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

    3,291
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Reputation Activity

  1. Thanks
    SoRoUsH reacted to Sirius_Bright in Scholars and the Vaccine   
    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.world-federation.org/sites/default/files/Religious_Vaccine_QnA_29Dec2020_Final.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi_4J_Ds5LwAhWryjgGHXd4CqkQFjAEegQIDRAC&usg=AOvVaw1Ru6zhbh9wDSbTeC4hEIOS
  2. Disagree
    SoRoUsH reacted to F.M in Scholars and the Vaccine   
    this is actually the biggest proof that we shia arent allowed to take them. we shia have nothing to say, its our imam mahdi is our leader of this time. because of his occulation he has clearly stated to go to our merjas (they are also under control by the imam). If they arent allowing something then its an obligation to us shia,elsewhere nothing would be left of our soo called shia-iman/ our jafariah. 
    I am sure imam al mahdi is more than aware of what is happening on this world including what we even dont know and is hidden from us.He wouldnt just let the marja in this crazy time be left alone. They clearly stated its not allowed to take te vaccine from the western world (which is also logically) if people chose to not accept the saying. If they gave the wrong information then we all know our own imam who is activelly/ serious bussy in his mission, would intervene and take action and propably say it to the marjas that its not right or whatsoever. Our marjas are at the end controlled by imam al mahdi himself if they dont listen to the merjas then they dont acept the words of our living imam either. At the end everyone knows that when he will return, lots shias will turn against him and not obey to him so its not big news to see that people arent respecting their merjas anymore. Everyone stands for him/herself and its deeds.
  3. Thanks
    SoRoUsH reacted to Hameedeh in Scholars and the Vaccine   
    Salam. I read about a webinar through Zoom and Facebook to be held on Saturday, April 24,  at 5:00 pm EST (New York and Florida time). The topic is What to Know about Islamic Rules, COVID-19 and Vaccinations. The information about the webinar is here:
    https://imam-us.org/webinar-at-the-crossroads-of-religious-obligation-and-medicine-what-to-know-about-islamic-rules-covid-19-and-vaccinations
  4. Like
    SoRoUsH got a reaction from Allah Seeker in "He Created You from a Single Soul"   
    So, you're saying the word مِنْهَا isn't connected to the نفس? 
    I'm not quite sure, since in the statement, the phrase "from her" must be referring to a known noun. It's hard to assume that "her" is referring to a female human being. 
    For example, we can't say, "I like the taste of it" without first knowing what "it" is referring to. 
    Similarly, we can't say, "Then He made from her" without first knowing what/who "her" is referring to. 
    We have no reason to think that "her" in that sentence is referring to a female human being. So, there seems to be a grammatical/logical issue with your proposition.
  5. Like
    SoRoUsH got a reaction from Allah Seeker in "He Created You from a Single Soul"   
    If we choose this line of argument, and if we accept that we are all created from Adam, then we must qualify our belief to be that we are created from a feminine "part" of Adam, namely, his feminine nafs. 
    The question that emerges is, what is the relationship between Adam's feminine nafs and Adam? 
    Our nafs cannot be our whole being, including our physical body, since it leaves our body during sleep. 
    Was Adam, himself, created from this نفس واحداة? 
  6. Like
    SoRoUsH got a reaction from Allah Seeker in "He Created You from a Single Soul"   
    A car is feminine because it carries within passengers. A car is feminine because it is a receptive thing; it receives things inside of it. 
    We could argue, and it has been argued by some Sufis, that nafs, of men and women, is a feminine thing, since it carries the spirit and Fitra in it. 
  7. Like
    SoRoUsH got a reaction from Allah Seeker in "He Created You from a Single Soul"   
    سلام
    I've looked through our narrations to find an authentic narration to properly understand the following: 
    خَلَقَكُم مِّن نَّفْسٍ وَاحِدَةٍ ثُمَّ جَعَلَ مِنْهَا زَوْجَهَا
    This is part of 39:6.
    "He created you from a single being/nafs, then made from her her spouse."
    The words مِنْهَا زَوْجَهَا have female pronoun suffixes, referring to the نفس/nafs. Therefore, this nafs is a female or a feminine entity. It is probably not Adam. 
    So, my first question is, what/who is this نفس واحدة? 
    I Couldn't find any authentic narration to clarify this issue, and even weak narrations are all over the place, and do not point to a single coherent story.
    "Nafs" refers to a living being. 
    So, it seems, we are created from one living female being/nafs. 
     
     
     
     
  8. Disagree
    SoRoUsH reacted to Dawid Das in What do you think of effeminate men?   
    You are not a real man if you support feminism. A woman can never be equal to a man. God created man to put his will in society.
    For this reason there has always only existed male prophets and never female prophets.
  9. Like
    SoRoUsH got a reaction from ahlulbaytkr in [Mature topic] An Alarming Trend   
    There's nothing alarming. It's just common sense that more people, now, would feel more comfortable to openly talk about their queerness. 

  10. Like
    SoRoUsH got a reaction from Uni Student in [Mature topic] An Alarming Trend   
    There's nothing alarming. It's just common sense that more people, now, would feel more comfortable to openly talk about their queerness. 

  11. Thanks
    SoRoUsH got a reaction from Northwest in Scholars and the Vaccine   
    سلام
    Is there any scholar or marja' that has advised against taking the COVID vaccine? 
    As far as I know, most scholars are encouraging their followers to get the vaccine. Correct? 
    Has any marja claimed that it's either Mustahab or compulsory to get the vaccine? 
    Thank you
  12. Like
  13. Disagree
    SoRoUsH got a reaction from hasanhh in "He Created You from a Single Soul"   
    سلام
    I've looked through our narrations to find an authentic narration to properly understand the following: 
    خَلَقَكُم مِّن نَّفْسٍ وَاحِدَةٍ ثُمَّ جَعَلَ مِنْهَا زَوْجَهَا
    This is part of 39:6.
    "He created you from a single being/nafs, then made from her her spouse."
    The words مِنْهَا زَوْجَهَا have female pronoun suffixes, referring to the نفس/nafs. Therefore, this nafs is a female or a feminine entity. It is probably not Adam. 
    So, my first question is, what/who is this نفس واحدة? 
    I Couldn't find any authentic narration to clarify this issue, and even weak narrations are all over the place, and do not point to a single coherent story.
    "Nafs" refers to a living being. 
    So, it seems, we are created from one living female being/nafs. 
     
     
     
     
  14. Like
    SoRoUsH got a reaction from 3wliya_maryam in Sistani's Office Response to His Thighing Fatwa   
    Ok. Let's put it in simple words.
    To prevent men from murdering little girls, men are given permission to molest little girls with their penises. 
    Murder or molestation! 
    And we are being told that this is in fact for the sake of little girls to help them? 
    Should we now be thankful about this?! 
  15. Thanks
    SoRoUsH got a reaction from Abu Nur in Scholars and the Vaccine   
    سلام
    Is there any scholar or marja' that has advised against taking the COVID vaccine? 
    As far as I know, most scholars are encouraging their followers to get the vaccine. Correct? 
    Has any marja claimed that it's either Mustahab or compulsory to get the vaccine? 
    Thank you
  16. Like
    SoRoUsH got a reaction from pisceswolf96 in Sistani's Office Response to His Thighing Fatwa   
    Ok. Let's put it in simple words.
    To prevent men from murdering little girls, men are given permission to molest little girls with their penises. 
    Murder or molestation! 
    And we are being told that this is in fact for the sake of little girls to help them? 
    Should we now be thankful about this?! 
  17. Partially Agree
    SoRoUsH got a reaction from Zainuu in Ilm ur Rijaal - Challenge to Everyone Whos After Sahih Chains   
    First, you're assuming, and this is a horrible assumption, that a scholar like Najashi simply labelled/ranked narrators, baselessly and randomly, without knowing anything about them. 
    Second, you're assuming, another horrible assumption, that one must know a person, in-person, to be able to tell whether their narrations can be trusted or not. 
    Third, you're assuming, your third horrible assumption, that the books we have with us today, are what Najashi had with him in his time. Therefore, if we can't find any evidence for his verdict, he must not have had any evidence at all either.
    Three horrible assumptions → weak, unsound argument
    You clearly don't understand how scientific frameworks are built and sustained.
    There are other issues with your post. But these three issues are sufficient for now to reject your arrogant approach to a science, which has been constructed and revised and enhanced by numerous scholars throughout numerous centuries, to help us better understand our Deen. 
    Some random dude, on Shiachat, with a weak post, isn't going to crumble a science built and sustained by devoted scholars throughout centuries.
  18. Completely Agree
    SoRoUsH got a reaction from Mahdavist in Ilm ur Rijaal - Challenge to Everyone Whos After Sahih Chains   
    First, you're assuming, and this is a horrible assumption, that a scholar like Najashi simply labelled/ranked narrators, baselessly and randomly, without knowing anything about them. 
    Second, you're assuming, another horrible assumption, that one must know a person, in-person, to be able to tell whether their narrations can be trusted or not. 
    Third, you're assuming, your third horrible assumption, that the books we have with us today, are what Najashi had with him in his time. Therefore, if we can't find any evidence for his verdict, he must not have had any evidence at all either.
    Three horrible assumptions → weak, unsound argument
    You clearly don't understand how scientific frameworks are built and sustained.
    There are other issues with your post. But these three issues are sufficient for now to reject your arrogant approach to a science, which has been constructed and revised and enhanced by numerous scholars throughout numerous centuries, to help us better understand our Deen. 
    Some random dude, on Shiachat, with a weak post, isn't going to crumble a science built and sustained by devoted scholars throughout centuries.
  19. Like
    SoRoUsH got a reaction from Abu Nur in Ilm ur Rijaal - Challenge to Everyone Whos After Sahih Chains   
    First, you're assuming, and this is a horrible assumption, that a scholar like Najashi simply labelled/ranked narrators, baselessly and randomly, without knowing anything about them. 
    Second, you're assuming, another horrible assumption, that one must know a person, in-person, to be able to tell whether their narrations can be trusted or not. 
    Third, you're assuming, your third horrible assumption, that the books we have with us today, are what Najashi had with him in his time. Therefore, if we can't find any evidence for his verdict, he must not have had any evidence at all either.
    Three horrible assumptions → weak, unsound argument
    You clearly don't understand how scientific frameworks are built and sustained.
    There are other issues with your post. But these three issues are sufficient for now to reject your arrogant approach to a science, which has been constructed and revised and enhanced by numerous scholars throughout numerous centuries, to help us better understand our Deen. 
    Some random dude, on Shiachat, with a weak post, isn't going to crumble a science built and sustained by devoted scholars throughout centuries.
  20. Completely Agree
    SoRoUsH reacted to Qa'im in Ilm ur Rijaal - Challenge to Everyone Whos After Sahih Chains   
    Whilst valid criticisms of rijal exist, saying that the system is useless would pose a number of questions:
    1. What is to be done with hadiths that are very late (say, 19th century)? Why?
    2. What is to be done with hadiths that irreconcilably contradict one another?
    3. What is to be done with hadiths that contradict indubitable aspects of reality?
    4. What is to be done with hadiths narrated by Sunnis, Zaydis, Isma`ilis, and Nusayris (since chains don't matter)?
    These are questions that would really test one's methodological consistency.
  21. Thanks
    SoRoUsH reacted to Abu Hadi in Beat Wives Qur'aan 4:34 What is the Shi'ite Perspective???   
    I was going to post this, but someone beat (lol) me to it, 
    "How can you embrace your wife with the same hand that you beat her with?"1
    Hadith mentioned in al-Mizan, by Allamah Tabataba’i, Commentary of Surah al-Nisa’, vol. 8, verses 32-35, A Discourse On Men’s Authority Over Women pages 202-213, the hadith is mentioned at page 208. Here is the Arabic and exact reference to the hadith, and its translation:
    محمد بن يعقوب ، عن حميد بن زياد ، عن الحسن بن محمد بن سماعة ، عن غير واحد ، عن ابان ، عن أبي مريم ، عن أبي جعفر عليه‌السلام قال : قال رسول الله صلى‌الله‌عليه‌وآله : أيضرب أحدكم المرأة ثم يظل معانقها.
    From Abi Maryam from Abi Ja`far (عليه السلام) said, the Messenger of Allah (SAWAS) said: "How can you embrace your wife with the same hand that you beat her with? " Source: -al-Kulayni, al-Kafi, vol. 5, pg. 509, hadīth # 10 
    The above is from this article
    https://www.al-islam.org/some-questions-related-womens-rights-islam-sayyid-rida-husayni-nasab/has-islam-permitted-man-punish
    The reason why I posted the video from Sayyid Ammar first, is because he gives logic and context for the ayat mentioned to be understood. There are many here who knowledge of Arabic and Ilm Al Rijal is limited, so they would not have the ability to go back to the original sources to derive the meaning. You don't need this knowledge to understand why you cant 'beat' your wife if you understand the context of the ayat. 
    From the same article, about the meaning of the word 'Dharib', commonly translated as 'beat' by the Christian Zionist trolls
    The word "dharb" in Arabic language has different meanings. It has different meanings in different dictionaries. For instance, in the book, "Lesan Al Arab", it means: achieve and invoke. In order to prove this meaning for "dharb", refer to a poem of "Kumait" who is a famous literal Arabian poet. In this poem he argued that “dharb" is request and the “dharaba" also means requested.
    Also, in "Lesan Al-Arab" the word “dharb" means prevention or prohibition, and it says "I do dharb one person from other person". It means that I prevent him. Also others hold that the term means "to separate or keep away".
    In this book the term “dharb" means "to separate or keep away".
    Therefore, this word has different meanings and it does not mean "beat" only. Even some of the intellectuals believe that the word " dharb" in this verse, is not necessarily "beat the woman", but means demand and request for getting their attention by the help of psychological ways, and preventing them from committing actions of guilt and by Islamic legal system.
    Also Islamic traditions interpreting this verse, conclude that the purpose of “dharb" in this verse is not related to hurt somebody as commonly believed.
    This is a very important issue because, as Sayyid Ammar said in his video, there are women who were born into muslim families and have left the religion of Islam and became atheists due to their misunderstanding of this ayat in Quran. So we need to understand the real meaning of this ayat so that we don't have a wrong interpretation and spread this wrong interpretation around. 
  22. Completely Agree
    SoRoUsH got a reaction from Abu Nur in Best argument for the trinity of all time?   
    It is me signing off. Sorry. I have no interest in this topic. I am convinced that Trinity is illogical and irrational and a complete blasphemy against God. I have studied it for years, and have participated in numerous discussions and debates about it. I know where it always ends.
    I see absolutely no point in continuing to debate or discuss this topic, as I have moved on, and as there are many more topics that I'd like to explore and study. There's no point or reason, for me, to spend any more time or energy on the topic of Trinity. 
    I hope other brothers and/or sisters have the time or the desire to continue this discussion with you. I do not. 
    My Allah guide us all to His straight path. 
    Peace!
  23. Completely Agree
    SoRoUsH got a reaction from M.A.H in Views on Ayatollah Sayid Sadiq Hussaini al-Shirazi?   
    Unity is a multidimensional issue. Unity shouldn't imply theological or Aqeeda unity. We shouldn't try to change our Deen to satisfy anyone. 
    However, we should become tolerant and respectful of differences among various factions in order to have a united society. 
  24. Like
    SoRoUsH got a reaction from 313_Waiter in Views on Ayatollah Sayid Sadiq Hussaini al-Shirazi?   
    Unity is a multidimensional issue. Unity shouldn't imply theological or Aqeeda unity. We shouldn't try to change our Deen to satisfy anyone. 
    However, we should become tolerant and respectful of differences among various factions in order to have a united society. 
  25. Completely Agree
    SoRoUsH got a reaction from pakistanyar in Views on Ayatollah Sayid Sadiq Hussaini al-Shirazi?   
    Unity is a multidimensional issue. Unity shouldn't imply theological or Aqeeda unity. We shouldn't try to change our Deen to satisfy anyone. 
    However, we should become tolerant and respectful of differences among various factions in order to have a united society. 
×
×
  • Create New...