Dawoodi Bohra Forum

Here are two questions for which we need clarifications from the learned members of this Forum.

</font>

• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Is Sayedna saheb, in his position as Dai-ul-Mutlaq, correct when he says he is the sole trustee of all dawoodi Bohra properties and hence their management and control vests in him alone?
  
  </font></li>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Is the permission of Sayedna saheb or his amil compusary and necessary for any Bohra to lead congregational prayers? And if one leads such a prayer without this type of permission, the prayers so performed is invalid?</font></li>

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Sayedna saheb justifies these claims on the basis of Daium ul Islam and other source books. Can anybody shed light on this, and prove/disprove these claims with reference to Bohra/Islamic material? Please note that we are not looking for personal opinion but solid documentary reference and evidence. We appreciate your help.

Admin,

When the Syedna claims his authority from

Sayedna saheb justifies these claims on the basis of Daium ul Islam and other source books

, it is way to broad. Can he be a bit more specific? Which chapter of Daim-ul-Islam? Which other source books?

One thing is for sure, the Dai is given no such authority by the quran.

We do not have any specifics. We ask these questions because these will come in the court cases regarding masjids in Udaipur. Sayedna saheb is claiming sole ownership of these masjids which are under reformist control. Reformists are fighting this claim and must prove in the court that his claims are unfounded.

You do understand that Dawoodi Bohra faith does not represent Islam in totality but a small portion of it. As a matter of fact, there is no such thing as pure Islam or sole Islam and ALL (hundreds of cults) have their own versions of mini-governments under the garb of Islam. This is due to personal understandings of Quran, Hadith and Sira justifying their own exclusive rights and is relentlessly yet cunningly supported by the verses 18:109, 29:43, 30:32, 31:27 among others. It becomes a hardlined challenge to otherwise defeat a linguistic perspective to understand a specific verse or collective verses on contextual "religious" basis.

My understanding on the two questions posed above, the answer is a certain NO to the first and a doubtful NO to the second. By strict Islamic universal standards, perhaps you may relate your questions to the renowned knowledgeable Islamic scholar Zakir Naik requesting for detailed explanation to his answers (zakir@irf.net). I’m sure his answers will be a challenge in the court of Burhanuddin.

Admin,

Shouldn't it be the other way around? Shouldn't it be on the Syedna to prove the basis of his claims rather than for the reformists to disprove it? Has any reformist read the entire Diamul Islam? Does anything that the Syedna say is in there actually in there?

Here's the other thing that the reformists can do. Put the Daimul Islam in front of the judge and tell him that you've read the entire book and can't find anything that substantiates the Dai's claims. That should be your proof.

Also remember that Burhanuddin, his chamchas and the rest of the idiots are a very strong and powerful corp. that can most likely bribe out the Indian courts from inside out paid by YOU. M.O.N.E.Y. IS the name of the game of livelihood embossed on kothars foreheads. Can you honestly fight them in courts? What happened to the "Chandabhoy Galla Case"? Did you really win?

Originally posted by Danish:
Also remember that Burhanuddin, his chamchas and the rest of the idiots are a very strong and powerful corp. that can most likely bribe out the Indian courts from inside out paid by YOU. M.O.N.E.Y. IS the name of the game of livelihood embossed on kothars foreheads. Can you honestly fight them in courts? What happened to the "Chandabhoy Galla Case"? Did you really win?

Heck, has anyone ever won any case against Burhanuddin insofar in the courts of law OR on humanitarian grounds outside of law?

And one final word: Religion and Politics are the worst of all GAMES OF CHANCE and M.O.N.E.Y. is the EVIL of all. Combine the three and one certainly becomes braindead till death overtakes them. Think hard on this one, LOL!

If reformists are trying their balls out to make a drastic change without much support (financially nor collectively) in the current Dawoodi Bohra regime, then just forget it. It is powerful enough in making your pants wet. So then, what's the solution and why are there other denominations of the Fatimid or Islamic cults preventing you from joining? In truth, the reformists are really waisting their efforts, time and money for a cause that has no effect, though I do acknowledge their struggle with utmost respect, but in vain. Must they now join hands with other Bohra denominations (Alvi, Jafferi, Sulaymani) to overthrow the Dawoodi-Burhani regime or invent their own or better yet, abandon the Bohra and Islamic concepts entirely and become true humanists.

That is not only M<O<O<N<E<Y P>O>W>E>R exist but there is a devine power too exist, so, it is powerful enough in making your (progressives) pants wet.

LOL

That is not only MONEY PO>W>E>R exist but there is....... [ditto]

unlike other religion like christ where they select there pope in islam selection is forbidden so since adam imam n prophet till muhammed where elected n after muhammad election is there since imam ali was elected on the day of gadirekhum and mainly sia follow election so there are many firkas in shi ie twelvere shia then khoja shia then zaidis and then we now tayibbis now in tayyabis there is firkas ie jafaris sulemanis alawai n dawoodi

so the question is that who is the one to whom the righteos naas of rasul has reached
and to the it must have reached he must be the true one a no one can oppose him and if one do so then he indirectly question rasul and allah too

if the naas has come too sayedna burhanuddin then u all r wrong n if u all beleive that ur rigth than u r wasting ur time in court instead of that u should search for the right one too whom the naas has reached

why dont u ask this quest to those four from jamia then must be having something to say

i think ur first question is already ans by the british verdict in the court case during sayedna taher saifuddin zaman which has approved that sayedna is sole trustee n sayedna also won the case against the crorepati reformist of that time but now unfortunately roadpati

Originally posted by abde sayedna:
why dont u ask this quest to those four from jamia then must be having something to say

Who are they? and why should I ask them? This is again a stupid pointless post by you.

the simple reply to ur second question is that raza is nessary bcz noting wrong goes in the mayiat naamaz n if there is no raaza then it will be possible that something wrong as half learned percon will lead the prayers and can go wrongin leading the prayers n that no body will want
and i would like to inform u that there is no fix salaam it depend on u

lm i wsh that not to ans u but it was shocking to read that u dont count that poor guyz they were the one who started all ur reform movement a did so much for reform the were the one who went to udaipur and did all the mess

if u rnot an reformist the why r u falling in the matter unneccary ru the chamcha of reformist

Originally posted by abde sayedna:
lm i wsh that not to ans u but it was shocking to read that u dont count that poor guyz they were the one who started all ur reform movement a did so much for reform the were the one who went to udaipur and did all the mess

if u rnot an reformist the why r u falling in the matter unneccary ru the chamcha of reformist

Look who is talking of chamchagiri!!!!! abde, get your head examined.. the burhani crap has destroyed your brains.

Morons like you might even seek raza to screw, pee or shit.. thats your condition!! get it??

Look who is talking of chamchagiri!!!!! abde, get your head examined.. the burhani crap has destroyed your brains. Morons like you might even seek raza to screw, pee or shit.. thats your condition!! get it??

THis is absolutely MORONIC reply.
what else should we expect from you guys?

LM, if you are not belongs to reformist or else or real bohras then why lot of worries still remain in your brain??? why you are wasting site bandwidth??

gulf we can quote that
begane ki shaadi me abdullah diwana

Above Average Bohra,

You're correct the onus is on Sayedna to prove but we have to be prepared all the same. Reformist scholars of course have read the source books and will come up with necessary references, but we thought we'll put it out there and see if other learned people on this forum could chip in.

Danish,

You're correct about money, power and politics but this the way it is and reformists have to deal with Kothar in every way possible.

Thanks for your input.

Admin,

Evidence from the Sunnah exists by the boat load to disprove the Syedna's claims. Unfortunately, I don't think the reformists can use the sunnah of the prophet as evidence, can they?

Sure they can and may well do so. Our focus though is on Fatimid source books.

I would have to question the allowability by Indian Legal System of Bohra religious "source material" to advance the claim of sole ownership of properties.

After all, is not the proprietership governed by "registration"?

Let us say that Sayedna has convinced me by his teachings that he is the owner of my property. Then, I willingly sign the property over to him and it becomes his.

Are courts interested in Source books or in the legal process of property treansferred to him?

If, later, I decide that I was duped and no longewr believe that Sayedna is not the owner, what recourse would I have in court to get my property back?

In summary, Sayedna may claim ownership on the basis of "sources". And this may be acceptable to Bohras. But does this source grant ownershp in the eyes of the law or is the ownership the result of the actual legal process that Bohras willingly go through?

Correction:

If, later, I decide that I was duped and no longer believe that Sayedna is the owner, what recourse would I have in courts to get my property back?

Porus,

Sayedna's lawyers have presented their case citing the source material. But we don't yet know the actual references. Whether the court considers this as eligible or not is moot. Reformists will of course argue against it but they must also be ready with counter arguments citing the same sources. In its deliberations, the court is likely to consider bohra tradition and history and the role of dai, and also other case histories dealing with similar issues.

I am very surprised and dissapointed by the tone of helpnessness in countering Burhanuddin on religious grounds when several arguments and articles has been deliberated on your home page and talked about. Where must I ask are the intelligent and knowledgeable higher officials of reformists? Can your lawyers request or access and provide the case presented or is it possible to get support from other Fatimid/Taiyyabi denominations in countering the Dawoodi? Do you have a copy of Diamul Islam in your possession? Just some thoughts and wish I could genuinely help.

Danish,

Reformists have the necessary intellectual and scholarly resources to deal with issue. As we mentioned before, we're just making it public and trying to see if other scholars out there who are not directly involved with reformists or this particular case can shed light on it.

If its helpful ,representative or reporters of arab news papers should be invited and reports from courts submited to them.Winning this case would make it hard for them in other muslim countries.
I also think if we petition the removal of judges it will become expensive to keep bribing new judges.
Anybody learned from scientology,Bigger than dawoodi bohras were brought down through the internet and u-tube.

it is posted on one of ur website that all the seven masjid r in the control of reformist ,
but i have inquired with near n dear person from udaipur n told that all the seven masjid r in control of sayedna saheb and only one masjid in being accesed by reformist
can kindly any put the light on the matter