Monday, May 31, 2010

Nadamat Nadamat Aur Nadamat by Hamid Mir

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Facebook users revolt against Mark Zuckerberg over privacy

Social networking site founder faces an online rebellion by users who accuse him of exploiting their data
Marcio Jose Sanchez

Mark Zuckerberg, founder of Facebook, the social networking site now valued at $10bn. Photograph: Marcio Jose Sanchez/AP
Millions of users of Facebook are being urged to take part in the most dramatic "screenwipe" in history a week tomorrow. People are being asked to end their addiction to the social networking site by closing their accounts and turning billions of family videos, photographs and "friend requests" into little more than digital debris.
Two Canadian campaigners have declared 31 May as Quit Facebook Day in protest at the company's decision to make more of that valuable personal data available to advertisers without the users' permission or, in some cases, without their knowledge. Their protest reflects a growing feeling of unease about how internet giants such as Facebook and Google, and upstarts like Twitter, use the information we give them.
It also completes a miserable few weeks for Facebook's 26-year-old founder Mark Zuckerberg, the whiz-kid who lists "openness", "revolutions" and "making things" in the interests section of his own Facebook page. Zuckerberg is facing a rebellion by users over privacy and has been warned by regulators in Europe and the US that the company may be in danger of breaching data protection laws.
Worse still, a new Hollywood film produced by Kevin Spacey, The Social Network, is set to portray an even younger Zuckerberg, who set up Facebook six years ago after being dumped by his girlfriend while studying at Harvard, as a sexually insecure computer nerd.
For the first time there is a danger that the fairytale about the man from White Plains, New York, who turned a site for his college friends into a global phenomenon might not have a happy ending.
In truth, the great Facebook revolt is unlikely to happen overnight. The social networking site is weeks away from announcing its 500 millionth registered user and is still expanding at a healthy rate. Nearly 40% of the world's internet users have a Facebook page they have visited at least once in the past month and it is not just the young who use it; 28% of the site's users are older than 34, a demographic that has plenty of cash to spend.
In terms of scale, if not profits, Facebook is second only to Google. A small rebellion by a few thousand users is unlikely to dent its prospects. Yet recent changes to the site's privacy settings, which determine how much personal information users can keep hidden, have prompted an outcry that senior executives, Zuckerberg included, cannot ignore.
At a stroke, the company made most of that information accessible to other users by default last month, although it continued to allow subscribers to apply restrictions to who can see what, should they choose to. Those "privacy settings" are complicated to change, however – users are faced with a menu with up to 150 options – and few can work out how to do so; many have concluded Facebook is simply trying to hoodwink consumers into sharing more information than they would like. For an internet company that has built its reputation on honesty and openness, and grown rapidly by exploiting the good feeling that surrounds a medium in its infancy, there can be few more damaging allegations.
A routine executive meeting at Facebook's Californian headquarters earlier this month turned into an emergency discussion about privacy amid fears that pushing through the changes without consultation might do irreparable damage to the company. Simon Davies, a former consultant turned privacy campaigner who knows most of Facebook's senior management team, says: "My information from the people who participated is there is a sense the company has gone off the rails somewhat and realistically it could go downhill. The feeling in the meeting, as I understand it, was that, right or wrong, [the] privacy [issue] was damaging the company and that, right or wrong, something has to change."
The company is likely to simplify its privacy settings, possibly as soon as this week. It is reported to be planning to introduce a "master control" that would simplify users' privacy settings. Users would be able to choose which groups of people they wished to share information with – everyone, friends of friends, or just friends. This would replace the automatic system that shares users' information with third parties.
The planned move acknowledges the fact that, as Zuckerberg told Timemagazine: "What people want isn't complete privacy. It isn't that they want secrecy. It's that they want control over what they share and what they don't."
This may not assuage wider concerns about how our digital footprints can be exploited, however. The novelty of tracking down an old school friend or boasting about how many people attended your birthday party has given way to anxiety over whether we might have given away too much. Facebook has been criticised for failing to address concerns that paedophiles are using the site to identify and "groom" potential victims.
"It has been exposed to more public relations problems in the last 18 months than any social network business can bear," Davies claims. Potentially more serious, however, is growing anger among Facebook users over the company's determination to mine their personal data for commercial gain.
The company's office campus, in Palo Alto, a community of 50,000 people in the San Francisco Bay area, is a large but unremarkable space that was once occupied by computer giant Hewlett Packard. It's open plan and with high ceilings, and employees can break off from their work to play table tennis; bikes litter the floor; and some of the lifts have been painted by a New York graffiti artist.
Visitors describe the atmosphere as "orderly yet bohemian". Yet behind the trendy façade, the company is carrying out a prosaic task, collecting information for what is in effect the largest and most sophisticated direct marketing exercise ever undertaken. Facebook is handing over information about its users' favourite films, brand of coffee, what car they drive, even their shopping habits, to companies that will pay handsomely for it. Selling data to "third parties" underpins the company's business model, which, like that of many internet companies, is built on acquiring huge scale and reach quickly, then making money later.
The company is worth about £10bn, but that valuation is based on optimistic expectations about future profits. Banner advertising can generate only so much cash. If shareholders, including Microsoft (which paid £117m for a 1.6% stake in 2007) are to see a return on their investment, Zuckerberg must persuade users that even a free service like Facebook comes with a price – in this case allowing big corporations a glimpse of their spending habits.
Facebook users did not sign up in order to be targeted by marketers, of course, and the internet has proved resistant to overt commercialisation in the past. When Rupert Murdoch's News Corp bought MySpace for $580m in July 2005, the company used it to plug its own products and the site's hip audience of teenage music fans soon began to search for other online hangouts.
Most observers predict that Facebook is too well established to go the way of Friends Reunited, Bebo or Excite, internet fads that failed to turn overnight popularity into lasting success. But if Facebook flirts too brazenly with commercial partners, it may see its growth slow down dramatically.
On his own Facebook profile, Zuckerberg demonstrates he still has the right credentials to claim membership of the IT fraternity by listing The MatrixDark KnightIron Man and Star Wars among his favourite films. The enigmatic Facebook founder also lists "eliminating desire" as one of his interests, alongside "breaking things".
Breaking Facebook now would be a remarkable achievement, given its global dominance. But in order to fix it, Zuckerberg must resolve the tension between what users want to tell Facebook about themselves and what Facebook wants to tell other companies about them.


2004 As Facebook grows in popularity at Harvard, fellow students sue Zuckerberg, claiming he copied ideas and code from their social networking site ConnectU.
2006 With nearly 10 million users, Facebook launches a "news feed" application displaying users' recent activity on their friends' home pages. Members campaign against the "invasive" feature, prompting Zuckerberg to publish an apology and introduce privacy options to allow users to decide what is shown.
2007 Six major firms, including Vodafone and Virgin Media, withdraw adverts from the site after their ads appear on pages for groups linked to the BNP.
2008 Campaigners call on Facebook and other social networking sites to clamp down on pro-anorexia groups after experts say that such groups have played a significant part in young people developing eating disorders.
2009 Accused of being a tool for cyberbullying and cyberstalking after users are attacked by people they met on the site. Teenager Keeley Houghton becomes the first person in Britain jailed for posting death threats on the site.
2010 After the number of complaints alleging grooming and bullying on the site quadruple, British police accuse Facebook of "arrogantly" ignoring children's safety. The site is blocked in Pakistan after a contest entitled "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" provoked street demonstrations. The decision to open Facebook data to third-party websites drew widespread criticism, including a letter from the European commission.

Afghans believe US is funding Taliban

Intellectuals and respected Afghan professionals are convinced the west is prolonging conflict to maintain influence in the region.
U.S. Army Conducts Operations In Kandahar Province

It is the common belief among Afghans that the west has no intention of ending the conflict in Afghanistan. Photograph: John Moore/Getty Images
It's near-impossible to find anyone in Afghanistan who doesn't believe the US are funding the Taliban: and it's the highly educated Afghan professionals, those employed by ISAFUSAID, international media organisations – and even advising US diplomats – who seem the most convinced.
One Afghan friend, who speaks flawless English and likes to quote Charles Dickens, Bertolt Brecht and Anton Chekhov, says the reason is clear. "The US has an interest in prolonging the conflict so as to stay in Afghanistan for the long term."
The continuing violence between coalition forces and the Taliban is simple proof in itself.
"We say in this country, you need two hands to clap," he says, slapping his hands together in demonstration. "One side can't do it on its own."
His arguments are reasoned, although he slightly ruins the effect by explaining to me that no Jews died in the Twin Towers. It's not just the natural assets of Afghanistan but its strategic position, the logic goes. Commanding this country would give the US power over India, Russia, Pakistan and China, not to mention all the central Asian states.
"The US uses Israel to threaten the Arab states, and they want to make Afghanistan into the same thing," he says. "Whoever controls Asia in the future, controls the world."
"Even a child of five knows this," one Kabuli radio journalist tells me, holding his hand a couple of feet from the ground in illustration. Look at Helmand, he says; how could 15,000 international and Afghan troops fail to crush a couple of thousand of badly equipped Taliban?
And as for the British, apparently they want to stay in Afghanistan even more than the Americans. The reason they want to talk to the Taliban is to bring them into the government, thus consolidating UK influence.
This isn't just some vague prejudice or the wildly conspiratorial theories so prevalent in the Middle East. There is a highly structured if convoluted analysis behind this. If the US really wanted to defeat the Taliban, person after person asks me, why don't they tackle them in Pakistan? The reason is simple, one friend tells me. "As long as you don't get rid of the nest, the problem will continue. If they eliminate the Taliban, the US will have no reason to stay here."
The proof is manifold, they say (although it does tend to include the phrase guaranteed to dismay every journalist: "everybody knows that …").
Among the things everybody knows are that Afghan national army troops report taking over Taliban bases to find identical rations and weapons to their own US-supplied equipment. The US funds the madrasas both in Afghanistan and in Pakistan, which produce the young Talibs. US army helicopters regularly deliver supplies behind Taliban lines. The aid organisations are nothing more than intelligence-collecting agencies, going into regions the army cannot easily reach to obtain facts on the ground. Even the humblest midwife-training project is a spying outfit.
One political scientist, who works as an advisor to US agencies in the north of the country, recounts how people fear the continuing influence of the warlords, illustrating his point with descriptions of violence and corruption that extends into the realms of banking, government and trade.
Afghans hate these warlords, he says, but the US wants them kept in place. "If they were removed, and competent and clean people brought in, we would bring in revenues of our own. We could have our own economy, and demand foreign investment with transparency. We would have a true army, to protect us and serve Afghanistan."
So why do these well-educated Afghan professionals work for governments they are convinced want to sink their claws into their country?
There's nothing contrived about their patriotism – with their skills they could easily study or work abroad, but choose to stay to build a better future for their country. Afghans have a historical suspicion towards any foreign power involved in their country and maybe with the resilience of a nation which has seen off one occupier after another, they are willing to wait it out, confident the will of the US will break before their own.
They don't want Nato to leave for 15, maybe 20 years, anyway. It will take that long for Afghan institutions to be able to survive independently. In the meantime, as my literature-loving friend – who works for a number of US agencies – tells me, there is no contradiction in survival. "I like Benjamin Franklin in my pocket," he smiles. So much for hearts and minds.

Pakistanio Ka Aik Naya… by Munno Bhai

Wo Jo Sab Par Bhari Hai by Amer Jalil

Asman Nahie Garay Ga by Haroon ur Rashed

Facebook and Pakistan

ions, protest demonstrations, book readings, parties, concerts, charity drives, business meetings, etc., and reminders are given to users on the home page once an RSVP is given.
One such event, ‘Draw Muhammad Day’, had been made by a Facebook user in Seattle in reaction to the censorship of an episode of the popular American animated satirical comedy ‘South Park’ that had a graphic representation of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), and in support of the freedom of expression. However, this was insensitive to millions of Muslim users of Facebook.
Muslims reacted by ‘reporting abuse’ for offence on the event and page; however, the Facebook administration has announced that the event and page do not violate Facebook’s privacy statement and terms of use; hence, they cannot be deleted. Another point to be noted here is that the Facebook event has been made by a private Facebook user, and is not endorsed by the Facebook administration. The event can only be seen if searched for or if one is invited to it.
However, the question that arises here is whether the blockage of Facebook by official Pakistani authorities is useful and effective.
The chances of a Pakistani participating in this event are very slim. Rather, Pakistanis were one of the most active in creating and spreading awareness about, and making groups and events to counter this event considered blasphemous by Muslims.
One such event declared May 20 as ‘Respect Muhammad Day’ and encouraged users to share and talk about the sayings of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). Some other groups were also made calling for the deletion of ‘Draw Muhammad Day’ event and page. Another movement titled ‘Boycott Facebook on May 20′ was initiated that encouraged users not to use Facebook on May 20 in protest of the ‘Draw Muhammad Day’ event.
This was a viable option as users could boycott the page upon their own discretion.
This is a time when Muslims should exhibit strong faith and be unmoved by any attacks on their religion; and take peaceful and constructive steps to avert such offensive outbursts. The state blocking the site makes it seem like it is fearful of its citizens losing faith and averting to blasphemy.
Furthermore, the ban, in effect, alienates the Pakistani people from Facebook users all over the world. These people could have been made aware of the sensitivity of such an event rather than being cut off!
It is also pertinent to explore the effects the Facebook ban has had on Pakistanis. Facebook is a much cheaper and quicker medium for mass communication and interaction purposes.
Its interactive features make it all the more useful for people to meet others with similar interests, and makes networking for all purposes very convenient. Many developmental projects have their grounding in Facebook where social activism and community service, as well as awareness programmes are made popular.
It is a place for many Pakistanis, especially the younger lot, to meet and discuss ideas, and mobilize resources for different causes. Examples of youth organizations with a mass purposeful presence on Facebook include Future Leaders of Pakistan (FLP), Pakistan Youth Alliance (PYA), Thali, Zimmedar Shehri, among others.
There are many religious groups as well where religion is actively discussed, and information is exchanged. Many businesses use Facebook to appeal to prospective customers and have pages that have become alternatives to more costly websites.
With a plethora of crises mounting in intensity and causing discontent in society, Facebook is a world of its own that acts like a welcome distraction as well as hope for the internet-using Pakistani.
However, the blockage of Facebook is only increasing this discontent and discomfort amongst the public, acting as an infringement of personal freedoms. Hence, these factors must be considered and explored by the Pakistani authorities before such a ban with wide repercussions is imposed. Moreover, the state should concentrate on solving more pressing issues that Pakistanis are facing; such as loadshedding, inflation, unemployment, illiteracy and lack of proper healthcare facilities.

Azhaar-E-Tashakar by Irfan Siddiqui

Facebook may make disputed page inaccessible in Pakistan

A computer user tries to open the Facebook website at an internet cafe in Islamabad. The Lahore High Court has ordered authorities to block Facebook temporarily over a competition encouraging users to post caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) on the social networking site. –AFP Photo/Aamir Quershi
WASHINGTON: Facebook is disappointed at being blocked in Pakistan over a contest that encourages users to post caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) and may make the offending page inaccessible to users there, the social network said late Wednesday.
“We are very disappointed with the Pakistani courts’ decision to block Facebook without warning, and suspect our users there feel the same way,” Facebook said in a statement to AFP.
“We are analyzing the situation and the legal considerations, and will take appropriate action, which may include making this content inaccessible to users in Pakistan,” it said.
Pakistan blocked access to Facebook on a court order over a competition created by a Facebook user who set up a page called “Draw Mohammed Day,” inviting people to send in caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) on May 20.
Islam strictly prohibits depictions of Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) as blasphemous and Muslims around the world staged angry protests over the publication of satirical cartoons of the prophet in European newspapers in 2006.
The statement from the Palo Alto, California-based social network said “we want Facebook to be a place where people can openly discuss issues and express their views, while respecting the rights and feelings of others.
“With now more than 400 million users from around the world, we sometimes find people discussing and posting about topics that others may find controversial, inaccurate, or offensive,” it said.
“While some kinds of comments and content may be upsetting for someone — criticism of a certain culture, country, religion, lifestyle, or political ideology, for example — that alone is not a reason to remove the discussion,” it said.
“We strongly believe that Facebook users have the freedom to express their opinions, and we don't typically take down content, groups or pages that speak out against countries, religions, political entities, or ideas.”
The statement noted that “Nazi content is illegal in some countries” but said “that does not mean it should be removed entirely from Facebook.”
“Most companies approach this issue by preventing certain content from being shown to users in the countries where it is illegal and that is our approach as well,” it added.

Pakistan blocks access to YouTube in internet crackdown

kistan has blocked the popular video sharing website YouTube because of its "growing sacrilegious content".
Access to the social network Facebook has also been barred as part of a crackdown on websites seen to be hosting un-Islamic content.
On Wednesday a Pakistani court ordered Facebook to be blocked because of a page inviting people to draw images of the Prophet Muhammad.
Some Wikipedia pages are also now being restricted, latest reports say.
Correspondents say it remains to be seen how successful the new bans will be in Pakistan and whether citizens find a way round them.
Women supporters of Islamic political party Jamaat-e-Islami hold a placard during a protest against Facebook in Karachi May 19, 2010.
All Pakistanis are angry at the 'Draw Muhammad' competition
YouTube says it is "looking into the matter and working to ensure that the service is restored as soon as possible". The site was briefly blocked in Pakistan in 2008 - ostensibly for carrying material deemed offensive to Muslims.
Facebook said on Wednesday that the content did not violate its terms.
There have been protests in several Pakistani cities against the Facebook competition.
'Derogatory material'
The Pakistan Telecommunications Authority said it had ordered internet service providers to "completely shut down" YouTube and prevent Facebook from being viewed within Pakistan.
It said the move came only after "all possible avenues" within its jurisdiction had been used.

Pak security agencies’ secret report blames RAW for meddling in Balochistan

Lahore, May 21 (ANI): Pakistani security agencies have blamed ‘hostile’ foreign intelligence agencies, particularly India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) for creating trouble in Balochistan.
A confidential report, which has been sent to the Interior Ministry, has blamed these foreign agencies of targeting teachers and renowned educationists in Balochistan, which has long been affected by insurgency.
“After suicide bombing and terrorist attacks, they are targeting teachers and renowned educationists. Almost 80 per cent of the teaching staff in Balochistan belongs to Punjab, Sindh and Khyber PK provinces and hostile elements are threatening their lives to force them to relocate to other places,” The Nation quoted the report, as saying.
Sources, while quoting the secret report, said that the Indian spy agency is supplying hate literature in Balochi language to all schools and colleges across the troubled province.
The report also claimed that RAW has been recruiting young Baloch students and training them in guerrilla warfare to create trouble there.
“The Baloch students were cultivated through BSO hardliners by Indian RAW, taken to Kabul for indoctrination, given Afghan passports and trained in art of guerrilla warfare. India opened up Balochistan specific three consulates in Zahidan, Bandar Abbas and Ashkabad in Iran and established refugee camps for Balochistan dissidents in Kandahar, Spin Boldak, Helmand and Nimroz,” the report stated.
The report also said that India has opened many training centres across Afghanistan to prepare and send trained Baloch nationals to carry out activities against the country.
“India is running training centres in Kabul, Jalalabad, Khwaja Ghar (Takher Province), Khost, Paktia, Urgun, Khandar, Spin Boldak, Dranj (Badakhshan Province) where it’s military personnel in collaboration with RAW have been imparting training to the innocent Balochs against Pakistan,” it said. (ANI)

Pakistan blocks 800 web pages over 'blasphemy'

LAMABAD: Pakistan has blocked 800 web pages and URLs to limit access to “blasphemous” material, extending a crackdown that has already banned access to Facebook and YouTube, an official said Saturday.
The Pakistan Telecommunications Authority (PTA) banned access to Facebook, YouTube and other links, which included restricted access to Wikipedia, in view of what it called “growing sacrilegious content” this week.
“At least 800 individual web pages and URLs have been blocked since the government's orders to shut Facebook and YouTube,” Wahaj us Siraj, a spokesman for the Internet Service Providers Association of Pakistan told AFP.
Siraj's remarks came hours after the Facebook user who organised an “Everyone Draw Mohammed Day” competition to promote “freedom of expression”evidently took down the page along with a separate blog about the campaign.
The competition sparked angry protests in Pakistan, a Muslim country of 170 million, although members of a well-educated, moderate elite expressed disappointment on the blanket ban on the wildly popular websites.
Siraj said that any decision to restore Facebook and YouTube access would be taken by the PTA.
The offending Facebook page attracted 105,000 fans - and five pages of crude manipulated pictures and caricatures. Pages denouncing the competition and calling for a boycott of the May 20 competition attracted far more fans.
PTA spokesman Khurram Mehran told AFP on Saturday that the authority would lift the ban only after receiving instructions from the government.
“We are just an implementing authority and we have to act on the orders from the government,” Mehran said.
Pakistan also briefly banned YouTube in February 2008 in a similar protest against “blasphemous” cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH).

Sunday, May 16, 2010

آئينہ ایامِ تاریخ

آئينہ ایامِ تاریخ
کتب مادہ کا بیان
    عنوان: آئينہ ایامِ تاریخ
    زبان: اردو
    اضافہ کی تاریخ: May 15,2010
    ترجمہ کرنے والا : ابو مسعود عبد الجبار سلفی
    نظر ثانی کرنے والا : شفیق الرحمن ضیاء اللہ مدنی
    آئٹم کے ساتھ منسلک : 1
    مختصر بیان: یہ کتاب حضرت رسول کریم صلى اللہ علیہ وسلم کی وفات سے لے کرنواسئہ رسول سیدنا حسین بن على رضی اللہ عنہ کی شہادت 61ھ تک کے اہم ترین عرصہ پر مشتمل ہے-
    اس کتاب میں مندرجہ ذیل اہم موضوعات پر بحث کی گئی ہے:
    سقیفہ بنی ساعدہ, قصہ شورى, حضرت عثمان رضی اللہ عنہ پر اعتراضات , شہادت عثمان رضی اللہ عنہ, خلافت على رضی اللہ عنہ, معرکہ جمل, معرکہ صفین, معرکہ نہروان, شہادت على المرتضی , خلافت حسن بن على بن ابی طالب , عام الجماعة, خلافت معاویہ بن ابی سفیان , خلافت یزید بن معاویہ , شہادت حسین بن على , صحابہ کرام رضی اللہ عنہم کی عدالت پر پاکدامنی, صحابہ کرام کے متعلق پھیلائی گئی بدگمانیاں اور انکے جوابات, امامت على المرتضی کی اوّلیت کے دلائل اورانکے جوابات وغیرہ- عدالت صحابہ پر لاجواب تحقیقی اور علمی کتاب ہے ضرور مطالعہ کریں.
    پہنچنے کا رابط :
آئٹم کے ساتھ منسلک ( 1 )
آئينہ ایامِ تاریخ.pdfآئينہ ایامِ تاریخ
7.2 MB
آئينہ ایامِ تاریخ.pdfمواد کو ڈاون لوڈ کریں: آئينہ ایامِ تاریخ.pdf: آئينہ ایامِ تاریخ.pdf


Sunday, May 9, 2010

متعہ کی حقیقت

متعہ کی حقیقت
کتب مادہ کا بیان
    عنوان: متعہ کی حقیقت
    زبان: اردو
    اضافہ کی تاریخ: May 04,2010
    ترجمہ کرنے والا : فضل الرحمن رحمانى ندوى
    نظر ثانی کرنے والا : عطاء الرحمن ضياء الله
    آئٹم کے ساتھ منسلک : 1
    مختصر بیان: متعہ اسلام کے ابتدائی ادوار میں شرعی مصلحت کے پیش نظر دوران سفر میں کافر عورتوں کے ساتھ مباح تھا اسکے بعد ہمیشہ کیلئے قیامت تک حرام قرار دے دیا گیا جیسا کہ شراب ایک زمانے میں حلال تھی مگر اسکے بعد شریعت نے اسے حرام قرار دیدیا اب شراب نوشی باجماع امت حرام ہے اسی طرح متعہ باجماع امت حرام ہے اس میں دورائے نہیں جو اسکے خلاف ہے وہ اجماع امت کے خلاف ہے. لیکن ان نام نہاد فرقوں میں سے کہ جو اپنی نسبت اسلام کی طرف کرتے ہیں ایک فرقہ ایسا بھی ہے جو متعہ کی حرمت سے انکار کرتا اور اسے حلال قراردیتا ہے- اگر تاریخ اٹھا کر دیکھی جائے تو پتہ یہ چلتا ہے کہ اسلام اور شریعت محمدیہ کی طرف نسبت کرنے والے تمام کے تمام فرق متعہ کی حرمت کے قائل ہیں یہاں تک کہ شیعی فرقوں میں سے بھی تمام فرق متعہ کی حرمت کے قائل ہیں سوائے اثنا عشریہ کے کہ یہ فرقہ اپنی ڈھٹائی کی وجہ سے کسی صورت میں بھی متعہ کی حرمت کو ماننے کیلئے تیار نہیں ہے.زیر مطالعہ کتاب میں انہیں کے باطل شبہات اور جھوٹے اتہامات کا شرعی پوسٹ مارٹم کیا گیا ہے.
    پہنچنے کا رابط :
آئٹم کے ساتھ منسلک ( 1 )
متعہ کی حقیقت.pdfمتعہ کی حقیقت
3.5 MB
متعہ کی حقیقت.pdfمواد کو ڈاون لوڈ کریں: متعہ کی حقیقت.pdf: متعہ کی حقیقت.pdf
مشترک لنک
    کتب اثنا عشری شیعہ کے عقائد ( متعلقات ) - ( اردو )