Why Imam choose the word DIWAN for the establishment of seat of Imamat?
There are many usages of the word Diwan (Divan), for example in poetry;
Diwan e Nasir Khusraw
Diwan e Shams Tabriz
Diwan e Galib and so on.
The word Diwan is also used for buildings, for example;
Diwan e 'Aam: A place for gathering of common people or subject.
Diwan e Khaas: A place for gathering of particular or important persons.
Diwan Khana: A guest house or a type of audience hall.
Diwan is also used as a Title, it also means a minister, for example;
Diwan Sir Eebu Pir Bhai
Diwan of Hyderabad
In Islamic societies the word Diwan is used for Governing Body, or a central finance department, or a Chief Administrative office.
Diwan - Seat of Imamat
-
shivaathervedi_3
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2018 7:29 pm
-
shivaathervedi_3
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2018 7:29 pm
DIWAN:
In Islamic societies, the word Diwan was used as a “register,” or logbook, and later a “finance department,” “government bureau,” or “administration.” The first diwan appeared under the caliph Umar (634–644) as a pensions list, recording free Arab warriors entitled to a share of the spoils of war. Out of rents and property taxes exacted from conquered farmers and landowners, hereditary pensions were assigned to warriors entered in the diwan. Later the term came to signify a financial institution, and it meant a government bureau, e.g., the chancellery or the postal service. Iranians used the term diwan until about the 19th century to mean the central government in general, while in Mughal India, from the time of Akbar (1556–1605), the term was chiefly associated with government finance, the chief finance minister being the diwan, with provincial dawawin under him. In the Ottoman Empire the diwan became the imperial chancery headed by the grand vizier, though a consultative assembly of senior officials summoned by Selim I in 1515 was also called a diwan. The term was early extended to mean the audience chamber of important government officers, whose offices, furnished with mattresses and cushions along the walls, account for the extension of the meaning of diwan to sofa. In modern Turkey a diwan is an administrative unit in rural areas.
Encyclopaedia Britannica
In Islamic societies, the word Diwan was used as a “register,” or logbook, and later a “finance department,” “government bureau,” or “administration.” The first diwan appeared under the caliph Umar (634–644) as a pensions list, recording free Arab warriors entitled to a share of the spoils of war. Out of rents and property taxes exacted from conquered farmers and landowners, hereditary pensions were assigned to warriors entered in the diwan. Later the term came to signify a financial institution, and it meant a government bureau, e.g., the chancellery or the postal service. Iranians used the term diwan until about the 19th century to mean the central government in general, while in Mughal India, from the time of Akbar (1556–1605), the term was chiefly associated with government finance, the chief finance minister being the diwan, with provincial dawawin under him. In the Ottoman Empire the diwan became the imperial chancery headed by the grand vizier, though a consultative assembly of senior officials summoned by Selim I in 1515 was also called a diwan. The term was early extended to mean the audience chamber of important government officers, whose offices, furnished with mattresses and cushions along the walls, account for the extension of the meaning of diwan to sofa. In modern Turkey a diwan is an administrative unit in rural areas.
Encyclopaedia Britannica
-
shivaathervedi_3
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2018 7:29 pm
We have one thread on Diwan in the Law section. That section should only contain documents related to the formation of the Seat of Imamat, the agreements with the Portuguese or any other government and legal interpretation and discussion on this specific topic.
We have a second thread under Imamat. That thread should contain what is related to Imam and Diwan within the contemporary period.
This third thread under Doctrine should only contain doctrinal matters on the concept of Diwan, sources from our history, interpretation from our Dai's and discussion on similar matter.
Please make sure not to cross post or post under the wrong thread. It is important to keep these 3 threads separated but if there are cross posting, I will close threads or remove postings.
We have a second thread under Imamat. That thread should contain what is related to Imam and Diwan within the contemporary period.
This third thread under Doctrine should only contain doctrinal matters on the concept of Diwan, sources from our history, interpretation from our Dai's and discussion on similar matter.
Please make sure not to cross post or post under the wrong thread. It is important to keep these 3 threads separated but if there are cross posting, I will close threads or remove postings.
-
shivaathervedi_3
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2018 7:29 pm
ADOPTED FROM U_ISMAILI
Why He chose Portugal as seat of Imamat?
An enlightening article in which Hazar Imam explains why He chose Portugal over Canada for His Seat of Imamat.
He is a prince and lives with the international royalty. He is received as head of state without state. He holds two secular titles - that of His Highness and that of Aga Khan - attributed by the British monarchies and Qajar dynasty.
He is a direct descendant of the Prophet Muhammad.
He says that the work he has developed is neither charity nor philanthropy.
He is also the founder and President of the Aga Khan Development Network, which is part of the well-known Foundation, among other agencies for economic, social, scientific and cultural development in the world, including Portugal .
In the singular interview he gave to the Portuguese press , during the celebration of his Golden Jubilee, he made a point of making his position very clear: he is part of the foundational Islam, he said, both Sunni and Shiite, that an Imam assumes his responsibility first place, in the security of peoples, and then in improving the quality of life of the population in general, especially where poverty is critical.
It is the responsibility of an Imam to lead his leadership on the basis of the Islamic ethical principle of "helping people to help themselves."
The goal of my Imamate will always be to contribute to the populations becoming independent and masters of their own destinies.
He argues that unlike Judeo-Christian traditions, an Imam teaches the believer not to divide or separate faith from the affairs of the world.
For the Aga Khan, faith must be lived every day, at all times, and cannot consist only of "occasional entries," in situations such as baptisms, weddings, or funerals.
However, being different religious traditions, they should not be understood as conflictual.
Asked about the interreligious dialogue, the prince argued that he does not see in these any added value.
For him, the dialogues are not inclusive enough, because if on the one hand, non-believers are left out, on the other, even believers may have life circumstances in which they lose faith.
And then, he said, there is always the danger of religious proselytism.
That is to say, when ethics which represent only the faith are imposed, all the unbelievers who believe in an ethical society are left out.
Thus, if there is to be a dialogue, it will have to go through the construction of a society where ethics are global, and this can only be an "ethics of quality of life", a "cosmopolitan ethic".
The question that occupies the minds of Ismailis and not Ismailis is this: why did His Highness Prince Aga Khan IV choose Portugal to establish the Ismaili Imamat, when he could have chosen Canada - a larger, richer, pluralistic country, and where he has established other important institutions?
How can a small country, with an Ismaili community also reduced, be chosen, after approximately a thousand years since the Fatimid dynasty, to establish an Imamate that projects this "cosmopolitan ethic"?
Although he did not specifically refer to the establishment of the Imamate's headquarters in Portugal - something that was completely unknown to most believers and non-believers, - the prince pointed out in that interview four reasons for this choice:
In the first place, Portugal is a country where one can observe a "social construction in operation" instead of a "dysfunctional social construction".
Secondly, as a secular and secular country, there is a political will in Portugal to recognize the structures of faith, and to give them an important role for their development - something that does not happen in other secular and secular countries.
Third, Portugal has a history of pluralism that is unique; and even if the Portuguese themselves are unaware of this fact, one can only understand pluralism when one has already been exposed to it.
And "the truth is that there have been centuries of pluralism and acceptance of difference!"
This lack of knowledge probably results from a historiography that neglected the pluralism that existed throughout 700 years of Portuguese history, where Jews, Christians, Muslims and even non-believers worked and governed from pluralistic political and cultural models.
His Highness saw in this important factor the possibility of working with Portugal on the shortcomings of understanding and knowledge between Europe and the Islamic World; not only what is missing here but also the mutual lack of knowledge that exists outside this country.
Finally, he recognized in Portugal a strong, massive and active civil society. In a world where there are enormous governmental weaknesses, both in Africa and Asia, and which in its opinion, can last for decades, it will be fundamental that Portugal can, through this partnership between the Portuguese government and the Imamate, create the conditions to help other developing societies to strengthen their own civil society.
But can a minority like the Portuguese make a difference? Aga Khan responds to this conviction that we should never underestimate the power of minorities.
For this religious leader, it is precisely in the smaller ones that often lies the greater responsibility to change reality; and, in that sense, Portugal may not only be an example to follow but, indeed, a case study for the rest of the world.
Why He chose Portugal as seat of Imamat?
An enlightening article in which Hazar Imam explains why He chose Portugal over Canada for His Seat of Imamat.
He is a prince and lives with the international royalty. He is received as head of state without state. He holds two secular titles - that of His Highness and that of Aga Khan - attributed by the British monarchies and Qajar dynasty.
He is a direct descendant of the Prophet Muhammad.
He says that the work he has developed is neither charity nor philanthropy.
He is also the founder and President of the Aga Khan Development Network, which is part of the well-known Foundation, among other agencies for economic, social, scientific and cultural development in the world, including Portugal .
In the singular interview he gave to the Portuguese press , during the celebration of his Golden Jubilee, he made a point of making his position very clear: he is part of the foundational Islam, he said, both Sunni and Shiite, that an Imam assumes his responsibility first place, in the security of peoples, and then in improving the quality of life of the population in general, especially where poverty is critical.
It is the responsibility of an Imam to lead his leadership on the basis of the Islamic ethical principle of "helping people to help themselves."
The goal of my Imamate will always be to contribute to the populations becoming independent and masters of their own destinies.
He argues that unlike Judeo-Christian traditions, an Imam teaches the believer not to divide or separate faith from the affairs of the world.
For the Aga Khan, faith must be lived every day, at all times, and cannot consist only of "occasional entries," in situations such as baptisms, weddings, or funerals.
However, being different religious traditions, they should not be understood as conflictual.
Asked about the interreligious dialogue, the prince argued that he does not see in these any added value.
For him, the dialogues are not inclusive enough, because if on the one hand, non-believers are left out, on the other, even believers may have life circumstances in which they lose faith.
And then, he said, there is always the danger of religious proselytism.
That is to say, when ethics which represent only the faith are imposed, all the unbelievers who believe in an ethical society are left out.
Thus, if there is to be a dialogue, it will have to go through the construction of a society where ethics are global, and this can only be an "ethics of quality of life", a "cosmopolitan ethic".
The question that occupies the minds of Ismailis and not Ismailis is this: why did His Highness Prince Aga Khan IV choose Portugal to establish the Ismaili Imamat, when he could have chosen Canada - a larger, richer, pluralistic country, and where he has established other important institutions?
How can a small country, with an Ismaili community also reduced, be chosen, after approximately a thousand years since the Fatimid dynasty, to establish an Imamate that projects this "cosmopolitan ethic"?
Although he did not specifically refer to the establishment of the Imamate's headquarters in Portugal - something that was completely unknown to most believers and non-believers, - the prince pointed out in that interview four reasons for this choice:
In the first place, Portugal is a country where one can observe a "social construction in operation" instead of a "dysfunctional social construction".
Secondly, as a secular and secular country, there is a political will in Portugal to recognize the structures of faith, and to give them an important role for their development - something that does not happen in other secular and secular countries.
Third, Portugal has a history of pluralism that is unique; and even if the Portuguese themselves are unaware of this fact, one can only understand pluralism when one has already been exposed to it.
And "the truth is that there have been centuries of pluralism and acceptance of difference!"
This lack of knowledge probably results from a historiography that neglected the pluralism that existed throughout 700 years of Portuguese history, where Jews, Christians, Muslims and even non-believers worked and governed from pluralistic political and cultural models.
His Highness saw in this important factor the possibility of working with Portugal on the shortcomings of understanding and knowledge between Europe and the Islamic World; not only what is missing here but also the mutual lack of knowledge that exists outside this country.
Finally, he recognized in Portugal a strong, massive and active civil society. In a world where there are enormous governmental weaknesses, both in Africa and Asia, and which in its opinion, can last for decades, it will be fundamental that Portugal can, through this partnership between the Portuguese government and the Imamate, create the conditions to help other developing societies to strengthen their own civil society.
But can a minority like the Portuguese make a difference? Aga Khan responds to this conviction that we should never underestimate the power of minorities.
For this religious leader, it is precisely in the smaller ones that often lies the greater responsibility to change reality; and, in that sense, Portugal may not only be an example to follow but, indeed, a case study for the rest of the world.