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.
RedBox
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:41 am

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

#2791

Unread post by RedBox » Sun May 24, 2020 6:53 am

ajamali wrote: Sat May 16, 2020 7:12 am The above is a supremely flawed analysis because it is based on the assumption that SMB sidelined SKQ. The truth is that every attempt was made by the sons to sideline SKQ but SMB took every opportunity to signal to the contrary. Let me describe what I observed in the 100th milad. An event pretty close to the stroke:

1) SKQ was present for all events.
2) When MS tried to jump up and do muanaqqa to SMB before SKQ, SMB stopped him. SMB then signaled SKQ to step forward and perform muanaqqa which he performed with deep reverence. MS tried to step up again and SMB stopped him again. FD has a video that captures the whole thing and it has been posted on this forum in the past.
3) In the 100th milad, SMB only accepted one ziyafat. It was by SKQ.
4) For zohar namaaz after waaz before SMB departed, he announced “me javu chu magar bhai ne Tamara darmiyan muki ne javu chu.” Then he gave SKQ raza to lead namaaz.

Your theory is based on “what people said....” Who to you think trained them to say those things? My response to them would be: “Moula ye rutbaa maa raakha che to tamey kaun aava Mazoon ni behurmati karva wala?” All of these people who said those things were proving that they thought they knew better than Moula! The more intelligent always saw through the systematic way in which SKQ was kept out of the video frames to give an impression that he was not there. Any account of any “outburst” is completely fabricated. Yes SKQ followers know how much love SKQ and his children have for SMB. Luckily now we get to experience it first hand without manipulated camera frames. Malgudi your deluded post has no credibility. No facts.
Hajamali

If smb was soo found of KQ why he could not spare just 5 minutes and declare KQ as dai in any of his waez when he was perfectly healthy.

All this ishara baazi is vein and dont hold any value in real world.

RedBox
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:41 am

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

#2792

Unread post by RedBox » Sun May 24, 2020 6:59 am

Malgudidays you are correct. Both these parties are speaking lies about the power of nazim dai to keep the full power to them self.

Taher should grow spine and speak the truth and in that way truth loving people will follow him. Give up on big big claims and come down to terms in reality. Dont try to be GOD on earth.

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

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

#2793

Unread post by byculla » Sun May 24, 2020 7:43 am

@James - responding to some of your points.

james wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 7:43 pm On a forum,personal anonymous recollections of bayans don't amount to much.I have zero trust and zero interest in you paraphrasing Duat bayaans. Now if you were to back up your words with so and so Waaz on so and so date,then that can be checked and discussed upon.So there is no slyness on my part. Just plain common sense and logic.
I have it in my notes of 2003 Mumbai ashara. Its a well known zikr even outside of SMB RA bayan. Chief of Nizari sect gave misak to Syedna Dawood bin Ajab RA. While arguing with the Chief, Syedna's central argument was 'who is closest to shariat Mohammediah ?' since Nizaris had abandoned fasting and namaz. Adherence to Shariat is important. When you say MS can't be dai since he did Shirk in doing sajda to TV or when he did adawat of Syedna Burhanuddin TUS's 2nd highest maratib its evident MS went against well established dawat ground rules. Its not Qiyaas as you retort.. Yes you can argue that doing sajda to TV is not shirk and your personal belief (and thats your choice) but you can't argue that if you do genuinely believe that its shirk (as Mukasir Shz Husain bs has already said) then concluding based on that belief is Qiyaas. Its following the central principle Syedna Dawood RA outlined as per SMB RA bayan in my notes.
james wrote: Sun May 10, 2020 8:02 am has ever in the history of Dawat,a dawedaar has done dawa to be the Mansoos in the lifetime of Naas? Taqqiyah doesn't apply here. Munafiq actions applies here.

Either you didn't understand the question or you tried to steer it off track. Here,let me try again.

Has there ever been a Dawedaar to be Mansoos in the lifetime of a Naas in dawat history? Haqq always comes first. Baatil always follows Haqq.

Gadheer e Khum - Haqq.

Event of Saqifah- Baatil

Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin's numerous instances of Nass on Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS amongst private witnesses,written records,public declaration in his LIFETIME - HAQQ

Darus us Saqifah after the PASSING AWAY of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA - BAATIL.

Ali bin Ibrahim accepted Nass for 3 years and then did dawa of rutba of Itlaq.

Khuzaima accepted Nass for 3 years and then did dawa of Itlaq.
Some pretty twisted before/after logic (its not the first time you resorted to this). In any case if you truly believe that HAQ comes before BAATIL - consider this Syedna Burhanuddin RA conferred nass on SKQ RA the day he appointed him as mazoon. SMB RA himself said in the bayan mubarak on 17th Shaban 1385H that the name "Khuzaima" was most beloved to Syedna Taher Saifuddin while appointing him as mazoon publicly. Your master MS did Sajda to SKQ RA for several years. He wrote him a letter calling him "Maula" and even referred to SMB RA and SKQ together as "Bewe Maula" (Ref FD website). Sajda is given only to Dai or his mansoos (Your fried Saif53 has also accepted.). So MS after accepting SKQ as mansoos stopped believing. Doesn't Haq come before Baatil here ? Events of 17th Shaban 1385 even predate the fake 1388 nass letter your produced. What comes before/after now ?

james wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 7:43 pm Also,"The amanat of so called Nass" has been refuted extensively.If you want,I can rehash all these points extensively. Website domain registered in the lifetime of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA waiting for him to pass away so that Khuzaima and his ilk can do their FITNAT in the open because guess what? No dawedaar till date in history has done a dawa in the lifetime of NAAS.
I don't know the exact individual who registered the domain. Neither do you (else you would have mentioned). Its my guess that it might be STF tus. He knew MS couldn't be mansoos by his actions. Further as he has said in numerous bayans (ref many of his waaz publicly available on youtube), he has himself seen several Hudoods in time of Syedna Burhanuddin RA publicly do Sajda to SKQ RA including Miyasaheb Ibrahim Yamani. Since sajda during hayati of a hudood is offered only to a Dai or his mansoos, and further that Nass cannot change after conferment. He knew SKQ was mansoos and it does NOT and should NOT mean that SKQ disclosed the events of his own nass on 17th Shaban 1385 . Knowing the ruse going in dawat he may have registered this as his khidmat as he knew at some point SKQ would need to come out and internet is the fastest way for information to reach all mumineen. Supporting Syedna Burhanuddin RA's true mansoos is not FITNAT. Its khidmat. Further its additional proof that MS fake nass was not accepted by children of SKQ RA.



james wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 7:43 pm You have tried very hard to spin that Abdeali and his brothers were doing taqiyyah but in reality they were munafiqeen during the last three years of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA's era. A conspiracy was hatched by the disgruntled half brother and his litter just like in the time of Prophet Mohammed SAW's time against his Wasi Ameerul Mumineen Ali ibn Abi Talib AS.
I already answered your above point. See my previous posts.
james wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 7:43 pm Their true intentions and the hatred they harbored for the 52nd Dai Mutlaq RA came out in the open when they not only boycotted 52nd Dai RA's kafan dafan but also prevented others from attending it.Not only that,they prevented the grandsons and granddaughters of 52nd Dai RA's funeral procession as a way to hurt the Mansoos 53rd Dai Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS.

Even Khuzaima's own personal secretary and other people close to him rejected Khuzaima's claims and you want to spin it as they are afraid of barat. Shame on you for making up excuses willy nilly.You think you can make up as you go and you won't be challenged on that?
DISTORTION of truth. The adults who attended events during the night after SMB RA wafaat were neither forced or handcuffed. They were free to attend Janaza of Syedna Burhanuddin if they wished. The time when SKQ RA gave his bayan in which he disclosed Nass on him DID NOT coincide with the time of Janaza of Syedna Burhanuddin. It was several hours before that. The only time in which it may have coincided was the tragic stampede of 18 mumineen which we all are aware of.


james wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 7:43 pm Waah.You keep beating the drum of Khuzaima never missing Urs Mubarak of Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA but then what was stopping him from doing zyarat in the afternoon? Even after wafaat of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA,he did not care to do zyarat and was rushing towards Saqeefah.
I already responded to this. See my post on different thread. After passing away of Syedna Burhanuddin RA, it was his (SKQ's) solemn duty to disclose SMB RA's nass on him without any further delay. Yes he did ziyarat from far as were the halaat on that day and time.
james wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 7:43 pm Mukasir ud Dawat of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA- Syedi Husain bs Husamuddin

If you say that Mazoon's words are so and so because his name is mentioned in the meethaq then what about Mukasir eh? The number of times Mazoon's name is mentioned is the same as Mukasir. Both are the zaire dast of Dai Mutlaq.


If both of them cannot go astray then your fundamentals are crushed because they are at opposites.

Like I said,mention of just one personality is enough to show the Baatil you are peddling.
Again your attempt to fabricate (as if Mukasir and Mazoon are equivalent just because both are mentioned in misak).
Mukasir is an important maratib mentioned in misak, but this rutba is lower than mazoon. Yes we believe in Dai, Mazoon and Mukasir in that order. Dai and mazoon in particular are mentioned as Hudood Muzdaweja (wedded to each other). Belief in Dai and Mazoon is part of belief of Kalematush Shahadat. Rutba of Mukasir is not mentioned in the same manner.

All SKQ followers believed and respected (ex) Mukasir saheb - Shz Husain Husamuddin during entire SMB RA daur. In our qusoor we believed in Dai and his maratib (mazoon and mukasir in that order) - unlike the Mufaddalies who did not believe in SMB RA mazoon during SMB RA daur itself, while under SMB RA misak . That is the difference.

After the death of SMB RA, the authority of mazoon is over mukasir (and in that order).
Last edited by byculla on Sun May 24, 2020 8:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

Qadir
Posts: 262
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2015 1:28 am

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

#2794

Unread post by Qadir » Sun May 24, 2020 8:19 am

dal-chaval-palidu wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 11:56 pm Bhai Qadir, (or anybody else),

I had asked for that 2nd Moharram Waiz (in 2011), where SMB is supposed to have done the waiz. (after the stroke)

I am still waiting for a video or a link to that waiz. The link that was provided was not for that waiz. Please provide the correct link.

Thanks.
For the video/audio of that waaz, you'll have to approach Jamea-tus-Saifiyah because videos of STS, SMB, and SMS are under their copyright.
Here's the link for the waaz photo which should be ample evidence that SMB did the first waaz.
https://www.alvazarat.org/1433/moharram ... es/001.jpg

if you have doubt its from previous ashara, compare the mehrab design with this photo,
https://www.alvazarat.org/1433/moharram ... es/013.jpg

malgudidays
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:47 am

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

#2795

Unread post by malgudidays » Mon May 25, 2020 6:12 am

RedBox wrote: Sun May 24, 2020 6:46 am
malgudidays wrote: Sat May 16, 2020 4:37 am KQ lost the battle long before Nass(Subject to believe) was done on SMS in Raudat Tahera.

YN & Co had successfully maligned his image among the masses. Plus most of the insiders knew about KQs confrontations and issues with SMB.

KQ was never around SMB in his last years. All this and many other things that were done by KQ only added to the hidden contempt people already had for KQ.

On so many occasions I have witnessed people talking about him all sorts of things but then closing the conversation saying "Moula ye rakha chey, to apna si kai na kehwaai."

Truth is which both SMS and STF agents on this forum won't accept is that.

It is a fact that STS had as per the prenup promise to his youngest wife that one of the offspring from her would be designated as heir to SMB, and of all the sons he had with her KQ was the one with the most potential, and hence he was indeed prepared for the office of Dai al Mutlaq by STS and had clearly instructed SMB to do so.

Hence, in the early years of SMB's reign, it is a fact that no one can deny that everyone use to do Sajda/Taqbil al Ard to KQ, and use to address with him all sorts of legacy Dawat Terms that are used for a mansoos.


But two things went against KQ.

1. His character flaws like, arrogance, over-confidence, etc.
2. Having a dynamic and genius YN as his nemesis... YN went for a long game and succeeded in it.. and the KQs own character flaws made it easier for him to achieve what he wanted.


Now KQ has ample of evidence to prove that Nass was in fact done on him in early years and SMB had promised STS that he will nominate him as his successor( which SMS side will never accept) but it is also a fact that SMB did not do so and Nominated SMS, and most of the people love and admire SMS, Progressives/reformists can ridicule and insult SMS as much as they want, but the fact is that people see him as a very humble, kind, and common man's Dai, who speaks to them in a very simple language and connects with them at a very personal level.

Now, KQ side is hell-bent on acquiring the sole proprietorship of Dawat Hadiya Trust based on early nass evidence that they have and they are saying nass once done cannot be revoked. Because it is divinely guided and divinity is infallible.

and SMS side is hell-bent on saying yes it can be done and they are trying to prove it by citing various controversial issues of the past. But maintains silence when one asks them how can infallible divinity changes its mind.

What both sides are hiding and not ready to accept is that there is a difference between Nass that a Mustaqar Imam does on another Mustaqar Imam and the one that Dai does on another Dai. and that Dai of Satr does not have the same Ismat as the Mustaqar Imam, because accepting this won't be good for the business.


Because, the fundamental doctrine that gives the current Dai al Mutlaq the divine status and control over everything today is this carefully, meticulously developed concept, which every Mulla repeats over and over again...."Imam (as) aney Satr ma ena Dai" by prefixing and suffixing this after every sentence, the current ruling dispensation has successfully established the concept Ismat equivalent to that of Imam for dai. Which is far from reality.(nobody even dares to use term Kal masum anymore for the Dai, thanks to various asbaaqs by Ali Asger Kalimuddin and his dead Brother Qasim Hakimuddin)

In fact, the very fact that makes the office of Dai al Mutlaq so special is that he has the full authority to choose his successor, whether he gets Taeed or not.
I have myself heard SMB say this in a waaz of Ashara 2007 that, If a dai gets taaeed then great but even he does not then he has the right to appoint whoever he sees fit, and then went on to give the example of Nass on Syedna Mohammed Ezzuddin by Syedna Abdeali Saifuddin where the later chose the former based on his discretion, he said that this very fact gives the position of Dai al Mutlaq a rank above Mustawda Imams because they were dependent for everything on Mustaqar Imam, which is not the case with Dai al Mutlaq.(One of the many dogmas created in last 100 yrs to give Dai the position he enjoys today)

By taking away Ismat or rather Ismat equivalent to that of a Mustaqar Imam from Dai, neither side wants to dig their own grave.

This would take away the blind following that people have today for their respective Dai's

Truth is STS wanted KQ to be 53rd and that he had instructed SMB to do so, but SMB did not follow up on it because both KQ turned out to be a rotten egg and he preferred his son over him and someone else(YN) was ready to fight this battle for him then why not.

Both the parties will never accept or rather openly discuss this.

Those close to STF clan know very well how much love(hate) and liking(contempt) they had for SMB.

Accepting this truth will reveal that Dai al Mutlaq is not as divine as thought to be and does not have same Ismat as a Mustaqar Imam from the progeny of Ahl al Kisa(SWA).
it also reveals that not everything that a Dai al Mutlaq does(based on the admission of SMB) is through Taeed, it also reveals many other things, which I leave to the readers imagination. out of personal respect for STS, SMB, and the office of Dai al Mutlaq I would not elaborate on that, because, even without Taeed or Infallible divinity at the help.
It is an office created by the Raza of Imam (as) and STS, SMB, and today SMS have done a lot for the well-being of the community, and Progressive/reformists can ridicule and say all sort of nasty things about the regular SMB followers, but they are not as bad as they are portrayed to be in term of any social metrics. Infact one of the many reasons these progressives/reformists don't give up on their golden ITS card is because they know very well, that as compared to any other community, the culture overall social and political respect of the DB community is second to none. Kothar has many evil aspects to it, but one thing about which Kothar doesn't think much before spending any amount necessary on, is when it comes to the social and political security of the community members.
Very good post. You have explained almost every thing.
Thanks :-)

yfm
Posts: 246
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 8:31 pm

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

#2796

Unread post by yfm » Mon May 25, 2020 10:12 pm

I am sick with all these intellectuals discourse from members who are all useless.

I am now going to join Alavi Bohras.

Hope Imam Zaman, if he is paying attention to these crooked dais will not strike me dead.

:D :mrgreen: :o :shock: lol:

Salaam.

dal-chaval-palidu
Posts: 673
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:46 am

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

#2797

Unread post by dal-chaval-palidu » Tue May 26, 2020 12:42 am

Qadir wrote: Sun May 24, 2020 8:19 am
dal-chaval-palidu wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 11:56 pm Bhai Qadir, (or anybody else),

I had asked for that 2nd Moharram Waiz (in 2011), where SMB is supposed to have done the waiz. (after the stroke)

I am still waiting for a video or a link to that waiz. The link that was provided was not for that waiz. Please provide the correct link.

Thanks.
For the video/audio of that waaz, you'll have to approach Jamea-tus-Saifiyah because videos of STS, SMB, and SMS are under their copyright.
Here's the link for the waaz photo which should be ample evidence that SMB did the first waaz.
https://www.alvazarat.org/1433/moharram ... es/001.jpg

if you have doubt its from previous ashara, compare the mehrab design with this photo,
https://www.alvazarat.org/1433/moharram ... es/013.jpg,
Sorry bhai, this photo is not at all clear. What I would like is to see is the audio and video to see that SMB was coherent. And if it is under copyright, why was a video from a different waiz posted before?

dal-chaval-palidu
Posts: 673
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:46 am

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

#2798

Unread post by dal-chaval-palidu » Tue May 26, 2020 12:54 am

RedBox wrote: Sun May 24, 2020 6:53 am
ajamali wrote: Sat May 16, 2020 7:12 am The above is a supremely flawed analysis because it is based on the assumption that SMB sidelined SKQ. The truth is that every attempt was made by the sons to sideline SKQ but SMB took every opportunity to signal to the contrary. Let me describe what I observed in the 100th milad. An event pretty close to the stroke:

1) SKQ was present for all events.
2) When MS tried to jump up and do muanaqqa to SMB before SKQ, SMB stopped him. SMB then signaled SKQ to step forward and perform muanaqqa which he performed with deep reverence. MS tried to step up again and SMB stopped him again. FD has a video that captures the whole thing and it has been posted on this forum in the past.
3) In the 100th milad, SMB only accepted one ziyafat. It was by SKQ.
4) For zohar namaaz after waaz before SMB departed, he announced “me javu chu magar bhai ne Tamara darmiyan muki ne javu chu.” Then he gave SKQ raza to lead namaaz.

Your theory is based on “what people said....” Who to you think trained them to say those things? My response to them would be: “Moula ye rutbaa maa raakha che to tamey kaun aava Mazoon ni behurmati karva wala?” All of these people who said those things were proving that they thought they knew better than Moula! The more intelligent always saw through the systematic way in which SKQ was kept out of the video frames to give an impression that he was not there. Any account of any “outburst” is completely fabricated. Yes SKQ followers know how much love SKQ and his children have for SMB. Luckily now we get to experience it first hand without manipulated camera frames. Malgudi your deluded post has no credibility. No facts.
Hajamali

If smb was soo found of KQ why he could not spare just 5 minutes and declare KQ as dai in any of his waez when he was perfectly healthy.

All this ishara baazi is vein and dont hold any value in real world.
I would really like this video that I have underlined above, if it has been posted before. I asked a few weeks back, but I have not seen it. Please re-post.

RedBox,

I agree SMB never spared that 5 minutes and declared KQ as dai openly. However, when he was healthy, SMB never took 5 minutes and declared MS as dai too. That is why we are in this "mess".

And I agree that the best way to do a nass is clearly, not with ishara.

dal-chaval-palidu
Posts: 673
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:46 am

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

#2799

Unread post by dal-chaval-palidu » Tue May 26, 2020 1:02 am

malgudidays wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 6:12 am
RedBox wrote: Sun May 24, 2020 6:46 am
YN & Co had successfully maligned his image among the masses. Plus most of the insiders knew about KQs confrontations and issues with SMB.

KQ was never around SMB in his last years. All this and many other things that were done by KQ only added to the hidden contempt people already had for KQ.

On so many occasions I have witnessed people talking about him all sorts of things but then closing the conversation saying "Moula ye rakha chey, to apna si kai na kehwaai."

Truth is which both SMS and STF agents on this forum won't accept is that.

It is a fact that STS had as per the prenup promise to his youngest wife that one of the offspring from her would be designated as heir to SMB, and of all the sons he had with her KQ was the one with the most potential, and hence he was indeed prepared for the office of Dai al Mutlaq by STS and had clearly instructed SMB to do so.

Hence, in the early years of SMB's reign, it is a fact that no one can deny that everyone use to do Sajda/Taqbil al Ard to KQ, and use to address with him all sorts of legacy Dawat Terms that are used for a mansoos.


But two things went against KQ.

1. His character flaws like, arrogance, over-confidence, etc.
2. Having a dynamic and genius YN as his nemesis... YN went for a long game and succeeded in it.. and the KQs own character flaws made it easier for him to achieve what he wanted.


Now KQ has ample of evidence to prove that Nass was in fact done on him in early years and SMB had promised STS that he will nominate him as his successor( which SMS side will never accept) but it is also a fact that SMB did not do so and Nominated SMS, and most of the people love and admire SMS, Progressives/reformists can ridicule and insult SMS as much as they want, but the fact is that people see him as a very humble, kind, and common man's Dai, who speaks to them in a very simple language and connects with them at a very personal level.

Now, KQ side is hell-bent on acquiring the sole proprietorship of Dawat Hadiya Trust based on early nass evidence that they have and they are saying nass once done cannot be revoked. Because it is divinely guided and divinity is infallible.

and SMS side is hell-bent on saying yes it can be done and they are trying to prove it by citing various controversial issues of the past. But maintains silence when one asks them how can infallible divinity changes its mind.

What both sides are hiding and not ready to accept is that there is a difference between Nass that a Mustaqar Imam does on another Mustaqar Imam and the one that Dai does on another Dai. and that Dai of Satr does not have the same Ismat as the Mustaqar Imam, because accepting this won't be good for the business.



Very good post. You have explained almost every thing.
Thanks :-)
btw, if what I have highlighted in bold is true, and nass cannot be changed, then you should accept that SKQ is the correct dai.

Also, as for what I have underlined, how can you be so sure? How can you be sure that some formal letter or some proof from SMB does not exist? May be they are constrained due to the court case to make it public?

I am NOT saying I know, I am just wondering how you can be so sure.

RedBox
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:41 am

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

#2800

Unread post by RedBox » Tue May 26, 2020 4:48 am

dal-chaval-palidu wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 12:54 am
RedBox wrote: Sun May 24, 2020 6:53 am

Hajamali

If smb was soo found of KQ why he could not spare just 5 minutes and declare KQ as dai in any of his waez when he was perfectly healthy.

All this ishara baazi is vein and dont hold any value in real world.
I would really like this video that I have underlined above, if it has been posted before. I asked a few weeks back, but I have not seen it. Please re-post.

RedBox,

I agree SMB never spared that 5 minutes and declared KQ as dai openly. However, when he was healthy, SMB never took 5 minutes and declared MS as dai too. That is why we are in this "mess".

And I agree that the best way to do a nass is clearly, not with ishara.
MS was not declared clearly for the reason to keep all the power centric to SMB till his last breath. but later on he did what he could to keep the family business going.

RedBox
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:41 am

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

#2801

Unread post by RedBox » Tue May 26, 2020 4:53 am

DAI concept is ended since Taheri saifuddin took power. now just follow Quran pray namaaz do good and wait for Imam or wait for death.

malgudidays
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:47 am

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

#2802

Unread post by malgudidays » Tue May 26, 2020 1:46 pm

dal-chaval-palidu wrote: Tue May 26, 2020 1:02 am
malgudidays wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 6:12 am

Thanks :-)
btw, if what I have highlighted in bold is true, and nass cannot be changed, then you should accept that SKQ is the correct dai.

Also, as for what I have underlined, how can you be so sure? How can you be sure that some formal letter or some proof from SMB does not exist? May be they are constrained due to the court case to make it public?

I am NOT saying I know, I am just wondering how you can be so sure.
Read carefully what I have written once again, It's the Nass of Mustaqar Imam(as) on his Successor Mustaqar Imam(as) that does not change.
Nass of Dai al Mutlaq does not have same Ismat, it can be change/revoked, that is what happened(Unless TF can prove in court of law with forensic validation that evidences presented by SMS are forged)

Both the parties are not ready to admit that Nass of Dai is not neccessarily through Taeed of Imam al Zaman(as).
Because admitting to this fact would severly affect the glorification that is basis of all the brainwashing and subjugation practising dawoodi bohra's are subjected to.

RedBox
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:41 am

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

#2803

Unread post by RedBox » Wed May 27, 2020 2:33 am

Are they mad to shoot on their own foot?
Why would they admit it.

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

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

#2804

Unread post by james » Wed May 27, 2020 7:47 pm

byculla wrote: Sun May 24, 2020 7:43 am @James - responding to some of your points.


I have it in my notes of 2003 Mumbai ashara. Its a well known zikr even outside of SMB RA bayan. Chief of Nizari sect gave misak to Syedna Dawood bin Ajab RA. While arguing with the Chief, Syedna's central argument was 'who is closest to shariat Mohammediah ?' since Nizaris had abandoned fasting and namaz. Adherence to Shariat is important. When you say MS can't be dai since he did Shirk in doing sajda to TV or when he did adawat of Syedna Burhanuddin TUS's 2nd highest maratib its evident MS went against well established dawat ground rules. Its not Qiyaas as you retort.. Yes you can argue that doing sajda to TV is not shirk and your personal belief (and thats your choice) but you can't argue that if you do genuinely believe that its shirk (as Mukasir Shz Husain bs has already said) then concluding based on that belief is Qiyaas. Its following the central principle Syedna Dawood RA outlined as per SMB RA bayan in my notes.
Again not interested in your personal notes especially when you claim that followers have the intellect to decide who the Mansoos should be. Your notes are on par with events of Saqeefah when they decided to nominate you know who.

You keep harping on about the sajda to TV. Let's address this bullshit straight on just this one time. What was playing on the tv at that time?

As for your second point of adawat. Stop twisting words.I do not have the bayan with me,but I reckon it was along the lines of Khuzaima doing adawat of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA during his lifetime. Hardly surprising seeing Khuzaima's antics after the death of the 52nd Dai RA. Ran away from janaza mubarakah,prevented Syedna RA's grandchildren from attending janazah mubarakah,orchestrated Saqeefah 2.0 whilst the 52nd Dai RA was yet to be buried,did Inqaar of Nass of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA after accepting it for three years.ordered people close to him to come to Thane instead of telling them to attend Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA's janazah mubarakah,the list goes on. The organizers of Saqeefah 1.0 did adawat even during Prophet Mohammed SAW's lifetime but he did Sabr so it hardly surprising that Khuzaima did adawat slyly during his lifetime. I used the word sly because his fitnat was only limited to corrupting his children and some close to him. On the whole,he couldn't do anything due to Shaan of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA just like how the 4 manahis of Jamea couldn't corrupt Jamea which is the zaat mubarak of Dai Mutlaq.

In fact,read on what Syedi Husain bs Husamuddin (Mukasir of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA) conveyed during Sadaqallah Majlis.


Syedi Husain bs Husamuddin said that the impostors that do inkaar (reject) of the True Nass in reality have done inkaar (rejected) of ALL the previous Nass, and are mustahiq (worthy) of la’nat.



Some pretty twisted before/after logic (its not the first time you resorted to this). In any case if you truly believe that HAQ comes before BAATIL - consider this Syedna Burhanuddin RA conferred nass on SKQ RA the day he appointed him as mazoon. SMB RA himself said in the bayan mubarak on 17th Shaban 1385H that the name "Khuzaima" was most beloved to Syedna Taher Saifuddin while appointing him as mazoon publicly. Your master MS did Sajda to SKQ RA for several years. He wrote him a letter calling him "Maula" and even referred to SMB RA and SKQ together as "Bewe Maula" (Ref FD website). Sajda is given only to Dai or his mansoos (Your fried Saif53 has also accepted.). So MS after accepting SKQ as mansoos stopped believing. Doesn't Haq come before Baatil here ? Events of 17th Shaban 1385 even predate the fake 1388 nass letter your produced. What comes before/after now ?
Just because you keep adding the word fake doesn't make it so. All actions of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA have been on HAQ till his last breath. "Mufaddal bhai ne nass nu taj" is as clear the Sun in the sky in the video that was posted by the dawedaar youtube team.

Are we doing the "most beloved" dance again?

https://believesyednaqutbuddin.files.wo ... -walad.jpg



There was no sajda given to Khuzaima.In fact, in court he has admitted that he doesn't remember his brothers ever giving a sajda to him. (I can flush out the news articles if you want me to.Unlike you,I can back up everything I say)

The quicksand and the predicament you guys are under is astonishing. On one hand,only Khuzaima was told of the Nass because talvaro chali jaate and on the other hand,all and sundry were giving him sajda in open,etc So where was this threat? Are you even contemplating on what you are saying? Not only Khuzaima and his ilk,but on this very forum you have admitted on things having settled after the Hospital events were shown to mumineen. Inkaar after Iqraar,Baatil after Haq.
I don't know the exact individual who registered the domain. Neither do you (else you would have mentioned). Its my guess that it might be STF tus. He knew MS couldn't be mansoos by his actions. Further as he has said in numerous bayans (ref many of his waaz publicly available on youtube), he has himself seen several Hudoods in time of Syedna Burhanuddin RA publicly do Sajda to SKQ RA including Miyasaheb Ibrahim Yamani. Since sajda during hayati of a hudood is offered only to a Dai or his mansoos, and further that Nass cannot change after conferment. He knew SKQ was mansoos and it does NOT and should NOT mean that SKQ disclosed the events of his own nass on 17th Shaban 1385 . Knowing the ruse going in dawat he may have registered this as his khidmat as he knew at some point SKQ would need to come out and internet is the fastest way for information to reach all mumineen. Supporting Syedna Burhanuddin RA's true mansoos is not FITNAT. Its khidmat. Further its additional proof that MS fake nass was not accepted by children of SKQ RA.

You suggesting Taher registered the domain shows how they were waiting for Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA to close his eyes so that they can start their propaganda.And to suggest that Taher took this step without Khuzaima's approval is lunacy.The propaganda walls of text were ready from before and like I said before,a disgruntled half brother and his children started this nonsense in private and were waiting and I daresay hoping on how early Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA leaves this mortal world. But Allah SWT is the best of planners and not munafiqeen.The janazah mubarakah of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA became the biggest daleel in that critical time on what is Haq and what is Baatil.During the time of mourning,the children were used as pawns in this fitnat but since then,the kidnapped children have also returned to the fold and the icing on the cake was the US court's observation on the character of daughters of Khuzaima. The barking by Husain on "behurmati of 52nd Dai RA's janazah mubarakah" (Nauzobillah) was given a fitting reply by the Allah SWT The best of planners when Khuzaima's body went without dafan and kafan for what,10-11 days? Transported from USA to India for Taher's greed instead of burying him there in the USA as per Shariat Mohammediyah.

DISTORTION of truth. The adults who attended events during the night after SMB RA wafaat were neither forced or handcuffed. They were free to attend Janaza of Syedna Burhanuddin if they wished. The time when SKQ RA gave his bayan in which he disclosed Nass on him DID NOT coincide with the time of Janaza of Syedna Burhanuddin. It was several hours before that. The only time in which it may have coincided was the tragic stampede of 18 mumineen which we all are aware of.
Look at the language you are using. "They were free to attend IF THEY WISHED". Khuzaima should have ordered them to attend the janazah mubarakah if he wasn't going to attend. Maybe he was afraid that if they go,they will never come back.

At the coinciding time,the people shouldn't have been called to Thane but should have been told to do one last deedar of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA but nopes,they were pulled away from Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA. It resonates with testimonies which said how he prevented people from enrolling in Jamea and attending Hazrat Aaliyah of 52nd Dai RA.



I already responded to this. See my post on different thread. After passing away of Syedna Burhanuddin RA, it was his (SKQ's) solemn duty to disclose SMB RA's nass on him without any further delay. Yes he did ziyarat from far as were the halaat on that day and time.

I am not sure you understand the meaning of the word delay and this is not a taunt.Ask yourself how many hours had passed by when he made the claim.Then again,Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA also banished him from his zyarat and zero taufeeq to even do his zyarat.
Again your attempt to fabricate (as if Mukasir and Mazoon are equivalent just because both are mentioned in misak).
Mukasir is an important maratib mentioned in misak, but this rutba is lower than mazoon. Yes we believe in Dai, Mazoon and Mukasir in that order. Dai and mazoon in particular are mentioned as Hudood Muzdaweja (wedded to each other). Belief in Dai and Mazoon is part of belief of Kalematush Shahadat. Rutba of Mukasir is not mentioned in the same manner.

All SKQ followers believed and respected (ex) Mukasir saheb - Shz Husain Husamuddin during entire SMB RA daur. In our qusoor we believed in Dai and his maratib (mazoon and mukasir in that order) - unlike the Mufaddalies who did not believe in SMB RA mazoon during SMB RA daur itself, while under SMB RA misak . That is the difference.

After the death of SMB RA, the authority of mazoon is over mukasir (and in that order).


Now coming to the most important part.Like I previously said,just the mention of one personality shatters every fitnat coming from Khuzaima and his ilk.


Lower higher is what you are reduced to. The crux of the matter is,

Mazoon name taken in misaq so he cannot go astray.

Then again you guys conveniently miss out on talking about another name taken in the misaq.By same logic,

Mukasir name taken in misaq so he cannot go astray.

But here we have a Mukasir saying
that the impostors that do inkaar (reject) of the True Nass in reality have done inkaar (rejected) of ALL the previous Nass, and are mustahiq (worthy) of la’nat.


So it's obvious either Mukasir or the Mazoon has gone astray. So this bullshit of name taken in misaq can never go astray is destroyed in milliseconds.

And I am sure you will back up your bullshit with Dawat texts where it says on the difference of identifying Mansoos of preceding Dai,Mazoon's word is to be taken over the word of Mukasir.I challenge you to bring me just one text saying this.


You don't use intellect where it is to be used.You are blind to understand a simple reality that Mazoon and Mukasir are fallible positions and any claims without Proof is not acceptable in religion or worldly affairs.


Nass without Tawfeeq are claims of a dawedaar.And even if you keep religion aside for a minute,replay the events happening after the wafaat of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA.

Leaving the janazah mubarak of 52nd Dai RA.

Organizing Saqeefah 2.0.

Preventing attendance of grandchildren of 52nd Dai RA's janazah.

Making a video oppressing the children during the time of mourning.

Filing a court case in USA and getting hammered and losing custody of the children.

I daresay,99% have rejected his wild fanciful claims including the Mukasir of 52nd Dai RA.

The Mumbai court case is just for usurping Dawat properties. Even if one sees from a judicial point of view,tell me how is it Adl that a schism of 500-600 people want to control Dawat properties which cater to Lacs and Lacs of mumineen?

I mean,say you constructed a Masjid and you gave it away for Waqf under the trustee of Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS and you are his follower. How is it Adl that Taher and his ilk try to wrest that away? Is there no end to Taher's selfishness and greed?

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

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

#2805

Unread post by byculla » Thu May 28, 2020 9:37 am

james wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 7:43 pm Again not interested in your personal notes especially when you claim that followers have the intellect to decide who the Mansoos should be. Your notes are on par with events of Saqeefah when they decided to nominate you know who.

You keep harping on about the sajda to TV. Let's address this bullshit straight on just this one time. What was playing on the tv at that time?

As for your second point of adawat. Stop twisting words.I do not have the bayan with me,but I reckon it was along the lines of Khuzaima doing adawat of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA during his lifetime. Hardly surprising seeing Khuzaima's antics after the death of the 52nd Dai RA. Ran away from janaza mubarakah,prevented Syedna RA's grandchildren from attending janazah mubarakah,orchestrated Saqeefah 2.0 whilst the 52nd Dai RA was yet to be buried,did Inqaar of Nass of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA after accepting it for three years.ordered people close to him to come to Thane instead of telling them to attend Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA's janazah mubarakah,the list goes on. The organizers of Saqeefah 1.0 did adawat even during Prophet Mohammed SAW's lifetime but he did Sabr so it hardly surprising that Khuzaima did adawat slyly during his lifetime. I used the word sly because his fitnat was only limited to corrupting his children and some close to him. On the whole,he couldn't do anything due to Shaan of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA just like how the 4 manahis of Jamea couldn't corrupt Jamea which is the zaat mubarak of Dai Mutlaq.

In fact,read on what Syedi Husain bs Husamuddin (Mukasir of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA) conveyed during Sadaqallah Majlis.


Syedi Husain bs Husamuddin said that the impostors that do inkaar (reject) of the True Nass in reality have done inkaar (rejected) of ALL the previous Nass, and are mustahiq (worthy) of la’nat.
Read my post again and stop misrepresenting things (twice now). This is the bayan I quoted from SMB RA (from Syedna Dawood RA). I said followers can choose who can't be a mansoos. I cited only 2 points but there are many others which disqualified Mufaddal Saifuddin from his actions. It doesn't matter what was playing on TV that time. Sajda to TV is what it is - sajda to an object. Its Shirk and it goes against basis of Islam. As Mukasir Shz Husain bs once mentioned, several times in Saifee Mahal, Video was played of STS RA on TV in presence of SMB RA. Not once SMB RA ever do sajda to TV. Enough said.

Your comparison to Saqeefah have been going on for some time now by Mufaddalis. Its twisted to say the least. Key difference is "election" (not same with SKQ RA). Saqeefah had many participants and "aspirants". Other than top (3) whom we all know, there was Sa'd ibn Ubadah who was an aspirant (not same with SKQ RA). No he didn't run from Janaza Mubaraka. He was prevented by none other than your leader Mufaddal Saifuddin. No he didn't accept nass. I have written sufficiently about it. Your post and all your previous writings are sufficient proof you did not believe in SMB RA mazoon while he (SMB RA) was alive. Who is second guessing the Dai now ? Who is showing ibleesiat now ? Not once did SMB RA ever say he was not happy with his mazoon. All baseless assumptions on your part, In fact multiple times he publicly showed importance of his mazoon including the time of 100th milad. About Mukasir of Syedna Burhanuddin, it is indeed unfortunate that he placed the words of the shahids (of lower capacity - read "ilm" ) at higher priority than the words of mazoon (who has maximum ilm after dai). Mukasir is lower rutba than mazoon. These maratibs are SMB RA legacy and like I said before once SMB RA has passed away we follow his legacy, his established maratibs in order established by him.



james wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 7:43 pm Just because you keep adding the word fake doesn't make it so. All actions of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA have been on HAQ till his last breath. "Mufaddal bhai ne nass nu taj" is as clear the Sun in the sky in the video that was posted by the dawedaar youtube team.

Are we doing the "most beloved" dance again?

https://believesyednaqutbuddin.files.wo ... -walad.jpg



There was no sajda given to Khuzaima.In fact, in court he has admitted that he doesn't remember his brothers ever giving a sajda to him. (I can flush out the news articles if you want me to.Unlike you,I can back up everything I say)

The quicksand and the predicament you guys are under is astonishing. On one hand,only Khuzaima was told of the Nass because talvaro chali jaate and on the other hand,all and sundry were giving him sajda in open,etc So where was this threat? Are you even contemplating on what you are saying? Not only Khuzaima and his ilk,but on this very forum you have admitted on things having settled after the Hospital events were shown to mumineen. Inkaar after Iqraar,Baatil after Haq.
Nope. Stop misrepresenting things again. After he said "Mufaddal bhai ne nass nu taj" he immediately said "naam su che, su naam che ? Mohammed naam che ne ? Mohammed bhai ne - Mohanmmed bhai ne.". This proves SMB RA condition post stroke was not the same as before and the (fake) words of nass were those of Dr Moiz NOT Syedna Burhanuddin RA.

About "most beloved" these are words of Syedna Burhanuddin RA in his first misak that he used while talking about his mazoon as said by STS RA. Again this shows how much respect you have for Syedna Burhanuddin RA.

Yes please go ahead and show me where did SKQ RA said he can't remember about his brothers giving sajda to him. I would like to see the context of discussion. One of his brothers Shz Baqir bs Jamaluddin used to give him sajda and use words similar to mansoos in his writings. Regardless, key point is Mufaddal Saifuddin who many elders of those times have observed used to do sajda to SKQ RA. (This is discussed here - https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cit ... 657792.cms) Yes I am contemplating what I am saying. several learned during that time did do sajda. I and general mumineen were not aware that sajda is offered only to mansoos. The concerns to open declaration are similar to time of Rasulullah SA due to which he also indicated several times that Ali was his mansoos but did not openly say so until Ghadeer AFTER Allah Subhanahu granted him ismat thrice. There could be concerns to open declaration but the learned did what they did - some such as Miyasaheb Ibrahim Yamani continued (doing Sajda) till his demise and some others such as Mufaddal Saifuddin did inkaar after iqraar.



james wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 7:43 pm Look at the language you are using. "They were free to attend IF THEY WISHED". Khuzaima should have ordered them to attend the janazah mubarakah if he wasn't going to attend. Maybe he was afraid that if they go,they will never come back.

At the coinciding time,the people shouldn't have been called to Thane but should have been told to do one last deedar of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA but nopes,they were pulled away from Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA. It resonates with testimonies which said how he prevented people from enrolling in Jamea and attending Hazrat Aaliyah of 52nd Dai RA.
First you said these adults were "stopped". When I pointed out that its not possible they could be stopped you change your goal post again.

The adults after witnessing SMB RA's mazoon's short waaz, if they anyways didn't believe in his words (and their videos are evidence that they did not), what stopped them from attending SMB RA janaza mubaraka ? FACT - SKQ RA did not prevent any adult from attending SMB RA janaza. Those who after his first waaz in the night didn't believe in him as mansoos anyway, why would it matter what SKQ said in that night? Deedar of Janaza (Wajeh Mubarak) is something which didn't happen during STS RA janaza. Its something Mufaddal Saifuddin chose to do with Syedna Burhanuddin RA janaza mubaraka and he didn't manage it well as 18 mumineen died in that tragic event. I don't blame him entirely but the organizers (guards) who could have done a better job to prevent the stampede.

james wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 7:43 pm You suggesting Taher registered the domain shows how they were waiting for Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA to close his eyes so that they can start their propaganda.And to suggest that Taher took this step without Khuzaima's approval is lunacy.The propaganda walls of text were ready from before and like I said before,a disgruntled half brother and his children started this nonsense in private and were waiting and I daresay hoping on how early Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA leaves this mortal world. But Allah SWT is the best of planners and not munafiqeen.The janazah mubarakah of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA became the biggest daleel in that critical time on what is Haq and what is Baatil.During the time of mourning,the children were used as pawns in this fitnat but since then,the kidnapped children have also returned to the fold and the icing on the cake was the US court's observation on the character of daughters of Khuzaima. The barking by Husain on "behurmati of 52nd Dai RA's janazah mubarakah" (Nauzobillah) was given a fitting reply by the Allah SWT The best of planners when Khuzaima's body went without dafan and kafan for what,10-11 days? Transported from USA to India for Taher's greed instead of burying him there in the USA as per Shariat Mohammediyah.
All actions with SKQ RA janaza were as per allowance and past practices of Shariat Mohammediah. Janaza of Dai is different. No I did not say that STF did not take raza for the domain name. I don't even know if he is the one who registered it (neither do you). All I said was just because a domain was registered does not mean and should not mean that SKQ RA disclosed his amanat of nass events on 17th Shaban 1385 to others. Rest of your para is plain rhetoric.

james wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 7:43 pm Ask yourself how many hours had passed by when he made the claim.
Sure. Just a few. Less than a day.

james wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 7:43 pm Now coming to the most important part.Like I previously said,just the mention of one personality shatters every fitnat coming from Khuzaima and his ilk.


Lower higher is what you are reduced to. The crux of the matter is,

Mazoon name taken in misaq so he cannot go astray.

Then again you guys conveniently miss out on talking about another name taken in the misaq.By same logic,

Mukasir name taken in misaq so he cannot go astray.

But here we have a Mukasir saying
Stop twisting things. What I have said before multiple times is followers like you @James did not follow Misak in first place when you did not believe in SMB RA mazoon and second guessed SMB RA. Mazoon and Mukasir after death of Dai are important rutbas but they have to be followed in order of these rutbas. The Dai which established these rutbas is no longer there and that is why the order in following them is important. What part of this do you not understand ? Or do you believe that mazoon and mukasir are equal ?

james wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 7:43 pm And I am sure you will back up your bullshit with Dawat texts where it says on the difference of identifying Mansoos of preceding Dai,Mazoon's word is to be taken over the word of Mukasir.I challenge you to bring me just one text saying this.
These are established dawat practices. Role of mazoon after death of previous dai is established and its central.

james wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 7:43 pm You don't use intellect where it is to be used.You are blind to understand a simple reality that Mazoon and Mukasir are fallible positions and any claims without Proof is not acceptable in religion or worldly affairs.


Nass without Tawfeeq are claims of a dawedaar.And even if you keep religion aside for a minute,replay the events happening after the wafaat of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA.
Yes agreed. Both Mazoon and Mukasir are fallible positions but mazoon is truthful and his truthfullness is beyond doubt. I would follow the mazoon above mukasir (and certainly above Shezadas like Mr Abdul Qadir). As per dawat kitab, he would speak the truth even if it goes against him. Additionally SKQ was also mansoos. Many including Miyasaheb Ibrahim yamani and your master Mufaddal did Sajda to him for several years. In fact your master Mufaddal wrote to SKQ RA letter in which he referred to SMB RA and SKQ RA together as "bewe maula" and prayed for both of them together for their long lives till Qiyamat. Also, in STS RA zaman, he wrote a different letter to Syedna that presence of SKQ RA is similar to STS and SMB ("Hum ghulaamo ne em-aj laagtu hatu ke aa toh Taher Saifuddin Maula TUS hum ghulaamo na darmiyaan waaz farmaavi rahya chhe ane em laagtu hatu ke aa toh Burhanuddin Maula TUS hum ghulaamo na darmiyaan waaz farmaavi rahya chhe.") - ref http://www.mostbelovedson.com/uncategor ... bs-letter/. Who did iqraar before inkaar now ?

In fact similar sentiments are expressed in same letter twice by Mufaddal Saifuddin. "Saglu araz toh nathi kari sakto magar em araz karu chhu ke Kakaji Saheb nu har cheez aap be (2) Maula si ghanu miltu aave chhe ane sagli jagah logo bhi em-aj kahe chhe ke aa toh Taher Saifuddin Maula TUS ya Burhanuddin Maula TUS padhaara chhe"

UnhappyBohra
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 2:23 pm

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

#2806

Unread post by UnhappyBohra » Thu May 28, 2020 4:18 pm

Bravo Byculla! Zampa Bazaar is no match for you.

Saif53
Posts: 152
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 10:39 am

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

#2807

Unread post by Saif53 » Fri May 29, 2020 2:09 am

@byculla
Correcting a few mistakes
I would follow the mazoon above mukasir (and certainly above Shezadas like Mr Abdul Qadir). As per dawat kitab, he would speak the truth even if it goes against him.
Dawat kitab doesn't state this:
http://qutbibohras.blogspot.com/2016/05 ... th_21.html
Your master MS did Sajda to SKQ RA for several years.
Proof?
Sajda is given only to Dai or his mansoos (Your fried Saif53 has also accepted.).
No, I didn't say that.
I said:
Sajda in practice
And the ultimate prerogative of is based on the Dai's instructions. And Mansoos is only by Nass, not by Sajda.

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

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

#2808

Unread post by byculla » Fri May 29, 2020 7:11 am

@Saif53 - I have limited knowledge of Arabic knowledge so I can't comment much on the article you presented. (I have read it before as well). That a mazoon speaks the truth even if its against him is written in Taj ul Aqaid - its SKQ RA position and I will go by it. I will say this though that interpretation is everything. You can argue by saying a particular text can have only one interpretation and that yours ONLY is correct - and thats fine as an argument but Yes dawat texts and words in general are to be interpreted correctly in the right context. On Ghadeer the very basis of the 2 sects in Islam were formed were differences in interpretation of the word "maula". Maratib of mazoon to SKQ RA is testimony to his high knowledge and ikhlaas. Additionally all of his knowledge likely including this kitab he learnt it from STS RA in the correct tasawwur and context.

I did not know the word "in practice" mean so much to you. I will continue to add those words while asserting the same to you on this forum going forward.

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

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

#2809

Unread post by james » Fri May 29, 2020 10:07 am

byculla wrote: Thu May 28, 2020 9:37 am
Read my post again and stop misrepresenting things (twice now). This is the bayan I quoted from SMB RA (from Syedna Dawood RA). I said followers can choose who can't be a mansoos. I cited only 2 points but there are many others which disqualified Mufaddal Saifuddin from his actions. It doesn't matter what was playing on TV that time. Sajda to TV is what it is - sajda to an object. Its Shirk and it goes against basis of Islam. As Mukasir Shz Husain bs once mentioned, several times in Saifee Mahal, Video was played of STS RA on TV in presence of SMB RA. Not once SMB RA ever do sajda to TV. Enough said.

So you with your limited knowledge of Arabic knows more than the 52nd Dai RA on who to appoint as his mansoos. Cool story bro


It doesn't matter eh? You have a problem with "objects" Never go to Makkah please. Do you now realize how stupid you sound?

Also,if I were you I would take everything said by Husain with a pinch of salt.He is a sly one.Accepted Nass on Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS for 3 years and when caught out on his hypocrisy,claimed he was doing taqiyyah. And the amount of stupidity he displayed in Q&A videos led to those being deleted. Didn't he endorse Imam Aamir AS's book in those videos? Maybe that is the reason why they aren't available on Youtube anymore.
Your comparison to Saqeefah have been going on for some time now by Mufaddalis. Its twisted to say the least. Key difference is "election" (not same with SKQ RA). Saqeefah had many participants and "aspirants". Other than top (3) whom we all know, there was Sa'd ibn Ubadah who was an aspirant (not same with SKQ RA). No he didn't run from Janaza Mubaraka. He was prevented by none other than your leader Mufaddal Saifuddin. No he didn't accept nass. I have written sufficiently about it.


Saheb e Zaman passes away and the claimant and other munafeqeen move away from the janazah mubarakah of Saheb e Zaman and talk about successor and implement their strategy of fitnat. That's Saqeefah. Happened 1400 years ago. Happened on 16th Rabi ul Awwal 1435H.

1400 years ago they tried to torch Imam Ali's home and here,they kidnapped the grandchildren of Saheb e Zaman and took them away as far as they could to deprive them of barakat of janazah mubarakah.


Nothing of that sort happened.Packed up the bags and left with no intention of attending janazah mubarakah. No one prevented him anywhere. He properly checked that Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA has indeed closed his eyes and ran away from Saifee Mahal.

He and his children did accept nass.He presided over the Nass announcement majlis,congratulated Syedna Muffadal Saifuddin TUS,sat in tarteeb lesser than the Mansoos during Shz Hatim bs sadaqallah and on top of that,sat in tarteeb below Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS in Saifee Mahal in presence of the 52nd Dai RA. His son Husain confirmed to his close confidante that Nass barabar che.Khuzaima in waaz did zikr of Rajab Nass event and said Aqeeq al Yemen par nass kidi and did dua for both 52nd Dai RA and his Mansoos Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS.His son Abdeali publicly in waaz accepted Nass on Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS and privately confirmed the same 12 days before 16th Rabi Awwal 1435H to his close confidante. His other son Aziz in Secundarabad kissed the Misaal Shareef of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA in Ramadhan proving he did believe in all the Misaal Shareef issued by Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA's administrative office.Your lies do nothing but further take you in the sinkhole.
Your post and all your previous writings are sufficient proof you did not believe in SMB RA mazoon while he (SMB RA) was alive. Who is second guessing the Dai now ? Who is showing ibleesiat now ? Not once did SMB RA ever say he was not happy with his mazoon. All baseless assumptions on your part, In fact multiple times he publicly showed importance of his mazoon including the time of 100th milad.


Just this one time I am going to let your wild presumptions about me slide.
About Mukasir of Syedna Burhanuddin, it is indeed unfortunate that he placed the words of the shahids (of lower capacity - read "ilm" ) at higher priority than the words of mazoon (who has maximum ilm after dai). Mukasir is lower rutba than mazoon. These maratibs are SMB RA legacy and like I said before once SMB RA has passed away we follow his legacy, his established maratibs in order established by him.


Stop squirming. This is a known fact to everyone that either the Mazoon or the Mukasir is wrong. Both names taken in Misaq and both are zaire dast of the Dai Mutlaq. You build your whole nonsensical illogical case on the fallacy that the Mazoon cannot go astray because his name is taken in the Misaq which proves that even the Mukasir cannot go astray because his name is also taken in the Misaq.But over here, one of them 100% has gone astray. In fact to the extent that Mukasir said Khuzaima is worthy of lanat.

You are just parroting the words of shahids and lower ilm when the fact is that the Mukasir was present in the Nass e Jali in Raudat Tahera and he heard the Nass Mubarak from Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA himself.

Once you accept that Mazoon and Mukasir are fallible and can go astray,your whole pack of lies comes crashing down.It is rather dishonest of you to not call a spade a spade here. Say it out loud,that the Mukasir of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA has gone astray (Nauzobillah) and this has happened inspite of his name taken in the Misaq.It is but an era of challenges so I challenge you to say your true beliefs loudly for everyone to see and then we will take this forward.

Nope. Stop misrepresenting things again. After he said "Mufaddal bhai ne nass nu taj" he immediately said "naam su che, su naam che ? Mohammed naam che ne ? Mohammed bhai ne - Mohanmmed bhai ne.". This proves SMB RA condition post stroke was not the same as before and the (fake) words of nass were those of Dr Moiz NOT Syedna Burhanuddin RA.
Thank you for accepting that you heard him say 'Mufaddal bhai ne Nass nu Taj" clearly.

As for the "Naam su che", perhaps you need to dig into your notes to see if this was the mode of him delivering bayaan. " Me Kaun chu? Maru naam su che? Mohammed Burhanuddin mamluke Aale Mohammed"

And you need to check your tasawur and wahanj tehri jawu joye (lol) if you say a stroke can make Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA utter the wrong words in the most important task of announcing his Mansoos publicly. It is very shameful to see you say that 52nd Dai RA can utter fake words but a disgruntled half brother Mazoon will always say the truth.In addition to attacking the rutba of Mukasir,you have also attacked the rutba of Dai Mutlaq.
About "most beloved" these are words of Syedna Burhanuddin RA in his first misak that he used while talking about his mazoon as said by STS RA. Again this shows how much respect you have for Syedna Burhanuddin RA.
Your propaganda won't work here. I have already shown you where the 52nd Dai RA calls his Mansoos " al walad al ahab".If you would like I would show you how Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA did zikar of hadiyat of his sons in his Risalah Shareefah.Doesn't mean he did nass on all his sons.
Yes please go ahead and show me where did SKQ RA said he can't remember about his brothers giving sajda to him. I would like to see the context of discussion. One of his brothers Shz Baqir bs Jamaluddin used to give him sajda and use words similar to mansoos in his writings.
https://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report- ... in-2118053
"I remember my sisters would sometimes do so (offer him sajda). I do not remember if my brothers did it," he added

How convenient of you to indulge in hearsay and fabrication and lies when that person has passed away.Why stop at Shz Baqir Bs? Take Hatim Bs's name as well as he also passed away before Khuzaima made his claim. Oh wait you cannot as he was present during Nass e Jali in Raudat Tahera.I challenge you to post a picture of Baqir bs giving sajda to Khuzaima or else you will be condemned for attributing false tohmat on a person who has passed away.

Regardless, key point is Mufaddal Saifuddin who many elders of those times have observed used to do sajda to SKQ RA. (This is discussed here - https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cit ... 657792.cms) Yes I am contemplating what I am saying. several learned during that time did do sajda. I and general mumineen were not aware that sajda is offered only to mansoos. The concerns to open declaration are similar to time of Rasulullah SA due to which he also indicated several times that Ali was his mansoos but did not openly say so until Ghadeer AFTER Allah Subhanahu granted him ismat thrice. There could be concerns to open declaration but the learned did what they did - some such as Miyasaheb Ibrahim Yamani continued (doing Sajda) till his demise and some others such as Mufaddal Saifuddin did inkaar after iqraar.
Your history is weak. In front of Quraish, Rasulullah SAW declared Imam Ali AS to be his Wasi.

Again convenient of you to slander Miyasaheb Ibrahim bhai Yamani as he has passed away. His own son Sk Shabbir bhai Yamani who was a personal secretary of Khuzaima for many years has called Khuzaima a dawedaar and prayed lanat on him.Is there anyone from Miyasaheb Ibrahim Yamani's family who has accepted Khuzaima's claim?

Also if you hold Miyasaheb Ibrahim bhai Yamani in such high esteem,then why don't you accept his nass diary which also has the signature of the Naas 52nd Dai RA? tsk tsk





First you said these adults were "stopped". When I pointed out that its not possible they could be stopped you change your goal post again.
I personally know a family who were stopped to attend Janazah Mubarakah of the 52nd Dai RA.They were told to not leave and stay there at his bungalow.I cannot disclose their names so I don't mind conceding this information.



All actions with SKQ RA janaza were as per allowance and past practices of Shariat Mohammediah. Janaza of Dai is different.
Different as in Wajeh Mubarak cannot be shown but the body can be kept for 10-11 days without burial,right?

It wasn't enough to drive straight from the airport to the burial site after 10-11 days,but No,a helicopter ride was mandatory. PR victim-card points are a must. Like I said,Allah SWT the best of planners has shown Taher and Khuzaima everything they accused Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA of. Adl of Allah SWT

Take ibrat and stop defending the indefensible.
No I did not say that STF did not take raza for the domain name. I don't even know if he is the one who registered it (neither do you). All I said was just because a domain was registered does not mean and should not mean that SKQ RA disclosed his amanat of nass events on 17th Shaban 1385 to others. Rest of your para is plain rhetoric.

A Domain was registered for the fitnat before the wafaat and if it was Taher as you suggested then it is obvious Khuzaima gave approval for the same.

Stop twisting things. What I have said before multiple times is followers like you @James did not follow Misak in first place when you did not believe in SMB RA mazoon and second guessed SMB RA. Mazoon and Mukasir after death of Dai are important rutbas but they have to be followed in order of these rutbas. The Dai which established these rutbas is no longer there and that is why the order in following them is important. What part of this do you not understand ? Or do you believe that mazoon and mukasir are equal ?


These are established dawat practices. Role of mazoon after death of previous dai is established and its central.


Please quote Dawat texts which say that in the matter or Nass,the word of the Mazoon of the Naas is to be taken over the words of the Naas himself. Or any dawat texts that the words of the Mazoon are to be taken over the words of the Mukasir in the matter of Nass.Now don't be manufacturing things out of thin air. Support your wild fancilful claims with some evidence.
Yes agreed. Both Mazoon and Mukasir are fallible positions but mazoon is truthful and his truthfullness is beyond doubt. I would follow the mazoon above mukasir (and certainly above Shezadas like Mr Abdul Qadir). As per dawat kitab, he would speak the truth even if it goes against him. Additionally SKQ was also mansoos. Many including Miyasaheb Ibrahim yamani and your master Mufaddal did Sajda to him for several years. In fact your master Mufaddal wrote to SKQ RA letter in which he referred to SMB RA and SKQ RA together as "bewe maula" and prayed for both of them together for their long lives till Qiyamat. Also, in STS RA zaman, he wrote a different letter to Syedna that presence of SKQ RA is similar to STS and SMB ("Hum ghulaamo ne em-aj laagtu hatu ke aa toh Taher Saifuddin Maula TUS hum ghulaamo na darmiyaan waaz farmaavi rahya chhe ane em laagtu hatu ke aa toh Burhanuddin Maula TUS hum ghulaamo na darmiyaan waaz farmaavi rahya chhe.") - ref http://www.mostbelovedson.com/uncategor ... bs-letter/. Who did iqraar before inkaar now ?

In fact similar sentiments are expressed in same letter twice by Mufaddal Saifuddin. "Saglu araz toh nathi kari sakto magar em araz karu chhu ke Kakaji Saheb nu har cheez aap be (2) Maula si ghanu miltu aave chhe ane sagli jagah logo bhi em-aj kahe chhe ke aa toh Taher Saifuddin Maula TUS ya Burhanuddin Maula TUS padhaara chhe"

On one hand you completely dismiss Miyasaheb Ibrahim Yamani's Nass documentation to be fake (I am presuming this,if you consider to be not fake then this paragraph doesn't apply to you) and on the other hand you bring a letter as your supporting evidence? Seriously lol.

I'll happily discuss the letters if you consider Miyasaheb Ibrahim Yamani's nass documentation along with his son's nass documentation to be true. :)

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

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

#2810

Unread post by byculla » Fri May 29, 2020 11:25 am

@James - most of your rhetoric I have already responded to you previously - including your items in bold and underline. Some such as your idea of Saqifa is extensive and I don't want to go into a discussion with you on this. I have highlighted the important difference between the 2 which is "election" vs a "short waaz". There was no "election" with SKQ RA.

About the DNA Article, again as I mentioned the context is important. I am not sure what context was the question post to SKQ RA. Its entirely possible the question was about his older brothers and sisters. In that context, his response was accurate.

Shz Baqir bs used to have high reverence for SKQ. A note written by him is present on FD website and you can go ahead and read it. It says

"To the greatest Maula and grandest patrician, who shines in the firmament of religion like the full moon, for whom trees and plants and stars bow down in sajda. For he has been given [the signature-alaamat by Sayyidna Taher Saifuddin RA]: <All your blessings come from Allah> Quran Nahl 16:53). These are Allah ta’ala’s words in His Book: All His blessings (ni’am) will be bestowed on him. The tongues of all God’s servants will say to him “Yes!” (na’am=I give you my bay’at). He is Mazoon al-Dawat-al-Gharra’, Khuzaima bhaisaheb Qutbuddin TUS, my lord (sayyid). My soul, my heart, my liver are all fida upon him.

From the humblest ghulam of Maulana, father of us all, TUS,

Muhammad-ul-Baqir Jamaluddin

29 Rabi’ al-Akhar 1398H"

This and several other items about position of mazoon are @ https://www.fatemidawat.com/about/recen ... t-sources/. I understand you may (and do) have different interpretation of these dawat texts including Taj Ul Aqaid (in which it says that mazoon speaks truth even if it goes against him). Thats fine. Its your choice.

No I don't believe in the (Fake) nass letter produced in name of Miyasaheb Ibrahim Yamani. Yes he has passed away and also has all the shahids mentioned in the letter. The letter itself was produced and not even talked about publicly until after SMB RA death. Kothar has attributed a number of things to SMB RA including saying he himself wrote the Sherullah Munajat Sharifa in 2013 (post stroke) so if you come up with a nass letter in his name is not surprising. It happened in time of Syedna Dawood RA as well.

I understand that his ex-personal secretary (Shabbir Yamani) has chosen a different route. Throughout his life while he was in khidmat of SKQ RA he was sidelined. He suffered. In fact his son suffered physically as well in incident well known and documented. He knew what his future would be if he continues with his support of SKQ. Several believers in SKQ RA know that he himself used to say that Miyasaheb Ibrahim Yamani used to do Sajda to SKQ RA. I know he would say otherwise now.

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

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

#2811

Unread post by byculla » Fri May 29, 2020 12:03 pm

Providing you evidence about Kothar's version that 2013 munajat was written by SMB RA post stroke in 1434. This munajat had 72 bands. Attached is extract from page 3. Do you think SMB RA wrote this post stroke in the year 1434H ? This is Kothar's publication. (Of course its rhetorical question. I know your answer is Yes.). For those who have witnessed SMB RA condition during that time in particular in person, this should be enough to see what can happen in his name.

In summary, things happened in SMB RA name (both towards the end of SMB RA daur and later) including 1388 letter.
Attachments
Munajat.png

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

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

#2812

Unread post by byculla » Fri May 29, 2020 12:46 pm

james wrote: Fri May 29, 2020 10:07 am
It doesn't matter eh? You have a problem with "objects" Never go to Makkah please. Do you now realize how stupid you sound?
It can only be a Mufaddali who doesn't see the difference between Sajda to Kaaba and Sajda to TV. Can't believe you still stand justifying this. My counter question is do you realize how stupid you sound ? Yes I have confessed I have limited knowledge in Arabic but I am muslim enough to get the difference between the two.

I don't want to go on endless discussion with you on this but - I mean don't you see the difference between the two ? For you Kaaba is just an Object ?

UnhappyBohra
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 2:23 pm

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

#2813

Unread post by UnhappyBohra » Fri May 29, 2020 1:31 pm

Zampa Bazaar is giving green light to doing sajda to TV, soon it will be OK to do arti with a little diya to pictures of MS......, I think they have already signed the community up for ghar wapasi. TV, Kaabatullah, both were built By Ibrahim nabi, both were mentioned in the Quran....same-to-same according to Fake53 and Jamie boy of Zampa Bazaar.....

UnhappyBohra
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 2:23 pm

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

#2814

Unread post by UnhappyBohra » Fri May 29, 2020 1:36 pm

Also, equating a letter allegedly signed by Miyasaab Yamaani (a signature that is different from all his public signatures Before and after 1388) to his act of doing sajdaa to SKQ or his Madeh written for SKQ, is the typical smoke and mirrors tactic used by the MS clan....no one is fooled. Apples and Oranges......

objectiveobserver53
Posts: 523
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 2:29 pm

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

#2815

Unread post by objectiveobserver53 » Fri May 29, 2020 6:35 pm

Those who can lie about what their Dai just said, can lie about anything!

Listen to how Moiz twists SMB's words....Anybody who can sit and watch their father struggle in this manner for the sake of their own benefit is not a Mumin, let alone a person fit to lead mumineen. They will stoop to ANYTHING including forging signatures and letters just so they can grab power and usurp the rightful successor.

We will keep posting this here to remind the community how they were taken for a ride.
Attachments
Maru Naam Mohammed Che.m4a
(677.35 KiB) Downloaded 38 times

dal-chaval-palidu
Posts: 673
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:46 am

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

#2816

Unread post by dal-chaval-palidu » Fri May 29, 2020 10:46 pm

UnhappyBohra wrote: Fri May 29, 2020 1:36 pm Also, equating a letter allegedly signed by Miyasaab Yamaani (a signature that is different from all his public signatures Before and after 1388) to his act of doing sajdaa to SKQ or his Madeh written for SKQ, is the typical smoke and mirrors tactic used by the MS clan....no one is fooled. Apples and Oranges......

I did not know that. Was his signature in that letter different from all his other public signatures?

btw, when did this Miyasaab Yamaani (whose signature is on the year 1388 letter) pass away?

And what is the name of his son, grandson, great-grandson, etc.? Thanks.

UnhappyBohra
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 2:23 pm

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

#2817

Unread post by UnhappyBohra » Sat May 30, 2020 6:19 pm

dal-chaval-palidu wrote: Fri May 29, 2020 10:46 pm
UnhappyBohra wrote: Fri May 29, 2020 1:36 pm Also, equating a letter allegedly signed by Miyasaab Yamaani (a signature that is different from all his public signatures Before and after 1388) to his act of doing sajdaa to SKQ or his Madeh written for SKQ, is the typical smoke and mirrors tactic used by the MS clan....no one is fooled. Apples and Oranges......

I did not know that. Was his signature in that letter different from all his other public signatures?

btw, when did this Miyasaab Yamaani (whose signature is on the year 1388 letter) pass away?

And what is the name of his son, grandson, great-grandson, etc.? Thanks.
STF was asked in court whether he believed the letter and he said that he did not. One of the reasons he gave, and I can’t remember exactly which one it was, but he pointed out either that the signature has an extra Alif or a missing Alif compared to how Miyasaab Yamani signed his madehs and his letters.

Crater Lake
Posts: 353
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2014 10:46 pm

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

#2818

Unread post by Crater Lake » Sat May 30, 2020 8:47 pm

objectiveobserver53 wrote: Fri May 29, 2020 6:35 pm Those who can lie about what their Dai just said, can lie about anything!

Listen to how Moiz twists SMB's words....Anybody who can sit and watch their father struggle in this manner for the sake of their own benefit is not a Mumin, let alone a person fit to lead mumineen. They will stoop to ANYTHING including forging signatures and letters just so they can grab power and usurp the rightful successor.

We will keep posting this here to remind the community how they were taken for a ride.
Every time I listen to this it sends a chill down my spine to think how callously a father was treated and how coldly and blatantly a community was led astray.

dal-chaval-palidu
Posts: 673
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:46 am

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

#2819

Unread post by dal-chaval-palidu » Sat May 30, 2020 11:24 pm

UnhappyBohra wrote: Sat May 30, 2020 6:19 pm
dal-chaval-palidu wrote: Fri May 29, 2020 10:46 pm


I did not know that. Was his signature in that letter different from all his other public signatures?

btw, when did this Miyasaab Yamaani (whose signature is on the year 1388 letter) pass away?

And what is the name of his son, grandson, great-grandson, etc.? Thanks.
STF was asked in court whether he believed the letter and he said that he did not. One of the reasons he gave, and I can’t remember exactly which one it was, but he pointed out either that the signature has an extra Alif or a missing Alif compared to how Miyasaab Yamani signed his madehs and his letters.

The fraud related to the nass audio, the letter signature related fraud, these are the reasons that this court case is important. It is about
the community - and that is why it is more than just a fight over properties.

And when did this particular Miyasaab Yamani pass away? Was it a while back?

Because another Miyasaab Yamani passed away a few years back. Was he the son, or, was it his signature on this nass letter?

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

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

#2820

Unread post by james » Sun May 31, 2020 12:04 am

SMB RA himself said in the bayan mubarak on 17th Shaban 1385H that the name "Khuzaima" was most beloved to Syedna Taher Saifuddin while appointing him as mazoon publicly.
Please provide audio where the 52nd Dai RA says the name Khuzaima was "most beloved" to Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA on 17th Shaban 1385H. You qutbis (returning the favor here) have lied enough about this and already been caught so many times about this event but still you don't have an iota of shame to stop attributing false statements to the 52nd Dai RA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NO7z_I12dq0

Your propaganda won't work here. I have already shown you where the 52nd Dai RA calls his Mansoos " al walad al ahab".If you would like I would show you how Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA did zikar of hadiyat of his sons in his Risalah Shareefah.Doesn't mean he did nass on all his sons.
No wonder you completely sidestepped this in your latest post which will replied to.

1379H - (On the 75th Milad of Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA - 27 Zil Q) - Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA took the misaaq of Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS (along with Shz Qaid Johar Bs). In his misaal shareef Syedna RA referred to Syedna Mufaddal TUS as follow:
و الكوكب الانور الاغر عالي قدر مفضل
(Ref: Risala Shareefah Hikmat al Ghaybah al Qudsaniyah al Abadiyah, Page 546)

1382H - (On the Milad of Syedna Taher Saifuddin- 27 Zil Q) - During the days of Golden Jubilee - Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA bestowed the sharaf of "Haddiyat" on Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS in Ghurratul Masajid. (Syedna's TUS age was 17 years, which is a significant age according to Dawat philosophy. Many Duat were given Haddiyat at age 17). For this occasion, Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA gifted Syedna TUS a copy of Kitab "Simt al Haqaiq". On the first page it said the following, followed by Syedna's RA Tawqee'.
الى الولد الاحب الاسعد الكوكب المتلالي
[To al Walad al Ahab al As'ad al Kawkab al Mutalaali]
(Ref: Risala Shareefah Hikmat al Ghaybah al Qudsaniyah al Abadiyah, Page 546)

1391H - (Night of Milaad un Nabi 12 Rabi al Awwal) - Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA bestowed Syedna TUS with the title of "Aqeeq al Yemen". In TWO misaal shareef, Syedna RA refers to Syedna TUS as "al Walad al Ahab" and 'Qurra tul Aiyn"
(Ref: Risala Shareefah Hikmat al Ghaybah al Qudsaniyah al Abadiyah, Page 574)

1407H - (26th Ramadan). After the demise of Ameer al Jamea Shehzada Yusuf Bs, Syedna RA appointed 4 Omara of Jamea. Syedna RA then instructed all 4 sahebo, that whenever any of their decisions differed, then Syedna Mufaddal's TUS decision will be final.
(Ref: Risala Shareefah Hikmat al Ghaybah al Qudsaniyah al Abadiyah, Page 594

1417H - On the iftetah of al Masjid al Moazzam (Surat), Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA recalled Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin's TUS azeem khidmat in renovating this Masjid. In the bayaan, Syedna RA referred to Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS as:
الولد الاحب، قرة العين، عقيق اليمن، مفضل بهائي سيف الدين
(Ref: Documentary video prepared by al Maraz al Burhani)
1408H - 23 Moharram. Syedna Mufaddal TUS began the work on Jame' al Aqmar in Cairo. In that years Misaal Mubarak, when referring to this renovation Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA refers to Syedna Mufaddal TUS as:
نجلي الاحب الاعز العالي القدر.
(MY most beloved son)
(Ref: Risala Shareefah Hikmat al Ghaybah al Qudsaniyah al Abadiyah, Page 595)
Most important lesson here. A simple Google translates AL as THE. Al walad al ahab translates to "THE BELOVED SON" Not sure why you Qutbis keep peddling it as 'my'

In 1408H however,the 52nd Dai RA referred to Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS as "my most beloved son"

Something for you to chew on.


As a bonus,Look how Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA refers to his sons in his Risalah Shareefah.
I raised my radiant children into the sky of the honorable [position of] haddiyat. I did so with the ever-flowing taa’eed of the Imam. These children rose in the sky of haddiyat like shining stars. I then gave them honorable, auspicious, lofty titles (laqabs). My radiant, respected, son, the wise—the one who is like a precious pearl, nay like a radiant star—the apple of my eye, the one known as Husain, I gave him the laqab of Husamuddin (Mukasir Saheb Syedi Husain Bhaisaheb Husamuddin DM). By doing so, I seek the barakat of the laqab of two great Dais among the rightly guiding Doat (Syedna Husain Husamuddin RA, the 21st Dai, and Syedna Abdul Husein Husamuddin RA, the 48th Dai). As for my respected, radiant son, the shining star, the one named Tayyib (Shz. Abd al-Tayyib Bhaisaheb), I am bestowing him with the laqab of Zakiuddin, seeking barakat from the laqab of Syedna Zakiuddin, the pillar of monotheists. As for my respected, radiant son, the wise—the one who is like a cherished pearl and well-guarded jewel. He is the Najm (star) of auspicious prosperity; he is known as Yusuf (Ameerul Jamea Shz. Yusuf Najmuddin). He is the one for whose excellent articulation and capacity for bayaan I hope and expect that he will be praised and lauded. I give him the laqab of Najmuddin seeking blessing from the laqab of our forefather, the noble, the unparalleled: Moulana [Abdulqadir] Najmuddin (47th Dai) as well as the other two noble, unique Dais, both known as Yusuf Najmuddin.
In his risalah shareefah, Amthaalo Sidarate Muntahaa (1377H, p. 394-95), Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA describes Shahzadah Shabbir Bhaisaheb Nooruddin’s DM haddiyat in detail. The following are excerpts from that risalah shareefah:
And I raised to the lofty sky of haddiyat in this majlis (Yawme Maba’th) my aforementioned son, the one known as Shabbir, with the ilhaam of Allah and the ilhaam of His Wali. This was a measure of gratitude for the many recurring bounties of Allah upon me. I gave him the laqab of Nooruddin as a means to gain the auspiciousness of the laqab of al-Dai al-Ajal al-Awhad Noor Mohammed Nooruddin, the one who is madfoon in Mandvi, the one who has been given the laqab of Nooruddin both in word and meaning. This son of mine rose in the sky of haddiyat like a shining star… to spend himself in the khidmat of the Radiant Dawat in such a way that he outdoes all others… [May Allah] make him a servant (khaadim) of the Imam, who though is absent from our sight, through the presence of his Dai remains in our midst.


https://believesyednaqutbuddin.com/2014 ... anslation/

http://qutbibohras.blogspot.com/2015/09 ... d-son.html