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


Advanced Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Koshaan

  • Rank
    Level 2 Member

Previous Fields

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,394 profile views
  1. Assalam o aleikum I have heard/ read in various places that the seventh Imam a.s. had 19 or 21 daughters, not one of whom ever got married. a) Can anyone please provide me any authentic sources for this? b) If this is true, do we know why this was so? I mean, why did all these ladies stay unmarried?
  2. Sis notme, should one avoid all store bought cookies and baked products made in the West, that list vanilla as an ingredient? (I specified the bit about having been manufactured in Western countries, because at least in my country, they generally use synthetic vanilla flavoring).
  3. ^open, uninhibited (in a good way) lady. Just helped set my gender straight. Starlight, I was equally confused by Batman's comment, albeit for a different reason:p
  4. Notme, you talking about Meccano by any chance? N awesome thread, baradar_jackson (and contributors)!
  5. ^Smart, sensitive guy, with humoungous amounts of willpower
  6. Hi. I did not post in your first thread, but wish you guys the best in the future. Regarding this issue, this is just guessing, but some Muslims can be rather uptight about inter-faith marriage. Or, since he sounds rather nice, plus they're also Muslim, perhaps they (or one of them) were also interested in him as a prospective spouse? I just realised that I've written almost the same things Ruq. Rather than delete my post and save you the trouble of reading the same stuff twice, I'll let it stay as testimony to the fact that I sometimes think like someone who is possibly my favourite person on this board. Sorry if I sound flippant; I realise this is important to you. Unless these girls do something outright mean, perhaps it would be best to just ignore them? What do you think?
  7. Thank you everyone who took the time to respond. Hayder M, I think Rashida has pretty much said what I would have in answer. Nocturne, depends on what you mean by 'taking slaves' in your last line. If it is owning them, the fact that the Masoomeen did is enough for me to believe that it is allowed even today. Tendersoul, that's a sweet story. Please share any sources about its authenticity; I'm really hoping there are some valid ones. Ruq, I love the interpretation that you've shared, and want to believe it. But what of the numerous accounts from traditional jurisprudence that indicate otherwise? This thread http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/234972802-sex-with-slaves/page-1has quite a few, especially in the exchange between Brothers Hannibal and fyst. Honesly speaking, there's quite a bit there, that had I come across in my weaker times, would've made me want to apostate, audhubillah. Haydar Husayn, are you sure that the only permissible way of taking slaves is in a just war waged by a masoom? If so, how did the later imams procure theirs? Unless you consider purchasing them a separate clause, and were referring only to slavery via war (and not all possible avenues) in your statement. Out of interest, do you also then think that punishments of Hudood may also be carried out only under an infallible's rule? Excuse me if I'm merging unrelated topics btw. Also, despite trying to get over my horror at the idea of the ownership of one human by another, and especially at the lack of necessity of a female bondswoman's consent if her master desires sex, I can't help asking one more question. Suppose the ISIS decide to go on a rampage in a Shia area, and start enslaving the women, even those victims who agree with the traditional/ popular understanding of slavery in Islam would rebel, not just because of their modern mindsets, but also because they would not believe their captors to have any rights over them. How then can we expect any non-Muslim POWs in a just (by our standards, ie led by the Imam himself; that's the only possible scenario, isn't it?) to submit in today's age? Of course, I'm assuming here that he would allow the practice in the war that will come at the end; perhaps he wouldn't after all, what with keeping in consideration modern sensibilities and all? I do realise I'm imagining what he would or would not do without any basis...
  8. I'd been trying to find this post for a while, and after suddenly figuring out how to today, I feel like an absolute duH-nce. Anyway, the reason I'd wanted to locate it because i hadnt replied to your input, Sister notme. Thank you for your kind and sensible response :)
  9. http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/middleeast/isis-enshrines-a-theology-of-rape.html?referrer= For all the members who believe that slavery is allowed in Islam, as is non-consensual sex with female slaves, is what ISIS is doing to the Yazidi women really wrong? Other than the fact that Shias don't consider them Muslims, of course... But if they were actual, practising Muslims, wouldnt their actions be justifiable? They've actually issued a manifesto about treatment of slavewomen, and from some bits i got to read online, it sounded horribly similar to what I've seen here on SC. This is not random sarcasm leveled at some folks, but an attempt to understand the whole slavery issue.
  10. Thanks, Batman. Yep, I'm aware of Sayyad Khui's stance, but the precaution eases restrictions for his muqallid ladies. Once again, folks, have there been any marji that have allowed women to keep their feet uncovered in front of namehrams?
  11. Aoa. First, the question I've already asked- do any marji, past or contemporary, allow women to expose their feet before namehrams? I've been told that Ayatullah Saanei does- does anyone know for sure? Also, in a long-ago thread about the hijab of feet, Macisaac stated that there have been three main positions among jurists about the extent of hijab vaajib on women: 1. It is obligatory to cover everything, including the face and hands 2. Obligatory to cover everything, save the face and hands 3. Obligatory to cover everything, except the face, hands and feet AFAIK, modern-day marji pretty much fall under #2. Does anyone have any examples of #1 and 3 I would appreciate any authenticated replies. Most importantly though, my first question, ie, about the permissibility of showing (unadorned) feet according to any marja, alive or deceased. This is rather urgent for me. Thank you
  12. Yoel, that's really interesting. I mean, we believe that Judaism and Islam have the same roots, but reminders through examples like these can be fascinating, nonetheless.
  13. I can't access YouTube here, but that's a great idea you're putting to practice, masha'Allah.
  14. The multiquote option is not working for me right now, so please bear with my random shots here. To the persons talking about ptotecting men from sin, why is the onus upon women? Just like it's unfair to bar non-fasting people from being able to purchase food or drink in Ramadan (though folks might challenge this too), it seems strange logic to force hijab on women. Is the abstainer's iman so weak as to be shaken by displays of food, or uncovered hair, for that matter? As for the question about what believers would do when Imam e Zamaan comes and enforces hijab, well- this is a geunine question- would he? From what I've read, neither the Prophet, nor the first Imam did so in their eras of governance- please correct me if I'm wrong. I have to admit though, that what baradar_jackson (I hope I got that right) said makes logical sense. Almost every place has a dress code that its residents are expected to abide by. And yes, I've heard the reasoning that it's an Islamic state, as per the locals' wish expressed in that referendum after the Revolution, so the Islamic dress being enforced is not wrong. What I don't get is the leap of logic in between. Like I asked before, how do we know that an Islamic government may enforce the Islamic code of dress? To call it a country's cultural/ national requirement is understandable; I'm not so sure about the religious aspect.
  • Create New...