|
|
Blogs
Our community blogs
-
- 38
entries - 383
comments - 23298
views
Recent Entries
Latest Entry
The Four Elements
The idea that the world is composed of four or five elements (fire, water, earth, wind, and aether) was almost universal in the ancient world. The science and mythology of many ancient civilizations, from Greece to Japan, operated on this understanding.
While Islam is not really married to the idea of four elements (it is not supported in an explicit way in the Quran or hadiths), it is interesting to note that Islamic metaphysics and cosmology use this system.
This is especially the case in the spiritual world. The jinn are made from a smokeless Fire, the humans are made from Earth (Teen), and the soul (ruH) comes from the word for Wind (reeH). The Throne of Allah was settled upon Water (11:7), until that water was separated into the heavens and earth. The angels are from light (Noor, a word related to Nar).
Allah does not raise a prophet except that he speaks the language of his people. He may have used these literary devices to explain a realm that is ultimately beyond our understanding (ghayb). The Quran is a book that needs to be intelligible to people, especially when speaking on the unseen and unknown.
While the universe is simply not made up of H2O, the image of Water as a fluid, clear, shapeless structure is befitting to understanding the world. In physics, the concept of fields (gravitational, spatial) operate largely on fluid mechanics. “Water” is a chaotic substance that was then categorized, compartmentalized and distinguished into the world we know today.
Similarly, a simple sample of the water (saliva) in your body can create an entire profile of who you are: your DNA, and therefore, your family lineage, your appearance, your susceptibility to diseases, and even parts of your personality.
There are some things that are beyond literal and metaphorical. The dichotomy of literal and metaphorical is sometimes not just inaccurate, but harmful to our readings of scripture. - 38
-
Latest Entry
Create your blog
Click on the Blogs tab at the top of the homepage.
Click on the button that says "Create a blog."
Fill in the special title name for your blog, and click the "Continue" button. Your blog is ready!
Click on "Add blog entry" to write your first blog post, and save it by clicking "Submit entry."
The next time you want to create a new blog post, do not create a new blog. Members are only allowed to create one blog. When you are in your own blog, click on the button that says "Add Blog Entry." -
Latest Entry
The Story of ShiaChat.com - The IRC (#Shia) Days!
[This will be a series of blog entries on the history of ShiaChat.com; how it was founded, major ups and down, politics and issues behind running such a site and of course, the drama! I will also provide some feedback on development efforts, new features and future goals and objectives]
Part 1 - The IRC (#Shia) Days!
Sit children, gather around and let me speak to you of tales of times before there was ever high-speed Internet, Wi-Fi, YouTube or Facebook; a time when the Internet was a much different place and 15 yearold me was still trying to make sense of it all.
In the 90s, the Internet was a very different place; no social media, no video streaming and downloading an image used to take anywhere from 5-10 minutes depending on how fast your 14.4k monster-sized dial-up modem was. Of course you also had to be lucky enough for your mom to have the common courtesy not to disconnect you when you’re in the middle of a session; that is if you were privileged enough to have Internet at home and not have to spend hours at school or libraries, or looking for AOL discs with 30 hour free trials..(Breathe... breathe... breathe) - I digress.
Back in 1998 when Google was still a little computer sitting in Larry Page and Sergey Brin’s basement, I was engaged in endless debates with our Sunni brothers on an IRC channel called #Shia. (Ok, a side note here for all you little pups. This is not read as Hashtag Shia, the correct way of reading this is “Channel Shia”. The “Hashtag” was a much cooler thing back in the day than the way you young’uns use it today).
For those of you who don’t know what IRC was (or is... as it still exists), it stands for Internet Relay Chat, which are servers available that you could host chat rooms in and connect through a client. It was like the Wild West where anyone can go and “found” their own channel (chat room), become an operator and reign down their god-like dictator powers upon the minions that were to join as a member of their chat room. Luckily, #Shia had already been established for a few years before by a couple of brothers I met from Toronto, Canada (Hussain A. and Mohammed H.). Young and eager, I quickly rose up the ranks to become a moderator (@Ali) and the chatroom quickly became an important part of my adolescent years. I learned everything I knew from that channel and met some of the most incredible people. Needless to say, I spent hours and dedicated a good portion of my life on the chatroom; of course, the alternate was school and work but that was just boring to a 15-year-old.
In the 90’s, creating a website was just starting to be cool so I volunteered to create a website for #Shia to advertise our services, who we are, what we do as well as have a list of moderators and administrators that have volunteered to maintain #Shia. As a result, #Shia’s first website was hosted on a friend’s server under the URL http://786-110.co.uk/shia/ - yes, ShiaChat.com as a domain did not exist yet – was too expensive for my taste so we piggybacked on one of our member’s servers and domain name.
The channel quickly became popular, so popular that we sometimes outnumbered our nemesis, #Islam. As a result, our moderator team was growing as well and we needed a website with an application that would help us manage our chatroom in a more efficient style. Being a global channel, it was very hard to do “shift transfers” and knowledge transfers between moderators as the typical nature of a chatroom is the fact that when a word is typed, its posted and its gone after a few seconds – this quickly became a pain point for us trying to maintain a list of offenders to keep an eye out for and have it all maintained in a historical, easily accessible way.
A thought occurred to me. Why not start a “forum” for the moderators to use? The concept of “forums” or discussion boards was new to the Internet – it was the seed of what we call social media today. The concept of having a chat-style discussion be forever hosted online and be available for everyone to view and respond to at any time from anywhere was extremely well welcomed by the Internet users. I don’t recall what software or service I initially used to set that forum up, but I did – with absolutely no knowledge that the forum I just set up was a tiny little acorn that would one day be the oak tree that is ShiaChat.com.
[More to follow, Part 2..]
So who here is still around from the good old #Shia IRC days?
-
- 3
entries - 1
comment - 450
views
Recent Entries
Latest Entry
The Prophesied Flag Of The Mahdi (عليه السلام)
|★|The Flag of the Mahdi (عليه السلام): One Design, Multiple Meanings — and Iran’s Banner as Its Clear Fulfillment|★|
It is narrated in reliable sources that on the flag of Imam al-Mahdi (عليه السلام) these words appear:
Allegiance is for Allah, the Almighty
— Kamal al-Din, vol. 2, p. 654Other versions recorded in Bihar al-Anwar and Ithbat al-Hudat state: Glory is for Allah (or Highness/Exaltation is for Allah).
From Nuf al-Bakali: On the flag of the Mahdi (عليه السلام), ‘Allegiance is for Allah’ is written.
— Tashrif al-Mannan, p. 144 (Sunni source)From Abdullah ibn Ajalan: … On the flag of the Mahdi (عليه السلام), ‘Allegiance is for Allah’ is written.
— Al-Adad al-Qawiyah, p. 66At first glance the wordings differ. How can one flag carry all these meanings at once?
The answer lies in the nature of Arabic calligraphy and sacred design. When the single word Allah (الله) is written in a highly stylized, geometric, or symbolic form — especially one that incorporates visual elements of power, sovereignty, and submission — the surrounding context and the viewer’s understanding can legitimately yield all of these readings. The core is always the same: everything — allegiance, glory, exaltation, authority — belongs exclusively to Allah. The different narrations are not contradictions; they are complementary descriptions of the same reality expressed through a multi-layered visual-linguistic design.
This is precisely what we find on the flag of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
★The Central Emblem: “Allah” Written in a Way That Contains All Meanings
At the heart of Iran’s flag stands a red emblem designed by Hamid Nadimi and approved in 1980. It consists of four crescents arranged symmetrically around a central vertical stroke that ends in a sword-like form, topped by a shadda (the diacritical mark that doubles a letter).
Read right to left in the classical manner, the four crescents and the central stroke form the letters of the Arabic word Allah (ا ل ل ه). The overall shape simultaneously evokes a tulip (the ancient Persian symbol of martyrdom, said to grow from the blood of those who die for truth) and a globe (the universality of Islam). The five elements of the design also represent the five pillars of Islam.
The central vertical stroke — the sword — carries particular weight in the context of bay‘ah. In Islamic tradition, the sword is not merely a weapon; it is the classic symbol of legitimate authority, the power to enforce justice, and the readiness to defend divine order. When this sword rises through the very word “Allah” and is crowned by the shadda that intensifies its force, it visually declares that all true authority and all right of command belong solely to Allah. The act of pledging allegiance (bay‘ah) is precisely the recognition of that exclusive authority. Thus the same design that writes “Allah” also writes the meaning of bay‘ah li-llāh: allegiance is given only to the One whose sovereignty the sword represents. The upright blade becomes a silent but unmistakable call to submit and to transfer every claim of power back to its rightful Owner.
Because the word “Allah” is rendered in this abstract, geometric, multi-layered style, the eye and the heart can legitimately draw from it:
- The pure affirmation that Allah alone is the focus.
- The implication of bay‘ah (allegiance): the entire composition, crowned by the sword of authority, is a visual pledge that sovereignty and obedience belong only to Him.
- The sense of glory and exaltation: the upright sword-like stroke rising through the word, intensified by the shadda, visually proclaims that all glory and elevation belong to Allah alone.In other words, the very design that writes “Allah” simultaneously writes the meanings reported in the different narrations. One stylized inscription yields every reported reading.
★The Repeated Takbir: A Public Act of Allegiance
Along the edges where the green and red bands meet the white band, the phrase Allahu Akbar (“Allah is the Greatest”) is written twenty-two times in white Kufic script — eleven times on the lower edge of the green stripe and eleven times on the upper edge of the red stripe. The number twenty-two commemorates the 22nd of Bahman 1357 (11 February 1979), the day the Islamic Revolution triumphed.
.jpg.78237251fdd71357da92f4a718bce07e.jpg)
.jpg.7ad114721f87a94cc151aed9602ecda2.jpg)
This continuous border of takbir is far more than a historical marker. The very cry that rose from the rooftops of Tehran on that night — “Allahu Akbar” — was itself an act of bay‘ah. By declaring that Allah is greater than the Shah, greater than any earthly throne, greater than every claim to absolute power, the people transferred their allegiance from human rulers to the only true Sovereign. Embedding that same cry twenty-two times along the flag’s borders turns the banner into a permanent, public renewal of that pledge. Every time the flag is raised, it reenacts the moment when a nation said, in the language of the narrations: “Allegiance is for Allah.” The date of the Revolution is therefore not an incidental detail; it is the historical embodiment of the very principle written on the Mahdi’s flag.
★Colors and Overall Symbolism
.jpeg.00305c58df5e376ba82420abb80185a2.jpeg)
- Green: the color of Islam, growth, and the Ahl al-Bayt.
- White: purity, peace, and sincerity of intention.
- Red: martyrdom, courage, and the blood of those who sacrificed for truth.Together with the central “Allah” (containing the sword of divine authority) and the surrounding Allahu Akbar (the living declaration of exclusive allegiance), the flag becomes a complete visual theology of tawhid in action: allegiance, glory, and exaltation belong solely to Allah.
★Conclusion: The Misdaq of the Prophetic Descriptions
The narrations describe a banner whose essential inscription centers on Allah in such a way that the meanings of exclusive allegiance and exclusive glory both emerge naturally.
Iran’s national flag fulfills this description with remarkable precision. Its central emblem is the word “Allah” written in a stylized form that simultaneously conveys sovereignty, strength, martyrdom, and universal monotheism — the sword at its heart being the visual seal of divine authority to which bay‘ah is due. Its borders continuously proclaim “Allahu Akbar,” the same cry that marked the historical transfer of allegiance from earthly power to Allah on 22 Bahman. Its colors and geometry reinforce the same message.
No other national flag on earth places the word “Allah” at its absolute center in this layered, calligraphic-symbolic manner while surrounding it with the repeated declaration of His greatness. In the language of the traditions, this is the flag on which “Allegiance is for Allah,” “Glory is for Allah,” and “Allegiance is for Allah, the Almighty” are all written — because the design itself makes every one of those meanings visible.
May Allah grant us the success of recognizing the signs He has already placed before our eyes.
- Read more...
-
- 0 comments
- 3
-
- 28
entries - 5
comments - 7770
views
Recent Entries
Latest Entry
When there was no TIME?!
Once upon a time, there was no "time"...
به یاد کردگارِ زندگیبخش
که هر جزء جهان دارد از او نقش
خدایی که فراتر از زمان است
کسی که مالک کل جهان است
به یاد آور چه پیمان بستی، ای دوست!
به هر سو بنگری، آنجا خودِ اوست!
به یاد عهد و میثاق الستی
به راهِ روشنِ یکتاپرستی
به یاد ذرهای که منفجر شد
به یاد لحظهی آغاز هستی
مقدمه
از دیرباز، ذهن پرسشگر و کنجکاو آدمی با مرزهای پنهان عالم هستی و شناخت آفرینشگر آن درگیر بوده است؛ با این وجود، محدودیت دانش و ساختار ذهنمان، مانع بزرگی در برابر درک پاسخ این معماهاست. ذهن ما اصولا پدیدههایی را میفهمد که پیشتر آنها را تجربه نمودهایم. به عنوان مثال، تجسم جهانی با بیش از ۳ بعد مکان برای ما غیر ممکن است زیرا هرگز فراتر از این پوسته زندگی نکردهایم. درست مثل یک نابینای مادرزاد که هیچ درکی از دیدن ندارد چون آن را تجربه نکرده است. این عدم درک منحصر به پدیدههایی نیست که وجود دارند یا ممکن است وجود داشته باشند ولی ما تجربهیشان نکردهایم؛ بلکه گاهی قادر به درک «عدم وجود» برخی پدیدهها نیز نیستیم. مثلا تصور جهانی فاقد زمان یا مکان برای ما تقریبا محال است. ممکن است کسی بگوید دنیای فاقد مکان یعنی خلأ. اما خلأ هم خود یک مکان است: مکانی خالی از جسم. پس عدم معادل خلأ نیست. مثال دیگر میتواند درک «نابینایی» باشد. ما بینایان، تا زمانی که نابینایی را تجربه نکردهایم، نمیتوانیم بفهمیم نابینایی دقیقا چگونه است. خیلی از مردم فکر میکنند که نابینایان دنیا را سیاه یا تاریک میبینند در حالی که آنها اصلا نمیبینند چه برسد به این که بخواهند رنگ سیاه را ببینند. این که ما فکر کنیم با بستنِ آگاهانهی چشمانمان میتوانیم نابینایی را تجربه کنیم هم اشتباه است. چرا که در این حالت، چشمان ما هنوز کار میکنند اما چون نوری به آنها نمیرسد، رنگ داخل پلکهایمان را تیره میبینیم. حال کافی است با چشمان بسته وارد فضایی پر از نور شویم، آنگاه با وارد شدن کمی نور به چشمانمان، رنگی که میبینیم به سمت سرخی میرود و این یعنی اگرچه پلکهایمان بسته است ولی ما همچنان در حال دیدنیم!
برای این که بتوانیم تا حدی نابینایی را درک کنیم، میتوانیم فرض کنیم که یک چشم سوم در پشت سرمان داریم که قادر به دیدن نیست. آیا ما با این چشم نابینا، محیط پشت سرمان را سیاه یا تاریک میبینیم؟! مسلما خیر! ما اصلا با این چشم سوم، هیچ چیزی را نمیبینیم. پس ملاحظه میکنید که گاهی عدم وجود یک پدیده هم برای ما قابل درک نیست!
...
- 28
-
Latest Entry
Regarding Iran. For the Record.
Salam Alaikum wr wb everyone,
It’s been a few years.. and I pray InshAllah you’ve all been well.
There’s an issue that’s been on my mind for a while now, and I find it pertinent to share, in this current geopolitical climate; where the line had been distinctly drawn in the sand since the Gaza Genocide which we all witnessed live on our screens.
This also particularly relates to ShiaChat, and some of the discussions that were held in the days I’d been active, years ago.
There were a lot of discussions happening back then around Iran, WF, Shia leadership/representation, demonstrations in Iraq etc
To cut to the chase,
With the exception of Palestine, and Iran’s support for it, I personally didn’t have the best of views on Iran back then, as some might recall recall.
And whilst we’re all entitled to our opinions and can change our minds or positions to varying degrees, on matters large or small, without the need to vocalise it; but because I was previously very vocal here with my question marks over certain aspects of Iranian policies and conduct, I believe it's very important to be Just, and fair by putting my hand up to say, for the record:
Iran isn’t a perfect country, far from it.
But Iran is the ONLY country and government standing in the face of the baby killing Genocidal Zionists and their supporters.
Iran is the only country that continuously helped the Palestinians & Lebanese in their legitimate struggle against the barbaric Zionist occupation from the outset of the Islamic Revolution.
This unwavering stand against the most wicked mass murderers of our time, on its own, is enough of an indication to us that any, and all attempts to demonise Iran in this climate is certainly propaganda and Hasbara.
Iran in its recent face-off with the baby killing Zionists & the Imperial US bullies wasn’t only rightfully defending itself against an illegal war of aggression; Iran is the only man standing and is defending us all from the servitude and dark future that awaits us, should the Zionists and the US bullies get their way.
Iran is standing up for humanity.
I ask Allah Ta’ala to protect Iran by the love and blessings of the Guarantor Imam الإمام الضامن, Ali Bin Musa Al Ridha and his blessed sister, Fatima Al M’asooma; and I ask Allah Ta’ala to forgive me for any wrong I had assumed of Iran.
وَفَوْقَ كُلِّ ذِي عِلْمٍ عَلِيمٌ
And above every man of knowledge is The All Knowing.
12.76
- Read more...
-
- 0 comments
-
The Developmental Cost of Fragmentation: How the Post-Ottoman Settlement Deprived the Arab World of Its Industrial Core
The post-Ottoman settlement of the Middle East produced a structural distortion whose consequences are still compounding a century later: it separated the Arab world's largest population centre from its most significant resource base, preventing the emergence of indigenous Arab industrial and technological capacity.
This was not accidental. When Muhammad Ali's Egypt attempted to extend control over the Arabian peninsula in the 1810s–1830s, European powers intervened to roll it back. The post-First World War order institutionalised this logic, establishing small, dependent sheikhdoms over the Gulf's energy reserves while leaving Egypt — then, as now, the Arab world's demographic and cultural centre of gravity — without the resource base to develop at scale. British imperial interests were better served by client micro-states controlling energy chokepoints than by a regional power capable of independent action.
The consequences are visible in a paradox that defines the contemporary Arab world. The Gulf states, controlling vast hydrocarbon wealth, lack the population to staff their own economies. They import millions of workers — engineers, doctors, educators, project managers — from South and Southeast Asia and from poorer Arab states, including Egypt itself. Meanwhile, Egypt's 100 million people, many inadequately educated and underemployed, export their labour on terms set by host states that offer no permanent residency, limited rights, and minimal knowledge transfer. The value generated accrues to Gulf sovereign wealth funds; what returns to Egypt comes freighted with political obligation. The 2024 Ras El-Hekma deal — in which Egypt transferred 170 million square metres of Mediterranean coastline to Abu Dhabi's ADQ in exchange for debt relief — exemplifies the dynamic: sovereign territory exchanged for short-term fiscal survival.
Iran provides the most instructive counterfactual. With a population comparable to Egypt's and significant hydrocarbon resources, Iran was forced by decades of sanctions into developing indigenous industrial capacity — steel production, petrochemical management, pharmaceutical manufacturing, and a defence industry that, whatever one's view of the regime, has demonstrably sustained operations against a US–Israeli military campaign for nearly two months. No Arab state possesses comparable self-sufficiency. The Gulf states, for all their wealth, cannot defend their own airports, as the 2026 conflict has brutally demonstrated. Iran's capacity was built under conditions of extreme adversity. The question this raises is uncomfortable: what might a state with Egypt's demographic scale and the Gulf's resource base have achieved under a developmental nationalist programme of the kind Nasser pursued — but with adequate capital behind it?
The answer points toward the deepest cost of fragmentation: not merely Egyptian impoverishment, but the absence of an Arab developmental core. The Gulf states are now spending billions on workforce nationalisation programmes — Saudisation, Emiratisation — to train citizen populations into roles that expatriates have filled for decades. They are attempting, expensively and artificially, to solve a problem that would not exist had demographic mass and resource base not been deliberately separated. The current arrangement serves a handful of ruling dynasties and their external patrons. It has not served the Arab world's 400 million people, who remain collectively without the indigenous industrial, technological, and military capacity that their resources and population could readily have sustained.
- Read more...
-
- 0 comments
-
- 20
entries - 21
comments - 113469
views
Recent Entries
Latest Entry
Yield to companions
By the time the city finished installing ramps for paws beside every staircase, the ramps for people had quietly been removed.
No one remembered the meeting where it was decided. Decisions arrived now as laminated notices tied to lampposts with biodegradable twine: PLEASE YIELD TO COMPANIONS; QUIET HOURS FOR CANINE SENSITIVITY. The notices bore smiling silhouettes of dogs wearing scarves. People learned to read them the way one reads weather—by feeling the chill before seeing the cloud.
Mara noticed first when her neighbour collapsed on the pavement. He was thin, as if he had been erased a little at a time. The street was busy, yet no one stopped. A woman paused only to pull her terrier closer, murmuring reassurance. “Not you,” she said, as the man’s hand trembled toward her ankle. “Careful.”
A drone hummed in and descended. Its camera irised, not toward the man, but toward the terrier. A soft voice chimed: IS YOUR COMPANION DISTRESSED? The woman nodded. A thermal blanket unfurled—around the dog. The man’s breath rattled like loose change in a pocket.
At the clinic where Mara worked, the waiting room had been renovated. Plush beds lined the walls, bowls of filtered water glowed with LED halos. People stood. There were no chairs anymore; standing was healthier, the pamphlet said, and chairs took up space that could be used for enrichment. When the nurse called names, she called the dogs’. Owners answered for them, translating barks into grievances with practiced fluency.
Mara’s brother arrived one afternoon with a bandage soaked through. He had been laid off, then laid out by a factory gate. “Just stitches,” he said. “I’ll wait.”
But a golden retriever was wheeled past on a gurney, an IV pole jangling like a charm bracelet. Applause broke out. Someone filmed. “Such bravery,” a man whispered. The nurse smiled and closed the door.
That night, Mara walked home through the park. It had once been a place of benches and chessboards. Now it was a sanctuary. Portraits hung from trees—dogs in graduation caps, dogs with medals. At the center stood a statue, bronze polished by touch: a dog gazing forward, jaw set in purpose. At its base, an inscription had been sanded smooth by time or by hands.
She watched a man kneel to tie a shoelace. A collie stiffened, hackles raised. The man froze, palms open, the universal sign of surrender. A handler clipped a leash shorter. “You can’t loom like that,” she said gently. “They feel threatened.”
Mara looked into the statue’s blank eyes and felt a strange vertigo. It was not that dogs were cruel; they were what they had always been—loyal, frightened, alive. It was that people had learned to look at one another through fur.
On her kitchen table lay an old photograph, rescued from a drawer: her parents, laughing, no pets in frame. She tried to remember when laughter had required translation.
Outside, the city hummed, orderly and kind, and she could not tell anymore—by posture, by priority—who was meant to serve whom.
- Read more...
-
- 0 comments
- 20
-
Latest Entry
Beyond Taqlid: The Path Of Taslim
The episode is a rigorous examination of religious adherence within the Twelver Shia tradition, contrasting the modern practice of Taqlid with the foundational concept of Taslim, or total submission to the Ahl al-Bayt. The central inquiry is whether following a scholar’s speculative opinion is the path designed by the Infallibles, or a human construct relying on conjecture rather than Divine Knowledge.
The author establishes the path of Taslim using primary narrations. This path requires three pillars: unconditional referral of all religious matters to the Imams, the precise preservation and transmission of their Hadith without addition or subtraction, and adherence to their specific speech as the definition of Shia identity. The Imams warned that refusing this direct referral risks spiritual deviation (Shirk).
The core critique centers on the epistemological gap between the Infallibles’ demand for Certainty (Yaqin) and the admitted reliance of modern Usuli jurisprudence on Conjecture (Zann), or educated probability. The Imams consistently prohibited basing religious practice on Zann, insisting that Allah's proof is clear and accessible. Following a scholar is only acceptable if that individual functions as a transparent guide to the Imam’s preserved words, rather than acting as a filter who mixes the infallible truth with his own deductions.
The author further argues that since seeking religious knowledge is obligatory for all Muslims, the means to access it must be universally available. Restricting laypeople from reading the clear, preserved body of Hadith—a Divine guarantee—and forcing them to rely on an intermediary creates a self-serving verification trap. True submission demands that the believer return to the clear light of the Akhbar, restoring the Imams as the direct and sufficient source of religious guidance, thereby moving the faith from a system of human opinion back to one of narrated truth.
- Read more...
-
- 0 comments
-
- 2
entries - 0
comments - 2747
views
Recent Entries
In the New Testament (NT) a curious phenomenon emerges: the absence of an earthly Jesus in Paul’s correspondence. Even more noteworthy is the fact that Paul is not forced by the first apostles, including the disciples and relatives of Jesus, to rely on eyewitness testimony.
In the Gospels Simon “Peter” (Aramaic: “Cephas”) first confesses Jesus to be the Messiah (Anointed [of God], Greek “Christ”) and is made Jesus’ deputy:
QuoteJohn 1:40–1: “One of the two which heard John speak, and followed him, was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, ‘We have found the Messias,’ which is, being interpreted, the Christ. And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, ‘Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas,’ which is by interpretation, A stone.” (KJV, Blue Letter Bible) [Jesus does not enjoin silence.]
Matthew 16:16–18: “And Simon Peter answered and said, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ And Jesus answered and said unto him, ‘Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in Heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.’” (KJV, Blue Letter Bible) [Note that in Mark 8:29–30 and Luke 9:20–1 Peter omits ‘the Son’, and Jesus enjoins silence. For uses of ‘son’ in the Old Testament, see here.]
Paul evidently refers to Peter/Cephas as a “pillar” of the early church, alongside James and John (cf. Matthew 10:2, Mark 1:19, Luke 6:4, and Acts 2:12):
QuoteGalatians 2:9: “And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.” (KJV, Blue Letter Bible)
Paul further mentions him as Jesus’ first eyewitness, but only after the latter’s ‘resurrection’ (Paul strangely excludes Jesus’ ministry):
Quote1 Corinthians 15:4–5,8: “For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died…was buried…and…rose again…according to the scriptures: and that he was seen by Cephas, etc. … And last of all he was seen by me also, as one born out of due time.” (KJV, Blue Letter Bible)
Oddly, Paul seems to imply that the apostles, among whom he includes himself, only saw Jesus after his ‘resurrection’:
Quote1 Corinthians 12:28: “For God hath set some in the church, first apostles...”
1 Corinthians 9:1: “Am I not an apostle? ... Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord?” (KJV, Blue Letter Bible)
Paul even claims that “the gospel” was only revealed to him:
QuoteGalatians 1:1,6,8,11–2: Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;)
I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. (KJV, Blue Letter Bible)
Now the Galatians might have regarded human testimony and/or traditional authority as paramount. If so, they would have deferred to the “pillars” and/or their emissaries. But had these known an earthly Jesus, Paul’s argumentation would not have worked, for then the Galatians would have cited either Jesus himself or eyewitnesses, including relatives. Yet Paul evidently treats the Galatians as valuing visions more than forms of testimony. Had he thought otherwise, he might have refrained from mentioning his lack of contact with other apostles:
QuoteGalatians 1:15–7,20,22–3: But when it pleased God…to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen: immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:
Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me…
Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not.
And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ:
But they had heard only… (KJV, Blue Letter Bible)
That Paul does not address eyewitness testimony or is even forced to do so is remarkable. To illustrate, one can imagine an exchange:
Galatians: “Your ‘gospel’ is manmade, whereas we have the testimony of Jesus’ companions”
Paul: “I am not lying, for I did not receive my ‘gospel’ by means of men, but revelation”
If the Galatians were arguing thusly, why would Paul appeal to revelation?
The Galatians could always rely on Jesus and his disciples. One might argue that Paul deliberately omitted Jesus’ ministry, knowing his weakness. He might have known that he would lose his case by a) giving equal weight to revelation and/or b) claiming to be an eyewitness. But if true, a) would nullify Paul’s line of argumentation in Galatians; the latter also rules out b), given that Paul, in his own words, does not rely on testimony either.
So, based on the evidence, one is left with the following:
- Paul says Jesus was only seen after his ‘death’, e.g., in 1 Corinthians 9:1, 15:5–8; and Galatians 1:1–24.
- Neither Paul nor his foes, including the very first apostles, relied on eyewitness testimony.
- Paul is not compelled to do so in his epistles; neither do his opponents insist that he do.
- The Galatians themselves did not use eyewitness testimony, as Paul’s case shows.
- Paul assumes he had the same access to ‘Jesus’ as the first apostles (revelation).
Given the author of this blog‘s own belief in a historical Jesus, all this awaits a plausible explanation.
- Read more...
-
- 0 comments
- 2
-
- 150
entries - 255
comments - 53488
views
Recent Entries
Latest Entry
Why conspiracy theorists sell food supplements
I won't mention names for fear of giving these people even more (unwarranted) publicity.
I wanted to draw attention to some theory that explains the title of this blog post.
Typically, the conspiracy theorist will draw attention to some phenomenon (unrelated to food supplements) and tell you how you have been lied to. This device is used to build your trust in the conspiracy theorist as someone who is both an expert (they know things) and also benevolent (they care about you).
They could be challenging the narrative about some medicine (or vaccine), some aspect of science e.g. moon landings or dinosaurs or anything else that you thought you knew about ... but now this stranger is telling you that people have been taking advantage of you.
So where do food supplements come into this?
Food supplements are known as credence goods. There are three different types of goods. Search goods are those whose quality you can assess prior to purchase. Experience goods are those whose quality you can't tell prior to purchase, but you can once you have bought them through your usage experience.
So what are credence goods?
These are products whose quality you can't tell even once you have bought them and used them!
Why do search, experience and credence matter?
Because where you can try out something before you buy it (e.g. tasting strawberries) you don't need much trust in the seller. Where you find out what something is like after you have bought it you do need some trust, because there is a chance the product won't perform as the seller promised or you expected. But where it is a credence good, you need much more trust in the seller because even after consumption you still won't really be able to tell whether it works.
This is why supplements are credence goods. Ultimately, they are all about believing and trusting the seller.
How do conspiracy theories come into this?
The people selling the supplements would not gain your trust if they started off with the sales pitch - you would see through it. Benevolence would be 0. However, if they have gained your trust with the conspiracy theory and then pitch the supplement, you will be more likely to believe it.
Are they going to a lot of trouble to sell pills?
If you knew the profit margins with these pills, you would understand why the effort is worth it.
- Read more...
-
- 0 comments
- 150
-
- 11
entries - 58
comments - 97351
views
Recent Entries
- 11
-
.thumb.jpg.8b2c418e30859cdcfe2d1c260c73e22c.jpg)
Latest Entry
Test and trials
Take:
Everyday , Every second, Every situations, Every difficulties, Every achievements
Take all these a test and trials where your patience is tested, your faith is tested, your ability to control your desires and emotions are tested, family relations is tested etc.....
Focus on passing these tests with patience, faith in God, doing religious obligations, praying to God, always seeking help from God, seeking forgiveness and thanking him in every situations we are in.
Remember God has something better waiting for you in the after world so try and somehow put a smile on your face every now and then...
- Read more...
-
- 0 comments
-
Summary
Using a decision theory framework, according to the Biblical account Abraham's decision-making is a direct response to a divine command, showcasing a hierarchical obedience. In contrast according to the Qur'anic version Ibrahim's decision-making involves communication and consensus, reflecting a more collaborative form of obedience.
Introduction
I was having a general chat with GPT4 about social science perspectives on the Qur'an and we ended up at a point where it seemed interesting to explore differences between Biblical and Qur'anic accounts of the same story and assess the implications using a social science framework. I am copy/pasting the prompt below, but taken out of the context of the conversation it may not make a lot of sense, but nevertheless the answer is meaningful enough.
As ever take this as an example of an output from generative AI and material that needs verification and validation.
Could you run an analysis on any story where the difference between the two versions is likely to lead to a different outcome?
One story that has distinct variations between the Qur'anic and Biblical narratives is the story of Abraham (Ibrahim in Islam) and the sacrifice of his son. This story, often referred to as the Binding of Isaac in the Jewish and Christian traditions and the Sacrifice of Ishmael in the Islamic tradition, can offer different insights when viewed through a lens of obedience, trust, and testing of faith.
1. Narrative Overview
- Biblical Narrative (Genesis 22:1-19):
- God commands Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac.
- Abraham obediently takes Isaac to the place of sacrifice without hesitation.
- Right before Abraham is about to carry out the act, an angel of the Lord stops him.
- A ram is provided for sacrifice instead.
- Qur'anic Narrative (Surah As-Saffat [37:102-107]):
- Ibrahim sees a vision of sacrificing his son (believed to be Ishmael in Islamic tradition).
- He discusses the vision with his son, who willingly agrees to fulfill the divine vision.
- Before the sacrifice, Allah ransoms the son with a great sacrifice (a ram).2. Analysis Framework - Trust and Obedience
- Communication and Consensus:
- Biblical: Abraham does not discuss the command with Isaac; the obedience is unilateral.
- Qur'anic: Ibrahim discusses the vision with his son, reaching a mutual understanding and willingness to obey.- Divine Intervention:
- Biblical: Divine intervention comes externally through an angel at the climax of the narrative.
- Qur'anic: Divine intervention is suggested through the ransom, yet the mutual understanding between Ibrahim and his son reflects an internal resolution.- Trust:
- Biblical: The trust is primarily between Abraham and God.
- Qur'anic: Trust is twofold - between Ibrahim and Allah, and between Ibrahim and his son.3. Theoretical Lens - Decision Theory
- Biblical: Abraham's decision-making is a direct response to a divine command, showcasing a hierarchical obedience.
- Qur'anic: Ibrahim's decision-making involves communication and consensus, reflecting a more collaborative form of obedience.4. Implications and Insights
- The distinct narrative elements might lead to different discussions or insights regarding the nature of obedience, trust, and divine testing.
- The Qur'anic narrative might provide a basis for exploring collaborative decision-making and mutual trust in the face of divine testing.
- The Biblical narrative might lead to discussions around hierarchical obedience and the nature of faith in adhering to divine commands without questioning.These variations between the two narratives could lead to different discussions and insights when analyzed through modern theoretical frameworks, thereby enriching the understanding and interpretations of these ancient texts in contemporary contexts.
-
- 6
entries - 4
comments - 2549
views
Recent Entries
Latest Entry
Should Shamima Begum be allowed back in the UK?
This was the schoolgirl who ran away from home in London aged 15 to join IS in Syria. Her story has been in the news for some years now and the British Government have revoked her citizenship.
She has appealed the decision and the court is due to make a final ruling at 10.00 GMT.
[Update: her appeal was rejected]
On one hand she was a child but on the other hand she has committed terror offences and will likely be in jail upon her return.
What do you think?
- 6
-
- 11
entries - 13
comments - 7702
views
Recent Entries
Latest Entry
Her Name is Fatima
An orphan is the name of a child who lost his mother,
But what is the name of a mother who loses a child?
Crushed between the door and the wall along with the souls of Hassanain,
Robbed of her child, her right, her husband's, she fights through the pain.
Her name is Fatima. The one whose essence mankind will never reach,
For God Himself has shielded her with a protection that none can breach,
Mistress of my soul and the women of the worlds,
With her name and her hand the secret of this life unfurls,
The strength of my heart and the strength of Haidar,
The strength of the lion who conquered Khaybar,
For who else can converse with such beauty and power,
Fight the usurpers after the loss of Mohsen, the wilted flower?
Her name is az-Zahra, the radiant light, illuminating a path,
For those who want to see and be away from God's wrath,
For he who angers az-Zahra has evoked the Messenger's displeasure,
And no doubt, God's own wrath which follows is that beyond any measure,
For who is so aligned with the will of her Creator,
Which woman did He create, that other than her there is no greater?
Her name is al-Batool, unsurpassed in every way,
Be it the chastity, the virtue, or the worship she did display,
No man equalled her strength the day she fought her right,
Look around you now- see the destruction of Fatima's might.
For which woman could have such eloquence and knowledge of the Book?
Fadak was hers then and now, no matter what they took.
Quoting the verses to them that were revealed to her very door,
Every lie, every plot of theirs and tactic, into shreds she tore.
For she is as-Siddiqa, the truthful, no matter who calls himself this too,
A name is just a name but the truth lies in what we do,
Ali is with the truth, truly this is no lie,
And the truth is with Ali, but she will shortly die,
Leaving behind a house that is both so full and bare,
Full of Ali's grief, but of a mother's warmth, left bare,
A homely nest no more, for its mother is no longer,
A house that used to buzz with life, now remains mourning and sombre.
Hassan holds her feet and Hussain cries on her chest,
An imagine after which the heart of Ali will never find rest,
Zainab and Kulthum sob as they await the darkness of night,
One final farewell they crave before facing a new plight.
And Ali...? A broken man, half a human, dealt his biggest blow,
He sits with his head in his hands, and tears of anguish now freely flow.
The lion, the warrior, the hero that roared with such might,
Now quietly sobs for her pain and her loss, a flame of grief now alight.
Two souls intertwined...now world's apart,
A long journey of loneliness Ali has to start,
Her orphans, her prayer mat, the memories of her days,
With these he will survive, and he now says...
'A flower, nipped in the bud. From paradise it came, and to paradise it went, but has left its fragrance in my mind'.
- 11
-
.thumb.jpeg.78c13b5c1e46194c0325b45f4c697f24.jpeg)
Latest Entry
Do You Have Problems in Life?
We all do. Small ones, big ones. Temporary and persistent. That is how life is.
Our Creator says: (rough translation)
'And no problem befalls you except it was already written in a book. We tell you this so you do not feel sad for the things you lose, and so you do not feel proud for possessing things because surely We do not like proud ones'.
Now think about it. He also says:
'Did you think you would simply be granted heaven and not tested? Nay you will be tested by the loss of lives, property, blessings.'
Its all in the Quran dear believer. I am sorry for the very crude translations but it is allowed provided the content or meaning is not changed. The point is to read it and follow people who share such things. Each verse can be life changing. You may have been thinking "Why me?" for years. News flash, most every >believer< thinks that. And its okay to think that. Notice I have emphasized the word "believer", because:
'This life is a dungeon for the believer, and paradise for the disbeliever.' - Imam (عليه السلام)
All my life I have steered through disasters, one after another. Life changing events. Near death experiences. Loss of property, monumental kinds. Health issues. Big ones. Bullets screeching by. Psychological issues. Loneliness including that from abandonment. Death of friends and loved ones. Disillusionment in big ways about things in this world. Frauds. Collapse of trust. Each of them a big disaster. So much so that now I don't trust anyone instead I let people earn it. Now I am wiser rather than "confident". All these experiences forced me to change but it was I who chose how to shape myself with intuition from Allah since I kept believing and He is the most Merciful.
Therefore I want to tell you dear comrade; Do not be afraid.
"This time period, as well, shall pass away."
-
- 3
entries - 1
comment - 4917
views
Recent Entries
Latest Entry
How to Refute Doubts with Research - A Case Study
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
A brother recently raised a shubhah (doubt) to me regarding the the following ahadith. He thought that it contradicts modern science.
Quoteوبهذا الاسناد عن محمد بن عبد الله بن جعفر، عن أبيه، عن (3) محمد بن أحمد بن يحيى [ عن محمد بن الحسين، عن أبي سعيد العصفري ] (1) عن عمرو بن ثابت (2)، عن أبي الجارود عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام، قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم: إني وأحد عشر من ولدي وأنت يا علي زر الارض - أعني أوتادها وجبالها - بنا أوتد الله الارض أن تسيخ بأهلها، فإذا ذهب الاثنا عشر من ولدي ساخت الارض بأهلها ولم ينظروا (3).
And by this isnad from Muhammad b.
Abdillah b. Jafar from his father from Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Yahya from Muhammad b. al-Husayn from Abu Sa`eed al-Asfari fromAmr b. Thabit from Abu’l Jarud from Abu Jafar عليه السلام. He said: The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم said: Me, eleven from my loins, and you O `Ali are the pegs of the Earth – I mean its pillars and its mountains. By us, Allah steadies the Earth from swallowing its inhabitants. When the twelfth from my loins goes, the Earth will swallow its inhabitants unexpectedly. (muwathaq) (موثق)The issue here is the word تسيخ which has the following definitions:
This phrasing also occurs in other ahadith.
Quoteوَجَبَلَ جَلاَمِيدَهَا، وَنُشُوزَ مُتُونِهَا وَأَطْوَادِهَا، فَأَرْسَاهَا في مَرَاسِيهَا، وَأَلْزَمَهَا قَرَارَاتِهَا، فَمَضَتْ رُؤُسُهَا فِي الْهَوَاءِ، وَرَسَتْ أُصُولُهَا فِي الْمَاءِ، فَأَنْهَدَ جِبَالَهَا عَنْ سُهُولِهَا، وَأَسَاخَ قَوَاعِدَهَا فِي متُونِ أَقْطَارِهَا، وَمَوَاضِعِ أَنْصَابِهَا، فَأشْهَقَ قِلاَلَهَا، وَأَطَالَ أَنْشَازَهَا، وَجَعَلَهَا لِلاْرْضِ عِمَاداً، وَأَرَّزَهَا فِيهَا أَوْتَاداً، فَسَكَنَتْ عَلَى حَرَكَتِهَا مِن أَنْ تَمِيدَ بِأَهْلِهَا، أَوْ تَسِيخَ بِحِمْلِهَا، أَوْ تَزُولَ عَنْ مَواضِعِهَا.
He also created its high hills, rocks of stones and lofty mountains. He put them in their positions and made them remain stationary. Their peaks rose into the air while their roots remained in the water. In this way He raised the mountains above the plains and fixed their foundations in the vast expanse wherever they stood. He made their peaks high and made their bodies lofty. He made them like pillars for the earth and fixed them in it like pegs. Consequently, the earth became stationary; otherwise it might bend with its inhabitants or sink inwards with its burden, or shift from its positions.
Nahjul Balagha Sermon 211
Before we come to ask if the hadith contradicts modern science, we have to know what modern science says on the issue and the degree of confirmation/confidence we can place on what modern science says, since not all hypotheses/theories are equal in their inductive support.
We also have to ask how much confidence we want to place on a given hadith, because, once again, not all ahadith are equal in their inductive support. Is it mutawatir, does it at least have a reliable chain, or not? These are important questions to ask when assessing the degree to which our two sources of information (natural sciences and hadith sciences) might clash. You can read more about induction here.
Let's start off with step 1: what does the science say?
Let's take a cursory glance on YouTube and see what pops up, just to get a basic understanding.
See the first part of this children's video:
You can also see this video for a more wild version whereby the tectonic plates are kept perfectly still (although such a situation would be impossible practically.) There would still be massive destruction. However, around ~3:00 in, he says something of particular note: when 2 tectonic plates smash into one another, the more dense of the two plates sinks underneath the other plate, causing mountains to be formed. If mountains are not formed, it would seem, as the first video indicates, that lava would simply engulf the earth, and that one plate would literally swallow another, causing the earth (and the inhabitants on it) to sink.
Let's see if we can't find some more academic sources to back this claim. Let's look at Wikipedia to begin with, before getting a proper academic source:
Quote"Subduction is a geological process in which the oceanic lithosphere is recycled into the Earth's mantle at convergent boundaries. Where the oceanic lithosphere of a tectonic plate converges with the less dense lithosphere of a second plate, the heavier plate dives beneath the second plate and sinks into the mantle. A region where this process occurs is known as a subduction zone, and its surface expression is known as an arc-trench complex." (Underline mine).
On page 77 of "Plate tectonics: A very short introduction" we read:
Quote"Gravity acting on the weight of cold lithosphere already subducted into the hotter, less dense asthenosphere pulls the plate down, causing it to bend downward." (Molnar, Peter Hale. Plate Tectonics: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press, 2015.)
This is an authoritative Oxford University publication; if this point was controversial for whatever reason, we'd have to delve further into primary literature. As it stands, however, we have no reason to think subduction as described above is anything other than established science, and so this is the end of the road as far as my interest is concerned. If someone can credibly contest the point, then further research would have to be done.
Conclusion and Naseehah
My point in this exercise was to demonstrate to you, my readers, how to begin to research doubts. When you have a doubt in mind, it is not sufficient to simply assume what the science says, or the degree of confidence we can have in a particular scientific theory. We need to delve into the details and see what is actually factual and what is not. It may turn out, as in this case, that modern science actually confirms that hadith with a high degree of confidence, and in fact, this may be seen as an example of a prophetic miracle. How could the Prophet have known that without mountains the earth would sink 1400 years ago? If anything, this is a confirmation of his prophecy (s).
I invite you to extend this skepticism to "common knowledge" or the inherited wisdom of secular society. There are many myths which we take for granted without even taking a second to think "wait a second, is my presumption even factual?" It is for this reason we often have faith-shattering doubts about a whole host of issues such as slavery, homosexuality, science, etc. without taking a moment to do even a cursory amount of research into the factual premises of the shubhah. One of the first things you should do when investigating a shubhah is not only to see what the Islamic position on an issue is, but to investigate the thing you take to be in conflict with the Islamic position. "X Islamic thing contradicts human rights!" Okay, why don't you read up on the foundations of human rights and especially the specific item that you take to be in conflict with Islam. "X Islamic position contradicts scientific theory Y." Okay, go and research scientific theory Y and go and see how solid it actually is.
If you make this a habit, you will see in reality how frail the shubuhaat really are, and how many of our modern assumptions are utterly baseless or even contrary to reality.- Read more...
-
- 0 comments
- 3
-
My eyes tear up at this kalaam... O Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)... Please reveal Imam Mahdi (عليه السلام) soon and make us amongst his supporters...
- Read more...
-
- 0 comments
-
- 5
entries - 11
comments - 4202
views
Recent Entries
Latest Entry
Mr. Lonely
I am alone at home for the week. Mom has gone to visit my aunt & uncle in New York state. I'm happy for her because she hasn't gone on a vacation since before COVID19 began it's rampage through America; so it's good that she's getting to visit them. She'll be visiting with my cousin Hannah as well. However, it's just me here with the cats (after all someone had to stay around to feed, water, scoop, and spend time with them). I have the house to myself for a week. Just me, completely alone and that got me thinking about my progress in Islam.
There is a masjid here in town. A Sunni masjid but a masjid nonetheless. I have gone there before when I was first investigating Islam, but not since I have decided to follow the Shia. I wanted to attend Jummah today, but the masjid is still closed because of COVID19. Unfortunately, even if the masjid was open, I can only think that I would be castigated by nitpicking brothers for how I pray, the way I perform the wudhu, and have to get into debates that I am not prepared for (and don't want to get into) as to why I "pray the wrong way" and how I am a heathen, so on and so forth. There is no Shia Islamic Center anywhere remotely close to my hometown. The closest one is 120 miles to the north of me and that's simply too far to drive for a Jummah service every week with the price of gas being what it is and me not even working at the time being (as well as not being able to leave the county without permission, but we won't get into that).
It makes me lonely as a revert. A revert who is the only Muslim in his family, let alone his household. I read through the Quran, sure but a lot of brothers and sisters have and many of them many more times that I already have. I have no background with the Hadith and don't know how to determine which are reliable, which I am allowed to use, and how to read them. I have no older brothers who can mentor me in Islam, as I feel like I am the only Shia in the area even if that is not true. What I liked about being a Christian, despite the glaring theological problems with Christianity, was the community and fellowship that was available to me at any of the hundreds of churches in the area. There were older Christians who could mentor me in the faith, Bible studies that were run that I could attend, service work in the community I could participate in... the communal aspect of religion is very important; but sadly I do not have any of those luxuries right now whether it's because of the town I live in or whether it's because I'm in the minority of an already minority religion in America. On one hand, I find myself wishing that Islam in America was like Christianity while on the other hand, for reasons I'll not get into here that I've already outlined in numerous threads, I thank Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) that it is different entirely. Shia Islam, despite being the minority of a minority in America, has yet to become infected and corrupted the way that Christianity has and inshallah, it never will. Inshallah, Islam in America will truly grow in to the "fastest growing religion" and will bring about a revival of traditional values and morality that this country desperately needs.
But before that day comes, what is there that can be done?
The answer: cling closely to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), the example of the Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and the Glorious Quran. Read it every day without ceasing, when you finish the final surah-- go back to the beginning and start over again. Make your five daily prayers wherein you spend time with Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and for those five wonderful times throughout the day, spend time before Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). Recite the Tasbih. Renew your Wudhu always. Read Islamic literature and watch Khutbas, and offer dua that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) might bring you some upright brothers to fellowship and pray along with, who encourage you as you encourage them. Perfect your prayers (which can be quite the challenge for Westerners with no background in Islam or Arabic). Enjoin good and forbid evil. Do the little things for family and friends to let Allah's (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) light shine through you and make this world a better place.
Being alone in your deen can be rough, it can certainly test your resolve to stay on the right path. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) never tests you beyond what he knows that you can handle and like steel in a furnace, these tests are to refine you into something more beautiful. Alhamdulillah. - 5
-
- 5
entries - 0
comments - 4568
views
Recent Entries
Latest Entry
Undeniable Idea of God
"And your Lord has commanded that you shall not serve (any) but Him...."
Each and every creation (makhlooq) in this universe has a natural innate attachment with the creator. Every being that is created, itself carries a signature of the creator in every form and shape and also submits to the reality of existence of its creator. This is not something for which a creature needs something from outside his being. His existence itself contains those elements that lead his way towards his creator. If we try to specify those elements within a human being, our first attention goes towards the conscience (fitrah) of a human being. This conscience is captured in our soul and is completely intrinsic to our being. The spirit is the being which is the home of conscience while body is just the outer representation of our being.
Our conscience is the one which tells us the right and wrong and all such moral principles. Hence, it needs to have an orientation or inclination. Orientation will set a direction for a being and finally a direction will have no end without an inspiration. So, basically, every spirit has a conscience which sets the moral principles and in order to do that, we ultimately and naturally need an ultimate inspiration. The entity that might act as an inspiration can have a scope. But there needs to be one entity, neither more nor less, which needs to be above every entity. To explain this mess, I would like to take an example of a student pursuing a career:
Let's suppose that a person has an orientation of caring and healing others. A sudden thought comes to his/her mind that he/she should become a doctor. Also, he/she defines certain objectives to achieve his/her career. This is the direction that was taken according to the orientation. According to the scope of final objective, inspiration or motivation is also recognized. And finally, he/she goes to the school and college and studies to become a doctor which is the path to reach the inspiration.
If we carefully notice this example, everything is clear-as-sky that the career path selected is due to the orientation which acts as a cause and it is pointing towards a direction to become something which is guided by the inspiration. And the inspiration here can be multiple but one, the ultimate is definitely needed. So, that states our point of view that the idea of God is an idea of ultimate inspiration which is undeniable if we have a conscience that is willing to set it's moral principles. Now, because taking care of morality is intrinsic to our conscience, the idea of god is also intrinsic and an innate reality which cannot be denied by our conscience.
This argument stated above begs a question. What about the conscience of a person who denies the existence of God? The simple answer is that it is impossible. Because it is not our words that testify to the idea of God but it is our conscience and our conscience doesn't work exactly according to us. Every being has an ultimate inspiration within his self. If someone denies that ultimate inspiration, his self will start recognizing something else as an inspiration and if he still denies this new inspiration then his self will cling to something else and so on. So, denying the idea of God means ultimately denying the idea of existence or submitting to something at some point by stopping the loop of denial. My physics teacher in school once said that most of the scientists our athiests and they don't believe in god. But he was forced to conclude his statement by saying that there god is nature. So, one can say that 'his idea of god is different than others' but cannot deny the idea itself. So, we conclude that atheism by definition has no value and it is fundamentally impossible to deny the existence of God. And the Holy Quran states in this context:
"The seven heavens declare His glory and the earth (too), and those who are in them; and there is not a single thing but glorifies Him with His praise, but you do not understand their glorification; surely He is Forbearing, Forgiving." Al Isra (17:44)
The above verse shows how the idea of God is within every creation. And another verse which states that how our conscience says opposite to what a proponent of athiesm might say:
"Read your book; your own self is sufficient as a reckoner against you this day." Al Isra (17:14)
Our self definitely contains this fundamental idea of god and that is the reason it will be a proof against us finally. Also, Imam Ali (عليه السلام) states, "The one who recognized his self, recognized his lord" implying that ultimately our self consists all those fundamentals we need to understand the idea of God in its entirety. So, now let us go further to address what is left with us.
We see that ultimately we now have to see what can be the possible reality of God. And we shall only use the most basic rational ways to reach the results inshallah. We can easily think of some possiblilities. Either God is one or more than one. Within these two broad categories of reality of God lies a long list of classifications. We are not going to mention them as it is not at all necessary to ponder on each and every speculation regarding these categories. Definition of more than one gods is followed in the polytheistic systems. This is a possibility but let us match this idea with what our self testifies. It doesn't matter for us over here whether Gods are two, three or more than that but the fact of the matter is that does our pure and perfect self which is the essence of our being accept it? Our self contains the innate idea of God which must be an ultimate inspiration. Can we have more than one ultimate inspiration? If we have many inspirations within our idea of God, those inspirations should either be absolutely equal or they should differ from each other. If they are equal then why are they having multiple forms? There multiple forms is a proof of the fact that they are different. Even if there forms are identical in a way that they are exactly a replica of each other then they cannot be absolute or independent. Because a replica needs to have an original version which means it depends on it's original form and that implies that it is not absolute but rather relative to the existence of the original version. Another proof is there similarlity which itself testifies that they are not unique.
So, absoluteness with exact equality is impossible and hence we are left with another option that they are different. Now, being different is itself a proof that one inspiration is better than another and one is best of all of them. So, again the multiplicity of the inspiration will finally melt down into a single inspiration which is best of all of them. We see this in the polythiestic faiths where one god is better than other and one of them is best of all. Because establishing such an idea is possible but it will not sustain. It will finally break into a hierarchy. This defeats the argument of multiple gods. As the gods which are different, comparative and have a hierarchy can be an inspiration but not ultimate inspiration. Our soul is traversing on a path which should end up on the absolute, the ultimate inspiration and objective rather than a passer-by-checkpoint or a short term goal. A doctor will never settle alone with a medical science degree. He/she will explore more unless and until he reaches a point where he doesn't need to strive further.
The Holy Quran challenges the idea of multiple gods or even a lower form of god by stating:
Do not associate with Allah any other god, lest you sit down despised, neglected. Al Isra (17:22)
This verse is not neglecting the possibility of a human being to accept multiple gods but rather it is clarifying that one would not achieve and would be finally neglected and despised if they do so. Because, naturally it means lowering the bar of the objective and inspiration which will be problematic for none but the self of the person as his soul will loose the ability to explore, think and ascend further. Finally, submitting to something less than the ultimate inspiration actually means submitting to someone who carries it's own inspiration. As Quran says:
"Those whom they call upon, themselves seek the means of access to their Lord-- whoever of them is nearest-- and they hope for His mercy and fear His chastisement; surely the chastisement of your Lord is a thing to be cautious of." Al Isra (17:57)
So, we notice how beautifully these verses state which is extremely fundamental to our souls. How these verses convert the fundamentals of every being into words and negate the reality of polythiestic ideologies. The verses of Quran are definitely speaking the voice of our self here which we don't listen. Concluding the above argument, we stand clear that atheism is impossible and an athiest has a god which he submits but is unaware of his own submission. And polytheism which might be a possible inclination will vanish if we deeply ponder upon the fundamentals of our self. We will understand if we ponder carefully that all the entities that we accidently thought of as gods were short of being an ultimate inspiration.
Now, if we enter into the realm of monotheism, we again need to deal with several questions. Now, the focus of discussion has shifted from 'what is the suitable idea of god?' to 'how should we define a single inspiration/God?' There can be a few possibilities. But those possibilties are not what we are looking to identify but rather what our soul will find to be the best. We need to understand that we are not forcing our conscience to accept something which is not asked for and is inferior. The concept of a single inspiration is proven but that inspiration should fit into the exact criteria of what our conscience fundamentally wants. It was stated in the above discussion that there must be atleast one ultimate inspiration above all that should suffice the requirement of our final destiny or objective on this journey of our soul. Further, we also stated while having an argument on polytheism that inspiration can be comparative and different but such inspiration cannot be considered ultimate inspiration. It might be the best among all but if it is comparable then it is not unique. Our ultimate inspiration should be one, unique, independent and above everything while being the origin of everything. Can an entity within the realm of creation fulfill such a criteria? Can we call a creation, an origin of other creation? Even if this creation is not known to us or it is something really amazing and out of the box? The problem over here is that, whatever it might be, it is still a creation and hence it doesn't fulfills the criteria of being above all. Because, it lies withing the realm of creation and is remotely comparable to something even if the comparison is not that close. A star we see in the sky might be a million light years apart but the distance is still finite and it can be compared to other stars because it is has all the features of a star. So, this short example shows that our conscience will never settle with an ultimate inspiration which is not unique in all aspects and has nothing remotely similar. One might say, what about this universe as a single entity? Well, this universe is a system which is dependent upon several physical forces and natural phenomenas and if we contemplate the origin of these forces we are left with a question mark. It doesn't suffice the criteria of the self that the inspiration should be independent. So, whatsoever we might imagine and regardless of how much we move ahead, our self searches for more.
We our left with nothing but to take an option of this ultimate inspiration which is away from all bounds. This process of reasoning to reach the final conclusion is quite clear in the Holy Book (Qur'an) where Prophet Ibrahim (عليه السلام) says:
So when the night over-shadowed him, he saw a star; said he: Is this my Lord? So when it set, he said: I do not love the setting ones.
Then when he saw the moon rising, he said: Is this my Lord? So when it set, he said: If my Lord had not guided me I should certainly be of the erring people.
Then when he saw the sun rising, he said: Is this my Lord? Is this the greatest? So when it set, he said: O my people! surely I am clear of what you set up (with Allah).
Al Anaam (6:76-78)As Imam Ali (عليه السلام) states the definition of that one god, the ultimate inspiration below:
Praise is due to Allah whose worth cannot be described by speakers, whose bounties cannot be counted by calculators and whose claim (to obedience) cannot be satisfied by those who attempt to do so, whom the height of intellectual courage cannot appreciate, and the divings of understanding cannot reach; He for whose description no limit has been laid down, no eulogy exists, no time is ordained and no duration is fixed. He brought forth creation through His Omnipotence, dispersed winds through His Compassion, and made firm the shaking earth with rocks......
He is a Being, but not through phenomenon of coming into being. He exists but not from non-existence. He is with everything but not in physical nearness. He is different from everything but not in physical separation. He acts but without connotation of movements and instruments. He sees even when there is none to be looked at from among His creation. He is only One, such that there is none with whom He may keep company or whom He may miss in his absence.
(excerpts of Nahj ul Balagha sermon 1)
As Amir al Mumineen (عليه السلام) defines, this is the ultimate destiny and inspiration our self is looking for and this is the only inspiration which can set pure moral standards for our conscience. Hence, this is the best and most beautiful definition of monotheism as it is testified by the soul and it is fundamental and intrinsic within ourselves.
Concluding this entire discussion now, we reach a conclusion which is solely given to us by our pure soul and our conscience. Similar to this, as described in the above verses, every particle in this entire universe is in complete servitude to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) (the ultimate inspiration). Hence, while setting up moral principles, they should be derived from this inspiration and nothing else. Such should be the fundamental of the religion of our conscience. Therefore, monotheism in theory and in action is our fundamental principle whether we accept it or deny it. As the verse below says:
"Whoever goes aright, for his own soul does he go aright; and whoever goes astray, to its detriment only does he go astray...." Al Isra (17:15)
At last, the acting upon this principle just means pure servitude. We end on where we started. Serving the commandment of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is the only way to act upon the principle of monotheism and for this Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has given commandments in his book of principles i.e Quran. Along with this he has brought the guiding inspirations which are not the ultimate inspirations but just the checkpoints on the path. Not the destiny but the bridge that connects to destiny. These are the prophets and Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام). This is just a brief Islamic point of view to elaborate the principle of monotheism and not necessarily the scope of our discussion for now. In this way we conclude our discussion by claiming from the purity of our soul that:
"Verily, we belong to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and verily to him do we return."
[Al Baqarah (2:156)]- Read more...
-
- 0 comments
- 5
-
Latest Entry
Self Building ( خود سازی) by Ayatullah Amini
Hello.First book I would to anyone who is looking to fight with his Nafs is to read book Self Building by Ayatullah Ibrahim Amini.It is published in urdu as well.
A few words about my experience.I found this book tough to get through.I stopped in the middle two times before finally finishing it.Well worth the time spent.
The author develops his arguments by going through material and immaterial aspects of our existence.
After this short introduction the book is divided into three parts namely self refinement, self perfection and finally means of perfection.
I would prefer you go through it slowly highlighting parts and rereading them at times. Here is link to english edition.
https://www.al-islam.org/self-building-ibrahim-amini/translators-foreword
- Read more...
-
- 0 comments
-
.jpeg.0f04fcb4111bb3d862c3242203ed1af1.jpeg)
- 2
entries - 0
comments - 4440
views
Recent Entries
Latest Entry
Noor ko noor ki Naayaab Ata Hai Zahra (AS)
Qudsiyaa Taahera sardaar-e-nisaa hai Zehraa,
Himmat-e-hasti-e-aurat ki sada hai zehraa,
Aalam-e-jehl ke toofaañ na bujhaa paaye jise,
Khalq-e-zan meiñ quvvat-e-shamm-e-haya hai zehraa
Apna haqq jaanna laazim hai so ye yaad rakheñ
Markaz-e-haqq-e-haqiiqi ka pata hai Zehraa,
Ilm-o-Irfaan ka meyaar khirad se hai pare,
Ilm ke shehr ki raunaq hai ana hai zehraa,
Malka-e-khalq kahaañ or kahaañ baagh-e-fadak,
Past-fitrat ko khaber kya ho ke kya hai Zehraa
Majlis-e-sheh meiñ jab aao to khuloos-e-dil se,
Mehv-e-riqqat jo sar-e-Farsh-e-aza hai Zehraa
Gulshan-e-Ahmed-e-mursal hai mu.atter jis se,
Paiker-e-sabr-o-gul-e-arsh-e-ulaa hai Zehraa
Fakhr-e-rab ruu-e-muqaddas hai saraapaa ismat,
Dasht-e-pasti meiñ balandi ki naba hai Zehraa,
shakl-o-seerat meiñ baseerat ki har ek jumbish meiñ,
Apne hi aap meiñ qur.aan-e-khudaa hai Zehraa
Parda-e-azmat-e-niswaañ pe likha ho goya,
Deen-e-islam ki zeenat ki ridaa hai Zehraa
Shafqat-o-rehmat-e-khaaliq ki ziyaa hai Zehraa,
noor ko noor ki naayaab ata hai Zehraa
Zikr jinka hai ibadat ki har ek zeb-o-'zain',
Lauh-e-mehfooz paa tehreer-e-baqaa hai Zehraa- Read more...
-
- 0 comments
- 2
-
- 3
entries - 23
comments - 5775
views
Recent Entries
Latest Entry
My thought on Biden's first day as President.
It's been a while since I last posted a blog but I would like to share my thoughts on Joe Biden's first day as president.
Words cannot describe how great it is to see Donald Trump leave. Donald Trump was one of the worst presidents in American history. He caused nothing but trouble to America. He is the one who resulted in Qassim Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis (both men who were responsible for removing terrorism) getting killed which happened early last year. His policies on the Covid-19 disaster were horrible. Joe Biden addressed the Covid-19 matters very nicely on Day 1 and getting rid of the issues Trump caused since he became president. He is going to make America recover from the issues that Trump caused in the last 4 years.
Edit: I've changed my stance on Biden. He is not that much better than Trump after all. He has caused more trouble than Trump has in the Middle East, in Syria with his strikes. He only has better Covid-19 policies and he is only stopping Trump's racist policies and his border wall for Mexicans.
- 3
-
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Blog Statistics
94
Total Blogs529
Total Entries