The Shia position is that the Holy Quran prescribes only three times the
daily prayers based on the following Ayats: ( I am quoting mainly from the Shia translation by S.V.Mir Ahmed Ali...go and check...
According to an early article on the practice in Iran of pre-Ayatollah
days, written by the eminent Shia Scholar Seyed Hossain Nasr which was
included in the Cambridge History Of Islam the Shia jamats offered only three times, early morning and then combining the noon and evening prayers and then the sunset and late night prayers together.
Also since the Shia Ithnashariya Imam Mehdi is 'ghaib' there was very poor attendance for Fridays' congregational prayers. Of course, Ayatollah Khomeni "changed" the practice.
After the disappearance of the Absent Imam (Mehdi), some resourceful Shias had succeeded in convincing the people that they visited the Absent Imam in utter secrecy and were, so to speak, his emissaries.
Four persons had made this claim one after the other, the last being Ali bin Mohammad Samiri who died in 329 A.H.
It is significant that the appearance of the Absent Imam having not taken place as yet can mean that during all these eleven hundred and fifty years since 260 A.H., 313 truthful and sincere Shias have not been available in their sect who could stand up for the Absent Imam, otherwise he would have, surely, emerged from the cave, as it is theor own Imam who has said this to them...
It is worth asking whether Shia leaders and theologians like "Imam" Khomeini, also, hold the same view or not....do they? what do you think?
The simple-minded Shias used to send their petitions and letters through these "emisarries" to the Absent Imam along with costly gifts, and these people used to bring back the letters of the Imam in reply bearing his seal.
All this was done in a most clandestine manner. The business of emissaries ended when it came into the knowledge of the government and steps were taken to apprehend the persons who were, thus, deceiving the people.
Thereafter, the game was abandoned ! The notion of a continuous lineage of Divine Guides from the family of the Prophets finds
support in the following verse of the Holy Quran: Holy Quran 3:33-34
The Imran mentioned in the above verse can be identified with Hazrat Abu Talib – the father of Hazrat Ali; Imran was his proper name and Abu Talib (“father of Talib”) was his title or kuniya.
Without obeying the Imam a Shiite can never expect any kind of salvation. All Sh'ias agree on the need for an "infallible" guide...it is the hadith of their own Imam that anyone who dies without knowing his Imam of the time dies the death of an infidel....so MF what are you are trying to compare? Kindly show us how the Bohora Da'i or the Sh'ia Ayatollah is communicating with them ? and why should an Imam be absent from this world ? explain please !
Amir ul Momineen describes members of his own family:...
" They are the life and death for ignorance" Then Imam Ali says: " Their forbearnace tells you of their knowledge and their silence of their wisdom; they do not go against right nor do they differ among themselves.."
From Imam Al-Baqir, on verse 2:90: Terrible is what they have purchased for themselves, that they would jealously disbelieve in what Allah has sent down about Ali. (Al-‘Ayyashi Tafsir 1:50)
From Imam al-Baqir, on verse 2:102: “And they approved, by fidelity to the demons, what the demons told them about the kingdom of Solomon.” (Amir-Moezzi Divine Guide 85)
When Imam Jafar as Sadiq's death was announced, his companions gathered together, and the command was passed to Ismail, who was made the Gate of Allah and His prayer niche, the house of His Light, the connection between Him and His Creation, and the caliph of Allah in His earth. Infact Sh'ias agree that that there was no change in decree concerning Imam Ismaili save that he had died during Imam Jaf'ar as sadiq's lifetime...then please show me his grave and tell me where it is for it then should be in arabia and not where it is now and many Sh'ias have been to visually see it and I have pictures also in the archives to prove my point... !
This is a clear contradiction of what is happening today and what the authentic ahadith of the Imams say including their "tafsirs" and in any case if this were the case and if Ismail had died, then the affair would
have to return to Ja’far, and would not move about randomly or "sideways".
“If one of you brought me the head of my son, then do not doubt that he is the Imam after me,” or his statement “The one who is between my two hands here, he is the Imam after me, so what ever you take from him, you have taken it from me.” (Ja’far ibn Mansur Sara’ir wa Asrar an-Nutaqa 248-256).
4:[56] Those who reject Our Signs, We shall soon cast into the Fire; as often as their skins are roasted through, We shall change them for fresh skins, that they may taste the Penalty: for Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.
Imam is the only path to happiness. Furthermore, Imam, for Shiite, is the central point of the universe.
He is the only connecting link between God and man.
The World can never exist without the Imam. Thus the line of the Imam should continue till the day of judgement.
Sahabae Karam and their conspiracies
MF et al....Ever read the book “Lolitta in Tehran”? or “Not without my daughter” ?
May Allah give victory to those who stand truly for the way of His Prophet (SAW), Blessings and Peace be upon him.
The absurd claim of the Wahabbis and the "Salafi" movement that it is they, and not others who are the Saved Group, is delusional, at best.
If the saved group are those who came after Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab, then what is the status of all those who came before him?
Muslims of the twenty-first century should beware of the renewed onslaught on their beliefs being conducted today from within our Communities East and West, In the name of Qur'an and Sunna, but actually supported by certain regimes, pursuing specific ideologies...
Wahabbis and "Salafis" are taking over the mosques built by Ahl al-Sunna in Europe and North America -- mostly through immigrants -- by means of elections and fundings.....so Muslims should BEWARE !
It is the duty of all Muslims to ascertain that the mosques of Allah continue as centres of sound Islamic practice, not Wahabbi and"Salafi" mal practices.
Those who behead people in public and stone women to death, practise apartheid in their Kingdom and wave the sword of apostasy over the heads of their fellow Muslim critics, should be the last people to speak on behalf of Islam.
The Wahhabi position on tawassul represents the essence of their own dubiety and deviation from the beliefs of Ahl al-Sunna, although it is but one of their many divergences.
The Wahabbis/"Salafis" went out of bounds in condemning the Umma (Muslim Community) on the question of taqlid, declaring as unbelievers all those who practice taqlid, that is, the majority of Muslims.
In declaring as unbelievers all Muslims who use the Prophet Muhammad's intercession, Peace be upon him, as a wasila or means of blessing,they have "moved away" by means of Wahhabi/Salafi practice of takfir, which is them declaring Muslims as unbelievers, according to a criteria that is suspect and not followed by the pious Salaf of the past but devised by the Wahabbis posing as modern-day "Salafis." .
They propagate man-made Islamic shariah laws which they shamelessly wave at the world and yet they oppose any scrutiny of their so called "shariah" that sanctions slavery, racism, misogyny and homophobia.
They rule their populations with a sense of entitlement that they believe is their God-given right, and millions suffer under their tutelage.
In spite of the Wahabbis' superficial efforts in worship and adherence to the religion. It is as the Prophet (upon whom be blessings and peace) declared: ' one of you would despise the prayer he says among them, and the fasting he completes with them; they recite Qur'an but it goes no further than their collarbones.'
The Prophet (SAW) characterised them (Wahabbis) as the 'Dogs of the Fire' [kilab al-nar], and informed us that they are the 'worst of all who dwell beneath the sky'....go and check the Sunni books !
THE WAHABBI CULT, and their land has NOT been blessed by Allah with any Wali or Salih since the beginning of Islam down to the present day....maybe that is why they love to destroy holy shrines of those sects who have been blessed by Allah (SWT)
Instead, what they the Wahabbis have is the Qarn al-Shaytan ['the Devil's Horn'], whose followers were the Khawarij of the thirteenth and subsequent Islamic centuries.
'It is the place of earthquakes, and fitnas, and from it the Devil's Horn shall rise.' [Narrated by Bukhari.] ...they call themselves the custodians of Mecca and Medina ! Hah ! what a farce ?
According to a video of the Saudi official recorded and translated by MEMRI,Al-Mu'bi has confirmed that marriage contracts are appropriate for girls as young as age 1.
And he said the model continues to be Muhammad, who married one of his wives when she was but 6 and Age, or lack thereof, is no hindrance,according to him...how hypocritical ?
Suddenly Muhamad becomes a model for them when it suits their pervasive and decadent agenda - otherwise they have no qualms about destroying the shrines of the same Prophet and his revered family and calling those who follow Muhamad as heretics !...
They who have made their countries the last bastions of tyranny and dictatorship in the world, and who demand submission to religious texts to justify their crimes, are the ones who harm Islam - not the shrines and graves of the Imams and Saints.
They have the gall to call their countries "Islamic Republic/Kingdom " when there is NOTHING Islamic about it or what they do !!
During the Umayyad period many false ahadith were made !The aim was to reduce the importance of the Ahl al Bayt !
A famous Sunni erudite Shibli Nomani writes in his siratun Nabi - Vol 1 - page 13.."the Umayyad rulers forced people like Zohri and Muawiya and Zohri was the teacher of Bukhari and Ibn Abil Hadeed writes in his book Sharah Nahjul Balagha - part 1 - P 37 that Zohri made concoctions for which he was honoured by the Umayyads who were Enemies of the Prophet's family !
The same tampering was done to their TEXTS by their scribes !
Maulvi Abdus salam Nadvi writes in his book Tari khul Fiqahil Islam - page 239 says openly that these "Kharijis" merely took the ahadith from their friends only and only which was favourable during the reign of the shaikeen and so it is a well known fact that these Kharijis were the enemy of the Prophet and history confirms that during the time of the first two Caliphs no ahadith of the Prophet even was allowed to be quoted or circulated which favoured the Ahl al Bayt !
They have betrayed the Prophet ! and now they are trying to act coy with the muslim world pretending they are some kind of divine instruments of God...
A Saudi prince who shares whisky in the evening, sentences a man to prison in the morning for drinking !
In Saudi Arabia if you are found wandering the streets during the time of Salaa and have a green colored Aqama, then you are liable to get caned and forced into one of those building they "mis" call Masjid in the Kingdom.
This is what is perceived as the true "Islamic" state by these so called muslims
The Prophet said, Peace be upon him:
1. "They [Khawarij = those outside] transferred the Qur'anic verses meant to refer to unbelievers and made them refer to believers." "What I most fear in my community is a man who interprets verses of the Qur'an out of context." "The confusion [fitna] comes from there (and he pointed to the East = Najd in present-day Eastern Saudi Arabia)."
The Prophet then said...
"A people that recite Qur'an will come out of the East, but it will not go past their throats.
"There will be in my Community a dissent and a faction, a people with excellent words and vile deeds.
They will read Qur'an, but their faith does not go past their throats. They are the worst of human beings and the worst of all creation.
They summon to the book of Allah but they have nothing to do with it. ...do you know whom this refers to? The Wahabbi/Salafi sect !
******************************************************************************
Saudi Government Cordons Off Imams' Graves in Baqi
Written by Abbas Lakha
Shock and disbelief was the initial response last Wednesday as pilgrims to the Jannat al-Baqi cemetery were faced with a barrier cordoning off the graves of the four Shia Imams buried there.
According to a report by the Ahlul Bayt News Agency (ABNA), the graves of Imam Hasan al-Mujtaba, Imam Zainul Abideen, Imam Muhammad al-Baqir, and Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq (peace be upon them) in the al-Baqi cemetery have been barricaded, preventing individual from even casting their glance on the holy sites.
May Allah give victory to those who stand truly for the way of His Prophet (SAW), Blessings and Peace be upon him.
The absurd claim of the Wahabbis and the "Salafi" movement that it is they, and not others who are the Saved Group, is delusional, at best.
If the saved group are those who came after Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab, then what is the status of all those who came before him?
Muslims of the twenty-first century should beware of the renewed onslaught on their beliefs being conducted today from within our Communities East and West, In the name of Qur'an and Sunna, but actually supported by certain regimes, pursuing specific ideologies...
Wahabbis and "Salafis" are taking over the mosques built by Ahl al-Sunna in Europe and North America -- mostly through immigrants -- by means of elections and fundings.....so Muslims should BEWARE !
It is the duty of all Muslims to ascertain that the mosques of Allah continue as centres of sound Islamic practice, not Wahabbi and"Salafi" mal practices.
Those who behead people in public and stone women to death, practise apartheid in their Kingdom and wave the sword of apostasy over the heads of their fellow Muslim critics, should be the last people to speak on behalf of Islam.
The Wahhabi position on tawassul represents the essence of their own dubiety and deviation from the beliefs of Ahl al-Sunna, although it is but one of their many divergences.
The Wahabbis/"Salafis" went out of bounds in condemning the Umma (Muslim Community) on the question of taqlid, declaring as unbelievers all those who practice taqlid, that is, the majority of Muslims.
In declaring as unbelievers all Muslims who use the Prophet Muhammad's intercession, Peace be upon him, as a wasila or means of blessing,they have "moved away" by means of Wahhabi/Salafi practice of takfir, which is them declaring Muslims as unbelievers, according to a criteria that is suspect and not followed by the pious Salaf of the past but devised by the Wahabbis posing as modern-day "Salafis." .
They propagate man-made Islamic shariah laws which they shamelessly wave at the world and yet they oppose any scrutiny of their so called "shariah" that sanctions slavery, racism, misogyny and homophobia.
They rule their populations with a sense of entitlement that they believe is their God-given right, and millions suffer under their tutelage.
In spite of the Wahabbis' superficial efforts in worship and adherence to the religion. It is as the Prophet (upon whom be blessings and peace) declared: ' one of you would despise the prayer he says among them, and the fasting he completes with them; they recite Qur'an but it goes no further than their collarbones.'
The Prophet (SAW) characterised them (Wahabbis) as the 'Dogs of the Fire' [kilab al-nar], and informed us that they are the 'worst of all who dwell beneath the sky'....go and check the Sunni books !
THE WAHABBI CULT, and their land has NOT been blessed by Allah with any Wali or Salih since the beginning of Islam down to the present day....maybe that is why they love to destroy holy shrines of those sects who have been blessed by Allah (SWT)
Instead, what they the Wahabbis have is the Qarn al-Shaytan ['the Devil's Horn'], whose followers were the Khawarij of the thirteenth and subsequent Islamic centuries.
'It is the place of earthquakes, and fitnas, and from it the Devil's Horn shall rise.' [Narrated by Bukhari.] ...they call themselves the custodians of Mecca and Medina ! Hah ! what a farce ?
According to a video of the Saudi official recorded and translated by MEMRI,Al-Mu'bi has confirmed that marriage contracts are appropriate for girls as young as age 1.
And he said the model continues to be Muhammad, who married one of his wives when she was but 6 and Age, or lack thereof, is no hindrance,according to him...how hypocritical ?
Suddenly Muhamad becomes a model for them when it suits their pervasive and decadent agenda - otherwise they have no qualms about destroying the shrines of the same Prophet and his revered family and calling those who follow Muhamad as heretics !...
They who have made their countries the last bastions of tyranny and dictatorship in the world, and who demand submission to religious texts to justify their crimes, are the ones who harm Islam - not the shrines and graves of the Imams and Saints.
They have the gall to call their countries "Islamic Republic/Kingdom " when there is NOTHING Islamic about it or what they do !!
During the Umayyad period many false ahadith were made !The aim was to reduce the importance of the Ahl al Bayt !
A famous Sunni erudite Shibli Nomani writes in his siratun Nabi - Vol 1 - page 13.."the Umayyad rulers forced people like Zohri and Muawiya and Zohri was the teacher of Bukhari and Ibn Abil Hadeed writes in his book Sharah Nahjul Balagha - part 1 - P 37 that Zohri made concoctions for which he was honoured by the Umayyads who were Enemies of the Prophet's family !
The same tampering was done to their TEXTS by their scribes !
Maulvi Abdus salam Nadvi writes in his book Tari khul Fiqahil Islam - page 239 says openly that these "Kharijis" merely took the ahadith from their friends only and only which was favourable during the reign of the shaikeen and so it is a well known fact that these Kharijis were the enemy of the Prophet and history confirms that during the time of the first two Caliphs no ahadith of the Prophet even was allowed to be quoted or circulated which favoured the Ahl al Bayt !
They have betrayed the Prophet ! and now they are trying to act coy with the muslim world pretending they are some kind of divine instruments of God...
A Saudi prince who shares whisky in the evening, sentences a man to prison in the morning for drinking !
In Saudi Arabia if you are found wandering the streets during the time of Salaa and have a green colored Aqama, then you are liable to get caned and forced into one of those building they "mis" call Masjid in the Kingdom.
This is what is perceived as the true "Islamic" state by these so called muslims
The Prophet said, Peace be upon him:
1. "They [Khawarij = those outside] transferred the Qur'anic verses meant to refer to unbelievers and made them refer to believers." "What I most fear in my community is a man who interprets verses of the Qur'an out of context." "The confusion [fitna] comes from there (and he pointed to the East = Najd in present-day Eastern Saudi Arabia)."
The Prophet then said...
"A people that recite Qur'an will come out of the East, but it will not go past their throats.
"There will be in my Community a dissent and a faction, a people with excellent words and vile deeds.
They will read Qur'an, but their faith does not go past their throats. They are the worst of human beings and the worst of all creation.
They summon to the book of Allah but they have nothing to do with it. ...do you know whom this refers to? The Wahabbi/Salafi sect !
******************************************************************************
Saudi Government Cordons Off Imams' Graves in Baqi
Written by Abbas Lakha
Shock and disbelief was the initial response last Wednesday as pilgrims to the Jannat al-Baqi cemetery were faced with a barrier cordoning off the graves of the four Shia Imams buried there.
According to a report by the Ahlul Bayt News Agency (ABNA), the graves of Imam Hasan al-Mujtaba, Imam Zainul Abideen, Imam Muhammad al-Baqir, and Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq (peace be upon them) in the al-Baqi cemetery have been barricaded, preventing individual from even casting their glance on the holy sites.
-
From_Alamut
- Posts: 666
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:22 am
Check Wikipedia on Wahhabism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabi
Quotes
"......Beginning in the last years of the 18th century Ibn Saud and his heirs would spend the next 140 years mounting various military campaigns to seize control of Arabia and its outlying regions, before being attacked and defeated by Ottoman forces. The invasions were justified as the destruction of the villages of polytheists as authorized in the Qu'ran.
One of their most famous and controversial attacks was on Karbala in 1802 (1217 AH). There, according to a Wahhabi chronicler `Uthman b. `Abdullah b. Bishr:
"[Wahhabis] scaled the walls, entered the city ... and killed the majority of its people in the markets and in their homes. [They] destroyed the dome placed over the grave of al-Husayn [and took] whatever they found inside the dome and its surroundings. .... the grille surrounding the tomb which was encrusted with emeralds, rubies, and other jewels. .... different types of property, weapons, clothing, carpets, gold, silver, precious copies of the Qur'an."......."
"........Wahabis have also committed controversial and violent actions against Muslims who the Wahabis believed to be non-Muslims. In 1801 and 1802, the Saudi Wahhabis under Abdul Aziz ibn Muhammad ibn Saud attacked and captured the holy Shi'a cities of Karbala and Najaf in Iraq, massacred parts of the Shi'a population and destroyed the tombs of Husayn ibn Ali, the grandson of Muhammad, and Ali (Ali bin Abu Talib), the son-in-law of Muhammad. (see: Saudi sponsorship mentioned previously) In 1803 and 1804 the Saudis captured Mecca and Medina and destroyed historical monuments and various holy Muslim sites and shrines, such as the shrine built over the tomb of Fatimah, the daughter of Muhammad, and even intended to destroy the grave of Muhammad himself as idolatrous..........."
Reference
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabi
HERE WATCH SOME SUNNIS VS WAHABIS DEBATE On Sunna of the Prophet Mohammad(Peace be upon him and his progeny)
I wish I understand their language so i could know what these guys debate on?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78xbFNHK_CM
This is one of the long crazy debate between Wahabis vs Sunnis DEBATE LONGEST Debate EVER....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTFVA7Pe ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kr0dgMlxuyU
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabi
Quotes
"......Beginning in the last years of the 18th century Ibn Saud and his heirs would spend the next 140 years mounting various military campaigns to seize control of Arabia and its outlying regions, before being attacked and defeated by Ottoman forces. The invasions were justified as the destruction of the villages of polytheists as authorized in the Qu'ran.
One of their most famous and controversial attacks was on Karbala in 1802 (1217 AH). There, according to a Wahhabi chronicler `Uthman b. `Abdullah b. Bishr:
"[Wahhabis] scaled the walls, entered the city ... and killed the majority of its people in the markets and in their homes. [They] destroyed the dome placed over the grave of al-Husayn [and took] whatever they found inside the dome and its surroundings. .... the grille surrounding the tomb which was encrusted with emeralds, rubies, and other jewels. .... different types of property, weapons, clothing, carpets, gold, silver, precious copies of the Qur'an."......."
"........Wahabis have also committed controversial and violent actions against Muslims who the Wahabis believed to be non-Muslims. In 1801 and 1802, the Saudi Wahhabis under Abdul Aziz ibn Muhammad ibn Saud attacked and captured the holy Shi'a cities of Karbala and Najaf in Iraq, massacred parts of the Shi'a population and destroyed the tombs of Husayn ibn Ali, the grandson of Muhammad, and Ali (Ali bin Abu Talib), the son-in-law of Muhammad. (see: Saudi sponsorship mentioned previously) In 1803 and 1804 the Saudis captured Mecca and Medina and destroyed historical monuments and various holy Muslim sites and shrines, such as the shrine built over the tomb of Fatimah, the daughter of Muhammad, and even intended to destroy the grave of Muhammad himself as idolatrous..........."
Reference
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabi
HERE WATCH SOME SUNNIS VS WAHABIS DEBATE On Sunna of the Prophet Mohammad(Peace be upon him and his progeny)
I wish I understand their language so i could know what these guys debate on?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78xbFNHK_CM
This is one of the long crazy debate between Wahabis vs Sunnis DEBATE LONGEST Debate EVER....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTFVA7Pe ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kr0dgMlxuyU
Maula Ali SA.
" Maula Ali Hai Noor Rab Kah,"
" Maula Ali SA. Subh Kaah Hai Madadgar,"
" Bholo Bholo Saaraey Ya Ali Madad "
You will Witness Dargaah Maula Ali SA
at Najaf in Iraq.
Keep Speakers On.
Click on Link Below or copy paste to the browser:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PpNaKVyQnc
" Maula Ali Hai Noor Rab Kah,"
" Maula Ali SA. Subh Kaah Hai Madadgar,"
" Bholo Bholo Saaraey Ya Ali Madad "
You will Witness Dargaah Maula Ali SA
at Najaf in Iraq.
Keep Speakers On.
Click on Link Below or copy paste to the browser:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PpNaKVyQnc
Excerpts from Qadi al-Numan’s work, Da’aim al-Islam
(adopted by Simerg)
“Say (O Muhammad): No reward do I ask (for my favours)
except your love for my kith and kin” – Holy Qur’an, Sura 42, Ayat 23
"He who loves us will be with us on the Day of Judgement” - Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq
It is related from Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq that a group of Shias visited him one day. One in the group addressed the Imam and spoke of a man who was with them.
“O Son of the Messenger of God: this man has love for you.”
On hearing these words, the lmam looked at the person and said:
“The best kind of love is the love for the sake of God and His Messenger. There is no gain in any other kind of love.”
The Imam then continued.
“Once the Ansars came to Hazrat Muhammad Mustafa (s.a.s.) and said, ‘O Messenger of God! We were on the wrong path and Allah guided us through you.
We were destitute and we prospered by your blessings. For this reason, you may ask of anything you desire from our belongings and we shall give it to you.’
At this, the following verse was revealed by Allah, ‘Say (O Muhammad): No reward do I ask (for my favours) except your love for my kith and kin’.
Moved to tears, Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq then raised his hands and exclaimed:
“Praise be to God, Who has exalted us above all.”
2. It is related of Imam Jafar as-Sadiq that one day he said to some of his followers:
“Should I not inform you of a meritorious deed which would save a person from the Day of Judgement? And should I not warn you of the evil deed which will plunge you headlong into Hell?”
He continued:
“The meritorious deed is your love for us and the evil deed is your hatred and enmity towards us.”
It is said that a group of people came from Khorassan to pay their homage to Imam Muhammad al-Baqir. Seeing both the feet of one of the visitors severely wounded he inquired about the nature of the injury. The man replied:
“O the Son of the Messenger of God! My feet have become sore with blisters because of the long distance I travelled on foot.
"I swear by God that nothing but the love for Ahl al-Bayt has brought me all the way here.”
The Imam said: “He who loves us will be with us on the Day of Judgement.
Religion is nothing but love! God says. ‘Say (0 Muhammad): if you love God follow me. God will love you’.” (Sura 2, Ayat 31)
Imam al-Baqir is reported to have said, “At the time of death, when one is breathing his last, it is only the love of Ali that will be most beneficial to him.”
It is related that a man came to Imam Jafar as-Sadiq and informed him of a person who had died recently. He said, “O the Son of the Messenger of God! the deceased had great regard and love for you (the People of the House).”
The Imam replied:
“He who bears love for us, will be with us on the Day of Judgement. He will be under our care and be our companion..."
I swear this by God. I swear by God also that no one can love us until God purifies his heart and no one’s heart shall be purified until he accepts our Imamat.
When he accepts us as Imam, God will save him from the penalty of his sins and from His wrath on the Day of Judgement.
He who has accepted our Imamat will feel happy when his life reaches here.” (and the Imam pointed to his throat).
Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq is reported to have said, “A believer who bears love for us will come to no harm, poor though he may be, that he has no shelter over his head except a tree and has no food to eat except its leaves.
Today, the state of the people is such that they have deserted us but it is you who have stayed with us.”
One, from amongst those who were seated there, said:
“May I sacrifice my life for your sake! We are assured that God will not treat us as He will treat the others.”
The Imam replied, “No, I swear by God this will never happen. There will be no honour or grace for them.”
7. It is related of Imam al-Baqir that he said:
“Verily, Paradise is anxious to receive the progeny of the Prophet and their followers..."
The splendour of Paradise will increase all the more by their arrival. If a servant of God prays between Rukn and Maqam Ibrahim to the extent that his limbs are torn apart but he does not accept the authority of Ahl al-Bayt and bears no love for them, then God will not accept his prayers.”
Imam al-Baqir is reported to have told his followers:
“When the life of any one of you reaches the throat you will feel extremely pleased.”
He continued to explain that the angel of death will come and say, ‘Whatever you desire, you shall receive and whatever you fear, you shall be kept safe from it.’
Then a door to Paradise will be opened out to him and the angel of death will say:
‘Behold your abode in Paradise. See the Messenger of God and Ali and Fatima and Hassan and Husayn who are your companions.’
It is reported that Imam al-Baqir was asked whether the following revelation of God referred to the chosen few or to all,
‘Say: O My servants who have transgressed against their own souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah, for Allah forgives all sins. Lo! He is oft-Forgiving, most Merciful’. (Sura 39, Ayat 53).
Imam al-Baqir replied:
“This revelation especially refers to our followers.”
It is also reported that he said:
“On the Day of Resurrection, our followers will rise from their graves with their errors and sins, and mount the winged she-camel.
Their stirrups will be bright with the Noor (light) and it will be easy for them to ride upwards.
Their obstacles and difficulties will have been removed. Others will be full of fear but not they.
Others will be drowned in misery and sorrow but not they. They will find shelter under the Divine Canopy and they will eat from the feast laid out on the table- spread, while others will be busily occupied in giving the accounts from their Book of Deeds.”
Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq one day addressed his followers and said:
“On the Day of Judgement, we shall hold the Prophet and you shall hold us. Where do you think you will then go?”
Someone from amongst the followers said:
“To Paradise, Inshallah.”
The Imam said. “Yes, I swear by God, to Paradise, Inshallah.”
___________________________
So now is thre any Sh'ia who wants to dispute the ahadith of their own Imam? now all Sh'ias agree that there can be only ONE Imam per era ! so let them reflect and ponder ...it is best for them !
(adopted by Simerg)
“Say (O Muhammad): No reward do I ask (for my favours)
except your love for my kith and kin” – Holy Qur’an, Sura 42, Ayat 23
"He who loves us will be with us on the Day of Judgement” - Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq
It is related from Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq that a group of Shias visited him one day. One in the group addressed the Imam and spoke of a man who was with them.
“O Son of the Messenger of God: this man has love for you.”
On hearing these words, the lmam looked at the person and said:
“The best kind of love is the love for the sake of God and His Messenger. There is no gain in any other kind of love.”
The Imam then continued.
“Once the Ansars came to Hazrat Muhammad Mustafa (s.a.s.) and said, ‘O Messenger of God! We were on the wrong path and Allah guided us through you.
We were destitute and we prospered by your blessings. For this reason, you may ask of anything you desire from our belongings and we shall give it to you.’
At this, the following verse was revealed by Allah, ‘Say (O Muhammad): No reward do I ask (for my favours) except your love for my kith and kin’.
Moved to tears, Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq then raised his hands and exclaimed:
“Praise be to God, Who has exalted us above all.”
2. It is related of Imam Jafar as-Sadiq that one day he said to some of his followers:
“Should I not inform you of a meritorious deed which would save a person from the Day of Judgement? And should I not warn you of the evil deed which will plunge you headlong into Hell?”
He continued:
“The meritorious deed is your love for us and the evil deed is your hatred and enmity towards us.”
It is said that a group of people came from Khorassan to pay their homage to Imam Muhammad al-Baqir. Seeing both the feet of one of the visitors severely wounded he inquired about the nature of the injury. The man replied:
“O the Son of the Messenger of God! My feet have become sore with blisters because of the long distance I travelled on foot.
"I swear by God that nothing but the love for Ahl al-Bayt has brought me all the way here.”
The Imam said: “He who loves us will be with us on the Day of Judgement.
Religion is nothing but love! God says. ‘Say (0 Muhammad): if you love God follow me. God will love you’.” (Sura 2, Ayat 31)
Imam al-Baqir is reported to have said, “At the time of death, when one is breathing his last, it is only the love of Ali that will be most beneficial to him.”
It is related that a man came to Imam Jafar as-Sadiq and informed him of a person who had died recently. He said, “O the Son of the Messenger of God! the deceased had great regard and love for you (the People of the House).”
The Imam replied:
“He who bears love for us, will be with us on the Day of Judgement. He will be under our care and be our companion..."
I swear this by God. I swear by God also that no one can love us until God purifies his heart and no one’s heart shall be purified until he accepts our Imamat.
When he accepts us as Imam, God will save him from the penalty of his sins and from His wrath on the Day of Judgement.
He who has accepted our Imamat will feel happy when his life reaches here.” (and the Imam pointed to his throat).
Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq is reported to have said, “A believer who bears love for us will come to no harm, poor though he may be, that he has no shelter over his head except a tree and has no food to eat except its leaves.
Today, the state of the people is such that they have deserted us but it is you who have stayed with us.”
One, from amongst those who were seated there, said:
“May I sacrifice my life for your sake! We are assured that God will not treat us as He will treat the others.”
The Imam replied, “No, I swear by God this will never happen. There will be no honour or grace for them.”
7. It is related of Imam al-Baqir that he said:
“Verily, Paradise is anxious to receive the progeny of the Prophet and their followers..."
The splendour of Paradise will increase all the more by their arrival. If a servant of God prays between Rukn and Maqam Ibrahim to the extent that his limbs are torn apart but he does not accept the authority of Ahl al-Bayt and bears no love for them, then God will not accept his prayers.”
Imam al-Baqir is reported to have told his followers:
“When the life of any one of you reaches the throat you will feel extremely pleased.”
He continued to explain that the angel of death will come and say, ‘Whatever you desire, you shall receive and whatever you fear, you shall be kept safe from it.’
Then a door to Paradise will be opened out to him and the angel of death will say:
‘Behold your abode in Paradise. See the Messenger of God and Ali and Fatima and Hassan and Husayn who are your companions.’
It is reported that Imam al-Baqir was asked whether the following revelation of God referred to the chosen few or to all,
‘Say: O My servants who have transgressed against their own souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah, for Allah forgives all sins. Lo! He is oft-Forgiving, most Merciful’. (Sura 39, Ayat 53).
Imam al-Baqir replied:
“This revelation especially refers to our followers.”
It is also reported that he said:
“On the Day of Resurrection, our followers will rise from their graves with their errors and sins, and mount the winged she-camel.
Their stirrups will be bright with the Noor (light) and it will be easy for them to ride upwards.
Their obstacles and difficulties will have been removed. Others will be full of fear but not they.
Others will be drowned in misery and sorrow but not they. They will find shelter under the Divine Canopy and they will eat from the feast laid out on the table- spread, while others will be busily occupied in giving the accounts from their Book of Deeds.”
Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq one day addressed his followers and said:
“On the Day of Judgement, we shall hold the Prophet and you shall hold us. Where do you think you will then go?”
Someone from amongst the followers said:
“To Paradise, Inshallah.”
The Imam said. “Yes, I swear by God, to Paradise, Inshallah.”
___________________________
So now is thre any Sh'ia who wants to dispute the ahadith of their own Imam? now all Sh'ias agree that there can be only ONE Imam per era ! so let them reflect and ponder ...it is best for them !
There needs to be an authoritative basis for it, but that authority need not be your imam.In addition, the Quran needs to be re-interpreted according to context and hence there needs to be an authoritative basis for it. No Tom Dick and Harry could do it.
Your interpretation, specifically about what it means to be the ahl al-kitaab as was the issue, has no basis in the Qur’an because it’s not derived from the holy text but is instead derived from something your imam said in an interview. You’re not even interpreting (any verses from) the book properly speaking, but are only interpreting the answer your imam gave in that interview. That is why it has no basis in the Qur’an.In what manner it has no basis. The Book can be interpreted in many ways. It is my interpretation. You are free to disagree with it.
This issue is dealt with below.Yes my fundamental beliefs are not derived from the Quran in the sense that they existed before the Quran...
You don’t seem to understand what it is exactly that I’m asking from you. I’m going to therefore try and make it very clear now. The problem is that you disregard the qualifications with which I qualified the questions that I asked you. In the case of the first question, I asked you to prove to me, without reference to the Qur’an (or hadith), that Imamat, as understood in Ismailism, has always existed. You claim you’ve answered it by the fact that, as the article states, “God's Word must in order to realize itself in this world, be manifested to man.” This does not answer the particular question that I asked you though. It only states a universal principle that does not at all exclusively belong to Ismaili doctrine. In fact, this pricinple is shared by all authentic religious traditions including even the ancient Greek sages, from whom the Ismailis, like al-Sijistani, took it (in a positive sense). This doctrine is thus not something that is essentially Ismaili, but is something universal, shared by all authentic traditions. To give just one example in the context of Islam, which has parallels in other traditions, in Sunni and Twelver Shi’ite Islam, it’s identified at the highest level with the Qur'an itself or Prophet (saw) and at lower levels with the Imams (as) and the great sages and saints (ra) of the respective traditions. Accordinbly then, you might as well just say it’s a Sunni doctrine or a Twelve Shi’ite doctrine since they believe in it as well. There is, other words, nothing particularly Ismaili about it. However, what is a purely Ismaili doctrine is the identification of this manifested Word with the Ismaili Imam, your Imam, and this is what I’m asking you to prove without reference either to the Qur’an or hadith. To prove certain universal beliefs and then equate them with your own particular Ismaili beliefs does not answer my question. Those universal beliefs do not belong to any one particular interpretation by their very nature, i.e. they are universal. They are shared by all and constitute a kind universal Wisdom you might say. It’s like saying that the Ismaili belief in God is not derived from the Qur’an but it independent of it – which is true, but it is as much Sunni, or Christian, or Hindu, or Shi’ite, or something of the traditions of Greek Antiquity, etc, as it is Ismaili. The belief in God is a universal doctrine not limited to any particular religion. The same is true of the belief that God must provide guidance to his creatures which takes different forms and expressions in a given religious universe. This is not what I’m asking from you though. I’m asking you to prove to me your particular Ismaili belief/doctrine, which other traditions don’t obviously share, that the Imam as understood in Ismailism has always existed, without reference to the Qur’an or hadith.The article states:
"As we have seen above, God's Word must in order to realize itself in this world, be manifested to man.”
The first sentence is what I’m really asking you to prove without reference to the Qur’an or hadith as that is what is a particularly Ismaili doctrine, provided, if by ‘the Imam’ at the beginning of the sentence it means the Imam as Ismailis understand it since other traditions differ in their idea of it. How are you going to do this? If, by the Imam it refers to a universal concept of a guide, then the doctrine is not so Ismaili anymore. I can take it to refer to the Qur’an, or the Prophet (saw) or the Imam(s) of the Twelver Shi’ites or the Sufi shaykh, etc.“The Imam who is the guide of the believers (those who comply with God's Word) is therefore the embodiment of this Word. He is God's Word manifested.
Again, if this Imam is the Imam as understood in Ismailism, then prove that to me without reference to the Qur’an or hadith.The Imam, therefore, must always be present (muqim) in this world in order to guide the believers."
I’m not denying this nor is it the issue I’m concerned with. All authentic religions maintain this doctrine. It is not dependent upon the particular Qur’anic revelation, but what and who, as an Ismaili, you think this Word of God is is dependent upon the Qur’an. That is and has been my issue all this time. Prove to me that this is not the case.The above statement points to God's will as manifested in his word which must exist at all times to guide mankind.
The manifestation of God’s Word in the cosmos is a metaphysical necessity; not this manifestation being your imam. Al-Sijistani used Qur’anic notions to derive at the particular Ismaili understanding of what and who this manifested Word of God is. This, however, goes against you and proves the point I’ve been trying to make.It is a metaphysical necessity. Sijistani used the Quranic notion of amr to derive at the Will or the word. But this could equally have been drived through concepts from other tradition such as ichhha (wish). Similarly the notion of the permanence of the word can also be derived from other traditions.
As I’ve been saying, I have no quarrel with this. The ‘notion of continuous guidance or the continuous presence of the Word’ is not exclusively an Ismaili doctrine. Who this Word is in the world according to Ismailis is an exclusively Ismaili doctrine. I’m asking you to justify the latter without reference either to the Qur’an or hadith.Sijistani sought Quranic justification because he lived in a Quranic context, but the notion of continuous guidance or the continuos presence of the 'word' can equally be dreived from the notion of Das Avtaar which is not Quranic. All traditions point to the need for this word to exist at all times.
Again I ask you, which Imam? Your Imam? Do you mean Imam as understood in Ismailism? If so, prove this to me without reference to either the Qur’an or hadith.The Ismaili notion is that the word is manifested in the Imam. Since the word has existed at all times, it follows that Imamat has existed at all times.
Three questions: On what bases do you consider your (Ismaili) imam to be the embodiment of God’s Word? On what bases do you consider him to be even an imam? From where have you derived your understanding of what an imam is? If you refer to the Qur’an in answering these questions, you prove my point.The article states:
"I have shown above that the Ismai'ilis consider their Imam to be the embodiment of God's Will or Word.”
What does the institution of Imamate mean? Again, is it Imamate as understood in Ismailism or not? If so, then prove that to me. If not, then it could equally be referring to other traditions as well and the doctrine is then not exclusively Ismaili.He is, therefore, the First Intellect manifested in this world. The seed of Imamate passes from one Imam to the other. For this institution of Imamate, as we have mentioned before, is God's Will or Word.
How do you know that Adam was the first to be entrusted with Imamate? What does the Imamate he was entrusted with mean in this context? Is it the particular Ismaili meaning? If so, prove that to me. If not, then it’s not a particularly Ismaili doctrine. If ‘Imam’ in this context means anything other than the particular Ismaili meaning the term has, then it could equally be interpreted as God entrusting Adam with Prophecy, something which Muslims generally believe.Adam (31) was the first to be entrusted with that Word or Will, i.e. with the Imamate. In other words, he was willed by God to be Imam. He, in his turn, entrusted this Will or Word (the activity of the Imam) to his son, and so on.
These are simply statements being made with not justification whatsoever. If you justify them from the Qur’an, you prove my point. If you justify them by some other means, show me the means that you justify them by.Every Imam would, in his turn, express this Will, and then entrust it to his successor, and thus this Will (the Imamate) would settle (istaqarra) and dwell (aqama) in the following Imam, and so on. Thus, the person of the Imam becomes the mustaqarr of God's Will or Word, i.e. the place in which God's Word is settled (istaqarra), as well as its muqam, i.e. the place in which God's Word dwells (aqama).
The passage simply points something out, it does not prove anything. Who is the first Imam that your present imam is the descendant of? Sayidna Ali (as)? Or is it Adam (as)? If it’s Ali, how do you he’s the first Imam? If it’s Adam, how do you know he’s the first Imam? Moreover, like I asked you before, how do you know what you know about (the particular Ismaili notion of) Imamate that you claim these two figures possessed? Where do you derive your particular understanding of Imamat from? The Qur’an? If so, you prove my point. If not, from where then? Is it other religions? Then show me how the notion Imamate as understood is Ismailism in contained in them. Or do you derive it from reason? If so, then show me the reasoning process by which you came to this conclusion.The above passage points to the hereditory nature of the authority. The Present Imam is the direct descendant of the first Imam and he is the only authority. Since Imamat has existed since the Beginning, Ismailism has existed since the beginning.
Kmaherali, you quote statements from Ali and Jafar al-Sadiq and think that this proves your beliefs. But, you have not proved Ali or Jafar al-Sadiq to be authoritative yet. Why then should I accept what they have to say? This goes back to the point I made before. You haven’t proved the authority of your imam yet, so quoting him to justify your beliefs is not possible. You have to prove his Imamate or successorship first and then you can deem his statements as authoritative. But, how will you prove his imamate? Through the Qur’an? But you can’t, since you believe it to be incomplete, tampered with, and insufficient as guide by itself. How have you come to believe this about the Qur’an though? Through your imam? But, again, you haven’t proved his authority yet, so why do you accept his word? If you reply, ‘the doctrine of Imamate is not dependent upon the Qur’an’. I say, it’s not dependent in its universal sense of continuous guide/guidance, but it is dependent upon the Qur’an in your particular Ismaili sense. The figure of the Prophet/Imam/Guide is not dependent upon the Qur’an as the traditions of others attest, but the figure of the particular Ismaili Imam is very much dependent upon the Qur’an. If you disagree with this, show me how it’s not the case. I hope you see the point I’m trying to make?The article quotes Hazarat Ali as saying:
"O, Salman and Jundub, I bring humanity to life and make them die, I create them, and nourish them... And the Rightful Imams from my progeny are acting in the same way, because all of us are one and the same imams manifested at all times... But with all this, we eat and drink, ... in the market place and do what we will, by the will of God, our Lord."
Another statement of the article:
"Al-Hamidi, in his highly esoteric book Kanz al-walad, (32) relates from the Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq that he said "Our appearance (zahir) is Imamate, and our reality is Divinity (ghayb) which cannot be attained." An-Nasafi, another Isma'ili da'i says in his book Kitab al-mahsul: (33) "The Imam is the end of Existence (ghayat al-wujud)... His essence is divine, and his life is eternal... He is the end of all ends and the creator of creation." In his book Zahr al-ma'ani, Idris Imad ad-Din mentions many sayings attributed to 'Ali, which show the Ismai'li belief in 'Ali, as well as in all the other Imams. He says relating from Jabir ibn 'Abdallah al-Ansari: (34)."
The above statements clearly prove that the world cannot exist without the Imams. Since Imam Ali and Imam Jafar as-saddiq were both Ismaili Imams and the present Imam is the direct descendant of them it follows that the Imam under consideration is the Ismaili Imam.
They referred to the Vedic traditions because they were speaking to a Hindu audience. Moreover, they must have known that something in the Vedic tradition corresponds to what the Qur’anic revelation contains. Why else would they do it? Could they have used Vedic doctrines to prove to a largely Hindu audience what the Qur’an says? If this is true, it just goes to prove my point; that the particular Ismaili doctrine of Imamate is derived from the Qur’an. This particular doctrine certainly can’t be contained in Hinduism.Our Pirs were well versed in the Quran and the hadith as well as in other traditions. There are no direct explicit references to the Quran or the hadith. One can of course make indirect correspondances. There are however references to the Vedic traditions. There are concepts in the Ginans such as the Das Avtars which are not at all mentioned in the Quran and the hadiths. Ginans are however quite clear that our tradition existed since the beginning and not from the time of the Prophet.
.the Das Avtars which are not at all mentioned in the Quran and the hadiths
Don’t be too sure of this. It is not true. The great sages and saints of Islam have held and discussed certain beliefs which parallel this doctrine, which they saw as deriving from the Qur’an, in the world-view and language of the Islam though. This is however beside the point. In fact, ironically, don’t you think that if you set out to prove the particular Ismaili doctrine of Imamat through the Qur’an or hadith, you’ll be also proving yourself wrong when you state that this ‘Das Avataras’ doctrine is not in the Qur’an as you belief your imam to be related to it?
binom,
The authority can only be the Imam from the pure progeny of the prophet who were purified by Allah ! certainly this excludes your scholars and mullahs...the quran speaks very affirmatively about the Imams....so where does this then leave you at least? in the doldrums !
Every day you pray "Guide us to the right path....the path of those upon whom thou has bestowed favours....." seems like you are chanting logans and poetry for you do not know what you are even invoking? No wonder Islam is in turbulent waters !
The Quran says: “And God is not going to chastise them while you are, O Muhammd among them” (8:33).
On reading the above Quranic verse, one comes to the conclusion that the privilege mentioned therein is restricted only to the life time of the Prophet as it reads: “While you are among them.”
The Prophet is not among us at present but then if one examines the following ayah :
“And had there not been God averting some people’s (doom) by others, certainly there would have been pulled down cloisters and churches and synagogues and mosques in which God’s name is much remembered” (22:40).
This verse makes it clear that there always exists in this world an infallible one through whose inherent auspiciousness this world exists.
"We sent thee not save as a Mercy for the worlds.." !
"Verily God hath preferred Adam and Noah and the family of Abraham and the family of Imran, above HIS creatures...."
"And WE chose them and guided them unto a straight path.." !
"And WE set a just balance for the day of Judgment so that no soul is wronged in aught.."!
"Verily God wrongeth not mankind in anything" !
This infallible one is no other than the Prophet’s pure Progeny, the Imams of the Ahl al Bayt
Ibn Hajar writes, “Inasmuch as the Prophet was a security for the inhabitants of this earth, the people of his house (ahl al-bayt) are likewise the securities.”
This is further corroborated by the hadith, “If the Imam were to be removed from this earth, the earth together with its inhabitants would have cleaved asunder.”
It implies that the existence of an Imam in every age is necessary and indispensable.
The Quran says: “O ye! Who believe, obey God and obey the Apostle and those among you invested with authority” (4:59).
It is an undoubted fact that every apostle is sent to be obeyed by his people as is obvious from the following verse:
“And We never sent an apostle but he who ought to be obeyed by God’s permission” (4:64). ...disobedience to the Prophet is disobedience to Allah Himself !
Inasmuch as the extent of the obedience is not restricted, the last verse should be treated as an injunction for an absolute and complete obedience.
The question arises as to the identity of these persons who are described “Invested with authority.”
Everyone knows the Prophet, but who are the “Invested with authority/” To be brief, the commentators are in agreement that the expression “Those invested with authority” may either mean the Imams or the ruling princes of the time.
The second alternative is obviously incorrect.
The ruling princes certainly not "infallible" and subject to greed, oratory and political inclinations.
To solve the question, we have a tradition from Jabir bin Abdullah Ansari, who relates that the verse:
“O ye! Who believe, obey God and obey the Apostle and those among you invested with authority” (4:59) was revealed, he asked the Prophet, “We know God and His Prophet, but who are these persons invested with authority?” The Prophet said, “Ali and his descendants are invested with authority.”
So atleast the above supports our belief more than yours pal !
In sum, the Imam of every age is the Hujjatullah (Sign of God), the Noorullah (Light of God) and (Epiphany) of God. He is Mansus (designated), Ma’sum (infallible) and Afdal an-na’s (the best of the mankind).
If the folks during the time of the Prophet had the benefit of his guidance and mercy which Allah personified through Mohamed, why would Allah be so unjust so as to deprive humankind of these blessings after Prophet hood ended when Allah clearly says that He does not wrong any soul in aught ?
" Verily I have shown him the way , whether he be grateful or disbelieving.."
Allah says..." God bears witness (as do also) the angels and the "men of knowledge", upright in Justice, that there is no God save HIM.." - so who are these "men of Knowledge"?
"Verily God wrongeth not even the weight of an atom.."
" So whoever breakteh his oath, breaketh it only to his soul's detriment, while whoever keepeth his Covernant with God, on him will HE bestow an immense reward.."
" O! Prophet those who give you their allegiance they give it but to Allah Himself...God's Hand is upon their hands.."..............."That Day will faces be radiant looking at their Lord..."
"SAY:....Were the sea to be ink for the words of my Lord, verily the sea would be used up before the words of my Lord were exhausted, even if WE were to bring the like thereof to help..." ( it is abundantly clear that it is the Book and the Progeny that continues to provide clarifications and wisdom and the "SIGNS")..shows the Book is NOT enough ! Allah says so...
If one reads the Quran it says clearly that folks need to seek these Signs/Proofs of Allah ! Allah even asks a rhetorical question:..."will they not reflect and ponder"?
With the Quran also came MANIFEST PROOFS !
"We have indeed sent down Manifest Proofs" !
For those who claim unmediated and direct relationship...." Say: "Those without knowledge, why speaketh not Allah unto us or why cometh not unto us a sign?"....."Their hearts are alike, WE have made clear Signs unto people who hold firmly to faith ."
Thus those who truly have faith will recognize the Manifest Proof !
" And if ye slide back after the MANIFEST PROOFS have come unto you, then know that Allah is Mighty Wise..."............
"And those who govern the event.."................:And there are those upon whose hearts HE had written faith..."........
SAY:.."unto God belongeth all Intercession..."............"betweem them is a veil and on the HEIGHTS are MEN who know them ALL by their minds...."................"Yes! HE is the all-knowing Creator.."...........
"Shall WE treat those who believe and do good works as those who spread corruption in the earth; or shall WE treat the PIOUS as the Wicked?..."............
"And they rate not God as HIS true worth...."..............
"SAY:.." I ask of you no Reward save loving kindness for Kinsfolk..."(the arabic "qurba" here means those 'close" to the Prophet as it is the prophet himself making this request)................
"And WE have revealed unto thee the "remembrance" that thou mayst explain to mankind that which hath been revealed for them..." ( here Allah talks of "remembrance" and that is the Isme el Zikr which is the remembrance name, as far as I can see as HE does not talk of the Book or the Message or the recital or the Quran but it is an expansive expression and Allah does talk in parable)...so go and sleep !
The authority can only be the Imam from the pure progeny of the prophet who were purified by Allah ! certainly this excludes your scholars and mullahs...the quran speaks very affirmatively about the Imams....so where does this then leave you at least? in the doldrums !
Every day you pray "Guide us to the right path....the path of those upon whom thou has bestowed favours....." seems like you are chanting logans and poetry for you do not know what you are even invoking? No wonder Islam is in turbulent waters !
The Quran says: “And God is not going to chastise them while you are, O Muhammd among them” (8:33).
On reading the above Quranic verse, one comes to the conclusion that the privilege mentioned therein is restricted only to the life time of the Prophet as it reads: “While you are among them.”
The Prophet is not among us at present but then if one examines the following ayah :
“And had there not been God averting some people’s (doom) by others, certainly there would have been pulled down cloisters and churches and synagogues and mosques in which God’s name is much remembered” (22:40).
This verse makes it clear that there always exists in this world an infallible one through whose inherent auspiciousness this world exists.
"We sent thee not save as a Mercy for the worlds.." !
"Verily God hath preferred Adam and Noah and the family of Abraham and the family of Imran, above HIS creatures...."
"And WE chose them and guided them unto a straight path.." !
"And WE set a just balance for the day of Judgment so that no soul is wronged in aught.."!
"Verily God wrongeth not mankind in anything" !
This infallible one is no other than the Prophet’s pure Progeny, the Imams of the Ahl al Bayt
Ibn Hajar writes, “Inasmuch as the Prophet was a security for the inhabitants of this earth, the people of his house (ahl al-bayt) are likewise the securities.”
This is further corroborated by the hadith, “If the Imam were to be removed from this earth, the earth together with its inhabitants would have cleaved asunder.”
It implies that the existence of an Imam in every age is necessary and indispensable.
The Quran says: “O ye! Who believe, obey God and obey the Apostle and those among you invested with authority” (4:59).
It is an undoubted fact that every apostle is sent to be obeyed by his people as is obvious from the following verse:
“And We never sent an apostle but he who ought to be obeyed by God’s permission” (4:64). ...disobedience to the Prophet is disobedience to Allah Himself !
Inasmuch as the extent of the obedience is not restricted, the last verse should be treated as an injunction for an absolute and complete obedience.
The question arises as to the identity of these persons who are described “Invested with authority.”
Everyone knows the Prophet, but who are the “Invested with authority/” To be brief, the commentators are in agreement that the expression “Those invested with authority” may either mean the Imams or the ruling princes of the time.
The second alternative is obviously incorrect.
The ruling princes certainly not "infallible" and subject to greed, oratory and political inclinations.
To solve the question, we have a tradition from Jabir bin Abdullah Ansari, who relates that the verse:
“O ye! Who believe, obey God and obey the Apostle and those among you invested with authority” (4:59) was revealed, he asked the Prophet, “We know God and His Prophet, but who are these persons invested with authority?” The Prophet said, “Ali and his descendants are invested with authority.”
So atleast the above supports our belief more than yours pal !
In sum, the Imam of every age is the Hujjatullah (Sign of God), the Noorullah (Light of God) and (Epiphany) of God. He is Mansus (designated), Ma’sum (infallible) and Afdal an-na’s (the best of the mankind).
If the folks during the time of the Prophet had the benefit of his guidance and mercy which Allah personified through Mohamed, why would Allah be so unjust so as to deprive humankind of these blessings after Prophet hood ended when Allah clearly says that He does not wrong any soul in aught ?
" Verily I have shown him the way , whether he be grateful or disbelieving.."
Allah says..." God bears witness (as do also) the angels and the "men of knowledge", upright in Justice, that there is no God save HIM.." - so who are these "men of Knowledge"?
"Verily God wrongeth not even the weight of an atom.."
" So whoever breakteh his oath, breaketh it only to his soul's detriment, while whoever keepeth his Covernant with God, on him will HE bestow an immense reward.."
" O! Prophet those who give you their allegiance they give it but to Allah Himself...God's Hand is upon their hands.."..............."That Day will faces be radiant looking at their Lord..."
"SAY:....Were the sea to be ink for the words of my Lord, verily the sea would be used up before the words of my Lord were exhausted, even if WE were to bring the like thereof to help..." ( it is abundantly clear that it is the Book and the Progeny that continues to provide clarifications and wisdom and the "SIGNS")..shows the Book is NOT enough ! Allah says so...
If one reads the Quran it says clearly that folks need to seek these Signs/Proofs of Allah ! Allah even asks a rhetorical question:..."will they not reflect and ponder"?
With the Quran also came MANIFEST PROOFS !
"We have indeed sent down Manifest Proofs" !
For those who claim unmediated and direct relationship...." Say: "Those without knowledge, why speaketh not Allah unto us or why cometh not unto us a sign?"....."Their hearts are alike, WE have made clear Signs unto people who hold firmly to faith ."
Thus those who truly have faith will recognize the Manifest Proof !
" And if ye slide back after the MANIFEST PROOFS have come unto you, then know that Allah is Mighty Wise..."............
"And those who govern the event.."................:And there are those upon whose hearts HE had written faith..."........
SAY:.."unto God belongeth all Intercession..."............"betweem them is a veil and on the HEIGHTS are MEN who know them ALL by their minds...."................"Yes! HE is the all-knowing Creator.."...........
"Shall WE treat those who believe and do good works as those who spread corruption in the earth; or shall WE treat the PIOUS as the Wicked?..."............
"And they rate not God as HIS true worth...."..............
"SAY:.." I ask of you no Reward save loving kindness for Kinsfolk..."(the arabic "qurba" here means those 'close" to the Prophet as it is the prophet himself making this request)................
"And WE have revealed unto thee the "remembrance" that thou mayst explain to mankind that which hath been revealed for them..." ( here Allah talks of "remembrance" and that is the Isme el Zikr which is the remembrance name, as far as I can see as HE does not talk of the Book or the Message or the recital or the Quran but it is an expansive expression and Allah does talk in parable)...so go and sleep !
People of the Book ! There were 124,000 prophets...why don't you first tell us how many were given the Book, to begin with....
Name the Prophet whose name is mentioned and discussed most in the Quran? Let us have some answers as you seem to be rather too knowledgeable huh?....What were those worships and prayers that were ordered by Allah to the community of Bani Israeel and which were continued by the Muslim Ummah also?
In which Holy Book of Non-Muslims the Quran is mentioned repeatedly?
What is the scale or measure of one's dignity according to the Quran?
What are the two most important types of Aayaat (Verses)found in the Quran?
Which is the smallest Surah in the Quran? and what is it's historical context?
Where was the first Surah revealed?
Which Surah(Chapter) of the Quran is to be read compulsorily in each raka'at of the Salaat (Namaaz as you guys call this )?
Which is the Surah, which Allah taught as a Du'a(Prayer) ?
First at least give us some answers and then show us you have the desired qualifications to even talk about the subject "People of the Book"..
Name the Prophet whose name is mentioned and discussed most in the Quran? Let us have some answers as you seem to be rather too knowledgeable huh?....What were those worships and prayers that were ordered by Allah to the community of Bani Israeel and which were continued by the Muslim Ummah also?
In which Holy Book of Non-Muslims the Quran is mentioned repeatedly?
What is the scale or measure of one's dignity according to the Quran?
What are the two most important types of Aayaat (Verses)found in the Quran?
Which is the smallest Surah in the Quran? and what is it's historical context?
Where was the first Surah revealed?
Which Surah(Chapter) of the Quran is to be read compulsorily in each raka'at of the Salaat (Namaaz as you guys call this )?
Which is the Surah, which Allah taught as a Du'a(Prayer) ?
First at least give us some answers and then show us you have the desired qualifications to even talk about the subject "People of the Book"..
binom,
Your arguments are weird and incompetent ....the angels have already testified to the descent of this manifestation of this person of divine knowledge (shakhs i marifat i bari) amongst the human species...
The Holy Quran described this "tree" as:
"Seest thou not how Allah sets a proverb:- A goodly saying, as a goodly tree, its root set firm, its branches reaching into heaven giving its fruit at every season by permission of its Lord.
Allah sets a proverb for men in order that they may reflect". (ch 14, v. 24-25).
And in another verse it says:
"Verily, God has chosen Adam and Noah and Abraham's descendants and Imran's descendants above the people of the world, one after another in the lineage and God hears and knows".(ch.3, vs. 33, 34)
The descendants of Imran are the Holy tree from Murtaza Ali ibn Abi Talib, who are above the people of the world .
Take it or leave it ! as each man to his own !
SAY:"O PEOPLE OF THE BOOK! COME TO COMMON TERMS AS BETWEEN US AND YOU: THAT WE WORSHIP NONE BUT GOD;
THAT WE ASSOCIATE NO PARTNERS WITH HIM; THAT WE ERECT NOT, FROM AMONG OURSELVES, LORDS AND PATRONS OTHER THAN GOD."
IF THEN THEY TURN BACK, SAY:"BEAR WITNESS THAT WE (AT LEAST)
ARE MUSLIMS (BOWING TO GOD'S WILL)."
(SURA AL-I-'IMRAN) Holy Qur'an 3:64
"PEOPLE OF THE BOOK" is the respectful title given to the Jews and the Christians in the Holy Qur'an.
The Muslims is here commanded to invite - "O People of the Book!" - O Learned People! O People who claim to be the recipients of Divine Revelation, of a Holy Scripture...
So what else do you want to know? I have shown you from the quran now !
Your arguments are weird and incompetent ....the angels have already testified to the descent of this manifestation of this person of divine knowledge (shakhs i marifat i bari) amongst the human species...
The Holy Quran described this "tree" as:
"Seest thou not how Allah sets a proverb:- A goodly saying, as a goodly tree, its root set firm, its branches reaching into heaven giving its fruit at every season by permission of its Lord.
Allah sets a proverb for men in order that they may reflect". (ch 14, v. 24-25).
And in another verse it says:
"Verily, God has chosen Adam and Noah and Abraham's descendants and Imran's descendants above the people of the world, one after another in the lineage and God hears and knows".(ch.3, vs. 33, 34)
The descendants of Imran are the Holy tree from Murtaza Ali ibn Abi Talib, who are above the people of the world .
Take it or leave it ! as each man to his own !
SAY:"O PEOPLE OF THE BOOK! COME TO COMMON TERMS AS BETWEEN US AND YOU: THAT WE WORSHIP NONE BUT GOD;
THAT WE ASSOCIATE NO PARTNERS WITH HIM; THAT WE ERECT NOT, FROM AMONG OURSELVES, LORDS AND PATRONS OTHER THAN GOD."
IF THEN THEY TURN BACK, SAY:"BEAR WITNESS THAT WE (AT LEAST)
ARE MUSLIMS (BOWING TO GOD'S WILL)."
(SURA AL-I-'IMRAN) Holy Qur'an 3:64
"PEOPLE OF THE BOOK" is the respectful title given to the Jews and the Christians in the Holy Qur'an.
The Muslims is here commanded to invite - "O People of the Book!" - O Learned People! O People who claim to be the recipients of Divine Revelation, of a Holy Scripture...
So what else do you want to know? I have shown you from the quran now !
binom,
Please tell me are you a sh'ia or a sunni? people love to masquerade and pretend but this pretense is shirk...now are you holding yourself out in good faith at least - let us know....all the readers are able to see that you are shying away from engaging me....and from answering questions asked of you ? that shows bad faith...right? at best a dubious motive !
The Creed of Islam is given to us here in a nutshell from Holy Qur'an:
Say ye: "We believe in Allah,
And the revelation given to us,
And to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac,
Jacob, and the Tribes,
And that given to Moses and Jesus
And that given to (all)
Prophets from their Lord:
We make no difference
Between one and another of them:
And we bow to Allah (in Islam)."
(SURA BAQARA) Holy Qur'an 2:136.
You don't seem to even know how many Prophets were blessed with the Book ! and you want to talk about the "people of the Book"
The Quran is a criterion for the entire mankind - a Furqan ! a Universal Message for all !
Not a Book of dogmas for your cult...it is nothing but the old Books refined of human alloy....contains the transcendant truths embodied in all sacred scriptures with additions necessary...
The noble quran (as revealed to Muhamad SAW) is the HAKAM between a Christian and a Christian; between a Hindu and a Hindu ; between a Budhist and a Budhist and the quran distinguishes the differences with the adherents of each religious dispensation rather than among the dispensations themselves per se
The Quran of Allah - is the flawless and perfect Book (not necessarily your TEXTS)....and it cannot serve or function in the context of world religions if you and others want to make YOUR texts the Quran and conversely the Quran, the handbook of your cults or sects...
The quran of Allah speaks of humanity as a whole; it speaks to nations, communities, families and individuals ...not just to the muslimeen...
The quran of God is complete with both outer and inner teachings and it speaks to persons and souls, both individually and collectively....
The Muslim position is clear.
The Muslim does not claim to have a religion peculiar to himself. Islam is not a sect or an ethnic religion.....you cannot conversely mix "madhabibs" with the Deen !
All Religion is one, for the Truth is one.
IT WAS THE SAME RELIGION PREACHED BY ALL THE EARLIER PROPHETS. (Holy Qur'an 42:13).
It was the truth taught by all the inspired Books.
In essence it amounts to a consciousness of the Will and Plan of God and a joyful submission to that Will and Plan.
IF ANYONE WANTS A RELIGION OTHER THAN THAT, HE IS FALSE TO HIS OWN NATURE, AS HE IS FALSE TO GOD'S WILL AND PLAN.
Such a one cannot expect guidance, for he has deliberately renounced guidance...and so Allah seals their hearts and Allah guides unto HIS Noor whomsoever HE wills !
Please tell me are you a sh'ia or a sunni? people love to masquerade and pretend but this pretense is shirk...now are you holding yourself out in good faith at least - let us know....all the readers are able to see that you are shying away from engaging me....and from answering questions asked of you ? that shows bad faith...right? at best a dubious motive !
The Creed of Islam is given to us here in a nutshell from Holy Qur'an:
Say ye: "We believe in Allah,
And the revelation given to us,
And to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac,
Jacob, and the Tribes,
And that given to Moses and Jesus
And that given to (all)
Prophets from their Lord:
We make no difference
Between one and another of them:
And we bow to Allah (in Islam)."
(SURA BAQARA) Holy Qur'an 2:136.
You don't seem to even know how many Prophets were blessed with the Book ! and you want to talk about the "people of the Book"
The Quran is a criterion for the entire mankind - a Furqan ! a Universal Message for all !
Not a Book of dogmas for your cult...it is nothing but the old Books refined of human alloy....contains the transcendant truths embodied in all sacred scriptures with additions necessary...
The noble quran (as revealed to Muhamad SAW) is the HAKAM between a Christian and a Christian; between a Hindu and a Hindu ; between a Budhist and a Budhist and the quran distinguishes the differences with the adherents of each religious dispensation rather than among the dispensations themselves per se
The Quran of Allah - is the flawless and perfect Book (not necessarily your TEXTS)....and it cannot serve or function in the context of world religions if you and others want to make YOUR texts the Quran and conversely the Quran, the handbook of your cults or sects...
The quran of Allah speaks of humanity as a whole; it speaks to nations, communities, families and individuals ...not just to the muslimeen...
The quran of God is complete with both outer and inner teachings and it speaks to persons and souls, both individually and collectively....
The Muslim position is clear.
The Muslim does not claim to have a religion peculiar to himself. Islam is not a sect or an ethnic religion.....you cannot conversely mix "madhabibs" with the Deen !
All Religion is one, for the Truth is one.
IT WAS THE SAME RELIGION PREACHED BY ALL THE EARLIER PROPHETS. (Holy Qur'an 42:13).
It was the truth taught by all the inspired Books.
In essence it amounts to a consciousness of the Will and Plan of God and a joyful submission to that Will and Plan.
IF ANYONE WANTS A RELIGION OTHER THAN THAT, HE IS FALSE TO HIS OWN NATURE, AS HE IS FALSE TO GOD'S WILL AND PLAN.
Such a one cannot expect guidance, for he has deliberately renounced guidance...and so Allah seals their hearts and Allah guides unto HIS Noor whomsoever HE wills !
binom,
I do not know if you even know what you are talking? on one hand you are saying prove to me without making reference to the quran or the ahadith that the Imams existed from before...and then you are saying make references to the quran to show that he can express his "will"...what nonsense? are you speaking from both your ends?
The word Imam (pl. a’imma) is derived from amma, meaning to lead the way, precede, or to lead by example. Thus, the Imam means a model, an exemplar, a teacher, a guide or a path.
With the Prophet, the Khatim al-anbiya (seal of the prophets), the cycle of prophecy (da’irat an-nubuwwa) was closed, but God did not thenceforth leave His people without guidance on the way to Himself.
For some the the guide was the Book. For the others, the exoteric laws, though accepted, was not enough.
For these who became known as the Shi’ites, the guide through this world of divine wisdom (hikma ilahiyya) was the infallible Imam.
The closing of the prophetical cycle heralded the opening of another, i.e., the da’irat al-walaya only...
The word Imam is used seven times in singular and five times in plural form in the Koran.
"And when his Lord tried Abraham with certain words, he fulfilled them. He said: Verily, I make you Imam for the mankind. Abraham said: And of my offspring? He (God) said: My covenant does not include the unjust" (2:124).
So does this not tell you that Imamat is not a new phenomena but even Abraham was made an Imam for the whole mankind and then his offspring EXCEPT the unjust ones who are now not there....so simple ! so is that why you are telling Maherally not to make any references to the quran because you are trying to suppress the truth?
"And We desired to bestow a favour upon those who were deemed weak in the land, and to make them the Imams and to make them heirs" (28:5).
So who are the "heirs" ? and so why would each heir and successor not be able to express his Will according to evolving times and their own era?
"And those who pray: O our Lord! Grant in our wives and our progeny the comfort of our eyes and make us Imams to lead the righteous" (25:74).
So whom do the Imams lead? and conversely whom would they not lead? or is this ayah unclear?
"Verily, We give life to the dead and We write down what they have sent before and their footprints, and We have counted everything in a Manifest Imam" (36:12).
Manifest is apparent ! NOT hidden or obsure !
The above verses indicate that the rightful Imams are divinely designated and that they are from the progeny of Prophet Abraham.
Hence, Ali bin Abu Talib was from the same descent, designated Imam by the Prophet at the command of God.
Lastly, in the single Quranic verse of this group, the term Imam is used in the sense of a witness, i.e. the Imam will serve as a witness on behalf of his followers:-
"(Remember) the day (hereafter) when We will summon every people with their Imam (leader-witness) then, whosoever is given his book in his right hand, these shall read their books and they shall not be dealt with (even) a shred unjustly" (17:71)...
So what will you then do? and so who will be dealt with unjustly as per the above ayah? do I have to say it? it is clear ...right?
I do not know if you even know what you are talking? on one hand you are saying prove to me without making reference to the quran or the ahadith that the Imams existed from before...and then you are saying make references to the quran to show that he can express his "will"...what nonsense? are you speaking from both your ends?
The word Imam (pl. a’imma) is derived from amma, meaning to lead the way, precede, or to lead by example. Thus, the Imam means a model, an exemplar, a teacher, a guide or a path.
With the Prophet, the Khatim al-anbiya (seal of the prophets), the cycle of prophecy (da’irat an-nubuwwa) was closed, but God did not thenceforth leave His people without guidance on the way to Himself.
For some the the guide was the Book. For the others, the exoteric laws, though accepted, was not enough.
For these who became known as the Shi’ites, the guide through this world of divine wisdom (hikma ilahiyya) was the infallible Imam.
The closing of the prophetical cycle heralded the opening of another, i.e., the da’irat al-walaya only...
The word Imam is used seven times in singular and five times in plural form in the Koran.
"And when his Lord tried Abraham with certain words, he fulfilled them. He said: Verily, I make you Imam for the mankind. Abraham said: And of my offspring? He (God) said: My covenant does not include the unjust" (2:124).
So does this not tell you that Imamat is not a new phenomena but even Abraham was made an Imam for the whole mankind and then his offspring EXCEPT the unjust ones who are now not there....so simple ! so is that why you are telling Maherally not to make any references to the quran because you are trying to suppress the truth?
"And We desired to bestow a favour upon those who were deemed weak in the land, and to make them the Imams and to make them heirs" (28:5).
So who are the "heirs" ? and so why would each heir and successor not be able to express his Will according to evolving times and their own era?
"And those who pray: O our Lord! Grant in our wives and our progeny the comfort of our eyes and make us Imams to lead the righteous" (25:74).
So whom do the Imams lead? and conversely whom would they not lead? or is this ayah unclear?
"Verily, We give life to the dead and We write down what they have sent before and their footprints, and We have counted everything in a Manifest Imam" (36:12).
Manifest is apparent ! NOT hidden or obsure !
The above verses indicate that the rightful Imams are divinely designated and that they are from the progeny of Prophet Abraham.
Hence, Ali bin Abu Talib was from the same descent, designated Imam by the Prophet at the command of God.
Lastly, in the single Quranic verse of this group, the term Imam is used in the sense of a witness, i.e. the Imam will serve as a witness on behalf of his followers:-
"(Remember) the day (hereafter) when We will summon every people with their Imam (leader-witness) then, whosoever is given his book in his right hand, these shall read their books and they shall not be dealt with (even) a shred unjustly" (17:71)...
So what will you then do? and so who will be dealt with unjustly as per the above ayah? do I have to say it? it is clear ...right?
-
shiraz.virani
- Posts: 1256
- Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 2:52 pm
the following video is recommended for both ismailis and non ismailis
http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=32062
http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=32062
According to Ismaili interpretation he is. Regardless the Quran by itself is not sufficient for Guidancebinom wrote: There needs to be an authoritative basis for it, but that authority need not be your imam.
Regardless, the phrase ahl al-kitab exists in the Quran and I was merely reinforcing my Imam's interpretation of it. Hence the basis is still the Quran but with authoritative basis of interpretation.binom wrote: Your interpretation, specifically about what it means to be the ahl al-kitaab as was the issue, has no basis in the Qur’an because it’s not derived from the holy text but is instead derived from something your imam said in an interview. You’re not even interpreting (any verses from) the book properly speaking, but are only interpreting the answer your imam gave in that interview. That is why it has no basis in the Qur’an.
This seems to be the crux of your argument. The Ismaili concept of Imam has two distinct features: the presence of a unique Imam at all times and it's hereditory nature. These ideas have been part of ancient scriptures as explained to us by our Pirs in our Ginans. They are not derived from the Quran, but ofcourse have it's justification.binom wrote: I’m asking you to prove to me your particular Ismaili belief/doctrine, which other traditions don’t obviously share, that the Imam as understood in Ismailism has always existed, without reference to the Qur’an or hadith.
Just to illustrate my point, a few years ago a group of Hindus got converted to Ismailism in the presence of our 48th Imam (Aga khan 111). These people were obviously rooted in the Indian scriptures i.e the Vedas and the Gita etc. Our missionaries who were involved in the conversion process did not relate our faith through the Quran but rather through their own scriptures. The encounter with the living Imam confirmed what they knew in their scriptures (not in the Quran). Below is a lecture of a convertee about how he became convinced about Ismaili Imamat.
A LECTURE DELIVERED BY MR. JAFFERALI LALJI AT THE GOLDEN JUBILEE HALL, DAR-ES-SALAAM, IN SEPTEMBER 1941. THE AUTHOR WAS PRESENT.
Dear Brothers and Sisters,
A few years ago, I was a Hindu by cast, resident of Gujerat. Ismaili missionaries from the Recreation Club of Bombay were visiting our Province on mission of propagating Ismaili Faith. They used to arrange ‘BHAJAN PARTIES’ and ‘SATSANG’ gatherings where I was invited several times.
Your missionaries were, no doubt, well versed in VED, GITA, and PURAN Shashtras and through these scriptures, they endeavoured to prove Ismaili Dharma (Religion) as THE TRUE “SATPANTH” DHARMA where in “NOOR-E-ALI” had descended and IMAM SULTAN MOHAMED SHAH is the FORTY_EIGHTH BEARER of THE “NOOR-E-IMAMAT,” DASMA NAKLANKI AVTAR.
After a number of SATSANG MULAKATS most of the members of our group, numbering two hundred, were convinced of what the missionaries had said about the DIVINE ASPECT of MOWLANA SULTAN MOHAMED SHAH, who was the FORTY_EIGHTH JOMADHARI NOOR MOWLA MURTAZA ALI (SHRI VISHNU VAR DATAR). We, the participants of the ISMAILI BHAJAN MANDALI, were well convinced and agreed to embrace ISMAILI FAITH, but in one way wished it was practically proved – the DIVINE POWER and the PROOF of the “DASMA NAKLANK AVTAR” by MOWLANA SULTAN MOHAMED SHAH HIMSELF. Our group submitted the above suggestion because it would be extremely hard for us to discard our faith and desert our relatives, friends and fellow brothers unless we had been convinced to the fullest as to the genuineness of the DIVINE “LIGHT” OF SHRI VISHNU.
After some years following this, good news of Mowlana Sultan Mohammed Shah’s MUBARAK PADHRAMNI (visit) was announced and our aspirant group was invited to visit Bombay for HOLY DIDAR (encounter). We all readily agreed to go to Bombay.
During the misssionaries’ MEHMANI, a request was submitted to KHUDAVIND HAZER IMAM explaining how a group of Hindus has been given instruction on the present LIVING DASMA NAKLANK AVTAR and a result of various meetings everything was done pending final “PROOF” of KHUDAVIND’S KHUDAI NOOR NAKLANK AVTAR.
Mowlana Sultan Mohammed Shah was much delighted to read the missionaries’ ARIJA (submission) and most graciously made HOLY FARMAN for the arrangement of a meeting with our Hindu group, of approximately two hundred in number – young and old, ladies, gents, and children.
The next day was a RED LETTER DAY! for us. We made ourselves present at the Recreation Club Office in the morning and KHUDAVIND HAZER IMAM arrived at about 11:00 a.m.
At first glance we were very much touched to behold KHUDAVIND’S HOLY DIDAR. MOWLANA SULTAN MOHAMMED SHAH, on HIS arrival, said:
“ACCHA TUMKO NAKLANK KA DARSHAN KARNA HAY? SHABASH.”(You want to have the Vision of the Pure?, Excellent)
MOWLANA SULTAN MOHAMMED SHAH was seated on the sofa. HIS ‘NOORANI’ complexion was so charming that our hearts and souls, totally and instantly, became devoted and dedicated to HIM.
And LO! In moments there were the amazing appearances of the HOLY DAS AVTARS.
We beheld DIDAR of SHRI MACHHA AVTAR, then KORBHA, VARAH, NARSINHA, VAMAN, FARSIRAM, RAMCHADRAJI, SHRI KRISHNA, SHRI BUDHA, and lastly DASMA NAKLANK AVTAR MOWLANA SULTAN MOHAMMED SHAH in HIS DIVINE ASPECT.
We all bowed down immediately in front of the “NOOR-E-PANJTAN PAK” SHRI VISHNU, ALI VAR AVTAR. (ALLAHUMA SALI ALLAH MOHAMMADAN WA AALE MOHAMMED.) Tears of unsurpassable happiness and joy were shed from our eyes. It was truly an unforgettable event of our lives, which cannot be expressed in its perspective.
However, all the members of our group prayed to KHUDAVIND to accept us all as HIS Spiritual Children.
HAZER IMAM SULTAN MOHAMMED SHAH blessed us and said: “KHANAVADAN”.
HIS “NOORANI” ARSHIDWADS enlightened our souls to such a high extent that we, to this day, cannot express it by words. It was a day greatest of all days, the day we embraced THE ISMAILI SATPANTH DHARMA where THE “NOORANI” LIVING JYOT is EVER-PRESENT.
We realize that we have SAVED our BILLIONS of BIRTHS and RE-BIRTHS by the HOLY NOORANI DARSHAN and DIDAR. It is because we recognized the “NOOR” of ALI. SHRI VISHNU, we recognized the “NOORANI” JYOT. We had been always reading in our SHASHTRAS (Scriptures) of the advent of SHRI KRISHNA, but we were not knowledgeable of the LIVING KRISHNA, we were not knowledgeable of NAKLANKI AVTAR. We were most fortunate to be graced with the DARSHAN and DIDAR of SHRI NAKLANK – MOWLANA SULTAN MUHAMMAD SHAH, in our lives.
Finally, Mr. Jafferally Laji recited a verse of Holy Ginan.
EJI JO JEEV JAAVE SHAAHKA NAAM NA CHHODU,
DHAR SEER KARVAT ANGA NA MODU….
Explanation:- If someone were to cut my throat even, I would not leave the HOLY HOUSE OF HAZARIMAM: HIS HOLY NAME will be on my lips till the last breath of my life. AMEN.
Truly wonderful, amazing and unique, the story of Huzur Mukhi Jafferali Lalji’s family and colleagues.
**To give a brief introduction of the lecturer: Mr. Jafferali Laji and Count Mohammed Alarakhia were related through the marriage of their son and daughter respectively, which took place after the above incident.
.Why not?binom wrote: This particular doctrine certainly can’t be contained in Hinduism.
My apologies, I meant not explicitly mentioned in the Quran but of course indirectly one can make connections to the Quran through the notion of the continuance of the word. The point being made is that the continuous lineal descent of the word existed before the Quran was revealed.binom wrote: In fact, ironically, don’t you think that if you set out to prove the particular Ismaili doctrine of Imamat through the Qur’an or hadith, you’ll be also proving yourself wrong when you state that this ‘Das Avataras’ doctrine is not in the Qur’an as you belief your imam to be related to it?
They will not tell you who they are because they know and understand their own dubiety and ulterior motives to oscillate like fans....when it suits them they will pretend they are Wahabbis ; suddenly they will talk like Sunnis and then become Sh'ias....some of the are rented "heros" of the progressive Bohoras...in this way the idea is to pit all against us on the sly ....
Quran on Jews:
Quran is the ONLY non-Jewish scripture in the world where Jews have been honored and protected in so many verses [2:40, 2:47, 10:47, 2:122, 10:93, 20:47, 20:80, 44:30-32, 45:16, 5:44, etc.], good Jews have been praised with respect [3:113-115, 5:65-66, etc.], and they have also been offered salvation if they follow their own scriptures [5:69, 5:65-66, 3:113-115, 2:62, etc.].
I am just wondering if you guys really know the Quran ? now lets see what Allah says about the Christians then?
Quran on Christians:
Quran is the ONLY non-Christian scripture in the world where Jesus Christ and Mary have been honored with very high regard [3:42, 5:46, Chapter 3, Chapter 19 on Mary, etc.], good Christians have been praised with respect [3:113-115, 5:65-66, 5:82, etc.], and they have also been offered salvation if they follow their own scriptures [5:69, 5:65-66, 3:113-115, 2:62, etc.].
Good Muslims like you should ponder over the Words of God and the words of His Prophet and follow the Prophet's tradition and not allow jealousy to influence their conduct.
They should remember that one son of Adam was ruined because of his jealousy of his brother whose offer was more acceptable to God than his own.
People should never be carried away by any idea that they are superior in any way...everyone has the same duty and so must be conscious of their own responsibility in regards to their behaviour....
"BE THEY MUSLIMS, JEWS, CHRISTIANS OR SABIANS, THOSE WHO BELIEVE IN GOD AND THE LAST DAY AND WHO DO GOOD HAVE THEIR REWARD WITH THEIR LORD. THEY HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR AND THEY WILL NOT SORROW...."
When your ancestors heard the prophet (PBUH) recite the purified messages did they also not see him as a SIGN of Allah OR as HIS Manifest proof on this earth? AND did God not say that those who give the Prophet their allegiance they give it but to Allah Himself? Yes or No ?
"..We have sent among you a Messenger from you (minkum) who recites to you Our Signs and purifies you and teaches you the Book (al-Kitab) and the Wisdom ( al-Hikmat) and teaches you that which you did not know. -Holy Quran 2:151..."
What are the SIGNS? What is al-Hikmat? The Book "al-Kitab" was already EXISTING as per what I read here and the Prophet was already teaching the Book.. am I right? and also there were also SIGNS and Wisdom additionally being referred to......so why did the scribes and the Sahabas get together and compile some other text, after the Holy Prophet's death?
Sermon 1 - Amir ul Mo'mineen - Ali ibn Talib
In it (BOOK) there are some verses whose knowledge is obligatory and others whose ignorance by the people is permissible.
It (BOOK) also contains what appears to be obligatory, according to the Book but its REPEAL is signified by the Prophet's action (Sunnah)
OR that which appears compulsory according to the Prophet's action (peace be on all of them)but the BOOK allows not following it...
Now which Book is Hazrat Ali talking about?
Now was the Amir ul Mo'mineen not also their own caliph? and so now how will they figure out what he is saying? who can guide them? and if frankly their scholars and Mullahs could, Islam would not be in such turbulence and chaos...even Aby Hurayra was told by the Prophet to go and find the Imam and follow him...
As the Quran states:
"God created male and female and made you into communities and tribes, so that you may know one another." (49.13) ..
It is our differences that both define us and connect us.....Good Muslims should ponder over the Words of God and the words of His Prophet and follow the Prophet's tradition and not allow jealousy to influence their conduct.
They should remember that one son of Adam was ruined because of his jealousy of his brother whose offer was more acceptable to God than his own.
People should never be carried away by any idea that they are superior in any way...everyone has the same duty and so must be conscious of their own responsibility in regards to their behaviour....
Whilst you are still pondering over my email, let me just point out to you the following:
Quran on Jews:
Quran is the ONLY non-Jewish scripture in the world where Jews have been honored and protected in so many verses [2:40, 2:47, 10:47, 2:122, 10:93, 20:47, 20:80, 44:30-32, 45:16, 5:44, etc.], good Jews have been praised with respect [3:113-115, 5:65-66, etc.], and they have also been offered salvation if they follow their own scriptures [5:69, 5:65-66, 3:113-115, 2:62, etc.].
Quran on Christians:
Quran is the ONLY non-Christian scripture in the world where Jesus Christ and Mary have been honored with very high regard [3:42, 5:46, Chapter 3, Chapter 19 on Mary, etc.], good Christians have been praised with respect [3:113-115, 5:65-66, 5:82, etc.], and they have also been offered salvation if they follow their own scriptures [5:69, 5:65-66, 3:113-115, 2:62, etc.].
Now do some proper research of the Quran !
Quran on Jews:
Quran is the ONLY non-Jewish scripture in the world where Jews have been honored and protected in so many verses [2:40, 2:47, 10:47, 2:122, 10:93, 20:47, 20:80, 44:30-32, 45:16, 5:44, etc.], good Jews have been praised with respect [3:113-115, 5:65-66, etc.], and they have also been offered salvation if they follow their own scriptures [5:69, 5:65-66, 3:113-115, 2:62, etc.].
I am just wondering if you guys really know the Quran ? now lets see what Allah says about the Christians then?
Quran on Christians:
Quran is the ONLY non-Christian scripture in the world where Jesus Christ and Mary have been honored with very high regard [3:42, 5:46, Chapter 3, Chapter 19 on Mary, etc.], good Christians have been praised with respect [3:113-115, 5:65-66, 5:82, etc.], and they have also been offered salvation if they follow their own scriptures [5:69, 5:65-66, 3:113-115, 2:62, etc.].
Good Muslims like you should ponder over the Words of God and the words of His Prophet and follow the Prophet's tradition and not allow jealousy to influence their conduct.
They should remember that one son of Adam was ruined because of his jealousy of his brother whose offer was more acceptable to God than his own.
People should never be carried away by any idea that they are superior in any way...everyone has the same duty and so must be conscious of their own responsibility in regards to their behaviour....
"BE THEY MUSLIMS, JEWS, CHRISTIANS OR SABIANS, THOSE WHO BELIEVE IN GOD AND THE LAST DAY AND WHO DO GOOD HAVE THEIR REWARD WITH THEIR LORD. THEY HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR AND THEY WILL NOT SORROW...."
When your ancestors heard the prophet (PBUH) recite the purified messages did they also not see him as a SIGN of Allah OR as HIS Manifest proof on this earth? AND did God not say that those who give the Prophet their allegiance they give it but to Allah Himself? Yes or No ?
"..We have sent among you a Messenger from you (minkum) who recites to you Our Signs and purifies you and teaches you the Book (al-Kitab) and the Wisdom ( al-Hikmat) and teaches you that which you did not know. -Holy Quran 2:151..."
What are the SIGNS? What is al-Hikmat? The Book "al-Kitab" was already EXISTING as per what I read here and the Prophet was already teaching the Book.. am I right? and also there were also SIGNS and Wisdom additionally being referred to......so why did the scribes and the Sahabas get together and compile some other text, after the Holy Prophet's death?
Sermon 1 - Amir ul Mo'mineen - Ali ibn Talib
In it (BOOK) there are some verses whose knowledge is obligatory and others whose ignorance by the people is permissible.
It (BOOK) also contains what appears to be obligatory, according to the Book but its REPEAL is signified by the Prophet's action (Sunnah)
OR that which appears compulsory according to the Prophet's action (peace be on all of them)but the BOOK allows not following it...
Now which Book is Hazrat Ali talking about?
Now was the Amir ul Mo'mineen not also their own caliph? and so now how will they figure out what he is saying? who can guide them? and if frankly their scholars and Mullahs could, Islam would not be in such turbulence and chaos...even Aby Hurayra was told by the Prophet to go and find the Imam and follow him...
As the Quran states:
"God created male and female and made you into communities and tribes, so that you may know one another." (49.13) ..
It is our differences that both define us and connect us.....Good Muslims should ponder over the Words of God and the words of His Prophet and follow the Prophet's tradition and not allow jealousy to influence their conduct.
They should remember that one son of Adam was ruined because of his jealousy of his brother whose offer was more acceptable to God than his own.
People should never be carried away by any idea that they are superior in any way...everyone has the same duty and so must be conscious of their own responsibility in regards to their behaviour....
Whilst you are still pondering over my email, let me just point out to you the following:
Quran on Jews:
Quran is the ONLY non-Jewish scripture in the world where Jews have been honored and protected in so many verses [2:40, 2:47, 10:47, 2:122, 10:93, 20:47, 20:80, 44:30-32, 45:16, 5:44, etc.], good Jews have been praised with respect [3:113-115, 5:65-66, etc.], and they have also been offered salvation if they follow their own scriptures [5:69, 5:65-66, 3:113-115, 2:62, etc.].
Quran on Christians:
Quran is the ONLY non-Christian scripture in the world where Jesus Christ and Mary have been honored with very high regard [3:42, 5:46, Chapter 3, Chapter 19 on Mary, etc.], good Christians have been praised with respect [3:113-115, 5:65-66, 5:82, etc.], and they have also been offered salvation if they follow their own scriptures [5:69, 5:65-66, 3:113-115, 2:62, etc.].
Now do some proper research of the Quran !
Yes but lets still give them a chance to come clean so we could debate on even grounds with them. Its only fair they declare their beliefs and affiliations. They know everything about us which is like an open book on this website and gives them an unfair advantage over us. Hope they will reply. I am wondering about some others on this thread also but that is not of immediate concern.
-
arshad1988
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 2:02 am
- Contact:
104:1 Waylul-li kul-li humazatil-lumaza!znanwalla wrote:They will not tell you who they are because they know and understand their own dubiety and ulterior motives to oscillate like fans....when it suits them they will pretend they are Wahabbis ; suddenly they will talk like Sunnis and then become Sh'ias....some of the are rented "heros" of the progressive Bohoras...in this way the idea is to pit all against us on the sly ....
That is all i have to say to you! That is all you know how to do! You should calm that tongue of your's down. I bring valid arguments and all you can do is talk about things that are not even relevant to our topic and/or don't answer any questions that are being asked. All you want to do is backlash your tongue and think you know your stuff. This is not Islam! I don't see how me bringing arguments as to the completion of the Qur'an should cause you to talk like this! I feel it's because you are threatened of your own personal beliefs that you start getting defensive and assassinating others' characters and talking ill-mannerly! Very poor strategy, and I'm sure many can see this.
As for pardesi, all you need to know is that I am a Muslim, I do not need to affiliate myself with a sect, saying I am "Shia" "Sunni" "Wahhabi" etc. A sunni might call me a Shia because I love and respect the Ahl-al-Bayt and follow their teachings. A shia might call me a sunni for loving the way of our Prophet (sunnah) and following his example as shown or directed by Allah (33:21) , and disputing with ulil-amr if I have a problem with a concept if I believe it goes against the Qur'an. And someone might even call me a Wahhabi if I hold the Qur'an in high regard and believe strictly in the concept of Tawheed. In the end, I am a Muslim. Even if someone did say who they are strictly affiliated with, I don't see how that should matter. I don't intend to offend you if this is how the tone of my writing seems to portray.
6:159. As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with God: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did
Assuming you know yours, then why have some of questions remained unanswered so far?...lets not argue about semantics....your reliance on Sura 80 to justify the merit of the human scribes, is misconceived and far fetched....at best it is delusional !
It is clear to anyone who has the courage, the will and the inclination to stand by truth or maybe you have not been following the thread that the accusation of us being "defensive" is misconceived....
All prophets brought the same message of TAWHID and so those who submit to the One and only God (as the God of the Jews, Christians and Muslims, Hindus, is the same), by definition , are muslims.....however they may belong to the Ummat of their own Prophets...and conversely those who betrayed the Prophet and by extension his revered family, where do they belong ? The Prophet's own ahadith are explicit in this regard...kindly go and acquaint yourself.
Even if anyone changes one simple word of God during narration or translation, it changes the context - if the context is destroyed then what else is left ?...
When we study the TEXTS or NARRATIONS we find that the conjecture of the events behind individual verses of the Qur’an (Shaan-e-Nuzool) is an exercise in futility.
Instead of explaining, it distorts the meaning and binds the timeless verses to some particular supposed incidents.
Likewise, trying to establish whether a certain Surah was revealed in Makkah or Madinah is practically irrelevant to the Glorious Message.
The so-called ‘Ulama’ and exponents wasted centuries in this fruitless endeavor and their blind followers keep doing the same.
They continue to have fierce disagreement on this non-issue to this day.
I want to know what evidence you can cite to this question...
Was the quran revealed to our Prophet in "stages" i.e., the Makkah verses, the Madinah verses or was it revealed one time....
Are the “early” verses also at the back of the actual Qur’an, or are they just in the texts you are holding? - who decided to put them there?
If Allah had perfected Islam as early as the 5th Sura, then what was the need for HIM to send 109 additional suras?
Is there any evidence that the Qur’an was revealed to the Prophet (S) all at once either? I’ve really been thinking about it.
Even Muhammad Asad writes that the Qur’an was revealed in stages at various times in Makkah and in Madinah.
The Qur’an was unquestionably revealed at the exalted prophet’s heart as a one time down-load during a night of Ramadhan in 610 CE.
From then on, it was conveyed to people in stages on Divine Command. So, there is no human touch involved in its arrangement at all....so where was it revealed? and where was it protected then ? in the exalted heart of the Prophet under the command of "Iqra" ! Lets try and prove this from the Qur’an itself.
Please see the evidence I give :
ONE: Notice God calling the Qur’an a Book right in the beginning i.e as early as (2:2), ...
2:2 This is a Book whereof there is absolutely no doubt concerning its authority and authenticity. And it leaves no doubts lingering in a seeking mind…. ....So the BOOK was existing as early as Sura 2 ....
The entire Qur’an was revealed (down-loaded onto the Prophet’s heart) in a Blessed Night in the month of Ramadhan, 610 CE, and then conveyed to mankind in stages over a period of 23 years.
2:185, 97:1] ...so explain to me how the scribes of your ancestors would have done this? No chance !
so it is obvious that the "authors" (scribes ) were not the scribes who helped your ancestors compile the revealations in the form of "mushufs" but the angels who were honoured to bring this to the Prophet.... Allah refers to HIS BOOK as early as Sura 2 and the quran had not even been revealed to the Caliph's scribes and the Prophet had just begun his own Naboowat...right? and so why are you trying to unduly show us what Sura 80 is saying to plead your argument..
The scribes who could not even compile the later texts in its correct chronological order, are thus not the "honoured" scribes referred to in Sura 80 ? I see no connection whatsoever...if another Yemeni text has been found it will merely impact (if it does impact ), some of the existing texts and narrations ( NOT the Quran of Allah)....The Quran remains unchanged and protected....and so I would not worry or whine about it.
TWO: 44:3 We have revealed it on a Blessed Night. ....makes no mention of any stages and "night" is singular...right?
Now In what capacity did Muhamad SAW receive the Quran? as a Nabi or as a Rasool? let me know ! what happened thereafter?
THREE: 2:185 The month of Ramadhan has been chosen for this collective training (Saum) since this is the month in which the Qur’an was revealed …it is not talking of parts, portions or suras...Quran ! means in its entirity ! I do not see any "plurality".
FOUR: Surah 97…….. Al-Qadr … (The Majesty)
This is the 97th Surah of the Qur’an. The Night of Majesty is when the entire Qur’an was revealed through Gabriel onto the exalted Prophet's heart in the month of Ramadhan in the year 610 CE.
(Thus elsewhere in the Quran some translators have referred to the Angels as being the "Scribes" as the angels brought the Quran to the Prophet and you have shown dishonesty in not showing this to us in your discussion...right?)
97:1 Indeed, We have revealed it in the Night of Majesty. 97:2 Ah, what will enlighten you what it is, the Night of Majesty! 97:3 The Night of Majesty is better than a thousand months. [A day of
enlightenment is better than a life-time of ignorance]
Now Experience this : Wrong translations make the Qur’an appear disjointed, without flow and thus difficult to understand.
THE MAKKAH DIALECT - Reflect on the following verses
69:40 This is the revealed Word in the dialect of a noble Messenger.
81:19 This is the revealed Word in the dialect of a noble Messenger.
Now the dilemma of the ‘authorities’ of your ancestors -------------
just one example: Many of our ‘great scholars’ have been translating INNAHU LAQAULU RASOOLIN KAREEM in 69:40 and 81:19 as :
“This Qur’an is utterance (talk) of a noble angel.” (Fateh Muhammad Jallandhary)
“This is certainly the word (descended) upon an honourable messenger.” (Muhammad Ali, Urdu)
“This is the saying (speech) of a respected angel. (Ashraf Ali Thanwil)
“Verily this is the word of a most honourable Messenger.” (Yousuf Ali).
“This is in truth the word of an honoured messenger.” (Pickthall).
“This is the utterance of an honorable messenger.” (Rashad Khalifa).
“Behold, this (divine writ) is indeed the [inspired] word of a noble messenger.” (Muhammad Asad).
“This Qur’an is the utterance (narration) of God, the noble angel, and the exalted Messenger.” (Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmood)
“Verily, this is the statement of a respected message-bearer.” (Maududi).
“This (Qur’an) is the saying of a high angel.” (Shah Abdul Qadir)
Similar errors and confusions have been created by the ancient ‘authorities’. Wow!
So now you guys tell me and us whether the Quran is the word of God or not ?
OR is it the word of an angel or the Messenger?
Now do you see why non-muslims and enemies of the prophet are attacking the Quran , Nabi and Islam?
What more "defensive" summation can I give better than this example?
Why do many of them translate Rasool wrongly here?
perhaos because they do not wish to revert to the original tongue of Revelation, for various reasons, a daunting task being just one of them or maybe dishonesty. Or because they are fallible !
More importantly, they blindly follow the trails left by the Criminals of Islam, many of whom lived 300 years after the exalted prophet (d. 310 AH).
These ‘authorities’ conveniently contradict countless verses that clearly state that, “The Qur’an is the Word of God”, - do you all agree ? and thus, knowingly or unknowingly, they attempt to demolish the very foundation, the Divine Revelation, of the Glorious Book.
And then you say it is Protected ! how can Allah protect it - you explain now !
The above single example shows you the ensuing chaos and it can give you an idea how misguided and misguiding, unfortunately, our Qur’an translators and translations have been.
let me ask in closing , if "written" by scribes is safe, correct and protected then are you conceding that what was memorized wasn't included as being safe - many sahabas who had memorized had died in wars already - so was their portion left out because they had died?...
And everyone will tell you that for the most part the sahabas used to memorize what was revealed - there was a scramble to put together all the mushufs but what happens to those that were in the possession of the Sahabas who were no longer alive?....and why would Allah have to assure that HIS Book was safe so early in time during the ongoing naboowat, when man had not, as yet even embarked on trying to create the like thereof ? where is the logic here in your argument ?
Let the readers now judge for themselves !
It is clear to anyone who has the courage, the will and the inclination to stand by truth or maybe you have not been following the thread that the accusation of us being "defensive" is misconceived....
All prophets brought the same message of TAWHID and so those who submit to the One and only God (as the God of the Jews, Christians and Muslims, Hindus, is the same), by definition , are muslims.....however they may belong to the Ummat of their own Prophets...and conversely those who betrayed the Prophet and by extension his revered family, where do they belong ? The Prophet's own ahadith are explicit in this regard...kindly go and acquaint yourself.
Even if anyone changes one simple word of God during narration or translation, it changes the context - if the context is destroyed then what else is left ?...
When we study the TEXTS or NARRATIONS we find that the conjecture of the events behind individual verses of the Qur’an (Shaan-e-Nuzool) is an exercise in futility.
Instead of explaining, it distorts the meaning and binds the timeless verses to some particular supposed incidents.
Likewise, trying to establish whether a certain Surah was revealed in Makkah or Madinah is practically irrelevant to the Glorious Message.
The so-called ‘Ulama’ and exponents wasted centuries in this fruitless endeavor and their blind followers keep doing the same.
They continue to have fierce disagreement on this non-issue to this day.
I want to know what evidence you can cite to this question...
Was the quran revealed to our Prophet in "stages" i.e., the Makkah verses, the Madinah verses or was it revealed one time....
Are the “early” verses also at the back of the actual Qur’an, or are they just in the texts you are holding? - who decided to put them there?
If Allah had perfected Islam as early as the 5th Sura, then what was the need for HIM to send 109 additional suras?
Is there any evidence that the Qur’an was revealed to the Prophet (S) all at once either? I’ve really been thinking about it.
Even Muhammad Asad writes that the Qur’an was revealed in stages at various times in Makkah and in Madinah.
The Qur’an was unquestionably revealed at the exalted prophet’s heart as a one time down-load during a night of Ramadhan in 610 CE.
From then on, it was conveyed to people in stages on Divine Command. So, there is no human touch involved in its arrangement at all....so where was it revealed? and where was it protected then ? in the exalted heart of the Prophet under the command of "Iqra" ! Lets try and prove this from the Qur’an itself.
Please see the evidence I give :
ONE: Notice God calling the Qur’an a Book right in the beginning i.e as early as (2:2), ...
2:2 This is a Book whereof there is absolutely no doubt concerning its authority and authenticity. And it leaves no doubts lingering in a seeking mind…. ....So the BOOK was existing as early as Sura 2 ....
The entire Qur’an was revealed (down-loaded onto the Prophet’s heart) in a Blessed Night in the month of Ramadhan, 610 CE, and then conveyed to mankind in stages over a period of 23 years.
2:185, 97:1] ...so explain to me how the scribes of your ancestors would have done this? No chance !
so it is obvious that the "authors" (scribes ) were not the scribes who helped your ancestors compile the revealations in the form of "mushufs" but the angels who were honoured to bring this to the Prophet.... Allah refers to HIS BOOK as early as Sura 2 and the quran had not even been revealed to the Caliph's scribes and the Prophet had just begun his own Naboowat...right? and so why are you trying to unduly show us what Sura 80 is saying to plead your argument..
The scribes who could not even compile the later texts in its correct chronological order, are thus not the "honoured" scribes referred to in Sura 80 ? I see no connection whatsoever...if another Yemeni text has been found it will merely impact (if it does impact ), some of the existing texts and narrations ( NOT the Quran of Allah)....The Quran remains unchanged and protected....and so I would not worry or whine about it.
TWO: 44:3 We have revealed it on a Blessed Night. ....makes no mention of any stages and "night" is singular...right?
Now In what capacity did Muhamad SAW receive the Quran? as a Nabi or as a Rasool? let me know ! what happened thereafter?
THREE: 2:185 The month of Ramadhan has been chosen for this collective training (Saum) since this is the month in which the Qur’an was revealed …it is not talking of parts, portions or suras...Quran ! means in its entirity ! I do not see any "plurality".
FOUR: Surah 97…….. Al-Qadr … (The Majesty)
This is the 97th Surah of the Qur’an. The Night of Majesty is when the entire Qur’an was revealed through Gabriel onto the exalted Prophet's heart in the month of Ramadhan in the year 610 CE.
(Thus elsewhere in the Quran some translators have referred to the Angels as being the "Scribes" as the angels brought the Quran to the Prophet and you have shown dishonesty in not showing this to us in your discussion...right?)
97:1 Indeed, We have revealed it in the Night of Majesty. 97:2 Ah, what will enlighten you what it is, the Night of Majesty! 97:3 The Night of Majesty is better than a thousand months. [A day of
enlightenment is better than a life-time of ignorance]
Now Experience this : Wrong translations make the Qur’an appear disjointed, without flow and thus difficult to understand.
THE MAKKAH DIALECT - Reflect on the following verses
69:40 This is the revealed Word in the dialect of a noble Messenger.
81:19 This is the revealed Word in the dialect of a noble Messenger.
Now the dilemma of the ‘authorities’ of your ancestors -------------
just one example: Many of our ‘great scholars’ have been translating INNAHU LAQAULU RASOOLIN KAREEM in 69:40 and 81:19 as :
“This Qur’an is utterance (talk) of a noble angel.” (Fateh Muhammad Jallandhary)
“This is certainly the word (descended) upon an honourable messenger.” (Muhammad Ali, Urdu)
“This is the saying (speech) of a respected angel. (Ashraf Ali Thanwil)
“Verily this is the word of a most honourable Messenger.” (Yousuf Ali).
“This is in truth the word of an honoured messenger.” (Pickthall).
“This is the utterance of an honorable messenger.” (Rashad Khalifa).
“Behold, this (divine writ) is indeed the [inspired] word of a noble messenger.” (Muhammad Asad).
“This Qur’an is the utterance (narration) of God, the noble angel, and the exalted Messenger.” (Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmood)
“Verily, this is the statement of a respected message-bearer.” (Maududi).
“This (Qur’an) is the saying of a high angel.” (Shah Abdul Qadir)
Similar errors and confusions have been created by the ancient ‘authorities’. Wow!
So now you guys tell me and us whether the Quran is the word of God or not ?
OR is it the word of an angel or the Messenger?
Now do you see why non-muslims and enemies of the prophet are attacking the Quran , Nabi and Islam?
What more "defensive" summation can I give better than this example?
Why do many of them translate Rasool wrongly here?
perhaos because they do not wish to revert to the original tongue of Revelation, for various reasons, a daunting task being just one of them or maybe dishonesty. Or because they are fallible !
More importantly, they blindly follow the trails left by the Criminals of Islam, many of whom lived 300 years after the exalted prophet (d. 310 AH).
These ‘authorities’ conveniently contradict countless verses that clearly state that, “The Qur’an is the Word of God”, - do you all agree ? and thus, knowingly or unknowingly, they attempt to demolish the very foundation, the Divine Revelation, of the Glorious Book.
And then you say it is Protected ! how can Allah protect it - you explain now !
The above single example shows you the ensuing chaos and it can give you an idea how misguided and misguiding, unfortunately, our Qur’an translators and translations have been.
let me ask in closing , if "written" by scribes is safe, correct and protected then are you conceding that what was memorized wasn't included as being safe - many sahabas who had memorized had died in wars already - so was their portion left out because they had died?...
And everyone will tell you that for the most part the sahabas used to memorize what was revealed - there was a scramble to put together all the mushufs but what happens to those that were in the possession of the Sahabas who were no longer alive?....and why would Allah have to assure that HIS Book was safe so early in time during the ongoing naboowat, when man had not, as yet even embarked on trying to create the like thereof ? where is the logic here in your argument ?
Let the readers now judge for themselves !
What is the basis of this interpretation that establishes that your particular imam, the Aga Khan, is this authority? Your response (the story of the Hindu convert) is dealt with below.According to Ismaili interpretation he is. Regardless the Quran by itself is not sufficient for Guidance
I ask you again: How do you know that it is by itself insufficient for guidance?Regardless the Quran by itself is not sufficient for Guidance
My point it not that the phrase ahl al-kitaab is not in the Qur’an. My point is that your interpretation, which you admitted as false, of what that means is not based on the Qur’an. It’s rather based on something that your imam said.Regardless, the phrase ahl al-kitab exists in the Quran and I was merely reinforcing my Imam's interpretation of it. Hence the basis is still the Quran but with authoritative basis of interpretation.
Show me just how they related your faith through their own scriptures.Our missionaries who were involved in the conversion process did not relate our faith through the Quran but rather through their own scriptures.
So this is your response - an appeal to subjective experiences? I’m not going to try and dissect what they’ve said piece by piece as that would take too long. Instead, I’m going to deal with it in a general way hoping that my point will be clear anyway.A LECTURE DELIVERED BY MR. JAFFERALI LALJI AT THE GOLDEN JUBILEE HALL, DAR-ES-SALAAM, IN SEPTEMBER 1941. THE AUTHOR WAS PRESENT.
Dear Brothers and Sisters,
A few years ago, I was a Hindu by cast, resident of Gujerat. Ismaili missionaries.....
Kmaherali, you should know that there are too many problems with this sort of argument. Before I get into these problems, let me first make it clear that in discussing the problems I will mention just now, I don’t intend to give the lie to those men who say they’ve had this experience. Rather, as I said, I’ll only point out some of the difficulties you inevitably encounter when trying to prove your case this way. Having said that, there’s one fundamental problem you need to consider here. It is the following:
1.They’ve offered no proof for the truth of what they’ve experienced, only that they experienced it. As a result, what to do with the experiences of others that conflict theirs?
The men claim that they’ve experienced something, but offered no proof for the truth of that experience, except that they experienced something. There is something not right here though. Should I accept what they say simply on the basis of their claim? Is what they say true simply because they say they’ve experienced it? Even if I grant you that, what are you to make of the experiences that others have claimed which contradict theirs? There are people out there who have claimed to experience all sorts of things. There are Christians who have become Muslims by having a similar experience with the Prophet (saw) or some saintly figure from the Islamic tradition. Likewise, certain Muslims have claimed to have encountered Christ (as) or a saintly figure from the Christian tradition which has led to their conversion. Likewise Hindus too, similar to the ones in your case, have said that they’ve had experiences which has led them to convert to the religion which that experience of theirs best related to. There are all sorts of example I can give you. Moreover, and here is where it becomes even more of a problem, there are people from these respective traditions who have embraced heterodoxies and heretical sects within their traditions due to these kinds of experiences they have had or claimed. To give you some examples: It is well known among all Muslims that the Ahmadiyya are a heterdox and deviant sect, but I’ve come across people who have claimed that they experienced the majestic and ‘noorani’ presence of the founder of the movement or his successors, and then became convinced that the Ahmadiyya are the right ones. The Bahais also have similar stories. There are also the Mormons, whom the Christians despise and deem heretical, who are loaded with these kinds of stories to prove the truth of their claims. They say not only Christians, but also Muslims, Jews, Hindus etc, have experienced the ‘noor’ of their founder in dreams or by some other means. The same is true for Sunnis who have become Shias, Shias who have become Sunnis, Ismailis who have become Sunni or Shi’i and vice versa. The examples never end! So what proof do you have for the truth of the experience of those men? Notice, just to be clear, that I don’t ask you for the proof of their experience but for the proof of the truth of their experience. How will you be able to discern between their cases and the case of the two Hindu men? How will you provide this proof to me? What is your criterion? Is it the Qur’an? If so, then you again run into the problems that I mentioned in my previous posts. Not only do you now have to deal with this new problem of conflicting religious expiriences but you also have deal with my former questions which still remain to be properly answered.
Moreover, there is also the whole topic about how not all such expiriences are always true or offer correct guidance. There is the possiblity of misguidance even in these religious expiriences. Much has been written about this but I will not get into that now though.
If it were truly contained in another religion, like Hinduism, then all Hindus should have become Ismailis by now. And even if we leave out the regular believers, who you might say don’t know much about these matters, what about the saints of the Hindu tradition? They are the most authentic representatives of their tradition who know about its outer and inner dimensions better than anyone else, why then have they not become Ismailis? How have they missed something as so important as this doctrine of Imamat that supposedly, according to you, their doctrines contain? Why didn’t some of the greatest sages like Vallabha Achrya or Ramakrishna, just to name a few, convert to Ismailism in their own times? It seems to me that what you are simply doing is making indirect connections here and there where you see fit, but I’m sure you know well that nothing essentially Ismaili is in any of the doctrines of the Hindus.Why not?
I’m not disputing the fact that the ‘continuous lineal descent of the Word existed before the Qur’an was revealed.’ I’m disputing the fact that you can’t prove this Word to be your particular (Ismaili) imam without reference to the Qur’an or hadith.My apologies, I meant not explicitly mentioned in the Quran but of course indirectly one can make connections to the Quran through the notion of the continuance of the word. The point being made is that the continuous lineal descent of the word existed before the Quran was revealed.
znanwalla wrote:
They will not tell you who they are because they know and understand their own dubiety and ulterior motives to oscillate like fans....when it suits them they will pretend they are Wahabbis ; suddenly they will talk like Sunnis and then become Sh'ias....some of the are rented "heros" of the progressive Bohoras...in this way the idea is to pit all against us on the sly ....
Arshad’s comments (in red):
104:1 Waylul-li kul-li humazatil-lumaza!
That is all i have to say to you! That is all you know how to do! You should calm that tongue of your's down. I bring valid arguments and all you can do is talk about things that are not even relevant to our topic and/or don't answer any questions that are being asked. All you want to do is backlash your tongue and think you know your stuff. This is not Islam! I don't see how me bringing arguments as to the completion of the Qur'an should cause you to talk like this! I feel it's because you are threatened of your own personal beliefs that you start getting defensive and assassinating others' characters and talking ill-mannerly! Very poor strategy, and I'm sure many can see this.
My comments:
104:1 in general applies to whoever fits the mould. Your arguments are although valid but your intent is being questioned and therefore a harsh reply. Have you ever been to other websites where Ismailis and their faith and their Imams are bashed day in and day out?
As for pardesi, all you need to know is that I am a Muslim, I do not need to affiliate myself with a sect, saying I am "Shia" "Sunni" "Wahhabi" etc. A sunni might call me a Shia because I love and respect the Ahl-al-Bayt and follow their teachings. A shia might call me a sunni for loving the way of our Prophet (sunnah) and following his example as shown or directed by Allah (33:21) , and disputing with ulil-amr if I have a problem with a concept if I believe it goes against the Qur'an. And someone might even call me a Wahhabi if I hold the Qur'an in high regard and believe strictly in the concept of Tawheed. In the end, I am a Muslim. Even if someone did say who they are strictly affiliated with, I don't see how that should matter. I don't intend to offend you if this is how the tone of my writing seems to portray.
My comments:
We know that you are a muslim. But I thought that to be a true muslim one must adhere to the teachings of one of the four madhabs if you are a follower of sunnah, or the fifth (Jaffari madhab) if you are a Shia. How do you follow the teachings of the Ahl-al-Bayt and who do you consider Ahl-al-Bayt. Do you think they still live amongst us? Do you think the following ayah points towards the Ahl-al-Bayt?
Surat al-Nisa,
" If they had referred it to the Messenger and to those of authority among them, then those of them whose task it is to find it out would have known the matter " (Qur'an 4:83)
Also do you consider the Ulil-amr as divinely appointed or just somebody that was appointed by the masses. And if it is the latter then how can we call him Ulil-amr. Amr is God’s word and Ulil-amr is someone who enjoys the authority as a religious as well as secular leader. If you read Surah al-nisa ayah 59 it says to obey the Ulil Amr in the same way as obedience to Allah and his messenger is ordered.
Touching upon what you said about disputing with the Ulil Amr, Allah says in Quran that when a matter has been decided upon by Allah and His messenger, no momin men or momina women has any right to differ or dispute over it or have any say whatsoever. And since the obedience to Ulil Amr is required on the same level as the messenger, you have no right to dispute with the Ulil Amr. And if you dispute with the Ulil Amr in today’s time how are you going to refer it to Allah and His messenger? You yourself said you do not follow any particular madhab and therefore do not follow any particular Imam’s interpretation so how do you try to understand Quran? And Sunnah reached you through the hadith literature which is full of controversies and at best makes our Prophet look like someone he never was. So how are you going to dispute with the Ulil Amr and judge him in light of Quran (Allah) and sunnah (Prophet)?
I don’t get offended easily and neither is it my intention to offend anybody. I have always felt that it is important to know where the other person is standing before you get into arguments and debates. Gives you an even playing field. And I see no reason for someone to consider the disclosure of their affiliation as irrelevant. It is your choice however.
6:159. As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with God: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did….
Quoting the above ayah in your defense for not following any madhab is completely out of context.
You might find the following link of interest.
http://www.themodernreligion.com/basic/ ... ab-nec.htm
They will not tell you who they are because they know and understand their own dubiety and ulterior motives to oscillate like fans....when it suits them they will pretend they are Wahabbis ; suddenly they will talk like Sunnis and then become Sh'ias....some of the are rented "heros" of the progressive Bohoras...in this way the idea is to pit all against us on the sly ....
Arshad’s comments (in red):
104:1 Waylul-li kul-li humazatil-lumaza!
That is all i have to say to you! That is all you know how to do! You should calm that tongue of your's down. I bring valid arguments and all you can do is talk about things that are not even relevant to our topic and/or don't answer any questions that are being asked. All you want to do is backlash your tongue and think you know your stuff. This is not Islam! I don't see how me bringing arguments as to the completion of the Qur'an should cause you to talk like this! I feel it's because you are threatened of your own personal beliefs that you start getting defensive and assassinating others' characters and talking ill-mannerly! Very poor strategy, and I'm sure many can see this.
My comments:
104:1 in general applies to whoever fits the mould. Your arguments are although valid but your intent is being questioned and therefore a harsh reply. Have you ever been to other websites where Ismailis and their faith and their Imams are bashed day in and day out?
As for pardesi, all you need to know is that I am a Muslim, I do not need to affiliate myself with a sect, saying I am "Shia" "Sunni" "Wahhabi" etc. A sunni might call me a Shia because I love and respect the Ahl-al-Bayt and follow their teachings. A shia might call me a sunni for loving the way of our Prophet (sunnah) and following his example as shown or directed by Allah (33:21) , and disputing with ulil-amr if I have a problem with a concept if I believe it goes against the Qur'an. And someone might even call me a Wahhabi if I hold the Qur'an in high regard and believe strictly in the concept of Tawheed. In the end, I am a Muslim. Even if someone did say who they are strictly affiliated with, I don't see how that should matter. I don't intend to offend you if this is how the tone of my writing seems to portray.
My comments:
We know that you are a muslim. But I thought that to be a true muslim one must adhere to the teachings of one of the four madhabs if you are a follower of sunnah, or the fifth (Jaffari madhab) if you are a Shia. How do you follow the teachings of the Ahl-al-Bayt and who do you consider Ahl-al-Bayt. Do you think they still live amongst us? Do you think the following ayah points towards the Ahl-al-Bayt?
Surat al-Nisa,
" If they had referred it to the Messenger and to those of authority among them, then those of them whose task it is to find it out would have known the matter " (Qur'an 4:83)
Also do you consider the Ulil-amr as divinely appointed or just somebody that was appointed by the masses. And if it is the latter then how can we call him Ulil-amr. Amr is God’s word and Ulil-amr is someone who enjoys the authority as a religious as well as secular leader. If you read Surah al-nisa ayah 59 it says to obey the Ulil Amr in the same way as obedience to Allah and his messenger is ordered.
Touching upon what you said about disputing with the Ulil Amr, Allah says in Quran that when a matter has been decided upon by Allah and His messenger, no momin men or momina women has any right to differ or dispute over it or have any say whatsoever. And since the obedience to Ulil Amr is required on the same level as the messenger, you have no right to dispute with the Ulil Amr. And if you dispute with the Ulil Amr in today’s time how are you going to refer it to Allah and His messenger? You yourself said you do not follow any particular madhab and therefore do not follow any particular Imam’s interpretation so how do you try to understand Quran? And Sunnah reached you through the hadith literature which is full of controversies and at best makes our Prophet look like someone he never was. So how are you going to dispute with the Ulil Amr and judge him in light of Quran (Allah) and sunnah (Prophet)?
I don’t get offended easily and neither is it my intention to offend anybody. I have always felt that it is important to know where the other person is standing before you get into arguments and debates. Gives you an even playing field. And I see no reason for someone to consider the disclosure of their affiliation as irrelevant. It is your choice however.
6:159. As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with God: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did….
Quoting the above ayah in your defense for not following any madhab is completely out of context.
You might find the following link of interest.
http://www.themodernreligion.com/basic/ ... ab-nec.htm
-
arshad1988
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 2:02 am
- Contact:
Which madhab was the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him affiliated with? He was not a Shaf'i, a Hanafi, a Hanbali, a Maliki, a Jaf'ari, etc...he was a Muslim. Who ever said you need to be part of a particular madhab to be considered a true Muslim? A true Muslim, is one that submits his whole self to Allah. znanwalla gave a very good reference to an ayah which speaks of what a Muslim is:pardesi wrote:znanwalla wrote:
They will not tell you who they are because they know and understand their own dubiety and ulterior motives to oscillate like fans....when it suits them they will pretend they are Wahabbis ; suddenly they will talk like Sunnis and then become Sh'ias....some of the are rented "heros" of the progressive Bohoras...in this way the idea is to pit all against us on the sly ....
Arshad’s comments (in red):
104:1 Waylul-li kul-li humazatil-lumaza!
That is all i have to say to you! That is all you know how to do! You should calm that tongue of your's down. I bring valid arguments and all you can do is talk about things that are not even relevant to our topic and/or don't answer any questions that are being asked. All you want to do is backlash your tongue and think you know your stuff. This is not Islam! I don't see how me bringing arguments as to the completion of the Qur'an should cause you to talk like this! I feel it's because you are threatened of your own personal beliefs that you start getting defensive and assassinating others' characters and talking ill-mannerly! Very poor strategy, and I'm sure many can see this.
My comments:
104:1 in general applies to whoever fits the mould. Your arguments are although valid but your intent is being questioned and therefore a harsh reply. Have you ever been to other websites where Ismailis and their faith and their Imams are bashed day in and day out?
As for pardesi, all you need to know is that I am a Muslim, I do not need to affiliate myself with a sect, saying I am "Shia" "Sunni" "Wahhabi" etc. A sunni might call me a Shia because I love and respect the Ahl-al-Bayt and follow their teachings. A shia might call me a sunni for loving the way of our Prophet (sunnah) and following his example as shown or directed by Allah (33:21) , and disputing with ulil-amr if I have a problem with a concept if I believe it goes against the Qur'an. And someone might even call me a Wahhabi if I hold the Qur'an in high regard and believe strictly in the concept of Tawheed. In the end, I am a Muslim. Even if someone did say who they are strictly affiliated with, I don't see how that should matter. I don't intend to offend you if this is how the tone of my writing seems to portray.
My comments:
We know that you are a muslim. But I thought that to be a true muslim one must adhere to the teachings of one of the four madhabs if you are a follower of sunnah, or the fifth (Jaffari madhab) if you are a Shia. How do you follow the teachings of the Ahl-al-Bayt and who do you consider Ahl-al-Bayt. Do you think they still live amongst us? Do you think the following ayah points towards the Ahl-al-Bayt?
Surat al-Nisa,
" If they had referred it to the Messenger and to those of authority among them, then those of them whose task it is to find it out would have known the matter " (Qur'an 4:83)
Also do you consider the Ulil-amr as divinely appointed or just somebody that was appointed by the masses. And if it is the latter then how can we call him Ulil-amr. Amr is God’s word and Ulil-amr is someone who enjoys the authority as a religious as well as secular leader. If you read Surah al-nisa ayah 59 it says to obey the Ulil Amr in the same way as obedience to Allah and his messenger is ordered.
Touching upon what you said about disputing with the Ulil Amr, Allah says in Quran that when a matter has been decided upon by Allah and His messenger, no momin men or momina women has any right to differ or dispute over it or have any say whatsoever. And since the obedience to Ulil Amr is required on the same level as the messenger, you have no right to dispute with the Ulil Amr. And if you dispute with the Ulil Amr in today’s time how are you going to refer it to Allah and His messenger? You yourself said you do not follow any particular madhab and therefore do not follow any particular Imam’s interpretation so how do you try to understand Quran? And Sunnah reached you through the hadith literature which is full of controversies and at best makes our Prophet look like someone he never was. So how are you going to dispute with the Ulil Amr and judge him in light of Quran (Allah) and sunnah (Prophet)?
I don’t get offended easily and neither is it my intention to offend anybody. I have always felt that it is important to know where the other person is standing before you get into arguments and debates. Gives you an even playing field. And I see no reason for someone to consider the disclosure of their affiliation as irrelevant. It is your choice however.
6:159. As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with God: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did….
Quoting the above ayah in your defense for not following any madhab is completely out of context.
You might find the following link of interest.
http://www.themodernreligion.com/basic/ ... ab-nec.htm
5:69. Those who believe (in the Qur'an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians and the Christians,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness,- on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
I don't think quoting the verse that speaks of breaking up the religion into sects is quoted out of context at all, as I have explained above.
What is my wrong with my intent? If I have an opinion, especially in regards to the authenticity of the Qur'an I believe I am entitled to it. Ismailis in general are not sure of this matter and it is not clear to all, ...otherwise this thread would not have been started in the first place. Hence I decided to share my belief and give my opinion of what the truth is. Have I ever given any sense of attacking your's or anyone else's personal beliefs? I was simply giving my own just as you and everyone else has given their own as well.
I do not know of other sites and their bashing, but I expect at least a little respect, especially since I did not harm anyone with my words; rather I only present arguments to back up my opinion. I do not try to talk ill of others, especially when they have not done anything to me.
Generally, my belief is that anything that is said about deen should be corroborated against the Qur'an. If it goes against the Qur'an then it should not be followed. As for interpreting the Qur'an, I have referenced to verses of the Qur'an which indicate that it is clear, and that other verses are allegorical; however, the clear verses are the foundation of the Book, and the guidance for mankind.
And this your Lord's straight path; We have clarified the revelations to a people who remember. [6:126]
And We have come to them with a book which We have distinguished with knowledge; a guide and a mercy to those who have faith. [7:52]
Should we then not believe Allah (that is, if you believe the Book we have is complete, which I do) that its verses are clear?
I am not a scholar, hence I cannot comment on the entire corpus of hadith literature. But from what I understand, there is much controversy within the texts, and again they are to be corroborated with the Qur'an in my opinion to be considered valid. Anything that gives a depiction of the Prophet, upon whom be peace, that does not fit or tie in with the character as portrayed in the Qur'an is to be rejected.
You quote verse 4:59
4:59. O ye who believe! Obey God, and obey the Apostle, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to God and His Apostle, if ye do believe in God and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.
I agree, that the ulil-amr need to be obeyed, but does not the above verse show that the ulil-amr can make a mistake? Otherwise what would you need to dispute or differ with? Referring it back to God and His Apostle is the one and same thing. The Imam may be part of the ahl-al-bayt, however everything must be corroborated against the Qur'an as I said above. My belief at the moment (since I had mentioned that I cannot comment on the entire corpus of hadith literature) is that when referring it to the Apostle, it refers primarily to adhering to the Qur'an, as that is what was brought to mankind through him. Then, the example brought by him can also be illustrated through what is generally accepted in the seera literature by the ummah as a whole.
arshad1988 wrote:Which madhab was the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him affiliated with? He was not a Shaf'i, a Hanafi, a Hanbali, a Maliki, a Jaf'ari, etc...he was a Muslim. Who ever said you need to be part of a particular madhab to be considered a true Muslim? A true Muslim, is one that submits his whole self to Allah. znanwalla gave a very good reference to an ayah which speaks of what a Muslim is:pardesi wrote:znanwalla wrote:
They will not tell you who they are because they know and understand their own dubiety and ulterior motives to oscillate like fans....when it suits them they will pretend they are Wahabbis ; suddenly they will talk like Sunnis and then become Sh'ias....some of the are rented "heros" of the progressive Bohoras...in this way the idea is to pit all against us on the sly ....
Arshad’s comments (in red):
104:1 Waylul-li kul-li humazatil-lumaza!
That is all i have to say to you! That is all you know how to do! You should calm that tongue of your's down. I bring valid arguments and all you can do is talk about things that are not even relevant to our topic and/or don't answer any questions that are being asked. All you want to do is backlash your tongue and think you know your stuff. This is not Islam! I don't see how me bringing arguments as to the completion of the Qur'an should cause you to talk like this! I feel it's because you are threatened of your own personal beliefs that you start getting defensive and assassinating others' characters and talking ill-mannerly! Very poor strategy, and I'm sure many can see this.
My comments:
104:1 in general applies to whoever fits the mould. Your arguments are although valid but your intent is being questioned and therefore a harsh reply. Have you ever been to other websites where Ismailis and their faith and their Imams are bashed day in and day out?
As for pardesi, all you need to know is that I am a Muslim, I do not need to affiliate myself with a sect, saying I am "Shia" "Sunni" "Wahhabi" etc. A sunni might call me a Shia because I love and respect the Ahl-al-Bayt and follow their teachings. A shia might call me a sunni for loving the way of our Prophet (sunnah) and following his example as shown or directed by Allah (33:21) , and disputing with ulil-amr if I have a problem with a concept if I believe it goes against the Qur'an. And someone might even call me a Wahhabi if I hold the Qur'an in high regard and believe strictly in the concept of Tawheed. In the end, I am a Muslim. Even if someone did say who they are strictly affiliated with, I don't see how that should matter. I don't intend to offend you if this is how the tone of my writing seems to portray.
My comments:
We know that you are a muslim. But I thought that to be a true muslim one must adhere to the teachings of one of the four madhabs if you are a follower of sunnah, or the fifth (Jaffari madhab) if you are a Shia. How do you follow the teachings of the Ahl-al-Bayt and who do you consider Ahl-al-Bayt. Do you think they still live amongst us? Do you think the following ayah points towards the Ahl-al-Bayt?
Surat al-Nisa,
" If they had referred it to the Messenger and to those of authority among them, then those of them whose task it is to find it out would have known the matter " (Qur'an 4:83)
Also do you consider the Ulil-amr as divinely appointed or just somebody that was appointed by the masses. And if it is the latter then how can we call him Ulil-amr. Amr is God’s word and Ulil-amr is someone who enjoys the authority as a religious as well as secular leader. If you read Surah al-nisa ayah 59 it says to obey the Ulil Amr in the same way as obedience to Allah and his messenger is ordered.
Touching upon what you said about disputing with the Ulil Amr, Allah says in Quran that when a matter has been decided upon by Allah and His messenger, no momin men or momina women has any right to differ or dispute over it or have any say whatsoever. And since the obedience to Ulil Amr is required on the same level as the messenger, you have no right to dispute with the Ulil Amr. And if you dispute with the Ulil Amr in today’s time how are you going to refer it to Allah and His messenger? You yourself said you do not follow any particular madhab and therefore do not follow any particular Imam’s interpretation so how do you try to understand Quran? And Sunnah reached you through the hadith literature which is full of controversies and at best makes our Prophet look like someone he never was. So how are you going to dispute with the Ulil Amr and judge him in light of Quran (Allah) and sunnah (Prophet)?
I don’t get offended easily and neither is it my intention to offend anybody. I have always felt that it is important to know where the other person is standing before you get into arguments and debates. Gives you an even playing field. And I see no reason for someone to consider the disclosure of their affiliation as irrelevant. It is your choice however.
6:159. As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with God: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did….
Quoting the above ayah in your defense for not following any madhab is completely out of context.
You might find the following link of interest.
http://www.themodernreligion.com/basic/ ... ab-nec.htm
5:69. Those who believe (in the Qur'an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians and the Christians,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness,- on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
I don't think quoting the verse that speaks of breaking up the religion into sects is quoted out of context at all, as I have explained above.
What is my wrong with my intent? If I have an opinion, especially in regards to the authenticity of the Qur'an I believe I am entitled to it. Ismailis in general are not sure of this matter and it is not clear to all, ...otherwise this thread would not have been started in the first place. Hence I decided to share my belief and give my opinion of what the truth is. Have I ever given any sense of attacking your's or anyone else's personal beliefs? I was simply giving my own just as you and everyone else has given their own as well.
I do not know of other sites and their bashing, but I expect at least a little respect, especially since I did not harm anyone with my words; rather I only present arguments to back up my opinion. I do not try to talk ill of others, especially when they have not done anything to me.
Generally, my belief is that anything that is said about deen should be corroborated against the Qur'an. If it goes against the Qur'an then it should not be followed. As for interpreting the Qur'an, I have referenced to verses of the Qur'an which indicate that it is clear, and that other verses are allegorical; however, the clear verses are the foundation of the Book, and the guidance for mankind.
And this your Lord's straight path; We have clarified the revelations to a people who remember. [6:126]
And We have come to them with a book which We have distinguished with knowledge; a guide and a mercy to those who have faith. [7:52]
Should we then not believe Allah (that is, if you believe the Book we have is complete, which I do) that its verses are clear?
I am not a scholar, hence I cannot comment on the entire corpus of hadith literature. But from what I understand, there is much controversy within the texts, and again they are to be corroborated with the Qur'an in my opinion to be considered valid. Anything that gives a depiction of the Prophet, upon whom be peace, that does not fit or tie in with the character as portrayed in the Qur'an is to be rejected.
You quote verse 4:59
4:59. O ye who believe! Obey God, and obey the Apostle, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to God and His Apostle, if ye do believe in God and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.
I agree, that the ulil-amr need to be obeyed, but does not the above verse show that the ulil-amr can make a mistake? Otherwise what would you need to dispute or differ with? Referring it back to God and His Apostle is the one and same thing. The Imam may be part of the ahl-al-bayt, however everything must be corroborated against the Qur'an as I said above. My belief at the moment (since I had mentioned that I cannot comment on the entire corpus of hadith literature) is that when referring it to the Apostle, it refers primarily to adhering to the Qur'an, as that is what was brought to mankind through him. Then, the example brought by him can also be illustrated through what is generally accepted in the seera literature by the ummah as a whole.
Wow..thank you for allowing the Imam to be a part of the Ahl-e-Bayt.
In case you haven't noticed or observed in the Shia belief - no matter WHAT SHIA BELIEF - whether it be Mustaeli or Ithna Asheri or Ismaili - the IMAM has to be from AHL-E-BAYT - direct descendant of Hazrat Ali.
Seriously - go find a sunni site that endorses your beliefs - because somewhere along the line you've lost your way from discussion to "holier than thou" and "self righteousness"
Shams
ya Ali madad.....All, Had a good time reading all that has been written. Indeed it;s still knowledge all it lacs is inspiration....wa;llahi if you study the religion in that depth the doubt should not exist, then again all the shia;s final call ends at ali who is ever present so why the diffrence and sunnis who do adder to the holy quran...in deep contemplation will never do things otherwise infact will be guided better, as the holy quran and the religion ISLAM is here to stay and we will still be arguing in the year 3125 saying if its complite or not rather, why don;t we try and understand what good we can as the people of that time will still reflect and say oh...! the quran has been written for our times
I think that your view on this matter is not right. Insh'Allah, we'll talk about it someother time as I don't want to get into any other discussion other than the one I'm having with Kmaherali at the moment. In the mean time, you should read and reflect over the article, the link to which pardesi provided, written by Sheikh Nu Ha Mim Keller that I think addresses this issue well.arshad1988 wrote:
Which madhab was the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him affiliated with? He was not a Shaf'i, a Hanafi, a Hanbali, a Maliki, a Jaf'ari, etc...he was a Muslim. Who ever said you need to be part of a particular madhab to be considered a true Muslim? A true Muslim, is one that submits his whole self to Allah. znanwalla gave a very good reference to an ayah which speaks of what a Muslim is:
5:69. Those who believe (in the Qur'an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians and the Christians,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness,- on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
I don't think quoting the verse that speaks of breaking up the religion into sects is quoted out of context at all, as I have explained above.
What is my wrong with my intent? If I have an opinion, especially in regards to the authenticity of the Qur'an I believe I am entitled to it. Ismailis in general are not sure of this matter and it is not clear to all, ...otherwise this thread would not have been started in the first place. Hence I decided to share my belief and give my opinion of what the truth is. Have I ever given any sense of attacking your's or anyone else's personal beliefs? I was simply giving my own just as you and everyone else has given their own as well.
I do not know of other sites and their bashing, but I expect at least a little respect, especially since I did not harm anyone with my words; rather I only present arguments to back up my opinion. I do not try to talk ill of others, especially when they have not done anything to me.
Generally, my belief is that anything that is said about deen should be corroborated against the Qur'an. If it goes against the Qur'an then it should not be followed. As for interpreting the Qur'an, I have referenced to verses of the Qur'an which indicate that it is clear, and that other verses are allegorical; however, the clear verses are the foundation of the Book, and the guidance for mankind.
And this your Lord's straight path; We have clarified the revelations to a people who remember. [6:126]
And We have come to them with a book which We have distinguished with knowledge; a guide and a mercy to those who have faith. [7:52]
Should we then not believe Allah (that is, if you believe the Book we have is complete, which I do) that its verses are clear?
I am not a scholar, hence I cannot comment on the entire corpus of hadith literature. But from what I understand, there is much controversy within the texts, and again they are to be corroborated with the Qur'an in my opinion to be considered valid. Anything that gives a depiction of the Prophet, upon whom be peace, that does not fit or tie in with the character as portrayed in the Qur'an is to be rejected.
You quote verse 4:59
4:59. O ye who believe! Obey God, and obey the Apostle, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to God and His Apostle, if ye do believe in God and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.
I agree, that the ulil-amr need to be obeyed, but does not the above verse show that the ulil-amr can make a mistake? Otherwise what would you need to dispute or differ with? Referring it back to God and His Apostle is the one and same thing. The Imam may be part of the ahl-al-bayt, however everything must be corroborated against the Qur'an as I said above. My belief at the moment (since I had mentioned that I cannot comment on the entire corpus of hadith literature) is that when referring it to the Apostle, it refers primarily to adhering to the Qur'an, as that is what was brought to mankind through him. Then, the example brought by him can also be illustrated through what is generally accepted in the seera literature by the ummah as a whole.
binom,
You are asking...."..What is the basis of this interpretation that establishes that your particular imam, the Aga Khan, is this authority?..."
On the flip side my rude response would be, is that any of your business?
The basis is primarily the Quran and the ahadith...there are secondary and tertiary basis including history also that establishes our Imamat as being authentic and perpetual !
The Ismaili sect is the ONLY sect now that still has a LIVING hereditary successor from the progeny of the Prophet and Hazrat Murtaza Ali to guide the "believers" in the interpretation of the faith, at all times...the fact that not a single generation over the last 1400 plus years has been DEPRIVED of this guidance, is in itself sufficient proof and is a reflection of the Divine Reality in this world which others lack.
Today we have 49 names memorized that we recite daily, three times a day and we seek Allah's forgiveness and mercy under those names...for 1400 plus years we have recited these names and so do we need any research analyst like you or Maherally or any other record or manuscripts to show or prove to us our Imam's genealogy?
Let me ask you...do you need a DNA test to prove to anyone who your father is? Yes or No ?
If you are unduly taking such a keen interest in our madhab instead of minding your own business, then don't you atleast know that the genealogy of our Imams has always stayed intact and unchanged and is part and parcel of our own traditional prayer which is centuries old practice and not only has it rendered our Imam's genealogy doubt proof but has precluded any need to depend on any historical records or manuscripts for its authenticity....now if you read MIHIR BOSE and Maherally's confabulations then by all means you are at liberty to do so....but does this mean that they are saying a gospel truth?
Every departing Imam names and designates his succesor and the new Imam's name is then added to the bottom of the list of names of the Imams in our salat.
Now paradoxical as this may seem to you and some others, it is this UNBROKEN line of Ismaili Imamat which Allah is referring to in the Quran when HE urges mankind to hold onto...THE ROPE OF ALLAH !
Let me challenge you that as long as this Universe is in EXISTENCE the names of our 49 Imams ( and this includes the "Aga Khan") and ALL future succeeding Imams will continue to be recited in our Salat...many mischief mongers will rise as usual to forment trouble but then if you know our history then Ismailism will continue to shine, as per Allah's promise in the quran !...do you know the ayat I am referring to ?
Now in trying to chase Maherally what you are trying to show to us is that you love to chase your own tail...so keep on chasing your tail ! Imamat has existed from time immemorial...it is not a new phenomena....You are unable to understand Maherally's articulation as you are not on the same page as he is.....
You can serve Islam better by investing your time and effort more productively instead of chasing Maherally...go and do something for the Umma instead....help the poor who need hope in their lives....
In the absence of Imam e Zamana, the other sects now rely on some fallible priest and shaykhs for the interpretation of the Quran and for guidance....in consequence we all see as a visual and intellectual proof that they have disagreements and differences in the understanding and interpretation of the faith.....a primary reason why Islam is at cross roads today !
As for Ismailis the interpretation of the Quran and the faith is the sole prerogative of the Imam of the time and age who interprets according to the changing times and adapts to it without any compromise to its fundamental principles...Ismailis have the SAMIT and the NATIQ !
Now this is visibly lacking in others sects as they move around based on pre-fixed notions of what faith is or should be or ought to be and they still prefer to practice Islam the way it was practiced some 1400 years ago during the medieval times....and without the Imam though the Prophet did say to hold fast to BOTH !
The "Aga Khan" is merely a worldy or secular title....Title in Arabic is laqab (pl. Alqa'b). A title is a name of distinction; an appellation indicating ones rank.....
Queen Victoria has given the honour to the Aga Khan and made him sit on the throne that she had designated for Jesus Christ at a Royal banquet in the scores of foreign dignataries though the news was suppressed ...check the Saint Gazette of July 22nd 1898.....the British have given him a title also....in addition he holds many other secular titles.....secular is secular !
If you keen to know his religious authority then the Imam is the greatest blessing and the most abundant generosity which is bestowed by Allah on us...the AGA KHAN is the LEGITIMATE Imam of this epoch ; the rightful leader ; the Master of Thaqalayn and so may Allah EXALT his word and spread his summons over all the earth ! I hope you have no objection ?
Since the advent of Islam great Muslims - lecturers, warriors, poets, speakers etc. - have been given titles either by the Holy Prophet or by the Caliph or public.
Many Prophets of Allah have titles. For example: Hazrat Issa's title is Ruhullah and Hazrat Moosa's Kaleemullah. Our Holy Prophet Mohammed has many titles such as Rasoolullah, Rasa'lat Ma'ab, Nabiyil Aakhiru Zama'n, Al-Ameen. Mowla Ali has many titles such as Assadullah, Haider, Amirul Momineen, Sa'hibe'Zulfiqaar......
Shah Karim al Husayni is now the Aga Khan, a title that was given to His great grandfather by the noble King of Persia.
According to the ismailis the Imam of the time has to be present at all times since guiding the faithful on the right path is a major responsibility of the Imam and so what purpose can an Imam serve if he remains in hiding for over 1150 years or so? who would teach the permissible and what is not permissible?....
In Imamat one does not talk of any "particular" Imam? anyone who makes such distinctions based on physical aspects or concepts is an idol worshipper....Allah has ordained the believers to hold fast unto HIS Rope (Nur e Imamah) and so this extent your question is defective, so say the least....it was Ali ....then it was Ali and now it is Ali...it is only Ali...
As one can easily notice in others sects, in the absence of the Imam the clergy has taken over and the result is in front of everyone else to see....chaos and confusion.
Sura 3:33, 34 of the Quran states clearly .." Allah did choose Adam, Noah, the family of Abraham and the family of Imran above ALL people...a line of descendants, one succeeding the other...and Allah heareth and knoweth all things..."
Now kindly show me from the quran where it says that there will ONLY be 12 Imams ? please show me !
So far the Ismaili Imamat has come down in an unbroken lineage and Justice Russell actually UPHELD the direct descent claim of the Aga Khan 111, in a court of law after substantive evidence was presented to the court, in one of the longest trials reported at the time....
The mere fact that the prophet of islam, at Khum e Ghadir designated his successor and told the gathering that if the Umma would hold to both Ali and the Quran then they would never go astray and remain on the straight path and so it is obvious that Imamat cannot be restrictive but ongoing, for each generation needs guidance and the Prophet's direction is not only reported in many Sh'ia and Sunni books but also in the encycleopedia of Islam by Huston Smith.
You are asking...."..What is the basis of this interpretation that establishes that your particular imam, the Aga Khan, is this authority?..."
On the flip side my rude response would be, is that any of your business?
The basis is primarily the Quran and the ahadith...there are secondary and tertiary basis including history also that establishes our Imamat as being authentic and perpetual !
The Ismaili sect is the ONLY sect now that still has a LIVING hereditary successor from the progeny of the Prophet and Hazrat Murtaza Ali to guide the "believers" in the interpretation of the faith, at all times...the fact that not a single generation over the last 1400 plus years has been DEPRIVED of this guidance, is in itself sufficient proof and is a reflection of the Divine Reality in this world which others lack.
Today we have 49 names memorized that we recite daily, three times a day and we seek Allah's forgiveness and mercy under those names...for 1400 plus years we have recited these names and so do we need any research analyst like you or Maherally or any other record or manuscripts to show or prove to us our Imam's genealogy?
Let me ask you...do you need a DNA test to prove to anyone who your father is? Yes or No ?
If you are unduly taking such a keen interest in our madhab instead of minding your own business, then don't you atleast know that the genealogy of our Imams has always stayed intact and unchanged and is part and parcel of our own traditional prayer which is centuries old practice and not only has it rendered our Imam's genealogy doubt proof but has precluded any need to depend on any historical records or manuscripts for its authenticity....now if you read MIHIR BOSE and Maherally's confabulations then by all means you are at liberty to do so....but does this mean that they are saying a gospel truth?
Every departing Imam names and designates his succesor and the new Imam's name is then added to the bottom of the list of names of the Imams in our salat.
Now paradoxical as this may seem to you and some others, it is this UNBROKEN line of Ismaili Imamat which Allah is referring to in the Quran when HE urges mankind to hold onto...THE ROPE OF ALLAH !
Let me challenge you that as long as this Universe is in EXISTENCE the names of our 49 Imams ( and this includes the "Aga Khan") and ALL future succeeding Imams will continue to be recited in our Salat...many mischief mongers will rise as usual to forment trouble but then if you know our history then Ismailism will continue to shine, as per Allah's promise in the quran !...do you know the ayat I am referring to ?
Now in trying to chase Maherally what you are trying to show to us is that you love to chase your own tail...so keep on chasing your tail ! Imamat has existed from time immemorial...it is not a new phenomena....You are unable to understand Maherally's articulation as you are not on the same page as he is.....
You can serve Islam better by investing your time and effort more productively instead of chasing Maherally...go and do something for the Umma instead....help the poor who need hope in their lives....
In the absence of Imam e Zamana, the other sects now rely on some fallible priest and shaykhs for the interpretation of the Quran and for guidance....in consequence we all see as a visual and intellectual proof that they have disagreements and differences in the understanding and interpretation of the faith.....a primary reason why Islam is at cross roads today !
As for Ismailis the interpretation of the Quran and the faith is the sole prerogative of the Imam of the time and age who interprets according to the changing times and adapts to it without any compromise to its fundamental principles...Ismailis have the SAMIT and the NATIQ !
Now this is visibly lacking in others sects as they move around based on pre-fixed notions of what faith is or should be or ought to be and they still prefer to practice Islam the way it was practiced some 1400 years ago during the medieval times....and without the Imam though the Prophet did say to hold fast to BOTH !
The "Aga Khan" is merely a worldy or secular title....Title in Arabic is laqab (pl. Alqa'b). A title is a name of distinction; an appellation indicating ones rank.....
Queen Victoria has given the honour to the Aga Khan and made him sit on the throne that she had designated for Jesus Christ at a Royal banquet in the scores of foreign dignataries though the news was suppressed ...check the Saint Gazette of July 22nd 1898.....the British have given him a title also....in addition he holds many other secular titles.....secular is secular !
If you keen to know his religious authority then the Imam is the greatest blessing and the most abundant generosity which is bestowed by Allah on us...the AGA KHAN is the LEGITIMATE Imam of this epoch ; the rightful leader ; the Master of Thaqalayn and so may Allah EXALT his word and spread his summons over all the earth ! I hope you have no objection ?
Since the advent of Islam great Muslims - lecturers, warriors, poets, speakers etc. - have been given titles either by the Holy Prophet or by the Caliph or public.
Many Prophets of Allah have titles. For example: Hazrat Issa's title is Ruhullah and Hazrat Moosa's Kaleemullah. Our Holy Prophet Mohammed has many titles such as Rasoolullah, Rasa'lat Ma'ab, Nabiyil Aakhiru Zama'n, Al-Ameen. Mowla Ali has many titles such as Assadullah, Haider, Amirul Momineen, Sa'hibe'Zulfiqaar......
Shah Karim al Husayni is now the Aga Khan, a title that was given to His great grandfather by the noble King of Persia.
According to the ismailis the Imam of the time has to be present at all times since guiding the faithful on the right path is a major responsibility of the Imam and so what purpose can an Imam serve if he remains in hiding for over 1150 years or so? who would teach the permissible and what is not permissible?....
In Imamat one does not talk of any "particular" Imam? anyone who makes such distinctions based on physical aspects or concepts is an idol worshipper....Allah has ordained the believers to hold fast unto HIS Rope (Nur e Imamah) and so this extent your question is defective, so say the least....it was Ali ....then it was Ali and now it is Ali...it is only Ali...
As one can easily notice in others sects, in the absence of the Imam the clergy has taken over and the result is in front of everyone else to see....chaos and confusion.
Sura 3:33, 34 of the Quran states clearly .." Allah did choose Adam, Noah, the family of Abraham and the family of Imran above ALL people...a line of descendants, one succeeding the other...and Allah heareth and knoweth all things..."
Now kindly show me from the quran where it says that there will ONLY be 12 Imams ? please show me !
So far the Ismaili Imamat has come down in an unbroken lineage and Justice Russell actually UPHELD the direct descent claim of the Aga Khan 111, in a court of law after substantive evidence was presented to the court, in one of the longest trials reported at the time....
The mere fact that the prophet of islam, at Khum e Ghadir designated his successor and told the gathering that if the Umma would hold to both Ali and the Quran then they would never go astray and remain on the straight path and so it is obvious that Imamat cannot be restrictive but ongoing, for each generation needs guidance and the Prophet's direction is not only reported in many Sh'ia and Sunni books but also in the encycleopedia of Islam by Huston Smith.
binom,
You are asking:..."I ask you again: How do you know that quran is by itself insufficient for guidance?..."
You are asking a silly question ....my answer is that your own Prophet has said so...now go and read his ahadith and stop asking irrelevant questions please.
Additionally Allah says so....""And all things WE have created by pairs...that haply ye may reflect..." (Sura al Dhariyat)...
Now read Sura al Kahf - verse 109...it also says so !
How many ayats do you want me to show you which supports the notion directly or indirectly that the Book is not enough without the learned one ?
plus it is also doubtful whether you have the Book of Allah , to begin with.
SAY:"O PEOPLE OF THE BOOK!
COME TO COMMON TERMS AS BETWEEN US AND YOU:
THAT WE WORSHIP NONE BUT GOD;
THAT WE ASSOCIATE NO PARTNERS WITH HIM;
THAT WE ERECT NOT, FROM AMONG OURSELVES,
LORDS AND PATRONS OTHER THAN GOD."
IF THEN THEY TURN BACK,
SAY:"BEAR WITNESS THAT WE (AT LEAST)
ARE MUSLIMS (BOWING TO GOD'S WILL)."
(SURA AL-I-'IMRAN) Holy Qur'an 3:64
The ayat about Ahl i Imran is fulfilled only in the Ismaili Imamat...sorry if I am disappointing you but then this is the reality ...
According to numerous Islamic scholars (both Sunni and Shi'a), the event at Ghadir Khumm is a credible one which has been narrated by about 110 companions of Muhammad, the single largest amount among all narration.
The debate lies in what Muhammad meant in this specific speech when he used the term Mowla. The Sunnis believe that it means beloved friend. While the Shi'as believe that it means Master.
THE MEANING OF MAWLA AS “GUIDE”, MASTER”
The first proof is the Holy Qur'an and the revelation of the verse: "Oh Apostle! deliver that which has been reveled to you from your Lord; and if you do it not, then you have not delivered His message, and Allah will protect you from the people." (5.67)
All reputable sunni ulema have accepted it that this verse was revealed on that day of Ghadir-e-Khum in regard to Amiru’l-Mu’minin Ali. For instance Jalalud-Din Suyuti: Durru’l-Mansur; vol.II; Hafiz Ibn Abi Hatim Razi: Tafsir-e-Ghadir; Hafiz Abu Ja’far Tabari: Kitabu’l-Wilaya; Hafiz Abu Abdullah Mahamili: Amali; Hafiz Abu Bakr Shirazi: Ma Nazala Mina’l-Qur’an Fi Amiri’l-Mu’minin; Hafiz Abu Sa’id Sijistani: Kitabu’l-Wilaya; Hafiz Abu’l-Qasim Haskani: Shwahidu’t-Tanzil; Badru’d-Din Hanafi: Umdatu’l-Qari Fi Sharh-e-Sahih Bukhari, vol. 8; Ahmad Tha’labi: Tafsir Kashfu’l-Bayan; Imam Fakhru’d-din Razi: Tafsir-e-Kabir, vol. III; etc.
In short, at least thirty of leading Sunni ulema have written in their authentic books and in their own commentaries that this holy verse was revealed on the day of Ghadir-e-Khum in regard to Amiru’l-Mu’minin Ali.
Qazi Fazl Bin Ruzbahan writes: “Verily it is proved in our authentic Sahih that when this verse was revealed, the Prophet of Allah holding Ali by the hand, said: ‘To whomsoever I am the mawla (master), this Ali is also his mawla.’”
Qazi Fazl in Kash Ghumma gives a very different report from Razi Bin Abdullah: “In the days of Holy Prophet we used to read this verse thus: ‘Oh our Prophet (Muhammad) deliver what has been sent down to you from your Lord, that is Ali is the master of the believers. If you do not, then you have not delivered His message.’”
In short the warning contained in this verse says: “If you do it not then (it will be as if) you have not delivered His message (at all)….”
Shows that the message which the Holy Prophet had been ordered to deliver was of great importance. It was in fact essential to the completion of Prophet hood itself.
Therefore the issue in question was surely the matter of the imamate, the conferring of authority on one who would guide the people according to the tenets of Islam after the death of the Holy Prophet.
SIBT IBN JAUZI’S VIEW ABOUT THE MEANING OF MAWLA
Some reputable Sunni ulema have acknowledged that the primary meaning of mawla is “master”.
Among them is Sibt Ibn Jauzi, who after giving ten meanings of the word in his Tadhkira-e-Khawas, ch. II, p. 20, says that none of them except the tenth one corresponds with what the Holy Prophet meant to say. He says: “The hadith specifically means obedience; so the tenth meaning is correct, and it means ‘mastery over others’.
Hence, the hadith means of whomever I am the mawla (master) Ali is also his mawla (master)”.
In the book Maraju’l-Bahrain Hafiz Abdu’l-Faraj Yahya Bin Sa’id Saqafi interprets it in the same way.
He narrates this hadith with his own sources from his leaders, who said htat the Holy Prophet, holding Ali by the hand, said: “Of whomsoever I am wali or master over his self, Ali is also his wali or master over his self.”
Sibt Ibn Jauzi says, “The saying of the Holy Prophet that Ali has authority or is the master over the selves of all the believers clearly proves the Imamate or vicegerency of Ali and that obedience to him is obligatory.”
VIEW OF IBN TALHA SHAFI’I ABOUT THE MEANING OF MAWLA
Muhammad Bin Talha Shafi’I in his Matalibu’s-Su’ul in the middle of Part V, ch. 1, p. 16, says that the word mawla has many meanings, for instance: “master”, “helper”, “successor”, “truthful one”, and “leader”.
He then says that this holy hadith furnishes an inner interpretation to the verse of Mubahila. (3.61) In it Allah Almighty has called Ali the ‘self’ of the Holy Prophet. There was no separation between the self of the Holy Prophet and the self of Ali since He combined the two with the pronoun referring to the Holy Prophet.
Muhammad Bin Talha adds: “In this hadith the Holy Prophet indicated that whatever obligations the believers had in respect to him, they had also in respect to Ali.
As the Holy Prophet was certainly master of the believers in all of their matters, their helper, leader, and chief – all of these being connotations of the word mawla – then it follows that he meant the same thing for Ali (A.S.) also.
And this is of course, an exalted position, an eminently high rank, which was specifically assigned to Ali.
It is for this reason that the Day of Ghadir was a day of eid and rejoicings for the lovers and friends of Ali.”
Unfortunately some people in view of the above statement put an objection that since the word mawla has a number of meanings, it would be wrong to conclude that it was use in this case to indicate a single meaning, “master”, to the exclusion of other meanings.
Although they are well aware of the basic principles of scholars that while a word may have different meanings, it has only one basic meaning and that the rest of the meanings are derived. The basic meaning of the word mawla or wali is master.
For instance, the wali of nika (wedlock) means one who acts as attorney, or trustee.
The wali of a woman is her husband, the wali of a child is his father, who has full authority over him.
The wali ahd (heir apparent) of a king means “one whose right to rule connot be denied if he outlives the ancestor.”
Apart from this the objection recoils upon them as to why they have restricted its meaning to “friend” and “helper” when it has many other meanings.
So this specification without any specific object is void.
The verses of the Holy Qur’an, the hadith and the opinions of scholars, all prove the same meaning i.e. “Master”, “Guide”.
Among these are the reasons which prominent ulema like Sibt Ibn Jauzi, Muhammad Ibn Abi Talha Shafi’I have given regarding its meaning. Moreover, it is narrated in a large number of hadith both from Sunni sources and Shi’a that this Holy verse was read thus:
“Oh Prophet of Allah! Deliver what has been sent down to you from your Lord about Ali’s wilaya (vicegerency) and his being master of the believers.”
Jalalud-Din Suyuti, who is one of reputable sunni ulema has collected these hadith in his book Durru’l-Mansur.
Another way of finding the meaning in which the Prophet used the word "mawla" for 'Ali is to see how the people in Ghadir Khumm understood it.
Did they take the word "mawla" in the sense of "friend" or in the meaning of "master, leader"? Hassān ibn Thābit, the famous poet of the Prophet, composed a poem on the event of Ghadir Khumm on the same day. He says:
He then said to him: "Stand up, O 'Ali, for I am pleased to make you Imam & Guide after me.”
In this line, Hassān ibn Thābit has understood the term "mawla" in the meaning of "Imam and Guide" which clearly proves that the Prophet was talking about his successor, and that he was not introducing 'Ali as a "friend" but as a "leader".
Even the words of 'Umar ibn al-Khattāb are interesting. He congratulated Imam 'Ali in these words: "Congratulations, O son of Abu Tālib, this morning you became mawla of every believing man and woman." If "mawla" meant "friend" then why the congratulations?
Was 'Ali an 'enemy' of all believing men and women before the day of Ghadir?
These immediate contexts make it very clear that the Prophet was talking about a comprehensive authority that 'Ali has over the Muslims comparable to his own authority over them.
They prove that the meaning of the term "mawla" in hadíth of Ghadír is not "friend" but "master, patron, lord, or leader".
You are asking:..."I ask you again: How do you know that quran is by itself insufficient for guidance?..."
You are asking a silly question ....my answer is that your own Prophet has said so...now go and read his ahadith and stop asking irrelevant questions please.
Additionally Allah says so....""And all things WE have created by pairs...that haply ye may reflect..." (Sura al Dhariyat)...
Now read Sura al Kahf - verse 109...it also says so !
How many ayats do you want me to show you which supports the notion directly or indirectly that the Book is not enough without the learned one ?
plus it is also doubtful whether you have the Book of Allah , to begin with.
SAY:"O PEOPLE OF THE BOOK!
COME TO COMMON TERMS AS BETWEEN US AND YOU:
THAT WE WORSHIP NONE BUT GOD;
THAT WE ASSOCIATE NO PARTNERS WITH HIM;
THAT WE ERECT NOT, FROM AMONG OURSELVES,
LORDS AND PATRONS OTHER THAN GOD."
IF THEN THEY TURN BACK,
SAY:"BEAR WITNESS THAT WE (AT LEAST)
ARE MUSLIMS (BOWING TO GOD'S WILL)."
(SURA AL-I-'IMRAN) Holy Qur'an 3:64
The ayat about Ahl i Imran is fulfilled only in the Ismaili Imamat...sorry if I am disappointing you but then this is the reality ...
According to numerous Islamic scholars (both Sunni and Shi'a), the event at Ghadir Khumm is a credible one which has been narrated by about 110 companions of Muhammad, the single largest amount among all narration.
The debate lies in what Muhammad meant in this specific speech when he used the term Mowla. The Sunnis believe that it means beloved friend. While the Shi'as believe that it means Master.
THE MEANING OF MAWLA AS “GUIDE”, MASTER”
The first proof is the Holy Qur'an and the revelation of the verse: "Oh Apostle! deliver that which has been reveled to you from your Lord; and if you do it not, then you have not delivered His message, and Allah will protect you from the people." (5.67)
All reputable sunni ulema have accepted it that this verse was revealed on that day of Ghadir-e-Khum in regard to Amiru’l-Mu’minin Ali. For instance Jalalud-Din Suyuti: Durru’l-Mansur; vol.II; Hafiz Ibn Abi Hatim Razi: Tafsir-e-Ghadir; Hafiz Abu Ja’far Tabari: Kitabu’l-Wilaya; Hafiz Abu Abdullah Mahamili: Amali; Hafiz Abu Bakr Shirazi: Ma Nazala Mina’l-Qur’an Fi Amiri’l-Mu’minin; Hafiz Abu Sa’id Sijistani: Kitabu’l-Wilaya; Hafiz Abu’l-Qasim Haskani: Shwahidu’t-Tanzil; Badru’d-Din Hanafi: Umdatu’l-Qari Fi Sharh-e-Sahih Bukhari, vol. 8; Ahmad Tha’labi: Tafsir Kashfu’l-Bayan; Imam Fakhru’d-din Razi: Tafsir-e-Kabir, vol. III; etc.
In short, at least thirty of leading Sunni ulema have written in their authentic books and in their own commentaries that this holy verse was revealed on the day of Ghadir-e-Khum in regard to Amiru’l-Mu’minin Ali.
Qazi Fazl Bin Ruzbahan writes: “Verily it is proved in our authentic Sahih that when this verse was revealed, the Prophet of Allah holding Ali by the hand, said: ‘To whomsoever I am the mawla (master), this Ali is also his mawla.’”
Qazi Fazl in Kash Ghumma gives a very different report from Razi Bin Abdullah: “In the days of Holy Prophet we used to read this verse thus: ‘Oh our Prophet (Muhammad) deliver what has been sent down to you from your Lord, that is Ali is the master of the believers. If you do not, then you have not delivered His message.’”
In short the warning contained in this verse says: “If you do it not then (it will be as if) you have not delivered His message (at all)….”
Shows that the message which the Holy Prophet had been ordered to deliver was of great importance. It was in fact essential to the completion of Prophet hood itself.
Therefore the issue in question was surely the matter of the imamate, the conferring of authority on one who would guide the people according to the tenets of Islam after the death of the Holy Prophet.
SIBT IBN JAUZI’S VIEW ABOUT THE MEANING OF MAWLA
Some reputable Sunni ulema have acknowledged that the primary meaning of mawla is “master”.
Among them is Sibt Ibn Jauzi, who after giving ten meanings of the word in his Tadhkira-e-Khawas, ch. II, p. 20, says that none of them except the tenth one corresponds with what the Holy Prophet meant to say. He says: “The hadith specifically means obedience; so the tenth meaning is correct, and it means ‘mastery over others’.
Hence, the hadith means of whomever I am the mawla (master) Ali is also his mawla (master)”.
In the book Maraju’l-Bahrain Hafiz Abdu’l-Faraj Yahya Bin Sa’id Saqafi interprets it in the same way.
He narrates this hadith with his own sources from his leaders, who said htat the Holy Prophet, holding Ali by the hand, said: “Of whomsoever I am wali or master over his self, Ali is also his wali or master over his self.”
Sibt Ibn Jauzi says, “The saying of the Holy Prophet that Ali has authority or is the master over the selves of all the believers clearly proves the Imamate or vicegerency of Ali and that obedience to him is obligatory.”
VIEW OF IBN TALHA SHAFI’I ABOUT THE MEANING OF MAWLA
Muhammad Bin Talha Shafi’I in his Matalibu’s-Su’ul in the middle of Part V, ch. 1, p. 16, says that the word mawla has many meanings, for instance: “master”, “helper”, “successor”, “truthful one”, and “leader”.
He then says that this holy hadith furnishes an inner interpretation to the verse of Mubahila. (3.61) In it Allah Almighty has called Ali the ‘self’ of the Holy Prophet. There was no separation between the self of the Holy Prophet and the self of Ali since He combined the two with the pronoun referring to the Holy Prophet.
Muhammad Bin Talha adds: “In this hadith the Holy Prophet indicated that whatever obligations the believers had in respect to him, they had also in respect to Ali.
As the Holy Prophet was certainly master of the believers in all of their matters, their helper, leader, and chief – all of these being connotations of the word mawla – then it follows that he meant the same thing for Ali (A.S.) also.
And this is of course, an exalted position, an eminently high rank, which was specifically assigned to Ali.
It is for this reason that the Day of Ghadir was a day of eid and rejoicings for the lovers and friends of Ali.”
Unfortunately some people in view of the above statement put an objection that since the word mawla has a number of meanings, it would be wrong to conclude that it was use in this case to indicate a single meaning, “master”, to the exclusion of other meanings.
Although they are well aware of the basic principles of scholars that while a word may have different meanings, it has only one basic meaning and that the rest of the meanings are derived. The basic meaning of the word mawla or wali is master.
For instance, the wali of nika (wedlock) means one who acts as attorney, or trustee.
The wali of a woman is her husband, the wali of a child is his father, who has full authority over him.
The wali ahd (heir apparent) of a king means “one whose right to rule connot be denied if he outlives the ancestor.”
Apart from this the objection recoils upon them as to why they have restricted its meaning to “friend” and “helper” when it has many other meanings.
So this specification without any specific object is void.
The verses of the Holy Qur’an, the hadith and the opinions of scholars, all prove the same meaning i.e. “Master”, “Guide”.
Among these are the reasons which prominent ulema like Sibt Ibn Jauzi, Muhammad Ibn Abi Talha Shafi’I have given regarding its meaning. Moreover, it is narrated in a large number of hadith both from Sunni sources and Shi’a that this Holy verse was read thus:
“Oh Prophet of Allah! Deliver what has been sent down to you from your Lord about Ali’s wilaya (vicegerency) and his being master of the believers.”
Jalalud-Din Suyuti, who is one of reputable sunni ulema has collected these hadith in his book Durru’l-Mansur.
Another way of finding the meaning in which the Prophet used the word "mawla" for 'Ali is to see how the people in Ghadir Khumm understood it.
Did they take the word "mawla" in the sense of "friend" or in the meaning of "master, leader"? Hassān ibn Thābit, the famous poet of the Prophet, composed a poem on the event of Ghadir Khumm on the same day. He says:
He then said to him: "Stand up, O 'Ali, for I am pleased to make you Imam & Guide after me.”
In this line, Hassān ibn Thābit has understood the term "mawla" in the meaning of "Imam and Guide" which clearly proves that the Prophet was talking about his successor, and that he was not introducing 'Ali as a "friend" but as a "leader".
Even the words of 'Umar ibn al-Khattāb are interesting. He congratulated Imam 'Ali in these words: "Congratulations, O son of Abu Tālib, this morning you became mawla of every believing man and woman." If "mawla" meant "friend" then why the congratulations?
Was 'Ali an 'enemy' of all believing men and women before the day of Ghadir?
These immediate contexts make it very clear that the Prophet was talking about a comprehensive authority that 'Ali has over the Muslims comparable to his own authority over them.
They prove that the meaning of the term "mawla" in hadíth of Ghadír is not "friend" but "master, patron, lord, or leader".
-
arshad1988
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 2:02 am
- Contact:
Shams, what is your interpretation of the latter part of 4:59 then?ShamsB wrote:arshad1988 wrote:Which madhab was the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him affiliated with? He was not a Shaf'i, a Hanafi, a Hanbali, a Maliki, a Jaf'ari, etc...he was a Muslim. Who ever said you need to be part of a particular madhab to be considered a true Muslim? A true Muslim, is one that submits his whole self to Allah. znanwalla gave a very good reference to an ayah which speaks of what a Muslim is:pardesi wrote:znanwalla wrote:
They will not tell you who they are because they know and understand their own dubiety and ulterior motives to oscillate like fans....when it suits them they will pretend they are Wahabbis ; suddenly they will talk like Sunnis and then become Sh'ias....some of the are rented "heros" of the progressive Bohoras...in this way the idea is to pit all against us on the sly ....
Arshad’s comments (in red):
104:1 Waylul-li kul-li humazatil-lumaza!
That is all i have to say to you! That is all you know how to do! You should calm that tongue of your's down. I bring valid arguments and all you can do is talk about things that are not even relevant to our topic and/or don't answer any questions that are being asked. All you want to do is backlash your tongue and think you know your stuff. This is not Islam! I don't see how me bringing arguments as to the completion of the Qur'an should cause you to talk like this! I feel it's because you are threatened of your own personal beliefs that you start getting defensive and assassinating others' characters and talking ill-mannerly! Very poor strategy, and I'm sure many can see this.
My comments:
104:1 in general applies to whoever fits the mould. Your arguments are although valid but your intent is being questioned and therefore a harsh reply. Have you ever been to other websites where Ismailis and their faith and their Imams are bashed day in and day out?
As for pardesi, all you need to know is that I am a Muslim, I do not need to affiliate myself with a sect, saying I am "Shia" "Sunni" "Wahhabi" etc. A sunni might call me a Shia because I love and respect the Ahl-al-Bayt and follow their teachings. A shia might call me a sunni for loving the way of our Prophet (sunnah) and following his example as shown or directed by Allah (33:21) , and disputing with ulil-amr if I have a problem with a concept if I believe it goes against the Qur'an. And someone might even call me a Wahhabi if I hold the Qur'an in high regard and believe strictly in the concept of Tawheed. In the end, I am a Muslim. Even if someone did say who they are strictly affiliated with, I don't see how that should matter. I don't intend to offend you if this is how the tone of my writing seems to portray.
My comments:
We know that you are a muslim. But I thought that to be a true muslim one must adhere to the teachings of one of the four madhabs if you are a follower of sunnah, or the fifth (Jaffari madhab) if you are a Shia. How do you follow the teachings of the Ahl-al-Bayt and who do you consider Ahl-al-Bayt. Do you think they still live amongst us? Do you think the following ayah points towards the Ahl-al-Bayt?
Surat al-Nisa,
" If they had referred it to the Messenger and to those of authority among them, then those of them whose task it is to find it out would have known the matter " (Qur'an 4:83)
Also do you consider the Ulil-amr as divinely appointed or just somebody that was appointed by the masses. And if it is the latter then how can we call him Ulil-amr. Amr is God’s word and Ulil-amr is someone who enjoys the authority as a religious as well as secular leader. If you read Surah al-nisa ayah 59 it says to obey the Ulil Amr in the same way as obedience to Allah and his messenger is ordered.
Touching upon what you said about disputing with the Ulil Amr, Allah says in Quran that when a matter has been decided upon by Allah and His messenger, no momin men or momina women has any right to differ or dispute over it or have any say whatsoever. And since the obedience to Ulil Amr is required on the same level as the messenger, you have no right to dispute with the Ulil Amr. And if you dispute with the Ulil Amr in today’s time how are you going to refer it to Allah and His messenger? You yourself said you do not follow any particular madhab and therefore do not follow any particular Imam’s interpretation so how do you try to understand Quran? And Sunnah reached you through the hadith literature which is full of controversies and at best makes our Prophet look like someone he never was. So how are you going to dispute with the Ulil Amr and judge him in light of Quran (Allah) and sunnah (Prophet)?
I don’t get offended easily and neither is it my intention to offend anybody. I have always felt that it is important to know where the other person is standing before you get into arguments and debates. Gives you an even playing field. And I see no reason for someone to consider the disclosure of their affiliation as irrelevant. It is your choice however.
6:159. As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with God: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did….
Quoting the above ayah in your defense for not following any madhab is completely out of context.
You might find the following link of interest.
http://www.themodernreligion.com/basic/ ... ab-nec.htm
5:69. Those who believe (in the Qur'an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians and the Christians,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness,- on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
I don't think quoting the verse that speaks of breaking up the religion into sects is quoted out of context at all, as I have explained above.
What is my wrong with my intent? If I have an opinion, especially in regards to the authenticity of the Qur'an I believe I am entitled to it. Ismailis in general are not sure of this matter and it is not clear to all, ...otherwise this thread would not have been started in the first place. Hence I decided to share my belief and give my opinion of what the truth is. Have I ever given any sense of attacking your's or anyone else's personal beliefs? I was simply giving my own just as you and everyone else has given their own as well.
I do not know of other sites and their bashing, but I expect at least a little respect, especially since I did not harm anyone with my words; rather I only present arguments to back up my opinion. I do not try to talk ill of others, especially when they have not done anything to me.
Generally, my belief is that anything that is said about deen should be corroborated against the Qur'an. If it goes against the Qur'an then it should not be followed. As for interpreting the Qur'an, I have referenced to verses of the Qur'an which indicate that it is clear, and that other verses are allegorical; however, the clear verses are the foundation of the Book, and the guidance for mankind.
And this your Lord's straight path; We have clarified the revelations to a people who remember. [6:126]
And We have come to them with a book which We have distinguished with knowledge; a guide and a mercy to those who have faith. [7:52]
Should we then not believe Allah (that is, if you believe the Book we have is complete, which I do) that its verses are clear?
I am not a scholar, hence I cannot comment on the entire corpus of hadith literature. But from what I understand, there is much controversy within the texts, and again they are to be corroborated with the Qur'an in my opinion to be considered valid. Anything that gives a depiction of the Prophet, upon whom be peace, that does not fit or tie in with the character as portrayed in the Qur'an is to be rejected.
You quote verse 4:59
4:59. O ye who believe! Obey God, and obey the Apostle, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to God and His Apostle, if ye do believe in God and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.
I agree, that the ulil-amr need to be obeyed, but does not the above verse show that the ulil-amr can make a mistake? Otherwise what would you need to dispute or differ with? Referring it back to God and His Apostle is the one and same thing. The Imam may be part of the ahl-al-bayt, however everything must be corroborated against the Qur'an as I said above. My belief at the moment (since I had mentioned that I cannot comment on the entire corpus of hadith literature) is that when referring it to the Apostle, it refers primarily to adhering to the Qur'an, as that is what was brought to mankind through him. Then, the example brought by him can also be illustrated through what is generally accepted in the seera literature by the ummah as a whole.
Wow..thank you for allowing the Imam to be a part of the Ahl-e-Bayt.
In case you haven't noticed or observed in the Shia belief - no matter WHAT SHIA BELIEF - whether it be Mustaeli or Ithna Asheri or Ismaili - the IMAM has to be from AHL-E-BAYT - direct descendant of Hazrat Ali.
Seriously - go find a sunni site that endorses your beliefs - because somewhere along the line you've lost your way from discussion to "holier than thou" and "self righteousness"
Shams
Why is it so taboo to have a healthy discussion, ask questions or have an opinion? I was not trying to sound arrogant (and I'm not sure if I really was). If you have a different opinion or point of view then share it and back it up with evidence to enlighten others. Pointing a finger won't generate anything.
We, Ismailis and the world associate deeply with the title "Aga Khan" and we are so much used to hearing this name, that we seldom pause to think of how the title of 'Aga Khan' to our last four Imams came to be, or what it really means..
In l742, Aga Mohammed Khan founded the Qajar Dynasty in Persia and became the first king in l796.
He was murdered shortly afterwards in l797, and was succeeded by his nephew, Fateh Ali Shah who ruled for over 38 years.
Mawlana Khalilillahi ascended the throne of Imamat in 1792 and soon after his accession; he transferred the seat of Imamat from Kirman to Kahak.
Imam Khalilillahi married Bibi Sarkara who gave birth to our 46th Imam, Mawlana Hasan Ali Shah.
In l815, Mawlana Khalilillahi moved to Yazd, situated between Isphahan and Kirman on the route to Baluchistan and Sindh.
Mawlana Khalilillahi was at Yazd two years later in l817 that the Imam became a victim of the intrigues of Ithnasheri Ullema and lost his life.
One Mullah Husain Yazdi collected a mob and attacked the Imam's residence. In the ensuing encounter, Mawlana Khalilillahi and several of his followers were brutally murdered.
Mawlana Khalilillahi had very good relations with the second Qajar ruler, Fateh Ali Shah.
At the time of moving to Yazd, Imam Khalilillahi had left his wife, Bibi Sarkara and the children in Kahak to live off the family holdings in the Mahallat area.
However, familial disputes left the family unprovided for. Out of the frustrations of the hardships that the family had to face, Bibi Sarkara, mother of Mawlana Hasan Ali Shah, who was quite young at the time, pleaded in the Qajar court in Tehran for justice for her husband's murder..
Her pleas were accepted favorably. The instigators of Mawlana Khalilillahi's murder were punished even though after a fashion, and Fateh Ali Shah gave the young Imam more lands in Mahallat area; and offered one of his daughters , Sarv-i-Jahan Khanum in marriage to Mawlana Hasan Ali Shah.
At the same time, Fateh Ali Shah appointed him as Governor of Qum and bestowed upon him the 'honorific' title of "AGA KHAN".
Actually, more correctly it is AQA KHAN even though commonly it has come to be referred to as "Aga Khan".
Thenceforth, Imam Hasan Ali Shah became generally known as Aga Khan Mahallati. And the title of Aga Khan became hereditary.
Bernard Lewis writes that" in l8l8, the Shah of Persia had appointed him governor of Mahallat and Qum, and had given him the title of "Aga Khan".
It is by this title that he and his descendents are usually known. " The investiture took place in the grand palace of Qasr-e-Qajar.
The title thus bestowed was a singular honor that the Ismaili Imam had earned on the basis of his illustrious descent and station.
In fact, Mawlana Hasan Ali Shah was the first Imam after Almaut to have received official cognizance of his spiritual role by the Persian Empire.
When the Imam moved to India, India was under British rule....In British India the Imam was awarded the title "HIS HIGHNESS" in l844..
From then on, Mawlana Hasan Ali Shah was called "His Highness the Aga Khan”. This conferment also suggests the acceptance and recognition of the authority and position of the "Aga Khan"..
Having learnt how the Imam became the recipient of this unique title, let us now try to understand its meaning.
In Ottoman Empire, the word 'agha' was used to mean chief or master. It is also believed that this Turkish word is derived from Greek , 'akha' or 'akhai' which later came to be used as 'agha' in Turkey.
Encyclopedia Britannica defines it as "a title of respect... Aga has also been used for Islamic religious leaders, notably for the leader of the Ismaili sect of Shia community. "
Most works, dictionaries and lexicons in various languages have defined the word 'aga' or 'aqa' or 'agha' as a great lord, master, commander, chief, a title signifying respect, dignity, status, great wealth and influence.
And now, the word 'khan'. Generally, people tend to associate the word 'khan ' with Pathans who mostly use this as surname.
The word 'khan' is also a Turkish title.
Under the Seljuk rulers 'khan' signified a high title of nobility taking precedence over 'malik' and 'amir'.
Persia also adopted the term 'khan' - In the provinces especially, 'khan' meant originally what 'chieftain' meant in Scotland among the clans.
The Reader's Digest Encyclopedic Dictionary notes: "Aga Khan", title given to Hasan Ali Shah.
Turk 'aga' master; 'khan' ruler, king. Again, according to the various dictionaries and encyclopedias, the meaning of 'khan' is given as an emperor, a king, a prince, a governor, a great lord and master, a supreme ruler.
Originally, the Turkish rulers combined the terms Agha and Beg - 'Agha Beg - a title awarded to a person of high repute and standing.
The Qajar rulers followed a similar pattern in Persia. They joined 'Aga' and 'Khan' or 'Aqa Khan' and awarded this supreme title to our 'supreme nobleman'.
To the world at large, our beloved Imam-e-Zaman addressed as the Aga Khan is popularly identified as a nobleman, a prince, a philanthropist - whose development network extends world wide.
But to the Ismailis, the Aga Khan is much more.
There cannot be a better definition than the one recorded by Mawlana Sultan Mohammed Shah in his Memoirs when he speaks of his illustrious ancestry:
"My grandfather was as I am and have been for close on seventy years, the hereditary Imam or Spiritual Chief of the Ismaili sect of the Shia Muslims.
He was a Persian nobleman, closely related to the then reigning dynasty in Persia, but also in his own right the most princely blood in the Islamic world, for our family claims direct descent from the Prophet Muhammad through his daughter Fatima and his beloved son-in-law Ali: and we are also descended from the Fatimite Caliphs of Egypt. "
In proclaiming Mawlana Shah Karim as his successor, he willed: "I appoint my grandson Karim, to succeed to the title of AGA KHAN and to the IMAM and PIR of all Shia Ismaili followers”.
Therefore, 'Aga' is Ali, the Chosen One, the Exalted.
He is our Spiritual Lord. He is our Aga Khan!
And when he says: "Yours Affectionately, Aga Khan" he means "Yours Affectionately, Ali!"
Sources:
Genealogy of the Aga Khan - Mumtaz Ali Tajddin Sadik Ali
The Memoirs of Aga Khan
The Ismailis: Their History & Doctrines - Farhad Daftary
Bernard Lewis
Encyclopedia Britannica
In l742, Aga Mohammed Khan founded the Qajar Dynasty in Persia and became the first king in l796.
He was murdered shortly afterwards in l797, and was succeeded by his nephew, Fateh Ali Shah who ruled for over 38 years.
Mawlana Khalilillahi ascended the throne of Imamat in 1792 and soon after his accession; he transferred the seat of Imamat from Kirman to Kahak.
Imam Khalilillahi married Bibi Sarkara who gave birth to our 46th Imam, Mawlana Hasan Ali Shah.
In l815, Mawlana Khalilillahi moved to Yazd, situated between Isphahan and Kirman on the route to Baluchistan and Sindh.
Mawlana Khalilillahi was at Yazd two years later in l817 that the Imam became a victim of the intrigues of Ithnasheri Ullema and lost his life.
One Mullah Husain Yazdi collected a mob and attacked the Imam's residence. In the ensuing encounter, Mawlana Khalilillahi and several of his followers were brutally murdered.
Mawlana Khalilillahi had very good relations with the second Qajar ruler, Fateh Ali Shah.
At the time of moving to Yazd, Imam Khalilillahi had left his wife, Bibi Sarkara and the children in Kahak to live off the family holdings in the Mahallat area.
However, familial disputes left the family unprovided for. Out of the frustrations of the hardships that the family had to face, Bibi Sarkara, mother of Mawlana Hasan Ali Shah, who was quite young at the time, pleaded in the Qajar court in Tehran for justice for her husband's murder..
Her pleas were accepted favorably. The instigators of Mawlana Khalilillahi's murder were punished even though after a fashion, and Fateh Ali Shah gave the young Imam more lands in Mahallat area; and offered one of his daughters , Sarv-i-Jahan Khanum in marriage to Mawlana Hasan Ali Shah.
At the same time, Fateh Ali Shah appointed him as Governor of Qum and bestowed upon him the 'honorific' title of "AGA KHAN".
Actually, more correctly it is AQA KHAN even though commonly it has come to be referred to as "Aga Khan".
Thenceforth, Imam Hasan Ali Shah became generally known as Aga Khan Mahallati. And the title of Aga Khan became hereditary.
Bernard Lewis writes that" in l8l8, the Shah of Persia had appointed him governor of Mahallat and Qum, and had given him the title of "Aga Khan".
It is by this title that he and his descendents are usually known. " The investiture took place in the grand palace of Qasr-e-Qajar.
The title thus bestowed was a singular honor that the Ismaili Imam had earned on the basis of his illustrious descent and station.
In fact, Mawlana Hasan Ali Shah was the first Imam after Almaut to have received official cognizance of his spiritual role by the Persian Empire.
When the Imam moved to India, India was under British rule....In British India the Imam was awarded the title "HIS HIGHNESS" in l844..
From then on, Mawlana Hasan Ali Shah was called "His Highness the Aga Khan”. This conferment also suggests the acceptance and recognition of the authority and position of the "Aga Khan"..
Having learnt how the Imam became the recipient of this unique title, let us now try to understand its meaning.
In Ottoman Empire, the word 'agha' was used to mean chief or master. It is also believed that this Turkish word is derived from Greek , 'akha' or 'akhai' which later came to be used as 'agha' in Turkey.
Encyclopedia Britannica defines it as "a title of respect... Aga has also been used for Islamic religious leaders, notably for the leader of the Ismaili sect of Shia community. "
Most works, dictionaries and lexicons in various languages have defined the word 'aga' or 'aqa' or 'agha' as a great lord, master, commander, chief, a title signifying respect, dignity, status, great wealth and influence.
And now, the word 'khan'. Generally, people tend to associate the word 'khan ' with Pathans who mostly use this as surname.
The word 'khan' is also a Turkish title.
Under the Seljuk rulers 'khan' signified a high title of nobility taking precedence over 'malik' and 'amir'.
Persia also adopted the term 'khan' - In the provinces especially, 'khan' meant originally what 'chieftain' meant in Scotland among the clans.
The Reader's Digest Encyclopedic Dictionary notes: "Aga Khan", title given to Hasan Ali Shah.
Turk 'aga' master; 'khan' ruler, king. Again, according to the various dictionaries and encyclopedias, the meaning of 'khan' is given as an emperor, a king, a prince, a governor, a great lord and master, a supreme ruler.
Originally, the Turkish rulers combined the terms Agha and Beg - 'Agha Beg - a title awarded to a person of high repute and standing.
The Qajar rulers followed a similar pattern in Persia. They joined 'Aga' and 'Khan' or 'Aqa Khan' and awarded this supreme title to our 'supreme nobleman'.
To the world at large, our beloved Imam-e-Zaman addressed as the Aga Khan is popularly identified as a nobleman, a prince, a philanthropist - whose development network extends world wide.
But to the Ismailis, the Aga Khan is much more.
There cannot be a better definition than the one recorded by Mawlana Sultan Mohammed Shah in his Memoirs when he speaks of his illustrious ancestry:
"My grandfather was as I am and have been for close on seventy years, the hereditary Imam or Spiritual Chief of the Ismaili sect of the Shia Muslims.
He was a Persian nobleman, closely related to the then reigning dynasty in Persia, but also in his own right the most princely blood in the Islamic world, for our family claims direct descent from the Prophet Muhammad through his daughter Fatima and his beloved son-in-law Ali: and we are also descended from the Fatimite Caliphs of Egypt. "
In proclaiming Mawlana Shah Karim as his successor, he willed: "I appoint my grandson Karim, to succeed to the title of AGA KHAN and to the IMAM and PIR of all Shia Ismaili followers”.
Therefore, 'Aga' is Ali, the Chosen One, the Exalted.
He is our Spiritual Lord. He is our Aga Khan!
And when he says: "Yours Affectionately, Aga Khan" he means "Yours Affectionately, Ali!"
Sources:
Genealogy of the Aga Khan - Mumtaz Ali Tajddin Sadik Ali
The Memoirs of Aga Khan
The Ismailis: Their History & Doctrines - Farhad Daftary
Bernard Lewis
Encyclopedia Britannica
Arshad says...."I agree, that the ulil-amr need to be obeyed, but does not the verse 4:59 show that the ulil-amr can make a mistake? Otherwise what would you need to dispute or differ with? Referring it back to God and His Apostle is the one and same thing..."
Did the Prophet make any mistakes? how do you know that he conveyed the quran to you in complete form and correctly? can you please let us know ! Was the Prophet also not the Olil Amr of his time and age?
Only the legitimate successors and the rightful Imams will be witnesses of their faithful followers and the unjust will accordingly be like "scattered locusts" when the trumpet is blown and as the quran says...
Haven't you read the famous ahadith of the Prophet? go and at least do some honest research first.
Those who are unjust leaders will not be able to intercede for their followers’ actions....because they are subject to greed, oratory, power, political inclinations and dishonesty and fallible also.
The Quran says: "None shall have the power of intercession, but such who has received permission (or promise) from (God), the Most Glorious" (19:87) and also:
" except he who bears witness of the truth and they (people) know (that)" (43:86).
So it all depends on who your "Olil Amr" is pal ? Now you cannot compare wasps versus caterpillars...nor can you make sweeping generalizations lumping them all together...that would be foolishness !
The Imam is the successor of the Prophet and the Vicar of God on earth. Obedience to him is obligatory.
Imam Jafar Sadik said: "We are the ones to whom God has made obedience obligatory.
The people will not prosper unless they recognized us and the people will not be excused if they are ignorant to us.
He who has recognized us is a believer and he who has denied us is an unbeliever, and he who has neither recognized nor denied us is, in error... unless he returns to the right guidance which God has made obligatory for him....And if he dies in a state of error, God will do with him what He wishes ..."
So for the most part this is the fate of those who have died without acknowledging and recognizing their Imam of the time...truly unfortunate !
The ever-presence of an Imam is imperative.
The Quranic verse, “If you should quarrel about anything, refer it to God and the Messenger” (4:59), necessitates the presence of an Imam physically after the Prophet, so that the believers may refer to him what they have quarrelled about.
Shaikh al-Mufid (d. 413/1022) writes in Awa’il al-maqalat (Tabriz, 1951, p. 35) that, “The Imams take the place of the prophets in enforcing judgments, seeing to the execution of the legal penalties, safeguarding the law and educating mankind.”
In addition, the Quran says, “And if when they had done injustice to themselves, they had but come to you and asked God’s forgiveness, and the Prophet had (also) asked forgiveness for them. Surely, they would have found God Forgiving, Merciful.” (4:64).
It indicates that God had even commanded the people to have recourse to the Prophet for the forgiveness of their sins and ask for forgiveness through him...but many of them turned away disdainfully...and averted their faces
The Quran also says, “And if two parties of the believers (mu’minin) fight with each other, make peace between them” (49:9).
Urwa narrates that once Zubayr quarrelled with a man from the Ansar because of a natural mountainous stream at al-Harra.
The Prophet said, “O’Zubayr! Irrigate your land and then let the water flow to your neighbour.”
The Ansar said, “O’Apostle of God! This is because Zubayr is your cousin?” The Prophet’s face became red in displeasure and said, “O’Zubayr! Irrigate your land and then withhold the water till it fills the land upto the walls and then let it flow to your neighbour.”
So the Prophet enabled Zubayr to take his full right after the Ansar provoked his anger. The Prophet however previously given an order that was in favour of both of them (Bukhari, 6:109).
On this occasion, the Quranic verse revealed: “But no! By your Lord! They do not believe (in reality) until they make you a judge in all disputes between them” (4:65).
Now the Umma was told to hold fast to BOTH the precious things...they haven't done so !..."And verily WE have shown him the way, whether he be grateful or disbelieving..."
The questions here arises, who will solve the local and international disputes of the Muslims in this age? It clearly means the necessity of the Imam on earth in every age.
Besides, the Quran says: “And God is not going to chastise them while you are, O Muhammd among them” (8:33).
It is the universal belief of all the Muslims that the followers of the Prophet are not going to be doomed with extirpation as was the case with the followers of other prophets.
They attribute two reasons for this privileged protection; first that the Prophet was the last of the prophets and if his followers were to be doomed to destruction, there would be no other apostle to raise another nation of believers.
And secondly that the Prophet is a Mercy to the whole world.
But on reading the above Quranic verse, one comes to the conclusion that the privilege is restricted only to the life time of the Prophet as it reads: “While you are among them.”
The Prophet is admittedly not among us at present, why then do we still enjoy the privilege?
The explanation of this is to be found in another verse: “And had there not been God averting some people’s (doom) by others, certainly there would have been pulled down cloisters and churches and synagogues and mosques in which God’s name is much remembered” (22:40). ..Now they are the real Olil Amr pal !! Go and find them...even Abu Hurayra was told to go and find the Imam or live in the forest and eat vegetation but not to follow hypocrites !
This verse above makes it clear that there always exists in this world an infallible one through whose inherent auspiciousness this world exists.
This infallible one is no other than the Prophet’s progeny.
Ibn Hajar writes, “Inasmuch as the Prophet was a security for the inhabitants of this earth, the people of his house (ahl al-bayt) are likewise the securities.”
This is further corroborated by the hadith, “If the Imam were to be removed from this earth, the earth together with its inhabitants would have cleaved asunder.”
It implies that that the existence of an Imam in every age is necessary and indispensable.
Inasmuch as the extent of the obedience is not restricted, the verse should be treated as an injunction for an absolute and complete obedience. ...now don't go and follow any pimps and dicks and then claim they are fallible... we have a tradition from Jabir bin Abdullah Ansari, who relates that the verse: “O ye! Who believe, obey God and obey the Apostle and those among you invested with authority” (4:59) was revealed, he asked the Prophet, “We know God and His Prophet, but who are these persons invested with authority?”
The Prophet said, “Ali and his descendants are invested with authority.”
In sum, the Imam of every age is the Hujjatullah (Sign of God), the Noorullah (Light of God) and (Epiphany) of God. He is Mansus (designated), Ma’sum (infallible) and Afdal an-na’s (the best of the mankind).
The Prophet brought the law to guide the men, and after him the Quranic revelation ceased and men are left with a law, which corresponds to the exoteric aspect of the revelation.
There then must come those who can interpret the inner meaning of the law and the esoteric content of the revelation.
In Islam, the door of prophecy closed with the Prophet. He was both the exoteric and esoteric source of the revelation, but in his function as revealer of Divine legislation he represented the exoteric aspect.
After him there must be those who inherited his esoteric function and whose duty is to expound the inner meaning of the Divine law.
Just as the function of prophecy, in as much as it concerns the bringing of Divine legislation, is called nabuwat, so is the function of interpreting its inner meaning to men and preserving a link with the source of revelation called walayah in Shi’ism....Now the mullahs and the muftis are not the real Olil Amr...get the point?
The Imam who fulfils the function of wilayah is the sustainer of the religion law and the guarantee of its continuation. ..and so he is the Infallible Olil Amr !
The Prophet brought a Divine law and then himself left the world. There are thus times when the world is without a prophet.
[b]But the Imam is always present. The earth cannot be devoid of the presence of the Imam[/b], whose duty is to interpret the religious science and the law to men, especially their inner meaning, and to guide men in the spiritual life and a hidden Imam serves no purpose and followers are left to depend on fallible Olil Amr, if you will !
Would a parent leave his children and go into hiding without offering a valid reason?
These are the same people who claim that the world would not survive without an Imam and yet they have neither seen their Imam nor heard from him in decades (for over a thousand plus years ).
Yet, we are not questioning them as it is none of our business....each man to his own...
There is a hadith of their own Imam which says who dies without knowing his Imam of the time, would die a death of Jahaliya.
This alone proves the need for an Imam who is present and apparent and one who creates relativity...so pal if you follow the rightful Imams the doubts concerning the prospects of erros and omissions will dissipate....
You have doubts because in reality you do not have an Olil Amr though you claim you have just the way you wave your texts at the world and say, oh ! it is the Quran...pathetic indeed huh?
Did the Prophet make any mistakes? how do you know that he conveyed the quran to you in complete form and correctly? can you please let us know ! Was the Prophet also not the Olil Amr of his time and age?
Only the legitimate successors and the rightful Imams will be witnesses of their faithful followers and the unjust will accordingly be like "scattered locusts" when the trumpet is blown and as the quran says...
Haven't you read the famous ahadith of the Prophet? go and at least do some honest research first.
Those who are unjust leaders will not be able to intercede for their followers’ actions....because they are subject to greed, oratory, power, political inclinations and dishonesty and fallible also.
The Quran says: "None shall have the power of intercession, but such who has received permission (or promise) from (God), the Most Glorious" (19:87) and also:
" except he who bears witness of the truth and they (people) know (that)" (43:86).
So it all depends on who your "Olil Amr" is pal ? Now you cannot compare wasps versus caterpillars...nor can you make sweeping generalizations lumping them all together...that would be foolishness !
The Imam is the successor of the Prophet and the Vicar of God on earth. Obedience to him is obligatory.
Imam Jafar Sadik said: "We are the ones to whom God has made obedience obligatory.
The people will not prosper unless they recognized us and the people will not be excused if they are ignorant to us.
He who has recognized us is a believer and he who has denied us is an unbeliever, and he who has neither recognized nor denied us is, in error... unless he returns to the right guidance which God has made obligatory for him....And if he dies in a state of error, God will do with him what He wishes ..."
So for the most part this is the fate of those who have died without acknowledging and recognizing their Imam of the time...truly unfortunate !
The ever-presence of an Imam is imperative.
The Quranic verse, “If you should quarrel about anything, refer it to God and the Messenger” (4:59), necessitates the presence of an Imam physically after the Prophet, so that the believers may refer to him what they have quarrelled about.
Shaikh al-Mufid (d. 413/1022) writes in Awa’il al-maqalat (Tabriz, 1951, p. 35) that, “The Imams take the place of the prophets in enforcing judgments, seeing to the execution of the legal penalties, safeguarding the law and educating mankind.”
In addition, the Quran says, “And if when they had done injustice to themselves, they had but come to you and asked God’s forgiveness, and the Prophet had (also) asked forgiveness for them. Surely, they would have found God Forgiving, Merciful.” (4:64).
It indicates that God had even commanded the people to have recourse to the Prophet for the forgiveness of their sins and ask for forgiveness through him...but many of them turned away disdainfully...and averted their faces
The Quran also says, “And if two parties of the believers (mu’minin) fight with each other, make peace between them” (49:9).
Urwa narrates that once Zubayr quarrelled with a man from the Ansar because of a natural mountainous stream at al-Harra.
The Prophet said, “O’Zubayr! Irrigate your land and then let the water flow to your neighbour.”
The Ansar said, “O’Apostle of God! This is because Zubayr is your cousin?” The Prophet’s face became red in displeasure and said, “O’Zubayr! Irrigate your land and then withhold the water till it fills the land upto the walls and then let it flow to your neighbour.”
So the Prophet enabled Zubayr to take his full right after the Ansar provoked his anger. The Prophet however previously given an order that was in favour of both of them (Bukhari, 6:109).
On this occasion, the Quranic verse revealed: “But no! By your Lord! They do not believe (in reality) until they make you a judge in all disputes between them” (4:65).
Now the Umma was told to hold fast to BOTH the precious things...they haven't done so !..."And verily WE have shown him the way, whether he be grateful or disbelieving..."
The questions here arises, who will solve the local and international disputes of the Muslims in this age? It clearly means the necessity of the Imam on earth in every age.
Besides, the Quran says: “And God is not going to chastise them while you are, O Muhammd among them” (8:33).
It is the universal belief of all the Muslims that the followers of the Prophet are not going to be doomed with extirpation as was the case with the followers of other prophets.
They attribute two reasons for this privileged protection; first that the Prophet was the last of the prophets and if his followers were to be doomed to destruction, there would be no other apostle to raise another nation of believers.
And secondly that the Prophet is a Mercy to the whole world.
But on reading the above Quranic verse, one comes to the conclusion that the privilege is restricted only to the life time of the Prophet as it reads: “While you are among them.”
The Prophet is admittedly not among us at present, why then do we still enjoy the privilege?
The explanation of this is to be found in another verse: “And had there not been God averting some people’s (doom) by others, certainly there would have been pulled down cloisters and churches and synagogues and mosques in which God’s name is much remembered” (22:40). ..Now they are the real Olil Amr pal !! Go and find them...even Abu Hurayra was told to go and find the Imam or live in the forest and eat vegetation but not to follow hypocrites !
This verse above makes it clear that there always exists in this world an infallible one through whose inherent auspiciousness this world exists.
This infallible one is no other than the Prophet’s progeny.
Ibn Hajar writes, “Inasmuch as the Prophet was a security for the inhabitants of this earth, the people of his house (ahl al-bayt) are likewise the securities.”
This is further corroborated by the hadith, “If the Imam were to be removed from this earth, the earth together with its inhabitants would have cleaved asunder.”
It implies that that the existence of an Imam in every age is necessary and indispensable.
Inasmuch as the extent of the obedience is not restricted, the verse should be treated as an injunction for an absolute and complete obedience. ...now don't go and follow any pimps and dicks and then claim they are fallible... we have a tradition from Jabir bin Abdullah Ansari, who relates that the verse: “O ye! Who believe, obey God and obey the Apostle and those among you invested with authority” (4:59) was revealed, he asked the Prophet, “We know God and His Prophet, but who are these persons invested with authority?”
The Prophet said, “Ali and his descendants are invested with authority.”
In sum, the Imam of every age is the Hujjatullah (Sign of God), the Noorullah (Light of God) and (Epiphany) of God. He is Mansus (designated), Ma’sum (infallible) and Afdal an-na’s (the best of the mankind).
The Prophet brought the law to guide the men, and after him the Quranic revelation ceased and men are left with a law, which corresponds to the exoteric aspect of the revelation.
There then must come those who can interpret the inner meaning of the law and the esoteric content of the revelation.
In Islam, the door of prophecy closed with the Prophet. He was both the exoteric and esoteric source of the revelation, but in his function as revealer of Divine legislation he represented the exoteric aspect.
After him there must be those who inherited his esoteric function and whose duty is to expound the inner meaning of the Divine law.
Just as the function of prophecy, in as much as it concerns the bringing of Divine legislation, is called nabuwat, so is the function of interpreting its inner meaning to men and preserving a link with the source of revelation called walayah in Shi’ism....Now the mullahs and the muftis are not the real Olil Amr...get the point?
The Imam who fulfils the function of wilayah is the sustainer of the religion law and the guarantee of its continuation. ..and so he is the Infallible Olil Amr !
The Prophet brought a Divine law and then himself left the world. There are thus times when the world is without a prophet.
[b]But the Imam is always present. The earth cannot be devoid of the presence of the Imam[/b], whose duty is to interpret the religious science and the law to men, especially their inner meaning, and to guide men in the spiritual life and a hidden Imam serves no purpose and followers are left to depend on fallible Olil Amr, if you will !
Would a parent leave his children and go into hiding without offering a valid reason?
These are the same people who claim that the world would not survive without an Imam and yet they have neither seen their Imam nor heard from him in decades (for over a thousand plus years ).
Yet, we are not questioning them as it is none of our business....each man to his own...
There is a hadith of their own Imam which says who dies without knowing his Imam of the time, would die a death of Jahaliya.
This alone proves the need for an Imam who is present and apparent and one who creates relativity...so pal if you follow the rightful Imams the doubts concerning the prospects of erros and omissions will dissipate....
You have doubts because in reality you do not have an Olil Amr though you claim you have just the way you wave your texts at the world and say, oh ! it is the Quran...pathetic indeed huh?
Arshad wrote:
Which madhab was the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him affiliated with? He was not a Shaf'i, a Hanafi, a Hanbali, a Maliki, a Jaf'ari, etc...he was a Muslim. Who ever said you need to be part of a particular madhab to be considered a true Muslim? A true Muslim, is one that submits his whole self to Allah. znanwalla gave a very good reference to an ayah which speaks of what a Muslim is:
5:69. Those who believe (in the Qur'an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians and the Christians,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness,- on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
I don't think quoting the verse that speaks of breaking up the religion into sects is quoted out of context at all, as I have explained above.
My comments:
Actually the idea of following one of the four madhabs for Sunnis comes from Sunnis scholars. Its all over the internet. Madhab is not a parallel to Deen (Islam), rather it is the interpretation of religion by the mujtahids who create and enjoy a following and hence we have different madhabs. Obviously the Prophet could not be a follower, he was followed. We are followers and unless you are a master of ijtihad, you follow someones teachings. Either you are wrong or all of the four Imams. Then again, I remember, you had said you follow the teachings of the ahl-al-bayt. So you do follow a school of thought. There is nothing wrong in subscribing to a school of thought.
Yousufali has added "in the Qur'an" in perenthesis. That is his understanding in verse 5:69. Others have used "Allah" as they deemed fit. As for verse 6:159 about breaking up into sects; it was revealed in relation to the Jews and Christians.
According to a shia source:
"According to Imam Muhammad bin Ali al Baqir this verse is in continuation of verse 154. Those who abandoned the path shown by the Holy Prophet through hadith al thaqalayn and his final announcement at Ghadir Khum, in fact sowed the seeds of discord and sectarianism in Islam, otherwise the directions given by the Holy Prophet, as commanded by Allah, were clear."
"My Ahl ul Bayt are like the ark of Nuh. Whoso gets into it is saved, and whoso stays away is drowned and lost" said the Holy Prophet."
The Holy Prophet also said:
"Out of the seventy-one sects of the followers of Musa, only one was on the right path. The followers of Isa also divided their religion into seventy two sects, out of which only one was on the right path. Likewise there will be seventy three sects among my followers, out of which only one will be on the right path."
The followers of true Islam hold fast to the Quran and the Imams of the Ahl ul Bayt as had been directed by the Holy Prophet."
Arshad wrote:
What is my wrong with my intent? If I have an opinion, especially in regards to the authenticity of the Qur'an I believe I am entitled to it. Ismailis in general are not sure of this matter and it is not clear to all, ...otherwise this thread would not have been started in the first place. Hence I decided to share my belief and give my opinion of what the truth is. Have I ever given any sense of attacking your's or anyone else's personal beliefs? I was simply giving my own just as you and everyone else has given their own as well.
My response:
You are once again bringing up the matter of authenticity of Quran implying that it is our stand that what is in the Quran is not authentic. I have made it clear a few times that it is not what is in the Quran that we see a problem with. I did explain to you why we doubt your intentions. "doodh ka jhala chach bhi phoonk kar peeta hai". Yes you are entitled to your opinion but when opinions sound like declaration then we have a problem. I mentioned in my previous post that you have not offended me and neither was it my intention to offend anybody. You probably missed it.
Arshad wrote:
I do not know of other sites and their bashing, but I expect at least a little respect, especially since I did not harm anyone with my words; rather I only present arguments to back up my opinion. I do not try to talk ill of others, especially when they have not done anything to me.
My response:
Again, I agree. So long as you keep it as an opinion and not become judgemental over sensitive issues pertaining to Ismailis and their faith we are Okay. Some non-ismailis take the matters into their own hands and start judging us. This does not sit well with us Ismailis. Allah has instructed the Prophet to approach even the non-believers with respect and in nicer ways. Allah has also instructed muslims to refrain from speaking ill of those who take others as gods. Unfortunately most of our muslim brothers fail to take heed.
Arshad wrote:
Generally, my belief is that anything that is said about deen should be corroborated against the Qur'an. If it goes against the Qur'an then it should not be followed. As for interpreting the Qur'an, I have referenced to verses of the Qur'an which indicate that it is clear, and that other verses are allegorical; however, the clear verses are the foundation of the Book, and the guidance for mankind.
My response:
Very true. But one must understand Quran and be very clear about its teachings before going on a rampage armed with the ayahs of Quran and start misquoting and out of their proper context. Knowing the translation does not make one an aalim-e-deen. It takes a lifetime for mortals like us to even start to understand what Allah says or means in the Quran.
Arshad wrote:
And this your Lord's straight path; We have clarified the revelations to a people who remember. [6:126]
And We have come to them with a book which We have distinguished with knowledge; a guide and a mercy to those who have faith. [7:52]
Should we then not believe Allah (that is, if you believe the Book we have is complete, which I do) that its verses are clear?
My response:
In 6:126 Allah is referring to "a people". A special class who have been given the clarification and knowledge of everything that which Allah has revealed and made them "waris" of the Book. Sunnis believe these to be the scribes and their Ulema, Shias believe them to be the Ahle Bayt. A large part of this Book is unclear for which you need a Mu'alim. Every heavenly Book was accompanied by a Mu'alim and when that Mu'alim departed he left behind people who were given complete understanding of what was revealed so that they could continue the work of the departed Mu'alim. When Moses went to Sinai for 40 days he left his brother Aaron incharge for teaching and 'islah' of his people. He was only going to be gone for 40 days yet he left behind his brother as incharge who had been given the knowledge of the book also. So when a prophet could not leave his ummah for just 40 days without an authority over them, how is it that Prophet Mohammad, the last of the prophets, left his Ummah without someone to look after the teaching and advancement of his people?
Arshad wrote:
I am not a scholar, hence I cannot comment on the entire corpus of hadith literature. But from what I understand, there is much controversy within the texts, and again they are to be corroborated with the Qur'an in my opinion to be considered valid. Anything that gives a depiction of the Prophet, upon whom be peace, that does not fit or tie in with the character as portrayed in the Qur'an is to be rejected.
My response:
None of us here are scholars, unless they are hiding their credentials. Some have lot more knowledge than others but we are all learning about each other. I agree somewhat that hadith or anything for that matter needs to be corroborated with Quran but without someone with an absolute authority over the affairs of people and true and complete understanding of Quran how are we going to come to common terms. Even though all scholars agree with this statement of corroboration yet they differ in interpretations and therefore can not come to an agreement in the broader interest of uniting the Ummah. Allah in His infinite wisdom knew this and therefore created the institution of Ahl-e-Bayt for guidance of manking till the day of judgement. Muslims unfortunately have still not gotten further than the first hurdle of agreeing on an authority.
As for the need to reject hadith that does not do justice to the character of our prophet, I absolutely agree. Unfortunately hell will freeze over before we can get a consensus.
Arshad wrote:
You quote verse 4:59
4:59. O ye who believe! Obey God, and obey the Apostle, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to God and His Apostle, if ye do believe in God and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.
I agree, that the ulil-amr need to be obeyed, but does not the above verse show that the ulil-amr can make a mistake? Otherwise what would you need to dispute or differ with? Referring it back to God and His Apostle is the one and same thing.
My response:
Let me ask you this. Who were the people charged with authority other than the Prophet during the lifetime of the Prophet? You are approaching this ayah from a very different angle than we Shi'ites. Yes you do have the right to follow the interpretation that makes better sense to you. But I don't see anywhere in this ayah where it says if you differ with the Ulil Amr refer it to Allah and His Apostle. It says "if ye differ in anything among yourselves". I understand it as if people have irreconcileable differences between each other then instead of fighting never ending wars they should refer it to Allah through His apostle and let him decide while he is still among them. After the Apostle such matters need to be referred to the Ulil Amr. Quran does not clarify who those Ulil Amr were going to be as the declaration was still some time away. Referring things back to God and His Apostle is one and the same thing, agreed, but 'Ita'at' of Ulil Amr is demanded by the same standard as asked for Allah and His Apostle. Could you dispute with the Prophet? That would negate your Iman. Similarly disputing with the Ulil Amr would land you in hot waters. Prophet is referred to have said that Haq is where Ali is. Allah has said in Quran that when a matter has been decided upon by Allah and His Prophet then any momin man or momina woman has no right to dispute or have their say in it whatsoever. So 'ita'at' of Ulil Amr is in absolute terms, no ifs and/or buts.
Arshad wrote:
The Imam may be part of the ahl-al-bayt, however everything must be corroborated against the Qur'an as I said above. My belief at the moment (since I had mentioned that I cannot comment on the entire corpus of hadith literature) is that when referring it to the Apostle, it refers primarily to adhering to the Qur'an, as that is what was brought to mankind through him. Then, the example brought by him can also be illustrated through what is generally accepted in the seera literature by the ummah as a whole.
My response:
To Shias Imam is the central and absolute authority appointed as the Ulil Amr. How can you have an authority over the Imam other than Allah and who would this authority be to corroborate the work of the Imam against the Quran and then decide if he is doing right or wrong. This means that there is another authority over and above Imam other than Allah and one who has not been certified by Allah as an authority over the Imam. You are disregarding every ayah in the Quran that points to the purification and appointment of Ahl-e-Bayt and Prophet himself has declared them as such on varioius occasions.
The above are just my views and I in no way expect you or anyone else to consider them as official Ismaili interpretation or stand. To each his own.
Which madhab was the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him affiliated with? He was not a Shaf'i, a Hanafi, a Hanbali, a Maliki, a Jaf'ari, etc...he was a Muslim. Who ever said you need to be part of a particular madhab to be considered a true Muslim? A true Muslim, is one that submits his whole self to Allah. znanwalla gave a very good reference to an ayah which speaks of what a Muslim is:
5:69. Those who believe (in the Qur'an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians and the Christians,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness,- on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
I don't think quoting the verse that speaks of breaking up the religion into sects is quoted out of context at all, as I have explained above.
My comments:
Actually the idea of following one of the four madhabs for Sunnis comes from Sunnis scholars. Its all over the internet. Madhab is not a parallel to Deen (Islam), rather it is the interpretation of religion by the mujtahids who create and enjoy a following and hence we have different madhabs. Obviously the Prophet could not be a follower, he was followed. We are followers and unless you are a master of ijtihad, you follow someones teachings. Either you are wrong or all of the four Imams. Then again, I remember, you had said you follow the teachings of the ahl-al-bayt. So you do follow a school of thought. There is nothing wrong in subscribing to a school of thought.
Yousufali has added "in the Qur'an" in perenthesis. That is his understanding in verse 5:69. Others have used "Allah" as they deemed fit. As for verse 6:159 about breaking up into sects; it was revealed in relation to the Jews and Christians.
According to a shia source:
"According to Imam Muhammad bin Ali al Baqir this verse is in continuation of verse 154. Those who abandoned the path shown by the Holy Prophet through hadith al thaqalayn and his final announcement at Ghadir Khum, in fact sowed the seeds of discord and sectarianism in Islam, otherwise the directions given by the Holy Prophet, as commanded by Allah, were clear."
"My Ahl ul Bayt are like the ark of Nuh. Whoso gets into it is saved, and whoso stays away is drowned and lost" said the Holy Prophet."
The Holy Prophet also said:
"Out of the seventy-one sects of the followers of Musa, only one was on the right path. The followers of Isa also divided their religion into seventy two sects, out of which only one was on the right path. Likewise there will be seventy three sects among my followers, out of which only one will be on the right path."
The followers of true Islam hold fast to the Quran and the Imams of the Ahl ul Bayt as had been directed by the Holy Prophet."
Arshad wrote:
What is my wrong with my intent? If I have an opinion, especially in regards to the authenticity of the Qur'an I believe I am entitled to it. Ismailis in general are not sure of this matter and it is not clear to all, ...otherwise this thread would not have been started in the first place. Hence I decided to share my belief and give my opinion of what the truth is. Have I ever given any sense of attacking your's or anyone else's personal beliefs? I was simply giving my own just as you and everyone else has given their own as well.
My response:
You are once again bringing up the matter of authenticity of Quran implying that it is our stand that what is in the Quran is not authentic. I have made it clear a few times that it is not what is in the Quran that we see a problem with. I did explain to you why we doubt your intentions. "doodh ka jhala chach bhi phoonk kar peeta hai". Yes you are entitled to your opinion but when opinions sound like declaration then we have a problem. I mentioned in my previous post that you have not offended me and neither was it my intention to offend anybody. You probably missed it.
Arshad wrote:
I do not know of other sites and their bashing, but I expect at least a little respect, especially since I did not harm anyone with my words; rather I only present arguments to back up my opinion. I do not try to talk ill of others, especially when they have not done anything to me.
My response:
Again, I agree. So long as you keep it as an opinion and not become judgemental over sensitive issues pertaining to Ismailis and their faith we are Okay. Some non-ismailis take the matters into their own hands and start judging us. This does not sit well with us Ismailis. Allah has instructed the Prophet to approach even the non-believers with respect and in nicer ways. Allah has also instructed muslims to refrain from speaking ill of those who take others as gods. Unfortunately most of our muslim brothers fail to take heed.
Arshad wrote:
Generally, my belief is that anything that is said about deen should be corroborated against the Qur'an. If it goes against the Qur'an then it should not be followed. As for interpreting the Qur'an, I have referenced to verses of the Qur'an which indicate that it is clear, and that other verses are allegorical; however, the clear verses are the foundation of the Book, and the guidance for mankind.
My response:
Very true. But one must understand Quran and be very clear about its teachings before going on a rampage armed with the ayahs of Quran and start misquoting and out of their proper context. Knowing the translation does not make one an aalim-e-deen. It takes a lifetime for mortals like us to even start to understand what Allah says or means in the Quran.
Arshad wrote:
And this your Lord's straight path; We have clarified the revelations to a people who remember. [6:126]
And We have come to them with a book which We have distinguished with knowledge; a guide and a mercy to those who have faith. [7:52]
Should we then not believe Allah (that is, if you believe the Book we have is complete, which I do) that its verses are clear?
My response:
In 6:126 Allah is referring to "a people". A special class who have been given the clarification and knowledge of everything that which Allah has revealed and made them "waris" of the Book. Sunnis believe these to be the scribes and their Ulema, Shias believe them to be the Ahle Bayt. A large part of this Book is unclear for which you need a Mu'alim. Every heavenly Book was accompanied by a Mu'alim and when that Mu'alim departed he left behind people who were given complete understanding of what was revealed so that they could continue the work of the departed Mu'alim. When Moses went to Sinai for 40 days he left his brother Aaron incharge for teaching and 'islah' of his people. He was only going to be gone for 40 days yet he left behind his brother as incharge who had been given the knowledge of the book also. So when a prophet could not leave his ummah for just 40 days without an authority over them, how is it that Prophet Mohammad, the last of the prophets, left his Ummah without someone to look after the teaching and advancement of his people?
Arshad wrote:
I am not a scholar, hence I cannot comment on the entire corpus of hadith literature. But from what I understand, there is much controversy within the texts, and again they are to be corroborated with the Qur'an in my opinion to be considered valid. Anything that gives a depiction of the Prophet, upon whom be peace, that does not fit or tie in with the character as portrayed in the Qur'an is to be rejected.
My response:
None of us here are scholars, unless they are hiding their credentials. Some have lot more knowledge than others but we are all learning about each other. I agree somewhat that hadith or anything for that matter needs to be corroborated with Quran but without someone with an absolute authority over the affairs of people and true and complete understanding of Quran how are we going to come to common terms. Even though all scholars agree with this statement of corroboration yet they differ in interpretations and therefore can not come to an agreement in the broader interest of uniting the Ummah. Allah in His infinite wisdom knew this and therefore created the institution of Ahl-e-Bayt for guidance of manking till the day of judgement. Muslims unfortunately have still not gotten further than the first hurdle of agreeing on an authority.
As for the need to reject hadith that does not do justice to the character of our prophet, I absolutely agree. Unfortunately hell will freeze over before we can get a consensus.
Arshad wrote:
You quote verse 4:59
4:59. O ye who believe! Obey God, and obey the Apostle, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to God and His Apostle, if ye do believe in God and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.
I agree, that the ulil-amr need to be obeyed, but does not the above verse show that the ulil-amr can make a mistake? Otherwise what would you need to dispute or differ with? Referring it back to God and His Apostle is the one and same thing.
My response:
Let me ask you this. Who were the people charged with authority other than the Prophet during the lifetime of the Prophet? You are approaching this ayah from a very different angle than we Shi'ites. Yes you do have the right to follow the interpretation that makes better sense to you. But I don't see anywhere in this ayah where it says if you differ with the Ulil Amr refer it to Allah and His Apostle. It says "if ye differ in anything among yourselves". I understand it as if people have irreconcileable differences between each other then instead of fighting never ending wars they should refer it to Allah through His apostle and let him decide while he is still among them. After the Apostle such matters need to be referred to the Ulil Amr. Quran does not clarify who those Ulil Amr were going to be as the declaration was still some time away. Referring things back to God and His Apostle is one and the same thing, agreed, but 'Ita'at' of Ulil Amr is demanded by the same standard as asked for Allah and His Apostle. Could you dispute with the Prophet? That would negate your Iman. Similarly disputing with the Ulil Amr would land you in hot waters. Prophet is referred to have said that Haq is where Ali is. Allah has said in Quran that when a matter has been decided upon by Allah and His Prophet then any momin man or momina woman has no right to dispute or have their say in it whatsoever. So 'ita'at' of Ulil Amr is in absolute terms, no ifs and/or buts.
Arshad wrote:
The Imam may be part of the ahl-al-bayt, however everything must be corroborated against the Qur'an as I said above. My belief at the moment (since I had mentioned that I cannot comment on the entire corpus of hadith literature) is that when referring it to the Apostle, it refers primarily to adhering to the Qur'an, as that is what was brought to mankind through him. Then, the example brought by him can also be illustrated through what is generally accepted in the seera literature by the ummah as a whole.
My response:
To Shias Imam is the central and absolute authority appointed as the Ulil Amr. How can you have an authority over the Imam other than Allah and who would this authority be to corroborate the work of the Imam against the Quran and then decide if he is doing right or wrong. This means that there is another authority over and above Imam other than Allah and one who has not been certified by Allah as an authority over the Imam. You are disregarding every ayah in the Quran that points to the purification and appointment of Ahl-e-Bayt and Prophet himself has declared them as such on varioius occasions.
The above are just my views and I in no way expect you or anyone else to consider them as official Ismaili interpretation or stand. To each his own.