I know that in those two at least I have a ready audience.
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
how dare you lecture me, you dimwit? you were probably not even born before i took on the first goonda amil and made him piss in his hijaar. as for your ill-informed 'assumptions', the less said about them the better. anajmi is not my pal in the sense that i am not his supporter. he has his views and i have mine. with these types of prejudicial comments, you are finally showing your real, ugly face. where is that false mask of scholarly analysis and categorisation now? had to drop it when cornered?fayyaaz wrote:AZ,
Control yourself. Unlike your pal, Yazid-loving Wahhabi, anajmi, I have not expressed any personal agenda about Reform of the Bohras. All I am saying is that I would leave them alone.
Any proofhese are the ones who wanted me restricted on this forum.
Hey, I am the creator of these categories. I stand beyond them. That is like being God. He is the Creator but He is not of the Creation.SBM wrote:Bravo Fayyaz
Which category would you fit yourself in
Birader,Biradar wrote:Humsafar:
Yes, you have raised many interesting points and I would agree with a lot of what you say. In essence, I agree that there is a difference between what is possible in principal (egalitarian ideas in Quran) v/s what actually happens in practice (ISIS). This struggle continues and will continue. However, the existence of ISIS should not make us despair of the Quran itself.
In the same vein, the Fatimid and Ismaili doctrine are egalitarian. One only needs to read the Ikhwan as-Safa, or parts of it available now in libraries in translations, to understand this. Yes, Muffadul Saifuddin is a terrible person, who can't compare with this vision, but that does not invalidate the ideas laid out in the original literature. I feel that this schism in the Bohras is actually a natural thing, something which will happen every few hundred years, to purge the system of the accumulated cancer. DMMS is the current cancer, and during the time of SMB (RA) this cancer had already started. I am not sure who is to blame, but it is clear that the policies of the last few decades resulted in extremism, basically destroying the secular and liberal outlook of the community. Fanaticism has risen to immense levels. Perhaps part of this the result or counterpoint to modernity. Perhaps people need something to balance the loss of certainty that has come with rise of science and technology.
I feel that the reformists did lay out a foundation in which one could at least imagine a resistance to the tyranny of the Kothar. However, honestly, what S Qutbuddin did in less than a year, no one could have imagined. Ever. He has essentially, in his quiet but persistent way, laid out a path which is different than the path to hell which DMMS and his infernal mentors laid out. He is not a fanatic. I mean, his own daughter just wears a scarf and not the ridiculous rida. He is all about education, upliftment and consultation, and quietism. For one, I support him and his movement, as I personally feel that he may have something unique and new to offer. However, it may just be a mirage. Time will tell.
Meanwhile, I now agree more with fayyaaz that this board is infested with anti-Bohras. Oz is one more to that list. He claims this and that make him believe that bohras and heretics. He says "… Ismailis were in trouble due to the suspicion of heretic practices". I mean, how much more can a person be a self-hating Bohra? He is the worst fifth-columnist, a traitor and a self-hating person. I have no respect for such people, who pick and choose anti-Muslim and anit-Shia/Fatmid/Isamaili literature to bolster their own self-hatred. Freud would say this is a form of rebellion against ones father, and I wonder how many of these self-hating, anti-Borhas have messed up relationships with their fathers.
In any case, I am at least glad that people are arguing and talking in a decent manner, rather than the nasty invectives we have seen in the last few months here. Hopefully, we can raise the level of discourse and learn from each other. A part of this to ignore and not rile up the trolls, and let this become a true Bohra forum and not some playground for anti-Bohras.
It is not an elephant, actually. During the time of satar, i.e. when the Imam is in seclusion, one must follow the da'i. That is it. Allah has given you intellect. You must use that to choose between right and wrong. Imam can't hand hold you during these times. Otherwise, free-will would be pointless. Which da'i you choose (which you must to remain a Bohra) is up to you. I understand that some small fraction of reformist don't believe that the da'i al-mutlaq exists any more. They can't be called Bohras. However, you yourself, and bulk of the progressives, from what I understand, accept the office of da'i al-mutlaq. So, the question is: who do you consider is the rightful da'i at present? No need to beat around the bush, just pick one. As I said, you don't need to follow him 100%, just like you did not follow SBM (RA), even though in principal you accepted he was da'i al-mutlaq.Humsafar wrote:Birader,Biradar wrote:Humsafar:
…..
You have addressed everything but the elephant in the room.
The belief in God and Angles is an abstract belief, they are abstract concepts. The belief in Prophethood is not abstract because the Prophet existed. The belief in Imamat is not abstract because Imams have historically existed, they are flesh and blood entities. They are, or supposed to be, concrete realities. Further, the belief is about Imams, not hidden Imams. Hidden Imams are oddities, if not the very antithesis of the premise and promise on which the whole structure of Imamat is based. That premise and promise is that there will always be a divinely appointed Imam to guide the faithful. That whole belief structure must come into question when that Imam is missing or is in hiding.fayyaaz wrote:Humsafar,
If Imam is a problem to you what about God? He is hidden and the faithful believe all sorts of things about Him. What about angels? Nobody has seen them but belief in them is mandatory for a Muslim. Just as you let belief in God and angels be I suggest you let belief in hidden Imam be. It is not a crime or illegal to believe in a God, angels or hidden Imams.
The only thing you should be concerned with is if you are losing money in all this. If you are, then do not pay. Why does what Khuzema, Mufaddal and their followers believe bother you? Let them be. Go to sleep. Be happy.
Humsafar wrote:The belief in God and Angles is an abstract belief, they are abstract concepts. The belief in Prophethood is not abstract because the Prophet existed. The belief in Imamat is not abstract because Imams have historically existed, they are flesh and blood entities. They are, or supposed to be, concrete realities. Further, the belief is about Imams, not hidden Imams. Hidden Imams are oddities, if not the very antithesis of the premise and promise on which the whole structure of Imamat is based. That premise and promise is that there will always be a divinely appointed Imam to guide the faithful. That whole belief structure must come into question when that Imam is missing or is in hiding.fayyaaz wrote:Humsafar,
If Imam is a problem to you what about God? He is hidden and the faithful believe all sorts of things about Him. What about angels? Nobody has seen them but belief in them is mandatory for a Muslim. Just as you let belief in God and angels be I suggest you let belief in hidden Imam be. It is not a crime or illegal to believe in a God, angels or hidden Imams.
The only thing you should be concerned with is if you are losing money in all this. If you are, then do not pay. Why does what Khuzema, Mufaddal and their followers believe bother you? Let them be. Go to sleep. Be happy.
The question is are you losing any money on this? If not then, why poke your nose. Let us be. And actually if anyone it should be you who must go to sleep and be happy. You're as relevant to this forum as a matchstick in hell.
My friend fayyaaz: I think you are mistaken here. There are two aspects to an individual's life. An inner one, and an outer one. The inner one may be weak or non-existent in many people, but it is not in all. For example, many people do fast, pray, give zakaat, go to hadjj, etc. Yes, they may be doing this ritualistically, but it may give them inner peace and contentment. I have personally felt this many times. Of course, religion does not have a monopoly on these "inner revelations", as one may put it. Art, science and mathematics (among others) can also elicit such feelings.fayyaaz wrote:Allah, Quran and the Hidden Imam are not all that relevant to Bohras just like they are not really relevant for most Muslims. I have explained all that before.
Yes they may invoke Allah and Quran in their lives but purely as linguistic expressions. What appears relevant are rituals like namaaz, reciting the Quran without understanding, roza, hajj, visiting the cemeteries etc.
Ancient Muslim literature including Ismaili literature is even less relevant to them. Yes, Mullas may quote from them and the faithful may listen but that is just more of a ritual. It is just like a Bohra Mulla reciting a long prologue in non-understandable Arabic to his lisaan-e-daawat bayans.
….
These have to be identified in real life out there and begin to join together for that purpose. These Bohras may discuss the relevance of Ismaili literature to their efforts just like Ikhawanus Safa did in the medieval times. Ignorant anti-Bohras are totally irrelevant to that effort.
Part of my answer you will find in my response to fayyaz's post. Your response "During the time of satar, i.e. when the Imam is in seclusion, one must follow the da'i." is quite facetious. The question is not who you should follow in the time of satar. The question is why satar at all. You cannot have it both ways: That you accept Imamat as the central pillar of faith and then be Okay with the central character of that faith missing in action.Biradar wrote:It is not an elephant, actually. During the time of satar, i.e. when the Imam is in seclusion, one must follow the da'i. That is it. Allah has given you intellect. You must use that to choose between right and wrong. Imam can't hand hold you during these times. Otherwise, free-will would be pointless. Which da'i you choose (which you must to remain a Bohra) is up to you. I understand that some small fraction of reformist don't believe that the da'i al-mutlaq exists any more. They can't be called Bohras. However, you yourself, and bulk of the progressives, from what I understand, accept the office of da'i al-mutlaq. So, the question is: who do you consider is the rightful da'i at present? No need to beat around the bush, just pick one. As I said, you don't need to follow him 100%, just like you did not follow SBM (RA), even though in principal you accepted he was da'i al-mutlaq.Humsafar wrote: Birader,
You have addressed everything but the elephant in the room.
Yes, that big elephant must be addressed, too but here we are talking a particular, specific article of faith that entails concrete action. God is an abstract entity.Biradar wrote:Now, lets ask the question: where is Allah when millions were being slaughtered in the world-wars, then in Gulags and then the several genocides of the last century. Why could Allah not stop this? That is a very big elephant, which needs addressing first. Personally, I don't expect anyone but us to solve out problems. But, you seem to want a savior. You will keep waiting, as people have for millennia.
Biradar BhaiDuring the time of satar, i.e. when the Imam is in seclusion, one must follow the da'i. That is it. Allah has given you intellect
And how do you propose to do that since one Dai is living Yazidi life style and other is too weak to do anything and your friend thinks this forum and progressives are insignificant to make dentBut he is not around at present, and so we must choose what to do in his absence, rather than lament and wring our hands in helplessness.
My friend abde53:abde53 wrote:Biradar BhaiDuring the time of satar, i.e. when the Imam is in seclusion, one must follow the da'i. That is it. Allah has given you intellect
Allaha has given us intelligent but are not we Bohras are told that we are not intelligent enough to understand the translation and meaning of Quran and we are discouraged to read the translation and this practice has been going since the 51st Dai Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA.
So if I understand you do I use my intelligent to decide who is my new Dai, Is not in our belief it is Imam's job to appoint the right dai and as a follower of Imam we are guided by his decision.
Now coming to having two Dais how do I to decide who is the right Dai when 99% of Bohras feel that Moula Muffadal is the right Dai and only 1% feel Sydi Qutbuddin is the right and both of them have agreed to let a Hindu Judge decide so where is Imam in all these if both these Dais are going to accept the judgement of a Hindu Judge
Do you think Imam made the mistake by not coming hard on both the Dais and telling them not to confuse his (Imam) followers
Isn't my solution clear: support S. Qutbuddin! Don't get dejected by his present weakness. It is only weakness in political matters, not in doctrine and truthfulness. (Incidentally, to correct you: he is the da'i already, and has already shown by his actions he is not maintaining status-quo).SBM wrote:And how do you propose to do that since one Dai is living Yazidi life style and other is too weak to do anything and your friend thinks this forum and progressives are insignificant to make dentBut he is not around at present, and so we must choose what to do in his absence, rather than lament and wring our hands in helplessness.
So let us hear some ideas and solution to this dilemma rather then to just blow hot air and categorizing.
Lets walk the talk show us your solution , Joining SKQ is not the answer since you said yourself he is too weak and we do not know if he is going to make any changes or it will be status-qua if he becomes the Dai.
No one says that Wahhabis and anti-Bohras should not express their views on this forum. I certainly have not said it. Why do you imagine these silly things?SBM wrote:Does it matter if those exposes are made by Ex Bohras, Anti Bohras, Anti Kothar Bohras, Anti Kothar Ex Bohras etc etc etc or for that reason Wahabis, If an Atheist can have free hand expressing his view and demean the Bohras by saying that Bohras do not believe in Allaha and Quran and give more importance to Dai then why not Wahabis (some one's imagination) be allowed to express their views...
SBM wrote:Biradar
You gave the example of Imam Ali who kept quiet for 26 years but he did it to keep the Ummah united and not for glory, power or wealth
but he did take stand against injustice while SKQ declaring himself as Dai has divided the community ( I am not saying if SMS is the rightful Dai either)
If you apply that analogy to SKQ why did SKQ kept quiet when he knew there was injustice going in the community. He was very well aware of nepotism and corruption in the community and as a Mazoon who had the eyes and ears of the Dai should have brought to his attention. Why should one believe now that SKQ who for 50 years kept quiet and shared the loot of the community will be any different when he gets the power.(Alavi Bohras hierarchy is no different then Dawoodi Bohras either)
Yes granted he and his family are more educated, more austere and simple living people who now responding to the community.s need and want to rid off all those gridlocks required for simple ceremonies like Nikkah and Misaq but why now and not before?
Let me just say one simple thing. We don't know the full picture yet of the last few decades, specially as to what happened within the confines of Saify and Badri Mahal. For example: what compelled S. Qutbuddin to leave Saify Mahal and build his own house (Darus Sakina)? What were the internal debates and struggles? How do we know he did not try to stop YN and other, but they ran rough-shod over him? An example: when S. Moayyad Shirazi came to the court of Imam Mustansir, he was not allowed to see the Imam due to the machinations of the vizers. Also, towards the end Imam Mustansir was no longer in control of the army and the administrative apparatus of the state, and it took S. Badrul Jamali to bring the empire back under control. We can't blame the Imam or da'i always. This is a world of material hardships and political upheavals. Sometimes long periods of time pass before significant changes occur.SBM wrote:Br Dawedar
Pl see my response in SKQ thread since this is going of track
Beyond the semantics of being present but in seclusion the fact is that he is absent for all practical purposes. The Imam - being the guide of the faithful - has no business in being seclusion. If he chooses to remain in seclusion for vast swathes of time then we must wonder why the belief in Imam should be fundamental to our faith? And because the Imam is in seclusion, not only the faithful are deprived of divine guidance, but even the succession of Dais turns into a dispute every now and then. That the "da'i al-mutlaq operates with the same authority as the Imam" is the whole difficulty. Ismaili Mustalians have split so many times, yet the Imam has not stirred out of his seclusion and the Dai of every splinter faction is operating with "the same authority of the Imam". How can the divinely appointed Imam allow this? Who do you think is the rightful Dai - Sulemani, Dawoodi, Alavi etc. etc, and now Mufaddali or Qutbi?Biradar wrote:Friend Humsafar: The central character in the faith is not missing in action. He is present, but in seclusion. The da'i al-mutlaq operates with the same authority as the Imam (while he is in seclusion). So, he is the divinely appointed guide during this time. The fundamental defining aspect of Bohras is this belief. You can reject it, of course, but that, by definition, takes you out of the set of Bohras.
As I said above the seclusion business does not make sense if the Imam are supposed be the guide of the faithful. Delegating their responsibility to the Dais - and we know their lot - amounts to ditching the faithful, their faith and the very concept of Imamat.Biradar wrote:The question of why satar at all is a complex one. I don't know. In our cosmogony, for vast swathes of time the Imam is in seclusion. For example, from the time of Ebrahim to the Prophet Mohammad, the mustakar Imams were in seclusion. The incidence of Ebrahim being ready to sacrifice his son is an allusion to this. After the prophet, the Imams were manifest only for a short time, and Imam Mohammad bin Ismail and a three of his descendants went into seclusion. Imam Ubayd Allah al-Mahdi Billah did zuhur, but then again in a relatively short while, Imam Tayyeb when into seclusion.
Don't you think the current crisis is directly linked to the concept of Imamat and absentee Imam? The Imam is failing, yet again, to appoint the rightful successor, and more importantly refusing to come out of seclusion.Biradar wrote:We can ask why till the cows come home, or our houses burn down. However, the question we are faced with now is: how do we continue to maintain our traditions and beliefs at present. At present, we are facing a crisis, in which we have one party turning the community into a bunch of fanatics baboons, and the other powerless to much to dent the Goliath's machine. The progressive have done great work, but they have ultimately been unsuccessful in the larger Bohra community. There is a chance for change now, and I believe we should support it.
The faithful choosing their leader? Isn't that the very antithesis of our faith in Imamat: The Imam is divinely appointed, in his absence he appoints the Dai. But when there are two Dais fighting for the same position where is the Imam in all this, where is the divinity? If we have to choose then why not have more candidates to choose from. Let's make it a real democracy, mind you I'm not suggesting that we should, but if we have to choose then, why not? You see, no matter how you cut it, we will keep coming back to the concept of Imamat and the difficulties it presents.Biradar wrote:Of course, one may choose, in dejection and frustration, to leave completely, become Sunni, or an atheist or an anti-Bohra. We all can't do that, or that will be the end of the community as we know it. That is all I am saying. Yes, yes, we must ask where the Imam is. But he is not around at present, and so we must choose what to do in his absence, rather than lament and wring our hands in helplessness.
Perhaps you are right. However, in the same vein, neither has the concept of Allah, Quran, Prophet et al served us well. These all have failed to ameliorate the troubles which beset this world. But let me say again what I said before: during the time of the Imam's seclusion, the da'i is the divinely appointed guide. That is all. Just as Allah never show himself directly, but sends messengers, for long periods of time the Imam may choose to direct the dawaat from seclusion. I don't know why, or you won't accept my answers. This is an interesting philosophical question, but moot for the present crisis.Humsafar wrote: ….
One last thought: The concept of Imamat, however fundamental it maybe to our belief it is obvious that it has no served us, our faith or our ummah well. On the contrary it has been misused by upstart mullahs to control us and exploit us. How useful it is to keep chanting that it is the fundamental article of our faith even as this very belief is destroying our faith and our community before our own eyes?
Wow he is complaining about his posts being deleted. This is very small insignificant forum so who would miss your posts so why complainI see many posts since yesterday are deleted. The last one of mine was an explanation about why this forum remains insignificant for Bohras. It should at least have been challenged before summarily being wiped out. But that is the way of the forum! Can't complain for small mercies!