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

The anti-tatbeer crowd might enjoy this

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 255
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

You're correct brother. But we cannot forget ashura, in fact our every day becomes the day of ashura after the tragedy of karbala.  We are fighting injustice & opression, but what to do

Bro, I think its the opposite. We were talking about this practice and how was it found in pagans, then suddenly people started to use fatwa cards that have nothing to do with the topic, then people s

This is because of them not understanding the life and death of Aba Abdillah (a.s)

7 minutes ago, Haimi said:

Filtered.

in mashad, brothers scratch their faces between maghrib/ isha of 9th muharram to fajr ashura till you can see their teeth through their cheeks. you wanna see a vid? its pretty hardcore

Edited by DigitalUmmah
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
38 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

in mashad, brothers scratch their faces between maghrib/ isha of 9th muharram to fajr ashura till you can see their teeth through their cheeks. you wanna see a vid? its pretty hardcore

So what? Does that mean its acceptable or somehow legitimate?

Im sure there are also a few people there who also dont wash their hands after the bathroom, doesnt mean its a proof?

I think Ayatallah Khameni has made an excellent point and those that follow these baseless things are not helping the right cause.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

In Islam, and this seems to always have been the case since it is a very prominent theme in the Jewish Scriptures as well, imitating non-believers is generally not allowed. This would obviously be especially the case in religious practice. Since nobody seems to be seriously arguing against the fact that blood-letting rituals originated outside of Islam (whether through pagan or Christian influence), I'm curious how they find it acceptable in this case to imitate the non-believers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Haydar Husayn said:

I'm curious how they find it acceptable in this case to imitate the non-believers

In cases like this, we refer to scholars. some feel that it is an acceptable level of "self harm", others think that it isnt.

bear in mind also that the bible is in no way reliable account of anything. its been translated and mistranslated and chopped and changed so many times in so many languages, when the original source material doesnt even exist, that we dont even know if those passages are even real or not

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
4 hours ago, Haydar Husayn said:

In Islam, and this seems to always have been the case since it is a very prominent theme in the Jewish Scriptures as well, imitating non-believers is generally not allowed. This would obviously be especially the case in religious practice. Since nobody seems to be seriously arguing against the fact that blood-letting rituals originated outside of Islam (whether through pagan or Christian influence), I'm curious how they find it acceptable in this case to imitate the non-believers.

2 things brother.

1) We are not wahabi. We are shia and our doctrine allows anything other than that which is specifically prohibited. If one's marja allows it, then it is sufficient for the believer to believe in and/or do tatbir. If one's marja does not allow it, then it would be haram for the person to indulge in this activity. It really is as simple as that.

2) Where do you draw the line as to what constitutes mourning for Imam Hussain and what doesn't. It seems like you are drawing the line at tatbir; @Dhulfikar is drawing the line at matam; others have a problem with too much masaib, yet more want the focus of majlis and lectures to be furuh-e-deen at the expense of fazail; then there are people who question starting lectures with hadees-e-kisa, why burn incense, question tabooth, processions aka juloos, need for alam, need for tabaruk? So the natural reaction to wanting to draw a line around azadari is to refuse any line all together. So I say this being 100% rational and looking at the long-term viability of shia surviving is to allow everything that is taking place because the minute you allow a line to be drawn around what is azadari, is the minute our decline starts. The haters of shia want to eliminate azadari; so our reaction SHOULD NOT be to reduce azadari but grow it.

Edited by shiaman14
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

1) We are not wahabi. We are shia and our doctrine allows anything other than that which is specifically prohibited.

you know, this really is an astonishingly good point to make at this moment, mashaAllah

(1) salafis - everything is haram unless its allowed
(2) shia - everything is halal unless it is prohibited

those who are arguing that its supposedly from pagans (the source isnt reliable) so we shouldnt do it, which of the two arguments above are they adhering to?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 19/09/2016 at 10:21 PM, shiaman14 said:

While it does seem like being anti-tatbeer and pro-unity are mutually exclusive, we have a quite a few people here who are both (they know who they are :) ).

 

This unity is someting which Imam Ali(as) and Imam Husain(as) sent messengers to the other camps to make people be united under guidance.

Imam Al Hujjah(atfs) will come and unite all under his banner and the Christians when corrected by Prophet Isa(as) will also come under the fold.

Only the die hard core nasibies who have nasb with full knowledge do not fall under the unity flag. Everyone else including illiterate salafis are fine. 

It is more important to bring people under wilaya which is the base rather than misguide them with hatred. It is a hujjah upon one and all. We do not seek self gratification but we want to see the flag(Alam) of true Islam(Al Islam) rise and flutter in every heart.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
Quote

2) Where do you draw the line as to what constitutes mourning for Imam Hussain and what doesn't. It seems like you are drawing the line at tatbir; @Dhulfikar is drawing the line at matam; others have a problem with too much masaib, yet more want the focus of majlis and lectures to be furuh-e-deen at the expense of fazail; then there are people who question starting lectures with hadees-e-kisa, why burn incense, question tabooth, processions aka juloos, need for alam, need for tabaruk? So the natural reaction to wanting to draw a line around azadari is to refuse any line all together. So I say this being 100% rational and looking at the long-term viability of shia surviving is to allow everything that is taking place because the minute you allow a line to be drawn around what is azadari, is the minute our decline starts. The haters of shia want to eliminate azadari; so our reaction SHOULD NOT be to reduce azadari but grow it.

No where I have even implied that I draw the line at matam. The mourning of Imam Husain (as) should always be in the correct way where it does not get tarnished. Crying for Him, listen and reflect his teaching and remembering the Ahlulbait (as), spreading the Message of Imam Husain (as) by what he stand for, letting the non-muslims know about Ahlulbait (as) and Ashura are all wonderful practices that Ahlulbait (as) would be proud of us. Tatbir is nothing but an crazy practice that it's origins came from the pagans. Like one of the user here said, the people who do tatbir do it out of their craziness. It is an ugly, and it draw people out from Imam Husain (as). There is logical reason why many scholars forbid it. It tarnish the whole mourning of Imam Husain (as). It damage your body in the way that it could lead you easily to death, which Islam prohibits to destroy yourself. And this is the most important point where it seems many Shi'as forgets:

Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as) said: 'I urge you to have God-consciousness, piety, fortitude, honesty, to return promptly the property entrusted to your care, to be good-natured and neighborly, and call people to yourselves [i.e., attract them] without the use of your tongue, and be such that you are an adornment [for us] and not a disgrace [to us]. I urge you to lengthen your bowing (ruku') and your prostration (sujud), for when one of you lengthen his bowing and his prostration, Iblis shouts out disapprovingly from behind him: "O Woe unto him, how he has obeyed while I have disobeyed, and how he prostrates while I had refused to do so."' al-Kafi, v. 2, p. 63, no. 9.

If you truly think Tatbir is adornment and does not cause any disgrace to Ahlulbait (as), then you truly are wrong.

Edited by Dhulfikar
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Dhulfikar said:

Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as) said: 'I urge you to have God-consciousness, piety, fortitude, honesty, to return promptly the property entrusted to your care, to be good-natured and neighborly, and call people to yourselves [i.e., attract them] without the use of your tongue, and be such that you are an adornment [for us] and not a disgrace [to us]. I urge you to lengthen your bowing (ruku') and your prostration (sujud), for when one of you lengthen his bowing and his prostration, Iblis shouts out disapprovingly from behind him: "O Woe unto him, how he has obeyed while I have disobeyed, and how he prostrates while I had refused to do so."' al-Kafi, v. 2, p. 63, no. 9.

If you truly think Tatbir is adornment and not disgrace, then you truly are wrong.

whats the context of that hadith?

Was it not a response because many muslims were being publicly sinful at the time, since it became the norm?

I do not think that anyone is in any position to judge whether certain forms of mourning are a "disgrace" to the Ahlulbayt (as) or not. certainly not you or me.

[MOD NOTE: R rated Movie Meme removed.]

"Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man."

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
21 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

whats the context of that hadith?

Was it not a response because many muslims were being publicly sinful at the time, since it became the norm?

Ajeeb. What does it even have to do with the whole message of the Hadith? The hadith talks in general sense to follow such commands no matter are you sinful or not.

Quote

I do not think that anyone is in any position to judge whether certain forms of mourning are a "disgrace" to the Ahlulbayt (as) or not. certainly not you or me.

You are just fooling yourself, nothing more. No where it is adornment for sure.

Edited by Dhulfikar
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
12 hours ago, Haydar Husayn said:

Nobody has said it's haram. At least not in his thread. It is simply being pointed out that it has a long pagan history, and a very short Islamic one.

 

12 hours ago, DigitalUmmah said:

so does wearing aqeeq for protection

your thinking is so flawed, what the Aimmah(as) say or do is not a pagan custom. It might be done by the pagans as a ritual but it is very much Islamic from then(whenever it was started) and till eternity.

What is innovated later has a very very big question mark against it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Dhulfikar said:

Ajeeb. What does it even have to do with the whole message of the Hadith? The hadith talks in general sense to follow such commands no matter are you sinful or not.

You are just fooling yourself, nothing more. No where it is adornment for sure.

You are looking at it through your lens, I am looking at it through mine. You think I am fooling myself because you think i see it the way you do.

I genuinely, with absolutely no deception, believe it to be a truly beautiful, honourable act. There are scholars who likewise agree with it. 

To you? Its a disgrace. To me? Its a genuine adornment. How about we leave the judgement to the one who knows all intentions?

So like i said. Its just, like, your opinion man.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
5 hours ago, DigitalUmmah said:

You are looking at it through your lens, I am looking at it through mine. You think I am fooling myself because you think i see it the way you do.

I genuinely, with absolutely no deception, believe it to be a truly beautiful, honourable act. There are scholars who likewise agree with it. 

To you? Its a disgrace. To me? Its a genuine adornment. How about we leave the judgement to the one who knows all intentions?

So like i said. Its just, like, your opinion man.

If you believe its an adornment and if you believe you are following the Sunnah of Hz Bibi Zainab then why dont your Malang women have women only zanjeer-zani sessions and cut themselves to shreds.

Why dont the women use blades on their chests and backs. Answer that question and you will see that blood letting is just a 'macho' man act and very little to do with religion

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
11 minutes ago, Sajjad Zaidi said:

Hebrews 9:22

Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.

For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, 20Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. 21Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry. 22And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. 23It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: 25Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;

 

Full quote . This is about sacrificing anaimals

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
7 hours ago, DigitalUmmah said:

In cases like this, we refer to scholars. some feel that it is an acceptable level of "self harm", others think that it isnt.

This is why most discussions on this site are to some extent pointless, because no matter what happens, in the end people can pull out the 'well, some scholars allow it' card. I don't mind, but I wish people wouldn't pretended to engage in rational discussions when ultimately they are just going to use the appeal to authority fallacy as soon as they are in a tight corner.

 

7 hours ago, DigitalUmmah said:

bear in mind also that the bible is in no way reliable account of anything. its been translated and mistranslated and chopped and changed so many times in so many languages, when the original source material doesnt even exist, that we dont even know if those passages are even real or not

Whether or not these specific passages in the Bible are reliable in the sense of being divine revelation or not isn't really important (although I see no reason to believe that they are not). The point is that it's a very early source (even just going by the earliest manuscripts that are still in existence, it predates Islam by hundreds of years) testifying to the fact that this was a ritual associated with pagans.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
8 minutes ago, Sajjad Zaidi said:

Hebrews 9:22

Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.

It's always hilarious when people take things completely out of context, and have no idea how ridiculous they are making themselves look.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Question: "What does the Bible say about self-harm / self-mutilation / cutting?"

Answer: 
In the Old Testament, self-mutilation was a common practice among false religions. First Kings 18:24-29describes a ritual in which those who worshiped the false god Baal slashed themselves with swords and spears, as was their custom. Because of the traditions of pagans, God made a law against this sort of practice. Leviticus 19:28 says, “You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor tattoo any marks on you: I am the LORD.”

In the New Testament, cutting oneself was associated with someone who was possessed by demons (Mark 5:2-5). It was characteristic of behavior caused by evil spirits. Today, self-mutilation is rarely used for ritualistic practices or actual demon possession, but is practiced instead usually by teenagers and young adults who have misplaced anger and pain that they are attempting to work out in destructive ways. Instead of dealing with emotional pain, some people would rather bring themselves physical pain, which actually serves as a relief from stress. Unfortunately, though, this sense of relief is quite short-lived, and the desire to be self-destructive quickly returns.

The Bible doesn't talk about self-mutilation in terms of depression or anxiety, but it is very important that whoever is making a practice of this seek immediate psychological (and hopefully Christian) counseling. Someone who is cutting may need to obtain medication to deal with a mental illness. This behavior also indicates, or can lead to, drug and/or alcohol abuse, eating disorders, identity disorders, and suicidal thoughts or even attempts. First Corinthians 6:19 tells us how important our bodies are to the Lord. We no longer belong to ourselves, but instead we belong to Christ, who purchased us at a high price. We should not abuse the gift we have been given."

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Haydar Husayn said:

It's always hilarious when people take things completely out of context, and have no idea how ridiculous they are making themselves look.

Without knowing the reason, your habbit of making absurd comments forced you to say something against the verse of bible.

We would have appreciated you if you posted on the thread like this:

"Question: "What does the Bible say about self-harm / self-mutilation / cutting?"

Answer: 
In the Old Testament, self-mutilation was a common practice among false religions. First Kings 18:24-29describes a ritual in which those who worshiped the false god Baal slashed themselves with swords and spears, as was their custom. Because of the traditions of pagans, God made a law against this sort of practice. Leviticus 19:28 says, “You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor tattoo any marks on you: I am the LORD.”

In the New Testament, cutting oneself was associated with someone who was possessed by demons (Mark 5:2-5). It was characteristic of behavior caused by evil spirits. Today, self-mutilation is rarely used for ritualistic practices or actual demon possession, but is practiced instead usually by teenagers and young adults who have misplaced anger and pain that they are attempting to work out in destructive ways. Instead of dealing with emotional pain, some people would rather bring themselves physical pain, which actually serves as a relief from stress. Unfortunately, though, this sense of relief is quite short-lived, and the desire to be self-destructive quickly returns.

The Bible doesn't talk about self-mutilation in terms of depression or anxiety, but it is very important that whoever is making a practice of this seek immediate psychological (and hopefully Christian) counseling.."

And you can see in above answer, Christians dont compare their brothers in faith with pagans, rather they approach the matter in a more positive & rational way. This is what i was pointing out from the very beginning.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be understood as your blindness whenever you try to compare the matam in the name of Imam Hussain with the cutting/mutilation practice of worshipping false god(s) in the false religions.

A tragedy on which everything cried, heavens & earth cried cannot be compareable with anything.

"Surah Ad-Dukhan, Verse 29:

فَمَا بَكَتْ عَلَيْهِمُ السَّمَاءُ وَالْأَرْضُ وَمَا كَانُوا مُنظَرِينَ

So the heaven and the earth did not weep for them, nor were they respited."

Do the heaven & earth weep? They did not wept for fir'on but for whom they wept? Or you think Allah has mentioned this in vain?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, A true Sunni said:

If you believe its an adornment and if you believe you are following the Sunnah of Hz Bibi Zainab then why dont your Malang women have women only zanjeer-zani sessions and cut themselves to shreds.

Why dont the women use blades on their chests and backs. Answer that question and you will see that blood letting is just a 'macho' man act and very little to do with religion

They do. Women do tatbir. In the UK the biggest womens ashura tatbir session is in cricklewood, london i believe. 

Next question?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

O you who have believed, let not a people ridicule [another] people; perhaps they may be better than them; nor let women ridicule [other] women; perhaps they may be better than them. And do not insult one another and do not call each other by [offensive] nicknames. Wretched is the name of disobedience after [one's] faith. And whoever does not repent - then it is those who are the wrongdoers. [Qur'an 49:11]

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
5 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

They do. Women do tatbir. In the UK the biggest womens ashura tatbir session is in cricklewood, london i believe. 

Next question?

I definitely think you are wrong there. You have no worries about massaging, being economical with and twisting of facts to score a point, hence I will confirm this.

Where will you guys go to next? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

These verses of bible are interesting, may I know what these anti-tatbir people say about these verses:

And in that day did the Lord God of hosts call to weeping and to mourning, and to baldness and to girding with sackcloth.
(Isaiah 22:12)

You are now at ease, be anxious; tremble, you who have no cares. Strip yourselves bare; put a cloth round your waists and beat yourselves" (Isaiah 32:11)

“Howl, O Heshbon, for Ai is despoiled! Cry, ye daughters of Rabbah; gird you with sackcloth! Lament, and run to and fro by the hedges;  (Jeremiah 49:3)

 When all the people who had gathered to witness this sight saw what took place, they beat their breasts and went away.
(Luke 23:48)  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

The Holy Prophet's (pbuh and his family ) advise to Imam Ali(as) :

I will Summerize Six thousand sentences in Six sentences:
 
-When you see people busy with voluntarily acts of worship, you perfect your obligatory acts.
 
-Whenever people are busy with the affairs of the world, you fullfill the acts of the hereafter.
 
-Whenever you see people busy with other people's faults, you seek your own faults.
 
-Whenever you see people beautifing the world, you occupy yourself with beautifing the here after.
 
-Whenever people are busy with increasing their quanity of acts , you focus on perfection, and the quality of your acts.
 
-Whenever you see people resorting to creation you resort to God All mighty.
Edited by Ya_isa (as)
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
1 hour ago, Sajjad Zaidi said:

These verses of bible are interesting, may I know what these anti-tatbir people say about these verses:

And in that day did the Lord God of hosts call to weeping and to mourning, and to baldness and to girding with sackcloth.
(Isaiah 22:12)

You are now at ease, be anxious; tremble, you who have no cares. Strip yourselves bare; put a cloth round your waists and beat yourselves" (Isaiah 32:11)

“Howl, O Heshbon, for Ai is despoiled! Cry, ye daughters of Rabbah; gird you with sackcloth! Lament, and run to and fro by the hedges;  (Jeremiah 49:3)

 When all the people who had gathered to witness this sight saw what took place, they beat their breasts and went away.
(Luke 23:48)  

Yeah, it seem that it is so hard for you to distinguish between beating yourself and tatbir. Please try to justify your tatbir with those verses. What is the context of these verses in first place may I ask? Did they use pagan custom of Tatbir while they were beating themselves? Should they make every year EVENT out of these verses?

 

Quote

In the New Testament, cutting oneself was associated with someone who was possessed by demons (Mark 5:2-5). It was characteristic of behavior caused by evil spirits. Today, self-mutilation is rarely used for ritualistic practices or actual demon possession, but is practiced instead usually by teenagers and young adults who have misplaced anger and pain that they are attempting to work out in destructive ways. Instead of dealing with emotional pain, some people would rather bring themselves physical pain, which actually serves as a relief from stress. Unfortunately, though, this sense of relief is quite short-lived, and the desire to be self-destructive quickly returns.

The Bible doesn't talk about self-mutilation in terms of depression or anxiety, but it is very important that whoever is making a practice of this seek immediate psychological (and hopefully Christian) counseling.."


The only reasonable part is the last one:
Whoever is making a practice of this seek immediate psychological (and hopefully Christian) counseling.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Haydar Husayn said:

This is why most discussions on this site are to some extent pointless, because no matter what happens, in the end people can pull out the 'well, some scholars allow it' card. I don't mind, but I wish people wouldn't pretended to engage in rational discussions when ultimately they are just going to use the appeal to authority fallacy as soon as they are in a tight corner.

I dont think this is a logical fallacy. any discussion of shia fiqh is going to ultimately end up referring back to scholars. Its a legitimate response, and not a desperate tactic once you are against the ropes. 

Lets say ok fine, its a logical fallacy so we cannot refer back to scholars authority, my response would be "all things are halal unless specifically stated to be haram".

"self harm" is just far too wide a term for "all self harm is haram". tatbir was not forbidden (since it is a modern practice), and my own belief is that it does not constitute excessive damage to my body (since I dont even miss maghrib/Isha), and i absolutely genuinely believe that it is a beautiful act. I'm not just saying this because I want to win internet points but inside I am repulsed by it. I 100% believe that it is a great act. 

4 hours ago, Haydar Husayn said:

Whether or not these specific passages in the Bible are reliable in the sense of being divine revelation or not isn't really important (although I see no reason to believe that they are not). The point is that it's a very early source (even just going by the earliest manuscripts that are still in existence, it predates Islam by hundreds of years) testifying to the fact that this was a ritual associated with pagans.

rituals without meanings or context cannot be used to link other rituals. 

my understanding of the source is that pagans would cut themselves during prayers to their idol. tatbir is an expression of grief. like for example if a christian uses a rosary to recite hail marys, that doesnt make us using a tasbih a bad thing. there is an overlap, but context has to be taken into consideration

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
3 hours ago, DigitalUmmah said:

They do. Women do tatbir. In the UK the biggest womens ashura tatbir session is in cricklewood, london i believe. 

Next question?

Did I say tatbir? I was very specific. Skull scar 'adornments' arent visible because of hair.

Mutillated backs and chest 'adornments'  would only be visible to the husband or close female relatives.

Surely these Malangs would want their wives suitably adorned 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, A true Sunni said:

Did I say tatbir? I was very specific. Skull scar 'adornments' arent visible because of hair.

Mutillated backs and chest 'adornments'  would only be visible to the husband or close female relatives.

Surely these Malangs would want their wives suitably adorned 

women cant see each others exposed breasts, bright spark. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
8 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

women cant see each others exposed breasts, bright spark. 

a mother can see her daughter . But I see you didnt answer the point as usual.

So you dont derail my point. Why dont male malangs get their female malang wives to mutillate and scar their chest and backs. (Which according to DU only they will see). Its an adornment according to DU 

Edited by A true Sunni
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...