[Closed/Review]Tatbir

[Shah Khan]

اَلسَّلاَ مُ عَلَيْكُمْ وَرَحْمَةُ اللهِ وَبَرَكَا تُهُ
(May Allah Shower his Mercy, Peace & Blessings Upon you) All My Shia Muslim Brothers & Shia Muslim Sisters In Islam. 

بِسْــــــــــــــــــمِ اﷲِالرَّحْمَنِ اارَّحِيم
(In the name of Allah, Beneficent & Merciful)

My Shia Muslim Brothers & Shia Muslim Sisters hope you all are Living a Good Life by The Grace of Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَتَعَالَىٰ‎ (May Allah Be Glorified & Exalted) الحمد لله (All Praises are due to Allah). 

My Shia Muslim Brothers and Shia Muslim Sisters, What are your Views on this ???
 

[Waseem162]

I strongly oppose Tatbir.

And so do majority of Marajes.

It is no part of our Religion.

It has its history in Turkey past few decades.

[Ashvazdanghe]

Salam Me too oppose Tatbir but commoners of Shia Muslim think that is a true action & it is hard to convince them from practicing it.

you can see Fatwas against it & history of this practice on

www.tatbir.org

[ShiaMan14]

9 hours ago, Shah Khan said:

اَلسَّلاَ مُ عَلَيْكُمْ وَرَحْمَةُ اللهِ وَبَرَكَا تُهُ
(May Allah Shower his Mercy, Peace & Blessings Upon you) All My Shia Muslim Brothers & Shia Muslim Sisters In Islam. 

بِسْــــــــــــــــــمِ اﷲِالرَّحْمَنِ اارَّحِيم
(In the name of Allah, Beneficent & Merciful)

My Shia Muslim Brothers & Shia Muslim Sisters hope you all are Living a Good Life by The Grace of Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَتَعَالَىٰ‎ (May Allah Be Glorified & Exalted) الحمد لله (All Praises are due to Allah). 

My Shia Muslim Brothers and Shia Muslim Sisters, What are your Views on this ???
 

 

Some scholars oppose it; some permit it.

In the grand scheme, it really doesn't matter. People who point fingers at tatbir today will simply find something else to point fingers at tomorrow.

It is really no one's business outside of shiaism how we commemorate the martyrdom of Imam Hussain (as). Rest assured we do not scratch and knife anyone but ourselves.

Instead of worrying about tatbir, please solve the suicide bombing and terrorism dilemma first.

[Shah Khan]

4 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

Instead of worrying about tatbir, please solve the suicide bombing and terrorism dilemma first.

For Me, Both Tatbir and Suicide bombing are threat to this Muslim Nation.

[ShiaMan14]

1 minute ago, Shah Khan said:

For Me, Both Tatbir and Suicide bombing are threat to this Muslim Nation.

for someone who thinks Saddam was a great leader, do you really think your opinion matters?

[Ron_Burgundy]

3 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

for someone who thinks Saddam was a great leader, do you really think your opinion matters?

lol hahahaha good one.

 

@Shah KhanShah your leaders say if you kill 1 shia you go to jannah.

[AnotherShepherd]

Tatbir is a grossly misdirected act of faith. As a former sunni, it took me forever to learn and come to the realization that the practices are not actually part of the Shi'i school of thought. Alhamdulillah. 

[Urwatul Wuthqa]

4 minutes ago, Shah Khan said:

For Me, Both Tatbir and Suicide bombing are threat to this Muslim Nation.

I can understand your problem!

Definately if anyone start doing tatbir while putting on the suicide vest, he will going to blow himself. And all those who practise tatbir wear the suicide vest in any form.

Their suicide vest is such a karamati thing that it never explode whether people use the ignition system to explode it or whether they use knives & swords for producing the spark to explode the vest. Perhaps it is the karamat of the name of Imam Hussain (asws).

Nawasibs successfully explode their suicide vest, if youhave listened to whom they call before exploding their vest, please let me know that

 

[Intellectual Resistance]

@Shah Khan

Tatbir in my view, is one of the worst things to ever inflict and infect Islam, particularly Shia Islam. It has nothing to do with Shia Islam and was an innovation copied by a small minority of zealots from Christianity or another religion, and then brought in by ignorant people and has grown to have a minority following. While some scholars are neutral on it and do not comment on it (for or against) like Sayed Sistani (though his representative has forbidden it to be done on children), the scholars who have spoken out against it are: Sayed Khomeini, Khamanei, Makraem Shirazi, Fadllulah, Mutahari, Esfahani, Muhammed Najafi, Kamal Hayderi, Muhsini,  and a number of other very well known scholars, figures, and personalities. 

Here's why i disagree with it:

1. It goes against basic Islamic principles. In Islam, our body is an Amanah, and we should act in a way which honours the precious gift of a healthy body. Furthermore, Islam teaches the course of tolerance, of moderation, of cleanliness, of civility, and taking swords and knives and gashing at yourself promotes barbarism, intolerance, uncleanliness, and is just morose. 

2. It can be potentially dangerous to health. Blood flies around, flails are often mixed, and sanitary efforts are terrible. This can cause the spread of blood-borne diseases which can be passed on to children, which can be passed on to spouses, many of which can lay dormant in the body and cause secondary diseases and contribute to ill health and even death. 

3. It absolutely annihilates the message of Imam al-Hussian [as] and the Ahlulbayt (asws). It overshadows it, takes over it, and gore and carnage fill the news papers, given that the human being is naturally repulsed by blood, cuts, violence and such acts. It is the number one thing used to attack Shias, and often people don't give a damn when you mention Imam al-Hussain (as) and Kerbala and the message of peace, of humanity, because all they see is gore and barbarism.

4. It promotes an extremely unhealthy way to deal with grief. Many people, teenagers in particular, unfortunately resort to methods of self-harm to deal with problems. Having people whole-scale publicly mutilate themselves sends the wrong message on how to deal with grief and is potentially a dangerous precedent to set.

I could go on, but these four reasons are strong enough. Wallahi, few things make my heart sink as much as seeing a minority of Shias engage in this barbaric practise, however pure their intentions may be.

[Intellectual Resistance]

15 minutes ago, Shah Khan said:

For Me, Both Tatbir and Suicide bombing are threat to this Muslim Nation.

Tatbir is an even bigger threat. Suicide bombers are often fringe , radical zealots. Tatbir is done in large enough a minority to have a strong association to our Madhab. 

I'm a Shia and i can proudly say i strongly oppose it. My convert mother opposes it, my father opposes it, and I've converted most of my family in their opposition to it. 

Edited February 20, 2018 by Intellectual Resistance

[Intellectual Resistance]

Just advice, a lot of people who are for it or tend to be neutral may fall into the following groups:

1. They have family members who do it, and even organise it. It is strong family tradition, and attacking it is like attacking their own family and their own tradition. You will be met with fierce resistance.

2. They associate this recent innovation to mourning for imam al-Hussain (as). However the two aren't even linked. An attack on Tatbir is not an attack on Ziyarah, poetry, lectures, crying, or even chest beating! 

3. They are married to someone who supports it, or have extended family who support it. It's hard to go against your wife, or husband. 

4. They don't realise the consequences of this act, and view it as permissible according to some scholars and refuse to look at the damage it does beyond an arbitrary harram or halal ruling. A woman performing Mutah with a dozens of men is technically Halal, so long as she does acts other than consummating it. Does that make it fair for society? Common sense has to be utilised as well.

5. The 'Slippery Slope' fallacy. These people assert that if you take out Tabir, next you'll take out poetry and mourning, then you'll take out other fundamental Shia practises until people become Sunnis. This is typical and classic fallacious reasoning you find used.

"A slippery slope argument (SSA), in logic, critical thinking, political rhetoric, and caselaw, is a consequentialist logical device in which a party asserts that a relatively small first step leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant (usually negative) effect."

 

[Urwatul Wuthqa]

8 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

Tatbir is an even bigger threat

 Trying to not laugh at it! Sheikh Najafi is among the well known scholars who promote these sort of threats. 

Wisdom & intellect everywhere!

[Intellectual Resistance]

1 minute ago, Salsabeel said:

 Trying to not laugh at it! Sheikh Najafi is among the well known scholars who promote these sort of threats. 

Wisdom & intellect everywhere!

I'm talking about the one in Pakistan, not Iraq. There are two Najafis. 

[Urwatul Wuthqa]

9 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

I'm talking about the one in Pakistan, not Iraq. There are two Najafis. 

If you understand Urdu, here is a poetry for you. Its title is :

"Molvi Sahab Jannat me"

 

[ShiaMan14]

28 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

Tatbir is an even bigger threat. Suicide bombers are often fringe , radical zealots. Tatbir is done in large enough a minority to have a strong association to our Madhab. 

I'm a Shia and i can proudly say i strongly oppose it. My convert mother opposes it, my father opposes it, and I've converted most of my family in their opposition to it. 

                          

Lost all credibility...again.

[ShiaMan14]

31 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

@Shah Khan

Tatbir in my view, is one of the worst things to ever inflict and infect Islam, particularly Shia Islam. It has nothing to do with Shia Islam and was an innovation copied by a small minority of zealots from Christianity or another religion, and then brought in by ignorant people and has grown to have a minority following. While some scholars are neutral on it and do not comment on it (for or against) like Sayed Sistani (though his representative has forbidden it to be done on children), the scholars who have spoken out against it are: Sayed Khomeini, Khamanei, Makraem Shirazi, Fadllulah, Mutahari, Esfahani, Muhammed Najafi, Kamal Hayderi, Muhsini,  and a number of other very well known scholars, figures, and personalities. 

Here's why i disagree with it:

1. It goes against basic Islamic principles. In Islam, our body is an Amanah, and we should act in a way which honours the precious gift of a healthy body. Furthermore, Islam teaches the course of tolerance, of moderation, of cleanliness, of civility, and taking swords and knives and gashing at yourself promotes barbarism, intolerance, uncleanliness, and is just morose. 

2. It can be potentially dangerous to health. Blood flies around, flails are often mixed, and sanitary efforts are terrible. This can cause the spread of blood-borne diseases which can be passed on to children, which can be passed on to spouses, many of which can lay dormant in the body and cause secondary diseases and contribute to ill health and even death. 

3. It absolutely annihilates the message of Imam al-Hussian [as] and the Ahlulbayt (asws). It overshadows it, takes over it, and gore and carnage fill the news papers, given that the human being is naturally repulsed by blood, cuts, violence and such acts. It is the number one thing used to attack Shias, and often people don't give a damn when you mention Imam al-Hussain (as) and Kerbala and the message of peace, of humanity, because all they see is gore and barbarism.

4. It promotes an extremely unhealthy way to deal with grief. Many people, teenagers in particular, unfortunately resort to methods of self-harm to deal with problems. Having people whole-scale publicly mutilate themselves sends the wrong message on how to deal with grief and is potentially a dangerous precedent to set.

I could go on, but these four reasons are strong enough. Wallahi, few things make my heart sink as much as seeing a minority of Shias engage in this barbaric practise, however pure their intentions may be.

how many people in your taqleed as opposed to in Bashir Al-Najafi's taqleed.

It is so easy. Someone who has a clear intention of creating fitna posts something controversial and you jump all over it playing to his tune.

Dance IR dance.

[ShiaMan14]

21 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

Just advice, a lot of people who are for it or tend to be neutral may fall into the following groups:

1. They have family members who do it, and even organise it. It is strong family tradition, and attacking it is like attacking their own family and their own tradition. You will be met with fierce resistance.

2. They associate this recent innovation to mourning for imam al-Hussain (as). However the two aren't even linked. An attack on Tatbir is not an attack on Ziyarah, poetry, lectures, crying, or even chest beating! 

3. They are married to someone who supports it, or have extended family who support it. It's hard to go against your wife, or husband. 

4. They don't realise the consequences of this act, and view it as permissible according to some scholars and refuse to look at the damage it does beyond an arbitrary harram or halal ruling. A woman performing Mutah with a dozens of men is technically Halal, so long as she does acts other than consummating it. Does that make it fair for society? Common sense has to be utilised as well.

5. The 'Slippery Slope' fallacy. These people assert that if you take out Tabir, next you'll take out poetry and mourning, then you'll take out other fundamental Shia practises until people become Sunnis. This is typical and classic fallacious reasoning you find used.

"A slippery slope argument (SSA), in logic, critical thinking, political rhetoric, and caselaw, is a consequentialist logical device in which a party asserts that a relatively small first step leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant (usually negative) effect."

 

Advice for a lot of people who are against it:

They want to appease Sunnis.

[Intellectual Resistance]

3 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

                          

Lost all credibility...again.

If you consider terrorists who the majority of Muslims condemn , as opposed to a large minority who are vocal enough to be attributed to the sect, which does more damage? In my eyes, a suicide bomber isn't going to hurt ale-Muhammed [asws]. Anyone with a brain will dissociate that from the Shias. However, a large enough minority performing Tatbir is, has, and will hurt ale-Muhammed. Suicide bombing obviously has loss of life , but in terms of its damage to our the message of Muhammed and his purified progeny, Tatbir no doubt has done more harm.

[Intellectual Resistance]

5 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

Advice for a lot of people who are against it:

They want to appease Sunnis.

Yes, i've given a list of four very cogent, and in my view very fair arguments against Tatbir. However, instead of tackling legitimate concerns against the act, you've concluded it's actually all just to appease Sunnis. Khomeini, Khamanei, Mutahari, Makarem Shirazi, Esfahani, Fadllulah, Kamal Hayderi who have opposed it with compelling arguments that mirror some of my contentions, all just want to appease Sunnis.

Edited February 20, 2018 by Intellectual Resistance

[786:)]

countdown til @shiaman14 or @Salsabeel say "we know who are"..."this is not your first account" to @Intellectual Resistance LOL. these two cant tolerate any criticism of their culture. Theyre like fox news.

[Intellectual Resistance]

Just now, 786:) said:

countdown til @shiaman14 or @Salsabeel say "we know who are"..."this is not your first account" to @Intellectual Resistance LOL. these two cant tolerate any criticism of their culture. Theyre like fox news.

At the end of the day, we are all Muslims, we are all brothers. I think these discussions should just focus on a polite and civil discussion of points, and put aside any attack on people. 

[Hamodiii]

5 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

If you consider terrorists who the majority of Muslims condemn , as opposed to a large minority who are vocal enough to be attributed to the sect, which does more damage? In my eyes, a suicide bomber isn't going to hurt ale-Muhammed [asws]. Anyone with a brain will dissociate that from the Shias. However, a large enough minority performing Tatbir is, has, and will hurt ale-Muhammed. Suicide bombing obviously has loss of life , but in terms of its damage to our the message of Muhammed and his purified progeny, Tatbir no doubt has done more harm.

You are right in your sentence, but there is Ignorance in the world, with other words, the west don't even know the difference between Shia and Sunni.

Furthermore, the both actually damage the Islam's reputation. In my opinion terrorism damages more than the tatbir cause that is just self harming, we don't haram the west as much as the terrorist do.

Edited February 20, 2018 by Hamodiii

[786:)]

28 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

Just advice, a lot of people who are for it or tend to be neutral may fall into the following groups:

1. They have family members who do it, and even organise it. It is strong family tradition, and attacking it is like attacking their own family and their own tradition. You will be met with fierce resistance.

2. They associate this recent innovation to mourning for imam al-Hussain (as). However the two aren't even linked. An attack on Tatbir is not an attack on Ziyarah, poetry, lectures, crying, or even chest beating! 

3. They are married to someone who supports it, or have extended family who support it. It's hard to go against your wife, or husband. 

4. They don't realise the consequences of this act, and view it as permissible according to some scholars and refuse to look at the damage it does beyond an arbitrary harram or halal ruling. A woman performing Mutah with a dozens of men is technically Halal, so long as she does acts other than consummating it. Does that make it fair for society? Common sense has to be utilised as well.

5. The 'Slippery Slope' fallacy. These people assert that if you take out Tabir, next you'll take out poetry and mourning, then you'll take out other fundamental Shia practises until people become Sunnis. This is typical and classic fallacious reasoning you find used.

"A slippery slope argument (SSA), in logic, critical thinking, political rhetoric, and caselaw, is a consequentialist logical device in which a party asserts that a relatively small first step leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant (usually negative) effect."

 

2 and 5 are usually the reasons I have uncovered. 2 is just silly hearing. 5 is insecurity. They would rather hold on to "Shia identity" even if it meant falsehood just to be different than the Sunnis. Its amazing.

[Urwatul Wuthqa]

2 minutes ago, 786:) said:

countdown til @shiaman14 or @Salsabeel say

I am not a person who practise or support tatbir. In the mean time, I dont want to view tatbir issue as a threat to Islam 

[Urwatul Wuthqa]

@786:), dont try to be like "molvi abdul wadood .

If you want to know who is he, watch the video posted by me

[786:)]

1 minute ago, Salsabeel said:

I am not a person who practise or support tatbir. In the mean time, I dont want to view tatbir issue as a threat to Islam 

I can assure you it is an obstacle in the growth of this madhab.

[Urwatul Wuthqa]

Just now, 786:) said:

I can assure you it is an obstacle in the growth of this madhab.

Keep your assurances to yourself,I dont need them.

I believe that very soon every nation will claim that Hussain (asws) is ours.

[786:)]

2 minutes ago, Salsabeel said:

Keep your assurances to yourself,I dont need them.

I believe that very soon every nation will claim that Hussain (asws) is ours.

let me guess--your favorite website also happens to be http://www.humaliwalayazadar.com/ LOL malang

[Intellectual Resistance]

9 minutes ago, 786:) said:

I can assure you it is an obstacle in the growth of this madhab.

If only people realised this was a fact. Forget growth, it's the cause of incredibly negative views. 

[Urwatul Wuthqa]

1 minute ago, 786:) said:

let me guess--your favorite website also happens to be http://www.humaliwalayazadar.com/ LOL malang

you can understand me as whatever you like. 

Make me kafir, malang, sufi, rafda, zindeeq, etc whatever you want. 

[786:)]

Just now, Salsabeel said:

you can understand me as whatever you like. 

Make me kafir, malang, sufi, rafda, zindeeq, etc whatever you want. 

I am no one to call you a kafir, but you are definitely a malang.

[Urwatul Wuthqa]

5 minutes ago, 786:) said:

I am no one to call you a kafir, but you are definitely a malang.

What is malang? Can you define it?

And you're definately "Molvi Abdul Wadood"

Edited February 20, 2018 by Salsabeel

[786:)]

14 minutes ago, Salsabeel said:

What is malang? Can you define it?

My definition is unconventional. Nevertheless, to me it is someone who gets put into a cultural coma by the various poets then looks to build Islam based of that coma--often times overlooking and overriding the fundamentals of Islam and the culture put into place by the Holy Prophet (saw) and progeny (as). Examples of this cultural coma:

Emphasizing:
Noha
Marsiya
Muharram
Nad e Ali
Tatbir/Matam
Imams (before the attacks begin--I am not saying they are not a part of Islam, but I am saying they are emphasized more)

Marginalizing:
Quran
Tawheed
Rasoolallah (saw) and the other prophets (as)
Salah
Ramadan

This is my rough definition of what constitutes a malang.
 

Edited February 20, 2018 by 786:)

[Urwatul Wuthqa]

1 minute ago, 786:) said:

Marginalizing:
Quran
Tawheed
Rasoolallah (saw) and the other prophets (as)
Ramadan

This is my rough definition of what constitutes a malang.

That means kafir!

So you're a true Molvi Abdul Wadood.