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

Tatbir - Okay Or Not?

Rate this topic


amatolah

Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member

Salam alaikum,

 Please watch and share this educational video with others.

 

http://youtu.be/CSuBjFDRoG0

 

Fi amanillah

 

Not really an educational video since its just a long list trying to justify the act of tatbir. It doesn't address any of the fatwas from major Marje and as such is misleading.

 

In addition it claims that Hz Bibi Zainab struck her head on the Howdah on seeing the heads of the Shaheed to such an extend that blood ran from under the veil.

 

I am sorry but that narration is out of step with every single narration I have heard. How many times have you heard that the veils/chadors of the Ahlul Bait were snatched from them and they were paraded through the streets of Kufa.

Seems like just another fanciful story to justify blood letting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Not really an educational video since its just a long list trying to justify the act of tatbir. It doesn't address any of the fatwas from major Marje and as such is misleading.

 

In addition it claims that Hz Bibi Zainab struck her head on the Howdah on seeing the heads of the Shaheed to such an extend that blood ran from under the veil.

 

I am sorry but that narration is out of step with every single narration I have heard. How many times have you heard that the veils/chadors of the Ahlul Bait were snatched from them and they were paraded through the streets of Kufa.

Seems like just another fanciful story to justify blood letting

I couldnt agree more this is definitely not the way of ahlulbayt.

Salam alaikum,

 Please watch and share this educational video with others.

 

http://youtu.be/CSuBjFDRoG0

 

Fi amanillah

 

If I beleived in those so called hadiths in the video, I wouldn't beleive in the infallibility of the ahlulbayt. Tatbir is an act of shame and a humiliation towards our sect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

WS,

According to the video's definition of harm @ 1:23, even drinking a bit of alcoholic beverages isn't classifiied as harm. Then @ 3:25, the video mentions Prophet Yaqoob (as) losing his eyesight crying over Prophet Yoosuf (as). This is loss of one of the five senses, thus being considered harm by definition of those 213 scholars mentioned earlier in the video.


@ 2:20, Did Sayyidah Zaynab (as) do this act only once?

@ 2:39, Did the women of Imam's family come out of the tent and show their hair to all?

@ 5:22, How many of you are willing to break your own teeth?

Do you all not see the inconsistencies?

Check out this site: http://tatbir.org/

Edited by NaveenHussain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Salam Alikum

 

Please look at these pictures.

 

Aayatullah Sistani has not stopped it infect he encourage it. 

Aayatullah Murtaza Sherazi doing it

Aayatullah Sadiq Sherazi doing it.

 

 

 

Wa salam

Everyone knows that the Shirazis are pro-blood letting so that's no earth shaking revelation.

As to Ayatullah Sistani fatawa post it in English so we can all analyse it. I refuse to accept any blood letters word on anything since they frequently lie.

 

 

Pathetic proof as normal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Advanced Member

Salam Alikum

 

Please look at these pictures.

 

Aayatullah Sistani has not stopped it infect he encourage it. 

Aayatullah Murtaza Sherazi doing it

Aayatullah Sadiq Sherazi doing it.

 

 

 

Wa salam

Is there proof that sayed sistani did this act ?!?!?!?!?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Basic Members

Even if you are theoretically for the act of tatbir you must be able to draw a line somewhere when it comes to practice. The issue I see is that many of those in the western world who perform the act, and many more of those who wholeheartedly defend it like it's a pillar of religion, could be more useful in putting their energies and efforts in propagating act that are wajib and fard. I have seen with my own eyes people rushing to prepare for tatbir at the cost of their fajir prayer.

 

I am not attacking the act but merely drawing attention to the point that no-one claims it is some sort of near wajib act for it to be so important. In fact on my point of people neglecting more important stuff it can be seen among some communities - particularly the youth - when it comes to mourning the imam in general. These youth may do haraam and not pray or know the basic usool yet they seem to be extremely outwardly (and quite possibly inwardly) passionate about Imam Hussain. 

 

Imam Hussain was martyred to uphold prayer, not so we can morn him. If or morning of him causes weakness in religion, division, fitna, and a confusion and misguidance in the social circles of the community then it can't be right. If however it is a tool to strengthen one's imaan then it is encouraged.

 

tldr: Whether tatbir as a theoretical act is haraam or not is one thing, however when it comes to practice you cannot deny that it can easily be negative. 


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

  2:170

وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمُ اتَّبِعُوا مَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ قَالُوا بَلْ نَتَّبِعُ مَا أَلْفَيْنَا عَلَيْهِ آبَاءَنَا أَوَلَوْ كَانَ آبَاؤُهُمْ لا يَعْقِلُونَ شَيْئًا وَلا يَهْتَدُونَ

    Wa-itha qeela lahumu ittabiAAoo ma anzala Allahu qaloo bal nattabiAAu ma alfayna AAalayhi abaana awa law kana abaohum la yaAAqiloona shay-an wala yahtadoona

    When it is said to them: "Follow what Allah has revealed:" They say: "No! we shall follow the ways of our fathers." What! even though their fathers Were void of wisdom and guidance? 

 

People who do those kinds of acts, they dont require evidence, they are happy following their culture / tribal traditions. Islam just happens to be part of their culture, but they follow their culture first. Ask them to just follow islam, and watch how quickly they walk away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

no, i like really dont know what tatbir is..isnt tatbir and zanjeer the same thing? hitting yourself with a blade on the chest?

 

or tatbir is hitting it on ur head?

 

Tatbir or some say Qama is hitting a blade on your head.

 

Literal translation of Zanjeer is chains. So when in Iran Zanjeer Zani means hitting your back with chains.

On the indo Pak continent Zanjeer Zani means hitting your back with chains with blades attached.

 

So when asking the question to your Marje is Zanjeer Zani allowed you should stipulate what you mean by Zanjeer Zani similarly if you read a fatwa about Zanjeer Zani you should clarify which Zanjeer Zani they talking about.

Edited by A true Sunni
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

umm whats the difference between tatbir and zanjeer?

Tatbir is the arabic for blood letting usually assosiated with the head. Zanjeer is more of a Indian/Pakistani/Irani way of hitting themselves with blades usually on their back.

P.s. others can add

O you who believe in the holy Quraan and the Pure Ahlul Bayt (as) . If we Shi3a rid ourselves of these obligatory acts of mourning for the Ahlul Bayt (as)  then there will be no true islam to follow anymore.

Islam encourages us to act upon what we teach and preach. Tatbir and rituals associated with it are ways to act upon what we teach, which is to mourn on the Ahlul bayt (as) .

Edited by shiamehdi14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

 

O you who believe in the holy Quraan and the Pure Ahlul Bayt (as) . If we Shi3a rid ourselves of these obligatory acts of mourning for the Ahlul Bayt (as)  then there will be no true islam to follow anymore.

Islam encourages us to act upon what we teach and preach. Tatbir and rituals associated with it are ways to act upon what we teach, which is to mourn on the Ahlul bayt (as) .

 

Where do you start when a person exposes his ignorance in such a profound manner. I will just correct you on a few points because no falsehood should remain unchallenged otherwise you become party to that falsehood.

Blood letting is not obligatory that is a lie.

True Islam has not and never will be saved by a bunch of macho guys running around slashing themselves

True Islam was and is saved  by the Holy Prophet (pbuhahp), the Ahlul Bait & the Holy Imams (as). None of who practiced or endorsed this vile act.

True Islam teaches us to follow the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet and the Holy Imams(as) none of which included blood letting.

True Islam does not ask to follow a 200 year practice which you then try and justify by trawling through the Quaran and history books looking for the word blood.

Was true Islam lost for 1200 years when there was no blood letting and then rediscovered when you started blood letting.

So less of the lies and garbage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Hey true Sunni..you sound like a Shia? "True Islam was and is saved by the Holy Prophet (pbuhahp), the Ahlul Bait & the Holy Imams "

 

Funny that considering so many people on here claiming to be Shia profess to have beliefs that are totally alien to the Ahlul Bait. What a topsy turvy world we live in

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Where do you start when a person exposes his ignorance in such a profound manner. I will just correct you on a few points because no falsehood should remain unchallenged otherwise you become party to that falsehood.

Blood letting is not obligatory that is a lie.

True Islam has not and never will be saved by a bunch of macho guys running around slashing themselves

True Islam was and is saved  by the Holy Prophet (pbuhahp), the Ahlul Bait & the Holy Imams (as). None of who practiced or endorsed this vile act.

True Islam teaches us to follow the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet and the Holy Imams(as) none of which included blood letting.

True Islam does not ask to follow a 200 year practice which you then try and justify by trawling through the Quaran and history books looking for the word blood.

Was true Islam lost for 1200 years when there was no blood letting and then rediscovered when you started blood letting.

So less of the lies and garbage

Did Imam Zaynul Abideen (as) not cry for his father to the extent where he cried tears of blood. Is this not a form of bloodletting. Could i ask you what you think a true believer would say when you ask him why do you do tatbir? What would his response be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did Imam Zaynul Abideen (as) not cry for his father to the extent where he cried tears of blood. Is this not a form of bloodletting. Could i ask you what you think a true believer would say when you ask him why do you do tatbir? What would his response be?

There is a difference between crying and slashing yourself with a sword. Do not ignore all the points a true sunni made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Did Imam Zaynul Abideen (as) not cry for his father to the extent where he cried tears of blood. Is this not a form of bloodletting. Could i ask you what you think a true believer would say when you ask him why do you do tatbir? What would his response be?

 

As I said before you blood letters trawl through the history books looking for the word blood and then extrapolate to justify blood letting.

Firstly crying tears of blood is a metaphor however if you want to think its real lets look at the reality.

 

Involuntary crying tears of blood is not the same as voluntarily slashing yourself.

 

If you then want to argue that no action of an Imam is 'involuntary' then you lay yourself open to accusation that you are accusing the Imams of showmanship (nauzbillah).

 

As to 'true believer' what they would say. I would first ask you to define the term true believer. My personal belief is that here are very few true believers in this world.

 

What i can say is that no true believer would engage in such a vile act so what he would say is a moot point 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

As I said before you blood letters trawl through the history books looking for the word blood and then extrapolate to justify blood letting.

Firstly crying tears of blood is a metaphor however if you want to think its real lets look at the reality.

 

Involuntary crying tears of blood is not the same as voluntarily slashing yourself.

 

If you then want to argue that no action of an Imam is 'involuntary' then you lay yourself open to accusation that you are accusing the Imams of showmanship (nauzbillah).

 

As to 'true believer' what they would say. I would first ask you to define the term true believer. My personal belief is that here are very few true believers in this world.

 

What i can say is that no true believer would engage in such a vile act so what he would say is a moot point 

lakum deenakum waliya deen. Brother, if you think you are right and I am wrong inshallah we will see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I'm so :sick:  :sick: of this topic. Its almost as bad as the syed/non-syed business.

 

Sometimes I wonder if scholars are all studying the same Ahlul Bayt (as). 

 

Anyone ever played telephone in pre-k? That's what most scholars are playing these days. Each one says something different was practiced by Ahlul Bayt (as) and each one is 100% certain and the rest of us have left common sense at the door. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

As I said before you blood letters trawl through the history books looking for the word blood and then extrapolate to justify blood letting.

Firstly crying tears of blood is a metaphor however if you want to think its real lets look at the reality.

 

Involuntary crying tears of blood is not the same as voluntarily slashing yourself.

 

If you then want to argue that no action of an Imam is 'involuntary' then you lay yourself open to accusation that you are accusing the Imams of showmanship (nauzbillah).

 

As to 'true believer' what they would say. I would first ask you to define the term true believer. My personal belief is that here are very few true believers in this world.

 

What i can say is that no true believer would engage in such a vile act so what he would say is a moot point 

 

  1. There are glands that transform blood by taking the vapor and thickening it to produce tears. After weeping profusley, there would be no more of this blood vapor so the person would cry tears sof blood. So no weeping tears of blood is not a metaphor.
  2. There are many other events in history where Prophets Such as the Prophet Musa (pbuh) was in the land of Karbala and had gotten a cut by the bootlace and thorns. Then it was said to them, by the angel Jibraeel, that your blood flew in accordance to the blood of Imam Hussayn (as) .
  3. I do agree that there are not too many true believers.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

 

  1. There are glands that transform blood by taking the vapor and thickening it to produce tears. After weeping profusley, there would be no more of this blood vapor so the person would cry tears sof blood. So no weeping tears of blood is not a metaphor.
  2. There are many other events in history where Prophets Such as the Prophet Musa (pbuh) was in the land of Karbala and had gotten a cut by the bootlace and thorns. Then it was said to them, by the angel Jibraeel, that your blood flew in accordance to the blood of Imam Hussayn (as) .
  3. I do agree that there are not too many true believers.

 

 

1)I am sorry I have sciences degree that is scientific nonsense http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haemolacria

 

as you can see Haemolacria has nothing to do with the act of crying (as in grief)

 

2) If indeed the circumstance of Prophet Musa occurred it occurred as an involuntary act not as a voluntary act.

 

3) well at least we agree on something

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

1)I am sorry I have sciences degree that is scientific nonsense http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haemolacria

 

as you can see Haemolacria has nothing to do with the act of crying (as in grief)

 

2) If indeed the circumstance of Prophet Musa occurred it occurred as an involuntary act not as a voluntary act.

 

3) well at least we agree on something

  1. What you are explaining is some type of disease not something that happens from extremeties.
  2. Definately, but it was said that he asked for forgiveness because he thought it was a sin. However the angel Jibraeel told him that it was not a sin. His blood flew in accordance to Imam Hussayn's (as) . So you are telling me that if we "involuntarily" bleed for Imam Hussayn (as) then there is no problem. Sorry but that does not make much sense.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

 

  1. What you are explaining is some type of disease not something that happens from extremeties.
  2. Definately, but it was said that he asked for forgiveness because he thought it was a sin. However the angel Jibraeel told him that it was not a sin. His blood flew in accordance to Imam Hussayn's (as) . So you are telling me that if we "involuntarily" bleed for Imam Hussayn (as) then there is no problem. Sorry but that does not make much sense.

 

 

 

As I explained before. There is no such thing as literally crying tears of blood caused by excessive crying. You can have 'bloody tears' when blood vessels close to the tear duct burst staining the tears .

If you wish to say that these are tears of blood caused by excessive grief then you have to say it is a miracle because there is no scientific basis for it.

 

Since miracles are in the hands of the Imams you are then accusing them of 'showmanship' nauzbillah.

 

We are not responsible for involuntary acts be they good or bad. You cannot be held responsible for an involuntary act. (involuntary means you have no control over it)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

As I explained before. There is no such thing as literally crying tears of blood caused by excessive crying. You can have 'bloody tears' when blood vessels close to the tear duct burst staining the tears .

If you wish to say that these are tears of blood caused by excessive grief then you have to say it is a miracle because there is no scientific basis for it.

 

Since miracles are in the hands of the Imams you are then accusing them of 'showmanship' nauzbillah.

 

We are not responsible for involuntary acts be they good or bad. You cannot be held responsible for an involuntary act. (involuntary means you have no control over it)

 

Brother please stop putting words into my mouth that i have not said.

I am pretty sure your opinions will not change no matter what i say. Neither will mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Brother please stop putting words into my mouth that i have not said.

I am pretty sure your opinions will not change no matter what i say. Neither will mine.

 

what words have I put in your mouth. All I ask is that you think through any statements you make. You do not realise that in attempting to justify your acts of blood letting you insult the Imams (as)

if you disagree with what I say fault my logic. By saying its not a metaphor you are insulting the Holy Imam (as) either that or you are a muquasareen since you seek to dismiss their ability to produce miracles

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...