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  
MohammadMufti

Imaams Forbid Nikah Al Mutah

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Compendium of Faiimid Law by Asaf AA Fyzee, Indian Institute of Advanced Study (1969); p95:

'Ali said: "There can be no marriage without a wali and two witnesses; or for one dirham or two dirhams, or for one day or two days. This is debauchery (sichfah) and such conditions are not valid in nikah"

Qadi Noman quoted a statement of Imam Jafar Sadik transmitted by Abbad b. Yaqub ar-Rawajini (d. 250/864) in which the Imam condemned it as a form of prostitution, vide Madelung's "The Sources of Ismaili Law" (p. 33).

http://ismaili.net/heritage/node/10643

Khalas - as confirmed from the real Shi'as, mota is forbidden!11!!!1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh mashallah. I wasn't aware of this... it was in their sources without them knowing, huh?

Nothing is forbidden when there's a clear contradiction from various sources.

Dude, are you saying that your sources contradict each other? If that is the case, then how do you know if it is halal or haram? It appears as though desires play a main role in your determination if this is indeed the case. May Allah guide us all.

Jazak Allah khair brother Mohammad. =)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not know why people are shy of accepting a rule allowed by Allah swt in Holy Quraan?

Every historian has agreed that mutta was allowed throughout the era of Holy Prophet sAaww and when sister of Hazrat Umer rz gave birth to a child with mutta, he disallowed it.

Was Hazrat Umar allowed to abandon a proceedure allowed by Allah swt in Quraan?

Thing is that people use a pros for sex and say we did mutta. This is haram. Mutta with a professional woman is haram. After mutta, even if it is for one intercorse, the female has to pass to stay alone for the full period of IDDAT (12 weeks).

Does a pros observe this?

So when she goes to an other man before the completion of IDDAT it is zina and that is haram.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't jump too fast,

this is Ismailist theology, you are on a Jafarite twelver website. Here is some paste work, since both of the posters in favor of banning Muta are not really in the mood to google anything before posting something interesting.

The Imam Ja'far was asked: "If the wife becomes pregnant as a result of Mut'a, to whom does the child belong?" He replied: "To the father," i.e., the child is legitimate. (Wasa'il al-Shia, v14, p488)

The entire Misyar belief is an evolutionary concept from the legitimate Mutá marriage in history...

It is also narrated that:

al-Suddy (ra) said: "The verse 'So for those of whom you have had pleasure with them by the contract to an appointed time' is about Mut'a, that is, a man marries a woman with a provision (i.e., dowry) for a fixed period of time and makes two witnesses, and (if virgin,) he asks the permission of her guardian, and when the time period is expired, they should separate and they will not inherit each other."

Sunni reference: Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, under the commentary of verse 4:24, v8, p176, Tradition #9033

Moreover:

Abu Karib said Yahya said: "I saw a book with Nasir in which it was: 'So for whatever you have had of pleasure with them by the contract to an appointed time.'"

Sunni references:

Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, under the verse 4:24, pp 176-177, Tradition #9035

Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Tha'labi, under commentary of verse 4:24 of Quran narrating similar tradition from Ibn Abi Thabit.

Another companion, Ubay Ibn Ka'ab (who based on authentic Sunni sources the Prophet ordered the companions to trust him in the matter of Quran as one of the three trustee persons in this regard. See Sahih al-Bukhari, English, vol. 6, Tradition #521) also mentioned that additional phrase:

Qatadah (ra) said: "The way that Ubay Ibn Ka'ab recited the verse was: 'So for those of whom you enjoyed by the contract to an appointed time.'"

Sunni reference: Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, under the commentary of verse 4:24, v8, p178, Tradition #9041

Any hadith contradicting Quran is not accepted

Edited by Rubaiyat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To the ignorant nawaseb who posted this, that is from an ismaili website.

You have failed to establish that brother Mohammad is a Nasibi. Does quoting an anti-Mut'ah hadith make one a Nasibi? That is the first issue. The second one is that I think that you are underestimating the brother, since I think it wouldn't make sense for someone to quote a site called ISMAILI.NET without knowing that they are Ismailis. =/

There are Shia hadiths where the imams condemned mutah. They are taken as being said under taqiyyah.

Jazak Allah khair for your sincerity brother. I do agree that they do have narrations that condemn Mut'ah and others that show that it is permissible. The issue here is finding out which view is the correct one.

From Bab Ikhtilaf Al-Hadith in Al-Kafi, we find this narration:

ÃÍãÏ Èä ÅÏÑíÓ¡ Úä ãÍãÏ Èä ÚÈÏÇáÌÈÇÑ¡ Úä ÇáÍÓä Èä Úáí¡ Úä ËÚáÈÉ Èä ãíãæä¡ Úä ÒÑÇÑÉ Èä ÃÚíä¡ Úä ÃÈí ÌÚÝÑ Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ÞÇá: ÓÃáÊå Úä ãÓÃáÉ ÝÃÌÇÈäí Ëã ÌÇÁ å ÑÌá ÝÓÃáå ÚäåÇ ÝÃÌÇÈå ÈÎáÇÝ ãÇ ÃÌÇÈäí¡ Ëã ÌÇÁ ÑÌá ÂÎÑ ÝÃÌÇÈå ÈÎáÇÝ ãÇ ÃÌÇÈäí æÃÌÇÈ ÕÇÍÈí¡ ÝáãÇ ÎÑÌ ÇáÑÌáÇä ÞáÊ: íÇ ÇÈä ÑÓæá Çááå ÑÌáÇä ãä Çåá ÇáÚÑÇÞ ãä ÔíÚÊßã ÞÏãÇ íÓÃáÇä ÝÃÌÈÊ ßá æÇÍÏ ãäåãÇ ÈÛíÑ ãÇ ÃÌÈÊ Èå ÕÇÍÈå¿ ÝÞÇá: íÇ ÒÑÇÑÉ ! Åä åÐÇ ÎíÑ áäÇ æÃÈÞì áäÇ æáßä æáæ ÇÌÊãÚÊã Úáì ÃãÑ æÇÍÏ áÕÏÞßã ÇáäÇÓ ÚáíäÇ æáßÇä ÃÞá áÈÞÇÆäÇ æÈÞÇÆßã.

So basically, Abi Ja'afar was caught giving three different answers to people from his sect and says that this is for the benefit of his sect and they wouldn't survive if they didn't do things in this manner.

Al-Majlisi says: "Muwathaq kal Saheeh!"

So once again, we face the problem of figuring out which fatwa is the correct one. As I have said earlier in post #3, I believe that desires play a major role in choosing what is halal and what is haram, which is why mut'ah is so... halal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh man, this is sad... Yeah this is from an Isma`ili hadith found in Da`aim al-Islam which I have a copy of (Qadhi Nu`man worked for the Fatimids). Furthermore, what I recall reading a long ago regarding this one is that it's original source is apparently a Zaydi hadith. So much for being from "our" own books...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aslam Alikum,

You know what bro forget everything. There are tons of your own sources which confuse you. Sunnis are always like brother brother brother. Follow hadithes until any other brother tells them otherwise and they do that. Get two of the people in the room they will pull out completely different theories. Now time to use your the brain. If Mutah was allowed zina wouldn't happen hence it’s allowed because the Prophet (saw) knew the future so why would he ban it? Remember he got our Namaz down from 50 times a day to 5 (Yes he (saw) is the best). They say Mutah is disallowed until the day of judgement LOL! So they say Mutah is there in heaven, jokers, what have they been watching. Stop trying to cuss shias man using ismaili stuff. And what’s the prossie stuff you on about? You out of your mind? Why do people marry if you not physical pleasure and physical attraction? You think that’s prossie well how about you were a woman and your hubby had 3 other ladies in the house, I know what you are going to say, if it's allowed in Islam I would accept it, yeah right easier said than done and someone like you will find any source to stop the husband marrying again like you pulled out this time. It seems you speak urdu or hindi hence Khalas well sunshine, it’s Mutah, mota means fat hence are you saying people who carry extra pounds are forbidden? I am tired of people hitting on Mutah all the time. Please brav take a break, have a kitkat man stop bashing shia rules. You think people are going to find something out of the blue moon saying shias are wrong. And its Sadiq not Sadik so tell the website to fix the error and proof read work before hand to avoid embarrassment (if you e-mail them then also add “should’ve gone to spec savers). There is no rule of Allah which places hardship on man. The Prophet (saw) made Islam the most easiest to follow religion. Even Namaz can be read qaza and you are telling me this would not be allowed. Prossie is when you go pay some money and that’s it. In Mutah there is a wait period and everything is just like Nikah excluding witnesses. Women who are divorced or abused or do not trust men for psychological reason would not do Nikah rather Mutah is a better option for them. Now a days after enough Indian movies where parents except son in law to be mega rich, Mutah can be used as form of an engagement (limits placed). I mean come on man think outside the box. Think of a bigger picture. Maximum people live is about 100 years or so. If you think about your childhood when you are 30 it seems just like yesterday. This is how short life is. Like a flash it comes and goes. We are from a creator who made time and can manipulate all at will. These so called "miracle" are physical interference with the system which God made. They happen because Allah allows so. Come on man use common sense. And Mufti I am sorry about saying you were wrong in the translation forum of Namaz. It was a technical error within the post therefore not my fault. I have already said sorry within the topic. You are a good guy. Have some chicken fillet burger with chips and medina cola, chill and think logically and spiritually. Remember anyone who makes up his mind before hitting a topic will change the outcomes one way or the other.

Take care,

Peace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aslam Alikum,

In first class they teach us how to spell so if man cannot copy and paste without making stuff and proof reading he aint no scholar. This is basic professional stuff. One little thing can change the whole meaning of word. Glad he's not writing in Arabic. Don't you agree bro, affect and effect have whole different meaning. Bakir and Bakar are different too. Argument with me is like hitting your head against a lead structure. Pointless and flawless.

Take care,

Peace

Edited by madscientist86

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You have failed to establish that brother Mohammad is a Nasibi. Does quoting an anti-Mut'ah hadith make one a Nasibi? That is the first issue. The second one is that I think that you are underestimating the brother, since I think it wouldn't make sense for someone to quote a site called ISMAILI.NET without knowing that they are Ismailis. =/

Jazak Allah khair for your sincerity brother. I do agree that they do have narrations that condemn Mut'ah and others that show that it is permissible. The issue here is finding out which view is the correct one.

From Bab Ikhtilaf Al-Hadith in Al-Kafi, we find this narration:

ÃÍãÏ Èä ÅÏÑíÓ¡ Úä ãÍãÏ Èä ÚÈÏÇáÌÈÇÑ¡ Úä ÇáÍÓä Èä Úáí¡ Úä ËÚáÈÉ Èä ãíãæä¡ Úä ÒÑÇÑÉ Èä ÃÚíä¡ Úä ÃÈí ÌÚÝÑ Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ÞÇá: ÓÃáÊå Úä ãÓÃáÉ ÝÃÌÇÈäí Ëã ÌÇÁ å ÑÌá ÝÓÃáå ÚäåÇ ÝÃÌÇÈå ÈÎáÇÝ ãÇ ÃÌÇÈäí¡ Ëã ÌÇÁ ÑÌá ÂÎÑ ÝÃÌÇÈå ÈÎáÇÝ ãÇ ÃÌÇÈäí æÃÌÇÈ ÕÇÍÈí¡ ÝáãÇ ÎÑÌ ÇáÑÌáÇä ÞáÊ: íÇ ÇÈä ÑÓæá Çááå ÑÌáÇä ãä Çåá ÇáÚÑÇÞ ãä ÔíÚÊßã ÞÏãÇ íÓÃáÇä ÝÃÌÈÊ ßá æÇÍÏ ãäåãÇ ÈÛíÑ ãÇ ÃÌÈÊ Èå ÕÇÍÈå¿ ÝÞÇá: íÇ ÒÑÇÑÉ ! Åä åÐÇ ÎíÑ áäÇ æÃÈÞì áäÇ æáßä æáæ ÇÌÊãÚÊã Úáì ÃãÑ æÇÍÏ áÕÏÞßã ÇáäÇÓ ÚáíäÇ æáßÇä ÃÞá áÈÞÇÆäÇ æÈÞÇÆßã.

So basically, Abi Ja'afar was caught giving three different answers to people from his sect and says that this is for the benefit of his sect and they wouldn't survive if they didn't do things in this manner.

Al-Majlisi says: "Muwathaq kal Saheeh!"

So once again, we face the problem of figuring out which fatwa is the correct one. As I have said earlier in post #3, I believe that desires play a major role in choosing what is halal and what is haram, which is why mut'ah is so... halal.

Yeah, there also seems to be ikhtilaf on some of the other workings of the practice...one of which being the degree to which (if at all) it's allowed with a woman from Ahlul Kitab and of course the virginity issue. Disallowing temporary marriage with Christian women would conflict with the Shia interpretation of 5:5. Moreover some tafsirs say 4:24 used to be "recited" "Famah astumtahtum bahy minhunna ala aj musammah," either (according to some people) meaning that the allowance of mutah was much more explicit in the original Qur'an sent down than it is now (which I don't think you can prove even endorses it), or that this "recitation" is merely a tafsir of it. Of course our desires say that mutah has benefits, but if you use 3aql then you can impartially weigh how permanent marriages are much safer and more beneficial than temporary ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moreover some tafsirs say 4:24 used to be "recited" "Famah astumtahtum bahy minhunna ala aj musammah,"

Interesting. Mashallah, you've done your homework akhi. So, is this an issue of naskh al tilawah? I hear that many twelvers have an issue of this. I'm not sure about the Ismaili point of view though. I don't think they have issues with something so clear. I could be mistaken though. Perhaps, brother Mohammad can shed some light on this matter.

Of course our desires say that mutah has benefits, but if you use 3aql then you can impartially weigh how permanent marriages are much safer and more beneficial than temporary ones.

Yes, I agree. However, it seems that many twelvers disagree with this unfortunately. May Allah guide us all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mutah is never to replace nikkah mybrothers, and is only used as last resort when you are unable to have nikkah....

yes mutah is allowed with a christian women so long as she agrees and abides by the laws concerning mutah in accordance with shariah

and mutah is not allowed with a virgin without consent of her father (and even then discouraged) and I am almost positive there are not many father who would agree in the first place!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it depends on what you mean by "our". There are tons of Shi'ites out there that accept this narration.

"Our" as in Imamis. That you'd have to pull something from the Ismailis (who may be pulling it from Zaydis) is telling. Tell me, if Imam Sadiq (as) had really taught this, why then would those close followers of his have argued for its being halal? Why would the Imams after him have taught it to be halal? Why would the Imamis, followers of "Ja`fari" fiqh have gone against something he taught as such? And how would you explain all those other hadiths narrated from him and others that clearly state it to be halal?

Anyhow, here's the narration under discussion:

æÚä ÌÚÝÑ Èä ãÍãÏ (Ú) Ãä ÑÌáÇ ÓÃáå Úä äßÇÍ ÇáãÊÚÉ¡ ÞÇá: ÕÝå áí¡ ÞÇá: íáÞì ÇáÑÌá ÇáãÑÃÉ¡ ÝíÞæá: ÃÊÒæÌß ÈåÐÇ ÇáÏÑåã æÇáÏÑåãíä¡ æÞÚÉ Ãæ íæãÇ Ãæ íæãíä. ÞÇá: åÐÇ ÒäÇ¡ æãÇ íÝÚá åÐÇ ÅáÇ ÝÇÌÑ

So a few things. Again, there's the source. Second, like most (if not all) of Da'aim, it's mursal (I didn't cut out the isnad, there is no isnad listed). And third, the matn itself. The way it reads it sounds like it's saying Imam Sadiq (as), the most learned `alim of his time, one whom even our opponents acknowledge as being learned, didn't know what mut`a was until it was described to him by the questioner. If that's supposed to be the case (as opposed to the Imam asking a question so that the question itself be a clear one), come on, you can't expect us to take this seriously...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting comment from the Ismaili.net page is this bit:

The Ismailis, Zaidis or the Sunnis reject muta. Modern controversies over the permissibility of muta, however, appears to be more or less theoretical, it is not practised by the Arab Shi'ites of Lebanon and Iraq and even in Iran its social significance appears to be very slight.
Do you think this is accurate? I mean, people are always talking about mut'ah, but is it actually in any kind of use?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So a few things. Again, there's the source. Second, like most (if not all) of Da'aim, it's mursal (I didn't cut out the isnad, there is no isnad listed).

Is this a fact, or did you thoroughly research all sources that bring up this hadith? I'm sure that the correct math-hab wouldn't come up with an assumption like this to justify their whole religion. I think they are owed some credit. Assuming that there is no isnad sounds unjust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aslam Alikum,

I don't know why people are against shias. I mean for others you guys pull out few thousand books which no one can get hold of which is narrated by some next people on some next level of understanding and point of view. We just follow one simple thing. Prophet said follow Quran and Ahul Bayt. Sunnah was living with Ahul Bayt yes Prophet lived at home. Letting Ahul Bayt sleep in his place. Letting Ahul Bayt win khabir (come on you think it was Hazrat Ali (as)? It was the will of Allah that he wins something as such). You people are jokers. I want to be friends with you all specially the ones in arabs because you guys are mega rich and well I am your best friend so leave everything to me when you go please thank you :blush:

Last time I tried strawberry milkshake at XFC is was thick but now I realise some people's brains are even thicker. Forget everything and think about basics. 2+2 is 4 correct? In the past Prophets (as) have past away leaving everything to their family. Why not this one? Some thing so clear? Orange juice appears to be clearer to some people than to understand that if a man dies and his friends are not there to burry him then they don't really care about the man. Now Aisha well listen to this. In relation Hazrat Fatimah Zehra she can be said to be step daughter of Aisha therefore step granddaughter of Abu bakr. Amazing how they weren't invited at her burrial either. So much love eh? Some thing so clear :o I know you guys are going to pull out some next books to cuss me saying these are your own books and you know what I couldn't care less about anything, all I know is Prophet said Quran and Ahul Bayt. Now Sunnah ok. Not many camel down M25 don't know why anyhow who can deny Prophet (saw) use to say Aslam Alikum at Hazrat Fatimah Zehra (as)'s door. Was that sunnah followed by the 3 caliphs :o LOL!!! Man I swear this is fun. Ok listen to this one right, what kind of a person would let his friends be accepted before his family? You answer is your faith. What kind of a person would say forget my cousin who I bought up, mentored, taught how to engage in battle, planned wars would say listen man I got this old man who hasn't got much experience in battle, hasn't really been mentored by me directly but hey lets make him the leader of the whole Ummah. Dude they don't even do this stuff is star wars what are you on about. It's always the twelvers they cuss don't they. Funny how Allah allowed the Propet (saw) to marry multiple times after passing of Hazrat Khatija (as) rather than in her life time even though old men and women were first to convert (therefore ladies needed men who were Muslim). Year of mourning. One year he (saw) was upset over passing of his uncle (as) and his wife (as). Yeh the wife sunnis never mention. She (as) bore him (saw) one child (as) who is the mother of all syeds today and funny how sunnis call someone who never held kids mother of momins. I just cannot wait to see your faces up there even if I have to wait few billion years. Time is irrelevant. Islam is a peaceful religion and is very simple. Things can get as complicated as you make them. That is why we have Imams (as) who understand that. Funny I read somewhere Prophet (saw) said there will be twelve successors after him and funny how we are called twelvers and people always try to prove we are wrong. Against Chicken fillet burger would help.

Love and respect for broken hearts

Aslam Alikum and for the first time on this forum YA ALI!!

Case dismissed ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is this a fact, or did you thoroughly research all sources that bring up this hadith? I'm sure that the correct math-hab wouldn't come up with an assumption like this to justify their whole religion. I think they are owed some credit. Assuming that there is no isnad sounds unjust.

I told you, I have the book myself (open right next to me on the page the hadith occurs on). Now, the khabar may very well have had an isnad at some point, but as it is now in Da`aim, in keeping with the rest of the work, it doesn't. Qadhi Nu`man did write a more extensive work of hadiths (with isnads) called Kitab al-Idah, however most of it (except for a fragment of the section on salat) has been lost. The sources he pulled his hadiths from were Imami (i.e. Twelver) and Zaydi books (and even possibly other sources, such as Fathi), and so as such Isma`ili fiqh is somewhat of a hybrid between them. Nowadays though, in terms of Ismaili fiqh material and hadith, Da`aim al-Islam appears to be the only work of theirs that has survived. Fiqh was and has been a very weak area of their madhhab (with the concentration having been on more batini and tawili type studies), so it isn't that surprising to see that the only substantial book of hadiths/fiqh that has come to us from them is one in which the majority of its contents are mursal.

As to that hadith, Madelung says it can be found in the Amali Ahmad b.`Isa al-Muradi with the isnad of `Abbad b. Ya`qun from Ibn al-Isbihani. (I don't know who these people are). He says Nu`man almost certainly took the narration (and the other one mentioned above it) from the kutub of Ibn Sallam, whom he says is unknown (though his work is clearly Zaydi). So we have a solitary hadith, coming from an unknown source in a Zaydi book, the Zaydis who neither believe in mut`a _nor_ the Imamate of Imam Sadiq (as)!

Now, compare this single hadith (with the issues I've raised) to the very many hadiths we have that affirm it's legitimacy:

http://www.rafed.net/books/hadith/wasael-21/v01.html

Read those and it's clear (as is the ijma` of the ta'ifa) that nikah mut`a is still halal in the teachings of the Imams (as). I say "still" because even Sunnis have being halal at one (or several) point(s) during the lifetime of the Prophet (pbuh) (you differ in that you think it was eventually made haram forever.) How then would one say this is zina?

In terms of contrary hadiths, then even there our scholars were of such honesty and integrity that they did include the one that's listed at the end of that chapter (narration #32). As avjar7 has mentioned, this has been understood as a taqiyya hadith, however, I don't think in this case that's necessary. Reason being is that modern scholarship has apparently (as I've suspected) established that the musnad attributed to Zayd b. `Ali, narrated from `Amr b. Khalid al-Wasiti, (which is were this narration seems to come from) could not have been the former's work.

Edited by macisaac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh my God. Wow, you've caught us. None of us, including all our scholars, have read our books for 1200 years. I guess we should have done so. Good thing you were able to spend 5 minutes for us. I feel so destroyed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh my God. Wow, you've caught us. None of us, including all our scholars, have read our books for 1200 years. I guess we should have done so. Good thing you were able to spend 5 minutes for us. I feel so destroyed.
"Our" as in Imamis. That you'd have to pull something from the Ismailis (who may be pulling it from Zaydis) is telling.
Last time I checked, I did not have any 'my' books. I'm not that kind of a muslim.
To the ignorant nawaseb who posted this, that is from an ismaili website.
Oh man, this is sad... Yeah this is from an Isma`ili hadith found in Da`aim al-Islam which I have a copy of (Qadhi Nu`man worked for the Fatimids). Furthermore, what I recall reading a long ago regarding this one is that it's original source is apparently a Zaydi hadith. So much for being from "our" own books...

I think everybody here is confused...I'm quoting from the books of the real Shi'as, obviously you 12ers are just Rawafid, this is about the REAL SHIAS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

I think you are the only confused one here. You very well know this is a 12-er Shia website, so why are you then quoting from the real Shias and trying to prove something to us - the 12-er Shias from the hadeeth of the real Shias. How are their ahadeeth a source for us, the 12-er Shias. . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^

Kadhim, you don't seem to be aware that brother Mohammad was talking about the real Shias. Scroll up to the first post.

Its hilarious when Salafis come in and tell others about their "real" self. I love it!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Call me conspiracy theorist but, seems to me he's doing the same thing as other members when they post hadiths and telle everyone; this is what the real sunni believes! Using it against us.

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...