Sunday, October 24, 2021 AD / Rabi' al-awwal 17, 1443 AH
English
فارسی العربية Точикӣ Русский
Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani
(70) The meaning of imitation is acting upon someone else’s saying or deed without reason, and therefore acting upon someone else’s saying or deed with reason is not considered imitation, but it is considered following the reason. Therefore, it is permissible to act upon the religious order of scholars in the case that they provide convincing reasons for it from the Book of God or Mutawatir Sunnah of the Prophet or the common sense, rather it is probably considered obligatory to do so; since acting upon it in that case, is acting upon the Book of God or Mutawatir Sunnah of the Prophet or the common sense. (Question and Answer 43)
loading
Criticisms & investigations
Go to
number
First/1/Last
Go to
page

Criticisms & investigations about Furu’ (ancillaries of the religion)

Code Number Code Subject & content Author Date Appendix
3 29
Laws; Furu’ (ancillaries of the religion)
With respect 1. What is the opinion of Allamah about the Muslims’ wars after the Prophet? 2. Is the Caliphs’ proceeds in war makings, which accidentally has led to extension of Islam, acceptable? 3. Does the law of murder, which is mentioned in Qur’an, mean attack, rape and exterminating?
David 17/11/2015
2 23
Laws; Furu’ (ancillaries of the religion)
1 . if Zakat was to be forbidden for Bani Hashim, would God not emphasize on it in the Quranic verses? This family did not accept Zakat in the beginning era of Islam, was that not a sign of their piety and contentment? 2 . Prove that the three-sixth of the Khums which is given to orphans and the needy and wayfarers, all of them must be from the Hashemi’s family. 3 . Is paying Khums and Zakat in accordance with other Quranic judicial commands whose establishments are contingent upon rulership of Caliph of God on earth?
Behnam 03/06/2015
1 10
Laws; Furu’ (ancillaries of the religion)
I read the book “Return to Islam” twice carefully. I did not understand it very well the first time, but I got it the second time. To be fair, it is a well-written and different book and I learnt a lot from it, especially from the parts it has explained cognition and its impediments, and the parts about the impediments to return to Islam, also my field of study is theology of religions and mysticism. In my opinion, these words they say that this book is deceptive and does not have reasoning and such, are absurd, because they themselves cannot write a book at this level, and if this book is deceptive, their books are blasphemies!! However, to be honest, I did not understand one part of the book and I have a problem and I think there is a contradiction. In one part, in the subject of “Performing some parts of Islam is contingent on performing the entire of it”, the author has said: “performing the Islamic Hadds[1] by those who do not know the entire laws of Islam and are not capable of administering all of them, is not permissible, without the legitimacy for non-performing the Islamic Hadds by them be permissible”! How is it possible that performing Islamic Hadds by them is not permissible and is also obligatory at the same time?!! This is contradiction and impossible! Of course, maybe I am wrong. Please guide me.
Mojtaba Salehi 22/01/2015
Go to
number
First/1/Last
Go to
page
Download collection of criticisms & investigations
Criticisms; Return to Islam; Mansoor Hashemi Khorasani
Any usage and utilization from the content of this website provided that proper citation is made, is allowed.
×
Login
Forgot password?
Membership
Cancel
loading
×
Membership in newsletter
Please enter the security code.
Captcha
loading