an article i came about in uk paper by a muslim.
wahabis-- just ponder over it are u true as u claim to be follower of rightful islam?
At a bus stop in Britain, bus No. 414 stopped and a well-dressed man in his 30s boarded the bus while holding a four-wheeled stroller with a beautiful blue-eyed baby who I think was not more than two years old.
Due to lack of sufficient space to safely place the stroller, the man placed it on a seat and stood throughout the journey. He held a mobile phone in his left hand and an apple in his other hand. The apple was bitten once.
Out of curiosity, I watched this man hold the apple and not eat it. Several questions were running through my mind especially because of the way he was holding the apple as though he was holding a bouquet of Holland’s flowers. I continued to watch him through my dark-shaded sunglasses even though I am not the kind of person to poke my nose into other people’s businesses.
At the next stop, a woman in her 20s boarded the bus. At that time, I was still wondering why he wasn’t eating the apple, whether it belonged to him or his child, and many such questions. I then saw the woman approach him and ask if she can finish the apple.
The man politely turned her down several times despite her persistence. All the while, I was watching out of increasing curiosity and wondering why he was holding onto that apple without eating it.
As I kept thinking about all these questions, the red bus came to a stop and immediately the man alighted from the bus, leaving behind the child in the stroller. He went to the nearest dustbin, threw the apple and hopped back into the bus.
When he was inside the bus, he politely told the woman who asked for the apple that, “The apple had fallen on the ground. I would not advise anyone to eat it”. It sounded as though the man was apologizing for not meeting her request.
This is when my mind reached a conclusion regarding the way he was holding the apple like a bouquet of followers and why it was bitten only once. The level of politeness and decorum shown by the man was admirable. He did not mock her or call her crazy. They both behaved in a respectable and kind manner, which made me wonder how such a situation would result in our Arab and Islamic world.
Our lives these days are based on incidents and our logical reactions to such incidents. Due to complexities of life, we usually end up looking for a knot on a rope with no knots.
I will not look into the reason why both of them behaved the way they did even though both appeared well-dressed and of sound mind. I am aware that there are people in this world who, despite their neat appearances, are unable to find anything to eat or drink. However, I would like to indicate my fascination regarding the way the man dealt with the woman in the most humane way possible without showing any kind of prejudice.
It is not strange for non-Muslims to show high moral standards that Muslims often lack. I see crippled trends and values being followed by Muslims of the present age while the non-Muslims follow the same trends and values in the best form. I believe there are many like me who have noticed this as well.
Where I currently live, it is common to find many female beggars hiding behind veils and uttering words to indicate they are Muslims. Even though I do not know if they are Muslims or not, what I know is that they have mastered the art of using religion to beg. They have even taught their children how to beg and they will not leave you until they receive something.
In the other world, it is common to see people, particularly the unfortunate ones, playing a musical instrument or performing some form of art on the streets. In return, pedestrians who appreciate their performance usually leave some money inside a cup or on a mat near those people out of generosity.
I believe anyone who exerts efforts even an acrobat on the street deserve a coin more than those who use their children as a begging tool irrespective of whether they are Muslims or non-Muslims.
I really feel sad and hurt when I see some Muslims following Islam only by the alphabets. The current events transpiring in the Muslim world in terms of conspiracies and plots among the Muslims themselves in regional and social scale are strong evidences of the fact that many Muslims lack the spirit of Islam and are just living skeletons.
The incident inside Bus No. 414 provoked me into thinking about Islam with no Muslims. I hope the hearts of Muslims who unfortunately are living without Islamic trends and values will be moved.
"WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
-
ghulam muhammed
- Posts: 11653
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
Radical face of Saudi Wahhabism
The agenda of the Islamic State today is merely an extension of the devious plan laid down by Abdul Wahhab almost two hundred years ago
It is ironical indeed that the Turkish regime today is implicated in propping up a terrorist group called the Islamic State (IS), which has vowed to spread Wahhabi Islam all over the world. The present Wahhabism, legitimated and empowered by the Saudi regime, has violent, almost criminal, origins in the 19th century. If we care to look into its beginnings, we won’t be surprised at its utter contempt for human life and everything else which doesn’t conform to its own narrow/sectarian agenda. Let me explain the irony first.
It was the Ottoman regime which bore the brunt of Wahhabi Islam soon after it became a force in the Central Arab region. The toxic combine of 18th century Islamic scholar Abdul Wahhab and the first monarch of Saudi Arabia Ibn Saud posed a challenge to the Ottoman rule. They also questioned the prevalent Islamic beliefs and practices. The Turks not only defended their power but also assiduously fought for the mystic Islam they had professed and supported all these years. The Ottomans fought and exiled the Wahhabis to the Arab deserts where they remained for almost a century. This Wahhabi bigotry was condemned by the Turks as criminal and unIslamic. The sad irony is that the current Turkish regime has joined the Wahhabi bandwagon, forgetting all about the Bektashis, Qadiris and other dervishes they had cherished all these centuries. The IS agenda today is merely an extension of the devious plan laid down by Abdul Wahhab almost 200 years ago. Let us look at this so-called puritan Islam proposed by the Wahhabis, its violent ‘othering’ of Muslims they disliked and the parallels with the present day IS terrorists.
Hate-filled agenda
Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab, the founder of Wahhabism, and his radical, exclusionist puritanism became deadlier when Ibn Saud decided to add its religious fervour to his banditry. (The latter was then no more than a minor leader amongst many of continually fighting and raiding Bedouin tribes in the desperately poor deserts of the Nejd.) Thus Abdul Wahhab, in collaboration with Ibn Saud, the founder of Saudi Arabia, laid down its sectarian and hate-filled agenda. He denounced his opponents and all Muslims unwilling to accept his views as idolaters and apostates, and abused the prophets, scholars, saints and other pious figures of the past. All those who did not adhere to his proposed version of Islam were to be killed; their wives and daughters violated. Shias, Sufis, and other Muslims whom he judged unorthodox were to be exterminated, and all other faiths to be humiliated or destroyed. With this awful doctrine, the foundation was laid for Islamic fundamentalism, leading ultimately to terrorism, vitiating the lives of not only Muslims but everyone else in the world.
Most of the so-called Islamic terrorist groups today are inspired by this devious political ideology. Saudi money and power has succeeded in mainstreaming this hate-filled conning of Islam as the true, puritan Islam, where any deviation is dubbed as unIslamic. Unfortunately, most Western writers on Islam took Wahhabi claims to represent reform against the alleged decadence of traditional Islam at face value. American journalist Stephen Schwartz says that the Wahhabi rejection of ostentatious spirituality is much the same as the Protestants detesting the veneration of saints in the Roman Church. Western observers have seen the movement as analogous with Christian Reformation. Sadly, they have failed to make a distinction between reform and bigotry.
IS and other terrorist groups today have taken the original Wahhabi perversion to even greater heights where they don’t even refer to their roots. The Saudi regime itself feels threatened by the monster their ideology helped create. They have publicly distanced themselves from IS terrorism and even used the chief cleric of Mecca to declare IS terrorism a heinous crime under sharia law. This is one consistent duplicity which the Saudis have pursued whenever they found themselves stuck in a tight spot.
However, the stark parallels between IS and its ilk and the Saudi-Wahhabi travesty are telling. If IS is detonating shrines, it is following the precedent set in the 1920s by the House of Saud with the Wahhabi-inspired demolition of 1,400-year-old tombs in the Jannat ul Baqi cemetery in Medina. Again, the hatred for the Shia Muslims is one of the core beliefs of the Wahhabis. The earliest destructions and killings they carried out were in Karbala in the early 19th century, which was followed by the looting and wrecking of the tomb of Hussain, the grandson of the Prophet. Whatever be the face, bile against the Shias has remained a constant throughout Wahhabi-Saudi history, which is being carried forward by its latest flag bearers, the IS and Al Qaeda.
Wahhabism’s reinvention
Why did hydra-headed Wahhabism become so menacingly active during the past few decades? One factor may be the Iranian Revolution of the 1970s, which was perceived as a threat by Wahhabism that had begun to look dated by then. It, therefore, had to reinvent itself to remain relevant. This reinvention had deadly manifestations such as the Boko Haram, the Al Shabab, the Al Qaeda, the Taliban and now the IS, and many others all over the world. Even Shia Islam changed radically in the post Ayatollah Khomeini era; it is no more as relaxed as it used to be.
The Saudi and Qatari regimes seem to have realised that they have created a monster in ISIS, which is now a threat to their own peaceful existence. Though IS remains deeply Wahhabist, it is ultra radical and “could be seen essentially as a corrective movement to contemporary Wahhabism.” Today, a collective military action seems to be the only way to check the IS menace, but a lasting peace in the Islamic world is possible only if a battle is waged within Islam to change the mindset. Besides we need to look beyond the usual Islamophobic and Islamophilic perspectives.
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/r ... epage=true
The agenda of the Islamic State today is merely an extension of the devious plan laid down by Abdul Wahhab almost two hundred years ago
It is ironical indeed that the Turkish regime today is implicated in propping up a terrorist group called the Islamic State (IS), which has vowed to spread Wahhabi Islam all over the world. The present Wahhabism, legitimated and empowered by the Saudi regime, has violent, almost criminal, origins in the 19th century. If we care to look into its beginnings, we won’t be surprised at its utter contempt for human life and everything else which doesn’t conform to its own narrow/sectarian agenda. Let me explain the irony first.
It was the Ottoman regime which bore the brunt of Wahhabi Islam soon after it became a force in the Central Arab region. The toxic combine of 18th century Islamic scholar Abdul Wahhab and the first monarch of Saudi Arabia Ibn Saud posed a challenge to the Ottoman rule. They also questioned the prevalent Islamic beliefs and practices. The Turks not only defended their power but also assiduously fought for the mystic Islam they had professed and supported all these years. The Ottomans fought and exiled the Wahhabis to the Arab deserts where they remained for almost a century. This Wahhabi bigotry was condemned by the Turks as criminal and unIslamic. The sad irony is that the current Turkish regime has joined the Wahhabi bandwagon, forgetting all about the Bektashis, Qadiris and other dervishes they had cherished all these centuries. The IS agenda today is merely an extension of the devious plan laid down by Abdul Wahhab almost 200 years ago. Let us look at this so-called puritan Islam proposed by the Wahhabis, its violent ‘othering’ of Muslims they disliked and the parallels with the present day IS terrorists.
Hate-filled agenda
Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab, the founder of Wahhabism, and his radical, exclusionist puritanism became deadlier when Ibn Saud decided to add its religious fervour to his banditry. (The latter was then no more than a minor leader amongst many of continually fighting and raiding Bedouin tribes in the desperately poor deserts of the Nejd.) Thus Abdul Wahhab, in collaboration with Ibn Saud, the founder of Saudi Arabia, laid down its sectarian and hate-filled agenda. He denounced his opponents and all Muslims unwilling to accept his views as idolaters and apostates, and abused the prophets, scholars, saints and other pious figures of the past. All those who did not adhere to his proposed version of Islam were to be killed; their wives and daughters violated. Shias, Sufis, and other Muslims whom he judged unorthodox were to be exterminated, and all other faiths to be humiliated or destroyed. With this awful doctrine, the foundation was laid for Islamic fundamentalism, leading ultimately to terrorism, vitiating the lives of not only Muslims but everyone else in the world.
Most of the so-called Islamic terrorist groups today are inspired by this devious political ideology. Saudi money and power has succeeded in mainstreaming this hate-filled conning of Islam as the true, puritan Islam, where any deviation is dubbed as unIslamic. Unfortunately, most Western writers on Islam took Wahhabi claims to represent reform against the alleged decadence of traditional Islam at face value. American journalist Stephen Schwartz says that the Wahhabi rejection of ostentatious spirituality is much the same as the Protestants detesting the veneration of saints in the Roman Church. Western observers have seen the movement as analogous with Christian Reformation. Sadly, they have failed to make a distinction between reform and bigotry.
IS and other terrorist groups today have taken the original Wahhabi perversion to even greater heights where they don’t even refer to their roots. The Saudi regime itself feels threatened by the monster their ideology helped create. They have publicly distanced themselves from IS terrorism and even used the chief cleric of Mecca to declare IS terrorism a heinous crime under sharia law. This is one consistent duplicity which the Saudis have pursued whenever they found themselves stuck in a tight spot.
However, the stark parallels between IS and its ilk and the Saudi-Wahhabi travesty are telling. If IS is detonating shrines, it is following the precedent set in the 1920s by the House of Saud with the Wahhabi-inspired demolition of 1,400-year-old tombs in the Jannat ul Baqi cemetery in Medina. Again, the hatred for the Shia Muslims is one of the core beliefs of the Wahhabis. The earliest destructions and killings they carried out were in Karbala in the early 19th century, which was followed by the looting and wrecking of the tomb of Hussain, the grandson of the Prophet. Whatever be the face, bile against the Shias has remained a constant throughout Wahhabi-Saudi history, which is being carried forward by its latest flag bearers, the IS and Al Qaeda.
Wahhabism’s reinvention
Why did hydra-headed Wahhabism become so menacingly active during the past few decades? One factor may be the Iranian Revolution of the 1970s, which was perceived as a threat by Wahhabism that had begun to look dated by then. It, therefore, had to reinvent itself to remain relevant. This reinvention had deadly manifestations such as the Boko Haram, the Al Shabab, the Al Qaeda, the Taliban and now the IS, and many others all over the world. Even Shia Islam changed radically in the post Ayatollah Khomeini era; it is no more as relaxed as it used to be.
The Saudi and Qatari regimes seem to have realised that they have created a monster in ISIS, which is now a threat to their own peaceful existence. Though IS remains deeply Wahhabist, it is ultra radical and “could be seen essentially as a corrective movement to contemporary Wahhabism.” Today, a collective military action seems to be the only way to check the IS menace, but a lasting peace in the Islamic world is possible only if a battle is waged within Islam to change the mindset. Besides we need to look beyond the usual Islamophobic and Islamophilic perspectives.
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/r ... epage=true
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
@Ghulam Muhammad: Thanks for posting it here. Hope that some forum members who swear by this wahab demagogue will go back read the basic tenants of Din-e-Islam.
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
There are no forum members who swear by any wahhab. People like yourself have created straw men which are easier to beat than real men. It is easier to dismiss anything anyone says that doesn't agree with you as wahhabi propaganda. This way you don't actually have to look inwards to figure out that you are actually wrong.
You would be better off if you go back and read the basic tenets of Din-e-Islam yourself.
You would be better off if you go back and read the basic tenets of Din-e-Islam yourself.
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
Sorry if I hit a nerve. But look at some recent posts and you will see it loud and clear.anajmi wrote:There are no forum members who swear by any wahhab. People like yourself have created straw men which are easier to beat than real men. It is easier to dismiss anything anyone says that doesn't agree with you as wahhabi propaganda. This way you don't actually have to look inwards to figure out that you are actually wrong.
You would be better off if you go back and read the basic tenets of Din-e-Islam yourself.
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
Sorry. I don't see anyone swearing by wahhab. I only see people claiming that about others. I see that happening more often now cause there are no more excuses, I guess!!
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
By the way, you will never find any book or article by Abdul Wahhab himself where he says
You will only find other people claiming that about him. If you do find something to that effect authored by Abdul Wahhab himself, let me know.All those who did not adhere to his proposed version of Islam were to be killed; their wives and daughters violated. Shias, Sufis, and other Muslims whom he judged unorthodox were to be exterminated, and all other faiths to be humiliated or destroyed. With this awful doctrine, the foundation was laid for Islamic fundamentalism, leading ultimately to terrorism, vitiating the lives of not only Muslims but everyone else in the world.
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
The acts of his followers speak the truth. As is evidenced by the behavior of AQ, IS etc. It is actions of those groups that desecrated the image of Islam and the Prophet (pbuh). You can continue to ignore the hard facts. It is your choice.anajmi wrote:By the way, you will never find any book or article by Abdul Wahhab himself where he saysYou will only find other people claiming that about him. If you do find something to that effect authored by Abdul Wahhab himself, let me know.All those who did not adhere to his proposed version of Islam were to be killed; their wives and daughters violated. Shias, Sufis, and other Muslims whom he judged unorthodox were to be exterminated, and all other faiths to be humiliated or destroyed. With this awful doctrine, the foundation was laid for Islamic fundamentalism, leading ultimately to terrorism, vitiating the lives of not only Muslims but everyone else in the world.
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
From the forum members, you have now suddenly jumped to AQ and IS. You see the problem? You guys have no idea who is what. You simply associate someone with someone as per your own personal conveniences and inconveniences. If you don't like what I say, you will have absolutely no problems making me a wahhabi or a member of AQ or IS. That is precisely the problem that I have been trying to point out. And you won't find any AQ or IS member referring to himself as a wahhabi either. It is you and the others like you who have made that association to demonize Abdul Wahhab and Islam overall.The acts of his followers speak the truth. As is evidenced by the behavior of AQ, IS etc. It is actions of those groups that desecrated the image of Islam and the Prophet (pbuh). You can continue to ignore the hard facts. It is your choice.
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
I was replying to your comment and used those as examples. They are valid cases. I did not jump from forum members to those groups. You are making that jump and assumptions yourself. By the way you do that very frequently. That is your hallmark and the thing that invalidates your arguments.anajmi wrote:From the forum members, you have now suddenly jumped to AQ and IS. You see the problem? You guys have no idea who is what. You simply associate someone with someone as per your own personal conveniences and inconveniences. If you don't like what I say, you will have absolutely no problems making me a wahhabi or a member of AQ or IS. That is precisely the problem that I have been trying to point out. And you won't find any AQ or IS member referring to himself as a wahhabi either. It is you and the others like you who have made that association to demonize Abdul Wahhab and Islam overall.The acts of his followers speak the truth. As is evidenced by the behavior of AQ, IS etc. It is actions of those groups that desecrated the image of Islam and the Prophet (pbuh). You can continue to ignore the hard facts. It is your choice.
Also you keep denying that you are wahhabi. And you may not be. But you sure do have a very soft spot for this wahhab guy and his teachings. You miss no chance to defend their twisted views.
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
Sorry. I dont think there is any point in responding to you. You do an about turn almost after every post. You have no spine to defend your own arguments. I do not defend anyones twisted views including those of the bohras.
If I ask you to point out a twisted view that I have defended, you will whine and cry and post something completely irrelevant. I guarantee it. Lets wait till your next post.
If I ask you to point out a twisted view that I have defended, you will whine and cry and post something completely irrelevant. I guarantee it. Lets wait till your next post.
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
Any luck finding the wahhabi twisted view that I have defended? I have more than 12 thousand posts to my credit. You should have absolutely no difficulty in finding my support for wahhabi twisted views.
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
Well?? Haven't found one twisted wahhabi view that I have supported yet?
-
qutub_mamajiwala
- Posts: 1052
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 4:17 am
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
well one twisted view is of defending yazid and saying may allah be peace with him after his name.
this one twisted beleif is enough to erode all the other hundreds or millions of good points u may be epousing
this one twisted beleif is enough to erode all the other hundreds or millions of good points u may be epousing
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
Their entire ideology is radical and twisted. So you cannot be with them for part of it. Their entire set of beliefs make them who they are and how they behave.anajmi wrote:Well?? Haven't found one twisted wahhabi view that I have supported yet?
So go back and re-read your own 12000+ posts and then you will figure out why so many forum members think of you as a supporter of wahhabi thinking. Go figure!!
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
Well, I knew you would cop out. You've been a colossal waste of time, with nothing but hot air.
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
There are many who think GM-AZ and me as Wahabi too. despite the fact all of us constantly remind everyone that we are E Jamaat card memberswhy so many forum members think of you as a supporter of wahhabi thinking. Go figure!!
It seems that it is fashionable for SMS abdes to label anyone Wahabi when they can not debate.
As far as I know from the posts by Anjami that he still has extended Bohra family with whom he interacts.
The trend of labeling everyone started Wahabi started when we started called all Muffaddali Abdes as Brain Dead slaves.
Go and figure....
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
AZ appears to be an non-Wahhabi ex-Bohra. If he carries an e-Jamaat card, then he is an anti-Bohra. I think that he has a soft spot for Fatimid doctrines. A person with a great writing talent who could make a good living through writing. He perhaps already does it.SBM wrote: There are many who think GM-AZ and me as Wahabi too. despite the fact all of us constantly remind everyone that we are E Jamaat card members
GM is also an anti-Bohra and I suspect that he carries an e-Jamaat card. He claims adherence to Fatimid doctrines. He is tolerant of other Muslim schools of thought but clearly he is not a Wahhabi.
Both AZ and GM make appreciative contributions to this forum although, like me, they are repetitive.
SBM is an anti-Bohra, the only one who has himself admitted to be an e-Jamaat card holder. I do not think he would know what a Wahhabi is. I do not think he is one though.
anajmi is the only one who is clearly a Wahhabi ex-Bohra. He of course denies being a Wahhabi. That is like Saudis who dislike being called Wahhabis but claim to be the 'Purest Muslims'.
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
I actually smile every time I see some loser call me a wahhabi. It tells me that the loser feels the need to create a straw man to beat cause he just got beat himself.
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
Fayyaz seems obsessed with the Who's Who on this forum. This profiling and categorizing is useless - for purposes of debate and dialogue. It prevents flexibility when You put people in boxes.
Did you know that the word "nigger" is only used lovingly among the insiders themselves referring to each other - but is a horrible slur when used by everyone else.
Similar thing with Wahhabi, or abde/amte, ex-bohra, reformist, to a degree.
Did you know that the word "nigger" is only used lovingly among the insiders themselves referring to each other - but is a horrible slur when used by everyone else.
Similar thing with Wahhabi, or abde/amte, ex-bohra, reformist, to a degree.
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
anajmi is the only Wahhabi, confirmed in my view, on this forum. He is no longer a card-carrying Bohra thus making him an ex-Bohra.
Wahhabi is a term used for a person associated with a specific interpretation of the Quran and Sunnah. It is not a slur like 'nigger'. Wahhabi can be from any nationality or any racial group.
I have defined Reformists, anti-Bohras and Bohras as clearly as possible. It is an arbitrary grouping and clearly many will disagree with the grouping. My categorization is intended to pigeon-hole but are not intended as a 'slur'. Of course, no individual can be confined to a tight category. I find them useful and will continue using them.
abde/amte is used as a 'slur' by anti-Bohras to refer to Bohra followers of SMS. There appears to be a sympathy for followers of SKQ among anti-Bohras. It will be interesting to see how long this 'honeymoon' lasts.
I repeat. My categorization applies only to the participants of this Website. There are not many non-Bohras or Reformists among the participants. Critical Thinker and Humsafar are possibly the only self-declared Reformists here.
Wahhabi is a term used for a person associated with a specific interpretation of the Quran and Sunnah. It is not a slur like 'nigger'. Wahhabi can be from any nationality or any racial group.
I have defined Reformists, anti-Bohras and Bohras as clearly as possible. It is an arbitrary grouping and clearly many will disagree with the grouping. My categorization is intended to pigeon-hole but are not intended as a 'slur'. Of course, no individual can be confined to a tight category. I find them useful and will continue using them.
abde/amte is used as a 'slur' by anti-Bohras to refer to Bohra followers of SMS. There appears to be a sympathy for followers of SKQ among anti-Bohras. It will be interesting to see how long this 'honeymoon' lasts.
I repeat. My categorization applies only to the participants of this Website. There are not many non-Bohras or Reformists among the participants. Critical Thinker and Humsafar are possibly the only self-declared Reformists here.
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
How can that be slur when they write themselves as Abde Sydena and Amte Syedna. Fayyaz has proved himself to be the spokesperson for SMS group by showing his bias towards SMS Followersabde/amte is used as a 'slur' by anti-Bohras to refer to Bohra followers of SMS.
-
DisillusionedDB
- Posts: 380
- Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2014 7:20 am
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
I still cannot understand the need to categorise the members of this forum. There is no point in it. Everybody is entitled to his/her own views and no one has a right to pass judgement on which category they fit into. Pretty futile exercise, fayyaz.
What does it matter in which category do AZ, SBM, GM and Anajmi fit into ... They have their own views about the wrongs happening in the dawat administration and as far as my personal first-hand experiences go, their views are pretty much accurate. Does it really matter whether they hold an e-jamaat card or not ? Anajmi has his own views and according to him he is convinced that he is right to have left the bohra fold as the shirk and bidah was not to his liking. That does not make him a wahabi. Many of his posts are really good and informative. Now if I accept some of his posts as 'good', does that make me a wahabi too ?
What I have seen here is that whosoever does not subscribe to the bohra thinking is labelled a wahabi. Grow up .. it's a free world .. everyone has a right to their own views. Accept it first .. if you want to argue, by any means do so .. but without boxing people into categories. Otherwise no one will learn anything about what makes people (with different thinking) tick. Accept the good things and cast aside the ones that you don't like and let the constructive and healthy arguments go on.
What does it matter in which category do AZ, SBM, GM and Anajmi fit into ... They have their own views about the wrongs happening in the dawat administration and as far as my personal first-hand experiences go, their views are pretty much accurate. Does it really matter whether they hold an e-jamaat card or not ? Anajmi has his own views and according to him he is convinced that he is right to have left the bohra fold as the shirk and bidah was not to his liking. That does not make him a wahabi. Many of his posts are really good and informative. Now if I accept some of his posts as 'good', does that make me a wahabi too ?
What I have seen here is that whosoever does not subscribe to the bohra thinking is labelled a wahabi. Grow up .. it's a free world .. everyone has a right to their own views. Accept it first .. if you want to argue, by any means do so .. but without boxing people into categories. Otherwise no one will learn anything about what makes people (with different thinking) tick. Accept the good things and cast aside the ones that you don't like and let the constructive and healthy arguments go on.
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
Consider the title of this thread, "Wahabism Exposed". If you are going to talk about Wahhabism you are going to categorize Wahhabis as a distinct group among Muslims. Categorization is a normal and necessary human activity prevalent in almost all fields. Categorization is almost always a prelude to all areas of studies from languages to sciences to religion. You did that in school and you continue doing it consciously or unconsciously throughout your life. In denying this normal all-pervading human activity you betray your ignorance.
I started with an assumption that this forum was created to discuss Reform in the Bohra community. I notice that hardly any discussion in that area ever takes place. I asked why and decided that the participants did not have Reform uppermost in their minds but were primarily concerned with quarrels among themselves. Lines of quarrels can be identified by grouping people in distinct groups depending on their views. The categories I have outlined represent fairly the demarcations of various views.
I would ask that you take your own advise. If you do not like my postings, just say so and be done with it. I will wait for constructive and healthy arguments from Ex-Bohras and anti-Bohras as well as from Bohras. I see little evidence of that so far.
I started with an assumption that this forum was created to discuss Reform in the Bohra community. I notice that hardly any discussion in that area ever takes place. I asked why and decided that the participants did not have Reform uppermost in their minds but were primarily concerned with quarrels among themselves. Lines of quarrels can be identified by grouping people in distinct groups depending on their views. The categories I have outlined represent fairly the demarcations of various views.
I don't speak for others but I have clearly defined who a Wahhabi is. Yes, it is a free world and that has been my refrain from the very beginning. I have said a hundred times that Bohras have as much right to their views as others. I am pointing out that Ex-Bohras like anajmi and anti-Bohras will not find audience among Bohras because of their repetitive vilification of Bohra beliefs and behavior.DisillusionedDB wrote: What I have seen here is that whosoever does not subscribe to the bohra thinking is labelled a wahabi. Grow up .. it's a free world .. everyone has a right to their own views. Accept it first .. if you want to argue, by any means do so .. but without boxing people into categories. Otherwise no one will learn anything about what makes people (with different thinking) tick. Accept the good things and cast aside the ones that you don't like and let the constructive and healthy arguments go on.
I would ask that you take your own advise. If you do not like my postings, just say so and be done with it. I will wait for constructive and healthy arguments from Ex-Bohras and anti-Bohras as well as from Bohras. I see little evidence of that so far.
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
Fayyaz
Exactly Hitler did the same with Jews so Fayyaz do you subscribe Hitler's theory and how about George Bush when he categorized American Muslims after 9/11.Categorization is a normal and necessary human activity prevalent in almost all fields.
And what have you contributed toward those reforms except labeling every one who exposed the opulence and showmanship of SMS as Wahabi?I started with an assumption that this forum was created to discuss Reform in the Bohra community. I notice that hardly any discussion in that area ever takes place.
But the defender of Bohras' views does not believe that Wahabis also have as much right to to their views even though there is NO WAHABI on this forum except in the minds of Fayyaz and his elks "the YOLK carrying slaves of SMS"I have said a hundred times that Bohras have as much right to their views as others.
And that is where you are totally ignorant and wrong. You have no knowledge who these Ex Bohra and Anti Bohras ( your definition) are capable of?I am pointing out that Ex-Bohras like anajmi and anti-Bohras will not find audience among Bohras because of their repetitive vilification of Bohra beliefs and behavior.
-
humanbeing
- Posts: 2195
- Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 2:30 am
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
A wrong assumption you made in a hurry or biased outlook either against wahabism or favouritism towards kothar’s bohraism. When we talk about corruption, opulence and exploitation in the community, you shoo them off as not your concern to discuss and keep beating the same anti-bohra and anti wahaabi drums in every arguments. You can surely right your thesis on categorization of bohras, that categorization does not help cause of reform either. Instead it misleads.fayyaaz wrote: I started with an assumption that this forum was created to discuss Reform in the Bohra community. I notice that hardly any discussion in that area ever takes place. I asked why and decided that the participants did not have Reform uppermost in their minds but were primarily concerned with quarrels among themselves. Lines of quarrels can be identified by grouping people in distinct groups depending on their views. The categories I have outlined represent fairly the demarcations of various views..
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
Is the assumption that this forum was created to discuss Reform in the Bohra community wrong? How is the assumption against Wahhabism? How does the assumption show favoritism towards Kothar?humanbeing wrote:A wrong assumption you made in a hurry or biased outlook either against wahabism or favouritism towards kothar’s bohraism. When we talk about corruption, opulence and exploitation in the community, you shoo them off as not your concern to discuss and keep beating the same anti-bohra and anti wahaabi drums in every arguments. You can surely right your thesis on categorization of bohras, that categorization does not help cause of reform either. Instead it misleads.fayyaaz wrote: I started with an assumption that this forum was created to discuss Reform in the Bohra community. I notice that hardly any discussion in that area ever takes place. I asked why and decided that the participants did not have Reform uppermost in their minds but were primarily concerned with quarrels among themselves. Lines of quarrels can be identified by grouping people in distinct groups depending on their views. The categories I have outlined represent fairly the demarcations of various views..
How did you conclude that I 'shoo off' ex-Bohras and anti-Bohras from talking about corruption, opulence and exploitation in the community?
Let me say again, human being. Both you and the intellectually challenged SBM do not read my posts but read your prejudices about me in them.
I will say more about categorization later but imagine that you do not categorize participants in the way I have done and lump them all into one category.
Imagine anajmi donning STD and deliver azaan in a Bohtra Masjid proclaiming Aliyun Waliyullah. Then imagine anajmi performing maatam after farz and invoking prayers for the Imams of ahl-e-bayt. Then, imagine him praying tawassul for the Dai. Can you imagine that? Difficult eh?
Imagine Adam doing the same. No difficulty there at all.
Are they both the same? Are they not in two different categories?
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
And imagine 90% of Abdes/Amtes doing Maatam without knowing the significance of Maataam.and that is the fact not an assumption.
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
Abdes/Amtes? Is that your category?SBM wrote:And imagine 90% of Abdes/Amtes doing Maatam without knowing the significance of Maataam.and that is the fact not an assumption.
-
humanbeing
- Posts: 2195
- Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 2:30 am
Re: "WAHABISM EXPOSED!"
Playing with words Mr. Fayyaz eh ! I intended to say, your assumption that "this forum does not actually discuss reform and indulges in quarrels all the time"
your bias and prejudice is quiet evident in points you make.
Your posts does mention, that you are not concerned / bothered about corruption and other ills of bohra community, for that there is law to address and one must take their complaints or cribbing through legal channel. your concern is the freedom of expression of bohra beleifs which is "oppressed" by wahaabis.
you seem to be infatuated with anjami and cant take him off your mind, every post needs to have his mention.
I said you are free to categorize bohras, there are many who did, some are right and some are wrong. in your case too, your definitions of those categories are wrong at places.
Your example of anajmi and adam in similar fashion is quiet correct, we cannot imagine anjami doing those things which he opposes. so no comments on that.
Although I acknowledge the fact that you are not a pro-kothar. But your arguments in favor of freedom of expression are flawed. I would like to know your opinion on below point.
You support the freedom of belief in the context of Bohra Misaaq condition where it states, that a bohra when breaks his misaak (ahed) his property must be looted, his wife be divorced, children being separated ?
You support the freedom of belief in the context of Fatimid doctrines, which considers itself as PURE ISLAM, something that you despise when wahabism says so ?
Fatimid, wahabism, Jaaferi, Ismaili, sunni, all of these claim to be PURE ISLAM in their respective thoughts. And they denounce the another. Your argument is step further that it is only wahabis who resort to violence. This is where I want to debate. Not every wahabi or Fatimid or sunni or jaaferi or shia out there in the world is roaming around with guns. The guys with guns / violence in their mind have only one agenda, which is kills people no matter what or how they believe to meet their political goals.
I am not pro wahabism or anti Fatimid. I am against violence and deception in any form. And denounce it in equal breath.
your bias and prejudice is quiet evident in points you make.
Your posts does mention, that you are not concerned / bothered about corruption and other ills of bohra community, for that there is law to address and one must take their complaints or cribbing through legal channel. your concern is the freedom of expression of bohra beleifs which is "oppressed" by wahaabis.
you seem to be infatuated with anjami and cant take him off your mind, every post needs to have his mention.
I said you are free to categorize bohras, there are many who did, some are right and some are wrong. in your case too, your definitions of those categories are wrong at places.
Your example of anajmi and adam in similar fashion is quiet correct, we cannot imagine anjami doing those things which he opposes. so no comments on that.
Although I acknowledge the fact that you are not a pro-kothar. But your arguments in favor of freedom of expression are flawed. I would like to know your opinion on below point.
You support the freedom of belief in the context of Bohra Misaaq condition where it states, that a bohra when breaks his misaak (ahed) his property must be looted, his wife be divorced, children being separated ?
You support the freedom of belief in the context of Fatimid doctrines, which considers itself as PURE ISLAM, something that you despise when wahabism says so ?
Fatimid, wahabism, Jaaferi, Ismaili, sunni, all of these claim to be PURE ISLAM in their respective thoughts. And they denounce the another. Your argument is step further that it is only wahabis who resort to violence. This is where I want to debate. Not every wahabi or Fatimid or sunni or jaaferi or shia out there in the world is roaming around with guns. The guys with guns / violence in their mind have only one agenda, which is kills people no matter what or how they believe to meet their political goals.
I am not pro wahabism or anti Fatimid. I am against violence and deception in any form. And denounce it in equal breath.