Hindu-Sikh-Shia relations

[YoungMind]

Salams,

I always hear that Hindus/Sikhs and Shias in the Indian subcontinent have had amiable relations with one another and neither group has ever attacked the other. The Hindu-Muslim riots and fights in the subcontinent were always caused by the Sunnis in the subcontinent. Some Hindus (as well as Sikhs) even go to Imambargahs during Muharram. I personally know a very religious Shia whose grandfather was a Hindu. Also there have been countless Hindus and Sikhs who write poetry about the Ahlul Bait (as). There was also a very famous Hindu who used to come to Pakistan to read majalis. I would like to discuss what is the background of these good relations between these 3 groups and why the Hindus and Sikhs never fought with the Shia in India?

[student of zahraa]

Salam Alaikum

This is so surprising!

I never knew of such relations and i wonder whether they exsisted in the first place..... plus, there are so many issues that seem to be self contradicting i mean a hindu or sikh or whoever is not kitabi is not even tahir so i dont get how they were allowed to read majalis or enter pure mosques or whatever .... after all i dont know much about the indian tradition although i have many indian friends from different relegous groups and my roomate is an indian too, so could you maybe elaborate on your question and the "History" you are talking about....

[YoungMind]

WaSalams Student,

Yes these relations do indeed exist. In India, Hindus and Sikhs are known to participate in Muharram procession and take part in azadari. I know that some mosques in India have a separate door for Hindus and Sikhs to enter and give their prayers and leave. The history that I'm talking is about the relations between these groups and how they lived and coexisted with one another under the oppressive Sunni rule of the Mughals, the British rule and whom ever else ruled India before. As you may know the Mughals killed countless Hindus, Sikhs and Shias in India. Unfortunately this topic I think has been neglected by history and is not very well documented.

[Satyam]

Indians (Hindus) are sentimental people. If you tell the story of the persecution of the Imams, a Hindu (example me :) )will instantly sympathise with you. That explains the participation of some Hindus in Muharram.

Have you heard of Husseini Brahmins. Apparently, when Hussein was in trouble, he sent a letter asking for help to an Indian king and the King sent some hundred soldiers. It is not clear if they reached the place in time and fought for Hussein or not, but the descendents of them call themselves Husseini Brahmins, and practise a mix of Islam and Hinduism.

Sunil Dutt , a famous Hindi film actor was a Husseini brahmin.

another reason for this could be the shared persecution of Hindus and Sikhs and Shias by the Sunni muslim kings.

For ex,

Sikh gurus were killed and the sons of Guru Govind, the last guru, were killed in a public execution by Aurangzeb - a devout sunni mughal. Reason why the disciplic succession was cut and Guru Govind was the last guru.

Almost all muslim kings were barbaric to Hindus , except maybe Akbar, and that's cuz Akbar was an apostate.

Shias also have faced persecution until the Brits and later the secular Indian govt could enforce laws prohibiting persecution.

[Guest rediscovering_islam]

Don't forget the Sufis! They've been pretty instrumental in bridging Hindu-Muslim relations. The fact that they tend to sympathize more with Shias than Sunnis (for example, rationalist thought and belief in divinity of Imams, esp. Ali) also explains why Shias and Hindus have had such amiable relations.

[krazykaffir]

what was Nadir Shah (an Iranian)?

He marched into Delhi, killled 30,000 people and then took thousands of Hindu/Indian slaves.

Edited June 30, 2005 by krazykaffir

[Satyam]

what was Nadir Shah (an Iranian)?

He marched into Delhi, killled 30,000 people and then took thousands of Hindu/Indian slaves.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/SHIA/MODERN.HTM

However, in 1726, Nadir Khan, and Afghani, went over to the Shi'ite cause and, under his leadership, drove the Turks from Iran. Long before this, the Afghanis had split into Iranian and Afghani spheres of influence, and the Russians ceased to expand after the death of Peter the Great. Nadir Khan had himself crowned Shah of Iran and he promptly converted to Sunni Islam, or orthodox Islam, and declared Iran to be a Sunni country. This was done in part to appease the Ottomans, but it appears that he was serious about converting the country. He made several efforts to impose Sunnism on the country, but Shi'ism was too rooted in the character of the country to give in.

  Nadir Shah promptly went on a series of wars of invasion, and in the 1730's he captured Dehli in India, as well as seizing Bokhara and Khiva on the eastern border of Iran

Know your history. Neither is Nadir Shah the representative of Shi'ite faith , nor do shi'ite Indias look up to him in any way.

[shehzad abbas]

salaam

DOES ANY ONE HAS ANY DETAIL OR IDEA ABOUT THE SHIAS KILLED IN INDIA during the mughal period or any idea of the location where this happened .I have heard that sadat barha was attacked was that true or any other place where attacks took place

[Hussein Parmar]

(bismillah)

Hello guys!!! I have a question in my mind so can anyone answer me?

Was Guru Nanak Dev, an imposter or he was a pious man as others speak of him that Guru Nanak was like Abdul-Qader Jailani and he didn't proclaim himself as a Prophet

[YoungMind]

(salam)

Good discussion guys.

Satyam, I'm glad you're here, you know a lot about this history, and since you're a Hindu, you can talk about the topic from your perspective. Most of the time when this topic comes up, the people discussing it are usually Shias. Some questions, do you have more information about this letter that Imam Hussain (as) sent to the Indian king? And which king was it? And do Husseini brahmins have a website where they discuss their backgrounds and beliefs?

Rediscovering Islam,

Are you sure that Sufis believe in the divinity of the Imams including Imam Ali (as)? Are you sure you're not confusing them with the Nusayris?

Hussein Parmar,

Who is Abdul Qadir Jillani, I read a little bit about him in Al-Tijani's book, but is he a sufi saint? what's the background on him?

[Satyam]

So how about we march into Iran get even?

No wait, we train their army and get buddy-buddy with them for OIL in hopes that they wont invade us AGAIN and kill us off...AGAIN!

SMART idea!

The forgiving Hindus suck up the same Iranic groups that treated them like African slaves through most of our joint-history!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Haven't we gone through this before ?

I raised many questions for which you had no anwer apart from parroting the same stuff.

I will repeat the questions,

1. What is the present danger that Iran is posing to India, so that India need not develop relationships with Iran ?

2. Has Iran / Iranians been hostile to Indian interets *after* India's independance ?

3. If we are to correct historical wrongs, where do we start with and where do we stop? what about the mongols, arabs, turks, afghans and brits, portuguese ?

4. If we are not to have relations with Iran, just cuz they are a muslim country, then why do we have relations with our own muslims, shall we kick them out of the country ?

The idea of india having strategic relationship with iran is as smart as US arming and funding pakistanis and turning a blind eye to them killing Indians with those arms and money.

American arms (patton tanks, planes etc) to pakistan and the confidence of pakistan that americans will bail them out, has killed more Indians than anything in modern history and poses the largest danger to India.

So take your "Iran is bad cuz america says so, but forget about our relationship and arming of pakistan" argument and stuff it. :)

Edited June 30, 2005 by Satyam

[Satyam]

(salam)

Good discussion guys.

Satyam, I'm glad you're here, you know a lot  about this history, and since you're a Hindu, you can talk about the topic from your perspective. Most of the time when this topic comes up, the people discussing it are usually Shias. Some questions, do you have more information about this letter that Imam Hussain (as) sent to the Indian king? And which king was it? And do Husseini brahmins have a website where they discuss their backgrounds and beliefs?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I remember reading about the letter, not the actual letter itself. Should be somewhere on the net.

Husseni Brahmins are a vanishing sect, they usually marry somebody outside the sect these days and do not pass on their beleifs.

http://www.himalmag.com/2002/may/profile.htm

The Hindu devotees of Imam Hussain

A case of cross-veneration

by Yoginder Sikand

One of the most important events in early Muslim history was the battle of Karbala fought in 680 CE in which Imam Hussain, grandson of the Prophet through his daughter Fat-ima and her husband Imam Ali, was slaughtered along with a small band of disciples in a bloody battle against Yazid, a tyrant who had usurped the Muslim caliphate. The slaughter of Ali is one of the pivotal events that led to a divide between the ‘mainstream’ Sunni and Shi’ite communities, with the latter ascrib-ing special importance to the family of Ali. This event occurred in the Islamic month of Muharram, and it is for this reason that this month is observed with great solemnity in many parts of the Muslim world.

What is particularly striking about the observances of the month of Muharram in India is the prom-inent participation of Hindus in the rituals. This has been a feature of popular religion for centuries in large parts of India, and continues even today, albeit on a smaller scale. In towns and villages all over the country, Hindus join Muslims in lamenting the death of Hussain, by sponsoring or taking part in lamen-tation rituals and tazia processions. In Lucknow, seat of the Shia na-wabs of Awadh, prominent Hindu noblemen like Raja Tikait Rai and Raja Bilas Rai built Imambaras to house alams, standards represent-ing the Karbala event. The non-Muslim tribal Lambadi community in Andhra Pradesh have their own genre of Muharram lamentation songs in Telugu. Among certain Hindu castes in Rajasthan, the Karbala battle is recounted by staging plays in which the death of Imam Hussain is enacted, after which the women of the village come out in a procession, crying and cursing Yazid for his cruelty. This custom is known as pitna dalna. In large parts of north India, Hindus believe that if barren women slip under an alam moving in a procession they will be blessed with a child.

Perhaps the most intriguing case of Hindu veneration of Imam Hus-sain is to be found among the small Hussaini Brahmin sect, located mostly in Punjab, also known as Dutts or Mohiyals. Unlike other Brahmin clans, the Hussaini Brah-mins have had a long martial trad-ition, which they trace back to the event of Karbala. They believe that an ancestor named Rahab traveled all the way from Punjab to Arabia and there developed close relations with Imam Hussain. In the battle of Karbala, Rahab fought in the army of the Imam against Yazid. His sons, too, joined him, and most of them were killed. The Imam, seeing Rahab’s love for him, bestowed upon him the title of sultan or king, and told him to go back to India. It is because of this close bond between their ancestor Rahab and Imam Hussain that the Hussaini Brah-mins got their name.

After Rahab and those of his sons who survived the battle of Karbala reached India, they settled down in the western Punjab and gradually a community grew aro-und them. This sect, the Hussaini Brahmins, practised an intriguing blend of Islamic and Hindu prac-tices, because of which they were commonly known as ‘half Hindu, half Muslim’. A popular saying about the Hussainis has it thus:

Wah Dutt Sultan,

Hindu ka dharm

Musalman ka iman,

Adha Hindu adha Musalman

(Oh! Dutt the king

With the religion of the Hindu

And the faith of the Muslim

Half Hindu, half Muslim)

Dutt = Hussaini Brahmin

But there is also another version of how the Dutts of Punjab came to be known as Hussaini Brahmins. One of the wives of Imam Hussain, the Persian princess Shahr Banu, was the sister of Chandra Lekha or Mehr Banu, the wife of an Indian king called Chandragupta. When it became clear that Yazid was adamant on wiping out the Imam, the Imam’s son Ali ibn Hussain rushed off a letter to Chandragupta asking him for help against Yazid. When Chandragupta received the letter, he dispatched a large army to Iraq to assist the Imam. By the time they arrived, however, the Imam had been slain. In the town of Kufa, in present-day Iraq, they met with one Mukhtar Saqaffi, a disciple of the Imam, who arranged for them to stay in a special part of the town, which even today is known by the name of Dair-i-Hindiya or ‘the Indian quarter’.

Some Dutt Brahmins, under the leadership of one Bhurya Dutt, got together with Mukhtar Saqaffi to avenge the death of the Imam. They stayed behind in Kufa, while the rest returned to India. Here they built up a community of their own, calling themselves Hussaini Brahmins, and although they did not convert to Islam they kept alive the memory of their links with Imam Hussain.

The Hussaini Brahmins believe that Krishna had foretold the event of the Imam’s death at Karbala in the Gita. According to them, the Kalanki Purana, the last of eighteen Puranas, as well as the Atharva Veda, the fourth Veda, refer to Imam Hussain as the divine incarnation or avatar of the Kali Yug, the present age. They hold Imam Ali, Imam Hussain’s father, and son-in-law and cousin of the Prophet Muham-mad, in particular reverence, refer-ring to him with the honorific title of Om Murti.

The Hussaini Brahmins, along with other Hindu devotees of the Muslim Imam, are today a rapidly vanishing community. The younger generation abandoning their an-cestral heritage, often now seen as embarrassingly deviant. No longer, it seems, can a comfortable limin-ality be sustained, and ambiguous identities seem crushed under the relentless pressure to conform to the logic of neatly demarcated ‘Hindu’ and ‘Muslim’ communities. And so, these and scores of other religious communities that once straddled the frontier between Hinduism and Islam seem destined for perdition, or else to folkloric curiosities that tell of a bygone age, when it was truly possible to be both Hindu as well as Muslim at the same time.

[YoungMind]

Thanks a lot Satyam. And yes it is very unfortunate that Pakistan still hasn't learned to get along with India. I am Pakistani myself and it saddens me to see the state of my country. But anyways, I heard from an Indian Shia that at one point during the Hindu-Muslim clashes in the early 1990s, Bal Thackery, the leader of Shiv Sena actually ordered his group to not attack the Shias! Can you confirm this?

[Satyam]

Thanks a lot Satyam. And yes it is very unfortunate that Pakistan still hasn't learned to get along with India. I am Pakistani myself and it saddens me to see the state of my country. But anyways, I heard from an Indian Shia that at one point during the Hindu-Muslim clashes in the early 1990s, Bal Thackery, the leader of Shiv Sena actually ordered his group to not attack the Shias! Can you confirm this?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not likely.

Bal Thackeray is a different breed, his goons attack other hindus , so forget about any thing else. Shiv sena is a virulently chauvinistic group which have attacked non-maharashtrians in bombay, especially Tamils.

Bombay Hindu -muslim riots were ugly. I am not defending Bal Thackeray but you have to remember the backdrop of the Bombay riots.

The riots were after the bomb blasts. The bomb blasts was done by Dawood Ibrahim. He did that at the behest of ISI. At that time economy was just about picking up, after the liberalisation by Manmohan Singh (the then finance minister).

By bombing the economic capital, Pakistan wanted to send us the message that "We will not allow you to progress unless you settle Kashmir to our satisfaction".

Proof, you may ask.

Dawood is in Pakistan as a state guest..(his daughter married Miandad's son :!!!:)

The detonator used in the bombs were found to be of the variety that US supplied to pakistan for use in the Afghan Jihad.

[YoungMind]

Yes, yes, I've heard of Dawood. He's known to be involved with anti-Shia groups in Pakistan as well. Sick people.

[Abdaal]

Rediscovering Islam,

Are you sure that Sufis believe in the divinity of the Imams including Imam Ali (as)? Are you sure you're not confusing them with the Nusayris?

The Sufis take Imam Ali (as) to be spiritual master of the Ummah. However, the difference between them and the Shias is that the Shias believe that the 12 Imams are infallible. Sufis on the other hand, believe that the 12 IMams were pious but not infallible, and they take other members that are descendents of Imam Hassan (as) and Imam Hussain (as) to be part of the Ahlul Bayt such as Imam Zayd bin Ali (as), Imam Yahya bin Zayd (as), Imam Muhammad bin Abdullah (as), Imam al-Hasan al-Muthanna (as) etc.

Who is Abdul Qadir Jillani, I read a little bit about him in Al-Tijani's book, but is he a sufi saint? what's the background on him?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Here is a website of Shaykh Abdul Qadir Al Jillani (ra).

http://www.algillani.org/saq/index.shtml

Yes he is an exalted Sufi saint. When Guru Nanak came to Baghdad, he built a shrine beside Shaykh Abdul Qadir's shrine which still stand till today.

Also here is website the SIkhs and Sufis built together to show thier unity.

www.apnaorg.com

[Satyam]

Congrats. You have succesfully wrecked the thread. :)

My distrust is based on

1. the history of the Iranian people.

What about it? Shouldn't we distrust the Brits ? What about the Americans who sent a nuke capable task force 74 into the Bay of Bengal ? Shoud we automatically trust the good intentions of america on your say so ?

What about the American sec. of state's assurance to China that US would intervene on China's behalf if China faces retaliation from US following the proposed Chinese intervention on behalf of the chinese ?

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB79/

Henry Kissinger's duplicity to the press and toward the Indians vis-à-vis the Chinese. In July of 1971, while Kissinger was in India, he told Indian officials that "under any conceivable circumstance the U.S. would back India against any Chinese pressures." In that same July meeting Kissinger said, "In any dialogue with China, we would of course not encourage her against India." However, near the end of the India-Pakistan war, in a highly secret 12/10/1971 meeting with the Chinese Ambassador to the UN Huang Ha, Kissinger did exactly this encouraging the PRC to engage in the equivalent of military action against the Indians. [Documents 14-15, 30-32]

Lemme get this straight. India, a democracy, intervened to stop the Genocide in Bangladesh. US a fellow democracy did not stay neutral, did not support India, but it chose to help a dictator committing genocide.

On top of that, the US sends its nuke capable seventh fleet to Bay of Bengal, to intimidate India.

On top of that, US sec of state (obviously with the president's approval) encourages China (ANOTHER DICTATORSHIP) to intervene on behalf of pakistan by assuring that US will intervene on behalf of China in case of a Soviet intervention.

So, the US was willing to risk a wrold war three to protect the pakistani army, just cuz it had uses for them, irrespective of the 3 million bengalis killed by the pakistani army.

FAST FARWORD TO 2005.

nothing has changed. US still protects pakistan and arms and funds them.

US is giving nuke-capable F-16s to pakistan apart from many other items that can ONLY be used against India.

http://www.observerindia.com/analysis/A336.htm

Facts are as follow. In the current package, the US has decided to sell 2000 TOW-2A missiles for $82 million, eight P-3C aircraft for $970 million, six PHALANX Close-in Weapon Systems for $155 million and about 2700 HF/VHF radio systems for $78 million. The reason for selling the weapons as stated by the US Defence Security Agency (accessed at www.dsca.mil) is that they `` will improve Pakistan’s ability to restrict the littoral movement of terrorists along Pakistan’s southern border and ensure Pakistan’s overall ability to maintain integrity of their borders``.

The weapon characteristics, however, do not seem to match these stated claims. TOW missiles, for instance is designed for anti-armour, anti-bunker, anti-fortification, and anti-amphibious missions. The TOW 2A features a tandem warhead armament system to increase its lethality against tanks configured with explosive reactive armour. The TOW 2B is a fly-over, shoot-down missile with explosively formed penetrator warheads. In other words, the system is designed to attack and defeat tanks and other armoured vehicles. It seems highly improbable therefore that TOW missiles could be an appropriate weapon to be used against terrorists hiding in the mountains of south Waziristan.

These 2000 TOW missiles, however, can be effectively used against the Indian troops in a short war.

The most expensive item on the shopping list is the P3 C aircraft which is a land-based, long-range anti-submarine warfare (ASW) patrol aircraft. With an operative range of 17 hours, the aircraft is capable of orbiting near the target for seven hours to a maximum distance of 1850 kms from the home base. The plane has a wide bomb load bay where a wide range of weapons like mines, depth charges and torpedoes can be loaded. The US defence agency says the aircraft ``will improve Pakistan’s ability to restrict the littoral movement of terrorists along Pakistan’s southern border and ensure Pakistan’s overall ability to maintain integrity of their borders’’. There are no terrorists on Pakistan’s southern borders and nor is there any possibility of any such grouping taking place in the near future. The P3C aircraft, however, has a critical role to play in countering the Indian naval presence in the region.

This acquisition should be seen in the context of another set of weapon systems which the US is supplying to Pakistan-PHALANX Close-in Weapon Systems. This is the second most expensive item on the list—over $25 million a piece, and the most lethal. The Phalanx Close-In Weapon System is a rapid-fire, computer-controlled, radar-guided gun system designed to defeat anti-ship missiles and other close-in air and surface threats. Phalanx automatically carries out functions usually performed by multiple systems –– including search, detection, and threat evaluation, tracking, engagement, and kill assessment. The advanced version has increased ammunition, a high-order-language computer, and expanded radar search and track envelopes to counter a broad spectrum of anti-ship missile threats, including supersonic, high-diving, and manoeuvring sea-skimmers. The US defence agency say by selling this hi-tech weapons system, the US was contributing to ``the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security of a friendly country``.

What the US agency doesn’t state is that Pakistan will have no use for such high-tech equipment but against Indian naval ships and other "floaters" in littoral waters which could mean Indian energy assests in the high seas and along the coast. Incidentally, it will be relevant here to note that the concept of Close in Weapon System (CIWS) came about during the India-Pakistan war of 1971 when a Pak sailor tried to protect Pakistan tanker, PNS Dacca, from the Indian anti-ship missile by firing at it.

The only conclusion, which can be drawn from the above analyses, is that Pakistan is steadily improving its naval prowess which indicates a changing strategic plan in the Indian coastal waters. There is a strong possibility that these new set of priorities could include designating Indian energy and nuclear infrastructure which are located in the neighbourhood as high priority targets in the event of a conflict in the future.

This assessment is further fortified by careful analyses of Pakistan’s weapons purchases in the recent past. For instance, Pakistan has bought 24 anti-submarine warfare torpedos from Sweden and three anti-submarine warfare helicopters from UK. In 1994, Pakistan signed a contract with a French firm to deliver three Agosta-90B class submarines by 2006. It bought from UK six frigates, 24 surface-to-air missiles Seacat, one BN-2A B Maritime aircraft besides 24 anti-ship missiles SM-39 Exocets from France, 16 anti-ship missiles Saccade from China and 96 torpedos from France. It is therefore quite clear that the fresh set of US weapons will only give an extra edge to Pakistan’s efforts to bolster its naval power which is certain to create an imbalance in the conventional maritime power equation in the region.

I believe I have give you VERY CLEAR reasons for India's strategic relationship with Iran.

I have been proved right.

2. The fact that the middle-east is intellectually backwards and that the use of violence is still commonplace, as evidenced by current events.

then why is the US having relationship with KSA, the horriblest regime in the area?

How many Indians marched into Iran and killed 30,000 Iranians?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How many Indians marched into Britain and made them a colony? How many nuke capable ships did India send to Gulf of Mexico to threaten US?

Bottom line :

If US wants India to not have relationships with countries that US sees as a threat, it is QUITE LOGICAL to expect US to do what it preaches. US foreign policy can be summed up in shortly as "DO AS WE SAY, NOT AS WE DO".

this can be tolerated only upto a point, after that countries will start to look after their own interests...india courting iran is a consequence of american policy.

I got some more questions for you.

How many Americans have died solely due to India's relationship with Iran ?

How many Indians have died solely due to America's relationship with Pakistan?

compare the two before crying about indi-iranian relationship.

[Mazlum]

(salam) to everyone

Has anyone heard of a lady called Anita Rai? :)

[YoungMind]

This discussion has gone way out of line. It was suppose to be about history, culture and not current affairs.

Yes I have heard of Anita Rai. She's got some good books out.

Edited July 1, 2005 by YoungMind

[Aliya]

off topic comments/posts deleted. If you wish to discuss politics, KK there is a forum for it. :)

[Satyam]

@above, Thank you !!

@young mind,

I know of aishwarya rai :P , who is this anita rai ???:huh:

btw, here's a "what if" that will lead to interesting discussion.

What if Ali was made the first caliph instead of Abu Bakr ? How history would have changed ?

I will give my opinion after seeing yours.

Edited July 2, 2005 by Satyam

[misbah 2004]

. I would like to discuss what is the background of these good relations between these 3 groups and why the Hindus and Sikhs never fought with the Shia in India?

Just the other day I was watching this really learned Hindu orator and scholar (I can’t recall his name now).He was in Lucknow and he was having one of his gatherings there and Maulana Kalbe Sadiq was present there.

I really liked that Hindu scholar and the way he spoke. Reportedly, he has learned oration by attending majaalis of Imam Hussain (as)

Bal Thackery, the leader of Shiv Sena actually ordered his group to not attack the Shias! Can you confirm this?

I don’t know about Thackery himself but there are shiv sainiks who mourn for Imam Hussain (as) in Muharram.

You know this Muharram I was in town to attend Maulana Mirza Athar’s Majalis and guess what?

The car ahead of mine belonged to a Shiv sainik.

[krazykaffir]

off topic comments/posts deleted. If you wish to discuss politics, KK there is a forum for it. :)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

why didnt you delete Satyam's reply?

[Aliya]

because it was in reply to one of yours, thus off topic too. I didn't say I deleted ONLY yours, did I?

[Satyam]

I don’t know about Thackery himself but there are shiv sainiks who mourn for Imam Hussain (as) in Muharram.

You know this Muharram I was in town to attend Maulana Mirza Athar’s Majalis and guess what?

The car ahead of mine belonged to a Shiv sainik.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thackeray is an opportunist who does not hesitate in using violence in achieving his means (which is dadagiri, machogiri, power, money etc). He started out with "Mumbai is for Marathas" campaign in which his goons would threaten all non-marathis, notable the biharis and Southies like Tamils etc, to get out of the area. As he grew in power, he self procalimed himself as guardians of Hindus since that would give him a wider constituency.

His immediate followers are goons who follow him, because they want to share those things.

There may be a few sainiks who are good fellows, nobody is all good or all bad.But all said and done, I would'nt touch a sainik even with a pole. I hope these nutcases fade into oblivion as India progresses.

[Mazlum]

Anita Rai's interest in Islam was triggered off by a sequence of deeply spiritual and thought provoking dreams in which she has been blessed by the recurring appearances of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh& his holy progeny), Imam Ali (as), Lady Fatima Zahra (SA), Imam Hussain (as), and Lady Zaynab (SA).

Please visit www.anitarai.com :)

[YoungMind]

@above, Thank you !!

@young mind,

I know of aishwarya rai :P  , who is this anita rai ???:huh:

btw, here's a "what if" that will lead to interesting discussion.

What if  Ali was made the first caliph instead of Abu Bakr ? How history would have changed ?

I will give my opinion after seeing yours.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't believe history itself would be changed that much if Imam Ali (as) was made the first caliph. He had too many enemies, he would have to deal with civil war and he would still have gotten assasinated..

[oxygen]

Bombay Hindu -muslim riots were ugly. I am not defending Bal Thackeray but you have to remember the backdrop of the Bombay riots.

The riots were after the bomb blasts. The bomb blasts was done by Dawood Ibrahim. He did that at the behest of ISI. At that time economy was just about picking up, after the liberalisation by Manmohan Singh (the then finance minister).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The bombs blasts happened AFTER the riots in which over 1,000 muslims were killed.

http://www.flonnet.com/fl2014/stories/20030718002704100.htm

IN December 1992 - January 1993, Mumbai set a record of sorts for itself in the matter of communal madness. In the riots that followed the destruction of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya, more than a thousand people were killed. Unlike previous riots, violence was dispersed and it spread to relatively newly urbanised areas. Arson, killings and the destruction of property occurred in distinctively different kinds of areas. Violence affected not only slums but also apartment blocks and chawls. What was common to all the areas was the systematic targeting of Muslims, who comprised 17 per cent of the city's population.

[Satyam]

you are right. I was wrong. Apologies.

[sallu]

Thackeray is an opportunist who does not hesitate in using violence in achieving his means (which is dadagiri, machogiri, power, money etc). He started out with "Mumbai is for Marathas" campaign in which his goons would threaten all non-marathis, notable the biharis and Southies like Tamils etc, to get out of the area. As he grew in power, he self procalimed himself as guardians of Hindus since that would give him a wider constituency.

His immediate followers are goons who follow him, because they want to share those things.

There may be a few sainiks who are good fellows, nobody is all good or all bad.But all said and done, I would'nt touch a sainik even with a pole. I hope these nutcases fade into oblivion as India progresses.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with satyam jsut by mourning for Imam hussain doesnt' mean Thackeray is a good person, maybe inside he jsut want to try to win people to help him create violence. People like these you have to be careful especially after looking at his history.

[baqar]

I don't believe history itself would be changed that much if Imam Ali  (as)  was made the first caliph. He had too many enemies, he would have to deal with civil war and he would still have gotten assasinated..

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

May be not, but the emphasis on humanity, justice, truthfulness, honesty, mercy and compassion would have been much more clearly etched into our lives than they are today.

[Satyam]

I don't believe history itself would be changed that much if Imam Ali  (as)  was made the first caliph. He had too many enemies, he would have to deal with civil war and he would still have gotten assasinated..

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I believe history would have changed VERY much.

For instance, most of the armies that conquered persian and north africa etc were all under the direct command of the sunni caliphs. By the end of the first round of conquests Islam became a political thing which perverted Islam the religion.

I doubt if Ali or Husein would have allowed such barbaric campaigns (this is from my readings of Baqar's posts on them).

I doubt the Indian invasion would have occurred the way it occured, if the Imams were in power instead of the caliphs. For ex, it was the caliph at Baghdad who sent Mohd Bin Kasim to invade Sindh.

The resentment that many hindus have against muslims for the invasions and the resulting destruction of hindu temples would not be there. Islam would have been viewed more benignly instead of the current viewing of it as arab imperialism and a forced religion which resulted in destruction of native religion and culture.

Sure the faith would have spread on its own power , definitely not to the extent it spread under the political power of islamic conquerors.

But I remember somebody (must be Baqar) saying that one true muslim is better than 100 namesake muslims.

There would have been a lot of changes in islam in religious aspects alone. The ridiculous sunni hadiths would not have come to existence. Mysticism would be more prevalent. I understand that some verses were "lost" and some were "made up" when caliph Uthman codified koran. That would not have happened if Ali was caliph and Koran was codified immediately after the death of muhammed.

Islam would have been less "militant" and i guess, even the crusades would not have happened if we follow that chain of events. Crusades were an important cog in the events which led to the european renaissance which led to colonialisation and imperialism which then led to world wars.

So a lot would have changed if Ali would have become the caliph and after him the imams (Husein, Hasan etc) came to power instead of abu bakr, muawiya, uthman, yazid and co.

Edited July 8, 2005 by Satyam

[scarymuslimah]

Salaamun Alaikum

There's some interesting articles on items related to this subject at my friend's website: http://islaminterfaith.org/

He isn't updating any longer, but the archives are absolutely fantastic. I suggest everyone go through the articles, you'll learn a lot :)

Leila

[YoungMind]

Thank you Satyam. Your reply actually reminded me of a majlis I heard 2 years ago where the maulana was talking about the difference between political Islam and real Islam. I guess I am more inclined to believe that pious and good people like Imam Ali (as) Imam Hassan (as) and Imam Hussain (as) will always be brought down by evil forces. Same can be said of other historical figures like Jesus, Malcolm X, MLK Jr. and Gandhi.

Edited July 12, 2005 by YoungMind

[Peer]

LOL.

Just a few points:

1) There are many Hindus and Sikhs, who mourn for Imam Hussain (as) during Muharram. Guru Nanak himself went to Karbala to visit the shrine of Imam Hussain (as) . And some of the poetries written by some Hindus and Sikhs are just awesome.

Below is a "Bhajan" (hymn/mantra) sung by Sundar Singh, a Sikh, who used to live in a small city of Amritsar state of India, called Pakhowaal. He was a lover of 14 masumeen (as) and used to attend Majalis-e-Aza and used to mourn and wail.

Ok here is his bhajan (hymn) which he was once reciting in his home.

Bairi Hay Manjdhaar Ali Ji

Niya Karado Paar Ali Ji

Mein Hoon Paapi aur Gunahi

Tum Ho Bakhshanhaar Ali Ji

Mein, Papi Kay Guru Tum He ho

Mairi Suno Pukaar Ali Ji

Tum Bin Kis Nay Ajgar Mara

Tum Haider Karrar Ali Ji

Narg Surg Hay Hath Tumharay

Do Jug Kay Sardar Ali Ji

Bhaiyya Ho Tum Paak Nabi kay

Uss Kay Raj-Kumar Ali Ji

Nabi Nay Tumko Baiti Bakhshi

Aishwar Nay Talwar Ali Ji

Hath Pakar lo Mein Papi Ka

Kardo baira paar Ali Ji

ROugh English translation:

The boat is (struck) in thunder, Ali (as)

Make it (the boat) cross the river, Ali (as)

I am the evil and the sinful,

You are the forgiver/interceder, Ali (as)

You are the guru of me, the sinful

Answer my call, Ali (as)

Who killed the Cobra, but you

You are Haider Karrar, Ali (as)

Heaven and Hell are in your hands

The lord of the two worlds, Ali (as)

You are the brother of Pure Prophet (pbuh)

(You are) His Crown Prince, Ali (as)

Nabi gifted you the daughter

God gifted you the sword (dhulfiqar), Ali (as)

Hold the hands of me, the sinful

Make me cross (overpower) the river (of Problems), Ali (as)

to be continued..