This article is now available as a lecture.

In recent days, the ongoing conflict in Palestine has spurred much anger and frustration at those who legitimise and carry out the besiegement and massacre of Muslims in Gaza and elsewhere; thus resulting in many Muslims, as the Prophet ﷺ mentioned, responding as the human body responds to pain or ailment:

المؤمنون تراحُمُهم ولطفُ بعضِهم ببعضٍ كجسدِ رجلٍ واحدٍ إذا اشتكى بعضُ جسدِه ألِمَ له سائرُ جسدِه

“The Muslims, in their love and affection for each other are like the body of a single man; if part of the body complains, the rest of the body shares its pain.”1

Through various channels, whether through advocacy, educating others on Palestine and the situation, and in particular mass demonstrations in support of the Palestinians, demanding for the siege to end, Muslims have responded in full force in applying Prophetic principles.

However, certain individuals have made it their duty at this dire time to not only espouse, but enforce without alternative upon others, the opinion that demonstrations are impermissible within the Shariah. Thus, in light of the current situation, and these discussions around demonstrations and protests becoming more prevalent, I felt it was a duty to clarify the position of the Shariah on the issue, free of false premises and logical fallacies, in order that people may educate themselves on whether such demonstrations are indeed permissible or not.

Defining demonstrations 

What is a demonstration?

First, it must be clarified what is defined by a demonstration. 

A demonstration, or protest, is a public form of dissent and disagreement voiced by either individuals or groups, usually gathering in a public place or on a public platform in order to demand for change, whether political, social, economic, religious or otherwise. These will generally be directed towards authority figures, be that governments, corporations, monarchies etc, with the express aim of making an opinion heard. One may liken public demonstrations to political lobbying; people will voice their opinions and ask for change that directly affects and improves the situation at hand.

As this article will explain, there is nothing about demonstrations that inherently imply or lead to violence, rather their only inherent quality being the voicing of dissenting opinion. Their presence throughout human history is unquestionable; not only within the last 20 years – for instance, when millions marched against the Iraq War, or against forced RSE education – but even from the early days of Islam, resulting in many cases tangible progressions on these issues and at the very least, Muslim voices are heard and forced to be respected. 

The following discussion article will show clear evidence from our history, as supported by our Shariah and esteemed scholars, that we have both the right and, in some cases, the need to protest. It would be a dire waste for us to have not only the ability to voice our dissent, but the right to do so, both given to us by our Prophet ﷺ, and to neglect it.

Demonstrations in light of the Qur’an & Sunnah

Demonstrations can be considered legitimate as per the following:

  1. As a means of inkaar al munkar – forbidding evil. 

    Allah (swt) states:

    وَلْتَكُن مِّنكُمْ أُمَّةٌ يَدْعُونَ إِلَى ٱلْخَيْرِ وَيَأْمُرُونَ بِٱلْمَعْرُوفِ وَيَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ ٱلْمُنكَرِ ۚ وَأُو۟لَـٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْمُفْلِحُونَ

    “Let there be a group among you who call ˹others˺ to goodness, encourage what is good, and forbid what is evil—it is they who will be successful.”2

    Through demonstrations, a group of Muslims may be able to pressure change and raise awareness towards either enjoining good (for example calling for the enforcement of protection of an individual’s right), or towards forbidding evil – such as condemning the legality of zina in a Muslim land.
  1. As being from adaat (customs) rather than ibadaat (worship)

    There is no explicit text encouraging nor forbidding demonstrations from the Qur’an or Sunnah. Thus; it is not a form of ibaadah (worship), but rather something which is mubah – a matter which the Shariah does not speak upon.

    Based upon this, and the general principle of the Shariah that all is permissible (halal) until proven prohibited (haram), then it can indeed be said that demonstrations are permissible in light of the Shariah. And whoever claims it to be prohibited, he has differed with the default position and is therefore obliged to provide evidence for its prohibition.

Precedence for demonstrations in Islamic history

From the seerah:

  1. A man once came to the Prophet ﷺ complaining about his neighbour, so the Prophet ﷺ told the man: “Leave, and stay patient.” However, the man returned, again, and then a third time, so the Prophet (swt) told him: “Go, and leave your belongings [from his home] out on the street”. So he left his property on the street, and when people ask him why he had done so, he would inform them of what his neighbour had done. As a result, the people would turn to the neighbour, cursing him, saying “May Allah do with him such and such”. At last, the neighbour then went to the man and said: “Return your belongings [to your home]; you will no longer see anything from me that is detestable.”3

    وعن ابي هريرة رضي الله عنه، جاءَ رجلٌ إلى النَّبيِّ صلَّى اللَّهُ عليهِ وسلَّمَ يَشكو جارَهُ ، فقالَ : اذهَب فاصبِر فأتاهُ مرَّتينِ أو ثلاثًا، فقالَ: اذهَب فاطرَحْ متاعَكَ في الطَّريقِ فطرحَ متاعَهُ في الطَّريقِ، فجعلَ النَّاسُ يَسألونَهُ فيُخبِرُهُم خبرَهُ، فجَعلَ النَّاسُ يلعنونَهُ: فعلَ اللَّهُ بِهِ، وفَعلَ، فجاءَ إليهِ جارُهُ فقالَ لَهُ: ارجِع لا تَرى منِّي شيئًا تَكْرَهُهُ
  1. A large group of women all gathered around the house of the Prophet ﷺ , protesting and complaining about their husbands beating them. Thus, the Prophet ﷺ stated: 

    “The Prophet ﷺ’s house has been flooded with a great number of women complaining about their husbands; they [the husbands] are not the best of you.”4

    فَأَطَافَ بآل رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم نساءٌ كثيرٌ يَشْكُونَ أزواجهن، فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : «لقد أَطَافَ بآل بيت محمد نساءٌ كثيرٌ يَشْكُونَ أزواجهن، ليس أولئك بِخِيَارِكُمْ» 

From the salaf and khalaf:

  1. During the Mu’tazilite inquisition, Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (ra) was imprisoned, tortured and publicly flogged for refusing to accept the doctrine that the Qur’an was created. Therefore, a group of Muslims gathered outside the palace of the Khilafa, and demanded for al-Ma’mun to release the Imam and end his torture, which was then a successful effort.5
  1. During the time of Shaykhul Islam Taqi-ad-Din Ibn Taymiyyah (ra), a Christian man by the name of Asaf insulted the Prophet ﷺ publicly. The governor of Syria however decided not to execute the penalty of blasphemy upon him, which led Ibn Taymiyyah and a number of other scholars to protest, rallying the people in the process; resulting in Ibn Taymiyyah’s imprisonment, and the authoring of his first major work: “The Unsheathed Sword Against The One Who Insults The Messenger” (as-Saarim al-Maslul ‘Ala Shatm al-Rasul).6

Common objections

“Demonstrations are a innovation (bidah)”

This claim is false from the outset, due to the simple fact that as stated before, demonstrations are not from acts of worship (ibadaat), but rather, from customs (adaat). For it to be categorised as an innovation must require it to be from acts of worship.

As for the argument that it is worship since one believes they may attain reward through it, it is not the demonstration itself that reward is attained but rather the act of hisbah – enjoining the good and forbidding evil. Thus, this argument falls flat upon its face.

To give an example: a person may choose to enjoin good and forbid evil through creating a video which is shared on various platforms. Creating the video itself is not an act of worship; it is merely the means to hisbah. Therefore, it cannot be said that making such a video is an innovation in the religion. 

“Demonstrations lead to bloodshed, corruption and crime”

This is again a fallacious argument. The vast majority of protests throughout history and in the current day and age are non-violent and have no harmful consequences. The slippery slope notion that the natural consequence of demonstrations is violence and bloodshed has no grounding in reality or history. 

Most opponents will reference the Arab Spring as an example of demonstrations resulting in bloodshed. Again, this is folly for the following reasons:

  • Bloodshed already existed before the protests began, usually perpetrated by respective states towards the common populace. 
  • The protests themselves were generally peaceful; they did not result in rioting and violence.
  • Bloodshed and instability only increased once armed forces opened fire on civilians. Thus, the situation shifted from mere resentment towards complete war and opposition. 
  • Not all protests ended in violence; for instance in Jordan, the protests resulted in small reforms and crowds subsiding. To this day, peaceful demonstrations continue to occur in Jordan without violence, crime or bloodshed. 

“Demonstrations are a manifestation of secular liberal democracies, and/or are an imitation of the disbelievers”

With regards to democracy:

As shown above, the phenomena of demonstrations far precedes the rise of liberalism by thousands of years within the Seerah of the Prophet ﷺ , and far precedes the establishment of democratic states and ideals. 

With regards to imitating the disbelievers:

If one is to claim this, one must then admit according to his view that the examples of demonstrations cited above are an imitation of disbelievers, and therefore place himself into a great contradiction. 

Furthermore; not every matter that is practiced by a disbeliever is necessarily imitation. For example; the treaty of Hilf al-Fudul by the Quraysh before the revelation, whereby they declared that not a wronged person would enter Makkah except that they would support him. 

And of Hilf al Fudul, the Prophet ﷺ stated:

ما أحب أن لي به حمر النعم، ولو دعيت به في الإسلام لأجبت

“It is more beloved to me than a herd of red camels, and if I was called to it once more now in Islam, I would respond.”7

“Demonstrations are impermissible due to free mixing, music and dancing”

With regards to music and dancing:

These do not make demonstrations in of themselves impermissible. Rather, it should be a case by case basis to decide whether one should attend.

For example; in today’s age, free mixing, music and dancing are all prevalent at many Muslim weddings. However, this does not make attending weddings in of themselves impermissible; rather, one attends based on whether such impermissible actions are present or not. 

Of course, this does not mean that one should accept munkar – as that would be contradictory to the point of the demonstration in the first place. Rather, one must assess each protest or demonstration individually.

With regards to free mixing

It must be understood that ikhtilaat – free mixing between men and women – has many levels. Whether one is on public transport, in the markets or even doing tawaf around the Ka’abah, there is a degree of mixing. 

Indeed, even during the time of the Prophet ﷺ, such mixing existed during his time:

  1. It was narrated from Anas:

    “On the day of Uhud, I saw Aisha bint Abi Bakr and Umm Sulaym with their robes lifted up so you could see the adornments around their ankles, carrying jugs of water to the people, emptying it into their mouths and then returning to refill the jugs.”8

    عن أنس قال: ” لما كان يوم أحد… رأيت عائشة بنت أبي بكر وأم سُليم، وإنهما لمشمِّرتان أرى خدم سوقهما تنفران القِرَب على متونهما تفرغانه في أفواه القوم، ثم ترجعان فتملآنها، ثم تجيئان فتفرغانه في أفواه القوم “.
  1. It was narrated by al-Rubee’ bint Ma’udh: 

    “We would take part in the battles with the Prophet ﷺ by providing the people with water, serving them, and returning the injured and dead back to Madinah.”9

    عن الرُّبيِّع بنت معوذ قالت:
    ” كنا نغزو مع النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، فنسقي القوم، ونخدمهم، ونردُّ الجرحى والقتلى إلى المدينة”.
  1. It was narrated by Umm ‘Attiyah: 

    “We took part in a number of battles alongside the Prophet ﷺ by cooking food, treating the injured and healing the sick.”10

    عن أم عطية قالت: “غزوت مع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يبع غزوات، أخلفهم في رحالهم، فأصنع لهم الطعام، وأداوي الجرحى، وأقوم على المرضى”.
  1. Nusaybah bint Ka’ab, also known as Umm Ammarah, participated in a number of battles, including Uhud, Hunain and Yamama, whereby she was injured in her hand, and was promised Paradise by the Prophet ﷺ as a result of her efforts in defending him in the Battle of Uhud.11
  1. It is narrated from Anas that Umm Sulaym took a dagger on the day of Hunain with her, and she was seen doing this by Abu Talha. He went to the Prophet ﷺ , and said: “Oh Messenger of Allah! Umm Sulaym has a dagger with her!” The Prophet ﷺ said to her “What is this dagger?” She replied: “I have taken it, so if one of the mushrikeen approach me, I can stab them in the stomach”; thus, causing the Prophet ﷺ to laugh.12

    عن أنس: ” أن أم سليم اتخذت يوم حنين خنجراً فكان معها، فرآها أبو طلحة. فقال: يا رسول الله! هذه أم سليم معها خنجر! فقال لها رسول الله: “ما هذا الخنجر؟” قالت: اتخذته إن دنا أحد من المشركين بقرت به بطنه. فجعل رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يضحك
  1. Narrated from Ibn Abbas: 

    “The Prophet ﷺ would go to battle with women who would treat the injured, and share in the spoils [of war.]”13

    عن ابن عباس قال: ” كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يغزو بالنساء، فيداوين الجرحى، ويُخذَين من الغنيمة”.

And even after His ﷺ’s death:

  1. It is narrated from Muhajir Al-Ansari, that Asmaa bint Yazid Al-Ansariyyah witnessed the battle of Yarmuk, and killed seven of the Byzantines with a tent pole.14

    عن مهاجر الأنصاري: ” أن أسماء بنت يزيد الأنصارية شهدت اليرموك مع الناس، فقتلت سبعة من الروم بعمود فسطاط ظلتها”
  1. It is narrated from Khalid ibn Sayhan:

    “I was a witness to Tustar with my father Abu Musa Al-Ashari, and with us were four women treating the injured, so we shared the spoils of the war with them”15

    عن خالد بن سيحان قال: شهدت تُستر مع أبي موسى ومعنا أربع نسوة يداوين الجرحى، فأسهم لهن”.
  1. It is narrated from Abdullah ibn Qart Al-Asadi:

    “We fought the Byzantines with Khalid ibn Al-Waleed, and I saw the women of Khalid and the women of his companions carrying water to the muhajireen and treating them.” 16

    عن الله بن قرط الأزدي قال: “غزوت الروم مع خالد بم الوليد، فرأيت نساء خالد بن الوليد ونساء أصحابه مشمرات يحملن الماء للمهاجرين يرتجزن”.
  1. It is narrated from Abu Balj Yahya ibn Abu Sulaym:

    “I witnessed Samra’ bint Nuhayk, wearing dense armour and a dense khimar, and in her hand was a whip she used to to discipline the people, and she enjoined the good and forbade the evil.”17

    عن أبي بلج يحيى بن أبي سُليم قال: ” رأيت سمراء بنت نهيك-وكانت قد أدركت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم-عليها درع غليظ وخمار غليظ، بيدها سوط تؤدب الناس،وتأمر بالمعروف وتنهى عن المنكر”.

Thus, if it is the case that the women of the Muhajireen and Ansaar were present in mixed environments, upon the battlefield in forbidding evil by the sword, and in the markets, forbidding evil by hand and speech, then how can one forbid women partaking in demonstrations in forbidding evil through mere speech?

“Demonstrations have no benefit nor immediate outcome”

First; demonstrations are not dependent on outcome, in the same way hisbah does not become redundant if there is no positive outcome.

If so, then one must acknowledge according to this view that the dawah of many of the Prophets (as) was a failure, since people refused to accept or change their actions in light of the clear instructions of their Messengers. 

One must then also acknowledge according to their view that the hadith regarding the best form of jihad is redundant; since the one who speaks the truth in the face of a tyrant ruler is killed, he has failed according to this fallacious view since there has been no change.

Rather, hisbah – enjoining good and forbidding evil – is done for the sake of establishing the truth, whether through hand, speech or belief in the heart, so that corruption is not normalised nor allowed to continue without scrutiny. Thus, demonstrations are a means of inkaar al munkar – forbidding evil. 

As Allah (swt) stated to his Prophets:

ليس عليك هداهم ولكن الله يهدي من يشاء

“It is not upon you to guide them; but Allah guides whom he wills”18

إِنْ أَنتَ إِلَّا نَذِيرٌ

“Indeed, you are only but a warner.”19

Secondly, demonstrations have various benefits, not limited to:

  • Raising awareness regarding an issue of concern
  • Encouraging more to support a cause
  • Giving hope to the oppressed 
  • Boosting the morale of Muslims in general
  • Reminding Muslims of what is permissible and what is prohibited through standing up for the sake of it.

When asked, Shaykh Hassan al-Kettani stated:

“Rather, it [protesting] is aiding the mujahideen and expressing the anger of the Muslims.”

“Demonstrations cause public disruption.”

As seen in the case of the man with his neighbour, and the Prophet ﷺ ‘s order to place his belongings on the middle of the street, the disruption was not condemned; rather, necessary in order to draw attention to the issue at hand. 

Similarly, the case of Ibn Taymiyyah with the blasphemous Christian also involved unrest; which brought the incident and the Damascene governor’s decision to wider public attention in order to pressure him to change his stance.

Of course, care should be taken to respect the rights of others as per the Shariah, and not overstepping the limits of the Shariah in practicing hisbah. 

“Demonstrations are humiliation, since you are begging for your oppressor to end his oppression”

By this atrocious logic, Musa (as) was humiliated by appealing to Pharoah and demanding to him to release the Children of Israel. 

So is any individual who approaches a ruler to admonish him or advise him, which is in contradiction of two clear statements from the Prophet ﷺ :

مَنْ كَانَتْ عِنْدَهُ نَصِيحَةٌ لِذِي سُلْطَانٍ فَلْيَأْخُذْ بِيَدِهِ فَلْيَخْلُو بِهِ فَإِنْ قَبِلَهَا قَبِلَهَا وَإِنْ رَدَّهَا كَانَ قَدْ أَدَّى الَّذِي عَلَيْهِ

“Whoever wishes to advise the ruler, then let him take his hand and privately advise him. If he accepts it, he accepts it; and if he refuses it, then he [the adviser] has fulfilled his duty.”20

أفضل الجهاد كلمة حق عند سلطان جائر 

“The best form of jihad is the word of truth [spoken] in the face of a tyrant ruler.”21

“Palestine will be freed anyway, so what’s the point in demonstrations or protesting?”

A simple principle within the Shariah – regardless of whether you know your place in Paradise or not, you are obliged to act for the sake of Allah. Even if one knows that victory will indeed come to His servants, he must act towards it, for indeed, as Allah (swt) says:

إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يُغَيِّرُ مَا بِقَوْمٍ حَتَّىٰ يُغَيِّرُوا۟ مَا بِأَنفُسِهِمْ ۗ 

“Indeed, Allah would never change a people’s state until they change their own state.”22

Furthermore; the Prophet ﷺ was forgiven for all his sins, and yet he would continuously seek forgiveness from Allah (istighfaar). His place in Paradise was guaranteed; yet he still acted towards it, because he was obliged to. Thus, regardless of whether Allah’s victory comes or not, we will be judged by how we acted, not by the outcome.

As a final point, consider the following hadith:

إِنْ قَامَتْ عَلَى أَحَدِكُمْ الْقِيَامَةُ وَفِي يَدِهِ فَسْلَةٌ فَلْيَغْرِسْهَا

“If the Hour was to come upon one of you, and in his hand is a tree sapling, then let him plant it.”23

“But so-and-so scholar said it’s haram!”

First, before one advances any further, let him remember the statement of Imam Malik Ibn Anas:

كل يؤخذ من قوله ويرد إلا صاحب هذا القبر

“Every person can be taken from or rejected, except the owner of this grave [the Prophet ﷺ .]”24

Second; one must remind himself that the position of the Shariah is that all matters are permissible by default, except where there is explicit evidence prohibiting it. If a person claims the opposite, the obligation is upon him to provide the evidence for its prohibition, from the Qur’an and Sunnah – and not merely an opinion.

With these two principles in mind, we may now analyse the statements of various scholars – may Allah have mercy upon them – who opposed demonstrations:

  • Shaykh Abdul Aziz Ibn Baz (ra)

    Claims that demonstrations are evil and prohibited,25 but does not provide any evidence for such prohibition.
  • Shaykh Salih Ibn Uthaymeen (ra)

    Claims they are evil and result in corruption, crime and bloodshed,26 but as discussed before this is a weak argument. However, he does allow demonstrations based on two conditions;27
  1. That it is in a non Muslim land where non Muslims are dominant and that demonstrations is a suitable means to protect rights
  2. That no prohibitions occur in them
  • Shaykh Nasir ad-Din al-Albani (ra)

    Claims that it is an imitation of the West, and a means of humiliation for the Muslims to ask from the disbelievers,28 but as discussed before, both are weak arguments for prohibiting demonstrations in of themselves, and would fall flat in the context of a Muslim polity making demands from a Muslim authority.
  • Shaykh Saleh al Fawzan 

    Claims that they are prohibited as they are a Western invention. However, as established previously, it precedes the rise of the West by thousands of years. Similarly to Ibn Uthaymeen, he claims that it results in bloodshed, but goes as far as to say that it is explicitly prohibited in the Shariah29 – a claim which he fails to provide any evidence for.

In summary, all positions generally include the following fallacies:

  • A lack of explicit proof for the prohibition of demonstrations.
  • A lack of knowledge regarding the history of demonstrations and their origins.
  • A general sense of fear mongering in claiming demonstrations lead to violence and crime.

Concluding remarks 


  • There is no explicit evidence prohibiting demonstrations in the Shariah. Rather, it is permissible by default, and the onus is upon the claimant of prohibition to prove it.
  • Demonstrations are not from acts of worship, but rather customs, and therefore cannot be considered an innovation in the religion.
  • There is a historical precedence for demonstrations within Islamic history, with clear examples of demonstrations at the time of the Messenger ﷺ .
  • Demonstrations are not impermissible in of themselves regardless if impermissible acts occur within them (eg. music or dancing); rather, it is a case by case basis. As for free mixing, it is of different levels and women have partaken in hisbah within mixed environments as shown in the evidences listed above.
  • The majority of demonstrations universally and historically are not inherently violent, nor do they lead to crime, rioting or bloodshed. 
  • Demonstrations are neither an imitation of disbelievers, nor a product of secular liberal democracies. 
  • Demonstrations are not humiliation due to the Muslims demanding their rights from their oppressors, since this is something established.
  • Demonstrations cannot be prohibited due to the lack of an outcome, in the same way hisbah cannot be made redundant if change does not occur.
  • Statements of prohibition by specific scholars – may Allah forgive them and have mercy upon them – are generally based on fearful opinions or false premises, and lack any evidence from the Qur’an and Sunnah.


I first would like to extend my appreciation and gratitude for the works of Sh. Dr Fahd al Ajlan, in particular his book “Political Freedoms In Light Of The Fiqh Of The Sahabah” (al-Huriyaat as-Siyasiyyah Fi Daw’i Fiqh as-Sahabah), in which he elaborated on the respective positions and evidences of the scholars with regards to demonstrations. Second, for the works of Shaykh Nasir ad-Din al-Albani, who elaborated on the role of women in the Prophet ﷺ ‘s society, in his book “The Heavy Rebuttal” (al-Radd al-Mufakham). May Allah have mercy upon him, Shaykh Ibn Baz and Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen.

I would also like to extend my thanks to my colleague Abu Marwan Altikriti, who kindly aided me in a very short space of time in translating sections of the above works into English for the benefit of the reader.

Finally, I ask Allah that he accepts this from me, and that any good that has been written in this, or comes as a result of this, is from Allah alone, and whatever mistakes have been made, then they are from me and Shaytan. 

  1.  رواه الشيخان ↩︎
  2.  سورة آل عمران، ١٠٤ ↩︎
  3.  اخرجه أبو داود، وابن حبان، وأبو يعلى بإسناد جيد ↩︎
  4.  واخرجه ابو داود وابن ماجه والدارمي، واسناده صحيح ↩︎
  5.  مناقب الإمام أحمد ١/‏٤٥٩ لابن الجوزي  ↩︎
  6.  البداية والنهاية ١٧/‏٦٦٦ لابن كثير ↩︎
  7.  اخرجه احمد ↩︎
  8.  أخرجه الشيخان ↩︎
  9.  أخرجه البخاري وأحمد ↩︎
  10.  وأخرجه الشيخان، وأحمد، وابن أبي شيبة، والطبراني ↩︎
  11. سير أعلام النبلاء ٢/‏٢٧٨ لشمس الدين الذهبي  ↩︎
  12. أخرجه مسلم، وأحمد، والطبراني ↩︎
  13.  وأخرجه مسلم والترمذي ↩︎
  14.  وأخرجه الطبراني وابن منصور بإسناد حسن ↩︎
  15.  وأخرجه البخاري وابن أبي شيبة ↩︎
  16.  واخرجه سعيد باسناد صحيح ↩︎
  17.  أخرجه الطبراني، وقال الهيثمي: “رجاله ثقات” ↩︎
  18.  سورة البقرة، ٢٧٢ ↩︎
  19.  سورة فاطر، ٢٣ ↩︎
  20.  رواه احمد ↩︎
  21.  رواه ابي داود، والترمذي ↩︎
  22.  سورة رعد، ١١ ↩︎
  23.  رواه احمد ↩︎
  24.  كشف الخفاء ٢/‏١٤٠، العجلوني  ↩︎
  25.  ↩︎
  26.  ↩︎
  27.  ↩︎
  28.  ↩︎
  29.  ↩︎

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: