This is a non-Bohra or anti-Bohra forum

[DisillusionedDB]

It's a step in the right direction for the right of women to drive. The voice of protests was growing and the Saudi authorities had to cut some slack or face rebellion.

[zinger]

.

But do you see us go an poke our noses on other Muslim forums saying "You guys are kaffirs, morons, mushirqs, you will burn in hell etc etc etc."????

Really Zinger then who provoked the riots in Mumbai by publicly doing laanaats on three Khalifas, Who is responsible for the death of innocent Dawoodi Bohras in that riot while the Kothari Master safely escaped to Saify Mahal.

The riots were provoked by people, either bohra, non-bohra or sunni, with vested interests

what the Dai had said, was for meant to be within closed wall. it is a pity someone decided to use it against the community for their own joy and satisfaction

[zinger]

But He does communicate with his creation via different methods and ways...doesn't He?

Yes. He communicates with his creation through his messengers. It is a conundrum for the faithless. If God were to provide unequivocal proof of his existence, life as we know it on earth would cease to exist. Not because God would cease it but because humans would cease it. What will the atheist do if God provides the proof that the atheist is looking for? What will the corrupt do? You think the Dai will let anyone do sajda to him if God were standing next to him? You think he will ride in a 6 horse AC baggi after the proof of God is staring at him in his face? You think the Imam will remain hidden after this proof of God?

more interesting is what would Muslims such as yourself, with the mindset that you have, do. I do sure hope you would repent for what you have said to other Muslims

[fayyaaz]

An atheist is neither looking for nor demanding a Proof of God's existence. He simply operates his life on the basis that there is no God as the religious claim. That is all.

Some atheists,like Richard Dawkins, take the position that Religions, not the existence or non-existence of God per se, are harmful and people must be weaned away from the 'the God delusion', which forms the basis of all of these religions. My position is that he, like Wahabis on an anti-Bohra forum such as this, can expound his arguments within the limits of the Law, but any suggestion by him to use extra-judiciary violence against the believers of any religion should be proscribed. Of course, Dawkins is too wise a scholar to suggest that.

[anajmi]

more interesting is what would Muslims such as yourself, with the mindset that you have, do. I do sure hope you would repent for what you have said to other Muslims

If you are referring to muslims such as yourself, then I have asked you to stop worshipping human idols and instead worship Allah alone, stop bending in front of humans and bend in front of Allah along, stop over the top glorifications of humans and glorify Allah alone, stop running for Maula ni namaz and start running for Allah ni namaz. I do not need to repent for any of that. Everything else that you accuse me of is simply in your heads and not in my posts.

[zinger]

more interesting is what would Muslims such as yourself, with the mindset that you have, do. I do sure hope you would repent for what you have said to other Muslims

If you are referring to muslims such as yourself, then I have asked you to stop worshipping human idols and instead worship Allah alone, stop bending in front of humans and bend in front of Allah along, stop over the top glorifications of humans and glorify Allah alone, stop running for Maula ni namaz and start running for Allah ni namaz. I do not need to repent for any of that. Everything else that you accuse me of is simply in your heads and not in my posts.

Sometimes i wonder if you even listen to the words that come out of your mouth. its obvious you dont. atleast read then!!!

i was referring to Muslims such as yourself

have highlighted it in my original post and my reply so you dont miss it,

[haqniwaat]

Zinger bhai, it is better to leave Anajmi bhai alone than to bump up your bp. His beliefs are his and yours are yours.

[chocoman]

But He does communicate with his creation via different methods and ways...doesn't He?

Yes. He communicates with his creation through his messengers. It is a conundrum for the faithless. If God were to provide unequivocal proof of his existence, life as we know it on earth would cease to exist. Not because God would cease it but because humans would cease it. What will the atheist do if God provides the proof that the atheist is looking for? What will the corrupt do? You think the Dai will let anyone do sajda to him if God were standing next to him? You think he will ride in a 6 horse AC baggi after the proof of God is staring at him in his face? You think the Imam will remain hidden after this proof of God?

whats a really mood off........someone like this guy using his expertise to justify the existence of God!!! such a disgrace!!!

[anajmi]

what the Dai had said, was for meant to be within closed wall.

The prophet (saw) has said - do not do in secret that which you are ashamed to do openly.

Now I know some fool is going to come and ask if we can have sex with our wives openly, but only a fool would ask such a question.

[anajmi]

zinger,

I was referring to these muslims in your sentence,

more interesting is what would Muslims such as yourself, with the mindset that you have, do. I do sure hope you would repent for what you have said to other Muslims

I should've been more specific. After all, I was talking to you, why did I assume you would understand? By the way, that is a rhetorical question. You do not need to answer it.

[zinger]

what the Dai had said, was for meant to be within closed wall.

The prophet (saw) has said - do not do in secret that which you are ashamed to do openly.

Now I know some fool is going to come and ask if we can have sex with our wives openly, but only a fool would ask such a question.

Well since the thought did come to your head first, we can all guess who the fool is!!! You!!! incase i didnt make it clear enough

[zinger]

zinger,

I was referring to these muslims in your sentence,

more interesting is what would Muslims such as yourself, with the mindset that you have, do. I do sure hope you would repent for what you have said to other Muslims

I should've been more specific. After all, I was talking to you, why did I assume you would understand? By the way, that is a rhetorical question. You do not need to answer it.

i have a conceptually solid answer for your rhetorical question. i was not referring to other muslims but Muslims such as yourself

but then again, since you have proven yourself to be a fool, i guess it can be expected of you

[anajmi]

zinger,

Thank you for clarifying. A muslim such as myself has decided to take your advise and repent for what a muslim such as myself has said to a muslim such as myself. However, when a muslim such as myself repented to a muslim such as myself for what a muslim such as myself has said to a muslim such as myself, a muslim such as myself tells a muslim such as myself that what was said by a muslim such as myself to a muslim such as myself did not need to be repented for. So in short, there is no need for a muslim such as myself to repent for what a muslim such as myself says to a muslim such as myself.

[Al Zulfiqar]

at the rate of postings of the atheist fayyaz, who also started this thread, it would be safe to assume that this is 'a non-bohra, atheist forum'.

[ghulam muhammed]

Bro AZ,

I have mentioned this earlier too that he is Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde..... fayyaz/matheist. He is supposedly a mole planted by Kothar but unlike others like Adam etc., he plays a confusing game with a bombastic and high pitch English language. If you observe then you will find that he always comes out in defence of Kothari masters and their distorted versions of Islam and does not believe in defending any other sect of Islam, he lengthens his post by some so called flowery language the bottomline of which is the sole defence of the corrupt clergy and their twisted ideology. But as birds of the same feathers flock together so does he because like a broken record he joins them and sings in chorus "Wahabi" whenever he is cornered and also goes a step further in labelling his and his Kothari master's opponents as anajmi a*** licker, so beware you may be the next in line !!

[Al Zulfiqar]

Bro AZ,

....a*** licker, so beware you may be the next in line !!

oh, if he wants to lick, he is welcome , but my calender presently is quite full. he will have to fix an apptt with my secretary.

[zinger]

zinger,

Thank you for clarifying. A muslim such as myself has decided to take your advise and repent for what a muslim such as myself has said to a muslim such as myself. However, when a muslim such as myself repented to a muslim such as myself for what a muslim such as myself has said to a muslim such as myself, a muslim such as myself tells a muslim such as myself that what was said by a muslim such as myself to a muslim such as myself did not need to be repented for. So in short, there is no need for a muslim such as myself to repent for what a muslim such as myself says to a muslim such as myself.

Thank God a muslim such as myself is not a muslim such as yourself. if a muslim such as myself was anywhere close to a muslim such as yourself, a muslim such as myself would be ashamed to call myself a muslim.

but now that a muslim such as yourself has repented, a muslim such as myself will pray for the wellbeing of a muslim such as yourself

a muslim such as myself wishes a muslim such as yourself a good day

[anajmi]

a muslim such as myself would be ashamed to call myself a muslim.

Good. A muslim such as yourself shouldn't call yourself a muslim. You are better off calling yourself a bohra instead.

[zinger]

Sorry Bro, a muslim such as myself will call a muslim such as yourself and a muslim such as myself a muslim.

And that my friend, is the main difference between us and that is why a muslim such as myself will always be considered a better muslim than a muslim such as yourself

[qutub_mamajiwala]

bro GM and AZ
why r u both against fayyaz.
i have never came across his post defending SMB or STS policies.
if his post are one sided, so is AZs, though i do enjoy it reading sometimes
just a thought, my apologies

[anajmi]

qm,

According to the strict guidelines set by fayyaaz himself, you have now been honored with the title of being the first fayy"aaz" licker.

[Al Zulfiqar]

i have never came across his post defending SMB or STS policies.

brother qm,

fayyaz never defends haramkhori. he only defends the inalienable right of anyone who wants to believe in and follow haramkhors. see the difference?

let me elaborate further in more detail. now let's assume there is a group of hate mongers, say, preaching hate against chinese people. fayyaz will admit that it is wrong, but he will defend these hate-mongers who have the sacred right to free speech. if you dont like it, dont hear it, but let the hate mongers speak, do gaali galoch, laanat and what have you.

on this forum, fayyaz has no objection for anyone following mufatlal or kq or tom, dick and harry. you also cannot object to whatever or whomsoever any idiots and retards worship. its a laissez faire policy. the only time he has an objection is when in his addled brain, a perceived wahabi (OMG!!) jumps into comment.

in conclusion, according to fayyaz's own laissez faire policy, everyone can enjoy that freedom, only so-called wahabi's cannot. bohras, shias, parsees, hindus, xyz, can abuse, curse and indulge in choicest gaali galoch and laanats, even inflict violence on their perceived dushmans, but wahabi's do not and must not have that privilege. here, his logic is not based on any solid reasoning, just blind hatred against a particular breed.

no one here is defending any wahabis. but without proof against any particular forum member of having indulged in physical violence, it is completely erroneous denying the same right of expression to anyone who is against one's views. in this respect, fayyaz is a worse wahabi than the wahabi's themselves.

[fayyaaz]

brother qm,

fayyaz never defends haramkhori. he only defends the inalienable right of anyone who wants to believe in and follow haramkhors. see the difference?

let me elaborate further in more detail. now let's assume there is a group of hate mongers, say, preaching hate against chinese people. fayyaz will admit that it is wrong, but he will defend these hate-mongers who have the sacred right to free speech. if you dont like it, dont hear it, but let the hate mongers speak, do gaali galoch, laanat and what have you.

Correct. That is their inalienable right. As long as they do not perpetrate physical violence against out-groups and they operate within the law, groups should have the freedom to follow their views.

on this forum, fayyaz has no objection for anyone following mufatlal or kq or tom, dick and harry. you also cannot object to whatever or whomsoever any idiots and retards worship. its a laissez faire policy. the only time he has an objection is when in his addled brain, a perceived wahabi (OMG!!) jumps into comment.

in conclusion, according to fayyaz's own laissez faire policy, everyone can enjoy that freedom, only so-called wahabi's cannot. bohras, shias, parsees, hindus, xyz, can abuse, curse and indulge in choicest gaali galoch and laanats, even inflict violence on their perceived dushmans, but wahabi's do not and must not have that privilege. here, his logic is not based on any solid reasoning, just blind hatred against a particular breed.

no one here is defending any wahabis. but without proof against any particular forum member of having indulged in physical violence, it is completely erroneous denying the same right of expression to anyone who is against one's views. in this respect, fayyaz is a worse wahabi than the wahabi's themselves.

I have never, to my knowledge, suggested that Wahhabis on this forum should have their freedom restricted or that they be banned. I have never accused any forum member to have inflicted physical violence. Neither do I object to a Wahhabis right to hold their beliefs except the one I have quote in the following paragraph.

The only objection I have against Wahhabis is their belief that they alone are Pure Muslims and that they are entitled to enforce their beliefs on others, especially Muslims of different persuasion, through violence.

In my posts I have said that former cult-members should be defended against violence from their former colleagues. And that peoples of Iraq and Syria ought to be defended against Wahhabis in the form of ISIS.

If you do not agree with what I have written, you should have the decency to quote from my posts to make your case. If I have erred, I will apologize. If not, then I think you should correct yourself.

[fayyaaz]

Bro AZ,

I have mentioned this earlier too that he is Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde..... fayyaz/matheist. He is supposedly a mole planted by Kothar but unlike others like Adam etc., he plays a confusing game with a bombastic and high pitch English language.

You are entitled to your opinion. But I think my English is quite good.

If you observe then you will find that he always comes out in defence of Kothari masters and their distorted versions of Islam and does not believe in defending any other sect of Islam, he lengthens his post by some so called flowery language the bottomline of which is the sole defence of the corrupt clergy and their twisted ideology. But as birds of the same feathers flock together so does he because like a broken record he joins them and sings in chorus "Wahabi" whenever he is cornered and also goes a step further in labelling his and his Kothari master's opponents as anajmi a*** licker, so beware you may be the next in line !!

Kothari Masters? You mean SMS or SKQ? I have made it clear that I do not follow them. I defend their right to believe and preach, not their religion. I don't care how distorted their version of Islam is or how corrupted their ideology, I still defend their right to believe in it. I am on record as saying that I would defend Ahmadiyyas and other sects proscribed in Muslim countries for their beliefs. I do not defend beliefs of any sect of Islam, only their rights to uphold them without violence and within the law. 'Distorted' and 'Corrupted' are value words. You are entitled to hold such views.

When was I cornered and sang "Wahhabi you or someone else". I have replied to most queries. If not, please provide quotes from my posts.

This is ostensibly a Bohra forum, originally created to address Reform issues. I hardly ever come across discussion addressing Reform. Non-Bohras (those who have left) and anti-Bohras (those still within the community) fight off against followers of SMS and SKQ, not always in a civil manner. I think you know to which of the three groups you belong.

[fayyaaz]

While I defend the right of anyone to hold any religious belief, I would comment on those beliefs with my personal views. And if I consider them 'laudable' or 'ridiculous' I will state so. That will be my personal opinion. Such judgments are always value-based, neither right nor wrong.

Judgments about right and wrong in 'legal sense' , criminal or civil, are best left to the Courts of Law. Moral judgments are everyone's prerogative to make whether they are considered good or bad by others.

[fayyaaz]

We should all be concerned with Justice. A working rule for justice is that a person should pay the society for what they consume and for their actions whether they are legal or illegal. If they are legal, they should pay the agreed price. If they are illegal they should pay the penalties prescribed by the Law.

In the United States, laws and bylaws operate at Federal, State and County levels. These laws are enforced by the Judiciary with instruments at their disposal such as courts, police etc.

In addition, there is freedom to create organizations which operate according to the rules set by members of that organization. These organizations include cults, both religious and non-religious, of various persuasions. People are free to join or leave these organizations which have to operate within the Law. Members can appeal to Legal Authorities if they believe their rights are violated or against the Law and the Cult does not address their issues.

Intra-cult disputes are notoriously difficult to resolve through legal means. Members should leave their cult and resort to protection of the Law against violence by their former cults-members. In any case, cults have rights to exist if their members so wish unless they are shown to be cleanly illegal.

This is an opinion. I believe that it is reasonable and you can apply it to Bohras, who are the primary subject of this forum.

[fayyaaz]

Bro AZ,

I have mentioned this earlier too that he is Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde..... fayyaz/matheist. He is supposedly a mole planted by Kothar but unlike others like Adam etc., he plays a confusing game with a bombastic and high pitch English language.

Leave aside the Kothar connection which seems to be a hallucination of yours unworthy of comment.

I don't know how 'literate' you are meaning how much are you familiar with R. L. Stevenson's masterpiece. Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde is an allegory about two parts of a human 'soul', good and evil. There is always an almost unconscious, deep-seated struggle going on between these two selves of a human being. The novel dramatizes the issue by explicitly separating the two selves through drug-induced transformations.

How did you then apply this allegory to fayyaaz/maethist? Is one Evil and the other Good? Or one a Good atheist and the other an Evil Kothar sycophant? Or if fayyaaz is both an atheist and a Kothari, isn't that a contradiction of sorts? Or did you think that by using the Jekyll/Hyde character in this case will make you look really very clever?

[fayyaaz]

Participants on this forum occasionally mention that they are proud of being Dawoodi Bohras, That is, they are proud of the culture that they represent.

But what do they mean by the word culture?

Culture involves beliefs, specifically religious beliefs, customs, arts, modes of thinking and behaving shared by Bohras. It includes the system of acculturation of succeeding generation of Bohras through development of religious consciousness, in other words, indoctrination during infancy as well as the attendance in Madrassas for successful participation in the community.

In addition, Bohras are identified by their mode of dress, recipes, language and a particular set of interpretations of Islam.

Most important, They are most closely identified with Religious Leadership and the associated religious organization, Dawat-e-Hadiyah. They swear obedience to the requirements set by this leadership to conduct their everyday affairs.

This forum consists primarily to discuss the Religious Leadership. The debate is mostly about those who love the leadership and those who hate it.

I divide participants into 4 groups: Non-Bohras, Ex-Bohras, anti-Bohras and Bohras.

1. Non-Bohras. They are not born Bohras and include Aga Khanis and others. This group is minimal and, apart from rare postings, is almost completely irrelevant.

2. Ex-Bohras. They have left the community and abandoned its religious beliefs. They are here to proselytize to rid Bohras of their religious beliefs. They believe they are the Purest Muslims and seek to convert Bohras to their views mainly by ridiculing their beliefs and insulting and caricaturing the leaders. A small but very vocal number of participants are a part of this group. anajmi is the leader of this group.

3. Anti-Bohras. Majority of participants belong to this group. They swear loyalty to the religious belief of Bohras but do not like the leadership. They are card-carrying members of the community. They are almost as vociferous as ex-Bohras in ridiculing the leaders and caricaturing them. I suspect many of them no longer subscribe to Bohra religious tenets but remain in the community to maintain family and friend circles and to take advantage of participation in community functions and rituals like funerals etc. For that reason, they display a mild to an extreme form of hypocrisy.

4. Bohras. They are the true believers and followers of SMS. Some have an issue regarding the nomination of SMS as the Leader and have a choice about following SMS or his rival SKQ.

This forum then is dominated by ex-Bohras and anti-Bohras. Ex-Bohras, though in minority, are the most prolific contributors and set the agenda for discussion. Bohras represent a tiny minority of participants and are generally shouted at and shouted down by the rest.

In terms of knowledge about the Bohra religion, as opposed to knowledge of the rituals, all these groups display little of it, with a few notable exceptions like Adam among Bohras.

The forum then is about Bohras versus anti-Bohras for the soul of the Fatimid religion which anti-Bohras claim has been hijacked by a corrupt leadership. Ex-Bohras are a spanner in the works derailing almost all discussions by inserting irrelevant Shia vs Sunni/Wahhabi issues.

Anti-Bohras claim that they wish to see 'Reform' but there is no 'civilized' debate about that issue. Bohras simply distrust anti-Bohras and will not entertain any discussion of Reforms with them.

[anajmi]

Actually bohras follow something called bohra religion which took a few things from Islam, but is an idol worshipping cult on whom the most important teachings of Islam (tawheed and shirk) are lost. By the way, cult is not short for "culture". Just in case you didn't know that.

[fayyaaz]

Actually bohras follow something called bohra religion which took a few things from Islam, but is an idol worshipping cult on whom the most important teachings of Islam (tawheed and shirk) are lost. By the way, cult is not short for "culture". Just in case you didn't know that.

This instant comment underlines what I just wrote;

2. Ex-Bohras. They have left the community and abandoned its religious beliefs. They are here to proselytize to rid Bohras of their religious beliefs. They believe they are the Purest Muslims and seek to convert Bohras to their views mainly by ridiculing their beliefs and insulting and caricaturing the leaders. A small but very vocal number of participants are a part of this group. anajmi is the leader of this group.

It does not matter what their religion is. It may be a Hindu/Muslim cult or a cult inspired by the Jews in your view. Their view is different and just as you are entitled to hold a belief about their religion, they too are entitled to hold their view about their religion.