Jump to content
SunniBrother

The merits of Talhah

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Talhah distinguished himself at the Battle of Uhud by keeping close to Muhammad while most of the Muslim army fled. He protected Muhammad's face from an arrow by taking the shot in his own hand, as a result of which two of his fingers were paralysed. He was also hit twice in the head, and it was said that he suffered a total of 75 wounds in the battle.

The Battle of the Camel was fought between Ali on one side and Aisha, Talhah and Zubayr on the other on 10 December 656. During the battle, Marwan ibn al-Hakam, who was fighting on the same side, accidentally shot Talhah in the thigh. Marwan commented, "After this I will never again seek a killer of Uthman." Talhah hugged his horse and galloped off the battle-field. He lay down using a stone as a pillow, while the auxiliaries tried to staunch the blood-flow. Whenever they stopped pressing, the bleeding resumed. In the end Talhah said, "Stop it. This is an arrow sent by God." He died of this injury, aged 64.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, SunniBrother said:

Talhah distinguished himself at the Battle of Uhud by keeping close to Muhammad while most of the Muslim army fled. He protected Muhammad's face from an arrow by taking the shot in his own hand, as a result of which two of his fingers were paralysed. He was also hit twice in the head, and it was said that he suffered a total of 75 wounds in the battle.

The Battle of the Camel was fought between Ali on one side and Aisha, Talhah and Zubayr on the other on 10 December 656. During the battle, Marwan ibn al-Hakam, who was fighting on the same side, accidentally shot Talhah in the thigh. Marwan commented, "After this I will never again seek a killer of Uthman." Talhah hugged his horse and galloped off the battle-field. He lay down using a stone as a pillow, while the auxiliaries tried to staunch the blood-flow. Whenever they stopped pressing, the bleeding resumed. In the end Talhah said, "Stop it. This is an arrow sent by God." He died of this injury, aged 64.

Salaam brother,

if it wasnt for the Battle of Jamal, I would consider him a good sahabi.

Also, not sure if Marwan shot him accidentally.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

Salaam brother,

if it wasnt for the Battle of Jamal, I would consider him a good sahabi.

Also, not sure if Marwan shot him accidentally.

 

He clearly repented by the looks of it and acknowledged that his death was a punishment. Not our place to judge his intentions. Aside the battle of Jamal he clearly have a long list of merits and virtues. One bad action does not overwrite all his good ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, SunniBrother said:

He clearly repented by the looks of it and acknowledged that his death was a punishment. Not our place to judge his intentions. 

which is why I neither say good nor bad about him.

39 minutes ago, SunniBrother said:

One bad action does not overwrite all his good ones.

Iblees had thousands of years of Allah's worship and one bad action....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When one fights Imam Ali (as), he will be responsible in hereafter and Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى will ask him about it. He fighted first for Allah sake and in the end of his life against Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى. One can tell how Imaan could change by time from actions.

One thing is that he loses his respect to be in side of shaytan. Very sad indeed.

Edited by Dhulfikar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

Thanks but I was being serious. You are a smart man, I always read your posts. I may not always agree but I do learn from you, brother.

I always respect your opinions brother. And often times, differences of opinion lead to greater learning and discoveries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SunniBrother said:

He clearly repented by the looks of it and acknowledged that his death was a punishment. Not our place to judge his intentions. Aside the battle of Jamal he clearly have a long list of merits and virtues. One bad action does not overwrite all his good ones.

Repentance is something which can never be fully established, because it is hard to read it on the face.

However, even if he truly repented, he showed a substantial love of the world in his bid for the caliphate.

And the job that he was after cannot be performed by those with an attachment for worldly glory.  

   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shiaman14 said:

which is why I neither say good nor bad about him.

Iblees had thousands of years of Allah's worship and one bad action....

Shaytan never repented. You cannot compare Iblis sin with Talha. Iblis rejected all humanity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hussaini624 said:

Talhah was a good companion before Jamal. Though he still sought power over knowledge, and betrayed Imam Ali (a.s)

May Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى forgive him

Thank you. Someone more rational

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, baqar said:

Repentance is something which can never be fully established, because it is hard to read it on the face.

However, even if he truly repented, he showed a substantial love of the world in his bid for the caliphate.

And the job that he was after cannot be performed by those with an attachment for worldly glory.  

   

The funny thing is that most people here think they are better then Talhah. He took several blows at the battle of Uhud to protect the Prophet (s.a.w.s) most people here do not have and will never have such honor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SunniBrother said:

The funny thing is that most people here think they are better then Talhah. 

I don't know who you are talking about but obviously you have been offended by my comment.

But that is how I feel about him.

 

Edited by baqar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SunniBrother said:

 He took several blows at the battle of Uhud to protect the Prophet (s.a.w.s)

Satan was also greatly obedient to the Lord.

For hundreds or may be thousands of years.

Until he made one final mistake.

A thousand good deeds may be diluted by one bad one.

God is the final judge but as I said, he showed a considerable desire to the caliph, when he just didnt deserve it.

6 minutes ago, SunniBrother said:

 most people here do not have and will never have such honor.

There is no need to be sarcastic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, baqar said:

I don't know who you are talking about but obviously you have been offended by my comment.

But that is how I feel abut him.

I don't think he was a good man.

Sorry if you like him.

 

A evil man that take blows to protect the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.s). He did one mistake which he clearly regretted. Everyone here focusing on one mistake and ignoring all his merits. How evil is men who do not look a single good in people. I made this threat to show the good side of him. Now if you wanna focus on the bad go ahead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, baqar said:

Satan was also greatly obedient to the Lord.

For hundreds or may be thousands of years.

Until he made one final mistake.

A thousand good deeds may be diluted by one bad one.

God is the final judge but as I said, he showed a considerable desire to the caliph, when he just didnt deserve it.

There is no need to be sarcastic.

You did not understood Iblis sin. Then maybe all muslims will go to hell for doing one single sin once in life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 minutes ago, SunniBrother said:

 Now if you wanna focus on the bad go ahead.

I do not particularly wish to focus on anything.

But (read below)

1 minute ago, SunniBrother said:

Then maybe all muslims will go to hell for doing one single sin once in life.

I waa not saying that he will go to hell.

That is not my role.

That is for God to judge.

it is just possoible that the All-Merciful God will forgive him.

However, the number of evid deeds that men do does not matter, but their weightage.

In my opinion, his wrongs do considerable disfavour to any good he may have done.

That is my firm and irrevocable view.

Where he will go in the Afterlife is not my business.

And I am not bothered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother repentance has many faces but only heeding to the truth and directing loyalties where they are due is worthy of admiration. Did Talha join the ranks of Ali (as) in an effort to fend off the aggressors? When it comes to admiration of the repentant, I seek shelter under glorious names with the likes of Hur at Kerbala. Not only did he abandon the camps of Yazid, he followed through by joining the other side in full knowledge of death being imminent. That there is repentance which we understand, whereas assuming pacifism or neutrality cannot be seen as repentance but a weakness/disregard which has a story of it's own.  

Forget the Battle of Jamal, more concerning is the issue of Talha and Zubayr breaking bayah with Ali (as). They denied their Khaliph, their Imam, broke ties with the appointed hand of spiritual and political affairs. If it couldn't get any worse, they readied themselves to spill blood against the very hand they once supposedly honoured, respected and were certainly not oblivious to the Merits of Ali (as). 

This constant instruction we force ourselves on - 'he was a good Muslim' - what does it mean? I mean, we can all be good people and deliver greatness when needed. We can all believe, love, honour the honourable, etc. But do we all follow through? If the trains going to derail, then it's certain the path was never secure. It might have been a good train, a train that served some purpose at some point of time, might of even lost a wheel along the way but in the end it derailed! A repentant train gets back on the track and reaches 'that' destination, unfortunately this repentant train got back on the tracks and we are still scratching our heads - 'where to'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, saas said:

Brother repentance has many faces but only heeding to the truth and directing loyalties where they are due is worthy of admiration. Did Talha join the ranks of Ali (as) in an effort to fend off the aggressors? When it comes to admiration of the repentant, I seek shelter under glorious names with the likes of Hur at Kerbala. Not only did he abandon the camps of Yazid, he followed through by joining the other side in full knowledge of death being imminent. That there is repentance which we understand, whereas assuming pacifism or neutrality cannot be seen as repentance but a weakness/disregard which has a story of it's own.  

Forget the Battle of Jamal, more concerning is the issue of Talha and Zubayr breaking bayah with Ali (as). They denied their Khaliph, their Imam, broke ties with the appointed hand of spiritual and political affairs. If it couldn't get any worse, they readied themselves to spill blood against the very hand they once supposedly honoured, respected and were certainly not oblivious to the Merits of Ali (as). 

This constant instruction we force ourselves on - 'he was a good Muslim' - what does it mean? I mean, we can all be good people and deliver greatness when needed. We can all believe, love, honour the honourable, etc. But do we all follow through? If the trains going to derail, then it's certain the path was never secure. It might have been a good train, a train that served some purpose at some point of time, might of even lost a wheel along the way but in the end it derailed! A repentant train gets back on the track and reaches 'that' destination, unfortunately this repentant train got back on the tracks and we are still scratching our heads - 'where to'?

I'll quote Abu Bakr - "I am sure it was a error of judgement" :grin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SunniBrother said:

Shaytan never repented. You cannot compare Iblis sin with Talha. Iblis rejected all humanity.

Talha's repentance is not really documented even in your initial post. 

If you want to look at repentance and our sense of fairness, Hz Hur was the biggest criminal in the event of Karbala up until the morning of Ashura (10th Muharram). Yet he repented sincerely and attained the highest of honors - sacrificing himself for the grandson of the Prophet. He literally walked away from he'll into heaven within a matter of minutes.

Secondly, Hz Zubayr left the battleground whereas Hz Talha chose to fight. So repentance is debatable. But I will still hold my tongue about him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, shiaman14 said:

Talha's repentance is not really documented even in your initial post. 

If you want to look at repentance and our sense of fairness, Hz Hur was the biggest criminal in the event of Karbala up until the morning of Ashura (10th Muharram). Yet he repented sincerely and attained the highest of honors - sacrificing himself for the grandson of the Prophet. He literally walked away from he'll into heaven within a matter of minutes.

Secondly, Hz Zubayr left the battleground whereas Hz Talha chose to fight. So repentance is debatable. But I will still hold my tongue about him.

That's up to Allah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's a backstabber and a betrayer. I don't have any respect for these kind of people, especially when you're committed to kill the leader of the Muslims over power.

 

Heres a sahih Hadith about the people who fought Ali (as):

يَحْيَى عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ مُسْكَانَ عَنْ ضُرَيْسٍ قَالَ تَمَارَى النَّاسُ عِنْدَ أَبِي جَعْفَرٍ ع فَقَالَ بَعْضُهُمْ حَرْبُ عَلِيٍّ شَرٌّ مِنْ حَرْبِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص وَ قَالَ بَعْضُهُمْ حَرْبُ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص شَرٌّ مِنْ حَرْبِ عَلِيٍّ ع قَالَ فَسَمِعَهُمْ أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ ع فَقَالَ مَا تَقُولُونَ فَقَالُوا أَصْلَحَكَ اللَّهُ تَمَارَيْنَا فِي حَرْبِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص وَ فِي حَرْبِ عَلِيٍّ ع فَقَالَ بَعْضُنَا حَرْبُ عَلِيٍّ ع شَرٌّ مِنْ حَرْبِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص وَ قَالَ بَعْضُنَا حَرْبُ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص شَرٌّ مِنْ حَرْبِ عَلِيٍّ ع فَقَالَ أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ ع لَا بَلْ حَرْبُ عَلِيٍّ ع شَرٌّ مِنْ حَرْبِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص فَقُلْتُ لَهُ جُعِلْتُ فِدَاكَ أَ حَرْبُ عَلِيٍّ ع شَرٌّ مِنْ حَرْبِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص قَالَ نَعَمْ وَ سَأُخْبِرُكَ عَنْ ذَلِكَ إِنَّ حَرْبَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص لَمْ يُقِرُّوا بِالْإِسْلَامِ وَ إِنَّ حَرْبَ عَلِيٍّ ع أَقَرُّوا بِالْإِسْلَامِ ثُمَّ جَحَدُوهُ


From Durays said: ’The people were arguing before Abī Ja`far (عليه السلام). Some of them said that the people who fought `Alī (عليه السلام)were more evil than the people who fought the Messenger of Allāh (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). And some of them say that those who fought the Messenger of Allāh (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) were more evil than the people who fought `Alī (عليه السلام).’ He (Durays) said: Abū Ja`far(عليه السلام) heard them and he (عليه السلام) said: ‘What are you saying?’. So they said: ‘May Allāh keep you well, we are arguing about the people who fought the Messenger of Allāh (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and about those who fought `Alī (عليه السلام)’. So some of us say the people who fought `Alī (عليه السلام) were more evil than those who fought the Messenger of Allāh (عليه السلام). And so of us say the people who fought the Messenger of Allāh (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) were more evil than those who fought `Alī (عليه السلام). So Abū Ja`far (عليه السلام) said: “No, rather those who fought `Alī (عليه السلام) were more evil.” So I said to him (عليه السلام): “May I be in your ransom, the people who fought `Alī (عليه السلام) were worse than those who fought the Messenger of Allāh (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)?” He (عليه السلام)said: “Yes, I will inform you about that. Verily, those who fought the Messenger of Allāh (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) did not acknowledge Islām, and those who fought `Alī (عليه السلام) acknowledged Islām then they rejected it”

Source:

1.     Al-Kulaynī, Al-Kāfī, ed. `Alī Akbar al-Ghaffārī, 8 vols.,(Tehran: Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyyah, 3rd Edition, 1388 AH), vol. 8, pg. 252, hadeeth # 353

Grading:

1.     Al-Majlisī said this hadeeth is Ṣaḥīḥ (Authentic)
à Mir’āt Al-`Uqūl, 26 vols., (Tehran: Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyyah, 1410 AH), vol. 26, pg. 228

2.     `Āsif al-Muḥsinī said this ḥadīth has a Mu`tabar Sanad (Authentic Chain of Narrators)
à Mashra`ah Bihār al-Anwaar, (Beirut: Mu’assasah al-`Ārif lil-Matbū`āt, 2nd ed., 1426) vol. 2, pg. 56

3.     Ḥussayn al-Rāḍī said this ḥadīth has a Ṣaḥīḥ Sanad (Authentic Chain of Narrators)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hassan- said:

He's a backstabber and a betrayer. I don't have any respect for these kind of people, especially when you're committed to kill the leader of the Muslims over power.

 

Heres a sahih Hadith about the people who fought Ali (as):

يَحْيَى عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ مُسْكَانَ عَنْ ضُرَيْسٍ قَالَ تَمَارَى النَّاسُ عِنْدَ أَبِي جَعْفَرٍ ع فَقَالَ بَعْضُهُمْ حَرْبُ عَلِيٍّ شَرٌّ مِنْ حَرْبِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص وَ قَالَ بَعْضُهُمْ حَرْبُ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص شَرٌّ مِنْ حَرْبِ عَلِيٍّ ع قَالَ فَسَمِعَهُمْ أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ ع فَقَالَ مَا تَقُولُونَ فَقَالُوا أَصْلَحَكَ اللَّهُ تَمَارَيْنَا فِي حَرْبِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص وَ فِي حَرْبِ عَلِيٍّ ع فَقَالَ بَعْضُنَا حَرْبُ عَلِيٍّ ع شَرٌّ مِنْ حَرْبِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص وَ قَالَ بَعْضُنَا حَرْبُ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص شَرٌّ مِنْ حَرْبِ عَلِيٍّ ع فَقَالَ أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ ع لَا بَلْ حَرْبُ عَلِيٍّ ع شَرٌّ مِنْ حَرْبِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص فَقُلْتُ لَهُ جُعِلْتُ فِدَاكَ أَ حَرْبُ عَلِيٍّ ع شَرٌّ مِنْ حَرْبِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص قَالَ نَعَمْ وَ سَأُخْبِرُكَ عَنْ ذَلِكَ إِنَّ حَرْبَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص لَمْ يُقِرُّوا بِالْإِسْلَامِ وَ إِنَّ حَرْبَ عَلِيٍّ ع أَقَرُّوا بِالْإِسْلَامِ ثُمَّ جَحَدُوهُ


From Durays said: ’The people were arguing before Abī Ja`far (عليه السلام). Some of them said that the people who fought `Alī (عليه السلام)were more evil than the people who fought the Messenger of Allāh (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). And some of them say that those who fought the Messenger of Allāh (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) were more evil than the people who fought `Alī (عليه السلام).’ He (Durays) said: Abū Ja`far(عليه السلام) heard them and he (عليه السلام) said: ‘What are you saying?’. So they said: ‘May Allāh keep you well, we are arguing about the people who fought the Messenger of Allāh (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and about those who fought `Alī (عليه السلام)’. So some of us say the people who fought `Alī (عليه السلام) were more evil than those who fought the Messenger of Allāh (عليه السلام). And so of us say the people who fought the Messenger of Allāh (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) were more evil than those who fought `Alī (عليه السلام). So Abū Ja`far (عليه السلام) said: “No, rather those who fought `Alī (عليه السلام) were more evil.” So I said to him (عليه السلام): “May I be in your ransom, the people who fought `Alī (عليه السلام) were worse than those who fought the Messenger of Allāh (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)?” He (عليه السلام)said: “Yes, I will inform you about that. Verily, those who fought the Messenger of Allāh (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) did not acknowledge Islām, and those who fought `Alī (عليه السلام) acknowledged Islām then they rejected it”

Source:

1.     Al-Kulaynī, Al-Kāfī, ed. `Alī Akbar al-Ghaffārī, 8 vols.,(Tehran: Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyyah, 3rd Edition, 1388 AH), vol. 8, pg. 252, hadeeth # 353

Grading:

1.     Al-Majlisī said this hadeeth is Ṣaḥīḥ (Authentic)
à Mir’āt Al-`Uqūl, 26 vols., (Tehran: Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyyah, 1410 AH), vol. 26, pg. 228

2.     `Āsif al-Muḥsinī said this ḥadīth has a Mu`tabar Sanad (Authentic Chain of Narrators)
à Mashra`ah Bihār al-Anwaar, (Beirut: Mu’assasah al-`Ārif lil-Matbū`āt, 2nd ed., 1426) vol. 2, pg. 56

3.     Ḥussayn al-Rāḍī said this ḥadīth has a Ṣaḥīḥ Sanad (Authentic Chain of Narrators)

So Ali (a.s) is above Muhammad (s.a.w.s)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • Salam dear friend, God is the 'creator' of destruction, so how can his creation be applied to him? It's like saying for example, I make a sandwich and then I eat it, but I don't believe it's possible for my sandwich to eat me lol (I know weird example lol), the rules of creation don't apply to the creator it's that simple, God is not limited to the imagination of our mind, but we are limited to the imaginative ability he has 'created' for us, anyway I hope you find the answer you seek all the best, wsalam
    • Bismehe Ta3ala, Assalam Alikum  I would never celebrate the slaughter of a nation.  Curse be upon CC. Just like we hate it when people celebrate on Ashura, we should feel the same way towards this mass murdering day.  But every year I mention the same thing, just a reminder for the passerby. M3 Salamah, FE AMIN Allah 
    • Thanks the most relevant answer to the question i have got is given below:  Mirza Jawad Tabrizi سؤال: ألا يكره للمصلي لبس السواد؟ كيف نجمع بين هذا الحكم الشرعي وبين استحباب لبس السواد عزاءا على الحسين عليه السلام؟ جواب: لم يثبت كراهية لبس السواد لا في الصلاة ولا في غيرها، نعم ورد في بعض الروايات ما يستفاد منها كراهية لبس السواد، ولكنها ضعيفة السند، ومع الإغماض عن ضعفها، فالكراهة في الصلاة بمعنى أقل ثوابا، ولبس السواد في عزاء الحسين والأئمة عليهم السلام لأجل إظهار الحزن وإقامة شعائر المذهب مستحب نفسي، وثوابه أكثر من نقص الثواب في الصلاة، والله العالم. Question: Isn’t wearing black while praying Makruh? On the other hand, donning black is commendable during the mourning period for Imam Hussein (AS). What is the justification for the contradiction between these two points? Answer: The undesirability of wearing black clothes in the state of praying or in other situations is not proven as an absolute fact. It is only derived from a number of narratives the chains of transmission of which are unreliable and weak. Regardless of their unreliability, wearing black clothes while praying will lessen its spiritual reward. But putting on black clothes in grief for Imam Hussein (AS) is a religious rite and commendable. Al-‘Amili; al-Intisar, vol. 9, p. 247; publication, Dar al-Sirat, Beirut, Lebanon, the first edition, 1422. Following the analysis of jurists’ ideas it was finally revealed that wearing black in prayers is Makruh. Another question which may come into the readers’ minds is whether praying in black clothes for black-clad mourners during the month of Muharram or ceremonies held for the martyrdoms of the Aimma is Makruh as well. The question has been answered by Haj Aqa Mirza Jawad Tabrizi. سؤال: ما حكم اللباس الأسود في الصلاة أيام وفيات الأئمة عليهم السلام، هل هو مكروه ؟ جواب : إذا كان اللبس بداع إظهار الحزن وتعظيم الشعائر فليس بمكروه، والله العالم. It is not Makruh if the motivation behind the clothing is the expression of grief. Al-‘Amili; al-Intisar, vol. 9, p. 247; publication: Dar al-Sirat, Beirut, Lebanon, the first edition, 1422. The considerable point in jurists’ decrees is bad this kind the prohibition implies that wearing black while praying will only diminish its spiritual rewards. In other words, donning black while praying does not nullify the prayer. It only decreases its rewards. So, wearing garments in other colors is recommended for the state of praying. http://www.valiasr-aj.com/english/mobile_shownews.php?idnews=251 wasalam
    • ^^^ A7SANTI sister, Mash'Allah.  God bless you. Allhoma sali 3la Mohammad wa Ahli Mohammad 
    • Are you asking if they are makrooh to wear in Muharram? No they are not.  They are only makrooh to wear in days that are not mourning days. Sayyed Al-Sistani said it is makrooh to wear black in a normal day.
×