Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

Sumerian

Unregistered
  • Posts

    11,794
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    20

Everything posted by Sumerian

  1. Not really. - We believe that belief in him is a condition of imaan and is a Faridha just like Salat, and they don't. - We believe he is an Imam, appointed by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) who is wajib to follow unconditionally in any circumstance, while they only believe it conditionally, similar to a leader or a Caliph. - We believe he is infallible, and is the inheritor of the Prophets (عليه السلام) and the Imams (عليه السلام), and they don't. - We believe he is a guide, and they don't. - We believe that his existence is what keeps this planet existing, as a world without a hujjah, such as a Prophet or an Imam, cannot exist. These are not mere differences in identity, these are core aqeeda differences on the characteristics of the Mahdi (عليه السلام).
  2. There are some Muslim countries that are rich and offer a comfortable lifestyle to those that live in it, but they are the exception as most Muslim countries are poor. Brunei, Qatar, UAE, Kuwait, Oman come to mind as rich countries.
  3. Probably not, but some Shi'a movements were inspired by the Brotherhood, most notably the Da'wah Party in Iraq.
  4. Absolutely. It is clear to anyone that understands basic Arabic.
  5. wa alaykum al salam If you want to believe that, that is up to you. Anyone who knows Arabic - even a little bit - would tell you otherwise. Thank you anyway.
  6. I believe brother @Islamic Salvationsummed it up quite well in quoting the lecture of Sayyed Hashim, and I will be quoting his post for the sake of this thread, highlighting key sections of his post: __________ QUOTE: __________ And Sabb like other forbidden acts, example lying, has different extenuating circumstances, so it may be permissible at times, in fact, it may even be obligatory at other times, which means that claiming to demonstrate precaution in the religion by avoiding Sabb totally, even in instances when it is actually obligatory is an explicit opposition to the religion. And Ayatullah al-Udhma al-Mirza al-Tabrizi says: “Then know that the prohibition of Sabb, that is, the Sabb of the believer, is so as to preserve his honor, consequently it is not forbidden when the one against whom Sabb is done has no honor or respect (due to him), such as the one who openly sins the greater sins, as it will come in the discussion on backbiting (where a similar ruling applies), for the implication of the allowance of backbiting him is the related allowance of making Sabb of him, and as for its obligatoriness for the purpose of commanding the good and forbidding the evil then it is legalized but restricted under its conditions which have been mentioned in that chapter (on commanding the good and forbidding the evil), and this ruling is also extended beyond the one who commits openly the greater sins to the innovator, rather, the permissibility in his (i.e. the innovator’s) case is even more obvious. And it is enough also in establishing this - the like of the Sahiha of Dawud b. Sirhan from Abi Abdillah who said: the messenger of Allah said: if you see the people of doubt and innovation after me - then - disassociate from them openly, and increase in insulting them and speaking negatively about them and slandering (back-biting) them and accusing (defaming) them - so that they do not feel hopeful in spreading corruption in Islam, and the people become warned of them, and they (the people) do not learn from their innovations, Allah shall write for you by that the good deeds and raise you by that in stations in the hereafter". [irshad al-Talib vol. 1 Pg. 161] And what is to be given attention to in this authentic report is that the gracious messenger does not only merely call for the Sabb of the innovators and the people of doubts, rather, he calls for the increase in doing so, and the command is by the verbal clause that evidences obligatoriness, from which we can extrapolate the obligatoriness of Sabb in the instances of forbidding the evil which calls for that. And al-Sayyid al-Khoei has confirmed this in his Fiqhi discussions – noting that Sabb can actually be obligatory [ref. Misbah al-Faqaha Vol. 1 Pg. 548] Similarly, it is to be noted in this report that the ruling of disassociating and increasing in Sabb and Waqi’a which means backbiting - is not exclusive to the innovator alone, but it also covers the people of doubts, that is, those whose work it is to create doubts among the believers regarding those matters that are agreed upon and from the core of the religion. And what is strange is that someone (a scholar) has attempted to isolate the wordings of the report from its primary meanings so that he can originate for us a new Madhhab in the understanding of the reports based on a methodology of voiding the meanings of words, so he has interpreted the Sabb and the Waqi’a of the people of doubt and innovations in the saying of the messenger to mean censure and rebuke! And the great jurists of the Imamiyya have clearly stated that Sabb of the believer is permitted in some cases – rather that the one who performs it is deserving of the reward. Shaykh al-Mufid (d. 413) says: “And the saying of the sayer to a Muslim: you are contemptible (Khasis), ignoble (Wadhi’), stupid (Raqi’), villainous (Nadhl), lowly (Saqit), impure (Najis), filth (Rijs), dog (Kalb), pig (Khinzir), disfigured (miskh), or something akin to that – becomes deserving of Ta’zir (discretionary punishment) and Ta’dib (disciplining), and there is no delineated Hadd (defined penal code). So if the one to whom this is said is deserving of this disparagement because of his misguidance from the truth, it is not incumbent upon the sayer (of such Sabb) any punishment, and he is rewarded for this disparagement” [al-Muqnia Pg. 796] And al-Shahid I (d. 786) said: “And likewise he is to be penalized for all that which is hurtful in its intent, such as saying O sinner, and O drinker of wine - while he (the one he insults) does so in secret (does not drink openly), and likewise saying O pig, dog, fool, and/or ignoble - except if the one so addressed deserves such disparagement” [al-Lu’ma Pg. 168] And al-Shahid II (d. 965) said – while commenting on the statement of al-Muhaqiq al-Hilli: “And if the one to whom this is said is deserving of disparagement then there is no Hadd or Ta’zir” And also: “The meaning of the one addressed by such insults to be deserving of such disparagement is that he is a sinner who exposes his sin openly, for then there is no sanctity for him, because of what has been narrated from al-Sadiq “If a sinner sins openly then there is no sanctity for him nor backbiting”. And in some reports “From the perfectness of worship is the speaking bad (backbiting) of the people of doubt”. And Dawud b. Sirhan narrates in a Sahih report from Abi Abdillah: the messenger of Allah said: if you see the people of doubt and innovation after me then disassociate publicly from them, and increase in insulting them and speaking against them and backbiting ….” [Masalik al-Ifham Vol. 14 Pg. 424, and something similar is mentioned by Sayyid Ahmad al-Khawansari in his Jami al-Madarik Vol. 7 Pg. 98] And al-Fadhil al-Hindi (d.1137) says: “And if the one so addressed [by Sabb] is deserving of disparagement because of Kufr (disbelief) or innovation or open sinning – the requirement of Ta’zir (of the insulter) is dropped, rather, he is rewarded (gets Thawab) as a result, because it is from the forbidding of evil, and it has come (in a report) that the perfectness of worship is backbiting the people of doubt …” [Kashf al-Litham Vol. 10 Pg. 523]. And the jurists of the Imamiyya have said similar things in their jurisprudential manuals [mostly using similar passages] which proves that there exists an exception of the prohibition on Sabb of some categories of people. Ref.: al-Kafi fi al-Fiqh Pg. 489 (Abu Salah al-Halabi), al-Wasila Pg. 422 (Ibn Hamza al-Tusi), Talkhis al-Maram Pgs. 324-325 and Irshad al-Adhhan Vo. 2 Pg. 178 (Allamah al-Hilli), Tahrir al-Wasila Vol. 2 Pg. 426 (al-Khumayni) etc. https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235031376-the-controversial-hadith-of-dawood-bin-sarhan/?do=findComment&comment=2821535
  7. Habibi, the same set of words in Arabic can mean something different depending if the context is for taqreer or otherwise. Anyone who understands basic Arabic can pinpoint the meaning to which Sayyed Al-Khomeini was alluding to. وأن can carry more than one definition, وَإنْ : - even if; although; despite And you can see in the Holy Qur'an aswell; He is the One Who raised for the illiterate ˹people˺ a messenger from among themselves—reciting to them His revelations, purifying them, and teaching them the Book and wisdom, for indeed they had previously been clearly astray—
  8. I don't think you read the thread properly my brother, Sayyed Al-Qazwini made a lecture arguing against the sahih hadith of Dawood bin Sarhan, and brothers such as@Ibn al-Hussainand others gave proof of the views of the scholars regarding sabb, and they are contrary to Qazwini's claim to why we shouldn't accept this hadith. And it wasn't one scholar, or two, or three, but rather tens of scholars. Brother, you literally said follow the scholars, and when the fatwas of the scholars were quoted to you, and an authentic hadith was presented, you start arguing against it. The sahih hadith, authenticated by tens of scholars, literally a golden chain: The Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: “When you will find people of bid`ah (innovation) and doubt/suspicion after me, do baraa’ (disassociation) from them and increase in your insults (sabihim) to them, and oppose (them) and bring evidences against them so they may not become greedy in bringing fasaad (corruption) to Islam. You must warn people against them and do not learn their bid`ah (innovation). Allah will write for you hasanaat (good deeds) for this, and will raise you darajaat (levels) in the next life.’” http://www.revivingalislam.com/2010/12/exposing-bidah-reward-for-doing-so.html?m=1 I don't care about Yasser Al-Habib, you told us there is no evidence of insulting in the Shari'ah, and contrary evidence and views by some of our greatest scholars were presented, where someone like Al-Khoei said insulting can even be wajib sometimes. In your previous post you completely threw sabb out the window as wrong in anyway shape or form. And your point about Aisha is indeed very weak, this is why Imam Ali (عليه السلام) treated Aisha the way she was treated as explained by Ahlulbayt (as); إنّ عليـًا «عليه السلام» إنما منّ عليهم كما منّ رسول الله «صلى الله عليه وآله» على أهل مكة، وإنما ترك عليٌ «عليه السلام» لأنه كان يعلم أنه سيكون له شيعة وأن دولة الباطل ستظهر عليهم، فأراد أن يقتدى به في شيعته، وقد رأيتم آثار ذلك هو ذا يسار بسيرة علي «عليه السلام»، ولو قتل علي أهل البصرة جميعا وأتخذ أموالهم لكان ذلك له حلالا، لكنه منَّ عليهم ليمنّ على شيعته من بعده. Imam Al-Sadiq (as): Imam Ali (عليه السلام) pardoned them (people of Jamal) the same way the Prophet (saww) pardoned the people of Mecca, and Imam Ali (عليه السلام) desisted because he knew there will be followers to him afterwards and that the State of falsehood will rule upon them, so he wanted to be followed in regards to his Shi'a, and you have seen the results of that, as his methods have been followed, and if he wanted to kill the people of Basra completely, and to take their property, that would have been permissible for him, but he pardoned them so that they may pardon his followers after him. Ilal Al-Shara'i by Shaykh Al-Saduq. This hadith shows why Imam Ali (عليه السلام) treated them the way he treated them, not because they deserve it, they were murderers who quite literally apostates and more evil than those who fought the Prophet, but it was for his follower's sake. I am not supporting Yasser's method my brother, I am pointing out that sabb has its place in Islam, and to argue against that is to argue against the ulama who say it is wajib and mustahab in certain times.
  9. I think you got lost in the translation. He is saying that waging a war for worldly desires does not make you najis as it does not fulfill the criteria of najasa of nawasib, but it does make you more malice than a dog. And he gave Aisha, Talha, Zubayr and Mu'awiyah as examples of such people, who fought Imam Ali (عليه السلام) for worldly desires. He says "wa inkanu" which means "in reality", not "if". I'm not disagreeing with you that Sayyed Al-Khomeini was pro-unity, he was, I'm saying that the ulama have stated their true beliefs in their books which are studied in Hawza. Not that I'm saying this should be public or anything.
  10. Yea well that's called police brutality and either abusing power or applying power which they do not have, which is against the law. The police's job is to detain and arrest, that's it, the job of the court is to punish and sentence.
  11. Yea no. Look what Sayyed Khomeini says about Aisha and Talha and Zubayr. وأما سائر الطوائف من النصاب بل الخوارج فلا دليل على نجاستهم وإن كانوا أشد عذابا من الكفار، فلو خرج سلطان على أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام لا بعنوان التدين بل للمعارضة في الملك أو غرض آخر كعائشة وزبير وطلحة ومعاوية وأشباههم أو نصب أحد عداوة له أو لأحد من الأئمة عليهم السلام لا بعنوان التدين بل لعداوة قريش أو بني هاشم أو العرب أو لأجل كونه قاتل ولده أو أبيه أو غير ذلك لا يوجب ظاهرا شئ منها نجاسة ظاهرية وإن كانوا أخبث من الكلاب والخنازير لعدم دليل من إجماع أو أخبار عليه He says those who fought Imam Ali (عليه السلام) for worldly desires cannot be considered najis technically because they did not fight Imam Ali (عليه السلام) with the intention of emnity, so the rulings of najasa of nawasib do not apply to them, and he gives the example of Aisha, Talha, Zubayr and Mu'awiyah, of such a type of people. He also says in reality such a people are "akhbathu min al kilaab wal khanazeer", meaning they are more malice than a dog. These are his words, not mine. You can take that as you will. This is in Al-Makasib Al-Muharama. http://shiaonlinelibrary.com/الكتب/496_كتاب-الطهارة-السيد-الخميني-ج-٣/الصفحة_336
  12. 1- According to most scholars, sabb (insulting) is not unconditionally haram. It can be haram, such as against the mu'min (Imami), or it can be mustahab, in fact it can be wajib in certain cases where you are combatting a propogator of bid'ah. The laws are similar to backbiting, which can go from haram to mustahab aswell. 2- There are hadiths, one of them authentic, which calls for insulting the people of innovation. A thread was started on this topic years ago, and you will find the fatwas of the scholars regarding sabb, and how it isn't all bad, and in fact it can be a good or rewarding thing. 3- Some scholars have insulted the so-called companions in their own writings. Please review this thread. https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235031376-the-controversial-hadith-of-dawood-bin-sarhan/?do=findComment&comment=2821199 Like I said, at the end of the day, follow your marja.
  13. Beat them up too after they're already on thd ground?
  14. So you believe police should have ultimate power in society? Can police use too much force?
  15. That's all beside the point. Even if I granted you that they were doing the wrong thing, police cannot use excessive force to detain someone.
  16. I think one of the flaws of some of the vaccine mandates in the US is that they do not recognise previously acquired infection (natural immunity), which may actually be more effective than the current available vaccines, or at the very least still effective enough to provide protection. Some European countries have recognised natural immunity if it can be proven, and I believe this is a good thing.
  17. The benefit of vaccinating children is proven, as Covid can affect children and send them to hospital (although extremely unlikely), but the main reason for vaccinating children - scientifically speaking - is to reduce transmissions from schools and then taken back home to infect the vulnerable. Out of over 650,000 deaths in the US, under 400 of those deaths are under 18 according to the CDC, and the vast majority will have been kids with underlying conditions. There is a benefit to vaccinating kids, but health wise, vaccinating kids in and of itself is more of a benefit to the older populations.
  18. The problem is not whether they stay home or not, we can say that it is wrong for them to leave them house, I'll allow you that point for the sake of argument. The videos show excessive use of force by the police, especially after they already have put someone on the ground, and resorting the physical assault in order to handcuff him. This shows that Australia's response has become militaristic and police-first, and is not a public health response anymore. The Governments of both Victoria and NSW already admitted that some of the rules that were put in place were not even based on health advice, they were purely police recommendations, meaning police were given authority to simply make rules up as they go along, which is not democratic to say the least, but justified under "emergency orders".
  19. These scenes have become normal in Australia, and they are nowhere near the worst that I have scene. These people were protesting the public health orders, which requires someone to stay at home unless they have a reason to be out.
  20. There are examples of fuqaha in the history of our madhab that openly exposed, cursed and yes, insulted, the beloved figures of the other deviant sects, whether it be in their books or in their lectures. This is because they believed that taqiyya wasn't necessary for their time period or that particular situation, or they believed that the interest of doing such things - perhaps exposing the baatil or strengthening the truth - was more important than taqiyya or protecting people's lives. The issue regarding this film is technically a jurisprudential issue, but it has become a political issue in the eyes of many. Basically it centres around the following points 1) When is taqiyya appropriate, and when is it not appropriate? 2) is this film in the interest of the madhab and strengthening the Haqq, or is it unnecessary or potentially harmful to the interest of the madhab? These are matters for the fuqaha to deal with, and they have historically disagreed on these matters. It is best for one to follow what his marja says and to hold onto it.
  21. I'm pretty sure the reason why they recommended for him to stop and declare peace was because the situation on the ground had shifted, so in fact they were further away from their goals of downing the regime in Baghdad, not closer.
  22. Everyone should follow their own marja on this issue. Clearly not all of the mujtahids see eye to eye on these issues.
  23. What was Iran's position in the Gulf War? And the invasion of Iraq?
  24. First of all, there is nothing wrong with desires in Islam, Islam only seeks to regulate it. You should fulfill your desires as much as you like within the scope of halal and recommended. Secondly, there is also nothing wrong with seeking pleasure in Dunya as long as it does not override your seeking of the pleasure of the akhira. One should ask Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) to increase his rizq and barakah in the dunya. Marriage in and of itself is mustahab, and the good deed of the married person are multiplied in comparison to the unmarried. It is also of the Sunnah of the Prophets to love women. We are not a religion that sees spirituality only, we are a religion that encompasses everything including physical desire.
  25. The fact of life is that a woman walking alone at 2am in an alley is more vulnerable than a man doing the same thing. It is a horrible fact, and animalistic men are the reason for this and are to be blamed entirely, but that is just how it is, and insha Allah this changes with education and teachings. Children are raised while considering the environment and circumstances around them, not how the world should be ideally. This also extends to certain jobs and activities that are obviously more suited for men, and it is not "sexist" to point this out. I would be more comfortable with my son working overnight shifts (as a security guard for example) than my daughter doing the same thing. In fact, it would be foolish to be even in such a situation.
×
×
  • Create New...