Al-Englisi

May Abu al-Fadhl al-Abbas guide you. The only proof those doing this need, is the results it produces. If it works, they'll continue, if ti doesn't, they will still continue and pray harder. Anyways, almost no one actually prays to Abbas ibn Ali (a) thinking he is independently able to provide without being granted that favor by God himself first. They just don't think about the whole chain of events when making their prayer.

Lol you either did not read my post or did not understand it at all, even with the examples i gave. This is a perfect example of selective reading and forcing your own understanding out of other peoples words. Khayr, one thing i've learned on Shiachat is when it's obvious a discussion with someone is going to be a waste of time, so i'll end it with you here with one last point; if you want to point the finger of reform towards anyone, at least do it right. Sayyid Khamenei did not offer any new or original ideas (as far what is available currently) towards the idea of WF. He has taken and reiterated everything from Sayyid Khumayni. So in essence he is following the ideas of another reformist (by your definition, by my explanation even he wouldn't necessarily be considered a reformist for his view). Your list, by your criterion, should have the original reformer, not followers who haven't added further to the idea (like Sayyid Fadhlullah to the ideas of Sayyid Khu'i).

The doctrine of absolute wilayat al-faqih needs to be understood in all its parts for us to make any such judgements. Before mentioning that however, let it be noted that until a year or two ago, it was not even know if Sayyid Khamenei believes in the 'absolute' version of wilayat faqih. He had a disagreement with Ayatullah Khomainie whilst he was the president, and he was promoting the idea of limited wilayah for the Faqih. It was never mentioned nor clarified if his position changed until recently in a speech he gave. Also, he is and was a believer of Shura (committee of jurists), but it was decided by the majority that they would implement a one man rulership. Regarding the actual doctrine, there are a few points i will make in an organised manner. The absolute version of the doctrine entitles the faqih with a few more powers; i.e. the power to declare offensive war. Whilst these powers may not all have been discussed collectively for a faqih, they were spoken about other scholars, and even accepted as powers of the faqih at times. The famous example is that of Sayyid Khu'i who believed in the power of the jursit to declare an offensive war, even if he didn't seemingly believe in the concept of wilayat faqih, at least not the absolute version. This opinion with these details is a very odd one, and even his students have failed to completely understand it (i have heard this directly from both shaykh Muslim Dawari - one of his special rijjal students, and Sayid Zanjani - who studied some Fiqh under him). So the powers as individual powers are things that the fuqaha did discuss and consider throughout history, however, collecting them all in one person and giving him absolute power was a new concept. This however isn't all that problematic in fiqh and not necessarily that far fetched it just needs to be proven with solid evidence. Another point is the actual position as we see it now. Scholars who discussed the wilayah of the faqih in the past could never imagine a jurist holding state power and being the ruler of all. Hence, their discussions being limited to the power of the jurist (in the areas where he did not need to be a ruler) as one who has `umur hisbiyyeh in his hands is nothing to be surprised about. The coming into power of a jurist is a new phenomenon and requires a new discussion in fiqh. It was never relevant before, so never discussed in these details. This does not make it an anti-traditional or reformist idea, it means a new door of fiqh issues is opened and is now being discussed. The same as fiqh regarding technology or certain types of transactions were not discussed before but are now being opened up for investigation, or even different issues related to hajj (e.g. doing tawaf on different levels) are all new and were not something the scholars or people dealt with before, hence never discussed. They say in fiqh 'the mawdhu' has changed/ a new mawdhu' has arisen, hence it requires a new ruling'. This is in fact not considered being reformist and on the contrary, Sayyid Khomanie and Khamanei both believed that these issuse should both be dealt with traditional methodology - what they refer/red to as fiqh of Saahib jawahir (fiqh jawhiri). etc etc etc

Wasalam Alaykum wa rahmatullah, Wasalam Alaykum, Reformist is not a negative label when it comes to Academic and intellectual discourse, it can in fact in may places be a term of praise. In arabic they use the term 'mujadid' for a number of great scholars, which is used to mean something similar to reformist. Funnily enough, there is a site: https://shiareformist.wordpress.com/ In farsi they use the term 'Roshan Fikr' which again, although carries negative connotations in some ways, it can also be seen as a positive attribute in certain fields. Wow, the comments about Sayyid Khamenei is up there among the seriously ignorant things i've heard regarding our jurists and fiqh as a whole. Sayyid Khamenei is known in the hawzaat as someone who is on the manhaaj of Fiqh al-Jawahiri, and is considered pretty traditional. If you wanted to put names of reformists (in ideas), you would say in recent history apart from the other two mentioned, it was Sayyid Baqir Sadr (r), Sayyidi al-Khu'i (r) shaykh Sadiqi Tehrani, among those who have passed, and Shaykh Jannaati among those still alive. There are a good number of scholars who fall into this category. The ideas of Sayyid Khamanei that are known among the people to vary from others in fiqh are just the use of optical aid in moon-sighting and artificial insemination. Other than those, most of his rulings fall into standard Shia traditional views. He has multiple talks (some i have translated in places) regarding keeping fiqh traditional. Sayyid Fadhlullah (r) is just the logical conclusion of Sayyid Khui's methodology (rejecting the usage of Shohrah - popularity in extrapolating Islamic law). Sayyid Khu'i and Shahid Sadr did not completely implement their ideas from Usul al-Fiqh inside their Fiqh rulings, whereas Sayyid Fadhlulah went the whole 10 yards.

Bismillah Salamun alaykum Try the site below, you can view the different translations and see which you prefer (just change the translation in the option on the left hand side). http://tanzil.net/#33:24

No, that is just a part of it, you're right, it is much longer.

Bismillah Wasalam alaykum wa rahmatullah wa barakatu It's called حديث الاهليلجة and comes through Mufaddhal b. Umar al-Ju'fi (in a letter exchange with Imam Sadiq). The narration is very lengthy. The chain of narrators is as follows: حدثني محمد بن محرزة بن سعيد النحوي بدمشق قال حدثني محمد بن ابي‏مسهر بالرملة عن ابيه عن جده قال کتب المفضل بن عمر الجعفي الي ابي‏عبدالله Mufadhhal is a disputed figure amongst scholars of Rijaal. Some consider him very weak and untrustworthy, while others consider him to be from the special companions of the Imams. The narration has been recollected by Muhaddith Majlisi in his Bihaar (as mentioned above). I am not aware of an earlier source than that, although it is also referred to as a separate treatise/book.

There are definitely some youth leaving Islam, but it isn't a large number and very rarely based on academic or intellectual reasoning. I know people in Iran who do not really follow organised religion but still don't 'hate' Islam, or announce that they do not label themselves Muslim. Most of the channels are being run and funded from outside of Iran. Channels like BBC Persia, VOA Persia (however they are spelt), different channels funded by Iranians who fled the country. I don't have any documents to show Israeli involvement, but i wouldn't be at all surprised if they had a big role to play too.

In my experience with Iranians, very few (in Iran) actually become atheist. Those who leave Islam, do so while adopting another Religion. A large part of it is the distance between the clerical establishment and the people, causing a noticeable misunderstanding between the two. Although factors like pressures from the government and ideas of freedom do play a role, one of the biggest factors is the ideas of western freedom that have been injected through satellite and internet platforms in to many Iranian homes. If you see how many persian channels are propagating against Islam, and attacking it in every way possible, causing serious doubts in the minds of the young and old, you see why such a situation would arise. It is not the fault of the government and religious scholars only, there is a lot of propaganda from the outside and inside alike. It is not a completely natural move as many would like to make it sound, but rather for a large part, engineered and directed outside of Iran. There are many factors at play, and it seems everyone is pointing the fingers away from themselves, which makes it less likely that things will improve drastically any time soon.

Bismillah Wa'alaykum AsSalam Wa Rahmatullah I think there should be a note in the title saying 'according to Sayyid Sistani'. According to Sayyid Khamenei, it is allowed with the conditions mentioned in the answer below: http://leader.ir/fa/book/11?sn=4558 Q.1330: Youth in schools and universities that are engaged in studying, also meet and see females, and due to being in the same class and lesson, they some times discuss issues related to the lesson, and other unrelated issues. Sometimes these discussions involve smiling and joking, however not with the intention of lust (Raybah?) and gaining pleasure, is this permissible? A: If it is done while observing hijjab, and without the intention of raybah, and with confidence/surety [lower level then certainty] that it will not end in sin (mafasid), it is not problematic, otherwise it is not permissible. The late Sheikh Fadhil Lankarani also only considered it prohibited if it was done with the intention of pleasure. سؤال 1721 :در يك خانه چند برادر با خانواده خود زندگى مى كنند. گاهى به حسب اتفاق برادر به زن برادر نگاه و گاهى هم شوخى مى كند. با عادى بودن اين جريان، حكم مسأله چيست؟ جواب: نگاه به زن نامحرم جايز نيست. اگرچه زن برادر باشد و در يك جا زندگى كنند و مزاح و شوخى توأم با قصد لذت جايز نيست. Q 1721 (p. 454) I'm sure other scholars also have a similar position, but it would take time finding it since it is a matter related to the Q&A section, not the actual book of laws. Thanks for posting the views of Sayyid Sistani.

Bismillah Wa`alaykum AsSalam, I never claimed there were narrations or Quranic verses in this regard. That's why i started of mentioning the view of many scholars. I stay away from interpreting verses and narrations in this topic (spirituality), and it's the one place i avoid even attempting to comment on from myself. Comments like yours (earlier posts) - the most 'solid aya', is a personal opinion of yours, and since you made it, you are required to bring proof for the truth of this? How did you decide which was the most 'solid' verse in this regard? DId the Qur'an mention this, or the narrations? About Hadith corresponding with the Qur'an, that is a misunderstanding of the narrations that are collected under the chapters of ta'aarudh in our hadith books. The narration is not required to correspond with the Qur'an for it to be correct (as per the criterion given in the narrations), it is enough that it does not oppose the Qur'an or Quranic teachings. Regarding Dhikr itself, there are narrations regarding the reality of dhikr and what is meant (at least in some places of the Qur'an) by the term, one of the narrations explain that the Dhikr is a reference to the Ahlulbayt (a). We really should be careful in these types of discussions, and not get ahead of ourselves. You don't always need narrations outlining the details - somethings are observable over time. Also, unless we have comprehensively studied our corpus of narrations, it is fallacious to say 'as far as i am aware....', it makes it seem like we have looked through the corpus and found nothing. The Sufis for instance believe that much of the spiritual teachings and guidelines came down through the oral tradition and were preserved by the special companions of the Awliyyah, or the Ashaab al-Sirr. We have indications in our narrations too that not every narration or teachings was to be shared widely or at all. With these possible factors at play, and others, we should be more careful about the judgements we make.

Lol what did i just read and where did i end up? I thought we were suffering from an e-jurist problem, but seems we have just as many e-arifs. Many of the scholars are in agreement that the best adhkaar for people on all levels of the path of spiritual wayfaring, and the ones with no mentioned negative side effects for there reciters, are the Salwat in its full form (including the progeny of the Prophet) and the Istighfaar. Also, regular recitation of the tasbih associated with the lady Fatimah, and remembering death regularly. The dhikr also does not have to be a recitation and can be a remembrance. Do not always look for things to say, many a time you just need to remember and ponder over the things God has directed us towards in His holy book.

Look, you don't need to over do it and stress yourself. Everyone agrees that if a group was waken to a police station for just being in a group larger than 3, it would raise many questions (if nothing else was at play and no other factors involved). The idea of dispersing groups or limiting numbers of groups in public settings is not particular to Iran, and was introduced in some areas of the UK too. The reason was obviously not that three people being together rather than two is morally wrong. Even if things happened as you say, and they were taken for just being in a group and not suspected for anything else, that wouldn't prove that having a moral police, or the idea of a moral police is a bad idea or wrong. It would just open up the details for discussion (and if many such cases appeared we could discuss the dangers of corrupt/poorly trained 'police', and maybe even asses if the negatives outweigh the positives), but you need actual proof to say the idea itself is incorrect.

The main point of the app isn't the idea of a moral police in and of itself, it is the behavior of the moral police towards those they target. The developers and others who commented are against how the moral police treat and talk to the people they are supposed to be doing 'irshaad' too. If you read the discussions regarding irshaad and the difference between irshaad (a gentle guiding/teaching/directing) and amr bi al-ma'ruf, you will see that the idea described by Iranians (if we want to take this sample) is far from the guidelines of doing Irshaad. In Irshaad, you are not aggressive. You are trying to teach and guide. If the job is amr bi al-ma'ruf, then that has its own conditions, which also need to be supervised. I've seen the Irshaad police at work and the other organs that were mentioned on the site (those responsible for stopping street sellers), and i can see why some people would want to take action to avoid coming in contact with these type of people.