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
Sign in to follow this  
Aabiss_Shakari

Hazrat Ali (as) Versus Shaikhain Before Quran

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Imam Muhammad bin Ali al Baqir said that when this verse was revealed, Abu Bakr and Umar asked the Holy Prophet: "Is imamum mubin the Tawrat given to Musa?" The answer was: "No". Again they asked: "Is it Injil, given to Isa?" The answer was: "No". Then they asked: "Is it the Holy Quran?" "No", was the answer. Then turning towards Ali ibn abi Talib, the Holy Prophet said: "Verily this is the Imam in whom Allah has deposited the knowledge of everything." Then, addressing the people present there, the Holy Prophet said: "O people, there is no branch of knowledge Allah did not teach me and I have not conveyed it to Ali. Verily Allah has given me wisdom and I have given it to Ali. I am the city of knowledge and Ali is its gate."

why those two stat with a jewish holy book?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

(bismillah)

Ðú ÃóÑúÓóáúäóÇ Åöáóíúåöãõ ÇËúäóíúäö ÝóßóÐøóÈõæåõãóÇ ÝóÚóÒøóÒúäóÇ ÈöËóÇáöËò ÝóÞóÇáõæÇ ÅöäøóÇ Åöáóíúßõã ãøõÑúÓóáõæäó {14}

ÞóÇáõæÇ ãóÇ ÃóäÊõãú ÅöáÇøó ÈóÔóÑñ ãøöËúáõäóÇ æóãóÇ ÃóäÒóáó ÇáÑøóÍúãä ãöä ÔóíúÁò Åöäú ÃóäÊõãú ÅöáÇøó ÊóßúÐöÈõæäó {15}

ÞóÇáõæÇ ÑóÈøõäóÇ íóÚúáóãõ ÅöäøóÇ Åöáóíúßõãú áóãõÑúÓóáõæäó {16}

æóãóÇ ÚóáóíúäóÇ ÅöáÇøó ÇáúÈóáÇóÛõ ÇáúãõÈöíäõ {17}

ÞóÇáõæÇ ÅöäøóÇ ÊóØóíøóÑúäóÇ Èößõãú áóÆöä áøóãú ÊóäÊóåõæÇ áóäóÑúÌõãóäøóßõãú æóáóíóãóÓøóäøóßõã ãøöäøóÇ ÚóÐóÇÈñ Ãóáöíãñ {18}

ÞóÇáõæÇ ØóÇÆöÑõßõãú ãóÚóßõãú ÃóÆöä ÐõßøöÑúÊõã Èóáú ÃóäÊõãú Þóæúãñ ãøõÓúÑöÝõæäó {19}

æóÌóÇÁ ãöäú ÃóÞúÕóì ÇáúãóÏöíäóÉö ÑóÌõáñ íóÓúÚóì ÞóÇáó íóÇ Þóæúãö ÇÊøóÈöÚõæÇ ÇáúãõÑúÓóáöíäó {20}

[Quran 36:14] When We sent to them two, they rejected both of them, then We strengthened (them) with a third, so they said: Surely we are messengers to you.

[Quran 36:15] They said: You are naught but mortals like ourselves, nor has the Beneficent Allah revealed anything; you only lie.

[Quran 36:16] They said: Our Lord knows that we are most surely messengers to you.

[Quran 36:17] And nothing devolves on us but a clear deliverance (of the message).

[Quran 36:18] They said: Surely we augur evil from you; if you do not desist, we will certainly stone you, and there shall certainly afflict vou a painful chastisement from us.

[Quran 36:19] They said: Your evil fortune is with you; what! if you are reminded! Nay, you are an extravagant people.

[Quran 36:20] And from the remote part of the city there came a man running, he said: O my people! follow the messengers;

Aqa Mahdi Puya says:

In line with the style of the Quran whereby stories are forwarded as example it is told that Isa had sent two of his disciples to preach his message. When they came to the outskirts of a city, they met a shepherd who asked as to who they were. They replied that they were the messengers from Isa, the prophet of Allah, and had been sent to invite people to the religion of Allah. The shepherd wished to see if they had any signs to prove their bonafide. They said that they could cure the sick and restore sight to the born blind and cure the born lepers. On this, the shepherd took those men to his son who was sick for long and no one could help him. They prayed to Allah and the sick son of the shepherd was cured. The shepherd embraced the religion of Allah preached by Isa.

Hearing about the arrival of these men in the city, the man known as "mumin of ali Yasin", who believed in the advent of the Holy Prophet, even 680 years before his coming, came out from his retreat and embraced the true faith, and a great number of sick in the city were cured by the disciples of Isa.

The King, who was a stubborn non-believer, imprisoned those messengers of Isa. On hearing the fate of his messengers, Isa sent another of his disciple Simon who came to the city and pretended to belong to the King's faith (an example of taqiyyah) and gained influence over him. See Acts 11: 16.

Thus, the despatch of two messengers was more strengthened by the third from Isa. This refers to the first two, the Holy Prophet and Ali and later Jafar joining them at the instance of Abu Talib, while the Holy Prophet and Ali were praying once in the Ka-bah.

Simon's conduct here indicates the validity of taqiyyah and its proper use.

When Simon had gained sufficient influence over the King, he asked the King one day to bring those two men to be questioned about their faith.

The two messengers came but did not give the indication of recognising Simon who asked them as to who they were and what was the purpose of their visit to that place. They said that they were the messengers of Isa, the prophet of Allah, sent to invite the King to give up his idolatry and embrace the faith in the only true Lord. On being asked about their bonafides they said that they can cure the sick and even born lepers and could give sight to the blind.

Simon told the king as to why the king and he should not ask the idol gods to show some kind of miracles The king laughed and replied: "How can we expect these things from idols which neither can speak nor hear." Then Simon said that they should have also joined those two men in worshipping Allah who has such powers.

The king agreed and embraced the religion of Allah but the people rejected the truth and said that the two messengers were only men who were mortals like themselves and called the disciples of Isa liars.

Whenever Prophets are sent, the best proof of their genuineness is that whenever people disbelieved them, the prophets always invoked the authority and mercy of Allah and patiently suffered the worst of persecution and tortures and never yielded to any authority other than Allah.

The messengers from Isa were warned by people that if they did not give up their preachings, they would be stoned and tortured. The messengers replied that any calamity which would come to the people will be the result of their own rebellious conduct.

When the people rejected the message from Isa, a man, Habib al Najjar, known as the mumin of ali Yasin, (see verse 14), came running from the outskirts of the city and urged his people to believe in the message.

Aqa Mahdi Puya says:

The Roman name of Habib was Theofulus. Like him there was a God-fearing man in Madina who embraced Islam as soon as he came to know that the Holy Prophet was inviting people to the true religion of Allah.

According to Tafsir Thalabi the Holy Prophet said that there were three persons who, without a moment of hesitation, responded to the call of three prophets: mumin of ali Firawn, mumin of ali Yasin, and Ali ibna abi Talib;and they never worshipped any god save Allah even for "the twinkling of an eye."

When Obayda bin Harith was fatally wounded in the battle of Badr, he told the Holy Prophet: "I wish Abu Talib were here to see that I am the first from his house to give my life in the cause of Allah."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Laylatolmabit verse:

æóãöäó ÇáäøóÇÓö ãóä íóÔúÑöí äóÝúÓóåõ ÇÈúÊöÛóÇÁ ãóÑúÖóÇÊö Çááøåö æóÇááøåõ ÑóÄõæÝñ ÈöÇáúÚöÈóÇÏö ﴿207﴾

but there are among people he who would give away his life desiring the pleasure of Allah. Allah is gentle to his worshipers. (207)

According to ahadith, any single verse of the Quran as got one Dhahir and 70 Batin.

As for the verse 2:207, famous as Laylatolmabit verse revelead in the honor of Amiralmo3menin A, there are 110 pointes exploited that has been written down in the book “Laylah Almabit” by “Gholamreza Sadeqifard” that I am going to post some.

1. the Laylatolmabit verse must have had an example when the verse had bean revealed and this example must not necessarily be restricted to an only one:

The verse says: “there are among people”. As logicians say, this sentence is a “Mowjebeye Joz3eeye”, or a partially affirmative proposition. Such propositions are reliable if they have at least one example.

As this verse is a verse by God, hence is a complete truth, the existence of at least one example for this verse is definite.

Now that we know there is at least one person corresponding with this verse, one may want to know whether there are some more people corresponding with it.

In this verse, the understood (mustater) pronoun HOWA (he) that is an antecedent for the relative pronoun MAN (among/ someone of) is a single masculine pronoun, but it doesn’t mean that MAN refers only to “an individual man”.

In Quran, we have verses with the use of the same pronoun(MAN) that not only don’t refer to “an individual man”, but also refer to some women since this pronoun is a “collective relative pronoun”(Mushtarak Mowsul). Such as in Ahzab Surah, verse 30:

íóÇ äöÓóÇÁ ÇáäøóÈöíøö ãóä íóÃúÊö ãöäßõäøó ÈöÝóÇÍöÔóÉò ãøõÈóíøöäóÉò íõÖóÇÚóÝú áóåóÇ ÇáúÚóÐóÇÈõ ÖöÚúÝóíúäö æóßóÇäó Ðóáößó Úóáóì Çááøóåö íóÓöíÑðÇ ﴿30﴾

O wives of the prophet! whosoever among you commit a flagrant indecency, for her the punishment shall be doubled, that is easy for Allah. (30)

or the same surah verse 36:

æóãóÇ ßóÇäó áöãõÄúãöäò æóáóÇ ãõÄúãöäóÉò ÅöÐóÇ ÞóÖóì Çááøóåõ æóÑóÓõæáõåõ ÃóãúÑðÇ Ãóä íóßõæäó áóåõãõ ÇáúÎöíóÑóÉõ ãöäú ÃóãúÑöåöãú æóãóä íóÚúÕö Çááøóåó æóÑóÓõæáóåõ ÝóÞóÏú Öóáøó ÖóáóÇáðÇ ãøõÈöíäðÇ ﴿36﴾

it is not for any believer man or woman to have the choice in the affair when a matter is decreed by Allah and his prophet. whosoever disobeys Allah and his messenger strays into clear error. (36)

At the beginning of this verse, the characteristic of the Mo3min (faithful man) and MO3mina (faithful woman) facing the commands of Prophet Saww has been propounded, and, at the end of the phrase “whosoever disobeys Allah and his messenger” using the term MAN (whosoever), a precept has been defined for this group. As we see, this term (whosoever) in this verse can refer to a group of faithful men and women, an individual faithful woman, in individual man, some women and a man, ….

So Man in the Laylatolmabit verse is not exclusively restricted to an only man.

Edited by PersianGulfever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ÈöÓúãö Çááåö ÇáÑøóÍúãäö ÇáÑøóÍöíãö

æóÇáÕøóÇÝøóÇÊö ÕóÝøðÇ {1}

ÝóÇáÒøóÇÌöÑóÇÊö ÒóÌúÑðÇ {2}

ÝóÇáÊøóÇáöíóÇÊö ÐößúÑðÇ {3}

I swear by those who draw themselves out in ranks (Surah Saf'aat Ayat 1)

Then those who drive away with reproof, (Surah Saf'aat Ayat 2)

Then those who recite, being mindful, (Surah Saf'aat Ayat 3)

Wa (and) is a conjunction, a word that connects sentences, clauses, and words, but it has been used in the Quran for several purposes. In these verses it has been used as an adjuration to witness the truth of a solemn affirmation and to emphasise that affirmation. It is a solemn appeal to a person or persons to believe in the important statements, made in these verses, on the basis of sublime and out of the ordinary evidence. Wa has been used here to assert, with special emphasis, the truth of that which is presented in order to render null and void expected rejection, if any.

Are the doers of the three things noted in these verses the same persons, or are they three distinct sets of persons? In either case, who are they? Many commentators take them to refer to angels and good men, the men of God, who strive and range themselves in Allah's service, defend truth and destroy the power base of evil, whenever necessary, and proclaim the truth of the word of Allah. Some commentators add "Lord of" in every verse, in which case wa becomes an oath, an invocation in the name of Allah, to assert the truth.

In sinlessness and infallibility, according to the Quran, the Holy Prophet and his Ahl ul Bayt, in addition to other prophets of Allah, are the only men of God. As per verses 33 of Al Ahzab and 61 of Ali Imran, they are the only "human beings" thoroughly purified. They are not only as pure and holy as the angels are but also stand high and above the angels in rank and honour, according to the commentary of Baqarah: 30 to 39. By becoming aware of the existence of the Holy Prophet and his Ahl ul Bayt Adam was declared superior to the angels who, when commanded by Allah, fell prostrate before him. So no other human being can be joined with the holy and pure angels in these verses as men of God except the Holy Prophet and his Ahl ul Bayt, because as said in Fatir: 19 to 22:-

"Alike are not the blind and those who can see, nor darkness and light, nor shade and heat, nor the living and the dead."

So the pure and the impure cannot be joined by the just and wise Lord together.

The men of God, mentioned in the verses 1 to 3 of this surah, are goodness personified or the true reflection or manifestation of the absolute goodness of the Lord, therefore every type of evil has been kept off from them. They have been thoroughly purified as per verse 33 of Ahzab. Also refer to Hijr: 40 and 42 and Bani Israil: 65 to know that Shaytan has no authority over the men of God mentioned above. Goodness is real and eternal. Evil is the consequence of the rebellious urge of the devil. It shall die its own death when the devil, along with his followers, goes to hell. So far as it lives in this world it cannot rise to the higher region of goodness, even if it tries to have a glimpse of the world of total righteousness. Its area of operation is the abyss.

No evil spirit can ever penetrate even the lowest heaven. Refer to the commentary of Hijr: 16 to 18.

After the advent of the Holy Prophet the doors of even the lowest regions were closed to the devils and evil spirits.

Prior to the advent of the Holy Prophet, the jinn and devils had access to the outskirts of heaven, and by assiduous eavesdropping secured some of the secrets of the upper world, which they communicated to soothsayers upon the earth. After the advent of the Holy Prophet they were driven from the heavens, and whenever they dared to approach, flaming bolts were hurled at them, appearing to mankind like falling stars.

Edited by Aabiss_Shakari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2. This verse is informing us about the “selling ones life” or self sacrifice.

As we said in the first point, there had been some people at the time of the revelation of Laylatolmabit ve4rse that the verse is talking about the secret of their selling their lives. if we look at it rationally we get to this conclusion that : they, in order to gain the MARDHAT (pleasures) of God, sell their lives, but what happens outside is not “selling the life” rather “sacrificing the life” to gain God’s pleasures.

We can name this “sacrificing the life to gain God’s pleasers” a “selling the life to gain God’s pleasures” only hen God, that is the one who owns the pleasure, expresses His agreements. in another word, BAY3 (selling) needs affirmation and acceptance and without affirmation and acceptance, no BAY3 (selling) has occurred, but we see, in Laylatolmabit verse, God has called their effort a “buying and selling” and refers to it with the expression “YASHRI” (sell/s) which is as His subscription to this trade.

Besides, this verse has been made up of 2 parts:

A. The part that talks about the life trade in return for God’s pleasures.

B. The par that talks about God’s mercy upon the worshippers.

if the first part of this verse, only talks about a simple action and not a trade, the relation between these 2 parts will be completely broken, while in Quranic verse the endings are incomplete relation with their previous parts which means this trade has been done.

Edited by PersianGulfever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3. the selling of the life the verse is taking about, for the liable of the verse, is permanent and everywhere:

The liable(s) for the Laylatolmabit verse, live with this attribute and this “buying and selling” is not restricted to single trade in their lives. This trade, to these people, is permanent everlasting repetitive, and. this point is derived from the essential denotation of the present tense verb _here YASHRI (sell/s) _ which indicates enduring, constancy, and repetition.

the Laylatolmabit verse is specifically unconditional and is not limited to a special place, location, or spot, whereas, in the verse 111 of Towbah, “buying Mo3menin’s life and property” has been expressed using the past tense ESHTARI (sold) and the purchase and sale is restricted to the battlefield and whatever relating to it:

Åöäøó Çááøåó ÇÔúÊóÑóì ãöäó ÇáúãõÄúãöäöíäó ÃóäÝõÓóåõãú æóÃóãúæóÇáóåõã ÈöÃóäøó áóåõãõ ÇáÌóäøóÉó íõÞóÇÊöáõæäó Ýöí ÓóÈöíáö Çááøåö ÝóíóÞúÊõáõæäó æóíõÞúÊóáõæäó æóÚúÏðÇ Úóáóíúåö ÍóÞøðÇ Ýöí ÇáÊøóæúÑóÇÉö æóÇáÅöäÌöíáö æóÇáúÞõÑúÂäö æóãóäú ÃóæúÝóì ÈöÚóåúÏöåö ãöäó Çááøåö ÝóÇÓúÊóÈúÔöÑõæÇú ÈöÈóíúÚößõãõ ÇáøóÐöí ÈóÇíóÚúÊõã Èöåö æóÐóáößó åõæó ÇáúÝóæúÒõ ÇáúÚóÙöíãõ ﴿111﴾

Allah has purchased from the believers their selves and possessions, and for them is paradise. They fight in the way of Allah, slay, and are slain. That is a binding promise upon him in the torah, the gospel and the Koran; and who is there that more truthfully fulfills his covenant than Allah? Therefore, rejoice in the bargain you have bargained with him. That is the mighty winning. (111)

the unconditional time and place introduced in Laylatolmabit verse has made the selling of the life’s trade an everlasting trade happening anywhere.

Edited by PersianGulfever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

(bismillah)

äÊõãú Úóäúåõ ãõÚúÑöÖõæäó {68}

Say: It is a message of importance, (Surah Saad Ayat 67)

Aqa Mahdi Puya says:

According to the Ahl ul Bayt vice-regency (imamah) is the most important part of the divine message.

Naba-il azim (the great news) in verse 2 of Surah Naba and in verse 67 of Sad, refers to the vicegerency of man to represent Allah on the earth in order to exercise authority on His behalf, i.e. imamah or wilayah.

Verse 3 of an Naba confirms it. This was an issue among the angels in verse 30 of al Baqarah. Again it has been described as a message of great importance in verse 67 of this surah, from which man turns away as said in verse 68;((And) you are turning aside from it: Surah Saad Ayat 68) and verse 69 again refers to verse 30 of al Baqarah. For the vice-regency (imamah) Allah selects and appoints His own chosen representatives on the earth. The selection is not arbitrary. Only those whose submission to His will is absolute and unconditional due to which they remain in constant communion with Allah are chosen. See al Baqarah: 124. The doctrine of imamah has been represented in the Quran in various ways. Even the angels were not clear about this great message. They first disputed, then submitted to the will of Allah, but Shaytan rebelled and was condemned and cursed for ever for not accepting the imamah of the chosen representatives of Allah.

This condition of acceptance and rejection continued in the children of Adam in various forms and manners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

(bismillah)

Ãóãøóäú åõæó ÞóÇäöÊñ ÂäóÇÁ Çááøóíúáö ÓóÇÌöÏðÇ æóÞóÇÆöãðÇ íóÍúÐóÑõ ÇáúÂÎöÑóÉó æóíóÑúÌõæ ÑóÍúãóÉó ÑóÈøöåö Þõáú åóáú íóÓúÊóæöí ÇáøóÐöíäó íóÚúáóãõæäó æóÇáøóÐöíäó áóÇ íóÚúáóãõæäó ÅöäøóãóÇ íóÊóÐóßøóÑõ ÃõæúáõæÇ ÇáúÃóáúÈóÇÈö {9}

What! he who is obedient during hours of the night, prostrating himself and standing, takes care of the hereafter and hopes for the mercy of his Lord! Say: Are those who know and those who do not know alike? Only the men of understanding are mindful.

As pointed out in the commentary of Fatihah: 7, it is necessary to know the way of life and teachings of the Holy Prophet and his Ahl ul Bayt to find out the right path and to walk on it. Imam Jafar bin Muhammad as Sadiq said:

" 'Those who know' refers to the Imams of the Ahl ul Bayt; and 'those who do not know' refers to the opponents of the Ahl ul Bayt; and the 'men of understanding' refers to the sincere devotees of the Ahl ul Bayt."

Once Ali and Qambar were taking a walk in the city of Kufa after nightfall. Qambar stopped at the doorsteps of a house in which a man was reciting this verse, but Ali went ahead. After a few steps he turned and asked Qambar: "Why did you stop?" Qambar replied: "He is reciting the Quran in a very tender and melodious voice." Ali said: "The sleep of a person whose mind and heart are ingrained with the conviction of faith is better than the adoration of a doubting hypocrite."

It is reported by Qambar that he could not grasp the meaning of Ali's observation, so he recorded the identity of that house in his mind and visited it the next day. He found out that it was the house of a hypocrite. Then he asked Ali as to how did he know what was hidden in the heart of the man? Ali said: "How could a guardian remain unaware of that which is concealed by the people in their hearts?"

The Holy Prophet said:

"I am the city of knowledge and Ali is its gate."

Allah chooses whom He pleases for His special favour; and we see in Ma-idah: 35 which contains clear guidance for identifying and selecting the true means of approach (wasilah).

As for praying in the nights there are no equals to Ali, Fatimah, and Ali bin Husayn Zayn al Abidin in particular among the Ahl ul Bayt, save the Holy Prophet, according to the authentic books of history written by well-known Muslim scholars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of the Sahabah (ra) are equally worthy of taking guidance from. They were all dearly beloved to the Prophet (SAW). This is a futile post. End of story.

I understand your emotions but the fact is that Imam Ali (as) was far more superior than Shaikhain. It is really illogical to say that all were equally worthy of taking guidance from while they differed from each other and even fought battles against each other. So accept your defeat openly. I know you must have not bothered to read the entire thread before passing your two line comment. I suggest you to pass through the thread and see how many sunnis came and posted and did not return after their rebuttal. I am anxious to see that how Shaikhain were worthy to become caliph after Prophet (pbuh). They were indeed usurpers and took that place which they were not worthy of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand your emotions but the fact is that Imam Ali (as) was far more superior than Shaikhain. It is really illogical to say that all were equally worthy of taking guidance from while they differed from each other and even fought battles against each other. So accept your defeat openly. I know you must have not bothered to read the entire thread before passing your two line comment. I suggest you to pass through the thread and see how many sunnis came and posted and did not return after their rebuttal. I am anxious to see that how Shaikhain were worthy to become caliph after Prophet (pbuh). They were indeed usurpers and took that place which they were not worthy of.

Ali (ra) fought against Muawiyah (ra). Ali (ra) isn't exempt from the criticism that you raised.

The logical position is to leave judgment up to Allah. Everything happens by the will of Allah. If the "Shaikhain" became caliphs, it was because Allah willed it to happen. To keep discussing this and to support any other outcome is to deny qadr.

The Sunni position on rulership and piety is that piety is not a condition for rulership. The only conditions are allowing the people to practice Islam freely and bayah from the Ummah. This is a difference with Shia Islam. This is the sole reason why succesorship is not a concern of ours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ali (ra) fought against Muawiyah (ra). Ali (ra) isn't exempt from the criticism that you raised.

Your argument is complete false and frivolous. It is like Kafir's objection on Prophet (pbuh) that he (pbuh) fought against pagans of Makkah and therefore he (pbuh) is not exempted from criticism. Is mere fighting battle means one remains not exempted from criticism? Are you not obliged to thrash out the facts and come out of your bias? Why you people are completely blind? Does your own book Sahih Bukhari not say that "Ammar (ra) will be killed by a rebellion group. Ammar will be calling them towards heaven while they will be calling Ammar (ra) to hell" [Reference can be given on demand].Amaar was martyred by the army of Muawvia (la). Muawvia just for the sake of chair and government took the lives of thousands of muslims. Same was the case of Bibi Aysha who against the clear instruction of Quran and Prophet (pbuh) "The dogs of Huwab will bark on one of my wife who will be fighting against Ali (as) and she will not be at right". So Muawvia and Aysha were at error and they were wrong. Even this is admitted by Sunni scholars. Therefore, Ali (as) is exempted from fair criticism however, if your eyes are covered with bias then i am not responsible for that.

The logical position is to leave judgment up to Allah. Everything happens by the will of Allah. If the "Shaikhain" became caliphs, it was because Allah willed it to happen. To keep discussing this and to support any other outcome is to deny qadr.

Amazing. You murder some one it is will of Allah? Americans killed thousands of muslims according to will of Allah? All the injustice and oppression happening in the world is will of Allah? Shaitan disobeyed Allah but this was will of Allah? Why you putting your mistakes on the head of Allah? "Shia rightly believe Good is always from Allah but not the bad and wrong. That is fault of the wrong doer"

The Sunni position on rulership and piety is that piety is not a condition for rulership. The only conditions are allowing the people to practice Islam freely and bayah from the Ummah. This is a difference with Shia Islam. This is the sole reason why succesorship is not a concern of ours.

Thanks for your implied admission that Shaikhain were not more piety than Ali (as). You brought the Khilafah to the level of common worldly government. So you admit that Khilfah of Shaikhain has no importance in Islam and one remains muslim even if he does not believe that Shaikhain were rightful rulers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

(bismillah)

ÃóÝóãóä ÔóÑóÍó Çááøóåõ ÕóÏúÑóåõ áöáúÅöÓúáóÇãö Ýóåõæó Úóáóì äõæÑò ãøöä ÑøóÈøöåö Ýóæóíúáñ áøöáúÞóÇÓöíóÉö ÞõáõæÈõåõã ãøöä ÐößúÑö Çááøóåö ÃõæúáóÆößó Ýöí ÖóáóÇáò ãõÈöíäò {22}

What! is he whose heart Allah has opened for Islam so that he is in a light from his Lord (like the hard-hearted)? Nay, woe to those whose hearts are hard against the remembrance of Allah; those are in clear error. [surah az-Zumar Ayat:22]

It is reported that this verse was revealed in praise of Ali ibn abi Talib. "I and Ali are from one and he same light", said the Holy Prophet, therefore, he and Ali never worshipped a ghayrallah (other than Allah).

Indirectly this verse is also applicable to those believers whose hearts have been enlightened with the truth according to the degree of their faith as mentioned in Surah-An-am Ayat No. 126.

To identify the enlightened heart the Holy Prophet said:

"An enlightened heart shuns the desires connected with the temporary stay in this world and desires that which is associated with the permanent abode of the hereafter."

The last part of the verse refers to Abu Lahab and his associates.

Just as there is spiritual progress for those who seek nearness to Allah, so there is more and more spiritual retrogression for those who close their hearts to the truth. Their hearts grow hardened, and they allow less and less grace of Allah to penetrate their souls.

The Holy Prophet said:

"Seek help from those of my adherents who have enlightened hearts, for Allah has bestowed His grace and mercy on them. Do not go near those whose hearts have grown hardened, for their souls have been destroyed by the wrath of Allah."

Allah loves those who show love and kindness to His creatures and guides them unto the right path and goodness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the point that you are trying to bring out by claiming Hazrat Ali (ra) to be better than the Shaikhain? Why do we need a comparison among the companions of Prophet(pbuh)? Its not going to prove Shias are in the right path or they are better than Sunnis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the point that you are trying to bring out by claiming Hazrat Ali (ra) to be better than the Shaikhain? Why do we need a comparison among the companions of Prophet(pbuh)? Its not going to prove Shias are in the right path or they are better than Sunnis.

It is important to prove so for the following reasons:-

1. Some of the Sunnis claim that Abu Bakar, Umer and Uthman were superior to Ali (as) therefore they rightly superseded Ali (as). This thread is a hard challenge for them and i challenge them "Bring your proof if you are true"

2. Some other Sunnis admit (as they admitted in this thread) that Ali (as) was superior to Shaikhain then my challenge to them is that "If Ali (as) was superior to Shaikhain then Why Shaikhain superseded him (as)?

You belong to second category so bring forward any solid reason for their assuming the office of Khilafah in the presence of Ali (as).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

(bismillah)

æóÇáøóÐöí ÌóÇÁ ÈöÇáÕøöÏúÞö æóÕóÏøóÞó Èöåö ÃõæúáóÆößó åõãõ ÇáúãõÊøóÞõæäó {33}

And he who brings the truth and (he who) accepts it as the truth-- these are they that guard (against evil). [surah az-Zumar Ayat 33]

"He who brings the truth" refers to the Holy Prophet, and it is unanimously accepted by the scholars of all sects that 'He who testifies it' refers to Ali ibn abi Talib.

Ibn al Maghazli writes the abovenoted interpretation in his Manaqibah on the authority of Mujahid. Hafizan ibn Marduwayh and Hafiz Abu Nu-aym have also recorded this tradition. Once the Holy Prophet asked his companions:

"Who among you would relate to me a distinguishing excellence of my cousin, Ali?"

"I shall," said Ammar Yasir.

"Do, then," said the Holy Prophet. Ammar recited this verse.

"True is that which you have recited," said the Holy Prophet.

Imam Ali said:

"I am the siddiq al akbar (the greatest truthful) and I am the faruq al azam (the greatest distinguisher), and none shall claim these titles other than me, save a liar."

Ibn Abbas said:

"When on the night of ascension the Holy Prophet visited the kingdom of Allah in the heavens, He told him: 'Go and inform your followers what you have seen here'. The Holy Prophet asked: 'Who would testify my statement?' Allah replied: 'Ali will testify.'"

"These are those who safeguard themselves against evil" and verses 34 and 35 refer to the other believers in the truth who also are entitled to be called muttaqin according to the degree of their sincerity in the faith.

Aqa Mahdi Puya says:

This verse is applicable to all the prophets and their testifiers. Among them the most distinguished are:

(i) Mumin ali Firawn,

(ii) Mumin ali Yasin,

(iii) Ali ibn abi Talib, the superior most among them.

Any view expressed by any commentator, not supported by the sayings of the Holy Prophet, should be rejected outright.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is important to prove so for the following reasons:-

1. Some of the Sunnis claim that Abu Bakar, Umer and Uthman were superior to Ali (as) therefore they rightly superseded Ali (as). This thread is a hard challenge for them and i challenge them "Bring your proof if you are true"

2. Some other Sunnis admit (as they admitted in this thread) that Ali (as) was superior to Shaikhain then my challenge to them is that "If Ali (as) was superior to Shaikhain then Why Shaikhain superseded him (as)?

You belong to second category so bring forward any solid reason for their assuming the office of Khilafah in the presence of Ali (as).

Brother Aabiss_Shakari,

I doubt whether we are even elligible to make such a comparison . All the four

rightly guided caliphs were capable of leading the Muslim Ummah. The challenge you have

raised is not a matter of concern to any Sunni, I guess. Trying to prove either ways is

not going to do any good for us. What we are arguing over is something that has already

happened in the past. We accept the caliphate of the Shaikhain, since we do not believe

in the divine appointment of Ali (ra).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother Aabiss_Shakari,

I doubt whether we are even elligible to make such a comparison . All the four

rightly guided caliphs were capable of leading the Muslim Ummah. The challenge you have

raised is not a matter of concern to any Sunni, I guess. Trying to prove either ways is

not going to do any good for us. What we are arguing over is something that has already

happened in the past. We accept the caliphate of the Shaikhain, since we do not believe

in the divine appointment of Ali (ra).

If you believe that Abu Bakar and other two caliphs were rightful caliphs before Ali (as) knowing that Ali (as) was superior to them than you are unjust in your faith. And if you do not believe in the divine appointment of Caliph then your faith is in contradiction to Quran and you can not present a single verse from Quran which will prove your faith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you believe that Abu Bakar and other two caliphs were rightful caliphs before Ali (as) knowing that Ali (as) was superior to them than you are unjust in your faith. And if you do not believe in the divine appointment of Caliph then your faith is in contradiction to Quran and you can not present a single verse from Quran which will prove your faith.

I never said that Ali(ra) was superior to the Shaikhain. In fact, I don't really know, neither I am interested in finding out. Also there is no clear verse in Quran regarding the divine appointment of Ali (ra). If there was such a divine appointment, then Ali(ra) would have surely become the caliph after Prophet (saw), irrespective of whatever the circumstances be. Since, it did not happen, there was no such Divine will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never said that Ali(ra) was superior to the Shaikhain. In fact, I don't really know, neither I am interested in finding out. Also there is no clear verse in Quran regarding the divine appointment of Ali (ra). If there was such a divine appointment, then Ali(ra) would have surely become the caliph after Prophet (saw), irrespective of whatever the circumstances be. Since, it did not happen, there was no such Divine will.

Leave the divine appointment of Hazrat Ali (as) as successor of Prophet (pbuh). Just tell me where in Quran it is mentioned that Caliph is elected or selected? Quran says Caliphate is divine and there are many verses in support of this view. Your argument that if Ali (as) was divinely appointed than he must have become caliph is weak and baseless. Many prophets were divinely appointed but still they were not in government. Ibrahim (as) was divinely appointed Prophet but still the government was with Namrood (Laeen). Will it legitimize the government of Narmood? Was it right objection by the supporters of Namrood that "If Ibrahim a.s would have been a prophet of Allah and divinely appointed then he would have been in power and government". Your objection is the same as was raised against Taloot that Taloot is weak, he is not wealthy etc but Allah reveled to his prophet that Taloot is appointed by Him and he is the caliph.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leave the divine appointment of Hazrat Ali (as) as successor of Prophet (pbuh). Just tell me where in Quran it is mentioned that Caliph is elected or selected? Quran says Caliphate is divine and there are many verses in support of this view. Your argument that if Ali (as) was divinely appointed than he must have become caliph is weak and baseless. Many prophets were divinely appointed but still they were not in government. Ibrahim (as) was divinely appointed Prophet but still the government was with Namrood (Laeen). Will it legitimize the government of Narmood? Was it right objection by the supporters of Namrood that "If Ibrahim a.s would have been a prophet of Allah and divinely appointed then he would have been in power and government". Your objection is the same as was raised against Taloot that Taloot is weak, he is not wealthy etc but Allah reveled to his prophet that Taloot is appointed by Him and he is the caliph.

There is an entire chapter in Quran entitled “Ash-Shura”. Sunnis have adopted the process of Shura in the selection of leadership.

According to you, Ali (ra) was appointed as a Caliph after Prophet(pbuh). I am asking if it were not to happen, then why was there such an appointment. Also, it is known that Ali(ra) accepted the caliphate of Abu Bakr(ra) [ whether its after 2 days or after 6 months ] . Then, why don't you accept Abu Bakr's(ra) caliphate if you truely follow Ali(ra) ???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

u all dont read history and declare everything....When ALI and BANI HASHIMwere busy with last rites of the burial of the apostle of god ,then if really your first khalifa loved rasoolallah(a.h)then were was he ?Not with ali and bani hashim instead with ansars and mohajirs at Saqueefa and declared himself the khalifa with his relatives. u r follower of oue prophet or the first khalifa who has done injustice with his daughter and what about gadhir khum .And if hazrath ali have snechted everything from abu bakar then he would not be called Hazrath ali and the islam end would be close.HE HAD BEFORE THE EXAMPLE OF OUR PROPHET AND THE TREATY of hudaibia foretold by the prophit of all that would happen. Allama Ali ibne Mohammad in Asud-ud-Ghabre .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

u all dont read history and declare everything....When ALI and BANI HASHIMwere busy with last rites of the burial of the apostle of god ,then if really your first khalifa loved rasoolallah(a.h)then were was he ?Not with ali and bani hashim instead with ansars and mohajirs at Saqueefa and declared himself the khalifa with his relatives. u r follower of oue prophet or the first khalifa who has done injustice with his daughter and what about gadhir khum .And if hazrath ali have snechted everything from abu bakar then he would not be called Hazrath ali and the islam end would be close.HE HAD BEFORE THE EXAMPLE OF OUR PROPHET AND THE TREATY of hudaibia foretold by the prophit of all that would happen. Allama Ali ibne Mohammad in Asud-ud-Ghabre .

You read only the history written by Shia scholars. This is why you don't get the facts right. Abu Bakr (ra) and Umar (ra) were there near the Prophet (pbuh).

You don't know the reasons that made them head towards Saqifa.

You don't know that it was Abu Bakr (ra) who suggested the place of burial of Prophet (pbuh).

We don't believe that Abu Bakr (ra) did injustice to the daughter of Prophet (pbuh). The sunni view of Fadak is different from yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i can declare that abu bakar was wrong from ur sahih book

we dont read shia history book its also in your history book and sahih bukharis hadees

Yes, the issue of Fadak is reported in our Hadeeth as well.

Start reading from here to find out if Abu Bakr (ra) can be blamed on the issue...

http:// www.ahlelbayt. com /articles/sahabah/fadak1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That article repeats the normal Sunni stance-

Fatima as.gif was wrong, Abu Bakr was right. It doesn't matter that whoever makes Fatima as.gif angry makes the Prophet pbuh.gif angry and whoever makes the Prophet pbuh.gif angry makes Allah angry. Abu Bakr did it, so it's all good.

But Shia say "no".

The hadith can be put to one side. As this brilliant thread states, we are looking at what the Quran says.

In the words of Hazrat Fatima as.gif :-

"O Muslims! Will my inheritance be usurped? O son of Abu Quhafa! Where is it in the Book of Allah that you inherit your father and I do not inherit mine? Surely you have come up with an unprecedented thing. Do you intentionally abandon the Book of Allah and cast it behind your back? Do you not read where it says: And Sulaiman inherited Dawood'? And when it narrates the story of Zakariya and says: `So give me an heir as from thyself (One that) will inherit me, and inherit the posterity of Yaqoob' And: `But kindred by hood have prior rights against each other in the Book of Allah'

And: Allah (thus) directs you as regards your children's (inheritance) to the male, a portion equal to that of two females' And, If he leaves any goods, that

he make a bequest to parents and next of kin, according to reasonable usage; this is due from the pious ones.' You claim that I have no share! And that I do not inherit my father!

What! Did Allah reveal a (Quranic) verse regarding you, from which He excluded my father? Or do you say: `These (Fatima and her father) are the people of two faiths, they do not inherit each other?!' Are we not, me and my father, a people adhering to one faith? Or is it that you have more knowledge about the specifications and generalizations of the Quran than my father and my cousin (Imam Ali)? So, here you are! Take it! (Ready with) its nose rope and saddled! But if shall encounter you on the Day of Gathering; (thus) what a wonderful judge is Allah, a claimant is Muhammad, and a day is the Day of Rising. At the time of the Hour shall the wrongdoers lose; and it shall not benefit you to regret (your actions) then!"

http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:wtyNy-KiGzAJ:www.hujjat-workshop.org/docs/Khutba_of_FatimaZahra.pdf+Khutbah+of+Fatima+on+issue+of+fadak&hl=en&gl=pk

even if the Ahlul Sunnah do not believe its authenticity, the Quranic Ayat quoted by the Daughter of the Prophet pbuh.gif are valid and cannot be ignored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quran ( 27 : 15-16 )

"And We verily gave knowledge unto David and Solomon, and they said: Praise be to Allah, Who hath preferred us

above many of His believing slaves!

And Solomon was David's heir. And he said: O mankind! Lo! we have been taught the language of birds, and have

been given (abundance) of all things. This surely is evident favour."

It was knowledge that Prophet Solomon inherited, not the material possessions.

Indeed, it is well-known that Prophet Zakariyyah (Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã) was a poor man who earned his living as a carpenter. What wealth could he possibly have had that would prompt him to request an heir from Allah? In fact, it was a general rule with the Prophets that they did not hoard anything beyond their need, and they spent any surplus in charity.

Sunni Hadith regarding Prophets and Inheritence

-----------------------------------------------------------------

“We do not leave inheritance. What we leave behind is charity.” (Sahih Muslim, Kitab al-Jihad was-Siyar, no. 49)

Shia Hadith

----------------

“The Prophets did not leave dinars and dirhams as inheritance, but they left knowledge.” (al-Kafi, vol. 1 p. 42)

“The prophets did not leave any Dirham or Dinar (wealth) as their inheritance but they did leave knowledge as their inheritance.”

(source: Al-Shia.com )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quran ( 27 : 15-16 )

"And We verily gave knowledge unto David and Solomon, and they said: Praise be to Allah, Who hath preferred us

above many of His believing slaves!

And Solomon was David's heir. And he said: O mankind! Lo! we have been taught the language of birds, and have

been given (abundance) of all things. This surely is evident favour."

It was knowledge that Prophet Solomon inherited, not the material possessions.

Indeed, it is well-known that Prophet Zakariyyah (عليه السلام) was a poor man who earned his living as a carpenter. What wealth could he possibly have had that would prompt him to request an heir from Allah? In fact, it was a general rule with the Prophets that they did not hoard anything beyond their need, and they spent any surplus in charity.

Sunni Hadith regarding Prophets and Inheritence

-----------------------------------------------------------------

"We do not leave inheritance. What we leave behind is charity." (Sahih Muslim, Kitab al-Jihad was-Siyar, no. 49)

Shia Hadith

----------------

"The Prophets did not leave dinars and dirhams as inheritance, but they left knowledge." (al-Kafi, vol. 1 p. 42)

"The prophets did not leave any Dirham or Dinar (wealth) as their inheritance but they did leave knowledge as their inheritance."

(source: Al-Shia.com )

As you correctly pointed out, Allah says He gave knowledge to BOTH Sulaiman as.gif and Dawood as.gif and that they BOTH thanked Him.

If it was purely inherited then what was Sulaiman's as.gif intellectual capacity before his father passed away? Zero?

Also did Sulaiman as.gif NOT inherit his father's Kingdom?

As for your statement about Hazrat Zakariya as.gif , poor men ask Allah for heirs every day.

Those hadith you've quoted indicate that the Prophets were not men who hoarded wealth. However, to deprive their offspring of the little they owned is "zulm".

I see you're leaning on the Hazrat Fatima as.gif being wrong side. Good luck on Qiyamat.

Edited by SayYaAli

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam Alaikum...

Please don't spoil this beautiful thread with regards to debate of Fadak..

Please refer to this article for all answers that are cut and pasted by Ahlelbayt(dot)com: http://answering-ansar.org/answers/fadak/en/index.php

I hope brothers would continue their participation in this thread..:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

(bismillah)

Ðóáößó ÇáøóÐöí íõÈóÔøöÑõ Çááøóåõ ÚöÈóÇÏóåõ ÇáøóÐöíäó ÂãóäõæÇ æóÚóãöáõæÇ ÇáÕøóÇáöÍóÇÊö Þõá áøóÇ ÃóÓúÃóáõßõãú Úóáóíúåö ÃóÌúÑðÇ ÅöáøóÇ ÇáúãóæóÏøóÉó Ýöí ÇáúÞõÑúÈóì æóãóä íóÞúÊóÑöÝú ÍóÓóäóÉð äøóÒöÏú áóåõ ÝöíåóÇ ÍõÓúäðÇ Åöäøó Çááøóåó ÛóÝõæÑñ ÔóßõæÑñ {23}

That is of which Allah gives the good news to His servants, (to) those who believe and do good deeds. Say: I do not ask of you any reward for it but love for my near relatives; and whoever earns good, We give him more of good therein; surely Allah is Forgiving, Grateful. [surah ash-Shura Ayat 23]

Ibn Hajr in Sawa-iq, chapter 11, page 160 and Ibn Sad in Tabaqat in the account of Umar bin Khattab have accepted that the near relatives of the Holy Prophet are the Ahl ul Bayt. The same opinion is found in Tafsir Kashaf, Sahih Muslim, Musnad ibn Hanbal and Tafsir Durr al Manthur.

This verse commands the Muslims to love the Ahl ul Bayt if they want to repay the Holy Prophet for his toils of prophethood, so that they should follow the Ahl ul Bayt in word and deed, because they have been thoroughly purified by Allah Himself, because they are the truthful, because they are the custodians of the word of Allah, because they alone know the true interpretation of the guidance sent for all mankind.

A large number of narratives reported by the most reliable authorities of the Islamic history prove that this verse was revealed in Madina after the births of Imam Hasan and Imam Husayn. Even if they were not born and this verse was revealed in Makka, no Muslim can deny that Allah has the absolute authority to refer to future events and persons not yet born, as He refers to the details of the day of judgement or relates the outcome of the battles the Holy Prophet fought in defence.

Those who try to sidetrack the command of Allah to love the near relatives of the Holy Prophet on flimsy ground must remember that even the least ill-will against the thoroughly purified Ahl ul Bayt has been forbidden. From the beginning to the end of their lives, every member of the Ahl ul Bayt had presented an ideal Islamic pattern of life, not equalled by any among the followers of the Holy Prophet, therefore love and devotion to them was ordained to provide highest form of guidance to mankind. See commentary of Saba: 47. Unless one loves and follows the Ahl ul Bayt one cannot sincerely avail of the guidance offered by the Holy Prophet. Love implies sincere attachment which must manifest in every thought and deed.

Imam Jafar bin Muhammad as Sadiq said:

"He who obeys Allah's commands is our devotee; and he who disobeys His commands is our enemy."

After the departure of the Holy Prophet from this world, his followers:

(i) deprived her daughter, Bibi Fatimah, of her rights.

(ii) her house was set on fire; a door fell upon her, killing her unborn child, Muhsin, in the womb, due to which, at last, she died,

(iii) Ali was dragged in the streets of Madina, bound with ropes;

(iv) Hasan was poisoned;

(v) Husayn, along with his relatives and friends, was killed in Karbala;

(vi) the remaining Imams of the Ahl ul Bayt were killed, one by one;

(vii) and their devotees, who loved and followed them as commanded by Allah, were persecuted and killed.

It is reported that the people of Madina, known as ansar, who gave asylum to the people of Makka, known as muhajirin, began to take pride in the role they played in the promotion of the mission of the Holy Prophet. Ibn Abbas and some other immigrants felt unhappy and complained to the Holy Prophet. The Holy Prophet, then, reminded the ansar that it was because of him they were saved from the accursed dirt of polytheism, and it was he who showed them the right path of salvation. The ansar realised their folly, avowed to put whatever they had at his disposal and follow every command given to them. Then this verse was revealed.

Aqa Mahdi Puya says:

Qurba means nearness. Fil qurba means for the sake of nearness.

The unanimous traditions of utmost authenticity assert that nearness to the Holy Prophet means love of his those relatives who are nearest to him in excellence and accomplishment. So, when he was asked to point out his relatives, he pronounced the names of Ali, Fatimah, Hasan and Husayn and their children. There is not a single tradition of the Holy Prophet that qurba refers to the relatives of the Quraysh, or the relationship of the Holy Prophet with the Quraysh or the relatives of the believers, as concocted by the anti Ahl ul Bayt commentators. The structure of the verse proves that the Holy Prophet has been commanded to demand recompense, as an exception, not from every one, but from those believers mentioned in Furqan: 57-those who take the way to their Lord. The recompense is in the interest of the believers themselves, not in any way profitable to the Holy Prophet in his personal life.

Instead of arham (the blood relatives), qurba (neamess) has been used to show that not only relationship but also nearness in character and accomplishment is taken into consideration as the important quality. So, on the basis of this verse, love of the Ahl ul Bayt has become an obligatory function of the faith, a fundamental condition without which no amount of devotion to Allah and good deeds will be of any use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

(bismillah)

ÝóÅöãøóÇ äóÐúåóÈóäøó Èößó ÝóÅöäøóÇ ãöäúåõã ãøõäÊóÞöãõæäó {41}

But if We should take you away, still We shall inflict retribution on them; (Surah Az-Zukhruf Ayat No. 41)

Ibn Marduwayh reports from Jabir bin Abdullah Ansari that the Holy Prophet said that this verse referred to Imam Ali (as) who would, after the Holy Prophet, fight and punish the hypocrites because they would break the covenant made with Allah and the Holy Prophet. This is also mentioned in Tafsir Durr al Manthur and Tafsir Nayshapuri.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...