Is Mawlana Hazar Imam a Muslim?

[amal_786]

YAM fellow ismailis,
I am new here, and I am not sure if this is in the right forum, but I didn't know where to put it .
I was researching online about Ismailis, and i came across something that said that MHI was a Muslim, there was a picture of him praying at a masjid, and it had said that he even led the prayers. (sorry I don't have the site at the moment)
This reminded me of an earlier question which was whether MHI was Ismaili or not?
I asked an al-waezeen on this, and he told me that Hazar Imam wasn't an Ismaili but was a Muslim? he said something like if MHI was an Ismaili, then he would be believing in himself and following himself, so therefore he can't be an Ismaili. But then if he was Muslim, then doesn't he believe in Allah? which would somehow lead back to himself...

if I could have some clarification on this, as in what type of Muslim is MHI, and just the 'reasons' -for lack of a better word- as to why?

Thank you all,

[kmaherali]

To Ismailis MHI is the Murshid of our tariqah in Islam. To the others he is a Muslim. In a gathering where there are Ismailis and non-Ismailis he adrresses the audience:

My Beloved Spiritual Children, my brothers and sisters in Islam and other faiths Assalam-0-Alaikum

He is a Muslim because he affirms the The Shahada, La-Illaha-Il-Allaah-Muhammad-ur-Rasulilah

[amal_786]

can you clarify the "confirms the shahadah" part
because if you are to say he is Muslim, then doesn't that mean he holds the same beliefs as any other Muslim.
and is he Sunni Muslim then?

[kmaherali]

can you clarify the "confirms the shahadah" part
because if you are to say he is Muslim, then doesn't that mean he holds the same beliefs as any other Muslim.
and is he Sunni Muslim then?

“Our historic adherence is to the Jafari Madhhab and other Madhahib of close affinity, and it continues, under the leadership of the hereditary Ismaili Imam of the time. This adherence is in harmony also with our acceptance of Sufi principles of personal search and balance between the zahir and the spirit or the intellect which the zahir signifies.” (Statement sent by MHI to the Amman Conference)

As per the above statement, the Imam is the hereditary leader associated with the Jafari Madhhab. What it means is that he is the leader of the Shia Ismaili Tariqah and hence a Shia Ismaili Muslim.

The Ismaili Tariqah has always held the complementary relationship between the Shariah practices common to all Muslims and the Tariqah practices restricted to the members of the Tariqah. The relative importance of the two types of practices for the Jamat has varied in the course of history. The Imam is required to practice the Shariah but does not perform the Tariqah practices – for him Namaz is a requirement but Dua is not..

[amal_786]

that makes more sense.
thanks a ton for your help kmaherali

[binom]

The Ismaili Tariqah has always held the complementary relationship between the Shariah practices common to all Muslims and the Tariqah practices restricted to the members of the Tariqah. The relative importance of the two types of practices for the Jamat has varied in the course of history.

As far as i'm concerned, there isn't any 'complementary relationship' between what Muslims generally practice (sharia') and what Ismailis practice (tariqa). Can you please clarify what you mean?

The Imam is required to practice the Shariah but does not perform the Tariqah practices – for him Namaz is a requirement but Dua is not..

This is ridiculous. So your 'imam' is required to practice the sharia' and you're not? Please explain yourself. Why is salaat/namaz a requirement for him, but not for you? And why isn't 'dua' a requirement for him but for you it is?

[kmaherali]

As far as i'm concerned, there isn't any 'complementary relationship' between what Muslims generally practice (sharia') and what Ismailis practice (tariqa). Can you please clarify what you mean?

Ismailis do practice the Shariah and the Tariqah as much as they can given the context in which they live. For example, Ismaili Namaz has been prescribed for the Shariah practice and Dua is prescribed for Tariqah practice. They are complementary

[This is ridiculous. So your 'imam' is required to practice the sharia' and you're not? Please explain yourself. Why is salaat/namaz a requirement for him, but not for you? And why isn't 'dua' a requirement for him but for you it is?

As I said we all are required to practice the Shariah as much as we can. In our Tariqah as I understand it, the roles of the murid and the Murshid are different. A murid follows the Murshid to be purified. The Murshid is Perfect and needs no further ritual purification.

[binom]

Ismailis do practice the Shariah and the Tariqah as much as they can given the context in which they live. For example, Ismaili Namaz has been prescribed for the Shariah practice and Dua is prescribed for Tariqah practice. They are complementary

First of all, you said there’s a complementary relationship between “the Shariah practices common to all Muslims and the Tariqah practices [of Ismailis]”, and not between Ismaili sharia’ (whatever it is) and tariqa practices. I’m not claiming otherwise with regards to the latter, only the former. So, please clarify this relationship (between the sharia' common to all Muslims and Ismaili tariqa practices) for me. Second, what ‘Ismaili Namaz’ are you talking about? As far as I’m aware there isn’t any Ismaili salaat/namaz.

As I said we all are required to practice the Shariah as much as we can. In our Tariqah as I understand it, the roles of the murid and the Murshid are different. A murid follows the Murshid to be purified. The Murshid is Perfect and needs no further ritual purification.

You (Ismailis) don’t practice the sharia’ that is common to all Muslims. You have (it seems) your own sharia’ (that is different from what is common to all Muslims) that your imam made for you. That is problematic though…

Anyway, I’m not denying what you said about the murshid/murid relationship. I’m wondering though: If the murshid (your imam I presume) is perfect and needs no ritual purification, then why, as you yourself stated, does he (or is obliged to) practice the sharia’, whose purpose is precisely that, namely, purification? Even besides that though, I think this idea of ‘perfection exempting you from observing the ordinances of the sharia’, an idea so common amongst you Ismailis, is complete nonsense. As if the Prophet –alayhi salaatu wa salaam, who is the epitome of perfection, ever stopped practicing the sharia’ because he thought he was above it, or too perfected for it, or anything of the like...

[kmaherali]

First of all, you said there’s a complementary relationship between “the Shariah practices common to all Muslims and the Tariqah practices [of Ismailis]”, and not between Ismaili sharia’ (whatever it is) and tariqa practices. I’m not claiming otherwise with regards to the latter, only the former. So, please clarify this relationship (between the sharia' common to all Muslims and Ismaili tariqa practices) for me. Second, what ‘Ismaili Namaz’ are you talking about? As far as I’m aware there isn’t any Ismaili salaat/namaz....

Yes we have an Ismaili Namaz in place reflecting the Shia Ismaili principles for those who have the capacity and the need to perform the Shariah practice common to all Muslims. If an Ismaili has the capacity and the need for religious and social reasons to congegate with other Muslims to perform Namaz then he can do so with the Ismaili Namaz.

The uniform Ismaili Namaz reflecting the Shia Ismaili principles has been instituted recently. Before Ismailis who performed the Namaz would perform Namaz of any denomination that suited their needs.

Dua is considered as a batini Sharia in the sense that it is a fundamental requirement of Ismaili Tariqah. But it is also viewed as a Tariqah practice in the sense that it is not common practice for all Muslims. It depends on how you view it.

Anyway, I’m not denying what you said about the murshid/murid relationship. I’m wondering though: If the murshid (your imam I presume) is perfect and needs no ritual purification, then why, as you yourself stated, does he (or is obliged to) practice the sharia’, whose purpose is precisely that, namely, purification? Even besides that though, I think this idea of ‘perfection exempting you from observing the ordinances of the sharia’, an idea so common amongst you Ismailis, is complete nonsense. As if the Prophet –alayhi salaatu wa salaam, who is the epitome of perfection, ever stopped practicing the sharia’ because he thought he was above it, or too perfected for it, or anything of the like...

I do not think that Ismailis claim exemption from Shariah based on their purity but rather they have to balance how much they can perform both the Shariah (common to all Muslims) and the Tariqah
practices specific to the Tariqah . It is an individual matter as to how he strikes that balance depending on how he interprets the relative importance of both practices in his context.

The Imam with respect to his murids is the Perfect One who does not need further purification within the Tariqah. But with respect to the Other, he is not perfect and he does not express himself as such, and hence he performs the Sharia in that respect.

Generally the Imam appears according to the context and audience. If one considers him only human, he will appear to that person in that manner; if one considers him more than human than he appears to him/her accordingly.

[binom]

Yes we have an Ismaili Namaz in place reflecting the Shia Ismaili principles for those who have the capacity and the need to perform the Shariah practice common to all Muslims. If an Ismaili has the capacity and the need for religious and social reasons to congegate with other Muslims to perform Namaz then he can do so with the Ismaili Namaz.

The uniform Ismaili Namaz reflecting the Shia Ismaili principles has been instituted recently.

Kmaherali, why are you lying? There isn’t any Ismaili Namaz at the moment. I’m aware of the plans of your imam to introduce one (which is a big problem in itself), but at the moment, there isn’t any namaz which Ismailis perform in their jamatkhanas. So please stop insisting that there is one.

Before Ismailis who performed the Namaz would perform Namaz of any denomination that suited their needs.

No they would not. Before, they had their own particular form of the salaat/namaz which was very similar to the Sunnis and Shias. Go and read the works of some of the Fatimid scholars who wrote about that matter. They would not just ‘perform the namaz of any denomination which suited their needs’. This was only true in special circumstances i.e. when practicing taqiyaa, etc.

I do not think that Ismailis claim exemption from Shariah based on their purity but rather they have to balance how much they can perform both the Shariah (common to all Muslims) and the Tariqah
practices specific to the Tariqah. It is an individual matter as to how he strikes that balance depending on how he interprets the relative importance of both practices in his context.

Ismailis claim exemption from observing the sharia’ (common to all Muslims) for many reasons. I can list them for you if you want. They do not perform the sharia’ common to all Muslims, you haven’t showed me anything to prove this is the case. They only observe their own sharia’ (whatever it is) that their imam has made for them. In fact, to be quite honest, you (Ismailis) don’t even have a sharia’ properly speaking (like Sunnis and Shias do). I have in mind a jurisprudential (fiqh) framework under which the sharia’ is observed. For example, what does your sharia’ say about the general halal and haram of all the various matters of life and their specifics i.e. marriage, divorce, murder, ablutions, transactions, and etc?

Generally the Imam appears according to the context and audience. If one considers him only human, he will appear to that person in that manner; if one considers him more than human than he appears to him/her accordingly.

Then it seems that all perceptions of your imam are subjective. Would you say that?

[kmaherali]

Kmaherali, why are you lying? There isn’t any Ismaili Namaz at the moment. I’m aware of the plans of your imam to introduce one (which is a big problem in itself), but at the moment, there isn’t any namaz which Ismailis perform in their jamatkhanas. So please stop insisting that there is one.

As far as I know the Imam has approved the text of the Namaz to be used by Ismailis. It is not meant to be used in Jamatkhanas as a Tariqah practice, it is meant to be used as a Shariah practice. Jamatkhana is a place where Tariqah practices are performed.
The fact that the Ismaili Namaz may not be available, does not imply that Ismailis do not practice Namaz. Many Ismailis attend Friday prayers with other Muslims for example. The degree of practice will vary depending upon individual circumstances.

No they would not. Before, they had their own particular form of the salaat/namaz which was very similar to the Sunnis and Shias. Go and read the works of some of the Fatimid scholars who wrote about that matter. They would not just ‘perform the namaz of any denomination which suited their needs’. This was only true in special circumstances i.e. when practicing taqiyaa, etc. ?

Yes during the Fatimid we had our own Ismaili Namaz, but that is over 1000 years ago. That form of Namaz has not come down to us - at least I am not aware of one. When I said that Ismailis have been performing Namaz of any denomination, I meant the recent past, not 1000 years ago.

Ismailis claim exemption from observing the sharia’ (common to all Muslims) for many reasons. I can list them for you if you want. They do not perform the sharia’ common to all Muslims, you haven’t showed me anything to prove this is the case. They only observe their own sharia’ (whatever it is) that their imam has made for them. In fact, to be quite honest, you (Ismailis) don’t even have a sharia’ properly speaking (like Sunnis and Shias do). I have in mind a jurisprudential (fiqh) framework under which the sharia’ is observed. For example, what does your sharia’ say about the general halal and haram of all the various matters of life and their specifics i.e. marriage, divorce, murder, ablutions, transactions, and etc?.

Yes individuals may have their own reasons/justifications for not following the Sharia, but that is not a general ruling. The general ruling is that we must try to observe it as much as possible. That is the reason for having Ismaili Namaz for Shariah practice. We do not believe in a static Sharia, but an evolving one based upon the ruling of the Living Imam. The guidance of the Imam supercedes any other Sharia ruling.

Then it seems that all perceptions of your imam are subjective. Would you say that?

Yes, it is an individual matter between a murid and the Imam. Not all murids would have the same understanding or perceptions of the Imam. Nevertheless at a Tariqah level we have a doctrine of the Imam as a Perfect Man.

[binom]

As far as I know the Imam has approved the text of the Namaz to be used by Ismailis. It is not meant to be used in Jamatkhanas as a Tariqah practice, it is meant to be used as a Shariah practice. Jamatkhana is a place where Tariqah practices are performed.

Why don’t I see Ismailis praying the salaat/namaz then? Why don’t’ they pray 5 times a day as a sharia’ practice? All Ismailis, except you, seem to be unaware of this namaz text.

The fact that the Ismaili Namaz may not be available, does not imply that Ismailis do not practice Namaz. Many Ismailis attend Friday prayers with other Muslims for example. The degree of practice will vary depending upon individual circumstances.

You seem to be missing the point of what I’m saying. My problem is that salaat/namaz is not a part of official Ismaili doctrine as a standard, obligatory practice. It does not matter if a few Ismailis occasionally go and attend Friday prayers. That’s not the point. Why aren’t the sharia’ practices that are common to all Muslims not common to Ismailis? Do you think that Ismailis generally pray salaat/namaz on their own, 5 times a day? No, they don’t. And the same is true for the other practices of the sharia’ that is common to all Muslims. That’s the reason why I say your claim (that there’s a complementary relationship between the practices of Ismailis and the rest of the Muslims) is plainly wrong.

Yes during the Fatimid we had our own Ismaili Namaz, but that is over 1000 years ago. That form of Namaz has not come down to us - at least I am not aware of one. When I said that Ismailis have been performing Namaz of any denomination, I meant the recent past, not 1000 years ago.

I’m sure something of it can be found in the texts from that period. In any case, the form of that namaz should be known to your imam. After all, he is, according to you, the ‘noor’...

Yes individuals may have their own reasons/justifications for not following the Sharia, but that is not a general ruling. The general ruling is that we must try to observe it as much as possible. That is the reason for having Ismaili Namaz for Shariah practice.

Khamerali, the majority of Ismaili don’t follow the sharia’ (that is common to all Muslims) and they certainly don’t pray this namaz that you keep talking about. As far as they’re concerned there isn’t any official namaz yet...

Even if I were to say alright, they pray this namaz (which I don’t), is that what constitutes Ismaili shari’a, just a namaz? Like I said earlier, Ismailism doesn’t have a sharia’ proper. Ismailism has only its own sharia’ (which apparently consists of only a namaz). Thus, again, there is no complementary relationship between what you practice and what other Muslims practice.

We do not believe in a static Sharia, but an evolving one based upon the ruling of the Living Imam. The guidance of the Imam supercedes any other Sharia ruling.

I find this very problematic. Not that you believe in an evolving sharia’ (which all Muslims do btw) but that the ruling of your imam supersedes Qur’anic injuctions/hadiths of the Prophet (saw) (sharia’). I’m not going to get into that right now though.

Not all murids would have the same understanding or perceptions of the Imam.

I know that they won’t. And of course the perceptions they have of their imam, according to you, are subjective.

Nevertheless at a Tariqah level we have a doctrine of the Imam as a Perfect Man

In accordance with whose perceptions, if anyone, was this doctrine of your imam as the perfect man formulated?

[kmaherali]

Why don’t I see Ismailis praying the salaat/namaz then? Why don’t’ they pray 5 times a day as a sharia’ practice? All Ismailis, except you, seem to be unaware of this namaz text. .

There is no complusion in religion. Many non-Ismaili Muslims that I know don't pray 5 times a day. It is a matter of individual capacities. The Imam informed the Jamat about approving the text, so every Ismaili is aware of it.

You seem to be missing the point of what I’m saying. My problem is that salaat/namaz is not a part of official Ismaili doctrine as a standard, obligatory practice. It does not matter if a few Ismailis occasionally go and attend Friday prayers. That’s not the point. Why aren’t the sharia’ practices that are common to all Muslims not common to Ismailis? Do you think that Ismailis generally pray salaat/namaz on their own, 5 times a day? No, they don’t. And the same is true for the other practices of the sharia’ that is common to all Muslims. That’s the reason why I say your claim (that there’s a complementary relationship between the practices of Ismailis and the rest of the Muslims) is plainly wrong.

As I said there is no compulsion in religion. You don't have to belong to the Tariqah is you choose not to and if you do then there are obligatory practices for the Tariqah. As for Sharia there is no complusion, but nevertheless there is a complementarity in the sense that we practice both aspects.

I’m sure something of it can be found in the texts from that period. In any case, the form of that namaz should be known to your imam. After all, he is, according to you, the ‘noor’...

That is true, but the Imams in their best judgement felt it appropriate not to carry it forward. As a matter of fact we did not have our Dua in Arabic for almost 6 centuries!

Thus, again, there is no complementary relationship between what you practice and what other Muslims practice.

The notion of complementarity is not hard and fast, it is fluid and can vary between individuals.

In accordance with whose perceptions, if anyone, was this doctrine of your imam as the perfect man formulated?

I am not quite clear with the question. Could you clarify?

[agakhani]

Why don’t’ they pray 5 times a day as a sharia’ practice?

Where did you find pray 5 TIMES A Day?
In Holy Quran it is not quoted anywhere that you should pray 5 times a day, if yes let me know in which Surah and what is the Ayat number? I may be wrong.
In addition we Ismailis consider our Dua as a Namaz.
Let me ask you one question, Why Sunnis and Shias pray Namaz? be honest please, you may answer because they all are greatful to Almighty Allah who created whole the universal and gave birth to them and for the Shukran of Allah for their well being and prosperity,and stay on the path of Shiratal mustkim, am I right? yes? then we Ismailis praying all these in our Dua, same thing brother you can tell it Namaz we tell it Dua a Hindu can tell this Bhajan, what different it make? nothing, after all we have to pray the Allah, no matter what name you call.
A Hindu devotee pray his Bhagwan in his Bhajan, thus you can tell his Bhajan, his own Namaz, off course wording may totaly different than Arabic namaz but it is namaz for him, so does the wording in our Dua is little different than your traditional Namaz but our dua is our Namaz and Salat.
Praying,remebering or worshiping Allah call Namaz for some one, dua for some other one, and Bhajan for some other devottee, no matter which language, which way and which tariqa they pray, these all practices are same and that is the bottom line.

[binom1]

There is no complusion in religion. Many non-Ismaili Muslims that I know don't pray 5 times a day. It is a matter of individual capacities. The Imam informed the Jamat about approving the text, so every Ismaili is aware of it.

There’s no compulsion in religion, (I never said there was so) you’re correct. But, those Muslims who don’t pray 5 times a day don’t do so (i.e. pray) because of a fault on their part, and not because they believe they are not required to. Ismailis on the other hand, believe that praying the salaat/namaz is not a part of their faith, it’s not obligatory on them. And they list various reasons why they think that. So, your comparison is faulty. The problem, as I said, is not that they don’t pray salaat/namaz 5 times day, the problem is the reason why they don’t do so, which goes back their belief that it is not a mandatory part of their faith.

Your imam informed them of approving a text, but he hasn’t approved it yet. It is not a standard Ismaili practice yet.

As I said there is no compulsion in religion. You don't have to belong to the Tariqah is you choose not to and if you do then there are obligatory practices for the Tariqah.

I’m not saying there’s compulsion in religion. Read what I write carefully. I was asking why the salaat/namaz is not a part of official Ismaili doctrine as a standard, obligatory practice. Why aren’t the sharia’ practices that are common to all Muslims not common to Ismailis?

As for Sharia there is no complusion, but nevertheless there is a complementarity in the sense that we practice both aspects.

Again, I’m not denying that you may practice both aspects (your sharia’ and your tariqa), so I’m sure there’s a complementarity relationship between the two in your practices. What I was denying was the complementarity between what you (Ismailis) practice and what Muslims generally practice. There isn’t any. You practice almost completely different things.

The notion of complementarity is not hard and fast, it is fluid and can vary between individuals.

There’s a complementarity between what Sunnis practice and what Shi’is practice, but not what Ismailis practice.

I am not quite clear with the question. Could you clarify?

You said all perceptions of your imam are subjective. Then you said at a doctrinal (tariqa) level, there’s a view (or perception) of your imam as the perfect man or the ‘noor’. So I asked: whose view or perception, if anyone, of the imam is that (i.e. as the noor or perfect man)?

[kmaherali]

You said all perceptions of your imam are subjective. Then you said at a doctrinal (tariqa) level, there’s a view (or perception) of your imam as the perfect man or the ‘noor’. So I asked: whose view or perception, if anyone, of the imam is that (i.e. as the noor or perfect man)?

This is the perception of our Dais such as Nasir Khusraw and Tusi and our Pirs.

[kmaherali]

Your imam informed them of approving a text, but he hasn’t approved it yet. It is not a standard Ismaili practice yet.

It has been approved by the Imam to be used as a Sharia practice according to the capacity and needs of individuals.

[binom1]

It has been approved by the Imam to be used as a Sharia practice according to the capacity and needs of individuals.

Then why aren’t Ismailis praying salaat/namaz reguraly 5 times day (like all other Muslims)? According to the capacity and needs of individuals? Again I ask you: why hasn’t he made it a standard, obligatory practice of Ismailis (like it is with all other Muslims)?

This is the perception of our Dais such as Nasir Khusraw and Tusi and our Pirs.

I don’t believe Tusi to be your dai, but let us leave that aside for now.

Now, these perceptions (of the Imam) by your dais must be (according to you) subjective. I wonder then: why are they (i.e. their perceptions of the Imam) made into the doctrinal view of him? Why not the perceptions of someone (who is either Ismaili or not) who does not believe your imam to be the ‘noor’ since both are subjective anyway? Why is one chosen over the other?

[kmaherali]

Then why aren’t Ismailis praying salaat/namaz reguraly 5 times day (like all other Muslims)? According to the capacity and needs of individuals? Again I ask you: why hasn’t he made it a standard, obligatory practice of Ismailis (like it is with all other Muslims)?

As I said earlier each murid evaluates his capacity based upon his overall commitments in life. It is hard enough for murids to satisfy the requirements of the Tariqah. Nevertheless the Ismaili Namaz is available for those who can do both. Hence there is a complementarity between the Shariah practices and Tariqah practices. You may argue about the degree and the nature but there is a complementarity. Significant number of Ismailis fast during Ramadhan. Many Ismailis including Pir Sadardeen performed Hajj although it is not a Tariqah practice.

Most Muslims do not belong to a tariqah and hence they have a greater capacity to perform the Shariah practices in comparison to Ismailis. The fact that Ismailis have a lesser capacity to perform the Shariah practices does not mean that complementarity does not exist.

Now, these perceptions (of the Imam) by your dais must be (according to you) subjective. I wonder then: why are they (i.e. their perceptions of the Imam) made into the doctrinal view of him? Why not the perceptions of someone (who is either Ismaili or not) who does not believe your imam to be the ‘noor’ since both are subjective anyway? Why is one chosen over the other?

They established the basis for trust within the communities in which they preached through exemplary lives, persuasive arguments and/or supernatural powers developed through spiritual elevation. Hence whatever they told the people about the interpretation of faith and Imamat in particular convinced them. This led to the tradition and doctrine of the Imam as the Perfect Man.

[binom1]

It is hard enough for murids to satisfy the requirements of the Tariqah. Nevertheless the Ismaili Namaz is available for those who can do both. Hence there is a complementarity between the Shariah practices and Tariqah practices. You may argue about the degree and the nature but there is a complementarity. Significant number of Ismailis fast during Ramadhan. Many Ismailis including Pir Sadardeen performed Hajj although it is not a Tariqah practice.

Ismailis don’t satisfy the requirements of the sharia’ (i.e. salaat/namaz) not because they have ‘commitments in life’ but because they don’t believe they are required to. It is not obligatory on them. I’ve encountered countless Ismailis who, when asked about their ‘dua’ believe it to be obligatory, but when asked about salaat/namaz, don’t think they’re required to perform it. You keep on referring to this ‘Ismaili Namaz’ that’s supposedly available for them, but anytime I (or any other Muslim) asks them about the question of salaat/namaz, they don’t say that ‘oh we have other commitments in life, so we can’t perform it, but rather say that they don’t have salaat/namaz, they have their dua’ in its stead. Kmaherali, why do you keep insisting that there is one, when it’s so clear that there isn’t? In fact, Ismailis are so well-known for this, that is, not having a sharia’ that is common to all Muslims (i.e. praying the salaat/namaz). Btw, can you show me the text of this ‘Ismaili Namaz’? After all, it is an ‘Ismaili sharia’ practice’ (according to you), so I’m sure you wouldn’t have a problem with it.

Some Ismailis fast during Ramadan, but do they believe to be an obligatory part of Ismailism? No, they don’t. Their view of fasting is the same as their view of salaat/namaz. Do they believe that the performance of Hajj is an obligatory part of Ismailis? No, they don’t. Instead, they believe that what is obligatory for them is seeing the ‘didar’ of their Imam, which is their Hajj. All this i.e. the fact that they don’t believe these basic sharia’ rules (that are common to all Muslims) to be obligatory is problematic. Again, I’m not denying any complemetarity between Ismaili (sharia and tariqa) practices. I’m denying any complementarity between the sharia’ practices that are common to all Muslims and Ismaili practices. I’ve made that clear several times. There isn’t any because the two practice very different things.

Most Muslims do not belong to a tariqah and hence they have a greater capacity to perform the Shariah practices in comparison to Ismailis. The fact that Ismailis have a lesser capacity to perform the Shariah practices does not mean that complementarity does not exist.

So their (Ismailis) tariqa practices are getting in the way of their sharia' ones or making it had to perform them? What nonsense and what a lame excuse. The only reason why Ismailis don’t practice the sharia’ (that is common to all Muslims) is because they believe they are not required to. Ismailis have been/and are infamous for this and every Ismaili that I have come across has confirmed it. You know this.

They established the basis for trust within the communities in which they preached through exemplary lives, persuasive arguments and/or supernatural powers developed through spiritual elevation. Hence whatever they told the people about the interpretation of faith and Imamat in particular convinced them. This led to the tradition and doctrine of the Imam as the Perfect Man.

But their perceptions of the imam remain subjective regardless. This means that the doctrine of the imam as the ‘perfect man’ is also subjective. In other words, it is not that your imam is the ‘perfect man’; it is that he is the ‘perfect man’ to someone (i.e. the dai). So why is it that you believe in someone’s subjective perception of your imam (i.e. that he is the perfect man) and not, let’s say, someone else’s, who perceives him as an imperfect man? Since both are subjective, you can’t choose one and deny the other. If you do that, why would you when the imam is perceived as perfect or imperfect to that particular individual who perceives him (as one of the two) since it is true only to him? If this is a bit difficult to follow, let me try and simplify it:

• You stated that all perceptions of your imam are subjective.
• If there are two men, one of whom perceives your imam as the perfect man and the other perceives him as the imperfect man, and since both of their perceptions are subjective, would you choose one and deny the other i.e. believe him to be perfect and not imperfect? If so, why? Or would you say they are both right? If so, why? If one of them perceives him as perfect, then the imam is perfect to that person (subjective). But if the other perceives him as imperfect then the imam is imperfect to that person (subjective). Is one of them right and the other wrong? If so, why, when all perceptions of him are subjective (i.e. one is as good as the other) since there is no criterion except individual subjective perceptions? Or are they both right? If so, the imam is then both imperfect and perfect at the same time. But that is a contradiction. How would you try and explain it?

[kmaherali]

Kmaherali, why do you keep insisting that there is one, when it’s so clear that there isn’t? In fact, Ismailis are so well-known for this, that is, not having a sharia’ that is common to all Muslims (i.e. praying the salaat/namaz). Btw, can you show me the text of this ‘Ismaili Namaz’? After all, it is an ‘Ismaili sharia’ practice’ (according to you), so I’m sure you wouldn’t have a problem with it.

As I said before that there was a mesage from the Imam in December last year that he has approved the text. I am not in possesion of one but would not mind sharing as it is a Sharia practice...

Some Ismailis fast during Ramadan, but do they believe to be an obligatory part of Ismailism? No, they don’t. Their view of fasting is the same as their view of salaat/namaz. Do they believe that the performance of Hajj is an obligatory part of Ismailis? No, they don’t. Instead, they believe that what is obligatory for them is seeing the ‘didar’ of their Imam, which is their Hajj. All this i.e. the fact that they don’t believe these basic sharia’ rules (that are common to all Muslims) to be obligatory is problematic. Again, I’m not denying any complemetarity between Ismaili (sharia and tariqa) practices. I’m denying any complementarity between the sharia’ practices that are common to all Muslims and Ismaili practices. I’ve made that clear several times. There isn’t any because the two practice very different things.

Those who observe the fasts believe it to be obligatory for them otherwise they would not do so. Similarly there are Ismailis who believe that attending Friday prayers with other Muslims is obligatory. Those who practice the Sharia believe it is obligatory to them. Our tariqah is open to diverse interpretations and traditions have evolved in diverse historical contexts. I will quote here the statement of the Imam with regard to complementarity..

"Throughout the Jamat's history, including during the Fatimid times, a consistent feature of the Ismaili Tariqah has been the complementarity between practices that are specific to our Tariqah, and those that are part of the Sharia, common to all Muslims, albeit with denominational specificities. Examples of this are the historic co-existence between Namaz and Du'a, and the concept of private prayer and personal search, which has an important place in Islam, since it concerns the relationship of faith with life."

So their (Ismailis) tariqa practices are getting in the way of their sharia' ones or making it had to perform them? What nonsense and what a lame excuse. The only reason why Ismailis don’t practice the sharia’ (that is common to all Muslims) is because they believe they are not required to. Ismailis have been/and are infamous for this and every Ismaili that I have come across has confirmed it. You know this.

As the Imam has explained above complementarity has existed throughout history. It is perhaps partly ignorance that there is a perception of the non requirement and combined with worldly commitments as well.

So why is it that you believe in someone’s subjective perception of your imam (i.e. that he is the perfect man) and not, let’s say, someone else’s, who perceives him as an imperfect man? Since both are subjective, you can’t choose one and deny the other. If you do that, why would you when the imam is perceived as perfect or imperfect to that particular individual who perceives him (as one of the two) since it is true only to him? ?

As I said they just did not say to the people 'the Imam is God to me so believe him to be God as well'. They first established the framework of trust through exemplary life, sound and persuasive arguments backed by the supernatural capacities acquired through spiritual elevation.

[binom1]

As I said before that there was a mesage from the Imam in December last year that he has approved the text. I am not in possesion of one but would not mind sharing as it is a Sharia practice...

No Ismaili seems to possess this namaz text. So according to you they are obliged to perform a namaz (by their imam) which they don’t know how to/or have access to.

Those who observe the fasts believe it to be obligatory for them otherwise they would not do so. Similarly there are Ismailis who believe that attending Friday prayers with other Muslims is obligatory. Those who practice the Sharia believe it is obligatory to them.

What about those Ismailis who don’t believe fasting and namaz (i.e. practicing the sharia’ common to all Muslims) to be obligatory? I guess they’re justified in that. This is exactly the problem with Ismailism. Does your imam say that practicing the sharia’ is obligatory on him who thinks it’s obligatory on him (and the converse of that)? If so, then, like I said, there’s no complementarity between what you (Ismailis) practice and what Muslims generally practice as that’s completely against what Muslims generally believe about the sharia’. According to them, it is obligatory on everyone, period. It is not up to the individual to decide whether the sharia’ is obligatory on him or not. The only up to him is whether to practice it or not.

Our tariqah is open to diverse interpretations and traditions have evolved in diverse historical contexts.

Please clarify something for me. What does your imam say about the status (i.e. whether it’s obligatory or not) of the sharia’ (common to all Muslims) with regards to Ismailis?

"Throughout the Jamat's history, including during the Fatimid times, a consistent feature of the Ismaili Tariqah has been the complementarity between practices that are specific to our Tariqah, and those that are part of the Sharia, common to all Muslims, albeit with denominational specificities."

Great. I never denied that complementarity in the past though. I’m talking about present Ismailism.

"Examples of this are the historic co-existence between Namaz and Du'a, and the concept of private prayer and personal search, which has an important place in Islam, since it concerns the relationship of faith with life."

Is he talking about the namaz that Muslims generally perform? If so, then can you provide me with a concrete example of this ‘historic co-existence’? As far as I’m aware, there hasn’t been any ‘historic co-existence’ between the dua’ of Ismailis and the salaat/namaz that Sunnis/Shias generally pray. On the contrary, other Muslims have generally been hostile to Ismailis because of their (unorthodox) beliefs and practices. This has continued up to our own day, because the majority of Muslims, both Sunni and Shia, regard your practices (i.e. dua’ in place of the salaat/namaz, etc) as heretical. So what ‘historic co-existence’ is your imam referring to? Maybe you can provide me with an example, but then again can a single example really be considered a “consistent feature of the Ismaili Tariqah [throughout history]”?

As the Imam has explained above complementarity has existed throughout history.

Give me concrete examples of this ‘complementarity’ throughout history.

As I said they just did not say to the people 'the Imam is God to me so believe him to be God as well'. They first established the framework of trust through exemplary life, sound and persuasive arguments backed by the supernatural capacities acquired through spiritual elevation.

So they first “established the framework of trust through exemplary life …” and only then said “Imam is God to me so believe him to be God as well?” What about people who did the same thing but believed your imam to an imposter i.e. Sunni/Shi’i figures? And why would they (the dais) want people to accept their subjective perceptions of who they thought the imam is anyway since every perception of him (by virtue of being subjective) is as good as any other? Here I refer you back to the questions (which you didn’t answer) in the scenario which I laid out for you in my previous post:

• You stated that all perceptions of your imam are subjective.
• If there are two men, one of whom perceives your imam as the perfect man and the other perceives him as the imperfect man, and since both of their perceptions are subjective, would you choose one and deny the other i.e. believe him to be perfect and not imperfect? If so, why? Or would you say they are both right? If so, why? If one of them perceives him as perfect, then the imam is perfect to that person (subjective). But if the other perceives him as imperfect then the imam is imperfect to that person (subjective). Is one of them right and the other wrong? If so, why, when all perceptions of him are subjective (i.e. one is as good as the other) since there is no criterion except individual subjective perceptions? Or are they both right? If so, the imam is then both imperfect and perfect at the same time. But that is a contradiction. How would you try and explain it?

[kmaherali]

No Ismaili seems to possess this namaz text. So according to you they are obliged to perform a namaz (by their imam) which they don’t know how to/or have access to.

Perhaps it is not in circulation, but the fact is that some Ismailis have been practicing Sharia namaz albeit of Fridays using any of the exsting namaz from other denominations. The new Ismaili namaz will replace that. It is not meant to be a new practice....

What about those Ismailis who don’t believe fasting and namaz (i.e. practicing the sharia’ common to all Muslims) to be obligatory? I guess they’re justified in that. This is exactly the problem with Ismailism. Does your imam say that practicing the sharia’ is obligatory on him who thinks it’s obligatory on him (and the converse of that)?

I think the notion of complementarity does not mean that the complementary practice has to be obligatory, it only means something that is additional to a given practice. In our tariqah there are non-obligatory practices such as 'Baitul Khayal' which complement the Dua which is obligatory.

Great. I never denied that complementarity in the past though. I’m talking about present Ismailism.

The Imam mentions that complemetarity is meant with practices that are part of the Sharia and not the entire Sharia...

Is he talking about the namaz that Muslims generally perform? If so, then can you provide me with a concrete example of this ‘historic co-existence’? .

He is talking about the form of the namaz practiced by Muslims in general. During the Fatimid period we had our own Namaz but this namaz has notcome down to us and hence Ismailis use any namaz that suits their needs.

So they first “established the framework of trust through exemplary life …” and only then said “Imam is God to me so believe him to be God as well?” What about people who did the same thing but believed your imam to an imposter i.e. Sunni/Shi’i figures? And why would they (the dais) want people to accept their subjective perceptions of who they thought the imam is anyway since every perception of him (by virtue of being subjective) is as good as any other? Here I refer you back to the questions (which you didn’t answer) in the scenario which I laid out for you in my previous post:?

It is not just their experience but also the consistent and coherent theology, philosophy and interpretaion of faith that convinced people that the Imams were indeed Divine. No doubt spiritual charlatans have appeared here and there in history but have not produced solid consistent philosophy to back up their claims.

The Dias were convinced through their spiritual elevation that the Imam was indeed Divine and that he should be obeyed to attain happiness and salvation. This was backed up by correct theology and philosophy to establish long sustained traditions. Once the traditions had been established various other murids had also found the Light through the teachings of the Imams and hence confirmed the ideas of the Dais and the Pirs.

[ShamsB]

well said Kmaherali.

However I don't think this will satisfy binom's purported curiousity - as the intent doesn't seem to be one of learning but rather of creating doubt.

Shams

[binom1]

Perhaps it is not in circulation, but the fact is that some Ismailis have been practicing Sharia namaz albeit of Fridays using any of the exsting namaz from other denominations. The new Ismaili namaz will replace that. It is not meant to be a new practice....

The fact is that the majority of Ismailis don’t pray the salaat/namaz because they don’t believe it to be obligatory. It doesn’t matter if a few Ismailis attend Friday prayers. So what? The fact that the salaat/namaz is not practiced by all Ismailis (like the dua’ is), coupled with what they themselves say regarding its obligatoriness on them (i.e. that it is not), proves that it is not obligatory on them. Of course it’s a new practice. You’re acting as if all Ismailis pray the salaat/namaz regularly 5 times a day. It will be a new practice for the majority of Ismailis who don’t pray (or never prayed) the salaat/namaz (because they don’t believe it to be obligatory).

I think the notion of complementarity does not mean that the complementary practice has to be obligatory, it only means something that is additional to a given practice. In our tariqah there are non-obligatory practices such as 'Baitul Khayal' which complement the Dua which is obligatory.

Great. But I’m not interested in what complements what in your tariqah. That’s irrelevant.

From the Oxford dictionary:
Complementary:
• adjective: combining so as to form a complete whole or to enhance each other.

Do you really think that Muslims believe that what you (Ismailis) practice in anyway completes or enhances (i.e. complements) what they practice? (I’m being rhetorical btw, the answer to it is obvious).

He is talking about the form of the namaz practiced by Muslims in general.

Then answer the questions that I posed to you. Why do you keep telling me things which I either already know or don’t have interest in knowing? Your imam was clearly talking about a ‘historic co-existence’ between the dua’ of Ismailis and the salaat/namaz that is common to all Muslims. Why then are you then telling me that during the Fatimid period you had your own namaz and this namaz hasn’t come down to you (something which is not only irrelevant, but also something which I already know and never asked you about)? As I asked you in my last post: can you provide me with a concrete example of this ‘historic co-existence’ (between, as your imam says, the salaat/namaz that Muslims perform and the dua’ of Ismailis)? As far as I’m aware, there hasn’t been any ‘historic co-existence’ between the dua’ of Ismailis and the salaat/namaz that Sunnis/Shias generally pray. On the contrary, other Muslims have generally been hostile to Ismailis because of their (unorthodox) beliefs and practices. This has continued up to our own day, because the majority of Muslims, both Sunni and Shia, regard your practices (i.e. dua’ in place of the salaat/namaz, etc) as heretical. So what ‘historic co-existence’ is your imam referring to? Maybe you can provide me with an example, but then again can a single example really be considered a “consistent feature of the Ismaili Tariqah [throughout history]”?

During the Fatimid period we had our own Namaz....

Great. I already knew that.

Ismailis use any namaz that suits their needs

Don’t say "Ismailis use" because that is a categorical statement which implies ‘all Ismailis’ - something which is not true. By far the majority of Ismailis don’t pray any salaat/namaz that ‘suits their needs’. They don’t pray the salaat/namaz period.

It is not just their experience but also the consistent and coherent theology, philosophy and interpretaion of faith that convinced people that the Imams were indeed Divine.

Kmaherali, you seem to be missing the point. Let’s, therefore, go through this step by step. If two men have contradictory views (perceptions) of your imam i.e. that he is divine and not divine, is one of them right and the other wrong? Or are they both right?

No doubt spiritual charlatans have appeared here and there in history but have not produced solid consistent philosophy to back up their claims.

Spiritual charlatans? Do you say that because they didn’t believe (perceive) your imam to be what your dai’s believed (perceived) him to be?

Believe me, those who deny your imam have produced a solid case for their views. If you want, we can discuss it.

[kandani]

Dear Binom1,

The Salat for Isma'ili Muslims is the Du'a which is the obligatory prayer of the Isma'ilis. It serves the same function as the namaz practiced by Sunnis and Twelver Shi'a. There is absolutely nothing heretical about the Isma'ili Dua and it is practiced 3 times a day in accordance with the verses of the Qur'an which command the times of Prayer (salat).

The Isma'ili view of the Shari'ah is an evolving and fluid Shari'ah which is continuously interpreted by the Imam of the time. The Isma'ili Madhab is the Jafari Madhab as well as other Madahib of close affinity (for example, the Isma'ilis even adopted the Shafi madhab at a certain time), but always under the guidance and interpretation of the Isma'ili Imam.

For hundreds of years, the Isma'ili practice of Shari'ah did have many commonalities with the practice of other Muslims. The Fatimid period and the periods thereafter are examples of this. Many changes were brought during the last 100 years during the Imamat of Imam Sultan Muhammad Shah where many Isma'ili practices were changed.

Today the Isma'ili Shari'ah of worship consists of the Du'a and the Dasond (zakat) and the Isma'ili Shari'ah for daily life consists of the practice of ethical principles of Islam which the Isma'ili Imamat continuously emphasises in his guidance to his Jamats. There is no Isma'ili fiqh today as in the Fatimid period and there is no such need for a device in accordance with today's circumstances.

During the age when Isma'ili Muslims did follow the classical shari'ah, the Isma'ili Da'is had foretold that in later periods, closer to the conclusion of the present cycle, the classical shari'ah practices would no longer have to be observed and there would be a shift from exoteric practices to knowledge and contemplation in the practice of the faith.

The Prophet's hadith - which says that during his time, he who neglects 10% of what is ordered will be ruined, and after him there will come a time when he who follows 10% of what was then ordered will be redeemed - speaks to this same reality.

[kmaherali]

The fact is that the majority of Ismailis don’t pray the salaat/namaz because they don’t believe it to be obligatory. .

I am not denying it and I said it could be due to ignorance. Perhaps the introduction of the Ismaili Namaz will serve as a wake up call for those who are not aware that one could also pracice the Namaz if he had the capacity to do so in addition to Dua.

Great. But I’m not interested in what complements what in your tariqah. That’s irrelevant.

From the Oxford dictionary:
Complementary:
• adjective: combining so as to form a complete whole or to enhance each other.

Do you really think that Muslims believe that what you (Ismailis) practice in anyway completes or enhances (i.e. complements) what they practice? (I’m being rhetorical btw, the answer to it is obvious). .

To me it is irrelevant what other Muslims perceive, what matters to me is what parts of the Sharia complement my Tariqah practices.

So what ‘historic co-existence’ is your imam referring to? Maybe you can provide me with an example, but then again can a single example really be considered a “consistent feature of the Ismaili Tariqah [throughout history]”?....

As I have continued to say there has been a relationship between Dua and Namaz albeit even as Namaz for Friday. This does not negate the coexistence.

Don’t say "Ismailis use" because that is a categorical statement which implies ‘all Ismailis’ - something which is not true. By far the majority of Ismailis don’t pray any salaat/namaz that ‘suits their needs’. They don’t pray the salaat/namaz period. .

OK correction, some Ismailis use, but it does not change the coexistence if all Ismailis do not use.

Kmaherali, you seem to be missing the point. Let’s, therefore, go through this step by step. If two men have contradictory views (perceptions) of your imam i.e. that he is divine and not divine, is one of them right and the other wrong? Or are they both right?.

Both are right according to their perceptions. As I said before the Imam appears according to the capacity of individuals. For an undeserving he would appear not divine wheras to the deserving he would appear divine.
So the next question you would ask, who is right? I would answer by their integrity and strength of their ideas and the trust they have established.

Spiritual charlatans? Do you say that because they didn’t believe (perceive) your imam to be what your dai’s believed (perceived) him to be?

Because they have not been able to produce enduring traditions that our Dais have established. They were like shooting stars who disappeared fast...

[sereya]

Dear Bison 1,
could you please tell us who is your imam?

[aminhooda]

Kmeharali - Unfortunately, I perceive that the user binom1 is dead set to declare Ismailis as heretics. Bionm1 perceives that Ismailis do not practice sharia and therefore are doomed. And there is no place or need for Imam-e-Zaman, who Ismailis believes gives divine guidance according to the times. No matter, how many ethical, intellectual or spiritual arguments are provided, bionm1 is all decided on what he wants.

binom1, pls. try to learn to respect Ismailis as brothers/sisters in Islam, or at least as humans who have right to their belief, to live a peaceful existence with others. They share and exercise their consciousness of Islam through the great and exemplary works of Aga Khan Development Network.

Ismailis cherish the diversity and respects all traditions of Islam as we are all bounded by same Shahada. The ethics of Islam does not allow us to live in hatred. Let's rise to our humanity and as humanity is our strongest bond.

[binom1]

Dear Kandani,

The Salat for Isma'ili Muslims is the Du'a which is the obligatory prayer of the Isma'ilis. It serves the same function as the namaz practiced by Sunnis and Twelver Shi'a. There is absolutely nothing heretical about the Isma'ili Dua and it is practiced 3 times a day in accordance with the verses of the Qur'an which command the times of Prayer (salat).

Kmaherali does not agree with you. He doesn’t think that salaat and dua’ are one the same thing. He thinks that for the Ismaili tariqa there’s the dua’ and for the ‘Ismaili sharia’ (whatever it is) there’s the salat/namaz. You two should make up your minds as to which is it and then we can discuss the matter. I’m not going to address two different views about what the salat/namaz is in Ismailism.

The Isma'ili view of the Shari'ah is an evolving and fluid Shari'ah which is continuously interpreted by the Imam of the time. The Isma'ili Madhab is the Jafari Madhab as well as other Madahib of close affinity (for example, the Isma'ilis even adopted the Shafi madhab at a certain time), but always under the guidance and interpretation of the Isma'ili Imam.

So is the Sunni and Shia view of the sharia’. But, unlike Ismailis, they don’t mistake interpretation of the sharia’ with changing the sharia’. Ismaili ‘madhab’ is not the Jafari madhab - because you don’t follow what the Twelver Shi’is follow (who are Jafaris), nor other madhahib of close affinity - because adopting (temporarily) Shafi madhab at a certain time does not mean you belong to that madhab now. Do you follow Shafi madhab now? No. You might have been Shafi at the time you adopted it, but not now. If that was true, then I guess Ismailis are as much Qarmati or Druze as they are Jafari or Shafi. Wouldn’t you say?

For hundreds of years, the Isma'ili practice of Shari'ah did have many commonalities with the practice of other Muslims. The Fatimid period and the periods thereafter are examples of this. Many changes were brought during the last 100 years during the Imamat of Imam Sultan Muhammad Shah where many Isma'ili practices were changed.

I know.

Today the Isma'ili Shari'ah of worship consists of the Du'a and the Dasond (zakat) and the Isma'ili Shari'ah for daily life consists of the practice of ethical principles of Islam which the Isma'ili Imamat continuously emphasises in his guidance to his Jamats. There is no Isma'ili fiqh today as in the Fatimid period and there is no such need for a device in accordance with today's circumstances.

Precisely because of today’s circumstances, you need fiqh.

During the age when Isma'ili Muslims did follow the classical shari'ah, the Isma'ili Da'is had foretold that in later periods, closer to the conclusion of the present cycle, the classical shari'ah practices would no longer have to be observed and there would be a shift from exoteric practices to knowledge and contemplation in the practice of the faith.

Well your dai’s were wrong. Knowledge and contemplation in the practice of the faith does not ever imply not observing the practices of the faith (i.e. sharia’). That is an absurd thing to believe. How on earth did they come to that conclusion?

The Prophet's hadith - which says that during his time, he who neglects 10% of what is ordered will be ruined, and after him there will come a time when he who follows 10% of what was then ordered will be redeemed - speaks to this same reality

No it does not. The hadith is “He who omits one tenth of the Law in the beginning of Islam will be damned; but he who accomplishes one tenth of the Law at the end of Islam will be saved.” It implies that the whole of the sharia’ is still obligatory, but the minimum amount to redeem yourself, if you can’t follow the whole thing, is one tenth. It’s not an excuse to not follow however much of the sharia’ as you can though. Furthermore, how do you know that the time the Prophet (alayhi salatu wa salaam) had in mind when he said ‘at the end of Islam’ (or in your words ‘there will come a time’) is now? I wouldn’t think so because the majority of Muslims still try to observe more than one tenth of the sharia’.