With all my respects to Sayyid Khamanaei

[khalf_al_Quaed 5]

QUOTE(-_shadowfax_- @ Feb 22 2005, 12:49 AM)

TATBEER is not HARAM

I Repeat not haram..

ppl who say its haram try to cause rift and division amongst the shia...

well am surprised how prson like you talkin about such a subject and dont know that alsayyid Alqaed has considered altatbear a taboo.. so better we not show our faith by harmin our selves but by true actions and sencere work..

I dont mean to be rude or anything, and I'm sorry i had to use this person's response as an example, but is it just me or do others also think that when such a comment is given, it is as though the ruling of all other Maraje3 becomes null and void, therefore there is no need to argue? I dont want to make this into a whole hate thread. Personally, I think it is rude when others call him Alsayyid Alqaed, not to the Marja3 himself, but to other members, who may not agree with that certain point of view.

[snake_1987 1]

Tatbeer may be haram , Allah Al 3alem

By what i read is that there is no saying by Ahlul Bayt recommending or stating tatbir , there is about azza ( mourning)

Zaynab ( (as) ) , hit her head on a bar( i think bar , not entirely sure what ) and was bleeding.. this is how Ayatullah Shirazi says tatbir originated

No swords nothing , if it is the fact of losing or crying blood , well today there are many blood donation centres ...

And Ayatullah Khamenei is both a marja3 . If he is not your Marja3 he is your waliy al faqih ( political leader) .

And one of the reasons he has forbidden tatbir is for the political aspect or political view among others.

(salam) wa Allah Al A3lam

[Sister Zaynab 4]

(bismillah)

(salam)

And Ayatullah Khamenei is both a marja3 . If he is not your Marja3 he is your waliy al faqih ( political leader) .

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Are you talking to the topic starter specifically with this statement? Because he isn't either one, to me, and to many others I'm sure. Not trying to redirect the thread, just curious :P

[snake_1987 1]

(bismillah)

Ya true many people do not consider him as waliy al faqih , but Khomeini (may his soul rest in peace) established this , and i believe that we should have some consideration for him for Jihad and other political stuff and even small things like boycott

(salam)

[Casper 2]

And one of the reasons he has forbidden tatbir is for the political aspect or political view among others.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This shows that tatbir in itself isn't haram . Ayatullah Khamenei made it haram under a secondary cause .

However this is his way in preserving the shia image to the world . Another way is to spread the tatbir philsophie and to urge others to respect cultural differences .

Those who don't are not worth to leave tatbir for them .

Anyway why we put ourselves in the postition that we accept others to be judgemental with us . I wont say for them : "Please accept my religion , you see we are civilised , the tatbir thing is done by the ignorants " .

The tatbir in Ashura isn't a reason for anyone to hate the shia sect and those who do because of tatbir , how do you expect from them to accept the wajib islamic rituals like Hajj and Veil and other islamic believes .

And Ayatullah Khamenei is both a marja3 . If he is not your Marja3 he is your waliy al faqih ( political leader) .

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

He isn't my political leader , despite if he is my marja3 or not .

What about shia who believe in the separation of politics and religion ?

What about another Ayatullahs who have more knowledge from him (A3lam) ?

What if he wrongly played politics ?

Who accepted him (qas) as the shia's political leader ?

[Hizbullah 9]

(bismillah)

(salam)

We call him(ha) Sayed al-qaed because we have been convinced by the concept of Wilayatul Faqih and we trust the experts who have told us that he is the most adequate person to be the wali of the ummah. Which means that he is our leader (Qaed | that's where www.qaed.net came from :P). If my dear brothers and sisters have been convinced through reasoning and logical deduction that there is no such thing as Wilayatul Faqih al-mutalaqa, then you are excused inshallah. Otherwise, as the great philosophers have said: "Whoever accepts or denies something without proof then he has gone against the human nature(fitra)." Na'uthubillah.

wassalam

Edited February 22, 2005 by Hizbullah

[Abdulhujjah 21]

(bismillah)

(salam)

Snake_1987,

He is the political leader of those who choose him, he hasn't been selected by Allah. This is exactly what br. Khalf is saying, don't force it down peoples throat, this is the same style as Muawiya, people have the right to choose. The Imam of our time, Our awaited Master al-Mahdi (as) who is ALLAHs representative on Earth, his word supersedes any others. But however this isnt the case for Sayed Khamanaei, his word only reigns supreme for his followers, no one else.

Wassalaam

[Orion 240]

But however this isnt the case for Sayed Khamanaei, his word only reigns supreme for his followers, no one else.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

(bismillah)

(salam)

Brother Abdulhujjah, I can understand that you may have differences with one scholar or another. But this does not give you any right to start issueing fatwas or give your opinion in matters of fiqh.

So according to the fatwa, the people may follow their Mujtahids in personal matters. But when it comes to matters concerning the administration of the Islamic state or general matters concerning the Ummah, Waley al-Faqih has to be followed (regardless of which scholar you follow).

Again you have understand that Leadership and Taqlid are two different but related issues.

The authority of scholars is well established. For example if today Ayatullah Sistani gives a hukum that it is wajib on all Iraqis to get out on the street and protest, all will have to get out on the street and protest regardless of their taqlid.

WS

Edited February 22, 2005 by Orion

[SiddiquaHaqnawaa 0]

Assalaam un Alaikum

From what I have read in most of the foregoing posts, it appears that most folks, their Maraje'ay included, are more concerned with a cosmetic image than what is right . . .

Moula aabaad rakhay

Sayyedah Siddiqua Haqnawaa

[Umm Zaynalabidin 3]

(bismillah)

(salam)

If anybody truly feels, sayed Khamenei is his leader, marje, wali el-faqih, then khayr insha'Allah, it is between him and Allah-but we have our marjaiyyah system inherited from imam Mahdi (as), what allows us to CHOOSE whomever we want, based on certain criterias, and not to forget, some of the maraaje don't agree with the system of wilaayat al-faqih.

IF those, who consider sayed Khamenei as their marjee, agree with this, then alhamdulillah, its truly a blessing, because as many ahadith state, disunity is from the Shaytan and unity is a mercy from Allah Taala...There are many great scholars under the sun alhamdulillah, including sayed Khamenei as well.

Angels in the qabr will ask you about your aqeedah, but won't ask about your marje.

We are all shias.

fi aman Allah

[khalf_al_Quaed 5]

If he is not your Marja3 he is your waliy al faqih ( political leader) .

This is why I started this topic, he is not my Wali Al Fiqh...

Ya true many people do not consider him as waliy al faqih , but Khomeini (may his soul rest in peace) established this , and i believe that we should have some consideration for him for Jihad and other political stuff and even small things like boycott

Some consideration, yes... but to the point as some are telling me that I have to follow him blindly.... I think I have a mind on my own, and if it were to that, then why is it that we have so many other 3ulama2... i mean, he is Sayyid Al Qaed...

And one of the reasons he has forbidden tatbir is for the political aspect or political view among others.

Untill when are we supposed to please the world? Us Muslims, we reject 3/4 of the things that the western world does, but you do not see them banning something because it may insult us, or make them look bad, why is it that we have to sacrifice our rituals and our beliefs in order to satisfy the west??? BTW, just for the record, this year, we took permission from the City of Ottawa to do Tatbeer, shouldnt the media have jumped all over that and made the Shias look bad?

He isn't my political leader , despite if he is my marja3 or not .

What about shia who believe in the separation of politics and religion ?

What about another Ayatullahs who have more knowledge from him (A3lam) ?

What if he wrongly played politics ?

Who accepted him  as the shia's political leader ?

That is exactly what I was trying to get to.

We call him(ha) Sayed al-qaed because we have been convinced by the concept of Wilayatul Faqih and we trust the experts who have told us that he is the most adequate person to be the wali of the ummah.

Wallah is it good that people are conviced that he is the one, but which experts am I supposed to trust? Those who forced a marja3 under house arrest for the better part of his life? Or those who even disallowed a proper Fati7a done for his him?

"Whoever accepts or denies something without proof then he has gone against the human nature(fitra)."

Above are only a few of the examples, there is much proof about this...

But when it comes to matters concerning the administration of the Islamic state or general matters concerning the Ummah, Waley al-Faqih has to be followed (regardless of which scholar you follow).

I did not want to get to this, but, unless there is a Majliss Al Shura that decides who is to be the Walyat Al Faqih, then there is no reason for me to believe that you have just said.

Again, I am sorry if I offended anyone, but this is truly what I believe, I am not trying to change anyone's mind, start a war, just trying to prove a small point that some of us may find it offensive when such words are thrown around.

[Orion 240]

(bismillah)

(salam)

This is why I started this topic, he is not my Wali Al Fiqh...

There is nothing like my Wali Al Fiqh or your Wali Al Fiqh. Wali Al Fiqh is the head of an Islamic state. He is appointed by Majlis e Khubra which is an elected body of scholars.

If Ibrahim Jaafari is the next PM of Iraq, and if you dont agree with him, you cannot say he is not my PM.

Some consideration, yes... but to the point as some are telling me that I have to follow him blindly.... I think I have a mind on my own, and if it were to that, then why is it that we have so many other 3ulama2

Following a scholar does not mean it is blind following weather its your Marje taqlid or Waley al-Faqih. This is because first you chose the most knowlidgeable Faqih. But once you have done that you have to follow his fatwas in those matters where he is most knowledgeable, regardless of your like or dislike about the fatwa. In other words you cannot use our own understanding when choosing a fatwa.

Similarly when experts have identified someone as the most suitable person to be head of the Islamic state, it is logical for you to follow him in matters concerning the sate.

What about shia who believe in the separation of politics and religion ?

What about another Ayatullahs who have more knowledge from him (A3lam) ?

What if he wrongly played politics ?

Who accepted him  as the shia's political leader ?

Shia who believe in the separation of politics and religion have misunderstood Islam.

If there are other Ayatullahs that have mor knowledge, they can be followed in those matters that they have more knowledge in.

If he wrongly played politics it is upto Majlis e Khubra to handle it.

As far as who accepted him as the shia's political leader.......The believers.

I did not want to get to this, but, unless there is a Majliss Al Shura that decides who is to be the Walyat Al Faqih, then there is no reason for me to believe that you have just said.

Majliss Al Shura is one of the different versions of Wilayat al-Faqih system and if think it is not without problems. Your attitude is that if we have the version of one Mujtahid (Aytullah Shirazi) its acceptable and if it is the version of another Mujtahid (Ayatullah Khomeini) it is unacceptable!!!!!!!

These are differences of Ijtehad. We should learn to tolerate such differences. Not tat my Mujtahid is right and other is wrong.

WS

Edited February 22, 2005 by Orion

[Shiaboy 0]

This shows that tatbir in itself isn't haram  . Ayatullah Khamenei made it haram under a secondary cause .

However this is his way in preserving the shia image to the world . Another way is to spread the tatbir philsophie and to urge others to respect cultural differences .

Those who don't are not worth to leave tatbir for them .

Anyway why we put ourselves in the postition that we accept others to be judgemental with us . I wont say for them : "Please accept my religion , you see we are civilised , the tatbir thing is done by the ignorants " .

The tatbir in Ashura isn't a reason for anyone to hate the shia sect and those who do because of tatbir , how do you expect from them to accept the wajib islamic rituals like Hajj and Veil and other islamic believes .

He isn't my political leader , despite if he is my marja3 or not .

What about shia who believe in the separation of politics and religion ?

What about another Ayatullahs who have more knowledge from him (A3lam) ?

What if he wrongly played politics ?

Who accepted him  (qas)  as the shia's political leader ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Assalam Alaikum

I once emailed Sayid Khamenai (ha) and he said that it was Haram in all its forms. I asked is it because of the way it makes Islam look? He said it is Haram for all reasons.

I was not convinced and soon this hukm in Iran will change, just let things in Iraq settle and we will see the Marajis promoting it again and Iran will have no choice but to allow it again.

[Shiaboy 0]

(bismillah)

(salam)

Brother Abdulhujjah, I can understand that you may have differences with one scholar or another. But this does not give you any right to start issueing fatwas or give your opinion in matters of fiqh.

So according to the fatwa, the people may follow their Mujtahids in personal matters. But when it comes to matters concerning the administration of the Islamic state or general matters concerning the Ummah, Waley al-Faqih has to be followed (regardless of which scholar you follow).

Again you have understand that Leadership and Taqlid are two different but related issues.

The authority of scholars is well established. For example if today Ayatullah Sistani gives a hukum that it is wajib on all Iraqis to get out on the street and protest, all will have to get out on the street and protest regardless of their taqlid.

WS

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Assalam Alaikum

The main problem is that Sayid Khumayni (ra) came out with this theory (mutlaqa) and although the Overwhelming majority of Ahlil Khibra refused it, they are asked to follow it? How can that be? You bind Ulamahs whose ijtihad hasn't even bound them to that. Moreover, we have to look at Ijma' we are Usooli.

Fi Aman Allah

Your bro Shiaboy

Edited February 22, 2005 by Shiaboy

[Orion 240]

(bismillah)

(salam)

The main problem is that Sayid Khumayni (ra) came out with this theory (mutlaqa) and although the Overwhelming majority of Ahlil Khibra refused it, they are asked to follow it? How can that be? You bind Ulamahs whose ijtihad hasn't even bound them to that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Here none of us is a Marja so we are discussing the following of common people (not Marja). It does not matter what overwehelming majority says. What matters is the knowledge of the Marja.

BTW, I am still waiting on your reply to my questions regarding "Shura".

Moreover, we have to look at Ijma' we are Usooli.

For Shias the Ijma of the Companions (ra) of the Masoomeen (as) is binding, not the Ijma of present day scholars.

I was not convinced and soon this hukm in Iran will change

Fatwas are based on Ijtehad. They dont change based on if "Shiaboy" is convinced or not, nor do they change based on what happens in an individual country.

WS

Edited February 23, 2005 by Orion

[Shiaboy 0]

(bismillah)

(salam)

Here none of us is a Marja so we are discussing the following of common people (not Marja). It does not matter what overwehelming majority says. What matters is the knowledge of the Marja.

BTW, I am still waiting on your reply to my questions regarding "Shura".

For Shias the Ijma of the Companions  (ra) of the Masoomeen  (as) is binding, not the Ijma of present day scholars.

Fatwas are based on Ijtehad. They dont change based on if "Shiaboy" is convinced or not, nor do they change based on what happens in an individual country.

WS

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Assalam Alaikum bro

Whomever has been selling us expired goods to follow Maraji's blindly I must admit has done a very good job. It reminds me of those who call for Unity with all Muslims but yet avoid fixing the growing internal problems within the Shias. The point is that WF Mutlaq is imposed on Marajis through the Ijtihad of one Marja when they all opposed it. It's just sad that so many muqalideen use their heart in judging things. We have failed to study the actual revolution and how it came about and what occured during 1979-1992 otherwise I'm sure there would be tons of question marks instead of following blindly what some turbaneds who take us for a ride have been spreading.

With regards to Shura, I haven't forgotten, we will go through this and as I said, Shura through the Adela Al Arba3a is very apparent. With regards to Ijma', it is clearing against the Mutlaqa; in fact, if you go back to the Usool, and I would recommend reading comparative studies in that field because I do not have the time nor the books from which to quote and it will be obvious once more that the Majority of Ulamahs are being forced to accept a concept they do not see (through Ijma') as Islamically the most fit.

Bro Orion, the last paragraph truly shows me your good intention; however, it also shows me your experience in Islamic politics (which is a better thing for you believe me, I wish I never would have gotten involved because all I got in return was a slap in the face). Go read Iranian news and see what happened with Qama this year in Iran. If you have family in Qum please do call them and enquire. I got some very good news on that but I haven't confirmed it from a cousin of mine in Canada; since it hasn't been confirmed, I shall wait.

With regards to fatawas, I do not simply accept a hukm if I do not see the logic behind it. Many have hidden behind Ijtihad like our Sunni brothers say about Mu3awiyah (la). I'm not saying the current Shia Marajis do that (astaghfurallah) but I will say that the fatwa in Iran against Qama being Haram will be rendered to nothing when Iraqi Scholars promote it once more in Iraq. Or at least, it will make it apparent to every muqalid that it is not Haram through ijtihad but rather was a political stoppage.

Prior to Saddam (la)'s banning it, they did Qama all over Shia-dominated Iraq (even as far as in Kadhmiya). Sure you may look at the current politics in Islam as rosey, and you are entitled to your opinion, but from my end, having lived in different countries for quite sometime and being the critical person that I am, I find it shameful that our religion has turned into a political game.

Fi Aman Allah

Your brother Shiaboy

Edited February 23, 2005 by Shiaboy

[Orion 240]

(bismillah)

(salam)

Whomever has been selling us expired goods to follow Maraji's blindly I must admit has done a very good job. It reminds me of those who call for Unity with all Muslims but yet avoid fixing the growing internal problems within the Shias. The point is that WF Mutlaq is imposed on Marajis through the Ijtihad of one Marja when they all opposed it. It's just sad that so many muqalideen use their heart in judging things. We have failed to study the actual revolution and how it came about and what occured during 1979-1992 otherwise I'm sure there would be tons of question marks instead of following blindly what some turbaneds who take us for a ride have been spreading.

Weather you like it or not, the Islamic republic is based on the vision and ijtehad of Imam Khomeini (qas). If you dont like it, no big deal. Establish another "Islamic Republic" elesewhere. This way we will be able to see other versions in practice. And future generations could learn from each one of them.

With regards to Shura, I haven't forgotten, we will go through this and as I said, Shura through the Adela Al Arba3a is very apparent. With regards to Ijma', it is clearing against the Mutlaqa; in fact, if you go back to the Usool, and I would recommend reading comparative studies in that field because I do not have the time nor the books from which to quote and it will be obvious once more that the Majority of Ulamahs are being forced to accept a concept they do not see (through Ijma') as Islamically the most fit.

Again, as I have said before. In Shia School, Ijma of present day scholars is not a binding proof (like that in Sunni school). This is a basic difference which you should know.

Go read Iranian news and see what happened with Qama this year in Iran. If you have family in Qum please do call them and enquire. I got some very good news on that but I haven't confirmed it from a cousin of mine in Canada; since it hasn't been confirmed, I shall wait.

It does not matter what happened or did not happen. It is an issue of Ijtehad.

With regards to fatawas, I do not simply accept a hukm if I do not see the logic behind it. Many have hidden behind Ijtihad like our Sunni brothers say about Mu3awiyah (la). I'm not saying the current Shia Marajis do that (astaghfurallah) but I will say that the fatwa in Iran against Qama being Haram will be rendered to nothing when Iraqi Scholars promote it once more in Iraq. Or at least, it will make it apparent to every muqalid that it is not Haram through ijtihad but rather was a political stoppage.

I strongly condem your presentation of Iran and Iraq OR Irani scholars and Iraqi scholars OR system in place in Iran vis system to be in Iraq as rivals. What we have in Iran and what we will InshaAllah have in Iraq are two versions of the same system. They are both near and dear to us. We dont consider them revals or opposing systems. Rather we expect them to augment each other for the beterment of Shia in particular, and Muslim Ummah in general.

Any one who wants to create a rift b/w Iran and Iraq (people, scholars or systems) is playing in the hands of Shaytan.

Prior to Saddam (la)'s banning it, they did Qama all over Shia-dominated Iraq (even as far as in Kadhmiya). Sure you may look at the current politics in Islam as rosey, and you are entitled to your opinion, but from my end, having lived in different countries for quite sometime and being the critical person that I am, I find it shameful that our religion has turned into a political game.

This is pure spaculation. Here you are disrespecting Shia Mujtahids and claiming that they have mislead the people. AstaghfarAllah.

Unlike you, I respect all Mujtaheedin. I am strongly against disrespecting any one of them. Even those who may not be in the good books of many. If you have logical arguments, bring them. I will be happy to discuss with you. My advise to you is keep an open mind and never let hate of any scholar florish in your heart.

WS

[Shiaboy 0]

(bismillah)

(salam)

Weather you like it or not, the Islamic republic is based on the vision and ijtehad of Imam Khomeini  (qas). If you dont like it, no big deal. Establish another "Islamic Republic" elesewhere. This way we will be able to see other versions in practice. And future generations could learn from each one of them.

Again, as I have said before. In Shia School, Ijma of present day scholars is not a binding proof (like that in Sunni school). This is a basic difference which you should know.

It does not matter what happened or did not happen. It is an issue of Ijtehad.

I strongly condem your presentation of Iran and Iraq OR Irani scholars and Iraqi scholars OR system in place in Iran vis system to be in Iraq as rivals. What we have in Iran and what we will InshaAllah have in Iraq are two versions of the same system. They are both near and dear to us. We dont consider them revals or opposing systems. Rather we expect them to augment each other for the beterment of Shia in particular, and Muslim Ummah in general.

Any one who wants to create a rift b/w Iran and Iraq (people, scholars or systems) is playing in the hands of Shaytan.

This is pure spaculation. Here you are disrespecting Shia Mujtahids and claiming that they have mislead the people. AstaghfarAllah.

Unlike you, I respect all Mujtaheedin. I am strongly against disrespecting any one of them. Even those who may not be in the good books of many. If you have logical arguments, bring them. I will be happy to discuss with you. My advise to you is keep an open mind and never let hate of any scholar florish in your heart.

WS

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Assalam Alaikum

Total misunderstanding of my view; as usual this is a forum so it's expected. If you want to discuss with me, I would this further, I suggest MSN :).

I hate utmost respect for the pious Mujtahideen be it in Iran or Iraq; but not every person that claims ijtihad and presents absolutely no daleel is to be taken seriously. I have stayed in Iran and Iraq for a while, Syria, Lebanon (short time), Canada (long), Europe (all over). Good old Shaytan issue again... for the love of God, let's stop assuming things of others. I say many of the turbaneds in the Iranian gvt as in the future Iraq gvt are not necessarily good. In fact, some are tyrants hiding behind the turban and beard; I've seen it with my own eyes. Iran happens to be an easier target because it is run by turbaneds. I have no hatred for anyone, it's just that I've seen many Scholars who have "studied' decades in Qum or Najaf who have been making a mockery of the religion. Sometimes I wonder whether their stay in Qum was too long of a vacation or to study.

Let me know if you wish to MSN

sayidshiaboy@hotmail.com because that way, we can talk live instead of misunderstanding one another. We can also go through Shura or Wilayah Mutlaqa more in depth.

Fi Aman Allah

Your bro Shiaboy

[Orion 240]

(bismillah)

(salam)

Total misunderstanding of my view; as usual this is a forum so it's expected. If you want to discuss with me, I would this further, I suggest MSN :).

I hate utmost respect for the pious Mujtahideen be it in Iran or Iraq; but not every person that claims ijtihad and presents absolutely no daleel is to be taken seriously. I have stayed in Iran and Iraq for a while, Syria, Lebanon (short time), Canada (long), Europe (all over). Good old Shaytan issue again... for the love of God, let's stop assuming things of others. I say many of the turbaneds in the Iranian gvt as in the future Iraq gvt are not necessarily good. In fact, some are tyrants hiding behind the turban and beard; I've seen it with my own eyes. Iran happens to be an easier target because it is run by turbaneds. I have no hatred for anyone, it's just that I've seen many Scholars who have "studied' decades in Qum or Najaf who have been making a mockery of the religion. Sometimes I wonder whether their stay in Qum was too long of a vacation or to study.

Let me know if you wish to MSN

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

(bismillah)

(salam)

What you are doing is just saying that you respect Mujtahedeen, but in fact you continue to do name-calling (turbaneds). AstaghfarAllah.

I dont go on MSN. If you want to discuss, do it here in front of everyone. But the first rule will be no name calling and no disrespect for any Mujtahid weather you agree with him or not.

Take it or leave it !!!!!!!!!

WS

Edited February 23, 2005 by Orion

[roya 5]

Salam,

Thank you br. Shiaboy for offering to take the discussion with Orion to MSN.

To the original poster: if I read your post correctly it sounded to me like you were taking something that bothers you (the term alsayyid alqaed) to discuss the issue of wilayat e faqih itself. Then you said

This is why I started this topic, he is not my Wali Al Fiqh...

People have responded variously on this issue or the issue of tatbeer.

If you wish to have a discussion on the more narrow topic of Ayat. Khamanei's ruling on tatbeer, please let me know and we can split this topic. Otherwise, topic closed according to ShiaChat rule 2b.