Alavi Bohras take on Dawoodi Bohras and their own Sect...!!! A detailed Account..!!!

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.
HMALAK
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2013 7:31 am

Alavi Bohras take on Dawoodi Bohras and their own Sect...!!! A detailed Account..!!!

#1

Unread post by HMALAK » Wed Aug 02, 2017 2:20 am

The Alavi Bohras has published a firing article about how Dawoodi Bohras usurped all the powers and also their Dai and how they were reduced to just a few numbers. The Dawoodis even destroyed the Qabr of Alavi Dai in Ahmedabad.

http://alavibohra.org/haqqaaniyat%20of% ... s.htm#one5



Haqeeqat of 'Alavi Tareekh from Kutub ud-Da'wat ish-Shareefah
Historic Facts of Saiyedna 'Ali saheb (aq) from 'Alavi Manuscripts



Part 1: Du'aa of Saiyedna Dawoodji Burhaanuddin bin Saiyedi Qutubshah (aq) for Saiyedna 'Ali saheb (aq) when he was in his Grand-father's Lap
Part 2: Discrepancies about the Year of Demise of Abd ut-Taiyeb Zakiyuddin and the Reason about our Hujjat
Part 3: 'Ilmiyat of Saiyedna 'Ali saheb (aq) in front of Saiyedna Dawoodji Burhaanuddin bin Saiyedi Qutubshah saheb (aq)
Part 4: The Kirdaar (role) and Status (darajah) of Saiyedi Ameenji bin Jalaal saheb (aq) during 29th Da'i ul-Mutlaq Saiyedna ‘Ali saheb (aq)
Part 5: Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin and the Court of Mughal Emperor Jahangir





Part 5:

Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin and the Court of Mughal Emperor Jahangir




31st Da’i Saiyedna Hasan Badruddin in his Diwaan writes to one of the Mughal Vizier of Jahangir and Shah Jahan Shaa’istah Khan



Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin bin Saiyedi Ibrahim ash-Shaheed (aq), the grandson of 28th Da’i al-Mutlaq Saiyedna Shaikh Adam Safiyuddin ascended to the throne of ad-Da’wat ul-Haadiyah as 29th Da’i al-Mutlaq after latter’s death on 7th Rajab 1030 AH/27 May 1621 AD in Ahmedabad through the tradition of the propagation of Nass. Since the second half of the 20th century AD, when the books by modern scholarship on Isma’ili studies and research based on its doctrines and history started rolling out with more and more historians getting involved into it, some of the historic facts revolving around the rightful appointment and proof of the 29th Da’i Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin bin Ibrahim got altered, fabricated and distorted due to the biased secondary sources.

Truly speaking, the need of presenting in person of the 29th Da’i Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin bin Ibrahim in the court of Mughal Emperor Jahangir has not taken place as, the former with the handful of his staunch followers was satisfied and the truth of his appointment as a Da’i recognized by his adherents and refuted by his opponents, convinced him that he will manage to safeguard the community by the right of Da’iship which was transferred to him by his grandfather. There was no need for him to furnish the proof of his appointment or arguments in public. As he already knew that all those who stood in his support initially deserted him for worldly gains and went openly to his opponent side but personally never denied the rightfulness of Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin. Because, for such people fear of harm always loomed large for supporting Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin publicly.




The old mausoleum of 3 ‘Alavi Du’aat viz. 28th, 29th and 30th da’i in Saraspur (Ahmedabad) defore the demolition of the graves in 1417 AH/1996 AD



Importantly this issue did not threaten the majority Bohras leadership as they knew that the small minority of Ali’s kith and kin are calm and will never use any force to claim their right. As it happened after the demise of the Prophet Mohammad that his cousin ‘Ali Ameer ul Mumineen preferred to be calm and kept his cool by confining himself in the corner of his house for some period of time not challenging the authority, sensing the might of the majority and his helplessness. He always knew that the Truth is with him and the time will come when the Truth will emerge by itself. The Qur’an testifies this in Surat ul-Maa’edah that, “O Mohammad! Say, the bad and the good are not equal, though the abundance of the bad may please you (surprise you); so fear Allaah (and do your duties) O the men of intellect, that you may be successful." (v. 100)

On the same ground, Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin bin Ibrahim took the safe path and secluded himself as the head of the nascent community and waited for the affairs and energy to subside and settle. But no sooner did ‘Abd ut Taiyeb Zakiyuddin died in 1031 AH/1622 AD, due to the illness emerged by the paralytic stroke that debarred him from performing routine religious obligatory duties, within 8 months of his leadership after the death of 28th Da’i, and the seat of their headship got transferred to Yemen from 1031-1042 AH/1622-1634 AD, than Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin bin Ibrahim sensed safe and secure to reestablish his right as the true successor of his grandfather. Meanwhile the leadership of majority Bohras weakened in Ahmedabad, the hostile forces dispersed then he was able to gain some more supporters and managed to systematize the affairs of ad-Da’wat ul-Haadiyat ul-‘Alaviyah.

Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin was Mazoon during the time of 28th Da’i and he himself was guardian and caretaker of the Da’wat library and having attained the second highest religious status in the Spiritual Hierarchy of Da’wat and he was well versed in all the branches of knowledge and was appointed as mufeed or instructor amongst the Hudood ud-Da’wat, gave personal audience to the pupils who came to acquire religious sectarian Bohra literature by the orders of his grandfather. Among the pupils, ‘Abd ut Taiyeb Zakiyuddin was one of them who studied books on Isma’ili jurisprudence such as Kitaab ut-Tahaarah. Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin was conferred Nass (an appointment of vicegerent through clear declaration) by 28th Da’i, then how could he be Mazoon of ‘Abd ut Taiyeb Zakiyuddin for 3 years as quoted from unauthorized and unreliable sources at many places consisting of distorted historical stories. Initially this account could be found in Muntaze’ ul-Akhbaar by Qutbuddin Burhaanpuri in 1231 AH/1816 AD exactly after 2oo years when the split between Dawoodis and Alavis occurred in Ahmedabad. Prior to this work there are many primary sources in which completely different historic accounts could be found.




The newly constructed tomb without the graves of 29th and 30th ‘Alavi Da’is



Due to the high secrecy of the studies of Da’wat literature, the truth of such historical facts surrounding the Da’wat of Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin remained only within the internal circles of Hudood ud-Da’wat. It was neither copied, printed, published nor discussed except among close associates of a Da’i. This is the reason why it has remained in wraps since centuries and never came up among the literary circles of historians. On the contrary, the historic accounts between 925-1075 AH/1519-1665 AD presented by the majority Bohra groups got unquestionably accepted by the masses and so by the historians. The historic blunders that were intentionally fabricated, framed and propagated by the majority could be found even today in the books pertaining to Isma’ili-Taiyebi Indian Bohra History. Alavi Bohras stood mute spectators to all this ugly game of power. The cognition of a true historian is justify the subject matter with utmost scrutiny and then arrive to any conclusion after confirming the true accounts and also consulting both the factions under question in sensitive issues like propagation of Nass.

Looking into the remarks of some historians who tends to say that, Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin founded the splinter group of Dawoodi Bohras, from his name, as Alavi Bohras in 1034 AH/1625 AD, is baseless. They seldom understand the fact that, Alavi Bohras are basically Dawoodis as they too believe in the Da’wat of 26th and 27th Da’is, both “Dawood”. But to make their identity clear and to distinguish themselves from majority Bohra group, the followers of Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin came to be known as Alavi Bohras. The majority Bohra group clinged to the old name and became known as Dawoodi Bohras. The line of succession of Da’is of Alavi Bohras and their spiritual institution is totally different from 1030 AH/1621 AD onwards and they have never been a sub-group of any Bohras. The name “al-Jamaa’at ud-Dawoodiyat il-‘Alaviyah”, is coined by 31st Da’i Saiyedna Hasan Badruddin in his anthology.




The grave of 29th da’i Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin that was demolished



Nevertheless, the mosque (now Burhani Masjid) of 28th da’i was adjacent to the place (tomb) of his and was under the ownership and control of Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin, where he and his followers offered prayers for years together and came to the tomb for ceremonial offerings. After the schism, this was the reason why Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin was buried besides the grave of his grandfather in the same mausoleum. This grave was demolished by the graveyard management in 1417 AH/1996 AD by the orders of their superior religious authorities which falls under the Dawoodi Bohra management till date. This crime was done under the pretext of constructing new tomb. But it never happened due to enmity and today the place of the grave is flattened and grounded, although Alavi Bohras still pay respects to Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin on the same place by offering flowers. During the last years of the tenure of Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin in Ahmedabad, Alavi Bohras were targeted, harassed, looted, socially boycotted to the extent that the trade relations were severed when again the seat of leadership of majority Bohras got transferred from Yemen to Ahmedabad in 1042 AH/1634 AD.

Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin during his Da’iship never approached any Mughal authorities to prove his right of legitimacy as he was least bothered about the judgment of Mughal Emperor knowing that Spiritual Sovereignty of his Da’wat is far more supreme than worldly power. How could a Mughal decide and declare him as a Da’i or judge the otherwise!!! Due to continuous harassment of the majority Bohras and severe persecution, Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin deputed his Mukaasir Hasan Badruddin to travel to Lahore in the court of the Mughal Emperor Jahagir (1605-1627 AD) and complain about the atrocities subjected upon Alavi Bohras. This complain was favourably endorsed by the Emperor as Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin had maintained cordial relations on behalf of his grandfather who had stayed there for months to convince the Mughal authorities about the legitimacy and righteousness of 27th da’i Saiyedna Burhanuddin Dawood bin Qutubshah, as the Sulaimani leadership had approached the Mughal courtiers to earn favour in deciding the legality of the da’iship after 26th da’i. Also to appraise about the situation that was built because of the unrest and social discord due to Dawoodi-Sulaimaani Bohras split after 997 AH/1589 AD. This complain was further put into action and the Lahore authorities instructed the same to their counterparts of Gujarat region to act against the perpetrators and do justice to Alavi Bohras.




In the same mausoleum and on the same place of the demolished grave of 29th da’i Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin, in 1429 AH/2008 AD 44th da’i Saiyedna Taiyeb Ziyauddin and 45th da’i Saiyedna Haatim Zakiyuddin paying respect by offering flowers and reciting Qaseedah



During the martyrdom of Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin in Ahmedabad in 1046 AH/1637 AD, Saiyedna Hasan Badruddin’s stay was in Lahore to carry out follow-up of his previous complain and then travelled to Kashmir when Emperor Shah Jahan (1628-1658 AD) was in power, hoping to get quick response to protect the lives of Alavis. Before his death, Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin appointed his uncle Saiyedna Taiyeb Zakiyuddin as his successor and the 30th Da’i of Alavi Bohras. He instructed Saiyedna Taiyeb Zakiyuddin to appoint Hasan Badruddin as his Mazoon e Mutlaq after his arrival and upon his death he should propagate Nass on him and appoint him as 31st da’i. Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin very well knew the health conditions and was aware of the advanced age of his uncle. But it was due to his untiring and sincere service to safeguard the cause of Da’wat and its followers during the tumultuous time, that Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin bestowed him the sublime status of Da’i al-Mutlaq.

When Hasan Badruddin returned to Ahmedabad, he was deeply shocked on knowing about the plot designed by the enemies that resulted in the martyrdom of Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin. In spite of the grievous circumstances, he intelligently and persistently handled all the Da’wat affairs being on the status of Mazoon for 11 months during the da’iship of Saiyedna Taiyeb Zakiyuddin who died in 1047 AH/1638 AD. Elevated to the most respected spiritual status of 31st Da’i al-Mutlaq, he kept no stone unturned to get the justice of the killing of his mentor and benefactor, Maulaa Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin. He again revived all the relations with Mughal authorities by extensively narrating the ground reality about opponent Bohra faction in Ahmedabad and also about unbearable oppression targeted on his small number of followers. He composed poetic verses eulogizing all those Mughal officers who assisted him in getting Qisaas-revenge. The poems relating to life realities, performing of religious duties, elegy, satirical accounts are very well preserved in an anthology named “Diwaan e Hasan”. All the above account is directly taken from the original autograph copy of the Diwaan written between 1048-1080 AH/1638-1669 AD in Ahmedabad.





It is due to this persecution and bullying of Alavi Bohras, 31st da’i Saiyedna Hasan Badruddin ordered his Mazoon Saiyedna Jivabhai Ziyauddin to leave Ahmedabad and migrate to Vadodara, as soon as possible when he ascended the throne of Da’wat after him. In 1090 AH/1679 AD Saiyedna Hasan Badruddin died and keeping his words and will, 32nd da’i Saiyedna Jivabhai Ziyauddin migrated to Vadodara in 1110 AH/1699 AD along with his followers.

In his anthology "Diwaan e Hasan", Saiyedna Hasan Badruddin wrote for the following personalities admiring their support in establishing the cause of Da’wat ul-Haqq in very grave and hostile situation in Ahmedabad between 1046-1085 AH/1637-1675 AD. They were, Miya Khawj bin Miya Khanji bin Ahmad, Diwaan Haji Shafi’, Mirza Kaazim Khan, Hakim Nawaab A’zam Khan, Saiyed Mustafaa Barodawi, Nawaab Ghayrat Khan, Diwaan ‘Abdullaah, Mohammadji bin Khanji, Miya Taiyeb bin Mohammad, Miyaji bin Miya Chandji, Babuji bin Khan bin Musanji, Miya Adam bin Miya Mohammad bin Khanji, Miya Adam bin Miyaji, Miya Noohji bin Adamji bin ‘Aliji, Miya Yusufji bin Khan, Miya Dawoodji bin Adam, Miya Taaj Khan bin Miya Sulaimaan bin Adam, Hebatullaah bin Miya Taaj Khan, Miya Chandji bin Khan, Miya Taaj Khan bin Hasan bin Ameen, Dawoodji bin Adam, Taiyebji bin Ja’far, Miya Adamji bin Dawood, Nawaab Sha’ista Khan bin Isfahaan, Sultaan Shah Jahan, Sultan Aurangzeb, Diwaan Mir Saabir, Diwaan Khwaaja Firoz Khan, Mirza Mumin, Diwaan-e-Gujarat Mo’iz il-Mulk, Diwaan Rahmat Khan, Miya Firji bin Maamji, Miya Peer bin Malak, Ameenji bin Khanji bin Musanji etc.



Sources: MSS from ad-Da’wat ul-Haadiyat ul-‘Alaviyah Library, Vadodara:



Kitaab Isbaat in-Nass ’alaa Saiyedna ‘Ali bin Ibrahim ash-Shaheed wa Hujjat il-Mutaghallib: 31st da’i Saiyedna Hasan Badruddin in 1050 AH/1641 AD
Risaalah fi Isbaat in-Nass ‘alaa Saiyedna ‘'Ali Shamsuddin bin Ibrahim: Compiled by one of the pupil of Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin in 1030 AH/1621 AD after his martyrdom addressed to Ya’qub bin Nizaamad-Dakhkhani of Nadiad
Kawkab-e-Falak: Translation of Sittah Rasaa’il by Saiyedi Khawj bin Malak by ‘Abd ul ‘Ali bin ‘Abd ul Qaadir in 1318 AH/1901 AD
Gulban-e-Hidaayat: Taiyebali bin Miyabhai in 1260 AH/1844 AD
Ne’mat ul-Mohtady wa Niqmat ul-Mo’tady: Saiyed Ikraamali, a deputy from Yemen for Indian Sulaimaanis in 1250 AH/1834 AD
ar-Risaalat us-Sagheerat ul-Jadeedah fi Isbaat in-Nass ‘alaa Saiyedna Taiyeb Zakiyuddin: Najm Khan in 11th century AH/17th century AD in Aurangabad
al-Mubserah minal ‘Amaa wal Mubtelah li Da’wat il-A’war wal A’maa: Ja’far bin Sulaimaan in 1045 AH/1636 AD
Muntaze’ ul-Akhbaar fi Akhbaar id-Du’aat il-Akhyaar: Qutbuddin Sulemanji Burhanpuri in 1231 AH/1816 AD
ar-Risaalat ul-Mozayyanah: Saiyedi Hasan Khan bin Ali Khan bin Taaj during the time of 27th Da’i-e-Mutlaq Saiyedna Dawoodji Burhaanuddin bin Qutubshah (d. 1021 AH/1612 AD)
ar-Risaalat ul-Mohbarat il-Munshe’ah: Saiyedi Hasan Khan bin Ali Khan bin Taaj during the time of 27th Da’i-e-Mutlaq Saiyedna Dawoodji Burhaanuddin bin Qutubshah (d. 1021 AH/1612 AD)
ar-Risaalah fi Ahwaal-e-Ta’leem-e-Saiyedna Ali Shamsuddin ‘inda Saiyedna Shaikh Aadam Safiyuddin: Written by a pupil during the time of 28th Da’i-e-Mutlaq Saiyedna S Aadam Safiyuddin (d. 1030 AH/1621 AD)
Diwaan-e-Hasan: 31st Da’i-e-Mutlaq Saiyedna Badruddin Hasan bin Wali, the last missionary (da’i) of Ahmedabad (d. 1090 AH/1679 AD)
Saheefah Nooraaniyah: 35th Da’i-e-Mutlaq Saiyedna Nuruddin Noorbhai bin Shaikhali, the only missionary (da’i) of Surat (d. 1178 AH/1765 AD)
Diwaan-e-Shams: 37th Da’i-e-Mutlaq Saiyedna Shaikhali Shamsuddin bin Saiyedna Hameeduddin (d. 1248 AH/1833 AD)
Diwaan-e-Haseen: 41st Da’i-e-Mutlaq Saiyedna Jivabhai Fakhruddin bin Saiyedna Ameenuddin (d. 1347 AH/1929 AD)
Qaraatees ud-Du’aat il-‘Alaviyeen: Historic and Doctrinal documents written by number of Alavi Du’aat since the seat of Da’wat was transferred to Vadodara
Risaalah Pali Meedu: Written by one of the Dawoodi aalim Shaikh Aadam Safiyuddin (1170 AH/1757 AD)
Bohra, nigaahi az daroon: Syed Jalaal Mir Aqaai, an officer of Majma’-e-Jahaani Taqreeb-e-Mazaahib-e-Islaami, Tehran (1434 AH/2013 AD)
Bohraha dar bistar Tareekh-o-Andishah: Kumail Rajani, a research scholar at Majma’-e-Aamozish-e-‘Aali Imam Khumaini, Qomm (1432 AH/2011 AD)




“Alavi Bohras” mentioned in different publications with distorted information and biased sources:



Muslim Communities in Gujarat: Satish C Misra (1985, New Delhi), “A splinter of the Da’udi Bohra stock which broke away in the seventeenth century.” p. 73
The Shi’a of India: John N Hollister (1979, London), “In 1034/1624 Sayyidna Saif al din designated ‘Abd al Taiyib as his successor in preference to his own sons. One of these, Ibrahim, had a son named 'Ali who was an aspirant for the position. 'Ali’s father and uncles supported his claims, but 'Ali secured only few followers even though he carried his protest to Emperor Jahangir. The group is known as ‘Alia Bohras.” p. 277
Historical Dictionary of the Ismailis: Farhad Daftary (2012, UK), “In 1034/1624, 'Ali b. Ibrahim (d. 1046/1637) founded the ‘Alawi Da’udi splinter group, which established their own separate lines of da’is. p. 50 (introduction). “’Abd al-Tayyib Zaki al-Din’s authority was challenged by Shams al-Din 'Ali b. Ibrahim (d. 1046/1637), the grandson of Shaykh Adam. Supported by a fraction of the Da’udi community, 'Ali now claimed the Da’udi leadership for himself and brought his case before the Mughal emperor Jahangir, who decided in favor of the incumbent da’i. But 'Ali seceded, with a group of his followers, from the Da’udi Bohra community. In 1034/1624-25, 'Ali in fact founded a new Tayyibi Bohra group called ‘Alawis (or incorrectly ‘Aliyya) after his own name.” p. 15
A Modern History of the Ismailis: Tahera Qutbuddin (2011, London) ed. by Farhad Daftary, “They believe the rightful da’i was not the majority Da’udi Bohra incumbent ’Abd al-Tayyib Zaki al-Din (d. 1041/1631) but rather a grandson of the 28th da’i named 'Ali Shams al-Din b. Ibrahim (d. 1046/1637). They are named after this 'Ali, calling themselves ‘Alavis, and their mission the da’wat hadiya ‘alaviyya. p. 357
Biobibliography of Isma’ili Literature: Ismail K Poonawala (1977, California), “In 1030/1621, after the death of Shaykh Adam Safi al-Din, the twenty-eighth Da’udi da’i, a small group led by 'Ali b. Ibrahim refused to recognize the succession of ’Abd al-Tayyib Zaki al-Din and seceded from the Da’udis. They became known as ‘Alia Bohras.” p. 13
The Bohras: Asghar Ali Engineer (1980, New Delhi), “After Abdu’l Tayyab took over, the community was faced with another split on the question of succession. Sayyidna Adam’s grandson Ali was the claimant this time. In his claim Ali was supported by his paternal uncle and two others. Ali took the matter to the court of Jahangir in Lahore and is said to have cultivated with some influential nobles in the Mughal court. Jahangir summoned Sayyidna Abdu’l Tayyab to Lahore to hear him in person. Sayyidna, according to the Bohra sources undertook the journey to the north. Jahangir decided the case in favour of Abdu’l Tayyab and on the emperor’s recommendation he forgave Ali and both of them returned to Ahmedabad. However, according to the official Bohra sources, Ali did not honour his word and finally a small number of people owing allegiance to Ali seceded from the community. They are called Alia Bohras.” p. 122
Isma’iliyah, az guzashteh ta haal: Mohammad Sa’eed Bahmanpur (2009, Tehran), This book is in Persian and has the matter about Alavi Bohras same as, The Bohras: Asghar Ali Engineer (1980, New Delhi), p. 103
The Isma’lis Their History and Doctrines: Farhad Daftary (2007, New York), “’Abd al-Tayyib Zaki al-Din’s authority was challenged by 'Ali b. Ibrahim, the grandson of the twenty-eighth da’i, Adam. 'Ali, supported by his paternal uncles and some others, claimed the succession for himself and carried his protest to the court of Jahangir. The Mughal emperor decided in favour of the incumbent da’i, ‘Abd al-Tayyib, and had 'Ali reconcile his differences with the da’i in his presence at Lahore. After both parties returned to Ahmadabad, however, 'Ali once again refused to acknowledge the da’i's leadership and seceded, with a small group of followers, from the Da’udi Bohra community. 'Ali had in fact founded, in 1034/1624-25, a new Tayyibi Bohra group called ‘Alawi, or incorrectly as ‘Aliyya, after his own name. ‘'Ali b. Ibrahim thus became the twenty-ninth da’i of the ‘Alawi Bohras, who have followed their own line of da’is to the present time.” p. 282
Zau’-o-Noor ul-Haqq il-Mubeen: 51st Dawoodi Da’i Taher Saif al-Din (Arabic, 1917, Mumbai). The author quotes the Qur’anic verse for Obedience and Disagreement (ch. 4 v. 137) and then goes on to call the followers of Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin as “al-firqat ul-‘aliliyah”, meaning the weak and sick group. As per the author, Saiyedna ‘Ali Shamsuddin claimed to be da’i and then realized his mistake and then accepted the ’Abd al-Tayyib Zaki al-Din as his da’i by tendering apology. He again became disobedient and misguided people. p. 165
Hamaare Isma’ili Mazhab ki Haqeeqat aur uska Nizaam: Zahid Ali (Urdu, 1954, Hyderabad). The author says that, 28th da’i Saiyedna Shaikh Adam Safiyuddin (d. 1030 AH) did Nass on ’Abd al-Tayyib Zaki al-Din, but his grandson ‘Ali b. Ibrahim claimed himself as a da’i and his followers were called “Alia” who are very small in number. p. 293
Risaalat-o-Kaifiyat-e-Tarteeb il-Hudood: Fayzullaah Hamdani (Gujarati, 1963, Surat). The author says that, During the time of 28th da’i, 'Ali bin Ibrahim was on the second position and ‘Abd ut Tayyib was on the ninth position. 'Ali was very clever and influential and he took great advantage of the position of his grandfather and mended his ways to become da’i. He was always after gaining worldly position and wealth. Then the author quotes the dialogue between Ahmad and his father 28th da’i declaring ‘Abd ut Tayyib as his successor from the book, Muntaze’ ul-Akhbaar fi Akhbaar id-Du’aat il-Akhyaar by Qutbuddin Sulemanji Burhanpuri and the description of disobedience from the book, Zau’-o-Noor ul-Haqq il-Mubeen by51st Dawoodi Da’i Taher Saif al-Din. The author compares the Alavi-Dawoodi split with schism of Dawoodi-Sulaimani saying that such fitnah-unrest often happens in Da’wat. p. 42-43
‘Iqd ul-Jawaahir fi Ahwaal il-Bawaahir: Syed Abu Zafar Nadvi (Urdu, 1936, Ahmedabad). The author says that, When ’Abd al-Tayyib Zaki al-Din became da’i in 1030 AH, the grandson of Saiyedna Shaikh Adam, Mulla 'Ali bin Ibrahim claimed his right as a head of the community. But Bohras refuted his claim, so he went to ’Abd al-Tayyib and offered an apology. Again after 2 years 9 months, he broke the promise and said that my grandfather has appointed me as a da’i. His claim was supported by his uncle Tayyib, Firji bin Mamji and Hasan Khan bin ‘Ali Khan. He reached to the court of Mughal Jahangir and complained about their being socially boycotted by ’Abd al-Tayyib. Then the author continues with the same episode described in the works of Asghar Ali Engineer and Farhad Daftary. p. 186
Mausam-e-Bahaar: Mohammad Ali bin Mulla Jivabhai (Lisaan-e-Da’wat, 1882, Mumbai). The author says that, ’Abd al-Tayyib Zaki al-Din headed the namaaz-e-jinaazah of Saiyedna Shaikh Adam. 'Ali bin Ibrahim, the grandson of Shaikh Adam first obeyed that commands of ’Abd al-Tayyib but then Shaytaan entered his nafs like he came near Musaa Nabi and ‘Isaa Nabi and tried to misguide them. 'Ali for 33 months remained in the bay’at of ’Abd al-Tayyib then again Shaytaan persuaded him in breaking the bay’at and declaring himself as a da’i. The author elaborately and figuratively describes the episode of Jahangir court where 'Ali offered apology to ’Abd al-Tayyib. Upon returning to Ahmadabad 'Ali never accepted ’Abd al-Tayyib as his da’i like Shaikh Sulaiman who disobeyed Saiyedna Da’ud b. Qutubshah after his initial loyalty to the da’i. p. 264-269