Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 06/02/2013 in all areas

  1. 9 points
    This one is a little tricky. I would have to say yes and no. What comes to my mind is Paradise, and that is the final destination we all wish to attain; so no, I think whoever is there for us is our true destiny. However, I said yes, because that person could very well be from this lifetime. But then again, it could be no, because Allah (swt) decrees everything and everyone in our life (this life and the Hereafter). Scholar's have debated this in the past, and have noted that there were women who (after their husband passed away) didn't want to get remarried, because they wanted to be with him in the Hereafter (if they attained it). This is something none of us will ever find out until we die and are judged; accordingly. I seen many people who mentioned (i.e divorce) etc...What about the people who truly serve eachother and lose a spouse to death? Example: My dear mother, Allah Yerhama died at 33 from cancer, and my father was still very young, so he eventually remarried. Even though he is spending the rest of his natural life with his new wife, he still is getting buried next to his first wife (my mother) and he had no children with his new wife either. Interesting isn't it? I have asked him why he is doing this, and he said: "That was my first love, and my heart will forever be hers. She is the mother of my children." I know; kinda sappy, but this was just an example of love. Now, are they Soulmates? Who knows, but he hopes that he can be with her once again, Insha'Allah. Best advice if you find someone in this life: Do the best you can to serve him or her to reach the Hereafter. That was hard to talk about, Wasalam
  2. 5 points
    i.e. 85% of the Muslim population ... We've got Buddhist mobs burning Muslim men, women, and children alive in Burma, but these Salafi morons haven't lifted a finger in their cause. Why should they when they have the "Syaa" bogeyman to focus their hatred on ?
  3. 4 points
    Abu Hadi

    Ethnic Cleansing Now Law In Burma

    Salam to all, We are now seeing open religious discrimination and ethnic cleansing codified into law in Burma. All brothers and sisters should be aware of this and should do whatever they can to protest this obvious injustice against muslims or this law will be repeated elsewhere.The nations of the world, at the U.N have spent more than 50 years trying to get rid of official religious discrimination, now it is being put back into law and the U,N nor any human rights groups care to even address this. Why ? . Please repost or re tweet this as much as you can to raise awareness. The next place this may happen may be Europe. Look at the sly trick in this article "Muslims in a province of Burma have been ordered not to have more than two children in an attempt by the government to stop Buddhist attacks on Muslims. State officials said the two-child limit in the state of Rakhine would ease tensions between Buddhists and their Muslim Rohingya neighbours." So muslims are being blamed for the attacks. It is their fault because they have too many kids compared to the Buddist population. No blame for the people who are actually committing the crimes and slaughter. This is a very dangerous precedent. Also, this policy will result in the shrinking of the muslim population over time, because a couple needs to produce (average) 2.2 children in order to keep the population stable. The .2 child figure is to account for infant and childhood deaths. So this is a policy of ethnic cleansing now put into law. http://www.guardian....two-child-limit
  4. 4 points
    I believe in the world we live in today, people who don't live a spiritual existence tried to fulfil this need of being with someone who is perfect in every way in the wrong context. They believe this is attainable with another human being. As muslims, we believe and understand first hand that the perfection that we, and all human beings, are drawn to is in fact the fitra we were all born with. One of the ways to reach back to true perfection, the source of all love, God Himself. That is the truest love we all search for and actually need to keep this soul alive in an emotional sense. After that, yes there are also perfect unions attainable between two people of the opposite gender, the examples everyone knows about is between the Prophet (sawa) and Lady Khadija (as), and the Lady of light (as) and Amir Al Mumineen (as) Will the rest of us achieve such divinely inspired love for another man or woman? Yes, i'd like to believe so. As long as we strive towards Allah (SWT), He will grant us that, but my personal belief is that we might not find them in this world, but the next. True the Quran talks about the heavenly damsels (and some interpretors of the Quran show these can also be dudes) for the believing men and women awaiting them in heaven, but i believe these are reserved for people in the lower ranks of heaven. For a man who has truly learned to express his love for Allah, would it not be more befitting to be in enternal unity with a woman who lived on this earth and took the same stands? And Allah (SWT) knows best
  5. 4 points
    The more i hear their leaders speak the more I realize why we should respect and follow our religious leaders. No one declared war on sunniism when Saddam killed just as many Shias. No one encouraged killing Sunnis in Iraq when Al-Qaeda was killing civilians nonstop. Shias in pakistan have never bombed a single Sunni Masjid. If our leaders do say anything they think before they speak. Just look at Nasarallahs reasoning. And look at how Sistani handled Iraq. Obviously Qardawi dosn't get his religion from the Ahlul Bayt and the difference between those that do and do not is evident now. One side is the sensational hot head sell outs. They lack reason and wisdom and have no value at all for human life. They bomb and behead and ally themselves with American interest. If Qardawi really wanted too stop the suffering in Syria there were other more effective ways. In his position he could have easliy reached out to other. Obviously he lacks foresight and aql and has no idea about what he's doing
  6. 3 points
    Okay, so, rike, I'm thinkin' about gettin' married/engaged or somethin'. Am re-considering my decision. I may just end up proposing today. Should I go ahead with it. I'm nervous. But can I do it? Unholy terror I'm nervous. So all the bruthas. HALP. I don't even know what to say, honestly.
  7. 3 points
    Unfortunately, It seems that the entire region is being engulfed in a sunni-shia civil war, and who benefits? the Zionist entity and their backers in the US
  8. 2 points
    Hannibal

    Imam Malik: Halal To Eat Dogs

    Salams, Imam Malik said: it is permissible to eat all animals except for that which there is evidence for its prohibition. Therefore, eating on-surface insects like beetles, worms and underground insects who have nests, like snakes, scorpions as well as predatory animals and hunting birds are permissible. Imam Malik [considered the eating] of dog meat halal but forbade the eating of horse meat. (al-Hawi al-Kabir by al-Mawardi)
  9. 2 points
    pepsi

    Considerin' Gettin' Married. Halp!

    oh man I hope that aint gonna be a reason for why your ego may be shattered today. Toughen up and all shall be good.
  10. 2 points
    guest022017a

    Grave

    if you dont remove every filth from your heart you will suffer sever consequence in the grave also having faith is not a state of mind, it is a state of heart an if a person gain faith he/she will know it via God's affirmation and that faith will enlighten them about the truth, there would be no doubts or questions about it and you will see the rest of your evil that needs to be worked on
  11. 2 points
    No. Soul doesn't need a mate, ego does.
  12. 2 points
    Mohammed-Payam Samadi– The main issue is legitimacy. At least so far in human development, no political system functions perfectly humanely, and all are works-in-progress. Yet, not all flaws render a political entity illegitimate, and much less justify violent opposition towards it. I think, judging on what I have come across your statements on Gandhi and civil disobedience, you would agree with me. To complicate matters further, two individuals living in the same nation-state may differ over what bestows legitimacy on a political entity, and it is a fact about the world that both cannot be satisfied. To speak of legitimacy without being vague, one would speak of legitimacy according to some standard of legitimacy. There is a minimum, I suppose, to which a political entity must conform to render it legitimate. For me, Professor, engaging in internationally illegal warfare which leads to uncountable destruction and death of citizens would render the government illegitimate. It matters not one iota that the government has a democratic mandate, acts according to a free constitution, or carries out its functions transparently as befits a republic. This is the case for the USA, Britain and Poland, states that invaded Iraq. For me, their governments were illegitimate, even if a majority of their people offered them unflinching support throughout the affair, or the courts of law were upheld, or welfare continued, or the economy prospered. So, neither popular democracy, nor state constitutionality, nor economic and social prosperity lend legitimacy to a violent contravention of international law, in my eyes at least. Yet, I did not thereby support internal armed challengers to these governments. Protests and civil disobedience, perhaps, but protestor endorsement of violence is only justified in response to governmental endorsement of violence. Where there is room for international pressure to make reforms, where evolution has not yet died out, armed revolution is disproportionate. The aftermath of armed revolutions is very often unstable and detrimental to the ordinary citizen. This, however, is not the only disaster lying in store for a revolutionary Syria. There have always been only two realistic options for such a Syria: to become pro-Western pro-Gulf states, or to become salafist Taliban-esque radicals. They can be economically and socially prosperous, rely on a sound constitution, even depend on a popular mandate, they would remain as illegitimate as the Lebanese 14 March Alliance is, if by legitimacy we mean the minimalist formula ‘the fitness of a state to defend its citizens’ rights.’ Peace with Israel over the Golan and the Palestinian issue, or the welcoming of US hegemony into the region, or a sectarian radicalism, perhaps an autocratic one at that, undermines the rights of the Syrian people dramatically. The only way forward was always reform. But, as I previously said, I am not convinced that armed elements were not present from very early in the peaceful uprising. Most of what we really have on Syria are unverifiable claims from both sides, receiving different emphases of coverage, depending on the news outlet. I do not insult anyone’s intelligence if I say that it is a psychological bias to have more trust in the claims of protestors than the claims of the government, simply because of an overdog-underdog dynamic. What we were told was that a large number of members of the Syrian forces were killed. The government called them martyrs fighting terrorists. The opposition called them defectors who were gunned down by the government. I don’t so easily buy the latter. But what we know of a long-term Pentagon plan to destabilise Syria, Saudi and Qatari investment in toppling Assad, and the emergence and dominance of armed foreign salafists on the ground, I find Sayyid Nasrallah’s interpretation more accurate: the peaceful opposition was hijacked by armed gangs and Syria was put on the road of civil war. A quick word needs to be said about chemical weapons. Governmental use of chemical weapons is being manufactured by the opposition, the news outlets and certain governments. We are asked to believe that Assad, whose only hope is to call for dialogue and expose the violent nature of the rebels, is instead acting out a role most desired by the opposition narrative: the man who gasses his own people, who crosses the US red line, who justifies an international coalition to invade his country and bring him down. I will never believe such obvious propaganda, especially when the only unbiased finger pointed at the rebels for possibly administering chemical weapons. This unbiased finger was rather hurriedly dismissed, no doubt under considerable pressure. No one should be able to place pressure on neutral international organisations, but it is a fact that even international organisations are pressured out of neutrality. But, if a case for chemical weapons is so easily conjured up from thin air and given fuel, why not ask the very legitimate question: how much of the opposition narrative is a mere conjuring trick? A short series of simple, fabricated claims on day one can be responsible for an entire civil war. Army defectors? Or victims of armed gangs? That makes all the difference. I do not like the Ba’thi regime. I do not approve of the emergency law. I hate a high security state. This does render the political system illegitimate. But it does not justify armed uprisings. Very few contemporary states have killed and tortured and terrorised and brainwashed as extensively and arrogantly as the United States of America. No amount of polling or free press can bless the United States. In my eyes, better an autocracy that does not unjustly kill, torture, terrorise and brainwash than a democracy that does. Yet, regardless of this fact about the USA, where reform can be pushed, even theoretically, where dialogue can be held, the one who rejects it is condemned. I believe Sayyid Nasrallah, and my reading from the news confirms, that the opposition has consistently rejected unconditional dialogues aimed at reform. I have no doubt who is pressing them against dialogue: those who fear Syrian reform the most: the Gulf states, the USA and the UK. In the upcoming Geneva talks, we had Syria’s government support dialogue and negotiations. Immediately following this announcement, the opposition was made to say that it will only engage if and only if the result would be the removal of Assad. This is clearly begging the conclusion of negotiations right at the start, and is undoubtedly a tool to provoke the Syrian government to withdraw from the talks – handing lucrative propaganda points to its enemies: the government rejects talks. It’s an old and tired game and it is only played by those who don’t mind watching more blood spilt and more anguish spread. It’s not a game played by suffering citizens, but by guerrilla warriors. In your email, the sentence I identify with on a personal level is this: ‘A state is not a toy in a child’s playpen.’ Professor, do you really suppose the opposition, both the pro-Western pro-Gulf secularists and the salafi radicals are anything but children, the former spoilt brats, the latter schoolyard bullies? Once again, many thanks for discussing this with me. Kind regards, http://normanfinkels...a-two-opinions/
  13. 2 points
    I think there can be many soul mates. Sometimes you just click. Forcing a relationship just doesnt work most of the time - people endure -but dont strive for more. It just creates a marriage of obligations and duties respectfully carried out. A soul mate is a connection on a more personal level with similar ethics, morals and sense of justice for example - an understanding that exceeds basic words and obligations.
  14. 2 points
    Not at all. Most people we marry are those who are going to be in our social circle; usually in our geographic part of the world (but with travel and internet not always), out of 7 billion possible "soul mate" candidates. There are marriages, divorces, girlfriends/boyfriends, polygamy, deaths, more marriages, etc. In the end you just need to marry the person that you're most comfortable with, and the concept of comfort here can be broken down into its own branches. Let's not fool people into thinking that there's a perfect match out there, it will only cause them to wait for disappointment and deny the realistic candidates. There's no need to find someone identical to you, you're looking to give yourself to someone and absorb their self into you.
  15. 2 points
    ^ doesnt swimming against the current get to you? psychologically? its like you almost always disagree with most of the members.
  16. 2 points
    guest022017a

    Learning From Iran

    i would really like to know how people deem and understand this "strong"? i am not saying that the aforementioned are not strong or are strong, but what are we talking about here? military might? the strength of faith? strength of number? strength of courage to face overwhelming foes and consequences? or something else? i know that there are an organized military battalions in Iran and Hezbollah and so forth but me personally when i meet people, from Iran and other places(students i met at university and islamic centers) i find all of them to be same, complaining about he same things, marriage, lifes problems and issues i am still waiting to meet "strong" people, one thing that dissapoints me , and i am talking about our local communities, they seem to be very political etc, and they wave the yellow flags and chant Iranian slogans, but in life they are just as ordinary as anyone else, they are infatuated in the world, they have bias and prejudice, they dont think critically or intellectually , rather they repeat herisay like the issue of syria, everyone has taken a side and wishes death on the other, instead of wishing guidance unity and understanding, i personally know sunnis, they are good people, yes they too are politically minded and think the other as demons, but their intentions are not evil, they have just "heard" how the other party "rapes and pillages" so from one side you have one calling the other rapists, and on the other side the same story, i personally believe Israel has agents whom create this fitna as they are masters of holywood so for them to create "home videos" and pictures etc they do with delight and ease, and the people from both side eat it up like a hungry baby, and they just wear the colours of the opposing team , and take pleasure in raping and maltreating and toruting to me strength is not about standing in front of an army, but strength in been able to find the truth and tolerate the other in order to sort the issue out, not be fooled by the cheap lies that are sold and the cheap efforts made to continue all the wars etc all i see is one angry side against another angry side, and anger does not lay with any "strong" army, anger lies with weak people who have no courage and are motivated by secterian differences , even if it be our side, the way that the response has been, has only added fuel to a very high burning fire strength is not to be fooled by the enemies lies and the Dajjal's greatest work
  17. 2 points
    These umari type threats of violence and indiscriminate killing will never deter any one. This video is the only appropriate response to the nawasib, may they die in their frustration: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3c2OOcK-bU
  18. 2 points
    The "i am umar" idiocy is some thing these people have picked up from their sunni-arab chauvinistic financiers. They commonly say stupid things like - we are going to crush the majoos the way that Umar did. (majoos being the pre-islamic iranians, and a derogatory term for shias today). They are constantly bragging about how "brave" umar was, and how they are going to re-live his savagery on shias and use his image to instill fear in them as they claim we hate him because he destroyed pre-islamic iran.
  19. 2 points
    guest022017a

    A Question

    an enemey is the one whom knowingly or uknowingly sabotages your effort to get to your goals, somebody who intercepts and puts obstacles in your path and an enemy can be somebody whom you ideologically see as a friend, or somebody close to you, somebody far from you, or somebody you know well or dont know at all your enemy can be an object or a person, a country or a street, whatever qualifies as something which hinders your path to you goal, and tries to stop you from being free your biggest enemy is the one whom is most closest to you, your own self that stops you from being free
  20. 2 points
    Why do these people have signs reading 'i am umar' lol
  21. 2 points
    You must be brushing up on your taqiyya skills... (wasalam)
  22. 2 points
    Basim Ali

    Decadency Among The Community

    I will not speak of the man. But I will speak of 2 persons I know who are heavily influenced by him (call him their 'mentor', know him personally, he comes to their house, they go to his, attend every majlis of his). They do not pray. One of them refuses to pray in congregation and the other one outright says Salaah is not obligatory (I think most people here would know what are the Islamic orders about dealing with such a person). They are huge ghaalis. One of them once said something about the origin Allah (swt) and the Panjatan which I'm even embarrassed to type. Let's just say he committed open shirk on the Mimbar without the slightest doubt. نعوذ بالله They are of the belief regardless of what we do (or do not do) in this life, if we weep for Imam Hussain (a) we have a free entry into Paradise. No reckoning, no sirat - nothing. I'm not sure how they reconcile that with everything contained in the Qur'aan (then again, I doubt any of them have ever even picked the book up). They hate all the scholars. Regularly curse and abuse them. I think you can put 2 and 2 together from here and tell what the teacher of these students must be like. (salam)
  23. 2 points
    floating

    Introduce yourself here.

    Returning member after a few years of disappearance :Hijabi:
  24. 2 points
    Just as it was to fight and die alongside Imam 'Ali (as) at Siffin or Nahrawan ...
  25. 2 points
    This is the first time in 10 years Al-Qaida is actually somewhere to be found. Usually they never fight like men and only bomb masjids and kill civilians then run away. But this time these scumbags are actually coming out of there holes. It should be an honor dying in the fight against Al-Qaeda.
×