Leaderboard

Salam! Matam itself is a symbol and an expression of grief & protest as well. It started with beating head, chest & cheeks and then taken different forms afterwards. From a fiqhi point of view, our scholars have difference of opinion only on its extreme forms which are zajeerzani or qamazani (tatbir). It should be noted that in our fiqh, scholars are unanimously declare suicide as haram act and any form of matam which causes damage to the great message & cause of the sacrifice of Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) in Karbala is also declared as haram. We have authentic ahadith in our books which says: محمد بن الحسن الطوسي في الأمالي عن أبيه، عن المفيد، عن ابن قولويه، عن أبيه، عن سعد، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن الحسن بن محبوب، عن أبي محمد الأنصاري، عن معاوية بن وهب، عن أبي عبد الله (ع) في حديث قال: كل الجزع والبكاء مكروه إلا الجزع والبكاء لقتل الحسين (ع). http://shiaonlinelibrary.com/الكتب/1420_الفصول-المهمة-في-أصول-الأئمة-الحر-العاملي-ج-٣/الصفحة_411 The difference of opinion among our scholars originates from their understanding of word الجزع which can mean extreme expression of grief. This word الجزع also appeared in another hadith: وعن محمد بن عبد الله بن جعفر الحميري، عن أبيه، عن علي بن محمد بن سالم، عن محمد بن خالد، عن عبد الله بن حماد، عن الأصم، عن مسمع بن عبد الملك قال: قال لي أبو عبد الله عليه السلام (في حديث:) أما تذكر ما صنع به يعني بالحسين عليه السلام قلت: بلى، قال: أتجزع؟ قلت: أي والله، وأستعبر بذلك حتى يرى أهلي أثر ذلك علي، فامتنع من الطعام حتى يستبين ذلك في وجهي، فقال: رحم الله دمعتك أما إنك من الذين يعدون من أهل الجزع لنا، والذين يفرحون لفرحنا، ويحزنون لحزننا، أما إنك سترى عند موتك حضور آبائي لك، ووصيتهم ملك الموت بك وما يلقونك به من البشارة أفضل، ولملك الموت ارق عليك وأشد رحمة لك من الام الشفيقة على ولدها (إلى أن قال:) ما بكى أحد رحمة لنا ولما لقينا إلا رحمه الله قبل أن تخرج الدمعة من عينه، فإذا سال دموعه على خده، فلو أن قطرة من دموعه سقطت في جهنم لأطفت حرها حتى لا يوجد لها حر، وذكر حديثا طويلا يتضمن ثوابا جزيلا، يقول فيه: وما من عين بكت لنا إلا نعمت بالنظر إلى الكوثر، وسقيت منه مع من أحبنا. http://www.shiaonlinelibrary.com/الكتب/1226_وسائل-الشيعة-الإسلامية-الحر-العاملي-ج-١٠/الصفحة_397#top In the above hadith, you can see the answer to question أتجزع؟, the answer mentions the expression of الجزع to the extent that his family see its أثار on his face: حتى يرى أهلي أثر ذلك علي، فامتنع من الطعام حتى يستبين ذلك في وجهي، And الجزع is not limited to crying, it also includes something else as well i.e., abstaining from food to the extent that its effects starts appearing on the face. Even if someone cry, the effects of his crying should appears to his face to the extent that other can see him crying. So I can understand why there is a difference of opinion about it in our scholars. Best for you is to either do the research yourself and adopt the way which looks correct to you or you can follow the instructions of your Marja'a e Taqlid. Remember that matam (of any sort) is not obligatory on every shia. What our scholars tells us is only that whether that specific form of matam is allowed or not. Like Ayatullah Bashir Najafi a.r allows both tatbir & zanjirzani but many of his followers do not practice these form of matam. I hope this response would suffice. Wassalam!!

I heard that kids who are raised by stay-at-home mothers develop better than ones who work. I know that life is expensive and some women really are forced to work. Most if not all would prefer to stay at home but that's not an option for a lot of mothers. It seems like in your case it is a (difficult) option. Yes life will be trickier, but think of it this way: Your wife's salary is a cheap price to pay for better developed kids. Just imagine you are taking that money and spending it on better kids. I don't know how to put it, but it seems like the people I know who had stay-at-home moms have more of a...soul. Of course it's not the case for everyone I know, but it's not a risk I'm willing to take.

Salaam, If the reduction in salary means adjusting your lifestyle slightly rather than financial hardship, then I would recommend a reduction in hours to spend more time with your child during the formative years. The investment you make in your child today will reap rewards for you and the child in the future. You dont want to be in a situation several years from now wishing you/spouse had spent more time on and with your child. Allah is the best of Providers. [Quran 11:6] And there is no animal in the earth but on Allah is the sustenance of it, and He knows its resting place and its depository all (things) are in a manifest book.

Salam bar Muaharram (Greetings to Muh[a]rram ) سلام بر محرم - محمود کریمی https://www.aparat.com/v/zt8S1/سلام_بر_محرم_-_محمود_کریمی سلام بر محرم - محمود کریمی | مترجمة للعربية - YouTube (English, Urdu, Arabic translation and Farsi Subtitle) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ncrn32f3-tM

Very true, we have quit going to Arab owned restaurants in the area for precisely this reason. To each their own, but once you leave the Kawthar of Wilaya, system of the Lord throws you at the sewage of the house of Shaitan, where they eat and drink the najis with full satisfaction of heart and mind. This is a Saudi minted Fatwa where the Ayat immediately before and after of the Ayat of Ghadeer (yes the completion of the Deen ayat) that they use for justification of eating Haram. The flaw in their crooked reason is they look at their definition of “food” as opposed to Allah’s definition of food. Non zabiha isn’t only Haram to eat, it’s also najis to touch.

Anyone have the full version? @Ashvazdanghe https://youtu.be/YkVFafJhXSY

I think Abu Mikhnafs is commonly considered as one of the more reliable collections, especially keeping it mind that it is among the earliest ones.

I know a guy who makes 300k and single. I know another guy who's still student and lives month to month but married. It has more to do with committment, Akhlaq, and responsibility than money.

Bismillah Ar Rahman Ar Rahim As you all know from Islamic History, when the persecution in Mecca became too intense, the Holy Prophet went to Medina with a group of muslims to establish a 'homeland' for Islam and muslims that was physically separate from the kuffar. I have been thinking about this for a while now and would genuinely like input / thoughts from others. While we, as Muslims living in the West are not being physically attacked by the kuffar (at least this is not common at this time), our Islamic values are constantly under attack, being threatened, our children are being forced to learn things that are not part of our value system, we are being forced thru various ways to accept values that are against Islam or face serious threats, etc. This is leading to a general state of confusion amoung our youth and a general sense of dread amoung our older people. So here is the question. Is it time to physically separate ourselves, as Muslims living in the West. Is it time to establish our own communities that are physically separate ? Or is this a bad idea / not necessary. I am not sure and I go back and forth about this. At least in the US, there are many religious communities that have physically separated themselves in this way; The Amish, The Mormons, etc. It is lawful to do this in the US and it can be done, logistically. I have read the fatwa of marjaa on this and they all basically say the same thing. If you can keep your religion in all it's aspects, then you are allowed to live in a Western Country. At the same time, if you cannot stay away from haram, are forced to do haram in order to survive, or cannot keep the religion of your kids and your family safe in this way then you are obligated to move to a muslim country or any place where you can do this. I think for many of us, it is becoming more and more difficult and in some cases impossible to do this, with haram readily available on every corner and all the haram that is being continuously normalized in Western society and new forms of haram being legalized all the time. So is it time and do we need to start thinking about doing this, i.e. establishing a conceptual / ideological / legal / logistic / financial strategy for doing this ? BTW, I will be monitoring this topic. Any OT or trolling posts will be deleted / hidden. Also, before some people say 'Oh, well we have places like Dearborn...', let me just say that is not what I am talking about. Dearborn has all the issues that any other Muslim community living in the US has, all the issues I talked about. The only difference is that there are more Muslims and more Shia in one physical location vs other places in the US. Other than that, there is no difference between Dearborn and any other Muslim community in a Western Country. Just as a example of this there is a 'gentleman's club' (i.e. strip club) within spitting distance from the largest mosque in Dearborn. This mosque also has a school where little kids have to walk past this 'club' on their way to school. If the Muslims / Mumin actually controlled anything in Dearborn, at least they would have been able to solve this issue. This issue has been going on for more than 20 years and still not solved. Also, before people start saying, 'Oh lets just buy a piece of land and start building...'. this is step 20, lol. There are alot of other steps that need to be done before this. This is why I called this thread 'Concepts and Framework'. Step 1 is deciding if it is even necessary, desirable, and possible. I believe it is possible, btw, but would like to hear other thoughts.

Salaam all, So my wife has been working full time since marriage for the last 3 years and even after having our first child. For 2 days in the week (Mon & Tues) my nan usually comes & looks after our daughter whilst my wife is at the office. Wed - Friday she works from home so there's flexibility around that, but we haven't put our daughter in nursery or anything just yet. My wife has been thinking for some time to reduce her hours & go part-time in order to give more attention to our daughter which of course is important. She was thinking to perhaps take some gap from work or go part-time eventually (not 100% confirmed yet). My nan does come every week to look after our daughter, but she's also been having aches & pains, so not sure how long we can rely on her for. I know that my wife sometimes struggles to work especially from home on Wed - Fri given that our daughter is at home and not going to any nursery. In a recent seminar at the mosque which my wife attended, the speaker was talking about child up-bringing and said not to send children to nursery so young and to wait till they are like 3 years+ as they need the first years of their life with the Mother (Which again I totally get). But with my wife going part time, it of course will mean a reduction in salary & our overall combined household income. Is this something I should worry about or focus on alot? Or just leave it to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)? Of course, the upbringing of children is very important especially in western societies where they are being fed all sorts of nonsense in schools etc. I don't want to force my wife into working but a reduction in salary will mean we will have to budget a bit more accurately & spend carefully. What are your guy's thoughts? Should I encourage her to continue working with the current setup (where my nan comes and looks after our child for 2 days) or leave it to her to decide what is best?

Thanks. To be fair to Sunnis, the description of the book on Amazon does say (my emphasis): https://www.amazon.co.uk/Opposing-Imam-Literature-Cambridge-Civilization-ebook/dp/B092R2NS1F/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

I've actually spent some time in this area of New York. It's near the famous area of Coney Island. There is no physical separation between this area and the rest of the city. It's just that people who are not Orthodox Jews don't usually live / buy houses in that area because they don't feel comfortable there. The area is called Williamsburg. It's in Brooklyn one of the five boroughs of New York City. Brooklyn has a lot of Jewish people but non Orthodox. Most of the Orthodox live in Williamsburg

As a side note, i recently read a book by a christian Psychiatrist called 'homosexuality and the politics of truth' it was really good. i feel like not enough shia clerics talk about the root cause of homosexuality and how treatable it is. all they say is "just don't act on it"

Salam Alaikum, Recently, I came across this narration from Imam Sadiq (as): Imam Sadiq was asked by one of his students– why are you ma’soom? He answered, you are also infallible in terms of certain sins – you just need to expand it. As an example, he offered the student a red hot charcoal to eat. The student refused and said you are offering me the hot charcoal and have the meat to yourself? I can’t; it is hot there is no way I can do it. In that regard the Imam demonstrated the “infallibility” of the student by not accepting the hot charcoal. Likewise, the Imam refuses sins. Likewise, throughout our childhood we were conditioned to hate certain things for example eating pork or drinking alcoholic beverages to such an extent that just mentioning those things we become disgusted. How exactly were we conditioned this way? Is it more of a type of classical conditioning where it was repeatedly mentioned that now we just associate pork and the like with haram immediately and its disgusting nature. If this is the case, do we need to expand the sins we avoid like Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام) is saying by learning to associate lets say lying with something disgusting or anything really that is haram with something disgusting. I have read that to avoid sins is having knowledge of its reality for example, backbiting is eating the dead flesh of your brother, so in this case, immediately when we think of backbiting we can think of eating dead flesh and we condition ourselves this way. How do we get to know the reality behind the sins? If we can be conditioned to hate eating pork from a young age in such a manner, how come so much other bad traits are left out when it comes to conditioning children against haram? We see many people hate the idea of eating pork but indulge in other sins regularly and have many bad traits. With Duas and Salams.

Salam it has been discussed partially in following thread about a successful example of making a Shia community in a western country as Le Moulinet Shia Muslim Converts In France which although a good exmaple but on the other hand the Le Moulinet community suffers from some problems likewise isolation from urban life due to being too far away from any city & transport problems which it still has not a proper road for traveling due to not supporting manupolicity 7 rest of related offices french governmnet from making a proper road to any nearby city which the community has had to make a local bumpy-dusty road based on financial resources of it's members also in similar fashion they only can give basic remote education to children in their society which after growing up children in their community so then they will have problem for receiving higher education although one of grown up children has attentded in Hawza of Qom by supprt of other members to study in Hawza of Qom. https://www.unifier.one/en/blogs/spirituality-blog/the-story-of-the-french-shia-mosque-le-moulinet/ http://sibtayn.com/en/index.php?option=com_hwdmediashare&view=mediaitem&id=412:en-shia-conversion-documentary-moulinet-france-mp4&Itemid=2129&category_id=921 https://www.al-islam.org/media/le-moulinet-french-revert-community

Salam, if anybody has bought a hard copy of the above from Tawheed Australia, could you kindly share the Foreword (only)? You can try to PM me first. I need it for my write-up. Thank you

Listen akhi. I’m not dismissing the idea that there are texts that have something negative to say about a man touching the hands of a strange woman. I’m sure they’re there, and that the idea of not shaking hands came from somewhere. No problem. Now, precisely what kind of hand touches those texts are talking about, the cultural context in which this happened and what these hand touches meant in that context, and how that relates to what a handshake is today in different circumstances, that’s many other questions. But I don’t dismiss that the texts exist. What I dismiss is the idea that anyone is going to Hell solely for a handshake and nothing else. Far be it from Him that He would do such a thing. This is not what we know of Him.

Allahumma salli ala muhammadiw wa ali muhammadin wa ajjil faraja hum Rabbinee lima anzalta ilayya min khayrin faqir Allahumma innee urreedu an atazawwaja faqaddir lee minan nisaa-I a’fihunna farjajan wa ah’fadh’ihunna lee fee nafsihaa wa awsa-i-hunna lee rizwan wa a-dhamahunna lee barakatan fee nafsihaa wa maaleee faqaddir lee minhaa waladan tayyiban tajaluhoo khalafan saalihan fee hayaatee wa ba`da mawtee. Oh Allah! I desire to marry, so arrange for me a woman from those who willingly abstain from what is unlawful and who safeguards her soul for my sake and because of her, not only my means of sustenance will increase, but also make there be in it abundance and also make it sure that she will give me a virtuous son, who will be a noble successor in my life and after my death. Ya Rabb, help me in finding a good wife in the same boat as me, who also understands and accepts me as I am. May she find peace and be filled with joy wherever she goes. May she have the strength and courage to find me, love me and live with me. May she find and be filled with much wisdom and clarity in her words and from her experiences. May she in her kindness, share these experiences with me and help us grow together. Verily with hardship comes ease. (إِنَّ مَعَ الْعُسْرِ يُسْرًا - 94:6) Ya Rabb, You alone know what is truly in my heart. You alone know my struggles and pain, Al-Wadud. I feel unbearably lonely and do not wish to incur Your displeasure by remaining unmarried, Al-'Aziz!

The claim that a good God would only create perfection from the buddhists,lays flat on it's head because,a unconditioned reality can only create something conditioned upon the unconditioned reality,and thus less perfection.it's actually the gradation of good among concrete things that prove they have their source in something absolutely good. a conditioned thing by nature,has privation.Even the buddhists say this,so what are they arguing?

https://www.al-islam.org/ask/topics/1799/questions-about-Muharram

The common Jews do not Believe Jesus is the messiah,but the top Rabbis of the kabbalah all do. But there's a twist,he is the messiah for the Gentiles,Esau etc sent to fool them into worshipping Jehovah and advocating secretely for them. Scholar christopher jon bjerknes has spent his entire life on this issue,that Top Rabbis of orthodox judaism have always believed in Jesus as the messiah,but that he is a type of war-like messiah saving gentiles thru war or deception of war.This is nothing like the Muslim view on christ that sees Christ as honest and noble and a person that will end the Dajjal's rule,not enhance it.

Try living those values. As long as there is no dichotomy between what parents can do and what kids are allowed to do, I believe you have done your part. In our household, we have shown them struggle in the way of Allah, taken them to political causes, exposed them to multi ethnic shia communities, have given them stage and mic to literally say their part in Muharram and other events, have shown them how to take initiative, have kept Jamaat salat at home, Maghrib and Esha is almost always in jamaat and in between we always have a discussion, and we have made them never wear a white collar when it comes to the Aza of Imam Hussain AS, so much so that they are totally at ease sitting on the bare dust for a majlis of Imam Hussain AS. We are not perfect either, we have Netflix with parent passwords, kids have kids only account, we do listen music occasionally in car, we watch ethnic sitcoms, not Hollywood or Bollywood mostly due to a customary F word or Haram kissing, but we also don’t leave a quality movie pass by. And we tell them almost every week that it’s in their hands to follow their Deen and we just can’t be a security camera on their heads. As our first one is heading to college after Summers InshAllah, we have plainly told them we have equipped you with everything, and now it’s your time to practice what you have learned in home and Sunday schools etc. We have turned off all restrictions from the cellphone, and are putting in weekly pocket money in the checking account.. Honestly we are secretly scared and would continue doing Amr bil Maroof from a distance but we have to let go, although our weapon of Dua’ is in really high gear lately for their choice of friendships, marriage, and education/career etc...

I think you did the right thing. You let them know that you're open to marriage at young age, so it's their responsibility to take it serious. You probably can talk to them sometimes from time to time and remind them of the importance of the early marriage, but at the end of day it's their own responsibility to make the move.

For practical reasons, I feel this is an impossibility. I will list those reasons in a post separately maybe after Ashura, inshallah, because the thoughts are all muddled in my mind right now. And a very big reason is the state of the Shi'a communities itself. Rather, those in the West should focus on moving back to the Muslim lands themselves, with the financial and human capital, and try to develop them.

The leadership is the most critical part of it. I would say step 2, once we have established that it is desirable / necessary, is to come up with a leadership structure that can be agreed upon. There also should be a heavy Shura aspect to this, since none of us are masoom. This is specifically designed to avoid those examples you talked about (Jones, Koresh, etc) which would be the nightmare scenario and would actually set the Ummah in the US backward instead of forward. In Islam, at least amoung followers of Ahl Al Bayt((عليه السلام)), we already have a non Masoom leadership structure, i.e. the Marjaa'. So any aspects of this where mumin/a disagree could always be referred to the marjaa'. Of course, for our Sunni brothers and sister who also wanted to participate / benefit from this, that might be a problem, but we would need to work that out. I would say it would be critical / necessary to get participation from our Sunni brothers and sisters, otherwise I don't think it would work. It would just be seen as another extremist / fringe community by the wider society which would put the community in a vulnerable position. That's step 2.

I think you’re doing what you can do. Don’t know how old yours are, but it seems like the younger generation, the ones who are in their teens now, seem content to take their time on the advancing into adulthood. There are all these stats that the GenZ-ers get driver’s licenses, smoke, drink, take drugs, have sex less than/later than the previous generations did. I don’t know. Ultimately we don’t own our kids. And at a certain age we kind of have to accept they are functionally adults and need to take responsibility for their own choices. Ultimately we can just offer our help and try to not be part of the problem.

That's ridiculous. How do you think a scholar is going to answer it? It's not like a marriage contract lists out all the rights each party has. There's just a basic list of details, name, dowry, right of divorce etc. All the other rights we just know from Islamic Law (which doesn't allow the kind of contract you think it does) How do you think they are going to come up with the inheritance rules for a man and another man? The initial basis is haram so why would they even start pondering on anything further. In my opinion it would be a huge waste of a scholars time to ask this question when even a layman knows quite clearly that it is forbidden. This isn't some genius idea you've come up with. It's a satanic idea.

If you are genuinely interested in a historical analysis of how the nasibi narrative was formed, the best book to refer to is 'Opposing the Imam' by Nebil Husayn.

I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone try to present handshaking as itself a damnable sin. It’s generally presented as a precautionary guardrail to prevent the approach to serious wrongdoing. This kind of loose speculation is a problem, because it makes God look like a monster and can drive people away from the religion.

I recall that Ali Khamenai took a good deal of criticism when he came out with this opinion. But I think it’s largely well reasoned. (I think someone’s head just exploded reading this, hehe) This is a good fatwa. The other views that frown on artificial insemination seem to depend on either a reflexive precaution reaction, or invoking precedents of dubious relevance. For example, I’ve heard restrictions on non-mahram physical contact being invoked for this issue, when that’s clearly not what is going on. My only partial criticism is that while it was bold in terms of the core of the ruling about permissibility of artificial insemination, it’s not quite bold enough in dealing with the side issues. Namely the impact on mahram relations and who is considered to have a parental relationship to the child. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The marjaiyyah need to creatively reevaluate the lesson of the precedent of milk mothers. I think to date it’s been too literal and reductionist, focusing on the mechanics of the milk feeding specifically. As opposed to inferring a more comprehensive principle. Namely: acts of parenting over a period of time establish sharii relationships of parenthood. This could be applied to the husband of the wife who gets the artificial insemination treatment in relation to the child. It could be applied to the case of both guardians in the case of adoption in relation to the child. The child should be told the truth (when they are old enough) of their biological roots. And somewhere the biological parenthood should be kept track of for public health purposes and in case the child wants to find their roots later on. But it’s really time for our scholars to acknowledge the reality that parenthood doesn’t have to be biological to be legit.

No, but there were times that I accepted the offered handshake. I couldn't afford to lose my job. I did my best to politely avoid handshakes, and I told my project managers so they helped too, but I wouldn't risk offending a client or plan reviewer. If a person made a point of offering me a handshake, I wouldn't leave them hanging. I'm far from perfect. I'm human like everyone, and I had to feed my family. May Allah forgive my errors.

Firstly, there is a difference between God's will and a jurisprudential ruling based on God's law. Sometimes, it could be God's will that someone does a certain sin because that same person will be driven to a true, genuine repentance. (In the Islamic worldview, the sin that one genuinely repents for is superior to the good deed for which one becomes conceited). So there is a difference between the "will of [G]od" as you mentioned, and a particular shar'i law decreed by God. God's will is not necessarily that every law is followed by every individual; we all know that if God wills something, it happens. However, God does not will this because it conflicts with the free will of His creation. And the whole premise of your post is faulty to begin with. If someone actually believes in the God of the Qur'an, then of course they will accept being viewed as an "inconsiderate jerk" over disobeying the laws of God. This much is pretty obvious. For someone who does not believe in God, or who has an inadequate belief in God, this may seem absurd or something worthy of mockery. But for a true believe this is not at all the case. It's a simple logical chain: 1) God is free of all faults, 2) people have faults, 3) if what people say conflicts with what God says, do not listen to people. The only way this doesn't make sense is if you dispute the premise #1. If one accepts this premise, the other two points follow this premise logically. Re: the hand shake issue in general @zainabamy To understand such an issue we need to look at it on a very basic, elemental level. There are certain principles which no rational person would ever dispute: ideals such as freedom, justice, as well as modesty and other good characteristics. People all gravitate towards these characteristics and consider them appealing, either consciously or unconsciously. This is an issue related to modesty so let's talk about modesty. Nobody will dispute the virtue of modesty. Even the promiscuous person, respects the modest person and does not respect the immodest person. This is a universal principle. However, the definition of modesty differs from culture to culture. For example: is showing hair modesty or immodest? Apparently, in most cultures, it is not immodest. Many cultures -- such as ancient Greece, pre-Islamic Iran, ancient China, etc. -- applied such principles but only to noblewomen and not on the mass level. But you and I and most Muslims consider it immodest in the general sense. We may not look down on women who do not cover their hair or think ill of them, but nonetheless we consider covering the hair to be obligatory. This is where we draw the line between permissible and impermissible. No matter what we are talking about, there has to be some delineation. There has to be some threshold; some point where on one side of it is haraam and the other side, halal. Every society, every culture, every nation, even every individual, has their own personal moral gauge. Are all of them correct? Either there is no truth or there is just one truth. And if there is just one truth, whose truth is the one truth? At the end of the day, this is the question you should ask yourself. In Islamic fiqh, shaking hands with a non mahram is haraam. But in some cultures this is a normal way of greeting. Which one of these views is correct? Shaking hands is not necessarily a great sin. It is probably a fairly minor sin. However, one of the thresholds, one of the delineations -- according to Islam -- with regard to the interaction between males and females, is this issue of physical contact. Not just "intimate" physical contact like hugs; any contact between man and woman. This is the threshold as defined in our fiqh. The root of this is the Quran which says (as another member mentioned) not simply "do not commit zina" but rather: do not even go near zina. This is why we have a lot of rules which may not make sense to others because they do not really have the same outlook towards zina as we do. Maybe they see zina as a sort of premeditated, planned out project. We see it as something which can happen -- and probably will happen -- to almost anybody, given the circumstances. So we have certain rules to protect us from ever having to face such circumstances. And God knows best.

I don't think a professional handshake would be disturbing, but that's me. In some places, it's usual for men to kiss upon greeting...fine for them, but most American guys would not appreciate that... so a little understanding is always called for in inter-cultural or inter-religious situations.

It's probably not going to kill some Westerners to learn other ways of affirmation that don't require touching. Not all cultures traditionally greet or agree by touching.

It is haram, and strange men and women are not allowed to touch each other skin-to-skin. Sistani says it's okay for the opposite genders to shake hands if one of them is wearing a glove for example.

Salaam everyone, I am wondering if anyone can shed light on an issue that I've seen become more prevalent in the American Sunni community in recent years. I've seen that a good portion of their community thinks that it's permissble to eat non-zabihah meat. I'm talking about fully practicing Muslims who pray 5x a day, wear hijabs etc... There seems to be this idea that you can eat non-zabihah poultry (they seem to avoid red meat?) in the West. They will go to Chik-fil-A and other chains like that without any issue. I've even heard that some of them have been told to simply say "Bismillah" over the food and that makes it halal for them. Again, I'm not talking about non-practicing Muslims, I'm talking about practicing Muslims that believe that it is permissible. So my question is, is there some ruling from a Mufti or Alim in the Sunni world that declared non-zabihah poultry in the West to be permissible? I don't have any stats to back this up, but anecdotally, this seems to be more prevalent of a practice in the Arab Sunni community than the South Asian Sunni community in the U.S. (perhaps there is some scholar or legal school that they tend to follow more strongly that has this view?). Can anyone help shed light on the origin of this practice? Note: I am specifically talking about the Sunni community, because as far as I know, there is no Marja in the Shia world that considers non-zabihah meat to be permissible. JAK