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.
dal-chaval-palidu
Posts: 495
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:46 am

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

#2191

Unread post by dal-chaval-palidu » Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:12 am

These messages from SMS side are, well what shall I say - fake news :D

On a more serious note, it is quite amazing that they send these messages given that the case was in the news in India and was covered in several Mumbai papers. I am at a loss to understand - So Bohras read one thing in the newspapers and another in the messages from ITS. So they (kothar) clearly and openly lie.

One question that I hope Bohras ask (at least in their minds, and hopefully openly) is this: They made a big deal that SMS had won the case and even declared Fateh mubin. If so, why is the case still going on? So clearly they lied the first time around. And there are verses in the Quran-e-sharif about supporting the truthful, and not taking the side of liars. There are hadiths of Rasulallah (SAW) about the same too. I hope Bohras ponder.

Just as a curiosity, bhai OO53, who were the two women who were witnesses to the nass? And who were all the witnesses?



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

#2192

Unread post by kimanumanu » Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:44 am

It is the season of fake news! I have not seen anything so far on ITS so these are all being created by someone else to cause mischief. Regardless, the court case is definitely continuing and next date is in May.



Biradar
Posts: 821
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#2193

Unread post by Biradar » Wed Mar 15, 2017 11:33 pm

The IQs of vast majority of Dawedar Mr Muffy Saifuddin (DMMS) is very low. Probably in the low 80s, or 85 at the most. I mean, really did any of these fool actually read the 27 page document? They are excited and salivating at the prospect of yet another tamaasha which will be put up by the baboon kotharis, giving them a chance to sing songs and dance, all the while sporting long flowing dadhis and colorful ridas. (Not the same person, of course. But given bohri men are such spineless cretins, they might as well wear ridas).

Incidentally, the judgment is full of sarcastic jokes and humor. One important part is section 11:
11. On an overall balance, and for several distinct reasons, it seems to me I should allow this Chamber Summons and the amendment. Mr Dwarkadas readily concedes that a separate suit by Taher Fakhruddin is possible. But if this is so, then surely the continuance of the present suit is equally possible, and possibly desirable in the interests of saving judicial time, money and, not least, vast amounts of paper.
The judge's humor should not be lost. Next, the important section is 24:
24. There is another dimension to this, too, one that Mr Kadam hints at. Order 22 Rule 1 does not limit itself to the death of a plaintiff. The survival of the ‘right to sue’ is a question that arises on the death of either the plaintiff or the defendant. I will confine myself to a situation of a sole plaintiff and sole defendant, because that is what I have before me. Let us suppose the situations were reversed, and the Defendant before me had passed away after appointing a successor. That successor would have assumed office. It surely cannot be suggested that Khuzemabhai’s ‘right to sue’ would not survive the death of the original Defendant. If the title and right claimed by the Defendant is not personal to him and would survive him, then surely the challenge to that title and claim must also survive the original Plaintiff. This is, in my assessment, so compelling an argument that one need not look much further.
Basically, in plain English: if DMMS had suddenly kicked the bucket would SKQ's "right to sue" suddenly vanish? Of course not! Incidentally, if this was the case, DMMS's brothers might have gone ahead and poisoned him, gotten one of his kids installed and then conveniently gotten the case dismissed! Nothing is impossible for the Kothari Mafia.

The judge's understanding of the complexities of the bohra succession of da'is is displayed in the next section, section 25:
25 ..... To view it from another perspective, even if Khuzemabhai had not filed the Suit, the present Applicant could well have brought the same Suit seeking first the same declaration of his late father being the properly appointed 53rd Dai and, in the next prayer, a similar declaration in his own favour as the 54th Dai.
This is really very important. Basically, even if SKQ had not filed a case, his successor STF could still be within his rights to sue DMMS. Plain and simple. Next section:
26.
To be clear: Taher Fakhruddin is not seeking to continue the suit in his father’s name. He does not want to rest with a declaration of a title or status in or on his now deceased father. He seeks instead to continue the suit, but in his name, seeking a derived, or devolved, interest.
"Devolved interest" here means his right as da'i al-mutlaq to the administration of various duties as da'i, from being the da'i and not simply from some personal interest he has. In fact, it can be argued that, the way DMMS and his Kothari Mafia are running the community, they are the ones with personal interest in this! All for money and power and not for any spirituality. I don't see any spirituality in the jahiliaat of DMMS jamaat.

The most amazing thing is the section 30, where clearly the dacoits of DMMS are claiming that nass can be retracted! It is so blatant that it has made its way to the judgement:
I have also added a submission that the Dawoodi Bohras belong to the Ismaili faith, and do not believe that nass can be revoked. By taking a defence in this suit that nass can be retracted or revoked or changed or superseded, the Defendant has gone against the very basis and foundation of the Ismaili faith viz. that nass is irrevocable. Thus, the Defendant is no longer following the faith of the Dawoodi Bohra Community, and certainly cannot claim to be the Dai al-Mutlaq of the Community.
Hence, as DMMS claims that the nass can be retracted or changed, he is by default disqualified from being a bohra, leave alone a da'i. Plain and simple. However, as this is a new amendment (which was not one made in the original suit by SKQ), the judge is disallowing the modification of the suit. He says this in section 33. Incidentally, this argument that DMMS is an apostate was made by STF in his letter to DMMS when he (STF) succeeded his father. Read the letter on Fatemi Dawaat website.

However, in the next section he says that:
I will, however, clarify that the Applicant will be entitled to lead evidence on the proper requirements and features of a valid nass, including whether or not it is revocable as a matter of doctrinal law or custom. This is necessary so that the Applicant is not latter confronted at the time of evidence by saying that there is no foundation in his pleading for that evidence.
Hence, this claim that DMMS is an apostate (he obviously is) is open to be proved in the court proceedings. The judge very cleverly has left this noose by which STF can hang DMMS's case.

Basically, all this mumbo-jumbo mean is that STF is now going to continue the suite against DMMS as the rightful da'i al-mutlaq, with all the rights and powers that office confers on him.


No where can I see reason for Fathe Mubin!! I mean, are these DMMS thugs high on some controlled substances? I think the more likely reason for these Watsapp messages is that DMMS and Kothari Mafia are so assured of the absolute stupidity of their docile sheep-like followers, that they will declare even this loss as "Fathe Mubin"!! Really, shame on such people and specially on their brain-dead followers.



dal-chaval-palidu
Posts: 495
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:46 am

#2194

Unread post by dal-chaval-palidu » Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:45 am

You may be right, bhai Biradar, that somebody from Kothar sent these whatapp messages.

However, you have to be open to the possibility (more likely in this case), that some other bohra person started circulating these messages in the name of Badri Mahal as a sarcasm on the Kothar, and to make them look stupid. So don't rule that out.



dal-chaval-palidu
Posts: 495
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:46 am

#2195

Unread post by dal-chaval-palidu » Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:52 am

I also find point # 3 interesting - on page 3.

"From the beginning, the Defendant resisted the suit most strenuously."

So now the judge put on paper what all folks suspect - that SMS has been trying "tarikh pe tarikh", and delay and resisting techniques.



Biradar
Posts: 821
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#2196

Unread post by Biradar » Thu Mar 16, 2017 8:42 am

Yes, this could be someone sarcastic and mischievous having fun at the expense of gullible bohras, who will believe anything "kothar" tells them, even if it is someone else pretending to be kothar.

One point I should mention: let us say that STF prevails in the end, and the courts decide in his favor. (This is highly unlikely but not impossible). In this case the whole community will be thrown into huge chaos. Basically, the suite requires that DMMS be restrained from exercising any control over any and all community properties, deeds, masjids, halls etc etc etc. Can you imagine the legal chaos? How will this be handled? It seems to me that the result of STF winning will be a huge blow to the kothar, with management of billions of dollars worth of property and resources thrown into utter confusion. Hence, it is not at all surprising, as the judge wryly observes, that DMMS and his Iblisi Toli are doing their best to delay, delay and delay.

We can see a small glimmer of the chaos in the handling of masjid properties in Udaipur or of the Saifee hospital in Mumbai. Basically, the courts will have to take over control, putting every community resource into government managed trusts. In my opinion, this is impossible to do at scale. Also, a ruling in the favor of STF will lead to riots, with bohras everywhere going completely ballistic with rage.



dal-chaval-palidu
Posts: 495
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:46 am

#2197

Unread post by dal-chaval-palidu » Fri Mar 17, 2017 12:17 am

Biradar wrote:
Thu Mar 16, 2017 8:42 am
Yes, this could be someone sarcastic and mischievous having fun at the expense of gullible bohras, who will believe anything "kothar" tells them, even if it is someone else pretending to be kothar.

One point I should mention: let us say that STF prevails in the end, and the courts decide in his favor. (This is highly unlikely but not impossible). In this case the whole community will be thrown into huge chaos. Basically, the suite requires that DMMS be restrained from exercising any control over any and all community properties, deeds, masjids, halls etc etc etc. Can you imagine the legal chaos? How will this be handled? It seems to me that the result of STF winning will be a huge blow to the kothar, with management of billions of dollars worth of property and resources thrown into utter confusion. Hence, it is not at all surprising, as the judge wryly observes, that DMMS and his Iblisi Toli are doing their best to delay, delay and delay.

We can see a small glimmer of the chaos in the handling of masjid properties in Udaipur or of the Saifee hospital in Mumbai. Basically, the courts will have to take over control, putting every community resource into government managed trusts. In my opinion, this is impossible to do at scale. Also, a ruling in the favor of STF will lead to riots, with bohras everywhere going completely ballistic with rage.
The job of the judge is to do justice and apply the law. I hope and pray that he does that, whatever the outcome.

As for Bohra's going ballistic with rage - I doubt it. They will march and some will be angry, but it is really hard to get an idea of how many are in the silent group. If they allow open access to masjid and dargahs and other places, a decent fraction may join them - who knows, my guess is as good as anybody else. It the court order comes with some enforcement teeth from the government authorities, I doubt that there will be large scale violence - but then again, I could be wrong. If the ruling is in favor of SMS, SKQ folks will definately be barred.

Btw, what is the chaos related to Saifee hospital?



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

#2198

Unread post by kimanumanu » Tue Jul 04, 2017 7:20 am

Latest update:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
SUITS NO. 337 OF 2014
Taher Fakhruddin Saheb Alias Taherbhai K
Qutbuddin Alias Taher Bhai Qutubuddin
....Petitioner
V/S
Mufaddal Burhanuddin Saifuddin
....Respondent
Mr. Anand Desai a/w Mr. Samit Shukla and Mr. Nausher Kohli
i/b DSK Legal for Plaintiff
Mr. Iqbal Chagla, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Pankaj Savant,
Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Juzer Shair, Ms. Azmin Irani, Mr.
Murtuza Kachwalla and Mr. Shahen Pradhan i/b HSA
Advocates for Defendant
CORAM :
K.R. SHRIRAM, J
DATE :
30th June, 2017
P.C. :
Remove from board.
( ASSOCIATE )

Any legal mind understand what "Remove from board" means? Also there is no future date listed currently:

Bench:- SINGLE
Status:- Pre-Admission Category:- DECLARATORY SUITS
Last Date:- 30/06/2017 Stage:- FOR DIRECTION [ORIGINAL SIDE MATTERS]
Last Coram:- HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE K.R. SRIRAM



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

#2199

Unread post by Truth-Prevails » Wed Jul 05, 2017 1:56 am

@kimanumanu

I heard the matter was moved from Justice Sriram to Justice Gautam Patel for Cross examination.



yfm
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 8:31 pm

#2200

Unread post by yfm » Sat Jul 08, 2017 3:20 pm

Can some of our brilliant minds, provide a guess as to what this court case will lead to?

1. I presume the followers of SMS will still cling to him no matter what. (The majority still follow SMS)

2. I presume the same will apply to STF. ( The minority follow STF)

3. What could happen if the court case results in SMS or STF be declared the winner?

4. Will the followers of either accept the Court Verdict?

5. How much is the costs involved or expected to be?

6. Who pays for the legal costs and the courts costs?

7. Some of us I believe will not be around to see the last days and I personally and am not sure if I will know of the results from my grave or otherwise.

8. Therefore it will be nice to hear of the speculation and feel relieved of the knowledge from this court case.

Thank you my brothers and sisters.



yfm
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 8:31 pm

#2201

Unread post by yfm » Sat Jul 08, 2017 10:29 pm

I think dal Chawla palidu does not honestly believe that many of us are cognizant of the judgement day! He is too presumptious. Salaam



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

#2202

Unread post by kimanumanu » Fri Jul 14, 2017 3:45 am

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
SUIT NO. 337 OF 2014
Taher Fakhruddin Saheb Alias Taherbhai K
Qutbuddin Alias Taher bhai Qutubuddin
...Plaintiff
Versus
Mufaddal Burhanuddin Saifuddin
...Defendant
Mr Chirag Mody
, with Samit Shukla & Nausher Kohli, i/b DSK
Legal, for the Plaintiff.
Mr Iqbal Chagla, Senior Advocate
,with Janak Dwarkadas, Senior
Advocate, Murtaza Kachwalla & Aashdin Chivalwala, i/b HSA
Advocates, for the Defendant.
CORAM:
G.S. PATEL, J
DATED:
11th July 2017
PC:-
1.
Not on board. Mentioned. Taken on board.
2.
The Plaintiff will file his Affidavit in lieu of examination-in-
chief by 24th July 2017. Time to file the Written Statement is
extended till 17th July 2017.
3.
List the matter on 24th July 2017 at 3.00 p.m.
(G. S. PATEL, J)

Next Date:- 24/07/2017 Stage:- FOR DIRECTION [ORIGINAL SIDE MATTERS]
Coram:- HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G.S. PATEL



dal-chaval-palidu
Posts: 495
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:46 am

#2203

Unread post by dal-chaval-palidu » Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:09 pm

Thank you, bhai kimanumanu for keeping us updated on this court case. I appreciate it.



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

#2204

Unread post by kimanumanu » Tue Jul 25, 2017 9:14 pm

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
SUIT NO. 337 OF 2014
Khuzemabhai Syedna Taher Saifuddin Saheb alias
Khuzemabhai STS Qutbuddin alias Khuzaima
Qutbuddin
...Plaintiff
Versus
Mufaddal Burhanuddin Saifuddin
...Defendant
Mr Anand Desai
, a/w Mr Chirag Mody, Mr Naushri Kohli, i/b DSK
Legal, for the Plaintiff.
Mr Janak Dwarkadas, Senior Advocate
, with Mr Fredun DeVitre,
Senior Advocate, Mr Firdosh Pooniwalla, Mr Juzer Shakir, M s
Azmin Irani, Mr Abzeer Faizullabhoy, Mr Murtaza Kachwalla,
Mr Aashdin Chivalwala & Mr Shahen Pradhan, i/b J Sagar
Associates, for the Defendant.
CORAM:
G.S. PATEL, J
DATED:
24th July 2017
PC:-
1.
The plaintiff has filed his own affidavit in lieu of examination
in chief. He has also filed the affidavit of evidence of an expert, one
Wilferd Ferdinand Madelung, a German citizen and Laudian
Professor of Arabic at Oxford University from 1978 to 1998.
The
two evidence affidavits are taken on record.
2.
Mr Desai’s application immediately on behalf of the Plaintiff
is for leave to lead the evidence of the expert first under Order
XVIII Rule 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 on account of
his advanced years:
he is 86 years old.
3.
Mr Desai is also filed a Motion as yet in draft for this purpose
and Mr Dwarkadas seeks time to respond in writing. Affidavit in
reply to be filed and served on or before 28th August 2017. At this
stage, no affidavit in rejoinder.
4.
In addition to the documents previously marked, the Plaintiff
has filed a compilation of 33 additional documents that he seeks to
have marked in evidence. A copy of this compilation has been given
to the advocates for the Defendant. Statements of admission and
denial are being prepared. Inspection is complete.
5.
It is unlikely that the matter can be taken much before Diwali
vacation. I will list the matter for directions on 31st October 2017,
but with liberty to the parties to apply for an earlier date if possible.
(G. S. PATEL, J)



dal-chaval-palidu
Posts: 495
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:46 am

#2205

Unread post by dal-chaval-palidu » Tue Jul 25, 2017 11:22 pm

kimanumanu wrote:
Tue Jul 25, 2017 9:14 pm
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
SUIT NO. 337 OF 2014
Khuzemabhai Syedna Taher Saifuddin Saheb alias
Khuzemabhai STS Qutbuddin alias Khuzaima
Qutbuddin
...Plaintiff
Versus
Mufaddal Burhanuddin Saifuddin
...Defendant
...........................

1.
The plaintiff has filed his own affidavit in lieu of examination
in chief. He has also filed the affidavit of evidence of an expert, one
Wilferd Ferdinand Madelung, a German citizen and Laudian
Professor of Arabic at Oxford University from 1978 to 1998.
The
two evidence affidavits are taken on record.
2.
Mr Desai’s application immediately on behalf of the Plaintiff
is for leave to lead the evidence of the expert first under Order
XVIII Rule 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 on account of
his advanced years:
he is 86 years old.
3.
Mr Desai is also filed a Motion as yet in draft for this purpose
and Mr Dwarkadas seeks time to respond in writing. Affidavit in
reply to be filed and served on or before 28th August 2017. At this
stage, no affidavit in rejoinder.
4.
In addition to the documents previously marked, the Plaintiff
has filed a compilation of 33 additional documents that he seeks to
have marked in evidence. A copy of this compilation has been given
to the advocates for the Defendant. Statements of admission and
denial are being prepared. Inspection is complete.
5.
It is unlikely that the matter can be taken much before Diwali
vacation. I will list the matter for directions on 31st October 2017,
but with liberty to the parties to apply for an earlier date if possible.
(G. S. PATEL, J)
Anybody has any idea who this gentleman is, as also what those 33 additional documents may be related to?



Biradar
Posts: 821
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#2206

Unread post by Biradar » Wed Jul 26, 2017 11:22 am

Wilferd Madelung is a scholar of Islam. He has written extensively on Ismaili history and philosophy, and has translated or edited several Ismaili texts. I am not sure what he can contribute to this case on succession of da'i. He may have worked with Tahera Qutbuddin, but I have not been able to find any joint papers with the two of them as co-authors. (I have not looked hard).

Anyway, as usual in Indian courts, this case will drag on and on for decades, with no end in sight, each side submitting some documents, brings some witnesses and rejecting others. Months and years will go by, and I am not even sure if Muffy (or, for that matter any of us) will live long enough to witness the outcome.



dal-chaval-palidu
Posts: 495
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:46 am

#2207

Unread post by dal-chaval-palidu » Wed Jul 26, 2017 12:00 pm

Biradar wrote:
Wed Jul 26, 2017 11:22 am
Wilferd Madelung is a scholar of Islam. He has written extensively on Ismaili history and philosophy, and has translated or edited several Ismaili texts. I am not sure what he can contribute to this case on succession of da'i. He may have worked with Tahera Qutbuddin, but I have not been able to find any joint papers with the two of them as co-authors. (I have not looked hard).

Anyway, as usual in Indian courts, this case will drag on and on for decades, with no end in sight, each side submitting some documents, brings some witnesses and rejecting others. Months and years will go by, and I am not even sure if Muffy (or, for that matter any of us) will live long enough to witness the outcome.

Sadly, yes that is possible. However, in my opinion it is still very important and critical that we (as a community, I understand that if it drags on, I may not be around) know the truth and evidence in due course, and hence the case is very important. For those of us who believe that based on the Nass and the claim of SKQ, that he was the rightful dai, it would be good to have the concrete evidence (not ishara, and hints, and implied stuff, as FD folks have said, but concrete evidence).

And I presume (and hope and pray :-) that they have concrete evidence (which they are constrained by the law to keep it from the public), else the case would not last in court for so long.

Consider this: SMS has all the political contacts, all the money, an overwhelming part of the community on his side, but the case has still survived. What do Bohras think SKQ/STF have, that the court has kept the case going? Courts are not likely to entertain frivolous lawsuits. I posit that one main thing that SKQ has is some truth and evidence on his side, and that is why the case continues.

Something for the community to think about?



Biradar
Posts: 821
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#2208

Unread post by Biradar » Wed Jul 26, 2017 7:27 pm

dal-chaval-palidu wrote:
Wed Jul 26, 2017 12:00 pm
For those of us who believe that based on the Nass and the claim of SKQ, that he was the rightful dai, it would be good to have the concrete evidence (not ishara, and hints, and implied stuff, as FD folks have said, but concrete evidence).
The only concrete evidence is the word of SKQ himself. There is nothing else. It is likely that Muffy camp does not dispute that nass was done on SKQ, but they claim that the nass was later changed. Perhaps this is the topic (i.e. if nass can be changed) on which Madelung will give expert witness to.

If there was any more concrete evidence, it would have been obvious by now. Of course, the word of SKQ is concrete enough, but don't expect witnesses or letters or anything else. I mean, if there were witnesses, they are long since dead. If any of the brothers of SQK were witnesses, why have they not left the Muffy dawaat? The outcome of this case will depend on "ishara and hints", and hence will hardly be conclusive. The split in the community is final and there is no way in which the losing side will accept the verdict.

Sad, but true.

At this point, one needs to resign oneself that the outcome of this case will not be clear-cut, and that the forces of the Kothar, meanwhile, have won a complete and decisive victory for the hearts and souls (and wealth) of Bohras. (Conversely, the forces of Reform have been defeated throughly and completely). FD will keep going, and Progressives will keep going, but they will have little impact on the Muffy Mafia, which will continue to increase in power and wealth.



dal-chaval-palidu
Posts: 495
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:46 am

#2209

Unread post by dal-chaval-palidu » Thu Jul 27, 2017 10:41 pm

Biradar wrote:
Wed Jul 26, 2017 7:27 pm
dal-chaval-palidu wrote:
Wed Jul 26, 2017 12:00 pm
For those of us who believe that based on the Nass and the claim of SKQ, that he was the rightful dai, it would be good to have the concrete evidence (not ishara, and hints, and implied stuff, as FD folks have said, but concrete evidence).
The only concrete evidence is the word of SKQ himself. There is nothing else. It is likely that Muffy camp does not dispute that nass was done on SKQ, but they claim that the nass was later changed. Perhaps this is the topic (i.e. if nass can be changed) on which Madelung will give expert witness to.

If there was any more concrete evidence, it would have been obvious by now. Of course, the word of SKQ is concrete enough, but don't expect witnesses or letters or anything else. I mean, if there were witnesses, they are long since dead. If any of the brothers of SQK were witnesses, why have they not left the Muffy dawaat? The outcome of this case will depend on "ishara and hints", and hence will hardly be conclusive. The split in the community is final and there is no way in which the losing side will accept the verdict.

Sad, but true.

At this point, one needs to resign oneself that the outcome of this case will not be clear-cut, and that the forces of the Kothar, meanwhile, have won a complete and decisive victory for the hearts and souls (and wealth) of Bohras. (Conversely, the forces of Reform have been defeated throughly and completely). FD will keep going, and Progressives will keep going, but they will have little impact on the Muffy Mafia, which will continue to increase in power and wealth.
Some thougths:

How about the statement by the Retired Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India, Justice Aziz Ahmedi, (a few days after SMB's wafat), that SKQ's family had shown him some papers and that based on those papers he believes that SKQ's claim was correct. I doubt that he was going by just his word?

Also, there was this "Saify Mahal court case" that allegedly SKQ "won". What was that about? Certainly they are not in Saify mahal, and SMS and his side are? So what was that? Could it be possible, just a wild guess, that the Saify mahal court case may not be about Saify mahal and possibly may have some relevance to "who is the 53rd dai"? This is just a wild guess on my part, nothing more.

Also, on this thread it was mentioned that amongst the documents submitted were "the Malbar Hill tennant association" document? What is the relevance of that? Why submit it? I could guess, but my guess is as good as anybody else.



I wonder if STF can petition the court that if the case is going to take long, as this is a case of interest to the community (and not a case that is personal in nature), the court should accept the evidence and then allow it to be shared with the community - basically, make the evidence public. Because justice delayed for too long is justice denied.

FD folks who are on this board, do you know if STF and team are approaching the court to keep the evidence admissible in court but still make it public to the community? Is that even possible?



gulam_parinda
Posts: 128
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 12:46 am

#2210

Unread post by gulam_parinda » Thu Jul 27, 2017 11:48 pm

Can nuss be changed...
Attachments
FB_IMG_1501213575328.jpg



Biradar
Posts: 821
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#2211

Unread post by Biradar » Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:30 am

dal-chaval-palidu wrote:
Thu Jul 27, 2017 10:41 pm
Some thougths:

How about the statement by the Retired Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India, Justice Aziz Ahmedi, (a few days after SMB's wafat), that SKQ's family had shown him some papers and that based on those papers he believes that SKQ's claim was correct. I doubt that he was going by just his word?
"Showing him some papers" does not mean that they showed him incontrovertible proof. Very likely, they showed him some documents to support their claim that (a) nass in private is valid and (b) nass once done can't be changed. If there was proof that could not be challenged, it would have come out soon after the wafaat of SMB. That would have been most effective as the matter then was still hot and a lot of people would have been convinced with some concrete proof.

Now, there is a possibility: there may be some letter from STS making a will to SMB to appoint SKQ as da'i after him. Obviously, SMB would have to act on such a will, for the claims of SKQ to be valid. That is, even if there is a will, FD people need to show that SMB acted on it.

I think this whole case will come down to the question: can nass be changed? This is a question which is tricky to answer definitely, as there has not been such a situation in the past. Nizari's claim that Imam Mustansir had done the nass on Nizar. However, we don't accept it and say that nass was done on Imam Mustali. The historical record is not clear, and many historians believe that the nass had indeed initially happened on Nizar but was later changed or revoked.

Now, there is also the curious case of Imam Hakim.

The other example by Muffy dawaat people about the "change" of nass is the case of Sayedna Hatim bin Ibrahim, the third da'i al-mutlaq. The claim (false one) is that at first S. Hatim did nass on Sayedna Ali bin Mohammad al-Walid (who would become the fifth da'i). However, he then changed it to his own son S. Ali bin Hatim. However, this claim is false. In reality, S. Ali bin Muhammad came to know that S. Hatim intended to do nass on him. He went to S. Hatim and told him that he (i.e. Ali bin Muhammad) had prepared Ali bin Hatim to be as qualified as himself, but, in addition, Ali bin Hatim had an extra qualification, i.e. he was the son of S. Hatim. Hence, he urged S. Hatim to perform nass on his son, which S. Hatim did.

Let me also add that the issue of succession is a very tricky one, even with Imams. The early history of Ismailis is shrouded in mystery as there is not a very clear idea of what happened after Imam Ismail and till the zuhur of Imam al-Mahdi billlah. Many early da'is who fought on behalf of the hidden Imam at first thought that Imam Mohammad bin Ismaili would reappear and did not expect a imam to appear from his progeny. The history is long and complex but perhaps worth recalling at some point. However, all I want to say now is that the question of nass has always been vexed, for the Prophet, the Imams and the dai's. There are several claims and counter claims, and obviously not all can be true, and to assume that only our claim is true, just because we are born Bohras, is rather far fetched and unlikely.

Don't get me wrong: I believe that the nass was done on SKQ right after the death of STS, when he was appointed as mazoon. The fact that SMB picked his youngest (but one) brother to be his deputy, itself shows the high esteem he held SKQ and also proves the truthfulness of SKQ's claim. However, I doubt there is any concrete evidence like letters or a will from SMB as such, showing a clear-cut nass on SKQ. If there was, it would have come to light a while ago.



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

#2212

Unread post by kimanumanu » Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:33 pm

Repeating my posting from another thread (I think it is more appropriate here):

Bro Biradar, regarding the whole concept of nass, in another thread - viewtopic.php?f=14&t=11267 - I shared a paper written by Paul E Walker. It made interesting reading and touched on this same question. It appeared to imply, obviously from a historical analysis point of view, that this seemed common as there were social/political circumstances at play. What's your take on it?

Here is the paper for reference:
ConflictingImamates(1).pdf
(5.47 MiB) Downloaded 170 times



Biradar
Posts: 821
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#2213

Unread post by Biradar » Fri Jul 28, 2017 2:58 pm

kimanumanu wrote:
Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:33 pm
What's your take on it?

Here is the paper for reference:

ConflictingImamates(1).pdf

Yes, this is a good paper and very relevant to the issue at hand. I had read it before, and I thought I had responded to it at that time. However, I see now I did not.

Basically, as I mentioned before, the question of succession is fraught with difficulties. In principle, the nass of an Imam (and in his absence, of the da'i al-mutlaq) is final and absolute. See the footnote 17 in the paper. The case of Imam Jafar's nass on Imam Ismaili is of a different sort: that was a question of a designated successor who pre-deceased his father. According to Ismailis, once Imam Jafar appointed Imam Ismaili, the latter was free to appoint his own successor, which he did. Hence, on the passing away of Imam Ismail, even though Imam Jafar was still alive, Imam Muhammad bin Ismail became the imam. Sometimes, in the theory of nass and imamat, this principle is stated as "Imammat does not flow backwards".

Note that as Walker mentions, the very fact of performing nass is a validation of an Imam. Hence, an Imam can not pass away without designating a successor. (BTW: This does not mean, as Ahmed Ali Raj in a lecture implied, that an imam can't die if he has not appointed a successor. It simply means that appointing a successor is the single most important task for an imam, and hence he takes care of it as soon as feasible). In the absence of the imam, the same holds for a da'i al-mutlaq. (Again: Ahmed Ali Raj says that there is no need for this principle for da'i al-mutlaq. I strongly disagree. The position of the da'i al-mutlaq in the time of satr is on par with the imam, except in some theoretical ways. Hence, what applies to an imam, applies to a da'i al-mutlaq in satr).

The case of Imam Qa'im's appointment of his son, versus the indication by Imam Mu'izz to Ustad Jawdhar that he intended his son Abdallah succeed him, is also interesting, and relevant. (And escaped the notice of Walker, apparently) In the former case, Imam Qa'im, his son (al-Mansur) already knew of his father's designation, while in the latter case, Abdallah did not know and in fact was surprised at the actions of Jawdhar. According to SKQ, SMB himself told him directly that he was doing nass on him. Hence, in this case, the nass is properly designated as the successor himself was informed, even though there were no other witnesses. Given that SKQ was the mazoon for 50 years, there is no reason to doubt his word, and, in fact, his word should be sufficient.

As I mentioned in my post above, however, the case of Imam Hakim is more mysterious. He appointed his cousin as "wali 'ahd" that i.e the one who was owed allegiance from Muslims due to his designation as the successor. Even coins were minted in Abd al-Rahim's name. Again, Imam Hakim designated another cousin as his successor. However, at the disappearance of Imam Hakim, Imam al-Zahir become the imam, despite these earlier designations. This case does not figure in the da'i case, as likely both parties agree that the actions of Imam Hakim were ruse and perhaps misunderstood by some of his followers.

The most interesting, and relevant case is of Imam Mustansir, that we discussed above. As Walker right mentions, one challenge Imam Mustansir has was that he lived very long. Note that this is the exact challenge which SMB had: he lived so long that his sons become too powerful and took over the seat of the da'i, reducing him only to a puppet to their whims. Eventually, these same sons staged a coup against SMB and his designated successor, i.e. SKQ.

The situation of having so many sons, some of whom no doubt wanted to be the next imam, caused a lot of chaos and confusion. That only two serious contenders arose (Nizar and Mustali) is rather surprising! Walker's description of the confusion is excellent, and no need to repeat it here. However, it is not clear from that description that nass was done on Nizar. In fact, even if Nizar was appointed as "wali 'ahd al mumineen" it is meaningless, as Imam Hakim had used that term for his cousin, without adverse consequences to the succession of his son. Hence, after the death of Imam Mustansir, three (not one!) of his other sons refused to accept Imam Mustali as Imam, as they thought they were themselves were appointed.

Some careful analysis of this incident makes it clear that even though Nizar claimed the imamat for himself, there is little clarity in the historical record of this. The use of titles was already made useless by Imam Hakim, and so simply having been called by some title can't be taken as a proper designation. Hence, the final death-bed designation of Imam Mustansir, which al-Afdal was witness to (presumably along with Imam Mustali himself) must be given the most weight.

Actually, this whole incidence proves that Dawedar Mr. Muffy Saifuddin (DMMS) is in the wrong, and has strayed very far from the core principles of his own dawaat in his lust for power and wealth. If he claims that Imam Mustansir did a proper designation on Nizar then he must accept that the whole edifice of Mustali dawaat (and after that the Tayebbi dawaat) is false.

Let us look at the following logical statements:

Axiom: Imam is infallible, and can not make a mistake

Proposition: A properly appointed successor via nass can't be changed

Proof: As the Imam is infallible, his initial proper designation (nass) can't be incorrect. Hence, any claims that he changed his mind later are false.

Corollary: If we accept Imam Mustali as the imam, then, it follows, Imam Mustansir can not have made another nass.

Hence, if Muffy claims that nass was done on Nizar, then he must accept that all he has believed in, going back 1000 years is false and he, hence, should immediately submit himself to the Aga Khan and become a Nizari Ismaili.

Clearly, Muffy, in his lust for power and wealth, has left the path of piety and become a liar and denier of his own doctrines. Sad that Bohris still follow him. Of course, as we all very well know, Bohris in their jamaan filled stupor are unable to hold a thought long enough to reflect on this, or for that matter, any other thing, besides the next jamaan and news about "mola". Pathetic, really.



yfm
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 8:31 pm

#2214

Unread post by yfm » Mon Aug 21, 2017 12:25 am

The mowla and his family are the power class the high class.



yfm
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 8:31 pm

#2215

Unread post by yfm » Sat Sep 02, 2017 3:51 pm

Oh my brother Biradar, (you do not pay tribute to Biradar!) you are so much of bullshit. I want to remind you of an eagle who just climbed on shith on to shith and one day it collapsed because it was shith.

Who cares about Nass. What distinguishes a nass is the results. Are the mumineens in a shape and frame of mind that their imam has made it possible for them. If the nass is granted on the right person and he is hopeless then what use is that to Allah. If Allah who has created us and made us the best creation and yet failed by the Imam who we believe had the right nass then what is the use of the Imam? The Sunnis after so many years recognize that Mowla Ali was the best Caliph. What mattered then when the caliphate went to Abu Baker, Omar or Osman?

Biradar too naihat soon. Listen to the Nasihat that was written by Bohras who were just ordinary but gifted by Allah and your explanation of Nass will become obvious to you is that you are full of shit and baloney and trying to convince the bohras at large with not proper knowledge. Shame on you Biradar becuase Biradar was the name of a great man and you do not live up to that standard.

Hope this awakens you and lets you realize that you have not been selected to be among the intellectuals. Many apply for that position but only few are selected. That is in the scriptures. You are not one of them.



Biradar
Posts: 821
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#2216

Unread post by Biradar » Sun Sep 03, 2017 9:43 am

yfm wrote:
Sat Sep 02, 2017 3:51 pm
Hope this awakens you and lets you realize that you have not been selected to be among the intellectuals. Many apply for that position but only few are selected. That is in the scriptures. You are not one of them.
I have been awakened! Thanks for awakening me. After all, humble and poor people like myself must learn from such azeem-as-shaan people like yourself. What intellect! What high IQ!! Unbelievable!!! Extraordinary!!!! A new Einstein, Newton and Gandhi all combine yourself!!!! So taari nirali shaan chee!!!!



yfm
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 8:31 pm

#2217

Unread post by yfm » Sun Sep 03, 2017 4:07 pm

Don't take it personally bhai Biradar. Let us not waste time on Nass. See what Nass has done to our community. It has torn us in to pieces and whose money are they using to fight in the courts?

Let us focus on the right leadership pursuits.

Salaam Biradar bhai and hope you focus on humility and not what others think of you.
Salaam.



yfm
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 8:31 pm

#2218

Unread post by yfm » Sun Sep 03, 2017 8:53 pm

To rub it in to guys like Biradar, please remember that pride brought great angels down and humility elevated small man into being angels.



SBM
Posts: 6170
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 4:01 am

#2219

Unread post by SBM » Mon Sep 04, 2017 7:24 am

yfm wrote:
Sun Sep 03, 2017 8:53 pm
To rub it in to guys like Biradar, please remember that pride brought great angels down and humility elevated small man into being angels.
I agree, unfortunately Biradar has made his name by his arrogance.



anajmi
Posts: 13400
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#2220

Unread post by anajmi » Sun Sep 10, 2017 12:12 pm

. Note that as Walker mentions, the very fact of performing nass is a validation of an Imam. Hence, an Imam can not pass away without designating a successor. (BTW: This does not mean, as Ahmed Ali Raj in a lecture implied, that an imam can't die if he has not appointed a successor. It simply means that appointing a successor is the single most important task for an imam, and hence he takes care of it as soon as feasible). In the absence of the imam, the same holds for a da'i al-mutlaq. (Again: Ahmed Ali Raj says that there is no need for this principle for da'i al-mutlaq. I strongly disagree. The position of the da'i al-mutlaq in the time of satr is on par with the imam, except in some theoretical ways. Hence, what applies to an imam, applies to a da'i al-mutlaq in satr).
The irony is that both the Imams as well as the Dais have failed to establish clear and indisputable nuss. This taken in conjunction with what walker has stated invalidates both the Imamat and the dawat!!!