Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

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.
ContentedBohra
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 7:02 pm

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1531

Unread post by ContentedBohra » Wed Mar 11, 2015 1:22 pm

James,

According to Mufaddali doctrine, up to amil's wife everyone is infallible. There is a recent example on this forum in which an amil's wife was caught texting to "upar na saheb" in the middle of matam majlis, and guess what, instead of her apologizing - because she can't be wrong - the person who caught her was asked to apologize. Amil's wife was full of "rehmat" in graciously forgiving the sinner.

In the history of fatemi dawat, there are two cases where the whole of the predecessor dai's family went against the successor dai who was also a mazoon of the predecessor. First case is of the family of Syedna Dawood bin Ajabshah Burhanuddin who went against his mazoon who was also appointed as his successor. The second case is of the family of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin who went against his mazoon who was also appointed as his successor. Interestingly, in both the cases, fake evidence was involved.

james
Posts: 550
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 4:06 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1532

Unread post by james » Wed Mar 11, 2015 5:28 pm

Haqq_Prevails wrote:It is clear the Shehzadas got a golden opportunity to implant their stooge, implement their plan and firm the grip they had on the community. Something they had been preparing for many years.Something which was started in the early days of SMB by their mentor Yusuf Najmuddin.

All the aalim understood the ishara done in 1385H and started doing sajda to the mansoos, including Mufatlal and the other zada's. They continued to do the sajda for 25 years and then they stopped, because they had started to conspire against the Dai's wishes and become Qabzedaars.
Say,what?

On one hand,you claimed a hate campaign was started by Shz Yusuf Najmuddin in the early days of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA's era.(Nauzobillah) And on the other hand,you claim that the Shehzadas of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA allegedly gave sajda to Khuzaima because they were "aalim" and knew the ishara done in 1385H.(Nauzobillah).

Now,why would the Shehzadas give sajda whilst participating in the hate campaign at the same time? :roll:

It would be a very ineffectual hate campaign if the participants would give sajda to the very person they want to malign.Don't you think?

Shz Yusuf Najmuddin passed away in 1407H.The sajdas allegedly continued till 1410H in your laughable opinion.Your timeline doesn't match.In fact,it exonerates Shz Yusuf Najmuddin completely as the sajdas continued even after his death.Do you want to try again?

Also,Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA allegedly told Syedi Saleh Bs that "Talwaro chali jaase" according to fatemidawat.com

So,the Nass Syedna RA wanted to put a veil over was already known by the Shehzadas and the Shehzadas openly gave sajda to Khuzaima in public and not once,Syedna RA or Khuzaima stopped the Shehzadas due to the fear of swords.

Or wait,does fatemidawat.com imply that "sword attack" would be done by the Shehzadas if Nass was made public.Tsk Tsk,but they were "aalim",so they already knew and yet they didn't brandish any swords but gave sajda on top of that.What was the point of a Private Nass then? Do you see how twisted and convoluted your fanciful stories look?

I don't usually approve of name calling but I have to say in your case,"Qutbi Child" fits like a glove.You're doing more disservice to Khuzaima with your posts.Not that,I'm complaining. :lol:

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

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1533

Unread post by lawgraduate » Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:46 am

Idiot sons of KQ and MS are fighting with each other over who is rightly guided dai, but morons could not prove if their grand father MB was dai him self, he made so many goofs that even a kid would make out, none of these idiots are ready to first prove if MB was dai him self.

none of these idiots have reply to questions raised on different threads, yet shouting on roof top about haq and truth.

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

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1534

Unread post by lawgraduate » Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:58 am

I dont thing mufaddal or yusuf najmuddin is criminal, I think person who was in charge is supposed to be blamed now it was his duty to keep thing in right place and manage dawat, YN and mufaddal were just puppets in the show.

DAI
MAZOON
MUKASIR

are suppose to keep dawat in check and manage dawat affairs, but since they were sleeping for 50 years now dawat is in hands of criminals.

natkhat pari
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:56 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1535

Unread post by natkhat pari » Fri Mar 13, 2015 7:47 am

16 march ms bs returns to Mumbai vai London.
As defendent will be present on 18 march as plantifs will make personal aperance in court for cross.

noor5253
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 5:36 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1536

Unread post by noor5253 » Tue Mar 17, 2015 4:38 am

natkhat pari wrote:16 march ms bs returns to Mumbai vai London.
As defendent will be present on 18 march as plantifs will make personal aperance in court for cross.
Today is 17th...Pls dont make assumptions..

Akhtiar Wahid
Posts: 802
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:22 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1537

Unread post by Akhtiar Wahid » Tue Mar 17, 2015 6:05 am

He is deliberately trying to escape this case, as he, his uncles and brothers know the loopholes of Indian Judiciary.
Court had given instruction for both the plantiff and respondent to be present in the court face to face and sort out this matter with adequate evidences. But as usual Muffadal Saifuddin likes to break laws in each country he visits to. Days are not far when he will become an outlaw in his own country because of his best friend Mr. Modi A.K.A babaasaram bapu destroyer.
He will be flying to Misr where he will be given the key to nile and a dip in Nile river.

Misr awaits the pharoh of its time!

asad
Posts: 777
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 12:54 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1538

Unread post by asad » Wed Mar 18, 2015 5:29 am

And slug fest starts now.

HC to begin trial in Syedna succession row

MUMBAI: Bombay high court today will commence trial in the succession row between the incumbent Syedna Muffadal Saifuddin and his uncle Khozema Qutbuddin, who has claimed that he is the rightful spiritual head of the Dawoodi Bohra community.

Khuzema Qutbuddin has filed a suit to declare him 53rd Dai-al-Mutlaq or spiritual head saying he was privately anointed by his half-brother - the late Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin- in December 1965. Among interim reliefs, he has sought restraint on Saifuddin from acting as Syedna.

Justice Gautam Patel will conduct the trial.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 605521.cms

y-kuc
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 11:10 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1539

Unread post by y-kuc » Wed Mar 18, 2015 5:49 am

Bombay high court on Wednesday restrained the entry of persons to attend the trial in the succession row between the incumbent Syedna Muffadal Saifuddin and his uncle Khozema Qutbuddin. The latter has claimed that he is the rightful spiritual head of the Dawoodi Bohra community.

Khuzema Qutbuddin has filed a suit to declare him 53rd Dai-al-Mutlaq or spiritual head saying he was privately anointed by his half-brother - the late Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin- in December 1965. Among interim reliefs, he has sought restraint on Saifuddin from acting as Syedna.

Justice Gautam Patel, taking into consideration the security and crowd management problem, directed that 25 persons from each side will be allowed entry into the court. They will be issued entry passes by HC security in advance.

The trial will take place in the central courtroom of the HC where the historic trial of Lokmanya Tilak for sedition took place.

The court at the next hearing on April 15 will consider application of Qutbuddin to delete documents which he has referred to in his plaint but is disputing their correctness. Cross-examination will commence on April 27 with Qutbuddin taking to the witness box.

The court administration has also been directed to make audio-visual arrangements.



http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/HC-r ... y-Sequeira

noor5253
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 5:36 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1540

Unread post by noor5253 » Wed Mar 18, 2015 7:12 am

He wants a Hindu judge to declare him Dai..
Really?

How come no one outside his 100 believers even wanna hear his voice?

Sceptical
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 3:38 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1541

Unread post by Sceptical » Wed Mar 18, 2015 7:52 am

Do you forget the hindu guy who came to Masjid during Khtamul Quran majlis to declare SMS Dai?

Universaldad
Posts: 179
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2014 2:50 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1542

Unread post by Universaldad » Wed Mar 18, 2015 8:59 am

KQ and his toli are getting more and more pathetic by the day... so much so that the Progressives have also decided to abandon him.

The progressives now spew their venom and bark only at SMS TUS, Just like they did to SMB RA.

Khuda's laanat on the progressives and KQ toli and all enemies of dawat. Hell fire inshallah for you.

natkhat pari
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:56 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1543

Unread post by natkhat pari » Wed Mar 18, 2015 10:07 am

Court ask to make audio video arrangment ?
So there will be live telecaste of 15 / 27 /28 April court proceding in all masjid and on you tube by fatemi dawat.

natkhat pari
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:56 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1544

Unread post by natkhat pari » Wed Mar 18, 2015 10:08 am

Court ask to make audio video arrangment ?
So there will be live telecaste of 15 / 27 /28 April court proceding in all masjid and on you tube by fatemi dawat.

y-kuc
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 11:10 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1545

Unread post by y-kuc » Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:14 am

Syedna row:


Due to security issue, the Bombay High Court on Wednesday restricted the entry of Bohra Muslims in the court premises for the hearing of Syedna succession row matter. Incumbent Syedna's uncle Khuzaima Qutbuddin has moved the court contesting his position.

Khuzaima Qutbuddin has sought his appointment as the rightful spiritual leader of the community, seeking restrain on his nephew Mufaddal Saifuddin from discharging his duties as Syedna.

During each hearing, many Bohra Muslims attend the court proceedings. On Wednesday too, hundreds of them thronged the court, prompting the police to approach the Chief Justice for security reasons.

Thereafter, Justice Gautam Patel, who was hearing the litigation, directed both the parties to disperse the crowd. "There is security issue and crowd management problem. Disperse the crowd, or else we will have to rise," he told both the parties.

Thereafter, he issued a formal order restricting the entry to 25 persons from each side. The names of the persons attending the trial will have to be informed 48 hours in advance. These persons will be issued passes which will be verified by the police before allowing them entry in the court premises.

Meanwhile, during the proceedings, plaintiff Khuzema Qutbuddin and defendant incumbent Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin filed sets of admissible documents. Senior counsel Ravi Kadam, representing petitioner Khuzema Qutbuddin, sought deletion of a few documents he had submitted to the court. He contested the correctness of those documents, seeking their deletion.

The defendants were given time till next month to file a reply to this application. The court will hear the matter next on April 15. Cross examination of witnesses will begin from April 27 when Khuzema Qutbuddin is likely to depose before the court.

On Wednesday, the court also took on record a set of documents which require translation from classical Arabic. "It is however agreed that these documents relied on by the plaintiff may be marked subject to cross examination and subject to proof of translation," Justice Patel said in his order


http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/mum ... 007774.ece

Biradar
Posts: 866
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#1546

Unread post by Biradar » Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:49 am

noor5253 wrote:He wants a Hindu judge to declare him Dai..
Really?

How come no one outside his 100 believers even wanna hear his voice?
Friend noor5253: For those who follow him, SKQ is the da'i. There is nothing in the court declaration that can change it. The point of the case is the control of the properties and administration, which Dawedar Mr. Muffadul Saifuddin (DMMS) (LA) has usurped.

Also, you are forgetting your own history. Several times secular or religious leaders have been involved in the bohra affairs. Think of what happened during the time of S. Dawood bin Qutubshah. It was not that Akbar "declared" S Dawood as da'i, but instructed his administrators to recognize the right of S. Dawood to practice his faith as he choose, to collect taxes, to administer properties, etc. In this case, the right to use the various properties should be shared by those who followed SMB (RA), whatever their affiliation. Sulayman eventually established his own institutions in Yemen, but obviously, today Sulaymani Bohras (called Makrami Ismailis) exist in large numbers.

Also, just to remind you: you heard S. Qutbuddin's voice and took his name for 50 years in the misaaq. Perhaps, like your master DMMS (LA) you also broke your misaaq repeatedly, but in that case you are an enemy of SMB (RA) and STS (RA), and hence it is pointless arguing with you. Apparently, you consider yourself to be smarter than both STS (RA) and SMB (RA), and hence should set up shop as imam or da'i or mufti. Best of luck.

think_for_yourself
Posts: 374
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 6:12 pm

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1547

Unread post by think_for_yourself » Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:59 am

Universaldad wrote:KQ and his toli are getting more and more pathetic by the day... so much so that the Progressives have also decided to abandon him.

The progressives now spew their venom and bark only at SMS TUS, Just like they did to SMB RA.

Khuda's laanat on the progressives and KQ toli and all enemies of dawat. Hell fire inshallah for you.
yawn....don't you guys tire of this nonsense? throwing your lanats around willy nilly. why don't you work on improving your akherat rather than worrying about ours?


Adam
Posts: 1257
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1549

Unread post by Adam » Wed Mar 18, 2015 1:01 pm

@byculla

You quoted from the 53 reasons blog:
Syedi Amin b Jalal QA says…..the reason for writing Kitab ul Idhaah wal Bayaan, was that the Dai who wrote the kitaab, the Dai before him did not openly perform nass (te na aage na Dai guzra te nass ZAAHERAN noti keedi) the people did not know…..this Dai, Syedna Hussain RA, the author of this kitaab, he thought, ‘How do I show others that nass has been conferred upon me?’. These are wise and articulate people. So I chose the same path chosen by Idris Nabi.


I have highlighted the part you need to understand.
Focus on the words "ZAHERAN".
It means, the Nass was not made public. By inserting the word Zaheran, it means that something DID happen BATENAN in Private.
Now, the interpretation takes place:
1) Qutbis say that the 7th Dai did Nass on the 8th Dai, and ONLY the 8th Dai knew about this. Yes, this can also mean a "private Nass", but if it was the ONLY Nass that ever took place, then that interpretation isn't in line with the Fatemi tradition of Nass. Nass must be done with Tawqeef (witnesses / evidence).


You then said:
why would Syedna again write Hakikat Kitaab to prove his nass ? Why would he go at lengths to write a Hakikat kitab to prove to them something that they are already aware of ?

Dawoodi Bohras say:
1) The Nass was Private. Muntaza al Akbar & Syedna Taher Saifuddin s Risala confirm it WAS indeed a Private Nass, but amoungst witnesses. "hudood mukhliseen muqeneen".
2) The comparison is drawn with Idris Nabi. Even though he made the Astrolabe, just like Kitab al Iydah, THERE WAS A NASS ON HIM.
3) Daim ul Islam and other books confirm that IMAMAT or NASS or NOT through Mojezaas. Therefore, claiming to be a Mansoos by performing Miracles ONLY is NOT the right way of proving a Nass. Miracles and Books only add weight to it. But the Nass is what matters at the end of the day. If a Prophet, Imam or Dai NEVER performed a miracle, they are still the Mansoos if there was a Nass on them.
4) So much talk about Kitaab al Iydah and proving the Nass. If that's the case to prove the Nass, where is KQ's book!? It's been 1 year! Surely he could have come up with something by now!
Kitab al Iydah wa al bayaaan means "the book of clarity and explanation". What has KQ been clear about all this time?

You then said:

In Muntazaul Akhbar, as you say (and we both agree with the text of the kitaab), nass was performed in front of "Hudood" and "Mumineen Mukhleseen". If the "Hudood" of that time were already aware of the nass as it was done "privately" as you allege
[/quote]

WRONG! I do not "allege" that "the "Hudood" of that time were already aware of the nass as it was done "privately" - The Kitab Munataza al Akbar CLEARLY states that.
If you want to deny what Muntaza says, be my guest!

Adam
Posts: 1257
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1550

Unread post by Adam » Wed Mar 18, 2015 1:08 pm

@Haqq_Prevails
My knowledge is very limited, and you still cannot even answer my arguments convincingly, you stand no chance of debating in front of any of Qutbuddin moula's children.

Which question have you asked? What have I not answered?
You haven't been able to prove a simple Nass according Fatemi Dawat texts.

Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA has already trained Dawat Hudood to take on these challenges.
If a tiny enemy can be blown away, why trouble Syedna?
Khuzaima is just a nuisance that's been taken care of.
Right now Syedna doesn't need to testify.
The court hasn't asked him to come either. If it does, he'll most certainly come.

Evidence to Syedna's clear Nass has already been submitted. It's KQ who needs to work on twisting stories to suite his agenda.




Adam
Posts: 1257
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1551

Unread post by Adam » Wed Mar 18, 2015 1:14 pm

@ContentedBohra
So Adam what are your credentials to interprete STS RA risala. Do you realize that STS RA himself taught this risala and dawat doctrines to both SMB RA and SKQ TUS?

1. I have received ilm with Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin's blessings and raza.
2. Syedna Taher Saifuddin taught many others as well. I have learned from them as well.
3. My interpretation is on common sense and Arabic grammar. Supported by Muntaza al Akbar.
What's yours?

What makes you think you can understand it better by checking the meaning on google? Who is digging the hole here?

I wasn't understanding the meaning of اشهد by referring to Google. I already knew the meaning (and anyone who knows Arabic does). I was just giving you a reference.

We see it in SKQ all the time when he is on takht, when he says that he is the successor of SMB RA with Quran in his hands.

Haha! What a Joke.
Prove the Nass, then do all the Drama you want. These Muawiyah tactics won't work here.

written script before he can say anything.

Have you seen the first announcement KQ made when he started his fitnat?
He's reading a written script. Is he not your Dai anymore?


Adam
Posts: 1257
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1552

Unread post by Adam » Wed Mar 18, 2015 1:19 pm

@James
Great answers on Syedna Jalaal & The Shehzadas & Private Nass.

None of the Qutbi's are replying to it. Just keep dodging, and running away.

james
Posts: 550
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 4:06 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1553

Unread post by james » Wed Mar 18, 2015 3:33 pm

Haqq_Prevails wrote: If as Mufatlal claims, the Mazoon was doing befarmani of Burhanuddin moula, why would he continue to keep him in the post for 50 years?

Tsk Tsk.

Do you believe that Dawat during Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA's era was hijacked? (Nauzobillah) If affirmative,then why keep blowing the trumpet of Khuzaima being Mazoon for 50 years?

If you were bright,you will realize that in event of Dawat hijacking,the Shehzadas kept Khuzaima as Mazoon for 50 years and not the 52nd Dai RA.(Nauzobillah)

If the Shehzadas controlled everything after Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA's stroke and for years vilified Khuzaima and tried to undermined him,don't you think/believe the most obvious step would be to remove Khuzaima from his position after the Hospital Nass itself? After all they controlled everything,innit? (Nauzobillah)


Dim-witted,aren't you?

Haqq_Prevails
Posts: 73
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 5:51 pm

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1554

Unread post by Haqq_Prevails » Wed Mar 18, 2015 7:15 pm

Seems like the [DELETED] fauj is back in full form from California! [DELETED] .

Adam
Posts: 1257
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1555

Unread post by Adam » Thu Mar 19, 2015 10:48 am

Haqq_Prevails wrote:Seems like the [DELETED] fauj is back in full form from California! [DELETED] .

That's all you could say?
I thought you wanted to do Mubahila with me?

SBM
Posts: 6224
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 4:01 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1556

Unread post by SBM » Thu Mar 19, 2015 11:40 am

Adam wrote: I thought you wanted to do Mubahila with me?
[/color]
Are you authorized to do Mubahilla with anyone== unless of course you are Taha Haikmuddin from Saify Mahal

next_generation2014
Posts: 66
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 4:37 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1557

Unread post by next_generation2014 » Thu Mar 19, 2015 2:24 pm

In bombay highcourt it shows that next date for cross examination is tomorrow

Bench:- SINGLE
Status:- Pre-Admission Category:- DECLARATORY SUITS
Next Date:- 20/03/2015 Stage:- FOR DIRECTION
Coram:- HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G.S. PATEL
Last Date:- 18/03/2015 Stage:- FOR CROSS EXAMINATION
Last Coram:- HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G.S. PATEL

kimanumanu
Posts: 607
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2014 2:16 pm

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1558

Unread post by kimanumanu » Thu Mar 19, 2015 2:58 pm

james wrote: Ever? Do you think the position holder of Mazoon is "infallible"? If affirmative,substantiate your claims with Dawat texts.
Do you think the ilham of Imam is infallible? Because when Syedna Burhanuddin RA announced him as Mazoon, he said he was doing it with ilham of Imam. So did both Imam and Syedna RA get it wrong? If I cannot trust the Mazoon, how can I trust anyone else that is not in rutba? Dai kept him as Mazoon till his last breath so how can Mufaddal BS now proclaim that this Mazoon was a dushman for a long time? Should I trust Mufaddal BS more than Syedna RA? Should I trust Syedna RA's shehzadas more than his Mazoon of 50 years? What about the ilham of Imam? Useless?

Fateh
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2012 7:25 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1559

Unread post by Fateh » Fri Mar 20, 2015 12:45 am

kimanumanu wrote:
james wrote: Ever? Do you think the position holder of Mazoon is "infallible"? If affirmative,substantiate your claims with Dawat texts.
Do you think the ilham of Imam is infallible? Because when Syedna Burhanuddin RA announced him as Mazoon, he said he was doing it with ilham of Imam. So did both Imam and Syedna RA get it wrong? If I cannot trust the Mazoon, how can I trust anyone else that is not in rutba? Dai kept him as Mazoon till his last breath so how can Mufaddal BS now proclaim that this Mazoon was a dushman for a long time? Should I trust Mufaddal BS more than Syedna RA? Should I trust Syedna RA's shehzadas more than his Mazoon of 50 years? What about the ilham of Imam? Useless?
Yes sir your all questions are very correct.In my pov all these dais after 46 are fake.

james
Posts: 550
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 4:06 am

Re: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1560

Unread post by james » Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:13 am

kimanumanu wrote:And before he comes back with the example of Ali Ibrahim as Mazoon, if you are to believe that he indeed was Mazoon then he was also removed from that position. Not "kept" for 50 years!
kimanumanu wrote:
james wrote: Ever? Do you think the position holder of Mazoon is "infallible"? If affirmative,substantiate your claims with Dawat texts.
Do you think the ilham of Imam is infallible? Because when Syedna Burhanuddin RA announced him as Mazoon, he said he was doing it with ilham of Imam. So did both Imam and Syedna RA get it wrong? If I cannot trust the Mazoon, how can I trust anyone else that is not in rutba? Dai kept him as Mazoon till his last breath so how can Mufaddal BS now proclaim that this Mazoon was a dushman for a long time? Should I trust Mufaddal BS more than Syedna RA? Should I trust Syedna RA's shehzadas more than his Mazoon of 50 years? What about the ilham of Imam? Useless?
The actions of Dai Mutlaq during Daur Satr is without error.The Ilham of Imam uz Zaman AS to aid the Dai Mutlaq is infallible.This is a constant and there are no two ways about it.

You seem to believe that the office holder of Mazoon rutba cannot go wrong because he has been appointed with the Ilham of Imam uz Zaman AS. I sincerely hope for the sake of consistency and fairness,you extend the same courtesy to the office holder of Mukasir rutba.So,the office holder of Mukasir rutba cannot go wrong because he has been appointed with the Ilham of Imam uz Zaman AS.In this era,you see both rutba's at loggerheads on a very important contention (Successor to the 52nd Dai RA). So basically,your argument that office holders cannot go wrong because they have been appointed with the Ilham of Imam uz Zaman AS blows out of the water because one office older is right and one office holder is wrong in this dispute.

The conclusion we derive is that appointment to an office/rutba is not a carte blanche for infallibility.If you are still not satisfied,then you have to look towards the actions of Syedna Ismail Badruddin RA who relieved Syedi Najam Khan QR from his position of Mazoon. Do you reckon the actions of Syedna Ismail Badruddin RA with the Ilham of Imam us Zaman AS went wrong in this scenario? (Nauzobillah)