Reason #27: Rebuttal on Mazoon’s “Absolute Truthfulness”
From the FatemiDawat website:
Syedna Khuzaima Qutbuddin was Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin’s Mazoon until his wafat. No one can dispute this. Mazoon’s aala shaan is attested in Dawat kitaabo. Therefore, you must accept that what Syedi Mazoon Saheb is saying about Nass is the truth (and that what shehzadas are claiming counter to that is fabricated).
Following Syedna Burhanuddin, Syedna Qutbuddin possessed the highest shaan in Dawat in rank, in imaan, ilm, akhlaaq, taqwa, riyazat, bandagi, sabar, siyasat, guidance, vision, wisdom, fairness, integrity, sincerity, khidmat, compassion, caring for mumineen’s well-being. Balance. Eg. wa’azo and bayaano, dealings with complicated Dawat issues in past (eg. Udaipur), Dawat ni khidmat ma jaanfishani, right guidance of hundreds of individual mumineen, founding and supervision of clean charities such as Zahra Hasanaat and QJSP (Qutbi Jubilee Scholarship Program).
As has been the case all along, empty claims have been the norm on this website. Numerous assertions have been rolled out that Khuzaima is characterised by a number of virtues and that his ‘shaan’ is second only to Syedna Mohammed BurhanuddinRA. There is evidence from no other than Syedna Mohammed BurhanuddinRA himself that undermines Khuzaima’s integrity and character, if not completely discrediting him. I refer to the bayaan mubarak of 1409H in Nairobi in which Syedna Mohammed BurhanuddinRA explicitly states his position as Al Dai Al Mutlaq and that he has the final word in passing any and all judgements. Syedna Mohammed BurhanuddinRA completely exonerated those innocent individuals who were implicated in the events of Africa. I refrain from talking about them in detail, as the Khuzaima camp – just as they have done with everything else – has labelled the entire episode a ‘fabrication’. However, to all the Mumineen world over who heard their beloved Moula’s voice a few days ago in the recording of the bayaan mubarak of 1409H, it is as plain as day as to what Syedna Mohammed BurhanuddinRA said and clear that the events of Africa did actually happen. He said, (exact words)
“ek waqt Bhai Qutbuddin ney bhi em
(1)khayal thai gayu, aney em
(2) yaqeen thai gayoo, aney
(3)zehn ma lai leedu key aa saazish….”
A number of salient points are evident. In whatever transpired in Africa, Khuzaima was misled. He was gullible and impressionable in being led astray by those who were less than trustworthy. In fact these people were referred to as ‘munafeqeen’ by Syedna Mohammed BurhanuddinRA. He lacked good judgement and clarity in believing – with wholehearted conviction (yaqeen) – that those who were innocent and wrongly accused were guilty. He lacked the ability to discern between right and wrong, and instead gave into his own emotions.
Would a Mazoon of the stature and character claimed by the website, have allowed himself to be duped and hoaxed into believing munafeqeen? Would a Mazoon even correspond and communicate and listen to a munafiq? Where are there signs of the attributed ‘wisdom, siyasat, vision, fairness, integrity and balance’ in this bayaan? The words of Syedna Mohammed BurhanuddinRA also beget the question “How many other instances have there been where Khuzaima has given into temptation, lacked clarity of judgement, been convinced of his own assumptions and communicated with munafeqeen and consequently been mislead?”
The website has furiously spun a tale of solemn virtue for a man whose word was not accepted by Dai al-Zaman. Not only did Syedna Mohammed BurhanuddinRA not accept his version of events, but actually accepted the word of a humble and loyal Mumin. He says,
“I believed Husain bhai and I unequivocally declared that he and his entire family are innocent of these accusations. I accepted his diyafat, honoured him with a shawl and prayed for his wellbeing.
After having done all this and after all that has transpired till now, if someone is still in doubt as to whether Husain bhai may have lied to me and was subsequently pardoned [even though he lied], then it is tantamount to having doubt in my judgement and the appropriateness of my actions. This stands true regardless of the rank and station of the person harbouring that doubt.”
To add insult to injury, the FateliDawat website continues to affirms that Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddins ‘final decision’ was not good enough for them, quoting their latest update:
“Qutbuddin Mola accepted Burhanuddin Mola’s decision to close the matter, and has NEVER spoken of it until today”.
(By today they mean 30th January 2014, when he’s actually being repeating the same story for decades, including the dat their website was launched). Why even talk about it today? Can he not simple accept what the 52nd Dai has so clearly decided?
There are innumerable accounts of Khuzaima’s tendency to lie, engage in immoral and unethical behaviour, volatile temperament, complete lack of compassion for others, inadequate judgement and even doubt on his fidelity. However, rather than list these – which again the Khuzaima camp will dismiss as fabrications – I have merely highlighted what is crystal clear in the bayaan mubarak of Syedna Mohammed BurhanuddinRA. If they wish to refute the above, then doing is a refutation of the words of Haq na Saheb, and they are contesting the very institution of Wali ullah. What claim to legitimacy will they be left with?