End these Tamashas and the corruption thereof

[Mubarak]

The very name "Daimul-Islam" means the "Pillars or founding principles of Islam". It has chapter on Iman, Valayat, Business transactions, Oaths and vows, food, Drinks, Medicines, Dress and perfumes, Hunting, Slaughtering animals, Marriage, Divorce, Wills, Inheritance etc. There is no mention of Misaq or Raza in Daimul Islam. When the book is meant to explain and elaborate the principles of Islam, how can it then differ from Quran and Sunna and be different for Ismailis or Dawoodi Bohras?
The Misaq and Raza are much later additions and recently introduced 'Baraat' is absolutely anti-Islam.

oh..meet Mr.insaaf...the person who will decide wat is islam and wat is anti islam...................
does not givin permission for zarih of moulatena fatema come under islam or anti islam for you....

'Bohras' in Arabic means follower of middle path.

Unlike Sunni and Ithna shari, Bohras neither worship grave and nor like Wahabi abondon grave.

'Mosque' is only the ground and not the precincts. Hence, Dawoodi Bohras are strictly against decorating mosque and graves.

Putting gold Zaree on the graves of Nabi/Vasi/Imam/Dai who never liked gold - is act of only religiously corrupt and materialistically rich people like Burhanuddin saheb. Thus putting gold Zaree on Molatina Fatima a.s. is against the principal of Dawoodi Bohras.

Guy_sam2005, there is no difference in 'sawab' for praying between luxary / highly decorated mosque of London, Dubai, etc and white-washed poor pricinct mosque in Indian village.

Can you cite one example where any Nabi, Wasi, Imam (even during era of Fatimi Daulat) or Dai's till 46th have decorated grave and mosque like Burhanuddin saheb does?

None till 46th Dai has band-baja!!!

None of the Indian Dai till 46 went to Haj, as it is against the principles for Dai to leave his zazira!

Do you find any photos or sketch or portrait of any Nabi/vasi/Imam/Dai till 46th? Burhanuddin sahib has effectively programmed Shabab Mumeen brothers/sisters mind like that of Kafirs/idol worshippers! They will wake by looking the photos! they will beg (asking dua) in front of Burhan sahib photo!

Businessman Burhanuddin sahib is the enemy of Fatima Dawat!

[Muslim First]

oh..meet Mr.insaaf...the person who will decide wat is islam and wat is anti islam...................
does not givin permission for zarih of moulatena fatema come under islam or anti islam for you....

Let Prophet decide what is under Islam or out of it.

Graves
Jabir reported:

The Prophet SAW forbade plastering of the graves and making inscriptions or building anything upon them.

Related by Muslim: From Treasury of Ahadith by Dr. M.U. Kazi

Zarih of Fatema RA would be unIslamic and not possible so long as Shia do not own S.A.

[Muslim First]

'Bohras' in Arabic means follower of middle path.

Which version of Arabic? Sk. Ismail Raj version?

Unlike Sunni and Ithna shari, Bohras neither worship grave and nor like Wahabi abondon grave.

Once again uninormed and ignorant statement from chela of Sk. raj.

Sunnis, Ithna shari or Bohra, if they are true Muslim then they would not worship graves. Wahabis have not abondoned graves, they just demolished buildings upon them and built walls around grave yard, so the grave worshippers do not worship them.

[Mubarak]

Wahabis have not abondoned graves, they just demolished buildings upon them and built walls around grave yard, so the grave worshippers do not worship them.

Then why Wahabies didn't demolished building upon Prophet Mohammed (s.a.) grave?

Why have Wahabies not ground levelled/falttened Prophet Mohammed (s.a.) and Abu Bakr graves like the way they did to Molatina Fatima (a.s.), Imam Hasan (a.s.) and other Imams grave?

[Muslim First]

Read history

They wanted to do it.

Just remember Prophets grave is in the house of Syedena Aisha. So there was already walls around and roof over it.

I do not know if Prophets grave has plstering around it or not.

[Muslim First]

Why have Wahabies not ground levelled/falttened Prophet Mohammed (s.a.) and Abu Bakr graves

What evidance you have that those graves are not flat?

[Mubarak]

Why have Wahabies not ground levelled/falttened Prophet Mohammed (s.a.) and Abu Bakr graves

What evidance you have that those graves are not flat?

What evidence you have that those graves are flat?

[Mubarak]

Read history

They wanted to do it.

Just remember Prophets grave is in the house of Syedena Aisha. So there was already walls around and roof over it.

I do not know if Prophets grave has plstering around it or not.

King of Saudi Arabia is the sole custodian/current title holder and not Aaisha! Likewise he is for Jannat-ul-baki.

He demolished later and not former! Why this double-standard?

[Humsafar]

anajmi, the moment I mention "literal interpretation" you seem to lose your marbles and begin to hyperventitlate. Why do you have to make it so obvious? Look at your posts, you're all over the place. I'm not even sure what are you railing against - me, the reform movement or all those clueless Muslims who cannot agree with your point of view about Islam? Please do calm down, this is not the end of the world. Besides we're only talking about ideas and stories - which ultimately have no substance, no matter how sacred you may consider them to be.

About the interpretation of the Quran we have gone over it many times before so not point in repeating ourselves.

Yes, I know Daim ul Islam means Pillars of Islam, and the Bohras are an Islamic sect in their own right. But given their doctrine of Imam/Dai/Dawat they are often charged as unIslamic by sunnis and wahabis. And this I said was not under discussion as far as the reform movement is concerned.

When I talk about the reform movement I try to lay down the official position to the best of my knowledge. My personal beliefs have nothng to do with it. And we've gone over this also umpteen times. If you continue to have issues with my position so much so that it drives you to call me names then that's absolutely fine. But please do not discredit the whole reform movement just because you do not agree with me.

[Humsafar]

I would again like to repeat the fact that you cannot eliminate corruption without eliminating the Dai.

Fact? This is not a fact, only your opinion. And maybe you're right but that is not the point. The point is that the Dai and Dawat are not negotiable as far as the reform movement is concerned. That is the official mandate. Whether you agree with this or not is anohter matter.
Can bohras live without the Dai and Dawat? Yes, they can - the whole bloody world lives without them - and reformists in Udaipur and elsewhere have managed without them (although without abandoning their belief in the doctrine). But that is not the point. The Dawoodi Bohra identity and faith are rooted in the Ismaili doctrine of Imam, Dai and Dawat. You can't abandon this doctrine and still be called Dawoodi Bohra.

[anajmi]

Humsafar,

I loose my marbles because people like you refuse to learn. I have mentioned the exact same thing a million times and you still come up with "literal interpretation". That seems to be the only two words left in your wahhabi related vocabulary. And ofcourse the third word - "wahhabi".

I have come across a few reformists on this board and most of them have the same belief system like you do. The words "wahhabi" and "literal interpretation" figure prominently in their vocabulary as well and they do not have Iman. I am not discrediting the reform movement. You are. Allah says in the Quran that he helps only those that help themselves. This can be understood by those that believe in Allah and his message. So if you want to reform the Dai as per Daim ul Islam, then first reform yourself as per Daim ul Islam.

When I talk about the reform movement I try to lay down the official position to the best of my knowledge. My personal beliefs have nothng to do with it. And we've gone over this also umpteen times.

And we will go over it every time you talk about reforming the Dai as per Daim ul Islam. Let me repost the very first line in of Daim ul Islam one more time This will take care of your argument that "my personal beliefs have nothing to do with it."

On Faith (Iman)
Jafar b. Muhammad: Faith consists in professing by the tongue, believing with the heart and acting in accordance with its tenets. This and nothing but this is valid.

Personally, I believe that people shouldn't be asking others to reform when they are not ready to do so themselves. If your personal beliefs can be different from your official beliefs, then so can the Dai's. Why can't the kotharis be two faced like you are?

[Humsafar]

Bohras today number a little over a million and if the e-jamat records are to be believed then they are a little over half a million so naturally during the era of the previous dais the number would have been a few thousand. Moreover there were hardly any wealthy bohras then as compared to the present times which means that there was hardly any scope for extortion and/or corruption. If the bohra population was as big as today and they were as wealthy then probably the story wouldnt have been any different. One cannot rule out this possibility totally.

Maybe you're right, and maybe despite all the temptation they would have remained true to faith. But this is all speculation.

[anajmi]

And by the way, I would appreciate it if you could show me where in Daim ul Islam are the actions of the Dai laid down.

[Aarif]

Aarif,

How is the Dai's position unique in that it cannot exist without corruption ? Are you saying just this Dai or any Dai , and why ?

If the dawoodi bohras will appoint you as their Dai will you carry out the affairs of dawat with full honesty and integrity? Do you think that you will serve the community selflessly for the rest of your life without expecting anything in return? We both know the answers to these questions. Don't we???

Furthermore, you are still arguing that the Dai's position is unnecessary which can be debated (and true), but this is beyond the scope of the reform movement as Humsafar has stated.

The reform ideology is not written on stone. The goal is to remove corruption. If it requires removal of Dai than so it be.

Furthermore, the "almost" does not cover mostly Muslim countries.
( You know I can't let you get away with that spin ! )

I was referring to countries like Israel, America and Russia you moron

These are matters of faith, not necessity.

Don't you think that matters of faith should be based on the faith. I am referring to Islam in this case since dawoodi bohras still call themselves muslims...

[Humsafar]

Personally, I believe that people shouldn't be asking others to reform when they are not ready to do so themselves. If your personal beliefs can be different from your official beliefs, then so can the Dai's. Why can't the kotharis be two faced like you are?

anajmi, all this self-righteousness does not suit you. And please don't be so preposterous as to equate me with the Dai and Kothar. The Dai is in a position of power and authority. From all evidence we know that he is abusing his authority and exploiting the community in the name of religion. What he is doing is patently wrong - and an enlightened public opinion can agree to that conclusion. Now if I join in that condemnation and demand that the dai and his administration change their behaviour, it does not require me to be religeous in order to express my opinion. Any human being has the right to condemn any wrong anywhere - so long as they are not committing the same wrong, otherwise that would be hypocritical. Now, if you charge me as 'double-faced' then you are imputing that I'm also committing the same wrongs as the Dai. This of course is ridiculous and needs no further comment.

Regarding Dai ul Islam, the Dai derives his position and authority from it and the traditions thereof. He professes belief in that doctrine and must be held up to the standards of that doctrine. If he is found wanting, he must be reminded. Nobody is foisting Daim ul Islam on him and saying "follow it". His very entity is rooted in Daim ul Islam and he has an obligation to follow it. He must be judged according the beliefs and tenets he espouses. I'm merely reminding him about this - especially because his actions adversely affect the public good. Now if you turn around and say I can't do that because I do not follow the same beliefs and tenets, that is ridiculous. Judge me by the standards of the beliefs and tenets I espouse.

For argument's sake, let's say tomorrow the Dai says he has nothing to do with Ismaili doctrine and dawat claiming that it's a load of crap, and says that he's only interested in the abdes' money. Then of course there will no point in throwing Daim ul Islam at him. Then he'll be charged only on the grounds of morality and human rights. Religion and Daim ul Islam will be out of the equation.

[porus]

Personally, I believe that people shouldn't be asking others to reform when they are not ready to do so themselves. If your personal beliefs can be different from your official beliefs, then so can the Dai's. Why can't the kotharis be two faced like you are?

No one can 'reform' personal beliefs of others. That type of reformation is personal.

Quran reports Rasulullah saying to Arabs that unless Iman enters their hearts they should consider themselves Muslims and not Mumins. Imam al-Sadiq's dictum elaborates the final stage of belief. In the earlier stages it is the actions that must be performed. Beliefs follow actions, most likely.

Reformists, rightly, are concerned with actions, procedures and accountability. The criteria of these are Daim ul Islam and other books. Quran too; but the Daim incorporates Quran from the Bohra standpoint. Personal beliefs of those who advocate reforms in accordance with these criteria should not matter. That will of course not be understood by fanatics who will simply be concerned with character assassination of those who advocate the reform.

[porus]

Regarding Dai ul Islam, the Dai derives his position and authority from it and the traditions thereof.

More correctly, in my opinion, it is the authority of the Imam that is central to and derived from the Daim-ul-Islam which was published during the Imamat of Imam Moiz. Al-Tayyib was the eigth Imam who followed Moiz. Authority of Dai-ul-Mutlaq was established by Hurrat al-Malika, and limitations of that authority have been specified by Sayedna Hatim.

[anajmi]

Humsafar,

Here is the deal. You do not believe in the Daim ul Islam. You do not believe in the Quran and you do not believe Allah. So you do not understand if what the Dai is doing as per the Quran or not. Neither do you understand any metaphorical interpretation of the Quran. Maybe what the Dai is doing is allowed according to some metaphorical interpretation of the Quran/Daim ul Islam that you do not have knowledge about. If the Dai is committing crimes and violating human rights, then take him to a secular court and prove your case.

He must be judged according the beliefs and tenets he espouses.

That is the most ignorant statement I have heard from someone claiming to have evolved consciousness. If I say that I believe in committing rape and then do not commit rape, will you send me to jail?

And the next time someone like me says "Quran", "literal interpretation" shouldn't be the only two words coming out of your mouth. Go and read it once in a while!!

[anajmi]

Personal beliefs of those who advocate reforms in accordance with these criteria should not matter.

And this is according to whose authority? We have seen many a politicians careers destroyed because their personal matters interfered with their political stands. It is pretty common, even in a developed nation like America to start digging into a would be politicians personal life to find personal issues that can be used against him. That is what society cares about. If your personal beliefs are daimmetrically opposite to what you represent, then you shouldn't be allowed to represent at all. Humsafar, has shown his personal beliefs only on this anonymous board. I am sure outside he pretends to be a believer standing to pray namaz and dare not display his personal beliefs. Just like you do porus!!

Fanatics like me have nothing to hide. We are the same outside and inside!!

[Humsafar]

Porus, thanks for the correction.

anajmi, understanding and beliefs are two different things. It can be argued that one is possible without the other.

If I say that I believe in committing rape and then do not commit rape, will you send me to jail?

That's funny. But you know what I mean. You do not have to stretch the logic of my point to win brownie points.

[anajmi]

anajmi, understanding and beliefs are two different things.

Correct. I understand you have two sets of beliefs and believe that it is hypocritical. Dai understands the Daim ul Islam but doesn't believe he needs to follow it. Simple.

More brownie points for me.

[porus]

Corruption has no religion. A non-Bohra will see corruption in Dawat whether he believes in Daim-ul-Islam or not. And a non-Bohra may even decide to support the cause of a Bohra reformist.

A non-believing Bohra like anajmi feels perfectly entitled to pour forth on matters Bohra. Why can't Humsafar do the same? A Bohra, even if he does not believe in the Bohra religion, may have an interest in it because of his personal history and close personal involvement with friends and relatives. Just like anajmi and Muslim First who consider it their right to pontificate on Bohras.

anajmi, why don't you read Taqwacore and other writings by Michael Muhammad Knight, a Muslim punk. That may cure you of your fanaticism and even Sunnism.

[anajmi]

Porus, thanks for the correction.

Humsafar,

I have now shown that you have neither understanding nor belief. For eg. you thought that the Dai derived his authority from Daim ul Islam just because the first word has "Dai" in it. You have neither read it nor understood it. Same thing with the Quran. You learned only two words from your accomplice porus - "literal interpretation". You might want to think about that the next time you want to reform someone according to their own faiths or beliefs.

porus,

I do not need to be cured of anything. I do not pretend to understand one thing and believe in another. A non-believing bohra, according to you, would end up becoming a muslim, which is actually what a believing bohra should be instead of idol worshipping the Dai and the ahle bait.

Why can't Humsafar do the same?

Sure he can. All I am saying is that he should learn a little bit more about what he is saying. Just saying two words "literal interpretation" every time someone says "Quran" isn't going to get him any brownie points. Besides, as I have said before, I do not pretend to be something I am not, which you and Humsafar do. Grow a pair and come out of the closet.

[anajmi]

One other thing. If I were to come out one day and claim that according to the Geetha, the Ganpati needs to be submerged in lake water and not salt water, I'd deserve to be slapped around. Not because it is not the truth, but simply because I am not supposed to be making that call. In my position as a muslim, I can only say that belief in Ganpati is idol worshipping and is haraam according to the Quran (literal interpretation or otherwise).

If however, I see the pundit stealing from the temple, then I can very well call the police, give my evidence and have him arrested. The reformists haven't been able to do any such thing with the Dai have they?

[Fatwa Banker]

Aarif,

Your incoherent post is devoid of logic. Perhaps you should stick to commenting on N/A's Sarbaat drinking posts instead of dumbing down other topics.

Otherwise I will have to call you a Jaahil (Jr. of course), and I don't want to

[Humsafar]

More brownie points for me.

Good for you.

Humsafar,

I have now shown that you have neither understanding nor belief. For eg. you thought that the Dai derived his authority from Daim ul Islam just because the first word has "Dai" in it. You have neither read it nor understood it. Same thing with the Quran. You learned only two words from your accomplice porus - "literal interpretation". You might want to think about that the next time you want to reform someone according to their own faiths or beliefs.

If you want find comfort in the assumptions you make about it then please continue to do so. You do need comfort. I've nothing to prove to you or anybody else.

If however, I see the pundit stealing from the temple, then I can very well call the police, give my evidence and have him arrested. The reformists haven't been able to do any such thing with the Dai have they?

The two inquiry commission have condemned his actions. But since you are prone to taking things literally you won't understand that it is as good as calling the police!!!

[anajmi]

The two inquiry commission have condemned his actions. But since you are prone to taking things literally you won't understand that it is as good as calling the police!!!

Well, then I guess it is time for the reformists to go home eh? Hundreds of inquiry commissions condemned atrocities committed by bal thakeray's goons during the riots. Similar inquiry commissions have condemned Israeli actions in the Gaza strip for decades. These inquiry commissions have no teeth. If you find comfort in the fact that his actions were condemned by a similarly toothless inquiry commission, more power to you.

[Humsafar]

anajmi, the way you keep changing the goal post it's difficult to keep up with you. Now you are accusing reformists of not doing enough. Of course, inquiry commissions are pointless put that is not the point. The point is that reformist are doing everything they can to bring the dai to book. Enquiry commissions was one way, several court cases against him are another, media articles etc. are yet another. We've the dai covered - from religious, social, legal, secular angles. And your barb "Well, then I guess it is time for the reformists to go home eh? " is misplaced. Would you say the same thing to Palestinians? The point is to keep trying, hence the reform movement, hence the intifada.

[anajmi]

anajmi, the way you keep changing the goal post it's difficult to keep up with you. Now you are accusing reformists of not doing enough.

C'mon Humsafar, you know what I mean. Do not try to argue simply to win some brownie points. Only I can do that.

And your barb "Well, then I guess it is time for the reformists to go home eh? " is misplaced.

C'mon man. You know what I mean. You said it was the same as calling the police. Obviously it is not. Trying to win more brownie points?

We've the dai covered - from religious, social, legal, secular angles.

Really? I seriously hope that you are not in charge of covering the religious angle. I support the reform movement but am not too impressed by reformists like yourself.

[Humsafar]

I support the reform movement but am not too impressed by reformists like yourself.

And you thought my life's purpose was to impress you???

Actually, I take that back. Glad that you support the reform movement. I do not matter!!!