Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

AbdusSibtayn

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    2,031
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    42

AbdusSibtayn last won the day on April 22

AbdusSibtayn had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Location
    Between Fear and Hope
  • Religion
    Islam
  • Mood
    Love and Hatred in Equal Measure
  • Favorite Subjects
    Fiqh, Kalam, Tafsir, All the social sciences.

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

9,057 profile views

AbdusSibtayn's Achievements

  1. Diasporic Sunni communities inevitably slip into casual Salafism irrespective of their nominal madhab affiliation, so it might well be that the body you talk about is functionally Salafi. Wahhabis have cannibalized Sunnism from within, and except for maybe some very hardcore Sufi Sunnis, their influence is all pervasive. Theirs is the default narrative in contemporary Sunnism. If they are admittedly following Saudi religious directives, then it's a no-brainer.
  2. Translation: "O Sheikh, give me some of the shawarma that is beside you. "
  3. Wa alaikis salam, I'd advice you to ask a scholar about that. Email the question to english@najaf.org. The response from here is really quick, usually within a day. If you struggle to come up with the names of forty believers, you can draw up a list including our scholars, both past and contemporary ones, as they are the most deserving of our prayers. As for your parents, we have narrations that say that even if you were to invoke mercy on them, your prayers won't benefit them. Their forgiveness is a matter best left to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). May Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) bless you too.
  4. This is categorically wrong irrespective of who says this, and if someone defends this junk under the mistaken impression that he is 'defending' Shiism by creating wiggle room for such heresy, then he has put his own afterlife at risk, much less 'defended' anything. I have seen a lot of Shia in their misplaced zeal try to justify such nonsense with contorted non-arguments; this is a tendency which must be purged from the community. Creation and sustenance are exclusive to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), and no one shares in those attributes. Absolutely no one. The books of our classical scholars are that which represent our believes, not something which any random person on the internet says.
  5. You can politely but firmly ask her to mind her own business, and to not indoctrinate your son in her religious beliefs, because had that been needed, you'd already have put such in the specifications. Sometimes people (especially those from a certain sect) need to be reminded not to poke their noses where they don't belong. These are Salafis. I wouldn't send my child to schools run by them, if I were in that position.
  6. The zeal to propagate Twelver Shiism was certainly a feature of their rule, but what is being doubted here is its violent imposition upon the population (the 'conversion-by-sword' thesis), given the practical reality. The government may well have gone out of its way to favour Shiism, and there might even be odd cases of forced conversion, but it is highly doubtful if it was followed through to the last person as a matter of policy, a la the Inquisition in the Iberian peninsula. The reason to doubt this is the continued existence of a large and substantial Sunni populace in the regions formerly ruled by the Safavids, as far East as Northwest Afghanistan of today, which had been ruled by them until the rise of Nadir Shah, and their subsequent incorporation into the Abdali/Durrani kingdom. If the aforementioned policy had been implemented, then we wouldn't see that Sunni demographic there today. Of course, this narrative of forced conversion has been publicised by the anti-Shi'a forces, then by the Ottomans, and now by the Wahhabis, who seek to equate Shiism with the Safavids, and project it as a Persian ethno-nationalist heresy created in opposition to 'Arab' Sunnism (ironically for them, the Safavids were of Turkic stock and claimed Arab Sayyid descent through Musa al-Kadhim (as)). The Orientalists have also followed suit. You may read the book of Catherine Babayan on the dynasty, and if you know Persian (or know someone who does) , then Rasul Ja'fariyan's book on them. Unfortunately, the latter hasn't been translated yet, to the best of my knowledge.
  7. There are instances of intolerance from the Safavid rule, undeniably, but to propose that they forced an entire country to convert to some other confession at the point of the sword is simply laughable. All that happened was that the 12er sect obtained an official position, and since the vast majority of people follow the officially preached doctrines, the majority of the laity followed suit (since the officially appointed judges, the local prayer leaders, religious scholars and preachers/parsons would be aligned with that denomination, and most laymen don't really care much about theological nitty gritties). The Shi'a are a majority in Iran for the very same reason that the Sunnis are a majority in much of the Arabian peninsula, the Maghrib and the Indian Subcontinent- their sect there had an official endorsed position and was therefore preached the most widely as the default madhab. I find it profoundly laughable that figures like Salah al-Din Ayyubi and his descendants are lauded for wiping Shiism off from Egypt and much of the Levant (many areas in the historic Greater Syria/Bilad ash-Sham were Twelver majority, mind you, and Lebanon is one such surviving pocket) and converting the local populace to Sunnism, while in the same breath the Safavids are demonised for their zealotry and the alleged imposition of Twelver Shiism by the same demographic; we could use a little consistency here. Those who gloat about the former, have no right to complain about the latter. Shiism has a historical pedigree in Iran and the 'Ajam lands from much before the Safavids; Qom and Mashhad were Shi'i settlements; clans like the Ash'ari family, the Bani Nawbakht and Bani Buwayh (the Buyids) were well known Shi'i figures in Iran; even before the Safavids Twelver Shiism had once been the official madhab in Iran under the Mongol Ilkhanids, when Sultan Oljeitu Khudabandah (rh) was converted to Shiism through the efforts of Allamah al-Hilli (rh). Persians had always had a soft-corner for the 'Alawi-Fatimis (even when Iran was technically 'Sunni') , and participated in great numbers in most pro-'Alid uprisings. All that was needed was something to tip the scales, and this was done by the Safavid policy. Wassalam. We must bear in mind that such court chronicles were often written with the aim to project their patron kings as zealous and fanatical Shi'a (in their own imagination, a way of showing their loyalty to the madhab), so we must take such accounts with a grain of salt. The Safavids who sponsored these histories might have wanted to project themselves and their forefathers as strict Shiis but the very fact that substantial Sunni populations survive to this day in the southeastern areas of modern day Iran, while the regions as far East as Qandahar and Herat were under Safavid rule and fiat, should really prompt us to doubt if any such policy of killing everyone who prayed the Sunni way was ever implemented. All I mean to say is that self-projection is one thing, while ground reality is another. They couldn't have realistically forced every Sunni they came across to become Shi'a; it is simply not practically possible.
  8. Sure "There is no condition for the presence of witnesses during the solemnization of the marriage, just as the presence of a cleric is not a condition for the validity of the marriage." https://www.sistani.org/english/book/46/2062/ Here are hadith references for the same- https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/54769/on-what-basis-do-shia-muslims-claim-that-a-marriage-is-valid-even-if-done-in-th
  9. 'Seegha' or 'formula' collectively refers to the statements that the bride and groom must pronounce for the marriage to be solemnized. You can find the wording here.
  10. How are you, Sheikh? Hope everything is fine at your end.

    1. Show previous comments  1 more
    2. 313_Waiter

      313_Waiter

      So solid Shia is my favourite Sheikh Rasta Kim Jong Un

       

      Put a fire pon de Babylon

    3. SO SOLID SHIA

      SO SOLID SHIA

      Whagwarn mi bredda tree one tree ....you are my beloved no Oh-Mo. A Yuh say put a grand fire pon Babylon we send di blessing pon Mo-Ammad an a Di wa Aale Mo-Ammad. ya Ali Madad esoteric power infinite blessing pon di Ameer of Ameers. Light of Aale Mo-Ammad inside to shine outside pon humany tea...nothin but love mi ave for all creation..mi a try to be a good human...not a lang tyme we have pon earth. Love mi bredrin mi connect with you one day in this domain or if Almighty Jah want in a Di next plane. Ali Ali Ali Ali Ali Ali Ali 

    4. AbdusSibtayn

      AbdusSibtayn

      Wassalam ustadh, I have been trying to battle some inner demons all this time, hence taking some time off from the forum. Sometimes I slip, despair, and feel that it is a losing battle, but then I remember your encouraging words. Did not see you around for some time, hence thought about asking. 

  11. Condolences from Sayyid Sistani (ha). https://ina.iq/eng/32829-sayyed-al-sistani-office-extends-condolences-on-the-death-of-the-iranian-president-and-his-companions.html
  12. , کشتگان خنجر تسلیم را " " .هر زمان از غیب جان دیگر است "For those slain with the Submission's Knife, Each Moment, from the Unseen, is a New Life." May Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) have mercy on all martyrs and their bereaved near and dear ones.
  13. Now that you have been through the debate back and forth, the next time you get that job, don't let the neighborhood rishta aunties know.
  14. To add to this, Sadrian metaphysics, and let me stick out my neck by saying this, most of the 'Muslim' peripatetic/neo- Aristotelian canon, is obsolete. It can not help anyone in navigating the challenges posed by modernity. The world has moved past continental philosophy, analytic philosophy and post-structuralism/post-modernism ages since, and the most cerebral of the venerable dons in Shi'a seminaries are wallowing in antiquated and pretty useless medieval tomes, hair-splitting over moot points. You'll be surprised to learn that despite all that high-browed philosophical posturing and pretences to profundity, a text as basic as Will Durant's 'Story of the Civilization' is regarded as some cardinal, foundational book amongst large sections of the seminarians; I have seen August mu'ammineen quote it as some authoritative source while it is a most rudimentary primer. So much for the perennial philosophical wallowing. I wonder what will happen the day these venerable dons and their armies of devout students are actually introduced to the modern canon since the 50s- Karl Popper, Foucault, Derrida, Sartre and Althusser, Lacan, the various schools of Critical Theory; they'd be flabbergasted, I presume. You won't be able to figure out why the media does what it does unless you read Althusser; you won't be able to figure out why they are forcing your children to cross dress, pumping hormones down their bloodstream and in fact, much of the modern identity politics until you read critical theory and especially third wave feminists; Bidayat al-Hikmah, Nihayat al-Hikmah, or the Asfar, none of these will help you grasp the ideological underpinnings of neocolonialism, you'd have to read Fanon to know about that. The mantras of Ibn Arabi won't help you conjure away the ghost of post-colonial modernity. For the inordinate amount of time our venerable Sadrian dons and their devout followers spend proselytizing their exotic fancies among the community, they seem to be dismally equipped to meet the actual challenge.
  15. What I have been told by some scholars (the person who told me had himself heard this either from Sayyid Ali Abu'l Hassan or Sayyid Zanjani IIRC) is that the current version of the Hadith al-Kisa wasn't even included in the earliest editions/original manuscript of the Mafatih by al-Qummi (rh), but added to the subsequent editions by some publisher himself. Since I don't have access to those early editions, I have not been able to verify this detail independently. Also there are other discrepancies involved in the text as well; for instance, the earliest narrations tell us that the event took place in Umm Salama (sa) 's house, whereas the currently popular version shows it to have happened in Sayyida Zahra (sa)'s house. The general emotive response (typical of these constituencies) is that 'Oh, so are you now doubting the authenticity of the hadith?', while this straw-man is farthest from the reality. In all honesty, these canards are getting annoying now.
×
×
  • Create New...