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

Abu Muntazer

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    269
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Abu Muntazer

  • Rank
    Level 2 Member

Profile Information

  • Religion
    Islam

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Male
  1. It is a very dangerous thing to draw conclusions about an ideology based on those who claim to adhere it. All the issue you point out in Muslim countries exist in Christian nations as well. The issues you mention therefore are not rooted in Islam, but are instead the product of freewill. Muslims leaders do no speaking for Islam., just as Christian leaders do not speak for Christianity. Ideals stand or fall on their own. I would suggest that you began with an examination of the logical underpinnings of Christianity itself. Perhaps reading Thomas Paine's "Age of Reason" would be beneficial for you.
  2. Comparing mutah performed according to shar'iah to prostitution is a very dangerous thing. As with any other act, it ideally should be performed for Allah.
  3. I do not know a single convert man who has a problem with a woman who has had a mut'ah, or is divorced. the only issue I have seen amongst converts is women who have more than two children finding it difficult to marry. The issues would therefore appear to be cultural, and let's be honest, extend to permanent marriage as well.
  4. (salam) I did not quore MDM, or Marbles but Brother MacIsaac,, who was speaking about the statement of one his teachers in QUm, who was a judge, that there is some form of disagreement regarding whether it is currently permissible to beat/torture suspects/prisoners. I was not confused in the least by your post. I was pointing out that your post, although correct in how things should be, does not necessarily reflect how things actually are in fact.
  5. (salam) This is precisely what the borther is saying did not happened, with some people in positions of authority considering "roughing people up" to be acceptable.
  6. (salam) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween If Halloween is haram then I would posit that Nowrouz, a Zoroastrian h9oliday in which people still jump over fires, would be haram as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nowruz
  7. I believe that the answer to your question lies in the continue elucidation of Islam and the Shariah by the Imams (as).
  8. (salam) It seems that we are demanding more from MDM then we do from hadith scholars. We have Ayatullah Montazeri, although not a direct witness, relating the reports he has received. Yes, the original reporters are not named, yet this is standard in our books of narration when it is feared the person or persons from whom the information was received would be in danger if they were named. Given the allegations that people were bing tortured and unjustly executed, Aya. Montazeri actually displays astuteness and not naivety when he does not name the individuals from who he heard the reports.
  9. (salam) If someone makes a posts about how united the scholars are on a matter, one would expect to see key scholars in the photos presented. There is no fitnah in pointing out that prominent figures are not meeting someone, in fact avoiding them. Doing so is a simple refutation of a poorly supported claim.
  10. (salam) When legitimate concerns are brought forward about the alleged actions of the scholars it is called disrespect. This is precisely what Sunnis do in regards to the sahaba. And before this analogy is simply brushed off, Hamza Sodagar has pointed out that the sahaba were highly knowledgeable, and would be maraaje if they were alive today. Brother Persian Shah, you keep quoting the same material over and over again by brother MacIsaac, but no where does he imply that he is the only or even the most knowledgeable person on the topic of WF. He simply points out that the members who are pro-WF will only consider someone knowledgeable in the matter if that person is pro-WF as well. From what I have seen so fat, this statement appears to be true. Brothwer if you have the capacity to read the primary and secondary source, it would be great if you started a thread on the topic, and brought forward opinions of the scholars, not just the scholars of the past hundred years, but included the opinions of the classical scholars presenting all sides of the discussion. Hamid Algar in his survey course on Shia'ish presents how the understanding of the authority of the Ulema developed overtime, how at one point even havign jumma or eid salat was highly controversial, on down to the present system of WF. In doing so he presents both positions and then states his position in support of the authority of the ulema. This is a far cry from the anachronistic apologetics of Pro-WF members who refuse to even deal with the history of the scholarly opinions.
  11. (salam) Brother Jebreil, The only flaw that I see in your reasoning regarding he understanding of the hadith i question is that for the majority of the history of Shi'a Islam since the occultaltion of the Imam (aj) is the fuquha have considered the exercise of particular function sof the Imam (aj) to be impermissible. It was not not until 200 to 300 years ago that we even see the fuqhua allowing for the salat-ul-Eid and salat-ul-jumah. It was not until more recently that we see the ulema allowing for the collection of khums. The concept of government as expressed by Imam Khumayni (ra) is extremely knew in Shi'a Islam. If the traditional view has been to have a much more limited role for the ulema to play in society, even more limited than the position I advocate, and the ulema themselves remain divided on this issue, put forward the idea that the broad array of governmental function should rest in the hands of a single fallible individual is extremely dangerous and cuts across the traditional position of the ulema.
  12. One would be required to refuse.
  13. (salam) What is the point of this post? It introduces no new information nor does it analyze information already present. It is at best a vapid ad hominem attack. Such a statement is beneath you, and has nothing to do with the point I made regarding this being a discussion of historical events. I make no claim to know or have access to the same information that scholars who have spent their lives studying Islam and its branches of knowledge. I do lay claim to the right to ask questions, exercise my intellect which lead me to Islam and the ahl-ul-bayt (as), and to hold opinions the based on exercise of my intellect and knowledge I have. Throughout this thread, and in others, I change my position based on the use of my intellect as applied to the information and analyze others provide. If you actual wish to make a contribution, then present some information, provide some analyze. Leave your personal attacks behind.
  14. Brother Jebreil, You miss read what I wrote in regards to the fifth hadith you cited. I am quoting here for the convince of discussion and the reader. "5. When Imam Ja'far Sadiq (as) was asked about the problems, which are referred to despotic administration for decision he said, "Referring to these departments is very bad because it is referring to the despot and if someone gets back his right from these despotic departments it becomes unlawful. On such occasions however, it is your duty to refer to those people who know our teachings and narrations fully well, because I declare them as the Qazi (Judge) for you. Thus you should remember that if this jurist has given you his decision and you consider it worthless it is as if you have considered the Divine command as worthless. If anyone disobeys these jurists, it is as if he has disobeyed us, and whosoever disobeys us, has in fact disobeyed Allah and this action amounts to polytheism"" This hadith is referring to specific matters, namely contract disputes, and disputes over inheritance. It does not refer to general matters. This was my point. That the hadith is more limited in scope than the proponents of the current system of WF as practiced in Iran would like it to be. And as far as your second point goes, you have not presented any reasoning as to why this is the case, when authority is given to a broad group they then have the authority to make a selection from amongst themselves. The appointment of judges is often cited. Is there an example in which the judges appointed by the Imam (aj), then turned around and select from themselves a chief judge? If there is please inform us. If I have misunderstood the nature of the claim of being someone's representative, then enlighten me. It has been claimed so far that the WF exercises authority over all aspects of society, the function of the government, the operations of the military, foreign affairs, etc. In what regard is the WF not claiming all the authority of the Imam (aj)? If one points to, "well you can still follow whom ever you want with regards to how to pray, etc." then this seems to be a rather small concession when the issue is how the government is structured. And the flaw in your reason here, "You also dispute the 'aqli reasons which say that if an Ulul-Amr rules you to obey x, to disobey x is to disobey the Ulul-Amr which is to disobey the Messenger and God Almighty. " is that you forget to mention that the matter when presented to Imam Sadiq (as) was regarding a and b issues in relation to a dispute between P and D, and that it was P and D who were told to obey the decision with rega5rds to matters a and b. This is far different from the formulation which you have provided.
  15. (salam) Recall that when someone comes to a father, and the father is pleased with that persons manners and religion, he should not be denied. Placing extra conditions should be avoided, however, if it is truly a matter of physical attraction, this is of course something to consider as it would be difficult to build a health realtionship if the spouse are not attracted to each other. so if a woman were in fact to find men outside of a particular ethic/racial group to be unattractive, then it is a good basis for not marrying them as she must submit herself to her husbands legitimate sexual requests.
×
×
  • Create New...