Raudat Tahera Incident

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.
Truth-Prevails
Posts: 146
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 1:02 am

Raudat Tahera Incident

#1

Unread post by Truth-Prevails » Tue Feb 17, 2015 11:49 pm

Just heard that the Burhani Guard goons attacked some mumineen who had come for ziyarat at Raudat Tahera. They are believers in SKQ and had gone for ziyarat today as it is his Milad.

It seems the Raudat Manager, Mr. Yunus was also there and was a silent onlooker, while people got cursed, pushed, heckled and hit. It seems some ladies were also pushed.

zinger
Posts: 2031
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 2:40 am

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#2

Unread post by zinger » Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:53 am

Truth-Prevails wrote:Just heard that the Burhani Guard goons attacked some mumineen who had come for ziyarat at Raudat Tahera. They are believers in SKQ and had gone for ziyarat today as it is his Milad.

It seems the Raudat Manager, Mr. Yunus was also there and was a silent onlooker, while people got cursed, pushed, heckled and hit. It seems some ladies were also pushed.
some small questions here.

1. does this mean that the BG/kothar have records of who follows whom?
2. or did the visitors perhaps declare themselves as followers of ex-Mazun Maula when they reached there?
3. Or were they dressed differently (i hear rumours sometimes of them adopting a different kind of dress code. dont know how much is true)?
4, Or were they people how have openly declared themselves as followers of ex-Mazun Maula in the past

i think these must be people who have perhaps openly declared themselves and hence, since it is the saalgirah of ex-Mazun Maula, the BG were perhaps on their guard

nonetheless, if what you say is true, then it is definitely wrong and illegal and immoral. i remember this was the straw that broke the back of this camel in pehli jumma of Ramzan last year

Truth-Prevails
Posts: 146
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 1:02 am

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#3

Unread post by Truth-Prevails » Wed Feb 18, 2015 3:15 am

1. does this mean that the BG/kothar have records of who follows whom?
2. or did the visitors perhaps declare themselves as followers of ex-Mazun Maula when they reached there?
3. Or were they dressed differently (i hear rumours sometimes of them adopting a different kind of dress code. dont know how much is true)?
4, Or were they people how have openly declared themselves as followers of ex-Mazun Maula in the past
To the best of my knowledge

1. They have records on who is openly with SKQ. Also they have blocked their ejamaats
2. The mumineen have to inform the JJ police station and they get escorted to the outside with police. But then Mr. Yunus the manager is supposed to ensure their safety inside.
3. Dress is the same. but No fancy safa or color coordinated ridas as is common now
4. They are out in the open about their allegiance to SKQ

The Burhani Guards knew about their visit and also the Jehadi group of Taher hotelwala and Juzar Soni were leading the group. they kicked one person when he was doing sajda near Burhauddin Aqa RA qabar and then also prevented him from ziyarat by pulling him from his neck..

Lots of laanats were uttered on them and also bad words like you are Shaitan etc.

SBM
Posts: 6352
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 4:01 am

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#4

Unread post by SBM » Wed Feb 18, 2015 2:28 pm

Video of the Raudat Tahera incident
raudat tahera.mp4
(13.17 MiB) Downloaded 5625 times

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

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#5

Unread post by ghulam muhammed » Wed Feb 18, 2015 6:28 pm

watsup msg :-

Forwarded as Received :-

We all have heard Aqa Mola's bayan of Ma Fatematuz Zehra (a.s.). We remember Mola's voice filled with gham when he used to deliver ke kewi reet si Ma Fatema na gaal par tamacha maara and peeth par dirra, then Mola with full josh use to say ke agar musalman na mohalla ma koi bairo par haath uthaave to khalbali thai jai, aa to Ma Fatema che kewo e dukh bharo manzar hase.

Aaj na khalifa Mufaddal Saifuddin hoo bahu awwal saani nu mixture che. Aaje Raudat Tahera ma Mufaddal Saifuddin na goonda Fatemi Dawat na bairo par haath uthaaya. Gazab e dukh bharo manzar hato ane e bhi Mola na roza ma. Mufaddal Saifuddin khaali Bohra o nej daraavi dhamkaavi ne mohto Don ya khalifo bani sake che, Dai banvu ehna naseeb ma nathi. He should hand it over to the right successor.

rational_guy
Posts: 205
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 6:21 am

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#6

Unread post by rational_guy » Thu Feb 19, 2015 2:22 am

Breakaway Dawoodi Bohra group clashes with Burhani guards

By: Express News Service | Mumbai | Posted: February 18, 2015 11:12 pm
The intra-community rift amongst Dawoodi Bohras continues with the most recent clash at Raudat Tahera mausoleum in Bhendi Bazaar, Wednesday, when a group of over 30 supporters of Khuzaima Qutbuddin reached the mausoleum for ziyarat (visit) to mark Qutbuddin’s birthday. The visitors allege that they were manhandled by Burhani guards, working under the administration of current Dai al-Mutlaq Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin.
The incident happened at 8.30 am Wednesday morning. Shabbir Tambawala, who joined the break-away group of Qutbuddin following 52nd Dai al-Mutlaq Syedna Mohammad Burhanuddin’s death, claimed that despite being accompanied by JJ police station’s officials, they were shoved around in the mausoleum where the bodies of the 51st and 52nd Dai have been buried for community members to pay their respects.
Qutbuddin, former Syedna’s half-brother, is the rival claimant to the title of 53rd Syedna that is currently held by Saifuddin, his nephew. The community has been left divided following the fallout between the former Syedna’s family.
On Wednesday, 65-year-old Haider Calcuttawala, who was also a part of the group that visited the mausoleum, was “pushed to the ground”. “When I stepped out in protest, I was kicked,” said Tambawala, adding that he visited the mausoleum everyday when Syedna Burhanuddin was alive and had to shift to Thane following his decision to support Qutbuddin.
Another Qutbuddin supporter, who requested anonymity, said, “The police officials came inside and helped us out.”
A non-cognizable report was filed at JJ police station after the incident. According to Tasneem Mansoor, the complainant, the guards, in their civilian clothes, pushed her while she attempted to pay her respects to the graves. The complaint said that they were “verbally abused and manhandled”.
Spokesperson from Saifuddin’s administration remained unavailable for comment.

http://indianexpress.com/article/cities ... /#comments

Ozdundee
Posts: 884
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:57 am

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#7

Unread post by Ozdundee » Thu Feb 19, 2015 3:32 am

This is most disturbing development . We condemn this action and wonder I'm what legal authority do the Burhani Gaurds exist . Are they licensed to operate and what is their licensed purpose.

Being In plain cloth or uniformed is immaterial .

Reformist should unite in condemning and making Sms responsible as he is custodian of the tombs and the followers follow direct instructions from the religious aithority. Claims for compensation should also be registered .

If this group or organization exists in Australia , Usa or Europe it is important they get reported for criminal investigations under unauthorized religious extremist militia with overseas sponsorship .

Don't get soft a proportionate legal response to this oppression needs to be given by skq team

rational_guy
Posts: 205
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 6:21 am

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#8

Unread post by rational_guy » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:25 am

Hindustan Times Articles
Attachments
Messages Image(254377803).png

alivasan
Posts: 394
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 9:28 am

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#9

Unread post by alivasan » Fri Feb 20, 2015 12:21 pm

Truth-Prevails wrote:
1. does this mean that the BG/kothar have records of who follows whom?
2. or did the visitors perhaps declare themselves as followers of ex-Mazun Maula when they reached there?
3. Or were they dressed differently (i hear rumours sometimes of them adopting a different kind of dress code. dont know how much is true)?
4, Or were they people how have openly declared themselves as followers of ex-Mazun Maula in the past
Is Juzer soni the one who stays in marol and have shop in qutbi masjid complex named ,"fatemi silver"?

To the best of my knowledge

1. They have records on who is openly with SKQ. Also they have blocked their ejamaats
2. The mumineen have to inform the JJ police station and they get escorted to the outside with police. But then Mr. Yunus the manager is supposed to ensure their safety inside.
3. Dress is the same. but No fancy safa or color coordinated ridas as is common now
4. They are out in the open about their allegiance to SKQ

The Burhani Guards knew about their visit and also the Jehadi group of Taher hotelwala and Juzar Soni were leading the group. they kicked one person when he was doing sajda near Burhauddin Aqa RA qabar and then also prevented him from ziyarat by pulling him from his neck..

Lots of laanats were uttered on them and also bad words like you are Shaitan etc.

alivasan
Posts: 394
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 9:28 am

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#10

Unread post by alivasan » Mon Feb 23, 2015 1:52 pm

Just see few BGI marol member posted inside roza. This incident I think is completely cooked up as not untoward fight incident in posted video.just could hear ladies taking. Pl avoid agitating rumors intended to create rift and hateredby posting videos to provoke hatered

SBM
Posts: 6352
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 4:01 am

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#11

Unread post by SBM » Mon Feb 23, 2015 1:57 pm

This incident I think is completely cooked up
Just like the video of NUSS

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

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#12

Unread post by james » Tue Feb 24, 2015 11:14 pm

zinger wrote: i remember this was the straw that broke the back of this camel in pehli jumma of Ramzan last year
Your own hypocrisy is the straw.

IIRC you wanted/demanded condemnation from Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS after the incident last year.You were then given examples of lack of condemnation or thereof during Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA's era when Asgar Ali Engineer's house was allegedly attacked. You chose to ignore that and used different yardsticks for the same office,

Don't blame the Raudat Tahera incident for your lack of fair judgment, Blame your ownself.

adna_mumin
Posts: 193
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:43 pm

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#13

Unread post by adna_mumin » Tue Feb 24, 2015 11:41 pm

james wrote:
zinger wrote: i remember this was the straw that broke the back of this camel in pehli jumma of Ramzan last year
Your own hypocrisy is the straw.

IIRC you wanted/demanded condemnation from Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS after the incident last year.You were then given examples of lack of condemnation or thereof during Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA's era when Asgar Ali Engineer's house was allegedly attacked. You chose to ignore that and used different yardsticks for the same office,

Don't blame the Raudat Tahera incident for your lack of fair judgment, Blame your ownself.
Complete bunkum and a precise misrepresentation
Perhaps you are too young to have been around then and so are unaware.

Syedna Burhanuddin RA publicly in a audio bayaan which was relayed showed his complete disapproval of those self-proclaimed-guards-and-mafia-in-garb exactly like what was seen in the videos of Raudat incident of last year.

Read: https://mumineennijamaat.wordpress.com/ ... estions-6/

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

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#14

Unread post by james » Wed Feb 25, 2015 12:11 am

adna_mumin wrote:
james wrote: Your own hypocrisy is the straw.

IIRC you wanted/demanded condemnation from Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS after the incident last year.You were then given examples of lack of condemnation or thereof during Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA's era when Asgar Ali Engineer's house was allegedly attacked. You chose to ignore that and used different yardsticks for the same office,

Don't blame the Raudat Tahera incident for your lack of fair judgment, Blame your ownself.
Complete bunkum and a precise misrepresentation
Perhaps you are too young to have been around then and so are unaware.

Syedna Burhanuddin RA publicly in a audio bayaan which was relayed showed his complete disapproval of those self-proclaimed-guards-and-mafia-in-garb exactly like what was seen in the videos of Raudat incident of last year.

Read: https://mumineennijamaat.wordpress.com/ ... estions-6/
"I condemn so and so incident and attack against so and so person or entity"

The above is a typical condemnation statement.After visiting your link,couldn't find the name of Asghar Ali Engineer in Syedna RA's bayan nor the mention of the specific event I'm referring to. Perhaps you can guide me towards it if it exists there.

As you're at an advanced age,can you please mention how the incident of 4 ustads of Jamea was referred to by Syedna RA? Was there condemnation for the same?

Lastly,in the words of the alleged victim Asghar Ali Engineer himself,
In fact this is also one of the qualification that a da`i should be<br>magnanimous and compassionate. If he had been such split would not have<br>taken place in the community. He is known as persecutor of the dissenters. I am the greatest victim of his wrath. I have been assaulted five times, my house and office both were completely destroyed by his followers and he did not utter a word condemning these brutal attacks thanks for magnanimity of Saiyyidna saheb. <p>I have never used an unbecoming word against him even after these attacks whereas he called me 'Shaitan, laeen, Jahannami' and so on
http://dawoodi-bohras.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=131

zinger
Posts: 2031
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 2:40 am

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#15

Unread post by zinger » Wed Feb 25, 2015 12:14 am

james wrote:
zinger wrote: i remember this was the straw that broke the back of this camel in pehli jumma of Ramzan last year
Your own hypocrisy is the straw.

IIRC you wanted/demanded condemnation from Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS after the incident last year.You were then given examples of lack of condemnation or thereof during Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA's era when Asgar Ali Engineer's house was allegedly attacked. You chose to ignore that and used different yardsticks for the same office,

Don't blame the Raudat Tahera incident for your lack of fair judgment, Blame your ownself.
i remember keeping quiet because i saw no reason in prolonging the argument then, as i will do so now.

but i would like to ask you a question. 2 actually!

1. You think Burhanuddin Maula, who is sleeping there, is liking what he is seeing? his own blood not being allowed to do his ziarat?
2. You think its superb fun and fanfare to have hindus come into the Roza, but mumineen, who had no issues with either Dai are stopped?

Should i blame myself for that too?

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

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#16

Unread post by james » Wed Feb 25, 2015 12:26 am

zinger wrote:
james wrote: Your own hypocrisy is the straw.

IIRC you wanted/demanded condemnation from Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS after the incident last year.You were then given examples of lack of condemnation or thereof during Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA's era when Asgar Ali Engineer's house was allegedly attacked. You chose to ignore that and used different yardsticks for the same office,

Don't blame the Raudat Tahera incident for your lack of fair judgment, Blame your ownself.
i remember keeping quiet because i saw no reason in prolonging the argument then, as i will do so now.

but i would like to ask you a question. 2 actually!

1. You think Burhanuddin Maula, who is sleeping there, is liking what he is seeing? his own blood not being allowed to do his ziarat?
2. You think its superb fun and fanfare to have hindus come into the Roza, but mumineen, who had no issues with either Dai are stopped?

Should i blame myself for that too?
Don't change the goalposts.

The matter of contention is your view that alleged lack of condemnation is wrong. You have been shown that the actions of the current office holder is in line with the actions of his predecessor.Therefore,it is your view which is in the wrong here as you believed completely in the predecessor without any prejudice.

"Je kahe ya kare haq che sarasar,
Samju toh samjho,na samju na samjho"

(The above may contain spelling mistakes. For more,listen to 'murshid che logo' )

rational_guy
Posts: 205
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 6:21 am

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#17

Unread post by rational_guy » Wed Feb 25, 2015 12:48 am

When Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA went to Karbala for Zyarat of Imam Husain then some Muslameen also harassed him. Later Syedna Taher Saifuddin sent a message to them, saying that even if you don't like me, but atleast respect me for that fact that I am Zaayir of Imam Husain AS.
After listening to this message, those Muslameen came to Syedna, apologised and continued a very cordial relationship

zinger
Posts: 2031
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 2:40 am

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#18

Unread post by zinger » Wed Feb 25, 2015 1:50 am

James bhai, i must however laud you on digging out a thread which is of vital importance.
i was going through it clearly shows reformists being caught off guard and then evading the topic and trying to jump from one branch to another since they could not defend it any longer

http://dawoodi-bohras.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=131[/quote]

adna_mumin
Posts: 193
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:43 pm

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#19

Unread post by adna_mumin » Wed Feb 25, 2015 7:58 am

"I condemn so and so incident and attack against so and so person or entity"

The above is a typical condemnation statement.After visiting your link,couldn't find the name of Asghar Ali Engineer in Syedna RA's bayan nor the mention of the specific event I'm referring to. Perhaps you can guide me towards it if it exists there.
So unless it is in the words you like to hear it is no condemnation? The author clearly recollects that Moula mentioned of the very incident in question in some detail and then went on to state that quote as it is provided there to show he disapproved of the actions of the few. He even mentioned that he will use law to take action against Engineer. You may still choose to turn blind eye to this as it may be an eyesore but that is a different thing altogether. The hujjat of condemnation is tamaam therefore.
As you're at an advanced age,can you please mention how the incident of 4 ustads of Jamea was referred to by Syedna RA? Was there condemnation for the same?
I am unaware but that does not change what has been said above. You want to bring his whole life and actions now to somehow justify the contemporary time?
Lastly,in the words of the alleged victim Asghar Ali Engineer himself,
Oh, i couldnt believe this. You are not going to believe a mumin when he is quoting Moula RA bayaan but want to quote Engineer and believe his story? Mr. James - your ignorance or politics is showing; and badly so. So stop trying.

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

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#20

Unread post by james » Sat Feb 28, 2015 6:26 am

rational_guy wrote:When Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA went to Karbala for Zyarat of Imam Husain then some Muslameen also harassed him. Later Syedna Taher Saifuddin sent a message to them, saying that even if you don't like me, but atleast respect me for that fact that I am Zaayir of Imam Husain AS.
After listening to this message, those Muslameen came to Syedna, apologised and continued a very cordial relationship
The event that you speak of would have some resemblance to the Raudat Tahera incident if Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA had passed comments or supported people who made comments (Nauzobillah) such as

1) Imam Husain AS was incapable of running Dawat. (Nauzobillah)

2) Imam Husain's dawat was high-jacked and Imam Husain AS did nothing to prevent that or took steps against it to mitigate the damage caused by the hijackers.(Nauzobillah)

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

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#21

Unread post by james » Sat Feb 28, 2015 6:43 am

adna_mumin wrote: So unless it is in the words you like to hear it is no condemnation? The author clearly recollects that Moula mentioned of the very incident in question in some detail and then went on to state that quote as it is provided there to show he disapproved of the actions of the few. He even mentioned that he will use law to take action against Engineer. You may still choose to turn blind eye to this as it may be an eyesore but that is a different thing altogether. The hujjat of condemnation is tamaam therefore.
Are you the author of that blog? The reason I ask is because there has been no mention of Syedna RA's words stating "he will use law to take action against Engineer." on that blog or perhaps I have missed it and you would be kind enough to point out the direct quoted words of Syedna RA.

What you label as "condemnation" is something else differently.Let's not get into dissecting the words of Syedna RA.
I am unaware but that does not change what has been said above. You want to bring his whole life and actions now to somehow justify the contemporary time?
It is rather convenient that you don't know how the incident of 4 Jamea Ustads was referred to by the then Syedna RA.

Let me be upfront with you. For people with baser intellect amongst us,comparisons are a way to make them understand the similarities between the Naas and Mansoos.

I'm sure you are aware of how people who question the Maula of their time are regarded by people of iman.Is it any different from the actions of Ibn Khuwaisara during Prophet Mohammed SAW's time? Or when Abu Hanafiyah casted aspersions on the staff of Imam Jafer us Sadiq AS? There are hundreds of examples such as this. There is one related by a commentator on the blog itself. Regarding the event of Majdu LA's nose being cut off by a mumin.

Oh, i couldnt believe this. You are not going to believe a mumin when he is quoting Moula RA bayaan but want to quote Engineer and believe his story? Mr. James - your ignorance or politics is showing; and badly so. So stop trying.
One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist.Who you consider as a mumin is on par with Engineer in my view.

In a debate,it is better to not bring emotional claptrap into the mix.Stick with the facts and two sides of the story.I presented the actual words of the alleged victim himself.If there had been a stern condemnation by the then Syedna RA,the mumineen who were debating with Engineer would have brought it up in the thread itself.

Lastly for the record,let me state that I hold the view that every action of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA was HAQ and every action of Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS is HAQ.

Simples.

SBM
Posts: 6352
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 4:01 am

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#22

Unread post by SBM » Sat Feb 28, 2015 9:29 am

.
Let's not get into dissecting the words of Syedna RA.
Really James
How do you justify Muffadali Goons doing the same with SMB Nuss Video

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

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#23

Unread post by Adam » Sat Feb 28, 2015 2:45 pm

zinger wrote: 1. You think Burhanuddin Maula, who is sleeping there, is liking what he is seeing? his own blood not being allowed to do his ziarat?
2. You think its superb fun and fanfare to have hindus come into the Roza, but mumineen, who had no issues with either Dai are stopped?
@Zinger
1. Moulantena Fatema's condition was to stop any of her enemies from doing her Ziyarat. Moulaa Ali AS made sure her wishes were fulfilled and prevented the "others" from attending, and doing Ziyarat, One riwayat states that Moulana Ali made multiple qabrs, in order to hide the true identity of her Qabr.
Now, would you say the same?
Why Moulana Ali AS stopped the father in law (No. 1) of her father (Rasulullah), or close companion from doing her ziyarat?

It's an illogical argument.

2. These people aren't "mumineen". They are the enemies of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA, because they have refused to follow his Mansoos, Syedna Mufaddal TUS.

3. Why all the hypocrisy on KQ's Milad? Why didn't they bother going to Raudat Tahera on Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin's Milad?
Or were they only going for Syedna Taher Saifuddin's ziyarat?

SBM
Posts: 6352
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 4:01 am

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#24

Unread post by SBM » Sat Feb 28, 2015 2:54 pm

Why didn't they bother going to Raudat Tahera on Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin's Milad?
Adam
I know you must be very tired after making so many ROTIS that you forgot that it is BURHANI GOONDAS who have beaten up many of the followers of SKQ
Just in case your memory is failing you, you can find the video of such incident and media report on this forum

zinger
Posts: 2031
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 2:40 am

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#25

Unread post by zinger » Mon Mar 02, 2015 4:37 am

james wrote:
zinger wrote: i remember keeping quiet because i saw no reason in prolonging the argument then, as i will do so now.

but i would like to ask you a question. 2 actually!

1. You think Burhanuddin Maula, who is sleeping there, is liking what he is seeing? his own blood not being allowed to do his ziarat?
2. You think its superb fun and fanfare to have hindus come into the Roza, but mumineen, who had no issues with either Dai are stopped?

Should i blame myself for that too?
Don't change the goalposts.

The matter of contention is your view that alleged lack of condemnation is wrong. You have been shown that the actions of the current office holder is in line with the actions of his predecessor.Therefore,it is your view which is in the wrong here as you believed completely in the predecessor without any prejudice.

"Je kahe ya kare haq che sarasar,
Samju toh samjho,na samju na samjho"

(The above may contain spelling mistakes. For more,listen to 'murshid che logo' )
very well, let me not change the goalposts. let me tackle what you say.

Point no. 1: Lack of condemnation? Well, i think that part of the question has been answered for you. I have myself heard Burhanuddin Maula say that we must not wish ill will for fellow mumineen and not take the law into your hand.

Point no. 2: There has to be condemnation because the other camp of ex-Mazun Maula is not in anyways, coming in the way or obstructing what Mufaddal Maula is doing. They are not going around saying Mufaddal Maula is wrong, he is a so and so, his children are so and so, laanat on him etc etc etc. what i do see is a dignified silence

Point no. 3: forget condemnation, the least Mufaddal Maula could do is ask his people "aa su lagawu che. apne mumineen che. aa badhu apne na soubhe". do you hear that? forget condemnation, do you even hear a peep of restraint? i dont.

this is why my back was broken with that particular straw

zinger
Posts: 2031
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 2:40 am

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#26

Unread post by zinger » Mon Mar 02, 2015 4:41 am

Adam wrote:
zinger wrote: 1. You think Burhanuddin Maula, who is sleeping there, is liking what he is seeing? his own blood not being allowed to do his ziarat?
2. You think its superb fun and fanfare to have hindus come into the Roza, but mumineen, who had no issues with either Dai are stopped?
@Zinger
1. Moulantena Fatema's condition was to stop any of her enemies from doing her Ziyarat. Moulaa Ali AS made sure her wishes were fulfilled and prevented the "others" from attending, and doing Ziyarat, One riwayat states that Moulana Ali made multiple qabrs, in order to hide the true identity of her Qabr.
Now, would you say the same?
Why Moulana Ali AS stopped the father in law (No. 1) of her father (Rasulullah), or close companion from doing her ziyarat?

It's an illogical argument.

2. These people aren't "mumineen". They are the enemies of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA, because they have refused to follow his Mansoos, Syedna Mufaddal TUS.

3. Why all the hypocrisy on KQ's Milad? Why didn't they bother going to Raudat Tahera on Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin's Milad?
Or were they only going for Syedna Taher Saifuddin's ziyarat?
Point 1:
Well Adam bhai, if you want draw parallels with Ahle Bait, then there is nothing i can say.
I have said this before and i say it again. the kothar is an expert on manipulating the emotions and feelings of normal mumineen by bring in Panjatan Pak AS because then we do not wish to debate.

Point 2:
I dont think anyone here, apart from the reformists, are enemies of Burhanuddin Maula. If at all, i find us, the conservative side, who are becoming enemies by doing things that are contrary to what he has taught (ban certain professions depending on whims and fancies, do not allow women to study, make them sit in one corner of the home, force people to subscribe to FMB, faakhir najwa and covers on every occasions, etc etc etc)

Point 3:
Why they didnt go on Burhanuddin Maulas milad is not my concern. let them answer that. dont even bother asking me that

true_bohra
Posts: 719
Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2013 4:19 am

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#27

Unread post by true_bohra » Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:01 am

zinger wrote: Point 2:
I dont think anyone here, apart from the reformists, are enemies of Burhanuddin Maula. If at all, i find us, the conservative side, who are becoming enemies by doing things that are contrary to what he has taught (ban certain professions depending on whims and fancies, do not allow women to study, make them sit in one corner of the home, force people to subscribe to FMB, faakhir najwa and covers on every occasions, etc etc etc)
People use to wear Black clothes during times of Syedna Taher Saifuddin Saheb RA era which he banned.

People were clean shaven during Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin Saheb RA era...He motivated for beard....contrary to the time we live in...was that also conservative step

If change is to be blamed then why not challenge this acts...

I guess you wont hesitate to tell the truth that these changes made the community much more distinct and developed.

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

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#28

Unread post by lawgraduate » Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:23 am


this is why abdes are mushrik

they associate sunnah of Muhammed(s)to their dai, beard is sunnah of Muhammed(s) and not sunnah of Taher saifuddin, white clothes were recommended by our prophet and it is not some thing new.

and those abdes who keep beard for the sake of TS are doing the whole thing wrong and Inshallah they wont get any thawaab of fulfilling sunnah, because their intention is Ts and not the prophet of Islam Muhammed(s).

instead of giving due credit to prophet and Islam they tend to make it some thing which comes from ts or mb
.

zinger
Posts: 2031
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 2:40 am

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#29

Unread post by zinger » Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:36 am

true_bohra wrote:
zinger wrote: Point 2:
I dont think anyone here, apart from the reformists, are enemies of Burhanuddin Maula. If at all, i find us, the conservative side, who are becoming enemies by doing things that are contrary to what he has taught (ban certain professions depending on whims and fancies, do not allow women to study, make them sit in one corner of the home, force people to subscribe to FMB, faakhir najwa and covers on every occasions, etc etc etc)
People use to wear Black clothes during times of Syedna Taher Saifuddin Saheb RA era which he banned. - i dont know why they were banned. Black is the colour of mourning, perhaps it was to distinguish Dawoodi Bohras from Mughal Shias. Could you tell me why it was banned?

People were clean shaven during Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin Saheb RA era...He motivated for beard....contrary to the time we live in...was that also conservative step. No, infact in Islam, if im not wrong, keeping a beard was the sunnah of the Prophet. If at all, Burhanuddin Maula did a good thing by insist people keep a beard.

If change is to be blamed then why not challenge this acts... TB bhai, we are not talking of change for progress, we are talking of change for regress here

I guess you wont hesitate to tell the truth that these changes made the community much more distinct and developed.in a way, i think carving a distant identity is a good thing. it might have some flaws, but in the larger scheme of things, it is good. so yes, i wont hesitate
TB bhai, i have replied in bold

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

Re: Raudat Tahera Incident

#30

Unread post by james » Mon Mar 02, 2015 7:42 am

zinger wrote: very well, let me not change the goalposts. let me tackle what you say.

Point no. 1: Lack of condemnation? Well, i think that part of the question has been answered for you. I have myself heard Burhanuddin Maula say that we must not wish ill will for fellow mumineen and not take the law into your hand.

Point no. 2: There has to be condemnation because the other camp of ex-Mazun Maula is not in anyways, coming in the way or obstructing what Mufaddal Maula is doing. They are not going around saying Mufaddal Maula is wrong, he is a so and so, his children are so and so, laanat on him etc etc etc. what i do see is a dignified silence

Point no. 3: forget condemnation, the least Mufaddal Maula could do is ask his people "aa su lagawu che. apne mumineen che. aa badhu apne na soubhe". do you hear that? forget condemnation, do you even hear a peep of restraint? i dont.

this is why my back was broken with that particular straw
And so you keep flogging the proverbial horse.


Point 1

Don't twist the words of Syedna RA. What you heard was " fellow mumineen" which would be a wrong analogy in this instance. It's true Syedna RA mentioned "upholding the law of the land" umpteenth of times.The alleged victims of the Raudat Tahera incident took legal remedy and that should have been the end of the matter,What that incident has got to do with your "Iman" is something I don't understand.

Someone allegedly get attacked in Raudat Tahera so you stop believing in the incumbent Dai Mutlaq? Do you realize how puerile this sounds? In the same breath, you should cease to be a Muslim altogether in face of the recent atrocities of ISIS.


Point 2

I laughed.

After Wafat of Syedna RA,mumineen received Auto messages from Whatsapp which compares Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS and other members of his family and mumineen to Awwal Thani Thalith of Rasulullah SAW's era.(Nauzobillah).The message also said and I quote directly "Je haq na saahib ne maula burhanuddin na gusul aney dafan si roka yeh dushmano ne khuda taala jald-si-jald pakadjo! " More : " Do not dismiss what he (Khuzaima) has to say,go to FatemiDawat.com.

Sent on behalf of Khuzaima Qutbuddin."

To this date,fatemidawat.com states the following " Shahzada Mufaddal Bhaisaheb false claim of Syedna Burhanuddin proclaiming Nass and his exploitation of Syedna’s condition for material gain " (Nauzobillah)

The internet ( Youtube in particular : Husain Qutbuddin Videos/Taher Qutbuddin's Sermons),newspapers are rife with the followers of Khuzaima Qutbuddin indulging in the character assassination of Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS and mumineen who believe in the Nass conferred by Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA.

Their proselytizing is ugly and without any substance.Why? There is not even an iota of evidence of Khuzaima's claim so they resorted to mud-slinging and false analogies and lies.

The above has been brought to your attention.Do you still believe they maintain " Dignified silence"?

Point 3

Again you resort to "Could have done this.Should have done this." Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS is the Dai Mutlaq and you're not.Don't do airaz on his actions or words lest you become part of the party of the likes of Ibn Khuwaisara.You accept Nass has taken place on Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS and you owe unwavering loyalty and belief in the actions of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA as you keep saying.