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

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member

I have been discussing the role of Umar at Hudaibiya. These are some descriptions from Sunni sources:

 

Tabari included this in his "Tarikh Al-Tabari"

Hudaibiya.gif.7c9bb5bba9f8c6ddd0aa40db6cef71a7.gif

 

The most learned scholar @Cherub786 rejects the above because "the sanad of that particular narration, and conclude it is not authentic as it is maqtu. Imam at-Tabari says “Ibn Ishaq from al-Zuhri”, clearly a sanad with much inqita in it and therefore not authentic".

Along with Tabari, Shibli Nomani also thought it is authentic enough to quote Tabari directly in his biography on Umar Al-Farooq:

farooq-hudaibiya.GIF.691fb4139163c6b3d651fccee35c515a.GIF

Shibli Nomani's analysis is that the tone of Umar was disrespectful.

Bukhari has also mentioned this episode:

"`Umar bin Al-Khattab said, "I went to the Prophet (ﷺ) and said, 'Aren't you truly the Messenger of Allah?' The Prophet (ﷺ) said, 'Yes, indeed.' I said, 'Isn't our Cause just and the cause of the enemy unjust?' He said, 'Yes.' I said, 'Then why should we be humble in our religion?' He said, 'I am Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and I do not disobey Him, and He will make me victorious.' I said, 'Didn't you tell us that we would go to the Ka`ba and perform Tawaf around it?' He said, 'Yes, but did I tell you that we would visit the Ka`ba this year?' I said, 'No.' He said, 'So you will visit it and perform Tawaf around it?' " `Umar further said, "I went to Abu Bakr and said, 'O Abu Bakr! Isn't he truly Allah's Prophet?' He replied, 'Yes.' I said, 'Then why should we be humble in our religion?' He said, 'Indeed, he is Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and he does not disobey his Lord, and He will make him victorious. Adhere to him as, by Allah, he is on the right.' I said, 'Was he not telling us that we would go to the Ka`ba and perform Tawaf around it?' He said, 'Yes, but did he tell you that you would go to the Ka`ba this year?' I said, 'No.' He said, "You will go to Ka`ba and perform Tawaf around it." (Az-Zuhri said, " `Umar said, 'I performed many good deeds as expiation for the improper questions I asked them.' ")"

 

With the narrations from Tabari + Bukhari and the analysis of Shibli Nomani that indeed Umar was disrespectful to the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), it is clear that Umar was indeed rude to the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) - the Mercy to Mankind. Not only was he rude, he questioned Muhammad's prophethood (blasphemy) and even went to other sahaba raising the same doubts (fasad-fil-ardh).

The fact that Umar was rude and disrespectful to the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is clearly established. What is not clear is whether Umar was repentant for his actions or not.

I believe Tabari, Bukhari and Shibli that Umar was repentant - fasted, prayed, gave alms as expiation of his sins. 

@Cherub786 believes that Umar was not repentant for this major sins of blasphemy and fasad-fil-ardh.

If indeed Umar was not repentant, then the following ayah would be applicable to him:

[Shakir 4:137] Surely (as for) those who believe then disbelieve, again believe and again disbelieve, then increase in disbelief, Allah will not forgive them nor guide them in the (right) path.
[Shakir 4:138] Announce to the hypocrites that they shall have a painful chastisement:

and this ayah would be applicable to @Cherub786:

[Shakir 4:139] Those who take the unbelievers for guardians rather than believers. Do they seek honor from them? Then surely all honor is for Allah.

 

if this was Pakistan, Umar would and should be tried for blasphemy + fasad-fil-ardh if he did not repent.

If he did repent, then @Cherub786 would be tried for blasphemy for abusing and maligning the prominent Umar Al-Farooq.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, ShiaMan14 said:

The fact that Umar was rude and disrespectful to the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is clearly established. What is not clear is whether Umar was repentant for his actions or not.

I believe Tabari, Bukhari and Shibli that Umar was repentant - fasted, prayed, gave alms as expiation of his sins. 

@Cherub786 believes that Umar was not repentant for this major sins of blasphemy and fasad-fil-ardh.

If indeed Umar was not repentant, then the following ayah would be applicable to him:

[Shakir 4:137] Surely (as for) those who believe then disbelieve, again believe and again disbelieve, then increase in disbelief, Allah will not forgive them nor guide them in the (right) path.
[Shakir 4:138] Announce to the hypocrites that they shall have a painful chastisement:

and this ayah would be applicable to @Cherub786:

[Shakir 4:139] Those who take the unbelievers for guardians rather than believers. Do they seek honor from them? Then surely all honor is for Allah.

if this was Pakistan, Umar would and should be tried for blasphemy + fasad-fil-ardh if he did not repent.

If he did repent, then @Cherub786 would be tried for blasphemy for abusing and maligning the prominent Umar Al-Farooq.

I wander if you would be consistent and fair and make the same judgment regarding your first Imam, sayyidina Ali b. Abi Talib رضى الله عنه also in connection with his attitude and behavior to the Treaty of Hudaibiyah:

https://www.al-islam.org/unschooled-prophet-ayatullah-murtadha-mutahhari/event-hudaybiyyah

Quote

From Ibn Hisham's "Sirat Ibn Hisham" and also from Sahih Al-Bukhari1 (Bab Shurut fi al- Jihad wal-Musalahah ma'a Ahl al-Harb), it can be concluded that this objection was made before the words "Allah's messenger" were written, where-upon the Prophet (SA) agreed immediately to have "Muhammad ibn `Abdillah" written for "Muhammad, the Allah's messenger". Yet, it can be concluded from most accounts that the objection was made at a time when `Ali (عليه السلام) had already written the words. The Prophet (SA) then requested `Ali (عليه السلام) to erase the words, whereupon `Ali (عليه السلام) requested to be excused from doing so. 

 

Here, again the texts differ. The Shi'ah ahadith's texts agree that upon `Ali's (عليه السلام) expressed refusal to erase the sacred words, the Prophet (SA) himself erased the words, in place of which `Ali (عليه السلام) wrote "Muhammad ibn `Abdillah ". In these texts and in certain Ahl al-Sunnah ahadith's texts, there is an explicit reference to the fact that the Prophet (SA) requested `Ali (عليه السلام) to show him the words by placing his hand on the words so that he might erase the words with his own hands. 

 

`Ali (عليه السلام) did so and the Prophet (SA) erased the words "Allah's messenger" with his own hand. Then, `Ali (عليه السلام) wrote "ibn `Abdillah", instead. Therefore, it was `Ali (عليه السلام) who did the writing and not the Prophet (SA). Rather, in accordance with both Shi'i accounts, and those of the Ahl al-Sunnah the Prophet (SA) neither read nor wrote. 

 

In the book entitled: "The Stories of the Qur'an", written in Persian in the 5th Centurv (Hijrah) by Abu Bakr `Atiqi Nayshapuri who adapted the work from his own exegesis of the Qur'an, the author relates the Hudaybiyyah event up to the point where Suhayl ibn `Amr, on behalf of the Quraysh, objected to the words "Allah's messenger". Suhayl ibn `Amr said "The Prophet said to `Ali to erase "Allah's messenger". `Ali disinclined to do this and felt uneasy at the Prophet's insistence. Then the Prophet said to `Ali; "Put my finger on the words so that I may erase them". Since Allah's messenger was untaught, and did not know how to write, `Ali placed the Prophet's finger on the words and the Prophet erased the words as Suhayl ibn `Amr meant. 

We see here that sayyidina Ali رضى الله عنه disobeyed a direct command of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم (according to your Shi’ite sources).

According to your standard, this constitutes blasphemy and doubting the Prophet’s Prophesy. 

You mentioned references which speak of sayyidina Umar allegedly repenting from his questioning the wisdom of Treaty of Hudaibiyah, but do you have any reference which establishes that sayyidina Ali likewise repented from disobeying a direct command of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم concerning the Treaty?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
54 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

I wander if you would be consistent and fair and make the same judgment regarding your first Imam, sayyidina Ali b. Abi Talib رضى الله عنه also in connection with his attitude and behavior to the Treaty of Hudaibiyah:

https://www.al-islam.org/unschooled-prophet-ayatullah-murtadha-mutahhari/event-hudaybiyyah

We see here that sayyidina Ali رضى الله عنه disobeyed a direct command of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم (according to your Shi’ite sources).

According to your standard, this constitutes blasphemy and doubting the Prophet’s Prophesy. 

You mentioned references which speak of sayyidina Umar allegedly repenting from his questioning the wisdom of Treaty of Hudaibiyah, but do you have any reference which establishes that sayyidina Ali likewise repented from disobeying a direct command of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم concerning the Treaty?

Fair enough - we can start that topic too but this topic is about Umar.

Imam Ali (عليه السلام) "disobedience" was out of respect whereas Umar's disobedience was insolence.

Back to Umar...

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, ShiaMan14 said:

Imam Ali (عليه السلام) "disobedience" was out of respect whereas Umar's disobedience was insolence.

That’s strange, since when is disobedience ever “respectful”?

I fail to see the distinction between the motive and feeling behind both alleged acts of disobedience (according to your criterion).

If sayyidina Umar رضى الله عنه objecting to signing the Treaty because the terms were apparently not fair to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was an example of insolence and not love and care for the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم then surely sayyidina Ali رضى الله عنه refusing a direct order by the Prophet to erase ‘Rasul Allah’ and replace it with ‘Ibn Abd Allah’ was likewise an example of insolence.

So either both acts were insolent or both were done out of extreme love and respect for the Prophet’s status. I definitely interpret both acts as falling in the second category. As for you, it seems in your haste and desperation to smear sayyidina Umar رضى الله عنه you are willing to impugn your own first Imam to whom you pay lip service.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
22 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

That’s strange, since when is disobedience ever “respectful”?

I fail to see the distinction between the motive and feeling behind both alleged acts of disobedience (according to your criterion).

If sayyidina Umar رضى الله عنه objecting to signing the Treaty because the terms were apparently not fair to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was an example of insolence and not love and care for the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم then surely sayyidina Ali رضى الله عنه refusing a direct order by the Prophet to erase ‘Rasul Allah’ and replace it with ‘Ibn Abd Allah’ was likewise an example of insolence.

So either both acts were insolent or both were done out of extreme love and respect for the Prophet’s status. I definitely interpret both acts as falling in the second category. As for you, it seems in your haste and desperation to smear sayyidina Umar رضى الله عنه you are willing to impugn your own first Imam to whom you pay lip service.

Yes let's discuss both.

But this topic is about Umar.

So whats the verdict?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

I wander if you would be consistent and fair and make the same judgment regarding your first Imam, sayyidina Ali b. Abi Talib رضى الله عنه also in connection with his attitude and behavior to the Treaty of Hudaibiyah:

https://www.al-islam.org/unschooled-prophet-ayatullah-murtadha-mutahhari/event-hudaybiyyah

We see here that sayyidina Ali رضى الله عنه disobeyed a direct command of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم (according to your Shi’ite sources).

According to your standard, this constitutes blasphemy and doubting the Prophet’s Prophesy. 

You mentioned references which speak of sayyidina Umar allegedly repenting from his questioning the wisdom of Treaty of Hudaibiyah, but do you have any reference which establishes that sayyidina Ali likewise repented from disobeying a direct command of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم concerning the Treaty?

@ShiaMan14 asked you about Umar. Why did you jump to Imam Ali (عليه السلام)? I request that you don't compare Imam Ali Al Faruq (عليه السلام) to Umar. Who is Umar Ibn Suhak compared to Ali Ibn Abi Talib Al Siddiq Al Akbar? Also the people who were being commanded by the father of your beloved Muawiya (la), didn't want Muhammad (اللهم صل على محمد و ال محمد), Rasul Allah, written in the treaty. When the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) ordered Imam Ali (عليه السلام) to erase Rasul Allah, Imam Ali (عليه السلام) didn't want to. He (عليه السلام) couldn't take the fact of how they took the appointed title that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) gave to his Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) told Ali (عليه السلام) that one day he will do a treaty and they will take away his title. And the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) of course told the truth. During the Hakimiya of Siffin, the army of Muawiya Ibn Akilat al Akbad, didn't let Imam Ali (عليه السلام) write Amir al Mumineen in the treaty. So let me sum it up for you.

1. Don't compare Imam Ali Ibn Fatima Bint Asad (عليه السلام) to Umar Ibn Suhak. (Its funny how Sunnis jump so instantly to defend Umar Ibn Suhak, the one who banned the 2 Mut'as even though Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and his Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) allowed it.)

2. Actually understand what you read before you want to use it for a debate.

Wa Salam

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
7 hours ago, ShiaMan14 said:

If indeed Umar was not repentant, then the following ayah would be applicable to him:

And these too:

يُنَادُونَهُمْ أَلَمْ نَكُنْ مَعَكُمْ ۖ قَالُوا بَلَىٰ وَلَٰكِنَّكُمْ فَتَنْتُمْ أَنْفُسَكُمْ وَتَرَبَّصْتُمْ وَارْتَبْتُمْ وَغَرَّتْكُمُ الْأَمَانِيُّ حَتَّىٰ جَاءَ أَمْرُ اللَّهِ وَغَرَّكُمْ بِاللَّهِ الْغَرُورُ {14}

[Shakir 57:14] They will cry out to them: Were we not with you? They shall say: Yea! but you caused yourselves to fall into temptation, and you waited and doubted, and vain desires deceived you till the threatened punishment of Allah came, while the archdeceiver deceived you about Allah.


[Pickthal 57:14] They will cry unto them (saying): Were we not with you? They will say: Yea, verily; but ye tempted one another, and hesitated, and doubted, and vain desires beguiled you till the ordinance of Allah came to pass; and the deceiver deceived you concerning Allah;

فَالْيَوْمَ لَا يُؤْخَذُ مِنْكُمْ فِدْيَةٌ وَلَا مِنَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا ۚ مَأْوَاكُمُ النَّارُ ۖ هِيَ مَوْلَاكُمْ ۖ وَبِئْسَ الْمَصِيرُ {15}

[Shakir 57:15] So today ransom shall not be accepted from you nor from those who disbelieved; your abode is the fire; it is your friend and evil is the resort.


[Pickthal 57:15] So this day no ransom can be taken from you nor from those who disbelieved. Your home is the Fire; that is your patron, and a hapless journey's end.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

@Ansur Shiat Ali

@ShiaofAli12

@Cool

The magnanimity of the Shiah is that we are defending Umar saying was repentant per Tabari, Bukhari and Nomani

The hypocrisy of the sunni is that they will call Umar a blasphemer and creator of "fasad-fil-ardh" just to try to win an argument that they have already lost.

Munafiq is as munafiq does.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

As far as I remember, Ibn Kathir also has mentioned this whole incident. I think I have seen it in tafseer ibn-Kathir.

Actually Tabari and rest of the authors knew the implication of not repenting on such a blunder. You can see Prophet's statement never satified him and he then went to Abu Bakr and repeated himself.

8 hours ago, ShiaMan14 said:

`Umar bin Al-Khattab said, "I went to the Prophet (ﷺ) and said, 'Aren't you truly the Messenger of Allah?' The Prophet (ﷺ) said, 'Yes, indeed.' I said, 'Isn't our Cause just and the cause of the enemy unjust?' He said, 'Yes.' I said, 'Then why should we be humble in our religion?' He said, 'I am Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and I do not disobey Him, and He will make me victorious.' I said, 'Didn't you tell us that we would go to the Ka`ba and perform Tawaf around it?' He said, 'Yes, but did I tell you that we would visit the Ka`ba this year?' I said, 'No.' He said, 'So you will visit it and perform Tawaf around it?' " `Umar further said, "I went to Abu Bakr and said, 'O Abu Bakr! Isn't he truly Allah's Prophet?' He replied, 'Yes.' I said, 'Then why should we be humble in our religion?' He said, 'Indeed, he is Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and he does not disobey his Lord, and He will make him victorious.

It seems to me that the doubt which originated in Umar's heart at Hudaybiyah was a very strong one.

It also reminds me the case of two of Prophet's wives. They too forgot that they are the wives of Prophet of Allah. So when Prophet informed them of their plot, one of them said: who has told you this (قَالَتْ مَنْ أَنبَأَكَ هَذَا). For which Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was needed to remind her his status by saying:

نَبَّأَنِيَ الْعَلِيمُ الْخَبِيرُ

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Cool said:

As far as I remember, Ibn Kathir also has mentioned this whole incident. I think I have seen it in tafseer ibn-Kathir.

The following was taken from the tafsir of Molana Moudoodi:

Quote

Even a statesman of th caliber of Hadrat Umar says that he had never given way to doubt since the time he had embraced Islam but on this occasion he also could not avoid it. Impatient he went to Hadrat Abu Bakr and said "Is he (the Holy Prophet) not Allah's Messenger, and are we not Muslims, and are they not polytheists? Then, why should we agree to what is humiliating to our Faith?" He replied "O Umar, he is surely Allah's Messenger, and Allah will never make him the loser." Unsatisfied he went to the Holy Prophet himself and put the same questions to him, and he also gave him the same replies as Hadrat Abu Bakr had given. Afterwards Hadrat Umar continued to offer voluntary prayers and give aims so that Allah may pardon his insolence that he had shown towards the Holy Prophet on that occasion

https://www.searchtruth.com/tafsir/tafsir.php?chapter=48

Ibn Kathir although tried to protect Umar, but in his effort he gave yet another clue in the form of what Umar felt after doubting the Prophethood in Umar's words:

Quote

O son of Al-Khattab! You were so stubborn in repeating your question three times to the Messenger of Allah; each time he did not respond to you. So I mounted my animal, my camel, and went ahead for fear that a part of the Quran might be revealed in my case.

http://www.alim.org/library/quran/AlQuran-tafsir/TIK/48/1

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
11 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

whereupon `Ali (عليه السلام) requested to be excused from doing so. 

Ali (عليه السلام) requested.

Can you bring narrations from Shia source where Imam Ali (عليه السلام) said: No i Will not, or directly refused?

And inshaAllah i will prove here, that sunnis use narrations that contradict Quran and other Sahih Hadith to prove that Ali (عليه السلام) directly refused Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).

When you are done with Khalifa tul Muslimeen Hazrat Umar, lets discuss Ali (عليه السلام).

I will also ask you how a person, who can never seperate from Quran deny "Obey Allah and Obey Messenger".

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)

 

Quote

but do you have any reference which establishes that sayyidina Ali likewise repented from disobeying a direct command of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم concerning the Treaty?

Lets first see the story presented by Bukhari:

فَدَعَا النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم الْكَاتِبَ، فَقَالَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ ‏"‏‏.‏ قَالَ سُهَيْلٌ أَمَّا الرَّحْمَنُ فَوَاللَّهِ مَا أَدْرِي مَا هُوَ وَلَكِنِ اكْتُبْ بِاسْمِكَ اللَّهُمَّ‏.‏ كَمَا كُنْتَ تَكْتُبُ‏.‏ فَقَالَ الْمُسْلِمُونَ وَاللَّهِ لاَ نَكْتُبُهَا إِلاَّ بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ‏.‏ فَقَالَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ اكْتُبْ بِاسْمِكَ اللَّهُمَّ ‏"‏‏.‏ ثُمَّ قَالَ ‏"‏ هَذَا مَا قَاضَى عَلَيْهِ مُحَمَّدٌ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ‏"‏‏.‏ فَقَالَ سُهَيْلٌ وَاللَّهِ لَوْ كُنَّا نَعْلَمُ أَنَّكَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ مَا صَدَدْنَاكَ عَنِ الْبَيْتِ وَلاَ قَاتَلْنَاكَ، وَلَكِنِ اكْتُبْ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ‏.‏ فَقَالَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ وَاللَّهِ إِنِّي لَرَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَإِنْ كَذَّبْتُمُونِي‏.‏ اكْتُبْ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ‏"‏‏

First of all there is no mention of Ali (عليه السلام). But we do know the treaty is written by him. So when Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) commanded him to write:

هَذَا مَا قَاضَى عَلَيْهِ مُحَمَّدٌ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ

The kuffar objected on word "Rasoolullah" and asked him to correct it. If Imam Ali (عليه السلام) would have disobeyed Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) here, I am sure Bukhari would have not only mentioned his name as "Katib" but also would have emphasized on this alleged disobedience. 

If Imam Ali requested Prophet to cut or erase word "Rasoolullah", it is because of the fact that he only knows him only in the capacity of Prophet of Allah. This is the big difference. 

At one point, we have a person who is doubting on the Prophethood and at other we have a person who is certain that Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is Rasoolullah and therefore feeling "karahat" to erase the truth. And the same "karahiyat" was expressed by Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) by saying:

وَاللَّهِ إِنِّي لَرَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَإِنْ كَذَّبْتُمُونِي 

By Allah! I am Apostle of Allah even if you people do not believe me.

@Cherub786

Then he (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) commanded:

اكْتُبْ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ

https://muflihun.com/bukhari/50/891

Edited by Cool
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
12 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

but do you have any reference which establishes that sayyidina Ali likewise repented from disobeying a direct command of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم concerning the Treaty?

I am compelled to write more as I look into the hadith. Lets see the disobedience:

قَالَ فَلَمَّا فَرَغَ مِنْ قَضِيَّةِ الْكِتَابِ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم لأَصْحَابِهِ ‏"‏ قُومُوا فَانْحَرُوا، ثُمَّ احْلِقُوا ‏"‏‏.‏ قَالَ فَوَاللَّهِ مَا قَامَ مِنْهُمْ رَجُلٌ حَتَّى قَالَ ذَلِكَ ثَلاَثَ مَرَّاتٍ

(When the writing of the peace treaty was concluded, Allah's Apostle ﷺ said to his companions, "Get up and' slaughter your sacrifices and get your head shaved." By Allah none of them got up, and the Prophet repeated his order thrice.)

 

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...