Usul

@VerminusM @Teeegra Propaganda.

@Teeegra nypost.com/2026/04/04/us-…

This is the niece of General Qasem Soleimani. The hypocrisy of these people knows no boundaries.

@itsPalmamerci @AdaaMaan34276 @TalAbdulrazaq The great satan is the US administration and its actual political agenda, do you really think Iranians or Shi'as think the US as a country or people is entirely bad?

@AdaaMaan34276 @TalAbdulrazaq Study in the great satan as you claim????? Makes me wonder if you people are really religious people as you claim.

Again, ask yourself why the families of senior Iranian officials - who insist that Iran is such a great country and state - have spent decades living in the West? Their ideology and literally their own kind control their state, they're not refugees. They deserve this treatment.

There's no problem with settling in foreign countries, even the US, any iranian that want to leave Iran is free to do so. You're presenting it as if all the Iranian leaders were outside, 99,99% of them are living in Iran with their families. Some of them just like any people go to foreign countries to study, live or whatever they want. You can be against the US administration and recognize that they have the best universities at the same time and want to study here. Iranian leaders don't hate the US as a country or a people, it is against its political agenda.

What they turn into upon living in the US.

And there's no problem with settling in foreign countries, even the US, any iranian that want to leave Iran is free to do so. You're presenting it as if all the Iranian leaders were outside, 99,99% of them are living in Iran with their families. Some of them just like any people go to foreign countries to study, live or whatever they want. You can be against the US administration and recognize that they have the best universities at the same time and want to study here. Iranian leaders don't hate the US as a country or a people, it is against its political agenda.

@usulspace @GlueReck @HijaziSidra No, it's perfectly alright. The problem is Regime leaders Oppress Women back at home and let their women settle in the Foreign countries. These double standards shouldn't be tolerated.

Epstein Axis lie all the time- it is what their spiritual leader Epstein taught them. Now let's talk facts. Below are the three daughters of General Qasim Soleimani (r), and they definitely do not look like the one you have supposedly caught.

They don't oppress women, they have a code of conduct for both men and women in their country. Double standards would be allowing the women of their family to not go by the code of conduct that the rest have to which is not the case since they have exactly the same laws for all citizens.

Qassem Soleimani's daughter denied she was from their family but anyway. " Allah sets forth an example for the disbelievers: the wife of Noah and the wife of Lot. Each was married to one of Our righteous servants, yet betrayed them. So their husbands were of no benefit to them against Allah whatsoever. Both were told, “Enter the Fire, along with the others!” "

First, you have no proof that she is linked to Qassem Soleimani and his daughter denied it. Second, each person is responsible of its own deeds, I know many muslims, shias and sunnis, who are very religious yet their own mothers, sisters, daughters aren't, does it mean they are faking it? Of course not. Third, here's the 3 daughters of Qassem Soleimani

First, you have no proof that she is linked to Qassem Soleimani and his daughter denied it. Second, each person is responsible of its own deeds, I know many sunnis who are very religious yet their own sisters aren't, does it mean they are faking it? Of course not. Third, here's the 3 daughters of Qassem Soleimani

@MrAdnanRashid These people fake Infront of the world that they are Islamic just look at the family of their most regarded commander

@GhostInGray_ @GlueReck @HijaziSidra What evidence do you have to prove it's his niece ? None, and even if it was, what's the problem? Also, what's the problem if the daughter of Ali Larijani was a US citizen, do you think we hate the US as a country, as a people or as an administration with injust politics?

@GlueReck @HijaziSidra They are lying. Ali Larijani'$ daughter was also a US citizen before this conflict.

@MoonBag_Jr @HASSAN05031967 @MrAdnanRashid It's fake.

What are they doing in the US in the first place? Don’t they chant “death to America”? What are the children of Iranian regime doing in the US?

Le Mahdi tel qu’il est décrit dans la tradition sunnite présente davantage de similitudes avec le sauveur attendu dans le judaïsme qu’avec le Mahdi de la tradition chiite. Dans la vision sunnite, le Mahdi n’est pas encore né. Il sera un dirigeant juste, mais ne possédera pas de science divine particulière et ne sera pas infaillible. De manière comparable, dans la tradition juive, le sauveur attendu n’est pas encore né non plus ; il est également envisagé comme un dirigeant juste, sans attribut de science divine spécifique ni infaillibilité. En revanche, dans la tradition chiite, le Mahdi est considéré comme déjà né. Il est décrit comme un dirigeant juste doté d’une science divine particulière et bénéficiant de l’infaillibilité. Cela dit, je ne vise pas à affirmer que le Mahdi sunnite et le sauveur juif seraient une seule et même figure. Selon ma foi, ces deux figures sont fictives et ne se réaliseront pas. Mon objectif est simplement de souligner qu’elles présentent davantage de ressemblances entre elles qu’avec la conception chiite du Mahdi.

@usulspace @XinVihD001 @PBlanrue Le lieu ne change rien. Vous prêtez attention à la forme sans prendre le fond en considération. Selon les Chiites, l'imam Mahdi est né à Samarra et gouvernera selon la loi de David et sa famille. (Al Kafi, Volume No.1) Les preuves sont nombreuses, vous les voulez toutes ?

« Le chiisme est la forme de l’islam qui a maintenu le sens d’une histoire sainte ouverte, orientée vers la présence invisible de l’Imam. Par là il présente une affinité remarquable avec la conscience chrétienne orientale de la présence permanente du Christ dans son Église et dans le monde. » Henry Corbin En Islam iranien, tome IV, Gallimard.

Je ne vois aucune preuve, l'Imam al-Mahdi est né à Samarra en Irak et il réapparaitra à la Mecque pour gouverner selon la loi de David et sa famille, c'est-à-dire qu'il gouvernera avec une sagesse et une science donnée directement par Dieu, comme l'étaient David et Salomon, envoyés d'Allah. Sourate 2, verset 251 « Et David tua Goliath ; et Allah lui donna la royauté et la sagesse, et lui enseigna de ce qu’Il voulut. » Sourate 21, versets 78–79 « Et David et Salomon, quand ils jugèrent au sujet d’un champ… Nous fîmes comprendre cela à Salomon. Et à chacun Nous donnâmes sagesse et science. » Sourate 38, verset 26 « Ô David, Nous avons fait de toi un calife sur terre. Juge donc entre les gens avec vérité… » Enfin, si le Mahdi réapparaitra à la Mecque et que le sauveur des juifs ne réapparaitra pas à la Mecque alors le Mahdi des chiites ne peut pas être le même que le sauveur des juifs. En plus tu dis as dis que le sauveur des juifs réapparaitra à Ispahan (ce qui n'est pas vrai mais supposons le) pour l'associer au dajjal, et tu veux associer le Mahdi au sauveur des juifs pour l'associer au dajjal également. Sauf que le Mahdi et le dajjal ont des missions totalement opposés: Le Mahdi a pour mission de rétablir la justice dans le monde et instaurer un gouvernement juste, Jésus qui sera parmi ses partisans tuera le dajjal. Le dajjal a pour mission de tromper l'humanité, prétendre qu'il est Dieu, répandre la corruption et l'égarement. En bref, tu devrais revoir ton analyse, le simple fait que le Mahdi et le sauveur des juifs sont censés (ré)apparaitre à des endroits différents montrent qu'ils ne peuvent pas être la même personne. Si on regarde leurs caractéristiques, ils sont totalement différents. Le Mashiah est un roi, un humain ordinaire, qui n'est pas encore né, il est descendant de David, il n'est pas infaillible, il règnera sur Israël. Le Mahdi est un imam divinement guidé, déjà né, il est descendant de Muhammad (paix et prière sur lui et sa famille), il est infaillible. Il règnera sur le monde entier.

@KevinDeblonde @XinVihD001 @PBlanrue S'il apparaît à la Mecque, comment peut-il être le même sauveur que celui des juifs ? Est-ce que le sauveur des juifs apparaîtra à la Mecque? Réponds à la question.

@KevinDeblonde @XinVihD001 @PBlanrue S'il apparaît à la Mecque, comment peut-il être le même sauveur que celui des juifs ? Est-ce que le sauveur des juifs apparaîtra à la Mecque?

@usulspace @XinVihD001 @PBlanrue Ne pas être chiite ne signifie pas que je suis wahhabite. Faites la part des choses. Quand bien même le mahdi des chiites duodecimains apparaît à la Mecque qu'est ce que cela change ? Encore une fois, pas le même habillage mais beaucoup de caractéristiques similaires.

First, mutʿa is not a casual or unregulated relationship; rather, it is a marriage contract in Shi‘i jurisprudence with clear conditions: a specified duration, a dowry (mahr), and the consent of both parties. It also entails legal consequences such as established lineage (nasab) and the obligation of a waiting period (ʿidda). This clearly distinguishes it from fornication (zina), which has no framework, no rights, and no obligations. Second, the legitimacy of mutʿa goes back to the early period of Islam. It was known during the time of the Prophet ﷺ and was acknowledged by a number of companions. The disagreement between Sunnis and Shi‘as is not about its original existence, but about whether it was later abrogated. Shi‘i scholars hold that there is no definitive evidence that the Prophet ﷺ permanently prohibited it. From a social perspective, mutʿa addresses real-life situations such as travel or temporary inability to enter into permanent marriage, providing a lawful framework that preserves dignity and prevents falling into what is prohibited. As for the claim that it is a “gateway to prostitution,” this is based on a clear misunderstanding. Prostitution is a commercial relationship with no rules or obligations, whereas mutʿa is a legal contract with conditions and consequences, including the obligation of a waiting period (ʿidda). In fact, the waiting period, which can reach around three months in some cases, makes repeated consecutive relationships practically impossible, which contradicts the nature of prostitution. Therefore, it cannot be equated with a mere sexual transaction, as it involves real rights and responsibilities. And just as any system can be misused, that does not change its true nature, just as the misuse of permanent marriage does not invalidate its legitimacy. And Allah knows best.

Mutʿah marriage; a temporary contract labelled as “marriage.” A system that opens the door to exploitation, secrecy, and the weakening of real marriage.

There is a clear indicator that this is not Shi‘i practice: in the first example, the man reportedly says “talaq” to end the marriage. In Shi‘i jurisprudence, temporary marriage (mut‘a) does not end through talaq. As established, it ends either by the expiration of the agreed duration or by the man renouncing the remaining time (hiba al-mudda). The use of “talaq” reflects a Sunni framework, not a Shi‘i one. This article is misleading because it implicitly associates these practices with Shi‘i Islam, while in reality the context described is overwhelmingly Sunni, not Shi‘i. Indonesia is a country that is more than 85% Sunni Muslim, and Shi‘a communities there are a very small minority. So the social practices described in the article cannot be attributed to Shi‘i jurisprudence or doctrine. What the article calls “temporary marriage” is in fact a local and often illegal phenomenon driven by poverty, tourism, and exploitation. It involves brokers, quick informal ceremonies, and repeated short-term arrangements with tourists, often ignoring basic Islamic legal conditions. In many cases, women enter these arrangements purely for financial survival, sometimes being married dozens of times, which shows that this is not a regulated religious practice but rather a form of exploitation resembling prostitution. Moreover, even within the article itself, the marriages are often described as informal, brokered, and lacking proper legal safeguards — which contradicts the conditions required for a valid marriage in any serious Islamic legal school, including Shi‘i fiqh.

@FarisHammadi latimes.com/world-nation/s…

أولًا، المتعة ليست علاقة عابرة أو غير منظمة، بل هي عقد زواج في الفقه الشيعي له شروط واضحة: تحديد المدة، والمهر، ورضا الطرفين، وتترتب عليه آثار شرعية مثل ثبوت النسب ووجوب العدة. وهذا يميزها تمامًا عن الزنا الذي لا إطار له ولا حقوق ولا التزامات. ثانيًا، مشروعية المتعة تعود إلى صدر الإسلام، حيث كانت معروفة في زمن النبي ﷺ وأقرّ بها عدد من الصحابة. والخلاف بين السنة والشيعة ليس في أصل وجودها، بل في مسألة نسخها لاحقًا. ويرى فقهاء الشيعة أنه لا يوجد دليل قطعي على تحريمها تحريمًا دائمًا من قبل النبي ﷺ. ومن الناحية الاجتماعية، فإن المتعة تعالج أوضاعًا واقعية مثل السفر أو العجز المؤقت عن الزواج الدائم، فتوفّر إطارًا شرعيًا يحفظ الكرامة ويمنع الوقوع في الحرام. أما القول بأنها “باب إلى الدعارة” فهو ناشئ عن خلط واضح. فالدعارة علاقة تجارية بلا ضوابط ولا التزامات، بينما المتعة عقد شرعي له شروط وآثار، منها وجوب العدة. بل إن العدة التي قد تصل إلى نحو ثلاثة أشهر في بعض الحالات تجعل تكرار العلاقات بشكل متتابع غير ممكن عمليًا، وهو ما يتعارض مع طبيعة الدعارة. لذلك لا يصح تشبيهها بمعاملة جنسية مجردة، لأنها تقوم على حقوق وواجبات حقيقية. وكما يمكن إساءة استخدام أي نظام، فإن ذلك لا يغيّر من حقيقته، تمامًا كما أن إساءة استخدام الزواج الدائم لا تبطل مشروعيته. والله أعلم.

As a shia, I think the difference comes from a deeper issue, not just politics or resources. In many Sunni contexts, there is a strong emphasis on obedience to the ruler (ḥākim), often to avoid fitna (chaos). In theory, this obedience is not absolute: classical Sunni scholarship clearly states that there is no obedience in disobedience to God, and that obedience is conditional, especially if the ruler commands sin or shows clear disbelief. However, in practice, this principle has often been applied in a very restrictive way. Many scholars prioritized stability to such an extent that opposition, reform, or public accountability became extremely limited. As a result, even unjust or oppressive rulers are often tolerated, as long as they do not cross certain theological red lines. This can create a structural limitation: when obedience is emphasized so strongly, it may discourage criticism, reform, and grassroots initiative. Over time, this fosters dependence on existing power structures rather than encouraging independent development. So the issue is not simply “why rely on others,” but whether the internal framework allows for genuine autonomy and reform. Without the ability to question authority and hold leadership accountable, it becomes much harder to build the kind of independence you’re calling for. And Allah knows best.

Instead of putting in time, energy, and money into supporting Iran, Why don’t we put time, energy, and money into developing ways to strengthen ourselves as Sunnis so we are independent and don’t have to rely on Shi’as and the west?

I double checked and it exists but the passage is misunderstood. What it actually says is that those who opposed Imam ‘Ali during his caliphate (such as the Khawarij and similar groups) do not have any outward ritual impurity (najasa). This is the main legal point being established. Khomeini then adds: “even if they are more vile than dogs and pigs” (وإن كانوا أخبث من الكلاب والخنازير). This statement is not directed specifically at Aisha or the other named individuals mentioned earlier. Rather, it refers generally to that broader category of opponents. In other words, he is saying that among those who opposed Imam ‘Ali, even those who may be described in the harshest terms still do not have any apparent ritual impurity. The phrase is therefore part of a general doctrinal statement about a category, not a direct insult toward specific individuals. Presenting this passage as a clear and explicit insult toward Aisha or others is therefore an oversimplification that ignores both the structure and the legal context of the text.

@ShanKhan452781 @MrAdnanRashid So u mean this b@st@ard was wrong?

This is what the rafida think of the Mother of the Believers, Aysha RA, the honour of Rasul Allah SA. I apologise for sharing this but it was necessary for some Muslims to wake up. There are fools out there dying to defend these vile enemies. They hate everything about us.

Ja'far al-Sadiq (عليه السلام): “Do not say: ‘We are Shiʿa,’ but say: ‘We are lovers.’” 👉 Why? Because the standard required to truly be “Shiʿa” is very high.