Dawoodi Bohra Forum

humanbeing wrote:HI MF
Thanks for sharing insight into topic under debate. I wish to refrain from divisive debates between Shia-Sunni. I dislike fragmentation and segregation of Human Spirit at any level, be it in Islam or other religions. Any side we choose, its filled with hatred.

Salam bhai,i totally agree with you.Islam as such is a simplest religion to follow as compare to any religion of world.Islam gives us total independence ,if i am not rong there is verse in Quran like LA IKRAHFIDDIN .True religion never segregate humans ,if allah loves only shia why sunnies,wahabis even hindus get child?Allah can stop new borns in these sects.In my pov be faithfull with your faith do not be blind with any faith.May we all muslims be unite .

The reason why I highlighted your quotes was because you said that
"Abu bakr being associate friend of Prophet"
"If prophet Muhammad had objection with Abu Bakr, why did he consider him as his friend at all and allow him other Islamic leadership rights" -
this is why I mention that you are observing the Bohras and not listening to the bayaan. Abu Bakr was dushman of the Prophet as well as Maulana Ali. I have heard you say so many times that you are a sabeel paying Bohra- but you sir are no Bohra. You may have been born in a Bohra family but you have strayed.
Abu Bakr was the person who usurped the khilafat, who usurped Fadak, who ran away from the battlefield multiple times - and you consider him a friend of the Prophet.

Your true colors are out in the open - human being.
Maula Ali was brave - no doubt - but he refrained from fighting with Abu Bakr and Umar and Usman. The nascent deen of Islam had to be preserved.

Sir

My statements are merely from the stories you Quoted. You have no Idea about my learning sources. My learning sources is from bohra faith only. I have not extensively interacted with Non Bohra Muslims in terms of religious discussions.. Having bought up in orthodox environment, sent to Bohra Madrasa, regular to sabaks, and involved in Jamat acitivities.

My understanding or learning of Abu Bakr as a Friend of Prophet Muhammad comes from Muallim who thought me in Bohra madrasa and Sabaks I have attended in Pune and Kuwait. You need to learn history of Islam from bohra sources as well mainstream sources, and it’s a common understanding that Abu bakr was as early associate of Prohpet Muhammad since early days of Islam. Further on, shia and bohra school of thought, denounces Abu Bakr as strayed from message of prophet due to power gained by virtue of his position in the society, embrace of Islam and closeness to Prophet Muhammad.

Maula Ali preserved deen of Islam by his virtuous conduct and adherence to Islamic Principles, he refrained from fighting for power and sacrificed beyond tolerance to keep Muslim Ummah united. And what exactly bohra leaders are doing is opposite of what Maula Ali sacrificed for. Bohra leadership have fragmented and divided Muslims into pigeon holes of beliefs to maintain their greedy authority over limited masses. Now figure out the difference, who is following what ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sir

Please lets not divert the topic by getting into Shia-Sunni hate debate. And please comment on related issues.

If Raza for Namaaz is an important factor to validate and Raza in present time can only come from Sayedna Saheb and now Mansoos Mufaddal bhai saaheb, then what do you say about Millions of Muslims, and Million of Masjids which are facilitating Namaaz all over the world, with no idea or knowledge of sayedna saheb and such condition ?


Do you conclude that, majority million muslims are praying namaaz in vain and only bohra namaaz is pristine of all, do you conclude that, Allah is not accepting their namaaz because its not permitted by raza na saheb

Allah is not accepting their namaaz because its not permitted by raza na saheb

humanbeing,

That is precisely what the abde idiots believe. Only bohra namaz is accepted because it has raza of raza na saheb. Where in the bohra namaz is the most haphazardly offered namaz as compared to that of any other followers of the sunnah!!

anajmi wrote:

Allah is not accepting their namaaz because its not permitted by raza na saheb

humanbeing,

That is precisely what the abde idiots believe. Only bohra namaz is accepted because it has raza of raza na saheb. Where in the bohra namaz is the most haphazardly offered namaz as compared to that of any other followers of the sunnah!!

Anajmi u must be saying dat ALLAH SWT will accept d namaz of those who used to smoke out side the gate of masjid and at the time of azan they just went inside d masjid and aftr wazu they started namaz.. Hope u get to which im pointing

Murtuza with VDs,

I get your point, but as always, it is completely irrelevant. You get my point?

MurtazaVds wrote:Anajmi u must be saying dat ALLAH SWT will accept d namaz of those who used to smoke out side the gate of masjid and at the time of azan they just went inside d masjid and aftr wazu they started namaz.. Hope u get to which im pointing

He forgot to mention the gutkha eating masses who spit outside the masjid gates and at the time of azan they just go inside and after they are in, they have their eyes on the first floor wherein they recieve immense "aankho ni thandak". Hope u get where Iam pointing at !!!

anajmi wrote:Murtuza with VDs,

I get your point, but as always, it is completely irrelevant. You get my point?

anajmi
when ur taking abt DB's dat is relevant and y then talking abt other than DB is irrelevant

Humanbeing - Your 'asal' is corrupted. 'Asal' is walayat. Let me explain why.
You say that "Maula Ali preserved deen of Islam by his virtuous conduct and adherence to Islamic Principles, he refrained from fighting for power and sacrificed beyond tolerance to keep Muslim Ummah united." But he did battle Aisha, Talha and Zubayr and also battled Muawiyah. So could he not have preserved deen of Islam by not fighting against Aisha and Muawaiyah. Imam Hasan did not fight against Muawiyah and accepted peace with him. Imam Husain did fight against Yazid.
Walayat teaches that the 'saaheb' - whatever he does, is haq. He does not fight - it is haq, he fights - it is haq, he accepts a peace treaty - it is haq, he fights and gains shahadat - it is haq. Rasulullah (SAW) did dua to Allah taala, that haq ne Ali na saathe phiraavje. He did not do dua ke - Ali ne haq par raakhje.
When Imam Hasan did a peace treaty with Muawiyah, Jabir bin Abdullah Ansari had some misgivings about it. That night the Prophet appeared in his dream - and he told Jabir that whatever Imam Hasan does, either he sits down or he stands up - it is haq.
You look at the history of Imams and Duaats. Imam Jafar us Sadiq submitted under the Abbasid Khalifas and the Fatimid Imams battled against the Abbasid Khalifas. Syedna Qutbuddin Shaheed gave up his life for preserving the deen - whereas Syedna Feerkhan and other duats submitted under rulers.

Walayat is accepting that whatever the zamaan na saheb does is correct.

Why are you worrying about millions of Muslims and their namaaz - with or without raza. The Bohra faith which you claim to be a follower expressly requires a raza. Jafar Laeen who came from Yemen and did not have raza to lead prayers but still went ahead and led prayers without raza. This caused a huge fitnat and thousands of mumineen were slaughtered in Gujarat.
You are not doing a good job of listening - stop looking around in the markaz and start concentrating on the bayan

LH

First, please stop throwing personal vengeance at me, my posts are always generally addressed, specifically to this thread. All the incidents you mentioned by haq na saheb in the past, stands justified to the need of the hour action and has stood as examples. By using vindictive statements and dumping accusations against me, you believe that, you are displaying yourself as holier than thou and escaping real issue at this thread.

It is very clear from my post where I mentioned maula Ali’s prudence of handling the situation in those times to keep the Muslim ummah united. It is you, who is dangling and playing with words to project Maula Ali as first exercising taqiyat and then declaring war and this and that. I would never object or question deeds of Prophet and Maula Ali and his progeny whose characters and persona stands as profound examples for other to emulate.

level_headed wrote:Walayat is accepting that whatever the zamaan na saheb does is correct.

Definitely, I would accept everything that Zaman – na – Saheb does, if it stands correct under purview of Islam. Deeds of Prophet Muhammad and Imam Ali were inspired by Quran and they lived by it, They prudently handled situations during their lifetime as per their reasoning and valour. So much that, their life stands an inspiration for many to seek worldly solution and salvation.

Walaayat of accepting Zamaan na saheb is correct, if Zamaan na saheb is living by Islamic principles. I m not a saint or sinless to judge another person, but I m not claiming leadership and promising to guide people too.

What do you want me to accept in walayat ?

• Hunting of Animal for sadistic pleasure of sport !
• Appointment and lack of justice of corrupt amils !
• Money oriented display of walaayat and piety !
• Segregation of bohra into classes on basis of purchased titles !

level_headed wrote:Why are you worrying about millions of Muslims and their namaaz - with or without raza.

What a lousy cop out ! The basic strategy of bohra brain washing is a derogatory comparison study of what “Ola Musalman” do and don’t.

level_headed wrote:The Bohra faith which you claim to be a follower expressly requires a raza. Jafar Laeen who came from Yemen and did not have raza to lead prayers but still went ahead and led prayers without raza. This caused a huge fitnat and thousands of mumineen were slaughtered in Gujarat.

What is your point ?? I m not aware of this case, may be I was looking around in the bayaan when this Rivayat must be going on. I will heed your advise and listen more carefully. For now please enlighten me with your story.

level_headed wrote:You are not doing a good job of listening - stop looking around in the markaz and start concentrating on the bayan

Yes ! Sir ! I shall do as advised, for now can you please concentrate on my query and enlighten me with your views, rather than looking around the topic. I shall present my query again to you, incase you missed.

humanbeing wrote:Sir

Please lets not divert the topic by getting into Shia-Sunni hate debate. And please comment on related issues.

If Raza for Namaaz is an important factor to validate and Raza in present time can only come from Sayedna Saheb and now Mansoos Mufaddal bhai saaheb, then what do you say about Millions of Muslims, and Million of Masjids which are facilitating Namaaz all over the world, with no idea or knowledge of sayedna saheb and such condition ?


Do you conclude that, majority million muslims are praying namaaz in vain and only bohra namaaz is pristine of all, do you conclude that, Allah is not accepting their namaaz because its not permitted by raza na saheb

Walaayat of accepting Zamaan na saheb is correct, if Zamaan na saheb is living by Islamic principles
Who are you to judge - whether the zamaan na saheb is living by Islamic principles or not. Are you that much deeply rooted in ilm that you can figure it out.

For example, you are throwing Hunting of Animal for sadistic pleasure of sport ! in the mix.
Who told you it is un-Islamic. Maulana Hamza was a very skilled hunter. I have not seen or heard one riwayat where Rasulullah (SAW) forbade Maulana Hamza to desist from hunting.
The following is from the book 'State & Society in Fatimid Egypt' by Yaacov Lev
"When going on hunting Al-Amir, made a monastery as his base "(page 189)
Corruption amongst Aamils - amaanat ma khayaanat - is a human trait. Aamils are humans and if they fall in this habit, unka bhi hisaab hoga. Personally, the 'corruption' that I have seen is - limited to - asking for larger salaam or better facilities.
Money oriented display of walayat and piety - My friend 'walayat' is in the heart. You can try to disguise by showing a lot of piety and throwing a lot of money - but walayat will always remain in the heart. You talk about Shiekhs in Kuwait getting special treatment but I will show you quite a few sheikhs who you will find rolling up their sleeves and serving and doing khidmat of mumineen during Ashara and other miqaats. Piety ka dhong to Awwal ne bhi kiya tha magar doodh ka doodh aur paani ka paani to baad mein nazar aa hi gaya.
Segregation of bohra into classes on basis of purchased titles ! Titles are enayat to everyone who does khidmat. Aap bhi karo na khidmat aap ko bhi enayat hogi.
Ilm se khidmat karo to aap ko Shaikh ka daraja, jaan se khidmat karo to aap ko Shaikh ka daraja aur maal se khidmat karo to Shaikh ka daraja

level_headed wrote:
Why are you worrying about millions of Muslims and their namaaz - with or without raza.


What a lousy cop out ! The basic strategy of bohra brain washing is a derogatory comparison study of what “Ola Musalman” do and don’t.

We chose to follow Maulana Ali after the Prophet, and after him the Imams and Duats. They(Prophet, Wasi, Imam and Duaat) instilled in us the concept of raza - that is why we follow it. You did not find Imam Hasan or Imam Husain or for that matter any Imam or Duaat going on a mission - trying to instill the concept of raza in the 'Ola Musalmaano' - so what leads you to think that in today's world Syedna Mohammad Burhanuddin should do it.

Here is some information on Jafar Laeen's fitnat. Very surprised that you have not heard anything on him
Vaali-ul-Hind
Moulai Hasan Bin Moulai Adam (Q.S.)
Wafat : 29th Moharram 883 AH.

Moulai Hasan Husamuddin(Q.S) became the Vaali after His father Moulai Adam (Q.S). He strived hard for the cause of Dawat and served with sincerity of heart, soul and wealth. He established a Madresa at Ahmedabad, and made arrangements for 'Mawaid'(eating facilities) of the 'Talebat-Ul-Ilm'(students).
The Fitnat of Laeen Jafar started during his time. Laeen Jafar bin Khwaja hailed from Mehsana. He came to Ahmedabad for Ilm and then did Araz to Maulai Hasan for Razaa Mubarak to go to Yemen in Hazrat Aaliyaa to gain more Ilm. Moulai Hasan (Q.S) told him to first gather knowledge in India and then go to Yemen, but Laeen Jafar disobeyed Maulai Hasan (Q.S) and proceeded to Yemen without 'Razaa' (permission). After leaving Yemen, he returned to Diu in India. In the villages there, he led namaaz and accepted ‘Vajebaat’ and ‘Huquq’ from Mumineen. On meeting Moulai Hasan in Ahmedabad and on being reprimanded by him, he apologised and asked for pardon. Moulai Hasan (Q.S) said that to gain pardon, he would have to write to all those that prayed behind him, to repeat the namaaz. Jafar refused and went away without permission to Patan.
Moulai Raja (Q.S) was the Aamil of Patan. Moulai Raja (Q.S) called Laeen Jafar and warned Laeen Jafar against defying the Hudud. Laeen Jafar challenged him that he would renounce the ‘Deen’ tomorrow and join the ‘Nasebeen’. (Nasebeen are those who are enemies of Amir-ul- Mumineen (S.A) and Ahl-e-Bait (S.A).) Moulai Raja (Q.S) thought it would be safer to leave, so he left in the night with all his belongings, family, and the books of Dawat . Safety of the 'Qutub'(books of Dawat) was his sole concern. But Jafar got hold of many books, destroyed them, slandered property, wealth, and harassed the mumineen with the help of other enemies
Truth prevailed and some Mumineen killed laeen Jafar near Champaner.
Moulai Hasan (Q.S) and His son Moulai Raj (Q.S) strived hard to survive against heavy odds and guide Mumineen back to the right path of Imaan. Moulai Hasan (Q.S) passed away on the 29th Moharram-Ul-Haram 883 AH.

level_headed wrote:Who are you to judge - whether the zamaan na saheb is living by Islamic principles or not. Are you that much deeply rooted in ilm that you can figure it out.

Level headed, you should have read my post clearly, I have already said, I m no one to judge as I m not saint and sinless, at the same time, I m not leading anyone with my fallible traits. Practices I mentioned are obviously discriminatory to a common sense free man.

level_headed wrote:Who told you it is un-Islamic. Maulana Hamza was a very skilled hunter. I have not seen or heard one riwayat where Rasulullah (SAW) forbade Maulana Hamza to desist from hunting.
The following is from the book 'State & Society in Fatimid Egypt' by Yaacov Lev
"When going on hunting Al-Amir, made a monastery as his base "(page 189)

Can you provide more insight on Hunting by Maulana Hamza, can you say with conviction that, Maulana Hamza hunted for sport / pleasure ? One can hunt for need too. Please be clear when you justify (it would help me understand).

level_headed wrote:The following is from the book 'State & Society in Fatimid Egypt' by Yaacov Lev
"When going on hunting Al-Amir, made a monastery as his base "(page 189)

Thanks for the reference, I shall find the book and read to gain more knowledge over all. However can you explain the context of the line you quoted ! Hunting and Monastery.

On a humane note, why do you feel killing of animal for pleasure sounds justified to you. Frankly when I saw the picture of hunting and sayedna saheb posing over dead corpse of hunted aimals, it made me feel uncomfortable, something inside my conscience said it is not right. I have no hatred towards Sayedna saheb. I would not like anyone hunting animals for pleasure.

I have learnt from several sabaks, how important it is to learn arkaan of zabihat and respect one must have for animal for sacrifice. I have also heard stories of Imam Ali, as a metaphor once muallim said, Imam Ali is so just in his rule, that he wouldn’t allow injustice to an ant also (I may not be able to put it in right words). Also I have heard how prophet Muhammad disliked those who mistreated animal, then how does shooting animals for fun / pleasure / sport be justified.

level_headed wrote:Corruption amongst Aamils - amaanat ma khayaanat - is a human trait. Aamils are humans and if they fall in this habit, unka bhi hisaab hoga. Personally, the 'corruption' that I have seen is - limited to - asking for larger salaam or better facilities.

Level headed ! again an innocent ignorance or shrewd denial. Sir, who are you fooling ? me or yourself ? Amaanat mein Khayanat karne walo ka kaha hisaab hua hai ? personally the corruption I have seen is :

Kufaah Fund : Plum amount of fund embezzled by Kuwait Amil in association with few sheikhs

Udaipur Kadambosi Pass : I think you are aware of that

Dahod Masjid : Do you think it takes 7 Crores to build a masjid in a town.

Corruption limited to asking for larger salaam, gold coins, schemes, selling masalla space, seling muharram space, demanding wasteful facilities (unneccssary renovations, news cars, more servants).

Sayedna saheb ke appointed Amil seena taan ke gaban karte hai, unko ek lafz nahi bola jataa, aur jo insaan hisaab maang le usko be-izzat karke baraat kar dete hai !

level_headed wrote:Money oriented display of walayat and piety - My friend 'walayat' is in the heart. You can try to disguise by showing a lot of piety and throwing a lot of money - but walayat will always remain in the heart. You talk about Shiekhs in Kuwait getting special treatment but I will show you quite a few sheikhs who you will find rolling up their sleeves and serving and doing khidmat of mumineen during Ashara and other miqaats. Piety ka dhong to Awwal ne bhi kiya tha magar doodh ka doodh aur paani ka paani to baad mein nazar aa hi gaya.

Exactly !! Sir, Walayat is in the heart, which Kothari Inc doesn’t see, That is why we see a price tag to every sharaf in our community, Ziyafat, Kadam, Kadambosi, etc. When one goes into dewri to get any of the sharaf mentioned, first thing Mulla asks “ Ketla Lakhaavo cho ??” Sheikhs will advise how much money shall be put into salaam covers, laagats are negotiated and levied on Misaak !! On Misaaak too !! To become a bohra one has to pay !!

All fingers are not same, there are good people and bad people, my objection is not with people, but ideologies and principles, no one is bad person, there are misplaced ideologies and principles. For example, you are throwing personal insults at me, and I m discussing issues. I have never questioned your faith or belief.

Piety ka dhong kuch amil bhi acha karte hai, what do you say about those amils who give hidayat in waaz and bayaans and then run away with embezzlement. Infact they don’t even run away, they settle in some other city.

level_headed wrote:Titles are enayat to everyone who does khidmat. Aap bhi karo na khidmat aap ko bhi enayat hogi.
Ilm se khidmat karo to aap ko Shaikh ka daraja, jaan se khidmat karo to aap ko Shaikh ka daraja aur maal se khidmat karo to Shaikh ka daraja

My concern is not Titles. My objection is Segregation, discriminatory practice that is going on in the community. Sir Level headed, very smartly you have dodged the issue, which is highlighted here.

level_headed wrote:We chose to follow Maulana Ali after the Prophet, and after him the Imams and Duats. They(Prophet, Wasi, Imam and Duaat) instilled in us the concept of raza - that is why we follow it. You did not find Imam Hasan or Imam Husain or for that matter any Imam or Duaat going on a mission - trying to instill the concept of raza in the 'Ola Musalmaano' - so what leads you to think that in today's world Syedna Mohammad Burhanuddin should do it.

If you are primarily deriving your raza from Prophet Muhammad, then rest of Muslims are also deriving raza from Prophet Muhammad.

level_headed wrote:You did not find Imam Hasan or Imam Husain or for that matter any Imam or Duaat going on a mission - trying to instill the concept of raza in the 'Ola Musalmaano' - so what leads you to think that in today's world Syedna Mohammad Burhanuddin should do it.

Level headed ! are you serious ? Imam hasan and Imam hussain and Imam and Duaats has been promoting, spreading awareness and inviting people to Islam, their lives are dedicated to Mission of Islam, if not Islam then what did Imam Hassan, Hussain and succeeding Imam and Duaats did ? Why did Imam hussain travel all way to karbala, why did Imams travelled al around middle east and north Africa, why did duaats were sent all over !!!

Piety ka dhong to Awwal ne bhi kiya tha magar doodh ka doodh aur paani ka paani to baad mein nazar aa hi gaya.

This (hatrade of 3+1) and extra ordinary love of Ahl-ul-Bait are founding principal of Shia Madhab. and It will never reconsile with people who abide by Qur'an and Sunnah of Prophet SAW that is mainstream Muslims.

In the Nahjul Balagha, one of the most revered books of the Shia, Ali (رضّى الله عنه) said in Sermon 126:

“With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness, and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. So be with him and be with the great majority of Muslims because Allah’s hand of protection is on keeping unity. You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is a prey to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is a prey to the wolf. Beware! Whoever calls to this course [of sectarianism], kill him, even though he may be under this headband of mine.”

(Source: Al-Islam.org, http://www.al-islam.org/nahjul/126.htm )

humanbeing wrote:MN
I don’t wish to continue tiresome discussion on obvious and simple issues. Please re read postings to get better understanding. Lets not make it a pain for others to read.

mustafanalwalla wrote: HB, this discussion cannot end like this. You need to counter what i have put forward or accept that you are wrong or accept that you have closed your mind to all that is good within the community and only wish to amplify the bad.
I am sorry but this is not a lounge that you can enter and leave. This is hotbed of serious discussion and debate. I for one never rest until i have admitted defeat or accept that i was wrong but i do not end a debate. If i have, in the past, then it is only because the person in front has asked to end it and I too, have nothing left to contribute anymore.
I suggest you re-read the postings too because what you suggest is neither obvious nor simple.
I propose to you to continue this thread.
Show me the proof that the trend of Muslims not praying under priests of other sects was started by our Aamils or by some one else.
Show me proof where other non-Bohra Muslims have attended prayers in Bohra mosques.
Until you have the answers to these 2 questions, i will not let this topic rest for you or for me. I have accepted my flaws on points 1, 4, 5 and 6. Now you need to answer me on points 2 and 3.

humanbeing wrote:OMG ! MN calm down ! .. allow me to continue…
Which part of the discussion is not obvious neither simple ?

• Bohra Priest farman not to pray in non bohra masjid : It’s a famous, obvious and age old fatwa issued from sayedna saheb disseminated via network of Amils, Muallims and Sheikhs through bayaans, sabaks and discussions. This farman is not retaliatory but a planned diktat to prevent bohra from interacting with Mainstream muslims.

• Non Bohra praying in Bohra Masjids : I have personally seen non bohra muslims come to bohra masjid and pray in IMAMAT of bohra priest. I have observed in Pune and Kuwait. Non Bohra has come to attend prayers, Also I have seen Shia attending Muharram Majalis in bohra setup. I have even seen how bohra brothers see in curiosity and surprise odd persons in non SKT. No Amil or Ayan stopped them, asked them to leave or instructed to attend masjid / majalis in white SKT !!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MN ! I m not competing with you ! I mentioned earlier, my intention is to present a debative point. I m open minded and intelligent enough to see goodness and exploitation in scheme of things. I have presented my opinions and I have changed, if convinced.

mustafanalwalla wrote:Let you finish??? What the heck!!! When you ended your post, you were finished!!! Now you make it seem like i cut you in between!!! Back to your old tricks again eh!!!

MN,
You are again making it a tiring discussion. I commented as you objected me and asked me to comment further, please refer to your respective post. I m not making it seem like this or that, I have been clear in conveying my viewpoint. I don’t have to indulge in silly tricks. You seem to have developed a misconception or misunderstanding due to your own lack of understanding.

mustafanalwalla wrote:Anyways, i got my answers to all my questions except the 2nd one. Who started this trend of not praying in one anothers mosques? Do you have any proof that we were the first ones to start it?

I have not raised a question who started it not to pray in eachother mosque !! I have raised why bohra leaders doesn’t allow / discourage bohra from praying in non bohra masjid ? I don’t have an answers to your said question raised. You can ask others who started this practice. All I know is, bohra are stopped or discouraged from praying in non bohra masjid.

mustafanalwalla wrote:BTW, my question was twisted by you again. thankfully, Profastian saw it and corrected it. My original question to you was why do we not pray in a Sunni mosque. i got the answer for that. you however, somewhere down the line, twisted it into a shia mosque. Which, when you realised was my original question, posed it at as your own.

MN ! you are a twisted person. Can you please provide quotes from my post where and what I have twisted. I have maintained Non Bohra Masjids (that includes shia and sunni)
Also can you provide that quote which you are referring to Profastian correcting. I shall learn from his answer too, in case I have missed.

mustafanalwalla wrote:also, i dont need your remarks to level-headed telling me what to do, thank you very much.

Sincere apologies, mistake regretted.

mustafanalwalla wrote:By the way, i am now seeing you squirm in your seat!!!

No ! I m tired and disappointed with your silly, baseless allegations.

mustafanalwalla wrote:What happened HB? Getting a taste of your own medicine?

Surely not !, dream on !! the only medicine I need now is a paracetamol tablet to relieve a headache I get reading your silly post.

mustafanalwalla wrote:When you were twisting my words out of context, which i pointed out 4 times to you, it was fine. But now, getting the same treatment making you hot under the collar? If you cant stand the heat, dont stand in the kitchen my friend.

MN, you need to really come out of your delusions. God bless you.

mustafanalwalla wrote:Anyways, coming back to my post. Answer my 2nd question

Ya Allah !! What is your second question please post again ! just in case you will accuse me again on twisting / misrepresenting / misquoting / misdirecting / mishandling / manipulating your words. Phew !! you are really disillusioned.
I m making a scary guess, your 2nd questions is

mustafanalwalla wrote:Anyways, i got my answers to all my questions except the 2nd one. Who started this trend of not praying in one anothers mosques? Do you have any proof that we were the first ones to start it?

I have not raised a question who started it !! I have raised why bohra leaders doesn’t allow bohra from praying in non bohra masjid ? I don’t have an answers to your said question raised. You can ask others who started this practice. All I know is, bohra are stopped or discouraged from praying in non bohra masjid. Reasons for which are well presented from both sides of the hatred.

Another observation is, any muslims including bohra is still free to go to non bohra masjid and pray. So question of who started the practice of not praying in eachother masjid does not arise, muslims are free to pray anywhere, its only bohra who has reservations / objections / apprehension / restriction from praying in non bohra masjid.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer presented on any question on any post on this thread or forum whatsoever, are my personal POV, opinions and understanding from experience and sources. I don’t claim to be an authority of scholarly advise, so please read my answers as mere POVs of a free man.

MN, I don’t wish to indulge in petty personal arguments with you. If we can keep the discussion to civilized and sensible generic level, I would appreciate your civility.

humanbeing, - Maulana Hamza hunted lions.

Who is Maulana Hamza? Do you know what the prophet (saw) has said about hunting animals for sport?

anajmi wrote:Who is Maulana Hamza? Do you know what the prophet (saw) has said about hunting animals for sport?

That shows the decline of the Wahabis. They remember awal, sani and salis but do not even know of the most important and trusted companions of the Prophet.

Is your Dai following in the footsteps of Maulana Hamza while ignoring the directions of the prophet (saw)? When did Maulana Hamza hunt animals? Before he accepted Islam or afterwards? Understand the question and read up on history before posting you moron. Maulana Hamza has neither been classified as a Dai nor has he been classified as an Imam. What then is the reason behind the abde idiot Dai following in his footsteps (before Islam) while ignoring the prophet (saw)?

That would be like me going on hunting and giving the example of your Dai. Your Dai is not an example that should be followed by others!!

anajmi wrote:Is your Dai following in the footsteps of Maulana Hamza while ignoring the directions of the prophet (saw)? When did Maulana Hamza hunt animals? Before he accepted Islam or afterwards? Understand the question and read up on history before posting you moron. Maulana Hamza has neither been classified as a Dai nor has he been classified as an Imam. What then is the reason behind the abde idiot Dai following in his footsteps (before Islam) while ignoring the prophet (saw)?

That would be like me going on hunting and giving the example of your Dai. Your Dai is not an example that should be followed by others!!

Again the height of ignorance, According to him, Maulana Hamza's example should not be followed. Hear hear progressies.

[

profastian wrote:According to him, Maulana Hamza's example should not be followed. Hear hear progressies

Before jumping to conclusions and celebrating a victory please read what anajmi has said and then answer after successfully disputing his contentions :-

anajmi wrote:When did Maulana Hamza hunt animals? Before he accepted Islam or afterwards? Understand the question and read up on history before posting you moron

Again the height of ignorance, According to him, Maulana Hamza's example should not be followed. Hear hear progressies.

The idiot proves one more time why he is an idiot and he also proves why his Dai is a mushrik. His Dai wants to follow the example of Maulana Hamza before he accepted Islam and ignore the prophet (saw)'s command after Islam. What a bunch of nitwits.

Anajmi - can you please quote a hadith, which mentions that Maulana Hamza gave up hunting after coming to Islam.

Profastian
Who is Maulana Hamza, did he communicate with the Imam in Satr after Maghrib Namaz every day? Did he ever said that he is the Dai of Imam Tayyab? then how do you compare with Maulana Hamza with a Dai, Please compare apple to apple not apple to oranges

level_headed wrote:Anajmi - can you please quote a hadith, which mentions that Maulana Hamza gave up hunting after coming to Islam.

Can you please quote a hadith which mentions that Maulana Hamza hunted lions? Please also provide the time period so that we can determine that he was still hunting lions after the prophet (saw) forbid the hunting of animals for sport.

Here is the other thing, I actually do not care about what Maulana Hamza did (as I made amply clear above when I asked "Who is Maulana Hamza"). What is the command of the prophet (saw) of Islam? If Maulana Hamza is inline with the command of the prophet (saw) then I can accept it and if he is not in line then I dare not follow Maulana Hamza against the command of the prophet (saw)!!

Check Wikipedia. Do a google search on "Hamza lion hunter". You will find many hits. Check the movie 'The Message" - there is reference to Maulana Hamza (Anthony Quinn) mentioning hunting of lions.
Can you also post from Quran or authentic hadeeth that hunting is disallowed. I have read the other post about hunting which Ramsay oops Al Zulfiqar had posted. I could not find anything which said hunting was prohibited.

Hi LH

You shall complete your question !

Can you also post from Quran or authentic hadeeth that hunting for pleasure is disallowed ?

A humble mind doesn’t need a religious justification to understand sadistic pleasure hunting is not a good virtue.

Hunting is allowed in Islam, but for a need or to avoid threat to life !! There is a good amount of details provided on various threads, how and when an animal can be hunted and retrieved to keep it halaal !

When wild animals are hunted, apparently no use to humans, how does that justify hunting for pleasure in Islam. Also the process of killing followed by Sayedna Saheb, did it conform to Halal process. Animals were shot dead by high powered rifle, and sayedna saheb posed over their corpse as an achievement.

There were lot of things that happened in the past, when Islam was in formative years since its inception. If we are to follow intricate details of personalities of those times, then the biggest example is to live with austerity of Prophet and Imam Ali. No one does that !! but when it comes to justifying sadistic and useless acts of hunting animals for pleasure. Everything will be justified from minute details from the times of prophet Muhammad. How convenient !

anajmi wrote:

Again the height of ignorance, According to him, Maulana Hamza's example should not be followed. Hear hear progressies.

The idiot proves one more time why he is an idiot and he also proves why his Dai is a mushrik. His Dai wants to follow the example of Maulana Hamza before he accepted Islam and ignore the prophet (saw)'s command after Islam. What a bunch of nitwits.

Proggies colluding with wahabies like anajmi who believe Asad-ul-allah was a mushrik before the prophet. In fact they believe, Abdullah and Abd-ul_muttalib were mushrikeens too. Do the proggies believe that too?

level_headed,

Please do a google search on "Is hunting for pleasure allowed in Islam". You will find many hits. You will find Quranic ayahs that support that point of view and you will find authentic hadith (not from hidden Imams and corrupt Dais). Then spend some time on Animal Planet and Discovery Channel and see the harm caused by hunting for pleasure to animals.

The prophet (saw) has cursed the one who hunts animals for the sake of pleasure. Do a google search, you will find many hits. Your Dai is a cursed man.

Proggies colluding with wahabies like anajmi who believe Asad-ul-allah was a mushrik before the prophet. In fact they believe, Abdullah and Abd-ul_muttalib were mushrikeens too. Do the proggies believe that too?

What matters is that the abde idiots of today are mushriks.