golestan

Be name Khoda The topic of this thread is the institution of the Granth Sahib. You accuse me of not sticking to the subject yet you are the ones going on and on about Bahadur Ali Shah. Ironic isn't it. As for the other issue that concerns unbreakable it is a mystery to me as to why he keeps insisting on it when the points I made speak for themselves. There is no need for me to debate with people who lack ANY and I insist here on ANY substantial knowledge of Islam. The day unbreakable shows that he has done his homework there might be a debate. For a debate to take place both parts need to share the same basic knowledge. What I have found here is that not only didn't people have that necessary knowledge about Shi'ism but on top of that tried to even dismantle basic and elementary facts without having the competence to do so. For example: when I say that Ismailis are Muslims, I am not sharing my opinion, I am stating an official recognized reality, one that is corroborated by any leading Shi'a or Sunni institution. Yet that very fact (not opinion) is being dismantled by people who themselves lack any knowledge of usul e dîn and usul e fiqh to be able to do it and who fail miserably at it. The other prerequisite for a debate is to stick to the discussion of the arguments NOT the people. Ad hominem attacks have been a recurring and constant feature in any thread I have participated in. Debating is about facts and ideas not people. Attacking me doesn't not change the facts and doesn't contribute in any way or form to the debate. And on top of that I have long grown immune to it. kind regards Bahadur Ali Shah

Be name Khoda I am not going to respond to Xylitol because he has no idea of what the concept of prophethood (nubuwwah) implies in Islam. And as I don't want to further divert you people from your topic I won't insist. Shaheediyan wrote:

Be name Khoda Off topic? The discussion is about the institution of guru granth which I have said derives from the practice of replacing the living teacher with the Quran or a book of his. There was nothing off topic in what I wrote. The problem isn't the off topics isn't it N3O... "past and future threads" future threads? Are you predicting the future N3O? Anyways I made my point about the topic. ps I noticed some unanswered posts by Matheen: Analogy is forbidden in matters of fiqh not in intellectual discussions. I am not discussing fiqh here. I am having an intellectual debate. If this was your attempt to show me that you checked wikipedia articles on Shi'ism you won: I am impressed. by Shaheediyan: Whatever you may say about it Ismailis are considered Muslims. 12er Shi'a scholars don't go to extent of declaring a group non-Muslim because of a difference of lineage. It doesn't mean they agree. It just means they respect the right to disagree. And for your information the Agha Khans untl recently pledged allegiance to the qutb of the Nimatullahi order, a 12er order which again means that many Sufis were both Nimatullahis and Ismailis. It is hence also clear that the Ismaili Imams didn't see themselves to be at equal level with Imam Mahdi (aj). see Lewisohn's article on the subject. kind regards Bahadur Ali Shah

Be name Khoda On the basis of which forum rule do you wish to ban me now N3O? I have put my points across in a polite and civilized fashion, I haven't attacked anyone on personal grounds nor used any personal info in any malicious manner, nor used foul language. Check all my posts as golestan and you will notice that although other members have had no moral issue with attacking me as a person using private information I have not once replied doing the same. It seems to me that you are indeed very biased as a moderator. Judge the argument not the person N3O. Anyone is free to come and visit the forum. On shiachat.com we have many people who are Islamophobes and who say the most outrageous things yet they are given the freedom to express their views. I on the other hand am just stating the Shi'a point of view about Baba Nanak Shah (ra). I do realize that you do have a problem with it. But I haven't insulted anyone, I haven't used foul language, nor used private information to defame others contrarily to others. As a moderator you are to judge people by rules not your own emotions. You have done this in the past already but I hold no grudges. This is a discussion forum unless you want it to be a "feel good lounge" with no challenges. " kind regards Bahadur Ali Shah

Be name Khoda 1. Amardeep, this isn't the only ginan that mentions Baba Nanak Shah (ra) and I would like to remind you that he is being referred to by his Sufi title: Nanak Shah 2. The people mentioned in this list have attained enlightenment by contemplating the light of Imam which has always existed. The fact that rishis of the past have contemplated it is hence of no surprise in the same way as your texts talk of rishi Patanjali attaining enlightenment. 3. The Ismaili origins of Baba Nanak Shah (ra) have already been investigated by Dr Dominique Sila-Khan from the EHESS, her work looks into more detail into the issue. kind regards Bahadur Ali Shah

Be name Khoda 1. Amardeep, this isn't the only ginan that mentions Baba Nanak Shah (ra) and I would like to remind you that he is being referred to by his Sufi title: Nanak Shah 2. The people mentioned in this list have attained enlightenment by contemplating the light of Imam which has always existed. The fact that rishis of the past have contemplated it is hence of no surprise in the same way as your texts talk of rishi Patanjali attaining enlightenment. 3. The Ismaili origins of Baba Nanak Shah (ra) have already been investigated by Dr Dominique Sila-Khan from the EHESS, her work looks into more detail into the issue. kind regards Bahadur Ali Shah

Be name Khoda Shaheediyan wrote: 1. I didn't give any definition of who is a Muslim. I only refuted your claim that Ismailis are not considered Muslims by major Islamic institutions. As for Wahabis the founder of Wahabis has been declared an apostate by the same authorities I have mentioned. Wahabis are therefore not my concern. 2. Shi'as who disagree with the 12er lines are considered heterodox and still within the fold of Islam as they accept tawhid, nubuwah and imamate. It's a difference of lineage which can be respected. 3. Inculturation is a well established notion different from influence. Inculturation in teh South Asian Ismaili tradition is an established fact and has been clearly distinguished from the notion of influence. see Shackle& Moir 1997 4. As for the mention of Ahl ul Bayt (as) in gurbani I would like to remind you that you nor any Sikh have the original pothi written by Baba Nanak Shah (ra) and that we have today is what your line of Gurus has chosen to present to the world with some editing and changes along the line. On the other hand the custodians of Bahlol's shrine in Baghdad are firm in the idea that Baba Nanak Shah (ra) was a Muslims and that he had a book written in Persian containing praises of Ahl ul Bayt (as). Members of the archeological survey of Pakistan have pointed out to me that such a volume has been mentioned in other sources as well. Hopefully we will be able to find it. I always found it strange that Sikhs couldn't locate that very first pothi of Baba Nanak Shah (ra) despite it being the very words of their founder. To Matheen: The chivalry rituals are conserved in Shi'a-Sufi orders, the zurkhaneh and the Ahl e Haqq. Yes there have been fraudsters in the past who managed to enter Mekkah and what you are implying by that is that Baba Nanak Shah (ra) entered Mekkah by fraud but we do know that he was checked at the entrance as you janamsakhis say. The guardians checked his writings and concluded that there was nothing wrong with them. As they couldn't read Gurmukhi it is obvious that the writings were either in Arabic or Persian. The fraudster solution some Sikhs use to explain Baba Nanak Shah (ra) visiting Mekkah is simply ridiculous and in many ways insulting to such a great saint. kind regards Bahadur Ali Shah

Be name Khoda Shaheediyan wrote: 1. As I said before al Azhar states that Ismailis are Muslims and so do most Shi'a maraja. Ismailis are Muslims as long as they respect the pillars of the faith which they do. The Agha Khan still holds an Iranian passport and Ismailis enjoy their rights as Muslims in Iran where they do have centres in important cities. The Ismaili institute published 12er works and the Agha Khans themselves and their own families often get married according to 12er procedures with 12er Shi'as. This would not be possible if they were not considered Muslims. There is no doubt that many clerics disagree with some Ismaili doctrines but there is a difference between divergence in mazhab and being non Muslim. Again your point is void even if you were to quote Sharif al Murtada there are many Shi'a scholars who, whilst disagreeing with Ismailis, clearly state that they are still Muslims because they hold to the declaration of faith. 2. + 3. You seem to confuse inculturation and influence.There is no question that Islam, like Buddhism or Christianity has used inculturation in order to present Islam in a way that would be culturally understandable for the local population. Nevertheless the pillars of the faith and its institution have remained untouched by this process which is why it ought to be termed inculturation not influence. kind regards Bahadur Ali Shah

Be name Khoda Shaheediyan wrote: 1. The highest Sunni institution, al Azhar, considers Ismailis to be Muslims and most maraja also do. It is Wahabis who don't consider them Muslims. So your argument about Ismailism being to Islkam what Ram Rahim is to Sikhism is void. 2. The Ginans are a collection of different mystical poems written by different authors during different periods. Most predate Sikhism others are contemporary to Sikhism. The words and institutions I have mentionned existed already before Sikhism emerged. 3. Interesting you mention raags because before the Agha Khan III the Ginans were played in raags too. You might want to listen to this old recording of a ginan (forgive the quality): http://soyouz.ismaili.net/real/ginanmusic/santok03.ra Here is the text to the ginan: SATGUR MILIYAA MUNE AAJ SAYYEDAA IMAAM BEGUM ejee satgur miliyaa mune aaj, aana(n)d hu(n) paamee satgur miliyaa taare dukhaja ttaalliyaajee sarve saariyaa daaseenaa kaaj...aana(n)d.....................1 Today I have found the True Guide and as a result I have attained joy and happiness. When I found the True Guide, all my sorrows vanished. The Lord fulfilled this maid servant's wishes or made her tasks easy. ejee kaaj daaseenaa sarve saariyaajee darshan deeyaa mahaaraaj....aana(n)d.........................2 He fulfilled all the wishes of this maid servant. The Majesty granted the Spiritual Vision. ejee darshan dekhiyaa man santokhiyaajee mahaapad paamee chhu(n) raaj...aana(n)d......................3 When I had this Vision my heart found satisfaction and contentment. As a result, I have attained the kingdom of the most exalted state. ejee mahaapad keri bhaai vaat chhe nyaareejee koi na jaanne e kaaj....aana(n)d.............................4 Matters pertaining to the exalted state are very mysterious. Nobody knows it's reality. ejee jo jaanne so nar navkha(n)d maanne jee ghatto ghatt dekhe mahaaraaj...aana(n)d......................5 The one who knows it, enjoys the nine continents(or heavens). In every heart he sees that Majesty. ejee ghatto ghatt dekhe taare ek karee lekhe jee nar nakla(n)kee kero raaj...aana(n)d........................6 When he sees every heart he regards all as one entity, and indeed he sees the kingdom of the spotless master (Hazarat Ali). ejee kahet imaam begum sunno moraa bhaaijee alee nabee chhe sirtaaj.........aana(n)d.....................7 Imaam Begum says: Listen o my brother! Hazarat Ali and Hazarat Nabi Muhammad(s.a.s.) are our lords. Is it just me or this sound like something familiar? kind regards Bahadur Ali Shah

Be name Khoda The Shaikh died last summer in tragic circumstances. It would be welcome if for once you would refrain from commenting about him the way you do. It shows you have no respect for the dead. His family and close friends are still shaken by his sudden and tragic death and the last thing we need right now is to have some random people commenting non sense about his death. Even though I disagreed on his views regarding dual Imamate and vilayat e faqih the fact remains that he was respected by his academic colleagues and students. I ask the moderators to close this thread so as to avoid any further random and insensitive comments by people who obviously have no respect for the grief that his family and close friends have gone through. Please recite Fatiha for his soul. kind regards Bahadur Ali Shah

Be name Khoda Xylitol wrote: That's new now...NO he entered the city of Mekka that's what your accounts say.

Be Name Khoda Baba Nanak Shah (ra) is mentioned in Ismaili ginans as an Ismaili saint. In India the Ismaili tradition is called Satpanth. At that period Nimatollahis and Ismailis were intertwined organisations with many of its member having double affliliations. The title Shah is part of the titles of the Nimatollahi order. He went to Mekka something ONLY Muslims can do.

Be name Khoda Matheen wrote: 1. Yes they use the term pahul. See Moir & Shackle 1992 2. The charan pahul did exist among one sect only namely the Vallabhis and was used by Ismailis too. There needs to be more research done as to who inspired who. Sure is both predate Sikhism. 3. What is unique is not the fact of giving 10% but calling it dasvand is. Only Sikhs and Ismailis do that. 4. There is no prohibition on non-Muslim to enter mosques except for the inner sanctum of certain shrines and the holy cities of Medina and Mekka. And yes the langa khaneh is open to all. Again same institution same word. 5. I have given the sources of the Shi'a initation ritual many times: - Futuwwah nameh ye Sultani of Hossain Kashifi - Ayin e Javanmardi, Henry Corbin What I find interesting is that you claim that it can't be the same ritual because Shi'a do't recite bani (of course they don't they're Muslims) Let me describe to you in clearer words what the relationship is between your khande da amrit and the Shi'a initiation ritual. Khande da amrit is to the futuwwah ritual what the ram rahimi sach sauda amrit is to your khande da amrit. It might not be exactly the same but it is very clearly an imitation because it has the same structure. In clear:

Be name Khoda 1. Yes they were borrowed by the Sikh Gurus 2. I didn't post similarities. I posted a certain number of elements that only exist in the Shi'a tradition. These aren't just concepts I have mentionned but also names. None of these concepts and names exist in the Sanatan tradition. 3. I have already stated the reason as to why these are borrowings: a. pre-existed Sikhism b. present in same geographical area c. institution AND name identical 4. These were borrowed because Baba Nanak Shah (ra) was part of that very Shi'a tradition.

Be name Khoda 1. The bhattan de svayye are quite clear about avtaravada and it has nothing to do with translations.