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


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 10/16/2018 in all areas

  1. 9 points
    @Ibn al-Hussain Jazakallah dear brother for your time and effort in translating this important work and also for explaining some of the factors and methods in this thread in clear and simple terms which can be understood by the layman. This is very much appreciated. As aspiring followers of the ahlulbayt (as) it is quite obvious that we must continuously strive to uphold what is true and correct and distance ourselves from misrepresentations and misportrayals. May Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى guide us all
  2. 7 points
    I can't help but point out the irony of this post. I think some people are really getting the wrong end of the stick here and imagining some kind of conspiracy. The brother has translated an important article. I have no clue why one or two of the other brothers took offence to it. In your case your issue seemed to be the claim that some of the later narrations are lies/exaggerations rather than honest mistakes as well as the discussion around apostacy. To me it was quite obvious that the brother wasnt saying that hearing an unreliable narration leads to apostasy. What I have however observed is that if authenticity is disregarded from the pulpit, then people lose faith in the entire system and institution. This isn't something that happens overnight or instantly but it is a gradual process. Of course it is their own loss that they left religion because of the shortcomings of some of the speakers they came across, and this isnt the primary reason for why authenticity should be upheld but the brother isn't exaggerating when he points out this unfortunate phenomenon. Regarding the other statement about lies, deception and exaggeration I would have to go back and see in what context this was used (was it against al kashani, al kashifi or some of the sources that they used?) Either way, my humble suggestion would be to not rush to conclusions about the sincerity of the brother who has done this translation. It is a more valuable contribution than what most of us are doing on this particular forum. Wallahu a'lam
  3. 4 points
    This is the same as blaming women for men’s mistakes. This is the same as an abused saying it was their own fault and not the abuser. This claim doesn’t allow men to take ownership of their actions. It’s not women’s fault because men take second wives in secret. Those men who do so without any sort of agreement to this arrangement prior to marriage is because the men themselves haven’t been raised right and are incredibly entitled. So no, there is no role of a woman in a man’s straying. A man can have the most amazing, beautiful, high class woman in the world, but he still will not appreciate and be grateful of what he has.
  4. 4 points
    Abu Hadi

    Where is Jamal Khashoggi???

    I don't think there are many people who can go out publically and accept that explaination. It is true that people like Branson and Zuckerburg are only interested in $ and they would like the grab some of the Al Saud dollars. But the simple fact is that there are a few detail that make this explanation logically impossible. 1) It has been widely reported and can be verified that the Saudi Embassy dismissed all Turkish for the day on the day of the assasination. Meaning that those who run the embassy, i.e. the heads of govt knew that something was going to happen that day. Otherwise why dismiss 'only' the Turkish embassy workers ? 2) They entered and exited the embassy as a team, with no protest from embassy employees. That is on camera. How can it be explained how a team of 15 'rogue killers' entered an embassy with weapons and all together without so much as a 'peep' from embassy employees and without them alerting anyone, even the Turkish authorities to the situation ? Also, after the assasination, they gracefully existed, drove 200m and entered the official residence of the ambassador, drove into an underground garage, then quickly drove out in a few minutes, all with the staff opening doors for them ? Even Seal Team 6 couldn't pull this kind of an operation off this seamlessly and without raising any suspicion from anyone in the area or getting shot at. And the Saudi's are not Seal Team 6. That is for sure. 3) If it was a 'rogue team of killers' why was the scene completely cleaned up and sanitized afterwards ? You would think that they would not want to clean up the scene and would want to preserve evidence so that the 'rogue team of killers' could be caught ? 4) Why did the Saudi authorities wait two weeks before letting Turkish investigators into the embassy ? 5) If it was a 'rogue team of killers', how is it that they brought a bone saw with them ? The only reason you would bring such an instrument is if you knew beforehand you would have enough time to not only kill the target, but dismember and package the body into boxes. This process of dismembering is not easy and takes hours to do. Ergo, they knew that they would have hours afterward to do the dismemberment. How were they sure they would have that much time, and that in that time noone would alert the authorities to a killing that just happened inside an embassy? So if they have an explaination for the above points, I will consider they explaination. I don't think they have one though. Those people who are stupid enough to buy the Saudi and Trumpian explanation are not fooling anyone. It is a extremely thinly veiled attempt to 'cover' for their buddies and their business interests with no regard for justice, truth, or human life. I think any rational person would recognize that.
  5. 4 points
    There are Marjas out there who believe that permission of the first wife is wajib out of respect for the first wife. Let’s not forget this. It is immoral for a man to be living a double life. For him to get a second wife of mere desire to drift away from the realities of the real world has done himself and his family a great disservice. This mindset is what sets apart cheating and a man getting a second wife. Halal doesn’t automatically equal right. Just because something is permissible, it doesn’t mean people should do it. People seem to cling onto hadiths that allow men more than one wife. However, the Quran explains that if you are not able to provide for both wives equally and justly (and treat them equally), then just have one. Yes, a man can get a second wife, but there are conditions and limitations to be fulfilled before doing so. Something that most men will not be able to do.
  6. 4 points
    I better start working out and getting in shape......for the walk
  7. 4 points
    I am not justifying their reasoning and conclusions, I am empathizing with them. My issue was trying to belittle their efforts to a simple "they want to eat haram and halal" which shows how grossly misunderstood and misjudged their efforts and quest for seeking the truth are and making those judgements and belittling their efforts simply cuts off any further hope of their return. I have dealt with a number of Shi'i youth over the past 2-3 years (primarily in my own city) for hours, who are or were literally on the verge of apostasy or apparently live like Muslims, and some who have actually apostatized. Some of them are desperate for answers and are not stupid, they have very legitimate questions and concerns. Most of them will not publicize their apostasy either (not until they feel safe and independent enough). You should also keep an eye out on the latest trend of ex-Muslim videos (both ex-Shia and ex-Sunni) that have become popular on the internet where many of them will bring these sort of stories and exaggerations out as one of their criticisms against Muslims. While I have my issues with their reasoning and try to point it out to them whenever I converse with them, this does not mean that are serious internal issues we have that we need to fix up. This, of course, does not mean that there are no apostates who simply want to "enjoy life" and "eat halal and haram". The issue isn't necessarily about understanding history (though that could be an issue as well at times), rather about "making up" history and claiming those events and descriptions to have "occurred". There is no doubt different generations "understood" their history and their religious texts differently and interpreted them in various ways, but we are talking about claims to events occurring. @ShiaMan14 to me it is looking like there is a communication break down between us - you are not understanding what I am saying which is fine, maybe others and future interested readers will appreciate the contents of this thread and see for themselves who is putting forth a better argument and judge for themselves. Otherwise, I am not really understanding your points and response here and don't really know what you are going on about. Furthermore, not one place did I ever write the statement you attributed to me: Some have apostatized out of the religion because of inaccuracies in the narrations of Karbala. Go and read the original paragraph again, after talking generally about elaborate details, exaggerations and lies in religious narratives, and citing the number of enemies as only one example within brackets to show that this specific instance is not what is relevant, I wrote: "Some have even apostatized out of Islam for this reason (or at least this is one of the factors that pushes them out)." Likewise @S.M.H.A. I am not sure what you are trying to get at with posting al-Islam excerpts or links to previous threads. Wasalam
  8. 3 points
    Recently a booklet of around 50 pages was published, researched and written by Muḥammad Tehrānī (researcher and teacher at the Hawzah) in which he goes over numerous accounts related to Āshūrā that are popularly retold from the pulpits or are part of our eulogies. In this work he mentions just over 90 such reports. Majority of them are not found in earlier reliable historical or maqātil literature at all. As a matter of fact, a lot of them are found in works considered seriously weak and problematic. Two famous works which many scholars have called out as problematic and which include a lot of fabrications and lies are Rawḍah al-Shuhadā of Kashifī (written 850 years after the battle of Karbala) and Tadhkirah al-Shuhadā of Mullā Ḥabībullah Sharīf Kashānī (written 1280 years after the battle of Karbala). Some of the accounts we hear today only first appear in one of these two works. The actual booklet mentions these popular, yet unreliable accounts, and gives further details regarding them, including its sources if there are any and what is problematic about them. It is also interesting to note how late some of these accounts appear only for the first time and how quickly they became popular. Of course, not all of these accounts are retold by everyone and neither are they told in gatherings organized by all ethnicities. In fact, some of these are only popular in Iranian gatherings and unheard of in gatherings held by other ethnicities. What follows below is simply a brief table of contents of what is further explained in the booklet. It can be seen that a very high percentage of stories often heard from the pulpits and in poetry can only be traced back to weak and problematic sources and often times are mere fabrications and imaginations of individuals. Continue Reading: http://www.iqraonline.net/popular-unreliable-accounts-related-to-ashura/
  9. 3 points
    Since the end of the 19th century and onwards, a number of scholars have attempted to cleanse the pulpit from these stories being presented as historical occurrences. One of the first works written explicitly on this subject was by Muhaddith Nuri. Interestingly he had Akhbari tendencies and was very lenient towards reports (see what Imam Khomeini said about him), but even he was not able to tolerate the extent of fabrications that had taken place. He wrote a work called Lulu wa Marjan which has two sections, first on sincerity, where he condemns the practice of charging money for reciting poetry for the Imam (a) and the second part is about lying and he mentions a number of fabricated events including the idea that the women and children of Imam Husayn (a) came back to Karbala on the 20th of Safar The first part of the book which is on Sincerity can be read here. Around that same time, you also had Sayyid 'Abdul Husayn Shushtari (scholar from Najaf) and Shaykh Muhammad Baqir Khorasani (around a 100 years ago he was the Marja' for the city of Birjand, Iran) also each wrote independent works on this topic critiquing these fabrications. Soon after them you had Sayyid Muhsin al-Amin (d. 1952) who wrote a whole treatise on this subject and was met with so many verbal attacks by the laymen and primarily muballighin. People were coining poetry attacking him and calling him an Umawi, his own father in law wrote poetry saying I regret giving my daughter to you and so on. His efforts pretty much went down the drain. After them, Shahid Mutahhari - inspired by Muhaddith Nuri - gave a series of lessons and lamented over the same tragedy and didn't hold back when he said: After him, Ayatullah Salehi Najafabadi (d. 2006) wrote a book called Shahid -e Javid where he addressed what he believed to be a misrepresentation of the event of Karbala and considered it an altered interpretation of history. While this critique was mostly based on theological presumptions resulting in a certain interpretation of history, he was met with academic critiques which were good. However, amongst the laity and muballighin once again we had a scholar who was met with character assassination. This was to such an extent that even some physical altercations took place amongst supporters of different scholars and individuals were killed. Today you have many scholars who have written smaller works and called these fabrications out - there are too many to list here. There is a sharp difference between poetic license in which imagery and exaggeration are done with respects to an event that occurred. Anyone who studies basic Arabic grammar and rhetoric will know the extent of imagery, metaphors and exaggerations allowed and how it is done. This is completely accepted and is present even in the Quran, earlier poetry of companions regarding Karbala, even later and contemporary poetry works and so on. There is a thousand year discussion on whether poetic propositions can be attributed as "true" or "false" or not, and many opine that they cannot be and in fact need to be treated in the same ruling as a creative sentence (insha), as opposed to a declaratory statement (khabar). A creative statement is like me saying, "come here" which is a command-tense, and one cannot say this statement is "true" or "false". This is different than someone making a declaratory statement, such as "X event happened" which can be attributed as "true" or "false. Producing a statement and putting it forth as a representation of what occurred, can and should be attributed as "true" or "false" when possible - or else they should not be narrated if one is unaware of their condition out of precaution. Not sure why there is this false perception in our communities that anyone who studies in the seminary is somehow meant to be well aware of all these things. Many students will have never come across these discussions because the seminary does not teach these things as some course or subject. The seminary primarily teaches tools (even more fundamentally, tools to eventually be able to derive law or to understand philosophy better) and it is expected of students to go and engage in their own reading and research. History is a specialization offered in literally a handful of seminaries in Qom and most foreign students do not specialize in it. Otherwise, you have all sorts of students, some are lazy and could care less about their studies let alone look into research material, some are content going with the flow and retelling whatever is popular; others do study, but have other research interests and have simply not looked into these things. Some may have looked into these things here and there and will try their best to recite things which other scholars have mentioned to be careful of and to avoid, but do not really do so with a research interest in it and will end up saying things that they are unsure of, but simply popular. Those who are interested in research will know these things (the arguments back and forth and may also have disagreements), but generally speaking most who are very much research-oriented do not end up speaking publicly or become public orators. Some of them feel they have nothing to contribute to the community because elders within communities do not appreciate new perspectives and discussions that need to be held and they will not be able to speak their findings and insight. They end up in academia or other teaching institutes. Many youths will appreciate these discussions on religion as a whole, if they are presented to them properly. Unfortunately, instead, we now have a slowly growing trend of apostatizing youth or youth becoming less religious, who keep their apostasy and irreligiosity hidden for years and attend the Majalis or the Julus (walking processions) out of pressure. If someone does not believe my personal experiences of youth who I have met who are like this, then it is not that difficult to do a simple Google search on "ex Shia Muslims" and see that this is not just an issue in my city. Wasalam
  10. 3 points
    Some of the stuff you hear in Punjab (Pakistan) sounds so fabricated it’s scary
  11. 3 points
    Trading with zaalim KSA might not be a good move but why is everyone freaking out. This is a trade. They are buying an essential necessity. Even Iran trades with US after all those 'Marg bar.. '. Please make a thread about it and say 'Disgusting'. https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5070.html
  12. 3 points
    Salam, I'm sorry about that. You never should've sent him your photo, but it's too late for that now anyway. Do you trust this guy? You've known him for nearly a year, but is he a good person? I think it's always best to assume that he's untrustworthy until he proves himself. What if this was his plan all along? What if he meant to fool around with you (by making you send a picture of you without hijab) and then would use his parents to get out of marrying you? Many young boys/men are very hypocritical, they have relationships with girls and when it comes to marriage they want a girl who's never even said a word to a guy her whole life. Is he like that? Has he ever pressured you into anything(such as sending the photo)? If yes, I think you should think twice before talking to him again. If he really is a good person then wait it out. Don't spend alot of time with him alone/without other friends even if it's in a public space if you think you'll fall into haram. Show your parents that he's a good man and he can help and support you. No matter what, don't do anything silly. If you can't trust yourself don't be around him at all. Be cautious because if he isn't a good person, he'll use your vulnerability to his advantage, in all sorts of ways. I don't know what else to say really, I hope everything goes well.
  13. 3 points
    If a man keeps his second wife a secret, and the first wife finds out and speaks badly about him, how is this an act of indecency? He was the one who kept secrets. He was the dishonest one. Why would you shame a women for expressing her anger? Do you really believe a woman would praise her man and speak kindly of him after he’s kept the fact that he’s gotten a second wife a secret?
  14. 3 points

    Does Islam encourage/accept cheating?

    This literally makes no sense. A marriage is a partnership. Just like one would be expected to inform their spouse that they don't want to have children , one must inform their future spouse that they may be interested in having a polygamous relationship. Is the woman merely a pawn in this marriage? Is she just a pawn the man uses to gain his desires? This is so insulting to women on so many levels. Either be upfront from the beginning or let go of certain rights that can sometimes cause more harm than good. Edit- if problems arise you don't dust them under the carpet. You're in this for the long run, so any two mature adults would solve their issues head first. If the issues aren't solved, and the only solution is the man remarrying then the least any decent man could do is inform his wife of the way he feels. Any woman would rather that over him sneaking around with another woman (which is both disrespectful to the first wife and the second, let alone the man himself). Some men should stop being so cowardly and blame their shortcomings in marriage over the woman. Also, what happens when the man has "problems" with his fourth wife? Which one will he divorce so he can "solve" his "issues" with a new woman? No one is denying that a man has this right. What were arguing for is that it's not viewed as a necessity unless it's very particular cases, and it's not used as a means of men pleasing their never-ending desires.
  15. 3 points

    Does Islam encourage/accept cheating?

    It's anyone's right to be in a relationship they like. It's no one's right to force a woman or anyone to live a life they don't want. If a woman wants to be the only wife, that's her right, and she deserves to live her life the way she wants. No one is pulling a gun to any man's head and forcing them to marry such a woman. What kind of man doesn't stick to his word (if he promised his wife that he'd remain monogamous)? Such a man is not worthy of the name.
  16. 3 points

    Does Islam encourage/accept cheating?

    They can't be mutually exclusive. If a man needs to marry more than one girl, that doesn't turn him into anything bad. If he lies about it out of fear of not being accepted, he's committing an error of indecency. Many men, if they allowed themselves to lie conveniently, would get married easily. But they have some decency, and will have a harder time finding the girl that will accept them with their own terms and conditions. As for the girl you put as an example who wants the diamond, well, she should be honest about it from the start, that she is a materialistic person expecting gold, diamonds and gucci. And whoever takes her as a wife, is already warned. There is no way in which the word Honesty may gain a negative connotation. One can bring all the religions of the world, this won't change. It is deeply rooted in the human heart.
  17. 3 points
    Assalamu alaikum sister @Miss Wonderful, Since I am a student,please make dua on my behalf that Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى may increase my ilm, may deepen my taqwa and help me strive towards zuhd. Barakallahu feeki.
  18. 3 points

    I'm doing duas for anyone who wants!

    Please pray for my daughter's marriage of her liking
  19. 3 points
    Lying is not immoral? First time I heard that one. No one is arguing against polygamy. What people argue against is selfish and disgusting men who ruin the lives of multiple people (women and children) for their own desire. What is cheating is Muslim men who claim to be followers of the sunnah yet find lying (which is cheating/remarrying without your partner's mere knowledge) completely halal and moral. In what world is lying and hurting someone's feelings, and treating them with utmost disrespect halal? Did the prophet (saw) ever treat Sayyeda Khadija like that? Did Imam Ali (as) ever treat Fatima-Al-Zahra like that? When either of such holy men had polygamous marriages it was with the will and consent of his existing wives at the time. Neither the Prophet nor Imam Ali ever would have treated their wives with such disrespect by cheating on them. It is a complete dishonour to commit such vile acts in the name of Islam and our Prophet (pbuh). Learn to draw the line: polygamy is halal. Lying is haram. The two do not equate to eachother.
  20. 3 points
    Dearest sister @Miss Wonderful. JazakAllah for your prayers. My daughter got the results we all hoped for and hence she will be attending the school of her choice from Sept 2019 IA. I feel so humbled and blessed. Thank you from the bottom of my heart. Please kindly continue to remember both my children in your prayers. May Allah bless you my dearest sister and accept all your prayers. I prayed for your mothers good health. X
  21. 3 points
    We have a solid legal and historical precedent for commemorating and mourning the tragedy of Imam Husayn (a). But can you tell me if anywhere in the teachings of religion has it appeared that this mourning and commemoration should be done so accompanied with lies, exaggerations and fabrications? That you can construct and make up stories with elaborate details and all-out lies to the extent that today we have defaced the story so much that there is nothing left of its originality? Is there a greater tragedy than the defacing of the tragedy that has occurred? Is this supported by the religious teachings, or in fact the teachings of any religion? There is no end to this as you can see, once you begin you are eventually down a slippery slope where anyone can come and make anything up and get away with it. What started off as simple exaggerations in the earlier centuries (such as increasing the number of enemy soldiers killed), has now turned into something unrecognizable. This is truly the fault of previous generations, certain rulers and dynasties, and even a number of scholars. Unfortunately, we are having to deal with the brunt of it in the 21st century and are paying a heavy price for it as well. It has come to the point that many from the young generation find these stories absurd, thinking that these are descriptions all of us have to believe in and that they are to be accepted without any thought and reflection. Some have even apostatized out of Islam for this reason (or at least this is one of the factors that pushes them out). Alhamdolillah we have had scholars in history and contemporary times who would point these things out for the people - even at the risk of their own character assassination. Mind you, these sort of fabrications are nothing unique to the Shi'a and rather takes place amongst humans and their history or beliefs in general. The problem is, you are trying to get into an argument when you do not seem to know how historicity and historical methodologies work neither do you have a working understanding of the literature nor the language. Every historian has a methodology, sometimes very different from others. However, within Islamic scholarship, historians generally agree that there is something called murajjihat. Meaning, those factors by which they will prefer one account over another. The reason why I asked you if it is 31 or 61 is that those are conflicting numbers and to show you that you are not really able to prove or conclude anything if you have not established these factors for yourself. You need to either be able to reconcile both of those numbers, or prefer one over another in which case you need evidence to pick one of them, or you will negate one over the other, or you will simply negate both of them. I am not going to sit here and discuss historical methodologies with you when you are not yet familiar with many preliminary discussions. Well with that sort of "free" subjectivity, anyone else is also free to show others how late the version of history people are mourning over appeared so those who are a bit more concerned with their understanding of history can appreciate it. First of all his work is not the earliest record we have. I already cited 3rd-century recorded works of historians that are earlier, and most importantly the Maqtal of Abu Mikhnaf itself which is void of this specific aspect. The reason why I will not address Shaykh Saduq's tradition (which is most definitely not authentic, nor can you ever attain assurance that it was uttered by the Imam) is as I mentioned earlier. You do not have the preliminaries to understand how something is weakened and why something is preferred in Fiqh al-Hadith. I can only briefly put it for you: the tradition of Saduq, first of all, violates a principle in hadith sciences due to its extreme length (lengthier an oral report is, more chances of it containing lies) so that puts a yellow flag, if not red, on it already. Secondly, it has serious problems in its chain - unknown individuals, including three women who would have every emotional reason to further add to the story, and the main narrator is someone who was a foster brother of some of the children of Zayd b. 'Ali. Though this individual is unknown, if he had any Zaydi influence, that would also explain the exaggerations in this report since the Zaydis altered the narrative of Karbala a lot and gave it a very different perspective. Much of their alterations even entered later works like Luhoof (who was very explicitly citing Zaydi works in his Maqtal). Thirdly you should know that the Amali genre is very unique and different from other works of hadith. While historically very important and significant, there is a lot of important material in there (see this 20 page research paper which discusses the role of Amali literature in developing Maqatil literature), but you should also know that many times in these dictations and gatherings the scholars would narrate reports that were made up by story-tellers, they did not enjoy the same degree of credibility, and would become extremely lenient in narrating them (similar to what happens today in some of our gatherings). Shaykh Saduq has a number of these reports, both in his Amali and as well as other books (like in his Kamal al-Deen). This 30-page research paper specifically looks at the hadith mentioned in Amali of Shaykh Saduq and demonstrates all the problems with it. On page 14-16 he specifically discusses the problems in the numbers of enemy soldiers killed. Those who have worked and have experience in hadith and textual criticism can point some of these problems out and will appreciate this attention to detail. If you are not comfortable knowing that these discussions require a lot more attention to detail, then no one is forcing you to get involved in them. However, if you want to critique then you should at least base it on some methodology and be willing to be consistent with that methodology (to the extent possible). If you do not have a methodology and are simply doing taqleed in this matter, then you have no right to critique or refute anyone since you have no basis for it yourself (you are simply imitating a scholar or a popular opinion). If you are still interested in researching further (in case you realize that you may not have the ultimate truth in your hands) your best bet is to try and see arguments on different sides and go with that which you sincerely believe is closer to the truth. Most definitely not everything in the Maqtal of Abu Mikhnaf can be trusted. This requires historical and textual criticism which is really beyond the scope of this thread and I don't think save a few handful of individuals could even get into those discussions here and appreciate them. Yes brother, I know of this. It is mujmal (i.e. the meaning can equally be applied on multiple instances), because it does not mention where and how they were cut (during battle or afterwards as is mentioned in an earlier report from Sharh al-Akhbar). If anything due to the verb "fada akhahu" you could prefer the opinion that it was "after" he was killed - or after he had "sacrificed" (fada) his life for "his brother" (akhahu). Wasalam
  22. 2 points
    (Salam) Peace and blessings be on all of you. Any specific suggestions regarding trip to Iraq this arbaeen InshaAllah ( all major ziyaraat destinations). Thanks in advance.
  23. 2 points
    https://purifying101.blogspot.com/2018/10/woman-in-islam-islamic-feminist.html?m=1 Salaam alaykom, So this blog I hope to send out to make a gloabal wide movement on empowering Islamic Woman and their rights but right of others too. I have been reading a lot on the femisistic movement for woman which started along time ago in fact many may not realize that we are now in the 3rd wave of this movement which is to make all genders equal... however I beg to differ on this quote so easy said as I think this movement is for woman and not men and with research and thought you can clearly see the woman activist for this movement have an idea of women over men... so "equal" slogans are hard to swallow when it seems to be something else. Anyways that you readers can look into with a unbiased opinion and see yourself what this means really, I'm sure you will be shocked if you are not bought into this and come with open mind and Islamic education. Click on link above for full blog.
  24. 2 points
    The more one can make people cry with fabrications the more money one can demand for a majlis/gathering. These people have no respect for the mimber/pulpit and do not know its worth. A lot of these unauthenticated narrations/narratives are just repeated by the academically depraved orators/zakirs.
  25. 2 points
    Salam, please everyone pray for me and my family .thanks alot
  26. 2 points
    Your post edit @2Timeless In that case, I agree with you. That is why we should always be in the state of thankfulness. God gave us so much, yet few are grateful. God bless you and goodnight. Sister 2time, thank you for reminding me to be mindful. I'm glad there are individuals who remember the destitute and underprivileged.
  27. 2 points
    Girl if his dad went haywire over a picture than think of what will happens when he become s your father in law? Maybe its better off you be away from them before your life becomes miserable from these people and their accusations.
  28. 2 points
    Muhammad ibn Sham'un from Imam Kadhim (as) said : Do not indulgence in Mutah and act to establish the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), which does not your work stops you from your wives to cause them to be angry, and in the case of anger, deny the right (the legitimacy and the importance of mutah). And send curse on us who we have caused you to do this! (Which would also lead to blasphemy and apostasy of women). Book of Mutah Sheikh Mofid http://hadana.ir/روایات-درباره-ازدواج-موقت/
  29. 2 points
    This is a fallacy in which the two issues, (buying diamond ring and getting a second wife) are completely separate from each other. There’s nothing wrong with a man spending money on his wife according to what is within his means. Really, is spending a couple hundred dollars on his wife, knowing it will make her happy, going to make a dent in his savings and “max out” his card? For men who have credit cards, spending a couple hundred for an anniversary, provided that it’s within his means, wouldn’t be a big deal. The main issue is when she starts comparing her sapphire ring to another woman’s blue diamond. It’s not the man’s fault at that point—the wife would be just insecure if she can’t be happy with appropriate anniversary gifts. A second wife is from Islam, however, one must weigh out the positives verses the negatives. The reason why men keep their second wives secret is because they know of the repercussions if they were to say anything. So they’d rather live in a fantasy filled dream where they’d get the best of both worlds, having two wives without the wives’ knowledge of the other. This never plays out in reality. If a man gets two wives, keeps his fantasies hidden, and he is eventually exposed, he will lose the trust and respect of his family, almost entirely. It’s not culture that causes a woman to become angry if her man gets a second wife—it’s always been in women to become disheartened at such news, but back in the day, they were not in a position to say anything. They had no options besides staying in unfulfilling marriages at the time. So they had to just deal with their husbands getting second wives. Most women now don’t have to put up with a man straying on his family. And they won’t. I doubt most women would be all right if her husband kept secrets like that.
  30. 2 points

    Does Islam encourage/accept cheating?

    Can't the man find the woman who will be able to tolerate that? No rip lacks for a patch. If there is something wrong, which is to harm someone's feelings for me, I won't do it because I believe society is wrong. It's not a matter of who's right or wrong, it's a matter of personal harm done to a person who, want it or not, doesn't accept secrecy and lies in her relationship. She wants a man to be a decent man, because that is what she is really asking for, nothing else. And I respect her for that. I don't know about you guys, but I have a sister, and if my brother-in-law ever dares to come with such stupidities when this is not what was agreed and spoken, I'd haul him over the coals.
  31. 2 points

    Ask Your Computer Problems Here !

    even if have differenet hard disk with another operating system it wont run at same time ..he would have option to select at boot up which operating system to boot with ..
  32. 2 points
    @Miss Wonderful Thanks. l have gotten some extra necessary things done. So it appears to be having an effect.
  33. 2 points

    Does Islam encourage/accept cheating?

    I know he doesn't need the permission. But it's still lying. Telling your wife and children you are going to "work" or "out with friends" when in fact you're going to see your secret second family is lying. Living with either of your wives on the basis that she is the only wife is a lie. And lies are haram. The least any decent man could do is inform her so he wouldn't be sinning by lying. So, as I said, nothing wrong with polygamy, everything is wrong with cheating (lying). Not only is lying immoral but the man would be doing a huge injustice to both sides. A 50 year old man sneaking around spending time with both/all wives is not only silly, but it's not healthy. What will the children (from either woman) think when they see their father every other week and only for a short while out of fear of being exposed? What will they learn from an untrustworthy father? What kind of morals will that in turn teach the children? Will it teach them that it's okay to lie and walk over everyone you supposedly love for your selfish desires?
  34. 2 points

    Does Islam encourage/accept cheating?

    Maybe a lie is not the best word, but it is indeed a deceival from my perspective. In which sense? In the sense that it is a socially unexpected circumstance to take place (I may only be referring to muslims living in the West). People take for granted many things, and we all are very well aware of them. Not being honest about something they have took for granted and affects them directly is deceival, in its most negative sense. There is really no other word to describe it. To deceive is literally: To cause to believe what is not true; mislead. If the thaqalain are not enough to prove that is wrong, I realize they are either not sufficient or holistically missunderstood. There was a guy I know who used to cheat on his wife. He did mutah with other women, used to travel to do so, and that meant he wouldn't give as much money as he could to his family (who, by the way, was in need) in order to pay for the lowest women he could find (they were not prostitutes per se, but there was barely any difference). He once told me I didn't deserve any trust because I refused ro go with him searching for women to do mutah with. The family then got a dog, and he was against it. So he told them you either choose the dog or me. They chose wisely, they kept the dog and he left the house. I know his wife and his two daughters, I used to teach English to one of them. They didn't deserve that, they were awesome and patient with him, yet he acted in the most selfish way. According to the "reasonings" (and forgive the irony, but I really can't get it) given here, his behaviour was morally correct because he did halal, and this family wronged him. I can only ask myself why the heck they didn't get the dog earlier.
  35. 2 points
    Its not lying and the reality is that a man doesn't need the permission of his first wife to take a second wife, he doesn't even need to inform her. That's not to say he shouldn't consult her but that her consenting or even being informed of it is irrelevant from a legal point of view. Once again morality is defined by the thaqalayn.
  36. 2 points
    The khawarij used to have a checkpoint where they would question a person's allegiance, if they are christian or jew or atheist, they were allowed to pass with no problem, but if they were 'Shia of Ali', they were decapitated on the spot.
  37. 2 points
    Not good to generalize, because according to sunni fiqh as far as I know ( @kingkhanwc correct me if I’m wrong akhi) pictures of prophets are indeed haram. The buyers are responsible and not the entire Sunni creed, this is not good to say and is not the akhlaaq we should be using anywhere, offline or online.
  38. 2 points
    Brothers just because someone is trying to educate us and trying to move us from a world of make belief to what is relatively authentic, we do not need to be harsh or throw ridicule. Learn to argue with facts and reason and not because you heard something a hundred times without checking any of the books. The Truth being built on lies is what taints the truth and draws it further away from the people. Why do you think there is was a constant retelling of the truth for generations pre Islam. And finally why do you think so many Shias will reject the Master(atfs) of our time.
  39. 2 points
    @Ibn al-Hussain @Salsabeel @S.M.H.A. @Husayni I have been following this discussion closely. While I can appreciate the historic Outlook and perspective, I am trying to understand the purpose of this thread. We know there were thousands vs hundreds. We know there was thirst. We know Imam Hussain (as) is Syed-us-Shohada. We know Hz Abbas was his loyal standard bearer. we know it was him (+brothers) vs 50th 4000. As long as a smaller group fought larger group and won, do the numbers matter? Does the status of Imam Hussain (as) and the martyrs of Karbala get reduced if they collectively killed 88. Similarly, will you love and honor them more if they killed 880 or 8,800? Imam Hussain (as) had sons killed in Karbala. Hz Ali Asghar aka Abdullah (as) could be 6mos, 6 yes, 60 years - would still be Imam's son and still a martyr. I find these discussions to be mere diversionary tactics to take focus away from Imam Hussain (as) and his great sacrifice. Like the guy in the video said, no one knows history because no one was there.
  40. 1 point
    This cheerleader was a strong supporter of ATS too. Hope you remember him.
  41. 1 point
    Criticising a country for engaging in trade for a mere necessity that may make or break the life of thousands of innocent people is simply outrageous. People are dying because of the lack of electricity and clean water, whilst people on the other side of the world sit behind their smartphones and type "disgusting" and carry on with their life. Having access to clean water and electricity and living in a clean environment is not luxurious? None of us could ever spend even an hour living the life of Iraqi and Syrian refugees. Sounds like luxury to me. Edit- also, you don't need to be a millionaire to be said to have a life of luxury. For some, even being able to close your eyes at night and not worry about whether or not you'll have access to water and electricity, that you'll have all your limbs when you wake up the next morning, is a luxury.
  42. 1 point
    Did you read the first two post on page 1. I did not get an answer to that. To not have an understanding of hsitory/Masib/poetry and lumping all in. utilizing outlier reports or minor differences and projecting it as this Popular belief in Shia's or in their Lectures is not prudent. Its misrepresenting the Facts. Have you read this stuff , http://www.iqraonline.net/popular-unreliable-accounts-related-to-ashura/ When someone is projecting this on the Shia's we will counter it. It has nothing to do with poster who can't logically and coherently explain his own understanding is not called ridicule or been harsh. Its called getting straight answers on a sensitive subject. If a person can't stand up to scrutiny and will play victim is not a good sign. They should not be in this business of rattling the cage. Not sure what you mean by "world of make belief" guess the marketing has worked. This is not world of make belief https://www.al-islam.org/event-taff-earliest-historical-account-tragedy-karbala-abu-mikhnaf https://www.al-islam.org/lohoof-sighs-sorrow-sayyid-ibn-tawus https://www.al-islam.org/nafasul-mahmum-relating-heart-rending-tragedy-karbala-shaykh-abbas-qummi https://www.al-islam.org/maqtal-al-husayn-abd-al-razzaq-al-muqarram Atheist will say the same for the book and the stories as fairy tails. Tell me you hear or read the above mentioned stuff exactly the way they try to market it. No on is denying stuff happens but this article initself is an exaggeration/projection of some ones perception and a gross mis representation of facts on the ground. This the real world of make belief. Atheist are using the same words to subdue the Muslims, fairy tales and superstitions . We do pay attention to frivolous charges we defend and ask them to explain their understanding before they are allowed to judge us. If they are agnostic and can't explain - are two minded - not sure - themselves about their own identity or faith - they will retaliate with coy tactics and distractions.
  43. 1 point
    @Ibn al-Hassan, I suggest you to forward your research to www.al-islam.org and ask them to either remove unreliable accounts or rewrite the history of Karbala. https://www.al-islam.org/karbala-and-ashura-ali-husayn-jalali/at-karbala#first-attack This time the writer is different. Why website like www.al-islam.org is involved in spread so called "lies"? They don't even care of hadith of Imam which mentions the cutting of hands of Abbas (as), and say that it is not clear. So it is unclear them, when exactly enemy cut hands of Abbas (as). How ridiculous this alone statement is !!!! Do they think enemy has cut the hands after running horses on his body and after cutting his head? Perhaps it satisfies them that the enemy forgot to cut the legs and satisfied with cutting hands only. They say there is no dual happened, from Sheikh Tusi (to Present day historians, every historian mentions that after the noon prayers companions fought individually or in group of two or three. https://www.al-islam.org/articles/ashura-tenth-muharram-muhammad-rida-hakimi Yet another writer......
  44. 1 point

    Should I repeat my prayer

    If the doubt occured after the salah, then no need to pat attention. If during salah, then you should have restarted recitation.
  45. 1 point

    Question about MATAM

    So with us being shia, only if something is expressly forbidden is it considered forbidden. Since there is no narration forbidding "latm in an organized and rhythmic manner to the meter of a poem being sung" , it is fully permissible. FYI - I guess we know.
  46. 1 point
    Arm yourself with basics so you don't get taken for a ride.( Siffin) The Massacre of Karbala: A Historical Analysis -
  47. 1 point

    Thoughts 2018

    Walaikum Salam, And We have made some of you [people] as trial for others - will you have patience? And ever is your Lord, Seeing. Quran 25:20
  48. 1 point
    Ibn Al-Ja'abi

    Question about MATAM

    Salams You're likely not going to find any mention of "matam" in ḥadiths by the ahl al-bayt because this is the Hindi-Urdu term for the act, it comes from the Arabic word مأتم (maʾtam) meaning "funeral", the Persians call it sīne-zanī and Arabs laṭm. There are some mentions of laṭm in the traditions about Karbala. For example, Šayḵ al-Mufīd records in K. al-Irshād (Lebanon: 1979) pp. 232 that when Imām Ḥusayn recited the poem يا دهر أف لك من خليل (O' time, woe unto thy friendship), Sayyida Zaynab started slapping her cheeks (ولطمت وجهها) and he tells her to have patience. This would be considered is an expression of jazʿ (جزع), what has been defined as the opposite or antithesis of patience (والجَزَعُ نَقِيضُ الصَّبْرِ. جَزِعَ) (Lisān al-ʿArab and K. al-ʿAyn). A ḥadith clarifies what would have been considered acts of jazʿ during the times of the Imams: عدة من أصحابنا، عن سهل بن زياد، عن أحمد بن محمد بن أبي نصر، والحسن ابن علي جميعا، عن أبي جميلة، عن جابر، عن أبي جعفر (عليه السلام) قال: قلت له: ما الجزع؟ قال: أشد الجزع الصراخ بالويل والعويل ولطم الوجه والصدر وجز الشعر من النواصي ومن أقام النواحة فقد ترك الصبر وأخذ في غير طريقه ومن صبر واسترجع وحمد الله عز وجل فقد رضي بما صنع الله ووقع أجره على الله ومن لم يفعل ذلك جرى عليه القضاء وهو ذميم وأحبط الله تعالى أجره. علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن عمرو بن عثمان، عن أبي جميلة، عن جابر، عن أبي جعفر (عليه السلام) مثله A number of our companions (narrated) from Sahl b. Ziyād, from Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. Abī Naṣr and al-Ḥasan b. ʿAlī collectively, from Abī Jamīlah, from Jābir, from Abī Ja'far (Imām al-Bāqir (as)) saying: I said to him: "What is jazʿ?" He said: "The severest form of jazʿ is shrieking the voice in distress and the slapping of the face and the chest, and cutting the hair from the forelock. Whoever takes up being a mourner (nawāḥah) has abandoned patience and chosen a path other than it, and whoever has patience and recites the verse of rujūʿ (2:156) and praises God, then he is pleased with what God designs for him and gets his reward from God. Whoever does not do so will be proceeding upon destruction, he is reprehensible, and his reward will be thwarted by God." It has been narrated likewise from ʿAlī b. Ibrāhīm, from his father, from ʿAmr b. ʿUṯman, from Abī Jamīlah, from Jābir, from Abī Ja'far. Šayḵ al-Kulaynī, al-Kāfī (Tehran: 1968), v. 3, pp. 222-223 As the above tradition establishes, wailing and slapping the face and chest falls into this category of jazʿ, as a whole a stoic attitude is what is prescribed by the Imams during times of tragedy and misfortune, as the above says, however the following tradition establishes precedence for the exception of jazʿ being applied to Imām Ḥusayn (specifically in regards to slapping the chest): وذكر أحمد بن محمد بن داود القمي في نوادره قال: روى محمد بن عيسى عن أخيه جعفر بن عيسى عن خالد بن سدير أخي حنان بن سدير قال: سألت أبا عبد الله عليه السلام عن رجل شق ثوبه على أبيه أو على أمه أو على أخيه أو على قريب له فقال: لا بأس بشق الجيوب. قد شق موسى بن عمران على أخيه هارون، ولا يشق الوالد على ولده ولا زوج على امرأته، وتشق المرأة على زوجها وإذا شق زوج على امرأته أو والد على ولده فكفارته حنث يمين ولا صلاة لهما حتى يكفرا ويتوبا من ذلك، وإذا خدشت المرأة وجهها أو جزت شعرها أو نتفته ففي جز الشعر عتق رقبة أو صيام شهرين متتابعين أو اطعام ستين مسكينا، وفي الخدش إذا دميت وفي النتف كفارة حنث يمين، ولا شئ في اللطم على الخدود سوى الاستغفار والتوبة، وقد شققن الجيوب ولطمن الخدود الفاطميات على الحسين بن علي عليهما السلام، وعلى مثله تلطم الخدود وتشق الجيوب Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. Dāwud al-Qummī in his collection of rarities mentioned saying: Muḥammad b. ʿĪsā narrated to me from his brother, Jaʿfar b. ʿĪsā, from Ḵālid b. Sadīr, the brother of Ḥanan b. Sadīr, who said: I asked Abū ʿAbdillah (Imām al-Sādiq (as)) about a man who would tear his garment for his father, or mother, or brother, or any kinsman. He said: "There is no issue in tearing the collars, Moses son of Amram had torn (his collars) for his brother, Aaron. (However,) a father does not tear it for his son, nor a husband for his wife, rather a wife for her husband. If a husband does so for his wife or the father for his son, then he owes a Kaffārah of perjury, and there is no funeral prayer until the Kāffarah is given and he has repented for that. If a woman scratches her face or cuts or tears out her hair, in the case of cutting her hair, she is to free a slave, or fast two consecutive months, or feed sixty destitute people. And in the case of scratching her face causing bleeding and in the case of plucking is the Kaffārah of perjury. And there is nothing regarding laṭm (slapping) of the except repentance and penance. And the women of Fāṭimah tore their collars and slapped their cheeks for al-Ḥusayn b. ʿAlī, and for those like him you are to slap your cheeks and tear your collars. Šayḵ al-Ṭūsī, Tahḏīb al-Aḥkām (Qum: 1970), v. 8, pp. 325 Additionally traditions exist that when the people of Banī Hāšim and Jābir b. ʿAbdullah al-Anṣārī went to do ziyārah of the grave of Imām Ḥusayn, the women present were hitting themselves and remained in such a state of mourning for three days (Luhūf, pp. 112-113) and the ḥūr al-ʿayn of paradise slapped their chests and face for Imām Ḥusayn (Kāmil al-Ziyārāt, pp. 80). This famous tradition is also used to establish that beating the chest for Imām Ḥusayn is not objectionable: عن أبي عبد الله : «كلّ الجزع والبكاء مكروه، سوى الجزع والبكاء على الحسين » Imām al-Sādiq: "All jazʿ and crying is reprehensible except for the jazʿ and crying for al-Ḥusayn." This particular tradition has been narrated in a number of different books in various iterations. Furthermore it is narrated that Imām al-Bāqir when recounting the tragedy in his home encouraged the manifestation of jazʿ (ويقيم في داره المصيبة باظهار الجزع عليه). So jurisprudentially and linguistically, slapping of the chest when faced with difficulty is considered jazʿ, an unsettled and severe grief, this is generally discouraged as Islām promotes living in a stoic manner when faced with misfortunes, however an exception is made regarding Imām Ḥusayn (as) and if anything jazʿ is to be made manifest for him. It, therefore, stands to reason that the slapping of one's chest and face for Imām Ḥusayn is religiously permissible and valid, as is demonstrated by the hadiths. However, there is a further discussion to be had here, what these traditions intend we know as a phenomenon of slapping oneself having surrendered to one's emotions in a moment of passion, not in an organized and rhythmic manner to the meter of a poem being sung by a rādūd/nawha-ḵān, the former was also traditionally what women did, while the recitation of poetry in a rhythmic manner was masculine. The origins are shrouded in mystery, from what I've seen. Ali J. Hussain (a scholar of Islamic history whose PhD dissertation was on the historiography of Karbala) has suggested in "The Mourning of History and the History of Mourning" (Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. Duke University Press, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 78-88) on pg. 81 suggested that the niyāḥah/nawha-ḵānī (recitation of poetry) originated in some form with the tawwābun during their anti-Ummayyad revolt, however this was without the associated laṭm. Per him, the two likely strengthened each other and were eventually, at an unknown point, blended together. We know however that it was being practiced publicly by around 1820 or so. By the recollection of Muḥammad Mahdī al-Qazwīnī, writing around taṭbīr in 1927, these acts had only shown up in Iraq a century earlier. The first recorded instance of laṭm/matam done in the manner we think of seems to be around the same time, it was introduced to the city of Kāẓimayn by one Šayḵ Bāqir b. Šayḵ Asadullah al-Difzūlī al-Kāẓimī¹ (Ṭabaqah Aʿlām al-Shīʿah, v. 2, pg. 170). I haven't found a mention of this practice earlier than him, I would conjecture that the practice itself was imported from Iran as were other methods of mourning. That being said, as has been demonstrated this, this act isn't an innovation (it doesn't even make sense to talk about innovations in this context) and clearly had an earlier base to develop from. It would be interesting to see what further research regarding the history of this method of mourning for Imām Ḥusayn brings up. To conclude, I'll quote the tradition of Imām al-Sādiq: نفس المهموم لنا المغتم لظلمنا تسبيح وهمه لامرنا عبادة وكتمانه لسرنا جهاد في سبيل الله "The sigh of him he is preoccupied with us and is distressed by the oppression faced by us is glorification, and his concern for our affairs is worship, and his guarding our secret is jihād fī sabīl Allah." wa assalam ___________________________________ ¹I'm not mentioning this aside in order to increase his credibility but because I came across it while researching and I thought it was interesting. His father was, as it seems, a very important scholar in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, who, when he died, was eulogized with the following poem: قضى العالم القدسي والعلم الذي إليه المزايا تنتهي والمحامد قضى نور مشكاة العلوم فضعضعت لذلك أركان الهدى والقواعد إمام له في العالمين مناقب تقضي عليها الدهر وهي خوالد ومذ حلّ أقصى السوء قلت مؤرّخاً بكت أسد الله التقي المساجد He himself had studied under the eminent jurist, Šayḵ Murtaḍā al-Anṣārī.
  49. 1 point
    Most of these achievements done by their general commanders Khalid ibn Walid & Sa'ad ibn Abi Waqas ,the first one done his job in anti islamic way with mix of brutality & he was a war criminal & religiously Abubakr must killed him the second one had better reputation ,he was the was the person that fullfil all Umar's achievements but Umar betrayed him & historians written all of these in favor of Umar while Umar during Iran war was as Median in conclusion if even an unmature kid was in position of three caliphs he would achieve same achievements Khalid b. Walid In the Time of Abu Bakr Abu Bakr regretted sending Khalid to Buzakha. He decisively defeated Tulayha who claimed prophethood and suppressed his followers. After that regardless of the fact that Malik b. Nuwayra, his tribe and Banu Tamim converted to Islam, they were captured as slaves by Khalid. Then Khalid ordered to Kill Malik b. Nuwayra and some members of his tribe and he committed adultary with Malik's wife that night. This wicked action of Khalid which is ignored or justified by some historians had infuriated a number of Muslims including his cousin 'Umar b. Khattab. They asked Abu Bakr to punish him, but he declined and said "it was a mistake". Later when Khalid returned to Medina, Abu Bakr accepted his apology. Enmity toward 'Ali b. Abi Talib (a) According to numerous Shi'ite narrations, Khalid b. Walid secretly attended actions against Imam 'Ali (a) including the terror plot against him. He was severely condemned for his actions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_ibn_al-Walid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Chains Sa'd b. Abi Waqqas During the Caliphate of Imam 'Ali (a) In the public allegiance to Imam 'Ali (a), Sa'd was asked to pledge his allegiance to Imam 'Ali (a), but he said to Imam (a): "I will not pledge my allegiance to you before all people do so; I swear to God that I will not cause any troubles". And Imam 'Ali (a) let him go. In one of his sermons, Imam 'Ali (a) refers to some people who did not pledge their allegiance to him, and said: "I heard news from Ibn 'Umar, Sa'd b. Abi Waqqas, and Muhammad b. Maslama that I do not like, and God will adjudicate the affairs between me and them." It seems that whereas Imam 'Ali (a) was unhappy with those who disobeyed him, he did not coerce anyone to pledge their allegiance to him. http://en.wikishia.net/view/Khalid_b._al-Walid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sa`d_ibn_Abi_Waqqas
  • Create New...