I am not sure if you meant it or not but the use of the word "accomplice" in
is not appropriate.Allah Subhanahu and 73 accomplice of hussain
is not appropriate.Allah Subhanahu and 73 accomplice of hussain
A passive and hypocritic stance frequently taken by kothar apologists.Originally posted by WYP:
I have faith that my Dai is leading me on the Siraat-e-Mustaqeem. The distractions and temptations to stray from this path are many, but like many here like to say, I have my blinders on. I may occasionally stray a little, but my Dai is there to guide me back. Some of those distractions may be corruption in the jamaat administration, may even involve amils and the Dai's family members, Allah Ta'ala will judge them in His court. My resolve and my faith remains unshaken by these distractions.
My responsibilities are to follow the 7 Da'im of Islam, the first of which is Walayah. Without Walayah, there is nothing. Jehad is not about fighting corruption. Jehad is to fight your own animal instinct. Look, for me it is very simple. The Dai is my guide in this life, I follow the 7 Da'im with Qusoor, and I strive to improve my benefits both here and in akherat. There is nothing apologetic or hypocritical in this. If you feel that it is, I cannot do anything about it.Originally posted by tahir:
A passive and hypocritic stance frequently taken by kothar apologists.
Hasn't the same Allah Ta'ala given you the faculties to discriminate between right and wrong and to fight corruption right here (Jehad). You are shirking away from your responsibilities (I mean if you believe in Islam) by calling it as 'distractions' and thereby breaking your covenent with Allah Ta'ala. Aren't you?
By the same token you should not care to believe in Dai and respect him since Allah Ta'ala will judge in his court if the Dai was believable/respectable or not. huh?
Do you fight your animal instincts that tempts you into believing that overlooking corruption is ok ?Jehad is not about fighting corruption. Jehad is to fight your own animal instinct
wyp: thanks for the articulate reply.The Dai should live his life as he sees fit. If the Dai thinks that he requires a palace in every country, so be it. If he thinks that a small hut is enough, so be it. As per my faith, the Dai has complete authority to do as he pleases. That is my faith.
No I fight my instinct to challenge a system put in place by the Dai-ul-Mutlaq. Again thats because of my faith. You are free to fight anything and anyone you want.Originally posted by tahir:
Do you fight your animal instincts that tempts you into believing that overlooking corruption is ok ?Jehad is not about fighting corruption. Jehad is to fight your own animal instinct
What the Aga Khan does or does not do is of no concern to me. You need to take up that question with someone else.Originally posted by accountability:
Aga khan lives in paris, had married a french lady, divorced, etc, he owns hotels, which sells liquors, promotes gambling, breeds horses for gambling so forth and so on. He claims to be the imam of ismaili sect. He claims the same privilage, as syedna saheb does. He also claims to be inheritor of fatimid dynasty, like syedna saheb claims to be the vice of fatimid imam. Now if you can not concur with aga khan's way of life, then your generalised expression, that syedna saheb may live a life as he sees fit, looses merit. If you do concur, with aga khan's life style, then you will have to change whole dynamics of religion.
What if future dai wants to live a life similar to that of aga khan. will he still be living a life according to sharia. This bags another question, what is the status of dai in our relgion, if he carries special privilages, then he has special duties too, foremost among them will be to follow sharia.
Sharia may not allow dai to live life, as he pleases.
The palaces, that he may require to propogate fatimid dawah, should also be reuired under sharia. The institute of dai is an institution, which carries high responsibility. The person representing the institution should merit.
WYP,Show me which Dai-ul-Mutlaq among the line of 52 has renounced Shariah?
Search the archives. This has been discussed to death by others here. Ask your family members, those with the titles. They might help or know who to contact. If you are sincere in your request you will get the answers you seek. Sorry to disappoint you.Originally posted by tahir:
WYP,
Can you explain kadambosi, sajda for dai, laanat and baraat through sharia ?
Also I would appreciate if you point out a reference to Dai-ul-Mutlaq in Quran.
I would like to know that considered that the nass was not done by the dai mentioned above, then should this tradition of daism be discontinued?also i would like to ask to mr insaf that who can be a dai if the need for such a leader arises. should he be nominated or should he be elected?If he is to be elected then who are the ones to decide for the election?Originally posted by accountability:
WYP: There were differences on nass on atleast two occassions. Even one of the contender went to Jehangir's court for remedy. In the recent period, one dai died without nass, and then there was difference, that the same is mutlaq or nazim.
If nass nazim is correct, then all the dais after that will be nazim dais, and not mutlaq ones.
Then again, you do not want to know the history.
You didn't disappoint me but reinforced the ortho stereotype. And no, people with title are blank just like you and just like the one who 'bestowed' them titles. That is why my conscience had to fight out my animal instinct of being tempted into that glittering system.Originally posted by WYP:
Search the archives. This has been discussed to death by others here. Ask your family members, those with the titles. They might help or know who to contact. If you are sincere in your request you will get the answers you seek. Sorry to disappoint you.
Golly!!Originally posted by WYP:
I am not the one making unsubstantiated claims
galaxee,I would like to know that considered that the nass was not done by the dai mentioned above, then should this tradition of daism be discontinued?
An atheist will say the same thing about all religions. Similarly you can make the claim that blind faith in the Quran and ahadith is illogical. There is no logic in faith. You believe first and then you learn.Originally posted by accountability:
Your emphasis on complete and blind faith, logically carry not much wieght.
I did not really want to know your life story, but thanks anyway. However, I did not understand your comment above, in italics.Originally posted by accountability:
I also prayed behind him, like every body else did.
According to our doctorine, you are not supposed to read namaz behind anyone else,or lead namaz.
WYP and others are abetting for two reasons, one because of their blind faith, other, they are in connivance with the administration in manipulating and exploiting the ordinary beings.
WYP knows from his heart, that total submission, calling syedna's sons shehzadas has nothing to do with shariat or religion. But irony is, with this knowledge he is determined to defend and prepetrate the same attitude for not understandable reasons.
WYP my friend,I did not really want to know your life story