The destruction of our holy sites.

[~Taalibah~]

This came out a while ago and i'm not sure if all of you have heard it. Please take time and listen to this program. What is happening is very sad. May Allah Ta'aala save us from his Atha'ab.

It is basically a discussion between Dr Irfaan Ahmed and the radio presenter, Inayat, on the destruction on many of our Islamic cultural sites. Very disturbing is the zam-zam, rebuilding of toilets on sacred places as well as the destruction of buildings that were in still standing from the time of Rasulullah's Salallahu'alauhi wassalam time.



Track 1
01 Track 1.wma
Track 2
http://s3.turboupload.com/file/709455693/02Track2.wma
Track 3

http://s3.turboupload.com/file/162081198/02Track2.wma

[Fishman]

This came out a while ago and i'm not sure if all of you have heard it. Please take time and listen to this program. What is happening is very sad. May Allah Ta'aala save us from his Atha'ab.

P.S. i could only upload track 2 and 3, 1 didn't come out, i'm trying again.....
Hope those work



http://s3.turboupload.com/file/709455693/02Track2.wma

http://s3.turboupload.com/file/162081198/02Track2.wma

What's it about?

[~Taalibah~]

Sorry, so preoccupied with this other uploading, i forgot abt that..

It basically has a discussion between Dr Irfaan Ahmed and the radio presenter Inayat on the destruction on many of our Islamic cultural sites. Very disturbing is the zam-zam as well as the destruction of buildings that were in still standing from the time of Rasulullah's Salallahu'alauhi wassalam time.

[chacha_jalebi]

salaam ma alaykum

the way i see it, is that no one wants them holy sites destroyed, but some stuff like levellin graves thats kool, because graves aint meant to have structures over them, and the other sites, im sure people would have left it alone, its other that go and do shirk at them sites by kissin them and makin special ziyarah's to go and visit them, when they have the kabaah and masjid an nabawi, the best places in the world!! they leave these places and begin to visit other sites, so thats the only possible reason i could think why they destroyed them, its a few individuals who ruin it for others, for example they could have kept some stuff for tourism or somethin, but people will end up misusin them,

let me give you a example lol, in pakiland they have a musuem where they have the cloak of RasoolAllah (sal allah hu aleyhi wasalam) and his walkin stick, and other items. and there was a man who was standin outside the room and makin dua towards the room and then another guy kept takin pictures so they had to close the room lol, so what happens is others ruin it for others, people go to some sites and start doin shirk, so then they just demolish them all!

[Questfortruth]

destruction of buildings that were in still standing from the time of Rasulullah's Salallahu'alauhi wassalam time.

Is that even possible? I don't support the Saudi kingdom but I think they might have brought them down because they were no longer safe.

[Fishman]

salaam ma alaykum

the way i see it, is that no one wants them holy sites destroyed, but some stuff like levellin graves thats kool, because graves aint meant to have structures over them, and the other sites, im sure people would have left it alone, its other that go and do shirk at them sites by kissin them and makin special ziyarah's to go and visit them, when they have the kabaah and masjid an nabawi, the best places in the world!!

Uhh, Masjid-ul-Nabi is a structure errected above a grave...

[~Taalibah~]

salaam ma alaykum

the way i see it, is that no one wants them holy sites destroyed, but some stuff like levellin graves thats kool, because graves aint meant to have structures over them, and the other sites, im sure people would have left it alone, its other that go and do shirk at them sites by kissin them and makin special ziyarah's to go and visit them, when they have the kabaah and masjid an nabawi, the best places in the world!! they leave these places and begin to visit other sites, so thats the only possible reason i could think why they destroyed them, its a few individuals who ruin it for others, for example they could have kept some stuff for tourism or somethin, but people will end up misusin them,

let me give you a example lol, in pakiland they have a musuem where they have the cloak of RasoolAllah (sal allah hu aleyhi wasalam) and his walkin stick, and other items. and there was a man who was standin outside the room and makin dua towards the room and then another guy kept takin pictures so they had to close the room lol, so what happens is others ruin it for others, people go to some sites and start doin shirk, so then they just demolish them all!

With you here. What struck us when we listened to the talk was that they were using this reason to destroy nearly everything important.

Is that even possible? I don't support the Saudi kingdom but I think they might have brought them down because they were no longer safe.

Well they were modified with times but still were sacred.

..let me get this track 1.. its just keep on giving me a problem!

[chacha_jalebi]

It was narrated that Abu’l-Hayaaj al-Asadi said: ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib said to me: “Shall I not send you on the same mission as the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) sent me? Do not leave any statue without erasing it, and do not leave any raised grave without leveling it.” (Narrated by Muslim, 969)

so thats what RasoolAllah (saw) said about graves, personally i dont agree with the destruction of the sites like Abu Bakr (Ra) house and stuff, but i can understand the reason behind it like, people might take it for a place where they decide to do sum nex thin lol, so like i said some people ruin it for others, like for example the shias they dont know where Hadhrat Hassan (ra) or Hadhrat Fatima (ra) are buried in jannah tul baqi, so they go round like the whole graveyard and recite stuff, imagine they knew which graves they were lol, they would have blatantly ended up doing some next thins there,

Uhh, Masjid-ul-Nabi is a structure errected above a grave...

yaaah fishy brooo but it werent built by RasoolAllah (saw), nor did he say to do it, nor was it built by the sahaba or tabieen, it was built by some king, and the scholars have said he shouldnt have built it over the grave of the Prophet (Saw) because it goes againist the hadiths and the teachins of RasoolAllah (Saw)



but the destruction of buildings, other then the reason of shirk or summin else like over exageratin them, like they should try to stop the people doin unislamic stuff at them buildings, like for example i wana see the well which Hadhrat Uthman (Ra) bought in madinah lol i dont wana spin in circles or start prayin there lol i just wana see it, but its been like cordoned off or smashed down, thats somethin i dont agree with, but they should make sure no one does any unislamic thins there and they should just allow the buildings

[BlissfullyJaded]

Nobody prays to the grave of Sayyidina Rasulullah (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam), well people may try to, but that is prevented by the guards. But there is no tomb there, and the structure surrounding it is for the purpose of worshipping Allah and not the grave. Behind the gates there is no tomb, just sand... When the time for salaah comes, people face the qibla, and those who happen to be there next to the grave have their backs facing it, so obviously there is no shirk.

The Saudis did not level the houses of Abu Bakr, 'Umar, Uthmaan, or 'Ali (Radiallahu Anhum). The Ottomans built masjids where their homes used to be, and presently those masjids are still there, and the Saudis are restoring them since they have become old. Other places which were leveled in Makkah and Madeenah were to make way for the Haram'ain expansions.

[Fishman]

yaaah fishy brooo but it werent built by RasoolAllah (saw), nor did he say to do it, nor was it built by the sahaba or tabieen, it was built by some king, and the scholars have said he shouldnt have built it over the grave of the Prophet (Saw) because it goes againist the hadiths and the teachins of RasoolAllah (Saw)

Yes it was, the Prophet (peace be upon him) was buried in his house. That house has become the Tomb inside the Masjid as the Masjid expanded and surrounded it.

[chacha_jalebi]

The Saudis did not level the houses of Abu Bakr, 'Umar, Uthmaan, or 'Ali (Radiallahu Anhum). The Ottomans built masjids where their homes used to be, and presently those masjids are still there, and the Saudis are restoring them since they have become old.

thats neww too me jazakhallah

i heard that they destroyed them, to build a car park or summin lol, i think quite a lot of stuff which has been removed is just rumours, there are many people out there who are againist saudi for one reason or another and they just like to make rumours up! Allah hu alim what has been removed, but most stuff was removed for the expansion of the mosque

Yes it was, the Prophet (peace be upon him) was buried in his house. That house has become the Tomb inside the Masjid as the Masjid expanded and surrounded it.

he was buried in his house fishyy, because Prophets (as) are meant to be buried where they die, and he was buried in the house of Hadhrat Aisha (Ra) which was right next to the mosque, and later on that room was incorporated into the mosque when it was expanded like you said lol, but he didnt ask for a dome to be built over him, that was done ages and ages after he died

[Fishman]

he was buried in his house fishyy, because Prophets (as) are meant to be buried where they die, and he was buried in the house of Hadhrat Aisha (Ra) which was right next to the mosque, and later on that room was incorporated into the mosque when it was expanded like you said lol, but he didnt ask for a dome to be built over him, that was done ages and ages after he died

But that means that there is still a structure over the grave, is there not? And a dome is just an architectural feature anyway, just a type of Persian roof. If raised graves are forbidden, then how does that apply only to domes and not buildings?

[BlissfullyJaded]

I don't understand... It was done for the purposes of expansion to fit more people inside the masjid. The purpose of having the structure was not to worship Rasulullah (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam), but to worship Allah. There isn't even a tomb on the grave, as is the case of some other graves...

The Messenger Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and his two companions [Abu Bakr and ‘Umar] (may Allaah be pleased with them) were not buried in the mosque, rather they were buried in the house of ‘Aa’ishah, but when the mosque was expanded during the time of al-Waleed ibn ‘Abd al-Malik, the room was incorporated into the mosque, at the end of the first century AH. His action does not come under the ruling of burial in the mosque, because the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and his two companions were not moved to the land of the mosque, rather the room in which they are buried was incorporated into the mosque because of the expansion. No one can use this as evidence that it is permissible to build structures over graves or to take graves as places of worship, or to bury people inside mosques, because of the saheeh ahaadeeth quoted above which forbid that. What al-Waleed did is not evidence for going against the proven Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). And Allaah is the Source of strength.
Source

[Fishman]

But there is still a structure built over it, is there not?

There isn't even a tomb on the grave, as is the case of some other graves

Any large grave can be called a tomb, from an underground vault to an Egyptian pyramid. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Tomb