173 replies to this topic

[A true Sunni]

Mut, on 07 July 2012 - 12:23 PM, said:

the fact that he said it in video is a fatwa in itself. in that video he clearly says: zanjeer zani
and to put it as exact as he said it (with his farsi-accent): zanjeer zanihaaah

from 0.42, again at 1.24


and look at this failed attempt at refuting/explaining khorasani's words, especially at 2.40




oh okay, that explains haha

Lets review the info.

he says Hussaini rituals- what are the Hussaini rituals referred to . Iran bans bloodletting
He says Zanjeer Zani- He is talking to the Iranian nation he actually says so. Zanjeer zani in Iran means with chains not chains with blades.
He talks about Ayatullah Naennis fatwa. Ayatullah Naennis fatwa is about chains. read the fatwa it is very clear.

So for a blood letter to refer to this without explanation is disengenuous.

You are quite clearly not an Iranian otherwise you would not have have to have the term  zanjeer zani explained to you.

[Mut'ah]

A true Sunni, on 07 July 2012 - 02:15 PM, said:

Lets review the info.

he says Hussaini rituals- what are the Hussaini rituals referred to . Iran bans bloodletting
He says Zanjeer Zani- He is talking to the Iranian nation he actually says so. Zanjeer zani in Iran means with chains not chains with blades.
He talks about Ayatullah Naennis fatwa. Ayatullah Naennis fatwa is about chains. read the fatwa it is very clear.

So for a blood letter to refer to this without explanation is disengenuous.

You are quite clearly not an Iranian otherwise you would not have have to have the term  zanjeer zani explained to you.

yes no i'm not iranian, but just like that 2nd video: you skipped to explain when he said "and if blood will flow, let it flow"
so according to your principles (as interpreted of khorasani): it's allowed to beat with chains to the extent that blood will flow?

quote me

[Kaniz e Zahra]

Iranians do zanjeerzani from over the clothes,so how is it suppose to draw blood?

And none of the maraji has prohibited zanjeer without blade so why did Ay.Khurasani specifically gave the verdict in its favor?it clearly indicates it meant zanjeer with blades,which is criticized usually,not one without blades,the fatwa is quite clear but those who don't want to admit will keep arguing for the sake of arguing.

[Ali Musaaa :)]

You don't need to be a scholar to see its clearly a Bid'a, a disturbing one at that.

[A true Sunni]

Mut, on 07 July 2012 - 02:21 PM, said:

yes no i'm not iranian, but just like that 2nd video: you skipped to explain when he said "and if blood will flow, let it flow"
so according to your principles (as interpreted of khorasani): it's allowed to beat with chains to the extent that blood will flow?

quote me

From what you say it is apparent that you havent read the Ayatullah Naennis fatwa. It helps that when you discuss fatwas that you go and read them before discussing them. It increases your credibility and makes me think you are serious about this discussion.  Nevertheless I will explain it to you as I have to many blood letters before. The fatwa talks about zanjeer zani and doing it to such extent that the back can turn red or black from bruising and even if a little blood is spilt it is permissable.

Blood letters would have you believe it is a fatwa about Indopak zanjeer zani ie. zanjeers Zani with blades.

However any reasonable person will recognise that zanjeer zani iranian style causes bruising (black and blue) and the skin can split causing blood to be spilt.

IndoPak zanjeer zani is not about bruising it is predominantly about cutting and slashing not bruising. So go and read the fatwa then come back and talk

Kaniz e Zahra, on 07 July 2012 - 02:48 PM, said:

Iranians do zanjeerzani from over the clothes,so how is it suppose to draw blood?

And none of the maraji has prohibited zanjeer without blade so why did Ay.Khurasani specifically gave the verdict in its favor?it clearly indicates it meant zanjeer with blades,which is criticized usually,not one without blades,the fatwa is quite clear but those who don't want to admit will keep arguing for the sake of arguing.

since the youtube clip is only a few minutes long and we dont know in what context the speech was given it is difficult to say why he was talking about what he is. Only the disengenuous blood letters focus on blood and zanjeer and ignore everything else in the fatwa. More fool you for thinking you can pull the wool over people eyes

Edited by A true Sunni, 07 July 2012 - 04:29 PM.

[Mut'ah]

A true Sunni, on 07 July 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

From what you say it is apparent that you havent read the Ayatullah Naennis fatwa. It helps that when you discuss fatwas that you go and read them before discussing them. It increases your credibility and makes me think you are serious about this discussion.  Nevertheless I will explain it to you as I have to many blood letters before. The fatwa talks about zanjeer zani and doing it to such extent that the back can turn red or black from bruising and even if a little blood is spilt it is permissable.

Blood letters would have you believe it is a fatwa about Indopak zanjeer zani ie. zanjeers Zani with blades.

However any reasonable person will recognise that zanjeer zani iranian style causes bruising (black and blue) and the skin can split causing blood to be spilt.

IndoPak zanjeer zani is not about bruising it is predominantly about cutting and slashing not bruising. So go and read the fatwa then come back and talk

then please forward naenni's fatwa.

[A true Sunni]

Mut, on 07 July 2012 - 04:44 PM, said:

then please forward naenni's fatwa.

since you have already rejected one posted fatwa as being suspect. I would suggest you look up the fatwa yourself using your own trusted sources. I would ask that you ignore any inserted bracketed comments on some pro-blood letting sites. They are there just to mislead you. But as i said to you before why discuss a fatwa and pose questions on a translated comment of a fatwa. Surely it would have made sense to read the original before posing it as proof

[89jghur32]

I can't possibly imagine any marja saying this is halal.

[Kaniz e Zahra]

al-Irshad, on 07 July 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

I can't possibly imagine any marja saying this is halal.

There are many marjas,go and visit them personally in Iran,and Iraq,they will let you know inshAllah.

True sunni it is you who always want to put wool on people's eyes.

[Kaniz e Zahra]

shadow_of_light, on 08 July 2012 - 04:29 AM, said:

Islam doesnt allow us to damage the reputation of a momin person. So, what about damaging the reputation of a religion? This is the main reason which proves that tatbir must be fordbidden.

Islam is not dependent upon the opinions,there are many Wajibaat disliked by non muslims so should we leave them too?

Anyways this thread was merely started for fatwa,so lets not derail it and start a discussion on Tatbir altogether,there are enough threads on it.

W/salam,and Thanks SD.

Anyone who sends email should ask for explicit fatwa from Ay.sistani with mention of tatbir in his answer,not like that which was pasted from tatbir.org.

Edited by Kaniz e Zahra, 08 July 2012 - 04:56 AM.

[A true Sunni]

Kaniz e Zahra, on 08 July 2012 - 04:55 AM, said:

Islam is not dependent upon the opinions,there are many Wajibaat disliked by non muslims so should we leave them too?

Anyways this thread was merely started for fatwa,so lets not derail it and start a discussion on Tatbir altogether,there are enough threads on it.

W/salam,and Thanks SD.

Anyone who sends email should ask for explicit fatwa from Ay.sistani with mention of tatbir in his answer,not like that which was pasted from tatbir.org.

So when I said you should be speficic in your questioning, you said I was being defensive. Now I find that you are echoing what I am saying are you being defensive. Is it possible you consulted your fellow blood letters and found the fatwa is genuine

[Kaniz e Zahra]

A true Sunni, on 08 July 2012 - 07:36 AM, said:

So when I said you should be speficic in your questioning, you said I was being defensive. Now I find that you are echoing what I am saying are you being defensive. Is it possible you consulted your fellow blood letters and found the fatwa is genuine

Nothing can be done about you,you just know how to twist the words,make as many possibilities as you can,i can't bother these things anymore.

[A true Sunni]

Kaniz e Zahra, on 08 July 2012 - 09:12 AM, said:

Nothing can be done about you,you just know how to twist the words,make as many possibilities as you can,i can't bother these things anymore.

How can it be twisting words. I say ask specific questions and have continuously battled to get recognition that specific questions carry greater jurispudence then non-specicic questions. You on a previous thread took that as some kind of weakness on my part.

Now I see you asking the same thing and I wonder why the change in heart. !!. So lets just wait Ayatullah Sistani's fatwa

[Kaniz e Zahra]

There is no change in heart,i just don't want to bother your useless accucations.

[A true Sunni]

Kaniz e Zahra, on 08 July 2012 - 11:01 AM, said:

There is no change in heart,i just don't want to bother your useless accucations.

Ah I see you just take potshots for the sake of taking them . Sort of like a kneejerk reaction. Doesnt do your credibility much good. Not that you had much in my eyes anyway. But am glad you a convert to looking at specicic rulings rather then trying to creatively interpret non-specific ones. So I shall take that as a move in the right direction from you at long last

[Kaniz e Zahra]

No i am not convert in my beliefs anyhow,i am a supporter of tatbit and inshAllah will remain so,my marja allow me too.

I don't want to drag this thread to 25 pages as you are wishing now, as before.

[A true Sunni]

Kaniz e Zahra, on 08 July 2012 - 11:17 AM, said:

No i am not convert in my beliefs anyhow,i am a supporter of tatbit and inshAllah will remain so,my marja allow me too.

I don't want to drag this thread to 25 pages as you are wishing now, as before.

Ah I see you change your stance as you see fit and if it offers an advantage. I am just trying to understand blood letters. So far you are true to form

[Mut'ah]

A true Sunni, on 07 July 2012 - 04:58 PM, said:

since you have already rejected one posted fatwa as being suspect. I would suggest you look up the fatwa yourself using your own trusted sources. I would ask that you ignore any inserted bracketed comments on some pro-blood letting sites. They are there just to mislead you. But as i said to you before why discuss a fatwa and pose questions on a translated comment of a fatwa. Surely it would have made sense to read the original before posing it as proof

don't bother then.
i do have to tell you though:

Question:
I have a question about matam (Azadari) and the manner our people are holding Muharram rituals.

Answer:
It is not appropriate of the mourners to violate the commemoration method received by the righteous predecessors (Salaf-e Saleh) in mourning the martyrdom of the Lord of Martyrs, Imam Husain (a.s.).
http://www.sistani.o...=616687&id=1125

it kind of prohibits it. what can we make out of this?

however, how to explain this then?
http://www.shiachat....ost__p__2428443

Edited by Mut'ah, 10 July 2012 - 05:33 PM.

[89jghur32]

Mut, on 10 July 2012 - 05:37 PM, said:

don't bother then.
i do have to tell you though:

Question:
I have a question about matam (Azadari) and the manner our people are holding Muharram rituals.

Answer:
It is not appropriate of the mourners to violate the commemoration method received by the righteous predecessors (Salaf-e Saleh) in mourning the martyrdom of the Lord of Martyrs, Imam Husain (a.s.).
http://www.sistani.o...=616687&id=1125

it kind of prohibits it. what can we make out of this?

however, how to explain this then?
http://www.shiachat....ost__p__2428443

Reading that, it's on someone to prove then that zanjeer/tatbeer/qama/etc. were not practiced by the Imams and their close followers . The latter has already been explained.

[A true Sunni]

Mut, on 10 July 2012 - 05:37 PM, said:

don't bother then.
i do have to tell you though:

Question:
I have a question about matam (Azadari) and the manner our people are holding Muharram rituals.

Answer:
It is not appropriate of the mourners to violate the commemoration method received by the righteous predecessors (Salaf-e Saleh) in mourning the martyrdom of the Lord of Martyrs, Imam Husain (a.s.).
http://www.sistani.o...=616687&id=1125

it kind of prohibits it. what can we make out of this?

however, how to explain this then?
http://www.shiachat....ost__p__2428443

It was not meant to offend you its just that I am tired of spoon feeding people only for them to reject the evidence of their own eyes and carry on their practice of blood letting. If you genuinely interested in Ayatullah Naenni fatwa you will look it up. If you just looking for an excuse to blood let well what the fatwa actually says wont change your mind anyway.

You say 'how do we explain this' why are you so reluctant to accept the explanation given. Its simple logical and consistent with all evidence posted. Dont le the blood letters mislead you. They would have you believe that Ayatullahs dont give much thought to fatwas and thus issue contradictory ones.

You should start from the premise that they dont issue contradictory fatwas then look for the self evident truth

[Kaniz e Zahra]

No where in Sistani's fatwa pasted on zanjeerzani has word zanjeer or tatbir in itself,the question was like that 'if it defame Azadari',and then the answer was saying anything which do so and so is prohibited with no explicit mention of Zanjeer,but on urdu section there is a complete contradiction,if he prohibited it why did n't he object on the practice itself instead of allowing removal of shirts.And Ay.Sistani is not so ill informed that he does n't know how zanjeerzani is being done here in Indo-Pak.

Edited by Kaniz e Zahra, 11 July 2012 - 03:10 PM.

[A true Sunni]

Kaniz e Zahra, on 11 July 2012 - 03:09 PM, said:

No where in Sistani's fatwa pasted on zanjeerzani has word zanjeer or tatbir in itself,the question was like that 'if it defame Azadari',and then the answer was saying anything which do so and so is prohibited with no explicit mention of Zanjeer,but on urdu section there is a complete contradiction,if he prohibited it why did n't he object on the practice itself instead of allowing removal of shirts.And Ay.Sistani is not so ill informed that he does n't know how zanjeerzani is being done here in Indo-Pak.

As I said before you blood letters try and imply that Ayatullahs are some doddering old guys who issue contradicting fatwas. By doing this you continue to try and legitimise this illegal activity.

Can you rephrase your English I was slightly confused by your reply.

Have you had a reply yet . I havent so I emailed the alternative adress which i believe is Agha Kashmiri's office

Edited by A true Sunni, 11 July 2012 - 03:45 PM.

[Kaniz e Zahra]

No need of rephrasing,you are already confused on everything..Language is one of your minor confusion.

Edited by Kaniz e Zahra, 11 July 2012 - 03:45 PM.

[A true Sunni]

Kaniz e Zahra, on 11 July 2012 - 03:44 PM, said:

No need of rephrasing,you are already confused on everything..Language is one of your minor confusion.

Yes I had to reread it quite a few times before I realised you just rehashing a discredited argument again. Well we will see what we will see when the reply arrives. Somehow i dont think you will post your answer on here

[Kaniz e Zahra]

I am not dishonest as you are.Do you think that OP will not be posting a fatwa as well?