Save the Bohras from Bahai Cult

[ghulam muhammed]

Admin,

This thread which was about Bahais has turned into a heated debate on Aga Khan much like other threads. I request you to please create a separate thread on Aga Khan/Ismailis as the topic under discussion gets derailed unnecessarily.

[fayyaaz]

Admin,

This thread which was about Bahais has turned into a heated debate on Aga Khan much like other threads. I request you to please create a separate thread on Aga Khan/Ismailis as the topic under discussion gets derailed unnecessarily.

You could change the subject to "Save the Bohras from Bahai/Aga Khani cults"!

[New]

Hey, why other religions are cult and Bohras are not? What is there to save and who is going to do it? If some one wants belong to any other religion or be an athiest, not my business.

This thread has no merit and does not belong in this forum. Let the contributors show what does it do for Progressive bohras?

[fayyaaz]

Hey, why other religions are cult and Bohras are not? What is there to save and who is going to do it? If some one wants belong to any other religion or be an athiest, not my business.

This thread has no merit and does not belong in this forum. Let the contributors show what does it do for Progressive bohras?

Bohras are a cult like Bahais and Aga Khanis. No doubt about that.

Progressives should be wary of the practices of all these cults. Leaders of cults are on an ego-trip. When millions pay homage to them they believe they are super-human, no matter how humble they pretend to be. When your ego rides on slavery of your dumb followers your belief in your infallibility and omnipotence is accompanied by a scary fear of loss of status. You see that in Muffy a lot. The guy has to pump his ego up continually by hearing shouts of "Jai Muffy, Jai Muffy", qadambosis, and being carried aloft in palkis. Ego and insecurity go together.

Thread serves as an adjunct reminder to a disgraceful cult which Bohras have become.

Moving from one cult to another does not lead to freedom.

[JavedhJuma]

Bohras are a cult like Bahais and Aga Khanis. No doubt about that.

Those who do not share your views, are cultists. Spoken like a real Jahil. You know zilch about us except from Maherally and Company, who have been proven liars, and suddenly you have become a master of religions. You are a disgrace to humanity.

[JavedhJuma]

Admin,

This thread which was about Bahais has turned into a heated debate on Aga Khan much like other threads. I request you to please create a separate thread on Aga Khan/Ismailis as the topic under discussion gets derailed unnecessarily.

I agree with you brother GM. However, if you notice we are not the ones derailing it. Your brothers in religion are the ones. They drag us in every subject. What are we supposed to do?

Have you noticed, we only engage people on this forum when they start maligning us. When they talk about the Bohoras, they drag Aga Khanis. When they talk about Bahais, they drag Aga Khanis.

We are no sheep. We have a right to defend ourselves, especially, when they drag abusive material from other sites which have been proven false.

Admin lets them drag material from these sites accusing our Imam's mother of adultery, etc. How can we keep quiet? I suggest Admin not allow this material from Maherally's site, especially, since Maherally had admitted of lying. This is not the first time and it will be not the last time. These are sick people.

Admin should warn them when they start dragging us that the subject has got nothing to do with us. May be Admin should delete the subject right away, and we will not post our answers.

I realise it is not easy for Admin to monitor 24x7 this site, but when he comes upon it, he should warn these sickos.

[fayyaaz]

This Ismaili retard, JavedhJuma, is an Aga Khani abde. Plenty of Bohra abdes complain about participants here 'maligning' their leaders. Many abdes, like this Ismaili retard, also abuse participants here because they do not like what these participants write. Admin, wisely, for the most part, lets them have their say.

It would be a shame if Admin succumbed to yammering and bellyaching by this Ismaili retard and ban material which is freely available against the interest of free and fair dissemination of information. I consider that visitors to this site are mostly intelligent folk who can make their own minds up about the 'truth' of what is being published here.

[JavedhJuma]

Hey fayyaz,

The only retard I see here is you.

I have repeatedly said and I am saying again, Maherally and Mir Bhose were proven liars so if you were intelligent why would you post here something that was proven a lie, not once but twice. So now who is a retard?

[fayyaaz]

Hey retard, where is the lie in the picture I posted of the Ismaili priest kissing women's feet and Aga Khan 3 and 4 offering Muslim prayer? Get thee to a Jamaat Khaana, you imbecile!

[Biradar]

Admin lets them drag material from these sites accusing our Imam's mother of adultery, etc. How can we keep quiet? I suggest Admin not allow this material from Maherally's site, especially, since Maherally had admitted of lying. This is not the first time and it will be not the last time. These are sick people.

Admin should warn them when they start dragging us that the subject has got nothing to do with us. May be Admin should delete the subject right away, and we will not post our answers.

I realise it is not easy for Admin to monitor 24x7 this site, but when he comes upon it, he should warn these sickos.

All I hear is bawling and crying of a baby. Next, you will tell Admin to take away our candy and give us a time-out!

Please, don't you realize you are derailing this thread! My friend, I told you no one cares if you worship Aga Khan. You are welcome to your so-called imam. How many times must you be told that this is a Bohra forum? No one cares about Aga Khanis on this forum. Please go somewhere else, or post in the Islam Today forum. Why are you derailing and going on and on and on? Honestly, you are doing a great disservice to your devta. People are seeing you for what you are: a fanatic, an abde, just like the abde sayednas who come here. Please don't insult your imam more. He is a nice guy, I don't doubt, but no one here is obliged to believe the crap about him being the imam! I mean, come on man, this is a Bohra forum! We don't believe in Aga Khan, don't you get it? I mean, who is stopping you from doing what you want. But we are not obliged to respect him. Heck, we don't even respect our own more-la Muffy! Why would we respect some other leader of another cult! Get real.

And stop whining! You sound like a two year old.

[Biradar]

Admin,

This thread which was about Bahais has turned into a heated debate on Aga Khan much like other threads. I request you to please create a separate thread on Aga Khan/Ismailis as the topic under discussion gets derailed unnecessarily.

My friend GM. This madman Abde Aga Khan is hell bent on throwing a tantrum in every thread. He has been trounced repeatedly, but like a masochist, keeps coming back for more. It is amazing. I suggest the Admin create a new sub-forum for this cry baby. He can post there to his hearts content, and leave us alone.

[KA786110]

It is amazing how some of the forum members hide behind the labels like Atheists, Progressives, Pure Islam etc but truly are religious bigots. They would not pass any chance to divert a topic and interject their agenda of hate and dissemination of lies. Some just hate all Shias, some hate all non-wahabi/non-salafi muslims, some hate Ismailis and yet some other exclusively target Bohras.

And what are these personal attacks on forum members who do not agree with you. Some manners please.

May God guide us all.

[Biradar]

And what are these personal attacks on forum members who do not agree with you. Some manners please.

May God guide us all.

Yes, this is very true. For example, some people will call a person who has genuine doubts about the existence of god, and expresses it openly, Mr. Nothing.

Perhaps another thing to add to your list: some people will make it all about themselves, and barging into a conversation, shouting "me, me, me!". Incidentally, I should add that people are simply trolling our Ismaili fanatic. Fanatics are very easy to troll.

Take the example of this thread. The Ismaili fanatic went into a rant, thinking I criticized his devta. Here is my first post in this thread on this viewtopic.php?p=159523#p159523. As anyone with a half a brain can see, my post was about the topic at hand, the Baha'is and their history. There was nothing negative about Ismailis. But what does Ismaili fanatic do? Barge in an throw a fit. Next thing that happens: people who would not have said anything about his cult, are now all over him. All for having poor reading comprehension and emotions of a two year old!

To avoid any further meltdowns of Ismaili fanatic, I have put him on ignore. Pointless engaging with a two year old.

[KA786110]

At the beginning of this thread there was mention of few Bohras converting to Bahai faith. Is that cause for alarm? Because I have not heard that Bahais are converting Bohras in large numbers into their fold. Every faith loses few members of their flock every now and then.

[mnoorani]

Admin,

This thread which was about Bahais has turned into a heated debate on Aga Khan much like other threads. I request you to please create a separate thread on Aga Khan/Ismailis as the topic under discussion gets derailed unnecessarily.

I agree with you brother GM. However, if you notice we are not the ones derailing it. Your brothers in religion are the ones. They drag us in every subject. What are we supposed to do?

Have you noticed, we only engage people on this forum when they start maligning us. When they talk about the Bohoras, they drag Aga Khanis. When they talk about Bahais, they drag Aga Khanis.

We are no sheep. We have a right to defend ourselves, especially, when they drag abusive material from other sites which have been proven false.

Admin lets them drag material from these sites accusing our Imam's mother of adultery, etc. How can we keep quiet? I suggest Admin not allow this material from Maherally's site, especially, since Maherally had admitted of lying. This is not the first time and it will be not the last time. These are sick people.

Admin should warn them when they start dragging us that the subject has got nothing to do with us. May be Admin should delete the subject right away, and we will not post our answers.

I realise it is not easy for Admin to monitor 24x7 this site, but when he comes upon it, he should warn these sickos.

Why don't you also defend yourself at the statements of Kamran Afridi. He has plenty of discussions with prominent Aga Khanis ,all available on you tube. he has put forward all the facts with proof of pictures and videos. However till now, not a single one of the Aga Khan follower that he has talked to was able to refute his words. So if you think that you can defend the Aga Khan and his cancellation of Islamic practices then why don't you engage in a conversation with him. His sites are very popular considering the hits that he receives. Check out the divorce dates and the marriage date of Aly Khan and then compare the date of Birth of the Aga Khan. All court procedings are now available online. This will give you the proof of the illicit affair of Prince Aly Khan that resulted in your current Imam. Infact the last Aga Khan was so upset with the playboy lifestyle of prince Aly Khan that he was overridden for imamate in favour of his son the Prince Karim.

[fayyaaz]

Thank you for an interesting name, Kamran Afridi. I have yet to decide if he is just a dirt peddler against Ismailis. But one thing I learned from him is the name of that women's feet kissing Ismaili priest. It is Allama Nasiruddin Nasir Hunzai. He is an Aga Khani and in this video expounds on his belief about 'Ali Allah'. The video is in Urdu.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TH0BGEScjVc

By the way, one of the Ismailis on this forum, Salim, claims that 'Ali Allah' means 'Ali is from Allah". That is wrong. 'Ali Allah' is not an Arabic sentence. It is in fact an Arabic phrase. In a simple sentence of two words, first word is definite and the second is indefinite. E.g. albaytu kabir means The house is big. If you say albaytu alkabir, both words being definite, the meaning changes to a phrase 'the big house'.

In Ali Allah, both words are purportedly definite proper nouns. It is a meaningless phrase, unless both names mean the same thing. E.g. in 'the world the globe' two definite words meaning the same thing are placed side by side. In Allah's case this is arguably permissible if a definite article al was attached to Ali because al-Ali is one of 99 names of Allah. Thus al-Ali Allah to refer to Allah alone would be ok, but not Ali Allah, because Ali, not al-Ali, is a proper name for a human being.

But some Ismailis, like my cousin, believe that Ali and Allah do not refer to one entity but two; and one is the same as the other, meaning Ali Allah means Ali is Allah. Curious!

[Biradar]

This guy, Allama Nasiruddin Nasir Hunzai, seems to be a true extremist Shia Ismaili. One would call him a ghulat. Such ghulat sub-movements are common in various Ismaili sub-sects, including Mustali Ismailis (Bohras). He has a lot of videos on youtube. For example, he says that the previous Aga Khan (grandfather of the present Aga Khan) was the greatest of Imams, and corresponds to the word "Al Hayy". He then goes on to say that the current Aga Khan is like the manifestation of the Qaim. He gives very flimsy reasoning about this, which is seems to pick out of some random books.

He also claims that the previous Aga Khan said to say "Ali Allah" and when some people objected, he told them not to say the du'a at all. (In which this term was found). Now, some Ismaili may say that Ali Allah may mean Ali is from Allah, but it is certainly not what this ghulat is saying. He makes statements like that the "tajalli" of the Qaim is found in many of the "Noorani Family", i.e. the immediate family of the Aga Khan.

The big mistake which such Ismailis make is that they rely on books which they them-selves have written, leading to a self fulfilling and self enforcing ideas. The only option is to try and explicate any ideas they have from the Quran and hadith from the early imams (including the Prophet). There is no other option. Yes, interpretations may be many, but these things which this guy is saying are totally flimsy and baseless, making up anything which comes to his imaginative mind.

Apparently, he seems to have some push-back from the Isamili communities. Some people claim that he is is putting himself above the Aga Khan, and says the Aly Khan was the real successor of the previous Aga Khan, and the current Aga Khan is just the secular imam and he himself is the spiritual imam. I mean, this just goes to show how ridiculous these people are. (I should say he refutes this in one video).

[humanbeing]

One would call him a ghulat. Such ghulat sub-movements are common in various Ismaili sub-sects, including Mustali Ismailis (Bohras).

Ghullats mean exaggerators, kind of people who went overboard with their praise for Ali or Imam or any religious leaderships. Does this term apply to current mullahs, amils, shehzada in short kothar clergy ? can someone throw more light on ghullats ..

[Biradar]

One would call him a ghulat. Such ghulat sub-movements are common in various Ismaili sub-sects, including Mustali Ismailis (Bohras).

Ghullats mean exaggerators, kind of people who went overboard with their praise for Ali or Imam or any religious leaderships. Does this term apply to current mullahs, amils, shehzada in short kothar clergy ? can someone throw more light on ghullats ..

You are correct. I should have defined that term. There has always been a danger of exaggeration among the Shia in general, specially as to the position of Maulana Ali. It is clear that early Ismailism (i.e. even before the rise of the Fatimids) had many ghulat factions within it. For example, one can consult the very early "Umm al-Kitab" ascribed (probably falsely) to Imam Muhammad al-Baqir in which many strange and fantastic concepts are elucidated. (This book was published in the collection "Gnostic Bible" and there are other versions of it also).

Exaggerators are also mentioned in the da'im al-Islam in the context of chapter of wallaayat, in a narration from Imam Jafer as-Sadiq.

With the advent of the Fatimids, these factions went silent, as such ideas were not conducive to running a secular, this-worldy state. However, crisis was never far away, and during the time of Imam Hakim there was group of people who claimed that Imam Hakim was a manifestation of the diety. The imam was not happy, and there was a schism, which led to the formation of what we now call the Druze. At that time, the imam invited Syedna Hamid al-din Kirmani to debate with the ghulat, and one of the outcomes was the clear enunciation of the idea of duality of both amaal (action) as well as ilm (knowledge), and the rejection of the claims of the Druze.

Incidentally, S. Kirmani is one of the greatest, perhaps the greatest, philosopher and theologian of the Ismailis. Another giant is of course S. Moayyad Shirzai, to whom the Tayebbi dawaat (i.e. the bohras) owe an enormous debt.

Among the bohras, it is said that one must neither diminish not exaggerate. Hence, bohras, by definition are not ghulat. However, sometimes excessive love for Ali and the imams does manifest itself in poetry and popular stories. For example, consider the couplet:

"Mazhaar che bhala kauun Khuda na ane ham naam, Maulana Ali che"
[Who is the Manifestation of Allah and his namesake? Its Maulana Ali]

There are other verses in this same qasida, for example, describing him as the "azali noor of Allah". (Azal is a word which means eternity without beginning. See the definition in Encyclopedia Iranica).

In many popular stories (mythical) one can see that the position of Ali is greatly exaggerated. A very through account of ghulat sects is in the the book Extremist Shiites: The Ghulat Sects. Much of the book can be read online, and some of the stories mentioned in it (in the context of other ghulat sects) are the same as told among the bohras.

In my opinion, there is a ghulat movement among the bohras at present. There are many signs of this, specially in the last few years of the SMB's reign. It is not clear, at least at present, if this is temporary phenomena and will soon die down, or become more pronounced and codified into the minds of the bohras. At present, there truly is a struggle for the soul of the community. We have a misogynistic mad-man, Mr Muffadul (LA), who has usurped the dawaat, and it is not clear what he will do to satisfy his lust for money and power. We have already seen him destroy the position of the mazoon and mukasir, and even disrespect his own father. Who knows what is next? I pointed out that on a poster someone had written that "Maula is maalik of everything". This should be a good sign of where we are heading.

[humanbeing]

Thanks for the explanation, my knowledge of ghulat was / is limited to joan's blank book. however it related to kothari mullahs a lot. many a time when I am listetning to orators top to bottom levels, go over board with thier praises bordering or violating line of shirk and logic.

in one instance, there was a sheikh who took up the dais in ramadan sermon time and expressed that, SMB's praise ( shanaat) cannot be completed with All ocean's water as ink and forest as pen, now I had heard this similar praise for Imam Ali, and this praise is also mentioned for Allah.

In another instance, they mention SMB to be familiar or copy of Imam hussein in appearance. It was a time when SMB was stroke ridden, speechless and would sit dummified next to SMS, at the peak of maktal and approaching maghrib, SMS went on ranting praises of SMB. in his zeal he mentioned that - " maula aapne dekhvu etle Imam hussein na noorani chehra ne dekhvu ya dedar karvu" something like that. trying to optimize on the maktal hysteria.

There are many such instances and phrases orators speak out without getting any objections from dummed down listeners. this guys are unchecked in thier safe confinesm, dishing out wierd philosophies to further thier agenda. seems like they have taken the cues and inspiration from gulaats.

[fayyaaz]

Thank you Biradar for an interesting post about ghullat.

I have said that the phrase 'aliyullah' is meaningless in Arabic. However, to their kalima, the Shia add the sentence "Aliyun Waliyullah" meaning " Ali is the Wali of Allah". What does the sentence actually mean?

According to this Quran dictionary, http://corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=wly, "Waliyun" means Protector or Friend.

Neither of those meanings make literal sense.

Ali cannot be a Protector of Allah. If anything, it is the other way round. And, what is a "Friend of Allah"? A believer's relationship to Allah is that of a Slave to his Master, not friendship, surely.

Plural of Wali is Awliya, the word Awliyaullah being commonly used for the departed pious people.

An interpretation that comes to mind is that they are "Protectors" not of Allah but of His Religion. So could the Shia Kalima mean "Ali is the Protector of Allah's religion"?

[Jai]

Biradar,

Cant we interpret the couplet from other point of view. Or try to understand why he is called manifestation of Allah swt. On what basis the writer is calling Ali a.s mazhar of Allah swt.

When Rasullah sws went on meraj did he not see Ali a.s there and the words heard were spoken in the voice of Ali a.s. Didnt Allah swt meet Rasullah through Ali a.s. Does it not mean Ali a.s represented Allah swt. Didnt the words of Allah swt manifest through Ali a.s.
Since Allah swt is purer than the sound as sound comes in the creation and is within space and time and He swt does not have any form and the whole universe could not contain him. He Swt met Rasullah sws through Ali a.s and spoke through Ali a.s as he a.s used to speak through inspiration of Allah swt.
And if you were to ask Why Ali a.s cause he was the best of creation of Allah swt after Rasullah sws. Havent we also heard that Ali a.s was Nurullah, wajhullah, yadullah, Ainullah. Ismullah.
If we understand and analyse the above event and if we say Ali a.s as Mazhar of Allah in this context would it be ghulu? Or can we say it is one of the greatest virtues of Ali a.s.

I have read that the first creation which came into existence was noor of Rasullah sws and there are various hadith which states that Rasullah sws and Ali a.s were created of same noor.
Rasullah sws is also known as Allah's noor. Then naturally Ali a.s is also nur e khuda.
The creation came into existence from the noor of Rasullah sws meaning before the beginning or existence of space and time or big bang.
In this context and understanding cant we say that they both Rasullah sws and Ali a.s are azali nur of Allah swt.

I have written it based on my understanding.

I am really sorry as my abilty is weak in expressing my taughts and understanding and I may not be able to do justice. I request my knowledgable brothers to correct my mistakes.

I seek forgiveness from Almighty for my errors and mistakes.

[fayyaaz]

"Mazhaar che bhala kauun Khuda na ane ham naam, Maulana Ali che"
[Who is the Manifestation of Allah and his namesake? Its Maulana Ali]

Ali is not one of 99 names of Allah. It is al-Ali. This distinction is important.

Ilah is not the name of Allah. It is al-Ilah which is shortened to Allah.

In what sense is Ali the manifestation of Allah? Is it like the Christian understanding of Jesus meaning Ali, like Jesus, is God who came to earth?

If that is the Bohra understanding of Ali, then they are no different from Aga Khanis who appear to believe that Ali and Allah are the same.

[fayyaaz]

"Mazhaar che bhala kauun Khuda na ane ham naam, Maulana Ali che"
[Who is the Manifestation of Allah and his namesake? Its Maulana Ali]

Cant we interpret the couplet from other point of view. Or try to understand why he is called manifestation of Allah swt. On what basis the writer is calling Ali a.s mazhar of Allah swt.

When Rasullah sws went on meraj did he not see Ali a.s there and the words heard were spoken in the voice of Ali a.s. Didnt Allah swt meet Rasullah through Ali a.s. Does it not mean Ali a.s represented Allah swt. Didnt the words of Allah swt manifest through Ali a.s.
Since Allah swt is purer than the sound as sound comes in the creation and is within space and time and He swt does not have any form and the whole universe could not contain him. He Swt met Rasullah sws through Ali a.s and spoke through Ali a.s as he a.s used to speak through inspiration of Allah swt.
And if you were to ask Why Ali a.s cause he was the best of creation of Allah swt after Rasullah sws. Havent we also heard that Ali a.s was Nurullah, wajhullah, yadullah, Ainullah. Ismullah.
If we understand and analyse the above event and if we say Ali a.s as Mazhar of Allah in this context would it be ghulu? Or can we say it is one of the greatest virtues of Ali a.s.

I have read that the first creation which came into existence was noor of Rasullah sws and there are various hadith which states that Rasullah sws and Ali a.s were created of same noor.
Rasullah sws is also known as Allah's noor. Then naturally Ali a.s is also nur e khuda.
The creation came into existence from the noor of Rasullah sws meaning before the beginning or existence of space and time or big bang.
In this context and understanding cant we say that they both Rasullah sws and Ali a.s are azali nur of Allah swt.

I have written it based on my understanding.

I am really sorry as my abilty is weak in expressing my taughts and understanding and I may not be able to do justice. I request my knowledgable brothers to correct my mistakes.

I seek forgiveness from Almighty for my errors and mistakes.

It is perfectly understandable to say that the couplet summarizes the mythology of meraj prevalent among Bohras. But that is not the 'understanding'. It is simply saying the same thing in non-verse form, repeating the claim that Ali and Allah are the same. This is what is known as ghulu, 'extremism'.

No wonder non-Shia Muslims as well as the mainstream Ithna Ashari Shia say that Bohras, like Ismailis, are no longer Muslims.

[Jai]

It is perfectly understandable to say that the couplet summarizes the mythology of meraj prevalent among Bohras. But that is not the 'understanding'. It is simply saying the same thing in non-verse form, repeating the claim that Ali and Allah are the same. This is what is known as ghulu, 'extremism'.

No wonder non-Shia Muslims as well as the mainstream Ithna Ashari Shia say that Bohras, like Ismailis, are no longer Muslims.

Brother Fayyaaz and all other members,
The comments are mine based on my limited knowledge and reasoning and in no way represents viewpoint or stand of DB and I have not studied any DB formal education except the basics and whatever learned through bayans.
As Birader mentioned that as per DBs, exaggeration and diminishing is not allowed in case of Ali a.s. It is true ad even shias hold the same beliefs and even sunni who have read the hadith.
As per the saying from one of the imams (heard in Shia waaz) that He a.s said that you are free to think anything about us but just dont call us Allah. Meaning the imams were beyond the limit of taught and imagination of humans. We can never comprehend them.
Another Hadith from Rasulallah sws where He sws said only Allah and I can understand you Ali.
In case of Ali you can only do Ghulu, by calling him Allah swt or elevating his status more that Rasulallah sws (nauzubillah) Else it is beyond our capacity to understand him.
My point in replying to Biradar's post was that there could be esoteric or spiritual context behind the couplet or may be it could be a symbolic expression.
Once Ali a.s said he was awal and akhir ( first and last) and we know only Allah swt is first and Last. Then he explained that he was the first amongst the men to Answer Rasullah sws call to islam and the last to have left him as he did the burial rites of rasullah sws. (Wording are different) If anybody were to refer to Ali in a qasida as awal o akhir then just without understanding its context labeling it ghulu would it be right? And there is no doubt most of us would label it ghulu.
Regarding our brothers non shias and ithna asharis label Bohras and ismailies as kafir are entitled to their opinion. They are also calling each other kafir and i have heard non shias calling non shias kafir and the same is true for shias. But Fayyaaz bhai athiests are kafir according to qadiyanis even.
I can only say that the discord arises most of the time because of analysing each others faith with narrow mind and without taking context into consideration. And we should not be worried people calling us kafir but should be scared from being those whom Allah has called Kafir.
I really could not understand what you intended when you mentioned Meraj as myth. Are you referring to the whole event as a myth or anything specific?
Lastly I can say on behalf of all DB that no sane bohra considers Ali as Allah but All the muslims will have to accept Allah as Ali or else they will be out of the fold of islam. In short "Ali is not Allah but Allah is Ali".

Thank you fayyaaz bhai for your post. Sorry for spelling and typing mistakes.
Please feel free to correct me.

I seek forgiveness from Almighty for my mistakes and error.

[Jai]

"Mazhaar che bhala kauun Khuda na ane ham naam, Maulana Ali che"
[Who is the Manifestation of Allah and his namesake? Its Maulana Ali]

Ali is not one of 99 names of Allah. It is al-Ali. This distinction is important.

Ilah is not the name of Allah. It is al-Ilah which is shortened to Allah.

In what sense is Ali the manifestation of Allah? Is it like the Christian understanding of Jesus meaning Ali, like Jesus, is God who came to earth?

If that is the Bohra understanding of Ali, then they are no different from Aga Khanis who appear to believe that Ali and Allah are the same.

Brother fayyaz,
It is not bohras understanding but mine.
As i mentioned earlier Muhammad sws was Allah's nur and so was Ali a.s, as both were created from same noor.
That noor of Allah swt (and Not Allah) was to manifest in the form of Bani Adam (Human form) and would manifest in or as the zaat mubarak of Muhammad sws and Ali a.s.
Some times meaning are symbolic.

I can call Allah Ar rahman - (The Most Gracious) or Ya Rahman (O most Gracious) and same Can be applied to other Names of Allah including Ali with exception to the unique name Allah swt.
When defining Allah swt attributes or his names I agree with you that the more appropriate way would be to add Al before but when calling unto him there is no such rule.
The name Ali was given to hazrat Ali a.s by Allah swt. Ali means most high and is one of the attributes of Allah swt and is mentioned in 99 names as Al Ali and Quran. Either you call Allah as Al Ali, ya Ali all both acceptable.

No sane muslim will say that Ali is Allah (nauzobillah) He a.s has made it clear till the day of judgement by prostrating before Allah that he a.s. is makhlook and Allah is his Khaliq.

[fayyaaz]

To be revised.

[asad]

"Mazhaar che bhala kauun Khuda na ane ham naam, Maulana Ali che"
[Who is the Manifestation of Allah and his namesake? Its Maulana Ali]

Ali is not one of 99 names of Allah. It is al-Ali. This distinction is important.

Ilah is not the name of Allah. It is al-Ilah which is shortened to Allah.

In what sense is Ali the manifestation of Allah? Is it like the Christian understanding of Jesus meaning Ali, like Jesus, is God who came to earth?

If that is the Bohra understanding of Ali, then they are no different from Aga Khanis who appear to believe that Ali and Allah are the same.

Brother fayyaz,
It is not bohras understanding but mine.
As i mentioned earlier Muhammad sws was Allah's nur and so was Ali a.s, as both were created from same noor.
That noor of Allah swt (and Not Allah) was to manifest in the form of Bani Adam (Human form) and would manifest in or as the zaat mubarak of Muhammad sws and Ali a.s.
Some times meaning are symbolic.

I can call Allah Ar rahman - (The Most Gracious) or Ya Rahman (O most Gracious) and same Can be applied to other Names of Allah including Ali with exception to the unique name Allah swt.
When defining Allah swt attributes or his names I agree with you that the more appropriate way would be to add Al before but when calling unto him there is no such rule.
The name Ali was given to hazrat Ali a.s by Allah swt. Ali means most high and is one of the attributes of Allah swt and is mentioned in 99 names as Al Ali and Quran. Either you call Allah as Al Ali, ya Ali all both acceptable.

No sane muslim will say that Ali is Allah (nauzobillah) He a.s has made it clear till the day of judgement by prostrating before Allah that he a.s. is makhlook and Allah is his Khaliq.

Br. Jai,

As far as my understanding goes word Ya is added to something which is present and can listen to you. Hence Shias say Ya Mohammed, Ya Ali etc. but Sunnis only say Ya Allah because only Allah is ever present and not other personalities including the Prophet.

If some one reads your above post he can understand in what context you have mentioned

Either you call Allah as Al Ali, ya Ali all both acceptable

but the problem with Shias is that they will be more than happy to only read this part, i have heard my Shia friends say InshaAli. They say that Prophet is above Ali but in the very next minute will equate Ali with Allah having all kinds of superhuman qualities. And for Bohras their Dai is above everyone.

Can we leave Ali has a human being and try to emulate his character rather than putting him on the same pedestal as Allah.

[fayyaaz]

I can call Allah Ar rahman - (The Most Gracious) or Ya Rahman (O most Gracious) and same Can be applied to other Names of Allah including Ali with exception to the unique name Allah swt.
When defining Allah swt attributes or his names I agree with you that the more appropriate way would be to add Al before but when calling unto him there is no such rule.
The name Ali was given to hazrat Ali a.s by Allah swt. Ali means most high and is one of the attributes of Allah swt and is mentioned in 99 names as Al Ali and Quran. Either you call Allah as Al Ali, ya Ali all both acceptable.

No sane muslim will say that Ali is Allah (nauzobillah) He a.s has made it clear till the day of judgement by prostrating before Allah that he a.s. is makhlook and Allah is his Khaliq.

There is definitely a rule when calling Allah by one of His 99 names using the vocative particle "Ya". The rule is that the definite particle "al" must be dropped. The only exception is the word Allah.**

Allah can be called (i.e. named) ar Rahman. But you only call upon Him (i.e. summon Him) using "Ya Rahman". Naming Him and summoning Him are two different situations. Summoning can only be done in a dua addressed to Allah. If you say "Ya Ali" in a dua to mean "Ya Allah", that is grammatically acceptable, but almost never ever done by Bohras.

In the couplet, the author actually says that Ali is Allah's name. That is not true.

However Bohras have a habit of calling upon Panjatan, Imams and Dai by using the vocative particle Ya. So when they say Ya Ali, they actually mean Ya Ali ibn Abi Talib. No Bohra uses Ya Ali to refer to Allah.

I agree that Bohras ordinarily do not believe Ali to be Allah but I am not so sure about Bohras in advanced stages getting their education in Jaamea.

** I have consulted Arabic Grammar books in connection with "Ya", the vocative particle (harfun nidaa).

[fayyaaz]

I really could not understand what you intended when you mentioned Meraj as myth. Are you referring to the whole event as a myth or anything specific?
Lastly I can say on behalf of all DB that no sane bohra considers Ali as Allah but All the muslims will have to accept Allah as Ali or else they will be out of the fold of islam. In short "Ali is not Allah but Allah is Ali".

Prophet's journey popularly known as Meraj consists of two events, Isra and Meraj. Isra is his journey from Makkah to Jerusalem and is mentioned in the Quran. Meraj is his journey to heaven described in a Sunni Hadith, which of course does not mention Ali at all. Both the Sunni Hadith and your description of Meraj are, in my opinion, obviously the works of fanciful imagination which a Muslim must accept or he is a blasphemer. In other words they are popular mythology.

Can you further elaborate on your assertion that ""Ali is not Allah but Allah is Ali"? I think you mean that Allah is al-Ali, the latter being one of the 99 names of Allah. But saying Allah is al-Ali is the same as saying Allah is Allah. Now why would you say that?

You should never ever say that Allah is Ali. I have made this clear, with explanations, in several posts on this forum.

Another myth you are stating is about noor. Quran does not say that Muhammad and Ali are noor of Allah. In fact, Allah says in Surah Noor that He is the noor of the heavens and the earth. You may have hadith about this 'noor' business but it is mythology of your sect, created to give enhanced status to Ali. It is ghulu, extremism.

Look at all the meanings of 'noor' showing all the instances of 'noor' in the Quran in this link of the Quran dictionary, http://corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=nwr .

Frankly, I have no idea what you mean by "noor" and I do not understand by what Allah means when He says that He is the "noor". I have yet to come across a satisfactory explanation despite numerous available interpretations.