Kitaab ul Himma on Sajada

[anajmi]

porus/Adam,
Excellent work guys. I'm enjoying and learning from your scholarly discussion. It was all going well until Adam pulled out the secret weapon: taawil.
Dr. Faust wrote:

Authority do extend to the Hudood of Dawat (which happen to be from his family in this case).

Now, that is very convinient. Ain't it doctor?

The entire shia faith is based upon this matter of convenience. Isn't Hazrat Ali supposed to be the successor of prophet Muhammad BECAUSE he was from the prophet (saw)'s family and hence better taught by the prophet (saw)??

You see, Allah says in the Quran - they plan and We plan and We are the best of planners. It was His wisdom that Hazrat Abu Bakr became the first khalifa. Otherwise we would've had people like the Dai ruling every mosque on earth.

[porus]

It appears that we have now come to the end of this discussion on justification of sajda to Imam/Dai on the basis of Kitabul Himma and I would like to wrap the discussion up with some final thoughts on the issue.

First I must respectfully thank all who made useful contribution to this discussion and would like to single out Murtaza2152 and Adam both whom, in their own way, made a strong case for sajda to Dai. While, essentially there was no difference in their views, I think Murtaza was handicapped by his weak command over Arabic. Adam, clearly, is very well versed in Arabic and hence was able to articulate his views very strongly.

Clearly, I do not agree with their views and hence reject any notion that Qadi Noman is advocating sujood to Imam or by extension to the Dai.

Initially in the chapter in Himma under discussion, Qadi Noman states that some people objected to taqbeel al-ard (kissing of ground before Imam) because it appeared to them that they were performing sujood to humans. He then goes on to say that taqbeel al-ard is not the same as sujood. (I agree that taqbeel al-ard before Imam can be mistaken for sujood and ought to be avoided despite Qadi Noman’s advocacy of it; though I do not fundamentally object to it.)

Two further sentences by Qadi Noman support my view. In one, he informs us that Rasulullah forbade sajda to him by his followers. In the other, he says that “I did not say that we perform sujood to Imams nor that they ordered us to bless them with sujood to them. But it is the kissing of the earth in front of him (that we perform)."

Thus, he tells us that Imams have not instructed us to perform sujood to them.

Let us now look at this sentence at the beginning of the chapter”

تعظيم الائمة من تعظيم الله،

I previously translated this sentence as “Respect of Imams (is) in the Glorification of God”. However it should be more accurately translated as “Glorification of Imam is Glorification of Allah” . This sounds like a slogan and I do not believe that we have ever heard Muslims say:

“Glorification of Prophet Muhammad is glorification of Allah”.

However, respect for Prophet is clearly Allah’s wish and His command.

Finally let us consider the ayat 37 of surat al-fussilat (41:37):

وَمِنْ آيَاتِهِ اللَّيْلُ وَالنَّهَارُ وَالشَّمْسُ وَالْقَمَرُ ۚ لَا تَسْجُدُوا لِلشَّمْسِ وَلَا لِلْقَمَرِ وَاسْجُدُوا لِلَّهِ الَّذِي خَلَقَهُنَّ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ إِيَّاهُ تَعْبُدُونَ

Translation:

"Among His signs are the night and the day, as well as the sun and the moon: do not perform sujood to the sun or the moon, but perform your sujood for Allah, who has created them - if it is Him whom you worship."

This ayat categorically forbids sajda to anyone other than Allah. Allah commands us not to perform sajda to His signs (ayaat). He gives the Sun and the Moon as example of His signs. Ithna-asharis consider their most eminent Mujtahids to be signs of Allah and call them Ayatullahs. Even if Bohras consider Sayedna to be the sign of Allah, Allah forbids sajda to him. You cannot get more categorical than that.

However, devotees of Sayedna may say that the ayat has a subtext which indicates that exceptions can be identified in Quran’s examples of angels’ sujood to Adam and Yaqub’s ‘supposed’ sujood to his son, Yusuf. I am not convinced.

Thus, in conclusion, devotees of Sayedna and I fundamentally disagree on this issue. I think that they are bordering, if not already actually engaged in, on shirk.

[accountability]

Marvellous discussion by Porus, Adam and others, indeed very knowledgebale.
Having said that, I am still at loss to understand the need for anyone (in this case Syedna Saheb) to have others prostrate before him. Allah has the ultimate ego, and rightly deserved so. But feeble human who depend on Allah from cradle to grave can not qualify as an ultimate glorified being.
I do not know if it is instructed by Syedna to do sujood before him or is it just zealots. In any case porus argument carries more ( undeniable) wieght than others.
Syedna or Dai is obviously not imam, prophet or Allah. There is no ayah in quran which refers to any dai, or imam. All quranic refrences are knowingly dishonest interpretation. One glaring example, I heard in one waaz, waaz giver reciting quranic verse which contained word "burhan" and then goes on to say, " Aa ayat Aqa Burhanuddin per dalalat kare che". I am sure he would be knowing the actual meaning of the ayat, despite that he went on to say that. which is ultimate dishonesty.

[Adam]

Since this is wrapping up, I thought it best to add my few sense
I truly appologize for the length, I try my best to keep it short, but sometimes I can't help it.

Porus, i've said it repeatedly. Your belief, you're choice, and I respect that. Even though we wouldn't share common beliefs, i'd rather converse with you than anyone else. I mean that

@humsafar

porus/Adam,
Excellent work guys. I'm enjoying and learning from your scholarly discussion. It was all going well until Adam pulled out the secret weapon: taawil.

Thank you for your kind words.
1. I only "pulled out" the taweel weapon, because of a question that was asked about Khidr - that was off the track of the Sajda topic. If you just ignore that part, the discussion remains the same, so it shouldn't make too much of a difference.
2. Disclosing Taweel is against our Ismaili Fatimi Dawoodi Bohra belief (our texts have stressed on this numerous times), that is our belief. I beg you to respect it.

@anajmi

There is nothing to disclose. The actions of Khidr (as) are already explained in the Quran when he himself explains them to Musa (as). Whatever great secrets you are taught, are nothing but fiction.

Yes he does explain himself to Musa AS, but it gets deeper than that.
This shows your lack of Ismaili Fatimi knowledge, as Taweel it the basis of the knowledge, especially from the Quran. There are many arguments on the existence of taweel (a deeper meaning), Syeda Moiyed Shirazi RA has discussed this numerous times. (Read it, that's IF you are an Ismaili Fatimi believer)

I hope this doesn't go off the track but:
There's a simple story i've heard from someone who went to University in Cairo. The professor was a blind man and argued against the existence of taweel. One of the students cried out, that there is an ayat in the Quran, that forces you to belive in taweel, to save your own soul!
He recited the ayah : من كان في هذه اعمى فهو في الاخرة اعمى و اضل سبيلا
(Translation: He who is blind (in this life), is blind in the hereafter and even more astray!)
So, if he believed in the "literal" meaning, he wouldn't be too happy in the afterlife

Thus, we believe everything has a deeper meaning.

@porus

I have referred to 'innovation' in the sense that it is a new practice introduced in Himma by Qadi Noman. I do not load the term with emotional baggage and do not consider it good or bad.

Justified. Agreed.

And whenever he refers to history or Quran (such as the episode of Yusuf), he says that it was not, or in Adam's view, it is not, considered undesirable. Why doesn't Qadi Noman say that it is actually desirable? That would be more logical if Qadi Noman wants Imam's followers to do the 'desirable', which is the main objective of Kitabul Himma.

I understand your argument. My understanding is that he brought up the fact that many un-learned people اوباش الناس do not agree with it, so he was just answering them in argument, by saying "If someone performs sujood, it's not wrong".

"Why doesn't Qadi Noman say that it is actually desirable?"
Well, he does, he wrote a whole chapter didn't he?!
He even started off by saying that many "personalities" perform this act, thus the believers/followers should be more likely to follow suit (or in porus words, desirable for them to do so)
تعظيم الائمة ص ع من تعظيم الله ع ج ، انه انما يراد من تعظيمهم طاعته ، ويبغى فيه مرضاته ، لا شريك له ، وقد رأينا اوصيائهم وولاة عهودهم يقبّلون الارض في سلامهم عليهم بين ايديهم اجلالا لهم ، وعلما بقدرهم ، ومعرفة بما اوجب الله لهم ، فاتباعهم احق من اقتدى في ذلك بهم ، ويتقرب الى الله بتعظيم اولياء الله غير مستنكفين ولا مستكبرين عنه

As I wrote before, Qadi Noman wrote "Himma" but there is no evidence that any Imam has approved it. If he did, then why did he refer to his "teacher" and not the Imam?

He uses the word "mufeed". And the Imam is the ultimate Mufeed. It is also our belief that he wouldn't have written without the Imams guidance, as stated by him in a majority of his books.

So, whether you like it or not, I cannot/will not disclose.

I was actually saying that to ajnajmi, not to you.

Many secret societies have used secrecy as a tool for control. However, slowly but surely, there is enough activity and interest in scholarly circles, both Muslim and non-Muslim including Ismailies, in Ismaili esoteric literature that it will all come out in the end. Bohras are noticeably absent from this endeavor except for a few like Poonawa and Hamdanis, both father and daughter.

Yes, I am aware of this activity. We don't agree with it. It may do some good, but according to us, a multifold of harm. As most of the times, the true views (according to the Ismaili) are mis-interpreted.

More importantly, the works they are publishing, their authors (example Syedna Moiyed Shirazi RA, Syeda Qazi Noman RA, Syenda Hamiduddin Kirmani) have actually spoken against the disclosure of this knowledge, thus, by claiming to "respect" or "believe" in the authors, they are actually going against their belief and the authors wishes. That in its self is betrayal or treason to the author and the belief in general.

Note: Poonwala & Hamdani were born into Bohra families, but i'm very sure they are not true Dawoodi Bohra s by belief.


@porus
Your translation :

تعظيم الائمة من تعظيم الله
“Glorification of Imam is Glorification of Allah”

That translation (according to me) is correct, and an integral part of our beliefs. Everything is connected. Imam AS to Rasulullah SAW and via Rasulullah SAW to Allah.
No-one would deny glorification to God (or a higher power), or wouldn't be able to. Rather his glorification to Allah is justified by his glorification/respect to the one appointed by Allah (ie Prophet etc)
Example: How much you respect a messenger reflects your respect of the sender.

Finally let us consider the ayat 37 of surat al-fussilat (41:37):

وَمِنْ آيَاتِهِ اللَّيْلُ وَالنَّهَارُ وَالشَّمْسُ وَالْقَمَرُ ۚ لَا تَسْجُدُوا لِلشَّمْسِ وَلَا لِلْقَمَرِ وَاسْجُدُوا لِلَّهِ الَّذِي خَلَقَهُنَّ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ إِيَّاهُ تَعْبُدُونَ

Translation:

"Among His signs are the night and the day, as well as the sun and the moon: do not perform sujood to the sun or the moon, but perform your sujood for Allah, who has created them - if it is Him whom you worship."

True, but I made it clear that OUR beliefs differ because those who performed Sajdo actually thought the Sun and the Moon were God. That's why Allah says, rather, they are his creation and not Gods.

However, devotees of Sayedna may say that the ayat has a subtext which indicates that exceptions can be identified in Quran’s examples of angels’ sujood to Adam and Yaqub’s ‘supposed’ sujood to his son, Yusuf. I am not convinced.

I really don't understand what more to argue with you on this.
How can you not be "convinced". This is the act of a Prophet!
Syedna Noman RA clearly says, that the Prophet Yaqoob AS performed this act, and "do you think a Prophet would do something wrong?". Furthermore, it doesn't even say (in the Quran) that his act was wrong.

The Prophet Yaqoob AS was NOT wrong? Neither was the Prophet Yusuf AS wrong to accept it. (Neither were the angels or Adam AS for that matter).

That's my belief.

[Muslim First]

Syedna or Dai is obviously not imam, prophet or Allah. There is no ayah in quran which refers to any dai, or imam. All quranic refrences are knowingly dishonest interpretation.

Bravo Br AC
At least one Bohra has guts to post obvious fact. Shias and Ismailis are known for inventing facts.

This is fascinating debate.
Ismailis are highly innovating. Batin and secrecy has become Mantra. These innovators are not averse to twist Qur’an and Sunna or putting lies even into mouth of Prophet SAW.

Look at this post by serial cut and paste artist (we are familiar with her posts)

From
http://www.ismaili.net/html/modules.php ... pic&t=7704
Zina.khan


Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2011 7:53 am Post subject: Wajah e deen
________________________________________
There is both the exoteric and the esoteric ! .."And WE have made everything in Pairs so that ye may haply reflect" !!!

The followers of the shariat do not know and realize the implications (or symbolism, ramz) of all commandments of Allah and HIS Messenger, the elements and the SUNNAH of Muhamad (saw). ...these matters belong to thousand unutterable (mysteries) which God (khudÀwand) commanded should not be divulged to everyone as some are undeserving.

These are the advices which the Prophet has brought from the mi’rÀj for the followers of the Truth (ahl-i Haqiqat)....

And those advices which he brought to the followers of sharÄ’at were a thousand matters which had to be conveyed, and all have acquired knowledge of them....

But about this matter (guftar) no one has information except for the true unitarian believer.

The Prophet instructed the believers, bequeathing them not to divulge (such mysteries), but to keep them hidden from those who are undeserving, in the same way as he himself had concealed them.

And it is about that secret teaching that he said: "Consort in the assemblies of the Truth (majlis-i Haqiqa).....God has founded this religion of "Haqiqat" for those who live cleanly.

Surely, every one who can do so must realize the value of this matter, must follow his path, and must be firm in following the Imam e Zamana....This means that a man should be contented with what has been commanded by God, with his destiny and fate accepting it in full resignation (taslim).

The (real) believer (mu'min) is one who from the (observance of the rules of) sharia'at arrives at (the following of the rules of) Tariqqat, and from the latter to Haqiqat, which is the real inner meaning (batin) of sharia'at

Continue reading more garbage at http://www.ismaili.net/html/modules.php ... pic&t=7704

So according to innovators Prophet during his Meraj brought more then 5 prayers. He kept all of it secrete and initiated only Ali RA. Ali kept it secret and passed these thru nass to either 12th Imam, or Hazir Imam or Imam in Satar and to Dai by Ilham.

Do you really believe this BS?

Wasalaam

[anajmi]

This shows your lack of Ismaili Fatimi knowledge,

Please do not blame me for this lack of knowledge. This is your fault. Didn't you say in an earlier post

So, whether you like it or not, I cannot/will not disclose.

You cannot have it both ways.

Here is what Allah says in the Quran
3:187 AND LO, God accepted a solemn pledge from those who were granted earlier revelation [when He bade them]: "Make it known unto mankind, and do not conceal it!" But they cast this [pledge] behind their backs, and bartered it away for a trifling gain: and how evil was their bargain!

2:283 And if you are on a journey and cannot find a scribe, pledges [may be taken] in hand: but if you trust one another, then let him who is trusted fulfil his trust, and let him be conscious of God, his Sustainer. And do not conceal what you have witnessed - for, verily, he who conceals it is sinful at heart; and God has full knowledge of all that you do. -

3:71 O followers of earlier revelation! Why do you cloak the truth with falsehood and conceal the truth of which you are [so well] aware? -

5:15 O followers of the Bible! Now there has come unto you Our Apostle, to make clear unto you much of what you have been concealing [from yourselves) of the Bible, and to pardon much. Now there has come unto you from God a light, and a clear divine writ, -
God sent prophet Muhammad (saw) to reveal that which was being concealed by the followers of the Bible. And now we have the same story in bohras. Fortunately, what the bohras hide is mere fiction, so we won't be needing another messenger to reveal it.

And here is the kicker

2:159 BEHOLD, as for those who suppress aught of the evidence of the truth and of the guidance which We have bestowed from on high, after We have made it clear unto mankind through the divine writ - these it is whom God will reject, and whom all who can judge will reject.

[anajmi]

There's a simple story i've heard from someone who went to University in Cairo. The professor was a blind man and argued against the existence of taweel. One of the students cried out, that there is an ayat in the Quran, that forces you to belive in taweel, to save your own soul!
He recited the ayah : من كان في هذه اعمى فهو في الاخرة اعمى و اضل سبيلا
(Translation: He who is blind (in this life), is blind in the hereafter and even more astray!)
So, if he believed in the "literal" meaning, he wouldn't be too happy in the afterlife
Thus, we believe everything has a deeper meaning.

Seriously? Is that your taaweel? I seriously doubt that professor had this ayah in mind when he was talking about Taaweel. This kind of taaweel is used in everyday language. When my daughter falls down for no apparent reason, I ask her "Are you blind"? Does she have to attend taaweel classes to figure out why I am asking her if she is blind?

[anajmi]

By the way, can you tell me which ayah is being referred to in this story? As I am positive that Allah has explained in the following or the preceding ayahs, who the people are who have been referred to as "blind" in this ayah.

[anajmi]

The Prophet Yaqoob AS was NOT wrong? Neither was the Prophet Yusuf AS wrong to accept it. (Neither were the angels or Adam AS for that matter).



That's my belief.

So you believe that prophet Muhammad (saw) was wrong, when he prevented people from doing sajda to him?

[fearAllah]

The Prophet Yaqoob AS was NOT wrong? Neither was the Prophet Yusuf AS wrong to accept it. (Neither were the angels or Adam AS for that matter).



That's my belief.

So you believe that prophet Muhammad (saw) was wrong, when he prevented people from doing sajda to him?

I asked one of my bohora friend the same question, he crossed the limit by saying that prophet Mohammed (SAW) was meant for his time and his people, Allah is in contact with our Dai now in our time and we should only follow whatever he says, it sounded so disgusting to me, i tried to open his eyes but he got provoked rather, for him no one was bigger than Sayedna, not even Allah, in the end i had to terminate the argument as i was just very close of getting a nomination for baraat. Deaf Dumb Blind (Summun Bukmun Umyun)!

[porus]

I do not have anything more to add to this topic but must correct false impression that Adam’s last post may have created.

And whenever he refers to history or Quran (such as the episode of Yusuf), he says that it was not, or in Adam's view, it is not, considered undesirable. Why doesn't Qadi Noman say that it is actually desirable? That would be more logical if Qadi Noman wants Imam's followers to do the 'desirable', which is the main objective of Kitabul Himma.

I understand your argument. My understanding is that he brought up the fact that many un-learned people اوباش الناس do not agree with it, so he was just answering them in argument, by saying "If someone performs sujood, it's not wrong".

You are mixing the episode of so-called sujood by Yaqub to Yusuf with taqbeel al-ard (kissing of earth). The ‘unlearned’ objected to taqbeel al-ard because it appeared to them to be sujood to other than Allah. Qadi Noman says that they are different. So what Qadi Noman was actually saying is that performing “taqbeel al-ard is not wrong”. Not as you say, “sujood is not wrong”

"Why doesn't Qadi Noman say that it is actually desirable?"

Well, he does, he wrote a whole chapter didn't he?!

No. He is devoting the chapter for the justification of taqbeel al-ard not sujood.

He even started off by saying that many "personalities" perform this act, thus the believers/followers should be more likely to follow suit (or in porus words, desirable for them to do so)
تعظيم الائمة ص ع من تعظيم الله ع ج ، انه انما يراد من تعظيمهم طاعته ، ويبغى فيه مرضاته ، لا شريك له ، وقد رأينا اوصيائهم وولاة عهودهم يقبّلون الارض في سلامهم عليهم بين ايديهم اجلالا لهم ، وعلما بقدرهم ، ومعرفة بما اوجب الله لهم ، فاتباعهم احق من اقتدى في ذلك بهم ، ويتقرب الى الله بتعظيم اولياء الله غير مستنكفين ولا مستكبرين عنه

Again, it is about taqbeel al-ard and not about sujood. I have translated this sentence in my earlier post.

Your translation :

تعظيم الائمة من تعظيم الله
“Glorification of Imam is Glorification of Allah”

That translation (according to me) is correct, and an integral part of our beliefs. Everything is connected. Imam AS to Rasulullah SAW and via Rasulullah SAW to Allah.

My comment here is related to uniqueness of Allah. He is not to be put in the same ‘maqaam’ as any of His creations. This is the same argument as sujood that devotees of Sayedna make. “Perofrming sujood to Sayedna is performing sujood to Allah” and it follows that glorifying Sayedna is glorification of Allah. I reject both of these on the basis of tawheed.

Finally let us consider the ayat 37 of surat al-fussilat (41:37):

وَمِنْ آيَاتِهِ اللَّيْلُ وَالنَّهَارُ وَالشَّمْسُ وَالْقَمَرُ ۚ لَا تَسْجُدُوا لِلشَّمْسِ وَلَا لِلْقَمَرِ وَاسْجُدُوا لِلَّهِ الَّذِي خَلَقَهُنَّ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ إِيَّاهُ تَعْبُدُونَ

Translation:

"Among His signs are the night and the day, as well as the sun and the moon: do not perform sujood to the sun or the moon, but perform your sujood for Allah, who has created them - if it is Him whom you worship."

True, but I made it clear that OUR beliefs differ because those who performed Sajdo actually thought the Sun and the Moon were God. That's why Allah says, rather, they are his creation and not Gods.

This ayat is not at all in reference to non-Muslims who considered other than Allah to be God. It is for Muslims who were aware of the kalima “la ilaha illa Allah”. Remember, in the chronology of revelation of the Quran, surat al-fussilat was revealed as the 61st sura, long after the ayat of “:iqra bismi rabbika” which was the 1st. By that time, tawheed of Allah was well-established. The ayat is rather the emphasis on what is due to Allah alone in ritual sajda. Maybe, it is addressed specifically to the devotees of Sayedna.

Syedna Noman RA clearly says, that the Prophet Yaqoob AS performed this act, and "do you think a Prophet would do something wrong?". Furthermore, it doesn't even say (in the Quran) that his act was wrong.

Quran does not say that this act was right either and it is clearly not intentional sujood of respect. It is more like that they fell sujjadan (“in the manner of sujood”), perhaps out of shame, this being quite the opposite of respect. Also, Sura Yusuf (53rd revelation) was revealed before Surat al-fussilat (61st revelation). Thus, it can be argued that the above ayat (41:37) supersedes any notion of Sujood to Yusuf.

[anajmi]

porus,

I seriously doubt the chronology of the ayahs in the Quran is going to make a difference. Isn't prophet Muhammad (saw) the last prophet? Didn't he come after Yusuf (as)? Shouldn't his actions and commands supercede those of prior prophets if they appear to be in conflict?

[porus]

porus,

I seriously doubt the chronology of the ayahs in the Quran is going to make a difference. Isn't prophet Muhammad (saw) the last prophet? Didn't he come after Yusuf (as)? Shouldn't his actions and commands supercede those of prior prophets if they appear to be in conflict?

This is a good point. Muslims are supposed to follow Muhammad and the shari'at he brought.

I must emphasize that 41:37 is addressed to Muslims primaily. Non-Muslims may read it but may not follow until they become Muslims. The ayat is a direct command to believers. Allah is not describing events such as sujood to Adam by angels or the supoosed sujood to Yusuf by Yaqub from which devotees of Sayedna are seeking justification for their sujood to Dai. Allah explicitly commands sajda only to Him and forbids it to anyone else.

I believe that the attribution to Qadi Noman as recommending sajda to humans in his kitab ul-himma is false. He is doing no such thing. He explicitly states that Imams have not instructed us to perform sajda to them and that Prophet forbade sajda to him by his followers.

[anajmi]

I believe that the attribution to Qadi Noman as recommending sajda to humans in his kitab ul-himma is false. He is doing no such thing. He explicitly states that Imams have not instructed us to perform sajda to them and that Prophet forbade sajda to him by his followers.

I believe Qadi Noman was bending the rules in the favor of his Imam. It was only a matter of time before this was taken to the next level as the bohras have done. He was playing games with the laws of Allah that almost all of us play. Aga Khanis claim that even though Allah has said that alcohol and gambling are the handiwork of satan, he hasn't explicitly prevented humans from either!!

[fearAllah]

Adam, are you claiming to be more knowlegeable and intelligent than Prophet Mohamed (SAW) and Moulana Ali in understanding/interpreting the glorious Quran? Both of them have utterly condemned the act of Sajda to anyone (be it of love or worship) but except to Allah. Fear the day of Qayamat where you will be facing them infront of Allah, would you even challenge them there also?