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

Cyrax

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    191
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Cyrax

  1. It means Allah is Greater, literally, people translate it in other ways because of what they think sounds best in English.
  2. Of course akhi, I don't think any one can disagree with that, that's how you know Mut'ah is haram
  3. So you believe that, even though Zina occurred in pre-Islamic society, during the time of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم and the rule of Abu Bakr, that Zina would not have happened had Omar not banned Mut'ah?! Then why don't you try? In the next statement you say: Couldn't a good reason to be to at least try to educate and re-direct ONE person back to the path of Ahl al Bayt عليهم السلام? (it is عليهم not عليه because they are a plural and not a singular بارك الله فيك). But if you don't want to keep this discussion going then خير إن شاء الله. I apologize if I had upset you بارك الله فيك or spoke to you in an inappropriate way. السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
  4. Dude, do you seriously believe that? People committed Zina during Jahiliyyah, the time of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم and during the rule of Abu Bakr, why didn't Mut'ah prevent it then? I seriously don't know how you can possibly belief this. It is in fact the opposite, the only way any one can accept this is if they are a 12er Shi'I and believe it to be a Sunnah. I would love for the some of the women on this forum to comment on this: do you seriously believe that Mut'ah has less of a harm on the woman who is practicing it, or whose husband is practicing it then it does for a man to not have his desires fulfilled even if he is riding on a camels back? There is no way you'll even get 10% of 12er women to agree to that, let alone any tangible percentage from a non-12er women, Muslim or otherwise.
  5. A lot of reasons really: 1) No Da'wah obviously. 2) Centers are empty. 3) Centers are divided by culture. 4) Lack of connection the Qur'an. 5) Lack of connection to the Arabic language. 6) Lack of clear evidence for the 12er concept of Imamah in the Qur'an (remember, most converts start out anti-Hadeeth). 7) Mutah. 8) Tatbeer. 9) Support of Bashar al-Assad and other dictators when it suits them. 10) Lack of focus on the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. 11) Ritual cursing. 12) What they see of Sunni and Shi'a debates. 13) Too much focus on shrines. 14) Combining Dhuhur/Asr and Maghrib/Isha even at the mosque. That's all I can think of off the top of my head.
  6. I can guarantee you that the depression and hopelessness that the women who practice Mut'ah or have their spouses practice Mut'ah FAR outweighs any supposed hopelessness that may appear in a man if a woman doesn't satisfy him even "when she's riding on a camel's back."
  7. The reason you went through all those mental gymnastics, akhi, is because you have adopted a position and you are now trying to look for evidence for it. Rather than extracting your position from the available evidence. You should do at least SOME research before just posting anything that comes to mind. All you had to do was go to Wikipedia (forget about the hundreds of articles addressing this, but I don't want to link to an "anti-Shia site" so the link doesn't get deleted) Who is this and what is Kitab al-Awail? LOL, did you just copy and paste that from Shiapen without changing anything? Have you read any counter article(s) written against it? That sounds like NOTHING like the Shi'as here recommend. I would love it if the Shi'as adopt the position of the Ahl Albayt Scholar ibn Abbbas on this, unfortunately, what we have is a very warped view of this. Nope, the four madhhab, the Dhahiri, the Ahl al-Hadeeth, the Zaydis and the Ismailis have consensus that Mut'ah was banned by the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم, and they ALL report the same incident. It is the 12er Shi'as who are confused on this issue: ranging from is it makrooh or musthabb? All the way to is it permissible to practice it with a lady of the night. Every single Marja3 has a completely different view on the rulings regarding Mut'ah, while every single non-12er Muslim agrees that it is haraam.
  8. I was obviously being sarcastic. I'm not only surprised that you didn't see that, but that TWO regular posters also didn't get the reference.
  9. No akhi, its not hate. You're just wanting Allah to remove His Mercy from them that's all...
  10. Let me get this straight: 1) You didn't know that Mut'ah was a practice that was pre-Islamic, and thought the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم introduced it. 2) You admit that you to learn more about this, yet you say to me "do not be so quick to jump to" my "delusions." 3) You criticize Umar for changing the ruling on Mut'ah (despite the overwhelming evidence the Mut'ah was banned by the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم) but then find the idea that the Imams would "seem to have changed" the ruling on Mut'ah just to oppose Sunnis a completely valid position. Just as an addition: why do you suppose the other Shi'a sects decided to support Umar's position here, when they oppose him on other issues like Taraweeh and Tathweeb, بارك الله فيك
  11. إن شاء الله، تفضل https://alkazemalzaidy2013.wordpress.com/tag/قول-أئمة-الزيدية-في-زواج-المُتعة/ Now I was wondering, does that mean you accept that the hadeeth the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم banned Mut'ah is mutawatir in Sunni sources?
  12. Yes I did, بارك الله فيك, but I didn't see anything regarding the mutawatir reports found in Sunni and Shia sources banning it and why the Shi'as reject the mutawatir corroborated reports for an opinion of a Sahabi. I noticed you like AStrugglers post, do you also believe that Mut'ah isn't a pre-Islamic practice?
  13. السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته Akhi, this is well known among everybody, do you believe the Mutah was introduced by the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم? Like the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم says, "البينة على المدعي واليمين على من أنكر". Please provide your evidence, as of right now, there is no evidence to suggest that Mut'ah was introduced by the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم. Here is a quote from al-Islam.org Akhi, I'm not trying to be a jerk, but this is like ABCs of this topic, أحسن الله إليك. Actually, I didn't use it to invalidate your practice, and in fact I even said that you taking the position of a Sahaabi on this issue is completely legit. I was just pointing out to the people here that this isn't a Sunni vs Shi'a issue, its a 12er versus the rest of the Muslim issue. I believe that yes, the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم left the religion in the hands of the "Greatest Ummah that was brought forth to the people" (3:110). You make takfeer of them and call them clueless, I confirm what Allah said about them. Would you like me to list them or are links fine?
  14. Not true, the Muslims, Sunni and Shi'a alike report with mutawatir chains that the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم banned Mutah. 12er Shi'as take the position of a handful of Companions (which is perfectly legit) which didn't know the prohibition. I don't have a problem with the brothers here following the position of a Companion, but the reality is, the tawatur nature of the reports, combined with the fact that they come from every Islamic sect (except the 12ers) should be more than enough evidence to dispel the myth the Umar banned Mutah.
  15. Actually, it is the 12er Shi'as who follow the opinion of a Sahabi while ignoring the clear prohibition of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم. The Sunnis, Zaydis, and Ismailis and the rest of the Muslims reject the positions that a Sahaabi here and there had. In fact, there are literally thousands of things that Muslims disagree with a companion here and there. And of course I'll compare Mutah to alcohol, because: Do you sincerely believe that Mut'ah is a special ruling that Arabs weren't practicing before? That seems to be your source of confusion. The reality is, Mutah is exactly like alcohol, a habit that pre-Islamic Arabs engaged in until Islam prohibited it. And do you sincerely believe that the Zaydis and the Ismailis take the ruling of the prohibition of Mutah from "certain individual of the time who managed to gain popularity?" LOL, that's almost as hard to believe as an infallible Imam changing the rulings of the religions just to "oppose the Sunnis."
  16. If you mean that it was permissible like how alcohol was permissible, then yes, obviously everyone agrees to that. If you mean that the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم died and left it halal, then no, all Muslim sects, Sunni or Shia, agree that he صلى الله عليه وسلم banned it before his dead, except the Ja'faris.
  17. السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته Do you sincerely believe that is possible? For the record, all Muslims groups, Sunni or Shia, agree that Mut'ah is haraam except for the Ja'faris.
  18. السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته So because the US "is sponsoring and feeding the division of the Muslim ummah" and "not China" it is ok to for Iran, Saudi and the UAE to support the crimes China commits against Muslims? I'm not sure what the rest of the post has to do with the topic at hand... I actually said, "In reality, there is so much evidence to what is going on, that I am appalled by your attempt to white wash this and pretend like its some how the "West" who is only saying this." The fact that you take the testimony of the Chinese government over the testimony of your Uyghuir Muslim brothers and sisters is what appalls me, بارك الله فيك. I've noticed that you completely overlooked my appeal to their testimony. It is shocking that anyone would trust the Chinese government, yes. No of course I'm not, I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of our Islamic governments, أحسن الله إليك. At least you are at least admitting there is some level of oppression against Muslims there. Yes of course, akhi, the situation is different for the Ughuir Muslims in the Xinjiang region. My understand is that Han Muslims don't have those same problems. Well, if you have not gathered enough information, then why are you speaking about this subject? Those of us that have known about this issue for more than 12 months feel there is more than enough evidence to condemn the Chinese government for their treatment of the Uyughir people. In addition, I certainly don't share your view regarding MBS, MBZ or Khamenei or do I think they are wise or have the Muslim Ummah in their best interest. As far as the intra-12er divisions between the different Maraji'3, and their hypocritical positions towards things, then I'd definitely say that I think Sistani is a more principled man than Khamenie and is far more consistent. But my opinion doesn't matter. Of course I would side by him, who wouldn't? Did you ever hear the statement of Ahmad bin Hanbal? I'm not sure there is a Muslim alive today that would side with Yazeed over Sayyid Shabab Ahl al-Jannah al Hussayn عليه السلام. If one exists, I dissociate with him and strongly oppose his position
  19. السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته I apologize, I thought when you said "confrontations" and "taking actions against" that you meant going to war. So if it doesn't mean war, then why is it so hard to speak out against China? If the fear is that if Iran speaks out against China then China will respond by cutting off trade to Iran, then why doesn't Iran try to also come to terms with the US in order to lift the trade sanctions? The irony, of course, is that one of the reasons the US imposes sanctions against Iran is because of their "support for terrorism", the same justification the Chinese government for doing what its doing to the Uyghur people. 1) It is not the only the "West" that is saying that, it is the Uyghur people that are saying it. In reality, there is so much evidence to what is going on, that I am appalled by your attempt to white wash this and pretend like its some how the "West" who is only saying this. There are also countries such as Saudi and the UAE who say nothing is going on. The Uyghur people on the other hand, said a very different thing. 2) Implying that I don't care about the people of Iran and the Shi'a people in general is a bunch of hogwash. I think the sanctions against Iran are a horrible practice of punishing the whole for the crimes of a few. I hate what is happening to Iran and speak out against it. In fact, if you go back to my original post, I mentioned how I speak out against the Saudis war crimes in Yemen and how I send money to the Yemeni people despite the fact, that as far as I know, they are most Shi'a. 3) The only Muslims that "don't mean anything special" to anyone are the Uyghur people to you, who you are quick to turn a blind eye to the crimes committed against them. What I have been told has been told to me by the Uyghur people, but maybe they are all Western puppets who are want the downfall of China. The reality is, I am much more likely to trust the collective "West" than I am to trust the government of China. The collective "West" has show itself to be far more just and open than the oppressive Chinese government. When it comes to the collective "West" versus the Chinese government, the Saudis, and the UAE (and Iran), I'm going to take the collective "West"s narrative any day of the week. Sorry. How much do you suppose I need to read and how long did I need to know about the Uyghur people before I am able to call out the hypocritical position of the UAE, Saudi (and Iran) regarding the Uyghur people. If I told you I learned about the Uyghur people 13 months ago, would that be enough? The Uyghur people are getting oppressed on some level (no matter how much you want to deny it) and the UAE, Saudi (and Iran) are all, not only staying quite, but are in fact OPENLY SUPPORTING THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT. You can justify that to yourself as much as you want, I'm just going to always side with the people against these oppressive governments. Sorry
  20. وعليكم السلام ورحمة الله وبركاته I'm not sure what this has to do with the post, am I missing something? However, this is actually not true. Wahhabis believe that pre-Islamic Arabs were "موحدون في الربوبية" (don't shoot the messenger, you'd have to ask them to explain themselves), so the pre-Islamic Arabs believing in Allah is actually how they prove their point. Wahhabis believe pre-Islamic Arabs were complete Monotheists in the Lordship of Allah, its in the act of worship where they deviated. Again, not here to defend them, but to show you that you seem to be misinformed about them. Can you actually substantiate anything you're saying here? Which Hashimite and Abbasids added it, and how did it help them? Also, who actually claims that bin Ladin, Baghdadi or the King of Jordan (LOL) is the Mahdi? A Jordanian national? Have you ever heard what Iran Nationals say about Khomeini and Khaminei?
  21. Isn't it true that all Shi'ite sects agree that Mut'ah is haram except the Ja'fari Shias? But I am also as surprised as you are from these reactions, I thought Mut'ah was highly recommended? I do admit I have not studied the Jafari madhhab, but from my understanding, it is recommended to do it at least once in your life, and with a pious woman like you quoted
  22. Other than the hardcore Saudi nationalists and a few brain dead Madkhalis, hardly anyone defends Saudi. Unfortunately, except for a few brave souls, most of our Shi'a brothers and sisters are hell bent on defending Iran to the point where it is downright disheartening
  23. And the ones quoted by ibn Taymiyah, which the author of the article attempted to refute, do. There are even other versions which neither Ibn Taymiyah nor the author of the article mentioned, such as the one I quoted from ibn Hibban. As far as I know, there isn't a single authentic hadeeth which mentions all the details of the Mahdi, they are all found in various solitary reports, which give us insights on who he might end up being in the future, such as his name, where he might come from, who he might fight etc. Most of these reports, such as the ones that mention his name and his father's name, are Hassan at best, and mawoo3 at worst
  24. Two main problems with your line of thinking: 1) Criticizing someone doesn't mean you want to go to war with them or that you even want anything bad to happen to them. I am, as an example, constantly criticizing the horrible crimes committed by the Saudis against the Yemeni people and have donated as much as I can to the cause, but I don't want to go to war with Saudi. I am constantly criticizing the sanctions placed on countries like Iran that causes needless suffering, and that doesn't mean I want go to war with the US. I'll give you one better, here is a list of countries criticizing China's policy towards the Uighur people: None of the countries are declaring war against China, and most of them, if not all of them, would get crushed by China should they actually go to war. 2) Iran has actually SUPPORTED the Chinese policy against the Uighur people, so its not simply an issue of being quite against injustice, they are actually openly supporting it.
  25. السلام عليكم أخي, I don't think you are actually reading what the brother is writing, بارك الله فيكما
×
×
  • Create New...