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

doing khooni matam by girls

Rate this topic


meesum hussain

Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, starlight said:

Why have you taken it upon yourself to do a jihad against tatbir? Why not leave it to the Ayatullahs to issue a clear statement? Does it make sense that there might be some reasoning why the marjas are not openly forbidding it, declaring it haram??maybe not to create a divide amongst the Shias?  Do you feel as strongly about the shia Muslims not paying zakat and khums, doing adultery, concealing knowledge, breaking off ties with relatives,lying to offending other muslims, missing fasts and prayers?

 I don't need answers to these questions. I just want you to think over them.

 You have made your thoughts about tatbir sufficiently clear.  Any further discussion would be a waste of time which is something I am sure you don't want. 

so to enjoin for good and forbid from evil is bad in you books. Or at the very least restricted to a 'cult group'. And of course there is so much evil in the world what does a little more do any harm . 

Finally embarassing the Imam is a minor point not to be taken to seriously ( i hope you note the heavy sarcasm)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, starlight said:

brother, I wonder , in a Jama'at  how many people offer namaz just to show off? Have you ever wondered about this?? 

So woe unto those performers of Salat (hypocrites), Those who delay their Salat (from their stated fixed times). Those who do good deeds only to be seen (of men). And prevent Al-Ma’un (small kindnesses) (Surah Al-Maauun 107: 4 – 7)

 

Repeatedly I have tried to say the same thing, there are things which hold a lot more importance than tatbir, the wajibaats and haram acts.  First let's focus on perfecting ourselves in those before we start pointing fingers at others over the forbidden and recommended. The enthusiasm with which with which tatbir is discussed makes me think that if in the people's minds it hold more importance than the Wajib acts?

I presume you are a die hard pro tatbir. Only a blood letter would compare Salaat and blood letting.

In essence you are saying its oK to show off blood letting because i am sure some people who pray also do it to show off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Forum Administrators
9 minutes ago, A true Sunni said:

I presume you are a die hard pro tatbir. Only a blood letter would compare Salaat and blood letting.

In essence you are saying its oK to show off blood letting because i am sure some people who pray also do it to show off. 

I agree, calm down. Even if all tatbir stopped today and forever, Google Images will always remain. You will have to find peace with that, and move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
On 12/8/2015, 5:22:50, A true Sunni said:

I presume you are a die hard pro tatbir. Only a blood letter would compare Salaat and blood letting.

In essence you are saying its oK to show off blood letting because i am sure some people who pray also do it to show off. 

all of your posts are based on  nothing but conjectures, you jump from making one absurd conclusion to the next. Show me a hadith or ruling where is specifically says that tatbir is haram or tatbir is an embarrassment to Imams(a.s). Missing namaz is not an embarrassment to the Imams(a.s) who got martyred , were fatally wounded in sajdahs???? let's hear you speak as zealously about missing namaz too. 

I will write once again what I have reiterated in the past I am neither pro tatbir not anti tatbir, I just feel there are issues more important than this. Bringing up tatbir is nothing but creating a division amongst shias. Our marjas have avoided discussing it, learn something from them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, starlight said:

all of your posts are based on  nothing but conjectures, you jump from making one absurd conclusion to the next. Show me a hadith or ruling where is specifically says that tatbir is haram or tatbir is an embarrassment to Imams(a.s). Missing namaz is not an embarrassment to the Imams(a.s) who got martyred , were fatally wounded in sajdahs???? let's hear you speak as zealously about missing namaz too. 

I will write once again what I have reiterated in the past I am neither pro tatbir not anti tatbir, I just feel there are issues more important than this. Bringing up tatbir is nothing but creating a division amongst shias. Our marjas have avoided discussing it, learn something from them.

If you had seen past your blinkers you would have seen that I pulled you up for daring to compare salaat to tatbir. You seem to have glossed over that point.

its apparent from your posts you are supposed impartiality towards tatbir is not correct

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Forum Administrators
7 minutes ago, A true Sunni said:

If you had seen past your blinkers you would have seen that I pulled you up for daring to compare salaat to tatbir. You seem to have glossed over that point.

its apparent from your posts you are supposed impartiality towards tatbir is not correct

She only compared namaz and tatbir within the dimension of both being potential uses for grandstanding, as virtually anything can be. In terms of intrinsic quality, it's clear starlight is implying that prayer (as well as other things) are more important than tatbir, and she's encouraging that perspective. If you'd calm down for a second you can see this. She's on your side.

Edited by magma
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Ibn Al-Ja'abi said:

 

Not about to jump into this debate because it is a useless discussion. That being said, for everyone's information, the fatwa that @Abbas. brought shouldn't be taken into any consideration.

 

Stamped Fatwa from the Marajeh' should be taken very seriously....(sorry for stating the obvious, but given the above statement.... thought I'd you know....mention that).

 Put 2 and 2 together, take one minute of your time to do a google search on "Shia Muslim"...doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand the wisdom behind  Ayatollah Sistani's fatwa. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
12 minutes ago, Sumayyeh said:

Stamped Fatwa from the Marajeh' should be taken very seriously....(sorry for stating the obvious, but given the above statement.... thought I'd you know....mention that).

 Put 2 and 2 together, take one minute of your time to do a google search on "Shia Muslim"...doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand the wisdom behind  Ayatollah Sistani's fatwa. 

Bismih Ta'ala
Assalamu Alaykum

This is the last post I'm making in this thread, but that fatwa which has been floating around the internet since 2006 is not representative of Syed Sistani's actual view on Tatbir, and it most likely reflects the view of his office in Qum. It is known in Najaf and by anyone who asks Syed Sistani himself that he does not have a fatwa for tatbir, whether allowing or forbidding it. That is why his office in Najaf released the fatwa clarifying the Syed's lack of any fatwa on this issue, and his prominent student in Najaf, Syed Hashim Al-Hashimi, has clarified what his Muqallideen should do in regards to this. I posted all relevant information in these threads.

What I advise the rest of you to do is to refer back to a Marja who does have a fatwa on this, whether allowing or prohibiting it. None of you has ever sat in an Usul Al-Fiqh class to be giving your own rulings, none of you has Ijtihad to give your views. The views of the Maraja have already been given many times regarding these issues, and as laymen we should follow them and remember that whatever we think is not Hujjiyya (binding evidence) over someone else.

There is a phrase in Arabic Br. @icewizard quoted one time, which is relevant to this discussion, "حطها براس عالم، واطلع منها سالم" (Place it on the head of an Alim, and remain in safety regarding an issue). This is what all the laymen on the website should be doing, and that means everyone on this website.

wa assalam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/7/2015, 6:04:43, A true Sunni said:

How do you plan on closing Pandoras box.. In addition to that very simple but apt reference to Greek mythology, the problem is that all you malangs have been telling people to do it in secret. So even if all Shias worldwide stopped blood letting tomorrow, noone would believe it because you have just instructed people to do it in secret. 

So by doing this you make the problem worse. 

So all you malangs have been broadcasting on the internet , fighting in the courts , shouting from the roof tops 'we dont bring Islam into disrepute because we do it in secret' 

Oh you mean like Taqiyyah and cursing the enemies of the Ahlulbayt (a) in public? Most Sunnis know we practice Taqiyyah, and consider cursing in private gatherings permissible. By your logic, we should throw those two out too?

I dislike Tatbir on a personal level, regardless of what the ruling about it is, however, let's think our words through. Just because it takes a few seconds to type out a sentence, doesn't mean we only have to think a few seconds before posting. 

 

21 hours ago, A true Sunni said:

As to Ayatullah Najafis position. He will have to sort out his contradicting statements. His written fatwa also talks about bringing Islam into disrepute. However I acknowledge there is a vid clip doing the rounds which claims to show that he supports it.

However the notable thing missing from this vid clip is the question asked, the venue and the audience

The clip is taken in his office, with a quality Camera (not a phone). If you watch the clip you can tell he starts with a khutbah, meaning he is begining a talk, he also makes his view very clear. There is no room for doubt. The audience are some Pakistani seminarians (you can tell by the comments made and references to principles used in qawaa'id al-fiqhiyyah). Also, if you're aware about how the maraaje offices work in Iran and Iraq, you know that you can't just walk in with a camcorder and ask the Marjaa' to give a lecture for you. Everything has to be preplanned by the office. The Maraaje hardly leave their offices for normal public gatherings for them to speak elsewhere. This was recorded officially in his office by his office (as all the evidence in the video points too - otherwise offices in Najaf barely allow you to take in a phone - although it depends on the time of year). 

All that being said, my friend went during this Arba'een trip and asked the office about the video, and they confirmed it was officially produced by the Office. 

Whether we like it or not, there are a number of heavy weight Maraaje both in favor of and against tatbir, let's not be naive. 

Regarding mixed messages from Shaykh Bashir, i agree with you that it does call for an explanation.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
3 hours ago, Al-Englisi said:

Oh you mean like Taqiyyah and cursing the enemies of the Ahlulbayt (a) in public? Most Sunnis know we practice Taqiyyah, and consider cursing in private gatherings permissible. By your logic, we should throw those two out too?

I dislike Tatbir on a personal level, regardless of what the ruling about it is, however, let's think our words through. Just because it takes a few seconds to type out a sentence, doesn't mean we only have to think a few seconds before posting. 

 

The clip is taken in his office, with a quality Camera (not a phone). If you watch the clip you can tell he starts with a khutbah, meaning he is begining a talk, he also makes his view very clear. There is no room for doubt. The audience are some Pakistani seminarians (you can tell by the comments made and references to principles used in qawaa'id al-fiqhiyyah). Also, if you're aware about how the maraaje offices work in Iran and Iraq, you know that you can't just walk in with a camcorder and ask the Marjaa' to give a lecture for you. Everything has to be preplanned by the office. The Maraaje hardly leave their offices for normal public gatherings for them to speak elsewhere. This was recorded officially in his office by his office (as all the evidence in the video points too - otherwise offices in Najaf barely allow you to take in a phone - although it depends on the time of year). 

All that being said, my friend went during this Arba'een trip and asked the office about the video, and they confirmed it was officially produced by the Office. 

Whether we like it or not, there are a number of heavy weight Maraaje both in favor of and against tatbir, let's not be naive. 

Regarding mixed messages from Shaykh Bashir, i agree with you that it does call for an explanation.  

 

Few points. Taquiya means dissimulation it does not mean lying or doing things in secret.

second point about the vid clip. No-one disputes that the vid clip is genuine however context context context and I repeat context is important.

Starting with a Khutba does not mean he was asked a question , one does not launch into a highly emotional lecture on blood letting.

If we accept this vid clip at face value we would have to conclude he is contradicting or rescinding his own fatwas.

Since he hasnt withdrawn his original written fatwa it must be concluded that the vid clip is being taken out of context   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/8/2015, 3:37:44, starlight said:

all of your posts are based on  nothing but conjectures, you jump from making one absurd conclusion to the next. Show me a hadith or ruling where is specifically says that tatbir is haram or tatbir is an embarrassment to Imams(a.s). Missing namaz is not an embarrassment to the Imams(a.s) who got martyred , were fatally wounded in sajdahs???? let's hear you speak as zealously about missing namaz too. 

I will write once again what I have reiterated in the past I am neither pro tatbir not anti tatbir, I just feel there are issues more important than this. Bringing up tatbir is nothing but creating a division amongst shias. Our marjas have avoided discussing it, learn something from them.

Show me a hadith that says slamming a brick on my knee as a form of mourning is haram........or wrapping a sandpaper to a stick and rubbing my face until it bleeds is haram. This whole show me a hadith business that this is haram and that is haram is futile as non of us are proficient in deducting hadith in collection. One hadith says it's forbidden to kill, another hadith says its allowed to kill in self defense. So unless you know how to read hadith in collection and in connection, it's futile. 

And no, our marjas have not avoided speaking about it.......in fact many of them have spoken about it, not sure where you are getting your information from.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The only marja that is clearly not taking a stand is Ayatollah Sistani, others have either spoken for or against it. It's up to the aql in this case to see which marja is speaking through enough proficiency in fiqq, aql, and social awareness. 

PS: Writing on phone sucks..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
On 12/7/2015, 7:09:44, starlight said:

Tatbir isn't a recommended act but neither has it been declared haram by any marja.

 

This is false.

 

I don't know how you can say this after the other tatbir thread where many fatawa were provided.

 

Also: the "fatwa" of a certain marja deeming tatbir to be haraam is not actually a fatwa but a hukm. A hukm is something all Muslims have to follow, not just followers of that particular marja.

Edited by baradar_jackson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Forum Administrators
14 minutes ago, certainclarity said:

Best solution ask Ayatullah Sistani if he ever did khooni matam in life. And do taqlid of what he did.

If he did khooni matam U do khooni matam , if he did not do khooni matam U also don't do.

this is real taqlid.

End of brain drain.

:hahaha:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
3 hours ago, baradar_jackson said:

A hukm is something all Muslims have to follow, not just followers of that particular marja.

This is the prerogative of an infallible Imam. One marja cannot issue a binding hukm when there are several maraaji around with a different take on the issue. 

The fault lies with the followers who confuse a political decree applicable within the borders of one state with a religious one and, by doing so, extending its writ universally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, certainclarity said:

Best solution ask Ayatullah Sistani if he ever did khooni matam in life. And do taqlid of what he did.

If he did khooni matam U do khooni matam , if he did not do khooni matam U also don't do.

this is real taqlid.

End of brain drain.

Bismillah

What he does is not Hujjah (binding) upon us. Only an act done or approved off (either directly or indirectly) by an Infallible has hujjah. WIth the Maraaje, their verdicts are important for us, but their personal actions or choices do not lead us to God's law. In this case, he may believe it is permissible, but never have practiced it himself (like many other rulings that scholars consider permissible). Not every Marjaa that has permitted chess, also plays it, to give a quick example. 

 

3 hours ago, Marbles said:

This is the prerogative of an infallible Imam. One marja cannot issue a binding hukm when there are several maraaji around with a different take on the issue. 

The fault lies with the followers who confuse a political decree applicable within the borders of one state with a religious one and, by doing so, extending its writ universally.

مسألة 26: حكم الحاكم الجامع للشرائط لا يجوز نقضه حتى لمجتهد آخر، إلا إذا كان مخالفاً لما ثبت قطعاً من الكتاب والسنة، نعم لا يكون حكمه مغيراً للواقع، مثلاً: من علم أن المال الذي حكم به للمدعي ليس ملكاً له لا يجوز ترتيب آثار ملكيته.

http://www.sistani.org/arabic/book/23720/3600/

It is not permissible to violate the Hukm of a Haakim, who posses all the required conditions, even for another Jurist. Except if the hukm is in opposition to that which has been established with certainty through the Quran and Sunnah...

--

So one Marja' can  issue a binding hukm even in the case you mentioned, and unless that hukm goes against what has been established without a doubt (a very difficult condition to reach) through the Quran and Sunnah (excluding other methods used in extrapolating rulings - e.g. the Asl al-Amali used in Usul). 

Tatbir or blood letting is not in anyway proven with certainty through the Quran and Sunnah, hence a Marja' could give a hukm regarding it. 

If you speak to the office of the Marja, they will assure you that the decree is not political, but rather religious and if you understand it, you will see that there is less reason for it to be political within the borders of a majority Shia country, and more reason for it to exist for areas where there is a larger non-Shia presence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Al-Englisi said:

Bismillah

What he does is not Hujjah (binding) upon us. Only an act done or approved off (either directly or indirectly) by an Infallible has hujjah. WIth the Maraaje, their verdicts are important for us, but their personal actions or choices do not lead us

 

I know. What I meant is marja supposed to be intelligent in religion.So if u taqlid him in religion.You should do what he finds more intelligent. So if he did not do it for himself, he found it not intelligent for himself, otherwise he would do it for himself. But for ppl he left it to them.

 

So if I think properly if I follow and taqlid him I should do what he finds more intelligent for himself. 

 

So if Sistani did not do for him self Because imams did not do for themselves.

I think think better topic than khooni matam is , what is intelligent thing to do , so in qiyama we will be safe? No ?

 

 

 

Edited by certainclarity
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
7 hours ago, Al-Englisi said:

It is not permissible to violate the Hukm of a Haakim, who posses all the required conditions, even for another Jurist. Except if the hukm is in opposition to that which has been established with certainty through the Quran and Sunnah...

--

So one Marja' can  issue a binding hukm even in the case you mentioned, and unless that hukm goes against what has been established without a doubt (a very difficult condition to reach) through the Quran and Sunnah (excluding other methods used in extrapolating rulings - e.g. the Asl al-Amali used in Usul). 

Tatbir or blood letting is not in anyway proven with certainty through the Quran and Sunnah, hence a Marja' could give a hukm regarding it. 

If you speak to the office of the Marja, they will assure you that the decree is not political, but rather religious and if you understand it, you will see that there is less reason for it to be political within the borders of a majority Shia country, and more reason for it to exist for areas where there is a larger non-Shia presence. 

 

I understand the theoretical framework underpinning it. The problem occurs towards its application in our times. A haakim would be one who is capable of exercising his writ on the community of Muslims, like a Shia version of the Sunni caliph. There is no such figure in existence. 

 

Besides, maraaji do not agree on one single haakim who possess all the required conditions. Any hukm issued by a haakim closest to the theoretical ideal is practically limited to his own country. Even this is not without disagreement. As we know, certain maraaji (whom I won't name) in the same country have issued fataawa that are in conflict with the hukm against tatbir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
16 hours ago, repenter said:

there is a serious bug in the system, if you quote someone to reply to them, but decide not to, you can never unquote them, even if you log off turn off you computer and log back on the next day, it is really annoying, if at least we still has the ability to delete our own posts. please fix it.

Edited by Ali_Hussain
...so many reasons
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, IbnSina said:

Can we discuss if its okay to walk on all four and bark like a dog outside of the Imam Hussein(as) shrine next?

Or what about rolling around in najis mud and sit and mourn?

 

I agree, forget about tatbir, we get it, it is better than prayer, without it, Islam would be dead and if you utter a word against it, you have broken the back of the Prophet .

 

We need to nip this pretending to be a dog nonsense in the bud before it becomes a sunna and all those who speak against it are excommunicated - unless this also falls into mourning and by speaking against it, we are insulting sayed Fatima [a].

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
8 hours ago, Marbles said:

 

I understand the theoretical framework underpinning it. The problem occurs towards its application in our times. A haakim would be one who is capable of exercising his writ on the community of Muslims, like a Shia version of the Sunni caliph. There is no such figure in existence. 

 

Besides, maraaji do not agree on one single haakim who possess all the required conditions. Any hukm issued by a haakim closest to the theoretical ideal is practically limited to his own country. Even this is not without disagreement. As we know, certain maraaji (whom I won't name) in the same country have issued fataawa that are in conflict with the hukm against tatbir.

 

Where in our fiqh does it say anything about this country stuff?

 

Firstly, theoretically, the wali faqih has political authority over all Muslims. Authority differs from power. Seyyed Ali Khamenei has power only in Iran, but he has authority on a wider scale.

 

And this is a fiqhi issue, anyway. If he issues a fatwa, that is binding on all of his muqalids (not all of whom are in Iran).

 

And a hukm is binding on... more than just his muqalids. In fact, I remember this was floating around on the internet (I hope someone can post it here). Some people asked Sayyed Sistani about this hukm and he said: you should follow it.

 

 

So the hukm is valid.

 

In any case, if sister @starlight or anyone else wants to continue thinking that "no marja" has deemed tatbir to be haraam, then they are insulating themselves. They are accepting the idea that makes them comfortable over the truth (which is that, yes, a number of maraja do deem it haraam).

 

 

FYI I know damn well most maraja don't want to speak about this issue. Frankly, I think it's because they lack..... well I'm not going to break two shiachat rules in one sentence. Let's just say: frankly, I think it's because they are overly conscious about being criticized by those who are very serious about defending their "rights" to do such bizarre rituals. This is just a guess; I may be wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
55 minutes ago, baradar_jackson said:

 

Where in our fiqh does it say anything about this country stuff?

 

Firstly, theoretically, the wali faqih has political authority over all Muslims. Authority differs from power. Seyyed Ali Khamenei has power only in Iran, but he has authority on a wider scale.

 

And this is a fiqhi issue, anyway. If he issues a fatwa, that is binding on all of his muqalids (not all of whom are in Iran).

 

And a hukm is binding on... more than just his muqalids. In fact, I remember this was floating around on the internet (I hope someone can post it here). Some people asked Sayyed Sistani about this hukm and he said: you should follow it.

 

 

So the hukm is valid.

 

In any case, if sister @starlight or anyone else wants to continue thinking that "no marja" has deemed tatbir to be haraam, then they are insulating themselves. They are accepting the idea that makes them comfortable over the truth (which is that, yes, a number of maraja do deem it haraam).

 

 

FYI I know damn well most maraja don't want to speak about this issue. Frankly, I think it's because they lack..... well I'm not going to break two shiachat rules in one sentence. Let's just say: frankly, I think it's because they are overly conscious about being criticized by those who are very serious about defending their "rights" to do such bizarre rituals. This is just a guess; I may be wrong.

 

I won't say more about hukm vs fatwa and political power vs authority as it has been parsed before and differences on this matter are well known. Suffice it to say that while our fiqh theory doesn't recognise countries and multiple rulers, fact remains that this ideal situation has never been achieved after Imam Hassan (as) stepped down. To this day Shias have worked out compromises to their ideal model, just as Sunnis have done when there were centres of powers outside the control of the designated, self-professing caliph, and now that there is none. Attempts to bring it back have been catastrophic for them. Shias can take a cue from Sunni failures and desist from trying to create the ideal situation as outlined in our fiqh (until the Imam remains absent, that is) and embrace the reality of today, which means de-religionizing a country's leadership (in our case Iran) and a public rescission of the claim of authority over all Shias let alone all Muslims. That way Shia poltical thought would progress.

 

Secondly, you're right some marjas have deemed tatbir haram so their muqalids should follow their marja's rulings. Some give ambiguous, generic answers as you pointed out, for one reason or the other, effectively deeming it mubah with conditions attached, but there are also marjas (solid, learned, star marjas) who have fatwa-ed on its being mustahab.

 

My question is why should one marja's ruling be taken as the final word when we have a range of positions on the matter, and have always been? How did the old system change in 1979?

 

That being said, anti tatbiris should avoid calling it barbaric, jahaliyah, absurd, retarded etc. If not out of respect for fellow Shia mourners than at least out of respect for those maraaji past & present who allow it as mustahab or mubah act of mourning. To my knowledge, tatbir is the only matter where anti folks get away with calling it nasty names, in complete disrespect to the views of pro tatbir maraaji.

 

If we are completely sincere we'd take a nuetral stance, follow live and let live, and rush to defend one party against the excesses of the other. Yet how many of us do that?

Edited by Marbles
Typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 12/7/2015 at 9:09 AM, starlight said:

Salam,

Firstly, it's not our problem whether anyone believes something about us or not.... it's their problem.I mean this not only for tatbir but but for all our actions.  

Secondly, this pro tatbir, anti tatbir issue has been discussed to death on this forum. Tatbir isn't a recommended act but neither has it been declared haram by any marja. I think both sides should develop some tolerance and instead of dividing over this issue they should agree to disagree so they can move on and focus on real issues faced by the shia community, mass murdering of shias, the zionists and ISIS to name a few. 

 

 

Baradar and repenter wrote what i wakted to write few days ago...I just want to add that there is no such thing as 'being' neutral.Our hearts always lean towards one side.So being neither for a thing nor against is not possible.

 

 

 

Edited by magma
edited per poster request
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
On 12/10/2015 at 11:41 AM, Marbles said:

 

I won't say more about hukm vs fatwa and political power vs authority as it has been parsed before and differences on this matter are well known. Suffice it to say that while our fiqh theory doesn't recognise countries and multiple rulers, fact remains that this ideal situation has never been achieved after Imam Hassan (as) stepped down. To this day Shias have worked out compromises to their ideal model, just as Sunnis have done when there were centres of powers outside the control of the designated, self-professing caliph, and now that there is none. Attempts to bring it back have been catastrophic for them. Shias can take a cue from Sunni failures and desist from trying to create the ideal situation as outlined in our fiqh (until the Imam remains absent, that is) and embrace the reality of today, which means de-religionizing a country's leadership (in our case Iran) and a public rescission of the claim of authority over all Shias let alone all Muslims. That way Shia poltical thought would progress.

 

Secondly, you're right some marjas have deemed tatbir haram so their muqalids should follow their marja's rulings. Some give ambiguous, generic answers as you pointed out, for one reason or the other, effectively deeming it mubah with conditions attached, but there are also marjas (solid, learned, star marjas) who have fatwa-ed on its being mustahab.

 

My question is why should one marja's ruling be taken as the final word when we have a range of positions on the matter, and have always been? How did the old system change in 1979?

 

That being said, anti tatbiris should avoid calling it barbaric, jahaliyah, absurd, retarded etc. If not out of respect for fellow Shia mourners than at least out of respect for those maraaji past & present who allow it as mustahab or mubah act of mourning. To my knowledge, tatbir is the only matter where anti folks get away with calling it nasty names, in complete disrespect to the views of pro tatbir maraaji.

 

If we are completely sincere we'd take a nuetral stance, follow live and let live, and rush to defend one party against the excesses of the other. Yet how many of us do that?

 

 

This is not a matter of defending one "party" or opposing another. This is a matter of discerning what is right and what is wrong.

 

Re: 1979

The concept of a hukm being binding on everyone (not just muqalids of that specific marja) was not invented in 1979. Nor is it connected to the position of wali faqih. If Sayyed Sistani issues a hukm, I have to follow it. Imam Khomeini issued that famous (or infamous) hukm that one time, and that little rat man [Salman Rushdie] has been living in fear ever since. The difference between a fatwa and a hukm is established. It's neither a new thing nor a political innovation.

 

But here's the problem. At the end of the day, who cares if it's a hukm or a fatwa or whether everyone should follow it or just the muqalids of that specific marja. It's all secondary.

 

Neither I practice tatbir, nor you (I am assuming, anyway). Why do you defend it (or "defend the rights of Shias to do it" and all that noise), but I criticize it? My question is rather: why does any Shia who does NOT do tatbir, defend it? Does it have anything to do with truth or upholding truth?

 

Here is what I think: it is only because this is a practice among some Shia. And thus, other Shia feel obliged to defend it. Otherwise, we all know it has no basis in our madhab. Not even its proponents go so far to say it was recommended by our Imams. We all know it has no true religious basis. And still, some Shias defend it. What can this be for, other than the fact that they feel compelled to defend their coreligionists?

 

But repenter (and Ali Hussein, as well) raises a good point which unfortunately has been ignored.

 

Tatbir is an invented practice which has been around for some time.

What about these new invented practices which has emerged in recent years?

Or what if I invent my own practice and say this is in the name of mourning Imam Hussein?

 

Should such practices be deemed acceptable?

 

 

Nobody can just have an opinion. Nobody can just say "live and let live." That "live and let live" needs to be a part of a coherent system. There is a specific logic behind that "live and let live." Once you have accepted that logical framework, there are other things which also must be accepted. Because there is no textual religious basis for tatbir being a tradition of our Imams, it is an invented tradition. Accepting it (or "letting live") merely on the basis that some Shia do this act, establishes the logical framework: any act which is performed by some Shias in the name of mourning Imam Hussein, is acceptable, or at least: it should not be condemned.

 

Or no?

 

If I tar and feather myself and say it's to mourn Imam Hussein, would you defend me or would you think I'm crazy? I would be the only Husseini tar-and-feather person.

 

Then there are a few more "Ana kalbun Roqayyeh" people. Maybe you are less inclined to think they are crazy.

 

And then there are even more tatbir people. These people, you say: "live and let live."

 

It's all on the basis of social acceptance and the number of practitioners. What does that have to do with truth?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ nothin got to do with the truthhhh! 

If any one shud have done tatbir out of extremeeee sadness it shud have been done by our 12 imams.

I guess we are more sad than 12 imam and more related to imam hussain then his own son, and grandsons

I wonder why no imam did tatbir. And we call ourself follower of imams. :einstein:Very funny funny world.

i wonder what are we following our own tradition or ahlul - bayt tradition :accident:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Forum Administrators

Is the principle of tatbir such that one is so striken with grief and emotion, they lose control of their feelings, and can't help themselves but to self flagellate with harmful items, as if that's an inevitable natural consequence of this emotional state?

If this was the case, you would think things would be a tad more spontaneous and less structured and coordinated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
44 minutes ago, baradar_jackson said:

Here is what I think: it is only because this is a practice among some Shia. And thus, other Shia feel obliged to defend it. Otherwise, we all know it has no basis in our madhab. Not even its proponents go so far to say it was recommended by our Imams. We all know it has no true religious basis.

My previous post was designed precisely to dissuade others from taking this line. But I reckon it didn't work.

I am not interested in establishing the right or wrong of either position, so for the purpose of this discussion, I seek recourse in argumentum ad verecundiam (argument from authority). All this reasoning behind anti-tatbir view must be also known to those maraaji who deem it permissible with requisite conditions attached. But they do not take the extreme position some of our zealous friends have taken here. This establishes the fact that there is no singular mainstream position on the matter. Either we accept that all those maraaji who do not deem the act unconditionally haram have failed to understand the basics of fiqh and therefore aren't fit for the office of marjiyat, or we show some humility and accept that maraaji have tried their best to deduce the rulings but have arrived at different conclusions. This is what it's all about.

What I don't get is this: Since tatbir has no historical precedent from the Imams, has no textual evidence for or against it, and does not impugn the fundamentals of the madhab itself, why then believers are either so fanatically against it or so zealously for it? This should be a small, inconsequential matter best left to people's choices in how they commemorate Karbala. It became life-and-death issue only when the two opposing camps were pit against each other after '79.

Now you know whom to blame.

Re: argument from supposed craziness.

You speak from a vantage point from which tatbir looks crazy to you but other acts of mourning do not. Ask a non-Shia. He'd tell you it is crazy to beat our chests black and blue and cry like babies for something that happened centuries ago. Why so emo? Ask a non-Muslim. He'd tell you it is completely crazy for pilgrims wrapped in white bed sheets to throw pebbles at stone pillars (a ritual that often ends in deadly stampedes). Both rituals and many others are totally crazy if you do not have the faith. See, I'm not a big fan of the argument from craziness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Forum Administrators

Everybody draws a line somewhere. Yours doesn't become more or less valid because others happen to draw it somewhere else. Positions are based on their own merit.

Yes, I do know who to blame, or at least pity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
20 minutes ago, magma said:

Yours doesn't become more or less valid because others happen to draw it somewhere else.

That's exactly what I'm saying all along, that one group should not try to draw lines for others. Hardliners from both camps should respect each other's lines.

Thanks for saying something you did not intend to, but did.

Edited by Marbles
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...