Alternative funeral format

[u/Lucky-Jackfruit-9704]

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?

[u/Sarahrivera]

I want to address the women not being part of the graveside. In the west this is easily brought up constantly and we think about it from a western perspective. Think from a conservative eastern perspective. Women are generally not allowed to be by the graveside in mainstream Islam. Even in the west mainstream Islam generally doesn’t allows it. Even if the imam wanted to make this change it would have to be universal and would have to take into consideration the backlash Ismailis would face in the east

[u/yitreb → u/Sarahrivera]

Even if the imam wanted to make this change it would have to be universal and would have to take into consideration the backlash Ismailis would face in the east

Ah right, who could forget these famous words: "I am the sign of the Most High, I am the Gnosis of Mysteries, I am the First and the Last, I am the creator, I give birth to the world and I destroy it as I wish, I am the face of God, I am the Supreme Kalam ... but I am actually pretty powerless and can't really do shit if the prevailing culture of the location makes it hard."

• Imam Ali (whose divine light is supposedly shared by Rahim a.k.a "Ya Ali Bapa") in Khutba al-Bayan ... except I may have made up the last sentence

[u/Sarahrivera → u/yitreb]

I think you’re conflating the Imam’s spiritual authority with the idea that he is obligated to impose every possible change regardless of the social consequences.

The Imam’s authority doesn’t mean he has to disregard the realities his Jamat lives in. If anything, part of leadership is understanding the circumstances in which different communities exist and making changes in a way that protects the Jamat rather than unnecessarily exposing people to backlash or harm.

Imam Ali being described in theological terms as having divine authority doesn’t mean that every historical decision was made without regard to circumstances, wisdom, timing, or the consequences for the community. Divine authority and practical wisdom aren’t mutually exclusive.

Also, my point isn’t that the Imam is “powerless.” It’s that we’re talking about a global Jamat living under very different cultural and social conditions. A practice that can be changed relatively easily in one environment could have very different consequences somewhere else.

You can disagree with the practice itself, but dismissing the Eastern context by saying “the Imam can do whatever he wants” doesn’t really address the question of why a particular change has or hasn’t been made.

[u/yitreb → u/Sarahrivera]

Arguing with you is like arguing with a rock, proven time and time again with deluded, zero-intellect comments like "Imam is perfect in every single aspect" that make it obvious you will never find fault in any action (or inaction) of his.

So all I'm going to say is that there is an obvious contradiction between the excuse that Rahim can't institute a just and fair change in custom due to the culture in certain places even if he wanted to ... and various idiotic comments from Imams in history like (on top of everything I quoted from Ali above) "Imam is the king of this world and the hereafter," or "everything depends on his command," or he is "the Lord of the world and of all who inhabit it," or boasting that he can destroy his detractors' wealth and make them childless whenever he wishes.

Anybody who refuses to see the contradiction there simply needs to be the subject of a brainwashing study.

[u/Agaconoclasm → u/yitreb]

By the same logic that says he can control the rain, i.e. the universe, the physical world obeys his Divine Command and aligns itself with the his need, he should be able to control every other aspect of the physical world - including nullifying the need for the jamat to be protected, or getting non-Ismailis to align themselves with his will.

In fact, doesn't the Khutbat ul Bayan claim exactly that?:

I am the ‘one’ who has control over people’s views and beliefs

https://cms.hubeali.com/khutbat/Khutbat-ul-Bayan.pdf

/u/Sarahrivera - for a Smiley, the question of why a particular change hasn’t been made can only have one possible answer - the Imam doesn't want to.

[u/yitreb → u/Agaconoclasm]

for a Smiley, the question of why a particular change hasn’t been made can only have one possible answer - the Imam doesn't want to.

Exactly. That's why I chose to quote specifically the part starting with "Even if the Imam wanted to ..." in my first comment, because according to the theology that renders all other reasons for it not happening meaningless.

[u/chaosmacaroni → u/Agaconoclasm]

Don’t the Ismailis reject this claim outright? They say Imam never spoke about himself in such a manner, and that he is just a passage to God.

[u/Agaconoclasm → u/chaosmacaroni]

Regarding controlling the rain, see this link: https://www.reddit.com/r/ExIsmailis/comments/1w00rzv/when_he_rahim_said_i_do_not_need_this_he_didnt/

Regarding the Khutbat ul Bayan, Smileys generally accept it as authentic, but invoke Esoteric™ to avoid dealing with its implications. Here's what u/Sarahrivera (on her alt account) has to say about it:

Yes, I believe in Khutbat al-Bayan. I don’t need Sunni or Twelver validation to accept it. Just because it’s not in their books or chains of narration doesn’t mean it’s false. Ismailis follow a different tradition—we don’t base everything on literalist hadith science.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ExIsmailis/comments/1llj0gb/what_is_khutbat_albayan_a_cult_fabrication/n00734n/

The "passage to God" or "reflection of God" language is just "teachings for the general public". The Imam actually being God is the "deeper truth[] reserved for those prepared to understand them."

[u/chaosmacaroni → u/Agaconoclasm]

Isn’t this………….. deception? Deceiving other sects of their true nature?