Imam Mehdi not the father of imam qa'im?

[Al-Uqul]

the Imam to the Ismailis is God manifested. He is the Word of God and His Will, he is one of the three hypostases which constitute one undivided essence of God . He is consequently higher than the Prophet. Al Muayyad made this clear when he differentiated between Nubuwwa (Prophethood) and Imama (Imamate). The position of Nubuwwa or Risala, he said, is the office of Trustees (istida), while that of the Imama is the office of Permanence (istiqrar).(M. K. Husayn (ed)., Diwan al-Mu'ayyad, p.80, quoting from al-Mu'ayyadiyya, vol. 1, p.68. )The Rasul is he who carries on the message entrusted (istawda'a) to him by God. In other words, he is the one who delivers the Word of God, while the Imam, as it is shown above, is the Word of God itself. It follows that Muhammad is considered by the Ismailis to be inferior 'Ali ibn Abi Talib, the first Imam. In his esoteric work Zahr al-Ma'ani, Idris Imad ad-Din, speaking about Ali, says: "... And this his position was exactly the same as that of Al Imam al-Qa'im bi Amrillah with regard to al-Mahdi." W. Ivanow, Rise of the Fatimids, p.78 of the Arabic text. If we remember here that 'Ubaydallah al-Mahdi was Mustawda,( A Mustawda Imam (trustee Imam) is a person entrusted with the Imamate without being himself the true Imam.)while al-Qa'im was a Mustaqarr Imam,(Cf. B. Lewis, The orgins of Isma'ilism, Cambridge, 1940, p.72. )we can realize what the position of 'Ali was with regard to the Prophet, namely that Muhammad was only Mustawda, while Ali was Mustaqarr.This may help to clarify a point left open by Wilferd Madelung concerning al-Mahdi's physical fathership of al-Qaim. Wilferd Madelung hesitated to affirm that al-Mahdi was not the physical father of al-Qa'im. The quote cited above from Idris Imad ad-Din seems to make such an affirmation possible. For if al-Mahdi, like the Prophet, was only a Mustawda Imam, he could not have been the physical father of a real Imam. (Wilferd Madelung, "Das Imamat inder frühen ismailitischen Lehre", Der Islam, 1961, vol. 37, pp.78-79. )

1. Is it True that ismailis beleive Ali(a.s)was Higher then The Prophet Muhammad(S.W.S)?
2.Is it True Imam Al-Mahdi Bi´llah was not the Biological Father of imam Al-Qa´im Bi Amr Allah ?
3.Is it True Imam Al-Mahdi was not a True Imam but a Trustee Imam?

The quran also states“ And try orphans (as regards their intelligence) until they reach the age of marriage; if then you find sound judgment in them, release their property to them.” How Can Imam Tayyib(a.s)being 2 years old Receive the Imamate wich is the Ownership of the Whole World Yet Allah places a Restriction on this age Group?sincere Questions wich Are Puzzling Me.

[anajmi]

the Imam to the Ismailis is God manifested. He is the Word of God and His Will, he is one of the three hypostases which constitute one undivided essence of God . He is consequently higher than the Prophet.

Another reason why these Ismailis are idol worshippers and are following a religion that has nothing to do with Islam.

namely that Muhammad was only Mustawda, while Ali was Mustaqarr.

Fiction which has no basis in the Quran or the Sunnah of the prophet (saw).

The other La Uqul mukhlis52 created an ilaah on earth and then we have this. The sooner you dump these Imams and these land ilaahs the better off you will be!!

[porus]

1. Is it True that ismailis beleive Ali(a.s)was Higher then The Prophet Muhammad(S.W.S)?
2.Is it True Imam Al-Mahdi Bi´llah was not the Biological Father of imam Al-Qa´im Bi Amr Allah ?
3.Is it True Imam Al-Mahdi was not a True Imam but a Trustee Imam?

The quran also states“ And try orphans (as regards their intelligence) until they reach the age of marriage; if then you find sound judgment in them, release their property to them.” How Can Imam Tayyib(a.s)being 2 years old Receive the Imamate wich is the Ownership of the Whole World Yet Allah places a Restriction on this age Group?sincere Questions wich Are Puzzling Me.

The answer to your three questions as far as Bohras are concerned is No. They do not believe any of that.

As far as al-Tayyib is concerned, if he was the only surviving son of al-Aamir, he would be considered Imam for Bohras whether he was officially designated as such or not. al-Tayyib was assumed to be Imam by Hurra al-Malika and designated Dai al-Mutlaq in his name. Imam Aamir had informed Hurra of the birth of al-Tayyib. Whether he also designated al-Tayyib as the Imam is, as far as I know, not known.

[porus]

Admin,

Please remove anajmi's posts to Islam Today Forum so Bohras can continue discussions that pertain to them. anajmi will derail discussions and it will certainly make this thread as worthless as all the others.

We can all assume that anajmi considers Shia idol-worshippers. We have known that for 10 years. We do not have to suffer the same broken record for another 10.

[Al-Uqul]

Admin,

Please remove anajmi's posts to Islam Today Forum so Bohras can continue discussions that pertain to them. anajmi will derail discussions and it will certainly make this thread as worthless as all the others.

We can all assume that anajmi considers Shia idol-worshippers. We have known that for 10 years. We do not have to suffer the same broken record for another 10.

brother,plz just tell admin to block anajmi,he always does this,and its kind of expected of him,its in his naturecant a expect a scorpion not to sting,anyway plz keep it because i need clarification or refutation of the above conclusions from a ismaili website itself.was imam mahdi a mustawda while imam qaim a mustaqqar?who si al=qaims father then?and idris imamdudeen isnt he a Bohra dai of early epriod?plz explain wallah
blessed week
-botan

[anajmi]

Well, when you cannot answer them, then ban them!!

Bohras can continue discussions that pertain to them.

You are as much of a bohra as I am. Do I need to point out your beliefs to you?

By the way, which one of the three participants on this board is actually a believing bohra? And how many are actually hypocrites?

If Admin bans me or my posts, then he will be displaying his hypocrisy like the kotharis at maalumat and other such sites.

[anajmi]

Also, I have been giving evidence of shia idol worship for 10 years and with people like Al-Uqul and mukhlis52 around, I will be able to continue to do so for another 10, unless ofcourse, Admin censures my posts.

[porus]

anajmi,

Being a Bohra is not a pre-requisite for participation here. If you know about Bohras and their beliefs, please continue in the spirit of the discussions. I will ask Admin to remove your posts if you divert discussions into Shia-Sunni debate and thwart discussions about Bohra beliefs. I think most participants here and those who read discussions would agree with me.

[anajmi]

porus,

Please do not label everything I have to say as shia sunni debate. I am simply pointing out that what Al-Uqul has posted has no basis in the Quran or the Sunnah of the prophet and demonstrates idol worship. The problem with people like you wanting to remove my posts is as I have pointed out above. It has nothing to do with shia sunni debate. You have accepted that you are not a shia or a sunni or even a muslim. Al-Uqul has claimed that if the bohra faith is against Mutah, then it is a false faith. So what is the reason for this vitriol against me? The answer is simple. It is easier to debate with idiotic beliefs than it is to debate with the Quran and the Sunnah of the prophet (saw). I bring the Quran and the Sunnah into the discussion. That becomes unacceptable to some. Hence the demand to remove my posts.

[porus]

was imam mahdi a mustawda while imam qaim a mustaqqar?who si al=qaims father then?and idris imamdudeen isnt he a Bohra dai of early epriod?

I have heard that only one person Imam Musa Kazim was mustawda for Imam Ismail who was mustaqarr. Idris Imaduddin was a Bohra Dai al-Mutlaq and he wrote Zahir al-Ma'ani. I cannot confirm what he wrote about Ali and Prophet in relation to mutaqar and mustawda. The latter is Ismaili (I.e. Nizari) revisionism and would be out of place for a Bohra Dai to discuss.

There is a belief amongst Ithanasharis that Imamat is a higher station than Nubuwwat. They base their claim on the ayat of the Quran that proclaims Ibrahim to be Imam after he was already a Nabi. They consider it his promotion to Imamat. They also state that Muhammad was also a Nabi and an Imam and therefore, he was higher than Ali who was just an Imam. However, this claim has no basis in the Quran.

With regard to Imam Mahdi, his appearance was predicted amidst expectations that he would usher in a utopian reign of justice and plenty. Imam Mahdi was called Qaim al Qiyama. Imam Mahdi could not live up to expectations and he quickly dampened down expectations by proclaiming that his son Imam al-Qaim would be the Qaim al-Qiyama. al-Qaim did not deliver on the promises either and later the concept of Qaim al-Qiyama was transformed by several scholars such as Sijistani, Shirazi and Kirmani.

My own opinion is that Sayedna Idris Imaduddin may have been comparing Imam Mahdi's proclamation of his son Imam Qaim to Muhammad's proclamation of Ali as his successor. However, it is only an opinion and others may have more to say on this.

[porus]

anajmi,

You agree that the Shia and Bohra interpretation of the Quran differs substantially from your or Sunni interpretation. I am willing to accept the Bohra interpretation and carry on discussions on that basis. You are not. My only peeve with Bohras would be if they deviated from their historically received interpretation. That is not the case with you. You throw in a spanner every time someone brings up a Shia interpretation with charge of idol worship. Then the discussion degenerates into non-Bohra issues. I therefore do not welcome your contributions unless you agree to abide by the assumption that Bohras and Shia have their own valid interpretations and their own views which differ from Sunni views.

I am willing to discuss Quran from the Sunni viewpoint in Islam Today forum.

[anajmi]

They also state that Muhammad was also a Nabi and an Imam and therefore, he was higher than Ali who was just an Imam. However, this claim has no basis in the Quran.

Bohras actually do not believe that Hazrat Ali was an Imam. He is considered to be the foundation of Imamat (I am not sure what that means). His son Hazrat Hassan is considered to be the first Imam.

[anajmi]

porus,

Since you do not believe in anything at all, it is ok for you to

I am willing to accept the Bohra interpretation and carry on discussions on that basis.

when needed.

But to place a similar condition on all participants is not only not fair, but outright hypocritical.

[anajmi]

Besides, Sunni and Shia point of view in the Quran is a deception. Take the Quran at its face value. For eg. Allah grants the status of Imam to prophet Abraham. Why make the assumption that this increased the status of prophet Abraham? Sometimes a high ranked official has to take on the duty of a lower ranked official as well. So prophet Abraham could've been asked to take on the duty of a lower rank. So Imamat could be a lower rank. What made Imamat a higher rank that prophethood?

[anajmi]

Besides, here is the explanation given by Al-Uqul as to why Imam has a higher status than prophet

the Imam to the Ismailis is God manifested.

This is not evident from the ayah that you referred to about Allah making prophet Ibrahim an Imam. Is this from some other ayah of the Quran? Which one?

[anajmi]

Elsewhere in the Quran (An Nahl ayah 120), Allah refers to prophet Abraham as a nation (ummah) that was obedient to Allah.

So if making him an Imam raised the status of Imamat to be higher than prophethood, making him an Ummah should raise the status of an Ummah to be higher than both prophethood and Imamat (unless ofcourse this ayah was revealed before the Imam ayah, then both Imamat and Ummah would be higher than prophethood but Imamat would be higher than Ummah and prophethood).

[porus]

anajmi,

Imamat being higher than Nubuwwat is an Ithanashari belief, I believe. Take your objections to the ShiaChat forum, you moron. No one is interested about this in the Bohra forum and Bohras do not much care about what the Ithanasharis believe about this.

DO NOT WASTE YOUR OR ANYBODY ELSE'S TIME HERE.

[anajmi]

porus,

Ithanashris can believe what they like. However, you, who pretends to be a bohra, just gave validity to their belief by pointing to an ayah of the Quran. So it becomes an obligation on my part to explore this further and see what the Quran really says about such beliefs. By the way, ignoring such references might lead people to misunderstand the Quran.

[porus]

porus,

Ithanashris can believe what they like. However, you, who pretends to be a bohra, just gave validity to their belief by pointing to an ayah of the Quran. So it becomes an obligation on my part to explore this further and see what the Quran really says about such beliefs. By the way, ignoring such references might lead people to misunderstand the Quran.

I did not validate the belief. Actually, I do not even know if that is their belief. I just happened to read it somewhere. I rejected it purely on logical grounds. If Imamat is a promotion then Ali would have had to be Nabi before being Imam. Ithnaasharis do not think that Ali was ever a Nabi.

Do not think that all Bohras are stupid and will misunderstand the Quran because they read these discussions. They have ways to clarify from their own sources.

[anajmi]

Actually, I do not even know if that is their belief.

Next time, make sure before you attribute beliefs to people so that we can avoid pointless discussions.

I did not validate the belief.

We can keep going back and forth on this. The problem with you is that you quote peoples beliefs like they are your own and then dump them when countered. It is always ... ithanasharis believe so and so, bohras believe so and so, shias believe so and so, but I am not a shia, I am not a bohra, I am not a ithanashari!!!

Do not make these discussions personal. Stick to the topic. Ignore my posts. It would save both of us a lot of time.

Do not think that all Bohras are stupid and will misunderstand the Quran because they read these discussions. They have ways to clarify from their own sources.

I am sure they do. I just feel the need to point out my findings which I will continue to do even though you have a problem with that.

[porus]

For Bohras only, I would like to clarify the meaning of the word asas as it applies to Ali ibn Abi Talib.

Ali is not the Imam but asas (foundation) of Imamat. Primary function of Imam is to interpret shariat on the basis of taawil. When Prophet established shariat, he did not at the same time make the roots of the knowledge on which the shariat was based available to all. This knowledge is the knowledge of Taaawil. It was Ali's duty and function to make this knowledge available to his descendants the Imams. Ali himself is the foundation of tawil, and hence the foundation of Imamat.

al-Uqul,

In this connection, Nizari Ismailies have revised the sequence of Imams. They have combined the function of asas and Imam into the function of Imam. They consider Ali as the first Imam. They have also eliminated Hasan from being an Imam. They now believe that Hasan was mustawda for Husain who was mustaqar. Husain is their second Imam.

For Bohras Hasan is first and Husain the second Imam. Ali is the asas of Imamat.

[porus]

al-Uqul,

I am reading about the confusion surrounding the paternity of Imam Qaim in Farhad Daftary's 'The Ismailies'. Bohras do not doubt the paternity but I can see why the confusion arose historically. Daftary makes too many cross references and it is not easy to read what he writes. When I decipher it, I will try to write my conclusions. (HIs discussion starts on page 117).

[porus]

The problem with you is that you quote peoples beliefs like they are your own ....

I do not make my religious or other beliefs public on this forum. I discuss other people's beliefs.

[porus]

"Ibrahim was a prophet. In spite of his holding the office of the prophethood he was tested and tried by Allah before He made him an Imam. It means that a prophet is not necessarily an Imam and imamat is an office of a decidedly higher order which is granted only when one proves himself suitable and worthy after undergoing a test. "Verily, I make you an Imam for mankind" clearly indicates that like risalat, imamat is also bestowed upon the chosen representatives of Allah by Allah Himself. It is a position no one, however virtuous or godly he may be, not even Ibrahim, the prophet of Allah, could claim for himself, nor can it be conferred on any one by any individual, group or community. It is an exclusively divine action. "

The above quote is from Quran commentary on ayat 2:124 by a twelver shia, Pooya/Ali.

http://www.al-islam.org/quran/process.a ... ay=windows

[porus]

"As we can see, Prophet Abraham was further tested by Allah during his
prophethood, and when he successfully passed the tests (which were the test
on his life, leaving his wife, sacrificing his son), he was granted the
position of Imamat. This shows position of Imamat is higher in degree
than prophethood which has been given to him later after acquiring more
qualifications. Degrees are always granted in ascending order. We have not
seen any person who got his Ph.D. degree first, and then gets his
highschool diploma. At least in the administration of God there is no such
mess!"

The above quote is from 'A Shi'ite Encyclopedia', an ithna-ashari publication. Look up chapter 6b Imamt vs Prophethood.

http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/

[anajmi]

Ali is not the Imam but asas (foundation) of Imamat. Primary function of Imam is to interpret shariat on the basis of taawil. When Prophet established shariat, he did not at the same time make the roots of the knowledge on which the shariat was based available to all. This knowledge is the knowledge of Taaawil. It was Ali's duty and function to make this knowledge available to his descendants the Imams. Ali himself is the foundation of tawil, and hence the foundation of Imamat.

Sunnis, wahhabis and Salafis will ask, where is this knowledge available? Is there a book that gives this knowledge? The prophet was sent as a mercy to mankind. He was asked to deliver the message in the Quran. The sunnis/wahhabis/salafis will ask - did the prophet not fulfill his duty? Why did he give this knowledge only to a few? I am not asking this. They will ask. There are many other things that they will ask. If you have a problem with that go take it up on a sunni/wahhabi/salafi website.

[anajmi]

I do not make my religious or other beliefs public on this forum. I discuss other people's beliefs.

porus,

you say enough for us (some of us atleast) to figure out what you believe. The only reason you choose not to make them public is so that you can deny them whenever the need arises. The sunnis/wahhabi/salafis refer to such people as munafiqs.

[anajmi]

imamat is an office of a decidedly higher order

An Imam is simply a person who leads in prayer and works for the benefit of the community in various religious capacity. Prophet Abraham was made a leader amongst his people. He was also referred to as a nation in himself by Allah as I have mentioned before. Infact, if you go to any local sunni/wahhabi/salafi mosque, you will find an Imam. However, you can search every corner of the earth, you won't find a prophet.

The sunnis/wahhabi/salafis say that the shia idol worshippers are so blind that the entire Quran which talks about the virtues of the prophet is discarded for one ayah which made prophet Abraham an Imam. If Imamat was such a high order, why was no Imam mentioned in the Quran? Allah says in the Quran to obey Allah and obey the prophet. Not once does Allah ask us to obey an Imam.

Bohras do not believe that Imamat is a higher order than prophethood. If they do, then they would further cement their status as idol worshippers.

imamat is also bestowed upon the chosen representatives of Allah by Allah Himself.

The only person that Allah bestowed Imamat upon is prophet Abraham as mentioned in the Quran. Is there any evidence of anyone else having being giving this position? The only person who could deliver the message of Allah is the prophet. The prophet has mentioned about no one else having being made the Imam. So every other Imam that people say is the Imam is not the Imam because Allah has to choose that Imam and the word of Allah is in the Quran. So if Hazrat Ali or Hazrat Hassan or Hazrat Hussein were not made Imams in the Quran, then they are not the Imams.

Now some people might say that Allah communicates with some people through their dreams. But this is simply a dream.

I am not saying this. Sunnis/wahhabis/salafis say this. So if you have a problem with that, please take it up on a sunni/wahhabi/salafi website. I am no longer going to discuss my beliefs on this forum. Only other people's beliefs.

[anajmi]

Let us think logically for a second.

Different shia sects have different Imams. And each sect is mutually exclusive. So one sect does not consider the Imam of the other sect to be the true Imam. Now, there is no confusion about the prophet. Every sect believes in the same prophet. Now if an Imam has to also be appointed by Allah in the same way that a prophet is appointed by Allah, then we can safely say that none of these Imams have actually been appointed by Allah. If they had been appointed by Allah, then there would be no confusion and we would have only one Imam sans any doubt.

That is logical thinking and not my personal thinking. If you have a problem with that, then take it up with the guy who invented logic.

[anajmi]

This is a quote from http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter6b/8.html

The Shia believe that the rank of Imamat (the position of a divinely-
appointed leader) is higher than that of prophethood and messengership.

If bohras do not believe that Imamat is higher than prophethood and messengership, can they still be considered as shia?