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

SoRoUsH

Veteran Member
  • Content Count

    3,062
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

SoRoUsH last won the day on February 20

SoRoUsH had the most liked content!

About SoRoUsH

  • Rank
    Level 6 Member

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

7,058 profile views
  1. Darwin, himself, may have been racist, like some other enlightenment philosophers and thinkers. However, Darwinism, the mechanisms of adaptation and natural selection aren't. So, he may have seen the direction of evolution or mechanism of evolution through his racist lenses, but the mechanism itself isn't racist.
  2. Yes. Muta'a is a blessing for both men and women. If a man believes that Muta'a is permissible and mustahab, but holds it against a woman who's done Muta'a, then the depth of his faith should be questioned. Our perception of Muta'a and sex is so skewed and deeply flawed that it'd take generations to rectify it. Our perception of Muta'a seems to be completely disconnected from our religion's teachings and, instead, deeply rooted in cultural conjectures and opinions, and highly influenced by non-shia cultures and belief systems.
  3. Excellent book. Short, but packed with useful, practical narrations, related to health. I've already added some of its recommendations to my regular diet. Thank you brother @Qa'im
  4. I won't go over the topic of Muta'a again. There are multiple threads on this topic in which I've participated in discussions. The bottom line is: Muta'a is Mustahab and a Sunnah. If you don't wish to believe this, then don't. Up to you. Wassalam
  5. Why conflicted? Muta'a is mustahab and a Sunnah. She should be grateful that this man has enough faith to avoid sin and seek what is lawful. If he knew she's conflicted because of his previous Muta'a, he'd have every right to be conflicted about her faith.
  6. Six years ago, on my blog, I made a short post that can be helpful in this thread: http://unveilingthelight.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-deserted-well-and-loft-castle.html
  7. I hope you understood my point properly. If a person picks up the Qur'an, dedicates his/her life to studying the Qur'an for decades, without also closely studying the narrations of the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), that person will not see or understand the foundations and fundamentals of the religion and faith.
  8. This is a common misconception, and sadly very prevalent. Here's another way to think about it: The Qur'an does lay down the foundation, however, we can't understand the Qur'an properly without resorting to the narrations of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). In this sense, the Qur'an and the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), together, lay down the foundation. All the secrets of the universe and existence, past, present, and future, are in the Qur'an, but we can't see or understand them, if we do not seek the narrations of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). This is what it means when we say they can't be separated. We can't understand either of them without the other.
  9. Both! You got to think of them as one unit, serving the same purpose, from two positions. The Qur'an builds the outer framework, and the narrations of the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), build inner content, within the framework. The Qur'an points and alludes, the narrations elaborate and clarify.
  10. This is absolutely incorrect. It's a very common misconception, and it's resulted in so much confusion and deviation from the straight path. Qur'an and Hadiths, narrations from the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), are never separated and should never be seen as separate. Hadith al-Thaqalayn makes this point very clear. In addition, the fundamental pillar of our faith is Walaya. We can properly understand the meaning and nature of Walaya, when we study what the Awliya of Allah, the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), have said about it, comments and narrations that are not explicitly found in the Qur'an.
  11. Islam is the religion of the heart. Your heart will know. And your heart will know, once it's receptive and perceptive to receive the light. There won't be an instance, when you reach a conclusion through reason or mind. The latter assists the heart in its journey to become receptive and perceptive. You'll know, when you'll know. Slowly and gradually, follow more and more Sunnah and Adab of the prophet and the imams, in addition to the mandatory obligations, and you'll start to notice more and more signs and confirmations as you move forward. But always and until the end, focus on improving your Adab, by following the right role models.
  12. سلام Recently, I've been questioning whether the Ahl al-Kisa are Bani Adam? Considering how Muhammad and Ali, peace be upon them, were created as light before the mixing of clay and water, and how Muhammad was a prophet, even before Adam's clay was mixed with water, can Mohammad and Ali be Children of Adam? Their essence is that of divine light. The essence of Bani Adam is that of clay and water. When you think of children of a father, you always know that the father comes into existence first, before the children. However, in case of Mohammad and Ali, they came into existence before Adam, in their light form. So, technically, they can't be children of Adam. Just some of my random thoughts today. Any thoughts on this?
  13. The following narrations could perhaps be more pieces of the puzzle that can be added to the context of the original narrations. 1. Mawaththaq حُمَيْدٌ عَنِ ابْنِ سَمَاعَةَ عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ الْحَسَنِ عَنْ مُعَاوِيَةَ بْنِ وَهْبٍ عَنْ عُبَيْدِ بْنِ زُرَارَةَ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع فِي الْمُتَوَفَّى عَنْهَا زَوْجُهَا وَ لَمْ يَدْخُلْ بِهَا قَالَ هِيَ بِمَنْزِلَةِ الْمُطَلَّقَةِ الَّتِي لَمْ يَدْخُلْ بِهَا إِنْ كَانَ سَمَّى لَهَا مَهْراً فَلَهَا نِصْفُهُ وَ هِيَ تَرِثُهُ وَ إِنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ سَمَّى لَهَا مَهْراً فَلَا مَهْرَ لَهَا وَ هِيَ تَرِثُهُ قُلْتُ وَ الْعِدَّةُ قَالَ كُفَّ عَنْ هَذَا Humayd has narrated from ibn Sama‘ah from Ahmad ibn al-Hassan from Mu‘awiyah ibn Wahab from ‘Ubayd ibn Zurarah who has said the following: “About the case of a woman whose husband dies before going to bed with her, abu ‘Abd Allah, ‘Alayhi al-Salam, has said, ‘She is like a divorced woman with whom he has not gone to bed. If mahr (dower) is set for her she deserves one-half of it, otherwise, she does not have the right to demand mahr (dower) but she has the right to inherit.’ I asked about waiting period. He (the Imam) said, ‘Do not ask about it.’” 2. Saheeh مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَحْيَى عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ عَنْ عَلِيِّ بْنِ الْحَكَمِ عَنِ الْعَلَاءِ بْنِ رَزِينٍ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ مُسْلِمٍ عَنْ أَحَدِهِمَا ع فِي الرَّجُلِ يَمُوتُ وَ تَحْتَهُ امْرَأَةٌ لَمْ يَدْخُلْ بِهَا قَالَ لَهَا نِصْفُ الْمَهْرِ وَ لَهَا الْمِيرَاثُ كَامِلًا وَ عَلَيْهَا الْعِدَّةُ كَامِلَةً Muhammad ibn Yahya has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from Ali ibn al-Hakam from al-‘Ala’ ibn Razin from Muhammad ibn Muslim who has said the following: “I once asked one of the two Imam, (abu Ja‘far or abu ‘Abd Allah), ‘Alayhim al-Salam, about the case of a woman whose husband dies before going to bed with her. He (the Imam) said, ‘She deserves one- half of mahr (dower) and complete inheritance and she must count a complete waiting period.’”
  14. Salam, What is an accurate translation of the following narration? مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَحْيَى عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ عَنِ ابْنِ مَحْبُوبٍ عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ سِنَانٍ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع قَالَ مُلَامَسَةُ النِّسَاءِ هُوَ الْإِيقَاعُ بِهِنَّ Muhammad ibn Yahya has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from ibn Mahbub from ‘Abd Allah ibn Sinan who has said the following: “Abu ‘Abd Allah, ‘Alayhi al-Salam, has said, ‘Touching women is falling upon them.’” Sarwar indictes that "falling upon them" implies "going to bed" with them. However, I can't understand how can "touching" someone is equivalent to sleeping with them or having intercourse with them. Any thoughts? Thank you! P.S. This narration is Saheeh.
  15. سلام, Just a quick note: We ought to be careful not to evaluate Imams' actions based on what we consider to be reasonable. We do not determine what's reasonable, first, and then judge the actions of our Imams to see if they fit within our notion of "reasonable." Instead, we view their actions, then form the criteria of reasonability in our minds and cognition. We have been warned, sternly, not to interpret the Qur'an according to our own opinions. And the Imams are the Speaking Qur'an. We view them and their actions, precisely like how we view the Qur'an and its ayaat. They are one and the same and are not separated from one another. The imams and the Qur'an are with Haqq, and the Haqq is with them. We are distant from the Haqq. Sorry, I just thought I should bring this point to the surface. التماس دعا
×
×
  • Create New...