I know they have dif sects...

I was asking what justification do they use?

I have never heard the action of self mutilation defended. I wanna know how they do so. what evidences they use.

I wanna hear the other side. Its not a personal attack or something. I know I will disagree with their 'proof', but its always better to know where others come from even if you disagree vehemently.

Is Zanjeer compulsory?

I was under the impression Shia do it to remind themselves - because they want to - not because they have to.

i have a family member who is a shia

whilst she doesnt do matam in muhurrum-she does dress down

wears dark colours no make up etc for a month

i don't know what evidence there is regarding this

but some shia's are more hardcore then others in this issue

about justuifcation...........sum1 went up2 one of the guys in the manchester matam and told him, slef infliction is not allowed, says in the Quran - t'is haraam

he said, but doctors do surgery - it heals. letting out blood is good for the system and lets you heal :roll:

lol

"Augustus" wrote:

Is Zanjeer compulsory?

I was under the impression Shia do it to remind themselves - because they want to - not because they have to.

I wouldnt think so no. Most shias in the jaloos dont do it.....they just beat their chests, u get the wild ones that use the knives. Like Malik said his dad did zanjeer he just beat his chest.

I wonder if the shias go by the quran and hadith, curious coz of the self-harming thing.

according to weak heresay

some say that matam is a curse cos they refused to help Imam Hussein in the battle :?

I guess well just have to have malik say...

Salam

Some of my friends did the blood and guts routine.

Their backs are still sore. I dont think they will make it to work on Monday. They will call in sick. These guys were doing some gruesome acts in their annual ritual.

Ladies couldn't even watch the terrifying spectacle.

I wanted to go but they insisted that I eat with them. Food was given out to everyone. Some sikhs also joined in. I have no idea why.

Omrow

...so they do that and then they eat?

[i]okay[/i]

Yes. It was very cold day. After everyone was exhausted, thirsty and drained of blood, hot tea and food was a welcome sight. Especially for people who travelled from other cities.

hmmm...

Well then...

High Five Omrow

LOL

the omro is just pullling ur leg

but generally speaking-after every religious get together

munch is always served

"MuslimSisLilSis" wrote:

LOL

the omro is just pullling ur leg

but generally speaking-after every religious get together

munch is always served

...is that so?

I'm going to mark that down on my list.

Matamdari is a religious act for the Shi'tes. Just as the reading of awraad and adhkaar and giving of sadaqah; similar is the act of mourning.

Among their evidences they narrate in their books that Ummul Mumineen Aisha Siddiqa radhiyallahu anha beat her chest and tore her hair and clothing on the death of Nabi Muhammad salallahu alayhi wa sallam.

They also claim that Nabi salallahu alayhi wa sallam instructed some of the women of Madinah to go to the houses of martyred Companions who had no relatives and they were to sit and mourn over the deceased.

It is devilish act.

What's so devilish about mourning?

I wish Malik were around more often to answer this kinda stuff but I can see why he wouldn't. Every four seconds somebody new is takfeering shias.

"Augustus" wrote:

What's so devilish about mourning?

I wish Malik were around more often to answer this kinda stuff but I can see why he wouldn't. [b]Every four seconds somebody new is takfeering shias.[/b]

lol.....ahem*

"Augustus" wrote:

What's so devilish about mourning?

I wish Malik were around more often to answer this kinda stuff but I can see why he wouldn't. Every four seconds somebody new is takfeering shias.

well that isnt strictly true, but i agree, it would be good if Malik were here more often...

"Adil" wrote:

Matamdari is a religious act for the Shi'tes. Just as the reading of awraad and adhkaar and giving of sadaqah; similar is the act of mourning.

Among their evidences they narrate in their books that Ummul Mumineen Aisha Siddiqa radhiyallahu anha beat her chest and tore her hair and clothing on the death of Nabi Muhammad salallahu alayhi wa sallam.

They also claim that Nabi salallahu alayhi wa sallam instructed some of the women of Madinah to go to the houses of martyred Companions who had no relatives and they were to sit and mourn over the deceased.

It is devilish act.

This sounds awfully alot like something Med would say. Hmm...

"Beast" wrote:

"Adil" wrote:

Matamdari is a religious act for the Shi'tes. Just as the reading of awraad and adhkaar and giving of sadaqah; similar is the act of mourning.

Among their evidences they narrate in their books that Ummul Mumineen Aisha Siddiqa radhiyallahu anha beat her chest and tore her hair and clothing on the death of Nabi Muhammad salallahu alayhi wa sallam.

They also claim that Nabi salallahu alayhi wa sallam instructed some of the women of Madinah to go to the houses of martyred Companions who had no relatives and they were to sit and mourn over the deceased.

It is devilish act.

This sounds awfully alot like something Med would say. Hmm...

:?

aaaaands he back :roll: :roll:

if he can change his name why doesnt he bother to change his condensceding style of writing and quit condemning shia's so that people dont clock who he is

It looks like he's trying to tone it down a little bit. He went after the practices this time rather than the people.

Assuming that's him - we can't assume everybody that doesn't like shias is med.

"Augustus" wrote:

Assuming that's him - we can't assume everybody that doesn't like shias is med.

Well I'll just wait until I'm corrected then.

like THAT'd ever happen :twisted:

[url=http://www.]EDIT[/url] is an article which exposes the true guilty party in this whole fiasco. I find it most interesting how Karbala is made out - even by Sunnis - to be the ultimate battle between Truth and Falsehood; Yazeed against Sayyidina Hussayn radhiyallahu anh for if that were the case then what category would the countless Sahabah Karaam and Tabi'een have been in?

This issue of Karbala should be looked at and studied objectively with the Quran, Sunnah, and the actual events of history before us rather than getting taken up by emotion and misunderstanding exactly what this historical event was and what it was not.

Cool, calm and clear approach will suffice.
[b]
EDIT: That's a very sectarian website. Easy there ------------------ Modnster [/b]

:roll:

typical.

there are many messages n lessons we can take frm the battale of karbala

ONE lesson is that it was a battle of truth vs falsehood

but instead of makling a sectarian rants why dont YOU tell us what other lessons we can derive

or are u waiting for muhurrum to finish-since u want to avoid following the "innovation of the shia" before talkling about karbala?

even though that hasnt stopped u before :roll:

The Battle of Karbala was NOT the ultimate conflict between truth and falsehood; this is not from Islaamic tradition that this was a dividing line between Haq and Batil.

If looked at objectively.
Let us hypthetically agree that this was a TruthvFalshood scenario. What category do the Sahaabah Karaam and the Tabi'een come into? They certainly were not present in the battlefields of Iraq nor did they encourage Sayyidina Hussayn radhiyallahu anh to proceed to iraq - infact a number of leading Sahaabah alayhim ridhwaan DISCOURAGED and advised against Sayyidina Hussayn and his clan from leaving hijaz.

Clearly, if this was the epic battle that it has been made out to be, then we must accept the shia stance that the Sahaabah Karaam were either - ma'aadhallah - cowards or worse that they were passive/active supporters of Yazeed who was on falsehood.

The only logical conclusion is that the Sahaabah Karaam and the vast majority of muslims were sided on falsehood.

No. This is not the case. We cannot accept that this battle was an epic between haq and batil because this stance only logically and theologically supports the shi'a doctrine. If we look at the history of this event and what was written about it by objective and learned ulama we will see that indeed great pain is felt over this incident but it has not been whitewashed over and made into a simple issue when clearly it is not.

The lessons of Karbala are many.

1. The issue of rebellion/baghawat needs to be addressed. Every jumu'ah in the khutbah we are warned by the khateeb against rebellion. Further in certain ahadeeth it has been mentioned that rebellion leads to the hellfire. Was Sayyidina Hussayn radhiyallahu anh rebelling? Who was the Ameer of the muslims? What was the status of this act and why was it undertaken? What are the religious legal argument which are for and against this action of Yazeed and for and against the action of Sayyidina Hussayn.

2. The status of Yazeed as the embodiment of evil also needs to be looked at. What was his intention when despatching the 18 men to Kufa? How far was he willing to go in getting the allegiance from his kinsmen - the Ahlul Bayt? What was his reaction to the martyrdom, what was his treatment of the Women of Ahlul Bayt? What does all this point to? What does it mean?

3. The motives and actions and letters and speeches of Sayyidina Hussayn radhiyallah anh also need to looked at. If - as some would have us believe - this was the epic between haq and batil then why did Sayyidina Hussayn offer to withdraw to the boundary of the Islamic state? Why did Sayyidina Hussayn agree to return away from the battlefield or agree to meet with Yazeed? Surely if this was the truth against falsehood then why was Sayyidina Hussayn radhiyallahu anh offering to withdraw and accept the LEADERSHIP of Yazeed?

These are three crucial issues. But I do not intend to exaggerate this historical battle out of context and inflating it beyond what it was.

Indeed there are lessons to learn from the event, as there are lessons from the martyrdom of Sayyidina Umar, Sayyidina Uthman, Sayyidina Ibn Zubayr radhiyallahu anhum ajmaeen.

Karbala was another example of the nobility of the Sahaabah Karaam amongst the many examples.

I trust a cool and clear look at this battle away from the emotionallly charged but factually and religiously incorrect speeches that are in vogue - will lead people to a proper understanding. It is unfortunate that sunnis have been taken in by propoganda of anti-islamic forces and have completely distorted the actions of the Grandson of Nubuwwat.

"Med" wrote:

Discussing various aspects of Islamic History is good but to speciify certain subjects for certain times is innovation. The events of Karbala etc can just as easily be explained in Ramadaan rather than in the build up to Muharram.

It is from the imitation of the shia to do this.

I will refrain from it and inshaALLAH at a time which is correct may perhaps say a little.

Intresting.

:roll:

The Martyrdom of Imam Hussain (ra) and hios family was not a battle. It was a massacre. Not many would have been able to do anything once everything had been set in motion.

[url=http://www.therevival.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4226]bump[/url].

when is it the first of muharram? tomorrow after magrib or friday? some people are saying it's friday.

i thought its tomorrow (fasting starts on thursday) but friend said its on friday. me is confused.

My calender says Thursday, 1st Muharram.