawil but explicitly says, Dhaalikuma mimma allamani rabbi. That is what my Lord has revealed to me. That is in verse 37 of Surah Yusuf.

As far as I know, Dai has no access to Taawil of God. He uses his own taawil. Prophet Muhammad clearly had access to it and he may have shared it with Ali, as the legend has it, by God's command.

So the "well-grounded" in knowledge refers to God's chosen messengers and prophets. They are the ones God has chosen for the knowledge.



Biradar
Posts: 826
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#59

Unread post by Biradar » Tue Dec 20, 2016 12:59 pm

fayyaaz wrote: So the "well-grounded" in knowledge refers to God's chosen messengers and prophets. They are the ones God has chosen for the knowledge.
Welcome back, fayyaaz. Just be careful now: if you say something sarcastic or criticize, you will be called a fanatic and promoting an "uncivil environment". This board has become full of delicate snowflakes, and your robust way of arguing may trigger someone. Then they will need play-doh, bubble machine, and therapy to recover. You have been warned.

Coming to those "well-grounded in knowledge". Anajmi would have us believe that these are the ones who simply say "We believe all of it; and all of it is from our Lord" and nothing more. So, for Anajmi, it is simply a matter of affirming a belief and not knowledge per-se. Hence, people who follow his school have made little progress, and, in fact, have taken the world backwards with their jahiliyaat and ignorance.

Of course, your point that the basis of life is carbon is not something which the willfully ignorant can parse. Perhaps they will catch up after another 1400 years.

What I find so strange in all this is that people are so quick to ascribe limits on God's word. They are hell bent in proving that the words in the Qur'an mean only what one can learn from a dictionary. It is almost that they are ascribing their own ignorance and illiteracy to Allah himself. Sad, but that is the conclusion one comes to, seeing all these walls of text trying to prove that the Qur'an means nothing more than its literal meaning.



kimanumanu
Posts: 607
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2014 2:16 pm

#60

Unread post by kimanumanu » Tue Dec 20, 2016 4:14 pm

I think the point anajmi is making about glorification of a human is valid though particularly if you see the current day status of the Dai in our community. I had posted the article about nass in another thread and it did make me question a fair bit all the stuff we get told in waaz about our imams when you read how, at least to an external eye, the whole succession looked very political and economic driven. I personally find it harder and harder to accept that these are really the so called chosen ones or ones "firmly grounded in knowledge". On the other hand, yes I also agree that the meanings behind the verses in the Quran cannot just be literal. But the whole concept that then gets built around it and the elevation of a mortal being to levels beyond even the prophet himself I have to admit I am finding more and more difficult to digest. Maybe it's my snowflake nature, as Biradar kindly puts it, or perhaps am just getting on now and my tolerance for such levels of intelligence is on the wane!