Muhammed Ali

Is ChatGPT finding all the occurrences? https://corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=flk

The very first result on Google for "Ammar Nakshawani sufism":

You can find these types of patterns for almost anything if you are cherry picking and being arbitrary. This is typical of numerologists and extreme conspiracy theories. This is how their brain works. With a large dataset you are sure to find the number 47 in some places and all you have to do is ignore the other instances which contradict the pattern that you are trying to demonstrate. And you can do that with numbers other than 47.

I am not referring to the glasses but to other screens.

I think what our brothers have in mind is not wanting to see certain things even if no subsequent haraam is committed. Self control can stop subsequent looks and actions but they can't stop accidental looks. It's the spiritual effects which are of concern. May Allah honour them. This wont be necessary. You could create software which overlays the screen. Eventually some Christians will probably do it. I don't think it would be difficult to do.

If a fasiq or a jahil Muslim wants to promote Islam then he should draw the attention of the people to pious ulama. He can use his influence and resources to help suitable people do that work and he should not speak beyond his limits. You are right, but your reasoning is wrong. We are not opposed to Tate because he is Sunni. Rather Shi'ism has has high standards for positions of influence and leadership. Even in our congregational prayers the imam must be adil. And history has vindicated the Shia because great oppression has been caused by Muslim leaders who were unqualified to lead.

You actually clicked on the 'Completely Agree' icon for a post that accuses the the Shia of outcasting converts who are not Shia! How do you justify that? You know that claim is a lie. That poster said the following, and you 'Completely Agree' with it: "you people are being arrogant and bullies, and Allah hates the oppressor and the arrogant ones. You people are hurt because your master (shaytan) is upset when Tate spreads Islam". You agree with someone who accused your fellow Shia of being arrogant and bullies and having Shaytan as their master? Those are grave accusations and agreeing with them is not benign matter. Your post is a misrepresentation of the issue. We don't condemn him simply because he did sinful things before he announced his conversion. Many converts did sinful things and you don't see us condemning them. It is the nature of his actions after conversion and the nature of those past actions that concerns us. For the sake of argument let us assume that he is only being condemned for his past sins. Can you tell us if Islam does not ask for a convert to atone for those that they oppressed? Is Tate doing any atonement? Does Islam tell us to not show any caution with new converts whose actions prior to conversion were oppressive and who are known to do things to gather more attention and supporters? When Muawiyah converts, do we let him take on a leadership role because his past sins are forgiven? Or do we ask him to be quiet and work on his soul? History teaches us what happens when such people become leaders.

Sorry I haven't read the rest of your post. First can you prove this because it is the very first thing you mentioned. List all 12 instances from the Quran where the word month is mentioned. If you can't do that then feel free to show evidence for some of your other claims. Just to be clear, I don't believe in numerology.

How do you determine the validity of numerology?

Why do people use it to learn Arabic? What motivates them to use an app which presents short randomised videos instead of a platform like Youtube? I don't use TikTok.

With respect you can't compare Shaykh Hama Yusuf and Professor Chomsky to Owens and Tate. The former are scholars whose views are not the same as ours but their mannerisms are good and their knowledge is useful. The latter are troublemakers who shouldn't even be talking. The reason I put 'culture war' in quotes is because I haven't put enough thought into assessing the suitability of the phrase. Perhaps there are better ways to describe the phenomenon. I am not belittling the phenomenon. In fact I think these extremists are causing a lot of problems. The phrase may be misleading because most normal people don't share the views of these extremists (thus the western world is not divided into two cultures), especially outside North America. I asked a number of my colleagues if they knew what the word woke meant and not even one of them had heard of it, which really surprised me.

You have admitted that both sides are wrong, and you are willing to make use of the content of troubled people and psychopaths to aid in the fight against harmful principles. Then why don't you do that equally for all sides? Why not use the content of vocal woke activists to protest against slave labour, wars and financial exploitation? If you have a problem with using wokeists, trans activists etc in your fight against the problems with the right then you should understand why it's wrong to promote the work right wing grifters when fighting the wokeists. We would never promote the work of Ibn Baz or Ibn Taymiyyah if we wanted to defend Islam.

You have two sides in this 'culture war' that are wrong and instead of rejecting both sides you decide to promote one of them? Can you explain why all the flaws of Tate that you listed are better than gender neutral toilets and the other flaws of the opposition?

May Allah guide those who look up to any of these people as sources of knowledge or enlightenment. Shaitan deludes you by mixing truth with falsehood. Falsehood alone would be much easier to reject.

Interest rate risks again: https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/08/moodys-cuts-ratings-of-10-us-banks-and-puts-some-big-names-on-downgrade-watch.html