Reason #81: (Position of the Mazoon – Post 3) – Syedna Jalal RA
In his YouTube bayaan from 4th Rabi al-Akhar, Khuzaima Qutbuddin claims that Mumineen all across the world should accept him as mansoos of Syedna Burhanuddin RA just because he says so and because he was Mazoon. He believes and claims that mumineen mukhliseen and hudood fodola acted in this way when Syedna Jalal Shamsuddin RA informed them that he was mansoos of Syedna Yusuf Najmuddin RA. Mumineen who do not accept him, according to him, are not mukhlis nor do they have sincere faith.
The summary of his sermon as found on FatemiDavat is as follows:
…Qutbuddin also asserted that in history, in periods of uncertainty, mumineen have trusted and believed the Mazoon-e-Dawat. He narrated briefly the history of Syedna Jalal Shamsuddin RA who was appointed as successor by his predecessor Syedna Yusuf Najmuddin RA. Syedna Yusuf Najmuddin was in Yemen when he conferred Nass upon his Mazoon Syedna Jalaal, who was in Ahmedabad. Before the messenger reached Ahmedabad, Syedna Jalaal saw a dream in which the Imam informed him that Syedna Yusuf has passed away and had appointed him as his successor. Syedna Jalal, then Mazoon, informed the hudood of his dream. The hudood and mumineen believed Syedna Jalaal and submitted to him. Such was the trust mumineen had in their Mazoon that they acknowledged his position based solely on a vision he had of the Imam.
This historical example, even if when not mutated as above, does not help his cause for FOUR primary reasons. Let us evaluate.
1) The Nass.
Syedna Yusuf Najmuddin RA (24th Dai) had explicitly done nass upon Syedna Jalal Shamsuddin RA before witnesses in Yemen, that too on more than one occasion. In fact, Syedna Yusuf’s RA first nass on Syedna Jalal RA was done NINE years prior to his wafaat in which Syedna Yusuf RA made his own son, Syedi Hasan witness as well as a group of other hudood. Syedna Jalal and others had been made aware of this nass (source: Najm e Saaqib). Then, when his wafaat approached, Syedna Yusuf Najmuddin RA re-announced his nass on Syedna Jalal. He gathered ‘a group of his Dawat’s unparalleled hudood’ and made them witness to his nass upon Syedna Jalal once more. One of the hudood who had come from India, said that Syedna Jalal RA was quite ill when they left him and they could not be sure if he was still alive. Syedna Yusuf Najmuddin RA stated that he was alive and that he would not pass from this world until the letter of his nass reached him (Risalah Shareefah Ne´am al-Sibgat al-Ilaahiyyah, p. 321-22).
Dawat texts confirm that Syedna Yusuf RA had done nass upon Syedna Jalal RA multiple times in front of witnesses. There is no proof of any nass being done on Khuzaima and in the one instance he alleges there was, in his own words, he states that there were no witnesses. The two situations are obviously then quite different.
2) The Dream.
Syedna Jalal RA had the great honor of the deedar of Imam al-Zaman in his manaam (dream). Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA and Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA have in their bayans repeatedly mentioned the great maqaam of Syedna Jalal RA as being one of the very few Dais to have received this honor. The Imam informed Syedna Jalal RA that Syedna Yusuf RA had passed away and that Syedna Yusuf RA had appointed him as the next Dai. This was on top of the fact that Syedna Jalal RA had already been informed of the first nass and the fact that Syedna Yusuf RA had dispatched a letter from Yemen informing him of his wafaat and his nass upon him. As Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA clearly states, the Imam honored Syedna Jalal with his presence in his manaam not because it was a time of uncertainty, but because Syedna Jalal RA was of such great stature and purity.
Khuzaima can claim no such honor.
3) The Letter.
Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA clarifies that the dream (in which The Imam AS informs Syedna Jalal RA of the nass) occurred ‘before the arrival of the investiture of nass’ (Risalah Shareefah Tazkerat Labeeb, p. 119). Syedna Yusuf Najmuddin RA had sent an official letter in which he explicitly re-declared his nass upon Syedna Jalal RA. In another risalah shareefah, Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA states that when Syedna Jalal RA received this letter from Syedna Yusuf RA, he began ‘to uphold the cause of Dawat’, ie administer the affairs of Dawat.
Khuzaima has received no such letter from Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA, his alleged predecessor, in which he was explicitly appointed his mansoos and the Dai after him.
4) The Witness.
In the risalah shareefah Ne´am al-Sibgat al-Ilaahiyyah, (p. 321-22) Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA narrates the events after Syedna Jalal Shamsuddin RA received word that Syedna Yusuf Najmuddin RA had passed away in Yemen.
Honourable Hudood and respectable Mashaikh came to him (Syedna Jalal RA) and enquired, “how should we establish namaaz (ie leading prayers, etc) since the physical letter regarding the demise [of Syedna Yusuf] has yet not reached us?” At that point, the man of great stature, Syedna Dawood b. Qutub stood and said, “I give testimony before Allah, and Allah is sufficient as witnesses, that I have heard from the honorable Shaikh, the one who is a verified scholar and dignitary, Miyan Feer b. Hasan that he has stated: “I have heard Syedna Yusuf RA state: The upholder of my cause and the Dai of my era’s Imam after me is Syedna Jalal b. Hasan”.”
Despite the manaam (dream) of the Imam AS, Syedna Dawood b. Qutub RA gave testimony to the fact that Syedna Yusuf RA had appointed Syenda Jalal RA as his mansoos.
Again, Khuzaima has no witnesses to his alleged nass; something that he and his children have repeated over and over again. There is no one that can say that they have heard Syedna Burhanuddin RA appoint Khuzaima as his mansoos. NOT A SINGLE PERSON.
It is clear then, that the Nass, the Letter, the Dream and the Witness all negate any parallels between Syedna Jalal’s RA appointment as Dai and Khuzaima’s false claim to be Dai. Mumineen Mukhliseen and Hudood Fodola accepted Syedna Jalal’s word and submitted to his ta’at not because he was ‘mazoon’ or because of a ‘vision’, but because he was the true mansoos appointed by nass and tawqeef (designation) in the presence of witnesses who gave testimony to the fact. The nass was further verified by the Imam al-Zaman and his Dai, both by manaam and by letter.
I believe then that these two situations are quite different, indeed.