DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Allegations against Sayyadina Mu'awiyah (RA) and Ghurmis

**RooxiaNof** · 05-28-2011, 05:13 AM

just answer this. why cant history condemn a sahabi? u urself admitted that they were not infallible. the main reason was sahabas werent included in durood sharif by PROPHET HIMSELF is becoz the reason of them not being infallible. our scholars by using these foolish arguments have narrowed the horizons of reason.

lol seems you made another id.. :P

anyways , you always create your own stupid arguments and try to argue on those, but while doing that you miss the actual arguments.

Sahaba can be condemned when did i deny? but I said that those reports NEEDS TO BE THOROUGHLY scrutinized, understood this? We cant just take those narrations for granted without verification this is what i said. So am i wrong in this?

So again i repeat the same thing dont try to fool people with your retarded arguments.

Lol, in durood shareef wives of Prophet(Saw) were included so are they infalllible ? What an idiot this is.

05-28-2011, 05:13 AM	#39
RooxiaNof Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 552 Senior Member	just answer this. why cant history condemn a sahabi? u urself admitted that they were not infallible. the main reason was sahabas werent included in durood sharif by PROPHET HIMSELF is becoz the reason of them not being infallible. our scholars by using these foolish arguments have narrowed the horizons of reason. lol seems you made another id.. :P anyways , you always create your own stupid arguments and try to argue on those, but while doing that you miss the actual arguments. Sahaba can be condemned when did i deny? but I said that those reports NEEDS TO BE THOROUGHLY scrutinized, understood this? We cant just take those narrations for granted without verification this is what i said. So am i wrong in this? So again i repeat the same thing dont try to fool people with your retarded arguments. Lol, in durood shareef wives of Prophet(Saw) were included so are they infalllible ? What an idiot this is.
	Quote