Fiqh al-Sirah of Shaykh Buti

Discussion in 'Refutation' started by Unbeknown, Feb 20, 2018.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    as a sunni who cares for truth and objectivity I reserve the right to comment on this discussion, which I will, in sha Allah, when I find some time.
     
  2. Abu Hamza

    Abu Hamza Hanafi-Maturidi

    agreed... now kindly show me in fiqh ul - sirah, where does shaykh buti say the following

     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 20, 2018
  3. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    shaykh ibn hajar al-haytami insists on turning one's back to the qiblah and facing the rawDah: jawhar, p88


    jawhar p88b.png



    ...we all agree that he - sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam - is alive in his grave and that he knows about those who are visiting him; and if he were alive in this world (that is, if he had not passed away from this world) - it would not be permissible for anyone to visit except by facing him and turning their back to the qiblah.

    when we accept and agree that the teacher in masjid al-haram sitting with his face towards the qiblah, has his students turning the back to the ka'abah and face him, then why should this not be the case with him sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam, when it is much more appropriate in his case (and is more deserving of our respect than our teachers).

    shortly we will mention malik's reply to mansur, though we are discussing a different issue here. mansur asked: 'shall i face the qiblah and do du'a or shall i face RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam'?

    imam malik replied: turn towards and face RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam, and turn not your face from him - he is the means of your salvation and salvation of your great-grandfather sayyiduna aadam alayhi's salam on the day of judgement. reported by mutawwiyi* from elders (salaf) that before the chambers (of the blessed wives of the Prophet, our mothers) were included in the masjid, that they would stand near the rawDah facing the (blessed grave) near the head-side; it is also true (and correctly reported) that they would stand near the house and greet, because of the excuse that they could not go inside and stand facing him. but when the chambers of his noble wives (sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam, wa raDiyAllahu anhunna) were included in the masjid - it became possible for one to go inside and stand facing him opposite his blessed face.

    thereafter, they began to stand facing him, with their backs to the qiblah. this is a true account as mentioned earlier that it is the position of jumhur.

    if it is sunnah to stand with one's back to the qiblah in khutbah (of jumu'ah and eydayn) for the sake of the audience - then it is far more necessary in his case. sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam.





    -----
    *abu'l abbas hasan ibn sayid al-mutawwi'yi (270-371 AH).
     
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2018
    Unbeknown likes this.
  4. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    then shaykh ibn hajar al-makki mentions whether one should stand there for long or make the visit short?

    p.92:
    jawhar, p92.png


    point #12: scholars differed whether one should stand there for a long time near his qabr sharif or should make it short and quick? ibn asakir said: 'that which has reached us from ibn umar and others among the elders (salaf) is that one should make it short.​

    but nawawi and others said that one should stand there as long as possible (that one wants to stand with attention and focus): p92:

    jawhar, p92b.png

    ==============

    then he talks of conveying the salam if one has been requested thus etc. thereafter one should greet the two khulafa: p.93:
    jawhar, p93.png


    point #14: it is sunnah, rather insisted upon that after greeting the Messenger of Allah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam, one should move a little to the right and greet the khalifah abu bakr siddiq raDiyAllahu anhu.

    notice, that one can move further to the right ONLY if one is facing the rawDah.

    ----
    NOW:

    he says, after you finish greeting the two khulafa, you come back to face RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam and stand near the head-side.

    jawhar p95.png

    point #15: after greeting the two shaykhs (i.e. abu bakr and umar raDiyAllahu anhuma) it is sunnah to return to the place where one stood first facing RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam. here he should do his tawassul for himself and seek his intercession near his Lord Almighty Glory to Him and Exalted is He.

    [and do dua by] tawassul for his [visitor's] loved ones.


    then he narrates the anecdote of utbi, that imam nawawi narrated in many places including his yiDah.

    just to remind you, we are still facing the qabr sharif.

    ================

    now he talks of moving further. p96-97:

    jawhar, p96-97.png

    point #16: after one has finished doing dua for oneself, for one's parents, teachers and those muslims who requested dua, and his brothers for the good of this dunya and the hereafter IN FRONT OF HIS BLESSED GRAVE, it is sunnah to move further up near the head-side of his honoured grave and the mark of this in our time is a silver box...

    ======
    hopefully, you can see that it is not one bland passage that tells you to turn here or there. hopefully, you can visualise that these are instructions one-by-one.

    notice that it is at this point, one turns towards the qiblah near the pillar close to the head-side. same as imam nawawi has said in his yidah.

    it is this point that was disputed by some ulama. so immediately after point #16, imam al-haytami says:

    jawhar, p97b.png

    note 1: izz ibn jama'ah disagreed (or rejected) this second standing, returning here after greeting the shaykhayn raDiyAllahu anhuma. and said dua and tawassul there itself..

    ====
    and now comes the passage quoted by our brother abu Hamza, may Allah ta'ala forgive us and him:

    p98:

    jawhar, p98.png


    note 2: that which we mentioned that to turn towards the qiblah HERE, during du'a is our madh'hab and the madh'ab of majority of scholars and thus said some maliki scholars as well. even though, imam malik opposed this and said that it is best to face the wajh al-sharif (the blessed qabr/grave) even here...

    ...and one report from imam malik is: "one should not stand in front of the qabr facing him sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam for dua but only for greeting him (salam).

    and the reconciliation between the two statements is that one who knows the etiquette of du'a and its conditions and things to be avoided will follow the first position (i.e face the qabr sharif for salam and dua); and the second (i.e. do salam only and return) is for the person who is ignorant of the above (conditions and etiquette of dua). because it is feared that he may do something seriously inappropriate in his presence (sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam) and that is not desirable thing to do.​


    =============
    Allah ta'ala knows best.
     
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2018
    Unbeknown and ridawi like this.
  5. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    quick recap of shaykh ibn Hajar al-makki (al-haytami)'s al-jawhar al-munazzam and what abu hamza quoted: [see p.83]

    jawhar,hd, p83.png



    this is in the seventh chapter: that which is necessary for the visitor to do when he enters the masjid of the prophet (alayhi's salam) [and his stay in madinah] until he sets out to leave for his own country; rulings concerning these matters.

    ---
    he explains how to enter madinah, the adab of being in the city, entering the masjid, etc.

    points relevant to our discussion are: [on page 87]


    jawhar, p87.png


    point #6: it is sunnah to come to the honourable qabr. some of them have said that it is best to enter from the side of the feet of the companions as it is the best manner of entering, better than entering from the side of his honoured head-side.


    then he talks of how to do salam and which direction to face (p87). here also, he states the false attribution to imam azam and clarifies that it is repudiated. and that one SHOULD face the blessed qabr.

    jawhar, p87b.png


    point #7: it is sunnah, when you come to visit the honoured tomb (al-qabr al-mukarram) that you turn your back to the qiblah and face his blessed grave [al-wajh al-sharif]

    and then he emphasises it on p87-88:
    jawhar, p87-88.png


    note/warning: that which we have mentioned that the best manner [al-afDal / or superior manner] is to turn one's back to the qiblah and to face his blessed qabr [al-wajh al-sharif al-mukarram]; this is OUR madh'hab and the madh'hab of majority [jumhur] of scholars. some have said that it is better to turn towards the ka'abah and thus it is reported of abu Hanifah raHimahullah.

    however, it is also reported from him that he conformed to the former position [i.e. face the rawDah/qabr sharif] and in support of this position, imam kamal ibn humam said: "that reported from abu hanifah that one should face qiblah is repudiated because [contrary to that] has been reported by him in his munsan from ibn umar that it is sunnah to face the honoured qabr and turn one's back to the qiblah.

    ----
    so al-haytami's short note in yiDah is explained and clarified here.

    ----

    short detour. also, here, al-haytami explains that one should stand with hands clasped one upon the other, in respect - just as one would stand in salah. p.89

    jawhar, p89.png

    =====

    then he explains the distance at which one should stand near the qabr sharif. p.90

    jawhar, p90.png

    point #10: scholars differed concerning how far should one stand near the qabr sharif.


    =====
    then he explains what to say, when standing there. it is lengthy and it is dua. here below i post only a snippet. see p.91:

    jawhar, p91.png
     
  6. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    frankly, i am not obsessed about shaykh buti as you are. but i am worried that you are actually saying what the salafis say - that one should not face the qabr and do dua because the jahil will think the rawDah is to be worshipped (al-iyadhu billah). and buti did not make it easy when he said that doing so implies shirk.

    it appears that for you, ta'wil for buti's mistake is more important than defending the position of ahlu's sunnah. and you don't mind distortions of texts. this is the second time you have done it. you quoted ibn Hajar from his al-jawhar al-munazzam:

    this is either poor attempt to cover up your folly, or you didn't understand what he was saying. usually, this happens when people read only a few lines that suit them, when they should read the whole chapter to make sure that they have understood it correctly.

    in my copy it is on p.98. and i have highlighted the portion you have translated.

    jawhar, p98.png



    =====
    i will demonstrate what 'distortion' actually means. in sha'Allah.
     
    Unbeknown likes this.
  7. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    a mistake is a mistake. you can do ta'wil, etc. but it is a mistake.

    when it is convenient to your argument, it is about common people who have no adab - but how many common people who may read buti's book (i.e. fiqh al-sirah) will do research and investigate, examine various clips and clarify and then say: 'shaykh buti's actual position is this.'?

    our criticism was restricted to the passage and i stand by it.

    if you still think it is 'distortion' - i will not attempt to change your mind. but do look up the meaning of distortion.
    -----
    dear brother, i am old enough to understand how bits and pieces can be hacked from here and there and stitched together to prove a point.

    shaykh buti was criticised for the way he presented in those few lines, the adab of visiting the prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam. simple. we did not pass judgement on shaykh buti. yes, i said i will never recommend this book for THE very reason that i criticised the passage. as for husn zann, i did clarify that it was in his early years and he might not have seen it in that light.

    i refuted YOUR article for drawing parallels between shaykh buti's and imam nawawi's passage - though they are in different contexts. you can deny it, close your eyes and bury your head in the sand. but anyone who reads your passage will think that imam nawawi favoured people turning their back to the qabr and deemed those who do otherwise as ignoramuses.

    your title clearly said and you quoted mufti wajid:

    mwj1.png


    and immediately wrote:

    abh.png


    =====
    what does anyone who has not seen yidah of imam nawawi think after reading your passage above?

    when one of my friends sent me a message asking whether this was a stretch (mind you, he was full of husn zann for you - hence he cautiously asked me whether this was justifiable), i immediately reached out to yidah to confirm what i already knew about imam nawawi's position. i also felt this was irresponsible and hence wrote what i wrote.

    ----
    Allah ta'ala knows best.
     
    Unbeknown likes this.
  8. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    the comparison of sh.buti to nawawi in your article (abu Hamza) was not about greeting the messenger. rather, you tried to present that turning away was imam nawawi's position. will see later if i have to respond to your posts.

    also, inserting videos NOT MENTIONED in the original discussion, to prove that shaykh buti had a different opinion is unwarranted. i have clarified that sh. buti wrote fiqh al-sirah at 38 and he might have missed rectifying it in 1991. (no husn zann of course).

    ====
    replying to my objection, where i clarified to harris:
    abu hamza writes:
    who taught you logic? did i ever comment on THIS video? or did i claim that shaykh buti NEVER considered istighatha valid etc.? my comments were restricted to sh.buti's passage and your article.

    ====
    when did i ever say so? even in my critique, i expressed the same disbelief. and what was that sh.buti had said that made me say so? do look up.
     
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2018
    Bazdawi and Unbeknown like this.
  9. Abu Hamza

    Abu Hamza Hanafi-Maturidi

  10. Abu Hamza

    Abu Hamza Hanafi-Maturidi

    quite the contrary, at 11 seconds, Shaykh Buti warns the visitor not to turn his back towards the Sacred Resting place, since this constitutes bad adab! rather, the sacred resting place would be on his left as he faces the qibla and supplicates...

    the previous objection regarding "addressing Allah" props up again here. the way i have understood it (and others), is that Shaykh Buti is addressing the common folk (that's pretty obvious seeing as he is on national television), many of whom don't know how to carry themselves in that noble presence, and many of them wouldn't know how to address the Messenger of Allah [sallAllahu alayhi wa salam], you can disagree if you so wish, i find it very hard to believe that a man of his calibre did not know about the numerous ahadith pertaining to istigatha.

    Allah knows best.


     
  11. Abu Hamza

    Abu Hamza Hanafi-Maturidi

    since these are responses to objections aH has brought up, i respectfully ask that only aH respond in sha allah,

    jazakumullahu khayr.
     
  12. Abu Hamza

    Abu Hamza Hanafi-Maturidi

    ثم استقبل القبلة و انحرف الى اليمين قليلا حتى تكون بين القبر و الاسطوانة التي عند أول القبر و ارفع كفيك بدعاء خاشع الى الله جل جلاله و لا تتوهم أن في هذا سوء أدب مع رسول الله صلى الله عليه و اله و سلم و أن الدعاء ينبغي أن يكون مع استقبال القبر فان الدعاء خطاب لله عزوجل و الخطاب لله لا يجوز أن يشرك فيه غيره...

    Fiqh ul – Sirah, pg. 564


    There’s a few contentions which aH has brought up with this part:

    1. Shaykh Buti is implicitly instructing the visitor to turn his back to the sacred resting place, and this is what he means by ‘don’t think this is bad adab with the Messenger of Allah’. aH wrote:


    "he only says those who turn towards the qabr are juhhal. and don't think turning your back to the qabr is bad adab. and reproaches those who do describing it as 'like shirk' even if he didn't say it so expressly."
    nas'alu Allaha al-aafiyah.

    Not only is this an abominable distortion of the text, aH has not given Shaykh Buti the benefit of the doubt (husn al - dhan), and yet he would for others. Furthermore, Shaykh Buti taught fiqh ul – sirah many times throughout his life, and these lectures are widely available (see the next post where Shaykh Buti explains this part and warns the visitor not to turn his back towards the sacred resting place). Before jumping the gun and accusing Shaykh Buti of imploring visitors to turn their backs on the Messenger of Allah [صلى الله عليه و اله و سلم], he should have clarified this point.

    3. When supplicating to Allah, it’s not necessary that one has to face the qibla, that’s a given. aH has quite rightly mentioned that the dominant position is to face the Messenger of Allah [صلى الله عليه و اله و سلم] when supplicating. Yet, despite this, not only is Shaykh Buti telling people to face the qibla, he reprimands those who face the rawda, suggesting they are innovators and ignoramuses! aH cited the incident of Imam Malik, but also added:


    “according to buti's description, the sahabi, sayyiduna anas ibn malik, imam malik, qaDi iyaD, imam nawawi among numerous imams were all jahils and heretics. al-iyadhu billah.”

    however, imam Malik had two positions when it came to supplicating at the Sacred Resting place, Ibn Hajr al – Haythami cites them both in al- Jawahir ul - Munazam:

    ‘[Another] statement of Malik: an individual should not stop facing the direction of the noble face for dua, rather, only for salam!’ [Ibn Hajr gathers both of Imam Malik’s statements and concludes]: ‘the first [facing the Messenger of Allah] is for the one who knows the etiquette's of supplicating, its conditions, and its prohibitions. The second is for the ignoramus, since it is feared that he may arrive in His grand presence with inappropriate conduct’. [pg. 152]

    I would give Shaykh Ramadan husn al – dhan here by giving him this ta’wil. If we fail to do so here, then we can quite easily condemn a host of scholars for statements they have made, yet we trawl through books to find an excuse for them, even if it is extremely far fetched. this, however, is not far fetched at all. Perhaps Shaykh Ramadan observed juhal on his visit who did not know the etiquette's of supplicating in that noble presence. Allah knows best.
     
  13. Abu Hamza

    Abu Hamza Hanafi-Maturidi

    On conveying salam to the Noble Messenger of Allah [صلى الله عليه و اله و سلم] at the sacred resting place [al – qabr ul - karim]


    Shaykh Ramadan al – Buti in fiqh ul – sirah, pg. 564

    فاِياك أن تهجم عليه أو تلتصق بالشبابيك أو تتمسح بها كما يفعل كثير من الجهال فتلك بدعة توشك أن تكون محرمة. بل قف بعيدا عن القبر نحو أربعة أذرع ناظرا الى أسفل ما يستقبلك من جدار القبر و أنت غاضّ الطرف تستشعر الهيبة و الاجلال ثمَّ سلم على رسول الله صلى الله عليه و اله و سلم بصوت خفيف قائلا: أشهد أن لا اِله الا الله و أشهد أن محمد عبده و رسوله أشهد أنك قد بلغت رسالة ربك و نصحت لأمتك و دعوت الى سبيل ربك بالحكمة و الموعظة الحسنة و عبدت الله حتى أتاك اليقين فصلى الله عليك و على آلك و أصحابك كثيرا كما يحب ربنا و يرضى

    Imam al – Nawawi in al- Iydah, pg. 157

    و في اِحياء علوم الدين أن تجعل جدار القبر على أربع أذرع من السارية التي عند رأس القبر في زاوية جداره و يجعل القنديل الذي في القبلة عند القبر على رأسه. و يقف ناظرا اِلى أسفل ما يستقبله من جدار القبر غاضّ الطرف في مقام الهيبة و الاجلال...

    [blue = shaykh buti's position in accordance with imam al- nawawi's/ imam al - ghazali's]

    It seems Shaykh Ramadan al - Buti simply condensed the supplication cited by al – Ghazali in the Ihya (as cited by Imam al – Nawawi in al – Iydah, see pg. 158, Dar ul – Kutub al – Ilmiyyah, 2nd edition, 1986).

    So I was wrong in this instance, not only is Shaykh Buti’s position in accordance with Imam al – Nawawi’s, it’s also in accordance with Imam al – Ghazali’s [Allah is pleased with them all] – this of course, is with regards to conveying salaam [the issue with regards to supplicating is a separate issue]..

    ***[Mufti Wajid did not even quote this passage in his article, strange]
     
  14. Abu Hamza

    Abu Hamza Hanafi-Maturidi

    i've been meaning to respond to aH's objections but have not had time, I will clarify these shortly in sha Allah.
     
  15. Harris786

    Harris786 Veteran

    ..
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2018
  16. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    brother do you even understand the implications of what you are saying? Either you have not understood the quoted passage (which is more likely) or you are speaking out of emotions, without weighing your words.

    ---

    Please calm down - none of us here are out to malign Sh. Buti.

    We all have husn-az-zann that it was a slip - as the same quote refutes the wahabi claim that verse#64 of Surah Nisa'a cannot be acted upon after the zahiri lifetime of the Prophet (peace be upon him).

    Those who are using this passage to defame Sh. Buti must fear Allah ta'ala. Despite his lapses, he was a man of learning, wisdom and tawadu'. He was a scholar and has good deeds to outweigh his past actions - in sha' Allah ta'ala. Let's not forget that he was killed while teaching the book of Allah ta'ala.

    [​IMG]

    How many of us can claim as much?

    Allah knows best and He is the Best of Judges.
     
  17. Aqib alQadri

    Aqib alQadri Veteran

    why don't you give a reference?

    let's put the question the other way round: if a Shia prays 5 times a day, does he become a Sunni? would it not be a mistake to still call him a Shia?
     
    Unbeknown likes this.
  18. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    i said that it is possible that shaykh bouti was visualising the entrance, salam etc. as in imam nawawi's time. i.e. entrance from the feet-side.

    i didn't say that. shaykh buti's passage implicitly acknowledges that turning towards the qiblah would be turning the back to the rawDah (audhu'billah. nas'alu Allaha al-aafiyah). and he says don't think this is suu'adab/bad adab.

    the rest of the passage is also distasteful. i don't want to dwell on it, as i have said in my recent post that he was only 38 back then. it is possible that he didn't think about it in this manner even when he revised it (to add tawassul matters) in 1991. (read the preface to the latest edition). all said and done, the author is long gone - only he could have explained what he really meant. we ask Allah ta'ala to forgive him.

    however, this is important for us, but not an issue of aqidah. we refute what is apparent, and that is that.

    as for abu Hamzah's article, he should not have compared this with imam nawawi. it is dangerous. if a brother (who notified me) didn't highlight it asking me whether it was a 'stretch', i would not have read abu Hamzah's article. even now, i have just read that part and clarified imam nawawi's position that was misrepresented. this does not mean i have refuted abu Hamzah's entire article. (i was informed that sh.yaqubi's followers are saying this).

    if shaykh bouti is to be defended against distortion of his views, imam nawawi's case is even more important. hence my posts.

    --
    agreed.

    in fact, i have clarified that turning to the qiblah is undesirable and is a weak and minority opinion. (keyword: jumhur). and we emphatically reject it. still this does not make shaykh bouti a salafi or make him go out of ahl al-sunnah.

    rather, shaykh yaqoubi has remained silent on serious matters which any self-respecting muslim, let alone a scholar should speak out.

    - hamza yusuf and perennialism: hamza yusuf praised the deplorable work that the zindiq nasr and his disciples concocted. he even has an essay in that work. it was touted as "the greatest work on islam/quran in english ever done". one piddling word by shaykh yaqoubi against this heresy? NO! on the contrary, he has shared the stage with hamza yusuf and is cordial with him, even praising him (if i remember).

    hamza yusuf says he is not a perennialist. but to date, the fons vitae board mentions him in the "board of scholars" alongside nasr and his perennialist gang. check here. unless hamza yusuf publicly disavows perennialism and calls it heresy and incompatible with islam and that perennialists are kuffar, that it is kufr, anything he says is just a politician's gimmick. as they say in india these days, 'fekugiri'. fake promises and tall claims like modi (indian PM).

    if yaqoubi sahib was not a sayyid, i would have said far more than i already have. and i won't hesitate, if this goes further. this religion is more beloved to us than contemporaries who claim to be muslim leaders.

    ----
    i have been told that yaqubi sab's followers have used this thread to attack shaykh asrar. my clarification to them:

    i respect shaykh asrar and i may disagree with him on n number of issues. but in the case of hamza yusuf, or shaykh yaqubi & his silence on serious matters, that the ghayrah of any muslim should be outraged - i am with him. not because of shaykh asrar, but that is siding with the truth. wAllahu a'alam.

    ----
    look harris, you don't seem to understand the passage. don't assume or state fanciful things. bouti's statement should be read in context and his statement is patently wrong. please don't defend it.

    imam nawawi says about doing tawaf or touching the wall near the rawDah etc. it is qualified and it is NOT the same as what sh. bouti said.

    ----
    looks like shaykh yaqoubi's positions also need to be reviewed and juxtaposed against previous ulama. only then his followers will shut up and hopefully, shaykh sahib will come back to the path of his noble ancestors.

    wa billahi't tawfiq.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2018
    Ghulam Ali, Aqdas, Bazdawi and 2 others like this.
  19. Harris786

    Harris786 Veteran

    toysoldier: at the end aH has accepted the point - so stop tripping before you land face first.

    2ndly the response doesn't strengthen the other side as it answers the point that they was trying to make that Imam Bouti violated the parameters of Sunni Islam.

    3rdly what aH is critiquing of Imam Bouti's passage in Fiqh alSira is interpretable. aH has accepted that Imam Bouti is not telling people to turn their back on the Rawza. Now I would want to mention something regarding the 'juhaal and mubtadia' comment. These type of statements are found in works. Like Imam Ghazzali saying 'the Sahabah never debated' yet it is known that some did debate like Ibn Abbas, Hazrat Ali etc radiyAllahu anhum. But Imam Ghazzali means almru alaghlab. Likewise when Sh Bouti says the 'juhaal mubtadia'he means almru alaghlab like what Imam Nawawi says regarding juhaal.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2018
  20. Harris786

    Harris786 Veteran

    Is it true Ala Hazrat said to hold the view of Imaan of Abu Talib is a Shia view?

    If that is the case wouldn't that be a mistake as it is also a Sunni view and other Sunni ulama held that view? And wouldn't Ala Hazrat's wording be harsh just as Sh Bouti's?
     

Share This Page