Question for Mr. Engineer

[GodBless]

Mr. Engineer,

I respect what you have done for the community under very difficult circumstances in a community ruled by fear, not knowledge. However, it is my opinion that your Progressive movement does not go far enough, because you have had the opportunity to provide the Bohri community with an alternative in each city where a traditional Bohri jamaat exists. It is my understanding the you support the position of that Dai, but you do not support the atrocities committed in the name of the position.

1. Where in the Quran does it legitimize the position of the Dai, with the responsibilities that you approve of ?
2. You refer to the Bohras in your article as ” a strictly Islamic community”. Is it ?
3. As Islam is being scrutinized in the West in light of 9/11, many so-called Christian scholars are citing facts such as the Prophet being a pedophile marrying a 10-year old, and the Quran promising 70+ virgins in heaven for those who kill in the name of God, and several references to the killing of infidels. From the select translations of the Quran that I have read, this appears to be true. Do you agree? If so, the Bohra community is not strictly Islamic (thankfully).
4. The Islamic community simply comes back with ‘Islam is the religion of peace” without any specific references in the Quran to refute question #3. Can you cite any specific references that dispute # 3 ?
5. No Islamic country seems to believe in a democracy ( and none exists) , yet they oppose the West where Islam is practiced freely. What thought process leads to this kind of thinking ?

[huzaif]

Huzaif and Raheel,

This post has been deleted as a warning. pls stop using bad language and curses. We can suspend your membership. If you do not have anything useful to contribute, you don't have to come to this board.

Thank you

Admin

<small>[ 11-07-2002, 05:12 PM: Message edited by: Admin ]</small>

[MOHD HUSSAIN]

Godblees- Thank you I have the same questions going thro my mind! I hope some of the scholars on the board will also attempt to answer these too specially Porus & Hamsafar -I also have the question regarding the war in Karbala when Imam Hussein died- Is this war was played due to religion or was there any family feud & Khalifat problems arising after the prophet"s death? Or it was a combination of both ? It has never been that clear to me!Thank you-

[MOHD HUSSAIN]

Godbless- Your question was answered by Mr Asgharali Engineer as follows ; "Dear Friend,

As for your comment and questions I have to say as follows:
We do want to provide alternative to the Jamat's set up under authoritarian rule of the present da`i. But no one is willing to come forward except in Udaipur, aurangabad, Malegaon, Hyderabad, Mumbai etc. People lack courage and go with establishment. Even they are afraid of associating with underground movement, let alone with any open, overground movement.

Yes, Bohras are an Islamic community in the sense that still, despite heresies sought to be introduced by the Da`i, they stick to Islamic shari`ah as compared to the Khojas who have given up Islamic shari`ah. it is in this sense that I maintain that Bohras are an Islamic community.
Simple translation of the Qur'an cannot enable anyone to understand the real meaning of the verses. They will have to study the history and the context in which the Qur'anic verses were revealed. it is not true that Qur'an requires all infidels to be killed (Europe has kiiled millions during medieval ages as infidels). it is meant only for those who were out to kill Muslims or severely persecute them. One should read the Qur'an in proper context. the basic teachings of the Qur'an lay stress on justice, equality, benevolence, compassion and wisdom.
Best wishes,
Asghar Ali Engineer

[GodBless]

Mohd.

Where did you find the response quoted above ?

[MOHD HUSSAIN]

Godbless: I E-mailed him your post & he mailed me back - Apprently he did not answer it completely!

[Sajid Zafar]

Bhai Mohamad Husain:

What looks apparently if one glance through the history that the Battle of Karbala was not between Yazid and Imam Husain rahter it was the family fued started at the time of Holy Prophet [PBUH]. This was further agrivated over the period of time [heightened at the time of "Fateh Macca" when Abu Soofyan obtained pardon. One must remember that both Imam Ali Zainul Abedeen and Imam Mohamdul Baqir were there during the Battle of Karbala. They could have been killed by Yazidi forces, if it was not a family fued. The fact is, the whole event is enchased by the pundits of all sects of Islams [including our corrupt Kothar].

[simon]

You are way off target when you call the Battle of Karbala as a family feud. Rather it was a battle between haq and the forces of evil.
To point some fallacies in your statement "the family fued started at the time of Holy Prophet [PBUH]. This was further agrivated over the period of time [heightened at the time of "Fateh Macca" when Abu Soofyan obtained pardon." The pardon should have alleviated the feud rather than pardoned. Also it is a grave injustice and bordering on blaspehemy, when we suggest that the Prophet(PBUH) and Maulana Ali(AS) and Hamza(AS) fought against the infidels because of a family feud. They fought and killed them in their cause of Islam. Maulana Ali while fighting in a battle and he was just about to kill his opponent when the opponent spat at him. This angered Maulana Ali and as he was about to raise his sword he withdrew and turned his back on his opponent and did not kill him. The opponent ran after him and asked him the reason why he did not kill him. He replied that he was fighting and killing him in the way of Allah but when he spat at him he became angry and then he realized that he was killing him in anger. To Maulana Ali this killing would not be a pure act because it would mix anger with the cause of Allah.

"One must remember that both Imam Ali Zainul Abedeen and Imam Mohamdul Baqir were there during the Battle of Karbala. They could have been killed by Yazidi forces, if it was not a family fued. " The reason why they were not killed was because Imam Zainul Abedin was prevented by Imam Husain from going into battle. Yezid and Obaidullah also were intent on killing Imam Zainal Abedin when he was brought to them as a prisoner. Imam Mohammadul Baqir was around 4 years old when he was in Karbala. Aliasgar, the 6 month old son was killed by the Yezidi forces which negates your theory of a family feud.

[Sajid Zafar]

In my personal openion Reformist Jamat {RJ] didn't get the place due to the following reasons:

Majority of Bohras don't know how it works [adminstrative wise] and how it would be different from Syedna's relegious establishment!

What kind of religious setup is established by the RJ especially when Dai is subtracted from the system?

How affairs [like Wedding, Taalak, Mot, etc.] are managed by RJ?

What are RJ’s views about Dawah, seclusion of Imam, Taweel and present Syedna and his father’s accession of Dawah?

What is RJ’s system for distribution of Zakat, Sadqat-ul-fitre, etc.?

What kind of set up RJ offers to our youth for their religious education?

Nothing will sucess unless answers to some of those above questions and many more like these are answered in the right prospective.

[GodBless]

Sajid,

You have outlined the very reasons that the Reformist Jamaat (RJ) has been a non-issue. I am dissapointed that Mr. Engineer did not respond to the question directly.

It is easy enough being against something, it is much harder to offer an alternative.

RJ does not offer an alternative.

[Humsafar]

Sajid/GodBless,

Pls read the extensive literature on the reform movement in the <a href="http://www.dawoodi-bohras.com/issues.htm"> reform issues </a> section on this site. Sajid, you'll find answers to your questions there. Also, see the <a href="http://www.dawoodi-bohras.com/about.htm"> about us </a> section to see details about various reformist jamaats.

The Udaipur reformist jamaat has been functioning for more than 30 years. If you are looking for alternatives, you'll not find a better example. Not that it is perfect ( nothing is), but compared to orthodox tyrannies, it comes close to what reformists want to achieve. Here are some highlights of the Udaipur jamaat: elections are held regularly to elect jamaat officials; jamaat account are made available to the public; the jamaat runs schools and clinics; monies collected through zakat etc. are spent on the community through various welfare schemes; religious and Arabic classes are held on weekends; jamaat is responsible for the upkeep of masjids and the jamaatkhana.

Similarly, various reformist jamaats, although much smaller, are run in Bombay, Aurungabad, Hyderabad, Malegaon etc.

Outside of India, we've vibrant reformist jamaats in the UK and Canada - where jamaat officials are democratically elected, accounts are published, religious functions/ceremonies are held regularly. In the US too, a sizeable number of reformists are in the process of forming a jamaat.

If you want to learn more about reformist jamaats, especially the Udaipur jamaat, you do well to sign up for the <a href="http://www.dawoodi-bohras.com/events/ud ... [b]Udaipur
trip[/b]</a> starting in two weeks - on 23rd December. The trip is organised by the reformists in the West to find for themselves first hand answers to the very same questions that Sajid has raised. Please join this trip to find out for yourselves. If what you see and experience on this trip does not live up to your expectations, only then you have the right to pronounce that "RJ does not offer an alternative." Tod declare this before knowing the details is, to say the least, irresponsible.

[Sajid Zafar]

Dear Br. Humsafar:

RJ in Udaipur and RJ jamats in some other cities is only few examples. Bohras are spread all over the world. We can’t afford to abandon our identity as we occupy a unique position [being progressive and broad-minded Muslims].

We need a socio-relegious system. Let’s take my example. I live here in Detroit, USA. I don’t know about the very existence of any RJ though I tried to find it out. On the other hand, Syedna’s establishment is everywhere. I don’t have even slightest doubt about the well doing of RJ. But still there are many questions, which remain unanswered as of to-date.

If we want to see RJ flourishing like others we have to find answers only after than we can convince our brothers and friends of our own community.

[GodBless]

Humsafar,

You are right, that statement is unfair. However all the questions on my original post are not addressed on the web site.

I am aware of some fully functional jamaats in major cities. As I say that I also realize the complexity of addressing the needs of a few progressives (if any) in each jamaat.

[MOHD HUSSAIN]

One of the another E- mail to me by Mr Engineeris as follows:---------"Friend,
Thanks for your e-mail and your questions. We have tried our best to form alternative jamats in every town in India. But what can we do if people do not come forward because of fear. We cannot form jammats without actual members. Fear is all pervasive in the Bohra community.How can we then form alternative jamaats in every town. We are at it for more than twenty five years now. there are jamaats in few towns where we have persons willing to do that.
Yes Bohras are much more Islamic than say Khojas who believe shari`at has been suspended. But The Da`i is busy pushing them towards un-Islamic things and introducing personality cult. He has let loose tyranny on his own followers to keep his grip. He is treating Bohras as a flock, not as human beings.
If some people are giving twist to Islam after 9/11 it is their mischief. It is not necessarily so. We have to argue and reply. I have written several articles on that to remove misunderstanding. The Holy Prophet first married Khadija ten years his senior. What about that. and the age of Ayesha was 10 or not is a historical controversy. Accroding to me she was 19 years when she married Prophet. Very good research work has been done on that by competant scholars. Her age being 10 first was mentioned 300 years after His death.
There is mention about Hur in Qur'an but no where that every Muslim will have 70 houris. Also, one has to understand the meaning of Hur. it is spiritual than corporeal.
Qur'an allows those kafirs to be killed who kill Muslims. it is totally wrong that Qur'an asks Muslims to kill any kafir whetehr he is war monger or not. Prophet's conduct is totally aobe board in this matter. I am surprised that people are being taken in by Western mischievous propaganda. Western countries have killed thosand times more innocent people in wars in the name of democracy than Muslims at any time. In two wars in twentieth century crores of people were killed, most of them civilians. Shall be blame Christianity for that? Certainly not. Similarly if some Muslims killed innocent people to serve their own political interests how can we blame Islam or Qur'an. The attack on 9/11 was motivated politically without any consensus between Muslims. Lakhs of Muslims condemned it.
Best wishes,
Asghar Ali Engineer

[Humsafar]

Sajid I fail to understand your point. Reformists are too few in number in North America to have their own jamaats "everywhere". I don't know what you mean when you say "we can't afford to abandon our identity". What do mean by identity? and how do mean we are abadoning it? Is it the outer appearance of saya/rida/top you are concerned about? This is the new "identity" that the royal establishment has imposed on the community in the last 20 years. The purpose of this is plain: to expand control over every aspect of Bohras's lives.

The ture identity in not in outwards appearance but the inner values that conform to islamic tenets and are reflected in our day to day lives and the conduct of our community's affairs. We reformists are trying to achieve just that in our own small way.

GodBless,
I'm sorry all your questions are not answered on this website. I'll try to find them for you.

[Sajid Zafar]

Br. Humsafar:

Thanks for you post.

The true identity of our community is our progressive mind, not the redicolous attire introduce by Syedna through his establishment. I agree with Mr. Engineer that most of us are not ready to leave their fear and come openly against Kothari tughs, though we feel that what is happening is neither islamic nor rational.

But you are still missing the point, we have to find the comlete alternative.

I would realy appreciate if Mr. Engineer spare sometime and write about the issues raised on this board.

[GodBless]

Humsafar,

I appreciate the offer, but I would not expect you to do my research for me. Mohd. Hussain's quote above from Mr. Engineer gives me more insight than the web site on his position.It is the same canned answer as the other leader's (most "so-called") answers.

There is mention about Hur in Qur'an...Also, one has to understand the meaning of Hur. it is spiritual than corporeal

OK, so what is it ?

The Holy Prophet first married Khadija ten years his senior. What about that

So ? Is marrying a 10 year old after marrying someone 10 years your senior OK ?

Accroding to me she was 19 years when she married Prophet

Not good enough for me without facts backing that statement up.

Western countries have killed thosand times more innocent people in wars in the name of democracy

Untrue unless you discount Muslim on Muslim atrocities. More relevant though, in recent times how many were killed unprovoked ?

Lakhs of Muslims condemned it

Did you ?

Since I am not privileged enough to recieve direct answers, perhaps you guys can get him to respond.

Thanks again....

[anajmi]

Godbless,

Not good enough for me without facts backing that statement up.

It is good enough for me!!

Untrue unless you discount Muslim on Muslim atrocities. More relevant though, in recent times how many were killed unprovoked ?

Actually it does not matter how many people were killed by the westerners. What matters is whether what you are doing is right or wrong (unprovoked or not) American actions in Iraq resulted in the deaths of more than a million Iraqis but they are not saying that they did it because Saddam Hussein may have killed even more. They say they are right in doing what they did. May be we should follow their example and instead of trying to show that what happened was a smaller wrong than something else that happened, we should show that what happened was right.

[anajmi]

Does anybody over here believe that an american life is worth more than a muslim life?

Cause I've heard so much condemnation of muslims because of the deaths of 3000 americans but not one word against the deaths of more than a million muslims. But then as the intelligentsia on this board will so readily point out, that it was the muslim's own fault.

[GodBless]

It is good enough for me!!
Based on which fact ?

What matters is whether what you are doing is right or wrong (unprovoked or not)

A dangerous statement unless there is a universal "right".

American actions in Iraq resulted in the deaths of more than a million Iraqis
It is time you guys also ask about more than a million dead during the Iraq/Iran war, Saddam gassing fellow Muslims, and his oppression of Kurds and Shiites. How many died, or is Muslim against Muslim a non-issue ? How many Muslim countries fought for Muslims in Bosnia ? More than a million Muslims were killed in Bangladesh thanks to Pakistan, muslims are gettting butchered in Africa by Muslims daily.

Your point is ? Who is "right" ?

[Khairan]

> It is time you guys also ask about more than a million dead during the Iraq/Iran war, Saddam gassing fellow Muslims, and his oppression of Kurds and Shiites.

Iraq was also solidly backed by America during this war. In fact, I believe that the only times Saddam Hussein has ever used is vaunted Weapons of Mass Destruction is when he was allied with the US.

How many people ever blame democracy or capitalism for the countless deaths during the Vietnam war?

That war was fought for the sake of defending democracy, just as militant Muslims are fighting "for the sake of defending Islam."

Of course their is fanaticism and ignorance involved on the part of Muslims in many parts of the world. But I find people far too comfortable with the double standard that Islam is rotten to the core because many Muslims are fanatical, or militant, or brutal.

Andrew Jackson and Christianity aren't blamed for the Trail of Tears. The genocidal president even gets to be commemorated on the twenty for all posterity.

feh...
<end rant here>

[GodBless]

Iraq was also solidly backed by America during this war. In fact, I believe that the only times Saddam Hussein has ever used is vaunted Weapons of Mass Destruction is when he was allied with the US.

Your point is that it absolves Saddam of all blame ? The US like all political leaderships exploits situations, for right or wrong.

How many people ever blame democracy or capitalism for the countless deaths during the Vietnam war?

That war was fought for the sake of defending democracy, just as militant Muslims are fighting "for the sake of defending Islam."

Point being that the US backed out of the war due to internal strife and opposition. INTERNAL being the key word.

just as militant Muslims are fighting "for the sake of defending Islam."

...and how many of YOU are fighting that ? Obviously not you.

How did Muslims "defend Islam" on September 11 ?

[Humsafar]

Sajid,

In terms of an alternative what you're asking for is a blueprint. In this sense, reformists do not have any - no social group can have such a blueprint. Human scoieties do not work that way. Reformists have broad guidelines with which we are wokring towards an alternative. It is a process which will keep evolving with time.

GodBless,
My intention was not to do the research for you but to perhaps get Mr. Engineer to answer your questions.

[Humsafar]

As for the West, the American Empire, Iraq, Vietnam et al:

There's no denying the fact the West has been actively demonising everything Islamic - from the time of Dante's "divine comedy" to the Crusades to the present-day, if poorly veiled, war on terrorism.

It is also true that in history rulers/mobs who happened to be Christians have killed more people than rulers/mobs who happened to be Muslims. This does not prove the goodness of Muslims or the intrinsic badness of Christianity. It's a simple power equation, Muslims would have done the same if they were in the position of power and domination. The difference is that when the Christian West kills, it's always for the sake of high principles (democracy etc.) but when Muslims kill it's because of religion. One should not underestimate the propaganda of Western media and its paid intellectual class.

Coming to the present day, it would help to keep in mind that we live in the age of the American Empire. Rulers of almost all Muslim countries are corrupt kings and dictators and would not survive for a single day without the support of their masters in Washington. Saddam was one of their stooges too until he stepped out of line. I would not trust Saddam anymore than I would trust the Empire. Sept 11 was a protest against American domination - although killing of civilians can never be justified. It's wrong to say that militants are fighting to "defend Islam". But it does serve West's propaganda purposes to equate sept 11/al qaida with Islam.

As for Americans in Vietnam, they were not there to defend democracy. They were there for reasons of imperial necessity. In other words, to keep the natives in check.

[GodBless]

Humsafar,

Generally I am in agreement with some of what you are saying. I think Muslims are too quick to demonize the US when it scares me to even think of an Islamic Empire.

One should not underestimate the propaganda of Western media and its paid intellectual class.

True, and one must not underestimate the propoganda of state controlled media in Islamic countries, and unfortunately, the schools and the Madrasas.

Rulers of almost all Muslim countries are corrupt kings and dictators and would not survive for a single day without the support of their masters in Washington

I used to think that, until I saw what happened in Iran. They replaced the Shah, who was a puppet and a dictator, with the Ayatollah. They no longer have US support, but they do not have a democracy either. My guess is that is if King Abdallah, or the Saud Family lost support of the US and were taken down by the populace, the result would not be a democracy but a dictatorship with less freedoms. I support neither of the the two, but not because the US supports them, but the fact that they allow the US or any country to buy them out.

I guess we defer on the accountability issue. Political motives require all countries to pay off someone (if they can), therefore, all are equal in that intent.

I simply don't buy the fact that the puppets who are bought are victims .

[Khairan]

> As for Americans in Vietnam, they were not there to defend democracy. They were there for reasons of imperial necessity.

Certainly they were not there to defend democracy. Nor do I think the 9/11 attackers were in any way defending Islam. The point at hand, however, is not whether they were, or even whether they thought they were, but the fact that they said they were. Whose rhetoric is permissible and whose is not.

I object to the hypocrisy that the West (and the US, in this example), allows itself to kill civilians for the sake of its ideology and safety, but when Muslims do so it is terrorism. If the one is, then so is the other.

I agree with GodBless that Muslims as a community have not been sufficiently self-critical of themselves as a community; domestic pressure was critical in ending the Vietnam War.

But I choke on this moral high ground garbage that the is being forced down our throats.
If Islam can be indicted for the actions of its followers, than so too can democracy and capitalism be - and I have yet to see anyone who wasn't on the other side of the Iron Curtain do so.

[Humsafar]

GodBless,

Islamic countries (madarsaas etc.) do no practice mere propaganda. What they do is wholesale, unapologetic brainwashing. When I lash out at the West, it doesn't mean I'm condoning Islamic countries. Rulers on both sides are hand in glove for their mutual interests - the brainwashed mobs join them with flag or faith, often both.

Whoever implied that puppets are victims? The people are - on both sides.

Again, I never implied that every Muslim despot/dictatorship is supported by the US. If it's not the US then it's the mullahs (as in Iran), the religion or tradition or whatever. Such has been the fate of Muslims that the rapacity of their rulers, the perversity of the mullahs and the greed to outsiders have prevented them from creating a free, democratic systems. Blame it on history, blame it on religion, blame it on the gullible Muslims masses themselves who will believe and do anything in the name of Islam.

[Muddai]

I agree with your post....

The foreign policy by definition is skewed, and meant to promote self-interest. I do not blame the US ar any country for doing what is in their self-interest, when the self-interest promotes freedom, I am more likely to bear it than if it is used to repress human rights, freedom of speech, press, and religion as Saudi Arabia, North Korea, China and all Islamic countries do. If you sell out to repress your own people, you are at fault, whether you are backed by Russia, France (Iraq etc.), or US (almost everyone else).

The US Foreign Policy component that does not promote self-interest, and is not consistent, is it's biased support of Israel, which I am against.

[Humsafar]

Muddai,
The American self-interest in foreign domination is not "freedom" but sheer control - to make the world and its resources accessible to its corporations. Economic and security interests are two holy cows for which the US power elite will sacrifice anything - freedom, rights, properties, lives of people abroad - and yes, economic and social justice of people at home.

If it serves the interests of the American ruling class to curb the rights and liberties of Americans it will bloody well do so - the most recent example being the Homeland Security Act.

American policies - foreign or domestic - only promote the self-interest of the ruling class. Which, to be fair, is true of all countries but not all of them aspire to rule the world. The greater the ambition of a ruling class, the greater its capacity to damage at home and abroad.

[Humsafar]

Sorry, the last should read:
The greater the ambition of a ruling class, the greater its capacity to do damage at home and abroad.