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

[RedBox]

ये मदारी बीच - बीच में अपनी पावर
चेक करता रहता है

कि मेरे बन्दरो ने इशारे पर नाचना
बन्द तो नही कर दिया?


This fits to modi and mufu both.

[RedBox]

This 5 mins of bayan from shia scholar is far superior than 200 hours of bullshiit by muffy and taher.

[Biradar]

This is the Mabas Majlis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBk3CSILDY8

About 1 hour and 31 minutes and about 55 seconds into this bayan, Mazoom-e-Dawat Abdeali Bhaisaheb says that they made a "kalam on Rasulallha (SAW)". And then he goes to explain it. [Including at 1:33:15, at 1:35:00 and up to about 1:38.] What kalam on Rasulallah (SAW) exactly is he talking about?

The explanation is not completely clear to me. Can somebody clarify it? Is this in anyway related to the reference to that book which MS BS referenced in the court case?

There are two issues he is trying to address here. Though, I have to say that he was less coherent than usual. I actually like Abdeali Bhaisaheb and think he is a relatively smart guy. But he was not fully clear here. Anyway, here are the issues:

First issue: S. Taher Saifuddin probably instructed SMB to appoint SKQ after him as the 53th da'i. This is almost a certainty and I have written about this here before. Not only he explicitly instructed SMB to do this, but many times he indicated (indirectly) that SKQ would be 53rd da'i. The FD people claim that this instruction is binding on SMB and he must obey his father and hence he appointed SKQ as 53rd da'i after him. As I wrote here before, SMB honored his father's wishes immediately and even before the chehlum of STS had occurred, he privately did nass on SKQ and publicly appointed him mazoon. SKQ was the youngest but one brother of SMB and there were many good candidates for mazoon. But SMB knew of his father's wishes and recognized that SKQ would be 53rd da'i and hence appointed his very young brother to the high post of mazoon.

Now, I want to say that this has happened in the Alavi Bohras also. The last Alavi da'i who passed away a few years ago had instructed his son and successor (Hatim Zakiyuddin) to do nass on Sa'eed il-Khayr (Hatim Zakiyuddin's son). In one of his bayaans Hatim Zakiyuddin said that it is hence incumbent on him to do this. He must obey his father's wishes. No way around it. Hence, he has kept the post of mazoon in his Alavi dawaat open till Sa'eed il-Khayr's education is complete. However, he has done nass on him already (as his father instructed).

The Muffy Mafia agrees that STS may have left such instructions (that SMB should appoint SQK as next da'i). But they claim that this instruction is "irrelevant"! If SMB wanted he could change and disobey his father and not appoint SKQ as 53rd da'i.

Now, Abdeali Bhaisaheb mentions that the Prophet said that Imam Hassan and Hussain will be the imams if they "stand" or "sit" (meaning if they adopt a quietist stance like Imam Hassan did or an active stance like Imam Hussain did). The Prophet also said that their father, i.e. Moulana Ali, is more exalted than Imams Hassan and Hussain. Meaning that the position of M. Ali of being the Prophet's waasi and the Foundation of the Imammat puts him in a higher station that the other imams in his progeny. SKQ apparently interprets this as meaning that this statement of the Prophet is an explicit designation that this must happen, just like STS's explicit instructions to SMB about appointing him as 53rd da'i.

However, the Iblisi Muffy Mafia is saying that this statement of the Prophet is merely something he found out from Allah and not any sort of designation on his part which was binding. Hence Abdeali Bhaisaheb is saying that the Muffy Mafia is doing "kalam" against the Prophet.

Second Issue: SKQ claims that once nass is done it can't be changed. Muffy toli has been arguing otherwise (which indicates that they accept that nass had likely been done on SQK). They say nass can be changed at will in any random way. This is actually a complex question as historical data shows either stance could be valid, depending on how one interprets a specific designation. This would be too tedious to explain at present. However, the point Abdeali Bhaisaheb is making is that to show that nass can be changed the Muffy Mafia are claiming that Imam Jafa as-Sadiq changed his nass from Imam Ismaili to Musa Kazim! This is so absurd that it is hard to believe that Muffy's lawyer would make such a statement. According to the Ismaili's nass can't be changed and in fact, more importantly in this specific case, the imammat can't go "backwards". What does this mean? When Imam Ismail pre-deceased his father the Imammat passed on to his son Imam Muhammad bin Ismail. Hence, in a sense, in the last few years of Imam Jafar's life he was no longer the imam but his grandson was instead. However, the claim that Muffy Mafia is making contradicts well established doctrines of the Ismailis. Clearly, Muffy has really strayed a long way from the path of righteousness in his quest to prove his false claim of being the da'i.

(BTW: This point that Muffy Mafia is now claiming that Imam Jafar changed his nass to Musa Kazim was also made recently by STF in his waaz. He said that Muffy's brother Qaid Johar (aka Qaid Choor) was also present in this court and did not blink and an eye, indicating that this is the official stance of the Muffy dawaat and not simply a slip-up on part of the lawyer).

[RedBox]

In simple words, Burhanuddin proved that his father Taher saifuddin was a moron and prone to mistake and he knew nothing so he must rectify his mistake and remove SKQ from post and put his own son as dai.

Burhanuddin denied his father knowledge and wisdom and rectified his mistake.

Burhanuddin intently kept everything in dark and secret so that he can keep complete control over the people's mind and money.

[RedBox]

“The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it” - George Orwell.

[yfm]

We have to leave the past and address the present.

We are a bunch of stupid Muslim scholars because we are guided by stupid mullahs.

[RedBox]

Surprising to see ultra-orthodox jews and bohras have many things in common when it comes to community building.

https://youtu.be/uGp4f2GnKTI

[SBM]

Surprising to see ultra-orthodox jews and bohras have many things in common when it comes to community building.

https://youtu.be/uGp4f2GnKTI

Please explain how it is common?

[RedBox]

Surprising to see ultra-orthodox jews and bohras have many things in common when it comes to community building.

https://youtu.be/uGp4f2GnKTI

Please explain how it is common?

they use the same power technique and baraat system to crush people...

[RedBox]

Doing baraat on any individual is soo soo unislamic, if you read Islamic history, rasulullah saw got baraat in mecca but he never did baraat on any individual when he got into power in mecca and madina,

when you have truth you dont have to do baraat on people, but when you are superficial and worldly you have to do baraat on people to kee them under your power.

[Saif53]

Expert Witness Cross Examination
https://qutbibohras.blogspot.com/2020/0 ... ation.html

This discusses the accusation of the Murder of Imam Hasan.
And witnesses of the Nass on the 21st Imam.

This was discussed earlier on this thread.

[Ambassador_Mumbai]

Expert Witness Cross Examination
https://qutbibohras.blogspot.com/2020/0 ... ation.html

This discusses the accusation of the Murder of Imam Hasan.
And witnesses of the Nass on the 21st Imam.

This was discussed earlier on this thread.

I had been saying this all along, but STS Offshoots will go to any extent to prove their respective points.

[dal-chaval-palidu]

Expert Witness Cross Examination
https://qutbibohras.blogspot.com/2020/0 ... ation.html

This discusses the accusation of the Murder of Imam Hasan.
And witnesses of the Nass on the 21st Imam.

This was discussed earlier on this thread.

My guess is that Saif53 and others are essentially speaking on behalf of MS bhaisaheb and the Kothar. Can we get a clear response to their post from somebody knowledgeable on the FD side?

No mud slinging. Just address their answers point-by-point. A few questions from yours truely:

You (Saif53) say:
" ...
Now, in order to shed some doubt on the veracity of al-Hidāyah al-Āmirīyah, Professor Devin Stewart highlighted a text from its abridgement,[4] which the Qutbis have distorted and misquoted. They allege that this text states that Imam Husain AS murdered Imam Hasan AS. As ridiculous as it sounds, the Professor’s and the Qutbi position is, that since this is such a ludicrous statement, any work that contains such preposterousness cannot be relied on.

However, the reality is quite to the contrary.
This work does not state this. Far from it actually. In fact, the text is actually addressing a third person who makes this claim, and the work ridicules this claim and further states that anyone who believes this is a follower of satan.
Simply put, despite this work never actually saying this, the Qutbis would have their gullible group believe otherwise.
... "

If so, did your lawyer (Mr. Iqbal Chagla) point out that this was a distorted text? What was the witness and the judge's response? This is all elementary as you state, so I am sure those smart lawyers caught it and corrected the witness. What was response from the judge to a distorted text being submitted? Did the judge rebuke them? And how did it proceed/end?


And for the FD folks, the question would be:

" However, as always, other Fatimi texts refute the Qutbi claim, and establish the text of al-Hidāyah al-Āmirīyah as a true Fatimi work. Syedna Mohammed bin Taher RA and Syedna Idris Imaduddin RA reference al-Hidāyah al-Āmirīyah as the work[1] of Imam Amir AS.

What’s more, Taher Fakhruddin’s sister, Bazat Saifiyah Qutbuddin in her M.A Thesis paper extensively references it as Imam Amir’s AS work.[2] Further, Husain Qutbuddin in one of his initial Q&A sessions mentions al-Hidāyah al-Āmirīyah as Imam Amir’s AS work, in great detail.[3]"

Is the above stated accurate? Please clarify your position. Thanks.

May Allah keep all of humanity safe in these times.

[objectiveobserver53]

Expert Witness Cross Examination
https://qutbibohras.blogspot.com/2020/0 ... ation.html

This discusses the accusation of the Murder of Imam Hasan.
And witnesses of the Nass on the 21st Imam.

This was discussed earlier on this thread.

My guess is that Saif53 and others are essentially speaking on behalf of MS bhaisaheb and the Kothar. Can we get a clear response to their post from somebody knowledgeable on the FD side?

No mud slinging. Just address their answers point-by-point. A few questions from yours truely:

You (Saif53) say:
" ...
Now, in order to shed some doubt on the veracity of al-Hidāyah al-Āmirīyah, Professor Devin Stewart highlighted a text from its abridgement,[4] which the Qutbis have distorted and misquoted. They allege that this text states that Imam Husain AS murdered Imam Hasan AS. As ridiculous as it sounds, the Professor’s and the Qutbi position is, that since this is such a ludicrous statement, any work that contains such preposterousness cannot be relied on.

However, the reality is quite to the contrary.
This work does not state this. Far from it actually. In fact, the text is actually addressing a third person who makes this claim, and the work ridicules this claim and further states that anyone who believes this is a follower of satan.
Simply put, despite this work never actually saying this, the Qutbis would have their gullible group believe otherwise.
... "

If so, did your lawyer (Mr. Iqbal Chagla) point out that this was a distorted text? What was the witness and the judge's response? This is all elementary as you state, so I am sure those smart lawyers caught it and corrected the witness. What was response from the judge to a distorted text being submitted? Did the judge rebuke them? And how did it proceed/end?


And for the FD folks, the question would be:

" However, as always, other Fatimi texts refute the Qutbi claim, and establish the text of al-Hidāyah al-Āmirīyah as a true Fatimi work. Syedna Mohammed bin Taher RA and Syedna Idris Imaduddin RA reference al-Hidāyah al-Āmirīyah as the work[1] of Imam Amir AS.

What’s more, Taher Fakhruddin’s sister, Bazat Saifiyah Qutbuddin in her M.A Thesis paper extensively references it as Imam Amir’s AS work.[2] Further, Husain Qutbuddin in one of his initial Q&A sessions mentions al-Hidāyah al-Āmirīyah as Imam Amir’s AS work, in great detail.[3]"

Is the above stated accurate? Please clarify your position. Thanks.

May Allah keep all of humanity safe in these times.

In fact the reason Dr. Stewart questioned the credibility of this particular version of the text that was submitted by MS is that it claims that the Nizaris or some other Shia sect believe that Imam Husain AS murdered Imam Hasan AS. But because this sect is Shia, it would be preposterous for them to believe such a thing. Hence this particular version of the text was not credible because it satanized a Shia sect on a baseless claim. Many texts originally authored by Imams were edited by others in order to serve their agendas. No we did not receive the distorted account of the court proceedings. I think it got contorted on this forum.

And as you rightly pointed out DCP, their lawyer was not able to counter Dr. Stewart's testimony.

I think the most preposterous claim they have made in court is that Sadiq Imam did nass on Musa Qasim. You can see that Fake53 aka Adam aka James are not responding to that. In fact they claim here that they disagree to something that their Moula has gone on record to say in order to prove that nass can be changed. And they will never agree with what their Moula is claiming in court because every Jamea graduate knows that an imam is determined at birth.

[Biradar]

A couple of points. As OO53 said, often books ascribed to Imams were not actually written by them, but by professional secretaries. And often, extra (even contrary) material interpolated into them by later scribes who may have other agenda than the person who originally wrote the book. (For example, in many copies of Rasaail Ikhwan as-Safa much praise for the first three Sunni caliphs is written. This is unlikely to be present in the original exemplar especially if one assumes the Rasaail were composed in an Ismaili milieu, and hence these are likely interpolations).

In this case, the Al-Hidaya al-Amiriyya is ascribed to Imam Amir, even written as if he is speaking in first-person, but in reality was written by a secretary al-Sayrafi. Also, just because say some da'i references such a work as being written by say Imam Amir it does not make it so. The history of manuscripts is very complex and often attributions are pious frauds as someone may feel ascribing it to a more exalted person makes one's message more palpable. And what does STF's sister citing this document prove? Nothing. This is a well-known text and clearly she was not relying on it to prove outrageous things like nass can be changed! Not even in the deepest nightmare did this question come up in the past, till the Iblisi Toli started raking it up to prove their false usurpation of the dawaat infrastructure.

Any case, all this is irrelevant. More important is the question: can naas be changed? Clearly Muffy and his supports think so. However, by definition they are hence out of the pale of the Ismaili mazhaab. I mean, if say this is true. How can one be sure that after seeing two years of his son's incompetent behavior SMB did not want to change nass yet again but was prevented by the evil machinations of his physician Moiz? Clearly, SMB was at peace having already done the nass on his one-but-youngest brother right in the beginning of his era, in accordance of his father's wishes and likely was not fully in control towards the end.

Another point to reemphasize with OO53 said: it is true that in the most esoteric texts it is said that the determination of Imams happens very early on. Some say 40 days after birth, some say even when the mother of the to-be-born Imam is pregnant. I have attended many classes on haqqaiq, even by the senior brothers of SMB in which these points were discussed in great detail. (How seriously one should take these esoteric treatises is a different question. They are very often garbled and make no sense, betraying a highly superstitious mind). Hence, if the Muffy Toli is making claims that nass once done can be changed in the case of Imams (and hence by implication in the case of da'is) they have clearly taken the path of falsehood.

[yfm]

I sent an email to Mufaddal bhaisaheb or mowla Mufaddal and asked if he was to remove the kothars and the chamchas, I will give allegiance to him.

I sent an email to Fakhruddin bhaisaheb or mowla Fakhruddin and asked if he was to remove the kothars and the chamchas, I will give allegiance to him. He said he does not have any kothars or chamchas.

So I am inclined to join Mowla Fakruddin unless Mowla Muffadal replies and I will consider their replies.

Has any of you sent such requests to any of these Dai's

YFM

[dal-chaval-palidu]

A couple of points. As OO53 said, often books ascribed to Imams were not actually written by them, but by professional secretaries. And often, extra (even contrary) material interpolated into them by later scribes who may have other agenda than the person who originally wrote the book. (For example, in many copies of Rasaail Ikhwan as-Safa much praise for the first three Sunni caliphs is written. This is unlikely to be present in the original exemplar especially if one assumes the Rasaail were composed in an Ismaili milieu, and hence these are likely interpolations).

In this case, the Al-Hidaya al-Amiriyya is ascribed to Imam Amir, even written as if he is speaking in first-person, but in reality was written by a secretary al-Sayrafi. Also, just because say some da'i references such a work as being written by say Imam Amir it does not make it so. The history of manuscripts is very complex and often attributions are pious frauds as someone may feel ascribing it to a more exalted person makes one's message more palpable. And what does STF's sister citing this document prove? Nothing. This is a well-known text and clearly she was not relying on it to prove outrageous things like nass can be changed! Not even in the deepest nightmare did this question come up in the past, till the Iblisi Toli started raking it up to prove their false usurpation of the dawaat infrastructure.

Any case, all this is irrelevant. More important is the question: can naas be changed? Clearly Muffy and his supports think so. However, by definition they are hence out of the pale of the Ismaili mazhaab. I mean, if say this is true. How can one be sure that after seeing two years of his son's incompetent behavior SMB did not want to change nass yet again but was prevented by the evil machinations of his physician Moiz? Clearly, SMB was at peace having already done the nass on his one-but-youngest brother right in the beginning of his era, in accordance of his father's wishes and likely was not fully in control towards the end.

Another point to reemphasize with OO53 said: it is true that in the most esoteric texts it is said that the determination of Imams happens very early on. Some say 40 days after birth, some say even when the mother of the to-be-born Imam is pregnant. I have attended many classes on haqqaiq, even by the senior brothers of SMB in which these points were discussed in great detail. (How seriously one should take these esoteric treatises is a different question. They are very often garbled and make no sense, betraying a highly superstitious mind). Hence, if the Muffy Toli is making claims that nass once done can be changed in the case of Imams (and hence by implication in the case of da'is) they have clearly taken the path of falsehood.

Thank you for the response, both of you.

However, I must say that reading all this makes me concerned. Basically, deciding the arguments based on religious text (which sadly seems to have multiple versions) and beliefs may be difficult. Both side will spin it to their advantage, and sadly they have systematically kept away knowledge from the general community. I hope that simple and non-religious arguments are also clearly available. Those may help and are easier for the general public to understand.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Saif53, can you address the question below? You say:
" ...
Now, in order to shed some doubt on the veracity of al-Hidāyah al-Āmirīyah, Professor Devin Stewart highlighted a text from its abridgement,[4] which the Qutbis have distorted and misquoted. They allege that this text states that Imam Husain AS murdered Imam Hasan AS. As ridiculous as it sounds, the Professor’s and the Qutbi position is, that since this is such a ludicrous statement, any work that contains such preposterousness cannot be relied on.

However, the reality is quite to the contrary.
This work does not state this. Far from it actually. In fact, the text is actually addressing a third person who makes this claim, and the work ridicules this claim and further states that anyone who believes this is a follower of satan.
Simply put, despite this work never actually saying this, the Qutbis would have their gullible group believe otherwise.
... "

What was distorted (by whom) and misquoted (by whom)? The relevant material was from the Qutbi's or from MS side? And if the Professor misunderstood the work, why did your lawyer not correct it?

[dal-chaval-palidu]

A couple of points. As OO53 said, often books ascribed to Imams were not actually written by them, but by professional secretaries. And often, extra (even contrary) material interpolated into them by later scribes who may have other agenda than the person who originally wrote the book. (For example, in many copies of Rasaail Ikhwan as-Safa much praise for the first three Sunni caliphs is written. This is unlikely to be present in the original exemplar especially if one assumes the Rasaail were composed in an Ismaili milieu, and hence these are likely interpolations).

In this case, the Al-Hidaya al-Amiriyya is ascribed to Imam Amir, even written as if he is speaking in first-person, but in reality was written by a secretary al-Sayrafi. Also, just because say some da'i references such a work as being written by say Imam Amir it does not make it so. The history of manuscripts is very complex and often attributions are pious frauds as someone may feel ascribing it to a more exalted person makes one's message more palpable. And what does STF's sister citing this document prove? Nothing. This is a well-known text and clearly she was not relying on it to prove outrageous things like nass can be changed! Not even in the deepest nightmare did this question come up in the past, till the Iblisi Toli started raking it up to prove their false usurpation of the dawaat infrastructure.

Any case, all this is irrelevant. More important is the question: can naas be changed? Clearly Muffy and his supports think so. However, by definition they are hence out of the pale of the Ismaili mazhaab. I mean, if say this is true. How can one be sure that after seeing two years of his son's incompetent behavior SMB did not want to change nass yet again but was prevented by the evil machinations of his physician Moiz? Clearly, SMB was at peace having already done the nass on his one-but-youngest brother right in the beginning of his era, in accordance of his father's wishes and likely was not fully in control towards the end.

Another point to reemphasize with OO53 said: it is true that in the most esoteric texts it is said that the determination of Imams happens very early on. Some say 40 days after birth, some say even when the mother of the to-be-born Imam is pregnant. I have attended many classes on haqqaiq, even by the senior brothers of SMB in which these points were discussed in great detail. (How seriously one should take these esoteric treatises is a different question. They are very often garbled and make no sense, betraying a highly superstitious mind). Hence, if the Muffy Toli is making claims that nass once done can be changed in the case of Imams (and hence by implication in the case of da'is) they have clearly taken the path of falsehood.

Thank you for the response, both of you.

However, I must say that reading all this makes me concerned. Basically, deciding the arguments based on religious text (which sadly seems to have multiple versions) and beliefs may be difficult. Both side will spin it to their advantage, and sadly they have systematically kept away knowledge from the general community. I hope that simple and non-religious arguments are also clearly available. Those may help and are easier for the general public to understand.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Saif53, can you address the question below? You say:
" ...
Now, in order to shed some doubt on the veracity of al-Hidāyah al-Āmirīyah, Professor Devin Stewart highlighted a text from its abridgement,[4] which the Qutbis have distorted and misquoted. They allege that this text states that Imam Husain AS murdered Imam Hasan AS. As ridiculous as it sounds, the Professor’s and the Qutbi position is, that since this is such a ludicrous statement, any work that contains such preposterousness cannot be relied on.

However, the reality is quite to the contrary.
This work does not state this. Far from it actually. In fact, the text is actually addressing a third person who makes this claim, and the work ridicules this claim and further states that anyone who believes this is a follower of satan.
Simply put, despite this work never actually saying this, the Qutbis would have their gullible group believe otherwise.
... "

What was distorted (by whom) and misquoted (by whom)? The relevant material was from the Qutbi's or from MS side? And if the Professor misunderstood the work, why did your lawyer not correct it?

[dal-chaval-palidu]

......

Any case, all this is irrelevant. More important is the question: can naas be changed? Clearly Muffy and his supports think so. However, by definition they are hence out of the pale of the Ismaili mazhaab. I mean, if say this is true. How can one be sure that after seeing two years of his son's incompetent behavior SMB did not want to change nass yet again but was prevented by the evil machinations of his physician Moiz? Clearly, SMB was at peace having already done the nass on his one-but-youngest brother right in the beginning of his era, in accordance of his father's wishes and likely was not fully in control towards the end.

......

SMB was at peace? Sorry, I disagree, and here is why.

Well, the way I see it, for 50 years he (SMB) told the whole community that you have to follow the right Dai to go to heaven (as per our belief system), and now he left the whole community high and dry.

He failed in his prime (#1) duty, and now some 95+% of the Bohra's are with the wrong Dai. How is that fulfilling his main responsibility. He should have just clarified clearly and openly, plain and simple.

[Biradar]

SMB was at peace? Sorry, I disagree, and here is why.

Well, the way I see it, for 50 years he (SMB) told the whole community that you have to follow the right Dai to go to heaven (as per our belief system), and now he left the whole community high and dry.

He failed in his prime (#1) duty, and now some 95+% of the Bohra's are with the wrong Dai. How is that fulfilling his main responsibility. He should have just clarified clearly and openly, plain and simple.

I said "SMB was at peace". I did not say he left the community at peace! Clearly, his actions (or lack thereof) has split the community and caused a schism.

You have to remember one important point: at the start of SMB's reign there was a lot of love between SMB's children and SKQ. Letters they exchanged prove that. They really did have a happy family. The infernal root was Yusuf Najmuddin (LA) whose jealousy of SKQ was unbounded. He knew he would never obtain any position in the dawaat, leave alone become da'i, but he vowed to destroy SKQ and incite SMB's kids against SKQ. I mean, think about it: your brother who is about 20 years younger than you and in his 20s is now suddenly elevated to the position of mazoon. Further, you suspect he will be the next da'i. If you, like Yusuf Najmuddin (LA) are ambitious and of a scheming nature, your pride would be deeply hurt.

Further, when SMB's sons become older and came under the influence of this infernal Iblisi character, their own inner demons were wakened and eventually become the tree of fitna of which Muffy is the rebellious fruit.

I have written extensively of this before so no need to repeat it all again.

In any case, you made an important point before that all these claims appear to rely on vague and possibly corrupted religious texts. A lot depends on how one interprets certain phrases. For example, often Imams appointed one of their sons (or in case of Imam Hakim his cousin) as "Wali ahd al Muslemeen". They even have coins printed in their names, or their names inscribed on monuments and buildings. But what does this mean? Is it a designation of nass? (Not, as it happens to be from the viewpoint of Mustali-Ismaili mazhaab).

Or, there is also the confusion caused by da'is not making explicit designations publicly, or making them in indirect manner. An example of this the schism which led to the Alavi Bohra sect. They claim that nass was done on their da'i by S. Shaikh Adam Safiyuddin. They even make claims about the fact that Syedi Ameenji bin S Jalaal was a witness to this nass and was actually a mazoon (it's hard to tell about this as they say he was on the "highest rank" and in some documents claim that this means he was mazoon). On the contrary, we consider Syedi Ameenji bin S Jalaal as a mukasir! In fact the two communities can't even agree on his date of passing away (Alavis think it is 1031 AH which contradicts the date on the one inscribed on the grave, both of which are different than a date given in STS's book). Think about this for a moment to understand how difficult it is to decide these questions.

So yes there is always room for doubt. In case of the current situation, though, it is clear (at least in an indirect manner) that SKQ is the successor of SMB. I have given many, many reasons why this is the case. But it is also true that SMB did not say anything openly about this and has caused huge stress in the community. So if you were in doubt, it is best to lean towards STF and hope that Allah will be forgiving (which surely he is!).

[dal-chaval-palidu]

....

So yes there is always room for doubt. In case of the current situation, though, it is clear (at least in an indirect manner) that SKQ is the successor of SMB. I have given many, many reasons why this is the case. But it is also true that SMB did not say anything openly about this and has caused huge stress in the community. So if you were in doubt, it is best to lean towards STF and hope that Allah will be forgiving (which surely he is!).

I believe SKQ is correct in his claim, and that is why I accept him. What I am saying is that these arguments will not convince most in the community.

What can make a bigger impact and are easier to understand (imho) are non-religious arguments. For example, suppose there is a video from Cromwell hospital (official hospital video, accepted in court) showing that during the time when they claimed that SMB pronounced nass (roughly 8 Pm to 9:30 PM on June 4th, 2011, I think), actually SMB was just in bed and unconscious, ordinary folks can understand that. I hope that such evidence also exists and can be shared with the community. If multiple such evidences showing that the children of SMB were lying could be provided, that is easier for the community to understand.

Just my 2 cents. Technically in court you can win based on religious arguments, as the court will parse it, however, from the perspective of convincing the community, non-religious arguments may be easier to understand.

[Qadir]

DCP and Biradar,
The most important job that was given to syedna Zoeb by Moulatena Hurratul Malika was not to collect zakat, lead imamat 5 times everyday, or give sabaqs all the time. No, it was before you die, do nass and tawkeef on your succesor and tell him to do the same.

Nass: select a successor and give him ilm and knowledge to lead community.
Tawkeef: put multiple witnesses in place and if possible do nass publicly. We have seen tawkeef very variably since Rasulallah.
Rasulallah did nass on Moula na Ali when he accepted it at a dawat rusulallah gave to bani hashim. Tawkeef was on Ghadeer e khum.
Imam Aamir did nass on Imam Tayyib and made Syedah Arwa witness through a sigil. Syeda Arwa did tawkeef by showing paper to all duat shortly before Imam Aamir was assassinated.
Nass on Syedna Taher Saifuddin was never done publicly by Syedna Badruddin but there were multiple witnesses especially Syedi Dawood Bhaisaheb.
Nass on Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin was done publicly over and over and over again.

Saying Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin failed to do one thing that was most important job of his life, is preposterous. I am not even going to ask you to realize because if KQ wouldn't have done dawo, you would still haven't consider Mufaddal Moula to be a dai because you don't even consider SMB to be dai. You call him with a title of Syedna but so did Modi and literally everyone else. They kissed his hand but probably not with the same feeling as mumineen. You simply considered him to have become corrupt. Let's say SMS and other shezadahs were corrupted by SYN but SMB was the dai, how can 9-10 normal individuals suppress power of a dai? You believe it because you don't consider him to be dai.

I have something positive to say about KQ, he left the dawat on his own and died as a non-mazoon, but he also took people like you with him.

Let's say there was nass on KQ but where is the tawkeef? And don't say that's what is being taught to me in sabaq. If these books are so inaccurate then why did your moula took all these books only from Saifee Mahal. Why not write his own accurate versions in the years he was a mazoon and naas in maghfi in collaboration with SMB. He could have shown at least one signature of SMB and it could have made his claim atleast debatable.
It's not your fault you don't consider dai to be spiritual, KQ spoiled SMB's image, character and in whole stained the position of Dai al Mutlaq.

[yfm]

The boat has left the harbor, the train has left the station, Who cares about the Nass any more. Each has their followers. What we must try to determine, is whether the followers are doing what is good for their community or just what is good for these Dai's who are still hung on the nass.

[dal-chaval-palidu]

DCP and Biradar,
The most important job that was given to syedna Zoeb by Moulatena Hurratul Malika was not to collect zakat, lead imamat 5 times everyday, or give sabaqs all the time. No, it was before you die, do nass and tawkeef on your succesor and tell him to do the same.

Nass: select a successor and give him ilm and knowledge to lead community.
Tawkeef: put multiple witnesses in place and if possible do nass publicly. We have seen tawkeef very variably since Rasulallah.
Rasulallah did nass on Moula na Ali when he accepted it at a dawat rusulallah gave to bani hashim. Tawkeef was on Ghadeer e khum.
Imam Aamir did nass on Imam Tayyib and made Syedah Arwa witness through a sigil. Syeda Arwa did tawkeef by showing paper to all duat shortly before Imam Aamir was assassinated.
Nass on Syedna Taher Saifuddin was never done publicly by Syedna Badruddin but there were multiple witnesses especially Syedi Dawood Bhaisaheb.
Nass on Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin was done publicly over and over and over again.

Saying Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin failed to do one thing that was most important job of his life, is preposterous. I am not even going to ask you to realize because if KQ wouldn't have done dawo, you would still haven't consider Mufaddal Moula to be a dai because you don't even consider SMB to be dai. You call him with a title of Syedna but so did Modi and literally everyone else. They kissed his hand but probably not with the same feeling as mumineen. You simply considered him to have become corrupt. Let's say SMS and other shezadahs were corrupted by SYN but SMB was the dai, how can 9-10 normal individuals suppress power of a dai? You believe it because you don't consider him to be dai.

I have something positive to say about KQ, he left the dawat on his own and died as a non-mazoon, but he also took people like you with him.

Let's say there was nass on KQ but where is the tawkeef? And don't say that's what is being taught to me in sabaq. If these books are so inaccurate then why did your moula took all these books only from Saifee Mahal. Why not write his own accurate versions in the years he was a mazoon and naas in maghfi in collaboration with SMB. He could have shown at least one signature of SMB and it could have made his claim atleast debatable.
It's not your fault you don't consider dai to be spiritual, KQ spoiled SMB's image, character and in whole stained the position of Dai al Mutlaq.

You are entitled to your opinion, but I do consider SMB as the 52nd dai.

Let me ask you one thing: You agree that a nass (repeat) was done on SMS by SMB in London Hospital on June 4th, 2011, between 9 and 10 PM, correct? Based on Abdul Qadir BS bayan and the misaal, etc. Now, for the sake of argument (I have no evidence for it), suppose video is there from the official hospital records which shows that SMB never did anything like that - meaning the children of SMB made it up, would you then reconsider your position?

I appreciate your answer. And btw, they are the children of SMB. They can get the official video from the hospital - I think. Please tell them to get it and show the whole community. And don't show that supposed phone video. Get the official hospital video.

[Biradar]

Qadir: As you are still young and immature (at least that is what appears from your posts), let me repeat again what I have said like 100 times. SMB did nass on SKQ right after his father passed away, even before STS's chehlum had yet to happen. So, clearly, SMB did the most important thing he needed to do as da'i right at the start. He did not wait till he was old and in the control of his children. Also, though there were no witnesses initially (and none are needed) many people knew and so willingly did sajdaa to SKQ and treated him as if the nass had already happened. (It is very likely the first mukasir of SMB, Syedi Saleh bhaisaheb was privy to the nass. BTW, I have personally witnessed the children of SMB disrespect Saleh bhaisaheb when he became old and had hard time sitting down etc.). So SMB did both things you said. So I don't know what you are on about.

Now, you may think that the da'i or Imam is some sort of superman who can't be opposed by anyone. Please read some history. Imam Mustansir's court was essentially under the control of his ministers and army. The situation was so dire that S. Badrul Jamali appeared on the scene to bring back some control to the empire. Even S. Moayyad Shirazi when he first came to Egypt could not meet the Imam due to the machinations of the people surrounding the Imam. Further, let's think about the fact the Imam is in seclusion now for almost 1000 years. Why? Can someone suppress his power? So why does he not appear, according to your childish imaginings, like superman and destroy all his enemies?

In any case, again, my interest in these matters is to simply determine (for myself) what the historical reality of what happen. I do not consider everything written in ancient texts to be true. No one in their right mind (except for fanatics who know very little of the world outside their extremely narrow masjid-markaz) would do so either. Rigorous debate was a norm during the time of the great da'is of the Fatimid era. Many da'is wrote books to correct the views of other da'is. No one said everything written in the past was 100% accurate. We are living in the 21st century and know far more about most things than the most intelligent da'i who lived a 1000 year ago, however high stature he has in the dawaat. I have said many times that besides the Qur'an there is very little that can be certain.

Finally, let me tell you that doubts to the so-called "nass" on Muffy was evident of the very first day it was announced. The analysis of the events right after the Cromwell Hospital "announcement" happened here in very great rigor. How many times do I have to say that I myself did near-forensic analysis of the audio from Raudat Tahera and found SMB did not say anything indicating nass on Muffy? Equally importantly, SMB lived for two years after his brain stroke during which time Muffy clearly showed his incompetence, his inability to articulate even simple thoughts and his total disrespect for his father. Muffy's rants against women, his anti-intellectualism, his schemes to publicly shame those who may have some weakness are well know and well documented in the archives here and elsewhere.

As to "dawo": my friend, the man who did dawo was Muffy. As they say you can't hide the truth. Your hypothetical situation would not have come about as SKQ was destined to be the da'is al-mutlaq as predicted by his father and as appointed by his brother SBM.

(BTW: The fact that you mention Modi shows how childish and naive you are. You think what a mass-murderer of Muslims calls someone makes any difference? Clearly, you are cut from the same cloth as Muffy: I mean, what sort of man invites a hater of Muslims and one who did genocide of Muslims in Gujrat in his bhashan sabhaa during the holy 10 days of Muharram!!?)

In any case, to be honest, I have little time to argue. I only check here when I have time and can participate only a few days at a time. Each of us must decide for himself what is the truth. If you are convinced that Muffy is the da'i, well and good. The reality is that in the end it actually matters very little. Allah is forgiving and merciful. He has created an enormous universe and in it put billions of men and women of whom a just few thousand are Bohris. Surely all the rest of humanity, who have no clue about these various SXXs and their fights, were not made by Allah just so he could roast them in hell! So rest assured you will be fine as long as you don't cheat, steal, murder, and are basically a good guy (which you seem to be overall. I don't have anything against you).

[Qadir]

DCP and Biradar,
The most important job that was given to syedna Zoeb by Moulatena Hurratul Malika was not to collect zakat, lead imamat 5 times everyday, or give sabaqs all the time. No, it was before you die, do nass and tawkeef on your succesor and tell him to do the same.

Nass: select a successor and give him ilm and knowledge to lead community.
Tawkeef: put multiple witnesses in place and if possible do nass publicly. We have seen tawkeef very variably since Rasulallah.
Rasulallah did nass on Moula na Ali when he accepted it at a dawat rusulallah gave to bani hashim. Tawkeef was on Ghadeer e khum.
Imam Aamir did nass on Imam Tayyib and made Syedah Arwa witness through a sigil. Syeda Arwa did tawkeef by showing paper to all duat shortly before Imam Aamir was assassinated.
Nass on Syedna Taher Saifuddin was never done publicly by Syedna Badruddin but there were multiple witnesses especially Syedi Dawood Bhaisaheb.
Nass on Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin was done publicly over and over and over again.

Saying Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin failed to do one thing that was most important job of his life, is preposterous. I am not even going to ask you to realize because if KQ wouldn't have done dawo, you would still haven't consider Mufaddal Moula to be a dai because you don't even consider SMB to be dai. You call him with a title of Syedna but so did Modi and literally everyone else. They kissed his hand but probably not with the same feeling as mumineen. You simply considered him to have become corrupt. Let's say SMS and other shezadahs were corrupted by SYN but SMB was the dai, how can 9-10 normal individuals suppress power of a dai? You believe it because you don't consider him to be dai.

I have something positive to say about KQ, he left the dawat on his own and died as a non-mazoon, but he also took people like you with him.

Let's say there was nass on KQ but where is the tawkeef? And don't say that's what is being taught to me in sabaq. If these books are so inaccurate then why did your moula took all these books only from Saifee Mahal. Why not write his own accurate versions in the years he was a mazoon and naas in maghfi in collaboration with SMB. He could have shown at least one signature of SMB and it could have made his claim atleast debatable.
It's not your fault you don't consider dai to be spiritual, KQ spoiled SMB's image, character and in whole stained the position of Dai al Mutlaq.

You are entitled to your opinion, but I do consider SMB as the 52nd dai.

Let me ask you one thing: You agree that a nass (repeat) was done on SMS by SMB in London Hospital on June 4th, 2011, between 9 and 10 PM, correct? Based on Abdul Qadir BS bayan and the misaal, etc. Now, for the sake of argument (I have no evidence for it), suppose video is there from the official hospital records which shows that SMB never did anything like that - meaning the children of SMB made it up, would you then reconsider your position?

I appreciate your answer. And btw, they are the children of SMB. They can get the official video from the hospital - I think. Please tell them to get it and show the whole community. And don't show that supposed phone video. Get the official hospital video.

Let's just forget about the video if you think it was fabricated.

I will give you at least three different things I personally consider makes me believe in nass on SMS:

1) Nass letter from early years of Burhanuddin Moula's era with his signature.

2) Since we can both agree on the ala rutba of Mazoon and mukasir, mukasir saheb Syedi Hussain bs doing talaqqi and qadambosi of Mufaddal Moula.

3) Raudat Tahera Nass-e-jali. I don't believe Burhanuddin Moula could have allowed himself to become a puppet to anyone in the world.
One very good instance would be 2nd Moharram Waaz in Ashara after the stroke, Burhanuddin Moula did waaz himself. He did the waaz even though his speech was slurred you could have easily understood at least Imam Hussain's Shahadat. So he was conscious of his surroundings. If everything around him was going awry at that time, couldn't he just have taken KQ's name again and again.
You might say that he was afraid of his own life and of KQ's. Well since you believe he was dai, you must also believe he was aware of future. So KQ was there during 100mi milad, couldn't he have predicted what is going to happen. Couldn't he have done nass then and there in front of the whole world.
He didn't so the only logical answer is he was aware of his surroundings all the time, during Ashara, during Raudat Tahera and also during the time in hospital.

[Biradar]

....

So yes there is always room for doubt. In case of the current situation, though, it is clear (at least in an indirect manner) that SKQ is the successor of SMB. I have given many, many reasons why this is the case. But it is also true that SMB did not say anything openly about this and has caused huge stress in the community. So if you were in doubt, it is best to lean towards STF and hope that Allah will be forgiving (which surely he is!).

I believe SKQ is correct in his claim, and that is why I accept him. What I am saying is that these arguments will not convince most in the community.

What can make a bigger impact and are easier to understand (imho) are non-religious arguments. For example, suppose there is a video from Cromwell hospital (official hospital video, accepted in court) showing that during the time when they claimed that SMB pronounced nass (roughly 8 Pm to 9:30 PM on June 4th, 2011, I think), actually SMB was just in bed and unconscious, ordinary folks can understand that. I hope that such evidence also exists and can be shared with the community. If multiple such evidences showing that the children of SMB were lying could be provided, that is easier for the community to understand.

DCP: I don't think that any such thing exists. (But I may be wrong). If it did then the whole case could have ended in a couple of days. Clearly the fact that it has dragged on and on for so long means that it is not so simple. It is actually possible that SMB was conscious for a short while or periodically. In their rush to pull off the conspiracy we do not know what must have happened in the hospital. Clearly, the children of SMB felt that he would not live much longer and so had to do something in rush to cement their conspiracy. Also, as you know, Muffy was actually not present when this happened either and so he himself does not really know what transpired. Given he has forgotten when or if his father allegedly told him about his "nass" years ago, he really can not be sure nass has happened on him!

And I don't think hospitals have such camera in patient rooms. That would be a serious violation of privacy.

[Qadir]

Qadir: As you are still young and immature (at least that is what appears from your posts), let me repeat again what I have said like 100 times. SMB did nass on SKQ right after his father passed away, even before STS's chehlum had yet to happen. So, clearly, SMB did the most important thing he needed to do as da'i right at the start. He did not wait till he was old and in the control of his children. Also, though there were no witnesses initially (and none are needed) many people knew and so willingly did sajdaa to SKQ and treated him as if the nass had already happened. (It is very likely the first mukasir of SMB, Syedi Saleh bhaisaheb was privy to the nass. BTW, I have personally witnessed the children of SMB disrespect Saleh bhaisaheb when he became old and had hard time sitting down etc.). So SMB did both things you said. So I don't know what you are on about.

You are correct that "SMB did the most important thing he needed to do as da'i right at the start." I am referring to the nass letter with SMB's signature on it.

You are also correct that no witness are required for nass initially. I mentioned that in my response indirectly as well.

Reason people gave sajda to KQ was because he was Mazoon. Giving sadjo to him was like giving sajdo to SMB's decision of making him Mazoon.

If you believe SMB was ghaib an jaankar why not make a person who he knows will stand with KQ after his death and whose word community will cherish. Why not give clear evidence of nass like a letter or a video? How hard it is to record a video in private and send it to KQ? SMS's side has all of these witnesses which you say are fabricated. How convenient.

Everything else you wrote proves my point that you don't believe dai is sitting on the kursi of Imam and that Imam even as a 4 year old child has enough power that you or me can not even apprehend. In order to prove your point you have stained the office of Duat and that of Imam.

[dal-chaval-palidu]

You are entitled to your opinion, but I do consider SMB as the 52nd dai.

Let me ask you one thing: You agree that a nass (repeat) was done on SMS by SMB in London Hospital on June 4th, 2011, between 9 and 10 PM, correct? Based on Abdul Qadir BS bayan and the misaal, etc. Now, for the sake of argument (I have no evidence for it), suppose video is there from the official hospital records which shows that SMB never did anything like that - meaning the children of SMB made it up, would you then reconsider your position?

I appreciate your answer. And btw, they are the children of SMB. They can get the official video from the hospital - I think. Please tell them to get it and show the whole community. And don't show that supposed phone video. Get the official hospital video.

Let's just forget about the video if you think it was fabricated.

I will give you at least three different things I personally consider makes me believe in nass on SMS:

1) Nass letter from early years of Burhanuddin Moula's era with his signature.

2) Since we can both agree on the ala rutba of Mazoon and mukasir, mukasir saheb Syedi Hussain bs doing talaqqi and qadambosi of Mufaddal Moula.

3) Raudat Tahera Nass-e-jali. I don't believe Burhanuddin Moula could have allowed himself to become a puppet to anyone in the world.
One very good instance would be 2nd Moharram Waaz in Ashara after the stroke, Burhanuddin Moula did waaz himself. He did the waaz even though his speech was slurred you could have easily understood at least Imam Hussain's Shahadat. So he was conscious of his surroundings. If everything around him was going awry at that time, couldn't he just have taken KQ's name again and again.
You might say that he was afraid of his own life and of KQ's. Well since you believe he was dai, you must also believe he was aware of future. So KQ was there during 100mi milad, couldn't he have predicted what is going to happen. Couldn't he have done nass then and there in front of the whole world.
He didn't so the only logical answer is he was aware of his surroundings all the time, during Ashara, during Raudat Tahera and also during the time in hospital.

Bhai Qadir, 3 points:

1.) You never answered my question, the one I have highlighted in bold and underlined.
2.) If the video is fabricated, that is a big deal, not something to forget. That means they can lie and make up things - why should anybody believe them for other things.
3.) Can you please provide a video of the 2nd Moharram Waaz that you mention. I don't remember anytime SMB speaking after the stroke. If anybody else has, can they please provide too.

[Qadir]

https://www.alvazarat.org/1433/

You can see that SMB did waaz on 2nd Moharram, then on 3rd and 4th a recording from past was played of Burhanuddin Moula. Then starting from 5th Moharram, SMS did bayaan.