Reason #91: Of Date and Mandate

I will be the first to say that Husain Qutbuddin (HQ) and his siblings are intelligent. This is why their ignorance of select aspects of Dawat texts is all the more striking. Despite claims of Ilme Aale Mohammed SA and worldly knowledge, they fail to understand the most fundamental of Dawat principles, to recognise relevant precedents in Dawat history, and to comprehend simple reasoning and logic. This indicates that their abandoning of haqq has in turn led to Dawat texts and intellect abandoning them.

Like much of the ‘philosophy’ page of the site, HQ’s accusations are plagiarised from the forums of those that call themselves ‘Progressives’. That HQ and a group of people who have spent their lives ridiculing and loathing the Dai and Dawat would see eye to eye is of little surprise. Inspired by them, (in reference to Syedna Mufaddal’s nass bayaan) HQ claims that omitting the specific date in which an important event occurred is evidence that the event is fabricated. He in turn indicates that the historical document referred to in this event is also false; fallacious thinking indeed. Let us highlight the immaturity and lack of understanding such an accusation reflects:

  • Previous Doat Mutlaqeen RA have described the instances of nass upon them in a similar manner without explicitly mentioning a date. Syedna Tayyib Zainuddin RA has described the nass conferred upon him by Syedna Mohammed Ezzuddin RA in his own words. He speaks of a letter, one in which Syedna appoints him as his mansoos. This letter was written during the time of one of the plagues that afflicted Surat. He says:

Wa lamma kaana fi b´ad al-layaali. And one night, Syedna’s (Syedna Mohammed Ezzuddin RA) lofty health changed [for the worse]. He was afflicted so severely that he was unable to sleep the entire night. In the morning, however, he felt slightly better. He called me to his side and spoke of his illness and the night’s happenings. He then said, “A life that can be counted by [the number of] breaths is something that the intelligent should not hold faith in.”

Syedna Mohammed Ezzuddin RA then goes on to inform Syedna Tayyib Zainuddin RA that he has authored a document in which he has named him as his mansoos and has placed this document in a basket which he then pointed towards. Syedna Mohammed Ezzuddin RA then began speaking about something else.

This is the manner by which Syedna Tayyib Zainuddin RA describes the incident in which he first learns of the nass upon him: ‘and one night’.

If HQ believes that the narration of nass communicated by Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS is susceptible to doubt, then he also doubts the nass narration given by Syedna Zainuddin RA.

  • In this same letter, Syedna Tayyib Zainuddin RA describes the second incident in which Syedna Mohammed Ezzuddin RA informs him that he has appointed him as his mansoos. He states:

And on the 15th of Shehrullah, Friday, Syedna Mohammed Ezzuddin RA called me to his honourable presence. I arrived, and sat before him as instructed. He picked up a document in front of him, and after looking through it for a while and moving his lips as if saying something, he handed it to me. He then said, “I by the ilhaam of Allah and the ilhaam of His Wali, upon him salaam, am giving you this document; read it.”

Syedna Zainuddin RA goes on to describe how this kitaab was the kitaab of nass upon him. It is interesting, nay providential, to mark that the manner by which Syedna Ezzuddin RA informs Syedna Zainuddin RA of his nass upon him, mirrors the manner in which Syedna Burhanuddin RA informed Syedna Saifuddin TUS of the same.

  • If the evidence regarding the nass upon Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS was fabricated, or as HQ states, made up only a few days before it was released, it would only be logical that a date be included. Contrary to what HQ claims, there would have been no way for anyone to verify whether or not a private conversation took place between Syedna Burhanuddin RA and one of his sons on a specific date, following verification that Syedna al-Muqaddas RA was in Mumbai on the said date. HQ should know this; his father’s entire claim to the mantle of Dawat rests on a ‘private conversation’.
  • If an individual was asked where he was and what he was doing on a random date, like July 27th, 2012, more than likely he would have difficulty remembering. However, if he was asked what he was doing on the day of the opening ceremony of the London Olympics, there is a better chance that he would be able to recall his location and actions. Events are normally described and recollected more through context then dates.

Syedna Saifuddin TUS helped his audience contextualize this significant event by providing the following details: (1) This event took place 4 or 5 years ago, (2) Moulana Burhanuddin RA na mizaaj mubarak par giraani thi, (3) work was being carried out in the khazaanah, (4) the document was kept in Saifee Mahal in Syedna Taher Saifuddin’s RA room, in a teak cupboard, along with other private possessions and (5) only Syedna Burhanuddin RA could access it.

The above contextualisation would place this event as having taken place in either 1430 H or 1431 H. However, out of these two years Maula na mizaaj mubarak par giraani was in 1430 H, which was the one year in which he did not make a public appearance on the occasion of his Milad Mubarak. Reference to the khazaanah (Moula’s personal library) narrows down the period in question to the couple of months when work was going on in the khazaanah in Saify Mahal.

  • Questioning the event during which someone learns of the existence of an historical document does not negate the existence of said document. The fact remains, that the document exists and its age and authenticity can be ascertained very easily. HQ’s attempt to deny the fact that this event ever took place by insisting upon a date indicates the desperate levels to which they have fallen to in their attempts to cast doubt on the authenticity of a document they never knew existed, and have now dismissed without examination.
  • Caught off-guard by the existence of the nass document, KQ on the 4th of Rabi al-Akhar adds to his fabrications by claiming that Syedna Burhanuddin RA reiterated nass upon him multiple times even after 1388 H. He says “ehna pachi to mane Moulana ye haji kitni waar farmayu che ke mara waaris tame cho’’ (Moulana has repeatedly told me [after 1388] that I am his successor.


It is strange that in all of his official statements and bayaans he never mentions these other incidents of nass, until he learned of the existence of this nass document. If he remembers his so-called nass from 50 years ago so well, why hasn’t he shared these other instances with the community which would have occurred in more recent memory? Isn’t he concerned about strengthening our conviction regarding his claim?

  • HQ should not get too caught up in dates. In his 4th Rabi al-Akhar YouTube bayaan, his father insists that it has been 21 days since the wafaat of Syedna Burhanuddin RA and parades this as being a ‘blessed coincidence’. In actuality, there had been only 19 days between the wafaat of Syedna Burhanuddin RA and Imam al-Zaman’s AS Milad Mubarak. KQ either believes he was telling the truth or that he was lying. If he believes it was the truth, then he and his children, despite their PhDs, cannot do simple arithmetic. If he was lying, then as HQ clearly states, a liar cannot be Dai.



  • KhuzemaAbbasBhai

    The so called “progressives” and Khuzema’s brood appear to be one and the same. Infact, we should not be surprised if Khuzema’s brood, all along, has been provoking the “progressives” towards ever increasing animosity of Syedna Burhanuddin RA, Syedna Mufaddal TUS and Daawat as a whole.

  • “If he believes it was the truth, then he and his children, despite their PhDs, cannot do simple arithmetic. If he was lying, then as HQ clearly states, a liar cannot be Dai.”
    This above statement of yours, loved it, perfectly argued and put in a manner that if refuted by these misguided dunyawala’s it will backfire on themselves This blog is worth reading multiple times, no matter what the time, its 12:14 am right now ! 🙂 shukria bhai and your team with afzal us salaams

    • HQ in his videos says giving sajda to the tv is idol worshiping (boot puja) then according to his sake even having frames of Maula at homes and bowing down to them or kneeking to them should be called so. At times when we feel lonely, we feel blessed or any situations I and other people have a habbit of kissing Maulas photograph or jus looking at it or kneeling down. ( it shows for a fact that kq and his family cannot have done this)

  • Mohammed Mulla Saifuddin Rangoonwala

    A Gujarati saying is sufficient to describe the scandalised mindset of KQ family: “Pani mathi parpota kadhwa” and” Chhashware Chabarda” . as well as ” Vinashkale viprit Buddhi”. It is simple that the nass proclaimed by Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin R.A. on Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin is incontrovertibly proven through docum,ent and witnesses and is therefore irreversible. KQ shoul atone for his mistake and redirect his family to fall in line with the Aqidah of a Mumin rather than mislead his ilk.

  • Mohammed Mulla Saifuddin Rangoonwala

    Day and Date may mislead as it is by itself in a position to do arithmetically as KQhas done while counting upon 4th Rabi ul Akhar since 16th of Rabi ul Awwal “Tareekh bhi 21 mi chhe ane din bhi 21 mo chhe”.
    It is the ” time ” which is more important. It was the time which was required to be responded in when we were asked to: We did but were late and consequently were thrown out from that “ruhani space” Respond as Al Quran says: Ujibo Dawatad dae eza da’ane fal yastajibuli wal yuminoo bi la’alahum yarshodoon. Has Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin not invited KQ in Wa’az?

  • Shabbir Kanchwala

    KQ and his Family are habitual in MISGUIDING mumineen by wrong ARITHMETICS.

    If he is not good at knowledge of simple arithmetic ……How he can be Dai?…………..He is Just Davedar

  • Mohammed Mulla Saifuddin Rangoonwala

    He is not only a Dawedaar but is “A dewadaar” of Akherat on the day of judgement. Is he not worried? !!! Is there anybody in his family who can act as a la Mohammed bin abubakr ?

  • Shaikh Quresh Shaikh Ghulamhussain Haidry

    Their calculation has been wrong from the beginning. When they proclaimed that he is the Dai, their calculation was people would flock to Thane but they were wrong. During his misaq there were only 80 to 100 as reported in the newspaper.

  • I have heard that ek sacha dai or mansoos aj mojiza kari sake ane mufaddal moula tus ye karine batayu ap ye udaipur ma je kidu ye kitnaj mumeneen vala che.. Che koi bija je ye karu hoi.. Agar mufaddal moula tus haq na dai na hote to a thai sakte su.. Mumin nu bhalu koi haq na saheb aj kari sake…..

  • Udaipur is the example
    Aqa mohammed burhanuddIn moula ye jem mumeneen ne bachaya. Yej misal aqa mufaddal saifuddin moula Ye Udaipur na mumeneen ye bachaya che.. Did QK did anything like this helping and giving something to people can be done by anyone.. But bringing mumeneen back is only a work of haq na dai n mansoos…
    So sayedna mufaddal saifuddin tus ye 3 yrs ma ghana mojiza dikhaya che ane Burhanuddin moula ye je daawat na farzando ne naazo si pala che yej farzando ne aje mufaddal moula pali rahya che…..

  • Has KQ himself shown any document for his claim that has date on it. If no, than does he have moral authority to ask for this to Dai al-Mutlaq.

  • salam bhaiyo .je jhuta rahe che ehne prove karwa ni zarurat pade che haq na kai prove karwa ni zarurat nathi.ashura na divas aqa burhanuddin maula RA aali qadr maula tus ne apna saathe takht par bithavi ne shahdat na banayn ni raza aapi yej har dawa no reply che.

Leave a Reply to Shabbir Cancel reply

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s