Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
OhhCampione

Matam - Is It A Central Part Of A Shias Faith?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Salaam,

 

Firstly I would like to say I am a shia and have been since birth.

 

Whilst reading another thread on this forum about tatbir, it got me thinking; is matam a central part of a shias faith? Personally whilst i understand it is completely down to the intention of the person doing the action; zanjeer, tatbir etc I don't really agree with it.

 

I understand that matam allows you to feel moved and is a show of emotion and a stance to side with the imams, I dont agree with the concept of tatbir due to the potential harm it can do to you. My question is, are there any hadeeths which state something along the lines of if you do not agree with tatbir etc that you are not considered as a shia? Please note I am talking about tatbir and not matam with just your hands. 

 

Thank you for your time

 

Wasalaam

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam,

 

Firstly I would like to say I am a shia and have been since birth.

 

Whilst reading another thread on this forum about tatbir, it got me thinking; is matam a central part of a shias faith? Personally whilst i understand it is completely down to the intention of the person doing the action; zanjeer, tatbir etc I don't really agree with it.

 

I understand that matam allows you to feel moved and is a show of emotion and a stance to side with the imams, I dont agree with the concept of tatbir due to the potential harm it can do to you. My question is, are there any hadeeths which state something along the lines of if you do not agree with tatbir etc that you are not considered as a shia? Please note I am talking about tatbir and not matam with just your hands. 

 

Thank you for your time

 

Wasalaam

 

Amazing this debate rages on Shiachat whenever it close to Moharram. Neither Matam nor Zanjeer nor Tatbir are central to Shia faith. In fact most Marje have fatwas banning tatbir and zajneer (chains with blades not just chains) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam,

 

Firstly I would like to say I am a shia and have been since birth.

 

Whilst reading another thread on this forum about tatbir, it got me thinking; is matam a central part of a shias faith? Personally whilst i understand it is completely down to the intention of the person doing the action; zanjeer, tatbir etc I don't really agree with it.

 

I understand that matam allows you to feel moved and is a show of emotion and a stance to side with the imams, I dont agree with the concept of tatbir due to the potential harm it can do to you. My question is, are there any hadeeths which state something along the lines of if you do not agree with tatbir etc that you are not considered as a shia? Please note I am talking about tatbir and not matam with just your hands. 

 

Thank you for your time

 

Wasalaam

Yes.

Imam said "Our Shia (followers) are from us (ahlulbayt) they feel sad for our tragedies and they feel happy when we are happy".

Mourning Imam Husain specifically is old tradition that can be traced back to Imam Zayn Al'abdeen. They way it is done as brother Basim said varied through ages and geographical locations but they maintained the tragic feature of the mourning.There is another familiar saying(maybe even a hadith) that mo'mins should cry or show that they are crying on Imam Husain tragedy.

Generaly speaking, our religion is love, loving Allah and loving those whom He love, and those are Ahlulbayt. Because remembering them is remembering the blessings of Allah upon the Ummah, the guidance they brought, the truth that they revealed, the darkness that they fought, for this most Ulama highly recommend the maatam practice as a general title to any gathering to remember ahlulbayt and their sacrifices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes.

Imam said "Our Shia (followers) are from us (ahlulbayt) they feel sad for our tragedies and they feel happy when we are happy".

Mourning Imam Husain specifically is old tradition that can be traced back to Imam Zayn Al'abdeen. They way it is done as brother Basim said varied through ages and geographical locations but they maintained the tragic feature of the mourning.There is another familiar saying(maybe even a hadith) that mo'mins should cry or show that they are crying on Imam Husain tragedy.

Generaly speaking, our religion is love, loving Allah and loving those whom He love, and those are Ahlulbayt. Because remembering them is remembering the blessings of Allah upon the Ummah, the guidance they brought, the truth that they revealed, the darkness that they fought, for this most Ulama highly recommend the maatam practice as a general title to any gathering to remember ahlulbayt and their sacrifices.

 

The person was specifically asking about blood letting but left it ambiguous about chest beating. So arther then answer yes and then not answer the question. Read the question properly and then answer it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe if you are asking specifically about blood-letting rituals, then no, even those who do it (should) agree that it is not central to our faith, nor is it mandatory. However the consensus among scholars, due to the magnitude of narrations related to the issue, is that remembrance of Husayn (AS) is kept alive with the rituals that remind people of his struggle. And what is thabit, or has a legitimate presence in our sources, is the chest-beating, gatherings, poems, crying, and acting out his tragedy as a play (forgot the word for this last one, but you know what I mean).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blood-letting seems so anti-ethical to our belief in no self-harm. If it is haram to start smoking cigarettes, why would a person be allowed to cut their head open with a knife?

While I agree with your position on the issue, from what I understand, our jurisprudence does not work that way. Unless we have an explicit narration stating that such and such act is haram, then it remains muba7 (halal, but neither recommended/mustahab nor discouraged/makruh).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree with your position on the issue, from what I understand, our jurisprudence does not work that way. Unless we have an explicit narration stating that such and such act is haram, then it remains muba7 (halal, but neither recommended/mustahab nor discouraged/makruh).

 

People are suggesting that Matam and possibly blood letting is central to the Shia faith.

The question I would ask is. If  a person belives in Waliyat of Hz Ali (as)

believes in Imammat.

Rejects the first 3 Calphs

 

However does not do Matam in any of the forms. Does this mean he or she is not Shia Ithna Asheria.

 

If your answer is yes he/she is Shia then Matam is not central to the faith. If your answer is no that person is not Shia then it is central to the faith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

salam

the problem with many is a misunderstanding and especially amongst our indo pak brothers

1.laan is not cursing

2. aza is not matam

and bro AI

it is safer and better to take jurisprudence from those who understand jurisprudence much much better.

was salam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree with your position on the issue, from what I understand, our jurisprudence does not work that way. Unless we have an explicit narration stating that such and such act is haram, then it remains muba7 (halal, but neither recommended/mustahab nor discouraged/makruh).

Is Quran enough?

 

"Do not be cast into ruin by your own hands...." (2:195)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People are suggesting that Matam and possibly blood letting is central to the Shia faith.

The question I would ask is. If  a person belives in Waliyat of Hz Ali (as)

believes in Imammat.

Rejects the first 3 Calphs

 

However does not do Matam in any of the forms. Does this mean he or she is not Shia Ithna Asheria.

 

If your answer is yes he/she is Shia then Matam is not central to the faith. If your answer is no that person is not Shia then it is central to the faith.

I don't do it and I am still a Shia. It is not wajib, if that's what you are asking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

"People are suggesting that Matam and possibly blood letting is central to the Shia faith.

The question I would ask is. If  a person belives in Waliyat of Hz Ali  (as)

believes in Imammat.

Rejects the first 3 Calphs

 

However does not do Matam in any of the forms. Does this mean he or she is not Shia Ithna Asheria.

 

If your answer is yes he/she is Shia then Matam is not central to the faith. If your answer is no that person is not Shia then it is central to the faith."

Salaam bro, nope, it doesn't work like that. Matam is one of the many different ways we express our grieving and sorrow and so it's a very common practice, but not required of a Shia. What is required of a Shia? To forbid evil (ie, to narrate the injustices and crimes that happened against Imam Husain and others in Karbala and/or matam and/or one of the billion other options) and to enjoin good( ie, support those who did good and followed the command and guidance of Allah). So this is one of the very common and strongest ways Shia execute these Furooedeen, in which matam may or may not be included. If you're asking if grieving and expressing sorrow for the tragedy that fell down upon Imam Husain and his family and companions, in any way, shape, or form is a big part of our faith(not necessarily central), then yes. Remember, matam is just one option of the billion options out there. 

Shia:

Believes in Wilayat of Imam Ali --> Does do matam --> Shia

Believes in Wilayat of Imam Ali --> Does NOT do matam --> Shia
Does not believe in Wilayat of Imam Ali --> Does do matam --> NOT shia
Does not believes in Wilayat of Imam Ali --> Does NOT do matam --> NOT Shia

Which goes to show that being Shia, believing in the Wilayat of Imam Ali is required whereas matam is not required.



Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People are suggesting that Matam and possibly blood letting is central to the Shia faith.

The question I would ask is. If  a person belives in Waliyat of Hz Ali (as)

believes in Imammat.

Rejects the first 3 Calphs

 

However does not do Matam in any of the forms. Does this mean he or she is not Shia Ithna Asheria.

 

If your answer is yes he/she is Shia then Matam is not central to the faith. If your answer is no that person is not Shia then it is central to the faith.

 

I don't think the answer should be simplified to a simple yes or no, but if that's what your looking for, then yes, they are still shia (but not very dedicated) if they do not do matam. But as I have said they should still believe in it because it's a justified act according to our texts. And if you want to think along those lines, then neither is reading the Qu'ran central to your faith, nor giving charity, nor doing anything outside the 5 daily prayers and usual tahara/najasa rules that apply to daily life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the answer should be simplified to a simple yes or no, but if that's what your looking for, then yes, they are still shia (but not very dedicated) if they do not do matam. But as I have said they should still believe in it because it's a justified act according to our texts. And if you want to think along those lines, then neither is reading the Qu'ran central to your faith, nor giving charity, nor doing anything outside the 5 daily prayers and usual tahara/najasa rules that apply to daily life.

 

I see you like to set yourself up as judge and executioner of what you consider to be a 'dedicated shia' . Since you have raised the subject of all these other acts perhaps you would like to grade them and prioritise them . So an outsider can 'judge' what a dedicated Shia looks like , a 50% dedicated Shia, 25% dedicated Shia.

 

As a follow up question would you therefore regard a person who strikes himself hard or cuts himself more dedicated then one who strikes his chest lightly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see you like to set yourself up as judge and executioner of what you consider to be a 'dedicated shia' . Since you have raised the subject of all these other acts perhaps you would like to grade them and prioritise them . So an outsider can 'judge' what a dedicated Shia looks like , a 50% dedicated Shia, 25% dedicated Shia.

 

As a follow up question would you therefore regard a person who strikes himself hard or cuts himself more dedicated then one who strikes his chest lightly

Someone who does not mourn Imam Hussain (AS) is not a dedicated shia. It's clear and simple.

 

As for your second question, read my previous posts and you will see that in my opinion, blood-letting isn't even something that we should do. Matam on the other hand (which the original question was about) is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Salaam bro, nope, it doesn't work like that. Matam is one of the many different ways we express our grieving and sorrow and so it's a very common practice, but not required of a Shia. What is required of a Shia? To forbid evil (ie, to narrate the injustices and crimes that happened against Imam Husain and others in Karbala and/or matam and/or one of the billion other options) and to enjoin good( ie, support those who did good and followed the command and guidance of Allah). So this is one of the very common and strongest ways Shia execute these Furooedeen, in which matam may or may not be included. If you're asking if grieving and expressing sorrow for the tragedy that fell down upon Imam Husain and his family and companions, in any way, shape, or form is a big part of our faith(not necessarily central), then yes. Remember, matam is just one option of the billion options out there. 

Shia:

Believes in Wilayat of Imam Ali --> Does do matam --> Shia

Believes in Wilayat of Imam Ali --> Does NOT do matam --> Shia

Does not believe in Wilayat of Imam Ali --> Does do matam --> NOT shia

Does not believes in Wilayat of Imam Ali --> Does NOT do matam --> NOT Shia

Which goes to show that being Shia, believing in the Wilayat of Imam Ali is required whereas matam is not required.

 

 

I see we have a difference of opinion here. While the majority say a non-Matami can be Shia . Abu Izrael rather grudgingly concedes that a non-Matami is Shia but somehow less dedicated.

 

I await his reply with interest on my follow up question to him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone who does not mourn Imam Hussain (as) is not a dedicated shia. It's clear and simple.

 

As for your second question, read my previous posts and you will see that in my opinion, blood-letting isn't even something that we should do. Matam on the other hand (which the original question was about) is.

 

The question was not about mourning it was about Matam. There are many ways of mourning. Matam is just one of many. It seems like you are saying if you dont do matam you dont mourn and therefore are less dedicated.

 

I think you need to reexamine the articles of your faith before engaging in debate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the answer should be simplified to a simple yes or no, but if that's what your looking for, then yes, they are still shia (but not very dedicated) if they do not do matam. But as I have said they should still believe in it because it's a justified act according to our texts. And if you want to think along those lines, then neither is reading the Qu'ran central to your faith, nor giving charity, nor doing anything outside the 5 daily prayers and usual tahara/najasa rules that apply to daily life.

 

(salam)

 

What exactly do you mean by the word 'maatam'? Is it just mourning, grieving and being sad or chest beating, tatbir etc?

 

The reason is because the analogy you've used is flawed imo, as we do have authentic ahadith regarding reciting the holy Quran, about charity and salaah etc, while there being none for cutting oneself up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

 

What exactly do you mean by the word 'maatam'? Is it just mourning, grieving and being sad or chest beating, tatbir etc?

 

The reason is because the analogy you've used is flawed imo, as we do have authentic ahadith regarding reciting the holy Quran, about charity and salaah etc, while there being none for cutting oneself up.

By matam I mean everything except tatbir. And yes we do have authentic ahadith regarding the mourning of Imam Hussain, re-read this thread from the beginning and you will see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question was not about mourning it was about Matam. There are many ways of mourning. Matam is just one of many. It seems like you are saying if you dont do matam you dont mourn and therefore are less dedicated.

 

I think you need to reexamine the articles of your faith before engaging in debate

I think you need to learn how to read before you reply to me twice trying to bate me into stooping down to your level of "debate". I already replied to your question. I don't even consider Tatbir something halal or even remotely part of our religion, and in fact goes against it. I did not "grudgingly concede" that a non-Matami is a shia. That's not for me to decide.

 

A shia is someone who, as you yourself put it:

"belives in Waliyat of Hz Ali (as)

believes in Imammat.

Rejects the first 3 Calphs"

 

Now the question was posed, is matam central to our faith? I assumed by matam the OP meant chest-beating, in which case no, not really (see my above posts). The reason however, only someone who's really not dedicated to their faith and to the message of Imam Hussain (AS) doesn't mourn, meaning crying, attending majalis, and yes, even sometimes beating his chest. This is due to the high level of mustahaba. So if someone decides not to do it, are they still shia? Yes of course! They have not done anything wrong, but considering the whole Shia world is outside crying for their imam and reviving his tragedy while they decide to stay home and do something else, they're probably not very dedicated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you need to learn how to read before you reply to me twice trying to bate me into stooping down to your level of "debate". I already replied to your question. I don't even consider Tatbir something halal or even remotely part of our religion, and in fact goes against it. I did not "grudgingly concede" that a non-Matami is a shia. That's not for me to decide.

 

A shia is someone who, as you yourself put it:

"belives in Waliyat of Hz Ali (as)

believes in Imammat.

Rejects the first 3 Calphs"

 

Now the question was posed, is matam central to our faith? I assumed by matam the OP meant chest-beating, in which case no, not really (see my above posts). The reason however, only someone who's really not dedicated to their faith and to the message of Imam Hussain (as) doesn't mourn, meaning crying, attending majalis, and yes, even sometimes beating his chest. This is due to the high level of mustahaba. So if someone decides not to do it, are they still shia? Yes of course! They have not done anything wrong, but considering the whole Shia world is outside crying for their imam and reviving his tragedy while they decide to stay home and do something else, they're probably not very dedicated.

 

I think before asking people to learn to read before replying . it would help if you led by example. If you had bothered to read the OPs post you would have seen that your assumptions were erroneous and your replies betrayed the fact that you hadn't read beyond the title.

 

[EDITED] So I suggest you go go read the first post and ask yourself are your replies consistent with the question posed.

Edited by Basim Ali
Inappropriate language. Member warned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is Quran enough?

 

"Do not be cast into ruin by your own hands...." (2:195)

in this case it means permenant damage as per scholars. Tattoo is sort of damage but it is minor, letting blood from head, how repulsive it is for many, is a minor injury , the scalp has rich blood supply, any minor injury can make a foutain of blood. As per scholars, if someone scratched his head to let blood out to show sorrow on Imam Husain in non insulting way (according to him culture) it is fine. ( i just mixed all the fatwas in one , i know diff scholars put it in diff wordings but that's my conclusion )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam,

 

Firstly I would like to say I am a shia and have been since birth.

 

Whilst reading another thread on this forum about tatbir, it got me thinking; is matam a central part of a shias faith? Personally whilst i understand it is completely down to the intention of the person doing the action; zanjeer, tatbir etc I don't really agree with it.

 

I understand that matam allows you to feel moved and is a show of emotion and a stance to side with the imams, I dont agree with the concept of tatbir due to the potential harm it can do to you. My question is, are there any hadeeths which state something along the lines of if you do not agree with tatbir etc that you are not considered as a shia? Please note I am talking about tatbir and not matam with just your hands. 

 

Thank you for your time

 

Wasalaam

Hoob Fi Allah - love only for the sake of Allah swt

Bughz Fi Allah - Hatred for the sake of Allah swt

These two are the central to Shai Eiman. They are espoused in basic article of Eiman of Adl of Allah swt, Nabuwa, and Imamat.

Matam is just the reaction (or expression) of this Eiman. Shia become happy in the happiness of Prophet and his holy Ahlulbayt (for example at the event of Ghadeer, at the Kisa, or at the event of Mubahila) and become grieved at the grief of Prophet and Ahlulbayt (at the demise of Prophet, or the murder of Imam Ali or the massacre of Imam Hussain and family at Karbala).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way it is done today with many who gather and hit themselves is not what should be done. It adds to the alienation of Shias of Aale Muhammad (a.s) by their opponents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...