Where Hindus join Shias to mourn Imam Hussain.

[Armstrong]

If you don't give a damn about these 'sects' and castes, why comment? Why get into silly terms that mean nothing to you? And since when did a Mohiyal Brahmin need permission from Islam to be a Mohiyal Brahmin?

Only a truly dense person would bring god into this. A caste that traditionally fought for a living did not fight for the other man's God, only because he either believed in the man, or in his loyalty to his oath of service. Where does this become a problem between God A and God B?

Since you have shown how devoid of any background you are, you might ask yourself the same question about Ibrahim Gardi, the Master-at-Arms for the Marathas at Panipat III.

What are ignorant people like you doing in these discussions?

Joe, why didn't any of these events (the Bramins fighting alongside Hassan & Hussein (PBU all)) never came up in Muslim sources ? Or did they because I've read about the Battle in detail (by Arabs, Pakistanis, 2 Brits, 1 Iranian & an American) & I honestly can't recall them mentioning any of this.

 

[KingMamba]

If you don't give a damn about these 'sects' and castes, why comment? Why get into silly terms that mean nothing to you? And since when did a Mohiyal Brahmin need permission from Islam to be a Mohiyal Brahmin?

Only a truly dense person would bring god into this. A caste that traditionally fought for a living did not fight for the other man's God, only because he either believed in the man, or in his loyalty to his oath of service. Where does this become a problem between God A and God B?

Since you have shown how devoid of any background you are, you might ask yourself the same question about Ibrahim Gardi, the Master-at-Arms for the Marathas at Panipat III.

What are ignorant people like you doing in these discussions?

Joe can you comment on my post 158, maybe you would know how credible the story was based on the dates. Which Indian king was the strongman back around that time??

Joe, why didn't any of these events (the Bramins fighting alongside Hassan & Hussein (PBU all)) never came up in Muslim sources ? Or did they because I've read about the Battle in detail (by Arabs, Pakistanis, 2 Brits, 1 Iranian & an American) & I honestly can't recall them mentioning any of this.

Yaar read my post 158, I have given a reason why they may not have been known of in Muslim sources. I would like Joe to comment on that as well.

 

[Zabaniyah]

Buts thats already been mentioned that there will be such "fitnas" at the end of days.
All sorts.. and each will claim to be "pure"

Unfortunately, what you say is true.

If you don't give a damn about these 'sects' and castes, why comment? Why get into silly terms that mean nothing to you? And since when did a Mohiyal Brahmin need permission from Islam to be a Mohiyal Brahmin?

Never said that.

I just find it amusing.

I have nothing against Shias. They did celebrate Ashura in Dhaka peacefully, and they are a sizable community here.

Only a truly dense person would bring god into this. A caste that traditionally fought for a living did not fight for the other man's God, only because he either believed in the man, or in his loyalty to his oath of service. Where does this become a problem between God A and God B?

Since you have shown how devoid of any background you are, you might ask yourself the same question about Ibrahim Gardi, the Master-at-Arms for the Marathas at Panipat III.

What are ignorant people like you doing in these discussions?

So, it's culture? Great!

May be India has too many sub-cultures(?) Oh well...better than hurting one another eh?

Yaar read my post 158, I have given a reason why they may not have been known of in Muslim sources. I would like Joe to comment on that as well.

That's what I've been wondering...

Strange loopholes there.

 

[KS]

Are you people saying this is wrong on part of the Hindus ? I dont think so. Its a great gesture from these Brahmins (the stereotypical evil cunning ones) to celebrate ashura for whatever reason and that too in this political climate. If you cant appreciate that atleast dont ridicule.

 

[KS]

Read my signature, you know nothing. There was no shia at karbala the schism occurred after the fact. I am a Sunni Syed whose ancestors were Sufi Pirs so do not comment on things you know nothing about.

I am syed and i beat my chest and mourn loudly for
the slaughter of my family in Karbala. It does not make sense to me considering what happened in Karbala how a muslim could mourn quietly? What would u do if your whole family was killed including infants? i bet u will not mourn quietly. The difference between sunni and syed mourning is syed feels the pain of their ancestors and sunni does not .

Syeds afaik claim descent from the family of Mohammed. So by definition should they not be Shia ? Isnt that what the guy @hassana is referring to ? Or there were some other kids of Muhammed from which the Sunni Syeds claim descent ?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Joe, why didn't any of these events (the Bramins fighting alongside Hassan & Hussein (PBU all)) never came up in Muslim sources ? Or did they because I've read about the Battle in detail (by Arabs, Pakistanis, 2 Brits, 1 Iranian & an American) & I honestly can't recall them mentioning any of this.

Joe can you comment on my post 158, maybe you would know how credible the story was based on the dates. Which Indian king was the strongman back around that time??



Yaar read my post 158, I have given a reason why they may not have been known of in Muslim sources. I would like Joe to comment on that as well.

You are quite right, both of you, and subtly wrong. Just read on.

It was not about God, it was not about religion. This business about the Mohiyals believing that they were mercenaries who fought for a losing Islamic prince is not about God. The story never implied that there was any religious fervour involved. Mohiyal Brahmins remain Brahmins of a high order - I forget their exact affiliation - and their offshoots the Bhumihar Brahmins are Sarayupareen of Kanyakubja - in simple language, those Brahmins from Kanauj who lived on the other side of the Sarayu River, the River that flows past Faizabad and Ayodhya, and on the banks of which myth and legend claims Lord Rama was born. These two root and branch were never holding themselves out to be followers of the One God, but as mercenaries, who incidentally existed among Ghurids and Afsarids as well.

A good example of this kind of knight errantry is from an historical example, Banda Bairagi, who took to arms on the urgings of a dying Guru Gobind Singh. Banda was Hindu, but fought for the Khalsa religion on being asked to fight on by the Guru. The difference is that he converted to Sikhism; the Mohiyals did not convert.

It isn't about history, either. The annals of some of the sects of northern India are full of stories about their lives and times throughout a wide swathe of territory including Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Iran and Iraq. Not at all unlikely, considering that it was a tradition which is traceable at least to 500 AD for eastern UP and Bihar youngsters to go out and seek 'naukri', which was then strictly military service. The model that Indian, south Asian warfare followed, and to some extent that nearby kingdoms and powers followed, was the war-band, under a contractor, who brought a given number of troops into service, in the case of cavalry, complete with horse and armour, and who claimed the total gross wages and redistributed these with a modest cut for himself.

But there is nothing historical to show that there was actually a Mohiyal contingent fighting at Karbala. That is not an established historical fact.

What I found annoying was the misplaced piety and excessive belligerence of good Muslims who felt that in some way, this quaint legend was impugning the purity of their faith. Stuff and nonsense! If they want to believe that they carried the Cross for the Lord, who is to gainsay them, and should Christians then jump up and down in anguish? Their belief that they owed a debt of loyalty to Hussain gives them a soft corner for Muslims, which is always a useful thing in volatile Indian society.

Their folk legend is their folk legend, and there is no need for supercilious comment about it.

 

[KingMamba]

Syeds afaik claim descent from the family of Mohammed. So by definition should they not be Shia ? Isnt that what the guy @hassana is referring to ? Or there were some other kids of Muhammed from which the Sunni Syeds claim descent ?

No, I am Husseini most Syeds are. BTW the majority of Syeds are Sunni, although we are one family but our views differ. Example in my family alone there are Shias (Uncle and his kids etc), Wahabbis (maternal and paternal grandmothers), Sufis (my maternal grandfather and most of my ancestors), and Sunnis (both my parents and all my siblings). Also a couple of my aunts from father's side are Wahabbi. The differences are mostly political, hassana since he/she says is Bukhari syed somewhere along her family tree you will find one person who is on both of our trees. So we would be distantly related but my family does not do matam we fast for three days in Muharram.

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was not Sunni or Shia neither was Imam Hassan (RA), Imam Ali (RA), or Imam Hussein (RA).

Oh yeah I should add that some claim descent through different children of Hazrat Ali (RA) or the children of the uncle of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) but majority of people only consider people who are descendants of either Imam Hassan (RA) or Imam Hussein (RA) as the ahlul bayt because their mother (RA) was the daughter of the Prophet (PBUH).

 

[Joe Shearer]

Joe can you comment on my post 158, maybe you would know how credible the story was based on the dates. Which Indian king was the strongman back around that time??



Yaar read my post 158, I have given a reason why they may not have been known of in Muslim sources. I would like Joe to comment on that as well.

Totally not credible, as you have pointed out.

As a matter of fact, this particular excerpt came up in another, almost identical thread, and this is the third time I have read this; the first time was on our private mailing list, where a good friend, a British Pakistani, posted it. In the other PDF thread, I had pointed out, just as you have done, that this particular Chandragupta episode is totally ridiculous if it is intended to refer to the Maurya emperor, but might refer to some small king who bore the same name. Identifying that person has not yet been attempted, which means nothing: he might exist, then again, he might not. Certainly, Chandragupta Maurya was too busy fighting Seleucus, marrying Greek women and gifting elephants to the Diadochi to take an interest in events roughly a thousand years after his reign.

Unfortunately, what you say is true.



Never said that.

I just find it amusing.

I have nothing against Shias. They did celebrate Ashura in Dhaka peacefully, and they are a sizable community here.



So, it's culture? Great!

May be India has too many sub-cultures(?) Oh well...better than hurting one another eh?



That's what I've been wondering...

Strange loopholes there.

And now we have an authority who can tell us how many cultures can fit into a given country? Wunderbar! I used to feel hurt when other Indians mocked Bangladeshi daffiness. Now I am left disarmed. They were right, after all. A dolt is a dolt.

 

[KingMamba]

You are quite right, both of you, and subtly wrong. Just read on.

It was not about God, it was not about religion. This business about the Mohiyals believing that they were mercenaries who fought for a losing Islamic prince is not about God. The story never implied that there was any religious fervour involved. Mohiyal Brahmins remain Brahmins of a high order - I forget their exact affiliation - and their offshoots the Bhumihar Brahmins are Sarayupareen of Kanyakubja - in simple language, those Brahmins from Kanauj who lived on the other side of the Sarayu River, the River that flows past Faizabad and Ayodhya, and on the banks of which myth and legend claims Lord Rama was born. These two root and branch were never holding themselves out to be followers of the One God, but as mercenaries, who incidentally existed among Ghurids and Afsarids as well.

A good example of this kind of knight errantry is from an historical example, Banda Bairagi, who took to arms on the urgings of a dying Guru Gobind Singh. Banda was Hindu, but fought for the Khalsa religion on being asked to fight on by the Guru. The difference is that he converted to Sikhism; the Mohiyals did not convert.

It isn't about history, either. The annals of some of the sects of northern India are full of stories about their lives and times throughout a wide swathe of territory including Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Iran and Iraq. Not at all unlikely, considering that it was a tradition which is traceable at least to 500 AD for eastern UP and Bihar youngsters to go out and seek 'naukri', which was then strictly military service. The model that Indian, south Asian warfare followed, and to some extent that nearby kingdoms and powers followed, was the war-band, under a contractor, who brought a given number of troops into service, in the case of cavalry, complete with horse and armour, and who claimed the total gross wages and redistributed these with a modest cut for himself.

But there is nothing historical to show that there was actually a Mohiyal contingent fighting at Karbala. That is not an established historical fact.

What I found annoying was the misplaced piety and excessive belligerence of good Muslims who felt that in some way, this quaint legend was impugning the purity of their faith. Stuff and nonsense! If they want to believe that they carried the Cross for the Lord, who is to gainsay them, and should Christians then jump up and down in anguish? Their belief that they owed a debt of loyalty to Hussain gives them a soft corner for Muslims, which is always a useful thing in volatile Indian society.

Their folk legend is their folk legend, and there is no need for supercilious comment about it.

So basically Joe you agreed with everything I wrote, that is a folklore and should be treated as such but applauded as an uniting force? You could have just said yes yaar, besides I am not one of those people who was jumping up and down in anger, I only wanted to know if it was historically accurate because if so they deserve to be remembered for their sacrifice and if not then the story is still true to the Brahmins who abide by it and should be applauded by all Muslims for the sheer fact that they have nothing but respect for one of our beloved heroes.

 

[Zabaniyah]

And now we have an authority who can tell us how many cultures can fit into a given country? Wunderbar! I used to feel hurt when other Indians mocked Bangladeshi daffiness. Now I am left disarmed. They were right, after all. A dolt is a dolt.

Indians were mocking Bangladeshis right from the day I joined this forum. It's a norm. Don't feel bad.

By the way, I'm not ridiculing the Hindus or anything on the topic here, but the Muslims over there accepting some unknown and unverified history.

The part I found funny are Indians in the wild and amazing world of PDF justifying and the manner in justifying so.

In one line... Power game

1. Shia: Who followed/Supported Muhammad family members
2. Sunni : who supported Khalifa .

There are many minor issues and ideological differnce as well like.
1. SHia don't belive Muhammad last prophet, they believe in Messiha (like all other religion does)
2. Shia wanted Islam to spread by Muhammad blood line, while sunni wiped out those blood line.
3. Handful of Shia were trapped in Karbala by 10 Khalifa and bucherd mericlessly. even Women and kids were not spared.

allah is an incarnation of Vishnu. mohammad was nothing but a medium through wchich vishnu sent his thoughts instead of showing vishwaroopam, which was reserved only for indian subcontinental people.



how many kids did this mohammaed have >

These posts are absolute gold!

And plenty of Idiots thanked them.

You are right, I am a cynical man who leads his life by following the most primitive human impulses.

BUT.......but, I do maintain the original view of my religion irregardless of what a bunch of guys on the Internet are saying.

And it is my right to express my views here as much as Indians do by mocking my country, my religion and my nationality.

After all, it's PDF!

Jedem das Seine.

 

[Joe Shearer]

So basically Joe you agreed with everything I wrote, that is a folklore and should be treated as such but applauded as an uniting force? You could have just said yes yaar, besides I am not one of those people who was jumping up and down in anger, I only wanted to know if it was historically accurate because if so they deserve to be remembered for their sacrifice and if not then the story is still true to the Brahmins who abide by it and should be applauded by all Muslims for the sheer fact that they have nothing but respect for one of our beloved heroes.

I am puzzled.

I agreed with everything you wrote, and didn't say anywhere that you were one of those jumping up and down in anger. I was referring to the other thread. Take a look at it sometime.

And I precisely agree with your summary, except that I strongly doubt any historical foundation to this. It is another Barbarossa legend, and there is no historical basis to the story that the emperor actually broods half-asleep under the Unterberg, waiting for the ravens to stop flying to come out to defend Germany.

Why you volatile characters get worked up really beats me. Almost as if you are going around with chips on your shoulders.

 

[KingMamba]

I am puzzled.

I agreed with everything you wrote, and didn't say anywhere that you were one of those jumping up and down in anger. I was referring to the other thread. Take a look at it sometime.

And I precisely agree with your summary, except that I strongly doubt any historical foundation to this. It is another Barbarossa legend, and there is no historical basis to the story that the emperor actually broods half-asleep under the Unterberg, waiting for the ravens to stop flying to come out to defend Germany.

Why you volatile characters get worked up really beats me. Almost as if you are going around with chips on your shoulders.

Volatile ?? Nah yaar I just value your opinion maybe I seem volatile because I am a relatively young chap and you are a senior.

 

[KingMamba]

Indians were mocking Bangladeshis right from the day I joined this forum. It's a norm. Don't feel bad.

By the way, I'm not ridiculing the Hindus or anything, but the Muslims accepting some unknown and unverified history.

To each his own.

Except appreciating the gesture and solidarity is not necessarily accepting the story.

 

[Zabaniyah]

Except appreciating the gesture and solidarity is not necessarily accepting the story.

Fair enough.

Especially considering the tensions and politics over there now.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Indians were mocking Bangladeshis right from the day I joined this forum. It's a norm. Don't feel bad.

By the way, I'm not ridiculing the Hindus or anything, but the Muslims over there accepting some unknown and unverified history.

The part I found funny are Indians in the wild and amazing world of PDF justifying and the manner in justifying so.





These posts are absolute gold!

You are right, I am a cynical man who leads his life by following the most primitive human impulses.

BUT.......but, I do maintain the original view of my religion irregardless of what a bunch of pagans along with their ilks are saying.

And it is my right to express my views here as much as Indians do by mocking my country, my religion and my nationality.

After all, it's PDF!

Jedem das Seine.

Citing Black Widow and Minki as typical Indians is really hitting below the belt. One of them is a certifiable bigot, and the certifiable does not seem to refer to his bigotry.

I don't read the posts of some addle pates, so one of these didn't even come to my attention.

You were criticised not for maintaining the 'original' view of your religion (no doubt you can defend this original view against others), nor for attacking what a bunch of polytheists is saying. Not even for expressing your views, which on this thread have so far been expressed in smileys. If you have not got it so far, you must either be avoiding the issue deliberately or you must be challenged in some way.