12313

Photos: Islamic Unity Conference in Lahore, Pakistan
http://en.abna24.com/news//photos-islamic-unity-conference-in-lahore-pakistan_918289.html
November 26, 2018 - 7:23 PM News Code : 918289 Source : ABNA24Link:    On the auspicious occasion of birthday anniversary of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) and Hazrat Imam Jafar sadiq (AS), Islamic Unity Conference was held in presence of Allama Jawad Naqvi and hundreds of people's in attendance at Jamia Urwatul wusqa in Lahore, Pakistan.

By: Ovain Ali
 
   

To hell with him, trump and the rest of them.
When you are on the path of haqq, Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى is your supporter and there is no need for any other supporter than Him, He is more than sufficient. 

This is where you are wrong.
What do you base this conclusion on exactly? 
Islam is not a religion between you and you in the privacy of your home, its a religion between you and all of society, it encompasses all layers and functions of the world we live in, it is not only a religious ideology and a lifestyle but a political ideology as well.
Or as someone with a far greater knowledge bank than me and you, on which he draws his conclusions on, has said:

 
You not liking it because you live in America or because you are worried about what people who dont care about facts will think of it, does not render the slogan incorrect or wrong islamically to say. Trust me, willfully ignorant people driven by fear and assumption are easily manipulated and the enemy will make sure they hate islam and muslims regardless of if you say anything or not. Just like Palestinians will be killed off regardless of if they fight back or not.
The learnt people have made it clear regarding the good/bad aspect of this slogan and that is all I need to consider when building my personal opinion on it.

Ammar is not pro Tatbir and has spoken against it if I am correct. Hi is not a Shirazi and is a Sistani if I am correct again or now probably does tabeed.
The Islamic Pulse people do not call non WF shias an non shias. 
Wilayat e Faqih is not just a theory anymore, it is being implemented in IRI.  It is our natural progression from a Marja to ruling a state. People will take time to understand this and that is fine. Not everyone is at the same level of understanding.

For anyone that has been following history it should be clear what is going on:
The UK funded and brought the house of saud(la) and their wahabi ideology into power in its present form after WW1. The goal was to split the muslim ummah by giving power to the most extreme takfiri ideology, in long term effectively weakening any other sunni sects/alternatives.
Now we see the UK funding and supporting these "shia scholars" which main instruments are to create fires and fitna among muslims, Islam is not a religion of hate. These "scholars" are creating fitna within the shia community itself, effectively trying to split up the shia ummah. I got very sad to see one of the young brothers here on SC, not specially knowledgeable religiously, who had been listening to these snakes came out and sent laana on seyyed Khamenei.
To divide and conquer has always been the foreign tactic of the UK.
I hope my brothers and sisters will be wiser than this, to see beyond what they are trying to do to us. For sure the truth is with the oppressed and for sure Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى is with those who resist against oppressors. 
Finally, even before this video, Ammar has really not been anything like he used to be, I remember his lectures on the biography of the Imams(as), they were good... but all his recent lectures in recent years are so monotone and black and white. I hope he did not fall in love with dunya, though he would not be the first.

وعليكم السلام ورحمة الله وبركاته
For the points i will make, i will draw upon some of the content used in the following article: https://whoaretheshia.com/2017/10/31/aftermath-ix/
Response to first question:
Let us first start addressing this question by using sources reliable to both Shias and Sunnis. Once we have done that, we can look at common ground based on established history we both agree on, and then work our way from that. What do we know about the actions of Ali ibn Abi Talin [as] and do they best fit the Shia narrative, or the Sunni narrative?
 
Umar ibn Al Khattab narrates in Saheeh Al Bukhari the following:
Reference: Sahih Bukhari :Book 86 [Kitab Al Hudud] Chapter 31.
 
It is mentioned in Saheeh-Bukhari and Saheeh Muslim by Umar ibn Al Khattab: 
References:  [1] Sahih-Muslim: Book 019, Number 4352 [2] Sahih Bukhari :Volume 5, Book 59, Number 546.  [3] Sahih-Muslim: Book 019, Number 4352
 
Thus, as we can clearly see here, Ali ibn Abi Talib withheld his oath of allegiance from Abu Bakr. Not only did he do that, he also opposed him, stayed away from him, and buried his wife without informing him, at night. We find in the tradition and part agreed upon, after many months of opposition, Umar ibn al-Khattab revealing tells Abu Bakr 'By Allah you will not visit them alone'. Why is Umar worried, about a so-called loving fellow companion in Ali ibn Abi Talib [as] ? 
To any unbiased individual, the above two traditions are compelling evidence for the fact something deeper went on between them, so much so it led Ali ibn Abi Talib [as] to oppose the Abu Bakr and Umar, something which would make no sense if the Sunni narrative were true; if Ali [as] had close ties with them, believed in their superiority, and wanted them as Caliph away. The reality is, if as Sunnis argue in an attempt to justify the tradition, he was only upset at not being consulted, then pray do tell, would he have voted for anyone other than Abu Bakr? Do boon companions not discuss their differences civilly and resolve them quickly? 
We know the first few months of the Caliphate of Abu Bakr were famous for the apostatising tribes en-masse in Arabia, and incredible trouble for Abu Bakr. Would Ali ibn Abi Talib [as] choose this a moment to 'throw a strop' at something superfluous, when his 'superior' and a man he supposedly loved immensely as a boon companion was in crisis? Or, does the Shia narrative make sense: He knew his right had been taken, however he was evaluating the situation whether or not he should act and how he may do so. The fact is, Ali ibn Abi Talib rose against them in the form of opposing them, boycotting them, and actions at times speak louder than words. His refusal to pledge his allegiance for many months during a tumultuous period for the Caliph is a sign for all to see.
Now, if we go into the more specific aspect of your question: why did he not rise up in the way of Imam al-Hussain [as]? One could also ask, why did Imam al-Hasan sign a peace treaty, while Imam al-Hussain  [asws] fight to the death? Why did Imam Zain al-Abideen, Muhammed al-Baqir, and Jaffer as-Sadiq [asws] employ taqqiyah and not assist in rebellions of others? Why did Imam al-Ridha occupy a close position with the caliph ? Each individual time period has unique contextual factors that must be taken into account.
With Yazid, you were looking at a man who didn't just have hidden hypocrisy, but it was out in the open. He brought his sins out, and his corruption well out into the open and wasn't even concerned with being like his father, who at the very least showed Islam outwardly. Abu Bakr and Umar for all their faults did not commit Zina, drink alcohol, play with monkeys and engage in vices publicly. Yazid on the other hand, was someone who threatened Islam at its core. Furthermore, his policies were those whereby he did no mind attacking Makkah and the K'aba, or entering the Holy City of Medina and slaughtering scores of companions.  Giving your allegiance to a man like that, whose hypocrisy is open and not just hidden, means in the public eye you give him the mandate to continue as he is publicly and regard him as the patron of your affairs publicly.
As for Ali ibn Abi Talib, not only were the rulers not open with things, but Islam had only just grieved from the death of its symbol and rock - the Messenger of Allah [saw]. The nation was in its infancy, and the Romans and Persians were looking from the outside at the nascent Muslim community and as all enemies do, feeling this may have well been an opportune moment to attack for the Muslims certainly lost leadership, unity, and morale that the Prophet [saw] brought. Ali ibn Abi Talib [as] starting a civil war at this time period, when you also had other tribes of Arabia apostatising en-masse, when the support of the majority were not with him, nor could he cause much of an effect at all, would have threatened the very survival of the Ummah.
And opposing them was the best he could do at the time. So much so was he considered a threat, that early into his opposition, Umar ibn al-Khattab threatened to burn down the house of Ali and Fatima [asws] , and you can see the rage, fear and anger in the words of the second Caliph:
References: [1] Musnaf of Imam Ibn Abi Shaybah, Volume 7 page 432 Tradition 37045. [Saheeh Chain - Sunni source]
 

Ali ibn Abi Talib , despite having his right taken from him, still cared deeply about the state of the Ummah. This was the nation he gave his sweat and blood for, being the man at whose hands the  Muslims won battles time and time again. This was the Ummah he loved deeply, and one he sacrificed everything for. He wanted its survival, its strength, and thus advised where he felt he could for the sake of the Ummah - not for the Caliphs.
Let us not forget, there are many times we find Ali ibn Abi Talib [as] defiantly opposing them and correcting them:
Reference: Saheeh Bukhari: 1563 ,Book 25, Hadith 49/ Vol. 2, Book 26, Hadith 634
And: 
Narrated Sa`id bin Al-Musaiyab:
`Ali and `Uthman differed regarding Hajj-at-Tamattu` while they were at 'Usfan (a familiar place near Mecca). `Ali said, "I see you want to forbid people to do a thing that the Prophet (ﷺ) did?" When `Ali saw that, he assumed Ihram for both Hajj and `Umra.
[Saheeh Bukhari: https://sunnah.com/bukhari/25/55]
 
As for being consulted, despite his efforts to guide and give his verdicts, when he saw corruption, many times the caliphs threw his advice back onto his face. This is all evidenced for anyone to read:
Reference: Saheeh-Bukhari 3111,  Book 57, Hadith 20 / Vol. 4, Book 53, Hadith 343 ENG
 
Picture for a moment  Ali ibn Abi Talib hearing about the corruption of Uthmans tax officials, and drafting a document based on the Sunnah for Uthman to act properly. Rather than Uthman reading the document, keeping it as a reminder and guidance, he tells the man to go way for he is not in need of the advice of Ali [as]
 
Shurah
As for being part of the Shurah, it's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Ali ibn Abi Talib [as] could have refrained from it, but then people would have interpreted it as him never wanting to be the caliph and not showing any interest - a position put forward by Sunnis anyway. If he goes ahead and takes part, where he can assert his right, people will say he agreed to be confined by the boundaries set by Umar. He can't win in any case.
However, there is something very revealing about this 'Shurah':
"So I called them for him and he consulted them and then called me saying, 'Call `Ali for me." I called `Ali and he held a private talk with him till very late at night, and then 'Ali, got up to leave having had much hope (to be chosen as a Caliph) but `Abdur-Rahman was afraid of something concerning `Ali. "
Source: Saheeh Bukhari : https://sunnah.com/bukhari/93/67]
How interesting, Abd ar-Rahman bin Awf, a man who decided to be the arbiter and the consulter in this Shurah, looked at each individual to determine who ought to be Caliph. Yet, after talking to Ali ibn abi Talib into the dead of the night, he himself is afraid of something Ali said. What could is possibly be? Furthermore, Ali ibn Abi Talib is shown here as someone eager to become the Caliph, perhaps feeling he made a compelling case, again refuting the idea he never wanted to become one. It is clear here there was a clear desire to be one.
Killers of his wife?
There is no consensus in Shia Islam as to how Fatima [as] died. Furthermore, there are no reliable historical sources which attest to that, rather there are only weak sources which all contradict each other. We do know however, the evidence for Umar threatening to burn down the house of Fatima [as] is strong. If he went ahead and did it, then no doubt Fatima [as] being the one calling out to them to leave by her honour as the daughter of the apostle, may have been indirectly hurt as they tried to break open the door. However, the idea Umar went inside the house, and not only in front of Ali [as], but also in front of grown men of the Banu Hashim, man-handled her, slapped her, and began to hit her, makes absolutely no sense. As i have said, historical sources all differ and contradict, and because we strongly do not revere Umar does not mean we take anything and everything negative. 

This is another lie. 
If we just look at this from a very basic perspective, our main book is al-Kafi, which has more unique and reliable traditions than all of the most authentic six Sunni compilations [Kutub as Sittah] combined.
These are:
1. Saheeh al-Bukhari [most reliable to them]
2. Saheeh Muslim [second most reliable, a minority argue most reliable]
3. Sunan an-Nasai' [accepted as third most reliable]
4. Sunan Abu Dawud
5. Jami' at-Tirmidhi
6. Sunan ibn Majah
 
Now, let us look at the birth/death dates of the respective compilers:
1. Bukhari was born:  194AH, and died 256AH
2. Muslim was born:  204AH and died 261AH
3. Nasai' was born 214AH and died 303AH
4.  Abu Dawood was born 202AH and died 274AH
5. Tirmidhi was born 209AH and died 279AH
6. ibn Majah born 209 AH, and died 273AH 
 
What about al-Kulayni, the author of al-Kafi? 
1. Muhammed ibn Ya'qub al-Kulayni was born 250AH, and died 329AH. This means he was born not long after the major Sunni Imams, and had already started compiling al-Kafi while some of them may have still been alive and continuing to compile their own books. In fact, the compilation of al-Kafi, and the the work of Imam Nasai' are very close in completion date.  Al-Kafi differs only by 50 or so years at most from the time the other compilations were complete. Therefore it actually was compiled at pretty much a very similar time as the six main books of the Sunnis. 
What is more interesting is that we follow the Quran and the Ahlulbayt. Our traditions mainly go back to Imam Jaffer as-Sadiq, and Imam Muhammed al-Baqir [asws] who narrate through their forefathers from the Prophet [saw], and from them is a golden chain going back to the Prophet [saw], particularly given the knowledge had been passed down to them through the impeccable chain.  Therefore you find we often have shorter chains, with fewer individuals between us and an Imam [proof for us] than they do between them and the Prophet. 
Additionally, many of the companions of the Imams wrote traditions in note books, and there were several different men coming much earlier who began compiling traditions. 
Brother 'Cake' in his post here makes it clear:http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235023659-comparison-between-kulayni-and-bukharis-shaykhs/
"With regard to the comparision between Kulayni reporting from a smaller number of narrators than the number that Bukhari directly reported from, then this presumes that Kulayni was serving as the "primary" collector of these narrations in al-Kafi and the primary one to collect them together. We can categorise the Shia works of hadith into three "generations" of works. The first were the usul and similar works, which were either composed by the Imam's companion or his student or their like, with very short chains back to the Imam. The second were the compilations that gathered together a number of the usul. A famous example would be Nawadir al-Hikma by Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Yahya. Some of these second generation works were organised properly - often by topic - and some were not. For example, the Nawadir of Ahmad bin Muhammad bin `Isa and the Kitab al-Mashaykha were organised into chapters by Dawud bin Kura. The third were the works that absorbed and selected from various second generation works. Two very famous examples of these would be al-Kafi and Man La Yahduru al-Faqih. (The division of works and their authors into this three categories is rough, and not black-and-white; hence, for example, sometimes second generation authors report from second generation authors).
So, in some ways (and not all), Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Yahya, Ahmad bin Muhammad bin `Isa, and others like them, are the ones who should be compared to Bukhari, not Kulayni; because although Kulayni exerted much effort in collecting, selecting, compiling and organising al-Kafi, he was relying on the second generation works that had already collected many of the primary works together. Kulayni would be better compared, in this specific context, to someone who collected some of the (Sunni) Five/Six Books together, or collected from them and included other narrations."

وعليكم السلام
An interesting question, and one i have pondered over for a large part of my life. If we have to study anyway, then what effect do Duas have? An Atheist or someone who may not pray can get higher marks on account of how well they have studied, revised, and prepared. I will try to bring forth my approach to resolving this dilemma, and i will evidence authentic and reliable traditions from Muhammed (saw) and his purified progeny (asws) in my approach to this question.
First of all, we all know we live in a world of cause an effect. Put aside Quantum mechanics and the debates about that, pretty much everything relies on this principle. If you build a car well, it will take you from point A to B. If you cook and follow a recipe, usually you'll get to the desired product. If you leave it too long in the oven, the laws of this universe will mandate what you cook will burn. The same may apply for memory. If you find a way to repeat, learn, and continually investigate and study something, you will reinforce the neurones in your brain responsible for long term memory.  So one might ask - where does Dua come into this? I have written the below just now from scratch, so don't feel i am copying and pasting a lot of material and ignoring your precise question; everything is tailored to what you have asked.
Lets break this down into three parts:
Part one: As Muslims, we believe every single thing you do, is due to the fact Allah, the Almighty allowed you to perform that act and sustains every single moment of your existence and creates the actions you choose to make. We believe without the indefinite reliance on God for every facet of our existence, nothing would exist. We are in constant reliance upon him. When you choose to memorise something for an exam, God Almighty is the one who gives those neurones the existential capability to form. When you move a pen to write notes for an exam, God is the one who creates your actions (though you choose what you do, and you move your arm intentionally, and God creates the existential capability for you to do that). So although we live in a universe whereby we have means and laws, we must never forget despite this we are still always under the direct control and support of God , for everything. Atheist or theist, Allah can permit you to use the means he has created for the typical effects they yield, or he can influence them.
Part two: Certain aspects of our existence are ordained by destiny and we have the power to change our own destiny. It may be that despite revising, you were ordained say a certain mark in an exam, or a certain job, or failure, or success.  You used the means you had, and the basic laws we all see. However, getting a better mark Allah had made contingent on you making Dua to him. If you did so, sincerely and Allah accepted that Dua, then your destiny would shift and change. Here's the evidence:
Imam Muhammed Al Baqir عليه السلام has said: ‘ ‘Shall I tell you something about a case in which even the Messenger of Allah صلي الله عليه واله وسلم  is not an exception?’ I said, ‘Yes (i would like to know) ’. He [asws] said: ‘Prayer and pleading before Allah for help repeals Al-Qada, what is already determined, even though it may have firmly been established. He folded his fingers together (to form a fist as a sign of firmness)." [Al-Kafi, Hasan-like-Saheeh] قال لي ألا أدلك على شيء لم يستثن فيه رسول الله صلى‌الله‌عليه‌وآله قلت بلى قال الدعاء يرد القضاء وقد أبرم إبراما وضم  أصابع
Imam Jaffar as-Sadiq عليه السلام has said" 'O Maysir, pray and do not say that it is  predetermined and it is all over. There is a position with Allah,  the Majestic, the Glorious, that is not accessible without praying  to Him. If a servant keeps his mouth closed and does not plead  to receive help, he will not receive anything. O Maysir, there is  no door that is knocked repeatedly but that sooner or later it will  open up.'"  [Al-Kafi, Saheeh] قال قال لي يا ميسر ادع ولا تقل إن الأمر قد فرغ منه إن عند الله عز وجل منزلة لا تنال إلا بمسألة ولو أن عبدا سد فاه  ولم يسأل لم يعط شيئا فسل تعط يا ميسر إنه ليس من باب يقرع إلا يوشك أن يفتح لصاحبه. 
Making that Dua could have potentially resulted in a different outcome, had it been something Allah decreed would be for you. Allah writes for different people different things that may occur in their lives. One thing may occur at one point if they go one way, and their destiny may be shifted to another thing if they choose to go another way, including making Dua. 
Part three:  We must use the means we have to qualify for divine favours. We must understand that the realm of cause and effect and the laws we all must abide by is decreed by Allah. He has not made them in vain, but has made them as a means we need to reach for. Dua is one means from Allah,  but the means we have in the form of cause and effect are just as equally another means from Allah. So we must not think of one as holy and the other as immaterial and superfluous. 
Imam Jaffer as-Sadiq عليه السلام has said:  "The prayers of four kinds of people are not heard: a man who  sits home and says, 'O Lord, grant me sustenance,' and it is said  to him, "Have I not commanded you to work?" a man who is  troubled by his wife so he prays for relief, but he will be asked,  'Have i not made dissolving marriage lawful?' A man who has  destroyed his wealth and asks, 'O Lord, grant me wealth,' he  will be asked, "Have I not commanded you to spend it  moderately and have I not commanded you to make  corrections?" Then the Imam read from the Holy Quran, '. . .  who in their spending are neither extravagant nor stingy but  maintain moderation,' (25:67) and a man who lends money to  others without witnesses as evidence and it is said to him, 'Have  I not commanded you to ask for witnesses as testimony?"' 
 
Let us now bring all of this together and try to approach the question
1. God has created everything, and has ordained laws and means. We are obliged to seek these means just as much as we are to seek resource through the means of Dua. It is an obligation on us to do both, rather than only one and not the other. If an Atheist who does not pray uses the correct means, Allah may allow their actions to translate into what the law typically dictates it will translate to. 
2.  Allah is the one that creates and sustains all of our actions and our very existence at all times. He knows every single variable, he knows what happened, what will happen and had that not happen what else may have happened. Therefore the one in whose hand is power and ultimately reliance upon, can choose if he wills to control these variables. Allah can make someone suddenly be more receptive to an idea, or make a concept sink into their mind better. He can make someone remember something, or he can influence one event you may never think could have an effect on another event, but he has knowledge over all things and knows how complex variables will play out. He can do whatever he wills. Furthermore, whatever he allows to happen is that what he does so by his will - nothing occurs without it being what he has allowed to happen. Although this means he can enable a miracle or a very rare event to occur, by his will, permission and power, we shouldn't always think of Duas as a one-off supernatural event. It could be that Allah controls things, influences minds, and other such little variables.
Just have a look at this: Imam Jaffer as-Sadiq عليه السلام has said:   "Between the words of Allah, the Most Majestic, the Most  Holy, 'Your prayer is accepted,' (10:89) and the time the  Pharaoh was seized there was a forty-year timespan."[ al-Kafi] The verse before: "and Moses said, "Our Lord, indeed You have given Pharaoh and his establishment splendor and wealth in the worldly life, our Lord, that they may lead [men] astray from Your way. Our Lord, obliterate their wealth and harden their hearts so that they will not believe until they see the painful punishment." 10:88
Many things occurred in the kingdom of Pharaoh, events one by one, to allow him to be seized and for his Kingdom to collapse. There were many variables in play, that both effected the life of Moses (pbuh) and Pharaoh, and everyone in between. Allah knows best about this. It was only after a time span did Allah allow the prayer to be finally fulfilled culminating in the death of Pharaoh and his men.
3. Despite the fact there are natural means, Allah controls what is predestined to occur for man. He also controls what can alternatively occur to him, if he performs an act, goes a different way, or choose something else. Among that which can repeal what is divinely decreed is the Dua. At times we may never have this change of destiny until and unless we perform Dua, and not even the Prophet (saw) was an exception to this. Someone might not pray, or be an Atheist, but Allah has written for them what is in their share - perhaps he favours them in this world, and accepts their struggle to use means he has created. Others might not pray and might get no-where, either they did not use the means, or Allah did not permit it to occur or for whatever other reason. Someone might be a believer, and so may have a position with Allah which can be reached only by making Dua, and this effectively can cause a change in their destiny. An Atheist may not have this position, whereas someone who is a monotheist/Muslim/Believer may.  
In the end, we must use the means we have, and as believers, seek the help of Allah at all times and trust in his judgement on what he has decreed for us with full knowledge and awareness he is in total control and every moment of our existence and every act we make relies on him to provide us with the existential capability/creating of it. He knows every single variable, and he can as he wills influence those variables, either through a miracle, a rare event, small effects that can play out a certain way, or whatever else he wills. Allah may allow one who does not pray to use his means for the typical effect, by his permission while he may make prayer contingent for a certain other change of destiny and effect for the believers. We don't know what is in our destinies, nor what we could have changed, and the best position to be in is that of working hard, and seeking the help of Allah and trusting in his decision. Anything correct, is thanks to Allah, any mistake i have made are my own errors and i would like to be corrected.
 I'm away for a month, but given i am helping a few people through their exams, i felt i had to reply to this.

Five claims i have posted about:
1. Flu can have a protective effect  - this is true, and the mechanism is complex and this tradition is very, very interesting.
2. Washing your hands can prevent illness of the body - this is true, and wasn't known nor emphasised until only recently for this specific cause.
3. Not drying hands after washing them specifically on towels [non-reuseable]- tea-towels are often the most contaminated object in the house.
4. Wash stained towels , for they can cause harm - this is true.
5. Barely is superior to wheat, and can help cure many illnesses - this is true, and evidenced by medical journals, who demonstrate good evidence that Barely helps control high cholesterol, the dangerous kinds of cholesterol, as well as Diabetes and many other underlying processes which lead to many of the most common illnesses we see.  If you solve high cholesterol and insulin sensitivity, as well as these other protective effects Barely has, and you basically will significantly target, to some extent , some of the biggest killers in addition to most common causes of comorbidity.

I'm supposed to be taking a month off, inshAllah i will do so right after this post, but i have just seen something on the news and i could not resist coming onto this thread to share it. We know according to an authentic tradition in al-Kafi:
The Messenger of Allah (saw) said:  'The flu is an army from the armies of Allah, Mighty and Majestic. Allah, Mighty and Majestic Sends it to the illness, to eradicate it'.  [Volume 8 - Rawdat al-Kafi]
Before i go on, i just want to make it clear, i am not giving medical advice. I urge everyone who can to get the Flu shot and do whatever they can to avoid getting the Flu. However, i am only examining whether or not there is scientific evidence to support the idea Flu can actually help play a protective role.
We read from Dr Ben Kim: http://drbenkim.com/cold-flu-difference-health.html
"Viruses are different from your cells in that they cannot duplicate themselves through mitosis and cytokinesis. Viruses are nothing but microscopic particles of genetic material, each coated by a thin layer of protein. 
Due to their design, viruses are not able to reproduce on their own. The only way that viruses can flourish in your body is by using the machinery and metabolism of your cells to produce multiple copies of themselves.
Once a virus has gained access into one of your cells, depending on the type of virus involved, one of two things can happen:
The virus uses your cell's resources to replicate itself many times over and then breaks open (lyses) the cell so that the newly replicated viruses can leave in search of new cells to infect. Lysis effectively kills your cell.
The virus incorporates itself into the DNA of your cell, which allows the virus to be passed on to each daughter cell that stems from this cell. Later on, the virus in each daughter cell can begin replicating itself as described above. Once multiple copies of the virus have been produced, the cell is lysed.
Both possibilities lead to the same result: eventually, the infected cell can die due to lysis.
Here is the key to understanding why colds and flus, when allowed to run their course while you rest, can be good for you:
There's also something a little bit more significant and very recent:  https://nypost.com/2017/07/11/the-flu-virus-might-kill-cancer-doctors-say/
"The common flu virus could be used to fight cancer, say scientists who believe it can “shatter” tumors from within.
Doctors are set to test the new treatment, using a lab-grown flu virus to attack liver cancer cells, while leaving healthy ones alone."
Doctors are set to test the new treatment, using a lab-grown flu virus to attack liver cancer cells, while leaving healthy ones alone.
Dr. Tony Dhillon, an oncologist at the Royal Surrey County Hospital in Guildford, England, is leading the new trial.
He said it could be “potentially game changing” for patients who have been told their liver cancer is inoperable.
Currently patients with advanced liver cancer are treated with daily tablets, which only slow the growth of the cancer.
The virus, once inside the tumor’s cancerous cells, replicates, the experts explained.
They said: “Eventually the cells will become so full that they will burst, allowing the ‘flu-like’ infection to spread to adjacent cells.
“It is also hoped that the virus will also be able to penetrate tumors that have spread throughout the body."
As well as this: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/04/160414114151.htm
"A common flu virus could be used to overcome patients' resistance to certain cancer drugs -- and improve how those drugs kill cancer cells, according to new research from Queen Mary University of London (QMUL)."
There's a lot more i could have included. Its also interesting the Prophet (saw) is said to have used the word 'army' given the Flu is literally an army of innumerable viruses. That is a very apt way to describe the Flu. 

I am a convert to Shiism from Sunnism, but my conversion took place about 9 years ago, and so it is difficult for me to get back into the mindset of what initially brought me over, as I have matured and developed so much throughout the years. In Islam in general, I liked that it was a sophisticated, full-circle, holistic, and comprehensive worldview and way of life. It never leaves one without guidance, on nearly every aspect of one's life, from the mundane to the complex. How to make the best out of life and society is all delineated in a relatively clear and consistent way.  Some may find that constricting, but I think order is the highest function of human life, in that our minds incline towards Order (categorization, systematization, theorization, discipline, cleanliness, organization, language, and logic). These are some of man's highest expressions, and we feel dissatisfied with confusion, disorganization, and laziness. Ethics is but a branch of aesthetics, and in order and symmetry we find beauty and peace. Despite its vast complexity, Islam appealed to every part of the world, and was practiced closely and consistently for many centuries, which suggests that the regimen it brings is constructed to fit human nature and human convention. It is a robust tradition in a world that is constantly changing to the whims of the masses and the market. I can't fathom something like that being fabricated by one man or a group of men, because that would require superhuman foresight and clairvoyance. There is also an insistence on preserving the teachings as they are, so this was not a religion that was founded by accident over a long period of time by many different influences, this was truly (in its essence) the teaching of one man, who saw the completion of his religion in his lifetime, over a 23 year period.
In Shiism I found myself drawn to the men and women who were able to manifest those highest principles of Islam in their wisdom, nobility, chivalry, modesty, eloquence, discipline, mercy, justice, bravery, devotion, self-reflection, and countless other qualities. They truly were the Speaking Quran. But they were not only teachers who talked the talk, but actually walked the walk. They suffered in indescribable ways, by murder, imprisonment, exile, robbery, the loss of friends and relatives; but in the midst of that suffering, they maintained their composure and their humanity, and kept to the virtues that they espoused. Most of us just give up and retire if we are insulted or mildly threatened, but they encountered incredible hardship and remained moving forward until their martyrdoms. Their lives were not recorded by anonymous authors decades or centuries after the fact; they were surrounded by thousands of students that documented their lives and were dazzled by their character. They taught me that love is paired with suffering, that intelligence is paired with humility, that words are paired with beauty (in calligraphy, in eloquence, in poetry, in scripture), that justice is paired with mercy, that hardship is paired with purification, that hope is paired with fear; and you see these tropes consistently throughout all of our books and the lives of the ma`sumeen.
Outside of the overstated scientific miracles of the Quran, I found that it was a very precise and mathematical work with incredible depth. Every stroke carries meaning, and the smallest change of vowels or words can ruin the entire structure of the book. Maybe Arabic is not your mother tongue, but if you understand Arabic, I suggest you take a chapter of the Quran, then compare it to a chapter from the Arabic Bible, or an Arabic newspaper article. I have tested this with non-Arabic non-Muslim speakers and even they can distinguish the Quran from these other writings just by listening to them all read plainly. Sunni speakers like Nouman Ali Khan have a lot of interesting videos in English on the Quran's literary structure, but one simple example that I am very impressed by is the chiastic ring-composition of Surat al-Baqara, or the amount of times certain words are used:
 
Beyond that, the Quran's focus on ethical lessons through rhyming stories makes it very memorable, practical, and appealing to our minds (Jungian psychology and Joseph Campbell's monomyth), and this is often more effective than the Bible's structure, which focuses much more on detail, names and places, genealogy, and chronology. The Quran has a timeless element to it.
The prophecy that Muhammad (s) claimed for himself was that he was the fulfillment of Deuteronomy 18:18 - that is to say, he was the Prophet Like Unto Moses - and there were many uncontrollable circumstances in his life that made him similar to Moses. They were both raised in aristocratic homes rather than their parental home, they both attained prophethood at 40, they were both forced to flee from their homeland, they were both law-givers, they both took part in combat against polytheists, they were both were accepted by their respective peoples, they both achieved victory in this world, and they both had an "Aaron" - who was their eloquent, blood-related vizier, and the father of their descendants. There are many other biblical prophecies that came long before the Prophet which seem to indicate the events of his life, Isaiah 42 is a prominent one, which speaks of the coming of a man who will guide Arabia from polytheism.
The Prophet described the signs of the End Times with a spooky level of precision: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8JQqXf-Jv8
Our books were written during the times of the Imams, often under their approval and supervision, and so there are strong historiographical arguments that our sources truly reflect what the Imams espoused. This includes the many miracles attributed to them. This is in contrast to many other religions, where myth develops long after the historical figures have perished.
The qualities of the enemies of the Ahl al-Bayt are often in stark contrast to them. While the Imams walked the walk, they had foes that were, even according to neutral sources, conceited, gluttonous, cunning, selfish, corrupt, degenerate, and scared of everything. A good exercise is to look at the life of Imam Ali, and then look at the lives of those who fought them - look at any sources you'd like on either, and you'll still see what true belief and true hypocrisy does to a person. If Imam Ali was the chief student of Muhammad (s), who was with him from the beginning of the message till the end, then I too want to follow Muhammad (s), because Ali (as) had all of the characteristics that I want in myself, and even his detractors could not find a single aspect of his personality to criticize.

@Mansur Bakhtiari I've asked my father and a few uncles and cousins about this matter.
They have read something about this only on western newspaper. They have not found anything regarding such a law within Iranian media as of yet. This so-called "law" is vague and does not have a strong basis within that news article. I have scanned it and I have not been able to see a citation or a sentence which has the formal translated version of this "law". This has nothing to do with a law change.
The difference is that nowadays the police does not react on "loosened" (as we can see in the article) hijab. Back in the days, such figures would have been educated by the police. This news report from 28th of december 2017 is pretty old and weak. This sort of behaviour of the police has been going on for around 3 years now. Wearing loosened hijab is pretty "normal" now.
The other thing is that the skynews article uses the Sharq newspaper which is used by reformists to push their agenda. Reformists within Iran are known for their "liberal" and "freedom-y" voice. They often target "hardliners" and use emotional arguments in order to win votes from the youth. Reformists tend to spread news about such subjects in order to show the Iranian nation that we are moving towards change, freedom and a more Western style of living. Someone with 2 braincells will immediately understand that women could walk with loosened hijab for years now and this is nothing new in particular.
The reason why the West focuses so much on these types of news articles is because of their anti-Iran propaganda. The West understands that a direct war with Iran will bear no fruits nor will they achieve much from it rather than heavy losses. The Middle-East will be lit up and they will technically lose more than that Iran would. Obama's strategy has always been to change the inside of Iran rather than fight it directly. Something which you can change diplomatically is better than through war. The US and Israel have always been trying to target the culture and politics from within the country. I have seen news articles about Iranian women walking without hijab on the street and not being arrested. These types of figures are being used in order to internally target the Iranian nation and weaken their belief in the Islamic Republic thus bringing the possibility of toppling the establishment of Imam Khomeini.
Now that there are many earthquakes happening in Iran, the US and Israel are spreading false messages on the streets of upcoming heavy earthquakes that will diminish Iran. They even go as far as saying that these earthquakes are happening because of "Iranians not worshipping God". The Zionists are using the current earthquakes in order to put fear in the eyes and ears of the Iranians. The government has warned everyone to not believe such false stories and to ignore anyone who claims to know what or where certain earthquakes will happen.
The US is a dangerous government. It is worse than the Satan. If you take one step back they will advance two steps in front of you. If Iran would allow women to not wear hijab anymore, then the next day we will see streets full of women wearing short skinny jeans. The Islamic Republic should never take any steps back if it is a move that is in favour of the US, rather, it should take steps towards the fear of the US govt.
 
If there are any Iranians living in Iran reading this: please do not create division. Stay strong with your fellow brethren and do not believe silly stories of future earthquakes destroying the land of Iran. They are baseless stories in order to create fear. Stay behind the Wilayat al-Faqih and put trusts on the matter of your experts. Do not show fear nor neutrality. The Zionists wants to use that in order to topple the govt. We are the head of the Axis of Resistance and we should keep it that way. Do not let the US make you part of a puppet regime again.