Road to Islamic State was paved by America's Faustian bargain with Saudi Wahhabism

[Baloch Pakistani]

Brother your approach as to what is bid'ah or not is a bit off. First of all, as I imagine that you are a well informed person and when we speak about innovation in religion, it is innovation in religious matters opposed to using mobile phone or driving a car which is a baseless argument. The religion has been sealed since the time of the prophet and no new things can be introduced in 'religion'. We follow the example of the prophet and then the example of the rightly guided companions.

Secondly, the answer to your question is Yes it is an innovation or Bid'ah to touch Ka'baa or kiss it in order to seek closeness to Allah especially during tawaf. This is not proven by the prophet or his companions and whatever has been left in ibada by him should be left as well. He was the best of the people and he didnt do it was a proper sign to avoid it as well. The prophet only touched the yemeni corner and the black stone during tawaf and this is what is proven from him. Tawaf is part of Ibada and a matter of religion to which we cannot add anything without the consequence being added to it as well. If someone cannot touch it due to the issues these days is excused from it as we know the consequence to it and is excusable.

As for kissing the maqam e Ebrahim box is also an innovation and not even a part of religion. Cannot even be considered as a good deed and a useless thing to do. The prophet avoided any and everything from which shaitaan can find ways to distract a muslim unless he starts worshipping the Ka'baa instead of Allah and the foot marks of Ebrahim instead of sunnah of the prophet.

Lastly, the concept of reciting fatiha on graves is an innovation in itself. If you would know the meaning of what you are reciting over the graves you will never do that. When you recite fatiha you are asking for yourself instead. Visiting graves is a good thing it softens the heart and reminds one of death and there is also no harm in praying from Allah for the forgiveness of the person whether it be at home or anywhere. But reciting fatiha is neither proved from the sunnah of the prophet or the companions nor it makes any sense if you have a little knowledge of Arabic and Quran.

1. If the religion was sealed by Muhammad SAW then who gave the authority to our second calif to start tarawih prayer in mosque since Prophet SAW stopped performing it in mosque and started it in his house alone. He offered 13 rakats then no one pray even one rakat more or one rakat less otherwise its bidat.

2. If the religion was sealed then who gave the right to Hazrat Umar RA to give 80 lashes to a drinker since Prophet SAW gave just 40 lashes, is not also bidat. Saudi government just gave 350 lashes to a guy for that thing.

3. If i touch kabaa or maqam e ibrahim then you are saying that that guy who stood there by the authority of saudis to call me a Mushrik? He called haram haram shirk shirk. Just prove me that doing so is shirk or haram since i touched it when i was not even performing tawaf or umrah. And who told them i am touching it as a aqeedat or am i touching it as sawab? Do they read minds and hearts and then call shirk shirk to me? Does have that right to call me mushrik for touching that box?

You go and first do research before talking thrash I am no lover of Yazeed but I bother to do research not act like people like you. Several Sahabas had done bait of Yazeed he wasn' t that corrupt as promoted and lied about. So bother to do research before talking. Mr as for Yazeed I don't weather he would be in heaven or not but he was part of that lashkar who Hazoor SAW predicted would go to heaven. The laskar which attacked contastinople .Many do if you don't know that I can do nothing about that many start asking Kaba to reward them . What you think those who do Sajdas to grave here won't do this . Those bidat the bidat which is worse than known sins and leads to hell calling Wahabis who follow nothing but Quran and Sunnah is is irony and shows ignorance of those calling wahabi idiots. But those following bidat will keep defending bidat and Haram @Baloch Pakistani

If bidah is bidah then call hazrat umar too as bidati (Nauzubillah) who gave 80 lashes.
Answer to that false hadith the aqeeda of wahabis. Molana ishaq is Ahle hadith.

 

[Zarvan]

1. If the religion was sealed by Muhammad SAW then who gave the authority to our second calif to start tarawih prayer in mosque since Prophet SAW stopped performing it in mosque and started it in his house alone. He offered 13 rakats then no one pray even one rakat more or one rakat less otherwise its bidat.

2. If the religion was sealed then who gave the right to Hazrat Umar RA to give 80 lashes to a drinker since Prophet SAW gave just 40 lashes, is not also bidat. Saudi government just gave 350 lashes to a guy for that thing.

3. If i touch kabaa or maqam e ibrahim then you are saying that that guy who stood there by the authority of saudis to call me a Mushrik? He called haram haram shirk shirk. Just prove me that doing so is shirk or haram since i touched it when i was not even performing tawaf or umrah. And who told them i am touching it as a aqeedat or am i touching it as sawab? Do they read minds and hearts and then call shirk shirk to me? Does have that right to call me mushrik for touching that box?



If bidah is bidah then call hazrat umar too as bidati (Nauzubillah) who gave 80 lashes.
Answer to that false hadith the aqeeda of wahabis.

I know this guy you are quoting. He used to try his level best with half truth to lie and defend bidat. Finally who told you Salafis don't count actions of Sahabas as part of deen. Mr according to Salafi school of thought things told in Quran and Sunnah and done by Sahabas as the Jammat will be followed. No other thing would be accepted so at least get updated what Salafi school of thought is before showing your ignorace which is bigger than K2 mountain

1. If the religion was sealed by Muhammad SAW then who gave the authority to our second calif to start tarawih prayer in mosque since Prophet SAW stopped performing it in mosque and started it in his house alone. He offered 13 rakats then no one pray even one rakat more or one rakat less otherwise its bidat.

2. If the religion was sealed then who gave the right to Hazrat Umar RA to give 80 lashes to a drinker since Prophet SAW gave just 40 lashes, is not also bidat. Saudi government just gave 350 lashes to a guy for that thing.

3. If i touch kabaa or maqam e ibrahim then you are saying that that guy who stood there by the authority of saudis to call me a Mushrik? He called haram haram shirk shirk. Just prove me that doing so is shirk or haram since i touched it when i was not even performing tawaf or umrah. And who told them i am touching it as a aqeedat or am i touching it as sawab? Do they read minds and hearts and then call shirk shirk to me? Does have that right to call me mushrik for touching that box?



If bidah is bidah then call hazrat umar too as bidati (Nauzubillah) who gave 80 lashes.
Answer to that false hadith the aqeeda of wahabis. Molana ishaq is Ahle hadith.

Molvi is lying clearly lying and distorting history will fools promoting him.

 

[Zibago]

@Baloch Pakistani
You sure know how to handle wahabis

 

[Baloch Pakistani]

I know this guy you are quoting. He used to try his level best with half truth to lie and defend bidat. Finally who told you Salafis don't count actions of Sahabas as part of deen. Mr according to Salafi school of thought things told in Quran and Sunnah and done by Sahabas as the Jammat will be followed. No other thing would be accepted so at least get updated what Salafi school of thought is before showing your ignorace which is bigger than K2 mountain


Molvi is lying clearly lying and distorting history will fools promoting him.

Answer my above questions one by one, don't skip them.


Just prove that molvi wrong. But not by that idiot ibn e tamiyah's words.


The biggest fool and liar is Ibn e taymiya nasibi.

About bidat thats what i believe.

Wo punjabi mein kehtay hein na "sada kutta kutta, Tuwada kutta tommy ?" About your Wahabi logic that is.

 

[Zarvan]

Answer my above questions one by one, don't skip them.


Just prove that molvi wrong. But not by that idiot ibn e tamiyah's words.


The biggest fool and liar is Ibn e taymiya nasibi.

About bidat thats what i believe.

Wo punjabi mein kehtay hein na "sada kutta kutta, Tuwada kutta tommy ?" About your Wahabi logic that is.

Ibn taymiah only brought people to Quran and Sunnah that is enemies of Islam hate him I answered your question

 

[Baloch Pakistani]

Ibn taymiah only brought people to Quran and Sunnah that is enemies of Islam hate him I answered your question

No you didn't answered my questions. Anyhow, about your comment about yazid lanat ulla illeh. Read this and call everything a lie which is not told by wahabis.

YAZEED IBN MUAWIYAH WAS NOT IN THE FIRST BATCH OF THE CONSTANTINOPLE (QUSTUNTUNIA) ATTACK

It is said about Yazid ibn muawiyah that because he participated in first siege of the city of Caesar i.e. Constantinople (Qustuntuniya), he is worthy of being forgiven and he has already been forgiven. To prove this, a Hadith from Sahih Bukhari is quoted.

AN ANALYSIS OF THE HADITH OF CONSTANTINOPLE

Sahih bukhari, Kitab ul jihad, hadith no 2924

Narrated Khalid bin Madan:
That 'Umair bin Al-Aswad Al-Anasi told him that he went to 'Ubada bin As-Samit while he was staying in his house at the sea-shore of Hims with (his wife) Um Haram. 'Umair said. Um Haram informed us that she heard the Prophet (ﷺ) saying, "Paradise is granted to the first batch of my followers who will undertake a naval expedition."

FIRST ATTACK

Constantinople was first attacked by Mu'awiyah IN 32 A.H. There is no mention of Yazid participating in this siege. According to Bidayah wan Nihayah, Vol 9, Pg No. 76.

Yazid was born in 26 A.H., so in A.H. 32, he was a kid of 6 years old.

Sahih Bukhari,Kitab Ul Jihad, Hadith 2799

Narrated Anas bin Malik:

Um Haram said, "Invoke Allah to make me one of them." He said, "You are among the first batch." Later on it happened that she went out in the company of her husband 'Ubada bin As-Samit who went for Jihad and it was the FIRST TIME the Muslims undertook a naval expedition LED BY MUAWIYAH RADHIALLAH ANHU

THIRD ATTACK

The third attack on Constantinople was in 44 A.H. or 46 A.H. It is written in Tarikh Kamil in the incidents of the year of 44A.H:

In 44 A.H. Muslims, with Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid radhiallah anhu entered Rome and spent winter there only and Hadhrat Basar bin Artaah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) fought through the sea."
Tarikh Kamil, Vol 3, Pg no. 298

Sunan Abu Dawood, Kitab ul Jihad, Hadith no. 2512

Narrated AbuAyyub:

AbuImran said: We went out on an expedition from Medina with the intention of (attacking) Constantinople. AbdurRahman ibn Khalid ibn al-Walid was the leader of the company. The Romans were just keeping their backs to the walls of the city. A man (suddenly) attacked the enemy.
Thereupon the people said: Stop! Stop! There is no god but Allah. He is putting himself into danger.
AbuAyyub said: This verse was revealed about us, the group of the Ansar (the Helpers). When Allah helped His Prophet (ﷺ) and gave Islam dominance, we said (i.e. thought): Come on! Let us stay in our property and improve it.
Thereupon Allah, the Exalted, revealed, "And spend of your substance in the cause of Allah, and make not your hands contribute to (your destruction)". To put oneself into danger means that we stay in our property and commit ourselves to its improvement, and abandon fighting (i.e. jihad).
AbuImran said: AbuAyyub continued to strive in the cause of Allah until he (died and) was buried in Constantinople.

THE FOLLOWING HADITH ARE QUOTED IN THE FAVOUR OF YAZEED IBN MUAWIYYAH

To find out whether Yazid is included in the glad tidings of forgiveness given in the Hadith, it should be found in which attack of Constantinople did Yazid participate and in which year?

YAZEED IBN MUAWIYYAH ATTACK CONSTANTINOPLE IN 54 A.H WHICH IS SEVENTH ATTACK ON CONSTANTINOPLE

Sahih bukhari,Kitab ul Tahujjud, Hadith no. 1185

Narrated Mahmud bin Ar-rabi' Al-Ansari:

Mahmud added, "I told the above narration to some people, one of whom was Abu Aiyub, the companion of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) in the battle in which he (Abu Aiyub) died and Yazid bin Mu'awiya was their leader in Roman Territory.

Abu Ayyub Ansari radhiallah anhu participated in both the attack, the attack led by Abdur Rahman Khalid bin Walid Radhiallah anhu in 44 A.H and Yazeed ibn Muawiyyah in 54 A.H. Abu Ayyub Ansari radhiallah anhu died in the attack of Constantinople which waws led by Yazid ibn muawiyah.Yazid ibn Muawiyah's attack on Constantinople was the last participation of Abu Ayyub ansari radhiallah anhu in Constantinople attack.

So it is proved that Yazid ibn Muawiyah attack on Constantinople was not the first attack.


And about you wahabis read this:

Among the best-known of these hadiths is the relation of Imam al-Bukhari in which Ibn Umar said: ‘The Prophet (s.w.s.) mentioned: “O Allah, give us baraka in our Syria, O Allah, give us baraka in our Yemen.” They said: “And in our Najd?” and he said: “O Allah, give us baraka in our Syria, O Allah, give us baraka in our Yemen.” They said: “And in our Najd?” and I believe that he said the third time: “In that place are earthquakes, and seditions, and in that place shall rise the devil’s horn [qarn al-shaytan].”’

You guys cannot run away from this hadith, you guys just talk aein bien shein.

 

[Zarvan]

No you didn't answered my questions. Anyhow, about your comment about yazid lanat ulla illeh. Read this and call everything a lie which is not told by wahabis.

YAZEED IBN MUAWIYAH WAS NOT IN THE FIRST BATCH OF THE CONSTANTINOPLE (QUSTUNTUNIA) ATTACK

It is said about Yazid ibn muawiyah that because he participated in first siege of the city of Caesar i.e. Constantinople (Qustuntuniya), he is worthy of being forgiven and he has already been forgiven. To prove this, a Hadith from Sahih Bukhari is quoted.

AN ANALYSIS OF THE HADITH OF CONSTANTINOPLE

Sahih bukhari, Kitab ul jihad, hadith no 2924

Narrated Khalid bin Madan:
That 'Umair bin Al-Aswad Al-Anasi told him that he went to 'Ubada bin As-Samit while he was staying in his house at the sea-shore of Hims with (his wife) Um Haram. 'Umair said. Um Haram informed us that she heard the Prophet (ﷺ) saying, "Paradise is granted to the first batch of my followers who will undertake a naval expedition."

FIRST ATTACK

Constantinople was first attacked by Mu'awiyah IN 32 A.H. There is no mention of Yazid participating in this siege. According to Bidayah wan Nihayah, Vol 9, Pg No. 76.

Yazid was born in 26 A.H., so in A.H. 32, he was a kid of 6 years old.

Sahih Bukhari,Kitab Ul Jihad, Hadith 2799

Narrated Anas bin Malik:

Um Haram said, "Invoke Allah to make me one of them." He said, "You are among the first batch." Later on it happened that she went out in the company of her husband 'Ubada bin As-Samit who went for Jihad and it was the FIRST TIME the Muslims undertook a naval expedition LED BY MUAWIYAH RADHIALLAH ANHU

THIRD ATTACK

The third attack on Constantinople was in 44 A.H. or 46 A.H. It is written in Tarikh Kamil in the incidents of the year of 44A.H:

In 44 A.H. Muslims, with Hadhrat Abdur Rahman bin Khalid bin Walid radhiallah anhu entered Rome and spent winter there only and Hadhrat Basar bin Artaah (May Allah SWT be well pleased with him) fought through the sea."
Tarikh Kamil, Vol 3, Pg no. 298

Sunan Abu Dawood, Kitab ul Jihad, Hadith no. 2512

Narrated AbuAyyub:

AbuImran said: We went out on an expedition from Medina with the intention of (attacking) Constantinople. AbdurRahman ibn Khalid ibn al-Walid was the leader of the company. The Romans were just keeping their backs to the walls of the city. A man (suddenly) attacked the enemy.
Thereupon the people said: Stop! Stop! There is no god but Allah. He is putting himself into danger.
AbuAyyub said: This verse was revealed about us, the group of the Ansar (the Helpers). When Allah helped His Prophet (ﷺ) and gave Islam dominance, we said (i.e. thought): Come on! Let us stay in our property and improve it.
Thereupon Allah, the Exalted, revealed, "And spend of your substance in the cause of Allah, and make not your hands contribute to (your destruction)". To put oneself into danger means that we stay in our property and commit ourselves to its improvement, and abandon fighting (i.e. jihad).
AbuImran said: AbuAyyub continued to strive in the cause of Allah until he (died and) was buried in Constantinople.

THE FOLLOWING HADITH ARE QUOTED IN THE FAVOUR OF YAZEED IBN MUAWIYYAH

To find out whether Yazid is included in the glad tidings of forgiveness given in the Hadith, it should be found in which attack of Constantinople did Yazid participate and in which year?

YAZEED IBN MUAWIYYAH ATTACK CONSTANTINOPLE IN 54 A.H WHICH IS SEVENTH ATTACK ON CONSTANTINOPLE

Sahih bukhari,Kitab ul Tahujjud, Hadith no. 1185

Narrated Mahmud bin Ar-rabi' Al-Ansari:

Mahmud added, "I told the above narration to some people, one of whom was Abu Aiyub, the companion of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) in the battle in which he (Abu Aiyub) died and Yazid bin Mu'awiya was their leader in Roman Territory.

Abu Ayyub Ansari radhiallah anhu participated in both the attack, the attack led by Abdur Rahman Khalid bin Walid Radhiallah anhu in 44 A.H and Yazeed ibn Muawiyyah in 54 A.H. Abu Ayyub Ansari radhiallah anhu died in the attack of Constantinople which waws led by Yazid ibn muawiyah.Yazid ibn Muawiyah's attack on Constantinople was the last participation of Abu Ayyub ansari radhiallah anhu in Constantinople attack.

So it is proved that Yazid ibn Muawiyah attack on Constantinople was not the first attack.


And about you wahabis read this:

Among the best-known of these hadiths is the relation of Imam al-Bukhari in which Ibn Umar said: ‘The Prophet (s.w.s.) mentioned: “O Allah, give us baraka in our Syria, O Allah, give us baraka in our Yemen.” They said: “And in our Najd?” and he said: “O Allah, give us baraka in our Syria, O Allah, give us baraka in our Yemen.” They said: “And in our Najd?” and I believe that he said the third time: “In that place are earthquakes, and seditions, and in that place shall rise the devil’s horn [qarn al-shaytan].”’

You guys cannot run away from this hadith, you guys just talk aein bien shein.

If these are Hadith I accept it still my stand on Yazeed being not corrupt stands because several Sahabas including Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar RA and Hazrat Abdullah bin Abbas RA and several others had done bait of Yazeed. Main culprit Karbala tragedy was Ibn Ziad and Shimer. Now I am ending this debate here want to debate more contact me on Facebook.

 

[Baloch Pakistani]

If these are Hadith I accept it still my stand on Yazeed being not corrupt stands because several Sahabas including Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar RA and Hazrat Abdullah bin Abbas RA and several others had done bait of Yazeed. Main culprit Karbala tragedy was Ibn Ziad and Shimer. Now I am ending this debate here want to debate more contact me on Facebook.

Hazrat Ali RA said: For those who refused to side with any party, Hazrat Ali or his enemies, He said: They have forsaken religion and are of no use to infidelity also.

So whose side would you take? Yazid or Hazrat Hussain. Have courage. Choose a side.

 

[Zarvan]

Hazrat Ali RA said: For those who refused to side with any party, Hazrat Ali or his enemies, He said: They have forsaken religion and are of no use to infidelity also.

So whose side would you take? Yazid or Hazrat Hussain. Have courage. Choose a side.

No I am not going to take side this style is chosen by one sect to discredit and insult Sahabas like Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar RA and several others who had done bait of yazeed and try to extend their propaganda against Sahabas

 

[Baloch Pakistani]

No I am not going to take side this style is chosen by one sect to discredit and insult Sahabas like Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar RA and several others who had done bait of yazeed and try to extend their propaganda against Sahabas

Bhag arjun bhaaaaaaaaaaaaaag. So you have not taken a side and have forsaken religion and are of no use to infidelity also.

And so the debate is closed here on this conclusion.

 

[Azad-Kashmiri]

A lot of good that will do. IS do have their own clerics, you did not know that ?

You people in Christendom can't have it both ways; when Muslims give fatwa against them, you respond what good has that done. When our voices are not heard, you people bark why are Muslims quite! Muslim countries are occupied by Christendom and our armies are there for internal threats to keep the corrupt in power. Tell me which Muslim country has the means to fight outside of its borders? Turkey doesn't count, it's with NATO.

Yes, ISIS has their ''scholars'' but they're ignorant and resort to killing when challenged.

And it was Christians who stopped them.

No Christendom did not stop it, they imposed a 4 year long arms embargo on the Bosnian Muslims, whilst Christendom forces armed their breathran Serbs. The foreign Christendom forces UN watched and allowed the rape and Murder in Sabranezca, Tuzla, etc.

When the tide of war was turning in favour of the Muslim; Amrika told the munfaq Izabegafic to get rid of the Ansar and before Amrka will help. Why? After 4 years did Amrika drop 2-3 bombs on cardboard tank cut-outs the Serb Christians surrendered.

When the US invaded Iraq -- twice -- did we called upon Jesus ?

You are a blasphemous who dishonors prophet Essa (as'salaam). There are many UN resolutions that have need enforcing, especially with the Zionists. Why pick and choose?

The reality is that as a country, the US is far less a fear than your own Muslims, which now includes IS.

Don't you understand our Muslim countries are run by paid whores and dogs. Do you think they represent us? They steal loans given to the nation by Amrka and others and generations to come will have to pay them back.

Do you really think people hate Amrika in Pakistan? The polls said around 80% do, I tell you they don't. If your country stops giving loans to corrupt ginrals and sayasdan at our expense you would have 80% loving Amrika. If you doubt what I say, open your border and see how many Pakistanis will leave for your country. Hate is a strong word, people don't hate Amrikan people and I've spoken to some Pakistanis who live in Christendom and they're happy.

Stop backing corrupt dogs in power and come and sit with the Ulima-Ikram and you'll see all the secularists Pakistani lies unfolding before your eyes. They make the Ulima-Ikram scary to stay in power and Amrka keeps backing them. People are fed up with loans Christendom gives us and they pocket it. This is why we prefer to break-off ties with Amrika to stop the loans which our future generations will have to pay back. No body hates Amrika and I'm telling you the views of Madaris in ''general''.

 

[Zarvan]

Bhag arjun bhaaaaaaaaaaaaaag. So you have not taken a side and have forsaken religion and are of no use to infidelity also.

And so the debate is closed here on this conclusion.

I follow Quran and Sunnah and way of Sahabas and reject bidat because bidat leads towards hell. You want to follow bidat and Haram your choice and you are running away and I am here and for further debate add me on Facebook I can debate with you for years and years to come @Baloch Pakistani

 

[LfcRed]

1. If the religion was sealed by Muhammad SAW then who gave the authority to our second calif to start tarawih prayer in mosque since Prophet SAW stopped performing it in mosque and started it in his house alone. He offered 13 rakats then no one pray even one rakat more or one rakat less otherwise its bidat.

2. If the religion was sealed then who gave the right to Hazrat Umar RA to give 80 lashes to a drinker since Prophet SAW gave just 40 lashes, is not also bidat. Saudi government just gave 350 lashes to a guy for that thing.

3. If i touch kabaa or maqam e ibrahim then you are saying that that guy who stood there by the authority of saudis to call me a Mushrik? He called haram haram shirk shirk. Just prove me that doing so is shirk or haram since i touched it when i was not even performing tawaf or umrah. And who told them i am touching it as a aqeedat or am i touching it as sawab? Do they read minds and hearts and then call shirk shirk to me? Does have that right to call me mushrik for touching that box?



If bidah is bidah then call hazrat umar too as bidati (Nauzubillah) who gave 80 lashes.
Answer to that false hadith the aqeeda of wahabis. Molana ishaq is Ahle hadith.

1- The prophet prayed the first four days in the masjid in congregation and then the fifth day he didnt show up and prayed at home. He never forbade others to stop praying in the masjid. He feared for it to be made fard or the companions wrongly deem it as fard was the reason he didnt show up in masjid. Taraweeh is a sunnah prayer and there is no set limit to nafl prayers. The prophet guided for it to be prayed 2 rakats at a time but never set a ceiling to it. It is like the night prayer in whixh there is not a set maximum limit to it. This is not something to argue about or take as a basis of innovation. Both extreme groups who pray 8 and 20 should not denounce the other group. If we look at what the scholars of the prominent schools of thought said, you will clearly see that this matter is broad in scope and that there is nothing wrong with doing more than eleven rak’ahs.

Al-Sarkhasi, who is one of the imams of the Hanafi school, said:

It is twenty rak’ahs, apart from Witr, in our view.

Al-Mabsoot, 2/145

Ibn Qudaamah said:

The favoured view according to Abu ‘Abd-Allaah (i.e., Imam Ahmad, may Allaah have mercy on him), is that it is twenty rak’ahs. This was the view of al-Thawri, Abu Hanfeefah and al-Shaafa’i. Maalik said it is thirty-six.

Al-Mughni, 1/457

Al-Nawawi said:

Taraaweeh prayer is Sunnah according to scholarly consensus. Our view is that it is twenty rak’ahs with ten tasleems, and it is permissible to pray it individually or in congregation.

Al-Majmoo’, 4/31

All of the scholars said something more than eleven rak’ahs.

The Prophet used to pray eleven rak’ahs and make them very lengthy, so much so that it used to take him most of the night. Indeed, one night in which the Prophet led his companions in praying Taraaweeh he did not end his prayer until just before dawn and the Sahaabah feared that they would miss suhoor. The scholars thought that if the imam made the prayer so long, this would be too difficult for the members of the congregation and that might put them off. So they thought that the imam should make the recitation shorter and increase the number of rak’ahs.

The point is that the one who prays eleven rak’ahs in the manner narrated from the hadith is doing well and is following the Sunnah. Whoever makes the recitation shorter and increases the number of rak’ahs is also doing well. A person who does either of these two things is not to be denounced.

It is also not proven that the Prophet prayed twenty rak’ahs of Taraaweeh rather that he prayed at night with an unspecified number of rak’ahs.

2- With regard to the punishment of the drinker in this world, the punishment is flogging with 40 lashes also followed byat the time of Abu Bakr. But there is some difference of opinion as to the number of lashes. The majority of scholars are of the view that it is eighty lashes for a free man and forty for others.

When ‘Umar was the caliph, he consulted the people and ‘Abd al-Rahmaan said, “The minimum punishment is eighty,” so that is what ‘Umar commanded. The Sahaabah agreed with ‘Umar and did not differ. The Council of Senior Scholars is agreed that the punishment for one who drinks wine is the hadd punishment, which is eighty lashes.

Some of the scholars – such as Ibn Quddamah think that giving more than forty lashes is left to the discretion of the Muslim leader. So if he thinks that there is a need to give more than forty lashes, as happened at the time of ‘Umar, then he may make it eighty. The minimum is set by the prophet and the maximum number can vary according to time and the leader.

3- First, tell me what is the need to touch and kiss? Then i will tell you why you shouldnt do it. Its quiet simple it is the responsibility of a leader to stop people from indulging in innovations and shirk. The guards standing in the haram are made to keep an eye because you will surely know many muslims are emotional and exaggerate the status of these things to something they are not for the purpose of drawing close to Allah and gather good deeds. What is the need to touch the glass or kiss the Ka'baa when there is no need to. The guards there do not know your intention but the person looking at you might take a wrong impression and wrongly follow you in the same act with a different intention. Tnat is why they try and stop everyone to not anyone get a wrong impression of the acts in which there is no benefit but harm most probably.

 

[Baloch Pakistani]

I follow Quran and Sunnah and way of Sahabas and reject bidat because bidat leads towards hell. You want to follow bidat and Haram your choice and you are running away and I am here and for further debate add me on Facebook I can debate with you for years and years to come @Baloch Pakistani

Thats my belief about bidat

First, tell me what is the need to touch and kiss? Then i will tell you why you shouldnt do it. Its quiet simple it is the responsibility of a leader to stop people from indulging in innovations and shirk. The guards standing in the haram are made to keep an eye because you will surely know many muslims are emotional and exaggerate the status of these things to something they are not for the purpose of drawing close to Allah and gather good deeds. What is the need to touch the glass or kiss the Ka'baa when there is no need to. The guards there do not know your intention but the person looking at you might take a wrong impression and wrongly follow you in the same act with a different intention. Tnat is why they try and stop everyone to not anyone get a wrong impression of the acts in which there is no benefit but harm most probably.

the answer is this.

 

[Zarvan]

Thats my belief about bidat

Yes good way to defend all Haram. Molvi Sahab and you both need to know what bidat is before talking and coming up most stupid ways to defend bidat