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  
BULB

[Closed/Review]Jan Ali Kazmi

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Ya ALLAHH!! :'(:'(:'( Is this what Imam Hussain died for. :'( Curse those wahabies who made this video and ridiculed the shrine of Imam Hussain a.s This is one fornt, if you are a true shia, that we can unite on, to condemn such attrocities. Ya Allah!!! How low have we dropped,,,,how can you even think about having people dancing with no hijab and showing the Imam shrine in the same video...:'(....this is evident that the killers of Bibi Fatimahs children are still alive to day....May Allah curse those whos till cause her purified soul greif.....Wa Mazlooma....Wa Hussaina....

yeh true

but i jus cant STOP laughing at aloo qeemas/ali imrans comment :lol: on the vid

so apt hahahahaha

syed mohsin....the jak lovers believe that jak haters are in a majority and vice verca

i admire u for standing ur ground and arguing ur case despite soo much opposition lol

hats off to people who fight for what they believe in

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Salam

Ya Ali Madad

The duties of a Molana or a Zakir on a MIMBAR is to read Fazail and Musaib of Ahlulbayt.. i dont understand how the guy thinks that talking against Malangs, and there way of ibadat, is any type of zikar?

Subhanallah any Zikar of Ahlulbayt is beautiful.. which im sure many people like to hear during muharam and all year around.. but i dont think Zikar is made beautiful when a so called scholar is causing beef from a mimbar!?!?!

if his zikar is meant to attract people 2 islam and shiaism.. why is he pushing away most of the people in the shia community.. His trying to make out that malangs are dragging the Shia community down.. From what i can see malangs are more into Ibadat and azadari, and express there love more thru this, then a SO CALLED scholar showing his love by causing trouble from a MIMBAR

and you all are talking about discussing these issues with JAK? well set me his number and ill be glad to do so lol

Geo malango momino

Maro Wahabio Dushmano

HAQ HAIDERRRRR

COS HES A TROUBLE MAKER

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^^^^^^^^

like ive said i do zanjeer zani and matam as ibadat and azdari in the love of Ahlulbayt.. thats my intention in the end to mourn for the Family of Bibi Paak Zahra (as).. it is not 2 drive people away from Islam or Shiaism, i think people get scared enough of Shiaism when they see all the fighting and arguements going on, most of which are caused by Mr JAK..

YA ALI MADAD

I believe those non shias are just scared of the truth, which was there from the start and there have been major cover ups to try and hide the truth but it still prevails. They are scared of the fact that the Shias hold so much passionate love for their Masoomeen and so much hatred for their enemies which is not true in how they feel about their leaders hich makes them feel inadequate but they are too stubborn to step back and think about where the true path actually lies.

Islam has very simple idealogies very simple rules it is just man that has caused the confusion even up until today. The job of the Guider is to Guide and the job of the Shaitan is to lead astray and to confuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Salaams

Can someone please explain to me who JAK thinks he is that he can send demands to the people for him to come back and recite?

Wassalaam

koe or kaam nahi hay aap logo ko ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What irony. I beleive he was speaking against people doing zanjeer in public, just as a show off type action, and the malangs apparently got in a strop.

How convienent that you always seem to be in all the threads against Azadari, even if they have nothing to do with you and/or you have no knowledge of the facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How convienent that you always seem to be in all the threads against Azadari, even if they have nothing to do with you and/or you have no knowledge of the facts.

Funny that because this thread in nothing against Azadari. If anything it is against an act commited in the name of Azadari. Dont ever define Azadari by certain acts only. If any one is against Azadari he can not be shia, you know for a fact those who speak agaisnt Zanjeer Zani do not do so because they are against Azadari, they do it to preserve the true meaning of Azadari against those who wish to define and limit it to certain acts.

Edited by SyedMohsin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Funny that because this thread in nothing against Azadari. If anything it is against an act commited in the name of Azadari. Dont ever define Azadari by certain acts only. If any one is against Azadari he can not be shia, you know for a fact those who speak agaisnt Zanjeer Zani do not do so because they are against Azadari, they do it to preserve the true meaning of Azadari against those who wish to define and limit it to certain acts.

very well said

ur doin well for a bacha :yaali:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
job of the Guider is to Guide and the job of the Shaitan is to lead astray and to confuse.

Geo mera veer das da best way to put it

if he stuck to reedin fazail and musaib his majalises would actually be pretty goood... but with all this trouble his causing it reminds me of Iblees.. 1000s of Years of Ibadat and in the end he became shaytan 4 causing trouble during a sajda ;)

DUSHMAN-E-AHLULBAYT TE LAAAANAT

Inshallah Allah will guide Mr JAK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a quick note.

It is essential that anti-zanjeer people realize that the zanjeer people do zanjeer with the intention of expressing grief and for a reason. Likewise it is essential for malangs/matamis/sajda group (whatever you want to call them) to realize that those who are against zanjeer are not against Azadari and say it because they believe it is damaging to the image of shias.

Once we get these two ignorant assumptions out of our minds inshAllah we can build upon common ground. Its simple. Anti Zanjeer definately does not mean anti azadari and pro zanjeer people do it for good intentions. SIMPLE. From this we can build upon what is right but nore more loaded hate statement agaisnt the other group please. We are meant o be Shia of Ali for God sakes, the one who respected and did not lie about even his enemies, yet we claim to follow him and are ready to make assumptions about each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaams

Well firstly please tell me that if Zanjeer Zani is to express grief and sorrow why is it classed as a an act of tableegh. I can tell you that no one does zanjeer to bring people towards Shiaism. Tableegh can be done at some times on the mimbar. Tableegh isnt done by just slagging people of. Lets first concentrate on bringing those astray within Shiaism towards the right path before trying to bring others.

Also on the 2nd nightafter JAK mentioned juloos not one person put lanat on JAK let me assure you as I was there. Also every year lanat is put on mukasirs. Mukasir is someone who downgrades the position of the Ahlul Bayt. No one called JAK a mukasir so why he next day did he ASSUME that people had called him mukasir. If he is not a mukasir then that is for Allah to decide. Allah will decide who downgrades the Ahlul Bayt so there is nothing wrong with putting lanat on mukasirs.

Wassalaam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Salaams

Well firstly please tell me that if Zanjeer Zani is to express grief and sorrow why is it classed as a an act of tableegh. I can tell you that no one does zanjeer to bring people towards Shiaism. Tableegh can be done at some times on the mimbar. Tableegh isnt done by just slagging people of. Lets first concentrate on bringing those astray within Shiaism towards the right path before trying to bring others.

Also on the 2nd nightafter JAK mentioned juloos not one person put lanat on JAK let me assure you as I was there. Also every year lanat is put on mukasirs. Mukasir is someone who downgrades the position of the Ahlul Bayt. No one called JAK a mukasir so why he next day did he ASSUME that people had called him mukasir. If he is not a mukasir then that is for Allah to decide. Allah will decide who downgrades the Ahlul Bayt so there is nothing wrong with putting lanat on mukasirs.

Wassalaam

Every act we do in our lives should be a basis for tabligh. The way we walk talk sleep eat pray azadari etc etc etc. As I stated earlier I understand the intention is not to bring people closer but alhamdulilah it has brought people closer and has served the purpose of Tabligh very beautifully. However, in certain places in this time, is not only making people go away from Shia (which is a massive sin anyways) it is beccomming the basis to create hatred against the shias. For this reasons I believe against it. I hope you understand dear bro :)

Secondly, did you ask Maulana Jan Ali if anyone called him a mukasir? Did he recieve any emails, phonecalls or random people calling him a mukasir? Are you hundred percent sure that he was not called a mukasir by anyone?

Thirdly regarding julus, why would I send lanat on a scholar, the path I follow has taught me to show respect even to my enemies. Critisize him I would and question him I would and not accept what he says I would but I have been brought up to believe in those who are the peak of modesty and mountains of eloquence so why would I send la'an on him? Unless ofcourse I want a fight but I know better alhamdulilah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaams

Brother Mohsin so you are implying that Zanjeer Zani is a sin because it turns away people from Shiaism?

In his majlis on the third Muharram he said that yesterday people put lanat against my majlis and on me?

This did not happen and I can guarantee you after the majlis no one put lanat on JAK.

Within his own majlis JAK was hypocritical by saying that we should keep people close to the mimbar and close to ulemas. However by slagging them off are you going to bring them closer to the mimbar or make them go further away. And I can guarantee that the majlis on the Third of Muharram was slagging people off as I myself felt hurt by what he was saying even though I listen to majlis complete all my wajibats.

Is this the way to show respect to people?

Wassalaam

(salam)

Idara_Majlis_Jafria_2nd_Muharram_30-12-2008

Majlis given by Mawlana Jan Ali Kazmi on the second of Muharram at Idara Jafria 18 Church Lan

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2277609518931592694

What the heck!? This is an excellent Majlis! (Though some people ruined it in the middle)

So who spoilt the majlis? Since when was Juloos muba?

Edited by BULB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaams

Sorry this majlis was the 3rd Muharram. Did he say sorry for being 40mins late? Is this what we have been taught by the Ahlul Bayt?

Imam Ali did not raise the sword. This was not done because of Unity. If Unity was so great then tell me what did Imam Hussain (as) do he caed disunity?

Wassalaam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However, in certain places in this time, is not only making people go away from Shia (which is a massive sin anyways) it is beccomming the basis to create hatred against the shias. For this reasons I believe against it. I hope you understand dear bro :)

Thirdly regarding julus, why would I send lanat on a scholar, the path I follow has taught me to show respect even to my enemies. Critisize him I would and question him I would and not accept what he says I would but I have been brought up to believe in those who are the peak of modesty and mountains of eloquence so why would I send la'an on him? Unless ofcourse I want a fight but I know better alhamdulilah.

Salams brother Mohsin,

First of all, I believe you are refering to negative images again right? The whole 'making people turn away from Shia Islam' argument, well I have asked twice and no one has still answered my quesions! I posted 2 videos of 'non wajib acts' that are being shown in an extremely negative manner yet I do not see the same argument being applied there. Why is there such hypocricy and double standards?

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Ky-EkoRURWA

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=bl5Oco3f77A

The non Shia people perceive Mutah as 'legalised prostitution' what could possibly be a worse insult? Let me remind you, the haters will continue to hate regardless of what we try doing to accomodating their whims and the munqir within them will always be presant. Our aim is to please the Aima Masomeen (as) and not the people who use silly excuses such as Zanjeer to reject the Wilayah of Amir ul Momineed (as).

Regarding the La'anah, first of all I would like to point out sending a condemnation is part of our Faru E Dheen, there is no shying away from that! Also the noble Quran tells us to enjoin what is right and forbid evil (3:104). There are many MANY references available for this.

This doesn't mean one should stand up in the middle of the Majlis to start condemning scholars but was higlighting the face that we should promote la'ana and not try distancing ourselves from it and sending La'ana certainly isn't on the opposite ends of modesty and mountains of eloquence.

Ya Ali (as) Madad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Did he say sorry for being 40mins late?

Did you give him the benefit of the doubt for a valid reason or make excuses for him for being late? Did you tell yourself to forgive him and forget about it or rather to keep a grudge on him for being late?What has been taught by the Ahlul Bayt?

Imam Ali did not raise the sword. This was not done because of Unity.

What was it done for?

Sorry this majlis was the 3rd Muharram

I still loved it, beautiful everyone should hear it.

Wassalam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Every act we do in our lives should be a basis for tabligh. The way we walk talk sleep eat pray azadari etc etc etc. As I stated earlier I understand the intention is not to bring people closer but alhamdulilah it has brought people closer and has served the purpose of Tabligh very beautifully. However, in certain places in this time, is not only making people go away from Shia (which is a massive sin anyways) it is beccomming the basis to create hatred against the shias. For this reasons I believe against it. I hope you understand dear bro :)

Secondly, did you ask Maulana Jan Ali if anyone called him a mukasir? Did he recieve any emails, phonecalls or random people calling him a mukasir? Are you hundred percent sure that he was not called a mukasir by anyone?

Thirdly regarding julus, why would I send lanat on a scholar, the path I follow has taught me to show respect even to my enemies. Critisize him I would and question him I would and not accept what he says I would but I have been brought up to believe in those who are the peak of modesty and mountains of eloquence so why would I send la'an on him? Unless ofcourse I want a fight but I know better alhamdulilah.

Salaams

Well the Aimmah has told us to sow respect but they have a shown us to curse the enemies so by csing enemies you are not doing anything wrong. If it was all about respect Bibi Ftima did not respect them by not allowing them to her mayyat and cursing them after every namaz.

Wassalaam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(salam)

Did you give him the benefit of the doubt for a valid reason or make excuses for him for being late? Did you tell yourself to forgive him and forget about it or rather to keep a grudge on him for being late?What has been taught by the Ahlul Bayt?

What was it done for?

I still loved it, beautiful everyone should hear it.

Wassalam

No im not keeping a grudge but he and the commitee both had different stories. The reason was not valid why would you leave it to last minute to decide whether to recite or not. Im just letting everyone know what he did. Please do not try to defend him where there is no defending to be done. Should he have said sorry or not for those who waited 40min.

Imam Ali did not fight because he didnt have enough true believers. If he had forty true believers he would have fought. The reason he did not fight was because if there were so little true believers they would all have been martyred and the true message would not have reached us. Imam Hussain fought so does that mean he is wrong?

Wassalaam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Salaams

Sorry this majlis was the 3rd Muharram. Did he say sorry for being 40mins late? Is this what we have been taught by the Ahlul Bayt?

Imam Ali did not raise the sword. This was not done because of Unity. If Unity was so great then tell me what did Imam Hussain (as) do he caed disunity?

Wassalaam

from wat i have seen they are all pakis first.....i have spoken to jak on the fone.....he is very much a paki!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Should he have said sorry or not for those who waited 40min.

I wasn't there, I am just reading all the different comments from people here. I mean I don't know how many times you've said sorry to the mosque committee or the speaker for coming in late to a majlis (unless you are always on time literally) when they give out a starting time for a majlis. Instead of trying to pin him down, have you ever thought of the reward you and others would receive from Allah (swt), waiting patiently for those 40 minutes to listen to a majlis?

Imam Ali did not fight because he didnt have enough true believers. If he had forty true believers he would have fought. The reason he did not fight was because if there were so little true believers they would all have been martyred and the true message would not have reached us. Imam Hussain fought so does that mean he is wrong?

40 believers were not the mere reason; 40 believers were one of the prerequisites for the greater reason itself. He could have fought even if he had less than 40 believers but what would the result be. Of course he didn't have enough 'true believers', but he did speak about his right regardless, how ever what does that mean if he had risen up with arms despite that? What would it have done if he rose up? When he was being dragged from his house or his wife having the door pushed on her, the whole population of Medina wasn't there in the house of the Imam (as) and Imam could have at the very least taken his sword out for something very justifiable, but he didn't. What would have happened different if he had 39 instead of 40? What would have happened if he revolted with fewer people? Those answers are the reasons he didn't stand up.

Imam Hussain (as) did not want to fight and was telling them till the last moment to put an end to it even when he was the last one left. Painting an issue out to be merely due to 'lack of followers' without any other underlying reasons is very naive.

Sermon 5 from Nahjul Balagha, delivered when the Holy Prophet died and `Abbas ibn `Abd al-Muttalib and Abu Sufyan ibn Harb offered to pay allegiance to Amir al-mu'minin for the Caliphate

By Allah the son of Abu Talib is more familiar with death than an infant with the breast of its mother. I have hidden knowledge, if I disclose it you will start trembling like ropes in deep wells. ~ Sermon 5

. . .This was the most delicate moment for Amir al-mu'minin. He regarded himself as the true head and successor of the Prophet while a man with the backing of his tribe and party like Abu Sufyan was ready to support him. Just a signal was enough to ignite the flames of war. But Amir al-mu'minin's foresight and right judgement saved the Muslims from civil war as his piercing eyes perceived that this man wanted to start civil war by rousing the passions of tribal partisanship and distinction of birth, so that Islam should be struck with a convulsion that would shake it to its roots. Amir al-mu'minin therefore rejected his counsel and admonished him severely and spoke forth the words, whereby he has stopped people from mischief mongering, and undue conceit, and declared his stand to be that for him there were only two courses - either to take up arms or to sit quietly at home. If he rose for war there was no supporter so that he could suppress these rising insurgencies. The only course left was quietly to wait for the opportunity till circumstances were favourable.

Amir al-mu'minin's quietness at this stage was indicative of his high policy and far-sightedness, because if in those circumstances Medina had become the centre of war its fire would have engulfed the whole of Arabia in its flames. The discord and scuffle that had already begun among muhajirun (those who came from Mecca) and ansar (the locals of Medina) would have increased to maximum, the wire-pullings of the hypocrites would have had full play, and Islam's ship would have been caught in such a whirlpool that its balancing would have been difficult; Amir al-mu'minin suffered trouble and tribulations but did not raise his hands. History is witness that during his life at Mecca the Prophet suffered all sorts of troubles but he was not prepared to clash or struggle by abandoning patience and endurance, because he realised that if war took place at that stage the way for Islam's growth and fruition would be closed. Of course, when he had collected supporters and helpers enough to suppress the flood of unbelief and curb the disturbances, he rose to face the enemy. Similarly, Amir al-mu'minin, treating the life of the Prophet as a torch for his guidance refrained from exhibiting the power of his arm because he was realising that rising against the enemy without helpers and supporters would become a source of revolt and defeat instead of success and victory. Therefore, on this occasion Amir al-mu'minin has likened the desire for Caliphate to turbid water or a morsel suffocating the throat. Thus, even where people had forcibly snatched this morsel and wanted to swallow it by forcible thrusting, it got stuck up in their throat. They could neither swallow it nor vomit it out. That is, they could neither manage it as is apparent from the blunders they committed in connection with Islamic injunctions, nor were they ready to cast off the knot from their neck.

He reiterated the same ideas in different words thus: "If had I attempted to pluck the unripe fruit of Caliphate then by this the orchard would have been desolated and I too would have achieved nothing, like these people who cultivate on other's land but can neither guard it, nor water it at proper time, nor reap any crop from it. The position of these people is that if I ask them to vacate it so that the owner should cultivate it himself and protect it, they say how greedy I am, while if I keep quiet they think I am afraid of death. They should tell me on what occasion did I ever feel afraid, or flew from battle-field for life, whereas every small or big encounter is proof of my bravery and a witness to my daring and courage. He who plays with swords and strikes against hillocks is not afraid of death. I am so familiar with death that even an infant is not so familiar with the breast of its mother. Hark! The reason for my silence is the knowledge that the Prophet has put in my bosom. If I divulge it you would get perplexed and bewildered. Let some days pass and you would know the reason of my inaction, and perceive with your own eyes what sorts of people would appear on this scene under the name of Islam, and what destruction they would bring about. My silence is because this would happen, otherwise it is not silence without reason."

http://www.al-islam.org/nahj/5.htm

Islam was very young at that time (only 23 years old!) and division among Muslims could have totally removed Islam from the surface of the earth. So he kept silent, as Haroon (Aaron) kept silent to prevent division:

(Moses) said: "O' Aaron! what kept you back when you saw them going wrong?"... (Aaron said:) "...Truly I feared you would say 'You caused a division among the Children of Israel and you did not respect my word!'" (Quran 20:92-94).

Abu Sufyan was one of those who wanted to destroy the young Islam by encouraging Ali to revolt when he was sure that Ali will have no success due to small number of his followers. But the revolt of Ali would at least cause the civil war and the destruction of Islam. al-Tabari reported:

When people gathered to give their oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr, Abu Sufyan came while saying, "By God, I see a cloud of smoke which nothing but blood will clear. O family of Abd Manaf! Who is Abu Bakr that he should be the master of your affairs? Where are Ali and al-Abbas, the two oppressed ones?" He then said (to Ali): "O Abul Hasan! stretch your hand so that I give you the oath of allegiance."... Ali rebuked him, saying: "By God, you do not intend anything but (to stir up) Fitnah (dissension). For long you have desired evil for Islam. We do not need your advice."

History of al-Tabari, English version, v9, p199

http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter4/4.html

Seyyid Saeed Akhtar Rizvi (May Allah have mercy on him) in his book Your Questions Answered:

Why Ali (as) did not fight for the Khilafat??

If you read the biography of Imam Ali (as), you will easily understand why he did not feel like taking any action against his adversaries except to protest openly at every appropriate time. The situation at that time was such that a civil war in Medina would have meant the extinction of Islam in the whole of Arabia.

For example, if your child was abducted by someone who wanted to bring him up as his own son and you were sure that if you took any action against him he would kill the child, would you not wait for a suitable time for the return of the child instead of rushing headlong to that person and thus causing his death? And can anyone say that because the circumstances compelled you to keep quiet at that time, you lost the right of the custody of your child and the abductor became its true father?

There is a story in the Old Testament, which says that two women came to Prophet Sulaiman (as),

"And the one woman said, O my Lord, I and this woman dwell in one house; and I was delivered of a child with her in the house. And it came to pass the third day after that I was delivered, that this woman was delivered also; and we were together; there was no stranger with us in the house, save we two in the house. And this woman's child died in the night; because she overlaid it. And when I rose in the morning to give my child suck, behold it was not my son. which I did bear. And the other woman said, Nay; but the living is my son. Thus they spoke before the King. Then said the King, The one saith, This is my son that liveth, and thy son is the dead; and the other saith, Nay; but thy son is the dead, and my son is the living. And the King said, Bring me a sword. And they brought a sword before the King. And the king said, Divide the living child in two and give half to the one, and half to the other. The spoke the woman whose the living child was unto the king, for her bowels yearned upon her son, and she said, O my Lord, give her the living child, and in no wise slay it. But the other said, her-it be neither mine nor thine, but divide it. Then the king answered and said, Give her the living child, and in no wise slay it; she is the mother thereof. " (I Kings Ch.3, verses 17-27)

(A similar case came up before Ali (as) and he decided in the same way; finally he said "the solution of this case was revealed to Sulaiman (as) and now I have decided it in the same way")

I think this episode sufficiently depicts the stand of Ali (as) vis-a-vis his adversaries.

Wassalam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaams

Imam Ali did not fight because islam was young but not for unity. If Imam Ali did not fight against the oppressors and Imam Hussain did fight against the opressors. If Imam Ali didnt fight because of unity then why do we not have unity today? If Imam Ali did something for a reason then it would have been fulfilled. If Imam Ali did not fight because otherwise Islam would not have survived it makes more sense because that was fulfilled.

Also Bibi Fatima did not convey unity when not allowing 1, 2 and 3 attend her mayyat.

Wassalaam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Salaams

Brother Mohsin so you are implying that Zanjeer Zani is a sin because it turns away people from Shiaism?

In his majlis on the third Muharram he said that yesterday people put lanat against my majlis and on me?

This did not happen and I can guarantee you after the majlis no one put lanat on JAK.

Within his own majlis JAK was hypocritical by saying that we should keep people close to the mimbar and close to ulemas. However by slagging them off are you going to bring them closer to the mimbar or make them go further away. And I can guarantee that the majlis on the Third of Muharram was slagging people off as I myself felt hurt by what he was saying even though I listen to majlis complete all my wajibats.

Is this the way to show respect to people?

Wassalaam

So who spoilt the majlis? Since when was Juloos muba?

Wasalam Dearest Brother,

Yes according to shari law this act becomes Haram looking at the circumstances. That is why certain Marajae have said it is.

Regarding your second paragraph you know I agree with you dear bro :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well one thing i do have to agree on.. is where he said that people only come in for the matam and not the majalis

but still all this not sending laanats business??? DUSHMAN-E-AHLULBAYT TE LAAAANAT... BESHMAAAR

Send lanaat as long as you say it in a way where it does not cause them to turn around and send lanaat on your Imams a.s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well one thing i do have to agree on.. is where he said that people only come in for the matam and not the majalis

but still all this not sending laanats business??? DUSHMAN-E-AHLULBAYT TE LAAAANAT... BESHMAAAR

maybe they didnt want to listen to him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
maybe they didnt want to listen to him

well who would want 2 listen 2 him lol

im just talkin in general.. every majalis i go, every1s standing outsyd talking and smoking, and only coming in when its matam time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well who would want 2 listen 2 him lol

im just talkin in general.. every majalis i go, every1s standing outsyd talking and smoking, and only coming in when its matam time

Funny that, the 3 majalis he read at Idara and every majalis he read at Merkez has been completely packed. Unofrtunately there are certain people who stay outside during majalis no matter who it is and only come in for matam and unfortuantely there are certain people who stay for the majalis and even if they have no reason go when it is time for matam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...