Mazhar
With all respect, you do not seem to understand or follow what I am saying.
Your whole reply was explaining why the Imams are not Allah. That is great but I never said the Imams are Allah.
I said the Imams are the Living Names of Allah and the Face, Hands, Eyes, of Allah. That is the same thing as being Bab Allah.
The Quran mentions the Hands, Face, Eyes of Allah in many verses. Now we know Allah does not literally possess body parts. But you cannot metaphorically explain these things away. Rather, the Hands, Eyes, Side, Face of Allah refer to His greatest creatures through whom Allah reveals Himself, guides, and bestows His favors upon creation. And these creatures who are called the Face, Hand, Eyes, and Side of Allah are the Imams themselves.
That is why we ask the help of the Imam in our tasbihs - because we are seeking Allahs blessings through His Face, Hands, Eyes, Gate, etc.
“Allah created us and formed us, and gave us the most perfect form. He made us His Eye over His Servants, and His Speaking Tongue, through which He speaks to His Servants. We are His Open Hand, extended with Mercy and Kindness to His Servants. We are His Face, through which He is reached, and the Gate which indicates upon Him. We are His reservoir in the heavens and Earth. Through us, the trees grow and the fruits are ripened. Through us the rivers flow, and through us the succor of the skies comes down. We plant the grasses of the Earth. Through our ibadat, Allah is worshipped. If it were not for us, Allah would not be worshipped.”
- Imam Jafar as-Sadiq,
(al-Kulayni, Usul al-Kafi, Vol. 1, pp. 144)
first article of preamble of Ismaili Constitution
Dear Aghakhani,
With reference to your posting dated Jan 22, 2015, you asked me the meaning of ' Wa ash hadu anna Amirul Mu'mineena Aliullah'. This phrase means, " I bear witness, the commander of faithfuls is Ali, who is from Allah." The meaning of whole Kalima Pak is as follow;
I bear witness, there is no diety except Allah.
I bear witness, Muhammad pbuh is Prophet of Allah,
I bear witness , the commander of faithfuls is Ali, who is from Allah.
With reference to your posting dated Jan 22, 2015, you asked me the meaning of ' Wa ash hadu anna Amirul Mu'mineena Aliullah'. This phrase means, " I bear witness, the commander of faithfuls is Ali, who is from Allah." The meaning of whole Kalima Pak is as follow;
I bear witness, there is no diety except Allah.
I bear witness, Muhammad pbuh is Prophet of Allah,
I bear witness , the commander of faithfuls is Ali, who is from Allah.
Dear Ismailignosis,
With ref. to your Jan 24, 2015 posting, I humbly say that you asked me the question and explaination of Ayat e Baiyah.I gave you my perspective, please note in that
Ayat e Baiyah there is no mention of Ali or Imam. I am aware of hadith You quoted of Imam Ja'far Sadiq, narrated by Kulaini in Saafi. I agreed in my previous posting
addressed to you that I have no problem what so ever in reciting Tasbih of Ya Ali and Ya Muhammad, I do myself, because we invoke these pure names and through
Noor e Imamat we can get closer to Allah. Hence HI is intercessor or Baabullah. I quoted Ayat e istafa from Surah Al e Imran, which says, we have chosen Al e Imran
in Aalimeen. You know well who was IMRAN. You admitted in your posting that Imam ia not Allah. Hence so far we are on the same page. You wrote," The Quran mentions the hands, the face,the eyes of Allah in many verses. Now we know Allah does not literally posses body parts. But you can notmetaphoricallyexplain these things away."
Obviously you are talking about Imams. Now my question to you is at a one time there should be one face, eyes and hands. Let me remind you of hadith QUDSI, repoted by Prophet Muhammad," Allah says, when some one elevate his soul in ibaadat I become his face, eyes, hands, legs, and feet------------" If face of Allah, hand of Allah is a
reserved category for Imams, then what about the mo'mins who elevate themselves and become one with Allah and become His hands, face and eyes, according to hadith Qudsi. Imam SMS said in one of His Farman," There are always 313 mo'mins present in this world." These 313 mo'mins are those who elevated there souls, so according to this Farman 313 become Faces, eyes, and hands of Allah. How you will explain this, so many faces and so many hands!
With ref. to your Jan 24, 2015 posting, I humbly say that you asked me the question and explaination of Ayat e Baiyah.I gave you my perspective, please note in that
Ayat e Baiyah there is no mention of Ali or Imam. I am aware of hadith You quoted of Imam Ja'far Sadiq, narrated by Kulaini in Saafi. I agreed in my previous posting
addressed to you that I have no problem what so ever in reciting Tasbih of Ya Ali and Ya Muhammad, I do myself, because we invoke these pure names and through
Noor e Imamat we can get closer to Allah. Hence HI is intercessor or Baabullah. I quoted Ayat e istafa from Surah Al e Imran, which says, we have chosen Al e Imran
in Aalimeen. You know well who was IMRAN. You admitted in your posting that Imam ia not Allah. Hence so far we are on the same page. You wrote," The Quran mentions the hands, the face,the eyes of Allah in many verses. Now we know Allah does not literally posses body parts. But you can notmetaphoricallyexplain these things away."
Obviously you are talking about Imams. Now my question to you is at a one time there should be one face, eyes and hands. Let me remind you of hadith QUDSI, repoted by Prophet Muhammad," Allah says, when some one elevate his soul in ibaadat I become his face, eyes, hands, legs, and feet------------" If face of Allah, hand of Allah is a
reserved category for Imams, then what about the mo'mins who elevate themselves and become one with Allah and become His hands, face and eyes, according to hadith Qudsi. Imam SMS said in one of His Farman," There are always 313 mo'mins present in this world." These 313 mo'mins are those who elevated there souls, so according to this Farman 313 become Faces, eyes, and hands of Allah. How you will explain this, so many faces and so many hands!
Dear Administration, Please don't delete if you are a just moderator.
There is Farman of 313 mo'mins. I interpreted that way, if you allow other participants why not me. This is your biased approach. in one of previous postings, I mentioned Farman of 1964 and you jumped to conclusion of 1945 Farman. You allow one person calling me S and his posting stays there for 3 days and when I gave him befitting reply you abruptly deleted my posting, justice is my posting also should have been there for 3 days.
Being a MODERATOR you are not suppose to take sides. I understand your ideology and some participnats ideology is same, that does not mean you can't digest opponent views. In my last posting addressed to nuseri you should have edited the portions you did not like for him, may be he is one of your team member that's why you are showering favors on him. I understand you have right to edit. but don't kill the whole postings.
There is Farman of 313 mo'mins. I interpreted that way, if you allow other participants why not me. This is your biased approach. in one of previous postings, I mentioned Farman of 1964 and you jumped to conclusion of 1945 Farman. You allow one person calling me S and his posting stays there for 3 days and when I gave him befitting reply you abruptly deleted my posting, justice is my posting also should have been there for 3 days.
Being a MODERATOR you are not suppose to take sides. I understand your ideology and some participnats ideology is same, that does not mean you can't digest opponent views. In my last posting addressed to nuseri you should have edited the portions you did not like for him, may be he is one of your team member that's why you are showering favors on him. I understand you have right to edit. but don't kill the whole postings.
I can not allow you to invent Farmans for 1964 or any other year. Even if someone else invents Farmans or twist it, I will have the same reaction. You have to understand the role of a "just a Moderator." there are no problem with people interpreting. Just do not try to make it looks like you are quoting a Farman. if these advises are followed (by all) there should not be any frustrations in posting.mazhar wrote:Dear Administration, Please don't delete if you are a just moderator.
There is Farman of 313 mo'mins. I interpreted that way, if you allow other participants why not me. This is your biased approach. in one of previous postings, I mentioned Farman of 1964 and you jumped to conclusion of 1945 Farman.
Dear Friends,
Final Words On This Topic. Please do not delete this message.
Some time back I asked a senior official of ITREB the same question ," Is H I GOD." He replied officially not. When I asked him what about jamaits. He said we do not interfere. I asked a senior leader with 40 years of service same question. He explained, after Paris conference in 1975, there were few decisions made with instructions from
H I. It was explained that H I is not God, but He is Noorullah. I asked him why jamaits were not informed of the decisions taken at Paris conference? He replied it is failure of ITERB. Now quetion is why I asked this ? The reason is in past 20/25 years thousands of Ismailis have quit our faith because of this question and thousands will in coming years in sub continent, North America and else where, mostly are turning to sunnism. If ITREB is not going to settle this issue soon and clearly explain the jamaits before it is too late.I know my Iman but I am talking about the lost souls.To day RC students and youngsters are bluntly asking the same question and they want reply in yes or no.
Ground realities are different than web site realities. If this burning question is not solved we shall loose many more Ismailis to sunnism.
Final Words On This Topic. Please do not delete this message.
Some time back I asked a senior official of ITREB the same question ," Is H I GOD." He replied officially not. When I asked him what about jamaits. He said we do not interfere. I asked a senior leader with 40 years of service same question. He explained, after Paris conference in 1975, there were few decisions made with instructions from
H I. It was explained that H I is not God, but He is Noorullah. I asked him why jamaits were not informed of the decisions taken at Paris conference? He replied it is failure of ITERB. Now quetion is why I asked this ? The reason is in past 20/25 years thousands of Ismailis have quit our faith because of this question and thousands will in coming years in sub continent, North America and else where, mostly are turning to sunnism. If ITREB is not going to settle this issue soon and clearly explain the jamaits before it is too late.I know my Iman but I am talking about the lost souls.To day RC students and youngsters are bluntly asking the same question and they want reply in yes or no.
Ground realities are different than web site realities. If this burning question is not solved we shall loose many more Ismailis to sunnism.
-
ismailignosis
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2012 10:43 pm
Dear Mazhar
The Imam's guidance at Paris Conference was that the Imam is the mazhar of Allah. And that Allah Himself is absolutely transcendent. The Nur of Imamat, also called Nur Allah, is the supreme manifestation of Allah's Essence, and Imam is the human manifestation of Nur of Imamat n earth. Thus we both agree the Imams are the living Names and living manifestations of Allah and that they are His Face, Hands, Eyes etc.
More reading on this idea is here:
http://ismailignosis.com/2012/08/15/the ... ns-of-ali/
Verse of bayah does not have to mention Ali because it mentions Muhammad. And Ali is the Mawla of all whom Muhammad is the Mawla. Thus Ali succeeds to Muhammad's position in all matters except for revelation and prophethood.
So to give bayah to Ali and Ali's successors is to have God's Hand on your hands.
Now your first post objected to our tasbihs - Ya Ali, Ya Hazar Imam. Now you are changing your mind and saying you do acceptthem and understand this as praying to He who is above all else through Nur of Imamat. That is fine and I agree with that.
But then hasn't your original question been addressed now?
The Imam's guidance at Paris Conference was that the Imam is the mazhar of Allah. And that Allah Himself is absolutely transcendent. The Nur of Imamat, also called Nur Allah, is the supreme manifestation of Allah's Essence, and Imam is the human manifestation of Nur of Imamat n earth. Thus we both agree the Imams are the living Names and living manifestations of Allah and that they are His Face, Hands, Eyes etc.
More reading on this idea is here:
http://ismailignosis.com/2012/08/15/the ... ns-of-ali/
Verse of bayah does not have to mention Ali because it mentions Muhammad. And Ali is the Mawla of all whom Muhammad is the Mawla. Thus Ali succeeds to Muhammad's position in all matters except for revelation and prophethood.
So to give bayah to Ali and Ali's successors is to have God's Hand on your hands.
Now your first post objected to our tasbihs - Ya Ali, Ya Hazar Imam. Now you are changing your mind and saying you do acceptthem and understand this as praying to He who is above all else through Nur of Imamat. That is fine and I agree with that.
But then hasn't your original question been addressed now?
ismailignosis wrote:The Nur of Imamat, also called Nur Allah, is the supreme manifestation of Allah's Essence, and Imam is the human manifestation of Nur of Imamat n earth.
Ismailignosis,
Just to confirm; you are making a distinction between Allah's Essence vs Imam [Manifestation of Nur-e-Imamate], correct?
My understanding is Imam, as locus of Manifestation of Nur Imamate is not same as Manifestation of Essence of Allah... Is this what you intended to explain too?
-
ismaili103
- Posts: 542
- Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:40 am
Imam said in his firman that our doors are open, so if any confused soul cant understand our faith they has full right to leave ismailism. It will help us because these souls are never to be ismailis and its good of they leave ismailism , we got some clearance.
A couple of senior and ITREB members tell you that Imam is not God and you accept it because it same as your belief.
Now what about iur PIRS who wrote millions of verse for IMAM and wrote that IMAM is GOD.
You accept the thoughts of ITREB members who are even not in the level of dust of our PIRS feet.
My freind mazhar read Ginan and then thought why PIR said Imam is God.
Its also for tret, tret bro plzz read Ginans, I know its not your laguage but Imam also said about diversity and pluralism.
A couple of senior and ITREB members tell you that Imam is not God and you accept it because it same as your belief.
Now what about iur PIRS who wrote millions of verse for IMAM and wrote that IMAM is GOD.
You accept the thoughts of ITREB members who are even not in the level of dust of our PIRS feet.
My freind mazhar read Ginan and then thought why PIR said Imam is God.
Its also for tret, tret bro plzz read Ginans, I know its not your laguage but Imam also said about diversity and pluralism.
That is what our old Admin's old habits!!! it does not surprise me any more there are couple of other guys in this forum whose any post he doesn't delete!! because!! there are many reason bro Mazhar and I wrote many thing about him in past so go back and read my some post on Admin and if you do that then you will find the real picture about him.You allow one person calling me S and his posting stays there for 3 days and when I gave him befitting reply you abruptly deleted my posting, justice is my posting also should have been there for 3 days.
Ginan and Qasida are the Madh or Sana' of the Imam and the supreme God. In order for one to correctly understand the concepts that are expressed through Ginan or Qasida, one must also study other works of Pirs and Dais to be able to correctly understand the concepts explained in Ginan and Qasida. Remember, Qasida and Ginans are one genre of work done by our great Pirs and Dais; there are other works, that can complement the Qasidas and Ginans and one must study both to get the complete message of Pirs and Dais.ismaili103 wrote: Its also for tret, tret bro plzz read Ginans, I know its not your laguage but Imam also said about diversity and pluralism.
I give you an example. Rumi in his Divan-e-Shams in one verse says "Sham-e-Mann o Khuda-e Mann". Literally, this verse means, [Oh my Shams, my God]. If we take the face value of this verse, Rumi commits a shirk here, by calling Shams his God, that's the supreme God. However, one must understand that by "Khuda" [FYI, the word "Khuda" in Persian is the same as Allah] Rumi means his Lord and his Master; which is different than the Supreme God/the Transcendent.
Now, when you read in Ginan that Ali is Allah, in this context Pir doesn't imply that Imam [or Ali] is the supreme, the Transcendent God; however, Pir implies that Ali is the Lord and Master of the believers.
What a far fetched interpretation!tret wrote: Now, when you read in Ginan that Ali is Allah, in this context Pir doesn't imply that Imam [or Ali] is the supreme, the Transcendent God; however, Pir implies that Ali is the Lord and Master of the believers.
The Pir said "this cup is black", what he really meant to say was that the colour of the cup is yellow and blue but only the enveloppe is white however the the only material used to make it was from green composition and it contains some drop of coffee so it is black in essence.
I would be desperate if someone I considered as an intellectal person see what the Pir has said but can not understand that what you see if what you get.
Dear Ismailignosis,
With ref. to your posting dated Jan25, 2015, you wrote," Verse of bayah does not have to mention Ali because it mention Muhammad." As in my previous post to you I said, that was a historical event and the Ayat e Bayah has its own Tafseer and historical back groud. Mowla Ali was present Himself there and He had bayat on hands of Prophet. When Mowla Ali wrote contract, He mentioned Prophet as Rasullulah.Kufar e Mecca objected if we consider Muhammad as Rasullula then there should not have been this conflict. Prophet Muhammad asked Mowla Ali to erase these words, but Mowla Ali refused saying to me you are Raulullah. Sir my question is," Is that special hand of Allah for only Ismailis, what about 7 billion people on earth are they low caste and un touchables."
Yor wrote," Now your post objected to our Tasbih Ya Ali andYa Muhammad
now you are changing your mind."Nop, my question was about Du'a guzari and not tasbihat. So far my original question is not addressed,it is as it was. If you know Arabic there is difference in wordings of Du'a and du'a guzari AFTER TASBIHAT.
With ref. to your posting dated Jan25, 2015, you wrote," Verse of bayah does not have to mention Ali because it mention Muhammad." As in my previous post to you I said, that was a historical event and the Ayat e Bayah has its own Tafseer and historical back groud. Mowla Ali was present Himself there and He had bayat on hands of Prophet. When Mowla Ali wrote contract, He mentioned Prophet as Rasullulah.Kufar e Mecca objected if we consider Muhammad as Rasullula then there should not have been this conflict. Prophet Muhammad asked Mowla Ali to erase these words, but Mowla Ali refused saying to me you are Raulullah. Sir my question is," Is that special hand of Allah for only Ismailis, what about 7 billion people on earth are they low caste and un touchables."
Yor wrote," Now your post objected to our Tasbih Ya Ali andYa Muhammad
now you are changing your mind."Nop, my question was about Du'a guzari and not tasbihat. So far my original question is not addressed,it is as it was. If you know Arabic there is difference in wordings of Du'a and du'a guzari AFTER TASBIHAT.
Dear Ismailignosis,
With ref. to your Jan25, 2015 post, you wrote," Verse of bayah does not have to mention Ali because it mentions Muhammad." First in this Ayat name of Muhammad is not mentioned. As I wrote before, this Ayat was revealed at Hudaibiah. Please read its Tafseer. It was a historical event . Mowla Ali was present himself and with other 1400
suhabah, He had Bayat on hands of Prophet Muhammad. Now tell me whose hand on who? Dear gnosis, Is that special Hand of Allah meant only for Ismailis? What about 7 billions people, are they of low caste or un touchables.
You wrote," Now your post objected to our tasbis Ya Ali, Ya Muhammad, now you are changing your mind." Sir, I have objection on wordings of Du'a guzari after tasbihat.
So far my original question is not addressed. If you know Arabic, there is difference of wordings of Du'a and wordings of du'a guzari in Kacchi or Gugrati, not matching.
With ref. to your Jan25, 2015 post, you wrote," Verse of bayah does not have to mention Ali because it mentions Muhammad." First in this Ayat name of Muhammad is not mentioned. As I wrote before, this Ayat was revealed at Hudaibiah. Please read its Tafseer. It was a historical event . Mowla Ali was present himself and with other 1400
suhabah, He had Bayat on hands of Prophet Muhammad. Now tell me whose hand on who? Dear gnosis, Is that special Hand of Allah meant only for Ismailis? What about 7 billions people, are they of low caste or un touchables.
You wrote," Now your post objected to our tasbis Ya Ali, Ya Muhammad, now you are changing your mind." Sir, I have objection on wordings of Du'a guzari after tasbihat.
So far my original question is not addressed. If you know Arabic, there is difference of wordings of Du'a and wordings of du'a guzari in Kacchi or Gugrati, not matching.
I don't think it's far fetched at all! I gave you the example of how Rumi was referring to Shams. And how one must not take the face value of the verse. We are batini after all, right? We tend to seek the inner meaning of just words.Admin wrote:
What a far fetched interpretation!
The Pir said "this cup is black", what he really meant to say was that the colour of the cup is yellow and blue but only the enveloppe is white however the the only material used to make it was from green composition and it contains some drop of coffee so it is black in essence.
I would be desperate if someone I considered as an intellectal person see what the Pir has said but can not understand that what you see if what you get.
Second of all, I wish you were right that "what you see is what you get". If that was true, today you and I wouldn't have this debate. Today, the ummah wouldn't be divided into so many sections. After all, this realm is the realm of multiplicity, diversity. Truth is always expressed in parables, to obscure the the secret treasures of Allah. And everyone must contemplate through self-discovery and "kashf" to get to this secret of life.
People take a Farmaan of the Imam and say, look that says Imam is Allah. I think as Imam has said, we should use our god given intellect through soul-searching. Pirs and Dais teaching are the teachings of the Imam and that's our light to show us the path and lead us to our destination.
Dear Ismaili103,
With ref. to your posting dated Jan25, 2015, 8.44pm, you wrote," Imam said in his Farman that our doors are open, so if any confused soul can not under stand our faith they have full right to leave Ismailism." I shall not cry like you this is a fake farman. Dear 103, My Imam cares for all. He does not want any of His follower leave Him. He is kind. Let me quote a couplet of Rumi,
TU BRAI WASAL KARDAN AAMADI
YA BRAI FASAL KARDAN AAMADI.
You wrote," A couple of senior and ITREB members tell you that Imam is not God and you accept it because it same as your belief." Poor 103, that senior leader and ITREB top persons were appointed by my Imam ( and your god ). Believe me I did not appointed them. Don't get emotional.Obey Farman of the present Imam.
With ref. to your posting dated Jan25, 2015, 8.44pm, you wrote," Imam said in his Farman that our doors are open, so if any confused soul can not under stand our faith they have full right to leave Ismailism." I shall not cry like you this is a fake farman. Dear 103, My Imam cares for all. He does not want any of His follower leave Him. He is kind. Let me quote a couplet of Rumi,
TU BRAI WASAL KARDAN AAMADI
YA BRAI FASAL KARDAN AAMADI.
You wrote," A couple of senior and ITREB members tell you that Imam is not God and you accept it because it same as your belief." Poor 103, that senior leader and ITREB top persons were appointed by my Imam ( and your god ). Believe me I did not appointed them. Don't get emotional.Obey Farman of the present Imam.
So who appointed Badr al Jamali and Al-Afdal? Did the appointment by the Imam made them right? Did the appointment give them power to detrone Imam Nizar like they did? Read our history first. If all the appointees were loyal people, they would not betray the Imam. History is full of examples.mazhar wrote:that senior leader and ITREB top persons were appointed by my Imam ( and your god ). Believe me I did not appointed them. Don't get emotional.Obey Farman of the present Imam.
-
ismaili103
- Posts: 542
- Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:40 am
Dear Mazhar you again misunderstood.mazhar wrote:Dear Ismaili103,
With ref. to your posting dated Jan25, 2015, 8.44pm, you wrote," Imam said in his Farman that our doors are open, so if any confused soul can not under stand our faith they have full right to leave Ismailism." I shall not cry like you this is a fake farman. Dear 103, My Imam cares for all. He does not want any of His follower leave Him. He is kind. Let me quote a couplet of Rumi,
TU BRAI WASAL KARDAN AAMADI
YA BRAI FASAL KARDAN AAMADI.
You wrote," A couple of senior and ITREB members tell you that Imam is not God and you accept it because it same as your belief." Poor 103, that senior leader and ITREB top persons were appointed by my Imam ( and your god ). Believe me I did not appointed them. Don't get emotional.Obey Farman of the present Imam.
The phrase " our Doors are open " is only mention in Farman not the whole para which i wrote.
These ITREB members appoint by Imam and they take benefit of it and start corruption and changing in our literature.
These ITREB members are selected on the basis of there MBA and MBBS degree , atleast in Karachi that I have seen, but what about there religous knowledge " totaly Zero " .
I use the word " Yazeed of 21st century " for these members who every day beheaded Imam.
-
ismaili103
- Posts: 542
- Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:40 am
To Tret,
I am totaly agreed with Admin,
Tret what understanding and interpretation you want when Pir said in Ginan that
" Imam is INDEED Allah "
Look the word INDEED it says it all.
Pir also said in another verse that
" Imam is Indeed Allah and donot doubt on it "
Your defencive comments only shows your DOUBT.
BTW tret FYI some Ginans need batini understanding while some are open and clear and they donot need any batini meaning.
I am totaly agreed with Admin,
Tret what understanding and interpretation you want when Pir said in Ginan that
" Imam is INDEED Allah "
Look the word INDEED it says it all.
Pir also said in another verse that
" Imam is Indeed Allah and donot doubt on it "
Your defencive comments only shows your DOUBT.
BTW tret FYI some Ginans need batini understanding while some are open and clear and they donot need any batini meaning.
I am NOT negating the Doctrine of Imamat at all. As I have said there are two types of Murshid Kameels. Those that are innately perfect - the Ismaili Imams (Light upon light as though no fire touched it as per Qur'an) and those who attain perfection through search and purification and attain the status of the Imam and become like him. Now except for the Imams, individuals will always need external Light for perfection either through the Imams or other Murshid Kameels. The Mushid Kameels (other than the Imam) cannot spring out on their own. They need other Mushid Kameels to perfect them. Hence there is always a need for the Pure chain which does not need external Light.tret wrote: Please study the Doctrine of Ta'lim. Refer to Paradise of Submission of Tusi, where he explains beautifully, why the presence of the Imam of the Time is of immense importance. Basically, what you say -- by equating anyone to the Imam -- in a way negating the Doctrine of Imamate. You eliminate the need for the Imam of the Time, and that's entirely contradictory to the Principal Doctrine of Shia Ismaili.
Given that the Imams are not accessible to others generally. There will occur need of other Mursheed Kameels.
Of course by Physical Contact we don't really imply being in physical presence with the Imam. That is not possible even today. The physical contact in this context means coming into contact with the Imam through Bayah. This is generally administered today by MHI's representatives. In the past although the murids never saw the Imam physically, they were in contact with the Imams through their various representatives and administrators. This MSMS explains in his Memoirs:tret wrote: I think you misunderstood me. Bayhat is necessary of couse. However physical contact is not. Do you know what "Physical Contact" means? There are Ismailis who have never seen physically Imam of their Time in their entire lifetime, and could have very well been spiritully well off..
"In Central Asia the leadership of the Ismailis is by inheritance in the hands of certain families and has been handed down in continuous line through centuries. This is true of my followers in Afghanistan, and in Russia and Chinese Turkestan, where certain families have been, since their conversion to Islam, administrators and representatives of the Imam. The local leadership passes down in a close connection of kinship from one generation to another. Sometime it is the hereditary chieftain and occasionally-as in the case of Hunza-the secular kind, himself an Ismaili, who is the administrator of the religious brotherhood."
As I have said before once a murid becomes one with the Imam, he is one with the Imam and hence not a murid. There is a verse of a Ginan which states:tret wrote: This is just a repeat of what I said already. In this realm of relativity, everything we see is relative. i.e. you are a father in relation to your child[ren]; however, you are a son, in relation to your father. Same thing, Shams Tabriz could very well be Murshi-e-Kamil to Rumi, now dounbt about it, as Rumi himself says in his Diwan-e-Shams -- I believe -- "Shams-e-Mann o khuda-ee mann" Meaning My Shams, My God. However, Shams Tabriz, in relation to the Imam of the time is a Murid..
guruchelaa na rahyaa koee
sohee rahyaa jaa(n)su sesttee hoee................................7
In this state, the relationship of the guide and the disciple dissolves and what remains is that from which the universe originated.
Hence although for the sake of the world Shams may be called a disciple of the Imam, in reality he was one with him. Hence he could not have been a hadd.
I disagree. Ismailis are only those who recognize the Imam of the time. There are others who are equally engaged in the search and they are not Ismailis, infact some may even be offended if you called them Ismailis. MSMS did not consider Rumi as an Ismaili although he recognised his search and perfection. Similarly MHI did not consider Mansur as an Ismaili (read the Farman I quoted earlier).tret wrote: Don't you think that's absurd? I believe whoever invites or guides mankind to the right path, that's the path of Ismailis, because I believe Ismailism is the correct and right path, and any right path can be in essence ismaili path, it doesn't matter if you are officially identified as an ismaili, such as in the case of Rumi. Mind you, I provided you a reference from Rumi's own Masnavi that he indicated that he was as Ismailies
Rumi was very clear and empahtic about calling Shams God although it was considered as a shirk by others.Following is an excerpt from Annemarie Schimmel's book:tret wrote: I give you an example. Rumi in his Divan-e-Shams in one verse says "Sham-e-Mann o Khuda-e Mann". Literally, this verse means, [Oh my Shams, my God]. If we take the face value of this verse, Rumi commits a shirk here, by calling Shams his God, that's the supreme God. However, one must understand that by "Khuda" [FYI, the word "Khuda" in Persian is the same as Allah] Rumi means his Lord and his Master; which is different than the Supreme God/the Transcendent..
It is not meet that I should call you banda ['servant', human]
But I am afraid to call you God, khuda!(D 2768)
Such verses understandably enraged the people of Konya. But for Maulana there was no doubt:
Shamsulhaqq [Sun of Divine Truth], if I see in your clear mirror
Aught but God, I am worse than an infidel!(D 1027)
And he knows his difficult position and yet calls out:
Whether it be infidelity or Islam, listen:
You are either the light of God or God, khuda!(D 2711)
And he qualified this statement in the lines:
You are that light which said to Moses:
I am God, I am God, I am God! (D 1526)
The Pirs were never ambiguous about important concepts. They were very clear and precise. The verse below conveys the concept of Imama and Nabuwah (piratan).tret wrote: Now, when you read in Ginan that Ali is Allah, in this context Pir doesn't imply that Imam [or Ali] is the supreme, the Transcendent God; however, Pir implies that Ali is the Lord and Master of the believers.
ejee satgur sat karee jaann mahamad rupejee
aad niri(n)jan saam sadaay alee rupejee......................2
Know with conviction that the True Guide is in the form of Prophet Muhammed.
The Everliving Lord who is undescriptible and unknowable (Divine Essence) from the beginning, is indeed in the form of Ali.
Dear mazhar, thanks for bringing to our attention the above Farman. Yes indeed the 313 momins are elevated souls and have attained Fanna Fi Allah. That means they have become God. Hence we have 313 Gods.mazhar wrote: Imam SMS said in one of His Farman," There are always 313 mo'mins present in this world." These 313 mo'mins are those who elevated there souls, so according to this Farman 313 become Faces, eyes, and hands of Allah. How you will explain this, so many faces and so many hands!
As you have accepted the above Farman, I am sure you will also accept the Farman about the Imam himself being God.
Consider the issue from another perspective. If MHI can guide you towards Fanna, then wouldn't he himself have the status of Fanna i.e being God himself?
If Imam MSMS has said it in his Farman that he is God than we must accept it as a fact. How we articulate it can be a different matter. Hence we need to consider the zaheri and batini aspect of it. The zaheri aspect(for the Jamat and others) is the constitution and Dua. The batini side which is for the Jamat is the Dua Guzar. According to the zaheri side the Imam is the wasila. According to the batini aspect he is God as per MSMS's Farman.
If you accept this zaheri/batini duality, then there is no conflict in your original question.
Our faith allows all kinds of interpretation and is not restricted to only one. If a person is comfortable with the Imam being the wasila then he should practice the faith accordingly. On the other hand if one is comfortable with the Imam being God, then he should practice accordingly. The bottom line is the obedience to the Imam and practice our tariqah.
About murids leaving the faith, MSMS in his Memoirs says:
What has been my own policy with my followers? Our religion is our religion, you either believe in it or you do not. You can leave a faith but you cannot, if you do not accept its tenets, remain within it and claim to "reform" it. You can abandon those tenets, but you cannot try to change them and still protest that you belong to the particular sect that holds them. Many people have left the Ismaili faith, just as other have joined it throughout the ages. About a score of people out of many millions-a small group in Karachi and in India-pretended to be Ismailis but called themselves "reformers". The true Ismailis immediately excommunicated them. There has never been any question of changing the Ismaili faith; that faith has remained the same and must remain the same. Those who have not believed in it have rightly left it; we bear them no ill-will and respect them for their sincerity.
I actually asked you to refer to Doctrine of Ta'lim, and you quickly responded that you don't negate the concept of Imamate.kmaherali wrote: I am NOT negating the Doctrine of Imamat at all. As I have said there are two types of Murshid Kameels. Those that are innately perfect - the Ismaili Imams (Light upon light as though no fire touched it as per Qur'an) and those who attain perfection through search and purification and attain the status of the Imam and become like him. Now except for the Imams, individuals will always need external Light for perfection either through the Imams or other Murshid Kameels. The Mushid Kameels (other than the Imam) cannot spring out on their own. They need other Mushid Kameels to perfect them. Hence there is always a need for the Pure chain which does not need external Light.
Given that the Imams are not accessible to others generally. There will occur need of other Mursheed Kameels.
So, please refer to Doctrine of Ta'lim, which was revitelized by Sayy'dina Baba Hassan-e-Sabah, during the era of Alamut, and reinforced by Nasir-ulldin Tusi.
If you don't adhere to the Doctrine of Ta'lim, then what's good to have a Master? by rejecting the doctrine of Ta'lim, you indirectly negate the notion of Imamate. That's the point I wanted to make. If you choose to follow Sufi order, then by all means, but ours is to follow the Ta'lim and instruction of the Imam of the time, and not speculative philosophy.
People of Konya was angry at Rumi, and the reason for sure was not because Rumi called or referred Shams as his "Khudawand"; but rather people of Konya was angry at Shams. That's because Shams was the reason why Rumi left the maddrassa and qil-u-qal. People of Konya was more angry at Shams than Rumi.kmaherali wrote: Rumi was very clear and empahtic about calling Shams God although it was considered as a shirk by others.Following is an excerpt from Annemarie Schimmel's book:
It is not meet that I should call you banda ['servant', human]
But I am afraid to call you God, khuda!(D 2768)
Such verses understandably enraged the people of Konya. But for Maulana there was no doubt:
But, let's fast forward. Today, the book of Masnavi of Mawlana is very well respected by all communities in general, and amongst Islamic communities in particular. Ahle sunnah -- I heard this from ahl-e-sunnah -- even equate [maybe equate is a little over-exaggeration] Masnavi of Mawlana with the Qur'an. What I am trying to say, today Muslims respect Mawlana and his Masnavi immensely. I am sure ahl-e-sunnah knows very well/and read the verses [that says Shams-e-mann o khuda-e-mann]. So, if it was shirk according to mainstream muslims then, is it no logner shirk now? Do you get my point?
This is were we disagree. I guess we can leave it there.kmaherali wrote: As I have said before once a murid becomes one with the Imam, he is one with the Imam and hence not a murid
Someone asked Rumi this question:
- Was Bayazid [Bistami] great or Prophet Mohammad?
- Rumi replied. We can't even imagine to compare Bayazid with Prophet Mohammad.
- The man asked again, then why Bayazid saying that he is sage and know the truth and secrets of the treasure of God; but Prophet Mohammad never said such things?
- Rumi replied: Because Bayazid's thurst was releaved by drinking a glass of water from the ocean, but Prophet Mohammad's thurst for the Divine was never over. Prophet's knowledge compare to Bayazid [And he means to anyone who attains higher status] is much much greater than we can't even compare.
[FYI - Bayazid Bistami is one of the greatest sufi sages who has been given the title of "Sultan-ul-Arifayin", which means king of gnosis or king of sufis]
So, this means that even people who attains higher status, that doesn't mean that they immediately become the same as the Imam. It's not like getting using the stairs to get to the top floor of a building, and once you get to the top floor, that's it.
Why I said, it's absurd, because:kmaherali wrote: I disagree
You say people who attain higher status is like Imam
But, you disagree when I say, people who attain higher status is as Hujjat.
You tell me why it's not absurd.
I disagree for many reasons.kmaherali wrote: The Pirs were never ambiguous about important concepts. They were very clear and precise.
First, there's no such concept when it comes to faith, as 'not important'. Every concept in matters of faith is important. It depends on the murid's knowledge. If a murid knows a concept, that doesn't make it unimportant. It may not be important to you, but it maybe very important to someone else. So, no such thing in matters of faith to label it as "important" or "not important".
Second, if transmitting the truth was crystal clear, there wouldn't be divide between mankind, in general, between Islam in particular, and specifically between Shia and even our own ismaili community. You and I wouldn't argue today. The truth is always expressed in parables. Qur'an is full of symbolism. Truth is best explained in parable. So, teachings of Pirs has a context first of all, then they are all symbolism.
After reading all posts I think there are few guys here in this thread they have not accepted the rolls of our pirs and imams at all, they needs to study and find out what are the real positions of them? rather then proving he is wrong and I am right!
The reality is and it is accepted by prophet that imams status are much higher then any prophets! Period. when the time of demolishing the idols in Kaba H.Ali was climbed on the shoulders of prophet not prophet climbed on shoulders of H. Ali .
H Ali had asked prophet but he declined saying that o Ali your status is much higher than mine, therefore I can not climbed on your shoulders but you can climb on me.(salwat) ! Not only this but there are many historical events prophet Mohd has told the superiority of H.Ali to Muslims at that time then him. therefore I am urging to find out what is real role of Imams and pirs.
The reality is and it is accepted by prophet that imams status are much higher then any prophets! Period. when the time of demolishing the idols in Kaba H.Ali was climbed on the shoulders of prophet not prophet climbed on shoulders of H. Ali .
H Ali had asked prophet but he declined saying that o Ali your status is much higher than mine, therefore I can not climbed on your shoulders but you can climb on me.(salwat) ! Not only this but there are many historical events prophet Mohd has told the superiority of H.Ali to Muslims at that time then him. therefore I am urging to find out what is real role of Imams and pirs.
agakhani -
It's like you ask, if the status of mother is higher or father. You can't choose one over another. Their status are both high.
The story of H Ali climbing on Shoulder of Prophet can't be the reason why one should claim such. H Ali was younger than the Prophet. Say you are 15 years old, and your uncle is 30 years old, would your uncle climb on your shoulder? or the other way around? Would your 30 years old uncle feel okay to climb on you [15 years old]??? That can't be logical conclusion to determine who's status is higher. Regardless, as I said, you determine who's status is higher between mother and father. I mean we are too judgemental, even now it gets to a point that we judge the Prophet and the Imam. I mean if you say Ginan is better than Qasida, it's still not okay, because Qasida and Ginan are both composed by our great Pirs and Dais. But now if you start comparing Prophet and Imam, then god forbid where it will end?
Rumi, Attar, Khusraw, Al Hallaj, these are men of truth who attained higher status [according to kmaherali, they are god too].
So, what's wrong learning from their knowledge? Ismailism is not about calling Imam God; there's much more to that, to reach our original and final abode.
It's like you ask, if the status of mother is higher or father. You can't choose one over another. Their status are both high.
The story of H Ali climbing on Shoulder of Prophet can't be the reason why one should claim such. H Ali was younger than the Prophet. Say you are 15 years old, and your uncle is 30 years old, would your uncle climb on your shoulder? or the other way around? Would your 30 years old uncle feel okay to climb on you [15 years old]??? That can't be logical conclusion to determine who's status is higher. Regardless, as I said, you determine who's status is higher between mother and father. I mean we are too judgemental, even now it gets to a point that we judge the Prophet and the Imam. I mean if you say Ginan is better than Qasida, it's still not okay, because Qasida and Ginan are both composed by our great Pirs and Dais. But now if you start comparing Prophet and Imam, then god forbid where it will end?
Rumi, Attar, Khusraw, Al Hallaj, these are men of truth who attained higher status [according to kmaherali, they are god too].
So, what's wrong learning from their knowledge? Ismailism is not about calling Imam God; there's much more to that, to reach our original and final abode.
I agree that the fact that Hazrat Ali climbed on the shoulders of the prophet does not mean anything but it is important to know that it was Hazrat Ali which destroyed the statue, not the prophet. And what was the name of the statue that Hazrat Ali brought down? It was that of Hubal, the God of all the idol Gods of Qabba, Hubal also identified with the idol named Allah in pre-Islamic Arabia, the name by which the biggest statue was called by many. Things to ponder but not in this thread.
As for the status of ginans and qasidas, I suggest to discuss these in appropriate thread, not here.
As for the status of ginans and qasidas, I suggest to discuss these in appropriate thread, not here.
Dear kmaherali,
Let me clear that I am not a reformer. My original question went on back burner.You wrote," If you accept this zahiri/batini duality, then there is no conflict in your original question." Km, We travel from zahir to batin, why not we solve first zahiri aspect of Du'a. Hazar Imam has given us Du'a, and it cotains words 'Allahuma bi haqqi', Just add Allahuma in front of du'a guzari in Kacchi or Gugrati, problem solved. Why we shy to add Allahuma which is already in Du'a.
With reference to 313 mo'mins elevated souls--------------hence we have 313 Gods; I believe there is one God of universe named ALLAH.You can find word ALLAH in Nahjul balaghah, in Al kafi,in Tahzeebul ahkaam, in sermons of Mowla Ali, in sermons of Imam Baqir and Imam Ja'far Sadiq and in our Fatimi literature. It is strange that some participants of this site are allergic to word ALLAH, though they call them self muslims, and recite kalima pak after Du'a 3 times a day which contains word ALLAH.
Regarding 313 mo'mins, they are or were elavated souls and achieved status of fana, but fana in whom and that is Allah. OBJECT MUST BE ONE WITH SUBJECT. When we say object and subject means they are two different entities and lower become one or merge with higher. As you have given me quotation from Memoirs, so I shall give you quotation from Memoirs too.
Imam SMS wrote in Memoirs, I quote," Now I am convinced that through Islam, through the ideal of Allah, as presented by muslims, man can attain this direct experience which no words can explain but which for him are absolute certainties. I have not discussed experience of this order with non muslims, but I have been told that Buddhists, Brahmins,Zoroastrians, and Christians, I have not often heard of Jews, except perhaps Spinoza, have also attained this direct, mystical vision. I am cetain that many muslims
and I am convinced that I MYSELF HAVE HAD MOMENTS OF ENLIGHTENMENT AND OF KNOWLEDGE OF A KIND WHICH WE CAN NOT COMMUNICATE BECAUSE
IT IS SOMETHING GIVEN AND NOT SOMETHING ACQUIRED." ( Memoirs of Aga Khan 3rd.). Dear Km, I know your answer in advance; it is for outsiders and not for insiders
Let me clear that I am not a reformer. My original question went on back burner.You wrote," If you accept this zahiri/batini duality, then there is no conflict in your original question." Km, We travel from zahir to batin, why not we solve first zahiri aspect of Du'a. Hazar Imam has given us Du'a, and it cotains words 'Allahuma bi haqqi', Just add Allahuma in front of du'a guzari in Kacchi or Gugrati, problem solved. Why we shy to add Allahuma which is already in Du'a.
With reference to 313 mo'mins elevated souls--------------hence we have 313 Gods; I believe there is one God of universe named ALLAH.You can find word ALLAH in Nahjul balaghah, in Al kafi,in Tahzeebul ahkaam, in sermons of Mowla Ali, in sermons of Imam Baqir and Imam Ja'far Sadiq and in our Fatimi literature. It is strange that some participants of this site are allergic to word ALLAH, though they call them self muslims, and recite kalima pak after Du'a 3 times a day which contains word ALLAH.
Regarding 313 mo'mins, they are or were elavated souls and achieved status of fana, but fana in whom and that is Allah. OBJECT MUST BE ONE WITH SUBJECT. When we say object and subject means they are two different entities and lower become one or merge with higher. As you have given me quotation from Memoirs, so I shall give you quotation from Memoirs too.
Imam SMS wrote in Memoirs, I quote," Now I am convinced that through Islam, through the ideal of Allah, as presented by muslims, man can attain this direct experience which no words can explain but which for him are absolute certainties. I have not discussed experience of this order with non muslims, but I have been told that Buddhists, Brahmins,Zoroastrians, and Christians, I have not often heard of Jews, except perhaps Spinoza, have also attained this direct, mystical vision. I am cetain that many muslims
and I am convinced that I MYSELF HAVE HAD MOMENTS OF ENLIGHTENMENT AND OF KNOWLEDGE OF A KIND WHICH WE CAN NOT COMMUNICATE BECAUSE
IT IS SOMETHING GIVEN AND NOT SOMETHING ACQUIRED." ( Memoirs of Aga Khan 3rd.). Dear Km, I know your answer in advance; it is for outsiders and not for insiders