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

wahashimi

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    1,799
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by wahashimi

  1. Salaam Alaykum, Why not try and engage with her as to the content of the music, what type of music is it, what message is it portraying, how does it make her feel? Does she feel it "speaks" to her, if this is the case, then maybe you can speak to her about these issues that she might have as any teenager would have and what this music gives to her. If you simply try and ban her, or shut it off, we all know it won't work, maybe she needs an outlet for certain emotions she is going through, and when you find out what those emotions are you could re-direct her to other options.. Wasalaam
  2. Salaam, I understand the point from which Cypress is coming from, it was indeed a very insightful documentary. Nothing to be squeamish or scared about. It was clear that these were real people from various walks of life. Wasalaam
  3. Salaam, what members of the family were you going to visit? were any male cousins going to be present, not necessarily alone with you but simply present with other elder members of the family? Wasalaam
  4. Salaam, Ok - but seriously, IF women are supposedly emotional and irrational etc etc etc and all that other garbage...then why does Islamic Law seem to depict men as irrational, emotional, unable to control their emotions, and thusly provided them with "outlets" to maintain these "deficiencies"? I mean seriously, you just have to hear the [Edited Out] that comes such as, "even if the man is angry and in the wrong - keep quiet even under these circumstances" "If a man has needs woman must do this and do that and drop everything" "Women can control certain things, men can't" "Men go away to war and need a woman laa dee daa" "Women are left when their men are abroad, nothing they can do about it" Seriously, take a browse through certain sections of fiqh, akhlaaq, and history and seriously women seem a hell a lot more qualified to lead. Another angle you could come from is this, if a woman is not fit to lead, then she is not fit to be a mother. If you are geniunely trying to convince me that women are irrational and emotional and unable to make rational decisions etc etc etc, then how the hell can you put such a precious thing as a child in her care? Wasalaam
  5. Salaam, To be honest, men are more "emotional" and "irrational" Islamically speaking. A quick perusal through any book on Fiqh would highlight that. There 'must' be another reason :-) Wasalaam
  6. Salaam, Maybe, but I think a more pressing point of finding out is because he exists in certain Shajarah's of Sayed families in Indo-Pak (and maybe others but not sure) Wasalaam
  7. children will invariably follow the mother's belief as long as the husband and wife are balanced people
  8. Salaam, I am no expert on this but I have a question and would like some opinion from people with experience. If you don't eat anything at all, there is literally ZERO calorie intake (i.e. brocolli, green veg, green tea) and you do this for a very long time, at the same time you do cardio and weights regularly, and I mean hard training. What would happen? Wasalaam
  9. Salaam Alaykum, This has been on of the biggest and most painful "wake-up" calls for me in my life. I am a guy (just for clarification), however I have never EVER witnessed Muta being practised by married man for any noble or Islamic reasons whatsoever. Oh and btw, men DO talk about it, (and other things when they get together) In the majority of cases their wives have no idea, and these men have convinced themselves that this is their divine right. To be honest it completely disgusts me, and you can throw as many ahadith as you want at me about what the Masoomeen did, quite frankly the Masoomeen did MANY things during their lives, but I am so surprised how easily some men are willing to "emulate" the practises which get them off. There are people in my life whom I regarded as brothers as we were growing up, and afterwards I lost complete respect for due to their activities after marriage.... It truly is a sad situation Wasalaam
  10. Salaam Alaykum, Are there any other examples OTHER than the Holy Prophet(AS), Bibi Fatima (SA) and Imam Ali(AS)? The reason I ask is that I don't think their situations really apply in the modern context. You need to find a Masoom who's both parents were alive during their adult married lives and see what situation they lived under. Failing that, then look toward how the companions of the Masoomeen set up their families when there was no clear objection from the Masoomeen... Also taking in consideration historical methods of home ownership/leasing also - I dont think a simple straight comparison with then and now would be fair Wasalaam
  11. Surely though, in theory, in prostitution the money paid for the act performed belongs to the woman also, yet some (or all of it) can still end up in the hands of "pimps". And a "pimp" can easily get around the "Iddah" as long as you have enough women under your control and it is properly organised. Mutah could very easily be used for prostitution, and in a pure technical sense not be haraam. However morally, well that is another question entirely.... don't you think?
  12. I figured my password out....thanks for the offer though :D
  13. Salaam, This is why I love you bro, u constantly strive to make a difference. My duas are with you and I promise you that as soon as I am able, I will help you out. Keep up the good work Wasalaam
  14. Salaam, A saying I once read went, "I have never felt more alive than when my heart was breaking" Wasalaam
  15. Salaam Alaykum, Don't forget the second part of the article: “A lot of people in the Muslim community are very concerned about this. We need to urgently re-examine the kind of material that is being taught here and in other colleges in Britain.” Mohammed Saeed Bahmanpour, who teaches in both the Hawza and the ICAS, confirmed that al-Hilli text was used, but denied that it was taught as doctrine. He said that, although the book was a key work in the jurisprudence class, its prescriptions were not taught as law. When he taught from it, he omitted the impurity chapter, he said. Dr Bahmanpour said: “We just read the text and translate for them, but as I said I do not deal with the book on purity. We have left that to the discretion of the teacher whether he wants to teach it or not. “The idea is not to teach them jurisprudence because most of the fatwas of Muhaqiq are not actually conforming with the fatwa of our modern jurists. The idea is that they would be able to read classical texts and that is all.” Dr Bahmanpour said that Mr Moezi had no educational role at either the ICAS or Hawza Ilmiyya. Mr Moezi has been the representative in Britain of Ayatollah Khamenei since 2004 when he also succeeded Mr Araki in the role and as a trustee of the ICEL and the Irshad Trust. The Islamic centre’s website reports Ayatollah Khamenei’s speeches and activities prominently and one of the first sites listed under its links section is the supreme leader’s homepage. A spokeswoman for the ICEL also confirmed its links with the Iran’s spiritual leadership but said the centre was a purely religious organisation. Middlesex University, which accredits the ICAS course but not the Hawza Ilmiyya, said: “The BA in Islamic studies offered by the Islamic College of Advanced Studies is validated by Middlesex University. “This means that Middlesex ensures that the academic standards of this particular programme are appropriate, the curriculum delivers to the required standards, learning and teaching methods allow achievement of standards.” THE DOCTRINE ‘The water left over in the container after any type of animal has drunk from it is considered clean and pure apart from the left over of a dog, a pig, and a disbeliever’ ‘There are ten types of filth and impurities: urine, faeces, semen, carrion, blood of carrion, dogs, pigs, disbelievers’ ‘When a dog, a pig, or a disbeliever touches or comes in contact with the clothes or body [of a Muslim] while he [the disbeliever] is wet, it becomes obligatory- compulsory upon him [the Muslim] to wash and clean that part which came in contact with the disbeliever’ From the al-Hilli text ================================ Therefore, from the logic that the Times is inferring, ANY historical text which doesn't equate with modern perceptions that is studied in any university in it HISTORICAL CONTEXT should not take place in the UK University? This is the worst piece of reporting I have seen in a long time. I mean it is like saying you cannot study theology at Durham, because the primary text (i.e. the bible) is contradicting sex discrimination laws of the UK. Can someone please tell me, how on earth are you meant to study history AT ALL in any field, if somehow everything historical that is not according to the values of modern day has to be omitted from learning? Next they will be bringing out laws against studying books that talk about dogs being najis, cos it discriminates against dogs and qualifies as propagating or inciting cruelty to animals. Wasalaam
  16. Salaam, Being a widow or not, does not stop a soldier/corrupt caliph taking a woman if he wants her. There are cases, before Karbala, where married women who were desired by other soldiers, had their husbands murdered purely for that case, so that their marriage would end and said soldier could take that widow as his own. In battle scenarios, do you really think yazeedi soldiers check marriage certificates, or ask other people whether such a woman who has caught their eye was previously married or not? Do you really think it would matter to such men? What proof could anyone in such a scenario possibly provide to suggest a woman was married or not, once all the men are dead? If you are going to say, that the women themselves would simply state tht "I was the widow of so and so", then most of the unmarried women would have lied/falsly claimed tht in Yazid's court to protect themselves (i.e. this would show up in historical sources), and if that was the case it would mean a physical marriage taking place would have no use, because one could simply lie that such a marriage took place in order to save one's life. You think al-Husayn(AS) married them, then went to the front of Yazeed's army and announced it so everyone would know? The claim that such a marriage took place to protect women, would have to be re-inforced with something historical that would suggest that such a marriage could be "made public" so everyone would know that a woman was married and would therefore be a widow if her husband was killed. If you are going to go into issues of "henna on hands" as evidence, then you are suggesting, they had no food supplies, no water, but dont worry, they didn't forget to bring their henna with them to the battle field. Wasalaam
  17. Salaam, Well I know him very well, he is virtually family, and I can guarantee you that you are wrong, his Aqida is that of a Shia Ithna Asheri, and I suggest you desist from this type of posting, unless you are sure the brother himself is here to defend himself infront of all the Shiachatters. I am not having a go at you, but fact remains the guy is family to me, and I know him very VERY well, and you are misinformed. His Aqida (which is the benchmark of the madhaahib) is that of a Shia Ithna Asheri through and through. Whatever his views (and those of other Marjae, scholars and Ulama) regarding things that fall outside of Aqida are a separate issue and do not make someone more or less Shia. Like I said, unless you choose to engage him publically regarding his Aqida, then you shouldn't half engage him here where he is not available to defend himself. I hope the moderators take note of this thread, its unislamic to even debate or mention these things when he is not here to confirm or deny anything. Wasalaam
  18. Salaam Article written by Omar Ali Grant vetted and accepted by the Hawza Ilmiyyah and published on their own website: http://www.hawza.org.uk/index.php?option=c...id=92&Itemid=27 Wasalaam
  19. Salaam Alaykum, Omar Ali Grant is a Shia, I guarantee you that. Wasalaam
  20. Salaam Alaykum, Although I find your response to the film very thought provoking, and your analysis of the relationship between the powerful Aliens and the weak humans is in essence correct. However in that situation what is the possible alternative? It can be regarded as a type of bullying, but in that scenario is there really an alternative? And if we think there is, is that merely an illusion we are creating for ourselves? Wasalaam
  21. Salaam Alaykum, An explanation from Sunnis I have heard regarding this is that the Quranic Ayah uses the word "tilth", which basically refers to a place where things can grow. Therefore when using the metaphor of tilth for wives, the Quran according to them is refering to that part of a woman where new life grows, and therefore negates the other part of the body (where obviously a child cannot be grown). But this was a verbal explanation given to me. Wasalaam
  22. Salaam, If Allah(swt) decides to test you on anything, the minute the test begins, it means YOU can pass it. This is the basic principle of Allah(swt) not burdening a soul more than it can it handle. Therefore if you were put in a desert, or kidnapped, the very fact that this event happened to you AUTOMATICALLY means you CAN pass it, and that for YOU (because you were chosen), it is possible to pass it. If you could not pass the test of the desert, or the kidnap, then it would not have happened to you. Wasalaam
  23. Salaam, Anyhoooo! Back to the book. It was a good book, and in many ways was very Islamic, it showed the transformation of a human being from one state to another. Do u think he will write any other books? Wasalaam
  24. Salaam, I do understand your approach now, I apologise for my first post. Well, to be honest, as long as BOTH parties are willing and able, then it is simple they can marry each other. If only one party is willing and the other is not, then as hard as it may seem to some people, its just the way it is. They will HAVE to remain in that room and remain as non-Mahrams. If he casts inappropriate glances he will have to repent and have faith in ar-Rahman. A third option (assuming the girl is unmarried when she enters captivity) is she could agree to a Muta and specify in the contract that the agreement is only to talk to each other, and clearly set the boundaries. Apart from that I can't really think of anything else Wasalaam
×
×
  • Create New...