Taher Fakhrudin and related topics

[dal-chaval-palidu]

Well DCP, you have a point there. More questions come up, like how many people were surveyed. What defined literacy. Is it being able to read and write in at least one language? Or is it 10th standard or 5 th standard? I don't believe that in 1947 there was 100% literacy even in Bombay. I too wonder how they come up with the conclusion, and more details of the studies that are undertaken.

My only big problem with the interview has to do with the idea of right and wrong, and that right cannot mix with wrong. I do not think it's as black and white, but that's besides the point. I do not believe the dialogue and narratives focused on right vs wrong is going to unite our community community. It is far more complicated than that. There is the nature of facts, multiple contradictory facts, perspectives based on one sides history with certain facts, and human errors of selection bias or choosing to pay attention to only facts that fit with ones worldview, and disregard facts that contradict your worldview. The focus of uniting the community is nothing but a fantasy, which is harmless if indulged in sparingly.

I would say the Jalaluddin Rumi offers deeper wisdom "Somewhere between wrongdoing and rightdoing there is a field. I'll meet you there".

It would take a revolution in deepening and expanding insights and wisdom, and perhaps a few generations, if at all, for bringing unity in our community, or perhaps a miracle.

Bhai Alam, You said it well above, and that is the problem I have with these statements. When they make such claims as the above, I become skeptical of other claims that they make. For example, they say the truth is that "Nass was done on SKQ". But then if you claim as truth that the community had 100% literacy in 1947, that makes me skeptical of the nass claim.

Which is why clear proofs and ruling by an independent authority (like a judge of the high court) helps. My request to STF saheb and the Fatemi Dawat folks is to be reasonable in making such claims, not make extraordinary claims, as that hurts their credibility.

I still believe that SKQ sahib was correct in the claim of nass on him, but please, FD folks, make reasonable claims.

[Biradar]

Literacy simply means the ability to read and write. As one knows, India has struggled with literacy for a very long time. It is likely that Bohras achieved 100% literacy very early. No one is claiming a high level of scientific or philosophical knowledge, but simply the ability to read and write. That is all. Don't read too much into it.

[dal-chaval-palidu]

Literacy simply means the ability to read and write. As one knows, India has struggled with literacy for a very long time. It is likely that Bohras achieved 100% literacy very early. No one is claiming a high level of scientific or philosophical knowledge, but simply the ability to read and write. That is all. Don't read too much into it.

100% in 1947 ?? Even the basic ability to read and write.

I know many people who could not have done that in 1947, please ....

[objectiveobserver53]

I don't find it very hard to believe. I cannot think of a single grandparent, grand aunt or grand uncle who could not read or write and my relatives were from small villages in Gujarat and Rajasthan.

[Biradar]

Literacy simply means the ability to read and write. As one knows, India has struggled with literacy for a very long time. It is likely that Bohras achieved 100% literacy very early. No one is claiming a high level of scientific or philosophical knowledge, but simply the ability to read and write. That is all. Don't read too much into it.

100% in 1947 ?? Even the basic ability to read and write.

I know many people who could not have done that in 1947, please ....

Not sure why you think it is not possible. Literacy rates have been high amongst Bohras for a long time. I would not be surprised if the literacy rate even in 1947 was 100%, amongst the Bohras and a few other communities like Parsis etc. Remember we are not talking about something really sophisticated. Just the ability to read and write. That is all.

[alam]

<t>If the people who did the surveys claim that literacy only means ones ability to read and write, then yeah I agree with Biradar, don't read too much in it. Similar to OO53, Every single one of my elder relatives of my parents and grandparents' generation were literate, by this definition, even if they had no formal schooling. Most of my female relatives were homeschooled. <br/>
<br/>
However, I would argue that STF lumped together and claimed several numbers, and percentages. Once anyone does that, it is open to scrutiny. They pretty much have to back it up with either references to the surveys done or more elaboration of these numbers, sample size, mode of survey(oral or other), etc. it doesn't make sense that there would be 100% literacy, and then cite in the very next sentence about gender based literacy of men and women as 88 and % respectively.

My larger point is about extraordinary focus on right vs wrong, truth vs untruth. There are shades of grey, and there is the matter of perspective, seeing and citing only facts that support your position, and disregard the rest. But now I'm repeating myself.

Why does one expect perfection from these dais? They misrepresent facts to suit their purposes, with exaggerated claims of having a patent on predicting the future (STF saying 100% sure they are going to win the case), as also the claim to the fallacy of complete infallibility.

Factions in Daawat and Bohras, and in Islam in general are also due to factors in addition to "truth" and "falsehood". Lust for power and wealth, weak governance /leadership skills among spiritual leaders for managing large infrastructures, politics, lack of clarity for whatever reason in appointments of successors . . . And the differences along the continuum among people on the scale of conservatism vs progressives, love vs hatred, forgiving vs vengeful. People will follow whoever and go in whatever paths that ultimately is in congruence with their worldview, priorities, and what is inherently fulfilling for them.

Allah is the knower of all truths, let Allah be the Judge instead of Gautam Patel.

[ajamali]

STF's message in English to mumineen during Ashara 1439.

https://youtu.be/f4DDwQEKf9I

[ajamali]

Fatemi Dawat mumineen prayed in London masjid and did Zikre Hussain!
The most that Mufaddallies could do was to try to throw their shoes away! One phone call to the police and the shoes were returned

[objectiveobserver53]

Fatemi Dawat mumineen prayed in London masjid and did Zika e Hussain!
The most that Mufaddallies could do was to try to throw their shoes away! One phone call to the police and the shoes were returned!C3FB017F-360E-4580-8EDA-FB4F137EADE8.jpeg5A44845E-27FA-4DA4-9C36-87AC08A3C9AB.jpeg0C60E12D-8BD0-411F-A4DF-E6CE2AA73900.jpeg6D06F4B0-7F67-42DD-9CCD-59C567A25BF2.jpeg

Wow! That’s incredibly brave as laanat was said on STF and SKQ every single day during Ashara Mubaraka! Hats off to the courageous individuals!

[dal-chaval-palidu]

Fatemi Dawat mumineen prayed in London masjid and did Zika e Hussain!
The most that Mufaddallies could do was to try to throw their shoes away! One phone call to the police and the shoes were returned!C3FB017F-360E-4580-8EDA-FB4F137EADE8.jpeg5A44845E-27FA-4DA4-9C36-87AC08A3C9AB.jpeg0C60E12D-8BD0-411F-A4DF-E6CE2AA73900.jpeg6D06F4B0-7F67-42DD-9CCD-59C567A25BF2.jpeg

Wow! That’s incredibly brave as laanat was said on STF and SKQ every single day during Ashara Mubaraka! Hats off to the courageous individuals!

where was lannat on SKQ and STF prayed everyday during Ashara? In Karachi or in some other masjid?

[dal-chaval-palidu]

I wanted to comment on some of the waiz by STF. Before I go into details, I want to point out that I am not comparing to MS waiz. I just expect more from STF; and I have also heard from people who knew him before he became a dai that he was a nice person.

When he makes general bayan, he says that we all should be pious people, and piety and taqwa should be the standard to judge people. Also, that we should maintain good relations with all others, including muslims. Hence a few of these comments are not consistent with the above statements. Consider Waiz 3:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVlLotdvGrU

At 44 minutes: A dig at other muslims.
45:45 - making fun of general muslims about sirat-ul-mustakeen (the bridge, sirat)
53:25 - Just a little put down in the way he talks about the 1st caliph.
53:45 - again a dig at the 1st caliph; but it could just be that he was just being modest and was worried about upsetting Rasulallah (SAW) in any way.

Any thoughts from others on this forum? I mean, this is our belief, fine; why put down other people's belief and take a dig at other folks? I hope that STF takes the high road.

[dal-chaval-palidu]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TumeLGa9OUw

The Haqiqat behind Science - Waaz 2 Ashara 1439H - Syedna Taher Fakhruddin TUS

He acknowledges the contribution of science, but he says at the end: But why these things happen, they don't ask or know. Okay, so if we know something more about the cosmos or the creation of the universe, why not contribute to the knowledge of the world – go and get PhDs in physics and cosmology, publish it in peer-reviewed journals, etc., bring credit to yourselves and the community.

What they are saying is: We know something, and you (all) don’t know about it; but we will not tell anyone. Why?

From Physics, let me go to biology or medicine. Do we know in our books the cure for cancer, or other secrets? If so, why not tell the world, get credit and acknowledgement for it, and help save lives? What is the point of saying: These scientists don’t know the real thing; only we know, as it is in our books, but we will not tell anyone? Why?

It reminds me of all the recent claims by government ministers that ancient India knew plastic surgery, missiles, etc., …

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... CqwOL.html

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 545958.ece

and there are many more such statements by BJP ministers …

[kimanumanu]

I don't think they are implying that they know more. They are just stating that science does not acknowledge that there is a supernatural entity. That's the intent behind the statement "why these things happen". Religion says it is because of Allah, science does not.

[objectiveobserver53]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TumeLGa9OUw

The Haqiqat behind Science - Waaz 2 Ashara 1439H - Syedna Taher Fakhruddin TUS

He acknowledges the contribution of science, but he says at the end: But why these things happen, they don't ask or know. Okay, so if we know something more about the cosmos or the creation of the universe, why not contribute to the knowledge of the world – go and get PhDs in physics and cosmology, publish it in peer-reviewed journals, etc., bring credit to yourselves and the community.

What they are saying is: We know something, and you (all) don’t know about it; but we will not tell anyone. Why?

From Physics, let me go to biology or medicine. Do we know in our books the cure for cancer, or other secrets? If so, why not tell the world, get credit and acknowledgement for it, and help save lives? What is the point of saying: These scientists don’t know the real thing; only we know, as it is in our books, but we will not tell anyone? Why?

It reminds me of all the recent claims by government ministers that ancient India knew plastic surgery, missiles, etc., …

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... CqwOL.html

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 545958.ece

and there are many more such statements by BJP ministers …

As someone who has benefitted from the haqiqat sabaqs of Fatemi Dawat I can vouch that this knowledge IS available relatively easily to those who seek it. There is a historical precedence for the dissemination of this knowledge (VIA someone who has acquired it through rigorous study and TO someone who has met the prerequisites) as there is with the dissemination of western knowledge in Universities. I don’t believe that Fatemi Dawat should digress from that precedence to conform to a foreign one of publishing papers for peer review. Our knowledge is not an alternative to science but rather science is obviously a valid parallel and evolving field of study that does answer the How, What and When rather nicely, and changes it when there is new information available.

I did not see the Bayan as a mockery of science, rather I have known the Qutbuddins to have great respect for ALL bodies of knowledge. STF was simply pointing out that our knowledge answers the WHY in addition to providing a plausible theory of creation that has not been contradicted by any scientific discoveries. I did not hear any claims to having the cure for cancer!!

[Sceptical]

-

[Moiz_Dhaanu]

@DCP
1) Regarding making fun of general muslims....he was not making fun of them as individuals or their identity as muslims, but rather he was pointing out to the "folly/wrong understanding" in their view of what Rasulullah (SW) and Aqa Ali preached(siratul mustaqim)...and if he did it in with a little pinch of salt(if that's what you call making fun) , then i don't see it as bad as you make it sound.

2) Regarding the first caliph :
If the people on this forum consider themselves followers of Ali (shia) , then they should not feel bad about any thing truthful said about Awwal(1st) ....
Aqa Ali once said to one person when he said to him "I believe in you and Awwal(1st)". ali replied to him "Tu kaato puro dekhto thay jaa ya puro andho, kaano na tha" (you either start seeing with both eyes or become totally blind , don't become squinted)

3)Regarding keeping knowledge to themselves and not sharing or publishing to the world:
I know that in Fatemi dawat esoteric knowledge is being imparted to all who are willing to go the extra length(that included misaaq)..just like extremely high quality science and secular knowledge is being imparted in universities around the world, but for that one has to make the extra effort (either get that level of high marks or pay exhorbitant fees) to get admission...

I hope my points did answer some of the concerns about STF vaaz

If not ,just like STF said in many times in his waaz and other public discourses, man has been provided free will by allah,
hence everyone are free to make judgements about him too.. , but facts will remain facts.

[dal-chaval-palidu]

@DCP
1) Regarding making fun of general muslims....he was not making fun of them as individuals or their identity as muslims, but rather he was pointing out to the "folly/wrong understanding" in their view of what Rasulullah (SW) and Aqa Ali preached(siratul mustaqim)...and if he did it in with a little pinch of salt(if that's what you call making fun) , then i don't see it as bad as you make it sound.

2) Regarding the first caliph :
If the people on this forum consider themselves followers of Ali (shia) , then they should not feel bad about any thing truthful said about Awwal(1st) ....
Aqa Ali once said to one person when he said to him "I believe in you and Awwal(1st)". ali replied to him "Tu kaato puro dekhto thay jaa ya puro andho, kaano na tha" (you either start seeing with both eyes or become totally blind , don't become squinted)

3)Regarding keeping knowledge to themselves and not sharing or publishing to the world:
I know that in Fatemi dawat esoteric knowledge is being imparted to all who are willing to go the extra length(that included misaaq)..just like extremely high quality science and secular knowledge is being imparted in universities around the world, but for that one has to make the extra effort (either get that level of high marks or pay exhorbitant fees) to get admission...

I hope my points did answer some of the concerns about STF vaaz

If not ,just like STF said in many times in his waaz and other public discourses, man has been provided free will by allah,
hence everyone are free to make judgements about him too.. , but facts will remain facts.

Regarding the stuff you highlighted: I have heard that many times in waiz. The problem is, it is difficult to be sure that Maulana Ali actually said it. A lot of things are ascribed to him to, so it is hard to differnciate fact from made-up stories 1400 years later.

Shifting a little, but staying on the theme of authenticity of statements attributed to people long back, just in the past 3-4 years, we have seen new stuff added to the martyadom of Imam Husain (in SMS waiz). Example from this time: One old lady died and asked her son to ask Imam Husain to distribute her will. So the son went to Imam Husain. Imam Husain then went to where the old lady was lying (dead), prayed and aksed her to come alive, and she came back to life, and told Imam Husain to distribute her assets .... and the rest of the details.

I never heard this from SMB, but now SMS has added this and other stuff. And if this goes for long enough, it will be accepted as a fact. That is how, over time, facts get diluted and other stuff gets mixed in. The issue is how to verify that what is said was actually said by Maulana Ali.

[dal-chaval-palidu]

@DCP
1) Regarding making fun of general muslims....he was not making fun of them as individuals or their identity as muslims, but rather he was pointing out to the "folly/wrong understanding" in their view of what Rasulullah (SW) and Aqa Ali preached(siratul mustaqim)...and if he did it in with a little pinch of salt(if that's what you call making fun) , then i don't see it as bad as you make it sound.

2) Regarding the first caliph :
If the people on this forum consider themselves followers of Ali (shia) , then they should not feel bad about any thing truthful said about Awwal(1st) ....
Aqa Ali once said to one person when he said to him "I believe in you and Awwal(1st)". ali replied to him "Tu kaato puro dekhto thay jaa ya puro andho, kaano na tha" (you either start seeing with both eyes or become totally blind , don't become squinted)

3)Regarding keeping knowledge to themselves and not sharing or publishing to the world:
I know that in Fatemi dawat esoteric knowledge is being imparted to all who are willing to go the extra length(that included misaaq)..just like extremely high quality science and secular knowledge is being imparted in universities around the world, but for that one has to make the extra effort (either get that level of high marks or pay exhorbitant fees) to get admission...

I hope my points did answer some of the concerns about STF vaaz

If not ,just like STF said in many times in his waaz and other public discourses, man has been provided free will by allah,
hence everyone are free to make judgements about him too.. , but facts will remain facts.

Moiz bhai, and others,

Since we all think that Maulana Ali was so much against the 1st and 2nd caliph, I have question for people on this forum.

We have always heard of Maulana Ali and Ma Fatema-tus-Zahra's 4 children:

Imam Hasan
Imam Husain
Moulatena Zainab
Moulatena Umme-Kulsum

Correct?

Okay, the question is: Who was the husband of Moulatena Umme Kulsum?

[Moiz_Dhaanu]

I know everyone on this forum loves aqa ali immensely
so i humbly request, please use words extremely carefully when using them for molana ali... god forbid, in our collective ignorance we might commit a sin!!

First, all shia around the world know that molana ali never fought any personal war(his stature was way above the petty grudges) .
And there are numerous occasions qouted in history that he only fought for allah's will and in allah's path.
Ali was never against an individual , but rather against the evil ideas the particular individual harbored within themselves.
Ali did not fight a single war againts the 3 caliphs, rather they always schemed evil plots againts him.

I think I know what your question(regarding husband of Moulatena Umme-Kulsum) is leading up to? and my guess is that you know the answer too , but you ask this question as a garb for something else.

I dont consider myself knowledgeful enough to know what "hiqmat"(divine know-how) aqa ali had in mind when he chose the husband for Moulatena Umme-Kulsum,
nor do i think this forum is the right platform to discuss that.

But let me answer your question with another question.
we all know what jews and historians say about Porphet ebrahim(ebrahim nabi), about his marriage to hajra(as) (haagar) and why he left his wife and son Esmail ,in the desert alone (where death is certain). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishmael

Do you think jews know more then allah and ebrahim nabi ?, then similarly why do u think anyone of us (mortal individuals , including me) can know why aqa ali did what he did.

FYI... this topic does not belong to this thread.
May allah give you peace and the right source of knowledge and guidance

[dal-chaval-palidu]

I know everyone on this forum loves aqa ali immensely
so i humbly request, please use words extremely carefully when using them for molana ali... god forbid, in our collective ignorance we might commit a sin!!

First, all shia around the world know that molana ali never fought any personal war(his stature was way above the petty grudges) .
And there are numerous occasions qouted in history that he only fought for allah's will and in allah's path.
Ali was never against an individual , but rather against the evil ideas the particular individual harbored within themselves.
Ali did not fight a single war againts the 3 caliphs, rather they always schemed evil plots againts him.

I think I know what your question(regarding husband of Moulatena Umme-Kulsum) is leading up to? and my guess is that you know the answer too , but you ask this question as a garb for something else.

I dont consider myself knowledgeful enough to know what "hiqmat"(divine know-how) aqa ali had in mind when he chose the husband for Moulatena Umme-Kulsum,
nor do i think this forum is the right platform to discuss that.

But let me answer your question with another question.
we all know what jews and historians say about Porphet ebrahim(ebrahim nabi), about his marriage to hajra(as) (haagar) and why he left his wife and son Esmail ,in the desert alone (where death is certain). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishmael

Do you think jews know more then allah and ebrahim nabi ?, then similarly why do u think anyone of us (mortal individuals , including me) can know why aqa ali did what he did.

FYI... this topic does not belong to this thread.
May allah give you peace and the right source of knowledge and guidance

I have no intention of hurting anybody's feelings or to commit any sin. I have respect for STF and the Qutbuddn's and admire SKQ in particular for taking the stand that he took. I was just hoping to have a civil discussion along the lines that STF and his brothers say : " If you have any questions, ask". Of course, this specific question is equally applicable to MS dawat too, where lots of people pray loud lanat on 1-2-3.

I do not claim to know more than anybody, I was just using my Allah-given aql to think and to make people think. We can close the topic here at this point as I have no intention of hurting anyone.

Btw, I did not know about what historians say about Prophet Ibrahim (AS). I read briefly your link. It is irrelevant to me, and here is why. What I go by is what Allah says about Nabi Ibrahim in the Quran-e-sharif. If Allah says something in the Quran-e-sharif, it is definitive as far as my beliefs go.

[Bohra spring]

Seriously is that the best answer that to explain why Imam Ali AS married his daughter to a Khalifa, knowingly as she would have intimacy, have children for some Shia tawil so he would exploit his daughters life Nauzubillah. And then bring logic of Ibrahim SAW as deserting his family to explain Ali's action.

Let me be clear non of the Khalifa or Shia Imams have been described as much as Prophets in the Quran. Dont you find it odd you re member Imams and Diai more than prophets SAW. Why ?

I am not objecting to remembering Ashura but in moderation while remembering all who have given sacrifices Prophets, Ahlulbayt ,Ashaba sacrificed an made Muhammad SAW mission successful

If one looks at how Issa AS was tortured and crucified...where are the matams and ohbats. Our own Prophet SAW was harassed and lost his teeth, at grass to survive where are tears for him. But Bohras cry about Duats life in Gujarat really let us treat them fairly and equitably

I have to use very explicit examples because they were real people with real lives. That makes them that special and their legacy an excellent model to apply in life to get over this Sunni Shia crap.

One would stoop so low to justify their secterian animosity rather give benefit of doubt that Ali did not have any issue with Khalifa or was happy to be no 4. He lovingly gave his daughter to a Khalifa he sincerely respected and respected Aisha AS as ummul mumineen regardless of her errors. She has never claimed infallibility.

Even though we by hook or by crook want to promote Ali and this makes us feel good as it satisfies Bohra and Shia spiritual inheritance.. We split hairs in translations.

Did you ever question the historians who etched these tales to justify conflicts?

Have you ever considered Ali AS was a follower of Sunnah literally and would have never belittled the Prophet SAW choices of companions or choice of wife. Neither would Fatema AS or Hassan or Hussain. As

But these enemy stories keep our Sayedna relevant and stops us uniting as it solves our emotional need to have an enemy and as small group as possible to get reservations in heaven

[canadian]

’I know everyone on this forum loves aqa ali immensely
so i humbly request, please use words extremely carefully when using them for molana ali... god forbid, in our collective ignorance we might commit a sin!!”

Is this not a classic example of how to scare people away from any criticism or asking any awkward question?

“Ali was never against an individual , but rather against the evil ideas the particular individual harbored within themselves.
Ali did not fight a single war againts the 3 caliphs, rather they always schemed evil plots againts him.”

Ali was never against an individual but he would tell someone not to love or respect Abu Bakr if that person also loved Ali!!!
Apart from what our mullajis have said, I have never seen any proof or authentic saying/story that any of the three caliphs plotted against Ali.

[momeenbhai]

Ali (Alahi salaam) Ameer ul Momeenin.

Those who cant even take his name properly how would they understand him?

[canadian]

Ali (Alahi salaam) Ameer ul Momeenin.

Those who cant even take his name properly how would they understand him?

And those who know how to take his name correctly, will curse the first three khalifas and then will let their followers be beaten up by mobs and themselves run away with police protection and later apologise for their mistake.
Whether you call him Ali or Ali alaihi salaam amirul mumeenin, etc.- does it make him less or more noble?

[momeenbhai]

Ali (Alahi salaam) Ameer ul Momeenin.

Those who cant even take his name properly how would they understand him?

And those who know how to take his name correctly, will curse the first three khalifas and then will let their followers be beaten up by mobs and themselves run away with police protection and later apologise for their mistake.
Whether you call him Ali or Ali alaihi salaam amirul mumeenin, etc.- does it make him less or more noble?

what do you call your mother? mom, MAA, Ammi?

or you call her "hey woman who sleeps with my dad daily"?

You are so stupid that you dont deserve a reply but I am giving a reply to see if it makes any difference.

First learn to respect.

[SBM]

First learn to respect.

Momeen Bhai
Did you look yourself in the mirror and oh did you ask any of the Aamils of SMS to do the same before they start laanat on the former Mazoon E Dawat?

[canadian]

Momeenbhai:

Thank you. You have shown your true class .

[momeenbhai]

Momeenbhai:

Thank you. You have shown your true class .

Sure, so next time if you don't know how to respect Islamic personalities then stay out of discussing it.

Dont act like a fool.

[dal-chaval-palidu]

And those who know how to take his name correctly, will curse the first three khalifas and then will let their followers be beaten up by mobs and themselves run away with police protection and later apologise for their mistake.
Whether you call him Ali or Ali alaihi salaam amirul mumeenin, etc.- does it make him less or more noble?

what do you call your mother? mom, MAA, Ammi?

or you call her "hey woman who sleeps with my dad daily"?

You are so stupid that you dont deserve a reply but I am giving a reply to see if it makes any difference.

First learn to respect.

I am saddened that valid questions I asked which started this conversation has led to this.

Look, the idea is: There is difference of opinion amongst Muslims about the early Islamic history, and there is some controversy about some of those figures. Let us acknowledge the common things (which are far more significant - Ashadoan-lailaha-illallah, ashahoan-na-Muhammadan-rasolallah, the Quran-e-sharif), accept the differences, move beyond them and live with respect and behave in a civil way with each other.

Lots of people in the world hate us just because we are Muslims (Shia, Sunni, does not matter; look at the Rohingyas in Myanmar currently, as an example); let us at least stop hating each other (Shia, Sunni, Qutbi, muffadali, Sulemani, ... the list goes on)

That was the purpose of my initiating this discussion, not to score any points.

[Ozdundee]

Ali (Alahi salaam) Ameer ul Momeenin.

Those who cant even take his name properly how would they understand him?

Tread carefully attacking a fellow reformist on a progressive site is not going to be tolerated. If you cannot handle intelectual debates and resort to call names go somewhere else.

What does salutation got to do with facts. In fact those who exaggerate his respect and stretch his titles no least about his faith and if Ali AS was present would have rejected the fanatics as distorters of the faith Muhammad SAW worked so hard to establish.

As Bohra who taught you about Ali AS even existed and what he believed in? You as a Bohra heard your Sayedna or madrassa teacher talk about it believed it without objection and based on it joined the mob in creatong tales. In other ways you don't really know about Ali AS you only believe Ali because your community talks about a Ali, if they came up with another personality like Burhanudin you would do the same give this personality godly powers . It is spiritual in your mind. The only reality you know is a tomb in Najaf where you see others go so you believe Ali AS was burried there. But you have no personal proof.

Do you even know what Sunni believe in..and they have Khalifa no 4 also called Ali ibn Talib son in law of Prophet SAW .? Go read their books and see how much they respect this person.

Have you ever researched or read countless books from all angles to cross reference who Ali ibn Talib was his lifestyle from all Shia and Sunni sources. Once you have done I will debate you but by the time you do that you will be a better Muslim.

Ali was a Ashaba Ahlul Bayt Khalifa Imam a father father in law son husband leader scholar etc etc.