Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Hagop got a reaction from Ashvazdanghe in Musings Of A "sunni"
Just wanted to echo your thoughts on the idealism of Shiism versus the realism of Sunnism. It's interesting how the Shi'i theologians emphasise the Justice of God whilst the Sunni ones don't believe that anything is good or bad per se, i.e. they emphasise God's Command over His Justice.
Like you, I find the former more compelling than the latter. FWIW, as a former Sunni I didn't find the 'technical' (e.g. style of prayer) adjustments difficult. To be honest, the finer points of doctrine and interpretation of history (the injustice of Saqifah, Aisha's role at the Battle of the Camel etc) all of these came to me easily once I'd established a loving, spiritual connection with the Ahlul Bayt (Peace be upon Them). A major part of this was reading the duas, especially of Imam Al Sajjad (as). Of course the impact of Imam Hussein (as) and the sacrifice of Kerbala was another major factor.
I truly 'knew' that I was a Shia (or have to strive to be one) when listening to Dua Kumayl and the subsequent Ziyaraat of Imam Hussein (as) at a Shia mosque.
Now I feel that I have tasted something of Pure Islam, the way of the Prophet (Peace be upon Him and His Family). I feel I have a better connection with Allah because I'm (trying) to hold onto His Rope (Peace be Upon Them).
Good luck with your spiritual journey and may Allah fill it with His Barakah.
Hagop got a reaction from HakimPtsid in Shia-sufism
Salaams again Saintly_Jinn23,
I apologise if you're already familiar with this, if not then perhaps the following article by Dr Hamid Algar on The Fusion of the Gnostic and the Political in the Personality and Life of Imam Khomeini may be of interest.
Here's a sample of Imam Khomeini's (ra) mystical poetry taken from a rather nice blog on Shi'i esoterism, sufism and politics called Safir-i Simurgh (however it seems to be inactive as of Feb. 2009):
Oh my Beloved!
After witnessing your Infinite Beauty
I become entangled.
Seeing, the manifestation of Your Glory
I become saturated with joy and ecstasy.
I forget my own existence
and proclaimed the slogan - "I am the truth",
and like the Mansoor Hallaj
volunteered my self for hanging.
The agony and pain of your love
has burnt my entire existence.
That I become fed up with my own self,
and my affairs become the talks of the town.
Let the doors of the tavern be opened,
and let us go there day and night.
Because, I become disgusted with the Mosque
as well as the School.
I took off the dress of asceticism and dissimulation.
And become awakened
after wearing the robe of a tavern's haunter.
The town's preacher with his preaching
made me uncomfortable
Therefore I sought refuge in some on who was inwardly
upright but outwardly lewd.
Salaams macisaac. Just out of interest, what is the name of the book that you mentioned was written by Sayyid Ja`far Murtada al-'Amuli?
Hagop reacted to abuzahra in Farid's (lord Botta) Reply To Sayed Kamal Hyderi
Actually, it does require knowledge of Hadith sciences to understand this discussion. Since this is my last post on the subject, let me break down the discussion for you:
1) Ahmad b. Hambal was Bukhari's teacher.
2) He narrated this tradition using a chain that has been graded as "Sahih 'ala Shart al-Sahihayn" (which means that the chain used in this narration is sahih according to the criteria of Bukhari and Muslim)
3) Bukhari chose his compilation from a large no. of Hadith (600,000 is the number mentioned).
4) He did not chose the version of this narration which his own teacher had narrated, even though it conformed with all his "shurut".
5) Instead, he chose the narration which did not have the part about Ayesha not liking Imam Ali Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã.
7) Sayyid Kamal asks - where is the fairness in this on the part of Bukhari?
I hope this clears things up. May Allah bless you all.
Hagop reacted to abuzahra in Farid's (lord Botta) Reply To Sayed Kamal Hyderi
This reasoning is very poor and stems from compound ignorance on the part of the author.
When Sayyid Kamal mentions "sahih 'ala shart al-shaykhayn" it is clear that this narration has been classified as sahih - even if it comes from a different chain.
Further, the ziyadaat of those who are considered thuqat are hujjah according to the majority of Hadith scholars (from Ibn Salah right up to Subhi Salih) so unless you can prove beyond a doubt that the narration from Musnad Ahmad is flawed (not only by looking at the narrators but by considering the qara'in al-sihha that was accessible by the qudama), you have no firm ground to stand on!
Saying that Sayyid Kamal has little knowledge about hadith sciences is clear evidence of the author's own arrogance and ignorance. He has clearly not understood what is being implied by the respected Sayyid (may Allah grant him a long life).
Saying that there was a possibility that they were added later makes little sense because (1) It is mere conjecture and "inna al-dhann la yughni min al-haqqi shay'a"
(2) al-Zuhri (or those mentioned in his chain) had no pro-Shi'i tendency or any other motive to make such a problematic addition to the narration.
Narrating the hadith of Kisa (especially the way it has been narrated by 'Ayisha) in no way proves her admiration of Imam Ali (a) at all. And her open enemity against him in Jamal is too clear to overlook by such spurious claims.
Nasai's not narrating the addition is not evidence of anything unless his chain is exactly the same as Ahmad ibn Hambal's (which it is not).
And lastly, the mantuq of the addition clearly matches the mafhum of the ahadith without the addition.
And Allah knows best.
Hagop reacted to ___NAZM___ in Is Prophet Mohammed(saw)'s Nikah Is Haram?
Its seems you are expert in the sharia of Lut and Nuh! Can you please educate us from where you got the teaching of Sharia of Lut and Nuh a.s?
Can you give me the book of shariah of Nuh and Lut a.s. I mean the sharah from their age.
Waiting for your kind help.
Hagop reacted to Saintly_Jinn23 in Homosexual Struggle For Rights In Arab World.
The thing is for those of us raised in America, "displays of affection," are usually seen as exclusively sexual in our cultures. In other cultures, physical displays of affection aren't seen as exclusively sexual expressions. In many parts of the world, men holding hands or even kissing in some cases, is not seen as an expression of a sexual companionship. For many people in the world, romance and love for someone or appreciating the beauty of another person does not always have to do with being sexually attracted to or sexually active with them. For those of us who live in America, the higher the affection, the more obligatory sexual relations become to express affections and the highest and the most romantic and passionate relationships may be seen as synonymous with the most sexual.. Whereas other cultures don't see higher affections and relationships necessarily being those that are sexual.
Hagop reacted to beardedbaker in Affordable Travel
Some of us who are keen travelers, yet find themselves a bit short on cash these days, could try this as an alternative: spiritual travel; the alternative destination being: the imaginary world, or world of spirits. And the means of transport: Sujood (prostration).
In prostration we are in the highest form of submissiveness and nearness to Allah (swt) (in a physical, material sense). We become small, as our bodies curl up like a baby curls up in the womb; and we are at the lowest point during the sequence in prayers, our foreheads touching the cheapest materials (clay).
Some even reach the point where they feel like their foreheads demand them to prostrate. They feel emotionally defficient if they don't prolong this moment until that defficiency is satisfied. This is the travel of the believer.
So brothers and sisters, lets perfect our sujood to the Almighty, Who is the Perfect and Self-sufficient, Giver of Life and Insight in this world and the next, and on Whom all depend.
Hagop reacted to Marbles in [Closed/Review]Where Is Unity Now? Why Is Wef Not Taking Action?
Intervening in the affairs of Shia of Afghanistan and more specifically Pakistan isn't politically expedient. All you immature and naive people need to start reading pragmatic politics and international relations. Start with "The Prince".
Hagop reacted to guidance_seeker in Maula Ali (as) Divides The People On Judgement Day
Ali(AS) divides people of the paradise and of hell
He said: Al-Mudhaffar b. Muhammad al-Warraq reported to me from Abu Ali Muhammad b. Hammam, who reported from Abu Saeed al-Hasan b. Zakariyya al- Basri, who reported from Umar b. al-Mukhtar, who reported from Abu Muhammad al- Barsi, from al-Nadhr b. Suwaid, from Abdullah b. Maskan, from Abu Baseer, from Abu Ja'far Muhammad al-Baqir, from his forefathers, peace be upon them, that:
The Prophet, peace be upon him and his progeny said: "How will it be for you O Ali, when you will stand on the brim of hell fire, and the bridge (Sirat) will be laid, and the people will be told: 'Cross the bridge.' And you will tell the hell fire: 'This is for me, and this is for you!' So Ali said: "O messenger of Allah, who will be those with me?" He said: "They are your Shias, with you wherever you will be."
(Ref: Al-Amali Shaikh Mufeed The Thirty Eighth Assembly Hadees No.12)
Hagop reacted to Waiting for HIM in Maula Ali (as) Divides The People On Judgement Day
Most important is, if InshAllah Imam Mahdi (atf) count us among the Shias of Ahlulbait(as).
We saying that we are Shias is one thing, HIM saying that we are his Shias is the real gold medal.
Hagop got a reaction from south-lebanon in Assange Interviews Nasrallah
Salams Abu Muslim,
Do you not think that unlike Gaddafi, Seyyed Nasrallah (HA) has a substantially greater popular base? One can measure this, for example, by looking at Hezbollah's representation in the current Lebanese parliament: 12 seats out of a total of 128 (and not including their March 8 allies).
Surely the people/factions that dislike him and the Hezb, disliked them before the events in Syria? Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.
Hagop reacted to Golden-crowned in Video Of Khamenai Talking Against Azadari
they have cut his words in between,he knows what he is saying, in fact he tries to criticizes the way that some of Madahs do azadari, they don't make people cry, they make them laugh by their way, they are not honest and only shout, some of them even don't know the reason of azadari. I have seen so many madahs like them.
His point is: make people understand from reasons of event of karbala, cuz it is the main point and making people just emotional without telling them reason is meaningless.
It is was my opinion from his words.
I should add that I am not supporter of him, and nor against him, so I told u my neutral opinion.
Hagop reacted in Freedom Of Speech And Apostasy
Interesting brother. Thanks for the contribution.
I'm unsure about the argument you imply.
Wouldn't forcing everyone to be Muslim by the sword 1000 years ago (or even now if we could?) save many future generations? Would that be proper? How instrumentalist can we become? When do the ends stop justifying the means?
If the Muslim nations were the superpower today, would it be Islamic to impose Islam on everyone - including the people of the book - for the sake of future generations? If not, why not?
Hagop reacted in Freedom Of Speech And Apostasy
The argument that aspotasy can be contagious seems horribly weak. I have given reasons for it, but I would like to add more specific ones.
- people can still spread their misconceptions and denials in private sessions - if there is no public outlet where scholars can listen, understand, discuss and debate and demonstrate these ideas to be erroneous, it would become private, where there are less scholars (if any) and where resentment against the tyranny of opinion can lead to conspiracy against the Islamic state
- a public apostate, if killed, receives some sympathy - it is a fact - a person who died for saying what he or she believed in because he or she came to that conclusion and wished to share it with others, to enlighten them as well. This creates martyrs out of the wrong people.
- Human beings are 'works in progress'. People can change sides during their development. These Laws stifle development and terrify the mind into obedience. This is not dignified. Human beings were created free to choose; however, because of my father, I am condemned to be a Muslim, or be silenced, or die.
- In the Day of Judgement all things will be made clear and justice will be served accordingly. However, in this world, things are not too clear, minds develop, thoughts need time, people convert and ideas are discussed and enriched. Most of us have made enough big mistakes before to know that it does not deserve the death penalty. Great minds, such as Avicenna and Razes, have been led astray despite their loyalty to truth and reason. That is the difference between killing someone here where truth is not transparent and punishing someone later according to the rule: "we will not burden a soul beyond its capacity".
- There is a beautiful legal principle: It is not sufficient that Justice is done. Justice must be seen to be done. People's trust in a system comes from seeing the system demonstrate itself. It is a vote of no confidence in reasoning or Islam's manifest truth that we should terrify people out of arguing against it.
- If people were meant to believe willingly, and if they refused, to be forced to feign belief, then I do not see why God gave the choice to disbelieve.
Who is to say the person would not change and return to the Imamiyya after a few more years with a stengthened faith and better understanding? Is an apostate who is 19 really deserving death? S/he still has much to learn, probably much ahead of him/her and could develop and return with deeper insight and a determined faith.
Hagop reacted to Kamranistan in Freedom Of Speech And Apostasy
Interestingly my dad and me discussed this yesterday briefly.
The fact that the apostasy laws don't quite add up, if it were the case that ALL apostates were to be executed, whether they be hurting the ummah (e.g. salman rushdie) or apostating but keeping to themselves. The latter doesn't make any sense to me, if an apostate is deemed an apostate but keeps to himself and doesn't affect any one and believes that Islam isn't the truth, then is his punishment still death? By reading the hadiths posted that would be the case so it would seem..
I think the argument that hits home with me is the one you mentioned in the OP - 'In the absence of the Imam, who is to be the arbiter of when a given opinion transgresses the limitation?'
This arbiter, how can he be certain that the 'freedom of speech' that Islam actually encourages would and should be suppressed in certain cases where it isn't harming the ummah? Again he would be fallible so he cannot be 100% certain of the law to be applied. I believe a 'benefit of the doubt' should be given in the absence of the Imam (as), surely for an apostate ruling you need to be 100% certain that it is 'right' to execute him even though he is not harming the Islamic ummah. Or maybe these hadith's are enough to be certain.
I doubt it but do we have any hadith at all that show an apostate that has been let off from death?
Hagop reacted in Freedom Of Speech And Apostasy
It is perplexing. Isn't the Qur'an even consciously silent about it? Rather, preferring to say that the Prophet must leave them in a beautiful manner, or just leave them, or that God will deal with them, or that God will ridicule their mockeries, or that the afterlife would be the judgement of truth and false, or that Muslims must argue their case in beautiful discourse, or that there is no compulsion in religion (as you rightfully mentioned). Doesn't the Qur'an argue, appeal, warn of God's judgement?
It's easy to take the side of Freedom of Express Opinion - after all, we're not affected by it - but we seem to have solid consensus on death for apostasy across Muslim scholarship, emerging from the Sunna!
I also think it is a mistake to believe that we are not affected by it. Kufr is not just about someone who rejects Allah or the Messenger - but someone who rejects the Imams, someone who rejects one of the sayings of the Infallibles, and someone who has an opinion which is not compatible with the Infallibles.
With the absence of the Imam, this position is filled by scholars. We cannot limit interpretation to a group of scholars. Wasn't Avicenna given takfir? Wasn't Mulla Sadra forced to exile? Wasn't Shariati condemned?
With the Imam present, even if we become total devotees to the Imam, we must accept that doubt can arise in others, that people might find somethings difficult to agree with, that we cannot kill ideas by force but we should give them their voice, let them show themselves to be wrong. We cannot make martyrs out of erroneous ideologues.
We have to accept that the human being is free, needs freedom to develop, reflect, choose and that we are 'works in progress'. A Christian may become a Sunni, then become an Imami Shia, then a Zaydi, then a Quranist, then a Wahhabi, then back to Imami Shia. We cannot terrify people not to think, wonder, ask, not reject what makes no sense to them. We cannot dictate that our children, born Muslim, must remain so or be silenced or die.
Even when the Imam is present, I struggle to see how the Laws of Apostasy apply.