الله أكبر ❤️

This didn’t age well…🙊

لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد
‏لعنة الله على بشار الأسد

A repost from a few years ago

Contemporary Shiah are the least practicing, the most secularist, the furthest from religion virtually in every single Muslim country:

-In Iran the youth are apostatizing en masse or just don't care about religion.

-In Syria they were the backbone of the secularist kafir ba'athist nusayri government.

-In Pakistan behind any secularist/liberal there are always either Shiah or Qadyanis.

-In Afghanistan Hazara were known for being agents of secularism, westernization and fahsha'.

-In Turkey Alevis are either kemalists or communists, in any case heavily secularists and harshly opposed to Islam.

-In Albania Bektashis are total jokers.

-In Azerbaijan Shiahs are completely secular.

-In Tajikistan and Pakistan Ismailis are basically mountain pagans hiding behind a batini İsmaili mask.


In all those cases, their first enemies are always Sunnis, Shari`ah, Islam.

What does this tell you about the nature of shaism?

Plot twist, the liberal and secularist "mozlems" who call orthodox normative Muslims as "khawarij", they themselves follow a distinctive khariji belief in their denial of khilafah.

شرح تعديل العلوم - صدر الشریعة

In the commentary of Qur’ān 11:71, which mentions that the “wife of (Ibrāhīm عليه السلام) was standing” during the incident when the angels (appearing as men) visited Ibrāhīm (عليه السلام), Imām Abū Manṣūr al-Māturīdī (ca. 235–333 AH) states:

“Some have said that she was standing in front of the guests (to serve them) because she was an elderly woman. There is no issue with an elderly woman doing so. Do you not see the statement of Allāh (تعالى): ‘The sitting (elderly) women’ (24:60) to the end of the verse? Others have said she was standing behind the door. We do not know which of them transpired.” (Ta’wīlāt al-Qur’ān (Dār al-Mīzān), 7:204)

Abū Ḥafṣ al-Nasafī quotes the same from Imām al-Māturīdī in his tafsīr. (al-Taysīr fi ‘l-Tafsīr, 8:237)

(Note how the principle of avoiding ikhtilāṭ, rooted in basic values of ghayrah and ḥayā’, is applied here. See also Ibn ʿĀbidīn's comment above: “A messenger needs to mix with males in teaching and establishing proofs against them and so on, which can only occur from males.” The shar'ī laws of ḥijāb later formalised this principle as a legal necessity, though it was observed before this as well but in a less rigorous manner.)

Read More Here: https://ahlussunnah.boards.net/thread/975/prohibition-ikhtilat-mixing-men-women

__
Join the Ahlus Sunnah Forum Telegram Channel: https://t.me/AhlusSunnahForum

There is no “Human Rights”.
There is no “International Law”.

The kuffār will not protect us.
The kuffār cannot be trusted.

Things will not change until we get this through our heads.

A lot of 1st generation immigrants to the west, who have suffered from inferiority complexes, and have fallen victim to the liberal distortions of our Dīn, are now slowly waking up.

Views that were considered “extreme” just a few years ago are starting to appeal to them :)

No wonder he’s dead now lol.

Yasir Qadhi and Omar Suleiman being on here is laughable.

Yasir Qadhi is an open secularist at this point, and Omar Suleiman is an “activist” whose support for the cause is entirely based on some “human rights” nonsense.

Neither of them are scholars or political analysts.

Not a single statement on Syria from this guy. Just more “tasawwuf”.

OP is implying that the cat does not exist because the scale is not reading a weight for the cat. I am going to critique this post through a Manṭiqī lens.

If we were to put this into a syllogism, it would look like this:

Everything that exists has a mass.
This kitten does not have a mass.
Therefore, this kitten does not exist.

The syllogism above is correct in structure, meaning the logic flows correctly. There is a major premise, a minor premise, and then a conclusion. However, the premises themselves are either outright incorrect and untrue, or they are not verifiable in this particular case.

This post displays a horrible attempt at logical deduction for the following reasons:

1 - Even if we were to put aside metaphysics, not everything that exists has a mass (light is a good example of this). So the major premise is not correct or accurate. That alone invalidates the syllogism.

2 - The scale could be defective, broken, or out of batteries, and therefore, the reading (or lack thereof) is not an accurate representation of the kitten’s mass. This throws doubt on the minor premise as well, further disproving the conclusion.

3 - We cannot verify that this photo is real. It could be AI or edited through a photo-editing software.

4 - If this photo is in fact real, we still do not know where it was taken. Different planets and moons have different gravitational pulls. Weight ≠ Mass. Weight = Mass x Gravity. So the (lack of a) reading could also be due to the cat being somewhere that has such a weak gravitational pull that the weight is too small for the scale to detect it.

Huh?