Ishraq, on 15 October 2010 - 12:41 AM, said:
You are not Jafari for the same reason that the Druze, Bahais, Alevis, and the various other sects which split off from you (Ismailism), are not Jafari. All of these sects, you included, more or less perhaps, have some sort of a ‘loose’ connection to the teachings of the first 5 Imams (or 4 in your case), but that does not mean that they are therefore Jafari. Your contrived doctrines are the doctrines which distinguish you from Twelvers (e.g. your belief that your imam can alter the sharia’, to name just one.) not the general concepts of Imamah, and so on which make Shia Islam Shia Islam. These (i.e. your particular Ismaili beliefs) are not Twelver doctrines, which is to say that they are therefore not doctrines of the Jafari madhhab.
Only the Druze have any connection to Isma'ili
We are Jafari because the basis of our tariqah is based
on the precepts and concepts as laid out in the Jafari Madhab, it is only on the enforcement of ritual, and details of personal law that we differ. Just as Americans argue between an originalist
interpretation of the Constitution and original intent
, they are still all considered Americans. Whether you consider our positions contrived or not is irrelevant to the discussion, I'm not here to justify, merely to explain.
What nonsense. You think that your beliefs differ from that of Twelvers due, somehow, to merely the passage of time? If you mean that Ismailism changed its doctrines depending on the context in which it found itself, then, again, this was a totally false manner of proceeding. Time does not determine truth; rather it’s the other way around. Your imam, or other memebers of you community, willfully, for certain false reasons (i.e. the nature of the environment in which they found themselves) decided to ‘contrive’ false doctrines and thereby ‘separated’ from the Twelvers (Jafari madhhab). There’s no clearer example of this than the pretentions of your imam and his followers during the time of Alamut when he and his followers judged themselves to be free from the sharia’ and claimed to have ‘lifted’ it from his followers. This sort of stupidity is what separates you from us.
Time for us determines not truth, but the outward practice of ritual and law.
No serious scholar respects your doctrinal views. They might respect the various philanthropic activities of your imam and your community but on the level of doctrines no scholar takes what you have to say seriously. I mean common, you think that Sunni or Twelver shi’i scholars will ever accept the claims of your imam to alter what the Prophet (s) brought as regards the sharia’ given what they believe about the nature of the Qur’an and the centrality of the Sunna in its understanding? You have to be kidding me.
Perhaps when you pull your finger out and your scholars stand up for human rights, rather than hindering them, we and much of the world may take you
seriously. Personally I couldn't care less what most of them think, lest they hinder our right to practice. It is on the level of charity that we are as a community interested in dialogue, and on the levelof spirituality with those with whom we have commonality. The rest are of no interest. It gives me no more pause for thought than weather Sarah Palin believes I live in the "Real America". Meh'
To you the whims of your imam is your religion.
Don’t assume things about. My ‘co-religionists’ are not people who attack Sufism. Wahhabism or its Shi’i equivalent is not my religion. Any Muslim who attacks authentic Sufism or ‘Irfan does not know anything about either one.
Yet you make half witted assumptions about my faith? Hypocrisy much? Those scholars form a significant portion of your "co-religionists", but I'll leave it to you ya'll to slug it out in your house.
I know that. My point was precisly that non-khoja Ismailis generally don’t believe is such a concept. Pay attention.
Most Khoja don't either, having some degree of grounding in the subject before making wild accusations may help you to compose a coherent argument.
So what? That is not to say that they changed, as they saw fit (like your imam), whatever the Prophet (s) had practiced. You know nothing about my sense of justice and human rights. Stop assuming things about me. If you want to know ask me and I’ll tell you. They (non Ismaili scholars) may work for your institutions, but they don’t accept your doctrinal views. They may even respect your imam (as a person, who tries to do good), as do I, but they certainly don’t accept him as any sort of authority in matters of correct belief/practice. That’s precisely my point.
We don't expect them to accept our doctrines, the AKDN recruits from international development courses on the basis of merit not religious persuasion.
JimJam, on 24 October 2010 - 09:27 AM, said:
The Ismalis I've had most interaction with are the Bohris.They are like living fossils of the Fatimid age. They do adhere to zahir practices of faith. Nazarism appears to have turned into a movement similar to Qarmatism, where the batin obliterates the zahir instead of being in balance with it.
I've had a lot of experience with the Progressive Bohra movement. Their Imamate ended with the Fatimid Empire. The Nizari have only recently regained guidance from our Imam who is focussed on reorganising our community, rebuilding institutions and creating a commonality in ritual. Ever major "inovation" the Imams have introduced has been to move the community closer in terms of ritual. So to be fair, I think the comparison to the Quramati is a tad excessive.
Thing is most Nizaris appear to be Khoja-Satpanitht. Most Ismaili websites promote the ginans Doesn't the Satpanitht make up a large number of the followers of the Agha Khan? Apart from the Chitralis and Hunza natives, almost all the Nizaris in Pakistan are Gujrati / Khojas.
The Ginans were used to convert them, and form a part of their history and Indian culture which the Imam wants them to be proud of in every way. Communal singing of hymns plays an important part of practice in every Khana. I'm a Pashtun so sing Pushtu or Farsi qasida: Arabs, Persians, Chinese all have their own traditions. Recently I heard Japanese Isma'ili who recite Haiku. None of the approved Ginans they sing relate to reincarnation. The Satpanith are a separate Hindu sect primarily based around Rajasthan, who reverted to Hinduism under Mughal oppression.
Most of Pakistani society holds the Sufi saints dear. The Barelvi are the largest sect in the country and Shias also venerate men like Abdulllah Shah Ghazi and Lal Shabaz Qalandar for their lineage and piety and love of the ahl-e-bayt. The attacks reflect the ambition of a powerful minority which seeks to overthrow the majority. If most had animosity then there would have been no need for sneak attacks like suicide bombings. They'd have torn them down like the Saudis tore down jannat al baqee
Pakistan has flirted with extremism since Zia al-Haq, it has been riding the tail of a tiger that finally turned. Extremist groups are on the rise.
i've written this on my phone, and I can't be bothered to proof so ya'll will have to make do.