Announcement

**Manzareh** · 03-14-2012, 11:33 AM

Rather we focus on the hadiths that teach us to be united rather than talk about how different we are. Just my opinion.

**کیش** · 03-14-2012, 11:41 AM

Originally posted by Manzareh View Post

Rather we focus on the hadiths that teach us to be united rather than talk about how different we are. Just my opinion.

No offense, but where's the unity? Muslims are broken down into 70+ sects, which are broken from a Sunni and Shia sect. "sunni's" are barely units with each others, let alone being united with Shias.

Why the disunity? It all leads to the situation regarding Fatimah asking Abu Bakr for the prophets's inheritance, and he refused.

If your not interested in discussing this situation please keep opinions to yourself.

**کیش** · 03-14-2012, 12:04 PM

Interesting Hadith that is apart of this topic.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 53, Number 344:
Narrated 'Ali:
Fatima complained of what she suffered from the hand mill and from grinding, when she got the news that some slave girls of the booty had been brought to Allah's Apostle. She went to him to ask for a maid-servant, but she could not find him, and told 'Aisha of her need. When the Prophet came, Aisha informed him of that. The Prophet came to our house when we had gone to our beds. (On seeing the Prophet) we were going to get up, but he said, 'Keep at your places,' I felt the coolness of the Prophet's feet on my chest. Then he said, 'Shall I tell you a thing which is better than what you asked me for? When you go to your beds, say: 'Allahu Akbar (i.e. Allah is Greater)' for 34 times, and 'Alhamdu Lillah (i.e. all the praises are for Allah)' for 33 times, and Subhan Allah (i.e. Glorified be Allah) for 33 times. This is better for you than what you have requested.'

**Manzareh** · 03-14-2012, 12:09 PM

Originally posted by کیش View Post

No offense, but where's the unity? Muslims are broken down into 70+ sects, which are broken from a Sunni and Shia sect. "sunni's" are barely units with each others, let alone being united with Shias.

Why the disunity? It all leads to the situation regarding Fatimah asking Abu Bakr for the prophets's inheritance, and he refused.

If your not interested in discussing this situation please keep opinions to yourself.

Theres 2.2 Billion Muslims, with a figure like that its almost impossible for everyone to have the same thinking, interpretations and method of practicing the deen, its inevitable.

Once we define the situation between Fatima RA and Abu Bakr RA, then what?

**کیش** · 03-14-2012, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by Manzareh View Post

Theres 2.2 Billion Muslims, with a figure like that its almost impossible for everyone to have the same thinking, interpretations and method of practicing the deen, its inevitable.

Once we define the situation between Fatima RA and Abu Bakr RA, then what?

One this situation can be rested, it's Muslims jobs to disband every sect they have created (Sunni Shia Sufi, all those within them).

If they have to be a second Riddah wars, then so be it. They are over 70 sects of Islam, and only one will be granted paradise (Bukhari). Which one is that? Both Sunni and Shia are sects, and were not apart of Allah's message.

**Manzareh** · 03-14-2012, 12:21 PM

Why have a war with another Muslim, were all given intellect, if i believe im following a correct path in Islam all i can do is give dawa and promote that, no need for a war to force people into thinking the way i do, everyone is going to be in their own grave. Aslong as your making the effort in a sincere way to follow Allahs message and constantly seeking the truth and researching, even if at the end you followed a wrong sect and die, is Allah not the most understanding???

**Karachi** · 03-14-2012, 12:30 PM

I think the problem with muslims is even bigger then just divisions of sects, it has to do with the utter lack of respect for each other and willing to kill others for the sake of one's own beliefs. This latter part is what has caused so much violence with in muslims for the last 1400 years.

OP is right though, it's finally time to rectify these issues, these divisions are such a big ugly stain on muslims and Islam. But to be honest I dont think the situation will change, the mentality of extremists is totally some thing else we can not understand

**کیش** · 03-14-2012, 12:36 PM

Originally posted by Manzareh View Post

Why have a war with another Muslim, were all given intellect, if i believe im following a correct path in Islam all i can do is give dawa and promote that, no need for a war to force people into thinking the way i do, everyone is going to be in their own grave. Aslong as your making the effort in a sincere way to follow Allahs message and constantly seeking the truth and researching, even if at the end you followed a wrong sect and die, is Allah not the most understanding???

That's the same thoughts of logic Christians and Jews use to make their religion justifiable.

Most of the Muslim population are Muslims because of their parents, they follow the sect they are born in; without doing their own studying.

I would like to first have a discussion with people to bury the Shia ideology, and their sects. Then move onto Sunni sects.

Allah is the most understanding, but Allah is also the most strict in punishment.

Abu Bakr destroyed Musaylimah a false prophet of Allah. His sect can be counted as the first in Islam (in a way)

**Afghanistan2010** · 03-14-2012, 12:43 PM

Exaggerated Topic , this is not a big deal,there are the ones who accept the ahadiths and the sayings of other companions and who hate the companions and reject the authentic ahadiths.

The shia also have in their Kufi clearly stated this very hadith :
Narrated 'Amr bin Al-Harith:
The Prophet did not leave behind him after his death, anything except his arms, his white mule, and a piece of land at Khaibar which he left to be given in charity .

But yet stil accuse and slander abu bakr as sadiqq (rad) and Aisha (rad) this is what makes them the enemy of Allah and his beloved messenger (pbuh),they can't openly accuse and insult the messenger of Allah (pbuh) so they insult his family and his companions.

I wished Ali ibn abi Talib (rad) were here i swear by Allah he would have fought them with the uttermost and taught them lessons they would remember.

For other sects,everyone who does not follow the authentic ahadiths the teachings of quran and the methodology of the authentic scholars and reduce the scholarship to Rumi (rahimahullah ) or Ibn Taymiyah (rah) will go astray and also those who are among the doubtful things as the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said :

On the authority of Abu ‘Abdullah al-Nu’man bin Bashir, radiyallahu ‘anhu, who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah, sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam, say:
“Truly, what is lawful is evident, and what is unlawful is evident, and in between the two are matters which are doubtful which many people do not know. He who guards against doubtful things keeps his religion and honour blameless, and he who indulges in doubtful things indulges in fact in unlawful things, just as a shepherd who pastures his flock round a preserve will soon pasture them in it. Beware, every king has a preserve, and the things Allah has declared unlawful are His preserves. Beware, in the body there is a flesh; if it is sound, the whole body is sound, and if it is corrupt, the whole body is corrupt, and behold, it is the heart.”
For more reading read THIS.

This hadith is a great principle of shareeah.

And also

On the authority of Abu Muhammad al-Hasan bin Ali bin Abi Taib, the grandson of the Messenger of Allah, sallallahu ëalayhi wasallam, and who is dearest to him, radiyallahu ëanhuma, who said: ìI committed to memory from the Messenger of Allah, sallallahu ëalayhi wasallam, (the following words):
Leave that about which you are in doubt for that about which you are in no doubt.
[Al-Tirmidhi and al-Nasaíi related it, and al-Tirmidhi said: It is a good and genuine Hadith]

Lessons
This hadith indicates that one should only perform an act or deed (which is permissible and proper) if he is positive or certain of it. Performing this act will lead to some kind of tranquillity or happiness in this life and in the Hereafter – this is one of the benefits of applying the hadith.
In the other version of this hadith mentioned above, falsehood leads to doubt and never to tranquillity. So if a believer finds his heart being disturbed by something (i.e. he feels uncertain or doubtful), then he should stay away from it. The heart of the true believer is tranquil at the sight of truth and righteousness. And the heart becomes unsure and shaky at the sight of falsehood and wrong.
We can conclude that this criterion applies only to the guided righteous Muslim who is enlightened by wahi, i.e. the Qur’an and Sunnah, and is adhering to this guidance. If a Muslim is indulging in forbidden acts, this criterion will not work for him because his heart will not be sensitive to what it faces.
The criterion of the hadith is activated by certain conditions or pre-requisites: knowledge, iman, adhering to the enlightenment of the wahi, etc. In other words, this criterion can only exist if the person is adhering to the commands of Allah subhana wa ta’ala, the commands of the Prophet, sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam, following the wahi, etc. Only then can a person reach such a status or level. But for those who indulge in muharramat (prohibitions), do not observe wajibat (obligations) , etc., this criterion will not be activated. Even if it does exist, it will not be reliable.
Sometimes there are people who try to avoid doubtful matters while they are indulging in muharram. For example, the people who killed al-Hussain (the brother of the narrator of this hadith). After having killed him, they start discussing about the ruling on the killing of mosquitoes, whether it is permissible or not.
There are many matters or issues relating to the shariah where the scholars have conflicting views or opinions. For example, some scholars say that it is a wajib to recite Surat al-Fatihah in the congregational prayer while other scholars say it is not. Or the paying of zakat for Muslim women’s jewellery – whether a woman has to pay zakat for jewellery that she wears/uses and not just for those that she keeps for investment – an issue which has never been resolved. In these situations, can the Muslim apply the criterion of this hadith? According to some scholars, it is permissible to do so – this is known as the ‘cautious approach’. This became a very well-known approach for some scholars who used it whenever there were conflicting views.
So for the issue of reciting Surat al-Fatihah, to those who insist that without reciting it the prayer is invalid, these scholars following the cautious approach say that they should recite it. And in the case of the zakat for jewellery, the cautious approach is that it is better to pay the zakat for all jewellery, whether it is worn/used or not, so that the woman will be ‘saved’ either way.
There is another approach of the scholars which holds that it is not a matter of conflicting views, it is a matter of the authenticity and soundness of the proofs. If there is a sound dalil (evidence), the scholars will follow it. This approach is also practiced by those who strictly follow a madhab because the madhab follows a dalil.
There are also many situations which consist of both good and bad. The cautious approach will suggest that we avoid an act if it involves both good and bad aspects. The approach which follows the dalil applies the concept of weighing between benefits and harms. This involves applying principles derived from the Qur’an and Hadith. These principles state that it is permissible to give up a minor benefit in order to avoid a major harm. Or tolerate a minor harm in order to avoid a major one or to gain a major benefit.
Looking back on Islamic history, we can see that some scholars were for one approach while other scholars were for the other. Thus it is not crucial for us to determine which one is the better approach.
In the situation of conflicting views where something is known for certain and something which is just a mere conjecture, what is known for sure will take precedence, i.e. will be the prevailing view. This is one of the principles of Fiqh. For example, if we know that a piece of clothing has some impurity on it but we are not sure exactly where, it is better that we wash the entire clothing. Another example is if a person is doubtful about how many rakaats he has already prayed, whether it is one or two, he should continue his prayer with what he is certain of – he is sure he has prayed one rakaat so he should continue with the second one.
Another principle is that it is not allowed to make ijtihad if something is clearly and definitively stated in the Qur’an or authentic Hadith. If there is text which clearly states the hukum (ruling), then the ijtihad is not needed.
There is no righteousness or piety in avoiding something that is clearly and unquestionably permissible, i.e. something that is lawful and clearly permitted by shariah. For example, in the area of food, one shouldn’t say he will refrain from eating meat as a matter of righteousness. He will not be rewarded for this.
There is the hadith that tells the story of the three men, where one vowed not to sleep so he can pray all night, one vowed to fast everyday and one vowed not to marry, all for the sake of righteousness. These actions which these men vowed not to do (sleeping, eating and getting married) are lawful things which are not only permitted but also encouraged. (In fact, some scholars even say that there should be a minimum number of hours everyday which we allocate for sleep so that our bodies get enough rest.) When the Prophet, sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam, heard of the three men’s vows, he was very disappointed. He, sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam, called them and told them he was the most righteous and pious amongst them and yet he sleeps, eats and marries. Moreover the Prophet, sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam, made a principal concerning this matter by saying: “This is my way, and whoever refrains from it is not part of me.”
Thus, if something is clearly permissible in shariah, there is no point in refraining from doing it with the intention that doing so is an ibadah. If it is for other good reasons, e.g. to avoid meat because of one’s health, then it is okay.
One of the tricks of shaitan is that he will take something which is forbidden and present it in a way to make it look like a permissible act. One should be careful not to be deceived by shaitan. If something is muharram, then no matter what, it is forbidden. We must not allow shaitan to influence us and change our perception into thinking that something which is forbidden may not be all that bad after all – that it is permissible to do it.
Shaykh Jamaluddin Zarabozo says in his commentaries on Imam Nawawi’s Forty Hadith that in these contemporary times there are many matters in business transactions where there might contain some implicit aspects of riba’. Thus there are many new situations or issues where people are confused as to whether something is acceptable or not. He says that it is better to avoid acts which we are not sure of or where there are no clear views from scholars.
Sometimes these issues are discussed by scholars but their views are not being promoted enough to the Muslims in general. Many of the renowned scholars today meet once a year to discuss contemporary issues and these issues are then published in a special magazine. Unfortunately, this magazine is not widely distributed and not many people, including educators, other scholars, etc., are aware of it. We should all try to keep ourselves informed with the latest views or opinions of the scholars, especially on matters related to our lifestyle today, e.g. banking, insurance, etc.

Conclusion
This hadith equips Muslims with a practical criterion by which to judge doubtful acts and situations, and enables them to make the right decision concerning these matters. However, Muslims need to understand how to apply such a criterion correctly and not to be deceived by wrong perceptions or personal interest.

**کیش** · 03-14-2012, 01:01 PM

Afghanistan2010

Thanks for your input, but I wouldn't denigrate this split as "exaggerated", it is not and you know it.

For the Shia's Kufi, please cite the sources. Same with Tirmidhi, though am personally not a fan of Tirmidhi since Bukhari and Muslim has covered much of the Prophets (PBUH) narrations.

What Shiahs ignore is Ali's recognition of Abu Bakr's Caliphate; while they call it a forced one.

Bukhari 5:59:546

Narrated 'Aisha:
Fatima the daughter of the Prophet sent someone to Abu Bakr (when he was a caliph), asking for her inheritance of what Allah's Apostle had left of the property bestowed on him by Allah from the Fai (i.e. booty gained without fighting) in Medina, and Fadak, and what remained of the Khumus of the Khaibar booty. On that, Abu Bakr said, "Allah's Apostle said, "Our property is not inherited. Whatever we leave, is Sadaqa, but the family of (the Prophet) Muhammad can eat of this property.' By Allah, I will not make any change in the state of the Sadaqa of Allah's Apostle and will leave it as it was during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle, and will dispose of it as Allah's Apostle used to do." So Abu Bakr refused to give anything of that to Fatima. So she became angry with Abu Bakr and kept away from him, and did not task to him till she died. She remained alive for six months after the death of the Prophet. When she died, her husband 'Ali, buried her at night without informing Abu Bakr and he said the funeral prayer by himself. When Fatima was alive, the people used to respect 'Ali much, but after her death, 'Ali noticed a change in the people's attitude towards him. So Ali sought reconciliation with Abu Bakr and gave him an oath of allegiance. 'Ali had not given the oath of allegiance during those months (i.e. the period between the Prophet's death and Fatima's death). 'Ali sent someone to Abu Bakr saying, "Come to us, but let nobody come with you," as he disliked that 'Umar should come, 'Umar said (to Abu Bakr), "No, by Allah, you shall not enter upon them alone " Abu Bakr said, "What do you think they will do to me? By Allah, I will go to them' So Abu Bakr entered upon them, and then 'Ali uttered Tashah-hud and said (to Abu Bakr), "We know well your superiority and what Allah has given you, and we are not jealous of the good what Allah has bestowed upon you, but you did not consult us in the question of the rule and we thought that we have got a right in it because of our near relationship to Allah's Apostle ."
Thereupon Abu Bakr's eyes flowed with tears. And when Abu Bakr spoke, he said, "By Him in Whose Hand my soul is to keep good relations with the relatives of Allah's Apostle is dearer to me than to keep good relations with my own relatives. But as for the trouble which arose between me and you about his property, I will do my best to spend it according to what is good, and will not leave any rule or regulation which I saw Allah's Apostle following, in disposing of it, but I will follow." On that 'Ali said to Abu Bakr, "I promise to give you the oath of allegiance in this after noon." So when Abu Bakr had offered the Zuhr prayer, he ascended the pulpit and uttered the Tashah-hud and then mentioned the story of 'Ali and his failure to give the oath of allegiance, and excused him, accepting what excuses he had offered; Then 'Ali (got up) and praying (to Allah) for forgiveness, he uttered Tashah-hud, praised Abu Bakr's right, and said, that he had not done what he had done because of jealousy of Abu Bakr or as a protest of that Allah had favored him with. 'Ali added, "But we used to consider that we too had some right in this affair (of rulership) and that he (i.e. Abu Bakr) did not consult us in this matter, and therefore caused us to feel sorry." On that all the Muslims became happy and said, "You have done the right thing." The Muslims then became friendly with 'Ali as he returned to what the people had done (i.e. giving the oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr).

**Afghanistan2010** · 03-14-2012, 01:09 PM

Originally posted by کیش View Post

Afghanistan2010

Thanks for your input, but I wouldn't denigrate this split as "exaggerated", it is not and you know it.

For the Shia's Kufi, please cite the sources. Same with Tirmidhi, though am personally not a fan of Tirmidhi since Bukhari and Muslim has covered much of the Prophets (PBUH) narrations.

What Shiahs ignore is Ali's recognition of Abu Bakr's Caliphate; while they call it a forced one.

Indeed Bukhari and Muslim are the greatest collections after the noble Quran and they include alot of important ahadiths,but yet you may do not make researches in the other Hadith Collections otherwise you would not have said this , but the other hadith collections (Abu Dawud,Tirmidhi,Nisaaii,and Ibn Majah may Allah be pleased with them) have sooooo many hadiths which are not present in the two major books ( Bukhari and Muslim) and this is undenieable and you can make researches in Bukhari and Muslim to show me where to place the hands in prayer you will not find anything except in Abu Dawud,when you want to know if there are hadiths about touching the Quran or about those who teache and learn Quran you will not find much in the two major books but alot in the other collections not to forget Maliks Muwatta ( the collection of imam malik (rah)).

Ali ibn Talib (rad)s love can be heared through his saying on the hearing of the death of Abu Bakr as Siddiq (rad) he was the first who held a public speeche on this occassion and may Allah be pleased with him for these words,they reach the heart of the believer.

**کیش** · 03-14-2012, 01:16 PM

^^

I have posted a Hadith where Ali have allegiance to Abu Bakr with the source. Please provide sources of Tirmidhi and Kufi.

Have you read all the collection of Bukhari and Muslim, to go down to Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi? If you did then you would notice Abu Dawud contradict Bukhari: Bukhari reported that Muhammad (PBUH) drunk milk and goggles his mouth afterwards, while Abu Dawud wrote that Muhammad (PBUH) drunk milk but did not goggle afterwards. I will post the two hadiths when I come home later.

Let's not switch topics please,

**Afghanistan2010** · 03-14-2012, 01:32 PM

It is your opinion that they contradict,but the people of knowledge the ulema would state this,a completely wrong accusation,and yes there might some daif (weak) narrations in Abu Dawud which were also explained by the scholars.

If you want to understand a topic you have to take all the hadiths available and there are authentic hadiths in other collections aswell those who reject,have commited a sin.

so now for your reference :

First hadith : About doubtful actions

Hadeeth 6: The Halaal is Clear and the Haraam is Clear
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

عن أبي عبد الله النعـمان بن بشير رضي الله عـنهما ، قـال : سمعـت رسـول الله صلي الله عـليه وسلم يقول: ( إن الحلال بين ، وإن الحـرام بين ، وبينهما أمـور مشتبهات لا يعـلمهن كثير من الناس ، فمن اتقى الشبهات فـقـد استبرأ لديـنه وعـرضه ، ومن وقع في الشبهات وقـع في الحرام ، كـالراعي يـرعى حول الحمى يوشك أن يرتع فيه،ألا وإن لكل ملك حمى ، ألا وإن حمى الله محارمه ، ألا وإن في الجـسد مضغة إذا صلحـت صلح الجسد كله ، وإذا فـسـدت فـسـد الجسـد كـلـه ، ألا وهي الـقـلب) رواه البخاري [ رقم : 52 ] ومسلم [ رقم : 1599 ]

On the authority of Aboo `Abdillaah an-Nu`maan the son of Basheer (radiAllaahu 'anhumaa), who said: I heard the Messenger of ALLAH (sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam) say:

That which is lawful is clear and that which is unlawful is clear, and between the two of them are doubtful matters about which many people do not know. Thus he who avoids doubtful matters clears himself in regard to his religion and his honour, but he who falls into doubtful matters [eventually] falls into that which is unlawful, like the shepherd who pastures around a sanctuary, all but grazing therein. Truly every king has a sanctuary, and truly ALLAH's sanctuary is His prohibitions. Truly in the body there is a morsel of flesh, which, if it be whole, all the body is whole, and which, if it is diseased, all of [the body] is diseased. Truly, it is the heart. [Related by al-Bukhaari and Muslim.]

Hadeeth 9: Obligations are according to Ability
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

عن أبي هريرة عبد الرحمن بن صخر رضي الله عنه ، قال : سمعت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول : ( ما نهيتكم عنه فاجتنبوه ، وما أمرتكم به فأتوا منه ما استطعتم ، فإنما أهلك الذين من قبلكم كثرة مسائلهم واختلافهم على انبيائهم ). رواه البخاري [ رقم : 7288 ] ، ومسلم [ رقم : 1337]

On the authority of Abu Hurairah 'Abd-ur-Rahmaan ibn Sakhr (radiAllaahu 'anhu) who said: I heard the Messenger of ALLAH (sallAllaahu alayi wa sallam) say:

"What I have forbidden for you, avoid. What I have ordered you [to do], do as much of it as you can. For verily, it was only the excessive questioning and their disagreeing with their Prophets that destroyed [the nations] who were before you". [Related by al-Bukhaaree and Muslim]

The confirmation by the shia books.

This is confirmed in Shia Hadith as well. Let us examine Shia Hadith in Al-Kafi, the most reliable of the four Shia books of Hadith, on the same matter:

“The Prophets did not leave dinars and dirhams as inheritance, but they left knowledge.” (al-Kafi, vol. 1 p. 42)

This Shia Hadith in Al-Kafi has two separate narrations, and is considered Sahih by the Shia. The authenticity is confirmed by Ayatollah Khomeini, who used this Hadith to prove his claim of Wilayah al-Faqih. Khomeini said about the Hadith:

“The narrators of this tradition are all reliable and trustworthy. The father of ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim [namely Ibrahim ibn Hashim] is not only reliable, [but in fact] he is one of the most reliable and trustworthy narrators.”
(source: Khomeini, al-Hukumat al-Islamiyyah, p. 133, published by Markaz Baqiyyat Allah al-A’zam, Beirut)

So we wonder why this Hadith is reliable enough to prove Wilayah al-Faqih, but suddenly it is not used by the Shia to defend Abu Bakr’s (رضّى الله عنه) position?
Do we not then see that the statement made by Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) about Prophets not giving inheritance is the same statement that was made by Imam Sadiq (رضّى الله عنه) whom the Shia consider to be infallible? Allamah Al-Majlisi declared that the Hadith “do[es] not fall short of being Sahih.” And Ayatollah Khomeini considered it to be so Sahih that he used it to prove his Wilayah al-Faqih. If Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) is to be considered a liar for quoting this Hadith, then would the Shia also accept that Imam Sadiq (رضّى الله عنه), Allamah Majlisi, and Ayatollah Khomeini are also liars by same logic?
This Shia Hadith is referenced on Al-Shia.com, one of the most reliable of the Shia websites:

Hadith 57, Chapter 4, h 1
“The prophets did not leave any Dirham or Dinar (wealth) as their inheritance but they did leave knowledge as their inheritance.”

(source: Al-Shia.com,
http://www.al-shia.com/html/eng/book.../part2-ch4.htm)

**کیش** · 03-14-2012, 03:44 PM

I cant find your Bukhari and Muslim hadiths, please provide the volume #, book # and Hadith #.

Heres how Abu Dawuds recording should not hold sway:

Abu Dawud 38:4449

Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas: The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: If anyone has sexual intercourse with an animal, kill him and kill it along with him. I (Ikrimah) said: I asked him (Ibn Abbas): What offence can be attributed to the animal, He replied: I think he (the Prophet) disapproved of its flesh being eaten when such a thing had been done to it.

Abu Dawud 38:4450

Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas: There is no prescribed punishment for one who has sexual intercourse with an animal.

BTW, do you belong to a sect, or a teachings done by a scholar?

Announcement

Fatimah Vs. Abu Bakr

Fatimah Vs. Abu Bakr

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment