|
Post by SunniSevens on Jun 5, 2007 12:07:02 GMT
www.yanabi.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=59&threadid=28755&highlight_key=y&keyword1=ammanA'oodhu BiAllahi min AsShaytaan ArRajeem BismiAllah ArRahmaan ArRaheem Wassalaatu WasSalaamu Alaika Ya RasoolAllahLa tajidu qawman yuminoona biAllahi waalyawmi alakhiri yuwaddoona man hadda Allaha warasoolahu walaw kanoo abaahum aw abnaahum aw ikhwanahum aw AAasheeratahum olaika kataba fee quloobihimu aleemana waayyadahum biroohin minhu wayudkhiluhum jannatin tajree min tahtiha alanharu khalideena feeha radiya Allahu AAanhum waradoo AAanhu olaika hizbu Allahi ala inna hizba Allahi humu almuflihoona [Surahe Al-Mujadila(58) Ayat 22]You will not find a people who believe in Allah and the last Day taking as their friends those who opposed Allah and His Messenger, even though they be their fathers or their sons or their brotheren or their kinsmen. These are they in whose hearts Allah has inscribed faith and helped them with a spirit from Himself, and will make them enter gardens beneath which flow streams, abiding therein, Allah is pleased with them and they are pleased with Allah. This is Allah's party. Do you hear'? it is Allah's party that is successful. [Kanzul Imaan Translation]Our Murshid, Sheikh Sayyid Abdul Qaadir Jilani RadiyAllahu Ta'aala Anhu has said : "Three things inevitably demands the attention of every Believer under all circumstances : A Commandment to be obeyed A Prohibition to be respected A Divine Decree to be accepted with good grace"[/i] Regarding people who make Bid'ah-e-Sayyi'ah(evil innovations) in beliefs and practices, Our beloved Sheikh Sayyid Abdul Qaadir Jilani (RadiyAllahu Ta'aala Anhu) has further said in his "Gunya" : "It is also essential for a sensible Mu'min not to have any relations with the people of Bid'ah. And he should not bear any love or nearness with them. Neither should he do Salaam to him. Our Imaam Hazrat Ahmed bin Hambal RadAllahu Anh said that it is also necessary that he should not be in his company. Neither go to him. Nor greet him in Eid and such happy occasions."Our beloved Imaam Ahle Sunnat, Hazrat Ahmed Raza Khan Rahmatullah Alaih says : "He who recites the Qur'aan incorrectly by changing it's meaning, or does not perform proper wudhu or ghusl, or refutes a basic principle of Deen, Sects such as Wahaabi, Shia, Ghair Muqallid, Qadiani - behind these people, one's Namaaz is Baatil" [Ahkaam-e-Shariah, Vol 1, Page 128, Ma'asala 52]If Salaah is the Me'raaj of a Mu'min which leads us towards Allah Azzawajal, how can unity with these corrupt beliefs, individuals and "The Amman Message" take us towards Allah Subhaanahu wata'aala? Imaan is not merely about Believing in Allah and His Rasool, it's also about how one believes in Allah and His Rasool. To be merely called 'Muslim' is not sufficient in this Dunya, nor is it in the Aakhirat. The first step of the Aakhirat is the Qabr, where we would be asked three questions: 1. Ma Rabbuka? (who is your Lord?)The Mu'min would reply: "Rabbi Allah" (My Lord is Allah)2. Ma Deenuka? (what is your Deen?)Deen by Allah is only Islam, and thus the Mu'min would reply: "Deeni AlIslam" (My Deen is Islam)Now ponder over this, if a person comes and says to you: "I Believe in Allah and I follow Islam (i.e. I am Muslim)", is there any need for a further question? If a person makes such a declaration would one call him/her a Kaafir? 3. Despite this there is a third question, (when the Beloved Prophet Sallalahu alaihi wasallam would present himself in the Qabr) "Ma Kunta taqooli fi Haqqi haadi Rajul?" (What did you used to say about this personality)The interesting part of this final question, is that the question is not about the recognition of the Rasool of Allah, but more about HOW the person believed in the Rasool of Allah. So if the person use to believe that "he is just like us" or "He doesn't know what is behind the wall" or "His knowledge is equivalent to Tom, Dick and Harry (Zaid aw Amar)" then even though they got the first 2 questions correct, they are stuck and fail to qualify as a Muslim on this last question. Whereas the Mu'min would answer what he believed... so if you use to say "Mustafa Jaane Rahmat peh Laako Salaam" or "He is my Master" or "I love him more than any other creation" then indeed, they would pass this question with ease, and the Angels would say to them: "We knew you would give this answer" and instruct him/her: "Namka Uroosatin" (Sleep like a Bride) who would have rest and peace until meeting his/her beloved Allah Subhaanahu wata'aala. Allahu waRasoolahu a'alamu.It is clear that Muslims (Pakka Sacha Tantanatan Sunni Sahihul Aqeedah) should not support or endorse this "Amman Message". Infact, we should uphold our Maslak-e-'Ala Hazrat and strongly oppose such evil. I humbly request all those responsible individuals on the Ashrafi Forum, please inform your local Sunni Ulema and Mashaa'ikh about this Amman Message, and let us try to unite in opposing this Deviation from The Qur'aan and Sunnah of Allah's Beloved Sallalahu alaihi wasallam. We remain united on Haqq only! Never on Baatil! Maslak-e-'Ala Hazrat Zindabaad!SunniSevens Administrator Mohamed Mansoor Qaaderi Razvi groups.yahoo.com/group/sunnisevensps. Please also voice your opinion about this Amman Message, the world needs to know that we oppose it. And please sign petition: www.petitiononline.com/amanfitn/petition.htmlThe three points of the Amman Message are attached below: (Astaghfirullah min Dhaalik) (see ammanmessage.com/)(1) Whosoever is an adherent to one of the four Sunni schools (Mathahib) of Islamic jurisprudence (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi`i and Hanbali), the two Shi'i schools of Islamic jurisprudence (Ja`fari and Zaydi), the Ibadi school of Islamic jurisprudence and the Thahiri school of Islamic jurisprudence, is a Muslim. Declaring that person an apostate is impossible and impermissible. Verily his (or her) blood, honour, and property are inviolable. Moreover, in accordance with the Shaykh Al-Azhar's fatwa, it is neither possible nor permissible to declare whosoever subscribes to the Ash`ari creed or whoever practices real Tasawwuf (Sufism) an apostate. Likewise, it is neither possible nor permissible to declare whosoever subscribes to true Salafi thought an apostate. Equally, it is neither possible nor permissible to declare as apostates any other group of Muslims who believes in God, Glorified and Exalted be He, and His Messenger (may peace and blessings be upon him), the pillars of faith (Iman), and the five pillars of Islam, and does not deny any necessarily self-evident tenet of religion. (2) There exists more in common between the various schools of Islamic jurisprudence than there is difference between them. The adherents to the eight schools of Islamic jurisprudence are in agreement as regards the basic principles of Islam. All believe in Allah (God), Glorified and Exalted be He, the One and the Unique; that the Noble Qur'an is the Revealed Word of God preserved and protected by God, Exalted be He, from any change or aberration; and that our master Muhammad, may blessings and peace be upon him, is a Prophet and Messenger unto all mankind. All are in agreement about the five pillars of Islam: the two testaments of faith (shahadatayn); the ritual prayer (salat); almsgiving (zakat); fasting the month of Ramadan (sawm), and the Hajj to the sacred house of God (in Mecca). All are also in agreement about the foundations of belief: belief in Allah (God), His angels, His scriptures, His messengers, and in the Day of Judgment, in Divine Providence in good and in evil. Disagreements between the 'ulama (scholars) of the eight schools of Islamic jurisprudence are only with respect to the ancillary branches of religion (furu`) and some fundamentals (usul) [of the religion of Islam]. Disagreement with respect to the ancillary branches of religion (furu`) is a mercy. Long ago it was said that variance in opinion among the 'ulama (scholars) "is a mercy". (3) Acknowledgement of the schools of Islamic jurisprudence (Mathahib) within Islam means adhering to a fundamental methodology in the issuance of fatwas: no one may issue a fatwa without the requisite qualifications of knowledge. No one may issue a fatwa without adhering to the methodology of the schools of Islamic jurisprudence. No one may claim to do unlimited Ijtihad and create a new opinion or issue unacceptable fatwas that take Muslims out of the principles and certainties of the Shari`ah and what has been established in respect of its schools of jurisprudence.
|
|
Ashiq e Rasool
Valued Member
He who obeys the Beloved Prophet (alaihi salaam) has indeed obeyed Allah [surah al-Nisa?; 4:80]
Posts: 7,347
|
Post by Ashiq e Rasool on Jun 6, 2007 10:21:21 GMT
Assalamu 'Alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu
ASALATU WASALAMU ALAYKA YA RASULLALLAH Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa Sallam Respected brother I have voted for strongly oppose. Maybe if the moderators could stick this up then more members could view it and vote and I will sign the petition now. Jazak Allah Khair for informing us.
|
|
|
Post by Saalik on Jun 6, 2007 10:51:32 GMT
No, I don't endorse "The Amman Message" , so I have voted for "No, I strongly oppose it." . Allahumma Salle Alaa Sayyidinah Wa Mawlaanah Muhammadanin Nooril Anwari Wa Sirril Asraari Wa Sayyadil Abraar.
|
|
|
Post by musaafir on Jun 6, 2007 12:26:06 GMT
Assalaam Alaikum
I have read that message and nowehere does it say that you have to pray behind them or that you you have to believe they are sahih ul Aqeeda.
All it states is that you cannot call them apostates or totally out of the fold of islam.
We sunni do not call salafis or all shias murtads or apostates/kaafirs anyway, but rather consider them ghumraah /deviant /budmazhab/ghustaak etc
We cannot compare this to furec as that was hindus,christians,jews etc mixed,but here we have sects that claim to believe in the zarooriat e deen(essentials of deen).
The only thing that comes in mind is that by opposing what it states i.e." not calling them apostates" means that we want to call them apostates.
I dont remember Ala HadratRadi Allahu anhu a fatwa of blanket kufr on any sect of islam,but rather only individuals that belonged to certain sects.
Yet we as followers of these great shaykhs are prepared to give blanket fatwas and put our own imaan in danger.
Hence i will not fall for this emotional blackmail made by a person who has not even understood the flippin thing in the first place but just rabbitted on about putting fatwas of kufr on other scholars too and who implies that maslak e Ala Hadrat is the only factor in determining belief or kufr.
I think our scholars fit this criteria,and if neccassary they will give a fatwa against persons who transgress limits.
To sum it up,nowhere does ity state you have to hold hands with these baatil groups or sit in the same gatherings or like them or dine with them etc etc, but rather just accept them as within the folds of islam.
So until they force us to believe in the filthy beliefs of some of these sects or suggest that we accept these beliefs or what we seem to be ghustaakhi, i for one will not opposse it.
All i suggest is read it very carefully before making your minds up about it,or at least consult a scholar about it first by giving him the exact word for word translation/meaning to it and not one based on emotions(as fatwas of kufr are not given based emotions but rather Quraan,sunnah,Ijma and qyas). 0and
PS It also protects sunnis(Hanafi,shafi etc and maturidi/Ashari) from having fatwas of kufr put against them by deviants too.
I realise people will here may go against me in regards to this,but those are my thoughts on the matter.
Nor do i suggest anyone to vote in favour of it.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Nomee on Jun 6, 2007 13:22:00 GMT
Assalamu 'Alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu
ASALATU WASALAMU ALAYKA YA RASULLALLAH Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa Sallam
I also strongly oppose the "Amman Message"!!!
Wa'alaykum 'Assalam wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu
|
|
Hafeez
Valued Member
Islam786:Hum sab Huzoor Paak (assalatu wassallam) ke Ghulam hai
Posts: 4,019
|
Post by Hafeez on Jun 6, 2007 14:08:40 GMT
Assalamu 'Alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu
I also appose the Amman message!!
|
|
|
Post by Saalik on Jun 6, 2007 16:02:17 GMT
In my opinion if any one claiming to be a "MUSLIM" does not have the correct “AQEEDAH” towards any of the Blessed Companions of our Beloved Master Sayyadinah Hazrat Muhammad Mustapha , then that person’s faith is not complete. So, can anyone with an incomplete faith be considered a “MUSLIM”? By looking at the first point one can be easily misled. That may seem strange but there are still Sunnis who find no wrong with the deviants by giving such evidences like they also pray, fast, give alms, perform hadj and do daawah. These outer actions of the deviants make these people believe that they (the deviants) are not wrong. By reading point 1, their misconception will be strengthened. Point No 1. Whosoever is an adherent to one of the four Sunni schools (Mathahib) of Islamic jurisprudence (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi`i and Hanbali), the two Shi’i schools of Islamic jurisprudence (Ja`fari and Zaydi), the Ibadi school of Islamic jurisprudence and the Thahiri school of Islamic jurisprudence, is a Muslim. Declaring that person an apostate is impossible and impermissible. Verily his (or her) blood, honour, and property are inviolable. Moreover, in accordance with the Shaykh Al-Azhar’s fatwa, it is neither possible nor permissible to declare whosoever subscribes to the Ash`ari creed or whoever practices real Tasawwuf (Sufism) an apostate. Likewise, it is neither possible nor permissible to declare whosoever subscribes to true Salafi thought an apostate.
Equally, it is neither possible nor permissible to declare as apostates any group of Muslims who believes in God, Glorified and Exalted be He, and His Messenger (may peace and blessings be upon him) and the pillars of faith, and acknowledges the five pillars of Islam, and does not deny any necessarily self-evident tenet of religion.ammanmessage.com/By the same have a look at who are those who have endorsed the Amman Message:- ammanmessage.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=31Now after reading point No.1 it is understood that the deviants also are muslims. It is logical that in the eyes of the non-muslims we are all muslims. The hidden real danger in this is that once it gets anchored in the belief of easy targets it will evidently and automatically create APOSTASY. Some people will find no wrong in praying behing a MUSLIM (as defined in the Amman Message) and that will create discussions and divisions further. Is the real aim of "The Amman Message" religious or political? 1. apostasy : the state of having rejected your religious beliefs or your political party or a cause (often in favor of opposing beliefs or causes) 2. apostate : not faithful to religion or party or cause. Believing that the deviants are Muslims as is being made to believe by “The Amman Message” is in itself apostasy. Personally I cannot accept a shiah as a Muslim when taking into consideration what they say about Ameer-ul-Mouminine Sayyadinah Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddique , the Yaar e Ghaar of our Madani Aaqaa Sayyadinah Rahmatul-lil-Aalamine . I must point out that in giving my personal opinion I am in no way trying to create any debate or so. I have stressed on a point that I have personally witnessed in real life and seen sunnis engaging in discussions after having prayed a few times behind deviants and getting enchanted by their speech. What is more cheating from their parts is that they have started to lure people by reading Naat shareefs and Salat-o-Salaam. What they qualify as bid'at, they use to attract weak sunnis to misguide them with their poisonous speeches. Therefore no debating please but be careful, vigilant and don't get deviated. Take time to read and think :- ashraf786.proboards15.com/index.cgi?board=poems&action=display&thread=1180909905Jazaak Allah Khairan. Allahumma Salle Alaa Sayyidinah Wa Mawlaanah Muhammadanin Nooril Anwari Wa Sirril Asraari Wa Sayyadil Abraar.
|
|
|
Post by lailah on Jun 7, 2007 6:43:49 GMT
Assalamu 'Alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu
I strongly appose the Amman Message. To me it is a start of yet another deviant plan of the Deobandis/Wahabis to pull innocent Muslims into their circles.
Brother Musaafir, maybe to you this does not seem wrong, but think of our fellow brothers and sisters who are not educated, with this "amman message" they can be lead astray. We as Muslim have a right to protect our fellow Sunni Believers, and so if there is even a remote chance of this "Amman Message" corrupting the beliefs of others, then it is our duty to put a stop to it.
Ma'asalaam Lailah Sayed
|
|
|
Post by SunniSevens on Jun 7, 2007 7:50:03 GMT
Assalaam Alaikum I have read that message and nowehere does it say that you have to pray behind them or that you you have to believe they are sahih ul Aqeeda. All it states is that you cannot call them apostates or totally out of the fold of islam. Wa'alaikum assalaam. So according to you, a person who is not Sahihul Aqeedah is also a Muslim? Please elaborate... We sunni do not call salafis or all shias murtads or apostates/kaafirs anyway, but rather consider them ghumraah /deviant /budmazhab/ghustaak etc Are those 'salafis' or 'shias' who do not qualify as being Kaafir/Murtad actually salafis or shias in the true sense of the word? Those who are regarded as Wahaabi/Salafi/Deobandi/Shia, are only those who adopt the beliefs of those Firqahs. Those who simply have outward identity or mingle with Deobandis are not 'Deobandis' in the true sense of the word. A Deobandi is only one who adopts and aclaims the beliefs of Deobandism. Towards such a person the Fatwa-e-Takfir would definately be applicable! To doubt this puts one own Imaan at risk. Consult "Mustataab Hisaam-ul-Haramain Alaa Manher-ul-Kufr wal Main" for this ruling. There is a big difference between the ordinary public laymen's perception of what a 'Wahaabi' is compared to who really qualifies as being termed a 'Wahaabi'. If the person adopts the Belief system of this sect, then indeed he is a Wahaabi in the true sense of the word, and thus, due to his Kufri Beliefs, one is not to show any respect to him, nor greet him in occasions of Eid etc, nor perform Salaah behind him, nor allow one's womenfolk to marry him, nor eat any meat that is slaughtered by him etc. This meaning that the person fully understands and with this complete understanding - still holds incorrect beliefs. If the person has such incorrect beliefs that it summounts to Kufr, then YES - the persons slaughtering of the meat would render it Haraam, since one of the conditions of the meat being Halaal is that a Muslim slaughters it. We cannot compare this to furec as that was hindus,christians,jews etc mixed,but here we have sects that claim to believe in the zarooriat e deen(essentials of deen). The only thing that comes in mind is that by opposing what it states i.e." not calling them apostates" means that we want to call them apostates. The only thing that comes to mind is that by endorsing the Amman Message means that you want to call them Muslims. Well? do you? Do you want to call him who believes that Allah Subhaaahu wata'aala has the ability to lie (like the Deobandis believe), or that Allah has hands or Allah in confined to space(like the Wahaabis believe)... Astaghfirullah min dhaalik! I dont remember Ala HadratRadi Allahu anhu a fatwa of blanket kufr on any sect of islam,but rather only individuals that belonged to certain sects. Yet we as followers of these great shaykhs are prepared to give blanket fatwas and put our own imaan in danger. 'Ala Hazrat did not give fatwa on the entire fraternity, only on certain individuals. Remember also, that it wasn't given on them because of their namesakes, but rather on their Aqeedah. So if another person comes about with the same Aqeedah as those individuals, then does or doesn't the Fatwa-e-Takfir Apply to them? Hence i will not fall for this emotional blackmail made by a person who has not even understood the flippin thing in the first place but just rabbitted on about putting fatwas of kufr on other scholars too and who implies that maslak e Ala Hadrat is the only factor in determining belief or kufr. So Holding Firm to Maslak-e-'Ala Hazrat is regarded by you as 'emotional blackmail'? Ma'azAllah. Like i said in yesterday's post: Wa'alaikum assalaam warahmatullahi wabarakaatuh JazaakAllah khair for your support sister. I humbly request the moderators and administrators of this forum take this matter quite seriously. One good thing that has come about from this Amman Message, is that some chuppe huwe Wahaabis have exposed themselves.This Amman Message along with the list of signatures should be relayed up to Ulema and Masha'ikh of Bereilly Shareef, as well as Shaikh-al-Islam and Gaazi-e-Millat. This is no different from the Furec ordeal with Sayyid Muhhamad Ashraf Jilaani, surely the likes of Prof Tahirul Qaderi, Nuh Keller and Faraz Rabbani also deserve a Fatwa placed upon them. I'm fairly certain that some may regard my attitude towards these 'so called' reputable Ulema as slanderous, but this time round the proof is concrete enough. Alhamdulillah azzawajal. My heart is in Madina Shareef, my body in Baghdaad Shareef and my identity would proudly remain in Bereilly Shareef insha'Allah azzawajal. In this day and age, the main Sunni Identity is with Maslak-e-'Ala Hazrat! This has been a common practice throughout the ages. The term 'Muslim' is not enough. Our History shows that when it came to identifying a Muslim, more questions where needed. i.e. "Are you a Sunni Muslim or Shia Muslim?". Later on in history, even the answer to this question could not identify if the person was Sahihul Aqeedah, and one had to ask, "Are you Hanafi, Shaf'ee, Maliki or Hambali?" Infact, even at the time of Imaam-e-Aazam Abu Haneefa RadiAllahu Ta'aala anh, there were some people, who defied the mas'ala about the massaa on the Kuffs (leather socks) [wearing for 24 hours and not having to wash feet for wudhu, if musaafir 3 days/3 nights allowed], and due to their corrupt belief on this 'trivial' matter - Our Beloved Imaam-e-Aazam RadiAllahu anh said at that time: "The Identity of a Sunni Muslim is he who makes massaa of the Kuff" What has massa of the Kuff have to do with Imaan? Yet, this trivial matter became the identity of a Sahihul Aqeedah. Later on in history, corrupt sects errupted even from amongst those who made Taqleed, and thats when the identity of a Sunni Muslim was connected to Imaam Ashari and Imaam Maturidi Rahmatullah Alaihum. Then later, people rejected Tasawwuf, so the identity of a Sunni Muslim was with those who regarded themselves Qaaderi/Chishty/Naqshabandi/Soharwardi. Later on even those who acclaimed themselves to belong to these, they deviated from the mainstream beliefs of Ahle Sunnah wal Jamaat, and a great Imaam stood up, revived the Praise of Allah Subhaanahu wata'aala, and protected the dignity and station of RasoolAllah Sallalahu alaihi wasallam. He was non-other than Mo'jizatun Nabi, Mujaddid-e-Deen-o-Millat, Imaam Ahle Sunnat, Imaam Ashah Ahmed Raza Khan Fazil-e-Bereilwi Rahmatullah alaih. Thus today, no matter who a person is, whether Shaf'ee, Malaiki, Qaaderi, Naqshabandi, he must keep his identity as a Sunni Bereilwi! This is why even though we ourselves believe that things like 'Meeldun Nabi', 'Giyaari Shareef', 'Urs' etc are Mustahab - meaning that if one practices it there is Thawaab, and if one does not practice it, there is no sin upon them. Despite us knowing this and firmly believing it, why are we so regular in keeping these practices? Simply because these practices have become the Identity of Ahle Sunnah wal Jamaat. Similarly, our identity is with 'Ala Hazrat, who stood up to defend the Deen against the Gustkaakis Beliefs, yet today, people are giving technical arguments to also identify these very Gustaakis as 'Muslims'. Today, If ANYONE (after knowing about 'Ala Hazrat, and what sacrifices he has made to protect our own imaan even from his Qabr Mubaarak) has any issue with calling himselve "Sunni Bereilvi", then that person has a big question mark on his Aqeedah. I think our scholars fit this criteria,and if neccassary they will give a fatwa against persons who transgress limits. Nobody has issued fatwa, but nobody should open regard all Firqas as Muslim. While the Nabi has indicated that in the Aakhirat all these Firqahs would be in the Fire, some individuals want to protect them in this dunya by not regarding them as worthy of the fire. Jannat is only for Muslims, and then too, only for Sahihul Aqeedah Muslims. To sum it up,nowhere does ity state you have to hold hands with these baatil groups or sit in the same gatherings or like them or dine with them etc etc, but rather just accept them as within the folds of islam. So until they force us to believe in the filthy beliefs of some of these sects or suggest that we accept these beliefs or what we seem to be ghustaakhi, i for one will not opposse it. You holding hands with them by regarding them as one of you. Remember the Hadith: "You would be (in the Aakhirat) with those whom you love (in this Dunya)". Also recall the promise you make to Allah everyday in your Witr Salaah: "wa naghla'oo wanatruku mayyafjuruk" (we forsake those that disobey Allah). Now here you are promising Allah Azzawajal that you forsake the Faasiq-e-mu'lin (open transgressors) i.e. those with Evil Practices, yet here you are supporting the Amman Message and not forsaking those with Evil Beliefs. Which is worst? Those with Evil Practices or those with Evil Beliefs? All i suggest is read it very carefully before making your minds up about it,or at least consult a scholar about it first by giving him the exact word for word translation/meaning to it and not one based on emotions(as fatwas of kufr are not given based emotions but rather Quraan,sunnah,Ijma and qyas). Alhamdulillah ala kulli haal. Have YOU consulted? Please provide us their identity and verdict? Again, nobody has passed the fatwa of Kufr on the Amman Message or it's supporters, but we are not prepared to regard Shias/Wahaabis/Deobandis as Muslims either (Those who qualify as these in the true meaning) PS It also protects sunnis(Hanafi,shafi etc and maturidi/Ashari) from having fatwas of kufr put against them by deviants too. I realise people will here may go against me in regards to this,but those are my thoughts on the matter. Nor do i suggest anyone to vote in favour of it. We don't need the likes of King Abdullah II bin Al-Hussein to protect us from the 'fatwa of Kufr'. I would rather sacrifice my head at the feet of Kifayatullah (Khadim-e-Ala Hazrat) then appreciate such a attempt at protecting my Imaan. Allahu waRasoolahu a'alamu. Ya Allah Azzawajal, bear witness that I reject the Amman Message. Ya Mustafa Sallalahu alaihi wasallam, I reject regarding those who insult you as my brother. Shahe Madinah! Kutta Banaalo, Qadmo se Apne, Mujhko Lagaalo!
|
|
E P N
Valued Member
Posts: 739
|
Post by E P N on Jun 7, 2007 9:45:06 GMT
Assalamu 'Alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu
I oppose this "The Amman Message"! It's a definate NO from me!
Wa'alaykum 'Assalam wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu
|
|
|
Post by SunniSevens on Jun 7, 2007 10:28:49 GMT
|
|
MadaniSister
Senior Member
"Mujhe apni aur sari Dunia k logon ki islah ki koshish karni hai InshAllah Azzawajal"
Posts: 5,233
|
Post by MadaniSister on Jun 7, 2007 11:16:52 GMT
Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
ASALATU WASALAMU ALAYKA YA RASULLALLAH Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa Sallam
JazakAllahkhair for The petition Link Brother SunniSeven,I also appose the Amman message!!
|
|
|
Post by musaafir on Jun 7, 2007 13:54:41 GMT
So according to you, a person who is not Sahihul Aqeedah is also a Muslim? Please elaborate... Ok I will take you to task on this issue alone as the rest of it is just your own particular "brainwashed" rant not worthy of an answer. Why cant a gumraah/misguided person still remain in the folds of islam? Not believing in hazr nazr,or noor of Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa Sallam etc does not take you out of islam. Give me a fatwa of Any scholar of any repute who says otherwise. Why did Ala Hadrat state in "Tahmeed e Imaan the words" I still consider the followers of these four(Thanvi and co whom he passed a fatwa of kufr on) as muslims,but heretics"? What does the Hadith Shareef that states of 73 sects and only one going to heaven mean in the starting words"my ummah will break up into 73 sects"? notice the words "my Ummah?,whether your extremeist mentality allows it or not its quite clear they mean these other sects will still be amongst the ummah, but they will be gumraah and hence be worthy of fire for there their deviance. Classical scholars have said that these other deviant groups will be in hell for certain period but not eternity ,due to their belief in the fundementals of islam. Who are you to imply kufr to the sect that Ala Hadrat Radi Allahu anha did not do so on,collectively? What happens to your iman now? As matter of fact the pioneers of this message king abdullah son of king hussain are not deobandi or wahaabi at all,they are of nobale hashmi lineage and just want others not to give blanket fatwas of kufr on each other. What is bad about that? Why do you people seem its a plan to terickm gullible youngsters blah blah blah? They dont ask you to believe that these sects are sahih ul aqeeda or to believe that they have NO elements of wrong even kufric ideaology in some of there beliefs,but rather that you accept that they are still in the folds of islam(collectively as a sect) whilst they believe in the pillars of islam and the essentials of faith. You dont have to believe in them as true muslims or good muslims but just not as apostates or those that have left the folds of islamtotally,something which is dangerous for our imaan too as they might not have left islam whilst me and you percieve of them as having done so,what effect does that have on our iman then? Go and get academic proof from scholarly works from classical aqeeda books ,which specifically say that all these sects are out of the fold of islam as a whole and cannot be classified as muslims(i dont mean fatwas on individuals, and your ifs and buts about their followers, but hard proof). Imaan of fellow muslims(as a whole) is sacred and should not be done away with totally by our own notions and misconceptions. As far a your understanding of "maslak e Ala Hadrat" is concerned tell me a)Where Ala Hadrat Radi Allahu anhu mentions this title by [ [name? b) what maslak were the sunni contemporary's of Ala Hadrat Radi Allahu anhu such as Fatah e Qadianiat Syed Pir Mehr Ali Shah Radi Allahu anhu, Mujaddid e millat Pir Syed Jamaat Ali shah Radi Allahu anhu,Huzoor Mufti e Azam hind Radi Allahu anhu and the sunni contemporarys of the rest of the world following? it certainly wasnt "sunni brelvi",as this title did not exhist but has been invented recently. Rather some of these scholars differed with Ala Hadrat on furui/fiqhi matters so accordimng to to your twisted analogies these qutbe waqts/gouse were not sunnis? Brother grow out of this cocoon mentality,and bare in mind that Ala HadratRadi Allahu anhu is from the Ahle Sunnah Wal Jammaah,thec Ahle Sunnah wal Jamaah is NOT from Ala Hadrat regardless of what your moulvis teach you. Infact this is an insult to the great name of Ala Hadrat that you divide true sunnis by using this title for your religious politics. I will leave you with one Question since you are an Attari. What doesn't your respected murshid sahib prefer you to user the word brailvis? but rather says you should use the words Ahle Sunnah Wal Jamaah?(Alhamdulillah i totally agree with hazrat sahib,since i believe he's a wali Allah). I suggest you find out from the top before answering this one(as i been informed by some quite senior.) Dont try to determine peoples sunnyat on whetherr they consider themselves brelvi or not as you may become unstuck. I follow/accept the teachings of Ala Hadrat Radi Allahu anhaand that of all his true sunni contemporarys,if there is a difference of opinion i follow my Grandshaikhs and respectfully leave Al Hadrat's whilst also aknowledging it to be valid too. This brother is true sunniat ! i.e. respect difference of opinion amongst ahle Haq and not force yours on others if it differs,nor question their Sunnyat. Go and learn sunnyat and its conditions towards other sunnis before trying to give me lectures on sunnyat. Wassalaam. PS I am not a "brelvi(as i dont recognise such a sect)", then what?
|
|
|
Post by Sister Nomee on Jun 7, 2007 18:01:49 GMT
Assalamu 'Alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu
ASALATU WASALAMU ALAYKA YA RASULLALLAH Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa SallamRespected brothers musaafir and sunnisevens we must refrain from making personal attacks on each other, we are all entitled to our opinions and must respect each others views and opinions. JazakAllah khairun Wa'alaykum 'Assalam wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu[/b]
|
|
|
Post by Saalik on Jun 7, 2007 18:59:06 GMT
Assalamu 'Alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu
ASALATU WASALAMU ALAYKA YA RASULLALLAH Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa SallamRespected brothers musaafir and sunnisevens we must refrain from making personal attacks on each other, we are all entitled to our opinions and must respect each others views and opinions. JazakAllah khairun Wa'alaykum 'Assalam wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu [/b][/quote] Beloved Brothers, Respected Sister Nomee is right. I have observed that your discussion is indirectly preventing other members from participating freely in the poll, please be kind to respect their rights as well. You both have your rights here but when it is being like it is presently, then it is not fair towards other Respected Members. Hope you will look into the positive aspect of both messages.
Please forgive if you feel the least offence.
Jazaak Allah Khairan.Allahumma Salle Alaa Sayyidinah Wa Mawlaanah Muhammadanin Nooril Anwari Wa Sirril Asraari Wa Sayyadil Abraar.
|
|
|
Post by SunniSevens on Jun 7, 2007 20:22:14 GMT
Respected brothers musaafir and sunnisevens we must refrain from making personal attacks on each other, we are all entitled to our opinions and must respect each others views and opinions.
JazakAllah khairun
BismiAllah ArRahmaan ArRaheem Wassalaatu WasSalaamu alaika Ya RasoolAllah Sister Nomee Wa'alaikum assalaam warahmatullahi wabarakaatuh JazaakAllah for the reminder. However, please kindly direct your reminder at the person making the personal attacks as I have done no such thing. Parhaps sister needs a humble reminder of these: JazaakAllah. So according to you, a person who is not Sahihul Aqeedah is also a Muslim? Please elaborate... Ok I will take you to task on this issue alone as the rest of it is just your own particular "brainwashed" rant not worthy of an answer. Why cant a gumraah/misguided person still remain in the folds of islam? Not believing in hazr nazr,or noor of Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa Sallam etc does not take you out of islam. Give me a fatwa of Any scholar of any repute who says otherwise. Why did Ala Hadrat state in "Tahmeed e Imaan the words" I still consider the followers of these four(Thanvi and co whom he passed a fatwa of kufr on) as muslims,but heretics"? 'Take me to task' all you want. I've provided enough evidence for my "brainwashed rant" and would certainly provide more for the benefit of other readers who appreciate it. Perhaps if you bothered reading my comments on who qualifies as a 'Deobandi/Wahaabi/Shia' in the true sense of the meaning, then you would understand that I never said that the entire fraternity is Kaafir. It's obvious that whoever has the same beliefs as those individuals upon whom the fatwa was passed, then they too would qualify for the Fatwa-e-Takfir with the same arguments. What does the Hadith Shareef that states of 73 sects and only one going to heaven mean in the starting words"my ummah will break up into 73 sects"? notice the words "my Ummah?,whether your extremeist mentality allows it or not its quite clear they mean these other sects will still be amongst the ummah, but they will be gumraah and hence be worthy of fire for there their deviance. Classical scholars have said that these other deviant groups will be in hell for certain period but not eternity ,due to their belief in the fundementals of islam. Who are you to imply kufr to the sect that Ala Hadrat Radi Allahu anha did not do so on,collectively? What happens to your iman now? Again, please show me how I have blanketted Kufr on any sect? Be it in this thread or in the history of my contributions on this forum (or any other). This is indeed a baseless accusation which you would be accountable for. The Ummah of Nabi Sallalahu alaihi wasallam are those bound by his Shariat. This however does not mean that if such a bound person commit Kufr then he is still of Nabi's Sallalahu alaihi wasallams Ummat. They dont ask you to believe that these sects are sahih ul aqeeda or to believe that they have NO elements of wrong even kufric ideaology in some of there beliefs,but rather that you accept that they are still in the folds of islam(collectively as a sect) whilst they believe in the pillars of islam and the essentials of faith. You dont have to believe in them as true muslims or good muslims but just not as apostates or those that have left the folds of islamtotally,something which is dangerous for our imaan too as they might not have left islam whilst me and you percieve of them as having done so,what effect does that have on our iman then? Wait, let us understand what you are saying (in a nutshell)... they are not sahihul aqeeda + they have some kufri beliefs + they are not true Muslims + they are not good Muslims = they are Muslim. Did i sum up your above comment correctly? Go and get academic proof from scholarly works from classical aqeeda books ,which specifically say that all these sects are out of the fold of islam as a whole and cannot be classified as muslims(i dont mean fatwas on individuals, and your ifs and buts about their followers, but hard proof). Imaan of fellow muslims(as a whole) is sacred and should not be done away with totally by our own notions and misconceptions.[/quote] Is Allama Sadrush Shariah, Hazrat Amjad Ali Qaaderi Razvi's "Bahaar-e-Shariat" classical enough for you? Volume 1 under the Aqeedah concerning Allah's Being and attributes: "Allah has the Power over everything that is possible", it goes further to say: "to accept any Muhaal (absolutely impossible) to be within Allah's Qudrat, is to, in reality reject the Tawheed" What implications does this have on ANY individual who believes in Imkaane Kidhb? Same Volume and Chapter: "He does not depend on ears, eyes and tongue to hear, see or speak since these are all physical forms and Allah is free from any physical form" also "Almighty Allah is free from shape, size, space, direction, time and all that which is Haadith (created)" What implications does this have on those who say that 'Allah has Hands' or confine Allah to a certain space? Same Volume and Chapter: "Like all Allah's Attributes, His Kalaam (Words/Speech) is also Qadeem (uncreated). It is not created. The Holy Qur'aan is Allah's Kalaam. Any person who says the Qur'aan to be a creation has been termed a Kaafir, by our Imaam Aazam Abu Haneefa RadiAllahu anh. Actually the Kufr of such a person is proven from the Sahaaba Ikraam Radwaanullahi ajma'een" Volume 1, Capter Concerning the Beliefs of Nabuwwat: "As this religion (Islam) is to remain forever, Almighty Allah has taken upon Himself the responsibility of protecting the Quran. Almighty Allah says, "Verily We have revealed the Quran and verily We are definitely its protector." Thus, to make any alterations in the Quran in any way is totally impossible, even if the people of the entire world gather together with the intention of altering it, thus anyone who says that any chapters, verses, surahs, or even letters have been added or subtracted from it, is a Kaafir without any doubt, for he has refuted the verse of the Quran which we have quoted above." What implications does this have on some of those who reject Qur'aan, even if it be selected portions? V1, C2: "To respect a Nabi is "Fardh-e-Ain" (meaning that it is fard upon every individual personally). In actuality it is the reality of all Fard. The slightest disrespect or falsification of the word of any Nabi is Kufr." What of those who insult Nabi Sallahu alaihi wasallam's knowledge and status? The list goes on... V1, C2: "The Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) is Khaatimun Nabiyeen meaning that he is the Final Prophet of Allah. Almighty Allah has closed the doors of Prophethood after the Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam). No new Nabi can now come either in the era of the Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) or after this. Anyone who accepts that a new Nabi could come in the time of the Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) or after his time, or one who even thinks this to be possible is a Kaafir." V1, C2: "Any person who looks at any saying, action, practice or condition of the Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) with the slightest contempt, is a Kaafir." Chapter 9: "To be a Muslim, it is also compulsory not to verbally reject anything which is from amongst the necessities of Deen. Even if a person accepts all the other necessities and says that he is only rejecting it verbally but has faith in it in his heart. A Muslim can never utter words of kufr and only he will utter such words of kufr, who harbors such thoughts in his heart, and says whatever he pleases whenever he pleases. Imaan is such a firm conviction, that there is no room for disagreement present in it." 9: "Ones physical practices are not included in the actual theory of Imaan. There are however certain actions which when done, will cause a person to become a kaafir. Examples of these actions are : To make sajdah to the sun and the moon, to kill a Prophet, to say blasphemy against a Prophet, To insult the Kaaba Shareef or the Holy Quran, or to look at any sunnat with in a bad way. All these are without doubt Kufr. In the same way, there are certain practices which are signs of kufr, such as wearing a Zannaar, growing a choti (bunch of hair grown on the back of head by hindus), or applying the qashqa (the mark made on the foreheads by hindus indicating their conviction as hindus). The Great Jurists have labelled one who does these actions as a Kaafir. Now, that these actions show kufr, then the person who has done them will have to read the Kalima again and make Nikah again with his wife if he was married." Here's some knockout quotations for you... The same chapter(9) says: "There is no relationship between belief and unbelief. A person will either be a Muslim or a Kaafir. There is no third thing, that a person is neither a Muslim nor a Kaafir." "Any person who makes dua for a kaafir after his death, or refers to a dead murtad (one who turns away from Islam) as 'Marhoom' or 'Maghfoor' or addresses a dead hindu as a heavenly soul is a kaafir." "To have ill feeling about any Sahabi is a sign of being a bud mazhab and a mislead person. Such a person is worthy of the fire of hell. To have ill feelings concerning the Sahabi is to harbor ill feelings against the Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam). Such people who do this are Raafdhis, even if he accepts the Khulafa‑e‑Raashideen and claims to be a Sunni. To insult Hazrat Ameer Muawiyah, his father Hazrat Abu Sufyaan, His mother Hazrat Hind is not acceptable. In the same way, to speak against Sayyidina Amr ibn Aa's, Hazrat Mughira, Hazrat Abu Moosa Ash'ari, or even Hazrat Wahshi (who martyred Hazrat Ameer‑e‑Hamza before he [Hazrat Wahshi] was a Muslim. It must be noted that after accepting Islam, he killed Mussailma Kazzab who was a false prophet. He used to say that he had martyred one of the best amongst the people (this he would say with sadness) and he had killed the worst amongst people (he would say this with happiness). To disrespect anyone of these companions is a sinful act and worthy of punishment. It is however not like disrespecting Hazrat Abu Bakr and Hazrat Umar (ridwaanullahi ta aala alaihim ajmaeen). Any one who disrespects them, is a kaafir according to the Fuqaha (Jurists)." Still regard Shias Muslim? As far a your understanding of "maslak e Ala Hadrat" is concerned tell me a)Where Ala Hadrat Radi Allahu anhu mentions this title by name? b) what maslak were the sunni contemporary's of Ala Hadrat Radi Allahu anhu such as Fatah e Qadianiat Syed Pir Mehr Ali Shah Radi Allahu anhu, Mujaddid e millat Pir Syed Jamaat Ali shah Radi Allahu anhu,Huzoor Mufti e Azam hind Radi Allahu anhu and the sunni contemporarys of the rest of the world following? it certainly wasnt "sunni brelvi",as this title did not exhist but has been invented recently. Rather some of these scholars differed with Ala Hadrat on furui/fiqhi matters so accordimng to to your twisted analogies these qutbe waqts/gouse were not sunnis? Brother grow out of this cocoon mentality,and bare in mind that Ala HadratRadi Allahu anhu is from the Ahle Sunnah Wal Jammaah,thec Ahle Sunnah wal Jamaah is NOT from Ala Hadrat regardless of what your moulvis teach you. Another accusation, when did I even even notion that these great personalities were non-sunni? Nobody is discussing Fiqhi matters, Maslak-e-'Ala Hazrat is the Aqeedah that 'Ala Hazrat Revived and protected. This is why he is the undisputed Mujaddid, or perhaps you beg to differ on that too? Please be truthful? It's bad enough that you've hurled insults towards me, but now you attribute another baseless asumption to my 'moulvis' teachings? What next? Infact this is an insult to the great name of Ala Hadrat that you divide true sunnis by using this title for your religious politics. Alhamdulillah azzawajal, I would remain steadfast in 'Ala Hazrat's sunnat of separating Baatil from Haqq. He too is insulted up to this very day, but he never tolerated insults that were cast by individuals upon Allah and His Rasool. Why should we then be tolerant of this? I will leave you with one Question since you are an Attari. What doesn't your respected murshid sahib prefer you to user the word brailvis? but rather says you should use the words Ahle Sunnah Wal Jamaah?(Alhamdulillah i totally agree with hazrat sahib,since i believe he's a wali Allah). I suggest you find out from the top before answering this one(as i been informed by some quite senior.) Since you have all the information 'from the top', why don't you share it with us? Enlighten us (for a change). Dont try to determine peoples sunnyat on whetherr they consider themselves brelvi or not as you may become unstuck. I follow/accept the teachings of Ala Hadrat Radi Allahu anhaand that of all his true sunni contemporarys,if there is a difference of opinion i follow my Grandshaikhs and respectfully leave Al Hadrat's whilst also aknowledging it to be valid too. This brother is true sunniat ! i.e. respect difference of opinion amongst ahle Haq and not force yours on others if it differs,nor question their Sunnyat. Go and learn sunnyat and its conditions towards other sunnis before trying to give me lectures on sunnyat. Its useless displaying such affection by calling me your brother in conjuction with the insults and accusations you cast. A Muslims is he from whose tongue and hands other Muslims are safe. I respect all Ulema and Tareeqa Ahle Sunnat, but I would never bow down to signing and endorsing agreements with Gustaak-e-Rasool. Why are you so keen to endorse this Amman Message? please do inform us? Wassalaam. PS I am not a "brelvi(as i dont recognise such a sect)", then what? Alhamdulillah. I belong to Ahle Sunnah wal Jamaat, but since many false sects also regard themselves to be 'ahle sunnah wal jamaat', I would emphasise my identity by regarding myself as Sunni Bereilwi, I am Hanafi in Taqleed, Ash'ari in Creed, Qaaderi in Tareeqh. It's one body with many names, which despite your notion, none of which is a sect. I leave you with the Kalaam of Allah. See which one touches you the most before you endorse Amman Message: Allahu waRasoolahu a'alamu. Ma'assalaam. Mohamed Mansoor Qaaderi Razvi Zia'ee 'Attaari.
|
|
|
Post by Saalik on Jun 7, 2007 21:41:32 GMT
|
|
|
Post by musaafir on Jun 7, 2007 23:32:03 GMT
My dear brother i islam Mansoor, may i ask what all that above proves? You've wasted your time in writing all that out and yet still have not proved how all the sects mentioned in this message are kaafirs as a whole,nor have you proved that any scholar of the Ahle Sunnah in the past has put a collective kufr fatwa on the whole of these sects(i.e. every single member is kaafir) and you wont either as there isn such a fatwa anyway.
Bahare Shariat is mostly a fiqh treatise which holds no such fatwas on these sects as a whole,but rather points out what would be and could be kufr or not.
So that is a useless point from you.
Brother i am familiar with the rest of your points,infact the last 10 or so yrs of my life i've been going through such "proofs". They do not do anything for your futile argument.
As per you and your like, every sect other than sunnis, has wrong or kufric beliefs,so if that means they all of their followers are kaafirs. Are you saying only the Ahle Sunnah belong to the Ummah and every misguided sect is out of the fold of islam? If not then what problem do you have with others including them inside the fold of islam,albeit misguided in aqeeda?
Brother please get me what i asked for,a unanimous fatwa from classical Ahle Sunnah scholars that excommunicates all those non sunni sects named in this message from the folds of islam totally.
If you cant do that then dont waste my time with own inferences and analogy's.
Excuse me if i dont get involved in your tit for tat childish responses anymore that make no sense nor prove anything but are just made to please the nafs,as i'm a past that stage of life now.
However supply me with what i ask for and then we may continue.
PS I have no real interest in this message at all to be honest,the reason i have entertained you thus far is that i am sick and tired of so called fatwa dishing "sunnis" who are making a mockery of true Ahle Sunnah wal jamaah and sufi teachings by refusing to believe that its possible for non sunnis to be within the folds of islam.
Please broaden your reading brother as sunnism isnt in one place alone as youve been taught.
Wassalaam
|
|
muzaffar
Senior Member
Pray for what you want, but work for the things you need.
Posts: 1,042
|
Post by muzaffar on Jun 8, 2007 1:49:51 GMT
Assalamu 'Alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu
At first glance i strongly opposed it, but reading and thinking about it, i am not so sure. It all depends on who is actually behind this, and what do they hope to acheive. Do they want to stop takfir full stop, do they want to close ranks or is this the first step towards unity, one ummah one voice against the rest of the world ?
The very first point of the message still concerns me. If we are to embrace these points are we not then validifying some of the deviants ?
It could be perceived by some that their is less doubt or AN APPROVAL of the others, but then again its avote of confidence for Asharism and tasawwuf. I think i will sleep on it for the time being.
|
|
|
Post by Saalik on Jun 8, 2007 6:53:47 GMT
FOR THE SAKE OF KNOWLEDGE ON THE TOPICS BELOW:-[/color] www.yanabi.com/activeweb.cfm?a_id=852 * THE DEVIANT SHIA' SECT
* WHAT IS TAQIYYAH?
* SHIA AQAAID OR BELIEFS
* SHIAS HATRED FOR SUNNIS
* REFUTATIONS OF THE BELIEFS OF THE SHI'AS
*WHAT THE GREAT SAINTS AND SCHOLARS HAVE SAID IN REFUTATION OF THE BELIEFS OF THE SHIA
* FATAWA AGAINST THE SHIAS
* ABOUT THOSE WHO CURSE THE THREE KHALIFAS
* IMAM AHMED RAZA'S (RADI ALLAHU ANHU) FATAWA ON HAVING CONTACT WITH SHIA INDIVIDUALS
*A REQUEST TO THE MUSLIM YOUTH A SPECIAL REQUEST TO ALL - PLEASE SPARE SOME TIME & WISELY USE IT FOR THIS REWARDING AND PIOUS ACT ON THE LINK BELOW:-[/b][/color] ashraf786.proboards15.com/index.cgi?board=requests&action=display&thread=1180699368&page=1Jazaak Allah Khairan
Allahumma Salle Alaa Sayyidinah Wa Mawlaanah Muhammadanin Nooril Anwari Wa Sirril Asraari Wa Sayyadil Abraar.
|
|