#60: In Khuzaima We (dis)Trust

(In reply to Husain Qutbuddin’s Youtube video)

Husaain Qutbuddin states:

       To be Mazoon Mutlaq means to enjoy complete authority. Such complete authority must mean investment of complete trust by the Imam and his Dai. If such complete trust has been invested, then his word is absolute, he cannot stray.

Judging by the variety of fallacies presented in his videos, this definitely appears to be one area where he can claim irrefutable mastery in. Here, a crafty slippery slope is provided in which the rhetorical torrent of cause and effect might obscure a weak mind.

The Mazoon is limited by the authority and delegation of the Dai. If he had such complete authority as Husain claims, what would be the difference between the two entities? Khuzaima did not enjoy unlimited, unaccountable freedom in Dawat matters. But for argument’s sake, even if he did, it means that he was expected to serve effectively and efficiently, possibly more so than any saheb or Mumin below him. It does not mean that he was being trusted to the extent that he could not err or his word could not be questioned by the Dai. Trust and fallibility are two separate and distinct concepts. Even if trust in him was absolute, for argument’s sake, it did not make him infallible, which is exactly what Husain is hinting at. He is equating trust, even absolute trust with infallibility. If trust is broken it is because a human being is by nature and essence fallible, even if appointed by a Dai. This is very obvious because humans are imperfect and flawed. All throughout our lives, we trust people with major and minor responsibilities, yet at times our trust is betrayed. For example, husbands trust their wives completely in their personal lives but at times they betray that trust, and vice versa. Clients trust lawyers completely for their cases but they have been known to abuse their powers. Covenants of trust are known to be broken because human beings are by nature fallible. In Dawat al-Satr only the Dai is infallible. Khuzaima was, and definitely is, not.

An incident occurred in 1409 H where the covenant of trust between him and his Moula was definitely breached and though Husain would like us to forget, we know that Khuzaima’s character emerged quite tarnished, to say the least.

Al-Dai al-Ajal Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA proclaims.

“ek waqt Bhai Qutbuddin ney bhi em khayal thai gayu, aney em yaqeen thai gayoo, aney zehn ma lai leedu key aa saazish….”

Maybe Husain has some retort regarding how our eyes are shut and our intellect is jaded regarding this immaculate proclamation as well.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s