how u chose imam?

[SBM]

WHY THIS DISCUSSION ENDS UP ON THIS THREAD, ADMINISTRATION HAS CREATED "ISLAM TODAY" AND THAT IS THE PROPER PLACE.

[anajmi]

porus,

Thanks for making that clarification. So why is Mubarak confused? He should know that the Sunnis didn't appoint Imams, they just appointed khalifas. So, the Sunnis never went against the command of Allah (if there ever was one).

[Alhumdollilah]

i wonder from where progs get there amils to lead there prayers?

[Mubarak]

porus,

Thanks for making that clarification. So why is Mubarak confused? He should know that the Sunnis didn't appoint Imams, they just appointed khalifas. So, the Sunnis never went against the command of Allah (if there ever was one).

Anajmi,

Mustakar Imam i.e. the community Imam is synonym with Khalifa.

By electing a Khalifa = community Imam: Sunnis acted against the expressed Allah command (Re: Quran 2:124).

[anajmi]

Mubarak,

Thank you for explaining that. Then why is porus confused. He should know that Sunni will is more powerful than Allah's will.

[Human]

Not sure about porus, but I am definitely confused!!!

[anajmi]

That is how shia fiction works. Confuse the heck out of everyone.

[JC]

I have a simple question:

IF, IF, Allah wanted a Leader to continue leading the masses, elected or not, why did not He continued the sending/appointing of Prophets, as He had done with 124,000 prophets ........ would 21 (or 12) Imams or bunch of Dais would have made much difference??!!!

[anajmi]

JC,

A good question, but one that does not agree with shia fiction.

[humble_servant_us]

JC,
If i understand correctly , you mean to say that since Allah(swt) did not continue sending prophets(pbut) ,it implies there is no need for a leader after him. This logic is not correct.

I think its absolute clear among both shias and sunnis , that a leader after prophet (pbuh) is required, so lets not argue on whether leader is required or not. Rationale also dictates the importance and necessasity of leader for the muslim ummah.

The point of discussion should be the type of leadership after prophet(pbuh).
- whether it should be elected or appointed
- whether the leadership should be confined to only political affairs of muslims or should it extend upto the spritual affairs also

By the way leadership is not a shia fiction, it was so important that after prophet(pbuh)'s dealth ummah did not even wait for burial of prophet(pbuh) but considered the election of leader as the highest priority.

-hs

[anajmi]

humble servant,

The shia fiction is that the leader is appointed by Allah, who then runs into hiding for no apparent reason than to burden us with a corrupt Dai. Leaders are required so that these leaders can lead. We do not need leaders who are in hiding.

[Humsafar]

- whether the leadership should be confined to only political affairs of muslims or should it extend upto the spritual affairs also

The leadership, in any, should only be confined to the spiritual affairs. There is no such thing as "political affairs" of muslims.

[anajmi]

There is no such thing as "political affairs" of muslims.

I am not sure you understand what "political affairs" means. Taking care of the masses is a political affair and is the biggest responsibility of a muslim leader. Now there are some who only want a muslim leader to perform marriages and divorces and then shut up and go home. That is not what Islam is. "Political affairs of muslims" is a big reality.

Now, if the Dai had been giving an account of every penny that he had, he wouldn't be such a bad leader now would he? We wouldn't be asking him then, to be spiritual only.

[Humsafar]

anajmi, I'm sure you're stretching the meaning of "political affairs". Political affairs have to with the matters of state. Muslims are not a nation or a state, their political affairs are managed by the political system of the country they belong to. Again, apart from the shia, there's no such thing as "Muslim leadership" - and that too in the absence of a state is now only confined to spiritual matters. The Muslims empires of the past (Ottamans, Fatimids, Abbasids etc.) were not integral to the Islamic faith - they were historical accretions, more to do with the demands of the time than of faith.

As for the Dai, he is supposed to be managing only our spiritual affairs. Collecting money from the masses is an innovation, it is none of his business. Even if he accounted for every penny, it would still not absolve him from what he's not supposed to be doing.

[anajmi]

Humsafar,

Collecting money from the masses is an innovation

Wrong. As per the quran, there is a category of people who can get your zakat, who are responsible for collecting it and then distributing it.

009.060
YUSUFALI: Alms are for the poor and the needy, and those employed to administer the (funds); for those whose hearts have been (recently) reconciled (to Truth); for those in bondage and in debt; in the cause of Allah; and for the wayfarer: (thus is it) ordained by Allah, and Allah is full of knowledge and wisdom.
PICKTHAL: The alms are only for the poor and the needy, and those who collect them, and those whose hearts are to be reconciled, and to free the captives and the debtors, and for the cause of Allah, and (for) the wayfarer; a duty imposed by Allah. Allah is Knower, Wise.
SHAKIR: Alms are only for the poor and the needy, and the officials (appointed) over them, and those whose hearts are made to incline (to truth) and the (ransoming of) captives and those in debts and in the way of Allah and the wayfarer; an ordinance from Allah; and Allah is knowing, Wise.

Again, apart from the shia, there's no such thing as "Muslim leadership" -

Wrong again. There is no such thing as a "Muslim Leader". Muslim Leadership is what we are lacking.

Muslims are not a nation or a state

Actually muslim ummah is a muslim nation. The quran dictates how their affairs are to be conducted. Not all nations where muslims recide are needed to honor the commands in the quran and that is ok. But again that is just the current state. Doesn't mean that "political affairs" have nothing to do with muslims.

[anajmi]

As for the Dai, he is supposed to be managing only our spiritual affairs.

Actually, the Dai himself is an innovation. Besides, which Fatimid Tradition says that he is supposed to be managing only your spiritual affairs? Also, didn't you say that each one of us needs to work on his own spiritual affairs? Then why do you need the Dai?

[Humsafar]

anajmi, I was not talking about just zakat, but also about all the other "taxes" and huge sums of money he collects from the people. Zakat is only a small part of it. Even so, nobody has "officially" appointed him or employed him to collect zakat. He is self-appointed - and that is an innovation.

About "leader" and "leadership" it's only a matter of semantics. Muslim leadership exists at all levels and in all sects - and it is always going to be ad hoc and arbitrary. The kind of leadership you desire does not exist and cannot exist because Islam has no mechanism for it to exist (except for shias, of course - but then their fiction is a shade more weirder than those of other Muslims ).

[Mubarak]

‘Election’ of Khalifa (Abu Baker) is an invention, further climax: Shri Abubaker APPOINTING Umar as his successor and not letting people to elect next caliph! Quran 2:124 – rule of Allah is to appoint leader and Sunni invented their FICTIONS theory contrary to Quran of electing leaders (Abu Baker)!!!

Prophet Mohammed (s.a.) was appointed leader to preach Islam among masses. For FOUR DECADES he didn’t approached masses, why he kept himself in veil?

Allah has sent Prophet Mohammed (s.a.) to show masses right path then in those FORTY YEARS people who born and died – who is responsible for their heaven – why not Prophet Mohammed (s.a.) like Prophet Eesa (a.s.) started preaching Islam in masses from the day he born – why Prophet Mohammed kept himself in veil for FOUR DECADES???

Anajmi: The shia fiction is that the leader is appointed by Allah, who then runs into hiding for no apparent reason than to burden us with a corrupt Dai. Leaders are required so that these leaders can lead. We do not need leaders who are in hiding.

You are indeed accusing Prophet Mohammed: he was appointed by Allah, why then he runs into hiding for forty years… leaving unchecked corrupt Sunni leader Abu Sufiyan? Leaders are required so that these leaders can lead. We do not need leaders who are in hiding.

Prophet Mohammed (s.a.) by default can never ever be wrong, but for two third of his life he remained in veil i.e. not lead the masses i.e. NOT preached the Islam. Hence, your/Sunni contention as usual is wrong; the appointed leader of Allah, the Mustakar Imams / Prophets does go in veil as and when they deem fit and not per Sunni whims and fancies. As you do not understand that martyrs are not dead and get their ‘rizk’ from Allah like wise you do not understand why Prophet Mohammed or other leaders do not for some time lead (2/3 of Mohammed (s.a.) life he not preached Islam to masses!

Anajmi: …Now, if the Dai had been giving an account of every penny that he had, he wouldn't be such a bad leader now would he? We wouldn't be asking him then, to be spiritual only.

Anajmi you are perpetrators of lies like your trio caliphs who gave oath to be loyal to Prophet sole appointed successor Mola Ali (a.s.) and then plotted to coup Mola Ali and become king and referred it as elected leader.

When you do not believe Shia Bohras faith, in office of Dai, you consider Shia as fiction then - when you are you writing ‘we’?

Anajmi you are enemy of Shia Bohras faith, by writing ‘we’, you want to hide your self behind Bohra Reformist mask like your trio caliphs who wanted to enjoy ruling as king and they hide themselves behind mask of Islam (elected leader = against Quran 2:124)???

J.C. : IF, Allah wanted a Leader to continue leading the masses, elected or not, why did not He continued the sending/appointing of Prophets, as He had done with 124,000 prophets ........ would 21 (or 12) Imams or bunch of Dais would have made much difference??!!!

The history from Aadam saifyullah till date is approx 7000years.

Sunni do no have knowledge, per Sunni fiction: Prophet numbering 124,000 - each will have average life of (7000years / 124,000 prophets) 0.05 years or 18 days per Prophet to lead!!!! Because Sunni are not via Ali but via Abubaker / Maviya / Abu Sufiyan / Yazeed - that is why u have poor state of knowledge.

This state is only acceptable in Sunni fictions but not in intellectual capacity. This is big topic and beyond the premise of current discussion which cannot be understood by people like you who are not following Prophet’s command: I am the city of knowledge and Ali is its entrance gate.


Humsafar,

You are like your leader Engineer, blind leads blind.

Your Engineer Asghar Ali wrote his whimsical Communist / Marxist theory and named it Quran ki Inklabi tafseer – Inklab mean old is rubbish and current contention is only right. All what Molana Abdullah ibn Abbas, Mola Ali, Imams and true Dai’s wrote in tafseer of Quran per your Engineer is wrong and what he wrote is the only right inference!!!

People like you and your engineer are the sole reason why the reformists are leaving our fold.

You claim to be ground men of Udaipur, I remember in some post somewhere you expressed stranger identity / unknown person for Marsiya khawan Janab Asger bhai Jawriya Wala! If you do not know him then you leave in fools paradise and definitely you are not man of ground, which you claim you are.

In another post you are writing Sunni as main-stream Islam!!!!!! Dawoodi Bohras are the only true and main stream Islam – if you disagree then get out from our fold.

People of Udaipur, where +80% of world reformist reside: their life is run with religious zest. Your Engineer will come to Udaipur and respected Jamat Members will go to Vadi village for picnic and he returns back to Mumbai. He do not have any touch with comman man.

You are fighting for point that corrupt Burhanuddin is not giving accounts, but your Engineer likewise is not giving his expense account reimbursed by Bohra Youth. Prove me wrong by publishing the audited accounts of Udaipur Jamat and sister concerns!!!!

You and your Engineer have nothing to do with faith and love of Bohras indeed you and engineer are enemy of our faith. You both are traitor You are a pseudo name and your Engineer is pseudo Bohra. And because of it reformist are leaving our fold. The common man on ground want religion and you and Engineer promotes anti-religion.

You are writing Shia is a fiction – shame on u.

Per Bohras faith, the leader i.e. Imam or his appointed nominee have all right to work in field of spiritual, social, political, military, monetary…like Prophet Mohammed(s.a.), Mola Ali, Imam Hasan, Imam Mehdi, Imam Mustansir, etc did.

Abide and love Bohras faith by heart.

Jalal-e-paadshahi ho, ya jamhoori tamasha ho
Juda ho deen syasat say, tou reh jaati hai chengezi

[anajmi]

mubarak,

‘Election’ of Khalifa (Abu Baker) is an invention

Good, then shias do not have any cause to keep bickering.

Shri Abubaker APPOINTING Umar as his successor and not letting people to elect next caliph! Quran 2:124 – rule of Allah is to appoint leader and Sunni invented their FICTIONS theory contrary to Quran of electing leaders (Abu Baker)!!!

So, according to the shias, Abu Bakr is more powerful than God. Shia fiction anyone??

For FOUR DECADES he didn’t approached masses, why he kept himself in veil?

Actually, he wasn't in veil, like your hidden Imam. His entire life is recorded. What he did, when he got married, who he worked for. We know everything. Unlike the hidden Imam who is hiding from God knows what and who knows what he is doing while he is hiding.

Allah has sent Prophet Mohammed (s.a.) to show masses right path then in those FORTY YEARS people who born and died – who is responsible for their heaven – why not Prophet Mohammed (s.a.) like Prophet Eesa (a.s.) started preaching Islam in masses from the day he born – why Prophet Mohammed kept himself in veil for FOUR DECADES???

Ask that question to your Imam when he finally shows up. Ask him that when the prophet was "hidden" only for FORTY YEARS, how can he stay in hiding for HUNDREDS OF YEARS??

the Mustakar Imams / Prophets does go in veil as and when they deem fit

You are right. I just turned forty. I am your hidden Imam. I was hiding on this forum board trying to figure out who my true disciples are before showing myself to the world. I know now and I am revealing myself to you. Bow down before me.

Prophet numbering 124,000 - each will have average life of (7000years / 124,000 prophets) 0.05 years or 18 days per Prophet to lead!!!!

Not if each prophet had 1,000 sons and they were all prophets as per shia fiction.

so 124,000/1,000 = 124 generations 7000 years/124 = 56 years give or take.

Your idiotic blabbering doesn't deserve a sane response.

[anajmi]

I think I messed up the calculation.

If each prophet had 10 sons, for 5 generations, and then the last batch had .24 sons, then we arrive at the magic figure of 124,000 in 6 generations (I think). Which means 7000/6 = around 1200 years per prophet. This perfectly fits shia fiction as then we can allocate a few hundred years for each prophet to go into hiding and do whatever it is that hiding shia imams do.

[Haggi]

In Shia Doctrine you don't get to elect the Imam nor does he chosen by God. This is an inheridetry position from an Imam to his (most of the the time) his first male offspring ie. from the linage of Ehle Bait.
As I see the history of of Islam , at the time of the prophet's death, he made a huge mistake by not making his intentions clear to the Muslims. Yes, I know the declaration at Ghadeer e Khum is a very clear argument for the Shias
but it can still be debatable. Even if he had designated Ali to be his successor why did he not proclaim in plain simple langauage of his desire to elevate him to be his successor. His wordings " for whomever I'm his Mowlla so is Ali his". This is quiet ambigious and subjected to hundreds years of debate of what he actually meant to say. As a logical person , I would certainly chose somebody of seniority of age like Abu Baker as Ali was relatively younger but Alas we have no knowledge of the prophet's intents. The Shia reasoning may also be strongly be valid that while Ali was attending to the prophet's funeral the Shahabas were holding election. Ihope God knows what happend there and if he cares about our salvation he would guide us onto the right path as there has been enough mayhem in this Sunni/Shia schism in our 1400 year history.
Myself, being almost an aethiest do not want to take side as I admire the simplicity of Sunnism faith while i abhor the Waahabism thought but at the same time take the path of a shia who has been brought up
to believe the martydom of Imam hussein saved Islam. However, I'm convinced that all Imams from the ahle bayt have been fallible and if they were not nor are our so called Dai's.
I have come to believe that we have so many faults in Islam in general and in ur own sects that we are so blinded to acknowledge the that this is the best, final, improvised religion that God has given to mankind.

I beg to ask you one question. What happens to the rest of worldwide population who are not Muslims ?. Why did he create non Muslims and to condemn them to hell for not being Muslims.Come on,our God has to be more kinder than this situation

[Maqbool]

JC,
I think its absolute clear among both shias and sunnis , that a leader after prophet (pbuh) is required, so lets not argue on whether leader is required or not. Rationale also dictates the importance and necessasity of leader for the muslim ummah.
-hs

If leader is sent by God then why god sends a leader who is capable of leading only a 0.01% of mankind and not the one who can lead a masses.

[humble_servant_us]

.

es, I know the declaration at Ghadeer e Khum is a very clear argument for the Shias
but it can still be debatable.. Even if he had designated Ali to be his successor why did he not proclaim in plain simple langauage of his desire to elevate him to be his successor. His wordings " for whomever I'm his Mowlla so is Ali his". This is quiet ambigious and subjected to hundreds years of debate of what he actually meant to say.

When the entire event of ghadeer is studied under the correct context, in no way the word Mawla is ambigous. But yes if someone wants he can create ambiguity in it, its his free will. If leadership is so vital, it cannot be accepted that prophet(pbuh) could leave the world without appointing his successor. Apart from ghadeer at zul-ashira when prophet(pbuh) proclaimed Tawheed, Ali(as) was declared at his successor and helper.

The event of ghadeer, the sermon of prophet(pbuh), the quranic ayats revealed during the sermon do not leave any scope of debate on word Mawla provided someone looks at it without prejudice.

, I would certainly chose somebody of seniority of age like Abu Baker as Ali was relatively younger but Alas we have no knowledge of the prophet's intents. The Shia reasoning may also be strongly be valid that while Ali was attending to the prophet's funeral the Shahabas were holding election.

If I had to chose somebody I would still chose Ali(as) because my decision would be based on his superiority over others in matters of obedience to Allah(swt) and his proximity to the prophet(pbuh). In matters of deen age has no value, it is the level of piety (taqwa) which matters. You can have a baby Jesus(as) talking in his cradle worthy of following that the old priest of the times.

[Muslim First]

Prophet Mohammed (s.a.) by default can never ever be wrong, but for two third of his life he remained in veil i.e. not lead the masses i.e. NOT preached the Islam. Hence, your/Sunni contention as usual is wrong;

Mubark

It will help if you read Sira of Prophet instead of Sabaks only.

Look at this time line of Prophet's life at
http://www.pbs.org/muhammad/timeline_html.shtml

He was born in 570

In 610 Muhammad SAW Receives First Revelation

In 613 Muhammad SAW Takes his Message Public

So if he was in veil then he was only for 3 years.

Check your history before you preach here.

Wasalaam

[Muslim First]

When the entire event of ghadeer is studied under the correct context, in no way the word Mawla is ambigous. But yes if someone wants he can create ambiguity in it, its his free will.

Questions for H_S_U

If Hz Ali was declared successor at Gadhir, Then why for next 3 months (till death of Prophet) he was neither treated like Shehzada nor he behaved like one?

On Prophets death why were Ansars bent on appointing one of them as leader? They should have known that Ali was annoited leader!!!

Why was Hz Ali not appointed to lead prayers during Prophet's sickness?

When the entire event of ghadeer is studied under the correct context

Did you ever read about soldiers being mad at Hz Ali and Prophet's endorsement could be to mollify the anger of soldiers?


Wasalaam

[Humsafar]

Humsafar,

You are like your leader Engineer, blind leads blind.

Mubarak, you do me great hounour by equating me with Ashgar Ali Engineer. I don't think I deserve it though.
By the way, you're doing a great job following in the footsteps of your teacher. Shaikh Ahemd Ali Saheb would be proud of you. Keep it up.

[porus]

This is the conversation I recorded between a Christian and Muslim First.

Christian: You know, of course, that our lord Jesus was so cruelly crucified. At every Easter we mourn his death.

MF: You are completely ignorant of the truth. Please read the Quran. Jesus (as) was not crucified at all.

Christian: On the contrary, sir, you are the one who is sorely lacking in knowledge. It is very clearly stated in the Bible (Matthew 27:35) that our lord Jesus was crucified.

MF: I am sorry to say that you have been brainwashed into falsehood. Quran (An-Nisaa 4:157) clearly states that Jesus (as) was not crucified. It only appeared as if he was crucified.

Christian: Are you talking about the Muslim idea of Zaahir and Baatin? In Zaahir he was crucified, and in Baatin, he was not?

MF: No, No my friend. This Zaahir/Baatin is all rubbish. Baatin is the last refuge of the scoundrels.

Christian: But I have heard that your Prophet Muhammad said when he was describing the revelation of your holy book, the Quran, in seven readings that there is baatin and zaahir in the Quran.

MF: Never mind that. Just read the Quran and you will be convinced that Jesus(as) was not crucified.

Christian: I will take my Bible any day over your Quran.

MF: You willfully choose to remain ignorant . I pity you. You will face hell-fire on the Day of Judgment.

Christian: I seek refuge in my lord Jesus.

MF: And I in Allah. Wassalaam.

Christian: Good bye.

[anajmi]

Christian: Are you talking about the Muslim idea of Zaahir and Baatin? In Zaahir he was crucified, and in Baatin, he was not?

Hmmm, a Christian talking about zaahir and baatin..hmmm.... You sure this wasn't porus pretending to be a christian now?

[Human]

^
anajmi, if porus is pretending to be the Christian or not is not important. The important thing is the message. I'm sure you'd agree his post does make a lot of sense! I'm also conducting some brain storming sessions with a few people and will post the results of that soon too. But so far, I agree with porus' post above.

[anajmi]

Human,

In order to agree with porus' post you have to know what Zaahir and Baatin is. Specially in the case of the ayah that he is referring to. Please let me know if you do.