Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

-Rejector-

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    595
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    17

-Rejector- last won the day on September 6

-Rejector- had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Location
    Land
  • Religion
    Shia Islam
  • Mood
    حمدلله
  • Favorite Subjects
    Religious History

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1,376 profile views

-Rejector-'s Achievements

  1. Salam 3alaikom As above. I feel like I should learn Farsi because of how connected Iran is to Shi3ism. لو كان الدين معلقا بالثريا لتناوله أناس من أبناء فارس "If religion as suspended in the stars, a man from the sons of Persia would get it." (Source: Meezan al-7ikmeh, Vol. 3, P. 2391) And recommendations for where to learn farsi? (I don't want to spend money because I'm already going to spend on learning arabic) barak allah feekom
  2. Donbass referendum results revealed The republics previously recognized by Moscow have opted to join Russia, based on preliminary polls
  3. I wrote a whole response to this but it didn't save Anyway it's probably a good thing. This thread isn't really going anywhere. Ma3salameh.
  4. The Ahlulbayt (A) being infallible is not a reason to not strive to be like them. If Iranians are already moving away from religion, removing religion from society is only going to speed that process up. Ayatollah Sistani (ha) isn't the head of a state. He's very influential, but he's not much of a political figure. Imam Khamenei (ha), on the other hand, is called 'wali al-amr al-muslimeen'. He practically runs a state which is Shi'ite. This is why amr bil marouf and nahi anil munkar is more possible in his situation. Russia seems pretty fine to me. But besides that, the Iranian 'regime' does have the respect of people. It's just a minority that disapprove. But the Western media makes it seem like 99% of the nation are against the 'regime'. These are just lies. This is why I mentioned Russia; because the vast majority of Russians support the government. But the West doesn't want you to see that, so they show you (funded) protests against Putin's mobilization, etc. What I'm saying is that it sounds like you think 99% of Iranians are against the Iranian government. I don't blame you, I blame Western media. But this is an idea which is false. Most Iranians support the so-called 'regime'.
  5. Exactly. For God's sake, even Mahsa's father didn't want this. No to both questions. I'm saying that if Islam is separated from society, society will forget about it. Look what happened in the West. See how Christianity is rapidly declining? And the sole reason Islam is rising is because of reproduction, not because of converts (or as we like to call them, reverts). People are becoming increasingly disinterested in religion, and that's clear for everyone to see. It's a sad reality, but still reality. Without the laws of the land enforcing religion, religion will be lost. This is why Iran is so strict on enforcing shari'a. Because if they stop, the people will stop practising. If they stop practising, they will stop believing. This leads to yet another "democratic", "westernized" country, and I'm sure no one wants that. The Prophet's (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) state did. Ameer al-Momineen's (عليه السلام) state did. I'm not saying it hasn't, I was just saying that surely the Iranian 'regime' could go a bit faster in their 'oppression' of women. And no, enjoining the good is not a 'mistreatment'. Probably would've lost more hair as a politician Seriously though, of course it would give them more leeway. But that doesn't mean they would go ahead and do it. Judging from Iran's public image, they don't care much about it. Notice how President Raeisi only wears his turban in meetings and international events? That doesn't look like someone trying to please the "modernised" West. What I'm saying is that Iran doesn't care for its public image. If it wanted to oppress women, nothing would stop it. It's already drowning with sanctions anyway.
  6. Obviously this situation (that you described) isn't ideal. But it's far more preferable than the alternative. You know what the alternative is? The clerics will start easing up on Islamic laws. If hijab is first, maybe music is next, then alcohol, etc. Iranian society will become more and more secular until it reaches the point where the West is today. Youth won't even know about religion, let alone be interested. Religion will be, as I described in an earlier post, only contained to the mosques. Whereas Islam wanted to build a society where religion is a part of everyday life. This is what Iran is striving for. And no, Iran isn't perfect. No one said it was. But when we find a fault, we should peacefully and academically address it, instead of burning people alive and burning Allah's Name. Anyway, if these people are so unhappy with Iran being an Islamic state, someone should tell them that the West exists. You do realise that Iran and the Taliban are from two different, completely separate schools of Islam, right? Because if you did know, you would know that Shi'ism doesn't command women to wear burqas. Nor does it force women to stay inside. I don't know where you're getting your knowledge from, but don't group all Muslims in the same bracket. And by the way, who cares what the Taliban thinks? We're trying to please Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), not some barbaric group of thuggish Muslim posers. The Apostle of Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم): "Whoever enjoins good and prohibits wrong is the khaleefa of Allah and the khaleefa of His Apostle on the Earth." (Source: Mustadrak al-Wasaail, Vol. 12, P. 179)
  7. عن أبي ذر رضي الله عنه، قال: رأيت رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله وقد ضرب كتف عليّ بن أبي طالب عليه السلام بيده وقال: يا عليّ، من أحبّنا فهو العربيّ، ومن أبغضنا فهو العِلْج، فشيعتنا أهل البيوتات والمعادن والشرف، ومن كان مولده صحيحاً. وما على ملّة إبراهيم عليه السلام إلاّ نحن وشيعتنا وسائر الناس منها براء، إن الله وملائكته يهدمون سيّئات شيعتنا كما يهدم القوم البنيان Abu Zarr (رضي الله عنه) related: 'I saw the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) strike on the shoulder of Ali Ibn Abi Taleb (عليه السلام) and say: "O Ali, he who loves us is the true Arab and he who hates us is the infidel. Our shia are the masters, the highborn, the honorable, and the legitimate. Only are our shia and we following the religion of Ibraheem (عليه السلام). The remaining people are all out of it [i.e. the religion of Ibraheem]. Allah and His angels are surely destroying the evil deeds of our shia in the same way as an axe destroys the building."' (Source: Fadaail al-Shia, H. #9)
  8. The Reality of Hoor Al-een - Sayed Ahmed Al-Qazwini (47 minutes)
  9. What is Really Behind Iran's Unrest? (33 minutes - Brian Berletic)
  10. This is just secularism. (And I'm sure you know Imam Khamenei's (ha) views on secularism). If Iran were to implement this suggestion, it would no longer be the Islamic Republic of Iran. It would just be another secular state where religion is kept in the mosques/churches/synagogues and no one will care about it outside of these places. This isn't what Imam Khomeini (ha) started the revolution for, nor is it what the millions of revolutionaries back in 1979 voted for. What not okay about it? If you're living in an Islamic state, why do you expect secular laws? The IRI isn't like other countries. It won't make the same mistake by becoming secular and isolating religion from daily life. If people don't like that, airplanes exist. Imma just ignore this. I'm not denying that oppression usually happens in steps. But if the Iranian 'regime' really was as evil as some think, surely there'd be more than one case of an uncovered woman being mistreated. There are thousands of women without the proper hijab in Iran. Anyway, what are you suggesting here? That if Iran could get away with it, they would? You sound like a Western politician. Ok... If Muslims actually believe that the khimar isn't wajib... I've got nothing to say. In an Islamic state, where the the laws are based on religion, if half the population isn't wearing hijab, it's not too Islamic, is it? In other words, were Iran to abolish the dress code, and women take off their hijabs, other things could follow. Maybe paying zakat will no longer be monitored. Perhaps Iran will follow the Arab countries and legalise alcohol. If Iran starts moving away from religion, it won't stop. This is what troubles me. But what do you mean it does damage? Interesting point. Do you mean damage to the image of Islam from a non-Muslim perspective, or damage a Muslim woman's faith on a personal level? What I mean is that if the hijab can be enforced in Iran, that's not a bad thing. Yes, if a woman dies from it (she didn't by hypothetically), then that's wrong. But there's nothing wrong with implementing the more specifics of Allah's shari'a in an Islamic state. The internet is the reason behind these violent riots. If protesters killing people can be stopped (or even slowed) through disconnected from the internet, it's only common sense to do so.
  11. Salam alaikom warahmatullah With all the disinformation levelled at Iran by the West, it's hard to find out what's really happening. Yes, there's Press TV, but that's state-owned, and it's not like Iran is immaculate when it comes to honesty. I trust most of the stuff on Press TV, but not all of it. So does anyone know any good channels or blogs, from which I can learn the truth about Iranian news? Please share. I'm actually dying to find one. May Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) bless you all and gather us all in Jannah.
  12. The fact that she as a Kurd as well... too sus for me. There are probably hundreds of Tehrani women who have a loose hijab with visible hair. Why didn't the morality police beat up one of them? But now I'm thinking... it would make perfect sense for the Great Satan to stir up trouble between the Kurds and the other Iranians, wouldn't it? I know there's no proof for any of this, but judging from the Great Satan's history, it's not far-fetched at all. Not many. I didn't see it on any Western media that I read, but I did see that some outlets (like Euro News and 1 News) were reporting the rallies. I saw it reported on Press TV, Al Mayadeen, and RT.
  13. "Criticizing"? I was just thinking now... if the West's dreams come true and Iran's 'regime' is changed, what does that mean for the Middle-East? I don't even want to think about it. Regardless of the fact that Iraq, Syria, and Yemen would be in (even more) ruins (than they are already), Palestine would have no hope whatsoever. Someone could say that Hezbollah and Syria would help Palestine, but at the end of the day, all these weapons come from Iran. The Islamic Republic of Iran, that is. No Islamic Iran = no Palestine. that's true though I'm saying that if Iran could find a way to enforce hijab, what's wrong with them doing so? And why are Muslims, of all people, so vocal about it? If a society has reached a level where hijab is enforced, that should be praised, not condemned. That said, women should NOT be killed for not wearing proper hijab. But that's the thing; they're NOT being killed. Iranian law states that women not wearing proper hijab should be arrested and taken to a police station, where they are fined (an unbelievable small amount). But we can see that this law is not being enforced in a strict way. Thousands of Iranian women have a hijab that is undesirable. Do we every hear of genocide of Iranian women who aren't in hijab? No. Because the Iranian 'regime' isn't the devil. With regards to your question, the answer is no. I'd have to be extremely naive to believe that the answer is yes. But the majority believe in Islam, which mandates hijab. I still don't understand why there are Muslims who are against the encouragement and enforcement of this dress code. It's something Quranic. I just don't get it.
×
×
  • Create New...