baqar

Well, there are SAHIH hadiths from our 12th imam that say it is wajib.... For someone who does his own taqlid you should be aware of all hadith collections :dry: Reason dictates if you can never reach the level of having your own ijtihad, then you must do precautionary with EVERYTHING, or follow a marja. I will guarantee you have no credibility on any scholarship factor nor do you have the capacity to know everything. First of all you live in the west, thus you have a job and school prob, so your time per day shortens by 12 hours at the very least. How are you going to tell me, you know or have derived all rulings in such a time, plus the amount of years to your age. THERE IS NO WAY. Stop fooling yourself and committing bid'ha. You have no authority to be making such conclusions. With due respect, your knowledge compared to Sistani's is not even a piece of his hair. He has spent his life studying islam.
 
No one "imitates" marjas buddy. The marja is just the means to derive our rulings, in the most correct and proper way.  Thanks for the hadith, I dont think muslims worship our scholars or marjas o_O. Nothing you have brought proves or disproves anything. I dont need to bring anything, its common sense. Those of us who follow marjas understand that by them issuing fatwas, they are held responsible not us, if it was wrong. If you are going to go all your life making up what is sunnah and playing the guess game, then be sure, Allah WONT forgive you for acting so ignorant. Thus your actions are void. For those who do not want to follow a marja, then there is only one way, that is do everything precautionary, meaning if you are not sure, dont do it. Your life will become 9999x hard.
 
"Allah will not accept deeds that were preformed without comprehension" - Imam Sadiq A.S (KAfi V1 pg35 tehran)
 
"If you do not know then ask the learned ones (Ahluz Zikr)" Quran 16:43
 
Please check this out, for all those who are opposed to Taqlid or want proof for it. Its  called Taqlid and Ijtihad by Ayatollah Syed Ibn-e-Hasan Najafi:
 
Please start from the beginning but if you are looking for hadiths that prove taqlid check pg: 25 and go down :)
 
http://www.ziyaraat.net/books/TaqleedAurIjtehadEnglish.pdf
 
(wasalam)

De rien, Mon ami!

He is an atheist.
 
Therefore, before finding fault with Islam or another religion,  he needs to prove that God does not exist.
 
The question of Islam being a right religion or a wrong religion comes later.
 
Let him proceed step by step.

What would you suggest, non-Western Muslim girls living in the West do then?
Or you think they are not compatible to get married to a non-Western man who are usually lower in social status than themselves?
I agree that non-Western Muslim women living in the West need too long to get married, also due to social and cultural reasons. They are usually better educated and earn more money than their male counterparts, hence no urge to get married...
But they need a solution as well to get married, don't you think so?
The West has put things upside-down for Muslim society. And Muslims need to adapt new methods to survive there.
The situation is somehow similar in Iran, with similar number of unmarried women who want to explore the (Western) world!

Bismillah.
 
Salaamun Alaykum.
 
It seems to me that this would be appropriate to quote some Ahādīth in this regard:
 
The Prophet of Islam (p) said:
 
"عَنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ص أَنَّهُ نَهَى عَنْ مُحَادَثَةِ النِّسَاءِ يَعْنِي غَيْرِ ذَوَاتِ الْمَحَارِمِ وَ قَالَ لَا يَخْلُوَنَّ رَجُلٌ بِامْرَأَةٍ فَمَا مِنْ رَجُلٍ خَلَا بِامْرَأَةٍ إِلَّا كَانَ الشَّيْطَانُ ثَالِثَهُمَا"
 
“It’s been narrated from the Prophet of Islam (p) which he prohibited of talking with women i.e. non-relatives and he said: a man must not to be alone with a woman, for, there no man alone with a woman except the third one is Satan”
 
(Da‘ā’im al-Islam, vol.2, p.214)
 
Imam al-Sadiq (p) said:
"حَدِيثُ النِّسَاءِ مِنْ مَصَائِدِ الشَّيْطَانِ‌"
 
“Chatting with (non-relative) women is one of the Satan’s hunting ground”
(Da‘ā’im al-Islam, vol.2, p.214)
 
And he (p) said:
"فَإِنَّ الرَّجُلَ وَ الْمَرْأَةَ إِذَا خُلِّيَا فِي بَيْتٍ كَانَ ثَالِثُهُمَا الشَّيْطَانَ‌"
 
“Verily when a man is alone with a woman in a house, the third party is Satan”
(Man lā Yahḍuruhu-l Faqih, vol.3, p.252)
With Duas.
 
Narsis.

Abortion is not permitted for Muslims, unless the mother's life is in danger from the pregnancy. I'm not sure of the ruling on aborting when the unborn child has a fatal defect and will not live. Abortion is not permitted, but it is only classified as murder after the soul has entered the fetus, around 2.5 months after conception.
My feeling on the matter is life saving procedures should be covered by insurance. Voluntary abortion, even where legal, should not except in extreme circumstances which would need to be examined on a case by case basis.

My experience is that any language is a great asset. And for obvious reasons, Arabic will be more than just an asset.
 
But I agree that changing 'Khuda Hafiz' to 'Allah Hafiz' is plain silly.
 
It is even more silly to change Pakistan to Bakistan. 

No, it is not correct.
 
You have misunderstood what Placid said. He just said that the NT has 'updated' the Law in the OT.
 
An update is not the same as a contradiction.  

It is not complicated at all. It is very simple.
 
If the woman is not a Shia, then from her point of view and beliefs, the woman is committing an act of sin. And in all probability, God would judge her on the basis of her beliefs and not someone else's. Surely, God is extremely forgiving, but there is no reason to believe that every sin will be forgiven.
 
Assuming that she truly believes in her religion,this woman could very well be punished for a sin which could have been avoided if the other party had been a little thoughtful.
 
If however, she does not really believe in her professed religion, she does not qualify for the contract anyway. Because this contract can only be made with either a Muslim woman or with a follower of the Book (Jew/Christian).   
 
Further to the point, the other party in the deal knows all this only damn too well.
 
Therefore, indulging in something that we know a poor, misguided woman might suffer for, is in my view, nothing short of blatant and outright selfishness.

India and Pakistan (and perhaps some other countries with similar cultures) have an infinite stock of stories like this one. 

As I mentioned in post #279, many Hindu and Sikh poets have expressed their love and admiration for our Imams in their poems.
 
Here are a few examples - a total of seven poems, two by Hindu poets Jai Singh and Mathur Lucknavi and the rest (3.1 - 3.5) by a Sikh poet, Kunwar Mohinder Singh Bedi.
 
Translations done by me.
 
1. Hindu  poet  Jai Singh
 
In praise of IMAM HUSAIN
 
Husain's name lives on to this day
Husain's currency is valid the world over
If only he had come to India
Every Hindu would have worshipped him
There is no doubt that we (Hindus) worship idols
We would kiss his grave and place our eyes lovingly on it
For sinners like us is the example of Hurr 1
Husain's call has the power to change a man's destiny
Jai Singh, the fire of hell will not touch me
I am a Hindu but my love for Husain is simply indescribable.
 
1  Hurr was an official in Yazeed's army He realized at the very end that Imam Husain was on the right and left the caliph's forces to join the Imam 
 
2. Hindu  poet Mathur  Lucknavi
 
In praise of Imam Husain
 
There is place in my eyes and in my heart for 2Shabbeer (Husain)
This world belongs to 2Shabbeer (Husain) as do the heavens
Since the day he had wanted to come to India
India has been his all along.  
2 Shabbeer is another name for Imam Husain
 
3. Sikh poet Kunwar Mohinder Singh Bedi
 
3.1  In praise of Islam
 
In my view, Islam is another word for love
For peace, goodwill and affection
Largeness of the heart and brotherhood
The name of truth staring into the face of death
My Islam is surely worthy of its name
But unfortunately my Islam is not around any more
 
 
3.2 Combined Praise for the Prophet & Imam Ali
 
It does not matter what my religion is
I am all praise for the valiant 3 Haider (Ali)
I honour the name of Muhammad and praise him
I cannot help bowing down to the great 4 Ahmad (Muhammad)
What can anyone do when someone falls in love?
Muhammad does not belong to Muslims alone
3 Haider is another name of Imam Ali's and
4Ahmad of the Prophet
 
 
3.3 In praise of Imam Ali 
 
You belong to every faith and to every era
We will never let your name  be tarnished
As long as we are alive, God Willing
Never will you belong to just one nation
 
 
3.4 In praise of Imam Hussain
 
O Prince of martyrs
When your name comes up
I can see 5 Saqi-e-Kausar (your father, Imam Ali)
Coming towards me with a cool drink
Please accept me as your slave
A fake coin can also be useful
  5(Saqi-e-Kauthar is a title of Imam Ali's)
 
 
3.5 In praise of Imam Hussain
 
You (Husain) gave a new lease of life to Islam
You marked the boundary between truth and falsehood
Death is an inevitable certainty
But you taught us how to live after death
 
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here are a few opinions of Imam Ali from other non-Muslims.
 
Dr. Henry Stubbe (1632 - 1676, Classicist, physician and philosopher)
'He had a contempt of the world, its glory and pomp, he feared God much, gave many alms, was just in all his actions, humble and affable; of an exceedingly quick wit and of an ingenuity that was not common; he was exceedingly learned, not in those sciences that terminate in speculations but those which extend to practice.'
 
Gerald de Gaury (1897 - 1984, distinguished soldier and diplomat)
'He had been wise in counsel and brave in battle, true to his friends and magnanimous to his foes. He was the paragon of Muslim nobility and chivalry.'
 
Khalil Gibran (Lebanese-American Christian writer)
'He was like a prophet sent for a nation other than his own, in an era to which he did not belong.'
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Perhaps the most endearing accolades come from Thomas Carlyle and George Jordach.
 
Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881, British man of letters)
 
'As for this young Ali, one cannot but like him. A noble-minded creature, as he shows himself now and always afterwards; full of affection, of fiery daring; something chivalrous in him; brave as a lion, yet with a grace, a truth and affection worthy of Christian knighthood.'
 
George Jordach (Lebanese Christian writer)
 
'All the wealth and treasures of this world are worth less than the strap of his shoes.'
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
In the 1970's the city of Bombay, India, was abuzz with news of a well-known Zoroastrian journalist, D.F. Karaka, and his undying love for Imam  Ali, which he finally explained in his book 'Then came Ali'.  

Isn't the vow in Christian marriage that they marry till death parts them?  And the vow is made to God before witnesses.  
 
So…How can they knowingly enter into a marriage, in the Christian church, a marriage that they have plans to end after a certain period of time - definitely before death.  Agreeing to marry for 2 weeks, 2 months or 2 years would not be recognized at all as a Christian marriage.  And the church has to bless the marriage or they are not married in the eyes of the church (of God?)
 
I am as confused as baqar when it is continually mentioned that mutah can be with people of the book when it is known that it is a major sin for Christians to have sex outside of (Christian) marriage…. so if they go ahead anyway, are they still really a Christian? - as they don't follow the rules of their religion? 
 
I dont think it can be done from their side.  Now people that call themselves Christian but dont practice their religion - they may agree to contract mutah - but then - are you really marrying a Christian or just one who uses the term Christian.  Does it matter?  Does the person have to be a practising Christian?

Hi SoP
 
I think the best thing for everyone will be to stay where we are and to try and understand the other religion in the original version. We worry too much about the Spanish and Italian Inquisitions and the crimes of the Abbaside and Umayyad caliphs or the al-Qaida.
 
We never pause to think that none of them might represent the teachings of their faith.

My dear friend Shreek
 
I don't think we should ever discuss  who is better than who - not only in the Internet but just anywhere.
 
That question will always remain subjective and can never be answered.
 
More importantly, it can have serious consequences leading to unwanted violence that we might later regret.
 
Besides, taken in the original version, every religion was probably perfect.
 
We humans make changes to suit our own thinking and wants and cause them, i.e. the religions,  to degrade.
 
Anyway, it is surprising that you come from Lebanon - a country with all sorts of Muslims - Sunnis, Shias as well as Alawis.
 
But your information on Islam is despicably poor. I don't know about other branches of Islam.
 
Because threatening leavers with death is certainly not part of Shia Islam.
 
Imam Ali took action on the Kharijis not because they were leavers, but because they caused mischief in the land, killing,robbing and pillaging.
 
I thinking you are mistaking us with al- Qaida or the Taliban.
 
Please get your facts right.
 
 
Once again, as far as Shia Islam is concerned, that is absolutely untrue.
 
Shia scholars have categorically denied the death penalty for apostates, unless they are guilty of treason or treachery. 
 
 
Quite an aggressive remark!
 
Anyway, as far as we Shias are concerned, we take our strength from the character of the Ahlul Bayt, which, we believe, has few parallels in the history of the universe.
 
I rest my case. 

That would be a fair description.
 
Close!
 
More apt perhaps, Islam-friendly Christo-centric monotheist.  

That would be a fair description.
 
Close!
 
More apt perhaps, Islam-friendly Christo-centric monotheist.  

Hi SoP
 
I think the best thing for everyone will be to stay where we are and to try and understand the other religion in the original version. We worry too much about the Spanish and Italian Inquisitions and the crimes of the Abbaside and Umayyad caliphs or the al-Qaida.
 
We never pause to think that none of them might represent the teachings of their faith.

Hi Leto
 
If you ever have the opportunity to read the poems (or their translations) about Imam Ali and Imam Husain by Hindu and Sikh poets, you will appreciate the universality of the Ahlul Bayt, which goes well beyond the confines of religious dogma and belief.
 
Most Hindus know very little about religion, and even less, about other religions.
 
And in spite of that, some (a few really) have been so enraptured in their love for the Ahlul Bayt that is hard to see in people of other religions.

What do you want me to say? It is a matter between God and him. 
 
My friend, please try to understand that every pain is different.
 
The pain caused to the raped girl you are talking about - a girl who was already sexually active, in other words, not a very chaste woman, is quite different from the pain caused to the father of a 9 year old innocent boy who is abducted from a bus stop, sexually assaulted, raped and killed.
 
And there are cases of even greater pain than that.
 
Every case is different and is to be judged on its own merit.
 
But we cannot say that the time served by someone for a given offence in this life necessarily cancels the pain he (or she) may have caused.
 
God is the best judge of that and just because the man has served time here in this world, does not mean he will be entirely free in the next life. God may punish him again later if He thinks that the man deserves some more punishment.
 
And as Leto said in post # 228.
 
In terms of virtues like charity and justice I don't believe that they should be played off against each other.  
 
I rest my case. 
 
Sure, please do.  No one will stop you.  
 
But the father of that nine year old and many like him can't.
 
And God forbid that you have any suffering in your life, but if you were in place of the father of that 9-year old, I bet you'd forget what Jesus said.
 
You would hate your son's rapist and killer  -  hate him with a vengeance.
 
It is easy to say 'Jesus wants you to love everyone' until something of that magnitude befalls yourself.  

Hi Solitair,
 
The Crusades:
400 hunderd years of Crusades? There were several very distinct military campaigns called crusades that took place between 1095 and 1271. This isn't a "400 years of crusades" like one massive block; it are different wars over a period of 176 years.  
 
They were military expeditions that initially started off as a reaction to two situations:
-a request by Emperor Alexios I Komnenos to Latin Christianity for military aid against attacks of the Seljuq Turks on the Byzantine Empire
-enabling pelgrimage to Jerusalem, because there were many stories of pilgrims being killed by the Muslim rulers of Jerusalem
 
Responding to these situations the Pope asked kings and knights of Europe to go to Palestine and reconquer the former areas of the Byzantine Empire that were before were conquered by different Islamic rulers. Remember that Jerusalem was a Christian city and part of the Byzantine Emperor before it was conquered by the Arabs.
 
It also isn't true that there were only Muslims living in Jerusalem, Palestina and Lebanon at that time: the areas had quite recently be conquerd by the Muslims and many people were still Christian. In reality there were wars between different Muslim groups going on in the area as well. Historical context is important in this one. The situation is more complex than you paint it in your post. 
 
So: the main reasons were to halt the further consequenst of the Byzantine Empire and ensure the ability of Chrisitans to worship in the Holy Land. 
 
As it turned out it was true that some Muslim rulers had barred Christians from entering Jerusalem but in reality this was not general policy. And later crusaders like Richard Lionheart were able to come to terms and agreements with some of the Muslim rulers about these matters. It was not a black and white situation. One of the results was that Christians monks (Franciscans) were allowed to administer the holy places of Christianity, the Custodia Terrae Sanctae (a situation that goes on to this day).
 
Does that make the crusades into a good thing? Certainly not. But does that make it into the pinnacle of evil? I don't think either. Within the historical context I think it wasn't that strange. Later history has shown this; what happened to the Byzantine Empire afterwards? What happened to Constantinople? I think these questions give some hint to the context. Don't make an over-simplification of history.
 
Your second question:
If a Pope would proclaim heretical statements or statements that collide with the objective moral order that would result in an ipso facto excommunication and because of that in him losing his office. That would of course lead to a crisis but when it happened the conclave of cardinal has to be convoked to elect a new Pope.
 
In case of deposing a Pope for reasons other than clear acts of heresy; you are right that this is very difficult. Only a general council of the bishops could do this.
 
Your final comment:
I am not insulted or hurt by what you say, I simply don't agree with it. That is why I express my view on the points you mention like I think is normal on a discussion forum. No reason to get upset or angy. ;)
Cheers,
 
Leto

In terms of virtues like charity and justice I don't believe that they should be played off against each other. There has to be a certain ordening to society which promotes justice and protects the people and objective morality. Punishment is part of such a social order and has it's place. This does not contradict the principle of love because love itselves strives for justice and protection of the people in society.
 
On an interpersonal level I think we are called to unite ourselves with God who is forgiving for those that repent and turn to Him with uprightness of hearts. There is nobody that has sinned so much that he cannot repent. I believe that we should try to imitate this when people ask for our forgiveness. But nobody can be obliged to forgive someone else; only with the grace of God is this possible. In God there is no contradiction between love and justice.
 
Anyway; it does not come in the place of the rule of law. Even if a person forgives someone who has harmed him or her there is also the debt a person has to the society and the law. These punishments serve justice; not revenge and, if they are based on sound and righteous principles, are a good in themselves.

Hi Clynn
 
The following posts might give a little more insight into what Islam is all about
 
(1)  Post #82 and 83 in the thread            What I have learned from the Quran
 
           http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/234967884-what-i-have-learned-from-the-quran/page-4
 
(2)  Post #1 in the thread  
                  Imam Zainul Abedin's extraordinary forgiveness
 
                  http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235020586-imam-zainul-abedins-extraordinary-forgiveness/
 
(3) Post #1 in the thread  
                 Imam Musa Kazim's incredible piety
 
                 http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235020606-the-incredible-piety-of-imam-musa-kazim-as/
 
The first one might take a bit of time to go through but I hope it will be time well spent.
 
Cheers

(4) Post #1  
                Tragedy of Karbala for Jewish / Christian friends
 
                 http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/234920152-tragedy-of-karbala-for-jewishchristian-friends/

Hi Yoel
 
You are perfectly right that wisdom does not require formal education.
 
However, the word 'unschooled' is actually a mis-translation.
 
What Sunnis say is not that he did not go to school, rather that he was illiterate and could neither read nor write.
I was just comparing the difference in the views of Sunnis and Shias.
 
While Sunnis say that  the Prophet could not read or write, we Shias believe he could.That is all. 

By the way, have you had the opportunity to see the updates to the thread Islam-101 at the top of this forum?
 
Some more articles have been added :-
Good Governance in Islam - a superbly written  document of government from Imam Ali to his governor-designate to Egypt, Malik. Malik never assumed office because he was killed by Muawiya's gang before he could reach Egypt.
A sample collection of Imam Ali's sayings Imam Zainul Abedin's extraordinary forgiveness (My brother's killer) Imam Musa Kazim's incredible piety Cheers

In the English language, atheism is a belief   -   the belief that there is no God (or gods).
 
My dictionary describes an atheist  as someone who believes that God does not exist.
 
Another dictionary defines an atheist as a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of  a supreme being or beings.
 
The word atheism is defined as the doctrine or belief that there is no God. 

What you call 'personal agenda' is common in every walk of life.
 
If you have had an education in science, you will appreciate what I am trying to say.
 
If not, perhaps you should read some science magazines.
 
You will find the same attitude among rival scientists.
 
If one scientist staunchly believes in something, he will do his best to resist arguments, including experimental evidence, given by others.
 
It is not easy to just quickly abandon something you believe in strongly in a jiffy just because someone claims to have found evidence to the contrary.
 
And as far as material evidence is concerned, don't forget that all over the world, millions of innocent people have been sentenced to death, because the judge thought that there was sufficient evidence to prove the guilt. 
 
It happens very often that evidence is accepted by the court but the person is innocent.
 
They find out only too late that the evidence was flawed  - when the person has been executed.
 
Similarly, in religious debates, it is natural to think of countervailing arguments as flawed.
 
That is not the same as 'personal agenda'.
 
 
When you say, 'Muslim, Christian or secular', you seem to be saying  that a secular person cannot be either Muslim nor Christian.
 
That is not true.
 
I know lots of Muslims as well as Christians who are religious in their private life but are secular in their dealings with the outside world.
 
Go to India. 
 
You will find Muslim judges. You will see Christian parliamentarians. You have Zoroastrian industrialists. And you have Sikh professors.  
 
They don't mix their religion with their duties to their country and their dealings with those outside their religious fold. 
 
Their religion is their private affair. 
 
They know when and where to draw the line.
 
That may not be true in your experience but a person can definitely be 'secular' and 'religious' at the same time.
 
Being religious and secular are not mutually exclusive.
 
You should know when to wear your religious hat and when to wear your secular hat.
 
Of course, you cannot wear the two together.
 
 
I think you should spell proper names beginning with capital letters.
 
'Muslim' and 'Christian' are both proper nouns.
 
Even when used as adjectives,  the names of religions should always be spelled with the first letter in upper case.
 
It is actually incorrect according to the rules of English grammar.
 
I am sure it was not your intention to be insulting but some people feel uncomfortable with the name of a religion beginning with a small character.