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

Haydar Husayn

Veteran Member
  • Content Count

    10,420
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    73

Everything posted by Haydar Husayn

  1. Unless there is some Islamic basis to this law, I would not support it. If a wife is getting emotionally abused, and has tried all other means to get through to her husband, then she should seek a divorce.
  2. If you substitute Jesus (as) for Ali (as) in your second post, much of it would read like something a Christian would write. 'Acts won't save you, only belief in Jesus will.', 'Muslims will go to hell because although they claim to believe in Jesus, they are lowering his status', 'God is love', 'I love Jesus', ...
  3. If he is using these things incorrectly, then someone with more knowledge should point out where he is going wrong, so that he may learn something. I don't think this attitude of 'you aren't an ulema, so you can't use this' is very helpful. From what I can tell from this forum, brother Jondab_Azdi has been studying these sciences for many years now. I'm in no position to judge how competent he is one way or the other, but I don't think it follows that just because someone studies independently that they are automatically a 'novice' forever. At the end of he day, knowledge is knowledge, and there are many ways to acquire it. Out of interest, could you provide some names? By all means, go ahead. I would be interested to see it. Brother, I don't think it is correct to insinuate that Jondab_Azdi, or anyone else, is a Wahhabi unless you have some kind of proof. Nothing I have read of his on the forum has lead me to believe that he is. I have however noticed that some members are quick to label anyone with non-mainstream views as 'Wahhabis'. On the other hand, somebody would have to be pretty foolish to base his own views on the internet postings of an anonymous user that rely on things that person himself don't understand. It can however provide you with some questions to look into.
  4. No, I follow the Prophet (pbuh) because Allah says so, I don't submit to Allah because the Prophet (pbuh) tells me to. If the Prophet (pbuh) told me not to submit to Allah(swt) (naudhubillah) then I wouldn't listen to him. By the same token, if Allah(swt) told me not to follow the Prophet (pbuh), then I wouldn't. I'm surprised you can't see how wrong what you have just stated is. I believe in Allah (swt) through logic, I submit to Him through logic, and I follow His messenger through logic. If I simply stop at believing in Allah(swt), then how am I supposed to know that I should listen to the Prophet (pbuh)? I follow Islam because it is the only religion that makes any logical sense to me. For the same reason I am a Shia and not a Sunni. Just come out and say it. I don't know what you are afraid of. Is it against forum rules or something?
  5. Not at all. Someone could be loyal to the Prophet (pbuh) and not submit to Allah(swt). Loyalty and submission aren't the same thing. Even if they were, I believe the chain of thought that says you submit to Allah (swt) because you are loyal to the Prophet (pbuh), and he tells you to do so is deeply misguided. The key word being 'claim'. So in other words, you do not consider Sunnis to be muslims, but you don't want to say it clearly.
  6. I completely disagree with this. How can loyalty to the Prophet (pbuh) come before love and obedience to Allah (swt)? Loyalty to the Prophet (pbuh) and to the Ahlul Bayt (as) comes from obedience to Allah (swt), not the other way around. The very word Islam means submission(to Allah (swt)). For argument's sake however, let's take what you say to be the foundation of Islam, and the incident of the door to be the most important moment in Islam's history. Logic should dictate that if someone doesn't follow the foundation of something, then he cannot really be said to follow it at all. How can someone call themselves a muslim if they don't know the foundation of Islam? Now, Sunnis don't recognise the incident of the door in the Shia form, and they don't think the one in their books is that big a deal. Neither do they recognise the proper position of the Ahlul Bayt (as). Therefore Sunnis aren't muslims. Do you agree with this?
  7. If he were a Quran only muslims, then why would he care about the sanad being sahih or not? It seems to me that he simply stricter in which hadith he accepts as being acceptable than the majority of Shia scholars. And a lot of Shias will automatically accept any positive hadith about the Ahlul Bayt (as), as long as it isn't clear shirk. I don't at present have much knowledge of these things, but it doesn't seem completely unreasonable to me to ask that a hadith have a strong chain of narration before accepting it as part of your faith.
  8. Thank you brother. I agree with Syed Ammar 100%. This is how disagreements should be handled. Not by getting emotional and by smearing people.
  9. Sadly, I think it's inevitable that the US and/or Israel will attack Iran within the next year or two. I can't see Iran changing their nuclear policy, and Israel will not tolerate Iran having nuclear power.
  10. (wasalam) There is a long thread on this issue here : I also don't agree with this, but it's not like it's a part of the Shia faith. Coincidently I just saw one of those today as well. However, this might just be a common cultural practice of that region, and I'm sure there is nothing inappropriate going on. There are stories of the Prphet Mohammed (pbuh) kissing Imam Hasan (as) and Imam Husayn (as) on the mouth as well.
  11. I would have thought the election of Abu Bakr had already made that pretty clear, although what happened later did further confirm it. However, even if we take what is in the Sunni books concerning what happened, there is still more than enough evidence to determine the true nature of certain individuals. The story of the door doesn't need to be true for that. In addition, as important as it is to know who was loyal to the prophet, and who wasn't, in my view that isn't the single most important thing in Islam.
  12. It would would depend on what the nature of the criticism was. If it was just a disagreement on certain issues, then that is fine, and is normal. However, if he was personally attacking Syed Fadlallah, then yes, it would be odd. Anyway, without having seen the lecture, it's difficult to draw too many conclusions. I would be interested to know what your definition of the history of Islam is, in order to determine that the story of the burning door is the most important moment in its history, Because that seems very strange to me, to say the least.
  13. I'm pretty sure both the Sunnis and the Shias agree that the proper punishment for adultery is stoning. There are authentic hadith on both sides to back this up. However, the conditions that need to be met in order to carry out this punishment are very strict, and from my point of view almost impossible to fulfill. http://www.al-islam.org/greater_sins_complete/15.htmHowever, in Iran there appears to be some room for the judge to use his own judgement in order to find someone guilty. I haven't been able to find out more about this, but it doesn't sound right to me.
  14. Why would it be odd? There is more to Islam than the burning door incident. Anyway, it will be interesting to hear Syed Ammar's lecture to find out what exactly he said.
  15. Ok, there are several interesting things that I just read about this case in the Guardian. I'm not sure how much of it is true, but even if only a small amount of it is, it's pretty bad. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/09/stoning-death-penalty-iran-editorialEvery single sentence of this is shocking. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/08/iran-death-stoning-adulteryDoes anyone really think these 15 people either confessed, or were caught in the act by 4 men? Must be that 'judge's knowledge' thing again, which no one has yet explained what exactly it means or if it has any basis in Islam. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/09/iran-blackout-over-stoning-sentence-woman Maybe this is how these people get convicted, due to forced confessions. It's pretty clear that only an insane person would voluntarily confess when the result will be being stoned to death.
  16. What makes you think it's a doll? It seems to be that the Iranian woman protesting is the one buried up to her neck. I don't see the big deal anyway. People should have an idea of what stoning looks like.
  17. (wasalam) I was making a general point that it doesn't matter if they execute someone by stoning or hanging, the method of proof should be the same. If the head of the Majlis judiciary commission considers that in most cases it's difficult to prove guilt for adultery(which is an understatement to say the least), then what difference will it make if they replace stoning by hanging? Is less proof required to hang someone than to stone them? With regards to this specific case, if the woman has been charged with having something to do with a murder, then that's all Iran need to say to put an end to all this. However, considering neither the woman's son or her lawyer have mentioned this at all, I would find it suprising if it were the case. Her son claims he was in the room with her while she was flogged, so unless he is making it up, she has already been punished for what he claims is the same crime. I do agree that the picture that has been released is a little strange.
  18. Where did MysticKnight compare Imam Ali(as) to Yazid(la)?
  19. Forgive me if I am wrong, but wouldn't the burden of proof for hanging someone for adultery be the same as for stoning? Also, isn't stoning the correct Islamic way of punishing this crime, and is it wise to change that?
  20. I think it's a dangerous thing to speculate too seriously on whether various political leaders are people prophesied in the hadith literature. Once you convince ourself of something like this, then you will automatically stop questioning, and just blindly follow. I don't think there is any harm in indulging in some light-hearted speculation, but it shouldn't be taken too seriously, and people should keep their minds open at all times.
  21. So adultery is so difficult to prove, that it is unecessary to include in the new punishment bill? How does that square with all the reports of people being sentenced to death in Iran for the same crime? Are all these stories fabricated? Any reasonable person can see that under the most commonly available rules for proving adultary(fpr example the ones posted earlier in this thread), it is virually impossible to prove. The same goes for proving homosexual acts. So in theory, as long as adulterers and homosexuals don't go around confessing their crimes, or exposing themselves in front of four male witnesses, they should be almost as safe in Iran as they are in the West. However, that is highly unlikely to be the case in Iran at the moment.
  22. Do these local ulama consider themselves more educated on Islam than Syed Fadlallah? I thought it was our belief that only the Qur'an could be taken as 100% authentic, but now it seems that if someone questions whether some event from history is completely proven, then it is as if he questions the Qur'an. If people disagree about some event, then they should have a scholarly debate about it, but they shouldn't react with the kind of over-emotional response that greeted the product of Syed Fadlallah's research. To be unhappy with someone because they have praised a scholar of the stature of Syed Fadlallah is simply ridiculous. Even if what he said about the attack on the house, and/or some other things, is wrong, does that mean he did nothing in his life worthy of praise, or that his good deed should be overlooked?
  23. There are some Syeds out there who aren't even Muslim. Genealogy doesn't have much to do with faith.
  24. 'New' stooge? The house of Saud has been a Zionist stooge for a long time now, and any anti-Israel talk is just for show. The fact that they have agreed for Israel to use Saudi airspace in the event of an attack on Iran shows their true colours.
×
×
  • Create New...