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  
mj1

CUTTING FOREHEADS OF BABIES

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Salam everyone,

I recently came accross a post on social media showing pictures of cutting babies foreheads with knives on ashura. It was a long debate with that person afterwards and i asked him for some time to answer his question of whether or not this was fair and islamic. 

Can anybody please give me some knowledge?

Your help will be appriciated alot!

Jazakallah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Last Hope said:

It's haram.

Incomplete answer. It all depends upon one's maraja if he allows or not. Even in case of child, we should ask a scholar rather than giving fatwa.

In this Ashra-e-oola, I request brothers to concentrate on azadari instead of arguing on tatbir here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Venomous_92 said:

Wassalamu alaikum, I've never heard of this before, I'm pretty sure It's haram. Allah would never allow anyone to hurt a little child.

and yet Allah allows (enforces) all infant males to be circumcised.

I will desist from this debate other than saying that one should follow in accordance with one's marja.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

and yet Allah allows (enforces) all infant males to be circumcised.

I will desist from this debate other than saying that one should follow in accordance with one's marja.

Circumcision is for their own good though (which can be scientifically argued too), why would cutting their forehead be for their own good?  Especially if its not their will to?  Wouldn't this kind of thing be subject to a choice?   I thought Maatam was ok, but self cutting/wound inflict was banned/haram for the shia'?

So there are varying opinions?

What would a baby know about self wound infliction during Muharram?  I mean we can all agree no one did this during the lifetime of the Prophet SAW, right?

(This whole thing is beyond me, since I've never attempted to understand it)

Blood is considered an unclean thing that we can't pray if one is bleeding, right? 

And aren't innocent children exempt/blameless from sins?

So many Questions %O

Edited by wmehar2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, wmehar2 said:

Circumcision is for their own good though (which can be scientifically argued too), why would cutting their forehead be for their own good?  Especially if its not their will to?  Wouldn't this kind of thing be subject to a choice?   I thought Maatam was ok, but self cutting/wound inflict was banned/haram for the shia'?

I just replied to the brother who Allah would not allow hurting a child. As it turns out, in some circumstances it is ok.

5 minutes ago, wmehar2 said:

So there are varying opinions?

Some marajae allow it; others forbid it.

5 minutes ago, wmehar2 said:

What would a baby know about self wound infliction during Muharram?  I mean we can all agree no one did this during the lifetime of the Prophet SAW, right?

One of the first things we teach our kids is "Allah is one" even when they are less than a year old. They have no idea about Allah or the concept of one and yet we indoctrinate them. Similarly here, while a child may be too young to understand what is going on, the love of the Prophet and AhlulBayt is indoctrinated into them. This is part of that.

7 minutes ago, wmehar2 said:

Blood is considered an unclean thing that we can't pray if one is bleeding, right? 

Correct.

8 minutes ago, wmehar2 said:

And aren't innocent children exempt/blameless from sins?

Yes but this is not done for blame or sin.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So there's nothing wrong with a person who chooses not to cut their kids/babies forhead, even if a Marja tells them they should?

Ah... I see, interesting.   It's not compulsory I believe to participate in these activities right? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found this on wiki:

1 Ruhollah Khomeini Forbade Ayatollah Khomeini forbade it and hence Hizbullah does not allow the members to perform this violent action. Instead, Khomeini and Khamenei encourage the members to donate their bloods.[2]
2 Sayyid Sadeq Rohani Not forbade He said: "I love the youths that do tatbeer/GhameZani and I ask Allah (swt) to resurrect me with them."[citation needed]
3 Ali Sistani Forbade Should be avoided actions that tarnish the mourning of Husayn ibn Ali.[4]
4 Ali Khamenei Forbade Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Supreme Leader of Iran has stated that Tatbir is Haram (forbidden). He says:

It is an incorrect action which some people perform – taking a blade in one’s hand and hitting themselves on the head with it spilling their blood. What do they do this for? How is this action considered mourning? Of course, hitting one’s head with their hands is a form of mourning. You have seen over and over again, a person who has had something bad happen to them, hit themselves on their head and chest. This is a normal sign of mourning. But, have you ever seen a person who has had something bad happen to their most loved (ones) hit themselves on the head with a sword until blood flows down? How is this action considered mourning?[5]

5 Sadiq Hussaini Shirazi Not forbade According to Sadiq Hussaini Shirazi ritual of Tatbir (Qama Zani) it is Halal and Mustahab.[6] He also deems tatbir to be permissible for women; according to him tatbir was first practiced by Lady Zainab, a woman.[7]
6 Naser Makarem Shirazi Forbade Muslims should be avoided actions that weakness the Shia religious and damage to the body.[4]
7 Mohammad Fazel Lankarani Forbade Tatbir shows harsh face of mourning of Husayn ibn Ali and its harming Shiism.[4][8]
8 Abdollah Javadi-Amoli Forbade It is not permissible to insult Islam and the desecration of mourning. Therefore, it is better to avoiding Tatbir and some thing like that.[4]
9 Mohammad-Taqi Bahjat Foumani Forbade It should be avoided every act that would be an insult to the Shia.[4]
10 Hossein Noori Hamedani Forbade Should be avoided actions that weakness the Shia religious.[4][8]
11 Hossein Mazaheri Forbade When Wali e Faqih (Guardian Jurist) ordered to avoid something, all people have to avoid it. Even if they do not follow Guardian Jurist.[4]
12 Kazem al-Haeri Forbade Tatbir is a superstition that cause the defamation of Islam and Shia.[4]
13 Mohaqiq Kabuli Forbade There is any allowance to practice Tatbir or self-flagellation and something else that are considered as self-harm.[9]
14 Muhammad al-Fayadh Not forbade Tatbir is permissible, if it do not cause serious damage to the body.[10]
15 Muhammad Saeed al-Hakim Not forbade Tatbir as one form of the mourning of Husayn ibn Ali is permissible. It is permitted by the intention of sympathy with God and trust-seeking, to promote searching for trust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, wmehar2 said:

So there's nothing wrong with a person who chooses not to cut their kids/babies forhead, even if a Marja tells them they should?

Ah... I see, interesting.   It's not compulsory I believe to participate in these activities right? 

From what I understand, most of the hadiths in support of tatbir are dhaif  and seems to be more of a cultural thing,Waseem. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

From what I understand, most of the hadiths in support of tatbir are dhaif  and seems to be more of a cultural thing,Waseem. 

I see, though I see their intentions seem noble.   I like Ayatollahs Khomeinis alternative to give blood, that's a really great way to not let blood spill in vain and gives something good to come out of it.  Something I can think the Imam would appreciate that people are doing out of respect for him that's saving other lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, wmehar2 said:

I see, though I see their intentions seem noble.   I like Ayatollahs Khomeinis alternative to give blood, that's a really great way to not let blood spill in vain and gives something good to come out of it.  Something I can think the Imam would appreciate that people are doing out of respect for him that's saving other lives.

I agree, that's a very good way of looking at it, Waseem 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

From what I understand, most of the hadiths in support of tatbir are dhaif  and seems to be more of a cultural thing,Waseem. 

There are no narrations regarding tatbir,  it is a practice that was copied from the Christians and some sufis a couple of hundred years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ali_Hussain said:

There are no narrations regarding tatbir,  it is a practice that was copied from the Christians and some sufis a couple of hundred years ago.

Are you sure, I read on a thread here that were hadiths on it but it was in Sunni books. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Dhulfikar said:

Indeed, but keep in the mind, first comes the intellect before and after asking a scholar opinion.

There's lot of argument to be made but...

19 hours ago, Lover of Ahlulbait (ams) said:

In this Ashra-e-oola, I request brothers to concentrate on azadari instead of arguing on tatbir here.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clarification on Ayatullah Sayyid Ali al-Sistani's Opinion on the Practice of Tatbir


A clarification about the opinion of His Eminence, Grand Ayatullah Sayyid Ali al-Sistani, on the subject of Tatbir (Hitting the head with a sword or a knife on the anniversary of the martyrdom of Imam Husayn, peace be upon him)
 
-----------------------------------

 

In the Name of God, the All-Beneficent, the All-Merciful
 

God, the Glorified, says, “He gives wisdom to whomever He wishes, and he who is given wisdom, is certainly given an abundant good. But none takes admonition except those who possess intellect” (The Holy Quran, 2:269)

 
In response to this question asked by “The Missionary Youth” group:

The circulating statements/comments regarding the opinion of His Eminence, the religious authority, may God protect him,  that he has “abstained” from issuing a religious edict on the subject of tatbir requires clarification. What is the reason the supreme religious authority is abstaining from answering a jurisprudential question that causes such disagreement among people?
 
Answer:
The reason for abstaining from issuing an edict on this matter can be understood from the following standpoints:

First: A believer can refer in his or her emulation (taqleed) either to the supreme religious authority or to another religious authority. If a believer emulates another authority, then the abstention of the supreme authority from issuing an edict on a certain subject would not affect him. However, if he emulates the supreme authority, it means he thinks the supreme authority is the most knowledgeable and has the attributes of justness, piety, and wisdom, and therefore, should be assured that the supreme authority’s abstention from issuing an edict on a certain subject is because of some foresight. Even if he does not know (i.e. understand) that foresight, the believer should accept the position of the supreme authority (i.e. trust in his wisdom) and not worry.

Second: The jurist considers various factors and gives some of them priority over others when giving his opinion. There is no doubt that by not giving his opinion the supreme authority, based on his knowledge, experience and wisdom, considers certain factors as being more important (versus the factors that suggest an opinion is needed). It might even be because he does not see any suitability in issuing a religious edict because he knows that such an edict would not have any effect, and in fact may even increase the enmity between the two sides of the conflict and prolong it. The Master of the well-spoken and the wise, the Leader of the Believers, may peace be upon him, said, “He who is not obeyed cannot give counsel.”

Third: The reality we all live in and are aware of is that there is a conflict between two parties, each of them is so adamant in not abandoning its belief regardless of the supreme authority’s opinion about it. Therefore, the edict of the supreme authority would be used as a “stick” by one side to antagonize the other. While the supreme authority is mindful not to give any of the two parties a chance to do that.

This conflict is apparent to all believers every year as each of the two opposing parties struggles and strives to collect all kinds of evidence to prove the correctness of its position. They have searched all the books and found every detail of what previous jurists have said about this subject. Nevertheless, the supreme authority only aims to play its fatherly role and attend to all believers, whatever their position or viewpoint, and prevent the followers of the progeny of the Prophet, may peace be upon them, from being divided and disunited; and as such he does not want to favor one side over the other. This position of the supreme authority has been clearly demonstrated for various issues as is clearly evident to all.

Fourth: The conflict between the two sides about the Husayni sacraments is not limited to this subject such that the supreme authority can issue an edict and settle the matter. The groups will remain at odds and the debate will continue even if an edict is issued, because then another subject will be raised, and then another, and the supreme authority will be bound to issue edicts about all the subjects that will be raised. As a result of this the followers of the progeny of the Prophet, may peace be upon them, will be kept from commemorating the anniversary of the Master of the Martyrs, may peace be upon him, and will instead be busy with discussing and debating those subjects, which would cause further hostility and division among his followers, may peace be upon him. The supreme authority aims to distance himself from contributing to and participating in such a fruitless debate, the liability for which is borne by those who ignite it every year with the purpose of defeating the opposing party.

Fifth: Objections regarding the position of the supreme authority on this subject could themselves reveal that one party or the other is complaining about the supreme authority not issuing an edict that can enable them to argue for their position against the other party. This is evidence for the correctness of the position of the supreme authority and for his awareness of what is happening in society regarding this subject.

Sixth: The position of the supreme authority follows the example of Prophet Aaron, may peace be upon him, when he retreated and isolated himself from the people who worshipped the calf instead of God, the Glorified. He apologized to his brother Moses, may peace be upon him, who upon returning from the mountain asked him why he isolated himself from them, “He said, ‘O son of my mother! Do not hold my beard or my head! I feared lest you should say, You have caused a rift among the Children of Israel’” (Quran 20:94). Both Moses, may peace be upon him, and the Qur’an approved of the position of Aaron and did not condemn him. This was the case with those people who considered a calf their god and worshipped it. Yet our situation is much better; neither of the parties (God forbid) has been unfaithful to God (i.e. disbelieved). Therefore, the supreme authority isolating itself from this debate in order to not increase the divisions among the followers of the progeny of the Prophet, may peace be upon them, is most appropriate.

Seventh: The abstention of the supreme authority from issuing an edict about this subject can be considered a lesson and teaching for us from several perspectives as follows:

  • This is a jurisprudential subject the debate about which should not escalate to such levels of conflict and enmity. Each believer can simply refer to the authority he or she emulates regarding this subject, just as he does regarding hundreds of other jurisprudential issues about which different jurists have varying opinions.
  • The Husayni Sacraments can be applied and practiced in so many ways, whether we approve or disapprove of them.
  • A believer should distance him or herself from any fruitless debate that could cause them to insult others and should not busy themselves with such issues that would take them away from serving the Master of the Martyrs, may peace be upon him.

There are other points that I did not mention for fear of unnecessarily prolonging this answer or falling into the same trouble we are trying to avoid.
 
Sayyid Muhammad Husayn al-Amidi
Representative of His Eminence, Grand Ayatullah al-Sayyid al-Sistani
Najaf, Muharram of 1437 AH

We ask Allah (swt) to grant us success. May God make us all the servants of Islam and of our fellow Muslims, by which our good deeds are recorded in the book of Imam Husayn (as).

May the peace and blessings of God be upon you all.
 
I.M.A.M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/6/2016 at 5:11 PM, wmehar2 said:

So there's nothing wrong with a person who chooses not to cut their kids/babies forhead, even if a Marja tells them they should?

Ah... I see, interesting.   It's not compulsory I believe to participate in these activities right? 

Brother - nothing in azadari is obligatory. To each his own.

As shiaism has expanded, so has the definition of azadari. It has changed over the course of years as shias from different cultures have immersed together. A great example of this is during Arbaen when for almost 2-3 days there is a constant parade of shias from all over the world. They start from around where the encampment of Imam Hussain was through the shrine of Hz Abbas ( as) and then Imam Hussain (as). Each group offers their condolences in their own way and NO ONE criticizes them for it.

Edited by shiaman14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/6/2016 at 10:46 PM, Lover of Ahlulbait (ams) said:

Incomplete answer. It all depends upon one's maraja if he allows or not. Even in case of child, we should ask a scholar rather than giving fatwa.

In this Ashra-e-oola, I request brothers to concentrate on azadari instead of arguing on tatbir here.

There are some things brother i do not wait for my marja permission to stop it, or start it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Lover of Ahlulbait (ams) said:

^ But getting circumcision on the same infant is okay.

You love Islam/Shiaism so much you recreate it in your own image

You love the Ahlul Bait so much you recreate them in your own image.

Ah the irony of Shias of today recreating the Ahlul Bait in their own image.

1400 years ago the muslims reinvented/recreated the Ahlul Bait in their own image and massacred them

Today the Malangs recreate the Ahlul Bait in their own image and massacre their message.

So ironic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

image.jpeg

image.jpeg

At this rate In couple of hundred years human sacrifices coming up it seems like..... We went from mourning crying, hitting our chest then our heads to zanjeer and now this ...... Too far seriously. Scares every one away I think. Gives the wrong impression of Ahlulbayt(as) 

Edited by Ya_isa (as)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was indifferent and said we shouldn't judge people. Until someone said on the other forums Google pics so I did and I was shocked !!!! It's so appalling, I don't understand what does this have to do with Imam Hussein (as) sacrifice ??? What does it got to do with his msg of standing up to injustice ? ?? What does this got to do with saving Islam !!!! It's a disgusting act !! 

 

No one even talks about Imam Hussein (as) and what his msg was in the media or on the Internet, they talk about this act. It has taken the attention away and not in a positive way. I wonder about those marja who allow this !!! Obviously they don't deserve to be marja! Yeah I said it !!! They are tarnishing the sacrifice of Imam Hussein (as) by allowing this pagan act !!! Marja are fallible and it's obvious who's gonna rise against the Mahdi (as) and plp who follow their marjah blindly !!! 

Edited by Ya_isa (as)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

People who do this and say we are doing it because we LOVE Imam Hussein (as) are no different than those people who claimed Imam Ali (as) as God and that was out of too much love for Imam Ali (as) did that make them right ????  

These people who are defending this and the people who are doing this are tarnishing the msg of Imam Hussein (as) and ahlulbayt (as). 

Thank God , the merciful Lord has given me intellect and reason....... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...