Who are the blind followers?

[profastian]

The proggies and other riff-raff always accuse the mainstream abdes of blindly following the Syedna. The question is who are the blind followers. I will talk only in the context of Muslims and Islam. According to your framework, Quran is the book Of God and every belief follows from this basic concept. You believe everything in the Quran is true. You believe in propethood because the Quran says so(which itself is an anomaly as the Prophet himself brought the Quran to the people, so how do you there weren't in cahoots ). You ask for every answer from the Quran and when you don't find any (in a lot of cases), you either turn to Ijma or just say that only God knows the answer( God is a concept given by the Quran, again circular logic). You never question the validity of the Quran, hence following it blindly.

We on the other hand, have a proper framework for our beliefs. None of artifacts in the framework are followed blindly. In fact, each and every thing is questioned. For the concepts of God, the validatity of the Quran and Prophethood, we turn to the Haq na sahab. We also question the validity of the Haq na Sahab. The validity of the Haq na sahab is proved emprically, simply by asking questions. If there is no satisfying answer to any question (there haven't been any yet as far as I am concerned), this disproves his validity as he himself says that he knows every answer. I think this method of proving the validity of Haq na sahab is quite logical. This method has been prescribed by our awliya and every wali from Adam to Mohammad to Ali to Imams to DAI have urged their followers to ask any question of them..

Now who are the blind followers...
Please comment and don't try to derail this thread through mockery.

[labbaikyaHussain]

nicely drafted...

[sixfeetunder]

In the same way you don't need to prove that water is wet, the sun is hot and the earth is spheroidal, you don't need to 'prove' that Qur'an is true. It speaks for itself. However, if one wants to 'prove', there are numerous ways to do it. History shows us that Prophet had not read any book before the Qur'an. The eloquence of the Qur'an is in itself a miracle. Infact, the biggest miracle of the Prophet was the Qur'an. How do you think the Prophet gained thousands of followers only in a few years time? In 23 years, almost the entire Arabian peninsula had submitted to Islam. It was because of the power of the Qur'an. It moved people's heart. It moved even hard-hearted people like Umar, who had initially planned to murder the Prophet but after he read a few verses, it moved him and he became Muslim!

The Prophet did not spread Islam at the tip of the sword but with the power of the Qur'an. The Prophet was known as 'Al-Amin' (The Truthful) even before he declared his Prophethood to the people. He would settle disputes among the people. He had a lofty character and hence people were attracted towards his mission. They knew that this man would not speak a lie.

The Qur'an had also made prophecies which came true later (like the Romans defeating the Persians). The Qur'an also has a lot to say about everything from the development of a baby inside the womb to the big bang. Recent findings and scientific discoveries attest the authenticity of what the Qur'an talks about.

[master.b00t]

What is Shariyat , Tarikat, Marifat And Haquiqat in Isalam ?

Swayyam Shiv Profastian. Really I need Meanning Of These.

[Muslim First]

Profeatain

We on the other hand, have a proper framework for our beliefs. None of artifacts in the framework are followed blindly. In fact, each and every thing is questioned. For the concepts of God, the validatity of the Quran and Prophethood, we turn to the Haq na sahab.

So as per your Haq na Saheb:

What is concept of God?

His argument regarding validity of Qur'an and Prophethood?

I am sure he has explained to you.

[profastian]

Profeatain

We on the other hand, have a proper framework for our beliefs. None of artifacts in the framework are followed blindly. In fact, each and every thing is questioned. For the concepts of God, the validatity of the Quran and Prophethood, we turn to the Haq na sahab.

So as per your Haq na Saheb:

What is concept of God?

His argument regarding validity of Qur'an and Prophethood?

I am sure he has explained to you.

Yes he has. But again we are not discussing this nor do I have the liberty to do so.
What is under discussion is why are we the blind followers, when clearly it is others who are following blindly.

[profastian]

In the same way you don't need to prove that water is wet, the sun is hot and the earth is spheroidal, you don't need to 'prove' that Qur'an is true. It speaks for itself. However, if one wants to 'prove', there are numerous ways to do it. History shows us that Prophet had not read any book before the Qur'an. The eloquence of the Qur'an is in itself a miracle. Infact, the biggest miracle of the Prophet was the Qur'an. How do you think the Prophet gained thousands of followers only in a few years time? In 23 years, almost the entire Arabian peninsula had submitted to Islam. It was because of the power of the Qur'an. It moved people's heart. It moved even hard-hearted people like Umar, who had initially planned to murder the Prophet but after he read a few verses, it moved him and he became Muslim!

The Prophet did not spread Islam at the tip of the sword but with the power of the Qur'an. The Prophet was known as 'Al-Amin' (The Truthful) even before he declared his Prophethood to the people. He would settle disputes among the people. He had a lofty character and hence people were attracted towards his mission. They knew that this man would not speak a lie.

The Qur'an had also made prophecies which came true later (like the Romans defeating the Persians). The Qur'an also has a lot to say about everything from the development of a baby inside the womb to the big bang. Recent findings and scientific discoveries attest the authenticity of what the Qur'an talks about.

Agreed, the Quran has never been proven wrong. That is a strong argument. But what about the cases where Quran has no answers (on the face of it).

[profastian]

History shows us that Prophet had not read any book before the Qur'an.

That bit of history is BS. (Dawoodi bohra official position). The prophet was one of the most learned men amongst all the Arabs even before Prophet-hood. Again you guys reduce Islam to miracles and magic. How can a person who can't read/write suddenly become a "fount of all knowledge". But I digress. This probably should be discussed in some other thread.

[ozmujaheed]

Prof really one can ask any question and the diai will answer ?

Has he ever explained why his sons are the sole controllers of the dawaat ? Who and how why were they selected

Why does he think he is equal to the prophet or above that he watches when people give him sajada

Why does he never disown his wealth and live his final stages of his life living with modesty ?

Doesnhe realize he has lost touch with reality or he still lives a maharaja life where he gets whatever he or his princes want

[SBM]

Pro..
It is like banging the heads talking to you guys whenever a question is asked of you and others, you always hide behind the Oath of Secrecy what you took in Sabaq, I wonder if the Prophet and Other Imams had done the same, would current Dai would have known anything what they are talking since information could not have been revealed How do you know that what you are learning in secret Sabaks are authentic, prove it,donot say we believe whatever they say while casting doubt on authenticity of Quran, the word of Allah (btw in total Muslim Ummah and Scholar, Kotharis aamils are minute in numbers since you guys always harp about small number of Reform movement)
IT IS AMAZING THAT YOU CAST DOUBT ON AUTHENTICITY OF QURAN AND ASK FOR PROOF BUT HAVE NO PROBLEM IN BELIEVING EVERYTHING YOU LEARN IN SABAK WITHOUT ASKING ANY PROOFS OR PROVIDING FOR THE SAME, BY THE WAY QURAN WAS NOT BROUGHT TO PEOPLE BY PROPHET BUT WAS BROUGHT BY JIBRAIL TO THE PEOPLE THRU PROPHET

[blackstallion]

...How can a person who can't read/write suddenly become a "fount of all knowledge". But I digress. This probably should be discussed in some other thread.

Mr. Profatian,
Again in this post I ask you to ask any scholar of your choice and make him read this Ayath from Quran and verify, Sura 7 - Al Araf: Verse 158

Inshallah, you will get your answer

قُلۡ يَـٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّاسُ إِنِّى رَسُولُ ٱللَّهِ إِلَيۡڪُمۡ جَمِيعًا ٱلَّذِى لَهُ ۥ مُلۡكُ ٱلسَّمَـٰوَٲتِ وَٱلۡأَرۡضِ‌ۖ لَآ إِلَـٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ يُحۡىِۦ وَيُمِيتُ‌ۖ فَـَٔامِنُواْ بِٱللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ ٱلنَّبِىِّ ٱلۡأُمِّىِّ ٱلَّذِى يُؤۡمِنُ بِٱللَّهِ وَڪَلِمَـٰتِهِۦ وَٱتَّبِعُوهُ لَعَلَّڪُمۡ تَهۡتَدُونَ (١٥٨)


Sura 7 - Al-Araf (MAKKA) : Verse 158
Say (O Muhammad): O mankind! Lo! I am the messenger of Allah to you all - (the messenger of) Him unto Whom belongeth the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth. There is no God save Him. He quickeneth and He giveth death. So believe in Allah and His messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, who believeth in Allah and in His Words, and follow him that haply ye may be led aright.

[Humsafar]

We also question the validity of the Haq na Sahab. The validity of the Haq na sahab is proved emprically, simply by asking questions.

Profaustian, Please do let us know how did you empirically prove the validity of the Haq na saheb? What questions you asked? And what answers did you get and from whom?

[profastian]

We also question the validity of the Haq na Sahab. The validity of the Haq na sahab is proved emprically, simply by asking questions.

Profaustian, Please do let us know how did you empirically prove the validity of the Haq na saheb? What questions you asked? And what answers did you get and from whom?

Again that is not under discussion. I presented to you our framework and how it is to be used. The question of how and when I used it is of no consequence.

[Humsafar]

Profaustian, the framework you presented is nothing new. Every two-bit philosopher from time immemorial has been using this framework. Socrates said a long time ago that an unexamined life is not worth living. I hope your haq na saheb did not tell you that this framework was his seminal contribution to human knowledge!!! If you are not prepared to discuss how to use this framework and who will provide the answers then why even mention it here? Either you yourself don't know or you belong to a cult that wants to keep this knowledge secret. In any case, I propose that you rename your haq na saheb by introducing a comma in his title. It should read as: Haq, na saheb.

[profastian]

Profaustian, the framework you presented is nothing new. Every two-bit philosopher from time immemorial has been using this framework. Socrates said a long time ago that an unexamined life is not worth living. I hope your haq na saheb did not tell you that this framework was his seminal contribution to human knowledge!!! If you are not prepared to discuss how to use this framework and who will provide the answers then why even mention it here? Either you yourself don't know or you belong to a cult that wants to keep this knowledge secret. In any case, I propose that you rename your haq na saheb by introducing a comma in his title. It should read as: Haq, na saheb.

When did i say it was new. Besides that what i propose is not self examination at all. My motive is much inferior. I am saying simply this. You call us blind followers. I present to you our framework which doesn't have an inkling of following blindly. I present your framework, which is all about blind faith. Now, what i ask from you is just prove that i am wrong...

[porus]

Sura 7 - Al-Araf (MAKKA) : Verse 158
Say (O Muhammad): O mankind! Lo! I am the messenger of Allah to you all - (the messenger of) Him unto Whom belongeth the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth. There is no God save Him. He quickeneth and He giveth death. So believe in Allah and His messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, who believeth in Allah and in His Words, and follow him that haply ye may be led aright.

In the quote above, the translation for 'an-nabi al-ummi' is given as 'the Prophet who can neither read nor write'. Can you provide a scholarly justification for this translation?

By the way, in your initial postings you appear to have used the signature phrases from islamhelpline.com. Are you associated with this website? Or are you just copy/pasting from it? If so, please identify the source in your postings.

Muslim dogma has it that Quran is self-referential. That is, it can be corroborated only from within itself, not from any outside source. For abdes, Dai is also self-referential. This means, for instance, that when the Dai quotes from the Quran and offers a tafseer, it would be unthinkable for an abde to validate the Dai's words by referring to the Quran. This desire for validation would be considered gross disobedience of the Dai.

We therefore appear have a situation where there are two self-referential authorities for the Bohras, the Quran and the Dai. The Dai is superior in that the Quran is either not needed or, at best, only useful if the Dai provides an interpretation for it. Nonetheless, Quran's recitation is recommended for barakaat, and better if the barakaat is transferred to the Dai.

[Al Zulfiqar]

I propose that you rename your haq na saheb by introducing a comma in his title. It should read as: Haq, na saheb.

absolutely brilliant!!

[Al Zulfiqar]

porus, that was a superb rebuttal, but i daresay will go over the heads of all morons, who lack any intelligence to dissect or disseminate.

[Humsafar]

Thank you for your wonderful framework. I used it and questioned the whole series of sacred cows as you mentioned and the last sacred cow said that the haq na saheb is actually haq, na saheb!!!

[Jamali]

Profastian,

Are you trying to say that answers not found in the Quran are to be found with the Dai??? Does that mean the Dai is above the Quran? In other words are Dawoodi Bohras muslims or a new religion???

As every Muslim in this world knows that Almighty Allah is the creator of the heavens and the earth and is the one who has sent us the Holy Quran through the Prophet. In other words it is the word of Allah and there should not be any doubts. Infact as stated earlier scientists are only currently learning about things now that have been already written in the holy Quran many many years ago. So forget Muslims, but even non muslims have started to look at the Quran in a new perspective in search of answers.

Coming to your Dai, do tell us what should make us believe in him like the way you do? Now that you are a Dawoodi Bohra kindly enlighten us to why we should believe in your Dai. What answers does he have that others dont? If he truly knows or has answers that even the Quran cannot provide then we should share it to the whole muslim world as it is a duty.

Profastian judging by the current practices prevalent in the Bohra community towards the Maula is nothing short of Idol Worship. Shirk is well defined but that concept doesnt apply to bohras. Today every Bohras house has a big picture of Maula in the living rooms. In every aspect you ask for his permission, and link prosperity to him. If all that happens by Maulas grace then where does Almighty Allah fit in who has even made Maula? The basis of Islam is Almighty Allah but look at the importance that is given to a human by your community..Is this the practice of Islam? Isnt this akin to Idol worship?

As a brainwashed fanatic all what i said will probably never register in your brain but for a moment sit down in a quiet room and look at your daily life and count the number of times you have remembered Almighty Allah as compared to your Maula.
As a muslim your life should revolve around Almighty Allah not to a fellow human being. There is totally a difference between respecting a religious leader and idol worshiping him!!!

[anajmi]

In the quote above, the translation for 'an-nabi al-ummi' is given as 'the Prophet who can neither read nor write'. Can you provide a scholarly justification for this translation?

Most "scholars" of the Quran translate "Ummi" as unlettered, uneducated, illiterate. The word Ummi is used in other ayahs referencing other folks. In all contexts the accepted meaning is those who cannot read or write. There is a well known tradition about the treaty of Hudaibiya where the prophet asked Hazrat Ali to write down the agreement.

Some shia scholars have an issue with this because it invalidates the claim that the prophet wanted to write something on his death-bed. They can quote Bukhari but if bukhari conflicts with the Quran, then bukhari is wrong.

[blackstallion]

In the quote above, the translation for 'an-nabi al-ummi' is given as 'the Prophet who can neither read nor write'. Can you provide a scholarly justification for this translation?

What can be more scholarly justification then the Ayaath itself, if you understand. Then too as what I have read, here it is...

In Arabic terminology, an ‘Ummi’ is not necessarily one who is illiterate or one who does not know how to read and write; but because the Arab nation, unlike the ‘People of the Book’, had not received any specific Divine Scriptures or Divine Laws in their language, they were termed and recognized as an ‘Ummi’ or unlettered nation and people by the ‘People of the Book’, especially the Jews.

It was not that all the Arabs of Makkah were illiterate or did not know how to read and write; but the fact is that the pagan Arabs were extremely proud of their culture, and their language, and their literature, and poetry, and prose. Many amongst the Arabs, especially the Arabs of Makkah were proficient writers of literature and poetry and well acclaimed throughout the region for their composition in the Arabic language.

By the way, in your initial postings you appear to have used the signature phrases from islamhelpline.com. Are you associated with this website? Or are you just copy/pasting from it? If so, please identify the source in your postings.

Of course in my initial posting its a signature phrases from islamhelpline.com, don't you think this phrase should be a signature of for every mu'meneen. As I am not a scholar like those people who write on Islamhelpline.com and many other likewise sites, I read theirs and many other resources available who Quotes from Al Quran and Al Hadiths and post it on this forum so that Mu'meneens who maybe are not surfing those sites can a have review on similar topics.

Muslim dogma has it that Quran is self-referential. That is, it can be corroborated only from within itself, not from any outside source. For abdes, Dai is also self-referential. This means, for instance, that when the Dai quotes from the Quran and offers a tafseer, it would be unthinkable for an abde to validate the Dai's words by referring to the Quran. This desire for validation would be considered gross disobedience of the Dai.

We therefore appear have a situation where there are two self-referential authorities for the Bohras, the Quran and the Dai. The Dai is superior in that the Quran is either not needed or, at best, only useful if the Dai provides an interpretation for it. Nonetheless, Quran's recitation is recommended for barakaat, and better if the barakaat is transferred to the Dai.

I do not have any more comment on your above statement but only few Verses from Al Quran, if you understand...

Sura 22 - Al-Hajj (MADINA) : Verse 8
Yet there is among men such a one as disputes about Allah, without knowledge, without guidance, and without a Book of Enlightenment

Sura 3 - Al-E-Imran (MADINA) : Verse 79
It is not (possible) for any human being to whom Allâh has given the Book and Al-Hukm (the knowledge and understanding of the laws of religion) and Prophethood to say to the people: "Be my worshippers rather than Allâh's." On the contrary (he would say): "Be you Rabbaniyyun (learned men of religion who practise what they know and also preach others), because you are teaching the Book, and you are studying it."


I think you should read Quran with understanding, understand the creator and his creations, then I think you should try to ask justification for your above sentences. Further more whatever I have replied in this post is not a copy paste of another site or person except those Quotes marked in RED is from Al Quran.

[sixfeetunder]

History shows us that Prophet had not read any book before the Qur'an.

That bit of history is BS. (Dawoodi bohra official position). The prophet was one of the most learned men amongst all the Arabs even before Prophet-hood. Again you guys reduce Islam to miracles and magic. How can a person who can't read/write suddenly become a "fount of all knowledge". But I digress. This probably should be discussed in some other thread.

Profastian, I agree with you without doubt that The Prophet was THE MOST LEARNED man. But he did not learn in this world. The most marvelous creation of Allah does not need to 'learn' from others. Below, I provide a small commentary by Aqa Mahdi Puya on the word 'Ummi' and its connotations (with reference to verse 2:78).


The word ummi generally means one who can neither write nor read. Here it is used for those Jews who could neither read nor write. In many places the Quran addresses the Arabs as ummies. With reference to the use of ummi for the Holy Prophet, commentators say that it is either because the Holy Prophet could neither write nor read, or because he was one of the Arabs, or because he was the inhabitant of the city of Makka known as the Ummul-Qura.

Ummi can also be derived from the word umm-the mother. Ummi means the person who remains the same in his native endowments as was born, without receiving any education or training from any (outside) source. The Holy Prophet did not receive knowledge or education from any mortal but by Allah Himself. He was born with divinely endowed wisdom and remained the same, without letting any worldly agency influence his self, tutored and perfected by Allah Himself.

Allah has revealed to you the book and the wisdom and taught you what you did not know. Great has been the grace of Allah on you.

(NISA: 113)

Please refer to verse 12 of Ya Sin, verses 1 to 4 of al Rahman and verses 4 and 5 of al Najm.

It is He who raised among the ummies a messenger from amongst them, who recites His signs to them, reforms them and teaches them the book and the wisdom (JUMU-AH: 2), so it is absurd to believe that Allah had sent an illiterate to teach the book and the wisdom to the illiterates.

Imam Jafar bin Muhammad al Sadiq has said that the conscience of every human being tells him not to follow blindly any one who pretends to be a guide without having the necessary merits, therefore, he cannot wholly blame others for being ignorant of the divine guidance because of the trickery of the false guides he chooses to follow.

To conclude, I would quote a few beautiful lines from the poet Nizami:

Wisdom is inferior to the Messenger Ahmad,
The two worlds depend on the existence of Muhammad.
He is unschooled but stating in the most fluent way,
The inclusive knowledge from Adam to Jesus, I say.
In the keeping of a promise he is perfectly steadfast,
Ahead of all prophets he was though among them he was the last.

[profastian]

That bit of history is BS. (Dawoodi bohra official position). The prophet was one of the most learned men amongst all the Arabs even before Prophet-hood. Again you guys reduce Islam to miracles and magic. How can a person who can't read/write suddenly become a "fount of all knowledge". But I digress. This probably should be discussed in some other thread.

Profastian, I agree with you without doubt that The Prophet was THE MOST LEARNED man. But he did not learn in this world. The most marvelous creation of Allah does not need to 'learn' from others. Below, I provide a small commentary by Aqa Mahdi Puya on the word 'Ummi' and its connotations (with reference to verse 2:78).


The word ummi generally means one who can neither write nor read. Here it is used for those Jews who could neither read nor write. In many places the Quran addresses the Arabs as ummies. With reference to the use of ummi for the Holy Prophet, commentators say that it is either because the Holy Prophet could neither write nor read, or because he was one of the Arabs, or because he was the inhabitant of the city of Makka known as the Ummul-Qura.

Ummi can also be derived from the word umm-the mother. Ummi means the person who remains the same in his native endowments as was born, without receiving any education or training from any (outside) source. The Holy Prophet did not receive knowledge or education from any mortal but by Allah Himself. He was born with divinely endowed wisdom and remained the same, without letting any worldly agency influence his self, tutored and perfected by Allah Himself.

Allah has revealed to you the book and the wisdom and taught you what you did not know. Great has been the grace of Allah on you.

(NISA: 113)

Please refer to verse 12 of Ya Sin, verses 1 to 4 of al Rahman and verses 4 and 5 of al Najm.

It is He who raised among the ummies a messenger from amongst them, who recites His signs to them, reforms them and teaches them the book and the wisdom (JUMU-AH: 2), so it is absurd to believe that Allah had sent an illiterate to teach the book and the wisdom to the illiterates.

Imam Jafar bin Muhammad al Sadiq has said that the conscience of every human being tells him not to follow blindly any one who pretends to be a guide without having the necessary merits, therefore, he cannot wholly blame others for being ignorant of the divine guidance because of the trickery of the false guides he chooses to follow.

To conclude, I would quote a few beautiful lines from the poet Nizami:

Wisdom is inferior to the Messenger Ahmad,
The two worlds depend on the existence of Muhammad.
He is unschooled but stating in the most fluent way,
The inclusive knowledge from Adam to Jesus, I say.
In the keeping of a promise he is perfectly steadfast,
Ahead of all prophets he was though among them he was the last.

Ok, that maybe your position but not the Dawoodi Bohra one. The prophet was taught as other awliya before him were. Through other human beings. The other beings in the Prophet case being Abu Talib and Abdul Muttalib.

[profastian]

Muslim dogma has it that Quran is self-referential. That is, it can be corroborated only from within itself, not from any outside source. For abdes, Dai is also self-referential. This means, for instance, that when the Dai quotes from the Quran and offers a tafseer, it would be unthinkable for an abde to validate the Dai's words by referring to the Quran. This desire for validation would be considered gross disobedience of the Dai.

We therefore appear have a situation where there are two self-referential authorities for the Bohras, the Quran and the Dai. The Dai is superior in that the Quran is either not needed or, at best, only useful if the Dai provides an interpretation for it. Nonetheless, Quran's recitation is recommended for barakaat, and better if the barakaat is transferred to the Dai.

The DAI is not self referential nor is the Quran for abdes. Self referentiality is itself a logical anomaly and no logical framework can rely on that. The Quran can be corroborated through the Haq na Sahab(DAI is this case). As for the words of the DAI, they can be either factual knowledge (which can be tested empirically or through historical accounts), predictions ( which can be proven over the course of time) or religious doctrine (which requires basic logical sense, tawil is the way to this). As the Haq na sahab is present at all times, all the facts, predictions and religious doctrine can be covered. Quran on the other hand does not cover all facts, does not predict every happening and does not cover all religious knowledge (without tawil). As for questioning the actions or words of the DAI, it is not unthinkable rather it is encouraged. The only condition being that the questioner does not question with the intention to refute rather with the intention of gaining knowledge.

[profastian]

Profastian,

Are you trying to say that answers not found in the Quran are to be found with the Dai??? Does that mean the Dai is above the Quran? In other words are Dawoodi Bohras muslims or a new religion???

The Haq na sahab and the Quran are one and the same thing. Only one of them can talk. No question of one being above another.

[sixfeetunder]

Ok, that maybe your position but not the Dawoodi Bohra one. The prophet was taught as other awliya before him were. Through other human beings. The other beings in the Prophet case being Abu Talib and Abdul Muttalib.

Is this is the official Dawoodi Bohra position? Also, what did Hazrat Abu Talib (a.s) and Hazrat Abdul Muttalib (a.s) teach the Prophet?

Wordly/secular affairs or religious ones? Thanks.

[profastian]

Ok, that maybe your position but not the Dawoodi Bohra one. The prophet was taught as other awliya before him were. Through other human beings. The other beings in the Prophet case being Abu Talib and Abdul Muttalib.

Is this is the official Dawoodi Bohra position? Also, what did Hazrat Abu Talib (a.s) and Hazrat Abdul Muttalib (a.s) teach the Prophet?

Wordly/secular affairs or religious ones? Thanks.

Both... everything a Nabi needs to know.

[Jamali]

Profastian,

Are you trying to say that answers not found in the Quran are to be found with the Dai??? Does that mean the Dai is above the Quran? In other words are Dawoodi Bohras muslims or a new religion???

The Haq na sahab and the Quran are one and the same thing. Only one of them can talk. No question of one being above another.

Lol Profastian... There is no way "Quran and the Haq, na Saheb" are the same thing. What you are insinuating can have alot of repercussions in the Muslim World. Your 'More La' may have Quran nah Ilm but in no way can be compared to the Holy Quran!

Also maybe you can expla in"Shirk" in the context of the Quran and relate that with your Haq, na saheb. One forbids Shirk but the other....need I say more!!!

Profastian, you know "your kind" are really not to blame. Since birth, your brains have been washed and bleached so much by your community that you have started to relate things as being the same! Thats the reason such nonsensical quotes are made and we can only hope and pray that Almighty Allah put you on the right path. We also pray for your children who you have forced to follow the path of slavery and stupidity.

Sometimes I wonder why dont the Dawoodi Bohras just proclaim themselves to be a religion of their own with their Haq, na Saheb to be God....I mean after all if He holds the door of Jaanat then he is akin to God. You tend to rely on him for your whole life on this earth and even the hereafter so why do u call yourselves Muslims. The last I knew was Muslims believed in oneGod - Almighty Allah and Muhammad as the messenger of Allah and that there is now one who you do Sajda or pray namaz to except Allah but in your case most if not all the pillars of Islam have been circumvented to have an element of Haq, na Saheb incorporated in them so in essence you have a religion other than Islam. What i am saying is with your logic that two things are "same" then Bohrism automatically qualifies to be a religion too. I hope this you can understand as it benefits your More La! :):)

[porus]

The Haq na sahab and the Quran are one and the same thing. Only one of them can talk. No question of one being above another.

A famous remark attributed to Ali ibn Abi Talib is:

"al-Qur'an, huwa afzal min kull shayy doon Allah" meaning "Qur'an is superior to all things except Allah".

What Ali is saying is that the Quran is 'greater' than all, including humans which have Prophets and Ali amongst them. He does not say that any thing or person is equal to the Qur'an.

Since this abde wants to equal Haq na Saheb with the Quran, we must rewrite the above quote from Ali as:

"al-Quran, huwa afzal min kull shayy, doon ad-Dai"

And I must repeat al Z's rendering of a an ayat from the Quran as:

"Inna lid-Dai wa inna ila ad-Dai raji'oon".

That should bring smiles to all abdes.