Reason #92: Changing the Meethaq
Husain Qutbuddin (HQ) claims that the text of Ehd al-Awliyaa’ (Meethaq) can never be changed and since it was changed following the nass by Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA upon Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS, the latter cannot be a true Dai.
- Firstly, Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin issued the directive to add the name of his mansoos to the meethaq text. The mithaal mubarak was sent by Syedna al-Muqaddas’s secretariat (Alvazaratus Saifiyah) and the first person to carry out this directive was Syedi Mukasir Saheb Husain Bhaisaheb Husamuddin. Again, at yet another milestone in the golden annals of Dawat the yadd and yameen of the Dai was nowhere to be seen.
- Secondly, there is no record of the mithaal mubarak being sent twice, as HQ claims, however, it seems highly probable that the Qutbuddin family were sent the same mithaal twice seeing as they were the least likely to comply.
- Thirdly, HQ claims that one cannot change the ibaarat (text) of Ehd al-Awliyaa’ at all, not even one letter. It is explicitly mentioned in the text that the custom of Ehd is not a recent one. From the very day that Allah created Adam Nabi, this custom was in place. Allah states in the Quran that ‘Indeed, we had beforehand taken the covenant from Adam’. Does HQ really believe that the text of Ehd al-Awliyaa’ is the same as it was during the time of Adam Nabi? In Lisaan al-Dawat? Repeatedly mentioning Imam and Imam’s Dai? Detailing the functioning of Dawat when an Imam goes into seclusion? Delineating the three posts by which the Dawat continues during satr? And many other stipulations that are particular to Islam and the period of satr? Does he really think that whilst the Dawat was based in Yemen, the Ehd al-Awliyaa’ was recited in Lisan al-Dawat? It seems he is also unaware of the fact that the clause ‘zairey dast’ (the Mazoon and Mukasir being subordinate and controlled by the Dai Mutlaq) was added by al-Dai al-Ajal Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA. His father may not even know, since it was done well before he came into existence. Will he now even accuse Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA of violating the nehj of Dawat as he has Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA?
The text of the Ehd al-Awliyaa’ can be changed, but only by the Imam and during his satr by the Dai Mutlaq, because it is to him that we are giving meethaq. It his meethaq, an oath given to him, surely then the one the oath being given to has the right to alter it as he sees fit. The Imam and his Dai are not bound by the text of the Ehd al-Awliyaa’ but rather it is a means for them to convey to their followers what is expected and required of them. And as times change so does the language and content of Ehd al-Awliyaa’.
HQ then goes on to claim that ‘mansoos nu iqraar dawat na kitaabo ma nathi’. Has he read every single Dawat text? Secondly, this is a classic example of putting the cart before the horse. Has he not read the narration of Amirul Mumineen SA placing the Quran upon his head and calling upon it to speak? Amirul Mumineen SA then declared that ‘I am the book that speaks’. It is a fundamental flaw in his aqeedah if he gauges the actions of Duat Mutlaqeen by Dawat texts. They are the living books and their actions are the nehj of Dawat. If a Dai of any time deems it necessary to add his mansoos’s name in the Ehd al-Awliyaa’, he has an incontrovertible right to do so. And those who question his authority to do so need to re-examine their adherence to the tenets of Ehd al-Awliyaa’. Therefore, citing examples of what Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA did regarding the text of Ehd al-Awliyaa’ after his nass upon Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA is misleading. Different times require different courses of action. The Dai Mutlaq of the time knows which course to take.
The awareness of the four odd people sitting in front of HQ is also commendable. One person blurts out that no changes have been made to the Ehd al-Awliyaa’ for 900 years. How does he know? Has he examined each and every manuscript? If his audience are so scholarly maybe HQ can rest his throat and let them conduct the remaining Q&A sessions.
In the recording of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin’s RA waaz mubarak shown to Mumineen during Ashara 1435 H, he stated that Syedna Abdulhusain Husamuddin RA dismissed those who denied nass being conferred upon Syedna Abdulqadir Najmuddin RA and labelled them as ‘children’. Amongst the wisdom inherent in this statement, is the fact that some within these munafeqeen were 2, or 4, or 5, or 7 years old when nass was proclaimed. They were actually too young to know anything about nass at the time. The four Qutbuddin sons should realise that Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin’s RA nass upon Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS was conferred long before they were even born.
As the renowned Fatemi poet Ibne Hani aptly says:
The Banu Abbas (Abassids) ask ‘Has Egypt been conquered? Tell Banu Abbas that ‘the matter is long resolved’
According to historical texts, after doing nass e jali on ameerul munineen Rasulullah stayed at gadir e khum mauze for three days. For three days all 70000 muslimeen used to give misaq to Rasulullah n then to ameeril mumineen. So misaq was taken for mansoos in the presance of naas.
I remember, many many times, in Mithaq majlis for shafakat of mumineens, Moulana Mohammed Burhanuddin RA, gave raza to Moulana Aliqdr Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS though many saheb (Even KQ) above Moulana Aliqdr Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS in tartib were present in the Majlis.
Who is he (KQ) to dispute amal of Moulana Mohammed Burhanuddin RA?.
Who has given him(KQ) right to analyse in Ahed Bayaan?
Why did he not objected for it in hayati of Moulana Mohammed Burhanuddin RA?
Misaaq has not changed in its essence. Misaqwalas have changed in their paiman e ehed. To question the malik of misaq about the text whether it is being changed or not is tantamount to disobey him. Ta’at is the basic principle of Misaq. To be of mind to adhere to this principle will be considered as Ta,at rather than mind the entire text of Ehdul awliya which is so olemn and serene and crystal clear about principles of being in Dawat of the Dai of the time.Why forget: what Al Quran says: which is also incorporated in the Ehdul Awliya: ” Minal Mumineena rejaloon sadaoo ma ahadullaha alaiyhe waminhum manynaqaza nahbahu waminhum manyantazir wa ma baddaluho tabdeela.
The change which KQ and his ilk have visualised is a regressive form of belief. It cannot stand the test of time. Change as per Awliya kiram’s perception and amal reflects the need to energise. The Deen , The Faith and The Belief does reuire to be energised. At What time and juncture it is to be done should be left to them and them only., because it is they who always have one singular mission of that of “Ma’ad of a Mumin”( The Return to the Primal Matter of Origin). Imam Husain in Kerbala thus evolutionised the Deen rather than revolutionising it. Change within the prescribed ideology’s peraphernalia means evolution. Our Idelogy is simple : Aqa Maula T.U.S. At present it is Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin T.U.S.
KQ has done similar thing in Africa in 1407. He told mumeneen that all three makam receives faiz from Imam(a.s.) which is a lie.
KQ has shown two faces, he said such things first in Africa without approval of Dai-az-zaman(r.a) and now he is accusing previous doat (r.a) for changing text of mithaq.
Who gave him authority in 1407 to present such false beliefs?
He is accusing Bawa saheb moula(R.A) for changing mithaq text. Can he give an explanation of what he did in Africa in 1407?
How he claims to be a dai when he never understand the maqam of Dai?
Abde Syedna Mufaddal Saifudding (T.U.S)
If KQ has seen the waqafnama of jamea saifiyah inscribed on marble ( however how could one, harbouring hatred see the truth) which states: “our foundation and reliance is based on living sources.”
قال الله تعالى في القران الكريم في ذكر العهد والميثاق:
“ان الذين يبايعونك انما يبايعون الله يد الله فوق ايدهم ”
ويقول سبجانه وتعالى
“يمحو الله ما يشاء ويثبت وعنده ام الكتاب”
فامحاء العبارة من عهد الاولياء واثباتها بيد الله الذي نؤتيه الميثاق حق بنص كتاب الله الكريم وصدق الله العلي العظيم
Slowly slowly the KQ gang are coming up with newer and newer ‘points’ to prove to the rest of us mumineen just how much adawat, jealousy and hatered they have been harbouring for Burhanuddin maula.
They started with the Nass, then they put our misak under scrutiny, our life style and our culture. My prayers go out for those who cannot see thru their lies and mis guidance.
Thank you for this website. Last thing I check before I go to bed. Not because I want to find out what the KQ team are up to, but by reading the posts- my own aqida is becoming stronger – and the learning and thoughtful analysis just makes my day!
Since my very first memory Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA has always been in my thoughts and prayers. I have seen the love that he has given to us of the years of my life and only now regret that I have not done more. It is only when we loose something do we realise its true value.
I was blessed to have been in his presence on my own during the Karbala trip in 1989. As a young man, I was waiting to take photos for a friend’s Ziafat. Moula then comes out of the lift and I am in his presence with no one else there. (That would surely not happen now). As always I was spell bound by his presence and Moula gave that smiled of his which always puts you at ease. Even though I could not say anything I know that he knew what I wanted to say and could see right into my heart. I will always treasure that memory of him.
This was totally evident during the 40 days of mourning in Mumbai. I was able to go for 5 days but like every mumineen who attended could see the noor present in Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin T.U.S. but you can only see this if you have the love for Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA
I find all of this really strange and beyond belief. It only confirms that KQ and his sons are only focused on the here and now and not on what will happen to us after we leave this world. To have that much knowledge and still be blind makes me think that I have more power that they do since I like my fellow mumineen actually love our Moula and eventually started to behave and dress ask he has instructed us over the years. Moula converted us through love and understanding. KQ is doing it thought money and contradictions which will not stand up against the test of time. Is that what he thinks a Dai should do? I implore him to take our Dia’s hand and come back even now he will forgive you since that is what Burhanuddin Moula has taught us.
Wait, didn’t the misaaq change when a mazoon passed away (like in Sayedna Taher Saifuddin’s RA zaman) or when a mazoon was changed (sayedi najm khaan)? Has misaq not changed for every Dai?
Also, doesn’t he realize that Sayedna Mohammed Burhanuddin’s RA name was already in the misaq as he was in the position of mazoon? It would be redundant to take his RA name twice in the misaq..
This is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Taqoolo banul abbas
WHAT EVER IS SAID THE FACT REMAINS THAT i HAVE BEEN GIVING MY MISAAQ SINCE 1947 TILL LAST MONTH AND WHAT EVER CHANGES MAY HAVE TAKEN PLACE IS TOTALLY IMATIRIAL TO ME BECAE MY HAERT & NAZAR IS ON MY DAI MUFADDEL MOLA TUS ONLY