Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

The one and only free public forum for Bohras. The focus of this forum is the reform movement, the Dawoodi Bohra faith and, of course, the corrupt priesthood. But the discussion is in no way restricted to the Bohras alone.
dal-chaval-palidu
Posts: 665
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:46 am

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#181

Unread post by dal-chaval-palidu » Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:03 am

objectiveobserver53 wrote:I frequently see Mufaddal groupies call SKQ followers delusional but no one mentions the delusion of the MS and QJ sons, husbands of SKQ daughters.

I believe it was delusional of the husbands to imagine that they (by their own admission) could openly disrespect their wives father, get violent over their wishes to visit their parents, show disproportionate anger over their perceived housekeeping mistakes, show disproportionate anger in disciplining the children and then expect the wives to roll over and welcome them into marital relations in the bed-chamber.......Just sayin'.... :roll:

It would seem that their expectations were not grounded in reality which led to their frustrated punching of walls and the raping of their wives.

Every married bohra man knows all too well that unless the wife is treated like a flower, exactly as per Burhanuddin Moula's naseehat, the wife will withold certain gifts :D These men seemed to have missed out completely on those lessons despite having grown up in Burhanuddin Moula's home. Shame on them!
You raise some good points, OO53. The idea that they used to say disrespectful things of their wives' father tells of their hatred of the ex-mazoom saheb. And not allowing the women to visit their parents, that shows how mean and low the so called royals can get. You are right, the way of dealings of MS and QJ's sons is really bad, assuming the claims made by their wives is accurate.

But it also leads to questions about SKQ's daughters. They were in the innermost circle. Why did they not bring it up with Syedna Mohammad Burhanuddin? Why not mention to him that their respective husbands are saying demeaning things about his mazoom? That remains for me one of the many unanswered question.

The claim that they had no access to SMB during all these years, I find that hard to believe. Or, did they bring it up? What was the response, if any?

Qadir
Posts: 260
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2015 1:28 am

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#182

Unread post by Qadir » Sun Apr 05, 2015 3:41 am

mnoorani wrote:

Nobody should say anything offensive to anybody. It is only the haq of the Haq na dai to pronounce laanats and gaalis in the masjid to the ex mazoon whom he dutifully respected during his fathers lifetime for fifty years. We are the followers and we should not immitates the verbal offensives of our Dai Al Mutlaq Sayedna Mufaddal Saifuddin.
You got it correct. The ones who follow the Haq na Dai i.e. Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin have noor in their eyes and can understand the meaning of right and wrong. Just like how you did MNoorani.
objectiveobserver53 wrote:

Qadir bhai you forgot your own advice when you spoke ill of SKQ on the other thread. Not sure what is greater your stupidity or your hypocrisy!
Maybe you should understand this that when our dai SMS pronounced laanat on KQ then he can be said bad .

Moulana ALI pronounced laanat on 1,2 and 3(not to mention names here) and we get the right to pronounce laanat on them which allah does not count as your sins as they are daawat's dushman.

In Quran,
According to Surah Al-Munafiqun Ayat 2,

اتَّخَذُوا أَيْمَانَهُمْ جُنَّةً فَصَدُّوا عَن سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ ۚ إِنَّهُمْ سَاءَ مَا كَانُوا يَعْمَلُونَ

They (KQ) have taken their oaths(Oath of quran as him as rightful mansoos of SMB and 53rd Dai) as a cover, so they averted [people] from the way of Allah . Indeed, it was evil that they were doing.


Hope You Understand what i am saying.

SBM
Posts: 6437
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 4:01 am

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#183

Unread post by SBM » Sun Apr 05, 2015 5:45 am

Moulana ALI pronounced laanat on 1,2 and 3(not to mention names here)
Really Qadir
Do you any authentic proof of this. Which Aamil said that?
Please do not degrade the Shaanaat and humble personality of Moulana Ali to that of Yazidi living life style of Ayash Dai :twisted: :twisted:

Qadir
Posts: 260
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2015 1:28 am

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#184

Unread post by Qadir » Sun Apr 05, 2015 7:15 am

SBM wrote: Please do not degrade the Shaanaat and humble personality of Moulana Ali to that of Yazidi living life style of Ayash Dai :twisted: :twisted:
Maybe you are inaware of that what or who a dai is because you have never listened to him or never seen him from close.

But i have and when you see his noorani eyes then you will realise what kind of personality he holds, yazidi personality of haideri personality.

SBM
Posts: 6437
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 4:01 am

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#185

Unread post by SBM » Sun Apr 05, 2015 7:48 am

you see his noorani eyes
That is why he wears dark glasses because there is too much Noor in his eyes.
BTW how much did you have to pay him to get that close that you can see in his eyes
you have never listened to him
Oh yes I did couple of times and I decided to save my time as he made no sense because he kept repeating Koyne Kharab tu naa laago
and his message was how to make ROTI and asked for Fakhir Najwa

JavedhJuma
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:47 pm

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#186

Unread post by JavedhJuma » Sun Apr 05, 2015 2:34 pm

Moulana ALI pronounced laanat on 1,2 and 3(not to mention names here) and we get the right to pronounce laanat on them which allah does not count as your sins as they are daawat's dushman
Where does this say? Mowla Ali AS was not an ordinary human being. He would not stoop so low. In fact, he married their daughters, so how can he say lanaat on his in-laws. Please do not justify your leader's action by lowering the status of Mowla Ali AS.

Allah SWT does not like anybody who says laanat on anybody. Please do not involve Allah SWT and Mowla Ali in such low level thinking. Saying lanaat on anybody is a sin. That is why Allah SWT said not to say laanat. Those who are justifying their actions by involving Mowla Ali AS and Allah SWT, are liars and you should run from them and do not look back. They are teaching you wrong and hatred against other. Both are punishable by Allah SWT.

It boils my blood when somebody justifies their actions by misquoting Mowla Ali AS and Allah SWT. It is a Gunha Kabira. Repent.

ghulam muhammed
Posts: 11653
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#187

Unread post by ghulam muhammed » Mon Apr 06, 2015 5:06 pm

watsup msg :

Bacchao ni aava ni khushi ma Saifee Mahal ma Aatishbaazi and celebrations....... Yemen and Karachi ma bhale mumin marta hoi ane takleef ma hoi pan Kothari mafia ne kai pan farak nathi padhto, e logo no mauj shaukh to chaalu chhe.


Image

Image

ghulam muhammed
Posts: 11653
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#188

Unread post by ghulam muhammed » Mon Apr 06, 2015 5:09 pm

watsup msg :-

Sagla Mola na farzando ne aa misal kits aapi ne welcome kidhu...

Image

Image

ghulam muhammed
Posts: 11653
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#189

Unread post by ghulam muhammed » Mon Apr 06, 2015 6:07 pm

FOOLING THE ABDES.....

PROCESSION AND AATISHBAAZI FOR "FAKE" FATEH MUBIN IN RATLAM


Image

Image

ghulam muhammed
Posts: 11653
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#190

Unread post by ghulam muhammed » Mon Apr 06, 2015 6:13 pm

ONE MORE FAKE PROPAGANDA !!

KHUSHI NI MAJLIS ON FATEH MUBEEN IN RATLAM

14th Jumadil Aakhar, 1436


Image

Image

fustrate_Bohra
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2013 6:46 am

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#191

Unread post by fustrate_Bohra » Tue Apr 07, 2015 12:05 am

Y kqs is not replying for fake fateh mubin.?

Qadir
Posts: 260
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2015 1:28 am

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#192

Unread post by Qadir » Tue Apr 07, 2015 3:17 am

Because he is afraid of imam uz zamaan's dai.

Anything he says or does now can be used in his (kq) against.

james
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 4:06 am

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#193

Unread post by james » Wed Apr 08, 2015 3:44 am

JavedhJuma wrote:
Moulana ALI pronounced laanat on 1,2 and 3(not to mention names here) and we get the right to pronounce laanat on them which allah does not count as your sins as they are daawat's dushman
Where does this say? Mowla Ali AS was not an ordinary human being. He would not stoop so low. In fact, he married their daughters, so how can he say lanaat on his in-laws. Please do not justify your leader's action by lowering the status of Mowla Ali AS.

Allah SWT does not like anybody who says laanat on anybody. Please do not involve Allah SWT and Mowla Ali in such low level thinking. Saying lanaat on anybody is a sin. That is why Allah SWT said not to say laanat. Those who are justifying their actions by involving Mowla Ali AS and Allah SWT, are liars and you should run from them and do not look back. They are teaching you wrong and hatred against other. Both are punishable by Allah SWT.

It boils my blood when somebody justifies their actions by misquoting Mowla Ali AS and Allah SWT. It is a Gunha Kabira. Repent.
Instead of letting your blood boil,you'd do well to invest your time in reading the Quran.The below mentioned link talks about the various Quranic ayahs concerning lanat.

http://qutbibohras.blogspot.in/2014/10/ ... ation.html

You are issuing blanket statements like "Allah SWT does not like anybody who says lanat on anybody." There are numerous hadith where Prophet Mohammed SAW has said lanat/curse on specific people based on their actions.

You can see the numerous hadith here.If you have a problem with isnad of some of the narrators or the people who recorded them,then let me know.I will find the hadith specifically catering to the sources you believe in.

http://www.seratonline.com/1240/laanat- ... -sunnah-2/


So repent because I'm sure you don't mean to say that Allah SWT does not like Prophet Mohammed SAW. (Nauzobillah)

Afterall it is Gunah Kabira.

And out of curiosity is it the official Nizari Ismaili position you are speaking from?

Qadir
Posts: 260
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2015 1:28 am

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#194

Unread post by Qadir » Wed Apr 08, 2015 12:02 pm

Well said James bhai these munafiqs have no knowledge about islam (Quran e Majeed) or Panjetan Pak or Imams and Dai.

They just try to find ways to criticize Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin and his Mumineen.

JavedhJuma
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:47 pm

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#195

Unread post by JavedhJuma » Wed Apr 08, 2015 11:55 pm

Brother James,

Sorry if I touched a raw nerve.

I am not a Qutbi Bohra.

I am a Nizari Ismaili and we are taught not to say Lanat on anybody because We, as humans we are not perfect and we should not recite lanat on anybody.

What was the outcome of lanats recited by late Syedna on the 3 Khalifas during Mohorram a few years ago. He had to apologise. If he was right then why did he apologise? You should learn from that. I was taught "when you spit, it would not be possible to put that spit back into your mouth without consequences."

Instead, we are taught, to pray to Allah SWT to give taufiq to the misguided one. And leave it to Him to take care of things.

Tell me something. If the 3 Caliphas were deserving of lanats, then why did not Mowla Ali AS or the Prophet recite lanat on them. Why did Mowla Ali AS marry their daughters and even named his children after them. Why did Prophet SAW marry Hazarat Abu Bakar's daughter?

If Mowla Ali AS and the Prophet SAW did not recite lanat on them, who are we to do so? I do not believe anybody or any leader is above these two spiritual leaders.

You cannot teach me Qur'an or Ahadith. I know what Qur'an says. But Qur'an also tells me to use my Aql. As Allah SWT's servant I cannot raise myself to His level or the Prophet's level to give my pronouncements of lanat on my fellow human beings because I do not agree with their interpretation of faith. I am not pure. I am a sinner so what right do I have to pronounce lanat on anybody. I know I am not perfect and I do not dwell on this history of the past. People who dwell on the past can never progress. Like they say, when you point a finger at somebody, the other four fingers point back to you. Live and let go. Use your God given Aql. That is why Man was and is Allah SWT's highest creation.

I do not give much weight to ahadith.

There is no one interpretation of Qur'an. Qur'an is fluid and is open to interpretation. We are encouraged to read the Qur'an with understanding using our head. Qur'an is a Holy Book and hence a Holy Book does not teach curses.Your interpretation of Qur'an is different from mine. So you follow your interpretation and give me my right to follow mine.


I am not going to argue with you on the subject. If you want to justify yourself to say lanat on people, please do so but do not tell me I am wrong when I say, I do not share your views. I have my right to my own interpretation.

JavedhJuma
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:47 pm

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#196

Unread post by JavedhJuma » Thu Apr 09, 2015 12:17 am

Qadir wrote:Well said James bhai these munafiqs have no knowledge about islam (Quran e Majeed) or Panjetan Pak or Imams and Dai.

They just try to find ways to criticize Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin and his Mumineen.
Brother Qadir, you do not even know me and you have pronounced me to be a munafiqeen without knowledge of Qur'an. First of all, how do you know I have no knowledge of Qur'an? I have read many of your comments on the subject and it seems to me sometimes you do not know what you are talking about.

Your interpretation of Islam may be different from mine and vice versa. Allah SWT has given us Aql. Please use it and do not depend on others to teach you Islam and Qur'an.

I am not even a Bohora, so why would I try to find ways to criticize your Syedna? I have been taught better. I have been taught, "never to judge anybody without knowing the person well, and even then I should not make any pronouncements based on ignorance, envy or anger". In Islam all three are sins.

So go read the Qur'an independent of your Sheikhs because they themselves are not perfect.

james
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 4:06 am

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#197

Unread post by james » Thu Apr 09, 2015 1:55 am

JavedhJuma wrote:Brother James,

Sorry if I touched a raw nerve.

I am not a Qutbi Bohra.

I am a Nizari Ismaili and we are taught not to say Lanat on anybody because We, as humans we are not perfect and we should not recite lanat on anybody.
What has the imperfection of human beings got to do with the Sunnah amal of Prophet Mohammed SAW (Reciting Lanat of enemies of Allah Ta'ala and Ahle Bayt of Prophet Mohammed SAW) ?

Perhaps you also believe that as we are an imperfect creation,we shouldn't recite or try to understand perfect Quran as well. Or we shouldn't step our imperfect feet in the holy precinct of Ka'ba?


What was the outcome of lanats recited by late Syedna on the 3 Khalifas during Mohorram a few years ago. He had to apologise. If he was right then why did he apologise? You should learn from that. I was taught "when you spit, it would not be possible to put that spit back into your mouth without consequences."
Syedna RA did what he did in the larger interests of well being of mumineen.You should look at the wordings of the public apology.Never once did he claim that praying lanat on enemies of Ahle Bayt is a wrong action.

Instead, we are taught, to pray to Allah SWT to give taufiq to the misguided one. And leave it to Him to take care of things.
You keep mentioning "you are taught".


In another post to Qadir,you said "So go read the Qur'an independent of your Sheikhs because they themselves are not perfect."

If I may,who educates you? Is it an imperfect human being as you judged Qadir's Sheikhs to be?


Tell me something. If the 3 Caliphas were deserving of lanats, then why did not Mowla Ali AS or the Prophet recite lanat on them. Why did Mowla Ali AS marry their daughters and even named his children after them. Why did Prophet SAW marry Hazarat Abu Bakar's daughter?

If Mowla Ali AS and the Prophet SAW did not recite lanat on them, who are we to do so? I do not believe anybody or any leader is above these two spiritual leaders.
You are trying the tired old rhetoric used by the Wahabbis.I'm not surprised. On one hand you claim that you do not give much weight to ahadith.On the other hand,you want to discuss the actions of Prophet Mohammed SAW or Commander of the Faithful Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib AS which are well documented in ahadith. Win-win for you eh?
If Mowla Ali AS and the Prophet SAW did not recite lanat on them, who are we to do so? I do not believe anybody or any leader is above these two spiritual leaders.
You have no way of knowing if Prophet Mohammed SAW and Imam Ali AS recited lanat or not as you don't give weight to ahadith. What are your thoughts regarding Moulatena Zainab AS (Sister of the Lord of Martyrs Imam Husain AS),Imam Ali Zainul Abedin AS,Imam Mohammed Baqir AS,Imam Jafer us Sadiq AS? Do you reckon their actions would be in line with actions of Prophet Mohammed SAW or Imam Ali AS? Again,there are numerous traditions of actions of these esteemed personalities where they have recited lanat.If only you gave weight to ahadith and traditions!

You cannot teach me Qur'an or Ahadith. I know what Qur'an says. But Qur'an also tells me to use my Aql. As Allah SWT's servant I cannot raise myself to His level or the Prophet's level to give my pronouncements of lanat on my fellow human beings because I do not agree with their interpretation of faith. I am not pure. I am a sinner so what right do I have to pronounce lanat on anybody. I know I am not perfect and I do not dwell on this history of the past. People who dwell on the past can never progress. Like they say, when you point a finger at somebody, the other four fingers point back to you. Live and let go. Use your God given Aql. That is why Man was and is Allah SWT's highest creation.

I do not give much weight to ahadith.
Surah Baqarah 2:161.Read and weep! It shatters the apologetic Anti-Islamic bullshit you have written.Everything the Quran says will be dismissed by you because Quran also tells you to use your Aql.Right?

Funny you say that people who dwell on the past can never progress.If you knew what Quran says,you would have understood that a good major percentage of it refers to the era of past Prophets.


I am not going to argue with you on the subject. If you want to justify yourself to say lanat on people, please do so but do not tell me I am wrong when I say, I do not share your views. I have my right to my own interpretation.
You can believe whatever you want to believe.But expect people to reply when you issue blanket statements on behalf of Allah SWT. After all,blood boiling is common between imperfect human beings.

humanbeing
Posts: 2195
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 2:30 am

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#198

Unread post by humanbeing » Thu Apr 09, 2015 1:58 am

JavedhJuma wrote:I am a Nizari Ismaili and we are taught not to say Lanat on anybody because We, as humans we are not perfect and we should not recite lanat on anybody. …………………………. I have my right to my own interpretation.


Bro JJ

Well written response, however this falls on useless ears of abdes. There are 3 categories of laanat throwers, one who throw laanats as a calculated measure to manipulate an idea to meet their own agendas, the 2nd are called clueless abde (ghetaas / sheep) who will just follow the herd and 3rd one are casual users of the word “khuda-ni-laanat” to vent off their frustrations / anger on others.

Hate mongering is an effective tool used by kothar to spice up the emotions of frustrated common abde and align them to a common cause / party. More so when such hate mongering can be effectively channeled to secure their stand as well as defeat their critics. This game of laanat baazi is so effective and amazingly well coordinated by kothar.

The above is my POV limited to kothar & abdes only.

Kothari thugs and their followers are so sensitive, they start throwing laanats on slightest critic of their deceptive, greedy and manipulative ways. They will dance around the reasons and hide behind the excuses of prophets and imam’s time of throwing laanat. Those personalities back in time had faced far more hardships, torture and injustice that throwing laanat would be one of their last resorts, but these Kothari pansies will go all heavy breathing over slightest critic or objection.

Throwin laanat is a easy and convenient time pass for these abdes, we read recently, how one devoted abde completed his ibaadat by throwin laanat on a SKQ follower ..

JavedhJuma
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:47 pm

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#199

Unread post by JavedhJuma » Thu Apr 09, 2015 10:43 pm

What has the imperfection of human beings got to do with the Sunnah amal of Prophet Mohammed SAW (Reciting Lanat of enemies of Allah Ta'ala and Ahle Bayt of Prophet Mohammed SAW) ? So brother, show me one example wherein the Prophet SAW or Mowla Ali AS recited lanat on the 3 Caliphas. If they did then I will consider it Sunnah, if they didn't then you are wrong for reciting lanat on them. The three Caliphs were not enemies of Allah SWT. Allah SWT also says in the Qur'an He likes most those who forgive. So if you want to curry favor with Allah SWT then forget the past and move on. That is in your best interest.

Perhaps you also believe that as we are an imperfect creation,we shouldn't recite or try to understand perfect Quran as well. Or we shouldn't step our imperfect feet in the holy precinct of Ka'ba? I do not believe so and never suggested that. Read the Qur'an by all means. If you do not understand something, go to the Sheikh, but in the end you have to use your Aql to make sure you are doing the right thing because your Sheikh is not responsible for your soul, you are.

As regards setting foot in the Kabah, do you mean to say millions of people who go to Kaba are perfect. Peoples in the time of the Prophet were not perfect and neither are they in the present time.

JavedhJuma
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:47 pm

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#200

Unread post by JavedhJuma » Thu Apr 09, 2015 11:26 pm

Brother James says:
If I may,who educates you? Is it an imperfect human being as you judged Qadir's Sheikhs to be?
We are taught by our Missionaries who in the times of Fatimids were known as Dais. They are not as high in rutba as your Dais are but Missionary is an English word and its closest translation is Dai.. Yes, certainly, missionaries are not perfect . They are like you and me but more learned. I have never heard from the mouth of a missionary that the first three Caliphs were the enemies of Allah SWT, Prophet SAW and Hazarat Ali AS.

The purpose of a missionary is to build bridges between all faiths. Bridges can only built if we do not dwell in the past. We were not present at the time so how can we judge people of 1400 years ago. Some historians have written a lot of good things about the first 4 Caliphs and others have condemned the first three Caliphs.

You also mention Sura 2: Ayat 161 which states: Those who reject faith and die rejecting - on them is God's curse, and the curse of angels and of all mankind.

Do you mean to say the first three Calips rejected Islam? That is not true. They must have recited the Shahadah many times throughout their lives. I read a hadith long time ago, which stated that Hazarat Abu Bakar once donated all his wealth to the Prophet. If he had rejected Islam, then how could Prophet SAW have married his daughter, or accepted his wealth. Please think with your own Aql.

As regards the apology of late Syedna to the Sunni Jamat, that was a long time ago and I do not remember his exact words but I do remember reading there were riots and the Syedna had to leave the Masjid under the protection of the Police and that a lot of Bohoras were hurt and their businesses were looted. May be he issued an apology as you say for the benefit of the mumineen. My point is why utter words that you would have to take back. Didn't he expect there would be riots? I don't think he was short sighted because he was a very intelligent man. You say he is gaib na jankar. Didn't he know what would be the consequences of his actions?

Please forgive me, I am no judge and I do not want to engage in this dialogue any more. I have many Bohora friends whom I respect a lot and I do not want to hurt their feelings. Their lives have been uprooted because of the split as it is.

I am making this my last post on the subject because the original thread is being hijacked. I am sorry if I have hurt your feelings

Qadir
Posts: 260
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2015 1:28 am

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#201

Unread post by Qadir » Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:02 am

JavedhJuma wrote:
As regards the apology of late Syedna to the Sunni Jamat, that was a long time ago and I do not remember his exact words but I do remember reading there were riots and the Syedna had to leave the Masjid under the protection of the Police and that a lot of Bohoras were hurt and their businesses were looted. May be he issued an apology as you say for the benefit of the mumineen. My point is why utter words that you would have to take back. Didn't he expect there would be riots? I don't think he was short sighted because he was a very intelligent man. You say he is gaib na jankar. Didn't he know what would be the consequences of his actions?
He knew very well about the consequences and the aftermath.

His words approximately were:

"Mamluk e aale mohammed aaj aem kahu chu, poori duniya na saamne kahu chu, khuda ni laanat A*****, U****,U**** na upar.

Main duniya ne aem kahu chu ke mumineen bija gair koum na muslemeen si bilkul alag che. Mumineen ane gair muslemeen aek nathi zara bhi aek jeva nathi."

English:" I slave of Mohammed and ahle bayt is saying in this in front of whole world ***********.

I want to tell the whole world that Mumineen of Dawoodi bohra caste are totally different from the other muslim castes people.

We are not them and they are not us."


The consequences are well known.

The aftermath is that when there were Hindu Muslim riots in gujarat many hindus (not all) didnt harmed many dawoodi bohras as according to syedna mumineen were not same as other muslims.

Due to which lives of many mumineen were saved.


Maybe now you understand the hikmat.

bohrabhai
Posts: 401
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2014 11:16 am

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#202

Unread post by bohrabhai » Fri Apr 10, 2015 4:45 am

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 871439.cms
Bohra kids’ custody: US court rejects domestic violence plea by mothers
MUMBAI: While granting physical custody of nine Bohra children to their fathers, son and nephew of Dawoodi Bohras' spiritual head Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin, the superior court of California had said that mothers left India with the children "not because of any domestic violence that had occurred, but solely because of her strongly held religious belief regarding the proper successor to the Syedna". The children are now in Mumbai with the fathers.

The mothers are two sisters, daughters of rival claimant to the Syedna's post Khuzaima Qutbuddin. On January 17, 2014, the day Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin died, the sisters (married to Syedna Mufaddal's son and a nephew) took away the nine minor children and left for the USA where they petitioned the California court, alleging domestic violence and fearing that their children might have been harmed if they were given in custody of their fathers.

On March 3, 2015 the California court, rejecting the claims of domestic violence and saying that it was in the children's best interest, awarded custody of the children to their fathers. "The California court determined that the mothers' domestic violence claims were not credible, that the children have been wrongfully taken from India," said Lance S Spiegel, counsel for one of the respondents. There were several reasons the sisters cited to seek Domestic Violence Prevention Act restraining order. A sister said that that her husband threw her cellphone against the wall and broke it. Another sister testified that once her husband told her to cook chick peas for dinner, but she could not as it was unavailable and this made him angry. One sister stated that unless her children believed in her father (Khuzaima Qutbuddin), they would not be able to go to heaven."

Aziz Qutbuddin, Khuzaima Qutbuddin's son said: "This is a private and personal matter involving young children. The US court did not grant us the stay to pursue our appeal and the trial court's order giving temporary physical custody to the fathers and joint legal custody to both parents has come into effect. We are now looking at all available legal recourses in India and will support our sisters in every way."

lawgraduate
Posts: 261
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:31 pm

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#203

Unread post by lawgraduate » Fri Apr 10, 2015 9:52 am

I always knew KQ has no substantial points to win any cases, mark my words even sucession case will be win by muffy, but again this doesnt mean any thing, these both guys are (deleted) and they are fighting for power and money there is nothing spiritual about it because their predecessor is not spiritual at all. taking away kids without father consent was wrong and I am surprised KQ didnt stop his daughter from doing this, clear family desputes.

james
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 4:06 am

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#204

Unread post by james » Fri Apr 10, 2015 4:10 pm

JavedhJuma wrote: So brother, show me one example wherein the Prophet SAW or Mowla Ali AS recited lanat on the 3 Caliphas. If they did then I will consider it Sunnah, if they didn't then you are wrong for reciting lanat on them. The three Caliphs were not enemies of Allah SWT. Allah SWT also says in the Qur'an He likes most those who forgive. So if you want to curry favor with Allah SWT then forget the past and move on. That is in your best interest.
Let's agree to not change goalposts.

My first reply to you on this thread clearly mentions
There are numerous hadith where Prophet Mohammed SAW has said lanat/curse on specific people based on their actions.
I posted the link containing the various ahadith for your benefit.You said that you don't give much weight to ahadith.So why keep asking for examples from the Prophet SAW's life when you will discount it later? Prophet SAW recited lanat on giver/taker/recorder of interest.Prophet SAW recited lanat on the person who sullied the mosque with his phlegm.Prophet SAW recited lanat on Hakam and his progeny.Various sources state Prophet SAW recited lanat on Bani Umayyah (The accursed tree). Quran 2:161 states that there is lanat of Allah,angels and whole of mankind on the disbelievers.

Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib AS used to recite lanat on Muwaiyah LA in his qunoot of fajr namaz.
Imam Mohammed Baqir AS and Imam Jafer us Sadiq AS have explained the Ahle Bayt's stance regarding Abu Bakr,Umar and Usman.Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib AS himself speaks about the usurpers (Abu Bakr and Umar) in Nahj Balaga.Read up on the Khutbah of Zainab binte Ali ibn Abi Talib AS in the court of Yazid to know more about her views on the killers on Husain AS.

Till recently,amaana,org had English translations of some of Syedna Qadi Nu'man RA's majalis which talked about complete devotion to the Imams. It is very dishonest of you to completely deliberately omit their relevance when issuing Un-Islamic statements such "Saying lanaat on anybody is a sin. That is why Allah SWT said not to say laanat. "

Perhaps there is a Nizari version of Quran where Surah Lahab has been omitted as apparently Allah SWT says not to say lanat.(Nauzobillah)


I ask you again

"What are your thoughts regarding Moulatena Zainab AS (Sister of the Lord of Martyrs Imam Husain AS),Imam Ali Zainul Abedin AS,Imam Mohammed Baqir AS,Imam Jafer us Sadiq AS? Do you reckon their actions would be in line with actions of Prophet Mohammed SAW or Imam Ali AS? "


I do not believe so and never suggested that. Read the Qur'an by all means. If you do not understand something, go to the Sheikh, but in the end you have to use your Aql to make sure you are doing the right thing because your Sheikh is not responsible for your soul, you are.

As regards setting foot in the Kabah, do you mean to say millions of people who go to Kaba are perfect. Peoples in the time of the Prophet were not perfect and neither are they in the present time.
The two examples were given by me to expose your fallacies.You claim that because we are imperfect,we shouldn't recite lanat on anybody.(Enemies of Ahle Bayt AS) Nevermind that the act of reciting Lanat is Sunnah of Prophet Mohammed SAW.

My simple retort is that if the imperfection of our ownselves is stopping you from following Sunnah then perhaps it's time you revisit other actions of Sunnah. Such as reading Quran,going to Ka'ba,etc.

james
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 4:06 am

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#205

Unread post by james » Fri Apr 10, 2015 4:27 pm

JavedhJuma wrote:
We are taught by our Missionaries who in the times of Fatimids were known as Dais. They are not as high in rutba as your Dais are but Missionary is an English word and its closest translation is Dai.. Yes, certainly, missionaries are not perfect . They are like you and me but more learned. I have never heard from the mouth of a missionary that the first three Caliphs were the enemies of Allah SWT, Prophet SAW and Hazarat Ali AS.
Do your fallible missionaries supercede the Imams AS? If my memory serves me right,I believe it was Syedna Qadi Nu'man RA who wrote that Ali ibn Abi Talib AS the Lion was taken in front of Khinzir (when he was dragged by a rope around his neck) in one of his bayt. (Adam can help substantiate it. :) )


Do you mean to say the first three Calips rejected Islam? That is not true. They must have recited the Shahadah many times throughout their lives. I read a hadith long time ago, which stated that Hazarat Abu Bakar once donated all his wealth to the Prophet. If he had rejected Islam, then how could Prophet SAW have married his daughter, or accepted his wealth. Please think with your own Aql.
Yazid,Muwaiyah,Shimr (May Allah SWT recite lanat on them) must have recited the Shahadah many times throughout their lives.ISIS and other terrorist organizations of today may have recited the Shahadah. Do you consider them to be Muslims? Keep your Aql to yourself.Your Aql is your downfall which directly contradicts the actions of the Ahle Bayt AS.



As regards the apology of late Syedna to the Sunni Jamat, that was a long time ago and I do not remember his exact words but I do remember reading there were riots and the Syedna had to leave the Masjid under the protection of the Police and that a lot of Bohoras were hurt and their businesses were looted. May be he issued an apology as you say for the benefit of the mumineen. My point is why utter words that you would have to take back. Didn't he expect there would be riots? I don't think he was short sighted because he was a very intelligent man. You say he is gaib na jankar. Didn't he know what would be the consequences of his actions?
He didn't take back the words.It was a simple acknowledgment that some were hurt by his words.There isn't anymore to it.He chose to do what he do to safeguard the mumineen against rampant hooliganism.

Please forgive me, I am no judge and I do not want to engage in this dialogue any more. I have many Bohora friends whom I respect a lot and I do not want to hurt their feelings. Their lives have been uprooted because of the split as it is.
I laughed.It was you who brought the Syedna RA into your agenda filled posts without any provocation whatsoever. Do your Bohra friends know that you post here as JavedhJuma? Why care about them now after having already brought Syedna RA into the conversation when the topic at hand is so far removed from it? And save your dig about "lives uprooted because of the split" for someone who doesn't see right through you. :wink:

Adam
Posts: 1260
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#206

Unread post by Adam » Sat Apr 11, 2015 2:02 am

@Bro James
Do your fallible missionaries supercede the Imams AS? If my memory serves me right,I believe it was Syedna Qadi Nu'man RA who wrote that Ali ibn Abi Talib AS the Lion was taken in front of Khinzir (when he was dragged by a rope around his neck) in one of his bayt. (Adam can help substantiate it. :) )
The reference to this verse is from Syedna Qadi Noman's "Urjooza Mukhtara", in which he has documented The History of Islam in a Poem.

He always refers to Moulana Ali AS and his Ashaab as the "lions", surrounded by barking dogs.

james
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 4:06 am

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#207

Unread post by james » Sat Apr 11, 2015 2:30 am

Adam wrote:@Bro James
Do your fallible missionaries supercede the Imams AS? If my memory serves me right,I believe it was Syedna Qadi Nu'man RA who wrote that Ali ibn Abi Talib AS the Lion was taken in front of Khinzir (when he was dragged by a rope around his neck) in one of his bayt. (Adam can help substantiate it. :) )
The reference to this verse is from Syedna Qadi Noman's "Urjooza Mukhtara", in which he has documented The History of Islam in a Poem.

He always refers to Moulana Ali AS and his Ashaab as the "lions", surrounded by barking dogs.
Thank you. :D

ghulam muhammed
Posts: 11653
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#208

Unread post by ghulam muhammed » Thu May 21, 2015 7:05 pm

watsup msg :-

Forwarded as Received :-

BREAKING NEWS !!

Mubarak Mohanna thaai.

Shehzada Taha BS and Ibrahim BS na hamna Nikah thaya..... Yemen na dikri saathe..... Ek aj ghar na 2 dikri chhe.

Kaale fajere 8 am sagla Surat na mumineen Aqa Mola TUS ne tahini araz karva Dummas bungalow par aave.

Image

Taha BS and Ibrahim BS na Sasraa......

Image

Image

dawedaar
Posts: 844
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 4:40 pm

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#209

Unread post by dawedaar » Fri May 22, 2015 2:38 pm

car.jpg
shehzadas wedding car

qutub_mamajiwala
Posts: 1025
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 4:17 am

Re: Saifuddin v/s Saifuddin: Child custody case judgment

#210

Unread post by qutub_mamajiwala » Sun May 24, 2015 3:43 am

they both cant live without sex?
can they?