Trend of linkin all the bhagats as follower of Guru Nanak ji

[Guest]

Hari veer ji, good to see you back, please leave your input don't just leave with out one liner funny comments.. heheh.. :lol:

[Mystical]

How exciting is the mystical path, within yourself you seem travel everywhere while still in the same place.

[Guest Javanmard]

You people make me laugh. You are so used to your petty little Islamophobic hatred and put all Muslims into the same category.

Did it ever occur to you that Ismailis are a very tiny community which has always been persecuted by the majority Sunni community and that they have actually no interest in trying to make Kabir into a Muslim as they admit the possibility of non-Muslim hujjats or proofs of the eternal Imam.

So when I speak of Ismailis you guys jump on the usual litany of stupid stereotypes and conclude that it must all be propaganda. Kam1825 and SAdmin read up on Ismailism before you start typing lies. You just can't equate them with Sunnis. I mean I did clearly say Ismailis right? I did clearly specify Ismailis right? So why do you guys come up with stuff that a. only applies to Sunnis b. is not even true about Islmailis

I never said Ramananda wasn't Kabir's gurdev or inspiring figure but just that the Satguru for Kabir is Maharaj's eternal light. And this has been confirmed by the Kabir specialists such as Prof. Vaudeville under whose successor I have worked with in Paris at the Sorbonne whilst studying Braj and the literature of Kabir.

Confusing Ismailis with Sunnis is unpardonable. Stop restricting your knowledge of Islam to the few guys you meet in your suburbs and try and read more about it instead of coming up with blatant lies.

Kabir is mentioned in the Brahm Prakash, an Ismaili ginan or sacred poem. They don't even try to make him a Muslim there. They just say that he has attained divine knowledge by contemplating the eternal light of the Satguru-Imam.

So before you guys start barking about Muslilm propaganda check, read and then talk. Really ridiculous!

Here are the verses from Brahm Prakash:

"daas kabir, gururaamaana(n)daa - ve sukh ku(n) meeleekeeyaa aana(n)daa.......................44

Kabir Daas and Guru Ramana(n)da attained real peace and thereby were blissful. "

Doesn't say anywhere that they were Muslims nor does the text try to prove it, because Ismailis don't even do namaz you fools!!!

So Kam1825 and SAdmin it's good to know your facts before you start typing, activating the brain is actually not a luxury, it's free and it might help you in life!!!

[akaali]

people shouldnt speak about what they do not know. period.

[drawrof]

Great post Javanmard!

So you're telling me that islam isn't part of the natural order of god....

If you take the NI- out of SUN-NI....You can say that they discovered the sun.

If you take the A out of SHI-A....Then you have a water based substance

If you take the IS out of IS-MAILI....and drop the LI as well, you have may.....

So you can see that the SUN which is supposed to be true...is going against Nature because SHI comes down like RAIN...and its rainy in MAI...as Ismaili's came out of SHIA's........SO it Shi's in MAY...and the sun Is always around.....so it is natural, and as you can see...The sun although it has some parts which are right...and those parts don't change...it doesn't seem to understand that it doesn't have a place

because april showers bring may flowers

[Guest Javanmard]

Actually just as a little reminder...Kabir is a Muslim name just in case Kam1825 and SAdmin forgot. You never know...once one get used to have white Anglo-Saxon media to think for one's self instead of the brain when it comes to Islam it wouldn't be surprising to see memory failing from time to time. But yes Kabir is a Muslim name and yes he was born in a Muslm caste of Banarsi jhulahas who did conserve yogic techniques of meditation...

[amardeep]

the debate says something about Guru Nanak came in the three earlier Yugas as well..

can someone tell me more about this?

[Guest Javanmard]

You will find the reference to that in the Bhattan de swayye. It clearly states that Maharaj came in previous ages as Krishna and Rama and other forms.

[Guest SAdmin]

Javanmard,

I’m glad you didn’t go to extreme and called me “Kafir”… I think it becomes responsibility of scholars like you to educate others about Abrahmic complex religious claims rather than acting so offensive and revealing your anger. It won’t help if you slap someone and teach Gurbani but it will definitely help if you correct someone and teach them the right meanings. The reason why I try to keep myself away from scholars is that their “too much” knowledge is very dangerous to lay man who barely knows the right meanings of complex Abrahmic scriptural values let alone become expert at them.

The complex debates of Sunni verses Shia’s has produced web of misinformation from both sides that it is not in our hands to look at them without being skeptical. All Abrahmic religious faiths have somewhat involvement in propaganda because that’s the main “tool” missionaries’ use. You might know about Abrahmic Christian Missionary in Mexico and how he rip off all their religious texts and converted them to Christianity.

I can understand your frustration and im not against Islamic philosophy but Islamic scholars are known propagandists not all but most. The major difference between Shias & Sunnis is that Shias are more inclined to have debates or to refute others than calling them "kafir" and shooting them in the head which I respect the most.

This is just my lay man observation so do not get offensive and start writing the belief of Shia because there is very good website www.shiachat.com for that purpose. I visit that site to gain some knowledge once in a while.

My statement was references to Islamic Scholars of India who try to assimilate Bhagat Kabir Ji into Islam and it was not an attack on you indirectly or directly.

The R.S.S organization the pathetic so-called Hindu organization’s slogan “Ram Birthplace” and “Hinduism is under danger” is also product of Islamic ideology of Muslim League which was not able to compete with Congress and took the religious dirty politics. If you search on R.S.S old’s manifestos it is clear that RamChandar Janam Bhumi was not even issue in their manifestos from the Fifties onwards or in the writings of Hedgewar and Golwalka. Islamic propaganda is known fact and there is no doubt in it. I’ve never claimed to be scholars on religious texts and always willing to learn as you may know me by coming to this forum for all these years.

Reaping the whirlwind

Amulya Ganguli

The reason why the BJP traversed this path is well-known. After the shock of winning only two seats in the Lok Sabha in 1984, it realised that it had to follow a new course. Its reaction was not unlike that of the Muslim League in 1937, which realised after its stunning electoral setback in that year that it could not hope to compete with the Congress in a non-religious milieu. So it took up the Islam in danger slogan to survive, just as the BJP adopted the Hinduism in danger line half a century later.

I’ll look forward to see some tolerance in your behavior and be willing to educate us from your scholarly knowledge. And if there is no room for challenges or arguments then just say so because then there is no chance for me to raise any questions because that will be waste of time. I keep very rational approach in life and keep religion as part of my life not life itself. There should be room and "Freedom of Speech" in scholars’ world which I saw Shias allow as per your Video post.

King Akbar introduced a policy of reconciliation and assimilation in India and it is being used for long time off and on so sometimes we have to be skeptical to bring some challenges to Islamic scholars. I hope you understand my statement fully now and remove any prejudice you might have developed from my previous post.

I’m sorry to cause rage inside your heart and may God bless you.

[Guest Javanmard]

Hai Allah main in logon ke saath kya karun!!!

You have the nerve to ask me to be tolerant when you and Kam1825 have stated blatant lies about Ismailis? I hope I am dreaming.

1. I clearly did mention Ismailis. I didn't use the word Muslim.

2. If you didn't know what Ismailis were there is wikipedia if you're afraid to to go on ismaili.net (just in case these evil Ismaili scholars might want to convert you and steal a Sikh girl or two in the process...)

3. None of you took the energy to double check before writing which actually wasn't much of a favour to ask you guys.

4. Yet you took it upon yourselves to lie about the Ismaili tradition by putting up all these stereotypes found in Western media about Muslims.

5 Yes many Sunni scholars try to convert people by using propaganda but tell me one thing: which one of you two is able to reply back? Be honest!

If you are not able to reply back to these Sunni kuthe then there are two reasons: either you don't have knowledge or you don't have time.

a. If you have no knowledge to defend Guru Nanak then go and cut your hair! Maharaj travelled the whole world for you and you guys can't even make the effort to acquire the knowledge to defend him and his teachings?

b. If you don't have time to defend Guru Nanak then go and cut your hair! Guru Gobind Singh used all his time fighting and sacrificing everything for YOU yes YOU and if you can't take time to defend Maharaj then you might as well convert to another religion!!!

6. Did it ever occur to you that Kabir was born a Muslim and that he never rejected his shahada? Technically speaking he remained a Muslim although agreed he had broken off the shackles of lables such as the sociological notions of Hindu and Muslim. But he has not rejected his shahada. He may not have fasted or done namaz but still, technically speaking Muslims have a point and it has to be given to them.

It's all nice and dandy winging like children about Sunnis but how many of you have started studying not only the languages and history of our beautiful tradition and Arabic but also Persian in order to defeat those Sunni idiots?

And you're trying to teach me lessons SAdmin? Mashallah! What one doesn't have to hear these days!

Maula Hafiz

[Guest SAdmin]

Javanmard wrote:

You have the nerve to ask me to be tolerant when you and Kam1825 have stated blatant lies about Ismailis

JavanMard:

My statement was in reference to Islamic Scholars of India who try to assimilate Bhagat Kabir Ji into Islam and it was not an attack on you indirectly or directly. Please go back to my post which is still the same and read these lines once again before beating around bushes.

[Guest SAdmin]

Let me ask you one question and please answer with honesty and with your scholarly knowledge? Was Bhagat Kabir Ji Sunni Muslim? Thanks

[Guest Javanmard]

There is no evidence as to what mazhab he belonged to as there are no clear explicit signs of either mazhab in his writings (no mention of the Sunni caliphs or of the Ahl ul Bayt). That is why I am saying he was technically speaking Muslim. But I have to say that much of what he says is close to Ismailism and mystical Shi'ism which could mean that there is a possibility of links with that tradition, but then again that's just a possibility. In any case his belief in reincarnation, his abandoning of shari'a and his emphacis on the Satguru would disqualify him as a Sunnis whereas these are Ismaili and batini Shi'a beliefs. We can't say for sure if he was Shi'a but sure is that according to Sunni norms he would have been considered a kafir, no doubt about that.

[Guest SAdmin]

The following article on Bhagat Kabir Ji clealy mentions him as follower of "Shahj Path"... There is no source to claim that he might have been technically or non- technically a Muslim. There are legends that he may have been born off Hindu mother. There are no initiation of him as Muslim. He was raised by Muslim weaver family hence name was given "Kabir" which stands for great which he was in his lifetime.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabir

Few lines from article:

It is a fruitless endeavor, indeed one that Kabir himself disliked, to classify him as Hindu or Muslim, Sufi or Bhakta. The legends surrounding his lifetime attest to his strong aversion to communalism.

We can end this assumptions on the following lines:

To Hindus Kabir was a Vaisnava -- bhakta, to Muslims a pir, to Sikhs a bhagat and to the followers of Kabir ( kabir-panthis) an avatar of the supreme Being.

[Guest Javanmard]

Being a follower of the Sahaj path is not in contradiction with being technically a Muslim. As long as one does not deny Allah and his Prophet one remains a Muslim even if one may adopt features from other religions. The Shattati Sufi order has adopted Yoga, Sahaj path and even Omkar (in the Madhumalati it describes Allah as being the one omkar...) yet they remain Muslims. Technically speaking Kabir did not reject the shahada and did not leave the fold of Islam.

[akaali]

Great post Javanmard!

So you're telling me that islam isn't part of the natural order of god....

If you take the NI- out of SUN-NI....You can say that they discovered the sun.

If you take the A out of SHI-A....Then you have a water based substance

If you take the IS out of IS-MAILI....and drop the LI as well, you have may.....

So you can see that the SUN which is supposed to be true...is going against Nature because SHI comes down like RAIN...and its rainy in MAI...as Ismaili's came out of SHIA's........SO it Shi's in MAY...and the sun Is always around.....so it is natural, and as you can see...The sun although it has some parts which are right...and those parts don't change...it doesn't seem to understand that it doesn't have a place

because april showers bring may flowers

vah ji vah, vah vah vah vah vah vah vah

vahhhhhhh viiiiiiiii vahhhhhhhhhh vah vah vah

vah vah vah

bhalle bhalle oh bhalle tere

[Kam1825]

Javanmard i dont know why you get all upset over these discussion pages. it is called a discussion page as that is what we do . all you had to do was put on your next post i said ismailis and not a generic grup of muslims.

i have no emnity against muslims or hindus. i try to study what i can about both religions. i am totally aware of the history of bhagat kabir ji and their name and where it came from.

you do not need to get angry and embroiled in your pride about your knowledge of religion. Remember the sahaskritee salok katha as Pandit Gopal Datt was the same, he had vast knowledge and pride overtook his knowledge and made him arrogant. All he did was argue with people wo make himself greater and boost his ego.

i am just saying that in general a lot of people of the islamic faith state that other divine teachers have something to do with islam and change the history behind things to strengthen their faith. i work with sunnis, shias, sufis and druz all of whom have their roots in islam. they all state that both Bhagat Kabir Ji and Guru Nanak Dev Ji were islamic and followers of the path of Mohammed. They also believe that we have misinterpreted the message from these divine souls and should be islamic.

"Kabir is a muslim, do you not know that from the name?" is the normal question posed by them

"Guru Nanak Dev Ji did a pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina, only muslims do that"

This is what i was talking about where the truth is smeared by illusion and liars of people who want to bring people under their fold.

I have no knowledge of the group that you speak of so as a warning i mentioned what i did in a previous post.

no need to get on your high horse about it.

one last thing. i am aware of the bhatt sawiyai but in the sri dasam granth their is the 24 Avtar katha of VIshnu. If Guru Nanak Dev Ji was vishnu would not have Guru Gobind Singh Ji put it in the katha? does this mean that Guru Nanak Dev Ji were not Bavan Avtar, Ram Avtar and Krishan Avtar?

[vijaydeep Singh]

Gurfateh

Kabir is Arebic language means big and biggest is Akbar.

His fathers name was Nimah.

his son name was Kamaal or say Qamaal.

some guys do claim that he was left by Brahman parent on leafe near pond(prof Sahib Singh Ji refute that but still say that he was Hindu Julaha).

while similar things are said for Sant Ravidas,that he was Brahmin who by mistake ate bef and was demoted to lower caste.

Perhaps some people think that lower caste can not have intellect.

But when both claim to be of Chamar or Julaha jaat/birth/caste then threre should not be any confusion that both were Brahmins but not by Birth but by mercy Akal,which made them Brahm Gyani.

for give das for anything wrong.

[Guest Javanmard]

Kam1825 wrote:

"Guru Nanak Dev Ji did a pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina, only muslims do that"

If you take your religion to heart why on earth are you not able to respond back?

Where on earth does it state on the janamsakhis that Maharaj did hajj? It is never mentioned!

Are you even aware that there is a difference between hajj and umrah? If you studied Islamic history you would have found out that there has not always been a prohibition for non-Muslims to go to Mekka. As I said if you are not able to defend your Guru against misconceptions of others you either have no time or no knowledge and in both cases you might as well convert to another religion!

On your question about the Chaubis Avatar (an other Ismaili literary genre btw) you seem to forget that it is part of the Bachitar Natak Granth which is made of Bachitar Natak and Chaubis Avatar. So Guru Nanak is already mentioned as a divine manifestation. Are you implying that Guru Gobind Singh would contradict gurbani?

As for my ego, I am not surprised by your and SAdmin reaction at all. A man only needs to learn another language than English and Panjabi to be called an arrogant fool in the Sikh community today. Call me arrogant as much as you want it won't change a thing to the fact that you both had the arrogance to take it upon yourselves to judge Ismailis when you didn't know anything about them: this my dear is arrogance.

I was born out of semen and I will return dust, I know where my limits are. But when I see people lying blatantly about simple facts that they could have checked I get angry. At your age both of you should know better and be an example to the youngsters. Instead you perpretate the same mistakes as them and dare call me arrogant just because I told you that a. you were wrong b. what the Ismaili quote on Kabir Ji was. Really a good reason to call me arrogant right? mashallah!!!

What is your problem with Kabir being a Muslim? Is it some disease he should have been ashamed of?

What about taking on the criticism of your Muslim colleagues on board and check of they are right or not? This is true intellectual humility: to be able to question yourself and let yourself open for questioning which leads you to investigate and research. What about trying to see it from their perspective? Could it be that it might highlighten an aspect of our tradition we ignore because we have the arrogance to believe that we know it all just because we were born into it?

Questioning yourself, being open to challenge is the only way to progress.

Most of my friends are Muslims and I am able to respond respectfully to their questions because I know where they come from. I take their questions on board and don't just brush them away as rubbish as most people do. I investigate and after that I am able to see things differently and give a consistent reply. But for that you need to spend many sleepness nights, research and study!

So keep your accusations of arrogance to yourself Kam1825. Thank you! Don't you even dare compare me with Pandit Gopal Datt ever again you fool!!! You have internet access, access to libraries, books and television. Before posting your blatant pile of lies about Ismailis you should have checked first: this is what infuriates me NOT that you didn't know what Ismailis are! I had mentioned them in my post neither you nor Sadmin checked that word before writing!!! If you both lived in some poor village in Kurdistan it wouldn't even be a problem. But you guys have access to knowledge. It was just a question of reading up for 5 minutes and you still come up with these lies about Ismailis: I think it is rather you both who had the arrogance to believe that you knew what is was more or less and didn't check before writing!!!

So take your accusations of arrogance and stick them up where the cat has no hair!!!

[gsingh00]

kam,

have u listened to the katha done by Baba Hari Singh / Sant Gyani Gurbachan Singh on bhattan de swayae? I havent listened to it yet but i would be intereested in knowing what they believe the shabad in bhattan dey swayae means.

[Guest SAdmin]

Javanmard

I made it clear to you that it was not in regards to your post but it seems that you are having hard time reading those lines which I posted above. Also I can defend Sikhism when i see propaganda people from any Muslim community or from other religious faiths. I only discuss it when I see propaganda people otherwise im very neutral and have tolerance towards other religious faiths.

Shia & Sunnis religious debates have lots of information that we do not even need to be scholar to defend our own religious sentiments. Why re-invent the wheels?

We never had problem in our side of world ( U.S.A) so far from Muslims where they try to distort or convert us. The movement Islamic world decides which sect is on right path I will start researching on Islamic values but honestly Abrahmic religions are not my taste to explore. It is just my personal choice.

Also do not come out as same old allegation of typical Islamic scholars way where they accuse others of being anti muslims which is not the case otherwise this site would have never hold sub section for Islam. You should debate your side of arguments with Ali Sina an ex muslim and defend because he is of your line a scholar with all kind of Abhramic religious references.

Bhagat Kabir Ji clearly mentions no attachment to any religious faith in his own writing. The twists of scholars is not needed. It is clear cut what he was through his own writings.

And if you really want to be on scholars list I would like to see you having debates with people of great intelligence in your line of work. It is not my profession to be scholar of Abhramic religions. Mr. Ali Sina keeps his religious debate open for all scholars and rather than calling him Anti-Muslim defend it. It won't help us and you if you surf around youth forum and try to over power them with your gigantic references.

I can see by looking at Sikh history that true Gursikhs just kept their faith in Guru and never diverted from it. This was the simple answer to Islamic extremists and it still works.

[vijaydeep Singh]

Gurfateh

Coming back to main topic.

Das thinks that Bhagats were the follower of Guru of First Master ie Akal,then say personality of First Master.

Rather some personal worshipping cults of present,try to say that Gurus were worshipped while Gurmat is Anti personal worshop to large extent.

[Guest Javanmard]

Ali Sina a scholar? let me laugh! That monkey still goes on about Aisha being nine when she married the Prophet (pbuh) when she was at least 17 or 18! Give me a break! He doesn't have a PhD to my knowledge and isn't recognised as a scholar by academic in Islamic studies and isn't published in any recognised academic journal!

I never asked you to be a scholar of Abrahamic traditions. All you had to do was check the word Ismaili before writing stuff which you didn't.You don't need a PhD to check the word Ismaili don't you? So why didn't you do it? If you didn't know what it was then why a. didn't you check? b. why did you come up with stuff about Muslim scholars that had NOTHING to do with Ismailis?

But of course I am the arrogant one here right?

And the reason I am on this forum is that I have been asked to come here. But if my presence is not desired just let me know...

Sadmin wrote:

"Guru Nanak Dev Ji did a pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina, only muslims do that" today face a challenge regarding their religion all they do is masturbate about the past and think that everything is fine!

I never stop people from running against the wall...

[Guest SAdmin]

When my post was not even related to your post or to Ismaili do you see any relation for me to dig information on Ismaili? I've clarified to you the intention of my post which was for Indian Muslim scholars if it is hard to read then I got nothing else to say to you. Also stop assuming things. You have used very harsh words against me and Kam and still we showed you humbleness and if you think it is disrespect then feel free to stop posting under this topic because I do not wish to keep going on with you when you are acting like a typical scholar. And for Ali Sina that's the typical response Islamic scholars provide. Oh yeha he is fool but still this guy has written debates online why not defend faith which you try to spread? Why run away from defending Islam when it comes to real opponent rather than showing intelligence to weaker opponent.

And from where you got those lines under my name? Or is it that you are loosing your patience? Have some respect for others if you really want to get some in return. And let me know when you are ready to prove to Ali Sina that Aisha was at least 17 or 18.

Note: If you want to keep this match going with me please send me PM. I do not want to disturb public forum explaining my side. We got rules and I do not want to break them. There is nothing important which we are discussing here. You are stuck on why I didn't dig up on "Ismaili" and my anwser is that my response was not for Ismaili but in general for Indian Islamic scholars.

[Guest Javanmard]

Proof that Aisha wasn't nine when she married the Prophet (pbuh)? Any time any day darling!

Several Muslim scholars show evidence from Islamic history which allow us to infer that Aisha must have been older than nine when her marriage was consummated.

* One line of thought points to Ibn Hisham's recension of Ibn Ishaq's (d. 768) biography of Prophet Muhammad, the Sirat Rashul Allah, the earliest surviving biography of Muhammad. Ibn Ishaq lists converts to Islam in the order in which they converted; Aisha accepted Islam before Umar ibn al-Khattab. If that true, then Aisha accepted Islam during the first few years of Islam, sometime after 610 CE. She could not have been a babe in arms; she must have been walking and talking, hence at least three or four years of age, in order to accept Islam. Her marriage followed the Hijra, the migration to Medina, in 622 CE. She must have been at least twelve and possibly older when she married.

* Critics of the traditionalists argue that a small group of Muslims migrated to Ethiopia in 615 CE, and that Abu Bakr planned to join them. The historian Tabari reports that Abu Bakr wished to spare Aisha the discomforts of the journey and went to Mut`am, whose son was engaged to Aisha, and asked if the marriage could take place immediately. Mut`am refused because Abu Bakr had converted to Islam. If Aisha were only nine years old in 622 CE, when she married, she would only have been two years old in 615 CE -- much too young for marriage.

* Tabari reports that Abu Bakr had four children and all four were born during the Jahiliyyah -- the pre Islamic period. If Aisha was born in the period of Jahiliyyah, she could not have been less than fourteen years in 622. (Tabari, Vol. 4, p. 50)

* According to Ibn Hajar, Fatima was five years older than Aisha. Fatima is reported to have been born when Muhammad was thirty-five years old. Muhammad migrated to Medina when he was fifty-two, making Aisha fourteen years old in 622. (Tamyeez al-Sahaabah, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaniy, Vol. 4, p. 377)

* According to hadith in Bukhari and Muslim, Aisha is said to have joined Muhammad on the raid that culminated in the Battle of Badr, in 624. However, no one below the age of fifteen was allowed to accompany raiding parties. Hence Aisha must have been at least fifteen in 624, making her at least thirteen when she was married.

Muslim critics of the early marriage theory also criticize the relevant hadith as weak. They say that the hadith collectors Bukhari and Muslim applied less stringent standards to hadith relating to history than they did to hadith relating directly to prayer and family law. Hence a historical tradition included in Bukhari or Muslim cannot be presumed to be "strong". They also say that hadith sourced to Urwa through informants in Iraq were collected after he migrated to Iraq at the age of seventy-one. His memory was then weak and those hadith -- which include the hadith relating to Aisha -- are suspect.

One book, Politics, Gender, and the Islamic Past: the Legacy of A'isha bint Abi Bakr, by D.A. Spellberg, Columbia University Press, 1994, argues that Aisha's youth was deliberately emphasized by Sunni scholars who supported the Abbasid caliphate and rejected Shi'a claims for the descendents of Ali ibn Abi Talib. (This would have been the period when Islamic history, and the hadith, were first written down.) Aisha was the only virgin wife of Muhammad, divinely destined for him, and thus divinely inspired in her opposition to Ali. Claims for her youth at marriage are claims for her virginity and special status .

Also check any rajal book about the narrator of the hadith about Aisha being nine. The narrator is Hisham ibn Urwa. They all say that he took his hadiths from weak sources (i.e. Iraqi narrators) and that he made up hadiths for certain summs of money i.e. his hadith is unreliable!!!

Also one only needs to ask Aisha herself. She had a sister, Asma, who was 10 years older than her. Asma died at the age of 100 in 73 Hijra. That means that in the first year of Hijra she was 27 years old and Aisha 17!!! The Prophet (pbuh) married Aisha in the second year of Hijra which means that she was most probably 19!!!

I used both Sunni and Shi'a sources and history. All this evidence against one fabricated hadith!!!

The eternal curse of God be on those who call Muhammad (pbuh) a pedophile!!!

So much for replying to your question about Aisha. Now you probably understand why it's not worth wasting my time with some ex-Muslim who doesn't even know his own history!!! Ali Sina, a scholar...lol

a.If your answer wasn't for meant for Ismailis why on earth did you even target Indian Muslim scholars when they didn't even figire in the conversation?

b. Regarding Ali Sina he bases his accusations against the Prophet (pbuh) on Sunni hadiths and honestly Sunnis deserve him. He's a pure product of Sunnism and only Sunnis are afraid of him. He has been proven wrong many times by people like Ammar Naqshwani in many of his lectures and he does that job better than me as he is after all practising Shi'a, a scholar and a good person.

c. The very fact that you come with Ali Sina, the weak shield behind which most Islamophobes hide tells me a lot about your thinking I am afraid.

d. "acting like a typical scholar": please explain what it means to act like a typical scholar, please enlighten me o master!

e. My anger wasn't against you both not knowing what Ismailism is but that you came up with stupid statements later when it was clearly specified that we were dealig with Ismaili sources!

btw I don't believe your apology for a second. In the forum it was Islmailism that was mentioned not Muslims in general. If your reply really didn't target Ismailis then it was completely out of context and came out of nowhere for anyone reading the thread clearly understands that you both confused Ismailis with some other Muslims!!!