Is there any evidence against it?

There is a hadith about how the pious offspring of an individual can benefit a deceased through good actions etc.

khatams? SPEAK BLOODY ENGLISH SISTER!

(I distinctly remember you using the word kuffar a lot... pot meet kettle?)

ModerateMuslimsBurnInHellFire wrote:

khatams? SPEAK BLOODY ENGLISH SISTER!

katam means offering food for the dead!!

they dont eat it.

its the thought that counts.

We give the food to the poor on behalf of the dead.
Feeding the poor makes God happy. He sends the souls of the dead go to better place.
We dont want our granny to be trouble on the other side, do we? So we do Katam for her.

Aziza2011 wrote:

salaam guys,
Alot of people hold khatams for various days after a person has died. I was wondering what ur views are about this. Is it right? Is there any evidence for its practice in hadith? If not why do so many people take part in it?
:?:

walaikum salam.

There are many things that can be done when a loved one passes away, reading the Quran and making du'a for the deceased is one such act. But there is no hadith or Quranic evidence which states how much Quran should be read or when.

With regards to the word khatam. These often refer to rituals where specific dates are set out to read for the person who has passed away, and the Quran must be read in its entirety preferably within the same day or a few days. i.e day person passes away, then 40 days after the person has passed, then a so called death annniversay where its done again.( IT is also done when a family move into a new home). The concept is fine, what is not sanctioned is innovating dates and gatherings. To me that is an innovation, and many scholars object to this, rather than the act of reading the Quran and making du'a so that it may benefit the deceased.

These same scholars often object to the food that is apparently blessed and distributed usually on a big scale, and intermingling between the sexes that may occur. Again this is done with specific dates in mind, as if these dates hold any importance. Bearing in mind we arent to celebrate anything other than the two Eids i dont see how the "dates" are justified.

The best thing to do is to adhere to the strong evidences which say reading the Quran for a loved one who has passed away, in solitude and making du'a for the deceased after.

Paying off any debts the deceased may owe if possible. Fulfilling the pilgrimage for the deceased especially if they intended to do it before they passed away. Setting up a form of ongoing charity for the deceased i.e buying a well in their name so it may benefit them in the hereafter.

This subject hits home with me, i was really bitter when the pirs took over my family home when i was trying to mourn for their little death party. Personally all i saw was a bunch of so called holy men lining their coffers at the expense of those mourning. Why do we need to pay anyone to make dua for read for us. The best ppl to make dua and read Quran for our deceased is us, the immediate family. Make personal worship, there is no need for this khatam gathering. Worse thing in these gatherings they make khatam with one Quran then put it away, for next khatam a new Quran must be used, like the first one is of no benefit anymore. its a disgusting practicing. khatam for dollars, how many of these pirs do khatam for free, or dont say no to donations, they should adamantly refuse donations. Theyre so insincere.

The women usually spend most the day making the food for the khatam, and if someone has passed away they dont get to mourn theyre running around feeding people, nevermind doing salat. In islam its supposed to be the other way round we are not christians. people visiting those who are mourning should bring them some food if possible out of the kindness of their hearts. Those mourning will be in no mind to cook.

Around our ends, I don't think its the norm for the imediate family to provide the food when someone dies (the first three days). I thought that was some islamic custom where others would cover for that to allow them to mourn?

(on the issue of inviting someone else to do dua - could be a pir or it could be the local imam or anyone else - no amount of telling people its not needed will stop them. They just find that way more comforting, and if its not wrong, let the people have their comfort I say.)

its ok getting pious ppl to make du'a especially when someone passes away or is critically ill. As long as these people are genuine and don't do it for the money, i have a problem with people doing it for the money.

Well when my mum passed away aunty decided on this gathering never bothered to tell me, well hey im just the daughter wht do i matter. she consulted my older sister and went ahead then expect me to join in, course i wasnt in the mood for all that. who was cooking non stop my sis in laws when they were clearly too grief stricken to be standing in that kitchen. but they had to coz they were instructed by elders. i told my sis they could have their little party i wasnt eating the food or joining in. u guys may think im nuts i just didnt like what they were doing, i thght it would be enough to tell a pious person to make du'a there was no need to have every joe bloggs off the street in our house eating like it was a wedding feast and leaving. I was right about the disingenous attitude, we never heard from any of these ppl except the odd pious man, again. they dont even phone forget popping over, its like we dont exist in the community anymore because our mother has passed away. its like we've got a disease that might catch if they come near us. Well death touches everyone sad they dont know it yet.

Hajjar wrote:

its like we dont exist in the community anymore because our mother has passed away. its like we've got a disease that might catch if they come near us. Well death touches everyone sad they dont know it yet.

aameen.

ameen. well bit of a touchy subject for me right now approaching a year since mother passed. the khatam thread just reminded me of lots of things that occurred that i couldnt control at the time. Anyways moving on.....malik said something about khatam meaning an offering for the dead? i never knew that. The word khatam what language is it from urdu? and does it really mean what malik has suggested?

I had never heard of that either.

I considered the food to be a part of well... food. Like you can feed the poor and that is considered a good deed, but feeding teh family, relatives and neighbours is also a good deed and I never thought there were any more links than that.

ok, my bit of contribution....

khatam here means when someone passes away ppl gather to make dua/read quran/offer food to benefit the deceased

All this is done for the sake of E-saal-e-sawaab- i.e. offering reward/duas to the deceased....

there is plenty of evidence which proves the deceased do benefit from dua/good deeds from off spring etc

Any good deed that a Muslim starts during his lifetime, and that is of renewed benefit and ongoing use for the Muslims, will continue to benefit him and augment his record of good deeds, even after his departure - as long as its benefits continue to reach others. Allaah subhanahu wa ta'ala says - "We record that (deeds) which they have put forward and their traces (that which they have left behind)." (Yaa-Seen 36:12)

Abu Hurayrah rahimahullaah reported that Allaah's Messenger sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam said: "When a human being dies, all of his deeds are terminated except for three types: an ongoing sadaqah, a knowledge (of Islaam) from which others benefit, and a righteous child who makes du'aa for him." (Muslim and others).

Abu Qataadah rahimahullaah reported that Allaah's Messenger sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam said: "The best that a man can leave behind after his death are three things: a righteous child who makes du'aa for him, an ongoing sadaqah whose rewards continue to reach him, and a knowledge that continues to be implemented after him." (Ibn Maajah, and others).
Abu Qataadah rahimahullaah reported that Allaah's Messenger sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam said: "Among the good deeds that continue to benefit a believer after death are: a knowledge that he taught and disseminated, a righteous child who lived after him, a Qur'aan book that he left as inheritance a masjid that he built, a house that he built for the two wayfarers, a stream that he ran, or a charity that he gave from his wealth during his healthy lifetime so that it would reach him (in rewards) after death." (Ibn Maajah and others) .Commenting on this, al-Mundhiri rahimahullaah said: "Some scholars say that the deeds of a human being end with his death. However, since he had caused these things (which are mentioned in the above hadiths), such as the earning of a child, disseminating the knowledge among those who take it from him, compiling a book that remains after him, or establishing a sadaqah, the rewards of these things continue to reach him as long as they continue to exist." ('Awn al-Ma'bud, 8:86)

The reason that one continues to receive rewards for these deeds even though they are done by other people, is that he had initiated them during his life or contributed to them to a certain degree, whether little or large. Since Allaah does not neglect an atom's weight of deeds, He records these contribution for a person even after his death. Abu al-Wafaa' bin 'Aqeel said: "The best explanation for this in my view is that a human being, by his efforts and good conduct, had earned friends, produced children, married spouses, done good, and was amiable to the people. Because of this, they invoke mercy for him and do good on his behalf. All of this is then a result of his own earning." (ar-Ruh, Ibn al-Qayyim, p.171). And Rasheed Ridaa rahimahullaah said, "Among the deeds that benefit a person, even though they are done by others, are those that count like his own because he caused them, such as his children's supplication for him, or their performing hajj, giving sadaqah, or fasting on his behalf - all of which having been established with authentic hadiths." (Tafseer al-Manaar 8:247)

The above hadiths indicate that a righteous child benefits his deceased parents with du'aa. It is further demonstrated here that he can benefit them by spending sadaqah, as well as doing other charitable deeds, on their behalf. 'Aishah rahimahullaah reported that Allaah's Messenger sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam said, "Indeed the best that one eats is that which he earns. And his child is from his earning." (Ahmad, Abu Dawud, and others. Verified sahih by al-Albaanee in Akhaam ul-Jana'iz, 217).

The reason for this is that a parent benefits himself by rearing his child according to the teachings of Islaam, and exerting a consistent effort to raise him as a righteous person. As the child grows into adulthood and does righteous deeds, his parents deserve a merit in that they helped him accomplish that and his good actions are therefore, at least in part, from his parents' earning. Sadaqah from a child A'ishah rahimahullaah reported that a man asked Allaah's Messenger sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam, "My mother had a sudden death, and did not have chance to bequeath anything. Had she been able to do, I think that she would have given sadaqah. Would she or I get any rewards if I give sadaqah on her behalf?" He sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam replied, "Yes! So give sadaqah on her behalf" (al-Bukhaaree, Muslim and others).

Ibn 'Abbas rahimahullaah reported that Sa'd bin 'Ubadah's mother died during his absence on a trip. He came to the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam and asked him, "O Allaah's Messenger! My mother has passed away during my absence. Would it be of benefit to her if I give sadaqah on her behalf?" He sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam replied, "Yes!" He said, "Be my witness then that I give my fruitful garden as sadaqah on her behalf."

Abu Hurayrah rahimahullaah reported that a man asked the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam "My father has died, leaving behind a wealth; but he did not bequeath anything. Would it help him if I give sadaqah on his behalf?" He sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam replied, "Yes!". (Muslim, Ahmad and others).

Abdullaah ibn 'Amr rahimahullaah reported that al-'Aas bin Waa'il as-Sahmee (his grandfather) bequeathed that one hundred slaves be freed on his behalf. His son, Hishaam freed fifty; and 'Amr wanted to free the other fifty, but decided to ask Allaah's Messenger sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam first. He came to the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam and said, "O Allaah's Messenger sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam! My father has bequeathed that one hundred slaves be freed on his behalf. Hishaam has freed fifty and fifty are left. Should I free them for him?" He replied: "Had he been a Muslim, your freeing slaves, giving sadaqah, or performing Hajj on his behalf would all have reached (in rewards) and benefited him." (Ahmad, Abu Dawud, al-Bayhaqi)

Commenting on these hadiths, ash-Shawkaani said: "This indicates that the rewards for a sadaqah from a child reach the parents after their death - even if they had not bequeathed it. These hadiths restrict the general meaning of Allaah's subhanahu wa ta'ala saying: "And that the human being can have nothing but what he has earned." (53:39)

Strangely the Salafi scholars argue that only actions from a persons child benefits the dead but not a non-child- which dont make sense at all.

Th eonly issue I have is where days/dates are fixed for khatams, eg 3rd or 40th day- this to me is more cltural rather than religious.
But the concept of khatam, reading quran, giving out food to benefit the deceased is all accepatable as quoted above.

salaam
excellent article here on E-saal-e-sawaab:
On the Possibility of the Living Benefiting the Dead

http://www.ilmgate.org/on-the-possibility-of-the-living-benefiting-the-d...

wasalaam

not reading much but. opinion on 40 days khattams? Isnt that a bid'ah? I believe it is when you have a "khattam" exactly 40 days after the death of someone. for..hmm..unknown (to me) reasons.

Only if you consider it a religious obligation.

If not, then it isn't. It comes under the hadith where if someone starts a good practice and others copy it, the original person is also rewarded.

Now people lose sight of where it comes from and its importance.

The idea is that in communities that may not think about religion as much as they should, you make "excuses" to remind people about Islam and religion etc. If it takes off it can become a part of culture.

Doing khatm on the 40th is just as much a bid'ah as deciding to attend Islamic classes every tuesday. People may start to do that because that is when it is convenient for them, but then go down a few months and years and for some it may become less convenient, but thats when they have those classes so some will organise their time to allow them to attend those classes.

It does not suddenly become wrong to have those classes and if someone suggested that it was unislamic for them to have classes on tuesdays, they would be laughed out of the room.

It would however become a bid'ah if someone suddenly said that having those classes on tuesday was a religious obligation, as that would be adding to the religion. As long as it is not enforced as a religious obligation (a cultural norm/obligation is a different thing), there is no issue as nothing new has been added to religion - only exisiting rules have been implemented.

You wrote:

Only if you consider it a religious obligation.

If not, then it isn't. It comes under the hadith where if someone starts a good practice and others copy it, the original person is also rewarded.

Now people lose sight of where it comes from and its importance.

The idea is that in communities that may not think about religion as much as they should, you make "excuses" to remind people about Islam and religion etc. If it takes off it can become a part of culture.

Doing khatm on the 40th is just as much a bid'ah as deciding to attend Islamic classes every tuesday. People may start to do that because that is when it is convenient for them, but then go down a few months and years and for some it may become less convenient, but thats when they have those classes so some will organise their time to allow them to attend those classes.

It does not suddenly become wrong to have those classes and if someone suggested that it was unislamic for them to have classes on tuesdays, they would be laughed out of the room.

It would however become a bid'ah if someone suddenly said that having those classes on tuesday was a religious obligation, as that would be adding to the religion. As long as it is not enforced as a religious obligation (a cultural norm/obligation is a different thing), there is no issue as nothing new has been added to religion - only exisiting rules have been implemented.

but where has 4th day and 4oth day come from
if u have seen any of these indian dramas they also mention 'chalisva' (4oth)- so isnt this imitating the kufaar or as we say 'tashabbuh'? how can muslims and hindus have the same religious practise on teh 4oth day after someone has passed away....

so for me esal-e-sawab is acceptable but specifying 4oth day is a bit suspect...

No, culture is culture. When people became Muslims, they were only obligated to drop the bits that were anti Islamic. The rest was repackaged as Islamic culture.

That is if the 40th is from some previous culture, which it may not be. 40 is a big/important/significant number in arabic too.

the revelation? but the prophet (pbuh) and Islam doesnt put a big emphasize on numbers. except one. but thats obvious.

so 40 day khataam is a bid'ah? not me being an extremist?

Not unless you enforce it as a religious obligation.

and preventing it totally is also a bid'ah as that is adding a new prohibition to religion.

As long as things stay "want to/dont want to" its all fine.

You wrote:

and preventing it totally is also a bid'ah as that is adding a new prohibition to religion.

i disagree. but you know that already. how can preventing a bid'ah be a bid'ah?! isnt that what everyone does?! depending on what they think a "bid'ah" is. and where did you get that from?

Adding a new restrection to Islam that did not exist before. It is a new thing, a bid'ah. That restriction did not exist before.

because that new thing didnt exist before. so the restriction didnt need to exist.

its like saying finding a new cure for a new disease is a bad thing. or something.