Khadim uz Zahra

You are suffering from OCD, brother. This is something that the Imams have mentioned in their ahadith and attributed to shaitan, as a way for him to stop distracting people from their ibadat and make them obssess over minutia, instead. I'd recommend you read up the laws regarding a kathir ush shak (i.e., one who doubts a lot). You might also want to consider going to therapy and consulting an aalim as OCD is a disorder that extends beyond just religious practice. Finally, an interim soultion for you might also be to do your ghusl by immersion (ghusl irtimasi). If you have a bathtub or swimming pool or other body of water that you can fully immerse your body in, then you can do your ghusl just by dunking your whole body under the water once. This will help you avoid any doubts about whether the water reached a part of your body or not and help you do ghusl a lot faster.

Could you give us some examples of these problematic thoughts that you have? In general, though, you're clearly struggling with OCD. Sometimes, the more we want to avoid something, the more we think about it. That's definitely the case here. You are only committing shirk if you actually believe, in your heart, that there are gods besides Allah, etc. You obviously don't believe that. So, you are not committing shirk. The phrase "committing shirk without knowing/meaning it" itself is an oxymoron, because shirk relates to beliefs, and it's really not possible for you to believe something without knowing about it or meaning it. While there may or may not be rulings relating to the specific thoughts you're having, there are many rulings in Islamic law that pertain to someone who is kathir ush shak (i.e., someone who doubts a lot about their prayers or wudhu, for example). So, in that case, their OCD pertains more to Islamic rituals. And the gist of those rulings is basically that such a person should basically ignore all their doubts. I'd recommend the same for you; just ignore these thoughts. There are also many ahadith that say that excessive doubts like this (what we'd call OCD today) are a trick from shaitan. If you're constantly spending your day thinking about whether you mistakenly committed shirk or not (even though that's literally not possible, as I explained above), then you're not using that time to perform acts of worship or increase your knowledge or help others. If you're having real doubts about Islam (though that doesn't seem to be the case), then that's a separate issue. Since you're young, that's entirely natural. You've grown up with a certain belief system, but you may not have a deep understanding of those beliefs -- you know what to believe, but not why you should believe these things. This is natural for someone young like you and you should try to address these questions/doubts by learning more about Islam and reading the Qur'an, books about religion that explain reasoning, logic, and proofs behind our beliefs, etc. But if you're spending all your day wondering if you accidentally committed shirk, you won't really be increasing your knowledge or strengthening your imaan, which is exactly what shaitan wants.

You also have to remember that even if all the Imams just did what Imam Hussain did, then what? It's not very useful to just keep sacrificing yourself, is it? Imam Hussain was the one Allah commanded to go down that route and the other Imams were commanded to safeguard the religion in other ways, because ultimately, Islam and the Ummah of the Prophet were not just restricted to that time. Even if all the rulers after Yazid were carbon copies of him, you still need a Imam Baqir or aImam Sadiq to actually expound on some of the theological foundations of the religion to prepare the ummah for the centuries to come after or, in the case of the later Imams, to prepare them for the ghaybah (occultation) of the 12th Imam. That required a different form of jihad and different priorities and strategies.

I mean, it also just looks utterly ridiculous. In the gaming/software world, this type of thing would be called vaporware (something you make a big deal out of which never actually materializes). Like, what's the point of building a 200KM structure? And thinking about all the logistics, energy consumption, plumbing, etc., it'd probably give any serious architect nightmares. I think it's good that Saudi is investing (or at least, that's what they say) all the money it has into some decent next-gen technologies (like advanced water desalination plants), but this is just so beyond the pale, I'm surprised anyone is taking this seriously.

Autism is not a form of jinn possession and claiming otherwise is, frankly, insulting to those who have the condition.

To add to that, there's also Ali Raza Rizvi, who's pretty famous these days. Jan Ali Shah Kazmi is a rare gem, though after his exile from Pakistan he's become less well known. But my favourite, by far, is Ali Murtaza Zaidi. He is the best Urdu speaker I've come across when it comes to building one's spirituality. His lectures are actually that: lectures. He literally starts every ashra by saying he's not interested in khitabat (making speeches). So, his style of speaking is quite different to what most Indians/Pakistanis are used to but if you can get over that, his lectures have a really high degree of quality to them. Aqeel ul Gharavi is aca lly also very good. I've only heard a few of his lectures but if you want a more philosophical lecture, he's very good in that regard.

If you discovered najasah on your body after washing, you must wash the area again to remove all najasah and make it tahir. Any areas that were wet and in contact with the najasah are also najis and must be washed.

I believe there is a hadith which says if you wish to know who is on the right path, look toward who is opposing them. If you look at the first video in the OP, you can see that the man brought to contrast Aqeel ul Garavi - and set him correct, as it were - preaches a wanton disregard of our fiqh and is openly preaching bidaat. Whoever said the blood discharged from tatbir is tahir? Which marja' has issued fatawa saying you can pray with that blood? Even Imam Hussain would wash his own blood for prayers. That he did not do so on the day of Ashura is a result of the fact that there was no water to clean the blood, not to mention the fact that it was literally in the middle of War! He then goes on to claim his blood is like that of the blood of the Shuhada of Karbala?! Who is the real muqassir here? How can you even claim that the blood of a normal person like you and me is equivalent to the companions and family of Imam Hussain? I am not a scholar but even I can tell that the man opposing the scholar in question is no scholar himself and is distorting the religion of Imam Hussain in his own name. To determine the righteousness of a person, look at who opposes him. Secondly, the whole thing about krishna is his personal opinion - again, read the above - and he never definitely claims it. He said it's very, very likely in my opinion. And he makes a sound argument to justify only the consideration of the possibility. Lastly, how can someone say XYZ aalim used to recite the majalis at this mosque before and we want another scholar of that caliber. That implies that we have the capability to judge either scholar's caliber. Except maybe 5-10 people, I don't think most of the people on ShiaChat have even gone to hawzah for any significant period of time, let alone being capable of determing the caliber of a man who was termed Ayatollah by other respected scholars. We must learn and understand that many of our respected scholars from the past have had severe differences of opinion amongst themselves. But they treated each other with respect and as fellow scholars. The best example I like of this is Shaykh Mufeed, who was Shaykh Saduq's student but disagreed with him on a subject as sensitive as sahw an nabi. If he was like how Shias have unfortunately started acting, he'd probably be issuing fatwas of kufr against his own teacher. Thank God, he wasn't like us and hopefully we can all learn from his example. If Aqeel ul Gharavi opposes tatbir and you believe in it, that's fine. But don't say he does not deserve to sit on the mimbar - any mimbar - and learn to respect him despite the difference of opinion. That's the difference between an educated nation and an emotional one. Don't throw away a scholar's boat loads of knowledge because he said one thing you don't like.

I'm replying a year late but, man, she was something. There's actually a cheat in the game where you can fight her right after the dog knight (so much earlier in the story than you'd normally fight her) by killing the woman who's in the dancer's chamber. I actually did that. I played a bunch further than the dog knight but saw the exploit on the internet so decided to try it. Man, she was impossible to kill. I don't know how many hours I spent just trying again and again to do it. The advantage of the exploit is that you can immediately proceed to Lothran Castle after killing her so you can farm t much higher XP from this region then go back to where you were in the story again super strong compared to if you played linearly.

Aww, I like Asus, too. Though, their customer service isn't necessarily the best so it's better for HS to stick with Dell, HP or Lenovo.

The description in the OP isn't entirely correct. It doesn't use pictures of a female body to guess what the person would look like unclothed. It's designed to take one face and transpose it over another in a video. That is, you could take a video of one person (naked or not) and put someone else's face over one of the people in the video. Whether you have a tight dress or a loose one won't really matter much to the AI, as all it really does is learn how to 1. replace one person's face with another and 2. recreate the expressions of the original face on the second, inserted face. It's basically like the video version of Photoshop, and if the person in the original video was smiling, it will attempt to produce an image of you smiling. While I'm not familiar with the exact specifications of how it works, having part of your face hidden by the hijab (e.g. your forehead) would present some issues for the AI as it would be hard for the AI to learn how to map another face's expression on your face without having access to your whole face. Still, most of our expressions come from the region below the eyebrows to a little over the chin, and those parts are usually visible even with hijab (unless you go for the full niqab). In conclusion, the AI is designed to replace one face with another. It doesn't really try to guess what you look like naked; it just figures out how to replace one face with another. You could also use it to potentially replace, say, Trump's face in a speech and put yours on top of his body, with no nakedness involved. Of course, this technology isn't actually perfect. You can actually often guess if the face in the video isn't real, but it all depends on how much data the computer has to generate its results (the more the better the results) and even things like how close the original face is to the inserted one. Given a lot of data to work with and at least a similar original face, it can do relatively quite well. There are samples of people replacing actors in famous movies with other actors. At least, that's my understanding from the news I've read about it, unless we're talking about different technologies. Though, on second thought, I would imagine training AI to learn to guess naked forms from tight clothing would rely on the same principles and could be achieved. Similarly, I imagine AI could also do well enough these days in taking millions of naked forms of random people and be able to slap your face over someone else's naked body and adjust the details so that the image is realistic enough, without actually needing to guess what your own naked body looks like through tight clothing. I'm not a machine learning engineer, but if it isn't possible now, we are at least somewhere around there in terms of the technology where it could be achieved soon.

Well, if you really do want to know, instead of asking are you a virgin, you should try and approach the matter with more subtlety, perhaps? Instead of asking that, ask if she was ever interested in another guy before you. And even this is supposed to happen after a little while, when she trusts you enough to tell you things she considers to be private. Don't go around asking about her romantic past (even if she hasn't touched another man, but was just in love or something) the first day you meet. First, just talk to the girl normally and see if you like her and she likes you back. Once there's some trust between you, you can inquire about her romantic past. If she says she was never interested in anyone before you, then you can easily assume she's a virgin. Now, I'm sure you will now ask, "What if she lied?" Well, isn't a prerequisite of asking her if she's a virgin that you trust her answer? If you'd trust her answer if she said she's a virgin, then trust her when she says she has no romantic past. If she says yes on the other hand, then you can again indirectly enquire about it (you should want to enquire anyways, regardless of virginity, because it's a pretty big detail about her life that you should know before marriage). Ask her about the relationship, what happened, why did it end, how serious was it and these questions will likely give you an indication of if something happened between them. And, again, you need to be respectful and subtle about these questions. If she has a past, it is your right to know about it, no doubt, but if you come in with a sense of entitlement, she'll likely just be too uncomfortable or scared or ashamed to open up. She might even end up lying, but not necessarily because she's a bad person or a liar. It's because you didn't make enough of an effort to make her feel comfortable opening up to you. Moreover, even if she answers truthfully, just blurting out, "Are you a virgin?" will probably not leave much of a chance for a relationship with her afterwards, because you'd be showing her you don't have very good people skills and that when you ask her something, you just want your own answers. You don't really care about making her feel comfortable or care about how she feels. And she be quite justified in asking whether you'd be a supportive and caring husband in the future if you are so rash in your enquiries right now. So, you might very well get your answer, but you would have shown her you're not kind or gentle towards her, which immediately reduces your prospects with her. It's not exactly rocket science to know that women, generally speaking, want someone who cares about their feelings and makes them feel safe. So, even if you do want to ask, just remember to do it in a way that doesn't make you come off as a self-obsessed jerk. If she did have a past, she'd probably feel very ashamed, afraid or concerned about it, especially if she's from a religious background. What happens if she tells you the truth, you don't like her, and you tell her parents and she gets in trouble, for example? All of these are concerns that she'd have and you'd be showing yourself to be a good potential husband if you put yourself in her shoes, consider all of these things, and then ask in a way that her fears about these things are allayed. Tell her whatever she says will always remain between you and so on. Then, you'll have shown yourself to be an understanding person, regardless of whether virginity is or isn't a deal breaker for you. I also recommend you read this post in its entirety: