Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
baqar

Tragedy Of Karbala For Jewish/Christian Friends

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

(salam)

Vicarious suffering in the path of God: Muharram

As the above summary of Shii history shows, Shiis have found themselves to have suffered severe injustices in the first three centuries of Muslim history. First they were excluded from taking the positions of leadership which clearly were theirs; when Ali, the proper heir to power, finally did gain the seat of the caliph he was granted only a short period of rule before being assassinated; when Ali's son Husayn made another try at the caliphate he too is assassinated, and this under most heinous conditions; and finally, the line of Ali seemed to die altogether when the twelfth imam disappeared.

Shiism reconciled these injustices with the clear directives of the Prophet, who, they felt, had explicitly designated them the true Muslims, by adopting the explanation that God's inscrutable plan underlay it all and that all these events were foreordained for specific reasons. Since these maligned Shii heroes were doubtless destined to receive the favor of God, it was not a long jump to the conclusion that accepting all the sufferings was in some way the key to God's good pleasure. For the mass of the Shiis, who were not privy to the core events of Shii history, the key to God's favor and even the intercession of the imams was to commemorate and sincerely lament over these events and thereby partake vicariously in the sufferings of God's chosen ones.

All of God's prophets, Muslim belief holds, have suffered in His path, and likewise have all of the imams.[64] Each and every one, according to Shii belief, found his life ended by martyrdom. Shiis commemorate the sufferings of these martyrs frequently, both in a variety of public holidays scattered throughout the year and also in private, often weekly, ceremonies. The most important of these ceremonies are those held in Muharram, the month in which Husayn was killed. This month, and especially its first ten days, is the central focus of Shii piety. Worshippers attend special commemorative meetings in which the story of Karbala is told and retold and the sufferings of the house of Ali, the imams, and especially Husayn are recounted, processions are held, and passion plays, taziya, are enacted.[65] These three rituals--the tellings of the story of Husayn (rauza-khani), the passion plays (ta'ziya), and the processions (dasta-yi azadari)--are the three main elements of activity and devotions during Muharram.[66]

The commemorative meetings known as rauza-khanis, or "Rauza readings," are named after an early book on the sufferings of Husayn called Rauza al-Shuhada', "Garden of Martyrs."[67] These are held in many venues, both public and private. Special narrators, called rauza-khans, "Rauza readers," are hired to recite the events surrounding the day of Ashura, the day of Husayn's martyrdom. The more successful of these narrators are highly skilled in poetic storytelling, dramatic techniques, and chanting of elegies, as well as perfect pronunciation of classical Arabic and skilled use of symbolism, all serving to convey the events of Karbala with an intense passion and maximize the audience's emotional involvement. The rauza-khan portrays the events with great detail, and dwells especially on the sufferings of Husayn and his party: their long march, the heat and their thirst, the gradual killing of the fighting men and the agonies of each individual death, and the brutality Husayn is subjected to. As the narration proceeds and continually heightens in intensity, the audience repeatedly will burst into sobbing and moaning and will slap their foreheads and beat their chests in anguish.

The taziya, the passion play in which the events of Husayn's death are actually reenacted by the participants, is another important event. These plays began to be enacted in a simple form shortly after the event of Karbala but only became widespread during the Safavid period,[68] reaching their peak in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Qajar Iran. In the twentieth century Iran's various secular governments have occasionally outlawed their practice,[69] but the taziyas nonetheless still exist as a key religious event in Iranian Islam. They are enacted in every major city in Iran, and semi-professional traveling troupes--whose pay is often provided by a wealthy sponsor as a public service bringing its own religious rewards--sometimes bring the play even to remote and small villages. As with the rauza-khans, the taziyas do not simply portray the known historical events but provide a great amount of imaginative detail to flesh out the story. A Turkish traveler to Iran in 1640 provides a vivid description of one such public passion play for Husayn, to which came "the nobles and notables and all the people of the city, great and small":

When the reader of the book [on the martyrdom of Husayn] reaches the part describing the manner in which the accursed Shemr killed the oppressed Husayn, at that very moment, they bring out to the field...mock representations of the bodies of the dead children of the Imam. Upon seeing this spectacle shouts and screams and wailings of "Alas, Husayn" mount from the people to the heavens and all spectators weep and wail. Hundreds of Husayn's devotees beat and wound their heads, faces and bodies with swords and knives. For the love of Imam Husayn they make their blood flow. The green grassy field becomes bloodied and looks like a field of poppies. Then the mock dead are carried from the field and the reading of the story of Imam Husayn's martyrdom is completed.[70]

The processions are perhaps the most public of the Muharram ceremonies and, with their conspicuous self-flagellation, are perhaps the most immediately noticeable to foreign observers. These range from simple marches to elaborate pageants, complete with characters from the taziya, groups singing dirges and laments, banners and flags representing the standard of Husayn at Karbala (the alam), and floats, all interspersed with often shirtless men wailing and beating their chests.[71] The self-beatings take a variety of forms, from light chest-slapping practiced chiefly by the observers to strenuous self-flagellation, often with chains, daggers, razor blades, or other "implements"--these occurring in their most vigorous forms during processions and other outdoor events--practiced most conspicuously by young men. Indeed, many of the forms of self-beating are complex and evolved enough that the activity has become even part art and part sport, with vendors selling a variety of instruments and enthusiasts discussing fine points of technique.[72]

http://bahai-library.com/theses/dying/dying5.shiism.html

For more details; follow the link, and read the entire chapter.

(salam)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't agree with the professor. I believe the prophet underwent extraordinary hardships and among his flock, there were many more Osamas and Saddams than Mother Teresas. His so-called successes were forestalled and foreshadowed by far greater sorrows and trials. Full details on that would require more than just a few posts here.

You missed the point completely.

The Shia historical experience is akin to those of the Jews and Christians in that it is is a millennium-long tale of martyrdom, persecution and suffering. Sunni's, by contrast are imbued with a sense that immediate worldly success should be theirs. Sunni Islam made huge strides as a force in the world very quickly. Within a generation after Prophet Muhammad (saw), Arab tribal armies had exploded from their native peninsula to defeat the three superpowers of the time, overrunning the Persian and Egyptian empires and pushing the Byzantines out of the Near East into Anatolia. Muslim armies continued to conquer, moving across North Africa, crossing the Straits of Gibraltar (named after the Arab commander Tariq) to control the Iberian Peninsula, and pushing into Western-Europe until the Franks stopped them at the Battle of Tours-Poiters in 732 CE.

Given thier history, the Shia would never associate thier faiths validity with worldly success. The Sunnis, by contrast, became accustomed to celebrating thier dominon in the world through the muscular temporal institution of the caliphate. As a result, Shias seem to find it less threatening than the Sunnis do the relative decline of Muslim Power in modern times, since for the Shiah such a decline does not suggest a crises of beleif.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You missed the point completely.

The point the professor was making and that I disagreed with (and still do) was about the Prophet. But you are entitled to your opinion.

Muhammad led a successful state, and died happy."

That is the professor's opinion and in my view incorrect. Anyway, I will not pursue the argument. It is outside the scope of this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ kufa was the head of islam according to umar, most of its best people were revolutionaries but were martyred by the ummayyad tyrants who replaced them with their mercenaries

the great tawwabun and amir mukhtar was also kufan

there is no lesson for polythesists in karbala, karbala is the same struggle that was started in badr and reached its climax at siffin

it was people of kufa who also led the revolution against uthman

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And this is what some Western scholars say about Imam Hussain

1. Reynold Alleyne Nicholson

(1868-1945) Sir Thomas Adams Professor of Arabic at the University of Cambridge.

"Hussain fell, pierced by an arrow, and his brave followers were cut down beside him to the last man. Muhammadan tradition, which with rare exceptions is uniformly hostile to the Umayyad dynasty, regards Hussain as a martyr and Yazid as his murderer."

[A Literary History of the Arabs, Cambridge, 1930, p. 197]

2. Robert Durey Osborn

(1835-1889) Major of the Bengal Staff Corps.

"Hussain had a child named Abdallah, only a year old. He had accompanied his father in this terrible march. Touched by its cries, he took the infant in his arms and wept. At that instant, a shaft from the hostile ranks pierced the child's ear, and it expired in his father's arms. Hussain placed the little corpse upon the ground. 'We come from God, and we return to Him!' he cried; 'O Lord, give me strength to bear these misfortunes!' … Faint with thirst, and exhausted with wounds, he fought with desperate courage, slaying several of his antagonists. At last he was cut down from behind; at the same instance a lance was thrust through his back and bore him to the ground; as the dealer of this last blow withdrew his weapon, the ill-fated son of Ali rolled over a corpse. The head was severed from the trunk; the trunk was trampled under the hoofs of the victors' horses; and the next morning the women and a surviving infant son were carried away to Kufa. The bodies of Hussain and his followers were left unburied on the spot where they fell. For three days they remained exposed to the sun and the night dews, the vultures and the prowling animals of the waste; but then the inhabitants of a neighboring village, struck with horror that the body of a grandson of the Prophet should be thus shamefully abandoned to the unclean beasts of the field, dared the anger of Obaidallah , and interred the body of the martyr and those of his heroic friends."

[islam Under the Arabs, Delaware, 1976, pp. 126-7]

3. Sir William Muir

(1819-1905) Scottish scholar and statesman. Held the post of Foreign Secretary to the Indian government as well as Lieutenant Governor of the Northwestern Provinces.

"The tragedy of Karbala decided not only the fate of the caliphate, but of the Mohammedan kingdoms long after the Caliphate had waned and disappeared."

[Annals of the Early Caliphate, London, 1883, pp. 441-2]

4. Peter J. Chelkowski

Professor of Middle Eastern Studies, New York University.

"Hussain accepted and set out from Mecca with his family and an entourage of about seventy followers. But on the plain of Karbala they were caught in an ambush set by the … caliph, Yazid. Though defeat was certain, Hussein refused to pay homage to him. Surrounded by a great enemy force, Hussein and his company existed without water for ten days in the burning desert of Karbala. Finally Hussein, the adults and some male children of his family and his companions were cut to bits by the arrows and swords of Yazid's army; his women and remaining children were taken as captives to Yazid in Damascus. The renowned historian Abu Reyhan al-Biruni states; "… then fire was set to their camp and the bodies were trampled by the hoofs of the horses; nobody in the history of the human kind has seen such atrocities."

[Ta'ziyeh: Ritual and Drama in Iran, New York, 1979, p. 2]

5. Simon Ockley

(1678-1720) Professor of Arabic at the University of Cambridge.

"Then Hussain mounted his horse, and took the Koran and laid it before him, and, coming up to the people, invited them to the performances of their duty: adding, 'O God, thou art my confidence in every trouble, and my hope in all adversity!'… He next reminded them of his excellency, the nobility of his birth, the greatness of his power, and his high descent, and said, 'Consider with yourselves whether or not such a man as I am is not better than you; I who am the son of your prophet's daughter, besides whom there is no other upon the face of the earth. Ali was my father; Jafar and Hamza, the chief of the martyrs, were both my uncles; and the apostle of God, upon whom be peace, said both of me and my brother, that we were the chief of the youth of paradise. If you will believe me, what I say is true, for by God, I never told a lie in earnest since I had my understanding; for God hates a lie. If you do not believe me, ask the companions of the apostle of God [here he named them], and they will tell you the same. Let me go back to what I have.' They asked, 'What hindered him from being ruled by the rest of his relations.' He answered, 'God forbid that I should set my hand to the resignation of my right after a slavish manner. I have recourse to God from every tyrant that doth not believe in the day of account.'"

[The History of the Saracens, London, 1894, pp. 404-5]

6. Edward G. Brown

Sir Thomas Adams Professor of Arabic and oriental studies at the University of Cambridge.

"… a reminder of the blood-stained field of Karbala, where the grandson of the Apostle of God fell at length, tortured by thirst and surrounded by the bodies of his murdered kinsmen, has been at anytime since then sufficient to evoke, even in the most lukewarm and heedless, the deepest emotions, the most frantic grief, and an exaltation of spirit before which pain, danger and death shrink to unconsidered trifles."

[A Literary History of Persia, London, 1919, p. 227]

7. Ignaz Goldziher

(1850-1921) Famous Hungarian orientalist and scholar.

"Ever since the black day of Karbala, the history of this family … has been a continuous series of sufferings and persecutions. These are narrated in poetry and prose, in a richly cultivated literature of martyrologies - a Shi'i specialty - and form the theme of Shi'i gatherings in the first third of the month of Muharram, whose tenth day ('ashura) is kept as the anniversary of the tragedy at Karbala. Scenes of that tragedy are also presented on this day of commemoration in dramatic form (ta'ziya). 'Our feast days are our assemblies of mourning.' So concludes a poem by a prince of Shi'i disposition recalling the many mihan of the Prophet's family. Weeping and lamentation over the evils and persecutions suffered by the 'Alid family, and mourning for its martyrs: these are things from which loyal supporters of the cause cannot cease. 'More touching than the tears of the Shi'is' has even become an Arabic proverb."

[introduction to Islamic Theology and Law, Princeton, 1981, p. 179]

8. Edward Gibbon

(1737-1794) Considered the greatest British historian of his time.

"In a distant age and climate the tragic scene of the death of Hussain will awaken the sympathy of the coldest reader."

[The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, London, 1911, volume 5, pp. 391-2]

9. Thomas Carlyle has relayed this about the Tragedy of Karbala:

"The best lesson which we get from the tragedy of Karbala is that Hussain and his companions were the rigid believers of God. They illustrated that numerical superiority does not count when it comes to truth and falsehood. The victory of Hussain despite his minority marvels me!"

Very well researched and intellectually rigorous. I am so happy to see this piece and the noble intention behind it. We need more of such dialogue and interaith reconciliation.

MAy Allah SWT reward you for your noble work..

Edited by lfatima

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You missed the point completely.

The Shia historical experience is akin to those of the Jews and Christians in that it is is a millennium-long tale of martyrdom, persecution and suffering. Sunni's, by contrast are imbued with a sense that immediate worldly success should be theirs. Sunni Islam made huge strides as a force in the world very quickly. Within a generation after Prophet Muhammad (saw), Arab tribal armies had exploded from their native peninsula to defeat the three superpowers of the time, overrunning the Persian and Egyptian empires and pushing the Byzantines out of the Near East into Anatolia. Muslim armies continued to conquer, moving across North Africa, crossing the Straits of Gibraltar (named after the Arab commander Tariq) to control the Iberian Peninsula, and pushing into Western-Europe until the Franks stopped them at the Battle of Tours-Poiters in 732 CE.

Given thier history, the Shia would never associate thier faiths validity with worldly success. The Sunnis, by contrast, became accustomed to celebrating thier dominon in the world through the muscular temporal institution of the caliphate. As a result, Shias seem to find it less threatening than the Sunnis do the relative decline of Muslim Power in modern times, since for the Shiah such a decline does not suggest a crises of beleif.

WOw awesome point. Everyday this forum enlightens me more and more..I really have to think about THAt one..

Always wondered why Muslims lost so much.. a la Allama Iqbal..

Kalme padhte the ham chayon mein talwaron ki..

BUt the SHia are also part of much cultural baggage.. esp in the subcontinent..so the danger is always there. The Effort never ceases and the jihad with the nafs and culture never ends.

The day we become complascnet and 'cultural' Muslims is the day we lost the spirit of real Islam..

May Allah SWT reward you all for your quust for knowledge and its spreading to fellow humans..

and hasten the Reappearance of our Qaim ATFS..

Edited by lfatima

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(salam)

(bismillah)

Mourning Imam Husain (as)

ibn ‘Abbas reports from Imam Amir al-Momenin, ‘Ali ibn Abi Taleb (as) who said:

"Once Prophet Jesus (as) was passing by Karbala when he sat down and began to weep. His disciples (hawariyoun) who were observing him, followed suit and began weeping too. But not understanding the reason for this behaviour, they asked him:

'Oh Spirit of God! What is that which makes you weep?'

Jesus (as) said:

'Do you know what land this is?'

The disciples replied: 'No'

He then said:

'This is the land on which the son of Prophet Ahmad (Mohammad) (pbuh) shall be killed.'"

Behaar al-Anwaar

Volume 44, page 252

:cry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if any on is interested in a book about karbala you could contact me at sjafri7865@yahoo.com becuse i can sell you some books on this topic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Christians holocost is Jesus crucifixion .

Jews holcost began in the first century .

Muslim shia holocost is tragedy of imam Hussein.

I think muslim sunnis need holocost .

Ashura and Imam Hussain are for all Muslims sunni and Shia and even nonmuslims

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was reading this thread and could not help being impressed by such smart personalities who write this thread on reading another hindu admirer of Imam Hussain came to mind and i felt that i had to share it with you people.

The famous hindu was none other that Mr Gandhi his non violence struggle was inspired by kabala and he was so inspired by iman hussains teachings and his wilingness to avert a fight that he came up with the idea of satyagrah that is a non violence way of fighting against injustice.

Again not many people know this but Mr. Gandhi tried to mimic Imam hussain whenever the situation presented itself, his famous dandhi march (protesting against the british on the tax on salt) was joined by many freedom fighters but he started the journey with 72 of his closest friends and companions and later many people joined him, to honour the 72 comarades of imam hussain

Just a kids thought in a room full of professors and specialist on the matter ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baqar my friend I hope all is well with you and your family.

I keep a copy of your article in my documents and posted it on another web site as well.

Blister

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imam Hussain (as) is a source of inspiration for all that believe in a righteous world. It will be world in which those who usurp power and crush the weak have perished in the judgement of God.

Such a world can only come to be by the blood and sacrifice of righteous people that refuse to bow for the power of this world and stand up against the abuse that reigns our world. Imam Hussain (as) was such a person and, even though he died, his victory on the forces of evil enlights humanity till this day.

Thanks for this thread!

Edited by Leto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baqar made these two statements:

"OK, there does not have to be a caliph at all if God does not want it. But we believe God asked Mohammad to declare one."

"In essence, the caliphate does not have to be in the family of the Prophet. But apparently God so chose it to be."

and it made me curious to know;

Why is it believed that God asked Muhammad to declare a caliph?

and

Why is it believed that God chose for the caliph to be in the family of the prophet?

The qur'an being the word of Allah, isn't the qur'an silent on this issue?

Thanks and salaam.

I was reading this thread and could not help being impressed by such smart personalities who write this thread on reading another hindu admirer of Imam Hussain came to mind and i felt that i had to share it with you people.

The famous hindu was none other that Mr Gandhi his non violence struggle was inspired by kabala and he was so inspired by iman hussains teachings and his wilingness to avert a fight that he came up with the idea of satyagrah that is a non violence way of fighting against injustice.

Again not many people know this but Mr. Gandhi tried to mimic Imam hussain whenever the situation presented itself, his famous dandhi march (protesting against the british on the tax on salt) was joined by many freedom fighters but he started the journey with 72 of his closest friends and companions and later many people joined him, to honour the 72 comarades of imam hussain

Just a kids thought in a room full of professors and specialist on the matter happy.gif

It is good that we learn from one another. :)

In this case Ghandi learning from Hussain according to what you say. This is how cultures improve themselves, by learning from one another, like the days of the Ottoman empire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading this I was moved to read more about it. Most articles linked it to the division between Sunni and Shia and some use it to cast Shia in an unfavorable light. I couldn't help but notice that the historical presentations changed with every author in order to reflect and/or support his own views. I don't think I ever read the same facts twice. It made it hard for me to draw a conclusion. It seemed the hero of your story was in rebellion to the Caliph. He refused to accept him and rode against him. Religiously speaking, he had about as much chance when he rode into Karbala of being accepted as Caliph as Jesus had of being accepted as the Messiah when he rode into Jerusalem. It is a story of tragedy, despair, and hopelessness. Its the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising.

Yet I don't understand the significance. Does the Quran call for a caliph? Did Muhammad appoint a successor? It seems the differences between Sunni and Shia are man made, particularly along tribal lines. The latter is a consistent theme dating from the third Caliph who appointed his own tribal members to governorships, governors the rest of Islam rejected for not practising the Quran (At least, that's how I read it. Again, views changed with every author.). I don't think Ali objected to the Caliph's assassination (Although he didn't initiate it either). I suspect Ali rode away from the Caliph in order to not be connected to what happened to the Caliph afterwards (Why else would Ali leave the city?) and those he left behind who assassinated the Caliph did so to make Ali the next Caliph - And it worked.

Now no insult is intended by me towards Ali. He seemed to me to be the best man for the job from day one. Yet somehow, for the #2 choice, he ended up fourth in line. When he left the city I expect he was thinking that maybe this was God's will. If so, then he would have to also believe that it was God's will that he be assassinated next - Which he was. Yet he failed to appoint one of his sons Caliph to replace himself. He too was unable to establish tribal heritage as the deciding factor of who became the next Caliph. Had he succeeded, the descendents of Muhammad would have been royalty versus elected popes.

All chance of a royal lineage from Muhammad ended with the Battle of Karbala. Is this what the Shia lament?

Again, I'm not critical. I'm just curious. I spent a couple of hours reading up on this and got no two viewpoints the same. I suppose I could have kept on reading a couple of more hours but it's getting late and I'm giving up. What I did learn is that Muslim historians seem to suffer from the same problems as Christian and Jewish historians. Ultimately, history is whatever the recorder wants it to be.

Anyway, here are the questions I did not find answers for:

1) Why should there be a Caliph?

2) Why should he be a descendent of Muhammad's?

3) Did not Ali accept the first three Caliphs? How is that explained?

Educate me. It's not a challenge (except to my stupidity). I figure you can tell me faster than I can look it up.

1) Ali is the first Caliph, Because God Cannot leave the World without divine Authority, take for example jesus who left His Disciples (successors) after he left.

2) he is the Grandson of the prophet (pbuh) and the Successor after Imam Hassan (as). *In Islam there ar 12 successors.

3) Ali is the first Successor of the prophet, the rest of the three your talking about are the ones that Elected the successor on pen and paper. Which is falsely against the commandments of God, and the Quran.

   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A very moving story.

It got me thinking about how the group psychology of different religions is affected by formative experiences, especially tragedies.

For Jews, our national history essentially begins in slavery, climaxes at Sinai, and then instantly sort of goes downhill with squabbling. Over the course of about 1400 years of national existence in our land (the first time), we had four good kings, a large number of mediocre to bad ones, and pretty much everything that could go wrong, did. Our Temple was destroyed (twice - which we mourn every day), we were exiled (twice - once for only 70 years, but the second time for 1900 years). So we've spent most of our history experiencing slavery, destruction, and exile.

 

I think one should be careful to apply such terms as "national existence" to ancient history. The ancient Israel was originally a tribal confederation united by religion. Many former idolaters from various backgrounds joined it and help to form it. Ancient Israel was not a nation in contemporary Western sense, but very much like the Islamic Ummah - a religious confederation of diverse communities.

 

The concept of "Goles/Galut" (I prefer the Yiddish pronunciation) is far broader than such English terms as "exile" or "diaspora". The imperfect world before the universal messianic redemption is Goles by definition, everywhere and for everyone. The Divine presence itself is in exile, metaphysically speaking, as long as some people suffer from injustice, because it's hard to see God in an injust world. Conversely, we can work toward redemption by trying to be better people and by helping the others.

 

Note that traditional Jews who live today in Jerusalem wish each other every year to celebrate "next year in Jerusalem", because Goles is not about geopolitics or the physical city of Jerusalem, and it's not only about the Jews. As Kabbala and especially Hasidism explains it, It's an ongoing cosmic tragedy that started from Adam's fall. The real Jerusalem we want to return to is the Divine center of human perfection that is yet to be revealed in people's hearts; the physical city is just a symbol of the future universal redemption.  IMHO, suffering of the Shia is very much a part of the same unfortunate "concealment of God's face" known in the Jewish esoteric tradition as Goles...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the greatest leaders of the Jewish people -- Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Joshua, David, Solomon, Hezekiah, Judah Maccabee, Hillel, the Vilna Gaon, the Baal Shem Tov, you name it -- didn't die as martyrs. While Jews do have tales of specific individual martyrs -- e.g., Rabbi Akiva, who was flayed alive by the Romans for teaching Torah -- by and large we do not focus very much on their sufferings (there is a reading in the Yom Kippur liturgy, but that's mainly it).

 

The Tishebov liturgy is full of specific martyrdom stories and the prayer ונתנה תוקף is, argueably, the most touching moment in the Yom Kippur liturgy, when people break into tears. Classic commentaries recommend to picture yourself being tortured and murdered as a martyr at the end of the Neilah prayer, in order to accept martyrdom personally.

 

Jews in Medieval Europe focused much more on individual martyrs. Entire books of lamentation prayers in Yiddish and Hebrew are dedicated to individual and collective martyrdom of specific Jewish communities. Quite a few medieval Jews practices sigufim, various forms of self-mortification, in order to commemorate the historical martyrs and to purify their bodies. These practices became increasingly unpopular in the 20th century, but in Hasidic communities people still do symbolic flagellation before the Yom Kippur.

 

I would say that Tishebov, The Ninth of Av, and not Yom Kippur, could be considered a Jewish parallel of the Day of Ashura. There are obvious differences though, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The famous hindu was none other that Mr Gandhi his non violence struggle was inspired by kabala and he was so inspired by iman hussains teachings and his wilingness to avert a fight that he came up with the idea of satyagrah that is a non violence way of fighting against injustice.

Again not many people know this but Mr. Gandhi tried to mimic Imam hussain whenever the situation presented itself, his famous gandhi march (protesting against the british on the tax on salt) was joined by many freedom fighters but he started the journey with 72 of his closest friends and companions and later many people joined him, to honour the 72 comarades of imam hussain

 

Coming across this tonight it struck me that it seems that only the western developed world knows how to respond to peaceful protest.

Ghandi and the british rule... Ghandi wins

Martin Luther King Jr. against slavery... Martin Luther King Jr.'s movement eventually wins

Nelson Mandela during his time in prison and when he came out of prison... can we say that he won through peaceful resistance also?

Those are what came to mind...

compared with Egypt, Syria, Ukraine...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coming across this tonight it struck me that it seems that only the western developed world knows how to respond to peaceful protest.

Ghandi and the british rule... Ghandi wins

Martin Luther King Jr. against slavery... Martin Luther King Jr.'s movement eventually wins

Nelson Mandela during his time in prison and when he came out of prison... can we say that he won through peaceful resistance also?

Those are what came to mind...

compared with Egypt, Syria, Ukraine...

 

The uprising in India was met with one of the most stiff, violent crackdowns in history. The British added many more massacres to their resume. Look it up.

 

Martin Luther King Jr. didn't live in slavery times. But his fight for black people's civil rights ended with him getting shot.

 

I don't know what "peaceful resistance" you are referring to in Syria and Ukraine? Care to enlighten us? Or are civilized countries obliged to kowtow when armed and crazy Salafists or neo-Nazis try to take over?

 

And with respect to Egypt... Sisi is Saudi Arabia's guy. So, good example.

 

Tool.

 

 

 

The success of peaceful protest has nothing to do with the nonsensical factors you have made up in your brilliant mind. It depends simply on the direction of that society. If the entirety of a society, or the majority of a society, or a powerful group of people within a society, embrace a certain change, then a peaceful movement can bring about that change.

 

The Islamic Revolution in Iran consisted almost entirely of peaceful protests. Imam Khomeini believed that the street protest in conjunction with the general strike were the two most powerful weapons to overthrow the monarchy. And it worked. Why? Because the entire people were behind it.

 

If everyone in the Indian subcontinent says: "I don't want British colonialism," then there is nothing the British empire can do, regardless of how much military might it possesses or how many massacres it commits.

 

But really this has to be the worst Clynn post ever. By far. And that's saying a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • I wonder if it is enough for a person to believe in Islam until they die to be eternally in heaven eventually? I mean maybe a person would not believe if they were subject to torture but if they are not subject to torture they would believe. Must a Muslim believe no matter what or can they just rely on that if they believed in this life then they will someday enter heaven?
    • Guest Boy
      I m 28yrs old .I started praying since last year. I was not knowing the importance of praying.My parents never told me to pray .They were only after my studies.I was busy in my life not knowing the real purpose if life  . I new nothing about what are the duties of muslim. Then Allah guided me at the age of 27 and i started going to masjid . Now i regret why was i so far away from my deen for so many years.Some questions kill me everyday ..Why didnt allahs guidance came early .? .I have to make up for so many prayers.i have asked Allah for forgiveness .Why i hav to still make up?. Is it too late age to get guided ?  Like i have done nothing no namaz no roza ..when my parents never told me about deen how am i responsible ? Now i ask Allah for forgiveness why i still have to make up for qada ?? If i make niyat of making qada after some years is it ok  or i hav to start praying qada ??When were u ppl guided to do these things ? I am feeling very bad..Whatever we learn from childhood imprints in heart ..i have learnt nothing..share ur views please
    • This is not possible because this is a breach of the basis of unity. When its decided that we are not going to discuss about our beliefs. Scholars can sit together and discuss all this but this can't be done in a public scenario.
    • Quran has not talked about the punishment of Apostaty in this world. But we have Sahih hadeeths from Imams. Quran doesn't tell everything explicitly.  When Imam Ali said that "all secrets and knowledge is condensed in Quran" then it means we can't access it but they can. So its better to be satisfied with the hadeetha and Marajes have done a lot of study to accept these hadeeth and Law. And you're not being killed for your belief but your action. Flee to any other Non Muslim country and you're free but if you harm Muslim society by your Apostasy then you are ought to be killed as you are a corrupter.
×