Talk:Dawoodi Bohra/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Syedna

Will someone please create an article on Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin?!! Should I do a stub? —iFaqeer | Talk to me! 19:58, Nov 2, 2004 (UTC)

Syedna

A stub would be a fine idea. I personally dont have enogh information nor the time to research about him at present. Maybe something on the general line of Syedna's descent might be a better idea.

Asghar Ali Engineer

just wanted to point out that using source material based solely on Asghar Ali Engineer's work would be too slanted to maintain NPOV. Asghar Ali Engineer and the Syedna have a personal enmity/feud going on and he himself has technically been exiled from the community.

Though there are various criticisms of the Bohra community that Engineer points out that may indeed be very valid... we can't not present both sides of the picture. Hulleye 08:54, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Fullly agree.—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 19:20, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)

agreed as well. But eliminating him from the picture isn't valid either. If their are divisions with the Dawoodi Bohras they should not be glossed over.

Engineer

Maybe we can mention both sources and add a line to the effect that there are unresolved issues between the two. Incidentally, are you two Bohras?

-Farhat

Actually, no. I mean not Bohra. But a (non-formal) student of religious history. And I agree that we need to provide a neutral description of the situation. And I think it's not a matter of "issues between the two", but that Mr. Engineer is a dissident/ex-communicated member of the Bohree community—and he might deserve mention since his critique is probably the most prominent and well-argued.—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 20:46, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)

True. I didn't think it over before typing. I think we should derive from as many sources as possible as there are large parts about Bohras, especially history, which are non-contentious and there should be independent sources for this. As for the contentious parts we'll have to tread a more carefully trying to be as non-partisan as possible. --Farhat

And to turn the question on you; are you Bohra?—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 00:37, Nov 6, 2004 (UTC)

Yes, non-practising though. -Farhat

This is most unfair. It is a wrong argument. Asghar-saheb is wrong about the oppression of the Bohras by the Syednas because he was excommunicated? Excuse me, but the reason why he was excommunicated was because he exposed the oppression of the Syednas. His social work is vilified by the Syednas because he exposes their brutalities and the social evils. This is evident because many others, both Muslims and non-Muslims also expose the social evils in Bohra society perptrated by the Syednas. Kalpana Sharma's criticism is also very "prominent" and "well-argued", as is many others which I will obtain over time. I am not a Bohra, or a Muslim for that matter, but I have many friends who are Bohras and they constantly talk about this problem so it is important to write about it as it is notable.India Rising 03:13, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Dissent in the community

The new additions from 216.138.105.66 on 30 June appear to be written from a completely non-NPOV, and make accusations that the author does not bother to substantiate with anything. It's hearsay at best and fiction at worst. Unless the author can provide a well-researched NPOV view and there are no objections from anyone else, I am going to revert the changes in 24 hours. Also, material related to this should really be on the Progressive Dawoodi Bohras page, not the main Dawoodi Bohras page. MHusein 1 July 2005 15:39 (UTC)

well the dissent section should not be removed altogether, though i agree with Mhusein that it does require an NPOV edit Hulleye 07:31, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
have replaced the Dissent section by reverting to the last edit by User:203.94.232.86. Hulleye 07:48, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

ANSWER

You talk about "substantiating" claims, yet you write; "Unlike many other sects of Islam, Dawoodi Bohras believe that the education of women is equally important to that of men, and many Dawoodi Bohra women choose to enter the workforce." What fact are you basing this on? Bohri women are one of the most opressed women in the Islamic world. In Masjid they continuely tell us that women are not supposed to be in any field that brings them in contact with men. They are allowed tobe doctors only when they are in OBGYN.

You also removed the FACT about Bohris calling other Mulsims unTrue believers, or that they are not momin. If you disown that statement then you are not a Bohri yourself. As the "Da'i" himself said that it is okay to curse the previous 3 caliphs and to say that non-Bohirs are not momineen. Are you saying that this statement is not true.

This claim about the so called "princes" spending habits and luxorious lifestyles is from observing these people from a very close position. For example, the so called "Shehzada Sahib" in Houston is being audited by the United States Internal Revenue Service for property fraud. He owns numerous properties in Houston and all over the country and he has no income to show for it. Also, I personally took some behan sehabs on their many thousands of dollars gold shopping sprees.

Also, the incident about being told to take a "Karzae Hasana" to pay the Wajibaat, that happened to me in the Houston Jamaat. What proof you want, do you need transcripts of my discussion with the Amil Sahib? You want proofs, yet all you believe in and have put on the page is Hearsay in itself.

There are many other issues that you are ignorning and are trying your best to put a rosy picture of here, and I am not going to let you do that. If you want to dispute the whole article so we can discuss things here. Of course according to you there are no issues since all of us whould believe what is said in the Masjid.

Also, are you so insecure that you would remove the link to the Progressive Bohra web-site?

Answer to your answer

With regards to Bohra women in the workforce, I am basing this on the fact that I personally know many Bohra women who are indeed in the workforce. I know even more Bohra women who are well educated. In fact, there are even Bohra women who are professors at some of the most respected universities in America. Needless to say, these women come in contact with men in their jobs, and there is no prohibition of this. Your example of women only being allowed to be OB/GYNs is also spurious, because there are many women Bohra doctors who are GPs who see patients of both sexes. In fact, not much of what you say about this is borne out by fact. That you say that Bohra women are one of the most oppresed in the world shows a severe lack of perspective. Having both a worldly and religious education is encouraged by the Da'i for both men and women alike.

I have no idea what you're getting at in your second point. The edit I removed said that hostility exists between Bohras and other Muslims. This is simply untrue. Not only is it untrue, but your content was written as if you were trying to prove a point, rather than stating an opinion from a neutral point of view. Wikipedia is not an advocacy site.

Regarding your third point, there are thousands of people audited by the IRS every year, most of whom are not guilty. If the person in question is actually found guilty by the IRS, feel free to make a note of that here. Until then, making claims about that person are just that, unsubstantiated claims. As for your shopping adventures, Wikipedia is not a place to voice your personal grievances. Perhaps if you thought it wrong, you shouldn't have done it.

Regarding point four, could you point us to the part of the page as it existed before you made your changes that was hearsay?

Regarding point five, I don't care about painting a rosy picture. I care about presenting an article that is well-researched, well-articulated, and written from a neutral point of view. Why is this so hard to understand? It's rather obvious that you're so emotionally charged about whatever it is that is bothering you that you are incapable of being objective.

Point six. While I'm sure you'd like to think of me as insecure (and toeing the line or whatever), I removed it because the link already existed in the Dissent section. What use are duplicate links?

How about getting a username so I'm not talking to a bunch of random IPs?

MHusein 1 July 2005 17:00 (UTC)

Reverting

I am reverting the article to the last version by Aebrahim, dated 07:18, 26 June 2005 (UTC) plus the minor change by BD2412. If someone wants to write a factually correct NPOV article about the Progressive Dawoodi Bohras they should feel free to do so. To 216.138.105.66, please note that while I am removing one link to the Progressives' web site, I am leaving the link in the Dissent section where it should be intact. So please don't start any new edit wars over it (one link is enough). If someone wants to write a long article about the dissidents, then it belongs on the Progressive Dawoodi Bohras page which is linked to from this one. MHusein 4 July 2005 02:56 (UTC)

Mullahs on the Mainframe

I read with interest the debate between a progressive dawoodi bohra and a believer of Syedna above. Most arguments made by the progressive dawoodi bohra's in the article and the discussion page is propaganda. They might want to refer to Jonah Blank's 'Mullahs on the Mainframe', the first independent study of the community. Sbohra 07:09, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

You say arguments made by progressives is propaganda. Enough said.


Table on Islam

I have removed the table on Islam. It is reflective of the Dawoodi Bohra's POV on Islam and hence is misleading. Sbohra 08:13, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Islam category ? - no thanks

Italic textI'm trying to reduce the number of articles on the Islam category page. Reason:, there are too many articles on that page and only the most important ones should be kept there. The Dawoodi Bohras article clearly belongs in the Shia subcategory (or even the Ismaili subcategory). I'm trying to recategorise all the Islam articles in the most efficient way without losing the most important ones. Please be patient. Thanks. MP (talk) 17:21, 28 February 2006 (UTC)


Pillars of Islam

Assalaamualaikum! (May peace be on you) I would like to know whether anybody is planning to add more info regarding the seven pillars of Islam based on the Dawoodi Bohra ideology.Stuffyvoid 13:18, 12 February 2007 (UTC)Muzaffar





Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.