.
On Difference & Understanding:
Al-Husayn: the Shiite Martyr, the Sunni Hero
http://www.islamonline.net/english/ArtC ... le06.shtml
.
Al-Husayn: the Shiite Martyr, the Sunni Hero
-
Muslim First
- Posts: 6893
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 4:01 am
Re: Al-Husayn: the Shiite Martyr, the Sunni Hero
I'm a little lost - who is your leader? (Reformist leader)
Re: Al-Husayn: the Shiite Martyr, the Sunni Hero
The Progressives/Reformists are Dawoodi Bohris - unlike the other factions like the Alavi, Suleimani, MehdiBaaghwallas, etc. So the Progressive/Reformist's leader is Syedna Burhanuddin Saheb.
Please refer to the attached by Mr. Shaukat Ajmeri:
"No separation please, we are Dawoodi Bohras
By Shaukat Ajmeri
The idea of creating a separate social religious system is not new. I personally have always suspected that this idea is planted amongst us by the "Kothar" to create confusion and dissension. But then, in our paranoia, we tend to blame everything on the Kothar.
Seriously though, the idea of separation is dangerous as it attacks the very foundation on which the reform movement is built. I think this idea keeps popping up because we tend to lose focus of what the reform movement is all about. Let's keep focus on the basic issues. We reformists demand:
accountability: the priesthood must account for the millions of dollars it collects from the community. Allied to this is a demand that the money should be spent on the welfare of the community.
jamaat democracy: every city/town should have the right to elect its own jamaat which will have control and ownership of local properties, including masjids, jamaat khanas, gullas etc.
end of baraat: any kind of protest or dissent should not be punished by ex-communication.
end raza and misaaq: these and various other "requirements" are recent innovations used by the priesthood to oppress and punish Bohras. Raza, misaaq and such have no religious validity.
respect and dignity: this should be stated as a general principle. The Bohras have a right to be treated with respect and dignity by the priesthood. We are not Dai's slaves and should not be treated as such.
How will an act of separation resolve these issues? One cannot emphasise this enough, that as progressives our first principle should be NOT to break away from the mainstream. You may ask why?
Because separation means failure. If we separate we will fail to accomplish the objectives we set out to achieve.
Because, even assuming that we leave the mainstream, there'll always be individuals or group of individuals who would rise against corruption and illegitimacy of the current priesthood. If not us then there will be others. A corrupt and decadent system will always have its dissidents. And if every succeeding reformist group were to go its separate ways, what would become of the community?
Because, being dawoodi bohra is our religious-cultural identity. As dawoodi bohras we share a rich wealth of inherited religious traditions and institutions which we are proud of and feel that these must be preserved, and, dare I say, improved upon, with changing times. As a community we share a common memory and narratives that give us our roots, a sense of belonging. Separation would mean an end of this identity.
Because our identity is entrenched in our faith - the Ismaili Mustalian Dawoodi Bohra faith. And this faith is tied to the Dawat. We have issues with the current "masters" of the Dawat and hence the reform movement. Who know the future "masters" will be more inclined to understand and address these issues. Separation would mean a fundamental disconnect from the Dawat.
Because it is our moral and religious duty to carry on the struggle. Separation would mean abandonment of Islamic principles which urge us to fight for justice and dignity.
Because separation would make nonsense of our past struggles, and make a mockery of sacrifices of brave reformists everywhere.
Because to talk of separation is to kill hope. Hope is our strength. As reformists, hope is wired in our commitment, it breathes in our every act of protest, it nourishes our struggle.
Because we owe it to our children, our children's children that they inherit a community they could be proud of.
One can think of many more reasons, but these are just a few that come to mind readily.
True, the Kothar is very powerful and has arrogated the right to determine who is a Bohra and who is a munafiq. And that is the whole point of the reform movement: to take that right away from the illegitimate, unaccountable priesthood. There's a fierce resistance from the conservative elements and an unceasing effort to distort and twist reformist stand. Change is never easy or quick, and more so when the social is entwined with the religious - as in our case.
It's natural to despair that we are just so few of us left. But we must try to understand why this is so. The priesthood has been successful in managing the community through a combination of control, manipulation, indoctrination, fear and dollops of religious mumbo jumbo. There are many who have escaped this indoctrination process, and I'm of the view that the majority of Bohras remain in the orthodox fold not because they are convinced of the rightness of the Kothar's cause or the Sayedna's infallibility. The reasons and motives are complex and diverse. But the chief reason, I think, has to do with convenience. It's more convenient to conform. People know that consequences of sticking out ones neck are not pleasant.
More generally, it's a truism to say that decent people everywhere have the right to demand decent conditions. People inherently have an urge to seek a system that's just and fair (be it religious, political or social). I'm personally convinced that if Bohras had a choice, they would certainly opt for something decent. But this choice is not going to fall from the heavens. We'll have to create this choice by our collective efforts - orthodox and progressives together.
It is often said by helpless, fed-up Bohras that things will remain the way they are because people and their nature never change. Or that the Kothar is too powerful.
But just look at history. There was a time when it was 'natural' to burn people at the stakes; it was okay to draw and quarter people; it was okay to conquer continents through war and genocide; it was fine to own slaves to work on plantations; it was okay to deny votes to women; it was normal to deny civil rights to blacks --- all these acts were accepted as standard operating procedure by the conventions and standards of their times.
But today normal human beings, with their 'human nature' informed by the standards and experience of the present age, will be appalled by such cruelties and oppression. This change is social and moral progress. True, the world is still in a mess - a sure sign that people will always have to fight for justice, rights and life of dignity.
This has been the case throughout history - and all social and political progress has been won through struggle and sacrifice.
With changing times, human nature too changes. And the human nature that makes the Kothar acceptable today will change too. It's only a matter of time. But we'll have to fight for it. Abandoning the reformist cause will only postpone such a change.
As for the Kothar being too powerful, I've just this to say. Whatever happened to the Roman Empire, the British Raj and European colonialism? They are all "history" thanks to peoples' struggle and their enduring hope for a better tomorrow.
In comparison the Bohra priesthood is a petty outfit. Our collective courage, hope and perseverance should fix the mullahs in due time.
December, 2002"
Please refer to the attached by Mr. Shaukat Ajmeri:
"No separation please, we are Dawoodi Bohras
By Shaukat Ajmeri
The idea of creating a separate social religious system is not new. I personally have always suspected that this idea is planted amongst us by the "Kothar" to create confusion and dissension. But then, in our paranoia, we tend to blame everything on the Kothar.
Seriously though, the idea of separation is dangerous as it attacks the very foundation on which the reform movement is built. I think this idea keeps popping up because we tend to lose focus of what the reform movement is all about. Let's keep focus on the basic issues. We reformists demand:
accountability: the priesthood must account for the millions of dollars it collects from the community. Allied to this is a demand that the money should be spent on the welfare of the community.
jamaat democracy: every city/town should have the right to elect its own jamaat which will have control and ownership of local properties, including masjids, jamaat khanas, gullas etc.
end of baraat: any kind of protest or dissent should not be punished by ex-communication.
end raza and misaaq: these and various other "requirements" are recent innovations used by the priesthood to oppress and punish Bohras. Raza, misaaq and such have no religious validity.
respect and dignity: this should be stated as a general principle. The Bohras have a right to be treated with respect and dignity by the priesthood. We are not Dai's slaves and should not be treated as such.
How will an act of separation resolve these issues? One cannot emphasise this enough, that as progressives our first principle should be NOT to break away from the mainstream. You may ask why?
Because separation means failure. If we separate we will fail to accomplish the objectives we set out to achieve.
Because, even assuming that we leave the mainstream, there'll always be individuals or group of individuals who would rise against corruption and illegitimacy of the current priesthood. If not us then there will be others. A corrupt and decadent system will always have its dissidents. And if every succeeding reformist group were to go its separate ways, what would become of the community?
Because, being dawoodi bohra is our religious-cultural identity. As dawoodi bohras we share a rich wealth of inherited religious traditions and institutions which we are proud of and feel that these must be preserved, and, dare I say, improved upon, with changing times. As a community we share a common memory and narratives that give us our roots, a sense of belonging. Separation would mean an end of this identity.
Because our identity is entrenched in our faith - the Ismaili Mustalian Dawoodi Bohra faith. And this faith is tied to the Dawat. We have issues with the current "masters" of the Dawat and hence the reform movement. Who know the future "masters" will be more inclined to understand and address these issues. Separation would mean a fundamental disconnect from the Dawat.
Because it is our moral and religious duty to carry on the struggle. Separation would mean abandonment of Islamic principles which urge us to fight for justice and dignity.
Because separation would make nonsense of our past struggles, and make a mockery of sacrifices of brave reformists everywhere.
Because to talk of separation is to kill hope. Hope is our strength. As reformists, hope is wired in our commitment, it breathes in our every act of protest, it nourishes our struggle.
Because we owe it to our children, our children's children that they inherit a community they could be proud of.
One can think of many more reasons, but these are just a few that come to mind readily.
True, the Kothar is very powerful and has arrogated the right to determine who is a Bohra and who is a munafiq. And that is the whole point of the reform movement: to take that right away from the illegitimate, unaccountable priesthood. There's a fierce resistance from the conservative elements and an unceasing effort to distort and twist reformist stand. Change is never easy or quick, and more so when the social is entwined with the religious - as in our case.
It's natural to despair that we are just so few of us left. But we must try to understand why this is so. The priesthood has been successful in managing the community through a combination of control, manipulation, indoctrination, fear and dollops of religious mumbo jumbo. There are many who have escaped this indoctrination process, and I'm of the view that the majority of Bohras remain in the orthodox fold not because they are convinced of the rightness of the Kothar's cause or the Sayedna's infallibility. The reasons and motives are complex and diverse. But the chief reason, I think, has to do with convenience. It's more convenient to conform. People know that consequences of sticking out ones neck are not pleasant.
More generally, it's a truism to say that decent people everywhere have the right to demand decent conditions. People inherently have an urge to seek a system that's just and fair (be it religious, political or social). I'm personally convinced that if Bohras had a choice, they would certainly opt for something decent. But this choice is not going to fall from the heavens. We'll have to create this choice by our collective efforts - orthodox and progressives together.
It is often said by helpless, fed-up Bohras that things will remain the way they are because people and their nature never change. Or that the Kothar is too powerful.
But just look at history. There was a time when it was 'natural' to burn people at the stakes; it was okay to draw and quarter people; it was okay to conquer continents through war and genocide; it was fine to own slaves to work on plantations; it was okay to deny votes to women; it was normal to deny civil rights to blacks --- all these acts were accepted as standard operating procedure by the conventions and standards of their times.
But today normal human beings, with their 'human nature' informed by the standards and experience of the present age, will be appalled by such cruelties and oppression. This change is social and moral progress. True, the world is still in a mess - a sure sign that people will always have to fight for justice, rights and life of dignity.
This has been the case throughout history - and all social and political progress has been won through struggle and sacrifice.
With changing times, human nature too changes. And the human nature that makes the Kothar acceptable today will change too. It's only a matter of time. But we'll have to fight for it. Abandoning the reformist cause will only postpone such a change.
As for the Kothar being too powerful, I've just this to say. Whatever happened to the Roman Empire, the British Raj and European colonialism? They are all "history" thanks to peoples' struggle and their enduring hope for a better tomorrow.
In comparison the Bohra priesthood is a petty outfit. Our collective courage, hope and perseverance should fix the mullahs in due time.
December, 2002"