28 replies to this topic

[abideen]

Salaam,

I know of many bohra's. They are Shia in that they believe in Imam ALi and the Imams upto and including Imam as-Sadiq .
I know much about them and have tried to read up but the crux always seem to come as to the Imamate of Imam Musa Al-Kadhim . They believe in Ismail. All eveidence I have presented that he was dead..was not considered because it was from SHia ithna;Asheri sources.

Does anyone have any arguement, book or sources by which Bohra's will be convinced.

I should also add they are devout muslims...hence I see it as a shame they are not ithna'Asheri.

[Gypsy]

 abideen, on Jan 7 2007, 07:49 PM, said:

Does anyone have any arguement, book or sources by which Bohra's will be convinced.

I should also add they are devout muslims...hence I see it as a shame they are not ithna'Asheri.

Please use this book http://www.amazon.co...s/dp/0521429749 The Isma'ilis: Their History and Doctrines  by Farhad Daftary
It will support your (Ithna Ashari) position.

Yes, I wish the Ismailis will join us to. They love the ahlul bayt.

[abideen]

 Zareen, on Jan 7 2007, 07:53 PM, said:

Please use this book http://www.amazon.co...s/dp/0521429749 The Isma'ilis: Their History and Doctrines  by Farhad Daftary
It will support your (Ithna Ashari) position.

Yes, I wish the Ismailis will join us to. They love the ahlul bayt.

Thank you very much. I actually came across this book in a Library once but couldnt take it out, so thx and I will pass it on however at £30 it is pricy. We should really reach out to the Ismaili's and the Bohra...it ashame we dont have the instituions that work efficiently enough. However I am impressed with rcent Iranian effort

[waiting]

They claim that the carrying of Ismail b. Jafar's casket in the streets (the ceremony) was a setup and intended to mislead the ruler of the time. That he had not really died, but instead hidden, etc

If you disprove that, then their entire religion falters.

[DerFeldMarschall]

^^No, the bohras believe that Ismail did indeed die in the lifetime of the Jafar as Sadiq. However, according to Bohra dogma the imam and his tenure here on earth is divinely ordained, and does not necessarily end with the death of an Imam. In this instance, the imammate of Jafar began and ended with the begining of the imammate of Ismail (while Jafar was still alive), Ismail's imammate began and ended with his death and passing to his son Mohammad.
Hope this helps.

[Gypsy]

I read a signifficant part of this book....6-7 years ago. And I believe the researcher presented both the theory. But I could be wrong since the information is no longer crisp in my head.

He basicly cited some evidence of the death of Ismail Ibn Imam Jaffar As Sadiq(as) and his burial in Janatul Baqi.
- He cited the event where Imam As Sadiq) called notable ppl to witness the death of his son.

Then he cited work of some people that claims this burial was fake to hide the Imam. Because after this you no longer see him being refered too. Some people cite that Ismail was in some sort of occultations until one of his descendent claim the Kingship in the Fatimid empire in egypt.

We the Ithna Asharis, refer to what Imam Jaffar(as) Sadiq said about this event-- Bada. It appeared to everyone that Ismail would be his successor because he was his eldest son. And his son was the most learned and most pious. Imam Musa Al Kadhim(as) was his youngest son the difference between Ismail and Musa is 15-20 years.

There is also one evidence which is frequently used by the Ismailis to approve their claim. They say that Imam Jaffar(as) had another son named Abdullah who died and not Ismail.


:!!!: Yeah..you have your work cut out for you.

[macisaac]

First, you should realize that whether Allah shows them His guidance is His decision, neither yours nor mine.

That said, in discussing with them, I wouldn't dwell on the point of whether Ismail had predeceased his father or not.   As someone else pointed out, the Ismailis nowadays largely believe that themselves.  The question becomes more this.  Who of their later "Imams" displayed an ounce of the knowledge, piety, and devotion of followers that the earlier Imams did?  The fact is the Fatimids ruled over a people who by and large did not feel a great attachment to them.  Compare this with Imam Rida and the reaction he received when he was to lead the Eid prayers.  The people were so overwhelmed that Mamun ordered them halted before he could begin...

Speaking of our eighth Masoom Imam, of whom Qadi Numani himself (one of their most respected authors) dedicated a section to in his Sharh al-Akhbar, how do they explain his, Imam Rida's, station of knowledge and excellence, while simultaneously denying him the Imamate?  How do they explain the wonder of his son, Imam Jawad, who as a boy baffled the scholar of his day with his knowledge?  During this time, who even was their Imam until the uprising of 'Ubaydullah?

As to the Bohras, who was the successor of Mustansir?  According to the Nizaris (who later degenerated further into the Agha Khanis we now know...) it was his eldest son Nizar, who claimed the same.  However, it was his younger son, Mustali who was placed on the throne via the regent Malik al-Afdal, who in turn ruled behind the scenes with Nizar revolting and eventually dying in prison.   After Mustali died, his son al-Amir was then installed, again via the regent until that latter was killed.  Amir died however, at which point the Fatimids degenerated further and further until they collapsed.  The Mustaliyyun (of which the Bohras are a part) however believe that Amir had a son, Tayyid, who then went into ghayba.  After that, they follow a series of Da'is (they dispute amongst themselves as to who was the rightful line,  the most prominent being the Dawoodi Bohras).  Again, with all this politicking and worldliness, what type of an Imamate is this?

I also question the cultish and exclusive nature of their group.  A far cry it seems from the call of Islam which our beloved Prophet and his true Successors called the people to.

[waiting]

Quote

^^No, the bohras believe that Ismail did indeed die in the lifetime of the Jafar as Sadiq. However, according to Bohra dogma the imam and his tenure here on earth is divinely ordained, and does not necessarily end with the death of an Imam. In this instance, the imammate of Jafar began and ended with the begining of the imammate of Ismail (while Jafar was still alive), Ismail's imammate began and ended with his death and passing to his son Mohammad.
Hope this helps.

What you say might be true. But the Ismaili historians (who preceded Bohraism, but are used as references by Bohras) that I have studied claim the funeral was a mock funeral.

In anycase, the issue is mainly hovering around Ismail. What needs to be disproven is his alleged succession of Imam Sadiq.

[DerFeldMarschall]

 waiting, on Jan 10 2007, 07:18 AM, said:

What you say might be true. But the Ismaili historians (who preceded Bohraism, but are used as references by Bohras) that I have studied claim the funeral was a mock funeral.

In anycase, the issue is mainly hovering around Ismail. What needs to be disproven is his alleged succession of Imam Sadiq.

Can I get a reference?
Thanks

[waiting]

Relevant chapters in Shahrestani's "Kitab al-Milal w'al Nihal" and Noor al Din b. Ahmad's "Fusool w'al Akhbar" are two famous ones.

[DerFeldMarschall]

 waiting, on Jan 10 2007, 10:16 PM, said:

Relevant chapters in Shahrestani's "Kitab al-Milal w'al Nihal" and Noor al Din b. Ahmad's "Fusool w'al Akhbar" are two famous ones.

Thanks
The books you quoted above are ithnashari books, not Ismaili books. The reason I am nitpicking is because the term Ismaili is often used interchangebly with Nizari Ismaili or Agha Khani, which would not necessarily be representative of Bohra or even Fatimid Ismaili theology.

[waiting]

Shahrestani is not Ithna Ashari. He is described by historians as a Shafe'i who converted to Ismailism (Nizarism, though).

The Madhhab of Noor al-Din b. Ahmad is not known to me. Where did you read that he is Ithna Ashari?

In anycase, the main point is that Ismailis use those books as references, just like they use Basaa'ir al-Darajat, Usool al-Kafi and other Ithna Ashari books. This is because they lack early references. Most of the Ismaili history is "written" during the Fatimid era, and is post-history constructs.

Yes, true, no sect represents another, but then again you are most likely referring to Dawoodi-Bohras (one out of several Bohra  sects). Even within Dawoodi-Bohras, there is a great difference of opinion (which Im sure you are aware of), especially between the reformists (who refuse to follow the Da'i Mutlaq, Burhan al-Din) and the followers of the Da'i. Infact I would go as far as saying this is a fundamental difference as Asghar Ali Engineer has suggested that the Da'i is not infallible nor the represenative "through divine appointment".

Edited by waiting, 11 January 2007 - 03:47 PM.

[sk00n]

Do you know that they're so called 'Imam' is still alive ...
they have like soooo many... God knows which Imam their current one is

Edited by sk00n, 11 January 2007 - 05:12 PM.

[sk00n]

Im not insulting their Imam(s) ... I'm just marvelling and wondering on how many they probably have till right now.

[Gypsy]

 waiting, on Jan 11 2007, 03:34 PM, said:

In anycase, the main point is that Ismailis use those books as references, just like they use Basaa'ir al-Darajat, Usool al-Kafi and other Ithna Ashari books. This is because they lack early references. Most of the Ismaili history is "written" during the Fatimid era, and is post-history constructs.

This is exactly what I read. One branch of Ismailis, I'm not sure which one, have an Imam in Ghayba (Occultation). These are from Ithna Asharis.

[BintAlHoda]

a friend of mine wrote a reserach paper on this subject many years ago.  pm me if u want and i can ask her if she still has it.

[A true Sunni]

 sk00n, on Jan 11 2007, 05:12 PM, said:

Im not insulting their Imam(s) ... I'm just marvelling and wondering on how many they probably have till right now.

salaam
thanks for modifying ur post to clarify ur meaning .i have deleted my original post as a result. The bohras current imam is in occultation.
salaam

Edited by A true Sunni, 11 January 2007 - 07:02 PM.

[Link]

I think the best way and only pracitically way, is to show Islam as taught by Quran. Then see who is abandoning it and who is following it.

A person who befriends the oppressed, dines with rich, has hotels with wine, and keeps preach western culture superiority to the rest of the world, and that the Quran and Islamic laws are obselete and that adapting western values is "advancement (why not adapt chinese values?)" and that it's the solution for the muslims, and you get the picture, compared to Imams who taught revelation is the guide to mankind, it's the source of values and nothing but that, taught the Islam Mohammad brought was the best and will be established one day and so be patient, taught to be enemies of oppressors and friends of oppressed, taught to work hard and being patient with regards to the true religion no matter how tough it gets.

See what Quran teaches, Quran says Allah (swt) is the judge in all our affairs, so if you want to follow "moderate Islam" which is giving up revealed laws and adapting western culture instead, if you want to follow judgement of other then revelation which the Quran says is the judgement of taghoot, (it says whatever you disagree, so all disagreement cannot be judged by disbelievers,) and if you want trick yourslef that your following the guide from God so that you can have it easy, follow man made laws to your appetite because the laws leading to the light are "barbaric obselete", then Ismailism is the religion for you.

Islam means submission to God in all matters, so how can the guide of time command submission to man made laws and culutre and value as opposed to revelation?

And their argument of an Imam being in occulation goes against them too, because for a long period, according to them, their Imams too were in occulation.

I would hope the Ismaili members here respond to this, and explain exactly why they have permission to revert to other then God's judgements  while the people of the past were all condemned for doing so. Why is their leader not teaching theocratic government and society while it's clear such a government and society is the only acceptable one according to Quran?

Edited by Link, 11 January 2007 - 10:19 PM.

[A true Sunni]

 Link, on Jan 11 2007, 10:00 PM, said:

I think the best way and only pracitically way, is to show Islam as taught by Quran. Then see who is abandoning it and who is following it.

A person who befriends the oppressed, dines with rich, has hotels with wine, and keeps preach western culture superiority to the rest of the world, and that the Quran and Islamic laws are obselete and that adapting western values is "advancement (why not adapt chinese values?)" and that it's the solution for the muslims, and you get the picture, compared to Imams who taught revelation is the guide to mankind, it's the source of values and nothing but that, taught the Islam Mohammad brought was the best and will be established one day and so be patient, taught to be enemies of oppressors and friends of oppressed, taught to work hard and being patient with regards to the true religion no matter how tough it gets.

See what Quran teaches, Quran says Allah (swt) is the judge in all our affairs, so if you want to follow "moderate Islam" which is giving up revealed laws and adapting western culture instead, if you want to follow judgement of other then revelation which the Quran says is the judgement of taghoot, (it says whatever you disagree, so all disagreement cannot be judged by disbelievers,) and if you want trick yourslef that your following the guide from God so that you can have it easy, follow man made laws to your appetite because the laws leading to the light are "barbaric obselete", then Ismailism is the religion for you.

Islam means submission to God in all matters, so how can the guide of time command submission to man made laws and culutre and value as opposed to revelation?

And their argument of an Imam being in occulation goes against them too, because for a long period, according to them, their Imams too were in occulation.

I would hope the Ismaili members here respond to this, and explain exactly why they have permission to revert to other then God's judgements  while the people of the past were all condemned for doing so. Why is their leader not teaching theocratic government and society while it's clear such a government and society is the only acceptable one according to Quran?

salaam, important not to confuse the Bohras with the Agha Khanis. The Bohras i have met are a decent hard working people and most of their practices are similar to Ithna Asherias. salaam

[Chronic]

Bro "A true Sunni" is correct. It's important that we distinguish between Bohras and AgaKhanis, since their beliefs differ greatly. I know this from first hand experience because one of my aunt's was born and raised in this belief. They don't take Agha Khan as an Imam therefore what bro Link posted above is irrelevent to them.  It should also be noted that they pray 5 times a day like we do, unlike Ismailis (Aga Khanis), and hold many beliefs that are completely in line with the IthnaAshari school of thought.

Anyone who wants to learn more about the Dawoodi Bohras can refer to the following website (which I believe is pretty authentic):

http://www.mumineen.org/

There current and 52nd Imam is Mohammed Burhanuddin, who you can find more about here:

http://en.wikipedia....med_Burhanuddin

Wasalam

[Link]

O ok, sorry for mixing them up.

actually i haven't done much research on bohras. Will have to see what they teach.

ws

[Chronic]

 Link, on Jan 12 2007, 02:29 PM, said:

O ok, sorry for mixing them up.

actually i haven't done much research on bohras. Will have to see what they teach.

ws

Not a problem bro, everyone makes mistakes.

Anyways, for research sake, it should also be noted that just as the majority of the bohras are 'Dawoodi', a minority of the bohras is 'Sulaimani' who are mostly located in Yemen. Some info on them can be found here:

http://www.shaikhsid.../sulaimani.html

Wasalam

[A true Sunni]

 Chronic, on Jan 12 2007, 01:09 PM, said:

Bro "A true Sunni" is correct. It's important that we distinguish between Bohras and AgaKhanis, since their beliefs differ greatly. I know this from first hand experience because one of my aunt's was born and raised in this belief. They don't take Agha Khan as an Imam therefore what bro Link posted above is irrelevent to them.  It should also be noted that they pray 5 times a day like we do, unlike Ismailis (Aga Khanis), and hold many beliefs that are completely in line with the IthnaAshari school of thought.

Anyone who wants to learn more about the Dawoodi Bohras can refer to the following website (which I believe is pretty authentic):

http://www.mumineen.org/

There current and 52nd Imam is Mohammed Burhanuddin, who you can find more about here:

http://en.wikipedia....med_Burhanuddin

Wasalam

salaam, just as a point of clarification Syedana Mohammed Burhanadin is not their 'Imam'. He is their Chief religious leader. Their last 'Imam' was the the last Fatimid Calipha (i believe) he is believed by Bohras to have gone into occultation
salaam

[Chronic]

 A true Sunni, on Jan 12 2007, 02:46 PM, said:

salaam, just as a point of clarification Syedana Mohammed Burhanadin is not their 'Imam'. He is their Chief religious leader. Their last 'Imam' was the the last Fatimid Calipha (i believe) he is believed by Bohras to have gone into occultation
salaam

Oh right, I appologize for the mistake made. Their last and 21st Imam, Imam al-Tayyib Abul Qasim, is said to be in occultation, and is said to help their Duat Mutlaqeen (Religious Leaders) out while he himself is in ghaybat.

Wasalam