Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) — The 26th Dai al-Mutlaq

The Last Dai of the United Community

In the long and luminous history of the Tayyibi Ismaili Dawat, Syedna Dawood Burhanuddin ibn Ajabshah (RA) holds a singular, bittersweet position — simultaneously the crowning achievement of a tradition that had carefully transplanted itself from Yemen to India over six decades, and the final moment of unity before the most consequential fracture in Bohra communal history. He was the 26th Dai al-Mutlaq, and he was the last Dai recognized as legitimate by every branch of what had once been the single Tayyibi community descending from Mawlana Imam al-Tayyib (AS), the son of Imam al-Amir.

The two decades and more of his tenure — 975 to 997 AH, or approximately 1568 to 1589 CE — were years of consolidation, scholarship, institutional deepening, and sustained communal prosperity in Ahmedabad. He inherited a community that had only recently — and not without considerable upheaval — transferred its center of gravity from the mountain fortresses of Haraz in Yemen to the mercantile civilization of Gujarat in India. Under his careful, learned stewardship, that transfer was completed. The Dawat grew roots in Indian soil that would sustain it for centuries to come.

After his wafat on 27 Rabi al-Akhir 997 AH (corresponding to February/March 1589 CE), a succession dispute would arise and, within a few years, tear the community in two — producing the Dawoodi Bohra and Sulaimani Bohra communities that have coexisted, separately and in ongoing theological disagreement, ever since. To understand this schism — the most significant fracture in Bohra history — one must first understand the man at its hinge point, and the world in which he lived and led.

Lineage and Family: Who Was He?

اسمه الكريم: دَاوُودُ بنُ عَجَبشَاهَ بُرهَانُ الدِّينِ

His noble name: Dawud ibn Ajabshah Burhan al-Din

The name “Dawud” — the Arabic form of the Prophetic name David — echoes through the line of Dais with remarkable frequency, a name beloved in the Dawat tradition. The epithet Burhan al-Din (بُرهَانُ الدِّين, “Proof of the Faith”) was the laqab (honorific title) he bore as Dai — a title with deep resonance in the theological tradition of the Dawat, for the Dai is indeed the living proof and manifestation of the Imam’s presence in the world.

His father, Ajabshah, was a member of the community in Gujarat — a man whose name reflects the Indianization of Muslim naming conventions that had occurred over generations of Ismaili presence in the subcontinent. The name “Ajabshah” is a compound of Arabic ‘ajab (“wonder,” “marvel”) and Persian/Indian shah (“king” or simply a noble suffix), reflecting the cultural fusion that characterized the Bohra community of Gujarat. This community had been present in Gujarat since at least the 11th century CE, when the first missionaries from Yemen had arrived in the region.

Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) was thus a man of Indian birth and formation — though his spiritual and intellectual lineage traced back directly to the Imam al-Tayyib (AS) through the unbroken golden chain (silsilat al-dhahab) of forty-nine Imams and the Dais who represented them in his absence. He was the twenty-sixth link in the chain of Dais al-Mutlaqin that extended from Mawlana Zoeb ibn Musa (RA), the 1st Dai al-Mutlaq appointed by the Imam al-Tayyib (AS) himself in the mountains of Yemen, down through that long and distinguished succession to the bustling city of Ahmedabad in Mughal India.

His predecessor in the office was Syedna Jalal Shamshuddin (RA), the 25th Dai al-Mutlaq, who had himself received the nass from Syedna Yusuf Najmuddin I (RA), the 24th Dai — the great figure who had consolidated the Dawat’s move to India after decades of upheaval in Yemen. And it was from Syedna Jalal Shamshuddin (RA) that Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) received the nass of the Imamat’s representation, the sacred trust of the Dai’s office.

His successor — according to the Dawoodi and Alavi Bohra traditions — was Syedna Dawood Burhanuddin ibn Qutubshah (RA), who became the 27th Dai and whose followers would come to be called, in his honor, the Dawoodi Bohras.

Historical Context: The World of the 26th Dai

The Fatimid Caliphate and the Root of the Dawat

To understand where Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) stood in history, it is essential to trace the thread back to its origin. The Tayyibi Dawat traces its legitimacy through an unbroken chain to the Fatimid Caliphate of Egypt (297–567 AH / 909–1171 CE), which represented the public, manifest phase of the Imamate descended from the Prophet (SAWS) through Imam Ali (AS) and Sayyida Fatima al-Zahra (AS).

The Fatimid Caliph-Imam al-Mustansir Billah (d. 487 AH / 1094 CE) was succeeded by a contest between his sons al-Nizar and al-Musta’li. The Tayyibi tradition follows the line of al-Musta’li, who was recognized as Caliph in Egypt with the support of the great Fatimid vizier Badr al-Jamali. Al-Musta’li was succeeded by his son al-Amir bi-Ahkam Allah, during whose caliphate the remarkable institution of the Dai al-Mutlaq (the Absolute Representative) was established.

When al-Amir was assassinated in 524 AH / 1130 CE, his infant son al-Tayyib — who had been born shortly before the assassination — was taken into concealment (satr, الستر) to protect him from those who had usurped the Fatimid caliphate after his father’s death. The Dawat tradition teaches that al-Tayyib remains in occultation (ghayba, الغَيبَة) as the hidden Imam, and that the office of Dai al-Mutlaq was established by his designated representative, Mawlata Hurrat al-Malika al-Sayyida (AS), the remarkable woman who governed Yemen as regent for the Imam’s Dawat.

The 1st Dai al-Mutlaq, Mawlana Zoeb ibn Musa (RA), was appointed under Mawlata al-Sayyida’s guidance to lead the Dawat in the Imam’s absence. From that moment — around 532 AH / 1138 CE — the chain of Dais al-Mutlaqin has continued unbroken to the present day.

Yemen: Haraz and the Mountain Dawat

For its first three centuries, the Dawat was centered in Yemen — specifically in the Jabal Haraz highlands of central Yemen, a rugged mountain region that offered the Ismaili community both physical protection from hostile rulers and spiritual seclusion conducive to the preservation of their esoteric ‘ilm.

The political context of Yemen during this period was complex. The major dynasties that shaped the political landscape included:

The Ayyubids in Yemen (569–626 AH / 1174–1229 CE): The Ayyubid dynasty, founded by the famous Salah al-Din al-Ayyubi (Saladin), extended its power into Yemen when Saladin’s brother Turanshah conquered it in 569 AH. The Ayyubid presence in Yemen, though relatively brief, was significant for the Dawat because it represented a Sunni Shafi’i power hostile in principle to Ismaili ‘ilm. The Dais of this period — the 2nd through approximately the 7th or 8th Dais al-Mutlaq — had to navigate this Ayyubid presence with great discretion, maintaining the external practices of Sunni Muslims while preserving the inner (batin) dimensions of Ismaili faith within their mountain strongholds.

The Rasulid Sultanate (626–858 AH / 1229–1454 CE): The Rasulids, who succeeded the Ayyubids in Yemen, were in many ways more sophisticated and culturally accomplished rulers. Their court at Taizz and Zabid was a center of learning, and several Rasulid sultans were themselves scholars who wrote on astronomy, agriculture, medicine, and other sciences. The Rasulid period coincided with some of the most productive scholarly activity in Dawat history — the great 19th Dai, Syedna Idris Imad al-Din (RA), lived and wrote during the late Rasulid period, and his works represent the apex of Dawat historiography and scholarship.

The Tahirid dynasty (858–923 AH / 1454–1517 CE): The Tahirids, who followed the Rasulids, were a local Yemeni dynasty that ruled much of lowland Yemen before the Ottoman and Zaidi disruptions of the 16th century. Their relationship with the Dawat community varied over time.

Ottoman and Zaidi disruptions: By the time of the 24th Dai Syedna Yusuf Najmuddin I (RA) in the mid-16th century, Yemen was experiencing extreme turbulence — caught between the expanding Ottoman Empire (which had taken over Egypt and extended its power into Arabia) and the Zaidi Imam forces in northern Yemen. This chaos was the proximate cause of the Dawat’s permanent transfer to India.

Gujarat and the Indian Context

The Ismaili Dawat had maintained a presence in Gujarat since at least the 10th-11th centuries CE, when the first missionaries (dais in the lower sense) from Yemen had traveled to the region and begun making converts among the local trading communities. These early converts — primarily from the artisan and trading castes — formed the nucleus of what would become the Bohra community.

The name Bohra (or Vohra) itself derives from the Gujarati word voharvun (to trade), reflecting the mercantile character of this community. They were traders and artisans who, while maintaining their Ismaili faith in its inner dimensions, participated fully in the commercial life of Gujarat — sailing the Indian Ocean trade routes, dealing in textiles, spices, and other goods, and building the networks of trust and credit that characterized the Indian Ocean trading world.

The Gujarat Sultanate, which ruled Ahmedabad and the broader Gujarat region from the late 14th century until the Mughal conquest in 1573 CE, had generally been tolerant of religious minorities and had provided the Bohras with the space to practice their faith. Several Gujarat sultans had granted the Bohras various commercial privileges and had not interfered significantly with their religious practices.

By the time of Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA), Ahmedabad was under Mughal authority — the great emperor Akbar (r. 963–1014 AH / 1556–1605 CE) had conquered Gujarat in 1572–73 CE, incorporating it into the expanding Mughal empire. Akbar’s policy of sulh-i kull (universal peace and tolerance) created a generally favorable environment for religious minorities, including the Bohras, though the community had to navigate the new political reality with care.

The Chain Before Him: The Twenty-Five Dais al-Mutlaqin

To appreciate the position of Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) as the 26th Dai, it is worth tracing the chain that preceded him — that unbroken succession through which the Imam’s trust and authority had passed from hand to hand across more than four centuries.

1st Dai al-Mutlaq: Mawlana Zoeb ibn Musa (RA) — Appointed in the mountains of Yemen around 532 AH / 1138 CE by Mawlata al-Sayyida. He established the institution of the Dawat in its concealed form and preserved the chain of transmission.

2nd Dai: Mawlana Ibrahim ibn al-Husayn al-Hamidi (RA) — A foundational scholar whose contributions to Ismaili philosophy were immense. His Kanz al-Walad is one of the landmark texts of Ismaili Neoplatonic cosmology. The “Hamidi” school of thought he established influenced all subsequent Dawat scholarship.

3rd Dai: Mawlana Hatim ibn Ibrahim al-Hamidi (RA) — Son of the 2nd Dai, he continued the scholarly tradition and preserved the Dawat through a period of significant political pressure in Yemen.

4th Dai: Mawlana Ali ibn Hatim al-Hamidi (RA) — The Hamidi tradition continued through him.

5th Dai: Mawlana Ali ibn Muhammad (RA) — A period of consolidation.

The chain continued through the 6th Dai Ali ibn Hatim, 7th Dai Ahmad ibn al-Mubarak, 8th Dai Husayn ibn Ali, 9th Dai Ali ibn Husayn, and so on — each Dai preserving and transmitting the esoteric ‘ilm and the chain of nass, each serving as the representative of the hidden Imam through the political vicissitudes of medieval Yemen.

The 17th Dai, Mawlana Idris ibn al-Hasan al-Anf (RA), is particularly significant in the chain’s history — it was during his time that the relationship between the Yemen-based Dawat and the growing Indian community was systematically developed.

The 19th Dai, Mawlana Idris Imad al-Din (RA) (d. 872 AH / 1468 CE), represents a peak of scholarly achievement. His massive historical works — particularly the Uyun al-Akhbar — are the primary sources for all subsequent Bohra historical writing. His tenure coincided with the late Rasulid and early Tahirid periods.

The 23rd Dai, Mawlana Muhammad Ezzuddin (RA), was the Dai who had led the community during the period of Yemen’s greatest crisis in the 16th century, when Ottoman pressure and Zaidi conflicts made the continuation of the Dawat in Yemen increasingly untenable.

The 24th Dai, Mawlana Yusuf Najmuddin I (RA), was the great transitional figure — the Dai who formally and permanently transferred the seat of the Dawat from Yemen to India, to Ahmedabad in Gujarat. His decision was not made lightly; it reflected a clear-eyed assessment of the political realities in Yemen and the comparative safety and prosperity the Indian community could offer. He established Ahmedabad as the new center of the Dawat — a decision that would shape Bohra history for all time to come.

The 25th Dai, Mawlana Jalal Shamshuddin (RA), received the nass from the 24th Dai and served only very briefly before his own wafat — passing the office to Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA).

Early Life, Formation, and Education

Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) was born in approximately 930 AH / 1523 CE in Ahmedabad, Gujarat. He was thus a man of the Mughal era before the Mughals had even arrived in Gujarat — born in the late Gujarat Sultanate period, a boy when Humayun was fighting to hold his father Babur’s conquests, a young man when Akbar was consolidating Mughal power over north India.

His early education followed the traditional Bohra pattern: Quran memorization and recitation, Arabic grammar and morphology (sarf and nahw), Islamic jurisprudence according to the Fatimid Ismaili tradition, and the foundational texts of Ismaili philosophy and theology (hikmat). The Bohra community maintained its educational institutions in Ahmedabad with care, and the sons of respected families received careful training from childhood.

The depth of his eventual learning — and the fact that he would be chosen to receive the nass — suggests that he was identified early as someone of exceptional intellectual gifts and spiritual seriousness. The Dai’s office demands not only learning but a particular quality of soul: the ability to carry the amana (sacred trust) of the Imam, to make the difficult judgments that institutional leadership requires, and to inspire in the community the love and devotion that sustains the Dawat.

He traveled to Yemen for advanced study — maintaining the tradition by which serious Bohra scholars made the journey to sit at the feet of the Dawat’s senior ‘ulama in the land of origin. Even as the Dawat’s political center moved to India, Yemen remained a place of spiritual and scholarly authority — home to the great fortresses (qila’), the mazars of earlier Dais, and the oral traditions that transmitted knowledge unavailable in printed or even manuscript form.

In Yemen, he received his advanced formation under the supervision of the 24th Dai, Syedna Yusuf Najmuddin I (RA) — learning not only the texts but the living tradition of the Dawat, the esoteric knowledge that the Imam’s representative alone could authenticate and transmit. When he returned to Ahmedabad, he was not merely a scholar but an initiate — someone who had been shaped by the spiritual presence of the Dai and who carried within him the living flame of the Dawat’s ‘ilm.

He then served the 25th Dai, Syedna Jalal Shamshuddin (RA), in Ahmedabad — perhaps as a senior aide, perhaps as a student who had risen to become a trusted lieutenant. When the 25th Dai passed away after only a brief tenure in office, it was to Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) that the nass had been given, and he assumed the office of 26th Dai al-Mutlaq.

His Appointment and the Nass: Succession as Sacred Trust

The nass (نَصّ, “explicit designation”) is the doctrinal mechanism by which the authority of the Dawat passes from one Dai to the next. In Ismaili theology, this is not a mere human appointment but a divinely guided act — the Imam, through his interior knowledge (batin al-‘ilm), guides the current Dai to designate the one who will next carry the amana. The Dai performs the nass in proper form, with witnesses, before his death — ensuring the continuity of the chain.

The succession from the 24th to the 25th to the 26th Dai was accomplished during a period of considerable uncertainty: the 24th Dai had only recently transferred the Dawat’s base to India, and the 25th Dai served only briefly before his own wafat. The speed of these successions meant that Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) assumed the office of 26th Dai with the full weight of the Dawat’s transition from Yemen to India still fresh, and with much work remaining to consolidate the community’s new Indian home.

He assumed the maqam with the intention of providing what the community needed most: stability, learning, and the quiet deepening of roots in Indian soil. In this intention, the subsequent twenty-two years of his tenure were remarkably successful.

His Reign: Twenty-Two Years of Consolidation in Ahmedabad

The 975 to 997 AH (approximately 1568 to 1589 CE) tenure of Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) was the longest and most consequential of any India-based Dai to that point. The twenty-two years of his leadership can be understood under several thematic headings:

Administrative Consolidation of the Indian Dawat

The transfer of the Dawat’s center from Yemen to India had been accomplished physically and politically under the 24th Dai — but administrative consolidation is a different matter. It requires the systematic establishment of institutions, the formalization of hierarchies, the creation of sustainable systems for the collection and distribution of religious resources, and the cultivation of a leadership cadre capable of carrying on the work generation after generation.

Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) undertook this work with methodical care. Under his leadership:

The Dawat’s administrative hierarchy in India was formalized. The chain of religious officers — the mazuns, mukasirs, and other ranks of the Dawat — was organized and systematized in the Indian context. Rules were established for who could perform which religious functions, how the chain of permission (ijazat) worked, and how the Dawat’s central authority in Ahmedabad related to the scattered communities in other parts of Gujarat and India.

Educational institutions were organized. The transmission of the Dawat’s ‘ilm required schools and teachers — systems by which young men could receive both the exoteric and the esoteric knowledge that formed a complete Bohra education. Under his leadership, these educational arrangements in Ahmedabad became more formal and more systematically connected to the Dawat’s central resources.

Systems of wajibat (religious dues) were established. The Dawat’s activities — its educational work, its maintenance of sacred sites, its charitable activities, the support of the Dai’s household — required material resources. The formalization of the wajibat system, by which community members made their contributions to the Dawat according to well-understood rules, was a critical piece of administrative consolidation.

Community welfare was attended to. The Bohra community in Gujarat was primarily a trading community, and the Dawat’s leadership has always concerned itself with the material wellbeing of its members as well as their spiritual lives. Under his leadership, systems for helping community members in need — in times of commercial reversal, illness, or family crisis — were maintained and developed.

The Connection to Yemen: Recapture and Recovery

One of the most remarkable aspects of Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah’s (RA) tenure is his sustained engagement with the Yemen dimension of the Dawat even after the definitive transfer of the center to India. This engagement reflects a deep understanding of something essential to the Dawat’s identity: that however firmly rooted in Indian soil it might become, the Dawat’s spiritual origins and its deepest historical memories were in Yemen, in the mountain highlands of Haraz, in the fortresses and the graves of the early Dais.

The Recovery of Hisne Afeda: In approximately 986 AH / 1578 CE, Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) directed an effort to locate and identify the burial sites of previous Dais at Hisne Afeda — one of the great fortresses of the Dawat in Yemen that had been central to its operations during the long centuries of the Yemeni phase. These sites had been obscured or lost during decades of political turbulence — the Tahirid disruptions, the Ottoman invasions, the Zaidi conflicts — and the knowledge of their precise locations had become uncertain.

The successful identification of these sites was an act of profound historical and spiritual importance. For the Dawat tradition, the graves of the pious are not merely historical monuments but living points of connection between the living community and its ancestors in faith — sources of barakah (blessing) and intercession, places where the love between Dai and mumin transcends the barrier of death. That Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) cared enough to undertake this recovery, and succeeded in it, reflects a Dai who understood the full dimensions of his responsibility.

Maintenance of Yemen connections: Even after the establishment of India as the Dawat’s center, the community maintained connections to Yemen through representatives, through travel, and through ongoing concern for the Yemeni community members who remained there. Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) maintained and nurtured these connections throughout his tenure.

Relations with the Mughal Court

The political context of Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah’s (RA) tenure in India was dominated by the consolidating power of the Mughal Empire under Akbar the Great (r. 963–1014 AH / 1556–1605 CE). Akbar conquered Gujarat in 980 AH / 1573 CE — approximately seven years into Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah’s tenure — incorporating it into the expanding Mughal dominions.

For the Bohra community, the Mughal conquest of Gujarat was a significant political development that required careful navigation. The Gujarat Sultans had been known quantities — rulers with whom the Bohras had developed relationships over generations. The Mughals were different: a vast imperial system centered in Agra and Delhi, with a different administrative culture and different priorities.

Akbar’s famous policy of sulh-i kull (universal peace with all, سُلحِ كُلّ) — his attempt to create a syncretic religious culture that could accommodate the enormous diversity of his empire — created a generally tolerant environment for religious minorities. His famous Din-i-Ilahi (divine religion) experiment, his interest in multiple religious traditions, his debates at the Ibadat Khana (House of Worship) that he established at Fatehpur Sikri in 1575 CE — all of these reflected a ruler who was curious about religion rather than narrowly committed to suppressing it.

For the Bohras, this meant that their practice of a minority Ismaili faith within the broader Muslim world was not subjected to active persecution during Akbar’s reign. The community could practice, educate its members, collect its wajibat, and conduct its religious life without imperial interference. Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) managed the community’s relationship with the Mughal imperial administration with the diplomatic skill that the situation required — maintaining the community’s good standing with the authorities while preserving its religious integrity.

The subsequent disputed succession case that arose after his wafat — which was brought before the Mughal court for adjudication — is itself a testimony to the community’s relationship with Mughal authority. That the Bohras trusted the Mughal judicial system enough to bring their internal succession dispute before Akbar’s court in 1597 CE (some years after the 26th Dai’s death) reflects the kind of relationship that Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) had cultivated during his lifetime.

Scholarship, Teaching, and the Preservation of ‘Ilm

In the tradition of the great Dais before him, Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) was a scholar as well as an administrator — a man for whom the transmission of the Dawat’s ‘ilm was not merely an institutional duty but a personal passion. The Dawat’s ‘ilm has always been understood as living knowledge: not merely textual content that can be transmitted through manuscripts but a breathing, spiritually alive tradition that requires a living chain of teachers and students to preserve its essence.

The texts he would have engaged with and transmitted include the great works of the Ismaili philosophical and theological tradition:

The Rasa’il Ikhwan al-Safa (رَسَائِل إِخوَانُ الصَّفَا) — the famous “Epistles of the Brethren of Purity,” the encyclopedic philosophical compilation that exercised enormous influence on Ismaili thought.

The works of Syedna al-Qadi al-Nu’man (RA) — particularly his Da’a’im al-Islam (دَعَائِمُ الإِسلَام, “The Pillars of Islam”), the definitive code of Fatimid Ismaili jurisprudence, which remains the primary legal reference for the Bohra community.

The philosophical works of Sayyidna Hamid al-Din al-Kirmani (RA) — particularly his Rahat al-‘Aql (رَاحَةُ العَقل, “The Repose of the Intellect”), a sophisticated treatment of Ismaili cosmology and philosophy.

The works of the great Dai Syedna Idris Imad al-Din (RA) — particularly the Uyun al-Akhbar and the Zahr al-Ma’ani and other texts that the 19th Dai had produced in Yemen and that represented the apex of Dawat scholarship.

The works of the Hamidi school — particularly the Kanz al-Walad of the 2nd Dai, Mawlana Ibrahim al-Hamidi, and the subsequent works in that tradition of speculative theology and philosophy.

The transmission of this ‘ilm required not only its textual preservation but its living explanation — the unpacking of its layers of meaning by someone who had been initiated into those meanings through the living chain of teachers. This was the 26th Dai’s role as the representative of the hidden Imam: to be the living interpreter who could make the Imam’s ‘ilm available to the community according to the capacity of each person.

Scholarly Works Attributed to the 26th Dai

The Dawat tradition attributes to Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) a body of scholarly output appropriate to his position and his period. While many Dai texts remain in manuscript form and have not been fully catalogued or published, the tradition credits him with:

Risalas on esoteric topics — shorter treatises addressing specific questions of theology, philosophy, or jurisprudence that arose during his tenure. The Dais routinely composed such risalas in response to questions from the community or as contributions to ongoing scholarly discussions.

Correspondence and epistles — the Dawat’s administrative correspondence constitutes a body of texts in its own right. The Dai’s letters and instructions to subordinate officials in different parts of the community are themselves sources of historical and religious knowledge.

Teachings transmitted orally — in the Ismaili tradition, the most important transmission is not textual but oral and personal. What the Dai taught in his majalis (gatherings), what he explained in his waz (sermon) during Ramadan and on other occasions — this living teaching, transmitted from teacher to student and preserved in the memories of those who heard it, constitutes perhaps the most important part of his scholarly legacy.

Ta’wil compositions — the practice of ta’wil (تَأوِيل, esoteric interpretation) — finding the inner meaning (batin) behind the outer form (zahir) of Quranic verses, hadith, and religious practices — was a central activity of Dawat scholarship. The 26th Dai would have composed or transmitted ta’wil texts that opened up these inner dimensions of meaning for those prepared to receive them.

Karamat (Miracles) and Mojezat: The Spiritual Dimension

In the Dawat tradition, the Dai’s spiritual authority is not merely administrative or scholarly — it is also supernatural in the deepest sense. The Dai stands in a chain of wilaya (guardianship, love, spiritual authority) that extends from the Prophet (SAWS) through the Imams to the Dai; and through this wilaya flows the barakah of God’s grace, manifesting at times in ways that transcend ordinary causation.

The tradition of karamat (singular: karama, كَرَامَة) — miraculous gifts granted by God to his awliya (friends) — is well established in Islamic tradition broadly and in the Dawat tradition specifically. The Dais, as the highest awliya accessible to the community during the Imam’s occultation, are expected to be the channels of such graces.

The Recovery of the Yemen Sacred Sites

The identification of the burial places of previous Dais at Hisne Afeda in 986 AH / 1578 CE — after decades of political disruption had obscured their locations — is understood in the Dawat tradition as a manifestation of the 26th Dai’s spiritual vision. To know where the pious dead are buried when that knowledge has been lost to ordinary historical inquiry requires a form of knowing that transcends the historical record. The tradition attributes this recovery to his connection to the chain of Dais through the wilaya of the Imam.

The Preservation of Community Unity

That the Bohra community in India experienced twenty-two years of sustained peace, prosperity, and internal unity under his leadership — without major persecution, without significant internal conflict, without the kind of crisis that had so frequently threatened the Yemen-based Dawat — is understood as the fruit of the Dai’s du’a (prayer) and the community’s consequent protection by the Imam. The sustained peace of his tenure is not taken for granted in the Dawat tradition; it is understood as a grace, granted through the Imam to a community whose shepherd was faithful.

The Issuance of the Nass

The nass itself — the act by which the authority of the Dawat passes from one Dai to the next — is understood in the Dawat tradition as a spiritual event of the highest magnitude. The Dai does not choose his successor by human calculation; he receives the Imam’s guidance and acts in accordance with it. The successful issuance of the nass, and the continuation of the chain through the 27th Dai, is the ultimate testimony to the barakah and spiritual fidelity of Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA).

Protection of the Mughal Period Community

During a period when many minority religious communities in India faced significant pressures — from both the dominant Hindu majority and the dominant Sunni Muslim political establishment — the Bohras under his leadership maintained their identity, their ‘ilm, and their institutional structures without significant compromise. This preservation is understood as miraculous in the sense that the Dawat tradition always understands the survival of the Imam’s trust: as the fruit of divine protection working through the faithful Dai.

The Crucial Question: The Dawat’s Transmission and the Hidden Imam

Central to understanding the spiritual significance of Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) is the theological framework within which the Dawat tradition operates. The office of Dai al-Mutlaq is not a merely human position of religious leadership. It is the continuation of the Imamate in its accessible form during the period of the Imam’s occultation.

Al-Imam al-Tayyib (AS) — the son of the Fatimid Caliph al-Amir bi-Ahkam Allah — went into occultation in 524 AH / 1130 CE, and the Dawat tradition holds that he remains the living Imam, concealed from ordinary sight but present in his ongoing spiritual influence on the world and on his community. The Dai al-Mutlaq is his representative — the hujja (حُجَّة, proof) who makes the Imam’s presence accessible to the community, who transmits his ‘ilm, who leads the community in his name.

The theological significance of Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah’s (RA) role is therefore immense. For twenty-two years, he was the channel through which the living Imam’s grace reached the Bohra community. His waz (sermons), his teaching, his administration, his du’a — all of these were not merely the acts of a talented human being but the acts of the Imam’s representative, carrying the Imam’s authority and barakah.

When he recited the tawil of a Quranic verse in a majlis, he was not merely offering one scholar’s interpretation — he was transmitting the Imam’s understanding of that verse, the living exegesis of the one who stands closest to the source of Divine knowledge. When he accepted the bay’a (pledge of allegiance) of a new mumin, he was accepting it on behalf of the hidden Imam himself. When he administered the ‘ahd (covenant) of initiation, he was binding the mumin to the Imam through his own mediation.

This is the spiritual weight that Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) carried for twenty-two years — and the reason that his position in the chain of Dais, however difficult its aftermath, is one of profound reverence in the Dawoodi Bohra tradition.

The Bohra Community in Mughal Gujarat: Growth and Flourishing

The sixteenth century was, by many measures, a golden age for the Bohra community in Gujarat. The community’s commercial acumen had made it an important player in the Indian Ocean trading networks that connected Gujarat to the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea, East Africa, and Southeast Asia. Bohra merchants were present in ports from Aden to Malacca, trading in the textiles, spices, metals, and other goods that flowed through those networks.

Under Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah’s (RA) leadership, this commercial prosperity was channeled into the community’s institutional development. The construction and maintenance of mosques and jamaat khanas in Ahmedabad and elsewhere, the building of educational facilities, the support of the Dai’s household and the Dawat’s administrative expenses — all of this required and received material resources that the community’s merchants could provide.

The jamat (جماعت, community assembly) of Ahmedabad was, during his tenure, a functioning institution with its own leadership structure, its own systems of dispute resolution, and its own mechanisms for collective decision-making on matters of community welfare. The Dai presided over this jamat as its ultimate spiritual and temporal authority, but day-to-day community affairs were managed through a layered system of religious officers and community leaders.

The Eid celebrations, the Muharram commemorations, the Ramadan waz (sermons) — the rhythm of the religious year that gives Bohra community life its distinctive character — were observed under his leadership with the full depth of the Dawat tradition. The Ramadan waz in particular — the series of lectures given by the Dai each evening during the holy month, in which he would expound the esoteric meanings of religious texts and practices — was a central institution of communal life that the 26th Dai would have conducted with scholarly depth and spiritual warmth.

The Community’s Geographical Spread

While Ahmedabad was the center, the Bohra community was not confined to a single city. During Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah’s (RA) tenure, the community maintained significant populations in:

Surat — the great port city of Gujarat, through which much of the community’s maritime trade flowed. The Bohras of Surat were among the most commercially active, their ships and counting houses participating in the Indian Ocean economy.

Broach (Bharuch) — another important Gujarat trading center with a significant Bohra population.

Cambay (Khambhat) — the historic port city that had been one of the great entrepots of Indian Ocean trade, though it was beginning to silt up during this period.

Other Gujarat towns — Bohras were present in many smaller towns throughout Gujarat, maintaining their religious practices and their commercial networks.

Yemen communities — despite the transfer of the Dawat’s center to India, communities of Bohras and Ismaili Yemenis remained in Yemen, maintaining their connections to the India-based leadership.

The management of this dispersed community — maintaining its religious coherence, ensuring its members had access to the Dawat’s sacraments and teachings, addressing disputes and needs that arose in different locations — required a sophisticated system of communication and representation that the 26th Dai maintained throughout his tenure.

The Succession Crisis: The Question That Divided the Community

The most historically consequential event of Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah’s (RA) tenure is not something he did during his lifetime but something that happened — or rather, something whose aftermath unfolded — after his death.

The Setting

When Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) passed away on 27 Rabi al-Akhir 997 AH (approximately February or March 1589 CE) in Ahmedabad, a succession had to be confirmed. The Dawat’s doctrine is clear: the nass must be performed before the Dai’s death, and the identity of the new Dai should be known within the Dawat’s inner circle at the moment of the previous Dai’s wafat.

The Dawoodi Bohra tradition — and the Alavi Bohra tradition, which shares some of this history — holds without ambiguity that Syedna Dawood Burhanuddin ibn Qutubshah (RA) was the validly designated 27th Dai. The nass had been performed in proper form, with appropriate witnesses, and was known to the senior members of the Dawat at the time of the 26th Dai’s passing.

The Emergence of the Sulaimani Claim

What the community did not know — or what was not publicly asserted at the time of the wafat — was that a rival claim would emerge. Sulayman ibn Hasan, a senior religious scholar based in Yemen and a man of undoubted learning and standing in the community, subsequently claimed that the nass had been conferred upon him privately by the 26th Dai before his death.

According to Dawoodi accounts, Sulayman ibn Hasan initially accepted Dawood ibn Qutubshah as the 27th Dai — with some accounts citing a condolence message attributed to Sulayman that acknowledged the succession. This initial acceptance makes the subsequent assertion of his own claim — which did not emerge in its full form until approximately 1592 CE, three years after the 26th Dai’s death — all the more puzzling from the Dawoodi perspective.

The Mughal Tribunal

The dispute was significant enough to reach the ears of the Mughal imperial administration. Around 1597 CE, the matter was brought before the court of Akbar the Great for adjudication. A tribunal evaluated the competing claims — examining the evidence for each side’s assertions about the nass, hearing witnesses, and applying the standards of Islamic legal testimony to determine which claim was supported by credible evidence.

The tribunal ruled in favor of Dawood ibn Qutubshah — finding that the evidence for his designation as 27th Dai was stronger than the evidence for Sulayman ibn Hasan’s claim. This ruling confirmed the Dawoodi position and allowed Dawood ibn Qutubshah to continue as the recognized Dai in India.

The Sulaimani community, however, did not accept this judgment. They maintained their own line of Dais, centered in Yemen and subsequently in various other locations, and the two communities — Dawoodi and Sulaimani — have maintained separate institutional existences ever since.

The Theological Significance of the Question

For the Dawoodi Bohra tradition, the succession dispute is not merely a historical controversy but a theological matter of the highest importance. The doctrine of nass requires that the designation be:

1. Explicit (sarih, صَرِيح) — not merely implied or hinted at but stated clearly.
2. Witnessed — performed in the presence of appropriate witnesses who can testify to it.
3. Unambiguous — not susceptible of multiple interpretations.
4. Consistent with the Imam’s guidance — since the Dai acts as the Imam’s representative, a valid nass must reflect the Imam’s choice, not the Dai’s personal preference.

The Dawoodi tradition holds that the nass to Dawood ibn Qutubshah satisfies all these criteria, while the alleged nass to Sulayman ibn Hasan satisfies none of them — being, in their view, a subsequent assertion rather than a contemporaneous witnessed designation. The Mughal tribunal’s ruling confirmed this assessment.

For the Sulaimani tradition, the matter is of course understood differently. But within the Dawoodi community, the 26th Dai’s role in the chain is seen as unambiguous: he faithfully transmitted the Imam’s choice, performed the nass to Dawood ibn Qutubshah, and thus ensured the continuation of the true Dawat — which is the Dawoodi tradition.

The 26th Dai as the Last Point of Unity

What is universally acknowledged by both Dawoodi and Sulaimani traditions is that Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) was the last Dai whose authority was unquestioned by either branch. He stands at the final point of unity — the last figure in the chain before the divergence. Both communities trace their legitimacy through him; both honor him as a Dai of the undivided community.

This makes his position in the chain uniquely poignant. He is revered by more communities than any other Dai — not because of any ambiguity in his own position but because the dispute that followed his death has caused two communities, each claiming his succession, to honor his memory with equal love and respect.

Wafat and Mazaar: The Sacred Rest

Syedna Dawood Burhanuddin ibn Ajabshah (RA) passed from this world on 27 Rabi al-Akhir 997 AH, corresponding to approximately February or March 1589 CE, in Ahmedabad, Gujarat.

He was buried in Ahmedabad, where his mazaar (مَزَار, mausoleum) stands as a site of ziyarat (زِيَارَة, blessed visitation) for the community. The mazaar of a Dai is not merely a historical monument but a living spiritual site — a place where the Dai’s barakah continues to be accessible to those who come with sincere hearts, recite the appropriate salawat and duas, and seek the intercession of the one who rested there.

The tradition of ziyarat to the maazarat (plural of mazaar) of the Dais is an important practice in Bohra communal life. Visiting the mazaar of the 26th Dai in Ahmedabad, reciting the special salawat and prayers composed for that occasion, and seeking his barakah and intercession — this is a practice maintained by Dawoodi Bohras who visit Ahmedabad, and by those for whom Ahmedabad itself is home.

The mazaar is maintained with the care appropriate to its status as a sacred site. Its upkeep, its illumination on special occasions, the recitation of Quran and duas within it — all of these are expressions of the community’s ongoing love for and connection to this great Dai.

The Succession at His Wafat

At the moment of his wafat, the 27th Dai Syedna Dawood Burhanuddin ibn Qutubshah (RA) assumed the office of Dai al-Mutlaq in accordance with the nass that the 26th Dai had performed. The tenure of the 27th Dai would be marked by the succession crisis that subsequently emerged — but the chain of the Dawat continued unbroken, and the Dawoodi tradition honors the 27th Dai’s tenure as the legitimate continuation of the 26th Dai’s authority.

Situating the 26th Dai in the Broader Dai Chain

What Came Before: The Yemeni Scholarly Tradition and the Great 19th Dai

No article about any of the Dais can avoid some engagement with the enormous historical achievement of the 19th Dai, Syedna Idris Imad al-Din ibn al-Hasan al-Yamani (RA) (d. 872 AH / 1468 CE), whose works are the primary sources for virtually all Bohra historical knowledge.

Syedna Idris Imad al-Din (RA) served as the 19th Dai al-Mutlaq during the Rasulid period in Yemen — the late Rasulid period, when that sophisticated dynasty was in its twilight and the Dawat was experiencing a period of relative stability after earlier upheavals. He was a polymath of the first order: theologian, philosopher, historian, poet, and scholar of jurisprudence.

His masterwork, the Uyun al-Akhbar wa Funun al-Athar (عُيُونُ الأَخبَارِ وَفُنُونُ الآثَار, “The Springs of Reports and the Branches of Historical Records”) — commonly known simply as the Uyun al-Akhbar — is a massive historical compilation in seven volumes that covers the history of the Ismaili Imams and the Tayyibi Dawat from the beginning to his own time. It is, quite simply, the foundational source for all subsequent Bohra historical writing, and without it, vast portions of the Dawat’s early history would be inaccessible.

The Uyun al-Akhbar is not merely a chronological account but a sophisticated theological-historical work: each entry on an Imam or Dai is infused with the author’s own theological reflection on the significance of the figure’s life and tenure. The 19th Dai writes about his predecessors not as a neutral historian but as a believer and a successor — someone who understands the chain he is describing from within because he is himself a link in it.

His other major works include:

Zahr al-Ma’ani (زَهرُ المَعَانِي, “The Flower of Meanings”) — an important text of Ismaili theology and ta’wil.

Nuzhat al-Afkar (نُزهَةُ الأَفكَار, “The Promenade of Thoughts”) — a philosophical work engaging with the key questions of Ismaili cosmology and epistemology.

Al-Durar al-Muntatharah fi al-Qasa’id al-Mutakhayarah (الدُّرَرُ المُنتَثِرَة فِي القَصَائِدِ المُتَخَيَّرَة, “The Scattered Pearls Among Selected Poems”) — a poetic anthology.

Risalas on jurisprudence — shorter treatises on specific legal questions that he addressed during his tenure.

The 19th Dai’s works were central to the intellectual formation of the Dais who followed him — including the chain of 20th through 26th Dais. When Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) transmitted the Dawat’s ‘ilm, he was drawing on a tradition deeply shaped by Syedna Idris Imad al-Din’s (RA) historical and theological syntheses.

The 24th Dai: The Great Transition Figure

Syedna Yusuf Najmuddin I ibn Sulayman (RA), the 24th Dai al-Mutlaq, is the figure who presided over the decisive transfer of the Dawat’s center from Yemen to India. His tenure, in the mid-16th century, coincided with Yemen’s most disruptive period — the Ottoman conquest of much of the country, the Zaidi Imam’s resistance in the north, and the general collapse of the political environment that had sustained the Yemen-based Dawat for centuries.

The decision to permanently establish the Dawat’s center in India was a momentous one — arguably the most consequential institutional decision in the Dawat’s post-Fatimid history. It required the Dai to recognize that the era of the mountain Dawat in Haraz was over, that the community’s future lay in the Indian Ocean trading world rather than the Yemeni highlands, and that the esoteric ‘ilm of the Imams could be preserved and transmitted from Ahmedabad as well as from Haraz.

It was under this 24th Dai that Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) received his advanced education — he was formed by the Dai who made this decisive choice. And it was the legacy of that choice — a Dawat finally and permanently in India — that Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah inherited when he became the 26th Dai.

The 25th Dai: A Brief Tenure

Syedna Jalal Shamshuddin (RA), the 25th Dai, served for only a brief period — possibly as few as four months, certainly not more than a year or two — before passing the office to Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA). This brevity, following the 24th Dai’s own relatively brief tenure in the India-based period, meant that the 26th Dai received an office that had been formally in India for a generation but had not yet had the sustained, stable leadership needed to truly consolidate the transition.

The 26th Dai provided exactly this stability — twenty-two years of continuous, capable leadership that gave the community the time and the anchor it needed to truly take root in Indian soil.

Legacy and Historical Significance

Syedna Dawood Burhanuddin ibn Ajabshah (RA) left behind a community transformed. When he assumed the office in 975 AH, he inherited a Dawat that had only recently — and somewhat uncertainly — relocated its center to India. When he passed away in 997 AH, he left behind a Dawat that was firmly, permanently, and institutionally established in Ahmedabad and Gujarat — with the administrative frameworks, educational institutions, community hierarchies, and spiritual life needed to sustain it for centuries.

The particular dimensions of his legacy include:

The completion of the India transition: He was the Dai who finally, fully completed the transition that the 24th Dai had initiated. By the end of his twenty-two-year tenure, there was no question that the Dawat was an Indian institution — not a Yemeni institution temporarily residing in India but a genuinely Indian institution with its roots sunk deep in Gujarati soil.

The preservation of the Yemen connection: Even as he consolidated the India dimension, he preserved the connection to Yemen — through the recovery of the sacred sites at Hisne Afeda, through maintained communication with Yemen-based community members, through the transmission of a ‘ilm that was deeply rooted in the Yemeni scholarly tradition. This dual connection — firmly Indian, persistently Yemeni in spirit and memory — is a defining characteristic of the Bohra community that he helped shape.

The final unity: He is the last Dai of the undivided community. Every Bohra — Dawoodi, Sulaimani, Alavi, Hafizi — who traces their lineage back through the chain of Dais reaches the 26th Dai as their last common ancestor in the institutional succession. This gives him a unique place in the tradition: beloved by all, claimed by all, honored by all as the final point before the divergence.

The transmission of the chain: The most fundamental of his achievements — the one without which all others would be meaningless — is the successful transmission of the nass to the 27th Dai. The chain of Dais that extends to the present day, the unbroken silsilat that connects the present Dai to the hidden Imam and through him to the Prophet (SAWS), passes through Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA). That he performed his most essential duty faithfully is the deepest foundation of his legacy.

The Community’s Love: Remembering the 26th Dai

The Dawoodi Bohra community’s love for its Dais is not an abstract theological affirmation but a lived, emotional reality — expressed in the specific ways community members remember, invoke, and seek the barakah of the Dais who have passed from this world. The salawat (prayers of blessing) recited on the mazaar of a Dai, the recitation of waaz (sermons) about his life and tenure, the specific duas recited on his urs (death anniversary) — all of these are expressions of a communal love that crosses the barrier of centuries.

For the 26th Dai, this love has a particular quality: he is the ancestor of a divided community, honored by the Dawoodi tradition as a faithful Dai who performed the nass correctly and thus ensured the continuation of the true chain, while simultaneously honored by the Sulaimani tradition as the Dai from whom their own chain derives.

Within the Dawoodi community specifically, he is remembered with deep reverence as a Dai of learning, piety, and administrative wisdom — a man who gave the community twenty-two years of stability and growth, who kept it connected to its Yemen roots even as it blossomed in Indian soil, and who ensured the continuation of the Imam’s Dawat through the correct transmission of the nass to his successor.

The urs of the 26th Dai — the anniversary of his wafat on 27 Rabi al-Akhir — is an occasion for community members to visit his mazaar in Ahmedabad, to recite the appropriate salawat and duas, and to renew their spiritual connection to this great figure. The recitation of his name in the chain of Dais invoked in the community’s du’a, the mention of his title Burhan al-Din — these are regular features of Bohra communal and devotional life.

The Arabic Dimension: Key Terms and Concepts

For readers engaging with the 26th Dai’s historical context, the following key terms in Arabic are important:

الدَّاعِي المُطلَق (al-Da’i al-Mutlaq) — The Absolute Representative; the Dai who acts with the full authority of the Imam during the Imam’s occultation.

النَّصّ (al-Nass) — The explicit designation by which one Dai appoints his successor; the doctrinal mechanism of succession in the Dawat.

الغَيبَة (al-Ghayba) — The occultation; the concealment of the Imam al-Tayyib from public sight, maintained from 524 AH / 1130 CE to the present.

الوِلَايَة (al-Wilaya) — Guardianship, love, spiritual authority; the bond that connects the mumin to the Dai, the Dai to the Imam, and the Imam to the Prophet.

البَرَكَة (al-Baraka) — Blessing; the divine grace that flows through the chain of wilaya and is accessible to the community through the Dai.

العِلمُ البَاطِن (al-‘Ilm al-Batin) — The esoteric knowledge; the inner dimensions of religious understanding that the Dawat preserves and transmits, in contrast to the zahir (outer form).

التَّأوِيل (al-Ta’wil) — Esoteric interpretation; the process of finding the inner meaning behind the outer form of Quranic text, hadith, and religious practice.

الزِّيَارَة (al-Ziyara) — Blessed visitation; the practice of visiting the mazaar of a Dai or other pious figure to seek his barakah and intercession.

المَزَار (al-Mazar) — The mausoleum; the resting place of a Dai or pious figure, maintained as a site of ziyarat.

الأَمَانَة (al-Amana) — The sacred trust; what the Imam entrusts to the Dai, and what the Dai bears for the duration of his tenure.

Placing the 26th Dai in the Larger Picture: The Dawat’s Mission

The Tayyibi Ismaili Dawat is not merely an institutional or organizational reality — it is a metaphysical and soteriological mission. In the Dawat’s theology, the Imam and his representatives serve as the bab (gate, بَاب) through which souls can access the ma’rifa (gnosis, مَعرِفَة) of God. The Imam is the hujja (proof) of God on earth, and the Dai is the hujja of the Imam — the living proof and manifestation of the Imam’s presence and authority in the world.

From this perspective, the tenure of Syedna Dawood ibn Ajabshah (RA) as the 26th Dai al-Mutlaq was not merely a historical episode in the institutional development of the Bohra community. It was a twenty-two-year period during which the gate between the human world and the Divine knowledge was maintained open — during which the souls of tens of thousands of mumineen had access to the Imam’s grace through the mediation of the Dai.

Every majlis (gathering, مَجلِس) that the 26th Dai convened, every waz that he delivered, every ‘ahd (covenant) that he administered, every du’a that he recited on behalf of the community — all of these were acts by which the Dawat’s mission was fulfilled: the guidance of souls toward the ma’rifa of God through the recognition and love of the Imam and his representative.

This is the deepest significance of the 26th Dai’s tenure, and the deepest reason for the community’s enduring love and reverence for him. He was not merely a historical figure, not merely a successful administrator, not merely the last Dai of the united community. He was the representative of the living Imam for twenty-two years — and in that representation, he offered the community the most precious thing it could receive: access to the Divine knowledge through the chain of wilaya that extends to the Prophet (SAWS) and beyond.

His Salawat

اَللَّهُمَّ صَلِّ عَلَى مَولَانَا دَاوُودَ بُرهَانِ الدِّينِ بنِ عَجَبشَاه الدَّاعِي السَّادِسِ وَالعِشرِينَ وَآخِرِ الدُّعَاةِ المُتَّفَقِ عَلَيهِم الَّذِي رَسَّخَ الدَّعوَةَ فِي أَحمَدَآبَاد وَرَدَّ القِلَاعَ إِلَى الأُمَّة وَأَدَّى النَّصَّ بِأَمَانَةٍ تَامَّةٍ لِمَن اختَارَهُ الإِمَامُ

Allahumma salli ‘ala Mawlana Dawud Burhan al-Din ibn Ajabshah, Al-da’i al-sadis wal-‘ishrin wa akhir al-du’at al-muttafaq ‘alayhim, Alladhi rassakh al-da’wa fi Ahmedabad wa radda al-qila’ ila al-umma, Wa adda al-nass bi-amana tamma li-man ikhtarahu al-Imam.

O Allah, send blessings upon our Master Dawud Burhan al-Din ibn Ajabshah, The 26th Dai and the last of the universally accepted Dais, Who established the Dawat in Ahmedabad and restored the fortresses to the community, And conferred the nass faithfully upon the one the Imam had chosen.

اَللَّهُمَّ اجعَلنَا مِن أَهلِ وِلَايَتِهِ وَشَفَاعَتِهِ وَبَرَكَتِهِ وَثَبِّتنَا عَلَى الدَّعوَةِ الهَادِيَةِ إِلَى سَبِيلِ الحَقِّ

Allahumma ij’alna min ahl walayatihi wa shafa’atihi wa barakatih, Wa thabbitna ‘ala al-da’wa al-hadiya ila sabil al-haqq.

O Allah, make us among those who receive his guardianship, his intercession, and his blessing, And keep us steadfast upon the Dawat that guides to the path of truth.

اللَّهُمَّ ارحَم مَولَانَا دَاوُودَ بُرهَانَ الدِّينِ بنَ عَجَبشَاهَ وَارزُقنَا شَفَاعَتَهُ وَبَرَكَتَهُ O Allah, have mercy on our Master Dawud Burhan al-Din ibn Ajabshah and grant us his intercession and his blessing.

A Note on Sources and Methodology

The history of the Dawoodi Bohra Dais during the 16th century is reconstructed from several categories of sources:

The Dawat’s internal historical tradition — the chain of transmission that passes from teacher to student and that preserves accounts of the earlier Dais. This tradition is not merely textual but oral and experiential, and much of what is known about the earlier Dais comes from this living transmission.

The works of Syedna Idris Imad al-Din (RA) — particularly the Uyun al-Akhbar, which is the foundational text for all Bohra historical writing. For the later Dais, this source covers only up to the author’s own time (d. 872 AH / 1468 CE), so the 26th Dai is not directly covered in the Uyun al-Akhbar.

The Dawat’s own manuscripts and administrative records — the letters, risalas, and other documents produced by and for the Dais, preserved in the Dawat’s archives. These are not publicly available but form the basis for the community’s own historical knowledge.

The wider scholarship on Ismaili history — the works of scholars like Ismail K. Poonawala, Farhad Daftary, and others who have systematically studied Ismaili manuscripts and historical sources. While not produced from within the Dawat tradition, this scholarship illuminates the broader context.

The accounts relating to the succession dispute — the Mughal-period documentation relating to the 1597 CE tribunal provides some externally verifiable reference points for the history of this period.

It is important to acknowledge that the picture of the 26th Dai that emerges from these sources is necessarily partial. Many texts remain in manuscript, unedited and unstudied. The full scope of his scholarly output, the details of his personal life, the specifics of his administrative decisions — much of this remains to be recovered from the archives of the Dawat and the wider Ismaili manuscript tradition.

What is certain is the outline: twenty-two years of faithful service, the consolidation of the Indian Dawat, the preservation of the Yemen connection, and the transmission of the nass to the 27th Dai. The rest — the color, the texture, the human detail — awaits the fuller recovery that ongoing scholarship, God willing, will one day provide.

Quick Reference

See also: Dai Al Mutlaq Institution, Syedna Jalal Shamshuddin 25th, Syedna Dawood Burhanuddin 27th, Dawoodi Sulaimani Schism, Fatimid Caliphate, Imam Al Tayyib, Tayyibi Dawat, Syedna Idris Imad Al Din 19th, Syedna Yusuf Najmuddin 24th, Jabal Haraz Dawat, Mughal India Bohras