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

Consequences of tabarra

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Although history is witness (in abundance) to treachery of the usurpers, there are people [and ironically now in shi'i] who hesitate to join Allah (swt) in cursing them.

And when asked “What if the sheikhain were actually believers, what if history only makes allegations against them?” those who lack knowledge become humble to such questions and refrain from cursing the opressors by name.

For the sake of argument, lets take for granted that sheikhain were believers (although aql & naql say othewise) and logically analyze what the consequences of cursing them would be.

Allah (swt) says in Al-Ahzab:58-

Waallatheena yuthoona almumineena waalmuminati bighayri ma iktasaboo faqadi ihtamaloo buhtanan waithman mubeena

And those who speak evil things of the believing men and the believing women without their having earned (it), they are guilty indeed of a false accusation and a manifest sin.

Now we know that those who curse believers have committed a sin and for good & bad deeds Allah (swt) says in Zalzalaha:7 & 8:

Faman yaAAmal mithqala tharratin khayran yarah

Waman yaAAmal mithqala tharratin sharran yarah

99:7 And so, he who shall have done an atom's weight of good, shall behold it;

99:8 and he who shall have done an atom's weight of evil, shall behold it.

This tells us that punishment for a sin is limited to the sinful deed. And that there is a measure for it.

Now for the sake of argument you take for granted (although you may not believe) that sheikhain & their ilk were opressors, that Abubakr did usurp fadak from the daughter of Rasoolallah (sawas). That Umer did burn the house of the prophet's daughter. That Ayesha did fight against Imam Ali (as). How ironic and painful to the prophet would be your claim that these people have done great things (such as stealing fadak, murdering siyyida fatima [sa] and rising against Imam Ali (as) ) for Islam?

Allah (swt) says in Al-Ahzab:57-

Inna allatheena yuthoona Allaha warasoolahu laAAanahumu Allahu fee alddunya waalakhirati waaAAadda lahum AAathaban muheena

Those who annoy Allah and His Messenger - Allah has cursed them in this World and in the Hereafter, and has prepared for them a humiliating Punishment.

Now, let Quran be the judge between us:

In case we are wrong in cursing them, our punishment is limited to our sin but in case you are wrong in heeding to them with respect, is your punishment not unlimited in this world and in the hereafter?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

There is nothing but rewards for cursing those evildoers. Anyone who fights or rejects Imam Ali(as) is a kaafir.

You should feel sorry for Ayatollah Mehdi Puya Yazdi as well, he writes in his commentry on verse 107 of Al-Anbiyaa; æóãóÇ ÃóÑúÓóáúäóÇßó ÅöáøóÇ ÑóÍúãóÉð áøöáúÚóÇáóãöíäó {107} [shakir 21:107] And We ha

  • Advanced Member
There is nothing but rewards for cursing those evildoers. Anyone who fights or rejects Imam Ali(as) is a kaafir.

Come'on Bro.

Don't be so harsh !

Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Aisha all were believers !

Don't mix-up political quarrels and religious quarrels !

Imam Ali (as) never fought against Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman for Furuh ad Din nor for Usul ad Din, and same with Aisha.

:Hijabi:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Ali (as) has only participated in Jihads (holy war). Battle of Jamal and Siffeen were jihads, go read history. They made sure and determined that it is a jihad before they fought it.

Imam Ali (as) never fought against Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman for Furuh ad Din nor for Usul ad Din, and same with Aisha.

Yes because those said enemies of Ali (as) had nothing to do with Din.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

What's up with the sympathy for Abu Bakr (edit) Umar (edit) and Usman (edit)??

Each of them were against Imam Ali (as) one way or another. Wether it was something big or small, going against a masoom is going against a masoom. So why should we not curse them?

There is no consequence of tabarra, if there was, it would not be part of our faith.

[MOD NOTE: CURSING OF THE THREE SUNNI CALIPHS IS DISALLOWED BY SHIACHAT SITE RULES. POST EDITED MEMBER WARNED]

Edited by Aliya
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
I don't think anyone can seriously question the belief in Islam of the first 3 khalifs and certain wives. They were believers no doubt but they didn't act in the right way all the time.

Be honest and tell us if it would actually matter to a person experiencing hell FOREVER, if they were a hypocrite in life or if they were an infidel or if they committed too many grave and unforgivable sins back on earth?

Action is based on belief. Vile actions of the extreme degree indicate faithlessness. While even seemingly good actions can be done by the faithless. But a faithful person can not even imagine to reach the extreme where the enemies of Ali (as) went.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
What's up with the sympathy for Abu Bakr (edit) Umar (edit) and Usman (edit)??

Each of them were against Imam Ali (as) one way or another. Wether it was something big or small, going against a masoom is going against a masoom. So why should we not curse them?

There is no consequence of tabarra, if there was, it would not be part of our faith.

Com'on !

You know very well that the Theory of Infallibility came very late after Imam Ali's (as) caliphat.

As for Tabarra it's only a 'political measure' disguise by it's pertaining to Furuh-ad-Din as a part of our 'SHIA FAITH', because the Alids were oppressed for a long time.

This is why I always say don't misuse your feelings for the Ahlul Bayt to curse everybody without knowledge, and just try to understand that after the death of the Holy Prophet a boundary appeared between Religion and Politics.

Imam Ali's (as) all actions, during his time, were political wars but nothing to compare with Prophet's wars, at his time. The whole situation during Imam Ali's caliphat, was different than of the time of the Prophet. He (pbuh) never fought against Muslims, Imam Ali (as) did it.

Edited by bakr_umar
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Com'on !

You know very well that the Theory of Infallibility came very late after Imam Ali's (as) caliphat.

As for Tabarra it's only a 'political measure' disguise by it's pertaining to Furuh-ad-Din as a part of our 'SHIA FAITH', because the Alids were oppressed for a long time.

This is why I always say don't misuse your feelings for the Ahlul Bayt to curse everybody without knowledge, and just try to understand that after the death of the Holy Prophet a boundary appeared between Religion and Politics.

Imam Ali's (as) all actions, during his time, were political wars but nothing to compare with Prophet's wars, at his time. The whole situation during Imam Ali's caliphat, was different than of the time of the Prophet. He (pbuh) never fought against Muslims, Imam Ali (as) did it.

Assalam o Alaikum

Dear brother,

Allah's Cursing is not based upon "Political Situation", but disobeying Allah in certain matters (i.e. ACTS) causes you to be cursed by Allah, His Prophets and Angels and All Momineen.

These Severe ACTS, either they are based on Politics, or Intentions or Believe... it all doesn't matter. Once these Severe Acts are committed, then it is obligatory to curse All those whom Allah (swt) is cursing.

- For example, if one raises his voice higher than Rasool (saw), then he all his good doings have been ended and he is cursed.

- If any one make Fatima (salam Allah alaiha) angry, he is cursed.

- Aisha played a huge role in killing of 'Uthman, and then told thousands of lies and propagated that Ali is supporter of killers of Uthman and through those lies she incited people to fight and kill other thousands of Muslims.

That is why Lying is such severe Act that Allah (swt) openly sends His curse upon such act.

- Talha and Zubair for the first time in history brough 50 False Testimonies in name of Allah at the place of Hawab (when dogs were barking over Aisha). This lie caused the death of thousands of innocent Muslims.

- Religion has been changed by Umar Ibn Khattab and he introduced tens of misguided innovation in Islam (like 3 Talaqs in one sitting), but no one dared to speak against him, while indeed he has been cursed by Allah (swt) for changing the religion.

For sure, we must not be blind in cursing people. And we must follow the path of Ahlulbait (as) in this regard how they cursed without even taking Direct Names if some others are hurt from Open Cursing. But this Indirect Cursing is not equal to "No cursing at all".

You see, once people stop cursing the wrong doings of People, then those People become so sacred and above Sharia that people start following them in their misguidance (like people are following Umar Ibn Khttaba for centuries now for his evil misguided innovations in Islam). We could never turn away from the Duty of Cursing the Wrong Doers. It is a Sunnah of Allah (himself).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Assalam o Alaikum

Dear brother,

Allah's Cursing is not based upon "Political Situation", but disobeying Allah in certain matters (i.e. ACTS) causes you to be cursed by Allah, His Prophets and Angels and All Momineen.

These Severe ACTS, either they are based on Politics, or Intentions or Believe... it all doesn't matter. Once these Severe Acts are committed, then it is obligatory to curse All those whom Allah (swt) is cursing.

- For example, if one raises his voice higher than Rasool (saw), then he all his good doings have been ended and he is cursed.

- If any one make Fatima (salam Allah alaiha) angry, he is cursed.

- Aisha played a huge role in killing of 'Uthman, and then told thousands of lies and propagated that Ali is supporter of killers of Uthman and through those lies she incited people to fight and kill other thousands of Muslims.

That is why Lying is such severe Act that Allah (swt) openly sends His curse upon such act.

- Talha and Zubair for the first time in history brough 50 False Testimonies in name of Allah at the place of Hawab (when dogs were barking over Aisha). This lie caused the death of thousands of innocent Muslims.

- Religion has been changed by Umar Ibn Khattab and he introduced tens of misguided innovation in Islam (like 3 Talaqs in one sitting), but no one dared to speak against him, while indeed he has been cursed by Allah (swt) for changing the religion.

For sure, we must not be blind in cursing people. And we must follow the path of Ahlulbait (as) in this regard how they cursed without even taking Direct Names if some others are hurt from Open Cursing. But this Indirect Cursing is not equal to "No cursing at all".

You see, once people stop cursing the wrong doings of People, then those People become so sacred and above Sharia that people start following them in their misguidance (like people are following Umar Ibn Khttaba for centuries now for his evil misguided innovations in Islam). We could never turn away from the Duty of Cursing the Wrong Doers. It is a Sunnah of Allah (himself).

Based on apocryphal texts and hadiths. It's 50/50. So it's preferable to keep quite and to not curse everybody.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Based on apocryphal texts and hadiths. It's 50/50. So it's preferable to keep quite and to not curse everybody.

That means all the books that have been written down through the ages are made up???? Some of the points that the bro/sis mentioned here are found in both the sunni and shia texts.

And nobody is cursing everybody. Yes. Only those who usurped the rights of the Ahlul Bait (as) troubled, tortured and ultimately martyred them. Now whoever comes in that category deserves to be cursed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Only KITAB Allah is 100% AUTHENTIC or SAHIH (quranic terminology).

All books of hadiths shia or sunni, there is no one HADITH SAHIH (in comparison of the quranic terminology of 'SAHIH')

Yeah all books are made up according to the believes of each party (sunna or shia). No doubt in it.

Only those who usurped the rights of the Ahlul Bait (as)

Abu Bakr never usurped the caliphat from Imam Ali (as). If so, then what refrain those companions who gave bay'a to Abu Bakr from not giving him the bay'a ? It's just a political matter not religious.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
AS are those who take him as a god

We don't take Imam Ali(as) as a god! Imam Ali(as) is the Rabb of the Momineen. The term "Rabb" or Lord can be used as a sign of great respect for an honored individual. In a secular western sense read about how they use the title "lord"; lord balfour, etc. This is the same as the case of our Holy Rabb Imam Ali(as). Imam Ali(as) is from the Noor of the Allah(SWT) just like the Holy Prophet(SAWW); and Imam Ali(as) is shown by even Sunni hadith to be the leaders of all believers (Momin); remember at one time it was only the Prophet(SAWW) and Imam Ali(as) created from Allah(SWT)'s Holy Noor before the creation of even the angels or Adam. Imam Ali(as) was always the leader and Rabb of the Momineen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Imam Ali(as) is the Rabb of the Momineen. The term "Rabb" or Lord can be used as a sign of great respect for an honored individual. ; remember at one time it was only the Prophet(SAWW) and Imam Ali(as) created from Allah(SWT)'s Holy Noor before the creation of even the angels or Adam. Imam Ali(as) was always the leader and Rabb of the Momineen.

No doubt about it! Jazakallah

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Islam is a religion that covers ALL aspects of life, INCLUDING POLITICS. It is a bidah of the usurpers and their supporters to try and separate it into "only a political office", when successorship of Prophet (pbuh) (khalifa) was never such a thing before, and there was nothing to make it such after Prophet (pbuh). Another thing that belies the 'only political' argument is the title of "Ameerul Momineen" for the caliphs you claim were only political. Why would they be 'commander of the faithful' if it were only a political office?.

Edited by Aliya
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members
Although history is witness (in abundance) to treachery of the usurpers, there are people [and ironically now in shi'i] who hesitate to join Allah (swt) in cursing them.

And when asked “What if the sheikhain were actually believers, what if history only makes allegations against them?” those who lack knowledge become humble to such questions and refrain from cursing the opressors by name.

For the sake of argument, lets take for granted that sheikhain were believers (although aql & naql say othewise) and logically analyze what the consequences of cursing them would be.

Allah (swt) says in Al-Ahzab:58-

Waallatheena yuthoona almumineena waalmuminati bighayri ma iktasaboo faqadi ihtamaloo buhtanan waithman mubeena

And those who speak evil things of the believing men and the believing women without their having earned (it), they are guilty indeed of a false accusation and a manifest sin.

Now we know that those who curse believers have committed a sin and for good & bad deeds Allah (swt) says in Zalzalaha:7 & 8:

Faman yaAAmal mithqala tharratin khayran yarah

Waman yaAAmal mithqala tharratin sharran yarah

99:7 And so, he who shall have done an atom's weight of good, shall behold it;

99:8 and he who shall have done an atom's weight of evil, shall behold it.

This tells us that punishment for a sin is limited to the sinful deed. And that there is a measure for it.

Now for the sake of argument you take for granted (although you may not believe) that sheikhain & their ilk were opressors, that Abubakr did usurp fadak from the daughter of Rasoolallah (sawas). That Umer did burn the house of the prophet's daughter. That Ayesha did fight against Imam Ali (as). How ironic and painful to the prophet would be your claim that these people have done great things (such as stealing fadak, murdering siyyida fatima [sa] and rising against Imam Ali (as) ) for Islam?

Allah (swt) says in Al-Ahzab:57-

Inna allatheena yuthoona Allaha warasoolahu laAAanahumu Allahu fee alddunya waalakhirati waaAAadda lahum AAathaban muheena

Those who annoy Allah and His Messenger - Allah has cursed them in this World and in the Hereafter, and has prepared for them a humiliating Punishment.

Now, let Quran be the judge between us:

In case we are wrong in cursing them, our punishment is limited to our sin but in case you are wrong in heeding to them with respect, is your punishment not unlimited in this world and in the hereafter?

It's a far cry to take the translation of "Those who annoy Allah and His Messenger.." to include people who do not curse other Muslims. When you weigh up all the primary sources I know I'd rather be guilty of NOT cursing someone who may have done wrong than cursing someone who did not do any wrong.

Come'on Bro.

Don't be so harsh !

Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Aisha all were believers !

Don't mix-up political quarrels and religious quarrels !

Imam Ali (as) never fought against Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman for Furuh ad Din nor for Usul ad Din, and same with Aisha.

:Hijabi:

And when one Muslim makes takfir of another it is true that one of them at least has committed kufr.

We don't take Imam Ali(as) as a god! Imam Ali(as) is the Rabb of the Momineen. The term "Rabb" or Lord can be used as a sign of great respect for an honored individual. In a secular western sense read about how they use the title "lord"; lord balfour, etc. This is the same as the case of our Holy Rabb Imam Ali(as). Imam Ali(as) is from the Noor of the Allah(SWT) just like the Holy Prophet(SAWW); and Imam Ali(as) is shown by even Sunni hadith to be the leaders of all believers (Momin); remember at one time it was only the Prophet(SAWW) and Imam Ali(as) created from Allah(SWT)'s Holy Noor before the creation of even the angels or Adam. Imam Ali(as) was always the leader and Rabb of the Momineen.

Yes but what does Rabb mean in traditional Arabic?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
It's a far cry to take the translation of "Those who annoy Allah and His Messenger.." to include people who do not curse other Muslims. When you weigh up all the primary sources I know I'd rather be guilty of NOT cursing someone who may have done wrong than cursing someone who did not do any wrong.

And when one Muslim makes takfir of another it is true that one of them at least has committed kufr.

Yes but what does Rabb mean in traditional Arabic?

If you want to be a believer you must acknowledge your Rabb Imam Ali(as) who was created from Allah(SWT)'s own Holy Noor! As for the fasiq [Edited] abu bakr, umar, aisha, etc. there is no doubt of their sinful natures and disbelief.

Edited by Aal-e-Imran
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members

You haven't answered my question Abdul-Rahman. What does Rabb mean in traditional arabic? It does NOT mean Lord in the sense referred to above. As for the balance of your post, I'll let the moderators deal with that. This illustrates exactly my point.

If I am wrong in my assessment of the Suhaba you slander above then what is it I'm guilty of? But if you are wrong in your assessment what is it that you are guilty of?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Islam is a religion that covers ALL aspects of life, INCLUDING POLITICS. It is a bidah of the usurpers and their supporters to try and separate it into "only a political office", when successorship of Prophet (pbuh) (khalifa) was never such a thing before, and there was nothing to make it such after Prophet (pbuh). Another thing that belies the 'only political' argument is the title of "Ameerul Momineen" for the caliphs you claim were only political. Why would they be 'commander of the faithful' if it were only a political office?.

It's your point of view not mine. I don't see the events that took place after the death of the Prophet like this. So We don't have the same ideology on cursing, infallibility, imamat etc....

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
If you want to be a believer you must acknowledge your Rabb Imam Ali(as) who was created from Allah(SWT)'s own Holy Noor! As for the fasiq [Edited] abu bakr, umar, aisha, etc. there is no doubt of their sinful natures and disbelief.

That's pretty to say that Imam Ali (as) was created from Allah's Noor.

So from what the other people were created ?

Don't take it physically creation by the Noor of Allah, it's just a metaphor or like that.

If you say Allah is a Noor (=a light) from which Ali was created then you give HIM a physical body because it means that Ali is a part of Allah !

Personally I don't trust in such hadith even it's sahih.

Now it contradicts the verse saying "Kun Fayaqun" -> If Allah wants to create Imam Ali (as) or the Prophet (pbuh) what is the necessity to use HIS own Noor as we know Allah have to say just (Be' then it is !)

Now imagine the presence of Allah before the creation of the Universe, He is ALONE.

Say me from what spring his first creation ? (ie. Imam Ali (as), the Prophet (pbuh), planets, stars......)

My answer is from his own ENERGY (NOOR) !

We ALL are created from the NOOR of Allah, (DIVINE ENERGY) not only Imam Ali (as), or the Prophet (pbuh) !

:wacko:

According to me this hadith is just to emphasize the "divine characteristic" given to the Prophet (pbuh) and Imam Ali (as) used by the SHIAS of the early centuries against the unjust rulers. It's just a shia exaggeration community phenomenon. It's a secular defensive phenomenon which is found in many civilizations.

Edited by bakr_umar
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

It's like saying Allah breathed into Adam (as) from His soul as is mentioned in the Quran. Our poor Sunni brothers really think it is Allah's literal soul but we believe it is created, as is the noor mentioned and they have no relation to His essence. Let's not get into this whole anthropomorphism kafaffle now.

Dear brother Bakr Umar please stop with this game. There are some fatal flaws in your arguments but you manage to mix them in with some perfectly valid points that you have. I find it flabbergasting that you think that Abu Bakr didn't usurp the khilafah.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
It's like saying Allah breathed into Adam (as) from His soul as is mentioned in the Quran. Our poor Sunni brothers really think it is Allah's literal soul but we believe it is created, as is the noor mentioned and they have no relation to His essence. Let's not get into this whole anthropomorphism kafaffle now.

Dear brother Bakr Umar please stop with this game. There are some fatal flaws in your arguments but you manage to mix them in with some perfectly valid points that you have. I find it flabbergasting that you think that Abu Bakr didn't usurp the khilafah.

A basic question for you brother :

Say me from what spring HIS first creation ? and HIS second ? etc... (ie. Imam Ali as.gif, the Prophet pbuh.gif, planets, stars......)

My answer is from his own ENERGY (NOOR) !

Edited by bakr_umar
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
There are some fatal flaws in your arguments

Which are they ?

I find it flabbergasting that you think that Abu Bakr didn't usurp the khilafah.

Of course, why not ? It's flabbergasting for you because all your "theory of Imamat" is based upon ! Without this argument of usurpation, your are nothing.

But mine is not based upon this usurpation of the Khilafat.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Ahl Al Sunna Wal jamaat

Sura Attawba N° 9

23. O ye who believe! take not for protectors your fathers and your brothers if they love Infidelity above Faith: if any of you do so, they do wrong.

24. Say: If it be that your fathers, your sons, your brothers, your mates, or your kindred; the wealth that ye have gained; the commerce in which ye fear a decline: or the dwellings in which ye delight - are dearer to you than Allah, or His Messenger, or the striving in His cause;- then wait until Allah brings about His Decision: and Allah guides not the rebellious.

25. Assuredly Allah did help you in many battle-fields and on the day of Hunain: Behold! your great numbers elated you, but they availed you naught: the land, for all that it is wide, did constrain you, and ye turned back in retreat.

and Sura Al mudathir N° 74

11. Leave Me alone, (to deal) with the (creature) whom I created (bare and) alone!-

12. To whom I granted resources in abundance,

13. And sons to be by his side!-

14. To whom I made (life) smooth and comfortable!

15. Yet is he greedy-that I should add (yet more);-

16. By no means! For to Our Signs he has been refractory!

17. Soon will I visit him with a mount of calamities!

18. For he thought and he determined;-

19. And woe to him! How he determined!-

20. Yea, woe to him; how he determined!-

21. Then he reflected;

22. Then he frowned and he scowled;

23. Then he turned back and was haughty;

24. Then said he: "This is nothing but magic, derived from of old;

25. "This is nothing but the word of a mortal!"

26. Soon will I cast him into Hell-Fire!

Now just compare the 1, 2, 3, and their families and Sons up to moroccan monarchy, Egyptian lifelong rulership and middle East Kindomies with the 5.000 Saudi princes.

is it not cristal clear that these people are blindly following their fathers ?

Don't waste of your time with the Ugly Sunnism

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

abu bakr and omar and also othman were muslims

yes they did oppress ahlbeit but they werent kaffir

So if they rejected Allah(saw) comand on wilyat of Imam Ali(as) diliberatly, also rejecting Bibi fatima (as) being masoom.

(issue regarding fadak) and many part's of the quran.

so please inlightan me what were they

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
So if they rejected Allah(saw) comand on wilyat of Imam Ali(as) diliberatly, also rejecting Bibi fatima (as) being masoom.

(issue regarding fadak) and many part's of the quran.

so please inlightan me what were they

they were oppressors but they didn't hate ahlbeit they were power thirsty

omar said when asked why they took khilafat away from ali(as) he answered: we did this not out of hatred for ali but because we thought he was young and that

quraish will never approve of him

sayed alkhoei also said that the shaikhain didnt hate ali (as)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

they were oppressors but they didn't hate ahlbeit they were power thirsty

omar said when asked why they took khilafat away from ali(as) he answered: we did this not out of hatred for ali but because we thought he was young and that

quraish will never approve of him

sayed alkhoei also said that the shaikhain didnt hate ali (as)

Isn't this a contradiction to Khutba-e-Shaqshaqya?

Now they snatched Fidak and u are saying that they didn't love Ahle Bayt?

So do u deem that these Sheikheen would go to Jannat?

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.


×
×
  • Create New...