Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله


Advanced Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About ZethaPonderer

  • Rank
    Level 1 Member

Profile Information

  • Location
  • Religion
    Shia Islam (Zaidi Branch)
  • Mood
  • Favorite Subjects
    Philosophy, History, Spirituality, Mathematics, Film, Animation, Video Games, Computer Programming, Boxing, and... Religion... Yeah

Previous Fields

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

6,067 profile views
  1. I just wanna post my defense when it comes to posting both the internet links and quoting the whole thing in the quote box.

    For those of you who don’t know of my position, I usually post a bit on the long side by providing not just the internet links, but also quoting the entirety of the internet link in the Quote Box. Why do I do this? Because what would happen if the internet links don’t work if such links I provide are mysteriously inaccessible or simply gone? We might lose possibly invaluable information. That’s what the intent was on my part for quoting the entirety of the internet link in the Quote Box along with the internet link as a contingency plan.

  2. I just wanna chill and talk about one of the things that I’m not a fan of.

    Sweet and Savory Foods e.g. Pineapple Pizza.

    I’m not a fan of that. I would prefer my food to be either Savory or Sweet. But not both. Basically if I’m going to live up to the philosophy of ‘I eat to live’ I would prefer my Food to be kept simple and easy to cook. Or how other people would live up to the K.I.S.S Principle when living their Life, “Keep It Simple Stupid”

    Pineapple on Pizza is apparently considered a criminal offense given the reaction to the people from Naples, Italy where Pizza originated from. I wouldn’t be surprised if the people over there would enact a death penalty law against people who would make pineapple pizza over there.

    I can kinda sympathize with where they’re coming from. It’s like putting Orange or Chocolate on Indo-Pak Foods like Chicken Biryani which is a savory cuisine. Or a Banana Zinger Burger. I’ll at the very least try it out just out of pure morbid curiosity. But, if I don’t like it then whatever to each their own.

  3. Btw, I forgot to add furthermore quotes of what other statements this Sunni Muslim has made against me which I quote him the following, Basically this is his rebuttal for why he won’t accept Ghadir Khum as not just a Mutawattir graded Hadith, but a Hadith deserving of being studied at all under Sunni Islam Theology to see if this Hadith lives up to the Quranic Exegesis. And this last quote of his is just being stubborn and determined to live up to his expectations against Shia Muslims as the filthy Majoosi Mushrikeen Raafidas they are in their eyes. There is a lesson I’ve learned from this Sunni Muslim, “Takfiri is far worse for the Muslim Ummah than Taqqiya”. The practice of Takfiri defeats the concept of Unity that Islam emphasizes throughout the Quran. And while I may not be among those Shias who curse the likes of the 3 Caliphs who usurped Imam Ali (عليه السلام) leadership position on top of Aisha; I do criticize such people amongst the Sahaabas that have displayed such disrespectful, disloyal actions against the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and his family given the Hadith Al-Kisa (The Cloak). Why? BECAUSE it is irrational and against Human Nature to presume 100% of the Sahaabas of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) were Faithful and Loyal to him. Some had to be Faithless. Criticism =/= Disrespect, Slandering, or Cursing. Not all Sahaabas of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) WERE Sahaabas of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).
  4. I've stumbled across a proud and arrogant Sunni Muslim who asked these 4 questions against his stance towards Shias, What are your rebuttals towards this fellow Sunni? So far I've mentioned Hadith Ghadir Khum to justify as my answer for his first two questions, while the last two questions of his are baseless accusations on top of being loaded questions against the Shias. But of course as arrogant as he is, he will not accept Ghadir Khum, think's I've answered none of his questions, and charge me with Taqqiya despite me revealing myself openly to him as a Shia Muslim as I quote this Sunni Muslim, For those of you wondering what the 2nd quote is implying, I basically referenced @naqviam's quote which is the following in the discussion of Matam at General Islamic Discussion. I thought his points were pretty strong, he definitely did his research, but apparently in the eyes of this Sunni he states the otherwise. This Sunni Muslim as I speak of, rubs me the wrong way with his Akhlaaq. It's as if he's really not interested at all about Shia Islam, but more so trying his best to live up to his expectations against Shia Muslims as the filthy Raafidas we are in the many eyes of Sunnis while simultaneously being a possible Quranist Muslim through his rejection of Hadiths from the likes of Hadith Ghadir Khum, Thaqalayn, and The Cloak which I'm certain that not ALL Sunni Scholars reject them outright.
  5. @iCenozoic Ehh I kinda agree with where you’re coming from when it comes to intolerance towards Criticism, but remember despite the evolution that Criticism has taken place over the many years, there needs to be a Decorum to follow. Otherwise, Criticism and Insults/Harassments would start to blend if there was no decorum to make the necessary distinction. Destructive Criticism is obviously dissented and not usually the best way to get people to tolerate your criticisms due to having little to no decorum whatsoever, while Constructive Criticism would have a chance for people to be open to it to some extent. And personally speaking Non-Muslims are FAR more likely to jump into Destructive Criticism against the Islamic Religion simply because they don’t give a damn about it. If you’re gonna Criticize anything you come across in Life and you yearn for people to be tolerant with your criticism, then have a good decorum to balance things out and leave it up to the people to decide. Religion is like a Private Part. Some people can’t help making fun of your Privates for how silly it looks. Christianity is too straight while Islam is too curvy. At least both are Thicc. I think that’s good enough. Like I said, your premise seems a bit unfair to conclude that Muslims as a whole don’t take criticisms against the Islamic Religion. That kind of argument can be extended in general terms where majority of Human Beings generally speaking can’t take Criticism, but it’s a Necessary Evil for people to grow up.
  6. @iCenozoic I think it's unfair to live up to the underlying premise that Non-Muslims are willing to latch on to the fact that Muslims don't accept criticisms whatsoever against Islam. I don't think it's the fact that Muslims can't accept criticisms against Islam, but it's more about following a strict decorum for how you're supposed to address your criticisms against the Islamic religion without pissing off the un-scholarly majority. I mean if you've got criticisms against the Islamic Religion then please by all means take your criticisms towards a learned Islamic Scholar such as a Sheikh, Ayatollah, or a Mawlana. That's what most un-scholarly Muslims do if they have criticisms against the Islamic Religion. I would actually be interested seeing a debate between an Ayatollah and an Atheist. There was a famous recording of a Religious debate between an Atheist named Abu Shakir having an intellectual, though disrespectful, discourse towards Imam Jafar Sadiq (عليه السلام) Given how history and the many lectures/sermons of Islamic Scholars have been recorded down for the interests of Muslims it would be a bit unreasonable for Non-Muslims to consider that Muslims can't take criticisms against the Islamic Religion. You do realize that despite the evolution of how "Criticism" or "Critical Thinking" is studied and practiced nowadays compared to the past, there's still two types of Criticism people adhere to: Constructive and Destructive. Please take a wild guess what type of "Criticism" Non-Muslims, especially the people from the West, are so easily willing to latch on to when it comes to critiquing against the Islamic Religion. Nothing but politics and propaganda disguised as criticism to mislead the masses away from understanding WHY The Islamic Religion is so different to their ideals, way of life, and political standards overall.
  7. @Dave follower of The Way To discredit the Bible would imply that the "Injeel" Muslims believe according to the Quran based on these verses is not the Bible. Here are the many instances which the term Injil is being referred to in The Quran explicitly and the many translations accompanying it, https://quran.com/3/48?translations=57,21,18 https://quran.com/3/3?translations=57,21,18 https://quran.com/5/47?translations=21,18 https://quran.com/3/65?translations=21,18 https://quran.com/5/66?translations=21,18 https://quran.com/5/68?translations=21,18 https://quran.com/9/111?translations=21,18 https://quran.com/5/110?translations=21,18 https://quran.com/57/27?translations=21,18 Hence it is an explicit statement that The Injeel is a Singular Gospel which was revealed to Prophet Jesus/Isa (عليه السلام). Some Muslims believe The Bible is the Injeel but in an adulterated state. While others like me believe otherwise where The Bible =/= The Injeel of Prophet Jesus/Isa (عليه السلام). Now why would I think that? The Arabic Term "Injeel" means Gospel. The word Gospel means "Good News" or "Glad Tidings" and is derived from the Greek word "Evangelion". Gospel sounds singular in term, but plural in meaning which is contradictory. I would wager that by extending the original meaning of the term Gospel it implies that it means "A Book/A Pack/A Box/A Paper or Something that contains Good News". Now that makes more sense than just simply "Good News". Does the term Gospel literally mean The Bible? I don't think so. What would BE the Arabic Term of "The Bible" if The Bible is NOT The "Injeel" then? Well this is where the confusion accelerates if you were to research about this matter, but here's a snippet from what I dug up so far, The Arabic Language is very Context Sensitive, so whether the term Bible actually means Injeel in the Quran is a matter of dispute/debate between not just Christians and Muslims, but even for Muslims themselves. Ok then so what is The Bible to me just from my experience then? It's simply a collection of the previous scriptures ranging from the first five books of the Old Testament which constitutes the Torah, from the rest of the books being written by The God of Abraham knows whom. The lack of authorship remains a mystery. Not only that, but even disregarding the Old Testament and strictly focusing on the New Testament we have 4 Gospels to deal with that make up the 27 books of the NT. But here's my personal analogy that sums up what the Bible and the Injeel are to me, The Injeel (Gospel) is a Movie that is worth watching and The Bible is a collection of the 'alleged' previous scriptures written by a bunch of unknown people giving off their reflections of what they consider the Injeel of Prophet Jesus/Isa (عليه السلام) along with the previous scriptures to be. As in, The Bible's mysterious authors are no different from Movie Critics giving off their Reviews of The Movie and providing their perspectives plus shedding their personal reflections of The Movie. Not that watching a Review of The Movie is a bad thing, but it's not the same thing as watching The Movie. Hence, The Bible =/= The Injeel of Prophet Jesus/Isa (عليه السلام). Feel free to disagree with my analogy if you wish, but its close enough for me in terms of understanding. In the Quran, given how explicit these verses are it seems clear that there is only 1 Gospel which was strictly attributed to Prophet Jesus/Isa (عليه السلام) from which he taught to his stern and devout disciples throughout his life. I'm willing to believe that the Injeel the Quran speaks of is lost through time and The Bible contains remnants of Injeel (a mere reminder) that such a Holy Book of Prophet Jesus/Isa (عليه السلام) once existed long ago. Too bad such people were all killed by the Roman Emperors from the likes of Caligula and Nero given their persecution and killings of followers of Prophet Jesus/Isa (عليه السلام) from 0 AD - 100 AD.
  8. You could make the same argument from the likes of Acts17Apologetics (David Wood). Religious YouTube Channels seems like a bad idea and execution all in all given the superficial entertainment the Internet as a whole promotes far more so on a global scale. The internet is a safe haven for the likes of Atheists, and Agnostics mostly so misinformation is the bread and butter throughout. And don’t you dare express your religious beliefs on the internet. It shall be viewed as a joke throughout. Channels like these on top of the bigotry and discrimination Non-Muslims have against Muslims are not only tests from Allah, but signs from Allah Himself. 1) Non-Muslims have the upperhand and reign supreme nowadays in this world. Muslims don’t and have become their own worst enemies. Sunnis killing Shias and vice versa due to their disagreements. 2) Non-Muslims have the advantage of discrediting ALL Religions as pointless and fruitless endeavors that won’t lead Humanity to self-satisfaction through their misinformations. They thrive and depend on misinformation in order to be firm and certain with their beliefs. 3) Non-Muslims have become strong and united while Muslims have become weak and divided. All these 3 factors contribute to the closeness of Judgement Day. Focus on strengthening up your Beliefs based on the school of thought in Islam you wish to abide by and leave your fate up to Allah. Because as a Human Being you can only sway back and forth on top of comprehending so much out of anything in Life. We have limitations placed upon us. Surely Allah should be All-Merciful and All-Forgiving during Judgement Day.
  9. Hello OP here. Like I said I just want to understand whether the Quran is a Hadith or not given Surah 12:111 which I furthermore quoted from within my posts so far. I see so I'm conflating between the Quran and the Qudsi Hadiths within the Hadith Books. Based on what you're saying, the Quran is a Hadith, but it is on a different divine level compared to Hadith Books while Fallible containing some Qudsi Hadiths. So I was right somewhat, just a bit misunderstood with the relationship of The Quran and The Hadith Books? So let me re-correct myself again through my understanding so far, The Quran = Hadith according to Surah 12:111. But, the Hadith Books from the likes of Bukhari, Tirmidhi, Muslim, Bihar Al-Anwar, Wazaiful Abrar =/= The Quran given their Fallible Nature compared to The Quran. The Hadith Books, despite being fallible compared to The Quran, might contain some Qudsi Hadiths that don't contradict the Quran. Despite the definition of Qudsi when categorizing the reference of authority of the Hadiths, The Quran is on a different divine level given the fact its a direct revelation from Allah which overrides the definition of a Hadith Qudsi that are found within most Hadith Books. Thus, The Quran takes precedence over Hadith Books. However, the Hadith Books are necessary as support material for The Quran to explain the details the Quran explains technically speaking but in a broad/general sense with the exception of the ambiguous verses within the Quran such as The Muqataat Letters e.g. Alif Laam Meem, Ta Ha, Ya Seen. Ok got it. So far this understanding doesn't seem logically contradictory to me. Wow this was complicated to comprehend.
  10. So here's what I've learned long story short, The Quran = 100% Hadith Qudsi under the Science of Hadith Studies according to Surah 12:111, but the Hadith Books from the likes of Bukhari, Tirmidhi, Muslim, Bihar Al-Anwar, Wazaiful Abrar =/= The Quran given their Fallible Nature compared to The Quran. The Hadith Books, despite being fallible compared to The Quran, might contain some Qudsi Hadiths that don't contradict the Quran. Hence, they are necessary as support material for The Quran to explain the details the Quran explains technically speaking but in a broad/general sense with the exception of the ambiguous verses within the Quran such as The Muqataat Letters e.g. Alif Laam Meem, Ta Ha, Ya Seen. Ok got it.
  11. Ok after sifting through and understanding the 4 Verses of The Quran which explicitly states based on both the Original Arabic and the two translations: Sahih International and Yusuf Ali I want to bring up some concerns that need to be addressed, Surah 12:111 even states out the term "Hadith" given the Transliteration. So The Quran IS a Hadith? Given the Translation anything goes I guess, but this verse does confirm that the Quran is not a fabricated Hadith. So what it means that just because The Quran denies being a fabricated hadith, doesn't mean it denies being a hadith. Interesting. Still, Isn't the Quran more than just a Hadith, but a Revelation from Allah Himself which surpasses the expectations of what most people think of a typical narrative? Basically, the Arabic phrase and terms "Muffasalan" and "Tibyanan" needs more clarification. Do these terms have more than one meaning? I guess I was misunderstood about The Quran NOT being a Hadith on top of Quran being a book that is fully detailed. Hmm... this is puzzling. Logically if the 4 verses Quran I've stated above so far explains that it is a detailed book then who are we as Muslim to imply that The Quran is not a detailed book as it claims. What I'm struggling to understand is given the relationship between the Quran and why we need Hadith Books to supplement/support The Quran is the following question, Is the Quran too broad/general despite being detailed in some matters here and there as you state and the Quran even claiming that it is a detailed book according to Surah 16:89? Ehh... to say that Hadith Books from the likes of Bukhari, Tirmidhi, Muslim, Bihar Al-Anwar, Mafaatil Jinnah, Wazaiful Abrar etc etc contain ALL Qudsi Hadiths compared to The Quran is NOT TRUE given how Fallible they are compared to The Quran. That's why such Hadith Books need to be scrutinized under the Science of Hadith to overcome the logical inconsistency they suffer when comparing them to The Quran e.g. Abu Huraira's narrations. Overall, I don't deny that we need Hadiths in order to understand the 6236 verses of The Quran given the Ambiguous Verses such as The Muqataat Letters (Ta Ha, Ya Seen, Alif Laam Meem), but if the 12 Imams (عليه السلام) have narrated down narrations given Hadith of The Golden Chain on most Hadith Books then I hope we find more narrations narrated by the 12 Imams within the Hadith Books and see if they live up to the 6236 verses of The Quran which I'm certain they will, but you can never be too careful right?
  12. My nafs wants to fulfill the certainty of the belief that the Quran is a Divine Book. So far I do believe in that. But I’m pretty sure I’m committing some kind of logical contradiction here when understanding the relationship between The Quran and Hadith Books. Basically I’ve read from this website so far that discusses the concept of “Rakaats” when performing the Salaat for your Namaaz where simply put there is no Arabic Terminology of the phrase “Raka” at all throughout the 6236 verses of The Quran. Traditional Shia Islam Namaaz Prayer Rakaats is as follow for the respective 5 prayers of Islam: 1. Fajr (2 Rakaat for Salaat) 2. Zuhr (4 Rakaat for Salaat) 3. Asr (4 Rakaat for Salaat) 4. Maghrib (3 Rakaat for Salaat) 5. Isha (4 Rakaat for Salaat) However, given what this website discusses is quite the polar opposite. Can this website be challenged for their analogy? Cause they make a lot of good points that I’m having a hard time figuring out the necessary counter. I’ll leave the link here since the explanations they provide are pretty decisive and bold. Especially when relating to Surah 6:38, 12:111 and plenty more where the verses state that the Quran is a detailed book. http://quran-islam.org/main_topics/islam/pillars/al-salat/how_many_raka_(P1404).html I wish it was simple to be Firm and Certain of your Beliefs. But I guess as you grow older a Human Being’s thinking patterns become complicated that you begin to suffer from Doubts throughout your Life.
  13. Ok after reading through the sources that you provided about The Hadith of Golden Chain also known as Hadith of Silsilat Al-Dhahab @Ashvazdanghe is that there exists another level of Science when studying Hadith Literature where you study the narrative/report/account in reference to a particular authority. I've been reading furthermore from a website that simply is titled, Different "Types" of Hadith and Their Meanings. http://www.quranreading.com/blog/types-of-hadith/ So what you're implying is that I'm being a bit too generalized and intellectually dishonest when trying to understand the relationship between The Quran and Hadiths. So, The Quran is considered a "Hadith Qudsi"? If that's the case then the vast majority of Hadith Literature from the likes of Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, Bihar Al-Anwar while Fallible MIGHT contain Qudsi Hadiths that don't contradict the Quran. An example is the 5 prayers in the Quran, The following Surahs:Ayats = (24:58, 17:78, 2:238, and 11:114) it tells you that there are 5 prayers you must perform, but doesn't detail how many Rak'aats you're supposed to do for each of them. That's where the Hadith Books come to explain that detail provided that the reference to the narration is graded Qudsi which won't contradict the Quran. It's not like I'm trying to say don't bother with the Hadiths, and follow the Quran alone. As long as the Hadiths don't contradict the Quran and people don't conflate that Hadith Books such as Bukhari, Tirmidhi, Muslim, Bihar Al-Anwar = The Quran I don't have a problem with that given the Science of Hadith Literature. If the narrator was one of the 12 Imams (عليه السلام) narrating a narrative within the Hadith Books after Prophet Muhammad (SAW)'s passing then it would make sense to qualify that Hadith as an "Hadith Qudsi" given that they are the walking embodiment of The Quran. So what's truly important throughout all this is to study who's narrating the narrative? It could be one of the 12 Imams (عليه السلام) being the narrator within those Hadith Books. Still even with this explanation Most Hadiths are not Revelations of Allah compared to the Quran where 100% of the Verses are Preserved as they originally were Orally Recited. But from what I'm beginning to understand throughout this is that while The Quran IS Infallible and being The Word of Allah, has content and meanings in its 6236 verses that are too generalized and broad in terms of conveyance. So is the answer I'm receiving through this is The Quran is NOT a detailed book compared to the Hadith Books despite being Infallible? Should I conflate with the fact that Hadith Books = The Quran since Hadith Books with their Hadiths provide the details The Quran doesn't such as how many Raka'aats in your 5 prayers each or what percentage should the payment of Zakaat be (5%, 10%, 2.5%)? Hmm... this is confusing. Logic would dictate not to conflate between Hadith Books and The Quran given the Divine Nature of The Quran and its origin story.
  14. But Hadiths are NOT The Revelation of Allah. The Quran however IS. Hadiths are Historical Narratives/Reports/Accounts made by People who attributed sayings and teachings of The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and His Family The Ahlul-Bayt. From the likes of one of the Prophet's (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) most trusted Sahaabas all the way to the likes of Abu Huraira narrating false sayings/actions of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). To belittle the Divine Status of The Quran as a Hadith is a disservice given the Origin Story of HOW The Quran came to be. The Quran was originally an Oral Recitation where Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) recited continuously all his (SAW)'s life from which His followers memorized the 6236 verses and compiled it under His (SAW)'s supervision on which order should the verses go in which order at each Chapter. Whereas, the Hadiths from the likes of Bukhari, Bihar Al-Anwar etc. all were recorded narrations of people who narrated sayings/actions of The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). The Hadith Scholars found people, recorded their narrations in writing and preserved them in their Hadith Books. Perhaps it is my fault that I didn't explicitly state out the terminology contradictions highlighted so here I go, The Arabic Terminology of "Quran" literally means "Continuous Recitation". Qira means "Recitation". One of the synonyms of Recitation is Narrating which is where the conflation occurs between Hadiths and The Quran. However, there are differences between Recitation and Narrative, https://wikidiff.com/recitation/narrative The Quran is more than just a Hadith. It is a code-book that uncovers Life itself, the struggles/nature of Man, and the simple message that The God of Abraham has always laid down upon generations of yore, "There is no god, except The God"
  15. I've seen this particular argument that many Non-Muslims and even Muslims make this claim, "The Quran IS a Hadith". This is a serious issue and IMHO WRONG on so many levels to claim such a blasphemous statement against The Quran being the Word of Allah through Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). Why? Let's see what exactly does the term "Hadith" mean in terms of Arabic Terminology according to Al-Islam.org, Encyclopedia Britannica and what most dictionaries define as follows, https://www.al-islam.org/articles/al-hadith-analysis-and-overview-hashim Encyclopedia Britannica https://www.britannica.com/topic/Hadith Dictionaries that define "Hadith", Furthermore, let's also note down the fact that when it comes to the studying of Hadith Literature from the likes of Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi w/ respect to Sunni Hadiths and Bihar-Al-Anwar, Mafaatil Jinnah, and Wazaiful Abrar w/ respect to Shia Hadiths there is a Science of Studying Hadith Literature. http://www.muslimtents.com/aminahsworld/Science_of_hadith.htm Now that we've digested the meaning of what a Hadith is and the Science of Studying Hadith Literature, I want to question the legitimacy of this statement that I suspect is blasphemous "The Quran IS a Hadith" Are you telling me that IF The Quran IS a Hadith then is it just as Fallible as Hadiths from the likes of Bukhari, Tirmidhi, Bihar Al-Anwar, Wazaiful Abrar etc? If The Quran IS a Hadith then why are the 6236 verses of The Quran not studied under the same level of Scientific Study as The Hadiths? The Origin Story of HOW The Quran came to be is radically different from the likes of Hadiths. What does Quran mean to me? It means Revelation from Allah through Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) as His Final Mouthpiece for Humanity. Therefore a Revelation from Allah constitutes as The Word of Allah Himself through the mouth of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) as His Messenger. Since we know Allah is Divine and Infallible, His Words are ALSO Divine and Infallible. How does The Words of Allah which is Divine and Infallible = Hadith? If Quran IS a Hadith then it is just as similar as saying Quran = Hadith or Hadith = Quran. Both statements conflate with the fact that the Quran is no different from Hadiths and vice versa which is blasphemous and wrong on so many levels. There's a distinction between Hadiths and The Quran. The Quran is Infallible while Hadiths are Fallible. The Quran is The Word of Allah through Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) as His Last Messenger, while Hadiths are The Words of Man narrating/reporting/accounting sayings and actions of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). To conflate with The Word of Allah and The Word of Man is tantamount to Blasphemy at Best and Shirk at Worst.
  • Create New...