Jump to content

Shia Muslims and Sikhs


Recommended Posts

i m juz wondering if Pir Budhu Shah was a Shia Pathaan? what other examples in history do we have of Sikhs having friendly relations with Shia Muslims? i do remember reading there was some scuffle once in Amritsar during the rule of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, but what about relations during the times of the Gurus?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 8 months later...
Guest Javanmard

I have written an article on Shi'a-Sikh relations which will appear in the new Sikh Formations (December 2006, London: Routledge) an academic journal. A French version with substantial additions will appear in the "Journal Asiatique" (Paris) next year with the generous help of Prof. Amir-Moezzi (Sorbonne, Paris) one of the world's leading authorities on Shi'ism. But I don't mind giving you some spoilers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Javanmard

Pîr Budhu Shah was a Shi'a as it was confirmed to me by his descendants. But Mian Mîr was NOT a Chishti Sufi but a Qaderi Sufi and the shaikh of prince Dara Shukoh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gurfateh

Thanks for correction.

Well was not Dara Shikoh also Shia?

And likewise das read that Chisti sufies helped in relase of Six Guru from Gwalior fort and after the meeting ,when family member of Moghul King came to them in Nizzamudden Auliya Dargah asking for help to cure aling person (May be king).And some one from Punajb said that,Greatest of Peer is in custody and this is the result of such sin.Just your opinion bro?(here only das read that that person from punjab was something to do with mia Meer and was from Chisiti Silsilah and das finds it wrong).

And From which Silsilah did Sheik Fareed Rahmat Ul Allehe belong?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Javanmard

Dara Sihkoh was a Qaderi Sufi. You can consult the following book on him:

Hasrat, Bikrama Jit.1982.Dara Shikuh: Life and Works, Dehli: Munshiram Manoharlal.

Baba Farid was a Chishti Sufi. One needs to remember though that the Qaderi and Chishti orders though outwardly Sunni have Shi'a origins. Many of their followers today would call themselves Sunni but the fact remains that they have conserved the devotion for Ahl ul Bayt (as) as their orders derive from the Shi'a Imams.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Javanmard

1. Yes one could say that real Shi'a follow the real Sunnah of Ahl ul Bayt (as).

2. It is in Bhai Mani Singh's Janamsakhi that Guru Nanak says that Muhammad and Ali are one divine light. This implies support to the real Shi'as, the mystical ones, not those who follow mullahs like sheep.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read that sakhi and the Sakhi in the Bhai Mani Singh wali Janamsakhi does not imply that we should support the Shias over the Sunnis. It simply implies that both Mohammad and Ali have qualities that are admirable. No where did it say or indicate that the Shias have a rightful claim over the Sunnis.

Although personally I do think the Shias are better people then the Sunnis (from my personal experience) but the debate over Imam Ali and Abu Bakr have absolutely nothing to do with Sikhi. In Sikh history you will find plenty of Sunni Muslims who were very close to the Guru. Recently I read a book about sympathetic Muslims of Guru Gobind Singh Jee, and the vast majority of them were Sunnis.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Javanmard

I think Singh47 has misunderstood my post I am afraid.

Saying that Muhammad and Ali are one Light (this is what the text of the sakhi says literally) implies the support of a theological position. By that I do NOT imply that Sikhs should support Shi'as or at least all Shi'as.

The passage from the Janamsakhi is actually a hadith of Imam Jaffar. Sunnis would never say things like that except of course Sunni Sufis.

The majority of Guru Gobind Singh's Muslim supporters were mainly Sunni Sufis and I emphacise here Sufi NOT shariati Sunnis.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I think the Shias do have a better claim then the Sunnis. You don’t need to have a PhD to know that. Just read both sides of the story and you realize the Shias are right and Ali did have a rightful claim to the Khalifat over Abu Bakr. I think the problem the Sunnis now have with the Shias is the concept of the “Imam†(of the 12ers, Zaidis, Ismailis). They think of this and all the other traditions attached to it such as Muharam, 'Ya Ali' as opposed to 'Ya Allah' as very un Islamic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
  • 5 months later...

I think Singh47 has misunderstood my post I am afraid.

Saying that Muhammad and Ali are one Light (this is what the text of the sakhi says literally) implies the support of a theological position. By that I do NOT imply that Sikhs should support Shi'as or at least all Shi'as.

The passage from the Janamsakhi is actually a hadith of Imam Jaffar. Sunnis would never say things like that except of course Sunni Sufis.

The majority of Guru Gobind Singh's Muslim supporters were mainly Sunni Sufis and I emphacise here Sufi NOT shariati Sunnis.

Bahadur,

You have either not understood the text, which I don't think is possible given that it is written in basic Punjabi even a layman would understand or you have read the sakhi with a preconceived bias. Having debated with you many a times, I have already made sure that rather than rely on your translation or in this your interpretation I had access to the text and read it myself.

The sakhi which you refer to is from the Bhai Mani Singh Janamsakhi-;

Having met with a number of Muslim holymen in the city of Mashhad the Guru is asked -;

Fer ohna puchiya ki Sunni jo hain so Mohammed nu manday hain asin jo hain so Ali nu manday han. So tusin kaho ki duhan vichon visaikh kavan hoiya. Tan Baba kehiya ki juanmardi karkai ar shastran karkai Ali vadheek hoiya hai. Atay Ilam karkai Mohammed vadheek hoiya hai. Par samajh karaki dono ikko jahay hain. Ar noor Khudai da Chawan Yaarn vich bhi ar Mohammed vich bhi ikko jehay hai ar tusadi vich bhi ohi noor hai. Par khudi karkai tusanu Khudai bhul giya hai. So jay tusin Santan nun millo ar khudi aapni door karo ta Khudai nun paavoh.

The Muslim holymen asked those who are Sunni believe in Mohammed and we believe in Ali. So please tell us who was the better of the two. Baba said in terms of chivalry and use of weapons Ali is the greater of the two. In terms of knowledge Mohammed is the greater. But understand both are the same. The light of God which was in the four companions is the same that was in Mohammed and WITHIN YOU ALSO IS THE SAME LIGHT. But due to your haumai you have forgotten God so you should meet the Sants and keep your haumai away and be in remembrance of God.

I have had to put capitals on the most important line in the sakhi. Far from supporting the theological position of the Shias who believe that Mohammed and Ali had the same light the Guru is put forwarding his teachings that each and every person has the same light of God in them. It seems Bahadur forgot to read the last few lines which totally negate his theory that Guru Nanak supported the Shia theological position against the Sunni. The Sunni also have hadiths which they claim show that Mohammed claimed Abu Bakr to have been the same light as himself.

Bahadur has also claimed that Guru Nanak was a Shia Sufi and that was the reason that he went to Mecca. The very same Janamsakhi that Bahadur has used to try and twist to his way of thinking has a sakhi about the trip to Mecca.

The Hajis say to Guru Nanak that there is a place where a ship anchors and they will take anyone who wants to go to Mecca but only after that person has said the Kalima. They never allow a Hindu to go to Mecca. The Hajis then ask Guru Nanak not to travel with them (possibly perceiving problems for them should they be discovered having a non-Muslim with them). Guru Nanak then says that no one comes with anyone and everyone comes alone and goes alone. So they let the Hajis proceed while Guru Nanak and Mardana do Kirtan. When the bhog is done, miraculously they both see the Minarets of Mecca ahead of them.

So the question to you is this? If Guru Nanak was a Shia Sufi then why would the Hajis have brought up the subject of every person going to Mecca having to say the Kalima. If Guru Nanak was a Shia Sufi such a question would never have arisen. Why mention the fact that Hindus are not allowed on the ship?

The Bhai Bala Janamsakhi on which the Bhai Mani Singh Jamasakhi is based also has a discussion between Guru Nanak and Bhai Mardana. Bhai Mardana asks Guru Nanak where is this Mecca which the Turks keep on praising. Guru tells him that it is 2500 koh in distance and they do not allow any Hindus to go there. Bhai Mardana says that for you 2500 koh is like 2 and a half steps and you say they do not allow Hindus there but who is it that can stop you.

I think you just like to take a few lines out of the Janamsakhi which you can twist to suit your pet theories and disregard the mountain of evidence which negate these very theories.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...