The Height Of Qutbi Hypocrisy

A Letter From The Royal Qutbi Prince, Taher bin Khuzaima Qutbuddin of Bakersfield

Dear Mr. Qutbuddin,

I hope you are doing well. I was compelled to send in this letter to you after some of the comments which have been posted on this website by your diehard followers. My sincere query to you is regarding a letter which was supposedly written by your eldest son Taher who is currently residing in Bakersfield and often appears on your website where his waez is relayed from his living room because it is easier for most of your followers to understand him since it is difficult to follow what you say in your current medical condition. I understand this choice of yours to put Taher in the limelight and try to garner support for him as he very well may be your successor and since your health may not be what it use to be. But what I don’t understand is that it seems that Taher has interpreted a different ideology from you some years back that is different than what was purported on the Fatemi Dawat website. I will point out what I am trying to say in the following –

• The letter is almost 13 years old and has excerpts from a sabak you gave on the ‘urs of Syedna Tayib Zainuddin.
• The main point of the letter is that you say that in Zuhoor the ritual of proskynesis was given to Imam and so in satr it should also be given to Dai considering the maqam in which Imamuz Zaman has placed him.
• You go on to say (according to Prince Taher) that while it is necessary to accept and honor the positions below the Dai (Mazoon and Mukasir), the positions which the Dai has established, the ritual of proskynesis should only be done for the Dai.
• You then say that if someone hurls obscenities at the Dai, keeps enmity with him, then they will suffer ill-fortune. An enemy of the Dai cannot seek salvation from him and they will have the worse of punishments in the afterlife.
• You also mention that it is an article of faith to do baraat with the enemies of the Dai (cut off communications with them)  and that walayat cannot be considered complete unless you have done baraat.

So, Mr. Qutbuddin, what I don’t understand is that throughout your career as the Mazoon your children openly performed the ritual of proskynesis to you. Aqa Moula Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA put a stop to this amal and it was no longer allowed – this is a known fact. In fact, this is exactly why Prince Taher wrote this letter – to ensure that he affirmed that ideology and concurred that one is not allowed to offer proskynesis to the mazoon and it is an amal reserved solely for the Dai. This much is said in the letter – that Mazoon and Mukasir should be respected and honored but not given sajdo.

Therefore, if you maintained that this amal could only be performed for the Dai, then why were you allowing it to be done for you? I have seen your children and diwaans performing this amal for you in Karachi many times.  Secondly, if you somehow maintain that you were next in line to be Dai and that is why you allowed this amal for yourself, you have said many times on your website and elsewhere that your private nass without witnesses was suppose to remain a secret and no one was suppose to know because ‘talwar chali jaate.’ I hope you do understand the contradiction in your actions and statements. If you were Burhanuddin Moula’s RA mansoos then he surely would have indicated that we perform this amal for you publicly for Mumineen. He never has once told Mumineen to do this in any bayan  – ever.

If it was suppose to be a secret it should have only been done in private.  I saw you accepting this amal to be done to you many times in Karachi and elsewhere, almost as if it was being forced. Therefore, it seems to me that you were doing this amal openly on your own and this is why there was a stop put to it. Otherwise, why would something right be stopped? Furthermore, the fact that Taher Qutbuddin wrote this letter is further proof that he had to openly state that  improper protocol being followed with the amal. Obviously if you were only suppose to announce that you were the mansoos at the right time, as you have maintained, you were announcing it all these years with your amal in public and that is contradictory to what you have been saying all along about keeping it a secret. Why such a blatant contradiction of statements? Why didn’t Burhanuddin Moula RA ever tell us to perform this amal for you if you were truly his mansoos? And if you were keeping the so called nass a secret, logic mandates that you would never have allowed your children and close relatives to do this in public. In fact, when people asked them they would maintain that they were just kissing the ground at your feet which was not sajdo but another amal. Were they lying at the time? Did you tell them to lie?

Secondly, after articulating that it is an article of the faith to not hurl obscenities or blasphemous statements at the Dai, why was this the first amal that you did when Burhanuddin Moula RA passed away. You opened a website that hurled blasphemous statements and obscenities at the 53rd Dai Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS. Okay – lets say that you personally didn’t accept Moula TUS as the Dai. But you also didn’t do anything for three years after all Dawoodi Bohras had time to accept Mufaddal Moula TUS after nass was done on him. So you let everyone accept him as the Dai in their hearts, then after Burhanuddin Moula’s RA wafaat you came out and did dushmani and hurled obscenities such as calling him a wahabi, misogynist anti-woman suppressor, etc. etc. You knew what this would mean to the community and the 99.5 % of Dawoodi Bohras and what repercussions it would have. But you still chose to do it anyways. This is what I call fitnat because you must have anticipated the reaction of the Dawoodi Bohra community when you hurled insults at the 53rd Dai Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS openly all over the internet during the funeral procession and subsequent memorial services.

Then when baraat was done to you – according to the tenets of the faith which you uphold in the letter above – you ran to the newspapers to display what a wrong act it was and how it was unfair to you and your handful of followers. You demonstrated to your followers that the Dawoodi Bohras were acting irrationally and that the fact that they did baraat of you was such a wrong action. However, in this letter of Taher you have clearly stated that doing baraat with people who display enmity and hurl obscenities to the Dai is an article of faith. So I guess the question is why, Mr. Qutbuddin? I feel you really have some explaining to do as your recent actions seem contradictory to your previous beliefs and teachings. It seems a little ill-willed and malicious.

Hope your health is improving,

Warm wishes,

Zainub Mansoor bhai.

Karachi, Pakistan

Is Teyzoon Las Vegas Wala Still a Dawoodi Bohra?

What Happens in Vegas Should Stay in Vegas, No? What say you, Mr. Qutbuddin?

Dear Mr. Qutbuddin,

     You, your eminent children, your followers, and especially the progressive Dawoodi Bohras who openly gave gaali to Burhanuddin Moula RA on their website, have held Teyzoon the LasVegaswala in high esteem and continually placed him on a pedestal for ‘exposing’ the alleged conspiracy you say was going on against you for so many years. First of all, in many places you have stated, like in Nairobi many years ago when you fell from grace, that Imamuz Zaman directly supported you. So if you truly believed that then how could there have been an ongoing conspiracy for so many years? Wouldn’t divine providence have silenced your enemies some how? Anyhow, one thing is for sure – Teyzoon, your glorious follower, was never silenced and continued to blurt things he didn’t understand nor did he have the expertise to comment upon.

I am referring to what your hardcore followers have continuously mentioned on this site and elsewhere about Teyzoon’s Zahirbatin.org website. They maintain that it is some kind of smoking gun and the mastermind of this website, Teyzoon, is some kind of holy saint. I would like to send this letter to you to understand why you have continued this incorrect assumption and espoused Teyzoon. Isn’t it a well-known fact that there are many levels of knowledge in Dawoodi Bohra culture? I read in the comments here on this website that the level of knowledge that Mr. Teyzoon blurted and broadcasted all over the internet were at such a high level of knowledge, for which at the beginning of every class of this type of knowledge a strict oath is taken in which one promises that he will keep what he learns a secret and only reveal it to those he is charged to reveal it to. You’re not even suppose to reveal one word of what you learn – I believe. If he had questions about it I don’t think Google would have helped in answering them so broadcasting it on the internet seems malicious and latent with malintent. Furthermore, my grandfather told me that one who breaks this oath invokes the wrath of Allah and all his angels and their really isn’t a stricter oath than this? His website, the Zahir batin, is the epitome of such a breach of that oath. Yet, you and your followers still rave about it as some kind of magnificent fire-breathing dragon when in reality it is simply a red herring in every sense. Why so?

So my question to you is, Mr. Qutbuddin, you have made Teyzoon the martyr of your cause and used him to give him a sense of importance because he lacked any serious attention within his former family and religion, but is there any proof that he is still a Dawoodi Bohra after his breaching of the oath mentioned above? People have said how Burhanuddin Moula RA was hurt by him for making such a website and disclosing the secret knowledge he was charged to withhold and safeguard, but is there any proof that after breaking his oath that he reentered Dawat again. While we know he is a Qutbi cult follower, the question is was he ever a Dawoodi Bohra again after breaking his oath or did he come straight to the Qutbi Dawat? Did he give another oath of allegiance after he breached his original one? It seems like many people like this Teyzoon, your martyrs, are at the forefront of your religious cult and you have monopolized on their confusion. This in itself is very weird isn’t it, Mr. Qutbuddin. I was wondering if you cared to comment since Mr. Teyzoon is now part of the hierarchy of your congregation?

Good Day to You,

Yusuf Sulaymanjee,

Kenya

Your Self Preservation VS. the Sirat of Moulana Ali AS?

Site of the Battle of Khandaq Near Medina – Source Wikipedia commons

Map delineating the area where the Battle of Khandaq took place outside of Medina. The green line indicates the trench.

Dear Mr. Qutbuddin,

You have openly alleged that for the three years following the mild stroke of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA that his entire family, especially his own Shehzadas, had taken advantage of his medical condition to basically lay waste to everything he had sown and reaped in the Dawat for the last fifty years as the 52nd Dai of the Dawoodi Bohra community. During this time, if you believe it to be true since you have purported this on your Fatemidawat.com, not you or one member of your family or followers stood and tried to support Burhanuddin Moula RA. No one rose to try and rectify what you and your eminent learned children have considered a critical moment in Dawat. You have maintained that you did this for the preservation of yourself, and your children said in a press conference that you were silent because you hoped that Syedna’s health would get better. But in other places you have said that Syedna was so ill and his family, for lack of a better word, masqueraded Burhanuddin Moula RA and literally brandished him around to try and falsely demonstrate that Nass was done on Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS. I hope you do understand how this allegation, in itself, is so very offensive to every Dawoodi Bohra, although it has become a fundamental belief in establishing the legitimacy of your Qutbi Dawat. In fact, you say this deception and chicanery went on for three years and you labeled it as something like ‘drama baazi’ on your official website Fatemidawat.com. You said that the reason for your silence and inaction to protect Burhanuddin Moula RA was because he had told you not to reveal to anyone that nass was done on you until the ‘right time’ because had you done so before his demise – your life would be in danger. In other words, your silence, your retreat, your decision not to help Burhanudidn Moula RA while his children were doing this was because of your need for your own self-preservation. You have quoted Marhoom Mukasir Saheb as saying “talwaar chali jaate,” etc. With all of your exuberant claims, the fact that 1 million Dawoodi Bohras have been led astray because of your alleged secret and self preservation is inconsequential to you. The fact that Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin’s RA legacy of preparing so many nufus for Imamuz Zaman’s Zuhur is now in shambles because only the 300 people or so who follow you remain as the only true believers, means nothing in comparison to your own life. This defeats logic on its own terms – but okay – let’s say you’re right for a brief second. Let’s say you did all of this to preserve your own life. You didn’t come to the janazah because of the safety of your life. You led one million people astray because of an alleged secret which was kept to protect your life.

The action of self-preservation at the detriment of Haq na Sahib and the well-being of the nufus of Mumineen makes little sense logically and theologically. It is uncharacteristic of someone who would claim to be Moulana Ali’s Dai. Here is a breakdown of what I am trying to say.

• When Shaikhun Najdi got members of the Quraish to come and assassinate Rasullullah SAW while he slept, it was Moulana Ali AS who slept in his bed in his place. He thought of Rasullullah SAW and not his own self-preservation at the time and Ameerul Mumineen has said that this incident was one of the seven of his greatest trials in his life.
• In the Battle of Uhud, Rasullullah SAW suffered many losses and he himself was wounded on the battlefield. When the Muslimeen thought they had won, the army dispersed and went to collect the war booty. Rasullullah SAW was left alone and the disbelievers returned and then lead an attack on Rasullullah SAW. During that time, Moulana Ali stayed and said that he would protect Rasullullah SAW. Rasullullah SAW told Moulana Ali to also go and leave- and in reply he said, “Shall I become a kafir after bringing Islam?” Moulana Ali SA defeated the enemies and did not leave Rasullullah alone, an act of such bravery and loyalty that the riwaayats say that Jibra’il came from the skies and said, “This is the true meaning of loyalty,” and “There is no fata (young man) like Ali.” May I remind you – you have alleged that the title of fata also belongs to you.
• Another example – during the Battle of Khandaq, ‘Amr bin Abde Wadd crossed the khandaq dug to protect the people of Medina in which the Muslimeen were quite worried of what would happen next and if they might lose the battle. Burhanuddin Moula RA always called this event “a critical moment” in Islam because ‘Amr bin Abde Wadd was such a fierce warrior and enemy. At that time again, when everyone was worried about their own self-preservation, it was Moulana Ali who stood and said that I will go and fight him. He protected Rasullullah even though it meant his life was in danger. There were others present there at that time who decided not to go and fight ‘Amr bin Abdewadd during this ‘critical moment’ and decided to indulge in their own self-preservation. We all know who they are and there is no need for me to mention that here and on which side of the analogy you fall. I am just not understanding your actions because I for one, would never let my Moula suffer for the thought of my own self-preservation. However, according to your own testimony and allegations against Burhanuddin Moula’s RA family this is exactly what you have done.
• There are not just examples of Moulana Ali which exist- countless Hudood of Dawat sacrificed themselves for Haq na Sahib. For example, Syedi Feerkhan Shujauddin went to the Qayd Khana with Syedna Qutbuddin Shahid RA even though doing so might cause him harm or even death. There was eminent danger there too, no? How about Syedi Musanjee bin Taaj, from my own watan of Baroda. He was put in burning oil while he was protecting his Dai. The first thought of Mumineen has always been to protect Sahib uz Zaman. This is our history and this is our tradition. These are our natural feelings as a community – Moula par fida thawu – not just in words but in reality. It is considered an honor. You might say that your actions were for the preservation of the nufus of Mumineen through your own preservation. However, how does the loss of a million followers equate that? It does not make any sense, Mr. Qutbuddin.

So in light of these well-known historical events recording Moulana Ali’s protection of Rasullullah SAW, I want to ask you, Mr. Qutbuddin, whose Dai are you? Why did you let Moula suffer so much if indeed you really believe what you have said officially on your website and elsewhere? Would anyone look at your actions and say that you are truly Moulana Ali’s Dai? I think we all deserve an explanation of what was going in your head during this time since you are claiming to be the Fatemi Dai. What does fidaayat actually mean in your ideologies? You said in your Ashura sermon this year that you are the ‘sacrifice of Imamuz Zaman.’ How so, if you weren’t even willing to sacrifice yourself for Burhanuddin Moula in his critical moment while his children supposedly did what you openly have alleged. Please answer soon as I think this is very fundamental to the veracity of all your claims.

Yours truly,

Alefiya Ujjainwala

Mandsaur, UP.

Your Problem With Moulana Taher Saifuddin RA?

(Left) His Holiness Dr. Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA (Right) Al-Maula al-Hayy al-Muqaddas Syedna Mohammad Burhanuddin TUS

His Highness Prince Dr. Aziz Qutbuddin, the youngest son of the claimant of the Qutbi community. Dr. Aziz recently gave a quotation in the Indian tabloid newspaper, the Mumbai Mirror, saying “it’s unfortunate that Shehzada Mufaddal Saifuddin and his representatives are resorting to threats and social pressure to maintain their control over the community, “It is sad that a joyous occasion such as a marriage is used to apply this kind of pressure. We pray that the community is united once more and that this turmoil comes to an end.” I should note that the prince is currently married to the third woman he has had a relationship with in the last eight years. His second relationship that recently failed was with an Egyptian non-Dawoodi Bohra woman who he had met while studying in Cairo. The Qutbi Bohras are not allowed to marry unless within the community so several attempts were made directly by his family to convert this Egyptian Muslim girl. She even accompanied the Qutbuddins on a trip to Karbala Moalla with the late Syedna Burhanuddin during the inauguration proceedings of the Kufa mosque in 2010 in an attempt to convert her from her religion and have her accept the Dai so Aziz could marry her. He could not marry her otherwise because it was not allowed. However, when she did not convert Aziz was instructed by his family to break off relations with her and then later married his current wife.

Dear Mr. Qutbuddin,

I am a little confused by your eminent son Aziz’s recent statement in the tabloid newspaper called the Mumbai Mirror. He is quoted as saying, “it’s unfortunate that Shehzada Mufaddal Saifuddin and his representatives are resorting to threats and social pressure to maintain their control over the community, “It is sad that a joyous occasion such as a marriage is used to apply this kind of pressure. We pray that the community is united once more and that this turmoil comes to an end.”

What I am confused about is that Aziz is painting Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS as someone who uses the social pressure of disassociating the few hundred members of the Qutbi religion to garner support. However does it not make sense that members of any religion who choose to change their religion would no longer be able to use their former religion’s facilities? Furthermore, should the use of Dawoodi Bohra facilities which are exclusive and largely maintained and paid for by funds that come from community members, be available to non-members? I would think not. This policy also makes a lot of sense because in the end, the Dawoodi Bohra religious creed is a Shii’ version of Islam which means that the belief in the central figure of the Imam, or in this case his Da’i who is believed by Dawoodi Bohras to lead the community for the Imam, is the single most important tenet of the religion. It is what forms their identity. You can’t say you are a Dawoodi Bohra unless you believe in the central figure of the Dai just as you can’t say you are a Shi’a and not believe in the Imam. In the history of Shiism when people differed in the religious identity of the Imam, groups splintered off and formed their own religion. Hence we have Ithna Asharis, Ismailis, Nizaris, Zaydis, Sulaymanis, Alawis etc. The groups that splintered off severed ties with their old community and created new ones. This is a known historical fact.  They did not demand that they still be part of the old religion and try to congregate in the same places with the same old people. Obviously this would make no sense. Therefore, in the Mumbai Mirror article it seems that Aziz is trying to show that this type of policy, which makes absolute sense within the Shii context, is somehow a new practice and tactic being employed by Mufaddal Saifuddin. The article is biased and a horrible form of journalism because it is trying to paint the majority of Dawoodi Bohras as being irrational and somehow placing the blame on the split of the three hundred or so people on the belief system of the community members. It also implies that for some reason the Qutbi Bohras would not maintain such a practice, however, the Qutbis who believe very much in Syedna Taher Saifuddin and his policies will have to agree that the policies of not mingling and regulating the involvement of dissident members from the larger Dawoodi Bohra community was something that Syedna Taher Saifuddin fought for in the judicial court system in which you, Khuzaima Qutbuddin, have placed so much faith.

Therefore, Mr. Qutbuddin, if possible I would like to ask you a few questions.

1) In a court case dated to January 9 1962 of the Late Syedna Taher Saifuddin vs. the State of Mumbai, Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA was taken to court by people who had left the community and had the same plaints that Aziz was expressing in the article. The court ruled,

Coming back to the facts of the present petition, the position of the Dai-ul-Mutlaq, is an essential part of the creed of the Dawoodi Bohra sect. Faith in his spiritual mission and in the efficacy of his ministration is one of the bonds that hold the community together as a unit. The power of excommunication is vested in him for the purpose of enforcing discipline and keep the denomination together as an entity. The purity of the fellowship is secured by the removal of persons who had rendered themselves unfit and unsuitable for membership of the sect. The power of excommunication for the purpose of ensuring the preservation of the community, has therefore a prime significance in the religious life of every member of the group. A legislation which penalises this power even when exercised for the purpose above-indicated cannot be sustained as a measure of social welfare or social reform without eviscerating the guarantee under Art. 25(1) and rendering the protection illusory.

Several other cases were fought to prevent the Dai and his community of Dawoodi Bohras from exercising rights to ensure its preservation by not allowing dissident members to use community facilities and to take an active part in the community. I didn’t bother to list them here because I think you get the point. The court which the Qutbis believe is the beacon of justice upheld this practice several years ago. Therefore, why is Aziz defaming a deputy of Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin for not solemnizing a wedding when according to Dawoodi Bohra creed, community members are generally encouraged to marry only within the community and do not marry outsiders unless they convert. It is obvious that a minority community would need to uphold such practices for its survival. So simply stated, the three hundred or so Qutbi Bohras are no longer part of the 1.2 million Dawoodi Bohra community because they changed their religious identity when they chose not to follow Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin. They chose a leader that was not appointed by Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin according to the beliefs of the rest of the community. They did this consciously and so why would they be upset that suddenly they weren’t allowed to use the facilities or receive the services of their former Dawoodi Bohra community and its clergy? This was the hard choice they made when they chose to follow you, Mr. Qutbuddin. I am not understanding Aziz’s outcry here except as a cheap tactic to still paint Dawoodi Bohras in a prejudice typcasted ideology like they have previously tried to do for Dawoodi Bohra women. It is starting to seem pretty desperate, however, Aziz and your family claim that you are the true waris of Syedna Taher Saifuddin and Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin. So why do you find their practices, in the words of Dr. Aziz, “unfortunate,” and “sad?”

2) The second point I would like to make is that in the case of marriage, your family followed the same policy when it came to Aziz. Some time in 2009 while Aziz was studying in Egypt he fell in love with an Egyptian Muslim woman whose name I have omitted for the sake of her privacy. Aziz carried on the relationship for some time to the extent that you and your family made an attempt to convert the girl to the Dawoodi Bohra religion. In 2010 when Aqa Moula Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA visited Karbala, this Egyptian girl traveled from Egypt to Karbala with Aziz’s sisters and during her visit there the sisters dressed her in ridas that they had made for her especially for this trip. In the end, after she did not convert, Aziz was told by you and your family to end the relationship. Therefore, even the Qutbuddins believe that marriage normally does not take place to people outside the community and therefore you did not let Aziz marry this girl. Could this be the reason for Aziz’s outburst in the Mumbai Mirror?

So considering these two points above, again I don’t understand why your eminent prince Aziz said those quotations in the Mumbai Mirror. What was his point? Of course, the progressives and dissidents of the community have stood by their creed that this practice of exclusion of former members of the community is outdated and should not happen. They believe that people should marry whoever they choose and do what they want and no one should have control over their religious position and social behavior. They maintain that they do not have to believe in the Dai and they can still identify as being a Bohra. Well – within a shii context – this obviously doesn’t make sense and the debate with this ideology can be saved for another time.  But why have you and your family resorted to the same ideology as the dissidents? As I said before, you can’t call yourself a Shi’a if you don’t believe in the present Imam. Dawoodi Bohras cannot be Dawoodi Bohras (in the religious and spiritual sense) unless they believe in the Imam or Dai. Atleast this was the policy of Taher Saifuddin Moula and Burhanuddin Moula and dissidents can debate that as much as they want but the policy of the Duat has been this way. However, why now have you and your family made this an issue?  Do you or Prince Aziz have a problem with Taher Saifuddin Moula’s policies? Or is it your bitter hatred with Mufaddal Moula that led Aziz to not think before he spoke, since it is probably pretty obvious to him that Taher Saifuddin Moula had went to court several times over the same issue. Where does this place the Qutbis now in terms of ideologies? Even more, why do you have a problem with these policies when you enforced the same policies for your son?

If someone could back to me on this I would greatly appreciate it. I think you can email an answer on this website.

My best to you and Prince Aziz,

Abde Syedna TUS,

Hashim M.

Moula’s Funeral Procession?

Picture of the funeral procession of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA being attended by thousands and thousands of followers and led by the 53rd Dai al-Mutlaq Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS. The claimant, Mr. Khuzeima Qutbuddin, refused to participate in the funeral because his demand to lead the prayers were not answered. Picture from CNN.com: Year 2014 in Pictures.

Dear Mr. Qutbuddin,

A simple question, where were you?

Sincerely,

The Followers of The 53rd Dai al-Mutlaq, Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS.

About Your Choice of Directors For Qutbi International Markazes and Masjids?

Dear Mr. Qutbuddin,

I was looking up information for your markaz (community center) and masjid directories because I was interested in seeing the strength and cultural message of your Dawat and the scope of your new international places of worship. You always maintain that you’re continuing the true religion and message of Burhanuddin Moula and I just wanted to look into the veracity of that claim – just at its face value because convoluted theology can be fortified by speech and rhetoric to depict truth when actually reality is the only form of truth. What I mean to say is that when Burhanuddin Moula said that wearing topi, daari, and rida, and even when Taher Saifuddin Moula in a post-colonial era  said that you shouldn’t shave or trim your beard if you love me and Imamuz Zaman, that message seems unequivocal. However, recently you wrote on your official website about your new masjids and community centers,

These community centers will help and support mumineen for religious and social activities.  Each Markaz has aMas’ul (Coordinator) who is responsible for organizing and facilitating the following: 

1. Ibaadat – Namaz and Majlis with Syedna’s ^TUS raza Mubarak. 

2. Madrasa for children and Sabaq

3. Rites – Birth (chhatti/Aqeeqa/Misaaq/Nikah/Burial)

4. Social Support  (Zahra Hasanaat Activities) – Helping those who require medical, educational assistance (Qutbi Jubilee Scholarship Program).

5. Community gatherings – social g
   et-togethers

So I took a look at some of the heads and your new waali mullas [?], or whatever you are calling them according to your new policies and religion, whom you have designated for these centers –

For Pune you list

Mulla Shabbir bhai Haidermota
C 1004 Suyog Leher, Survey No.16 (2), Kondhwa, Budruk, Pune – 411048

Is this him?

Shabbir Haidermota – Pune

And for Boston you mention

“We are pleased present the Coordinator for Boston, Dr. Fehmida Chipty. Her detailed contact information is available here (on your website).”

Is this her?

For New Jersey you mention Munira Hamza,

Is this her?

For Detroit this person, Dr. Khairulla

Is this him?

Mufaddal Deesawala (Secundrabad)

Is this him?

Mukarram Patrawala in Toronto

Is this him?

There were others of this sort but I just wanted to inquire about the general selection of the heads of your communities and not about the individuals themselves. This is because I am just a little confused. Are these people the heads of your religious organizations and sort of like the acting waali Mullas?  In Burhanuddin Moula’s era I just wasn’t use to seeing waali mullas who didn’t practice what Moula actually said. These people must be great people, however, if I looked at first glance and didn’t know them I really couldn’t tell that the teachings and principles of Burhanuddin Moula was emanating from them. Certainly, faith and religion cannot only be an inward identity – it should manifest on the outward appearance – especially in a culture that is structured around the ideas of a zahir and batin. I know for some people adopting this identity might be hard, but you would expect it from the leaders of community centers so they can act as an example for others to follow, no?

So I have a few questions for you, Mr. Qutbuddin. When will you have aamils at these centers and since no one from the Jamea accepts you how will you teach Aale Mohammed nu Ilm to Mumineen? Will you create a seminary school for these current religious leaders and other followers with your new Qutbi religious principles? Will it also be an online institution?  I don’t understand the infrastructure of your organization and would really like to know more and I hope you can post something soon on your website explaining. Can Qutbi Bohras opt to not keep daaris and not maintain a cultural identity as long as they accept you as their religious leader. What else are you allowed to compromise in your faith? I find this all very fascinating. As for the members listed above, I also understand that they might channel their professionalism as an excuse for the absence of topis, ridas, and the presence of their trimmed daaris and goatees. That is their choice. However, you chose them as your community leaders and that was your choice. I am baffled – in Burhanuddin Moula’s era, the people who set out to establish the centers around the world  just don’t look like the people who are currently leading your community centers and masjids. I feel that your message is clear – You’re Dawat seems to be about a certain moderation of practice and beliefs which is something really new. I was hoping you could share more on it as many are interested.

I hope you’re doing well, there haven’t been any personal updates or new videos of you on your website.

Sincerely,

Murtuza Ali

UAE

PS

Do you want to take Sk. Mohammed Raja off of your UK Manchester directory of Markaz since he has abandoned your cause?

Shrinkage?

Shk. Mohammed bhai Raja and his wife Tasneem coming back to the fold of Mufaddal Moula’s TUS Dawat after being cajoled by the Qutbi leader, Khuzeima Qutbuddin. Shk. Mohammed bhai Raja and his wife are the parents-in-law of His Highness The Eminent Prince Husain Qutbuddin (pictured below).

Dear Mr. Qutbuddin,

I was just wondering about how you felt about your shrinkage of support. People are leaving your cause one by one, even those who are related to you. I recently learned that Shk. Mohammed Raja and his wife Tasneem whose daughter is married to your learned and most eminent son, Dr. Prince Husain Qutbuddin, have decided that your claims were not correct and came back to join the 53rd Dai Mutlaq of the Dawoodi Bohra community Aqa Moula Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin TUS. I just wanted to know how you felt regarding this? Why are people so closely related to you realizing that they might have made the wrong choice?  If you could kindly shed some light on the matter it would be great. Also, how is your prince, Dr. Husain Qutbuddin taking this and what does he feel about his shrinkage, especially because his own father in law and mother in law don’t believe him or the stuff he has been putting all over Youtube regarding your legitimacy? Do you know why they turned away from your cause and what the reasons were for them doing so?

Thanks for reading this email and my kindest regards to you,

Farazdaq

Mumineen Mukhliseen?

http://www.zahrapediatrics.com/PatientPortal/MyPractice.aspx?UAID={6C50DC0D-5E05-42C6-83AF-064D5D982803}&TabID={3}

Dear Mr. Qutbuddin,

Dr. Moiz Poconos and his daughter Dr. Ramlah Vahanvaty use to sit and lead Dawat majlises in front of other Mumineen, take salaam from them, and tell them that they were better than them because they were from the royal family (Qasr-e Aali) and thus had the authority to lead. They were the first to flock to the Qutbi Dawat. Can you explain that when Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin’s message on qawmi libas was pretty clear regarding topi and rida then why would senior members of your family not follow those principles? http://www.zahrapediatrics.com/PatientPortal/MyPractice.aspx?UAID={6C50DC0D-5E05-42C6-83AF-064D5D982803}&TabID={3} As people who maintained their elite status within the Dawoodi Bohra stratified social system and reaped the benefits and privileges of that status, don’t you think that they should have led an example for the rest of their community members – especially in the preservation of cultural identity with qawmi libas? It seems like they were wearing two different hats – or not even wearing them at all. Why is there such a contrast in the leading members of your Qutbi Dawat and those between the Dawoodi Bohras? Why is it so different from what we are use to seeing under Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin? Is what Vanvaty wearing the another version of the new Qutbi rida – since she is a royal family member? I hope you can answer these questions soon as you and your son Husain Qutbuddin have been called to mubahala and we would all like to know your thoughts.

Shukran jazilan,

Mustafa ———

New Jersey Jamaat

http://www.zahrapediatrics.com/PatientPortal/MyPractice.aspx?UAID={6C50DC0D-5E05-42C6-83AF-064D5D982803}&TabID={3}

Your Fatimi Dawat and the 99% of Dawoodi Bohras You Left Behind?

Dear Mr. Qutbuddin,

I hope you are doing okay. I had a question for you and hope that you or one of your eminent learned children could answer. You have made claims that you are the Da’i. Doesn’t Da’i mean the one who calls, the one who does the Dawat. You have maintained that you are the one and only successor of Aqa Moula Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin. If you are, then why did you leave the 99% of his followers behind. You made no strong willed attempt to call the Mumineen to your Dawat. Yes, you put up a youtube video and a website, but that hardly constitutes the workings of a true Dawat. Rather, within six days of Aqa Moula’s demise you sent the following message via whatsapp to all Mumineen regarding the funds and properties of Dawat and how Mumineen should stop using them immediately.

(The First Message and Correspondence from the Qutbi Dai to the Dawoodi Bohra followers which was distributed via whatsapp with email addresses that the Qutbi organization had taken from official Dawoodi Bohra Databases.)

Therefore, could you explain why this would be your first official correspondence as the Da’i to Mumineen? Why wasn’t there some sort of other correspondence explaining to us calmly and in a way we could understand how you are truly the 53rd Da’i. It seems to many that you are only doing Dawat to a select few and disregarding the rest of us. The Da’i has always been given the metaphor of being a shepherd herding his flock (ra’iyya). What good is it, if Moulana Mohammed Burhanuddin RA truly passed on the mantle of the Dawat to you, but then let his entire flock go to waste? It does not make logical sense that he would spend his entire life building such a beautiful community of believers, building such grand constructions, and consolidating a networked organization just to throw it away after his demise. I feel your only job should be calling the Mumineen, no? Then why does it seem that you’ve invested more efforts in trying to take control of properties, taking the community to court, and pursuing, what it would seem as can be described in no better words, temporal power? What about us – the 99%? What are we to do if you are truly the 53rd Da’i as you have maintained and sworn by the Quran? You seem to be going after us tooth and nail rather than explain to us like a loving father. I have heard in sabaq that Moulana Moiyyad was told by Imam to teach ‘ilm to Mumineen like a Bawa Mushfiq. You haven’t tried doing this to us. You have made no attempts to knock on our doors to ask us or convince us to believe in your cause. Isn’t the point of a Dawat for the salvation of Mumineen. It is as if we were simply disregarded by you.  If we were the followers of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA then why would you abandon us like you have. Is this the true nature of your Fatimi Dawat? I pray that you answer these questions soon because your actions have largely spoken against the integrity of your cause if it does exist.

Sincerely,

Hatim Rajnagarwala

Indore

I Call His Highness Prince Husain Qutbuddin To Mubahalah!

His Royal Highness the Prince Husain Qutbuddin, the founder and spokesperson of Fatemidawat.com, sporting a black trouser and black striped shirt with a Dawoodi Bohra traditional cap known as the topi. He is holding the pen his father blessed for him and prayed upon. In Fatimi fiqh, white was the color of the Fatimiyeen and black was considered the official color of the Banul Abbas. The contrast between black and white of Husain Qutbuddin is very stunning and he looks dashing in both outfits (see below).

His Highness Prince Dr. Husain Qutbuddin, a renowned academic, wearing white and preaching to the Qutbi Bohras and invoking mubahala.

Dear Mr. Qutbuddin,

      I am officially calling your son, His Royal Highness Prince Dr. Husain Qutbuddin to mubahala. In a You Tube video shortly after the demise of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA (while the community was still in mourning), you and later your beloved son, Husain Qutbuddin, invoked mubahala, to call the Dawoodi Bohras (your former community) to a debate about who was the correct Syedna (although historically this has no precedence in intercommunal affairs and originated between Muslims and Christians.) The history behind this word goes back to the time of the prophet Muhammad Rasullullah SAW. The word mubahala refers to an ayat in the Qur’an 3:61-62 which translates as,

“This revelation, and this wise admonition, we recite to you. Jesus is like Adam in the sight of God. He created Him of dust and said to Him ‘Be,’ and He was. This is the truth from your Lord; therefore, do not doubt it. To those who dispute with you concerning Jesus after the knowledge ye have received, say, ‘Come let us gather our sons and your sons, our wives and your wives, our people and your people. We will pray together and call down the curse of God (la’nat) on the ones who lie.”

I think your son, Prince Husain Qutbuddin, has memorized the Qur’an so you and he should be well aware of the historical origins of this ayat. What occurred is that in 631, a Christian delegation from Najran which consisted of seventy members came to Medina to debate religion with Rasullullah SAW. The debate, as is evident from the ayat above, was related to the divine nature of Jesus Christ and the belief that Islam was the only one true religion. Both parties got a little charged in the debate and so the Prophet Muhammad recited the ayat above and called the Christians of Najran to come the next day on the 15th of January 631. The calling to the mubahala included men (the sons), womenfolk (wives), and members of both communities. The point of the invocation was so that the disputing parties, Muslims and Christians, could invoke Khuda Taala to pray la’nat and curse the party who was not correct. Therefore, the devil is in the details. Calling mubahala is a serious matter in Islam and results in la’nat. Dr. Husain Qutbuddin and most of your followers have maintained that they have taken the moral high ground and refrained from la’nat and such deeming it an archaic practice. Yet you and your son, His Highness, called to pray la’nat on the Dawoodi Bohra establishment and hierarchy in order to purport you, Mr. Khuzeima Qutbuddin, as the head of the community with your continuous calls to mubahala. Besides the theological problems in calling other Muslims to such a debate, as this was an intracommunal matter, it also is very odd that you chose to do this while everyone was mourning the loss of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA. Mubahala, according to the Quran, includes men from both sides, women from both sides, and followers from both sides as mentioned above. Therefore, you were ready to start a debate and pray la’nat on the 99.89 % of Dawoodi Bohras who don’t follow Mr. Qutbuddin (I assume you believe you are on the correct side) while they had just lost their spiritual father. Without saying too much, I hope you do understand the serious moral dilemma that this represents.

In any case, let us put that in the past. Today, I also invoke mubahala, and call your learned and eminent son, Husain Qutbuddin to mubahala as is according to your own Qutbi Bohra practices. I also invoke your  sons and our sons, your womenfolk and our womenfolk, your people and our people, to debate on this website to see who is right. I am sure that you will answer the call to mubahala now that I have invoked you.

Allah bless you all,

Yours truly,

Farazdaq

 (note to readers: please forward to info@fatemidawat.com so it might reach His Highness Prince Husain Qutbuddin and to other readers via social apps so that the call to mubahila is answered by the prince.)