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


Advanced Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About shamoun

  • Rank
    Level 1 Member
  • Birthday February 20

Profile Information

  • Location
    London, UK
  • Religion

Previous Fields

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

3,022 profile views
  1. Alsalam alikum,

    I encourage some shias who have books about Ahlulbayt(as)and don't need them to donate their own books to new reverts, so we can spread the knowledge of Ahlulbayt(as) and to face Salafis who spread rumors about Shia Islam around the world. You don't need to afford any costs of shipping for these books if you can't.
    Can you help us in this project, please?
  2. Yes I think that's right xstatik2 and I've always understood the ruling to mean that your intention is not to pay interest on 'x' but that you are agreeing to pay the bank no more than 'y' by instalments over 'z' number of years for the right to own your property outright. I agree, though, it is a difficult ruling to interpret
  3. I was looking for evidence of this myself from Sistani's website but all I could find was this, which assumes that circumcision has taken place: http://www.sistani.org/index.php?p=616687&id=1226&perpage=2#15186 However, I've checked with local scholars who've confimed what brother abuzahra has said i.e. it is necessary for Hajj. I had it done as an adult and everything was fine after a couple of weeks of inconvenience and discomfort. Wa Salaam
  4. "I will do such things -- What they are, yet I know not: but they shall be The terrors of the earth!" King Lear Act II Scene iv
  5. Can anybody recommend a good wedding outfitter's in London (for dishdashas, sherwani's etc.)? Wa Salaam
  6. OK but this does not explain why he would ask for "forgiveness" for both of them.
  7. Wa Salaam Although I don't share Russell's agnosticism, he was right I think in pointing out that the expression "My existence is contingent on my parents' existence" is different from the statement "my parents caused me" and that it is a mistake to confuse the two. Indeed, it is a mistake to say "my parents caused me", which means that if one is going to look at chains, one should speak of a chain of contingencies rather than a chain of causes. However, to say the first thing in a series is contingent on God does not take you very far either because: 1. it does not explain the existence of the whole and 2. it does not explain how or why you get from the immaterial to the material. Spinoza's view was that to argue that God was not part of the universe was to deny his infiniteness. But as Islam denies pantheism I'm not going to argue in favour of that. My point is that these enquiries are limited by our own intelligence and that it is necessary to look at the revealed texts in order to discover a higher intelligence.
  8. As much as I respect and accept for myself your final sentence, Ali, I do not think it goes far enough to meet the objections of agnostics. This can be summarised in the point made in Bertrand Russell's essay "Why I am not a Christian". Russell states that if the answer to the question "Who created God?" is "Nobody created God and he has no cause", there is no logical reason why one could not apply this theory to the universe and say "the universe has no cause", once one admits that it is possible to have an uncaused entity. This is why it is necessary to understand why we say "Allahu Akbar/God is Greater" and to derive from the Qu'ran the conviction (of which I gave one small example above) that it is the product of a higher intelligence.
  9. One thing that has always astonished me about non-believers is how seriously they press the "plagiarism of earlier holy scriptures" charge against the Qu'ran. The whole point about plagiarism is that it keeps as faithfully as possible to the earlier text in order to make itself appear credible. Yet how can this charge be made against the Qu'ran when it defies the central tenets of Christianity that Christ was crucified, to take one example, or that he was the son of God, to take another? A man-made religion would surely either have supported these doctrines if its aim was to convert practising Christians with an updated form of their religion, or, if these aspects of Christianity were disbelieved, it would not have referred to them at all. I cannot see how, if the Qu'ran were a man-made ecumenical project, it could have assured its own survival by undermining the core beliefs of Christians. A fabricator attempting to explain his or her beliefs to a Christian would be asked to prove that event 'x' did not occur. If he or she were unable to prove that, one would eventually see the disappearance of the statement that event 'x' did not occur from subsequent versions of the text. This is the point about the textual integrity of the Quran: despite the claims it makes, none of them have been retracted or modified.
  10. I'm afraid I disagree with your last sentence. If a family meeting feels uncomfortable, in my experience this is partly because the girl or boy in question feels resentful about the idea that their parents must act as the funnel for prospective spouses. This is not conducive to a good relationship in my opinion, even if the environment is halal.
  11. I'm not sure it is accurate to say they were set up to say these things but I agree it is fishy that the French journalists held onto the information for a few days before suddenly and mysteriously releasing it into the open.
  12. Although he didn't provide a source for it, Norman Finkelstein at his talk in London on Friday explained that Sarkozy's remark was a response to an angry Obama who demanded to know why France had voted in favour of Palestine's UNESCO membership.
  13. I have no particular reason for starting this topic, I just wanted to get my feelings off my chest.
  14. He's speaking in London this coming Friday at 7pm and I'm looking forward to seeing him.
  • Create New...