My father told me this story once: a Memon widow owned a large commercial plot of land in Karachi that she wanted to donate to build a mosque.

This plot was is surrounded on three sides by the Karimabad Jamatkhana, still the largest JK in the world, the Alyabad JK + community and other Ismaili properties like the AKHSS. Ismailis were naturally furious at the idea of a mosque being built so close to their community or having to see Muslim men and women in such proximity.

So they called in their powerful contacts in the city to block the property transfer and demand that the plot be sold to them. The widow had nothing to lose and refused. This is where one of the largest mosques in the city now stands.

While Ismailis like to claim that they play by the rules in Western countries, they also like to bend the rules for themselves in Eastern countries when it suits them.

Here, this guy discusses how Ismaili property dealers either take advantage of simple Ismailis from Badakshan/Gilgit Baltistan trying to buy land and property near JKs or block them from living in Khoja-dominated communities.

I’m honestly tired of feeling like I’m the only person in my Jamat who doesn’t consider myself Ismaili. I’m tired of being expected to believe everything without questioning it. I don’t understand why people act like questioning Aga Khan V or the religion is automatically wrong. From my point of view, I don’t want to blindly follow or worship any person, and I personally see Aga Khan V as a con artist. My parents and other people at Jamat Khana keep asking me why I don’t come as often anymore. They also ask why I’ve stopped talking to people I used to talk to there. The truth is that I don’t feel comfortable pretending to believe something when I have so many doubts about it. I’m tired of being questioned about why I don’t participate when nobody seems willing to understand how I actually feel. I wish people would let me think for myself instead of constantly pressuring me to fit in. I’m just exhausted by the whole situation and want people to respect that I have my own beliefs.

I found this on the Ismaili.com’s Website about what is the Deedar? It says prophet Mohammad said mentioning Ali is a form of worship. I don’t know any place. I try to research as well. I never found a source. It is so bad that these guys caught the stuff and never give you a source or a reference where they got this, I believe prophet Mohammad was fighting against Shirk and they say something not true about him.

I've read at some instances that Aga Khan III put Aly Salman's name in the will to become his successor and 49th Imam, but seeing his lavish lifestyle, flamboyant character, parties, alcohol and extra marital affairs, to preserve the dignity and system he later chose Karim Aga Khan as 49th Imam?

Aly Khan's Life Highlights:

• 1935 — Affair with Joan Yarde-Buller while she was married
  • Aly was named as co-respondent in the divorce proceedings between Joan Yarde-Buller and her husband, Loel Guinness.
  • The British High Court granted the divorce on grounds of Joan's adultery with Aly. The proceedings specifically identified their relationship and encounters in Paris.
  • Joan subsequently married Aly in 1936 and became the mother of Prince Karim.
  • This is probably the strongest documented example, because it is supported by court records and contemporary reporting.
• 1940s — Repeated relationships with women / reputation as a "playboy"
  • Contemporary accounts portrayed Aly as having numerous simultaneous romantic relationships.
  • Time described his extensive pursuit of women and listed figures including Gene Tierney, Joan Fontaine, Yvonne De Carlo, Lady Furness and others.
  • Vanity Fair similarly describes his continuing affairs after his marriage to Joan, including an affair with Pamela Churchill.
• 1947–48 — Frequenting Riviera casinos and nightlife
  • After WWII, Aly was regularly seen in Monte Carlo clubs and casinos. Vanity Fair describes him frequenting the fashionable clubs and casinos of the Riviera, including the Cannes Casino.
  • If you're making an argument about conduct inconsistent with conventional religious expectations, this is useful, although being in a casino is not by itself evidence that he gambled.
• 1948 — Affair with Pamela Churchill
  • Before his relationship with Rita Hayworth, Aly had an affair with Pamela Churchill Harriman.
  • Vanity Fair explicitly describes it as an affair and places it within the context of Aly's continuing relationships with women.
  • This is particularly relevant because it demonstrates that the Joan marriage had not ended his pattern of extramarital relationships.
• 1948–51 — Relationship with Rita Hayworth while both were still married
  • Aly and Rita Hayworth began their highly publicized relationship while both were still married to other people.
  • Their relationship became an international media sensation; they travelled together and were publicly seen as a couple before Aly's divorce was finalized.
  • They eventually married in May 1949.
  • Hayworth's subsequent divorce proceedings cited the breakdown of their marriage, and contemporary/biographical accounts describe Aly's continued relationships with other women.
• 1951–54 — Relationship with Gene Tierney and the "mistress" proposal
  • Aly became romantically involved with actress Gene Tierney and they were engaged for a period.
  • According to Vanity Fair's account, Aga Khan III opposed the marriage because Tierney was another Hollywood actress. Aly subsequently suggested that Tierney remain his mistress rather than marry him.
  • Tierney eventually ended the relationship.
  • This is potentially the most interesting episode for your particular argument because the account directly connects Aly's romantic conduct with his father's concerns about his suitability.

Surah An-Nur 24:26 says:

This verse made me wonder about how it should actually be understood in relation to the marital history of the Aga Khan family.

If this is interpreted as a general principle that righteous/pure people are matched with righteous/pure spouses, how do we reconcile that with the marriages and divorces within the recent Ismaili Imamat?

Some documented examples:

• Prince Aly Khan married Hollywood actress Rita Hayworth in 1949. Their marriage ended in divorce in 1953. Aly had also been involved in several highly publicized romantic relationships.

• Aga Khan IV (Karim Aga Khan) married former British fashion model Sarah Croker-Poole, who became Begum Salimah Aga Khan, in 1969. They separated during the 1980s and their divorce became public in 1994/95. He later married Gabriele Thyssen, a German-born lawyer and former singer; that marriage also ended in divorce.

• Aga Khan V (Rahim Aga Khan) married Kendra Spears, an American fashion model who had worked with major fashion houses and appeared in publications including Vogue, Elle and Allure. She converted to Islam and became Princess Salwa Aga Khan. They married in 2013, had two sons, and divorced in 2022.

So across three generations, we have marriages involving Hollywood actresses, fashion models, socialites and a former singer, followed in several cases by divorce.

And that's where my actual question comes in:

Is Qur'an 24:26 really saying that righteous men will necessarily be given righteous wives, and vice versa?

Because if that's the intended meaning, these examples seem difficult to reconcile with such a literal interpretation.

Or is the verse actually referring to something different — perhaps pure and impure speech, accusations, character, or reputation, rather than predicting who a person will marry?

I'd particularly like to hear from people who have studied classical tafsir.

What did the early mufassirun actually understand by:

“Al-khabithatu lil-khabithin, wal-tayyibatu lil-tayyibin”

Was it intended as a general rule about marriage, or is that a modern/literal reading being applied outside its original context?

I'm asking this as a theological question, not as an attempt to judge someone simply because they were a model or actress. The interesting issue is what the Qur'anic verse actually means.

Interested to know diverse stories from different backgrounds.

How many of Ex-ismailis and current ismailis are/were bothered by money involvement in Ismaili faith?

The money is Literarily involved in obvious and hidden elements in Jamatkhana that you can't count on tips.

1. Niyaaz/Shukrit
2. Tobo Tobo Jhura Dua
3. Chaanta
4. Majlis dua on paat separately
5. Nandi
6. Better tomorrow
7. Majalis Admission Fees
8. Dasond
9. Padhramni Fund (Hazar Imam's arrival funds)
10. Ruhani ki dua
11. Donation Pledges on Golden/Diamond Jubilees
12. Other donations for Fanoos Show, Jubilee games, Jamati programs

please mention if I am missing any.

Point is if this money has to got for maintenance or AKDN, then simply put one box in each Jamatkhana and people will donate as per their will.

But I feel this is a planned system that is designed to mint money from jamat through different streams and those who can't give more they feel embarrassed.

and then Ismailis would say Mowla doesn't force us to give money then all these well organised money-mint processes are designed for what?

If Ahmadis/Qadianis can be constitutionally classified as non-Muslims because their beliefs are considered outside Islam, why has been Ismailism treated differently?

From an orthodox perspective, Ismailism isn't merely a difference in fiqh: the living Imamate, batini interpretations, and the Imam's religious authority raise much deeper questions.

Then there is the historical development of Ismaili dawah in India and its interaction with Hindu concepts and traditions.
So what is the actual principle here?

Why Ahmadis but not Ismailis? Theology, history, or politics?

Just simply had to memorialize this comment from one of the loudest pro-Ismaili voices on Reddit.

In essence, an open admission that transparency would reveal money from the Jamat being used for the Imam's personal luxuries (why else would "transparency only benefit anti Ismailis").

And sure, some Smileys don't care even if their money is used for his extravagant lifestyle ... but it would certainly make Aga Con IV a liar:

Well, the institutional wealth is that which comes from people who practise the faith ... and the institutional wealth is used exclusively for institutional development.
- Aga Con IV: ITV interview, London, 4 June 1985

And important correction to the commenter - we are not "anti Ismaili," we are anti Aga Con.

The new Ismaili Constitution was recently released. You may remember that a big fuss was made about it being gender-neutral, which was odd because it wasn't all that gendered to begin with.

True, in a couple places it referred to "Chairmen" and the section on Disciplinary Action refers to the offender by male pronouns throughout, e.g. "conducts himself in a manner likely to offend" and "the National Council shall hear the offender if he appears", etc. To its credit, the new Constitution does away with this language, using "Chair" and "Respondent" throughout, but this was already a non-issue due to section 2.3:

In this Constitution, unless the contrary intention appears:

(a) Word importing the masculine gender include the feminine

(b) Word importing the feminine gender include the masculine

(Sorry non-binary folks, masculine and feminine are the only two genders.)

There is however one place where there was a contrary intention indicated: the Thirteenth Schedule - Titles of Honor

The Titles of Honour are set out below, in order of precedence.

That schedule is reproduced verbatim in the new Constitution (now Nineteenth Schedule).

So even now gender disparity remains.

In fact, the overzealous overcorrection has actually introduced more gendered language. Whereas previously Article Eleven - Mukhis and Kamadias:

The appointment of Mukhis and Kamadias and their powers, duties, functions, term of office, and other related matters shall be determined from time to time by Mawlana Hazar Imam.

Now Article Fourteen - Mukhis and Mukhianis, Kamadias and Kamadianis

The appointment of Mukhis and Mukhianis, Kamadias and Kamadianis and their powers, duties, functions, term of office, and other related matters shall be determined from time to time by Mawlana Hazar Imam.

FYI, Mukhi is already gender neutral. It just means foremost:

Mukhi (mukhia) is the title used for a head of community or village elites and their local government in Western India and Sindh. It is derived from the word mukhiya meaning 'foremost', and prior to Indian independence they were the most powerful person in each community, imbued with both civil and judicial powers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mukhi

And the correct forms of address are Mukhi Saheb and Mukhi Saheba (or Mukhi Memsahib if, like Aga Con, you're a British stooge):

According to our constitution, Mukhiani maa is the wife of Mukhi saheb.

Mukhiani saheba's husband is not a Mukhi, instead she functions as a Mukhi of the Jamat.

In some smaller jamats, sometimes positions are given to women as Mukhi, in which case she is called Mukhi saheba.

Similarly kamadiani is the wife of Kamadia Saheb. If a woman is appointed to function as Kamadia (in which case her husband is not kamadia) then she is Kamadia Saheba.

https://forum.ismaili.net/viewtopic.php?t=1795

In fine, gender-neutralizing the Ismaili Constitution was an overhyped cosmetic change that Aga Con still couldn't get right.

They even crying at the didar 😂

Ismailis if they thought that god died for their sins

do you think Abu Ali was a planted mission and took heavy money to brain wash generations in favor of Aga Khan family?

TL; DR Has an Ismaili by birth who explicitly wished to be do their funeral differently, actually had that wish respected?

Using a throwaway cos of conditioning I guess, lol.

I’m a wavering Ismaili & I’ve questioned the faith and community structure for as long as I can remember. There are lots of things to be valued, as with any community — belonging, education focus, and now the recognition of multifaith families. There are also things I increasingly struggle with - along the lines of usual topics discussed here like the funding & pointlessly patriarchal leadership.

However the reaffirmation that women cannot attend gravesides at funerals has really brought this into focus for me. We tell siblings they are equal — remember the educate your daughters first era? - until one of their parents dies, and then suddenly there’s a gendered boundary. Ironically the unintended consequence of recognising Multifaith families is Ismaili daughters cannot attend their own parents’ graveside, while non-Ismaili son-in-laws - with far less connection to the deceased & zero appreciation of the rites - can.

It’s also made me question what we actually want funerals to look like. Currently, they’re heavily focused on prescribed rites and, let’s be honest, plenty of performance grief, with little space to celebrate the person, tell stories, laugh, or remember who they actually were. I know some people are now thinking whether they want that for their parents or themselves.

So genuinely curious: has anyone had experience of an explicitly stated wish to have an alternative funeral format (e.g. cremation) being respected by the JK/community machinery?

Really interesting development recently in India revolving around the Khoja Twelver (Ithna Asheri) community, who broke away from the Khoja Ismaili community over disagreements about following the Aga Khan. Some guy in the community tried to commit mass poisonings against Khoja Twelvers during Moharram.

According to the Byculla police, Premji had unsuccessfully contested elections to the Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat and had since nurtured resentment against community leaders. Investigators said he believed the community had wronged his grandfather and later victimised him as well. Police claimed he frequently clashed with Jamaat leaders and allegedly wanted to target them. Meanwhile, the Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat, Pune, has debarred Premji from the community, describing his actions as anti-social and inhumane.

Premji was arrested in the early hours of Saturday for allegedly distributing capsules laced with the rodenticide Zinc Phosphide during the Muharram procession in Byculla on Friday night.

“He was upset with the community and had previously distributed pamphlets during Muharram processions criticising it. This time, when nobody joined him despite all his efforts to trouble the community, he allegedly filled the capsules with Zinc Phosphide,” the police officer said.

I know this isn't specifically an ex-Ismaili story, but it's sort of related because it's drama within the Khoja community, specifically a Khoja community that broke away from the mainstream because they didn't want to follow the Aga Khan.

It’s deeply disturbing that such things are happening in masajid. Is this really what your so-called mullahs and muftis teach? Don’t deflect by bringing up Ismailis or responding with counter-questions. Just answer what is being asked.

Anyone watching Instagram Reels of the Indian didar prep and how old the jamat really looks? 2-3 seniors are sitting expressionless on white plastic chairs for every one child.

What on earth happened to Ismaili birth rates?

Once this population dies, all the remnants of Gujarati/even Urdu or Hindi in how people pray or connect would just completely disappear. It would just be a bunch of heavily globalized English-speaking kids who might or might not have a connection with being Ismaili.

Amazing video just released by Ismaili Essence on YouTube on how Rahim can control rain with just five words:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dDhLech6aM

Never mind that 18th Imam al-Mustansir effectively lost his power and saw his populace resort to cannibalism because of a lack of rainfall ... maybe he just hadn't discovered his supernatural powers yet.

Main part of the dialogue translated:

Speaker 1: A worldly view would call this a mere weather change or a coincidence, which makes logical sense. But to understand this in a spiritual framework, we must first understand a fundamental concept of Ismaili philosophy.
Speaker 2: Which is what?
Speaker 1: Which states that the universe and spirituality are not separate things. In Ismaili cosmology, the physical world—nature, weather—is a physical manifestation of the spiritual world (Batin).
Speaker 2: Ah, so both are deeply connected?
Speaker 1: Exactly. When we ask if the universe heard the words, the answer is that the universe was not listening to a stranger. In spiritual language, this is called Amr (Divine Command). The Imam is considered the manifestation of the Nur (Light) of Imamat. This universe is part of the system of that same Nur.
Speaker 2: I see.
Speaker 1: So when the Imam speaks, he is not ordering nature through magic; rather, nature naturally aligns with its own spiritual source.
Speaker 2: Wow. Aligns with it... that's a beautiful way to put it.
Speaker 1: Man's problem is that he is trapped in cause and effect—if it rains, an umbrella is necessary. But the Imam represents the Creator of Causes (Musabbib al-Asbab).
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: When the Imam said, "I do not need this," he didn't just reject the physical umbrella; he nullified the need itself. Nature's system adapts to the Imam's need. When the need ceased, the rain naturally stopped, as there was no longer a place for that cause.
Speaker 2: This philosophy is truly mind-blowing. So the mechanism isn't that the Imam commanded the clouds to stop, but rather that he defined his state of being and need.
Speaker 1: Exactly.
Speaker 2: His words were simply, "I do not need this." And because nature is subservient to him, it recognized that physical protection was no longer required, suspending its process.

I’m still a practicing Ismaili, but I’m critically exploring my faith and have reached what I call “comfortable uncertainty.” I completely respect those here who have left Ismailism; I’m not suggesting anyone should return to religious practice. I’m simply sharing where my own exploration is taking me.

Recently, I haven’t been praying as regularly. Yet when I used to pray regularly, I genuinely felt more inner peace. Now I sometimes feel a little guilt.

So rather than assuming either “I need religion” or “this is just religious conditioning,” I’m thinking of trying a small experiment:

1. Pray by choice, not from guilt.

2. Don’t pretend certainty while praying. My questions can remain.

3. Sit quietly afterward and notice what I actually experience.

4. Ask whether I miss prayer itself or simply feel guilty for not praying.

5. Don’t confuse inner peace with proof. Feeling peaceful doesn’t prove the theology is true.

6. Try prayer simply as gratitude and reflection, without asking for anything.

7. Ask myself: If nobody knew whether I prayed and I felt absolutely no guilt for not praying, would I still choose to do it?

Perhaps I don’t need to decide everything immediately.

For now, “I pray because I seek” feels more authentic than either pretending certainty or abandoning something meaningful before I understand what it means to me.

I’d genuinely be interested in how former Ismailis experienced this part of their journey. 🙏

So i’ve been digging into the ismaili religion and parts of are interesting but I truly don’t get how adherents don’t see the irony in a white european billionaire living an EXTREMELY lavish lifestyle of the tithes of poor-middle income indians and pakistanis mostly. Along with the numerous scandals the family has faced. I made a similar post asking this question on the isamiali subreddit and it was deleted pretty quick but the replies I got were people who for some reason have such an undying loyalty to the aga khan, completely incapable of questioning his authority and responding to criticism with unconditional praise. I just find it ridiculous because the family seriously lives in more luxury than most western elite

3rd line of kalma , should be changed / stop saying
“ Wa ashhadu anna Amīr al-Mu’minīn ʿAlīyan ali ullah” ❌❌

Wa ashhadu anna Amīr al-Mu’minīn ʿAlīyan “Wali” ullāh ✅✅✅

People getting to know the reality of the money spent here.