The truth about the udaipuri progressives

[WYP]

ignore and disobey the Dai at every opportunity, unless of course, the Dai's farmaan is to their convenience.

WYP
Do you obey all the farmans of the Dai?

I try my very best to do so, but in cases where I fall short (there are many - such as interacting with you), I seek forgiveness from Allah.

At least I do not 'ridicule' (you conveniently left this word out from your quote - nasty habit) these farmaans.

[SBM]

^
So you only follow farmans according to your own conveniences--right

[WYP]

I try my very best to do so, but in cases where I fall short (there are many - such as interacting with you), I seek forgiveness from Allah.

At least I do not 'ridicule' (you conveniently left this word out from your quote - nasty habit) these farmaans.

^
So you only follow farmans according to your own conveniences--right

So blinded by hate that you have issues in comprehending two short simple sentences.

Where have I said that I use my convenience or that I disobey or that I ridicule?

[zinger]

correct me if im wrong, but havent you also personally, doubted the existence of the imam?

Yes, I have. But my personal opinion is not at issue here. I speak in and on behalf of the reformist cause, but in my personal capacity and not as their representative. ok, im sorry... you speak in and on behalf of the reformist cause but in your personal capacity, but not as their representative? Arent you contradicting yourself? or am i reading you wrong?

sorry, but in all the abuses and derogatory remarks about the Dai and the community, the freedom is getting lost somewhere

Both sides are guilty of it. I agree, but like i have always said, majority of the abuses from our side are reactions from what is said from across the fence. we have no desire to engage in fights with you but the constant abuse on the forum forces us to react the way we do

IMHO, there needs to be some stricter sort of monitoring of posts because all posts here are by default, taken to be representative of the reformist community. just as all acts of individual dawoodi bohras are taken as being representative of the community.

Correct. But that is an unfortunate part of public engagement. You cannot control people's perceptions, they will think and believe what they CHOOSE to think and believe, irrespective of what the facts are. You cannot control the misrepresentation of this Forum anymore that you can control the misrepresentation of Dawoodi Bohra community. It's just the nature of the beast. well then, i'll make sure to remind you of this when you evaluate the community as a whole on the basis of some of the people here

[zinger]

zinger wrote: correct me if im wrong, but havent you also personally, doubted the existence of the imam?


Yes, I have. But my personal opinion is not at issue here. I speak in and on behalf of the reformist cause, but in my personal capacity and not as their representative.

Did not even Syedna STS or SMB denied the concept of Hidden Imam in Courts (I think it was posted elsewhere on this forum) May be some one can bring it up to refresh Br Zinger's memory

SBM bhai, we all know about it, no need to refesh my memory. i have also given my hypothesis on why he denied it. i have posted that earlier too, am doing it once again to save you the trouble of searching for it.

this is purely my hypothesis so its an assumption on my part, and im admitting it to be so

according to me Taher Saifuddin Maula did perjury. YES YOU HEARD ME RIGHT, HE LIED IN COURT but the reason, according to me, that he did was to preserve the sanctity of the seat of the Imam. had he admitted to the fact that the Imam exists and he is aware of the Imams whereabouts, he might have been forced to reveal it.

why he chose to lie in order to keep the Imam hidden is something i do not know. but like all Shias believe, the Imam will stay in purdah till the time is right.

you are now free to draw your own conculsions

[zinger]

I try my very best to do so, but in cases where I fall short (there are many - such as interacting with you), I seek forgiveness from Allah.

At least I do not 'ridicule' (you conveniently left this word out from your quote - nasty habit) these farmaans.

^
So you only follow farmans according to your own conveniences--right

So blinded by hate that you have issues in comprehending two short simple sentences.

Where have I said that I use my convenience or that I disobey or that I ridicule?

SBM bhai being himself

[Al Zulfiqar]

.. Taher Saifuddin Maula did perjury. YES YOU HEARD ME RIGHT, HE LIED IN COURT ..... to preserve the sanctity of the seat of the Imam. had he admitted to the fact that the Imam exists and he is aware of the Imams whereabouts, he might have been forced to reveal it.

exactly! at last some die-hard dai lover is admitting to the unvarnished truth.

"sts lied" to preserve not "the sanctity of the seat of the Imam", but his own seat (of his pants). and you are right, "he might have been forced to reveal it", an untenable situation when sts knew that no such imam exists and in fact he is expropriating the imam's powers and abusing his position.

this lame duck defense is as laughable as the newest defense of that criminal rampal baba who now claims that he was being held by force against his will inside his ashram!! chor na bhai ghantichor... aaw bhai harkha, apne bewe sarkha.

[Ozdundee]

Lying in court is contempt of court too. What a role model ?

Imam zaman or his Diai may condone Taqiya but would The Prophet SAW, Ali AS or Husein AS ever do such acts ...I cannot find any credible record in history that they would lie to protect their lives or position.

[fayyaaz]

Did not even Syedna STS or SMB denied the concept of Hidden Imam in Courts.

Why would they deny the concept of Hidden Imam? They invoked him in their prayers at least 5 times a day.

[fayyaaz]

according to me Taher Saifuddin Maula did perjury. YES YOU HEARD ME RIGHT, HE LIED IN COURT but the reason, according to me, that he did was to preserve the sanctity of the seat of the Imam. had he admitted to the fact that the Imam exists and he is aware of the Imams whereabouts, he might have been forced to reveal it.

This is beyond belief. Why would STS commit perjury? You must produce his exact words before making such a claim.

STS could simply have said that he did not know where Imam was. Imam was not his prisoner for the Court to invoke Habeas Corpus.

Many people swear by God and Courts in some countries ask witnesses to swear by God. God, like Imam, cannot be made to appear. And there is no danger of a court demanding that God be brought in its presence. Neither would it ask a Hidden Imam to appear. Nor a Santa.

Taqiyya is denial of one's faith under duress or in face of threatening damage. I do not see how STS was under duress by Court in respect of the existence of Imam or in what way would an Indian court threaten the religion of Bohras. Thus taqiyya in this case is clearly not the case.

In other words. first produce the exact words STS used and then proceed to discuss taqiyya's relevance. This sort of talk betrays extreme ignorance of issues.

[zinger]

according to me Taher Saifuddin Maula did perjury. YES YOU HEARD ME RIGHT, HE LIED IN COURT but the reason, according to me, that he did was to preserve the sanctity of the seat of the Imam. had he admitted to the fact that the Imam exists and he is aware of the Imams whereabouts, he might have been forced to reveal it.

This is beyond belief. Why would STS commit perjury? You must produce his exact words before making such a claim.

STS could simply have said that he did not know where Imam was. Imam was not his prisoner for the Court to invoke Habeas Corpus.

Many people swear by God and Courts in some countries ask witnesses to swear by God. God, like Imam, cannot be made to appear. And there is no danger of a court demanding that God be brought in its presence. Neither would it ask a Hidden Imam to appear. Nor a Santa.

Taqiyya is denial of one's faith under duress or in face of threatening damage. I do not see how STS was under duress by Court in respect of the existence of Imam or in what way would an Indian court threaten the religion of Bohras. Thus taqiyya in this case is clearly not the case.

In other words. first produce the exact words STS used and then proceed to discuss taqiyya's relevance. This sort of talk betrays extreme ignorance of issues.

Brother, let me repost what i wrote, with certain parts highlighted, incase you missed it in in my earlier posts. People here have a habit of deliberately OMITTING/DELETING certain words when capturing some ones else posts, in order to paint a completely different picture, so allow me ....

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SBM bhai, we all know about it, no need to refesh my memory. i have also given my hypothesis on why he denied it. i have posted that earlier too, am doing it once again to save you the trouble of searching for it.

this is purely my hypothesis so its an assumption on my part, and im admitting it to be so

according to me Taher Saifuddin Maula did perjury. YES YOU HEARD ME RIGHT, HE LIED IN COURT but the reason, according to me, that he did was to preserve the sanctity of the seat of the Imam. had he admitted to the fact that the Imam exists and he is aware of the Imams whereabouts, he might have been forced to reveal it.

why he chose to lie in order to keep the Imam hidden is something i do not know. but like all Shias believe, the Imam will stay in purdah till the time is right.

you are now free to draw your own conculsions

[zinger]

.. Taher Saifuddin Maula did perjury. YES YOU HEARD ME RIGHT, HE LIED IN COURT ..... to preserve the sanctity of the seat of the Imam. had he admitted to the fact that the Imam exists and he is aware of the Imams whereabouts, he might have been forced to reveal it.

exactly! at last some die-hard dai lover is admitting to the unvarnished truth.

"sts lied" to preserve not "the sanctity of the seat of the Imam", but his own seat (of his pants). and you are right, "he might have been forced to reveal it", an untenable situation when sts knew that no such imam exists and in fact he is expropriating the imam's powers and abusing his position.

this lame duck defense is as laughable as the newest defense of that criminal rampal baba who now claims that he was being held by force against his will inside his ashram!! chor na bhai ghantichor... aaw bhai harkha, apne bewe sarkha.

Like i ended my posts,
you are now free to draw your own conclusions

[fayyaaz]

Zinger,

I was aware that you were merely speculating and not presenting any 'truth'. I considered that your hypothesis lacked merit. That is all. I expressed an alternative view also partly in response to Ozdundee's use of the words "Lying" and "Taqiyya" in his post.

[alam]

this is purely my hypothesis so its an assumption on my part, and im admitting it to be so

according to me Taher Saifuddin Maula did perjury. YES YOU HEARD ME RIGHT, HE LIED IN COURT but the reason, according to me, that he did was to preserve the sanctity of the seat of the Imam. had he admitted to the fact that the Imam exists and he is aware of the Imams whereabouts, he might have been forced to reveal it.

why he chose to lie in order to keep the Imam hidden is something i do not know. but like all Shias believe, the Imam will stay in purdah till the time is right.

you are now free to draw your own conculsions

Zinger's assumptions and conclusions about the Imam in "purdah" is something that is floating around in a lot of people's minds in mumineen circles. Sometimes I'm inclined to conclude that zinger's comments represents what the the ordinary mumin in the jamatkhana is thinking. This is one of them.

Whether or not the conclusion drawn itself is true or not is not the issue. The fact that people are thinking this is highly relevant. Perception is everything.

[zinger]

this is purely my hypothesis so its an assumption on my part, and im admitting it to be so

according to me Taher Saifuddin Maula did perjury. YES YOU HEARD ME RIGHT, HE LIED IN COURT but the reason, according to me, that he did was to preserve the sanctity of the seat of the Imam. had he admitted to the fact that the Imam exists and he is aware of the Imams whereabouts, he might have been forced to reveal it.

why he chose to lie in order to keep the Imam hidden is something i do not know. but like all Shias believe, the Imam will stay in purdah till the time is right.

you are now free to draw your own conculsions

Zinger's assumptions and conclusions about the Imam in "purdah" is something that is floating around in a lot of people's minds in mumineen circles. Sometimes I'm inclined to conclude that zinger's comments represents what the the ordinary mumin in the jamatkhana is thinking. This is one of them.

Whether or not the conclusion drawn itself is true or not is not the issue. The fact that people are thinking this is highly relevant. Perception is everything.

But you know what brother Alam, to be very honest, i have never heard this from anyone. most times when we have this conversation, its put down to taqiya. to be honest, i have written this in my personal capacity. i personally do not intend this to represent anyones views, least of all the community, but my own

[zinger]

this is purely my hypothesis so its an assumption on my part, and im admitting it to be so

according to me Taher Saifuddin Maula did perjury. YES YOU HEARD ME RIGHT, HE LIED IN COURT but the reason, according to me, that he did was to preserve the sanctity of the seat of the Imam. had he admitted to the fact that the Imam exists and he is aware of the Imams whereabouts, he might have been forced to reveal it.

why he chose to lie in order to keep the Imam hidden is something i do not know. but like all Shias believe, the Imam will stay in purdah till the time is right.

you are now free to draw your own conculsions

Zinger's assumptions and conclusions about the Imam in "purdah" is something that is floating around in a lot of people's minds in mumineen circles. Sometimes I'm inclined to conclude that zinger's comments represents what the the ordinary mumin in the jamatkhana is thinking. This is one of them.

Whether or not the conclusion drawn itself is true or not is not the issue. The fact that people are thinking this is highly relevant. Perception is everything.

also, you mentioned that this is one of them. are there more that you know of? could you share them here, just for my knowledge?

[Ozdundee]

Zingerbhai and others I feel deep down in your heart you do feel there is something wrong with the SMS , imam in hiding, etc. reformist are not on the mark.

But something bothers or some fear and you kind of feel guilty and take SMS side . It comes out as a lawyer would do just have to protect a client.

You would serve both better if you would go back to SMS, camp and spread the word that the best way to respond to reformists and get rid of them is to listen and flex the rules and seek compromise in some of the issues that they seek.