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

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

#1561

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

#1562

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

#1563

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

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

#1564

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)

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

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

#1565

Unread post by natkhat pari » Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:43 am

On 27 April cross examination of skq
court room no 46 audio system
Gutam patel orders it to be installed
Aa skq is having problem with speech.
Will judge allow his cross examination in mike.
So skq can be clearlly heard by judge.
Will he be allowed to sit in box during cross ?
As skq is senior citizen can cross be conducted in judge chamber.
Will ms bs be present in court during cross.
Will ms bs take oath on Koran and testify what has been writeen in 800 page written statment to be true to his knowledge.
What during croos of ms bs its proved that what is written in statement is proved wrong.

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

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

#1566

Unread post by kimanumanu » Fri Mar 20, 2015 5:17 am

james wrote: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)
And this is the crux. Thank you for bringing up this example. Granted, being appointed to office does not guarantee they are perfect and your example above shows that a Dai can remove someone from rutba. Then, as Mufaddal BS claims, why was Mazoon of Syedna Burhanuddin RA not removed during his time? How do I interpret him being kept in this position - that Syedna RA did not think he was wrong? If yes, is Mufaddal BS wrong?

And yes, if Mukassir does not agree with Mazoon then where is the trust? How do I choose who to believe? Where is the consistency and fairness here?

byculla
Posts: 87
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2014 8:40 am

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

#1567

Unread post by byculla » Fri Mar 20, 2015 12:17 pm

About Syedi Najam Khan - SMB RA himself mentioned in one waaz about the deep ikhlaas of Syedi Najam Khan - "Rutba ma si giraawane rutbo lai lidho - ke Rutba ma Charhaawaane rutbo lai lidho". He went on to say that the fact that Syedna Ismail Badruddin RA removed Syedi Najam Khan from this Rutba to take his "imtehaan". This particular bayaan of SMB RA is present in a frame in the mazaar of Syedi Najam Khan.

Key difference between the 2 camps is the Mufaddalis do character assasination of the Mazoon of Syedna Burhanuddin during his tenure as the mazoon. Mufaddal bhaisaheb has mentioned in numerous waaz many things implying he was not doing his duties as mazoon. However from the other camp they have never done any character assasination of Burhanuddin Mola's Mukasir either during his tenure as mukasir of SMB or after. Of course fatemidawat.com disagrees with Syedna Burhanuddin's mukasir's opinion after SMB's death.

According to fatemidawat.com belief, Imam's ilhaam was not wrong in either mazoon nor mukasir When Syedna Burhanuddin appointed Syedi Khuzaima bs qutbuddin as mazoon nor when SMB appointed Syedi Husain bs Husamuddin as Mukasir. SMB's mukasir's acceptance of Mufaddal bhaisaheb as mansoos was because he was not witness to SMB's nass on his mazoon.

However according to Mufaddali's belief, SMB's mazoon never had any walayat of SMB RA, did outright adawat of SMB - all this during his tenure as mazoon. No follower of SMB's mazoon believes anything like that about SMB's mukasir.

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

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

#1568

Unread post by Adam » Sat Mar 21, 2015 6:27 am

@kimanumanu
Then, as Mufaddal BS claims, why was Mazoon of Syedna Burhanuddin RA not removed during his time? How do I interpret him being kept in this position - that Syedna RA did not think he was wrong?


Simple. Go back to Rasulullah's time. 1, 2, 3 were kept in VERY high positions. And Rasulullah knew very well they were wrong.



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

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

#1569

Unread post by Adam » Sat Mar 21, 2015 6:30 am

@Haqq_Prevails
Where are you?

You just say something irrelevant and vanish?

Taha Haikmuddin

First you guys thought I was one of the Shehzadas. Now you think i'm Taha Bs Hakimuddin.
Interesting.

Rightlyguided
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2015 3:13 am

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

#1570

Unread post by Rightlyguided » Sat Mar 21, 2015 2:35 pm

byculla wrote:About Syedi Najam Khan - SMB RA himself mentioned in one waaz about the deep ikhlaas of Syedi Najam Khan - "Rutba ma si giraawane rutbo lai lidho - ke Rutba ma Charhaawaane rutbo lai lidho". He went on to say that the fact that Syedna Ismail Badruddin RA removed Syedi Najam Khan from this Rutba to take his "imtehaan". This particular bayaan of SMB RA is present in a frame in the mazaar of Syedi Najam Khan.

Key difference between the 2 camps is the Mufaddalis do character assasination of the Mazoon of Syedna Burhanuddin during his tenure as the mazoon. Mufaddal bhaisaheb has mentioned in numerous waaz many things implying he was not doing his duties as mazoon. However from the other camp they have never done any character assasination of Burhanuddin Mola's Mukasir either during his tenure as mukasir of SMB or after. Of course fatemidawat.com disagrees with Syedna Burhanuddin's mukasir's opinion after SMB's death.

According to fatemidawat.com belief, Imam's ilhaam was not wrong in either mazoon nor mukasir When Syedna Burhanuddin appointed Syedi Khuzaima bs qutbuddin as mazoon nor when SMB appointed Syedi Husain bs Husamuddin as Mukasir. SMB's mukasir's acceptance of Mufaddal bhaisaheb as mansoos was because he was not witness to SMB's nass on his mazoon.

However according to Mufaddali's belief, SMB's mazoon never had any walayat of SMB RA, did outright adawat of SMB - all this during his tenure as mazoon. No follower of SMB's mazoon believes anything like that about SMB's mukasir.
Qutbis sayy ... Burhanuddin moula RA took name of then mazoon in misaaq so how could he have gone astray?

This is the argument they put... the same argument is put by us..

Burhanuddin moula RA took name of mukasir saheb in misaaq so how could he have gone astray??.

Backfiring logic.

Dig a hole fall in it yourself..

Sorry state

Sceptical
Posts: 252
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 3:38 am

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

#1571

Unread post by Sceptical » Sat Mar 21, 2015 3:11 pm

Qutbi or not, Mazoon is higher rutbah than Mukasir. Period.

Sceptical
Posts: 252
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 3:38 am

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

#1572

Unread post by Sceptical » Sat Mar 21, 2015 3:17 pm

Adam wrote:
Simple. Go back to Rasulullah's time. 1, 2, 3 were kept in VERY high positions. And Rasulullah knew very well they were wrong.
Same statement is valid for all hudood, including Mukasir and Shehzada... :D

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

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

#1573

Unread post by fustrate_Bohra » Sat Mar 21, 2015 3:18 pm

Mr Rightlyguided from Mufaddali clan admits that SMB had made mistake in selecting mazoon and hence SMB was NOT infallible.

Thanks for confirming.

SBM
Posts: 6429
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 4:01 am

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

#1574

Unread post by SBM » Sat Mar 21, 2015 3:59 pm

Now you think i'm Taha Bs Hakimuddin.
Interesting.
Are You?

Rightlyguided
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2015 3:13 am

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

#1575

Unread post by Rightlyguided » Sat Mar 21, 2015 11:03 pm

fustrate_Bohra wrote:Mr Rightlyguided from Mufaddali clan admits that SMB had made mistake in selecting mazoon and hence SMB was NOT infallible.

Thanks for confirming.
Are u stupid I was highlighting the false logic qutbis were putting forth..

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

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

#1576

Unread post by fustrate_Bohra » Sat Mar 21, 2015 11:16 pm

No, am certainly not stupid to believe that Dai is infallible.

SMB had made mistake in selecting either mazoon or mukasir.

Moiz_Dhaanu
Posts: 366
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:57 pm

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

#1577

Unread post by Moiz_Dhaanu » Sun Mar 22, 2015 12:42 am

Rightlyguided wrote:
byculla wrote:About Syedi Najam Khan - SMB RA himself mentioned in one waaz about the deep ikhlaas of Syedi Najam Khan - "Rutba ma si giraawane rutbo lai lidho - ke Rutba ma Charhaawaane rutbo lai lidho". He went on to say that the fact that Syedna Ismail Badruddin RA removed Syedi Najam Khan from this Rutba to take his "imtehaan". This particular bayaan of SMB RA is present in a frame in the mazaar of Syedi Najam Khan.

Key difference between the 2 camps is the Mufaddalis do character assasination of the Mazoon of Syedna Burhanuddin during his tenure as the mazoon. Mufaddal bhaisaheb has mentioned in numerous waaz many things implying he was not doing his duties as mazoon. However from the other camp they have never done any character assasination of Burhanuddin Mola's Mukasir either during his tenure as mukasir of SMB or after. Of course fatemidawat.com disagrees with Syedna Burhanuddin's mukasir's opinion after SMB's death.

According to fatemidawat.com belief, Imam's ilhaam was not wrong in either mazoon nor mukasir When Syedna Burhanuddin appointed Syedi Khuzaima bs qutbuddin as mazoon nor when SMB appointed Syedi Husain bs Husamuddin as Mukasir. SMB's mukasir's acceptance of Mufaddal bhaisaheb as mansoos was because he was not witness to SMB's nass on his mazoon.

However according to Mufaddali's belief, SMB's mazoon never had any walayat of SMB RA, did outright adawat of SMB - all this during his tenure as mazoon. No follower of SMB's mazoon believes anything like that about SMB's mukasir.
Qutbis sayy ... Burhanuddin moula RA took name of then mazoon in misaaq so how could he have gone astray?

This is the argument they put... the same argument is put by us..

Burhanuddin moula RA took name of mukasir saheb in misaaq so how could he have gone astray??.

Backfiring logic.

Dig a hole fall in it yourself..

Sorry state
As per our Dawoodi-Bohra doctrine (and it has been said umpteem times in Waaz) , when Imam-uz-zamaan comes out of seclusion and proclaims himself as the Imam, then at that time a mumin should not do sajda to Imam untill the dai-ul-mutlaq accepts him as the true imam.
Now lets say the Dai does not accept him as the Imam , (due to some unknown reason) and the Mazun accepts him as the Imam , would a mumin listen to the Mazun or the Dai? ..It is obvious that the mumin will listen to the dai since he is of the higher Rutba.

Similarly , when Mazun declares that the Nass is void and fake, but the Muqasir(for whatever unknown reason) supports the nass , then as per the above Doctrine of obeying the higher Rutba , a reasoning logical mind(which most DMBS abdes lack) must and should go with what the Mazun has to say, since he is of the higher rutba then Muqasir.

Also please do not just retaliate saying that we saw Burhanuddin Moula(RA) do nass in Raudat Tahera.. We all saw how fully staged and dramatised it was.

DMBS= Dawedar Mufaddal Bhai Saheb

Rightlyguided
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2015 3:13 am

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

#1578

Unread post by Rightlyguided » Sun Mar 22, 2015 2:28 am

Moiz_Dhaanu wrote:
Rightlyguided wrote: Qutbis sayy ... Burhanuddin moula RA took name of then mazoon in misaaq so how could he have gone astray?

This is the argument they put... the same argument is put by us..

Burhanuddin moula RA took name of mukasir saheb in misaaq so how could he have gone astray??.

Backfiring logic.

Dig a hole fall in it yourself..

Sorry state
As per our Dawoodi-Bohra doctrine (and it has been said umpteem times in Waaz) , when Imam-uz-zamaan comes out of seclusion and proclaims himself as the Imam, then at that time a mumin should not do sajda to Imam untill the dai-ul-mutlaq accepts him as the true imam.
Now lets say the Dai does not accept him as the Imam , (due to some unknown reason) and the Mazun accepts him as the Imam , would a mumin listen to the Mazun or the Dai? ..It is obvious that the mumin will listen to the dai since he is of the higher Rutba.

Similarly , when Mazun declares that the Nass is void and fake, but the Muqasir(for whatever unknown reason) supports the nass , then as per the above Doctrine of obeying the higher Rutba , a reasoning logical mind(which most DMBS abdes lack) must and should go with what the Mazun has to say, since he is of the higher rutba then Muqasir.

Also please do not just retaliate saying that we saw Burhanuddin Moula(RA) do nass in Raudat Tahera.. We all saw how fully staged and dramatised it was.

DMBS= Dawedar Mufaddal Bhai Saheb

We heard burhanuddin moula RA confer nass on Mufaddal moula TUS . . Words were clear enough for someone who have their ears open.
Also when qaid johar bs did araz and Moula RA ye farmayu 'Khuda barakat aape' mumineen sais aameen..
Moula RA s isharas to bring moula TUS closer...
And everything else that happened that day... we believe . No doubts..

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

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

#1579

Unread post by Universaldad » Sun Mar 22, 2015 2:50 am

Moiz_Dhaanu wrote:
Rightlyguided wrote: Qutbis sayy ... Burhanuddin moula RA took name of then mazoon in misaaq so how could he have gone astray?

This is the argument they put... the same argument is put by us..

Burhanuddin moula RA took name of mukasir saheb in misaaq so how could he have gone astray??.

Backfiring logic.

Dig a hole fall in it yourself..

Sorry state
As per our Dawoodi-Bohra doctrine (and it has been said umpteem times in Waaz) , when Imam-uz-zamaan comes out of seclusion and proclaims himself as the Imam, then at that time a mumin should not do sajda to Imam untill the dai-ul-mutlaq accepts him as the true imam.
Now lets say the Dai does not accept him as the Imam , (due to some unknown reason) and the Mazun accepts him as the Imam , would a mumin listen to the Mazun or the Dai? ..It is obvious that the mumin will listen to the dai since he is of the higher Rutba.

Similarly , when Mazun declares that the Nass is void and fake, but the Muqasir(for whatever unknown reason) supports the nass , then as per the above Doctrine of obeying the higher Rutba , a reasoning logical mind(which most DMBS abdes lack) must and should go with what the Mazun has to say, since he is of the higher rutba then Muqasir.

Also please do not just retaliate saying that we saw Burhanuddin Moula(RA) do nass in Raudat Tahera.. We all saw how fully staged and dramatised it was.

DMBS= Dawedar Mufaddal Bhai Saheb

Khozemites are getting more and more bizarre by the day... it was always bound to happen.....

Guess its because of too much subtitle reading of [DELETED] speech. There is no dawat tradition that the Mazun or the Mukasir have to validate the nass of a Dai. It is the Dai who will appoint, keep or discard the Mazun or Mukasir as per his wish under the guidance of Imam uz Zaman.

[DELETED] has been delusional and his condition is getting worse by the day. [DELETED] [DELETED]

Dhannu do your duty [DELETED]

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

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

#1580

Unread post by ContentedBohra » Sun Mar 22, 2015 2:58 am

Adam,

Appreciate your response but you have side stepped my question. Or, may be I asked a rhetorical question. However, I will elaborate.

I know you agree with me that Syedna Qutbuddin TUS was mazoon of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA until his last breath. My point was that when Mazoon of Syedna Burhanuddin RA says after his wafaat that Syedna Burhanuddin RA performed nass on him and that such a nass is valid within dawat doctrine, it has a lot of credibility as Syedna Burhanuddin RA himself put a seal of trustworthiness by appointing him as Mazoon. Why would I believe your interpretation of Syedna Taher Saifuddin's RA risala when you are an anonymous entity and you quote two anonymous website? If the risalas are to be understood by simple translation - as you say - then why would there be a requirement to obtain raza to learn them.

In your list of credentials, you say that you have learnt from those who were taught by Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA. I hope you will agree with me that, Syedna Burhanuddin RA appointed Syedna Qutbuddin TUS as his Mazoon over and above all those persons from whom you learnt including all shehzadas who were much elder to Syedna Qutbuddin TUS. This signifies the high position of Syedna Qutbuddin TUS in eyes of Syedna Burhanuddin RA.

You say that for a nass to be valid there must be witness/evidence. My question to you is what happens if the witnesses go astray and deny everything. This can happen as you have repeatedly claim that no one other than Dai is infallible, so these witnesses can fall prey to jealousy or worldly desires. How will the successor prove that he is the dai in such a case? Applying your theory, people will say that witnesses are absolutely needed so they will not believe in the true dai and will conclude that dawat has ended.

Secondly, what happens if some witnesses go astray and falsely suggest someone else as the Dai. Now there are two sets of witnesses one in favor of real successor dai and other in favor or the fake dai. How will people decide who is the real dai?

Talking about evidence, what happens if the evidence is lost or destroyed. Or, if a fake evidence shows up indicating someone else is a dai. How will the people decide between the real dai and fake dai.

I submit that having a witness or evidence is not foolproof and regardless of whether there is or isn't a witness/evidence, ultimately the followers will have to weigh the credibility of the saheb claiming to be dai as well as that of the the witnesses and evidences. In my view, the side where Mazoon of previous dai belongs has the highest credibility based on two things. First that the position of Mazoon as the next highest position (with mutlaq raza) signifies a high level of trust and credibility that the dai has in the person appointed to this position. Second, that in matter of nass there is overwhelming historical support that haq has always been on the side where the Mazoon of previous dai was.

In the current situation before us, MS and his supporters which include Adam, others like Adam and the anonymous websites referred by Adam, have tried to incorrectly argue that a Mazoon has no trust or credibility in this matter and all that matters is witnesses and evidence. Secondly, they have captured every opportunity or occasion to trigger a frenzy of laanat and hate toward Syedna Qutbuddin TUS. In his most recent post, Adam compares today's situation with Rasulullah's SAW time, suggesting that similar to how Rasulullah SAW kept 1-2-3, Syedna Burhanuddin RA kept his Mazoon. My question to Adam is that are you suggesting that the position of Mazoon itself is such unworthy that anyone can be appointed in that position, or are you suggesting that Syedna Burhanuddin RA knowingly appointed someone unworthy to the high position of Mazoon and took his name in misaq for fifty years. Do you think a Dai would do such a thing? Do you think Syedna Burhanuddin RA would do such a thing?

Adam and the anonymous websites have written pages on internet about how MS was always with Syedna Burhanuddin RA everywhere. Using Adam's analogy, one can argue that similar to 1-2-3, it was MS, QJ and shehzadas who always hanged around Syedna Burhanuddin RA to imply that they are everything and have full control of dawat. This analogy fits better as similar to Rasulullah SAW, Syedna Burhanuddin RA never endorsed them or took their name in misaq.

Most of the bohras are drowned under the hate propaganda by MS, et al. They will need to rise above this noise and clear their lenses to be able to see haq.

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

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

#1581

Unread post by Universaldad » Sun Mar 22, 2015 4:34 am

ContentedBohra wrote:Adam,

Appreciate your response but you have side stepped my question. Or, may be I asked a rhetorical question. However, I will elaborate.

I know you agree with me that Syedna Qutbuddin TUS was mazoon of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA until his last breath. My point was that when Mazoon of Syedna Burhanuddin RA says after his wafaat that Syedna Burhanuddin RA performed nass on him and that such a nass is valid within dawat doctrine, it has a lot of credibility as Syedna Burhanuddin RA himself put a seal of trustworthiness by appointing him as Mazoon. Why would I believe your interpretation of Syedna Taher Saifuddin's RA risala when you are an anonymous entity and you quote two anonymous website? If the risalas are to be understood by simple translation - as you say - then why would there be a requirement to obtain raza to learn them.

In your list of credentials, you say that you have learnt from those who were taught by Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA. I hope you will agree with me that, Syedna Burhanuddin RA appointed Syedna Qutbuddin TUS as his Mazoon over and above all those persons from whom you learnt including all shehzadas who were much elder to Syedna Qutbuddin TUS. This signifies the high position of Syedna Qutbuddin TUS in eyes of Syedna Burhanuddin RA.

You say that for a nass to be valid there must be witness/evidence. My question to you is what happens if the witnesses go astray and deny everything. This can happen as you have repeatedly claim that no one other than Dai is infallible, so these witnesses can fall prey to jealousy or worldly desires. How will the successor prove that he is the dai in such a case? Applying your theory, people will say that witnesses are absolutely needed so they will not believe in the true dai and will conclude that dawat has ended.

Secondly, what happens if some witnesses go astray and falsely suggest someone else as the Dai. Now there are two sets of witnesses one in favor of real successor dai and other in favor or the fake dai. How will people decide who is the real dai?

Talking about evidence, what happens if the evidence is lost or destroyed. Or, if a fake evidence shows up indicating someone else is a dai. How will the people decide between the real dai and fake dai.

I submit that having a witness or evidence is not foolproof and regardless of whether there is or isn't a witness/evidence, ultimately the followers will have to weigh the credibility of the saheb claiming to be dai as well as that of the the witnesses and evidences. In my view, the side where Mazoon of previous dai belongs has the highest credibility based on two things. First that the position of Mazoon as the next highest position (with mutlaq raza) signifies a high level of trust and credibility that the dai has in the person appointed to this position. Second, that in matter of nass there is overwhelming historical support that haq has always been on the side where the Mazoon of previous dai was.

In the current situation before us, MS and his supporters which include Adam, others like Adam and the anonymous websites referred by Adam, have tried to incorrectly argue that a Mazoon has no trust or credibility in this matter and all that matters is witnesses and evidence. Secondly, they have captured every opportunity or occasion to trigger a frenzy of laanat and hate toward Syedna Qutbuddin TUS. In his most recent post, Adam compares today's situation with Rasulullah's SAW time, suggesting that similar to how Rasulullah SAW kept 1-2-3, Syedna Burhanuddin RA kept his Mazoon. My question to Adam is that are you suggesting that the position of Mazoon itself is such unworthy that anyone can be appointed in that position, or are you suggesting that Syedna Burhanuddin RA knowingly appointed someone unworthy to the high position of Mazoon and took his name in misaq for fifty years. Do you think a Dai would do such a thing? Do you think Syedna Burhanuddin RA would do such a thing?

Adam and the anonymous websites have written pages on internet about how MS was always with Syedna Burhanuddin RA everywhere. Using Adam's analogy, one can argue that similar to 1-2-3, it was MS, QJ and shehzadas who always hanged around Syedna Burhanuddin RA to imply that they are everything and have full control of dawat. This analogy fits better as similar to Rasulullah SAW, Syedna Burhanuddin RA never endorsed them or took their name in misaq.

Most of the bohras are drowned under the hate propaganda by MS, et al. They will need to rise above this noise and clear their lenses to be able to see haq.
Convoluted Qutbi Bohra,

What non sense do you utter...

Facts is that Syedna Mohammad Burhanuddin RA did multiple public nass of Syedna Muffadal Saifuddin TUS. Raduat Tahera, Hospital in London the Public nass. He kept Syedna Muffadal with him at all miqaats in the last three years of his life in fact Syedna Muffadal was always with SMB RA. KQ was out of the scene during this time plotting his road to hell.

You Khozemites are a bunch of idiots... [DELETED]

Rightlyguided
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2015 3:13 am

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

#1582

Unread post by Rightlyguided » Sun Mar 22, 2015 2:09 pm

Qutbis admit it... You have lost.

Think! Your arguments are

Illogical
Back firing
Idiotic
Abusive towards burhanuddin moula RA

Correct your ways truth is crystal clear..

KQ was waiting till Moula RA s wafaat scheming and plotting..
He and his sons have abused Moula RA blatantly.
His ways are totally opposite to how Moula RAs were.

After moulas wafaat . KQ s clan called innocent mumineen and tried to lure them into their trap with money and businesses..

How are you so blind..
Who forces their children to say things on a video and post it in public.
Who does that.

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

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

#1583

Unread post by ContentedBohra » Sun Mar 22, 2015 3:34 pm

Universaldad, By using abusive language, you have just proved my point. In Raudat Tahera incident, Dr. Moiz defied Burhanuddin Aqa's RA instructions and instead of reciting ya sayyadus shohoda marasiya, he announced nass and then asked MS to speak. After this, what credibility does MS, Dr. Moiz and you all have. How can you expect us to believe other evidences. People stop thinking when they are drowned in the noise of laanats and abusive languages. By creating a chorus of lies, you guys are hoping that it will pass off as truth.

qjbj
Posts: 159
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 5:47 pm

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

#1584

Unread post by qjbj » Sun Mar 22, 2015 3:42 pm

ContentedBohra has put a very good argument and the two die hard MS followers above fail to see the very good points mentioned and start calling people idiots. In fact the argument is so good its worth quoting again. I have read the back and forth arguments looks like the MS followers just can't see the forest for the trees.

ContentedBohra wrote:Adam,

Appreciate your response but you have side stepped my question. Or, may be I asked a rhetorical question. However, I will elaborate.

I know you agree with me that Syedna Qutbuddin TUS was mazoon of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA until his last breath. My point was that when Mazoon of Syedna Burhanuddin RA says after his wafaat that Syedna Burhanuddin RA performed nass on him and that such a nass is valid within dawat doctrine, it has a lot of credibility as Syedna Burhanuddin RA himself put a seal of trustworthiness by appointing him as Mazoon. Why would I believe your interpretation of Syedna Taher Saifuddin's RA risala when you are an anonymous entity and you quote two anonymous website? If the risalas are to be understood by simple translation - as you say - then why would there be a requirement to obtain raza to learn them.

In your list of credentials, you say that you have learnt from those who were taught by Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA. I hope you will agree with me that, Syedna Burhanuddin RA appointed Syedna Qutbuddin TUS as his Mazoon over and above all those persons from whom you learnt including all shehzadas who were much elder to Syedna Qutbuddin TUS. This signifies the high position of Syedna Qutbuddin TUS in eyes of Syedna Burhanuddin RA.

You say that for a nass to be valid there must be witness/evidence. My question to you is what happens if the witnesses go astray and deny everything. This can happen as you have repeatedly claim that no one other than Dai is infallible, so these witnesses can fall prey to jealousy or worldly desires. How will the successor prove that he is the dai in such a case? Applying your theory, people will say that witnesses are absolutely needed so they will not believe in the true dai and will conclude that dawat has ended.

Secondly, what happens if some witnesses go astray and falsely suggest someone else as the Dai. Now there are two sets of witnesses one in favor of real successor dai and other in favor or the fake dai. How will people decide who is the real dai?

Talking about evidence, what happens if the evidence is lost or destroyed. Or, if a fake evidence shows up indicating someone else is a dai. How will the people decide between the real dai and fake dai.

I submit that having a witness or evidence is not foolproof and regardless of whether there is or isn't a witness/evidence, ultimately the followers will have to weigh the credibility of the saheb claiming to be dai as well as that of the the witnesses and evidences. In my view, the side where Mazoon of previous dai belongs has the highest credibility based on two things. First that the position of Mazoon as the next highest position (with mutlaq raza) signifies a high level of trust and credibility that the dai has in the person appointed to this position. Second, that in matter of nass there is overwhelming historical support that haq has always been on the side where the Mazoon of previous dai was.

In the current situation before us, MS and his supporters which include Adam, others like Adam and the anonymous websites referred by Adam, have tried to incorrectly argue that a Mazoon has no trust or credibility in this matter and all that matters is witnesses and evidence. Secondly, they have captured every opportunity or occasion to trigger a frenzy of laanat and hate toward Syedna Qutbuddin TUS. In his most recent post, Adam compares today's situation with Rasulullah's SAW time, suggesting that similar to how Rasulullah SAW kept 1-2-3, Syedna Burhanuddin RA kept his Mazoon. My question to Adam is that are you suggesting that the position of Mazoon itself is such unworthy that anyone can be appointed in that position, or are you suggesting that Syedna Burhanuddin RA knowingly appointed someone unworthy to the high position of Mazoon and took his name in misaq for fifty years. Do you think a Dai would do such a thing? Do you think Syedna Burhanuddin RA would do such a thing?

Adam and the anonymous websites have written pages on internet about how MS was always with Syedna Burhanuddin RA everywhere. Using Adam's analogy, one can argue that similar to 1-2-3, it was MS, QJ and shehzadas who always hanged around Syedna Burhanuddin RA to imply that they are everything and have full control of dawat. This analogy fits better as similar to Rasulullah SAW, Syedna Burhanuddin RA never endorsed them or took their name in misaq.

Most of the bohras are drowned under the hate propaganda by MS, et al. They will need to rise above this noise and clear their lenses to be able to see haq.

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

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

#1585

Unread post by ghulam muhammed » Sun Mar 22, 2015 7:35 pm

Don’t let trial in succession row divide Bohras, says Bombay high court

MUMBAI: Don't let the trial in the succession row polarize the Dawoodi Bohra community, the Bombay high court told the incumbent Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin and his uncle Khuzaima Qutbuddin on Wednesday.

Qutbuddin had filed a suit to declare him the 53rd Dai-al-Mutlaq or spiritual head, saying he was privately anointed by his half-brother—the late Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin—in December 1965.

Justice Gautam Patel expressed his apprehension about how passions can run high in the community over the trial and added that both sides must issue a joint statement to the community to maintain calm. "We have a long way to go. There will be ups and downs in the trial. Don't get upset if on some day things get bad for one side. Issue a joint statement to the community and the press to keep on an even keel," he said.

Taking note of the large number of Bohras who came to court and considering that it could create security issues and crowd management problem, the judge, in his order "requested both sides to ensure that 25 people from each side attend the hearing". These people will be issued passes by the high court security.

On Wednesday, the trial was moved to the central courtroom and both sides submitted documents to be accepted as evidence.

On April 15, the judge will consider Qutbuddin's application to delete documents which he has referred to in his plaint, but is disputing their correctness. Both sides also agreed that the documents relied on by Qutbuddin, which are in Arabic, will be marked as evidence subject to translations and interpretations, and their accuracy and correctness may be tested in cross-examination by Saifuddin's lawyers.

Cross-examination will commence on April 27 with Qutbuddin taking to the witness box first.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 614757.cms

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

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

#1586

Unread post by lawgraduate » Mon Mar 23, 2015 4:08 am

Bismillah Al rahman Al rahim

this is my analysis on this whole controversy. unfortunately, sound quality is low but I hope the truth of message will go across the hearts of true momeenin.


http://www.filedropper.com/untitled2_1

.....

Ozdundee
Posts: 888
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:57 am

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

#1587

Unread post by Ozdundee » Mon Mar 23, 2015 5:39 am

a joint statement to the community and the press to keep on an even keel," he said.
OK when are we getting the joint statement? If they don't are they both in contempt?

joint means togather!

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

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

#1588

Unread post by Universaldad » Mon Mar 23, 2015 6:37 am

ContentedBohra wrote:Universaldad, By using abusive language, you have just proved my point. In Raudat Tahera incident, Dr. Moiz defied Burhanuddin Aqa's RA instructions and instead of reciting ya sayyadus shohoda marasiya, he announced nass and then asked MS to speak. After this, what credibility does MS, Dr. Moiz and you all have. How can you expect us to believe other evidences. People stop thinking when they are drowned in the noise of laanats and abusive languages. By creating a chorus of lies, you guys are hoping that it will pass off as truth.
Dear convoluted Bohra and Khozemite,

Yes indeed laanat is due on KQ and his toli as he has attacked the high office of Duat, Be it Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS or Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA.

You need to see the Raudat Tahera Nass and the hospital audio and video well. The fact is that you and your like never believed in SMB RA. What us do you refer to a handful of people who hated SMB RA. A bunch of people who made haram halal on the basis of your KQ.

alam
Posts: 713
Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2013 8:15 pm

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

#1589

Unread post by alam » Mon Mar 23, 2015 11:22 am

a joint statement to the community and the press to keep on an even keel," he said.
On this forum -"An even keel" is needed

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

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

#1590

Unread post by kimanumanu » Tue Mar 24, 2015 4:57 am

Court order from 20th March.
20Mar.pdf
(39.32 KiB) Downloaded 432 times