VoidVortex

love is not shirk per se(shirk here means concealed polytheism, not minor polytheism like riya or major polytheism). If the love is for the sake of Allah its not concealed shirk. There was someone who was very agitated because they had just gotten married and loved their wife a lot, but they felt guilty because they thought it was a kind of betrayal to Allah. He asked a mystic about this, and the mystic told him the more he loved his spouse the more he loves god The blanket statement "love is shirk" is problematic and it should be clarified (1) The more you love your spouse, The more you will love God! | Ayatollah Tihrani| - YouTube

Sleep is actually not included in the hadith, the hadith is about time when you are awake. Also it shouldn't be taken too literally. When the hadith talks about the socialising it specifically talks about people who will benefit you spiritually, so not any old kind of socialising. Yes Islam tells us to talk less so this kind of socialising would not be a vain kind, but being with spiritual people to spiritually benefit from them. Also it doesn't mean that conversations are all about reminding of faults, the reminding of faults part could be interpreted more as when you wish to spiritually develop you will be blind to some of your own faults so surround yourself with people who will tell you your faults so that you may treat those faults. when I get home maybe I'll try speak my thoughts on this more, but my thoughts are just my own opinion

First, know that Allah loves you Second for the depression try a few things: 1. Diet: Diet can have a pretty big impact. I just checked a vid and many people in the comments are attesting to keto helping a loved one's autism. Try out the keto diet where you intake 80 to 90 percent fat, and the other 10 or 20 percent carbs and protein.(don't worry about consuming so much fat, contrary to myths, eating fat in itself doesn't make you fat) The diet could consist of foods, such as: • Fatty meat • Coconut oil ( or you could get mct oil which is even better) • Eggs ( good quality eggs are one of the best foods out there) • Fatty fish ( I would supplement omega 3, its very important) Also you can have salads too and any other meat you want You would also want to add electrolytes( magnesium, potassium, salt), B vitamins Also have at least 5000 iu of vitamin D a day, vit D is very important for the body. cut out the sugar in your diet and cut out veggie oils Also supplement on probiotics for the gut, most serotonin is produced in the gut By God's permission this diet may reduce the symptoms of the depression and autism, try implement it slowly and see if it helps. For the keto part, there will be something called a keto flu, as your body is not used to it so when you feel symptoms if you switch to keto you need to intake electrolytes to a high enough amount. This includes salt, a few thousand miligrams of potassium and 400 mg of magnesium a day. You can get potassium from losalt, those salt brands that replace sodium with potassium and you can get it from green veggies but those veggies differ in how much they have. Salt is extremely important in tackling keto flu. I'm sorry for overwhelming you, but these were dietary points I think you could try to help Exercise: Exercise is extremely important for mental health, exercise daily even if it's just walking.

Inshaalah you'll benefit a lot from this: You need God's Love more than you think - YouTube

this doesn't justify what you said, it doesn't suggest they believed in the dependence of those idols on God. In fact it seems apparent that the pagans believed in the independence of the idols in certain matters, and thus were polytheists. an extract: the pagans designated a horizontal relationship with Allah and that is what is being condemned and that made them polytheists. regardless I don't say personally that you can just say anything about the Imams because there is a vertical relationship. But I do think that sticking to the beliefs of theologians who lived a thousand years ago isn't necessary and that we can evolve our understanding of the Imams without attributing divinity or lordship to them. However there can be extremist positions even regarding the vertical relationship so if a person wishes to make a claim they need to provide evidence and show how it doesn't contradict Quran.

The Sheikh had posted something about God's love and an example he gave was the sun and moon as blessings for us out of his love for us, and someone had written something in the comments, basically that God, in his love wouldn't allow us to remain in hardship. They were pretty rude and aggressive about it but the way the sheikh responded softened their heart and I think its a really good way to deal with those who might misunderstand religion. With empathy. S stands for sheikh and C stands for commenter. In the middle comment, the commenter was responding to another individual

How do you manage to not burn out working for that much a week?

The theories are just an attempt to understand Quran and hadith at a much higher level. God isn't going to spoon feed us, a lot of higher teachings are in the Quran but unfortunately they have been neglected because we didn't have the capacity to understand. There's a reason its a common trend that the Imams forbade those who knew more about their status from disclosing their secrets, its because people couldn't handle it. Some were rightly accused of ghuluw and some were falsely accused of ghuluw. At the very least we can agree that secrets did exist and a very small minority had access to some of these secrets. For example if you read risalah al wilayah by Allamah Tabatabai its full of Quran and ahadith. Allamah wasn't just a philosopher or mystic, but he was also a mufassir, so he would never think to go against Quran in his worldview and he believed his worldview was in line with the Quran, even if to some his worldview seems to be against Quran. Anyways scholars like Ayatollah Hasanzadeh have proved a lot of things that may have not been conventionally accepted like immateriality of the soul for which he provided 20 proofs . To be honest, the best way to see their views is to read his books. Anyways I think at least the second video you will like to watch. The ulama abrar p2 video, because it talks about ghuluw and mufawidha and because this discussion especially happens here at shiachat frequently it would be great if you watched it when you have time and gave your thoughts. (2) 07 - Ramadhan 1443 | Dr. Faroukh Sekaleshfar | What Exactly Ulamaa Abrar Theory Entailed? (p2) - YouTube I would also say watch part 3 if you have time but part 2 is more important.

My bad, I'm not good at understanding poetry

Usually they say a parent is being kind or hits their children out of love. Maybe the angel's harshness causes one to grow, but if the angel used love instead of fear, the person might grow far quicker : ). The question is, how do you see your lord. Is the angel reflecting how you see your lord

why is the angel not being kind like its kind Lord

What do you define as a real religious Ayatollah? Why does liberality define a person's religiosity? What's the proof being conservative makes one a better mujtahid than being non-conservative? I'm not saying this to defend or oppose anyone. Just this statement in general is what I'm asking about

yes its this 3 part series on the theory of Ulama Abrar. Part 2 is on the same channel and part 3 is linked above.

The max Kadivar could go is do his own taqleed, if indeed he is a mujtahid. In Islam, being mujtahid doesn’t mean everybody else can do your taqleed. To be Marja’ Taqleed, a person needs higher qualifications than just being a Mujtahid. … thanks for sharing the links btw, after reading the Hijab view of his, I would say he better not do his own taqleed, since he seems to have partial sources available to his disposal… He also seems devoid of spiritual and moral aspects of the Fiqh rulings, otherwise why would he give a “fatwa” on something which is not applicable to himself (he is a male after all) and in doing so earn the Masia’ of those few women who would chose to listen to his view, To be fair, we impose the spiritual and moral aspects of fiqh rulings onto fiqh. for example, take the rulings of purity of non muslims, some impose the idea that they are inherently najis because of their kufr. But recently there has been a shift in fiqh and non muslims (non ahlul kitabi) will be ruled as tahir most likely in the future. Some maraja have ruled them tahir and others have changed it from impure to impure with obligatory precaution. Those spiritual dimensions that we imposed turned out to be false. We can extrapolate spiritual and moral aspects from fiqh, but we can't invalidate fiqh because of our own conceptions of spirituality and morality, at least that seems to be the case in my view. I just wanted to comment on this since its a good point to comment on.

As for the proof of the existence of these realms, to my knowledge I certainly know until the immaterial realm, things have been proven and its mentioned in another video that Ayatollah Hasanzadeh Amoli provided 20 proofs for the immateriality of the soul, although some theologians even still living today reject this, as did Shaykh Mufid.

By the way, I watched a video today and this is the moderate position. The Imams and Prophet are in unity with all realms except essence of Allah. Although they are in unity with all realms, they are not aware of all things that happen. If Allah wishes he diverts their attention to the Barzakhi realm or the immaterial realm and they gain knowledge from that. For example if the Prophet lost his camel, its not that he made taqqiyah and actually knew where it was. "Ana Bashurun mithlokum"! However, if he was made fun of, then as the religion is under attack, Allah makes the Prophet aware where the camel is. This theory solves Sayed Fadlullah's contention and also solves some questions about the esoteric nature of the Imams. The Imams are in unity with all these realms, but do not have absolute knowledge. Its like if you are working very intensely and you are hungry, but because of your focus on your work, you don't feel that hunger. You still are hungry but your attention is diverted. Hence it is said that if the Imams were given access to some high realms(which they are already in unity with), they wouldn't feel the stab of a knife. I can't do justice to this so this is the video

I agree with you but as per the theory of wilayatul faqih al mutlaqa the wilayah of the faqih is equal to the wilayah of the prophets and aimmah (عليه السلام) in the sense that obeying him is like obeying the Prophet etc. For example it is narrated that our deeds are witnessed by the 12th Imam every monday and thursday. Does it mean that wali al faqih has this ability. Nothing suggests that, and if someone wishes to prove this they can bring their proof.

even if this is the case, invading an entire country because of the actions of terrorists is nonsensical. There's no justification for it. It took them 10 years to find Bin Laden and another 10 to pull out. During this time, the military industrial complex was booming from the war that American taxpayer money was funding. Afghanistan is one of the many examples of the US government bowing down to its military industrial complex and corporations instead of its people. Eisenhower didn't warn the people of the military industrial complex for nothing! A waste of 20 years. A waste of many lives. A waste of trillions.

Totally unrealistic nonsense. why is it unrealistic nonsense?

Whatever he believed, I am not interested in knowing that as his famine of knowledge became apparent to me the moment I knew that there is no insaan e kamil for him, there are no personalities who are supposed to be the Wāsiṭat al-Fayḍ al-Ilāhī and that the Imams of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) don't have access to knowledge of unseen. first, stop saying he has a famine of knowledge, attack the ideas rather than the individual, you are presupposing with certainty that the view you are advocating is correct, whereas it may not be. He was a very knowledgable man, but he didn't believe in X concept and that's ok, that doesn't mean he has a famine of knowledge. Insan kamil is a term introduced by Ibn Arabi anyways, it has certain connotations that come along with it, connotations that many will reject, and it does not mean a person has a famine of knowledge if they reject Ibn Arabi or Mulla Sadra's ideas.

wilayat al faqih and wilayat takwiniyyah are not really related. Being wali al faqih doesn't give you the esoteric wilayah of the Imam. Imam Khomeini and Khamenei do not have such a power. Its far fetched for a lot of people to even claim Imam Zaman has such a power, let alone fallibles. As for Imam Zaman, he may have such a power, he may not, I don't know.

it certainly would not count as having a soul. The soul or heart is a very very great thing, which does not exist in the material world. Its impossible for human beings to give a soul to something.

I never advocated for that though or hinted at it. If a scholar says something they can be wrong, no matter how great they are. I just wanted to show that this take of wilayah takwinniyah does exist amongst some scholars of which Sayed Khomeini is included.

I wouldn't say he was known to be strong in the area of fiqh. He was known to be oriented more towards philosophy. His works on fiqh are somewhat limited and it appears that he mainly taught subjects other than fiqh in the limited time that he was teaching in Najaf. I wrote something for this, but @Ashvazdangheanswered the question way better than I could. I will also add he was a revolutionary in fiqh too. let's take this question and answer by Sayed Sistani for example: Sayed Sistani explains the hadith in a different way than what the hadith appears to be saying. He's not rejecting the hadith but adding nuance to it. This view is a recent view, and jurisprudents of the past actually only allowed seeing a woman once, with or without lust. Jurisprudents today have started issuing views different to the jurisprudents of the past. This is because hadiths have nuances, and they cannot just be read and applied. They have to be analysed very deeply and understood in the correct context, otherwise are our jurisprudents today sinning by ruling music to be lawful in certain circumstances despite some pretty explicit texts banning even certain instruments? Anyways, its not a matter that if I see an apparent conflict between Quran and hadith and the beliefs of a scholar I will adhere to the beliefs of a scholar, although we actually do this in taqlid, but its the case that I will consider a scholar's view as long as they provide evidences for it, and highlight why X hadith can be interpreted in Y way. For Sayed Khomeini's view on wilayat takwinniyah, whilst I acknowledge his view, I actually don't accept or reject his view. I do say however that his view could be argued for and against, but for now I don't reject it nor do I accept. As I increase in knowledge maybe my view will change, or it won't. If a scholar intends to argue for something, they need to bring evidences for it. Imam Khomeini actually brought hadiths from al-kafi to justify his view in those chapters I posted, hadiths I didn't know existed and not what I expected to be in al-kafi. Of course he can't argue for his view on this fully in that book, because it wasn't suitable to explain fully why he believed in his version of wilayat takwiyniyyah, he might have had to write an entire book for that or more(which might exist I'm not sure), certainly something which can't fit into a chapter.

I will say though that Imam Khomeini can be wrong about this, and his arguments can be responded too. He may be right or he may be wrong. It is however important to see that we have a portion of scholars that believe in wilayah takwiyyiniyah to this extent. Ayatollah Khomeini was heavyweight scholar, even in fiqh he was extremely strong, let alone his specialisation in other subjects. It makes his perspectives of the religion certainly worthy of consideration. certainly not. Those scholars are using Quran and Hadith to derive their conclusions in the first place. Let's take the rulings on music for example. It was essentially consensus that musical instruments were haram because the hadiths clearly stated it was haram. But, recently the rulings on this have changed. Sayed Sistani himself views it permissible as long as certain conditions are fulfilled. Did Sayed Sistani suddenly imagine Quran and hadith to not be strong proof. Certainly not. This is because hadith on this subject can be re-interpreted to be seen in the light of prohibiting it when it is suitable for entertainment or sinful gatherings. In a similar manner, Sayed Khomeini does not consider wilayah takwiyyiniyah the tafweedh prohibited in hadith, just like Shaykh as-Saduq and Shaykh al-Mufid differed on ghuluw. They didn't magically disregard sources, but their interpretation differed.