Can't shake the paganistic rites/rituals/tradition

[Shah Khan]

2 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

Islamic terrorism could be eradicated if all sunnis spent as much time rejecting Wahabi terrorism instead of worrying about azadari.

-_- Yeah Right ! No Sunni even Bothers Azadari. Why even bother these minority groups who never gave any type of advantage to Islamic world.

[Shah Khan]

2 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

Sunnis have no business telling shias how to observe azadari. If you have free time, get your own house in order. 

I mentioned suicide bombing, not azadari.

[ShiaMan14]

17 minutes ago, Shah Khan said:

-_- Yeah Right ! No Sunni even Bothers Azadari. Why even bother these minority groups who never gave any type of advantage to Islamic world.

Let's take you for example -  how much have you done to counter terrorism? How many salafi and wahabis sites have you gone to condemn terrorism?

We are digressing from the topic...

Edited March 10, 2018 by shiaman14

[ShiaMan14]

4 hours ago, Sunni Maliki said:

I sense negativity but any how. The last time I checked the only thing keeping Shiism alive is Iran and Taqiyya. It's no coincidence that every Shia has an Iranian uncle. And as for Suicide bombings, those too come from the Shia Hezbollah who thought Hamas how to blow themselves up while they where hiding in the mountains. Mourning to most logical people doesn't consist of walking over hot coal, crawling and barking like dogs and whacking yourself with a sword. Inshallah you will find your common sense and abandon these satanic practices. 

Ah, the infamous taqiyya allegations. But I guess not your fault that you haven't been told that taqiyya is in the Quran and permissible by the Prophet (saw) whose sunnah you claim to follow. I guess you probably don't know that shias, sunnis and all ethnicities practiced taqiyya save themselves from ISIS in Syria and Iraq.

Any Muslim with half a brain would choose Iran over Saudi any given day...key requirement is half a brain at least of course.

[ShiaMan14]

3 hours ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

Just a few comments to some of the respected brothers who have responded to me:

I personally do believe that was it technically permissible and impermissible lays on the feet of our scholars. However, i must emphasise that when they make jurisprudential rulings, something that is technically permissible does not necessarily mean it constitutes best practise. Someone who has questionable morals , or a woman with such morals, could technically engage in a temporary marriage with several men so long as she does not consummate it, one after the other. No self-respecting woman is going to do that, but what can be technically done as permissible does not always mean it is best practise. Another example is if a man had temporary marriage with a woman while travelling , he actually doesn't have to provide for her during her pregnancy according to some rulings, which most of us can see, what is technically permissible to do doesn't actually constitute best practise.  When jurists give their rulings, they do so on their own objective set of principles. They aren't passing judgement on what is probably best practise. They are just telling you on paper, if something is permissible or if it is not.

Now, let us put Tatbir/Self-mutilation aside, because i don't want this thread to be locked and the OP didn't discuss that, and given a lot of scholars have spoken out against it. With these other lesser known issues, for example, like people literally crawling to shrines, some even barking , Ay.Khamanei has deemed it a strange innovation, and has spoken out against it. There are scholars who have spoken out against drawing our Aimmah. Of course, it might not be technically forbidden or impermissible in the eyes of some other scholars, but again, ask yourself if it is right to draw a picture of someone you have no idea what he truly looked like, and then claim this is a representation? It isn't respectful, it isn't even necessary, and on top of that as i have shown in the original post, it's a mockery, and often radicalised and irano-centric. Ask yourself why these so-called drawings won't depict the later imams as dark skinned, which we know they were? Or Imam Mahdi ajfs as certainly of a dark complexion? Why are they drawn like drag-queens who look Iranian, or white? That's utterly disrespectful, and at best not necessary.

A lot of these recent innovations (whether you believe its a good innovation, a neutral one or a bad one) have only existed in recent centuries. Shia Islam has survived because of the dedication of our Aimmah asws, especially during the time of Imam Muhammed al-Baqir and Jaffer as-Sadiq (asws) who propagated the key tennants of tashayyu to the a wider audience and have allowed us to have a lot of material to work on. That, and the sacrifice of all of the other Masumeen, no doubt, and the one with the biggest influence who brought this religion being none other than the Messenger of Allah (saw). It survived because of the endless dedication by some of the companions of our Aimmah (asws), some of the later ones of the later imams especially such as Hisham b.Hakam, Hisham b. Salim, Zuara b.Ayn among others who most Shias do not even know.  It was preserved and protected by the dedication of our Salafi, and our pious scholars of old, from Shaykh al-Kulayni (ra), Shaykh as-Saduq (ra), Shaykh al-Mufid (ra), Shaykh Tusi (ra) and other great scholars, many of whom paid the price for this in some way.  For centuries, in fact, even a millennia, we didn't have practises like Tatbir, like rolling around in thick mud, like having the Hamsa pagan symbol on wooden poles in Indo-Pakistani centres wrapped in garlands of flowers like the Hindus wrap their idols. We didn't have people taking their shirts off and hitting their chests red-raw, we didn't have people crawling, some even barking, some even going on their stomachs. All of these are relatively recent innovations. Shia Islam has survived because of the dedication of our Masumeen, their companions, scholars, pious followers, and the fact our strength lies in the most logical, most intuitive, well evidenced understanding of Islam on this planet. Not modern day innovations that whole-sale drive so many people away from actually realising that.

Everything you wrote was succinctly summarized when I said:

AhlulBayt own azadari
Marajae take care of it
The rest of us serve it.

When something started is an irrelevant argument to make because we are not wahabi. As such it doesnt matter when something starts. All that matters is whether our marajae deem it permissible or not.

3 hours ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

There is no doubt, overall, the act of mourning and remembering the suffering of the Aimmah and Prophet (saw) is a meritorious deed, especially Imam al-Hussain (asws). Lectures in his name, poetry, even light chest beating are absolutely fine. However when we start to get colourful and bizarre, and even sometimes barbaric with some of the rituals we do in his name, it harms more than helps, and on top of that, it is not Azadari, or the core of Azadari done for a millennia.

Why do any of the above? Why not just an egghunt like our Christians brothers do on Easter? Think of how much money and time we could save.

[ShiaMan14]

3 hours ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

I firmly disagree with Sunni Aqeedah but one thing i have got to give them credit for is that they have at least retained the flawed Islam they inherited - generally speaking. Shias on the other hand - minorities all over the place , have introduced really bizarre things that have become widely adopted, and have inherited pure Islam but minorities within each culture have always sought to make things colourful, shall we say, and have hijacked the core of the message.

I believe truth-seeking individuals that can step out of the constraints of culture, and reflect on this with a clear mind will see we are better off without these recently newly invented practises.

Azadari, and mourning for Imam al-Hussain is not rolling in the mud, whipping oneself with chains or blades, cutting the scalp of ones child, taking your top of and hitting your chest violently red-raw in a very packed room with other men which leads to the entire room smelling of body odour,  crawling and or barking to shrines, covering yourself in an inch of thick mud all over your body after jumping and rolling around in mud (unfortunately some people have likened it to the behaviour of pigs). When we invent bizarre things and then attach it to Imam al-Hussain (as) and claim we do it in his name, it's just untenable. Unfortunately OP, i know from reliable sources that in some more-extreme Iraqi centres, women gather together (some) in circles and literally walk around in a circle flipping their head up and down so that hair flies up and down. Alhamdullilah i'm a male, because if i was a sister looking at something like that, it would frighten me, and is similar to what we see tribes do in exorcisms or their dances to summon spirits. 

Azadari is remembering his grief, his sacrifice, but then remember what it is he sacrificed for. He sacrificed for Islam, for pure Tawheed, for pure Sunnah, for higher moral values, higher ethics, to speak justice against injustice. Azadari is not turning his sacrifice into a cult. The time has to come where we stand up and say, yes, even doing summersaults in your front garden and telling 'Ya Hussain' is technically permissible, but does that harm or hurt , more than it helps ? When we exercise common sense and reign in on chaos and newly invented practises propping up all over the place, it's just going to be a bizarre cult-like behaviour we see among some minorities among us.

By all means give the Sunnis credit for following the killers of Sayeda (as), Imam Ali (as), Imam Hassan (as), Imam HUssain (as) and the other AhlulBayt.

Azadari is the remembrance of Hussain (as) and his sacrifice. You are in absolutely no position of authority to deem what practices constitute azadari and which ones don't.

Simple question for you - are you a servant, caretaker or owner of azadari?

[Intellectual Resistance]

2 hours ago, shiaman14 said:

Everything you wrote was succinctly summarized when I said:

AhlulBayt own azadari
Marajae take care of it
The rest of us serve it.

When something started is an irrelevant argument to make because we are not wahabi. As such it doesnt matter when something starts. All that matters is whether our marajae deem it permissible or not.

Why do any of the above? Why not just an egghunt like our Christians brothers do on Easter? Think of how much money and time we could save.

As i've mentioned and then gone on to elaborate on my post, something being technically permissible does not always mean it constitutes best practise. Technically speaking, on the 10th of Muharram, every Shia Man can go topless and start rolling around performing summersaults and crying 'Ya Hussain' in his front garden. However, what might be technically permissible does not mean it should be done, nor does it mean its appropriate to do. I gave the example of temporary marriage, or not providing for a wife during her pregnancy in my post.  Essentially, i have said all i feel is appropriate to mention for now.  On another note, Marji' tend to clash on these issues themselves, some of them absolutely certain an act is not permissible and on top of that, a mockery. It's up to someone to look at the reasons of that Marji' and then exert their common sense. So while ones own Marji might be silent on it, or permit something technically, they are not claiming it constitutes best practise.

Either way, i have written a long post which you have quoted, and that contains all i want to mention for now, inshAllah. 

[Intellectual Resistance]

6 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

Simple question for you - are you a servant, caretaker or owner of azadari?

My answer is simple, while our scholars clash on these issues, i recognise even the ones who permit something are not claiming it constitutes best practise, because if a woman who performs Mutah does not consumate it, she can jump from man to man and go with several men. A man can have several Mutahs with women in poverty and according to some major scholars does not have to provide for them during their pregnancy. I could roll around in my front garden performing front summersaults , and then putting a massive pile of soil on my head and shaping it like a cone, and crying 'Ya Hussain' with ten other shirtless men. 

The reality is, sense has to prevail at times. Is it acceptable to crawl on our knees and bark like a dog as some Shias do on the way to shrines? Some Marji' have even spoken out against crawling and kissing the floor of Shrines. Is it acceptable for Iraqi women in Muharram to gather in a circle and start to jump around as if dancing around a fire, bringing their head down and then tossing it up along with their hair , as if part of an exorcism? Is it acceptable to take dirty, blood crusted butcher knives and slit the scalps of babies , children, and the like year on year which become front-page news? 

Even if you ignore the concerns, arguments and claims of the scholars who vehemently speak out against the above, and look at the ones who might remain silent or permit some of these things, as i have established already, what might be technically permissible on a fiqh issue may not constitute best practise. The reality is, with opposing groups and strong debate on these issues, one group is right, another is wrong. Therefore neglecting common sense and performing and promoting an act as best practise may just mean you are in the wrong group, permissible or not, for what is in the best interests of the madhab of ale Muhammed asws.

That is not a risk i am willing to take, when my reason tells me otherwise. 

[AnotherShepherd]

1 hour ago, shiaman14 said:

Everything you wrote was succinctly summarized when I said:

AhlulBayt own azadari
Marajae take care of it
The rest of us serve it.

When something started is an irrelevant argument to make because we are not wahabi. As such it doesnt matter when something starts. All that matters is whether our marajae deem it permissible or not.

Why do any of the above? Why not just an egghunt like our Christians brothers do on Easter? Think of how much money and time we could save.

Funny you mention that. Why do so many shias now celebrate Christmas and wish people happy birthday for Isa as?? 

[ShiaMan14]

13 minutes ago, AnotherShepherd said:

Funny you mention that. Why do so many shias now celebrate Christmas and wish people happy birthday for Isa as?? 

2Question: What is the ruling on saying assalaamu [alaikum] (Islamic salutation, meaning peace be with you) to the People of the Book or unbelievers? Also, is it permissible to send them seasonal greetings, such as on Christmas?

Answer: There is no harm in initiating the salutation, albeit makrooh (undesirable act) except out of necessity, under whose remit comes urf. Responding to their salutation should be by uttering [the word] alaik (with you). There is no harm in greeting them on their occasions.

https://www.sistani.org/english/qa/01179/

 

[ShiaMan14]

1 hour ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

As i've mentioned and then gone on to elaborate on my post, something being technically permissible does not always mean it constitutes best practise. Technically speaking, on the 10th of Muharram, every Shia Man can go topless and start rolling around performing summersaults and crying 'Ya Hussain' in his front garden. However, what might be technically permissible does not mean it should be done, nor does it mean its appropriate to do. I gave the example of temporary marriage, or not providing for a wife during her pregnancy in my post.  Essentially, i have said all i feel is appropriate to mention for now.  On another note, Marji' tend to clash on these issues themselves, some of them absolutely certain an act is not permissible and on top of that, a mockery. It's up to someone to look at the reasons of that Marji' and then exert their common sense. So while ones own Marji might be silent on it, or permit something technically, they are not claiming it constitutes best practise.

Either way, i have written a long post which you have quoted, and that contains all i want to mention for now, inshAllah. 

Once you have accepted that things are permissible, then it is not for you to decide what I or someone thinks is acceptable. It becomes subjective at that point. Sitting in the West and trying pass judgement on an act on the other side of the world is simply ignorant and arrogant. For example, there is a center in the US that held a candlelight vigil on 6th Muharram for Hz Ali Asghar (as). I am certain plenty of people sitting in a village in Iraq or Pakistan or Iran or India would think of that as not being best practice. Who are we to judge? I am pretty certain they are not doing things to impress you or get your approval. You can't rule over people, simply can't. 

As for the length of your post -  lots of words, little value though.

 

1 hour ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

My answer is simple, while our scholars clash on these issues, i recognise even the ones who permit something are not claiming it constitutes best practise, because if a woman who performs Mutah does not consumate it, she can jump from man to man and go with several men. A man can have several Mutahs with women in poverty and according to some major scholars does not have to provide for them during their pregnancy. I could roll around in my front garden performing front summersaults , and then putting a massive pile of soil on my head and shaping it like a cone, and crying 'Ya Hussain' with ten other shirtless men. 

The reality is, sense has to prevail at times. Is it acceptable to crawl on our knees and bark like a dog as some Shias do on the way to shrines? Some Marji' have even spoken out against crawling and kissing the floor of Shrines. Is it acceptable for Iraqi women in Muharram to gather in a circle and start to jump around as if dancing around a fire, bringing their head down and then tossing it up along with their hair , as if part of an exorcism? Is it acceptable to take dirty, blood crusted butcher knives and slit the scalps of babies , children, and the like year on year which become front-page news? 

Even if you ignore the concerns, arguments and claims of the scholars who vehemently speak out against the above, and look at the ones who might remain silent or permit some of these things, as i have established already, what might be technically permissible on a fiqh issue may not constitute best practise. The reality is, with opposing groups and strong debate on these issues, one group is right, another is wrong. Therefore neglecting common sense and performing and promoting an act as best practise may just mean you are in the wrong group, permissible or not, for what is in the best interests of the madhab of ale Muhammed asws.

That is not a risk i am willing to take, when my reason tells me otherwise. 

Let me give you a simple example about common sense. I told my friend in Dubai that it is 40 degrees so I am wearing a thick jacket. He thought only a crazy person would wear a jacket in 40 degree weather. His common sense said 40 degrees is too hot to almost wear anything. My common sense said 40 degrees warrants a couple of layers of clothing.

Obviously, he was thinking in Celsius and I was meaning Fahrenheit.

So you can sit there in the West and talk about how backward the shia are and how forward thinking you are but you simply come off as a narrow-minded individual who has not idea how the world operates outside of your bubble - and I mean this in a good way.

[AbdusSibtayn]

4 hours ago, Shah Khan said:

-_- Yeah Right ! No Sunni even Bothers Azadari. Why even bother these minority groups who never gave any type of advantage to Islamic world.

The 'majority' groups who have usurped, looted and hoarded till their bellies burst with their ill-gotten gains, and plagiarized all their social, political and religious thought from the Greeks, the Persians and the Chinese, could not even liberate a tiny patch of  land in 68 years and are talking about 'giving advantages to the Islamic world'.

Worshiping whoever holds temporal power, fajir tyrant taghuts cavorting with concubines, blood thirsty cannibals spreading their filth all over the world,and petro-dollar millionaires wallowing in their ill-gotten gains squeezed from the bloodless bodies of the poor- this is the "advantage" that your sect has given to the Islamic world.

Irony died a million deaths between the two full stops.

[AbdusSibtayn]

Question: Is it permissible to draw or produce a scene which shows the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.), one of the past prophets or the infallible Imams (a.s.), or other luminaries and show it in cinema, on television or theater?

Answer: If due deference and respect is observed, and the scene does not contain anything that would detract from their holy pictures in the minds [of the viewers], there is no problem.

https://www.sistani.org/english/qa/01282/

[Urwatul Wuthqa]

7 hours ago, Shah Khan said:

What about Sunni Killed by Shias in Syria and Yemen ???

Seems to me that you would also care about those tyrants who were killed by the hands of Imam Hussain & his companions in the battle of karbala, by the hands of Imam Ali & his companions in the battle of Jamal & Siffin. 

 

[AbdusSibtayn]

8 hours ago, Sunni Maliki said:

I sense negativity but any how. The last time I checked the only thing keeping Shiism alive is Iran and Taqiyya. It's no coincidence that every Shia has an Iranian uncle. And as for Suicide bombings, those too come from the Shia Hezbollah who thought Hamas how to blow themselves up while they where hiding in the mountains. Mourning to most logical people doesn't consist of walking over hot coal, crawling and barking like dogs and whacking yourself with a sword. Inshallah you will find your common sense and abandon these satanic practices. 

Yeah, Qaradawi, Taqi Usmani and Zakir Naik are all devout and staunch Shias!

Quote

It's no coincidence that every Shia has an Iranian uncle.

Nor is it a coincidence that many Sunni children in the Levant, North Africa and Afghanistan have Arab, Uzbek, Chechen, Pashtun, Berber and Pakistani fathers. Apparently, the Nasibi terrorist groups too have well-extended networks.

Quote

The last time I checked the only thing keeping Shiism alive is Iran and Taqiyya.

The last time I checked the only thing keeping rabidly intolerant majoritarian Nasibism alive was violence, brute force and ethnic cleansing by the Umayyads,the Abbasids and their spawns in South Asia, Central Asia, the Middle East, North Africa and Andalusia, including the present day ones.

You don't hate us for being what we are. You hate us because we keep reminding you of your past.

Edited March 10, 2018 by AbdusSibtayn

[Ashvazdanghe]

7 hours ago, Shah Khan said:

I Know brother but that brother always accuse Sunnis of Suicide Bombing. Don't know why?

Salam Its because of Anti shia propaganda that shows any type of Azadari as a great sin but in OP  advertises Suicide Bombing as a direct way to Heaven & our problem is with these type of people not Sunnis bro&sis like you.

7 hours ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

zadari, and mourning for Imam al-Hussain is not rolling in the mud, whipping oneself with chains or blades, cutting the scalp of ones child, taking your top of and hitting your chest violently red-raw in a very packed room with other men which leads to the entire room smelling of body odour,  crawling and or barking to shrines, covering yourself in an inch of thick mud all over your body after jumping and rolling around in mud (unfortunately some people have likened it to the behaviour of pigs). When we invent bizarre things and then attach it to Imam al-Hussain (as) and claim we do it in his name, it's just untenable. Unfortunately OP, i know from reliable sources that in some more-extreme Iraqi centres, women gather together (some) in circles and literally walk around in a circle flipping their head up and down so that hair flies up and down. Alhamdullilah i'm a male, because if i was a sister looking at something like that, it would frighten me, and is similar to what we see tribes do in exorcisms or their dances to summon spirits. 

Salam I agree with most of you comment but about this part .rolling in mud don't represent as behavior of pigs this is like as you say prostrating on Turbah is worshiping the clay  & Idol  also same about spa ,it's represention of resurrection & Raj'a ,the Iraqi rituals backs to nomadic Azadari rituals  may be in pre Islamic era it relates to above acts that was common between Arab nomads but after martyrdom of Imam hussain (as) it is just a sign of grief  for him. 

also this rituals as whipping oneself with chains or blades, cutting the scalp of ones child, taking your top of and hitting your chest violently red-raw in a very packed room with other men which leads to the entire room smelling of body odour,  crawling and or barking to shrines except above ritual I have same opinion as you. 

8 hours ago, Shah Khan said:

What about Sunni Killed by Shias in Syria and Yemen ???

I'm sorry if sunnis killed but it is war so most of times we can't separate people in middle of war,but we don't kill people because of their Madhab & faith also about pro-Assad armies that do harsh things is not acceptable by us  they do it based on their anger not Shia Islam teachings.

Issue of minority vs majority about  beleiving to right path as many times mentioned in Holy Quram minority on Truth always win over majority of false by help of Allah as muslims in Badr and story of Davood & Taloot against Jaloot   also Ibadis don't claim anything & they are busy with their way of life. 

Edited March 10, 2018 by Ashvazdanghe

[S.M.H.A.]

[realizm]

16 hours ago, shiaman14 said:

Salaam Brother. You know how much I love and respect you. It is a mistake to call azadari practices ignorant unless you have delved into its deeper meaning. Outside of the pictures, nothing the brother mentioned is impermissible in Islam.

Please keep in mind that as Shia, we are allowed to do everything unless it is expressly forbidden. Wahabis forbid everything unless it is deemed expressly permissible.

Plus most of the practices the brother mentioned did not originate in the Indo-Pak region.

Pictures are deviant because they are against sharia. Rest can't be deviant because they ar enot regulated under sharia.

The thing is that there is no exact way of doing azadari. What I may find wrong, others may find right. Another simple example, indo-pak folks almost always make biryani for Arabeen. Arabs make something else. Iranians may make A'ash or Kaleh Pacheh . Which dish is more appropriate? All of them and yet they are all different.

Shias are stronger today that we've ever been. Could it be because of our strong culture enriched with azadari? How can you mock or revile something which could be the source of our very existence. As I have said before, our marajae and our azadari is what has ensured our survival.

Irony is when shias want to destroy the very thing that has ensured our survival. Sure enough, not all at one but piece by piece, little by little...just like termites.

Shia Islam is striving for perfection. In `ibadah, akhlaq, jihad.

Shia Islam is not azadari. Azadari is just a part of Shia Islam, some people make it its core and I think it is a grave mistake. It just emphasizes cultural stuff, which implies differences, rather than the faith and practice which unite all groups.

Qur'an recitation, zakah khums, congregational salah, love for Ahl el beit (as) : unite people.

Azadari practices : bring disunity.

I feel happy to see a convert attracted by the former, but feel ashamed to see him rebuked by the latter because of blood, mud ansd strange behaviour.

[TruthSeeker78611]

Yeah I understand but as a revert myself I don't see these rituals to be wajib. 

People do all sorts. I look at my own actions

[Ashvazdanghe]

24 minutes ago, realizm said:

Azadari practices : bring disunity.

Salam I'm not agree with you even sunni muslims  & people from other religions participate in Azadari.

 

11 minutes ago, TruthSeeker78611 said:

Yeah I understand but as a revert myself I don't see these rituals to be wajib. 

People do all sorts. I look at my own actions

 its true but now we show ourselves to people that doing these rituals in true way is the best tool for this.

[S.M.H.A.]

For those of you who are misinformed , basic Obligatory acts are the bare minimun. And if their were not obligatory, you know what will happen. 

Quote

Indeed, Imam Mahdi is from the progeny of Imam Husayn who will rise on the Day of Ashura and will speak of his grandfather's oppression. 

Imam Rida also said:

Four thousands angels descended to earth to help him. They found him killed. They will remain there until the coming of Imam Mahdi. Then they will help him. And their motto is Yaa lathaaraat al-Husayn!"9

Imam Sadiq also said:

The supporters of Imam Mahdi wish to be killed in the way of Allah and their motto is 'Ya lithaarat al-Husayn!" Whenever they move fear goes in front of them one month in advance."10

https://www.al-islam.org/message-thaqalayn/vol-15-no-3-autumn-2014/connection-between-imam-mahdi-and-imam-husayn-part-1/connection

Whatever is been indoctrinated into the psyche of the Shia- Shia' are been prepared to offer what will be required.( Enough for the people of insight to understand)

[Ibn Al-Shahid]

22 hours ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

 

These pictures look like homosexual men, to be honest, what an insult it is to have their faces look like they have make up and the like. Wallahi, Shias who support , encourage, or remain silent at things like this have to take a long hard look in the mirror. They would not accept this for their dad, but accept it for their Imams. 

 

 

Actually, no. This has been done throughout art history. If you look at paintings made during the Renaissance of angels or Jesus you'll see that you cannot say for certain whether the figure is male or female (androgyny). This is to convey the surpassing of normality. They are not human, they're just occupying a human body; they're divine.

Not saying I agree with it, but it is ignorant to speak about art practices without having any knowledge of it.

[Urwatul Wuthqa]

I can understand why reverts struggles to understand azadari or mourning for Imam e Mazloom (asws). Perhaps they have in their minds ahadith similar to following:

«He is not of us who beats his face, tears his clothes and bewails loudly when misfortune happens to him as was done before during the days of ignorance» (Reported by Bukhari & Muslim).

[realizm]

3 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Salam I'm not agree with you even sunni muslims  & people from other religions participate in Azadari.

 

What I tried to say is that shias themselves are disunited on azadari, while they cannot disagree on Qur'an, Jumu`ah prayers, etc...

[ali_fatheroforphans]

These people who engage in such rituals do it because that is what their forefathers did. They don't bother reading Islamic books or understanding the traditions of Ahlulbayt (as).

[ShiaMan14]

5 hours ago, realizm said:

Shia Islam is striving for perfection. In `ibadah, akhlaq, jihad.

Shia Islam is not azadari. Azadari is just a part of Shia Islam, some people make it its core and I think it is a grave mistake. It just emphasizes cultural stuff, which implies differences, rather than the faith and practice which unite all groups.

Qur'an recitation, zakah khums, congregational salah, love for Ahl el beit (as) : unite people.

Azadari practices : bring disunity.

I feel happy to see a convert attracted by the former, but feel ashamed to see him rebuked by the latter because of blood, mud ansd strange behaviour.

Who said azadari is Islam? Everything you know about Shia Islam has come either from a book written by a scholar or from a lecture you heard in a majlis. Hence, shia Islam has survived because of our scholars and azadari.

This does not mean our scholars are shia Islam or azadari is shia islam.

Azadari was attacked for 1,400 years and survived because we were united about it. So our enemies have focused on a new strategy of trying to divide us from within which is why you see the disunity. Every single aspect of it is attacked in order to trivialize it and reduce it to a distant memory of a simple historic event.

Our disunity about azadari is exactly the type of disunity Imam Ali (as) faced during Siffin by his own 'shias' and what Imam Hassan (as) faced. We should be careful lest we be left with another Muawiya in charge.

To the narrow-minded, ignorant, self-centered - differences mean disunity. To the people with open minds, who have seen the world and are selfless - differences are to be celebrated. This is why Hussain is not just for Arabs or Persians or Indian or Pakistanis but for everyone. And nowhere is the diversity, differences AND unity more apparent than in Karbala on Arbaeen. Millions of people of all ethnicities, races, skin colors with a 5-mile radius shouting Labaik Ya Hussain.

[Intellectual Resistance]

3 hours ago, Ibn Al-Shahid said:

Actually, no. This has been done throughout art history. If you look at paintings made during the Renaissance of angels or Jesus you'll see that you cannot say for certain whether the figure is male or female (androgyny). This is to convey the surpassing of normality. They are not human, they're just occupying a human body; they're divine.

Not saying I agree with it, but it is ignorant to speak about art practices without having any knowledge of it.

Let us assume i was ignorant of this, and you have now established and enabled me to understand that some of the drawings of our Prophet and Aimmah (asws) are essentially stylistic imitations of artists who try to draw beings to whom they do not want to attach any specific gender to, rather leaving things ambiguous. Does that change the fact that these drawings look like men who in todays society, put on make up and try to look effeminate? The effect is the same - they look like effeminate men.  What artistic roots they derive from is not relevant to condemning pictures which try to depict or represent the Aimmah as effeminate men, who in todays society, are well known in the homosexual community.  My comment did not come as someone intending to critique the artistic intentions , but someone  who like the majority of people, would look at these images and clearly see they depict extremely effeminate men, and that itself is an insult to our Aimmah asws.

As i also added, the issue runs deeper than just mockery, because we know many of our Aimmah were mixed race, of darker origins, something you will never find represented in these drawings. Even if someone chose to depict a realistic-type drawing, the reality is, we don't know what the Aimmah or Prophet (asws) truly looked like , it isn't right to try to depict them in any case in my opinion.

Therefore with due respect, my intention was not to talk about art practises, and so the assertion i am talking without knowledge doesn't apply nor is relevant, at all. At best, we should hardly be imitating renaissance art aimed at picturing genderless 'divine' symbols of Christianity.  If the was the intention and stylistic intent, it would only strengthen what i was saying, rather than detract from it. Nevertheless, it would not be the first time minorities within Shi'sm took deviant practises from other religions and infected a large minority with it.

I will leave this picture, where the beards of these insulting drawings are removed, and let people take a look at it:
 

 

We would not accept this for our own family members. 

Edited March 10, 2018 by Intellectual Resistance

[Intellectual Resistance]

If we rolled back the time to our Aimmah (asws) and the Salafi of our Madhab and the great scholars that shortly followed them, you would not find this commonly practised:

1. Taking blades, knives, chains and the like and mutilating oneself. This came much later on and is a relatively modern innovation.

2. People taking their tops off, in unison , and beating their chests red-raw (not just common chest beating). Chest beating the way we do it didn't even exist, though i am not against light chest beating. I remember Nader Zaveri once made a thread about this: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/234979783-one-hand-matam-or-two-hand-matam/  and that was a cleverly worded question from someone i regard knows more than almost every user on here, barring a very small number i could count on my hand.

3. Rolling around in mud, imitating pigs (as people have accused us of now), so that entire bodies and faces are caked in a thick layer of mud. Some have even started laughing at us claiming Allah has cursed us to be like the unclean animals and act like them, to show the world our deviance. 

4. Hamsa Symbols we decorate with garlands like Hindus do with Idols , and the like.  

When you talk to someone and question the above practises and ask them that, permissible or not (and that his hotly debated anyway among scholars), does it really constitute best practise and further, or harm the aims of the Ahlulbayt asws? They will paint you out to be against Azadari, and act as if relatively recent innovations are somehow a central pillar of our Madhab and true Azadari, whereas they didn't even exist for the majority of the existence of our Madhab and were not done by our Aimmah or the early scholars who paved foundational stones for us. 

I want to perform Azadari like Jaffer ibn Muhammed as-Sadiq (asws). Poetry, dignified mourning, and not the cult-like bizarre innovations of modern day. 

[Ibn Al-Shahid]

@Intellectual Resistance I don't really care, either way. I'm correcting your whole "they look like homosexuals" premise. I myself, as well as a few of my friends, have very thick eyelashes. If you were to crop a picture of my eyes, I'd look similar to one of the depictions. Yet I'm not homosexual. I don't understand your argument. You are judging based on appearance. The type of "homosexuals" you are referring to try to emulate perfect human features (based on common taste). Normal people with these features exist in the Arabian peninsula, just because we look like that doesn't mean we're homosexual.

Furthermore, if you are commenting on Kuh'l, it is mustahab for men to wear it.

I dislike your methods of coming to conclusions because they are based on absolutely no facts whatsoever.

I agree with you in that we should not be depicting them (a.s) with faces. Rather, have a cloth over their faces.

[S.M.H.A.]

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235052764-azadari-for-the-son-of-sayeda-fatima-az-zahrasa/?tab=comments#comment-3096150

[Intellectual Resistance]

12 minutes ago, Ibn Al-Shahid said:

@Intellectual Resistance I don't really care, either way. I'm correcting your whole "they look like homosexuals" premise. I myself, as well as a few of my friends, have very thick eyelashes. If you were to crop a picture of my eyes, I'd look similar to one of the depictions. Yet I'm not homosexual. I don't understand your argument. You are judging based on appearance. The type of "homosexuals" you are referring to try to emulate perfect human features (based on common taste). Normal people with these features exist in the Arabian peninsula, just because we look like that doesn't mean we're homosexual.

Furthermore, if you are commenting on Kuh'l, it is mustahab for men to wear it.

I dislike your methods of coming to conclusions because they are based on absolutely no facts whatsoever.

I agree with you in that we should not be depicting them (a.s) with faces. Rather, have a cloth over their faces.

Dear brother,

A moment ago you acknowledged the motivation behind some of this 'art' was to try to depict beings neither male nor female, but to bring in ambiguity and represent what is done in other religions, particularly during renaissance times to depict the 'divine'. This is what i am saying, if - and only if - this was the intention behind these drawings, they have depicted men today who are known in the homosexual community who attempt to try to look effeminate and achieve this kind of look. Men do not naturally look like this.

I have extremely long , thick eye lashes myself. I can assure you, i look nothing like these images and i can also guarantee that you don't either. Let me break it down:

 

The eye-brows in some of these looks extremely shaped, particularly the top left. 

 

A fuller picture can reveal another image whereby the eye-brows look extremely done, the face looks as if the individual has worn make up, not just Kohl, but something underneath their eyes, on their cheeks, and the like.  These images look as though the individuals are wearing make up, have had their eyebrows tweezed (in a number of them),  I'd like you to honestly tell me if you have seen men that look like this? The effect these pictures give in real life is only really achieved with make up.

Just to break it down:

1. The eye-brows look very done.

2. The area underneath the eye-brows, on the cheeks, looks very much like the effects we see in make-up - it does not look natural, but rather individuals who wear make up (put aside the Khol, which i am aware of).

3. Some of the way these are drawn in terms of features itself, give them very ambiguous projections - looking neither male nor female exactly.  

4. Racially speaking most of these images mimic Persian, rather than Arab men , again, showing hidden racism or ignorance in the reality many of our Aimmah were mixed race. They reflect the political climate they may have been drawn in. 

Edited March 10, 2018 by Intellectual Resistance

[S.M.H.A.]

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235052764-azadari-for-the-son-of-sayeda-fatima-az-zahrasa/?tab=comments#comment-3095200

 

[Intellectual Resistance]

25 minutes ago, Ibn Al-Shahid said:

 

I dislike your methods of coming to conclusions because they are based on absolutely no facts whatsoever.

 

Remember dear brother, what possible facts should i have brought here? When making a claim, i need evidence, and my evidence are clear drawings i presented. The last thing i want to do is post pictures of women with make up, or men who wear make up, and outline each area and try to elucidate on why i strongly believe those sorts of effects could only truly be achieved with make up. This ought to be common sense and common knowledge.

I hazard to guess that if i put up these pictures on any website, of any religion or group, and asked them Eyelashes and under-eyes excluding, do they believe these men look effeminate, ambiguous, and look as though they have had their eyebrows done and make up all over their face, most i would say would agree that is what it would appear to be.

One of the things i make sure i do is base whatever i believe on fact. I could be wrong, i retract some conclusions i have made, but at the core of it, i always try to look for evidence. This is who i am, and it is my philosophy and should be the philosophy of each and every one of us, either way. 

Edited March 10, 2018 by Intellectual Resistance

[Ashvazdanghe]

The trick for drawing this images is that at first a woman draws & after completing Image the beard adds to image.

now we see people in two side with a gap that increases every day ,I see that new converts try their best for being religious but many people who were born in religious family becomes more & more unreligiouse.

Edited March 10, 2018 by Ashvazdanghe

[Ibn Al-Shahid]

@Intellectual Resistance Absolute hogwash. Your "philosophy" is based on mere conjecture and not actual study. When you are talking about art, especially stylised art, you need the background of the style, where it formed, amongst whom it formed. When you are talking about the acts of "homosexuals" you need social and psychological studies and references to know why certain people act a certain way, because it doesn’t come out of thin air. I bet you’re the type of person that looks at impressionist paintings and thinks "now that’s art" while they were labelled and considered as terrorists (les intransigents) during their beginnings. It gets on my nerves when people just post without actual research. Right now you’re resisting, just not intellectually.

i’ll have to withdraw from this discussion as this will go absolutely nowhere.

وعليكم السلام