Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 06/30/2015 in all areas

  1. 17 points
    نصر بن الصباح و هو غال، قال حدثني إسحاق بن محمد البصري و هو متهم، قال حدثنا أحمد بن هلال، عن علي بن أسباط، عن العلاء، عن محمد بن حكيم، قال : ذكر عند أبي جعفر (عليه السلام) سلمان، فقال ذلك سلمان المحمدي، إن سلمان منا أهل البيت، إنه كان يقول للناس هربتم من القرآن إلى الأحاديث، وجدتم كتابا دقيقا حوسبتم فيه على النقير و القطمير و الفتيل و حبة خردل فضاق ذلك عليكم و هربتم إلى الأحاديث التي اتسعت عليكم 42. Nasr b. al-Sabah – and he is a Ghali – said: narrated to me Ishaq b. Muhammad al-Basri – and he is accused – narrated to us Ahmad b. Hilal from Ali b. Asbat from al-Ala from Muhammad b. Hukaym who said: Salman was mentioned in the presence of Abi Ja’far عليه السلام, so he said: that is Salman al-Muhammadi, Salman is from us the Ahlulbayt, he used to say to the people: you have fled from the Qur’an to the narrations (Hadith), you found an intricate (exacting) book, you have been measured in it upon the standards of the Naqir, and the Qitmir, and the Fatil, and the Khardal seed, so that became too constricting (burdening) for you (i.e. left you no room to play with), and you fled to the narrations which widened up (accommodated) you. NOTES: Naqir, Qitmir and Fatil all refer to properties found in a date stone, they are used as examples by the divine voice because the Arabs were well versed with dates. As for the Qitmir Allah says: وَالَّذِينَ تَدْعُونَ مِنْ دُونِهِ مَا يَمْلِكُونَ مِنْ قِطْمِيرٍ “And those whom you call upon apart from him do not own even a Qitmir”(35:13) It is the thin membrane over the date stone. And Allah says: قُلْ مَتَاعُ الدُّنْيَا قَلِيلٌ وَالآخِرَةُ خَيْرٌ لِمَنِ اتَّقَى وَلا تُظْلَمُونَ فَتِيلا “Say: the wares of the worldly life are few, and the hereafter is better - for the one who is conscious, and you will not be dealt with unjustly even as much as a Fatil” (4:77) And in another verse: فَمَنْ أُوتِيَ كِتَابَهُ بِيَمِينِهِ فَأُولَئِكَ يَقْرَءُونَ كِتَابَهُمْ وَلَا يُظْلَمُونَ فَتِيلًا “Then whomever is given his record in his right hand - those will read their records, and injustice will not be done to them, even as much as a Fatil” (17:71) It is the thread in the long slit of a date-stone And Allah says: وَمَنْ يَعْمَلْ مِنَ الصَّالِحَاتِ مِنْ ذَكَرٍ أَوْ أُنْثَى وَهُوَ مُؤْمِنٌ فَأُولَئِكَ يَدْخُلُونَ الْجَنَّةَ وَلا يُظْلَمُونَ نَقِيرًا “And whoever does of righteous deeds – being male or female – and he is a believer - then these will enter the garden and they will not be wronged even as much as a Naqir” (4:124) It is a speck (spot) on the back of a date-stone And Allah says: وَنَضَعُ الْمَوَازِينَ الْقِسْطَ لِيَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ فَلَا تُظْلَمُ نَفْسٌ شَيْئًا ۖ وَإِنْ كَانَ مِثْقَالَ حَبَّةٍ مِنْ خَرْدَلٍ أَتَيْنَا بِهَا “And We shall place the scales of justice for the Day of Resurrection, so no soul shall be treated unjustly in anyway. And even if it be the weight of a Khardal seed We shall bring it forth” (21:47) It is a mustard (seed). Addendum: I think I may have also just won the award for the wackiest title in Shiachat history.
  2. 7 points
    Marriage and The Matrix Suppose a bizarre skeptic seriously proposed -- not as a joke, not as dorm room bull session fodder, but seriously -- that you, he, and everyone else were part of a computer-generated virtual reality like the one featured in the science-fiction movie The Matrix. Suppose he easily shot down the arguments you initially thought sufficient to refute him. He might point out, for instance, that your appeals to what we know from common sense and science have no force, since they are (he insists) just part of the Matrix-generated illusion. Suppose many of your friends were so impressed by this skeptic’s ability to defend his strange views -- and so unimpressed by your increasingly flustered responses -- that they came around to his side. Suppose they got annoyed with you for not doing the same, and started to question your rationality and even your decency. Your adherence to commonsense realism in the face of the skeptic’s arguments is, they say, just irrational prejudice.No doubt you would think the world had gone mad, and you’d be right. But you would still find it difficult to come up with arguments that would convince the skeptic and his followers. The reason is not that their arguments are rationally and evidentially superior to yours, but on the contrary because they are so subversive of all rationality and evidence -- indeed, far more subversive than the skeptic and his followers themselves realize -- that you’d have trouble getting your bearings, and getting the skeptics to see that they had lost theirs. If the skeptic were correct, not even his own arguments would be any good -- their apparent soundness could be just another illusion generated by the Matrix, making the whole position self-undermining. Nor could he justifiably complain about your refusing to agree with him, nor take any delight in your friends’ agreement, since for all he knew both you and they might be Matrix-generated fictions anyway. So, the skeptic’s position is ultimately incoherent. But rhetorically he has an advantage. With every move you try to make, he can simply refuse to concede the assumptions you need in order to make it, leaving you constantly scrambling to find new footing. He will in the process be undermining his own position too, because his skepticism is so radical it takes down everything, including what he needs in order to make his position intelligible. But it will be harder to see this at first, because he is playing offense and you are playing defense. It falsely seems that you are the one making all the controversial assumptions whereas he is assuming nothing. Hence, while your position is in fact rationally superior, it is the skeptic’s position that will, perversely, appear to be rationally superior. People bizarrely give him the benefit of the doubt and put the burden of proof on you. This, I submit, is the situation defenders of traditional sexual morality are in vis-à-vis the proponents of “same-sex marriage.” The liberal position is a kind of radical skepticism, a calling into question of something that has always been part of common sense, viz. that marriage is inherently heterosexual. Like belief in the reality of the external world -- or in the reality of the past, or the reality of other minds, or the reality of change, or any other part of common sense that philosophical skeptics have challenged -- what makes the claim in question hard to justify is not that it is unreasonable, but, on the contrary, that it has always been regarded as a paradigm of reasonableness. Belief in the external world (or the past, or other minds, or change, etc.) has always been regarded as partiallyconstitutive of rationality. Hence, when some philosophical skeptic challenges it precisely in the name of rationality, the average person doesn’t know what to make of the challenge. Disoriented, he responds with arguments that seem superficial, question-begging, dogmatic, or otherwise unimpressive. Similarly, heterosexuality has always been regarded as constitutive of marriage. Hence, when someone proposes that there can be such a thing as same-sexmarriage, the average person is, in this case too, disoriented, and responds with arguments that appear similarly unimpressive. Like the skeptic about the external world (or the past, or other minds, or change, etc.) the “same-sex marriage” advocate typically says things he has no right to say consistent with his skeptical arguments. For example, if “same-sex marriage” is possible, why not incestuous marriage, or group marriage, or marriage to an animal, or marriage to a robot, or marriage to oneself? A more radical application of the “same-sex marriage” advocate’s key moves can always be deployed by a yet more radical skeptic in order to defend these proposals. Yet “same-sex marriage” advocates typically deny that they favor such proposals. If appeal to the natural ends or proper functions of our faculties has no moral significance, then why should anyone care about whether anyone’s arguments -- including arguments either for or against “same-sex marriage” -- are any good? The “same-sex marriage” advocate can hardly respond “But finding and endorsing sound arguments is what reason is for!”, since he claims that what our natural faculties and organs are naturally foris irrelevant to how we might legitimately choose to use them. Indeed, he typically denies that our faculties and organs, or anything else for that matter, are really for anything. Teleology, he claims, is an illusion. But then it is an illusion that reason itself is really foranything, including arriving at truth. In which case the “same-sex marriage” advocate has no business criticizing others for giving “bigoted” or otherwise bad arguments. (Why shouldn’t someone give bigoted arguments if reason does not have truth as its natural end? What if someone is just born with an orientation toward giving bigoted arguments?) If the “same-sex marriage” advocate appeals to current Western majority opinion vis-à-vis homosexuality as a ground for his condemnation of what he labels “bigotry,” then where does he get off criticizing past Western majority opinion vis-à-vis homosexuality, or current non-Western moral opinion vis-à-vis homosexuality? Etc. etc. So, the “same-sex marriage” advocate’s position is ultimately incoherent. Pushed through consistently, it takes down everything, including itself. But rhetorically it has the same advantages as Matrix-style skepticism. The “same-sex marriage” advocate is playing offense, and only calling things into doubt -- albeit selectively and inconsistently -- rather than putting forward any explicit positive position of his own, so that it falsely seems that it is only his opponent who is making controversial assumptions. Now, no one thinks the average person’s inability to give an impressive response to skepticism about the external world (or about the reality of the past, or other minds, etc.) makes it irrational for him to reject such skepticism. And as it happens, even most highly educated people have difficulty adequately responding to external world skepticism. If you ask the average natural scientist, or indeed even the average philosophy professor, to explain to you how to refute Cartesian skepticism, you’re not likely to get an answer that a clever philosopher couldn’t poke many holes in. You almost have to be a philosopher who specializes in the analysis of radical philosophical skepticism really to get at the heart of what is wrong with it. The reason is that such skepticism goes so deep in its challenge to our everyday understanding of notions like rationality,perception, reality, etc. that only someone who has thought long and carefully about those very notions is going to be able to understand and respond to the challenge. The irony is that it turns out, then, that very few people can give a solid, rigorous philosophical defenseof what everyone really knows to be true. But it hardly follows that the commonsense belief in the external world can be rationally held only by those few people. The same thing is true of the average person’s inability to give an impressive response to the “same-sex marriage” advocate’s challenge. It is completely unsurprising that this should be the case, just as it is unsurprising that the average person lacks a powerful response to the Matrix-style skeptic. In fact, as with commonsense realism about the external world, so too with traditional sexual morality, in the nature of the case relatively few people -- basically, traditional natural law theorists -- are going to be able to set out the complete philosophical defense of what the average person has, traditionally, believed. But it doesn’t follow that the average person can’t be rational in affirming traditional sexual morality. (For an exposition and defense of the traditional natural law approach, see “In Defense of the Perverted Faculty Argument,” in Neo-Scholastic Essays.) Indeed, the parallel with the Matrix scenario is even closer than what I’ve said so far suggests, for the implications of “same-sex marriage” are very radically skeptical. The reason is this: We cannot make sense of the world’s being intelligible at all, or of the human intellect’s ability to understand it, unless we affirm a classical essentialist and teleological metaphysics. But applying that metaphysics to the study of human nature entails a classical natural law understanding of ethics. And that understanding of ethics in turn yields, among other things, a traditional account of sexual morality that rules out “same-sex marriage” in principle. Hence, to defend “same-sex marriage” you have to reject natural law, which in turn requires rejecting a classical essentialist and teleological metaphysics, which in turn undermines the possibility of making intelligible either the world or the mind’s ability to understand it. (Needles to say, these are large claims, but I’ve defended them all at length in various places. For interested readers, the best place to start is, again, with the Neo-Scholastic Essays article.) Obviously, though, the radically skeptical implications are less directin the case of “same-sex marriage” than they are in the Matrix scenario, which is why most people don’t see them. And there is another difference. There are lots of people who believe in “same-sex marriage,” but very few people who seriously entertain the Matrix hypothesis. But imagine there was some kind of intense sensory pleasure associated with pretending that you were in the Matrix. Suppose also that some people just had, for whatever reason -- environmental influences, heredity, or whatever -- a deep-seated tendency to take pleasure in the idea that they were living in a Matrix-style reality. Then, I submit, lots of people would insist that we take the Matrix scenario seriously and some would even accuse those who scornfully rejected the idea of being insensitive bigots. (Compare the points made in a recent post in which I discussed the special kind of irrationality people are prone to where sex is concerned, due to the intense pleasure associated with it.) So, let’s add to my original scenario this further supposition -- that you are not only surrounded by people who take the Matrix theory seriously and scornfully dismiss your arguments against it, but some of them have a deep-seated tendency to take intense sensory pleasure in the idea that they live in the Matrix. That, I submit, is the situation defenders of traditional sexual morality are in vis-à-vis the proponents of “same-sex marriage.” Needless to say, it’s a pretty bad situation to be in. But it’s actually worse even than that. For suppose our imagined Matrix skeptic and his followers succeeded in intimidating a number of corporations into endorsing and funding their campaign to get the Matrix theory widely accepted, to propagandize for it in movies and television shows, etc. Suppose mobs of Matrix theorists occasionally threatened to boycott or even burn down bakeries, restaurants, etc. which refused to cater the meetings of Matrix theorists. Suppose they stopped even listening to the defenders of commonsense realism, but just shouted “Bigot! Bigot! Bigot!” in response to any expression of disagreement. Suppose the Supreme Court of the United States declared that agreement with the Matrix theory is required by the Constitution, and opined that adherence to commonsense realism stems from an irrational animus against Matrix theorists. In fact, the current position of opponents of “same-sex marriage” is worse even than that. Consider once again your situation as you try to reason with Matrix theorists and rebut their increasingly aggressive attempts to impose their doctrine via economic and political force. Suppose that as you look around, you notice that some of your allies are starting to slink away from the field of battle. One of them says: “Well, you know, we have sometimes been very insulting to believers in the Matrix theory. Who can blame them for being angry at us? Maybe we should focus more on correcting our own attitudes and less on changing their minds.” Another suggests: “Maybe we’ve been talking too much about this debate between the Matrix theory and commonsense realism. We sound like we’re obsessed with it. Maybe we should talk about something else instead, like poverty or the environment.” A third opines: “We can natter on about philosophy all we want, but the bottom line is that scripture says that the world outside our minds is real. The trouble is that we’ve gotten away from the Bible. Maybe we should withdraw into our own faith communities and just try to live our biblically-based belief in external reality the best we can.” Needless to say, all of this is bound only to make things worse. The Matrix theory advocate will smell blood, regarding these flaccid avowals as tacit admissions that commonsense realism about the external world really has no rational basis but is simply a historically contingent prejudice grounded in religious dogma. And in your battle with the Matrix theorists you’ll have discovered, as many “same-sex marriage” opponents have, that iron law of politics: that when you try to fight the Evil Party you soon find that most of your allies are card-carrying members of the Stupid Party. So, things look pretty bad. But like the defender of our commonsense belief in the external world, the opponent of “same-sex marriage” has at least one reliable ally on his side: reality. And reality absolutely always wins out in the end. It always wins at least partially even in the short run -- no one ever is or could be a consistent skeptic -- and wins completely in the long run. The trouble is just that the enemies of reality, though doomed, can do a hell of lot of damage in the meantime. http://edwardfeser.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/marriage-and-matrix.html
  3. 7 points
    Ali Musaaa :)

    Thoughts (2010-2016) [ARCHIVE]

    Umad? No, sir, I'm Ali Musa. I believe you have me confused with my colleague. Omar is currently creating tsunamis in the Staff Wudhu room, but I can assist you if you have any enquires? Thank you for holding Madam, hope you're well. I'm great too, thanks for not asking. Tad thirsty? Yes, quite understandable this time of year. Regarding your query, I'd firstly like to thank you for choosing ShiaChat and responding to our Feed-back request. Here at SC, we value our community members and recognise that you've been a loyal member of SC and a consistent user of our Chat-Room service, as our records indicate. As such, we hope to reward our customers for remaining loyal to our forum and ensure they recieve a satisfactory service. To do this, we humbly ask for advice and suggestions for improvement from our SC peasant class community members to ensure our service continues to exceed our customers expectations and match their needs. Because to us, you are not just another anonymous user, but rather a valued member of our SC family class hierarchy. Hows that? :P
  4. 7 points
    Al-Englisi

    Describe The Poster Above You

    ^Probably lost and posting in the wrong forum. *Directs to Politics and Current Affairs Forum* (Is that what it's called?)
  5. 6 points
    starlight

    Blast From The Past

    US President, Barack Obama with a Pakistani friend in Karachi in 1982. Altaf Hussain in the 70s Time when a Pakistani president could easily slap U.S President Nawaz Sharif, poses with a car(his car?? seems unlikely :P) as a young man in late 1960s. maybe this ad was the inspiration for 9/11 :P
  6. 6 points
    mina

    Egypt To Remove Books Of Ibn Taymiyyah

    As if the terrorists have read those or any other books in their life...
  7. 5 points
    baradar_jackson

    Why Block My Sunni Website?

    Bro faridov why all the debate-challenging and victim-framing? If you want to talk, talk. All this side stuff is meaningless. So someone was suspended. Who cares? I've been suspended like 20 times. Obviously you won't have wilayah mutlaqa over this website like you do in your own website. Meaning: you won't have everyone agreeing you and affirming of your superiority in every respect. That's only natural; this is a Shia website. But guess what? I have seen many discussion forums of the Ahl al-Sunnah that do not offer even a tiny fraction of the openness that is offered here. For example: I distinctly remember a Shia sister debating on a Shia forum about Abu Bakr (without being inflammatory, by the way) and many of the members of that website insinuated that she was a (cough) loose woman. This act is not just bad akhlaq: it is explicitly condemned by Allah in the Quran. Of course I am not saying that that reflects poorly on you, personally, or the Ahl al-Sunnah as a whole. What I am saying is: when you are different from anyone else, there are some inherent problems you will encounter. That's inevitable. There are a lot of websites which we are not allowed to link to. You're just gonna have to make the best of it and just thanks God that nobody is insinuating that you are unchaste.
  8. 5 points
    Abu Nur

    Egypt To Remove Books Of Ibn Taymiyyah

    So removing the books makes it better? What kind of country is this really.
  9. 5 points
    Ali Musaaa :)

    How To Respond To Praise

    If someone gives you a position or quality you know or feel you do not possess then say ameen and treat it as this person is in reality making Du'a for you, and ask God to give you the quality that they praised.
  10. 5 points
    Ethics

    Why Block My Sunni Website?

    Wait let me get this straight, you are not a 12vr Shia but you have a website by that exact domain trying to spread [false] arguments against us? Is this how low your side has become? You try to get people to falsely or mistakenly go on your site? XD LOOOL Im just sorry man. I feel sorry for you. It just further proves your agenda and the sad reality of having no confidence or weight in your own beliefs.
  11. 5 points
    Taken from Kamran on Bike I am cycling along the Panj river under clear skies. I am wearing headphones and listening to my favourite Buddha Bar music at loud volume. I lose my focus when I hear some shoutings. I glance at the mountains on the Tajik side to the left but cannot spot anyone. After a few seconds I hear the same thing again. I look to the right, and see a few people sitting across the Panj river in Afghanistan. I immediately pull the brakes and stop. There is only 20-30 metres of river separating us, so we are able to hear each other clearly. "Do you have a wife?", the boy in the white dress asks in Tajiki (Dari). "No!", I reply. "Do you want to marry her?", he points to the girl sitting beside him. "Yes!", I yell remembering my recent experience in Tajikistan. I then wait for her answer. "I love you", she shouts at me. I cannot believe my ears! "I love you too!", was my loud and clear response. Now that we both have agreed, the only hurdle between us is the river. She asks me to come over to the Afghan side. I first take a long look at the river and then at her. There is no chance I would be able cross the river. In helplessness, I ask her to come here to Tajik side but she points out to the river and shrugs her shoulders. Another lady in the green dress appears who after washing a tea kettle in the river joins the conversation. Both ladies start clapping and singing a song while I stand alone and watch all this from the other side of the river. After a while, I say goodbye and leave against my will. As I press the first pedal, I hear a loud echoing voice, "I love you"! All the way I curse the Panj river for the separation and pedal in anger, wondering how many friendships and relationships it has prevented for taking place. Near Ishkoshim, the Panj river recedes from the road and hides behind the trees as if it is ashamed of its wrongdoing. A strong tailwind helps me ride 45 kilometres in less than three hours despite the rugged nature of the terrain. The sound of "I love you" continues to echo in my ears during the rest of the day! After cycling 55 km from Alichur, when descending from the Neizatash pass (4137m) I saw a yurt in Mamazair, a tiny settlement of about three houses on the right side of the road. I went to ask the man coming out of the yurt if I could stay inside for night. He gladly took me inside. Notice the distintice flower pattern unique to Kyrgyz on the yurt felt, door carpet, and door mat. I gave a quick English lesson to Noor Ayum, for example counting from 1 - 10, and basic phrases like, "What is your name?", "Where are you from?", "How are you?", etc, which she practiced together with her grandfather who transliterated them in Cyrillic alphabet. The gentlmen left the yurt in the morning in his Kyrgyz outfit.
  12. 4 points
    Ali Musaaa :)

    Thoughts (2010-2016) [ARCHIVE]

    Who do you think.. ? :dry:
  13. 4 points
    Ali_Hussain

    Why Can't I Be A Sushi?

    Whilst this seems like a nice documentary, and my heart really goes out to those two girls, it really does, there is no such thing as a sushi
  14. 4 points
    Haydar Husayn

    Sexual Diversity In Islam

    I've thought about this, and my current view is that while it might be better for an individual person to hold these views than to leave Islam, and depending on their knowledge and intention they could still be Muslims, the movement as a whole is one of misguidance that leads to hellfire. Even if this is the only Islam someone can bring themselves to believe in, they should be honest enough to realise the fundamental intellectual dishonesty of the arguments, and refrain from trying to spread them. By the way Bakir, if it is mistreatment of those suffering from SSA that people wish to address, then they would be far better off making Islamic arguments from within the mainstream, rather than founding or joining deviant off-shoots. All this does is further alienate them. I do believe that people with SSA need understanding and compassion, while at the same time they need to accept that giving into temptation would be a grave sin, and they need to find other ways to deal with it, even if they are difficult. Life is meant to be a test after all, and we are all tested in different ways. I do believe though that a Muslim with SSA who successfully abstains from falling into sin will be rewarded for this jihad of the soul.
  15. 3 points
    starlight

    Thoughts (2010-2016) [ARCHIVE]

    After witnessing the effects of the change of user name , I think it can be useful as a tool to punish offenders.
  16. 3 points
    Qa'im

    Signs Of The Shi'a

    This was posted on my page here: https://www.facebook.com/AhlAlBaytDaily/photos/a.410093159080122.94215.403456586410446/827214607367973/?type=1&theater There is a reason why Shaykh an-Nu`mani put this hadith near the beginning of his Kitab al-Ghayba. The narration is rich in eschatological content. At the beginning, a distinction is made between those who simply love Ahl al-Bayt (most of us), and the true Shi`a of Ahl al-Bayt. Lovers may be loyal students and devotees, but their faith is not at the level of full yaqeen. The Imam then says that if 300+ of such people were to come up, then this affair (the rise of the Mahdi) would occur. There are similar narrations to this, where Imam as-Sadiq says that if he even had 17 true Shi`a, or 6, he would go out and seek the Caliphate. The true Shi`a are not simply those who pray and fast, but rather they have a special relationship with the Imam. So special, that they begin to take on his characteristics. So the Imam describes these people: they are in taqiyya, they avoid those who hate the Imams, they will survive all the fitnas and fires of the End times which will only refine their faith, they are rejected and despised by society, they live simply, and they support one and love one another even if their ethnic backgrounds are different. Sound familiar? This is how the Imams were, especially the Qa'im, as well as their truest Shi`a: they hid the divine secrets from the ignorant persecutors, they were the masters of tawalla and tabarra', they held their faith close during the tests, and it often cost them their lives. But they didn't care about the tribe, nationality, or race of their true friends. These are some of the highest spiritual prescriptions in Islam, and they are the keys to making the five pillars great. The Prophet said that each of these people would have the reward of 50 companions due to the patience they must endure (سيأتي قوم من بعدكم الرجل الواحد منهم له أجر خمسين منكم.). He described the believer at the End Times to be like a man holding two burning pieces of coal. Imam ar-Rida compared them to gold, who are refined in the furnace of affliction (يفتنون كما يفتن الذهب، ثم قال: يخلصون كما يخلص الذهب.) The true Shi`a of Husayn (as), whom we honour and bless alongside Husayn, were not those who remained in the Hijaz to do Hajj, or those in Kufa who were keeping up their prayers. They were those who lived his life and died his death. Likewise, this narration from Kitab al-Ghayba is about the true believers who will live the life of the Hidden Imam. They are patiently waiting, dissimulating, their hearts hurt for the sin around them, they are hunted, and unrecognized. They themselves are hidden in a way, because they are avoiding the fitna, and their righteousness garners the marginalization of the people at large. Even someone as prominent as Sayyid Sistani lives a simple, distant, devoted life, and despite his prominence, will never be "popular" in the way celebrities are. Likewise, the best people you've met are probably those who do not advertise their humility and their deeds, and actually do their best to conceal it. However, these people are not alone. They are the supporters of one another, they visit one another, they marry one another, they know and recognize one another. These people share an intimate relationship with their Imam, one that will always be far beyond that of an ordinary worshiper and lover. Chain analysis: Ahmad b. Hudha: majhool Ibrahim b. Is`haq: dha`eef `Abdillah b. Hammad: hasan An unnamed man: majhool It's not a strong hadith, and it may be mursal too, but note that Nu`mani included the year each person had narrated the hadith. The hadith was narrated in 229 AH, which was in the first part of the Imamate of Imam al-Hadi (as), which lends some credence that it was indeed a narration that came long before the ghayba (260 AH) yet it correctly describes the state of the believers during it. Nu`mani often includes dates in his chains to demonstrate a form of reliability. His book is a goldmine, but unfortunately, many of those whom he narrates from are lesser known individuals which our rijal books have not covered in too much detail.
  17. 3 points
    guest050817

    Thoughts (2010-2016) [ARCHIVE]

    Who did this to you?
  18. 3 points
    Abbas.

    Circular Reasoning Of Twelvers

    Here's the issue with you: You want shias to prove the concept of Imamat and provide you the names of their Imams from sunni books. You also want an explicit reference of the names and appointment of shia Imams from Quran. But how fair and academic do you think you are in your approach when you don't want to take a neutral stance and when you are not willing to re-consider, challenge, change or debate any of your pre-conceived ideas, yet you want your opponents to prove the concept based on biased conditions set by you? If you are a student of religion and history with a willingness to learn, why do you set condition of there being an explicit reference in sunni books? And why is there a demand for explicit reference of the names of Imams from Quran when you haven't thoroughly debated the need and scope of such an explicit reference? Shouldn't you be more concerned about the merits of the arguments and accompanied authentic references regardless of their source (sunni or shia)? Shouldn't you also be more concerned about collecting relevant Quranic references (regardless of them being explicit or implicit) and refer to their meaning and detailed tafasirs in order to see which ideology makes more sense? i.e the caliphate one presented by sunni school vs the Imamat one presented by the shia school. Maybe you need to revise your approach and first make it clear whether you are here to learn, share and discuss or whether you are here to claim 'victory' over shias? The former requires sincerity, clarity in thought process and a lot of evolving effort because keeping a neutral stance while weighing different arguments to reach an outcome isn't an easy job. Whereas the latter is very easy as it only requires trickery, a bit of experience debating in the past, playing with semantics, cheerleaders, an already prepared list of references and a made up mind as to how you will tackle and negate various arguments.
  19. 3 points
    Al-Hassan

    Ate/Eating/Will Eat?

    Chicken Biryani
  20. 3 points
    Bismillah Waslam alaykum, They both do have separate times in which the the can't be prayed. For Dhuhr it is when the time comes in up until the amount of times it takes to pray 4 units of prayer, and for `Asr, it's the last remaining time before Maghrib in which there is only time to pray 4 units of prayer. Those in the book of laws are considered the specific times of these two prayers.
  21. 3 points
    Darth Vader

    Why Block My Sunni Website?

    Farid you are running a website called "twelver shia dot net" (TSN). That alone is highly insulting to us real 12vers, and the name is fraudulent, and its preposterous. A real Muslim does not use such un-chivalrous hideous tactics.
  22. 3 points
    Muhammed Ali

    Why Block My Sunni Website?

    He is not even banned: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/user/97642-abul-hussain-hassani/ Many people have linked to that site and have not been banned. Example: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235027484-twelvershia-net-website-and-forum-of-cowards/ Mods will have differing views on what is acceptable. I personally would not like to see links to that site (for the reason mentioned above). Mentioning it is okay and pasting content from it is also okay and even encouraged for the sake of eliciting responses. This is my own view. I consider your ilk to be very dishonest. hameedeh did stop him from starting a thread promoting the site. In her view links to 'nasibi' sites are not allowed. I am not an expert on these current shia-wahabi polemics (I had to move on years ago), so I would rather leave this thread to the other mods who are familiar with this subject.
  23. 3 points
    Haydar Husayn

    Sexual Diversity In Islam

    Rather than even bothering to waste my time refuting that nonsense, let me just point out that anyone who calls themselves a 'progressive Muslim' is declaring from the start that they are coming to Islam with an agenda (a 'progressive' agenda). They are people that admire progressive values, but would like to remain Muslim at the same time. Hence, they seek to reconcile the two by reinterpreting Islam in such a way that it becomes compatible with their cherished values. Now, the problem with this should be obvious to everyone. Instead of letting the texts speak for themselves, the 'progressive Muslim' is reading the text with a pre-determined outcome in mind. So in this instance, they start off from the point of view of wanting to prove that homosexuality is allowed in Islam, and will twist meanings, selectively quote, and use deceptive argumentation in order to accomplish their goal. Many examples could be given from this article, and other similar ones. Now, I don't really know if all these people actually believe the rubbish they spout, but what I do know is that many of them have no other goal than to confuse the issue. If they can make it seem like Islam has no firm position on these issues, then naturally the average Muslim will be more likely to believe that there can't be that much harm in going with flow. Alternatively, they will just think that the issue seems really complicated, so who are they to judge. This is a tactic that has been repeated over and over. In Muslim circles, we've seen it most often with the hijab (how many times have we heard it said that hijab isn't in the Qur'an?). These people are deceptive liars, and following them will lead you straight to hell. This religion has been preserved through centuries of scholarship by people who spent their lives studying this religion, from all angles. While they may have come at the texts with their own cultural biases, at least they weren't coming at it with a completely foreign world-view. The difference is your biases will affect your rulings in cases where there is a lack of evidence, or contradictory evidence. However, you aren't going to go against dozens of hadiths for the sake of your culture. On the other hand, someone with a worldview other than Islam will quite happily reject hundreds of hadiths for the sake making Islam conform to their worldview. These are dangerous times, and Muslims should pray for guidance and protection, for both themselves and especially the younger generation.
  24. 2 points
    Must watch! May Allah swt give us all tawfiq to do something about all the orphans in the world. May Allah give to those in need. May Allah swt protect the unprotected. Makes you feel really grateful and opens yours eyes. Lets not take things for granted and strive to help those in need. This is a very touching documentary... (wasalam) There are currently over 3 million orphans in Iraq. Karbala has a side that is usually not seen, the side that sees many deprived from even having a roof on their head or even food to eat. Our cameras follow some of the conditions of these abandoned people.
  25. 2 points
    Heartbreaking...It was so painful when one of the widows said 'where are all the good people,where have they gone?' May Allah bless them and the helping people.
  26. 2 points
    assalam 'alaykum, I don't see any problem with a center that was founded by a Iranians (for example) having an Iranian feel to it, serving Iranian food etc. I think the problem that we have, and this is mainly in the English speaking world, where there are now many converts to tashayyu' from various backgrounds who need a place to feel welcome, somewhere that isn't too foreign to them, if the center is too strong in clinging to it's roots, that will put people off. By that I mean that all the programs are in language x, and even the resident shaykh can't express himself properly in English. It isn't only about reverts, second and third generation immigrants feel much more comfortable with English than the language of their grand-parents, and will be much more engaged with programs in English - which can be seen in Uk for example, since more centers starting having English language programs, a lot of the youth actively want to go to the mosque, whereas 10 years ago, it felt like more of a chore to them (I heard a shaykh say this). As you say, this is changing, when I lived in London, I went to Iranian centers and Khoja centers, and whilst they did offer programs in other languages, the main language was English, everyone was very welcoming, and I didn't get the feel that I was an outsider. Whilst I enjoyed the video, I'm not sure how relevant it is today, as things are changing for the better (based on my very restricted view of Islamic centers in the west) * On a side note, where I live now, the programs are all in Arabic, but they provide a live translation through head phones, it is rare to see youngsters there without their parents - or even with their parents.
  27. 2 points
    AnaAmmar1

    Thoughts (2010-2016) [ARCHIVE]

    home page i think.
  28. 2 points
    Chaotic Muslem

    Quran Reading Question

    Option 2 Imam said و لا يكن هيك آخر السورة Don't make your concern to reach the end of the chapter.
  29. 2 points
    Whilst I do join most of my prayers, through convenience, I know full well that that is a deficiency in my worship, the stronger more recommended Sunna is to divide you prayers, if you read through historical accounts, you rarely see that prayers were joined, you have to go to the specific narrations that mention that. I know people have written books mocking people who separate their prayers, saying it is an innovation, trying to prove it from the Qur'an etc, but that is just embarrassing.
  30. 2 points
    Ali M, bro... I just love your sense of humour :D
  31. 2 points
    حدثنا أبي رحمه الله، قال: حدثنا سعد بن عبد الله، قال: حدثنا محمد بن عيسى بن عبيد اليقطيني، قال: كتب علي بن محمد بن علي بن موسى الرضا عليهم السلام إلى بعض شيعته ببغداد: بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم عصمنا الله وإياك من الفتنة فإن يفعل فقد أعظم بها نعمة وإن لا يفعل فهي الهلكة، نحن نرى أن الجدال في القرآن بدعة، اشترك فيها السائل والمجيب، فيتعاطى السائل ما ليس له، ويتكلف المجيب ما ليس عليه، وليس الخالق إلا الله عز وجل، وما سواه مخلوق، والقرآن كلام الله، لا تجعل له اسما من عندك فتكون من الضالين، جعلنا الله وإياك من الذين يخشون ربهم بالغيب وهم من الساعة مشفقون. Firstly what is being said here is that Al-Jidaal (disputing,arguing, fighting) over the Qur'an is a bidah, not asking and discussing. Jidaal doesn't just mean "7iwar" or conversation, jidaal means arguing and disputing. Dear brothers, it is not a bid'ah to ask and discuss about the Qur'an rather it is mustahab, for the Imam (as) was asked himself regarding the Qur'an, and he said that it was muhdath (originated), and not created without him blaming his students for asking such a question. Secondly regarding the Qur'an, the Qur'an is Muhdath (originated) but not (makhluq), what is the difference between Allah creating something and Allah originating something? When "kalam" is "ma5luq" this implies that it is a lie. We find this in the Qur'an, we find the Imams (as) explaining the same thing in the narrations, and we also see that scholars such as shareef al murtadha and his inheritor of knowledge in sham Abu sallaa7 al-7alabi saying that when you apply this word to the Qur'an you are implying that the Qur'an is a fabrication. For we find in the Qur'an ما سمعنا بهذا في الملة الآخرة إن هذا إلا اختلاق. And we also can see that a scholar was asked the same question, and he interpreted the verse as such " أي افتعال وكذب ، فمن زعم أن القرآن مخلوق بمعنى أنه مكذوب فقد كذب ، ومن قال : إنه غير مخلوق بمعنى أنه غير مكذوب فقد صدق وقال الحق والصواب ، ومن زعم أنه غير مخلوق بمعنى أنه غير محدث وغير منزل وغير محفوظ ، فقد أخطأ وقال غير الحق والصواب" "meaning fabrication and lie, and whoever thinks that the Qur'an is makhluq with the meaning that it is a lie then he himself has lied, and whoever says that the Qur'an is not makhluq and he has been honest and has said the truth. and whoever thinks that the Qur'an is not ma5luq and that it is not originated and not revealed and not preserved, then he has made an error and has said other than the truth". And here we say that Shaykh At-Tusi may Allah preserve him also explained, وقال الشيخ الطوسي: كلام الله تعالى ، فعله ، وهو محدث ، وامتنع أصحابنا من تسميته بأنه مخلوق ,لما فيه من الايهام بكونه منحولا). وقال أكثر المعتزلة : أنه مخلوق "Shaykh At-Tusi has said : The speech of Allah is from his action and it is originated, and our companions have forbidden the naming of it as created, from the misleading that it is in itself fabricated, and most of the mutazila have said that it is created". So the Qur'an is the originated speech of Allah, and it is not eternal. Wasalam.
  32. 2 points
    http://kamranonbike.com/story/
  33. 2 points
    Marbles

    Blast From The Past

    Ha! Thank God there was no PIA jahaz involved in nau-do-giyara.
  34. 2 points
    monad

    How To Respond To Praise

    write a comment here -the-nicest-things-someones-said-to-you or you could just be polite and show some gratitude but not feeling superfluous. Thank you very much. Ohh it wasn't nothing, Yes, actually I am really awesome, I think I am awesome, Bow to me peasant!
  35. 2 points
    Ali Musaaa :)

    How To Respond To Praise

    Say Alhamdulillah for God giving you the tawfeeq to perform that action or for possessing that quality.
  36. 2 points
    I say "lol" to it. Console games with actually great graphics potential truly shine when they get "hacked" and their potential unleashed on a PC. :p Case in point, Dark Souls.
  37. 2 points
    In the situation where there is only time for four units before maghrib, then you pray `asr first, and pray dhuhr afterwards as qadhaa. The same goes for maghrib and `ishaa. See: وقت صلاة الجمعة أول الزوال عرفاً من يوم الجمعة، ووقت الظهرين من الزوال إلى المغرب، وتختص الظهر من أوله بمقدار أدائها، والعصر من آخره كذلك، وما بينهما مشترك بينهما، ووقت العشاءين للمختار من المغرب إلى نصف الليل، وتختص المغرب من أوله بمقدار أدائها، والعشاء من آخره كذلك وما بينهما مشترك أيضا بينهما، وأما المضطر لنوم أو نسيان أو حيض أو غيرها فيمتد وقتهما له إلى الفجر الصادق، وتختص العشاء من آخره بمقدار أدائها، والأحوط وجوباً للمتعمد في التأخير إلى نصف الليل الإتيان بهما قبل طلوع الفجر من دون نية القضاء أو الأداء، ومع ضيق الوقت يأتي بالعشاء ثم يقضيها بعد قضاء المغرب احتياطاً، و وقت الصبح من طلوع الفجر الصادق إلى طلوع الشمس. Also, مسألة 510: قد يجب العدول من اللاحقة إلى السابقة كما في الأدائيتين المترتبتين، فلو قدم العصر أو العشاء سهواً وذكر في الأثناء فإنه يعدل إلى الظهر أو المغرب، إلا إذا لم تكن وظيفته الاتيان بها لضيق الوقت http://www.sistani.org/arabic/book/23720/3607/
  38. 2 points
    Ali_Hussain

    How To Respond To Praise

    wa 'alaykum assalam, Smile awkwardly, twist your face a little and change the subject.
  39. 2 points
    hasanhh

    Ate/Eating/Will Eat?

    I need a Time Machine. Let us invent one. We can call it "Operation Iftar" 1.6 hours to go.
  40. 2 points
    What would have happened in Adam (as) hadn't listened to Shaytan? Your question is a hypothetical of a similar nature. Allah knows what will happen in the future, and plans in relation to what will happen, not what could have happened.
  41. 2 points
    Muhammed Ali

    Why Block My Sunni Website?

    I don't know which website you are referring to, but the shia on this forum do not shy away from discussing any subject. The shia have always held the upper hand in any debate with the sunnis, or wahabis. Bring whatever challenges you want to this website. Bring your arguments from that website here. Links to a few hyper extremist websites are broken because we wouldn't want search engines giving them a higher rank. We wouldn't want to promote some of the hateful anti-shia websites. It's not only shias who could visit them.
  42. 2 points
    Martyrdom

    Inspirational Personalities

    Sayed Hassan Nasrallah. He flipped the table on the arrogant powers and the Arab traitors.
  43. 2 points
    Bro, i like you and all, but have't you like posted this video in every single thread you have participitated in?
  44. 2 points
    mina

    Thoughts (2010-2016) [ARCHIVE]

    I humbly ask for dua for our hezb fighters,they prepare for a big battle against Isis. The duas of fasting ppl will be accepted inshallah by the right of Imam Mahdi,may Allah hasten his appearance. http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Lebanon-News/2015/Jun-28/304147-hezbollah-prepares-for-fierce-clashes-near-ras-baalbek.ashx
  45. 2 points
    Chaotic Muslem

    Daesh Threaten Bahrain

    Bahrainis who tried to form a security check for mosques from volunteers were jailed by authorities .
  46. 1 point
    Nail on head.. Feser articulates what many of us struggle to articulate. He remains one of my favourite modern day thinkers for his ability to elucidate and defend traditional ideas with expert clarity and precision.
  47. 1 point
    guest050817

    Daesh Threaten Bahrain

    We need to form a very clever media effort to counter the secterianism by ISIS and those that wish to incite haterd and violence. We shias have got to put aside the debates on how much azadari to do, who is a muqqasir( Imam Hussain a.s did not come to replace the sunnah ...) , and focus on forming lobbying groups and using the internet and media to pursue a peaceful agenda against oppresion and tyranny and violence.
  48. 1 point
    Some Pakistani scholars, i really admire. Syed Ali Al-Musavi A true lover of Imam khomeini and student of Great individuals like Ayatullah Hussain Brojurdi , Ayatullah Abu Al Hasan Isfahani, and Ayatullah Mohisnul Hakeem. During his period in Hawza, he was one of the shining students and very dear to his teachers. He was also a friend of Shaheed Nawab safvi. He served Shaheed Arif Hussain Al Hussaini like a true comrade. Even after the martyrdom of shaheed Hussaini, He continued serving the tashayyu of Pakistan in numerous ways. Alhamdulillah i had the opportunity to join his funeral prayers. Syed Safdar Hussain Najafi Shias of Pakistan can not thank him enough for his efforts. He spent all his life in serving Ahlulbayt (as) in our country. He translated dozens of books including Tafaseer, books of Allama Baqir Majalisi, Sheikh Abbas Qommi, and Ayatullah Ja'afar Subhani. He made a chain of Shia madaris in various areas of Pakistan. He started almost 30 shia madaris. Not only he was a great scholar, he played an active role in politics scenario of Pakistan for the benefit of followers of Ja'afri fiqh. Shaheed Arif Hussain Al Hussaini, Syed Safdar Hussain Najafi, Syed Ali Hussaini Khamenei. Kindly recite Fatiha for their departed souls. (wasalam)
×
×
  • Create New...