If Jesus Christ (PBUH) was among us today, He would not spare a second to fight the head of oppression and support the oppressed.

If Jesus Christ (PBUH) was among us today, He would not spare a second to fight the head of oppression and support the oppressed.
Imam Khamenei

A nice trick to bypass Saddam's security checks for Arbaeen walking

This morning a friend of mine was telling an interesting narration about one of his Iraqi relatives.

During the times of Saddam Hussein (Iraqi dictator) marking Arbaeen (walk to Karbala) was forbidden and nobody was allowed to travel from other cities to the city of Karbala on foot and this ritual was not performed the way it is today. If somebody did so, he/she would get arrested, tortured and killed.

The relative lived in Basrah city and every year they gathered for Arbaeen walk and they had thought of a creative plan in order to get rid of Saddam's soldiers and security barriers and to avoid detection and getting arrested.

They had a car and manipulated the engine of the car and pretended that the car was broken and needed to be pushed. They used to keep pushing it from Basrah to Karbala. One of them stayed in the car to control it and the others were pushing it. The driver replaced turn by turn.
Whenever they got tired, they took rest in the car. By using this trick, nobody got suspicious of them and they continued to reach Karbala to perform the Arbaeen walking.

This ritual starts near to the end of a 40-day mourning period following Ashura in Iraq and all people participating in this ritual, travel to Karbala from many points in Iraq by foot. Many people from various countries manage to be part of it and everyone chooses a starting point to walk. One of the significant characteristics of this ritual is to travel on foot.

Source: https://plus.google.com/112354716705089420958/posts/3J54DwPqNj6?hl=en

Priest Joseph Elias, an Iraqi Christian clergyman, walk to pilgrim of Imam Hussein along with some Christians of Iraq

He was asked: Father, there is no relation between you and Arbaeen of Imam Hussein(40th day of his martyrdom) walking.
He answered: That is right our prophets are different but our Hussein is the same. Hussein is for all

"Priest Joseph Elias, an Iraqi Christian clergyman, walk to pilgrim of Imam Hussein along with some Christians of Iraq"

Translated by: Hajar AF

More info: Who is Hussain?

Hours by Hours of Ashura Incidents Based on deceased Dr Birashk's accounting

Hours by Hours of Ashura Incidents Based on deceased Dr Birashk's accounting at "Iranian Chronometer":

About 9:00 AM
Shemr (curse upon him) bawled Omar Sa'd out to why he delays on attacking? Omar Sa'd finally commanded to start war, then he threw the first dart toward Imam's army, shouted :"Say Obeydollah I was the first man who shoot." Then bowmen of army threw many darts.
Imam told his companions: " Be ready for the death that's not any choice not to accept it." (The number of killed at this attack and another attack was written 50 persons at Maghtal books)

About 10:00 AM
After shooting, Yasar slave of Ziad ibn Abih and Salem slave of Ibn Ziad from enemy's army go to field of war. Abdullah ibn Amir went to war and killed both of them, the fingers of his left hand was cut.
After this one by one battle the attack of enemy started. First Hajjar attacked right wing of Imam Hussein's army but Habib and his companions fought back. At the same time Shemr attacked to left wing of army. Zohayr and his companions defended. Shemr was wounded. Then both attackers went backwards. Omar Sa'd sent 500 attackers toward Imam's army, several of companions were martyred.
Abolfotoh (author of one of Maghtal book) wrote the numbers of killed 500 persons and Inb Shahr Ashub wrote 38 persons. The first martyred was Abulsha'sa. Some group of Shemr army wanted to attack back of Imam's army but faced in fires of ditches.

Around 11:00 AM
After these attacks Imam ordered companions to go war one by one. Companions took an oath not to let Bani Hashem family to go war unless they are alive. One of the first martyred was old virtuous man named Borayr. Muslem ibn Osajeh was killed after was killed after him and adviced to Habib not to leave Imam.
& companions were put at attacking unawares, but Abbas ibn Ali rescued them.

12:50 PM, Noon (Zohr) Athan
Habib ibn Mazaher was killed at time of Noon Athan. It is written that Imam told his companions somebody go to speak enemies to let us say prayer. Habib went. One of Kufis told him that God doesn't accept your saying prayer. He said:" Do you think God accept yours but not accept Imam's one?" Then they fought and Habib was killed. Imam Hussein cried for his martyrdom for first time at Ashura. He told: " O' my God lives of my friends and myself are for you."
Imam said prayer based on the rule of "Danger" prayer and " Traveler" prayer. Some companions stayed to fight and defended others who said prayer. Zohayr and Saeed ibn Abdullah Hanafi put themselves as shield for Imam.

About 1:00 PM
30 persons of Imam's companion were alive until time of prayer but after that they were killed, such Zohayr and Hurr.
After death of companions, Bani Hashem went to war. The first one was Ali Akbar elder son of Imam. Alfotoh wrote Abdullah ibn Muslim is the first martyred of Bani Hashem. His martyrdom stung the heart of Bani Hashem. All of them attacked enemy but Imam calmed them:" Wait for death after that you never meet inferiority."

About 2:00 PM
28 persons of Bani Hashem were killed: 7 brothers of Imam Hussein,3 sons of Imam Hassan, 2 sons of Imam Hussein, 2 grandsons of Hafar ibn Abitalib, 9 persons from Al Aghil and grandsons of uncles of the prophet.
At last Imam Hussein and Abbas ibn Ali remained alone. Abbas asked to let him to go war but Imam asked him to deliver water to families at tents. Hands of brave Abbas was cut when he was trying to deliver water then enemy beated an iron pillar at head of Abbas (AS), so he was feld at fround. Imam Hussein went to see his brother. Enemy was frighten and went backwards a little. Imam cried for the second time said: " Now my back broke"
Imam turned back to tent to farewell to family. He torn his dress because knew his dresses would have been stolen and didnt want to make naked him. At time of farewell he picked Aliasghar and went to field of battle perhaps can find a little water for his 6 months old son. But Harmale threw a dart and killed baby. Imam said:" My God if you withhold your kindness from us please accept my baby and do it something better for us."
Imam (AS) went to battle but nobody fight on his face. Somebody threw darts, somebody threw javelins. Shemr and 10 persons fought Imam's face. There were the trace of 33 wound of javelin and 34 wounds of sword at blessed body of Imam after martyrdom of him. It is written when Imam was going to be martyred, nobody had courage to close Imam. Families heard the sound of Imam's horse (Zoljanah) so they found Imam had been killed. A child named Abdullah ibn Hassan ran toward Imam. Enemies killed him at hug of Imam. Imam couldn't tolerate this seen and cursed them:"O' God withhold the rain of sky and plants of earth from them."

4:16 PM, Asr (afternoon) Athan
It is said Imam was killed at time of Asr Athan. It is a narration by Tabari Historical Book, quoted by Omar Sa'd Army's Chronometer. Then they galloped horses at bodies of killed to cut bodies and bones into pieces.

6:49 PM, Maghrib (sunset) Athan
The killed were gathered. Omar Sa'd ordered to Maghrib saying prayer. Sannan ibn Anas shouted at his horse said:" I killed the best men of God, so they (Ibn Ziad and Yazid) should give me gold equal to my horse weight."

Source:  https://plus.google.com/u/0/115750560545024464038/posts/dweJ9yaAGMg

Al saud family is jewish: They're so-called Royal Family is of Jewish ancestory.

-Al Saud family is jewish: They're so-called Royal Family is of Jewish ancestory. They made it into a Jewish kingdom. Not an Islamic one. The Saudi cops and military are known for their ruthlessness and violent behaviours. So expect one big hell contained in a tin-can.

Indeed they have a Jewish history, check this out:

The Turkish Ottoman Empire, which included key parts of Saudi Arabia, had lots of crypto-Jews (Jews pretending to be Muslems)

These crypto-Jews (also called Donmeh) have connections to the Saudi royal family and Saudi religion. Namely, the wahhabi form of Islam. Reportedly, the founder of the Saudi Wahhabi sect of Islam, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab, was a crypto-Jew.

An Iraqi intelligence report, dated 2002, and released in 2008 by the US Defense Intelligence Agency, points to the Jewish roots of Wahhab. The report uses the memoirs of a Mr. Hempher, a British spy who claimed to be an Azeri.

In the mid-18th century, Hempher made contact with Wahhab in order to set up the Wahhabi sect.

Reportedly, the purpose of the Wahhabi sect was to bring about an Arab revolt against the Ottomans and pave the way for a Jewish state in Palestine.

Hempher’s memoirs are recounted by the Ottoman writer Ayyub Sabri Pasha in his 1888 work, 'The Beginning and Spreading of Wahhabism.'

In his book, 'The Dönmeh Jews', D. Mustafa Turan writes that Wahhab's grandfather, Tjen Sulayman, was actually Tjen Shulman, a member of the Jewish community of Basra, Iraq.

In his book, 'The Dönmeh Jews and the Origin of the Saudi Wahhabis', Rifat Salim Kabar reveals that Shulman eventually settled in what is now Saudi Arabia, where his grandson, Muhammad Wahhab, founded the Wahhabi sect of Islam.

The Iraqi intelligence report states that Shulman had been banished from Damascus, Cairo, and Mecca for his 'quackery.'

Abdul Wahhab Ibrahim al-Shammari’s book, 'The Wahhabi Movement: The Truth and Roots', states that King Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud, the first Saudi monarch, was descended from Mordechai bin Ibrahim bin Moishe, a Jewish merchant from Basra. According to the book, Moishe changed his name and married off his son to a woman from a Saudi tribe.

The Iraqi intelligence report reveals that the researcher Mohammad Sakher was the subject of a Saudi contract murder hit for his examination into the Sauds’ Jewish roots.

In Said Nasir’s book, 'The History of the Saud Family', it is maintained that in 1943, the Saudi ambassador to Egypt, Abdullah bin Ibrahim al Muffadal, paid Muhammad al Tamami to forge a family tree showing that the Sauds and Wahhabs were one family that descended directly from the Prophet Mohammed pbuh.

At the start of World War I, a Jewish British officer, David Shakespeare, met with Ibn Saud, who was to become the first Saudi monarch.

Shakespeare later led a Saudi army that defeated a tribe opposed to Ibn Saud. In 1915, Ibn Saud met with the British envoy to the Gulf region, Bracey Cocas. Cocas made the following offer to Ibn Saud: "I think this is a guarantee for your endurance as it is in the interest of Britain that the Jews have a homeland and existence, and Britain’s interests are, by all means, in your interest." Ibn Saud replied: "Yes, if my acknowledgement means so much to you, I acknowledge thousand times granting a homeland to the Jews in Palestine or other than Palestine." [1]

Two years later, British Foreign Secretary Lord Balfour (see Balfour Declaration), in a letter to Baron Walter Rothschild, a leader of the British Zionists, stated: "His Majesty’s government view with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people..."

The deal to set up Israel had the backing of the Turkish leader Kemal Ataturk, who was reportedly a crypto-Jew.

In 1932, the British put Ibn Saud into power as King of Saudi Arabia.

The Sauds made Wahhabism the state religion of Saudi Arabia.

Turkey - part of the New World Order

Turkey has its 'deep state', a hidden government which has carried out acts of false flag terrorism (Ergenekon). Turkey's 'deep state' is said to have worked with Mossad and the CIA, and to have aided in carrying out the 9/11 attacks.

One high-ranking Turkish foreign policy official has said that there are 'deep states' in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Syria.

These 'deep states' would appear to involve crypto-Jews.

In Libya's new government, the Wahhabis have much influence.

Sourced from: Strategic Culture Foundation on-line journal http://www.strategic-culture.org/.

For much more background on Sabbateans please go to: http://editorseye.com/WordPress/category/sabbateans/

In ancient times, Jews classically studied the TALMUD - a racist re-interpretation of the original Torah. An ancient Jewish rabbi, named Zevi, broke from the classic Jewish religion and formed his own movement called SABBATEAN (Sabbatean anti-thesis of Sabbath? Asralfarhi - any idea if this is could be the case with regard to the anti-thesis comment?) which included the practise of KABBAL (Kabbal is black magic, also pracised by the Egyptians as well as Jewish Zionists and the Zionist elites).

Quote from Wiki link below, In 1665, "...Sabbateans (Sabbatians) is a complex general term that refers to a variety of followers of, disciples and believers in Sabbatai Zevi (1626–1676),[color=#FF40FF] a Jewish rabbi who was proclaimed to be the Jewish Messiah in 1665 by Nathan of Gaza[/color]...." [2]

In 1666 (note the 666 KABBAL reference), Zevi converted to Islam....which shocked the classic Talmud Jews. Jewish dispora who follow Sabbati Zevi are classifed into 3 groups:

Quote from Wiki link below:"...Sabbatai Zevi's followers, both during his "Messiahship" and after his conversion to Islam, are known as Sabbateans. They can be grouped into three: "Maaminim" (believers), "Haberim" (associates), and "Ba'ale Milhamah" (warriors)...."

Sabbateans and Hasidic Jews = unproven but some believe that Hasidic Jews are sect of Sabbateans.

Sabbateans and Sufi-Quote from Wiki link below, "...Some alleged similarities between Dönme and unorthodox Sufi practice seem to exist, including the violation of kashrut/halal, sexual license, ecstatic singing, mystical interpretations of sacred scripture, and the practice of ritual meals...." (reminds me of the British Royal Beltaine/Walpurgis fesitval-Prince Willaim wedding date).

Donmeh-Quote from Wiki link below, "...Inside the Ottoman Empire, those followers of Zevi who had converted to Islam but secretly continued Jewish observances became known as the Dönme (Turkish: dönme "convert")..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbateans

https://plus.google.com/u/0/110968308613143182731/posts/QTarn6A6Tz8

______________________________

[1] And now, let me drop a ball - The Sauds have cordoned off the area which is purportedly the real site of Mount Sinai, where Allah granted Musa AS his ten commandments and this is the place where the Jews really should be coming for pilgrimage. here, check it out: http://www.wup-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=20815 ... now think about Ibn Sauds comment, namely this one: "Yes, if my acknowledgement means so much to you, I acknowledge thousand times granting a homeland to the Jews in Palestine or other than Palestine."

You starting to see something here? Something really profound? Something jaw shatterringly obvious? This is deep... and hardly anyone has got a clue...

[2] Quote from Wiki link, In 1665, "...Sabbateans (Sabbatians) is a complex general term that refers to a variety of followers of, disciples and believers in Sabbatai Zevi (1626–1676), a Jewish rabbi who was proclaimed to be the Jewish Messiah in 1665 by Nathan of Gaza...." If this is true - then could it be that the day like a year was already underway during this time? Think... all this is like a giant jigsaw puzzle and right now, we may be sitting on some of the most important pieces.

Why people cutting themselves in public on Ashura? (Blood mourning rituals)

Although almost all Shia scholars issued a Fitwa about it and have made it Haram (=Forbidden), unfortunately still some ignorants do it.

This action has not been mentioned anywhere in the Holy Shariah. Not only that, but in any case it causes damage and becomes a source of mockery for the others, it is Haraam. [here]

What is Tatbir?

Tatbir (Arabic) is amongst a set of bloody rituals that are performed by some Shia Muslims in commemoration of the great tragedy of Karbala, when the family of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was massacred by a group of corrupted Muslims. Tatbir is performed by striking the head with a sword or knife until blood gushes out. In the Persian language Tatbir is called Qama Zani.

Some Shias in the Indian subcontinent also perform an act called Zanjeer Zani (usually called Zanjeer). It involves repeatedly striking the back with a chain of blades with the intention of cutting the skin and causing blood to flow. Tatbir and Zanjeer are the two most widely practised of the blood shedding rituals. Other rituals include injuring oneself with a stone, padlock or chain.

Although these blood shedding rituals are historically not a part of Shia Islam, for some Shia Muslims they have become a central part of their religious practice.

It was Never Practiced or Recommended by the Ahl-ul-bayt (pbut)

Blood mourning rituals were never practiced by the founders and teachers of Shia Islam. There is not a single shred of evidence that the latter Imams (a) performed blood rituals. The modern day proponents of these damaging rituals shy away from mentioning this glaring fact.

If these rituals had any inherent merit in the eyes of Islam then they would have been practiced by the Holy Prophet (s) and the Twelve Holy Imams (a).

The Ahlulbayt (a) are divinely guided role models for Muslims and it is an obligation upon us to try and emulate them. Therefore it could be argued that the best way to mourn Imam Hussain (a) is by emulating the mourning of Ahlulbayt (a). Since they (a) did not perform these rituals, then the Shia should walk in their footsteps and refrain from performing them. A Shi’i who keeps away from blood rituals is closer in action to the Ahlulbayt (a) than one who performs them.

Considering the very controversial nature of the rituals, it wise to refrain from them and to carefully follow the practices of Ahlulbayt (a) in the manner that has been recommended by Imam Ali (a):

“Look at the people of the Prophet’s family. Adhere to their direction. Follow their footsteps because they would never let you out of guidance, and never throw you into destruction. If they sit down, you sit down, and if they rise up you rise up. Do not go ahead of them, as you would thereby go astray and go not lag behind them as you would thereby be ruined.” – Nahj al-Balagha, Sermon 96.

Some proponents of blood flagellation argue that the Imams (a) may have performed the rituals in private, and that may be the reason why we have no evidence that they (a) performed these rituals. Therefore we should not deny the fact that these rituals are Islamically recommended.

Any sincere person with a working intellect would not fail to see the flaw in that argument. If the argument were valid then it could be applied to a whole range of actions that have no Islamic backing. Any given Muslim could innovate a ritual and claim that we should not deny that it is Islamically recommended because it may have been performed by the Ahlulbayt (a) in private. For example we could innovate a new prayer with sixty four rakats and justify it by saying: “Don’t say it is not mustahab, maybe the Imams (a) did it in private!”

The lack of evidence in this case is sufficient to justify the proposition that the Imams (a) did not perform those rituals.

The History of Blood Mourning Ceremonies

For about a millennium after the tragedy of Karbala, the Shia did not practice blood shedding when mourning the martyrdom of Imam Hussain (a) or any of the Ahlulbayt (a). Instead they mourned in a traditional and more natural manner, which included the methods used by the Imams (a) and their families. However this changed when blood rituals were introduced into the mourning gatherings of the Shia.

Historians have shown that blood rituals were foreign cultural practices that were introduced to certain elements of the Shia community relatively recently in the history of the religion.

Quoting Professor Werner Ende in “The Flagellations of Muharram and the Shi’ite ‘Ulama’”:

Muhammad Mahdi al-Qazwini, however, in a work finished in the month of Ramadan 1345 H (March 1927), claims that the use of iron, i.e. of chains and swords for flagellation, was initiated “about a century ago” by people not well versed in the rules of the shari'a.

Source.

Below is an excerpt from the book “A Hidden Hand” which describes how these cultural practices entered the Shia community via external sources.

There are differences of opinion as to when blood matam started.¹ The most reliable opinion is that the cutting of the head was a practice performed by the Turks in Azerbaijan which was transferred to the Iranians and Arabs.²

The Iraqi author of the book The Tragedy of Karbala also believes that such practices were not common in Iraq before the nineteenth century. At the end of this century they started to gain popularity in this country. Therefore, blood matam started elsewhere and came to Iraq which means it is not rooted in Arab heritage.³ Shaykh Kazim Dajili also accepts this view and says: “Iraqis did not participate in these processions until the beginning of the twentieth century. This practice was first seen amongst the Turkish Iraqis, Sufis, and Western Iranian Kurds.”⁴ A report by English sources covering Ashura in Najaf in the year 1919 shows that 100 Turkish Shias performed blood matam that year.⁵

Memories of Sayyid Muhammad Bahr al-Ulum support this claim as well: “When I was in Najaf around 50-60 years ago there were only a fewTurkish mourning groups. They would come to Sayyid Bahr al-Ulum’s house on the days of mourning and with his permission they would recite emotional poems about Imam Hussayn (a). Some of them would slightly injure themselves while listening to the poems in order to try to feel what Imam Hussayn felt. Slowly this type of action changed and spread until it reached its peak when it was outlawed in 1935 by Yasin Hashimi, the prime minister of the time. In reality, this oppressive action had an opposite effect¹ – in such a way that the number of mourning groups tripled.”²

Hajj Hamid Razi (d.1953) was a police man in Karbala and lived to be about 110 years old. He told his memories regarding the mourning of Imam Hussayn (a) – about blood matam which he says was not normally practiced in Najaf or Karbala when he was young.³ There has been no recollection by elder people of Najaf and Karbala saying that there were these processions before the middle of the nineteenth century. These processions where first performed by Turkish visitors from the Qizilbash Tribe. When they would perform a ziyarat to Imam Hussayn (a) they would strike their heads with special swords.⁴

The full book can be purchased here for a nominal price.

Yitzhak Nakash in his article: “An Attempt to Trace the Origin of the Rituals of ʿĀshūrāʾ”, states the following regarding the origin of these practices:

The flagellations were introduced into central and southern Iran, as well as into Iraq, only in the nineteenth century. This proposition is supported by the data provided by Shi’i biographies and Iraqi Shi`i oral history. The biographies identify Shaykh Mulla Agha `Abidal-Darbendi (d. 1868/9) as the first to introduce violent acts of self-flagellation into Tehran around the mid-nineteenth century.

Darbendi is said to include in this work uncommon rituals, not to be found in other accepted Shi’i Imami writings on the commemoration of ‘Ashura.⁵⁴ The relatively late appearance of flagellation in Iraq is also evident from Shi’i accounts. The Iraqi Shi’i mujtahid Muhammad Mahdi al-Qazwini is cited by Werner Ende as claiming around 1927 that the use of iron was initiated “about a century ago” by people not well versed in the rules of the Shari’a.⁵⁵ Indeed, Iraqi Shi’i oral history traces the appearance of flagellation in Najaf and Karbala to the nineteenth century. It is related that the practice was imported to these cities by Shi’i Turks, who came to Karbala and Najaf on pilgrimage from the Caucasus or Azarbayjan.⁵⁶

The author goes on to state that the Qizilbash, an extreme ghulat Turkish sect, seemingly introduced blood rituals to Imami Shias. He then points out that the Qizilbash took their flagellation rituals from some Christians. Therefore the Shia blood rituals most probably have a Christian origin.

Sufi and Christian elements were fused in the rituals of the Qizilbash.⁶² As will be seen below, this was also evident in the flagellations, which reenacted the shedding of Husayn’s blood in a manner similar to the reenactment of the shedding of the blood of Christ among Christian Catholics.

__________

1 An Article in a Shia media outlet entitled: Maruri bar Tarikh Takvin Majalis va Aeenhaye Azadari dar Iran by Mohsin Hassam Mazaheri, Akhbar Adiyan Magazine, number 18, Farvardin va Ordibehesht138

2 Abdullah Mastufi, Sharh Zendiganiye Man ya Tarikh Ijtemai va Idari Douran Ghajariyeh, v.1 and 3.

3 Ibrahim Haydari, The Tragedy of Karbala (tradjedi Karbala) translated into Farsi by Ali Mamouri,p.475

4 Kazem Dajili, Ashura fi al-Najaf wa Karbala, p.287; Mahmoud Darah, Jiyyat Iraqi min wara’ al-Bawabih al-Sawda’, p.24

5 Naqash, p.269 (quoting from: Administration Report of the Shamiyya Division, Great Britain)

1 Anytime an action is forbid with force without any kind of intellectual or cultural explanation given it will have an opposite effect.

2 Goftegu ba Sayyid Bahr al-Ulum piramoun Azadari Husseini, Nour Magazine, number 74, January 1997

3 Tradjedi Karbala, a conversation with Doctor Shakir Latif, 4,12,1996

4 Talib Ali Sharqi, al-najaf al-Ashraf Adatha wa Talidha

* * *

The Safest Course for Shia Muslims to follow

Considering all the arguments that are presented in favour of and against blood flagellation, the safest course of action to take would be to refrain from the rituals. Consider the following four scenarios*:

1, If a person performs blood shedding and if the act is detrimental for all the reasons that have been given, then that person would be committing some serious sins.

2, If a person performs blood shedding and if the detriments are not real then the merit of performing the acts is very minimal since Ahlulbayt (a) would not refrain from a significantly meritorious act.

3, If a person refrains from the performance of blood shedding and if the act is detrimental for all the reasons that have been given, then that person would receive rewards for refraining from a harmful act that was not practiced by Ahlulbayt (a).

4, If a person refrains from the performance of blood shedding and if the detriments are not real then the merits lost due to non-performance is very minimal since Ahlulbayt (a) would not refrain from a significantly meritorious act.


The argument can be summarized using the following decision matrix:

	The rituals are detrimental	The rituals are not detrimental
Perform blood shedding	Commit serious sins	Minimal rewards
Refrain from blood shedding	Rewards available	Avoid minimal rewards

 

More information: http://tatbir.org/

Fatawa on Tatbir (Blood ritual in Ashura)

Shia Scholars strictly prohibited the blood ritual (Tatbir). It is impermissible to perform such action.

This action has not been mentioned anywhere in the Holy Shariah. Not only that, but in any case it causes damage and becomes a source of mockery for the others, it is Haraam.

The following are the verdits of some of the highest ranking and most widely respected Shia scholars on the issue of blood mourning rituals such as Tatbir and Zanjeer:

Grand Ayatullah Khoei

“If blood matam and hitting oneself with chains, which are practiced in Muharram, cause serious harm, or harm or ridicule the religion and sect then it is impermissible.”

Al-Masa’il al-Shar’iyah, istifta’at Imam Khoei, al-Ibadat and al-Tariq al-Najah, v.2, p.445

Regarding this action we have some questions as follows:

(a) What is the order of the shariah about hitting (with) such “Qameh” or chains? Please explain in detail.

Answer:
Bisimihi Taala. This action has not been mentioned anywhere in the Holy Shariah. Not only that, but in any case it causes damage and becomes a source of mockery for the others, it is haraam.

(b) Some people later on go and offer the prayer in the same clothes soaked with their blood. If someone raises any objection, they answer that this blood which has been shed in the name of Hazrat Imam Hussain (a) thorough the chain or qameh is not najis (ritually impure). Therefore there is no problem in reciting the prayer with this blood. It is humbly requested to your honour to explain the order of the shariah in extensive detail on this matter.

Answer:
Bismihi Taaala. As far as the taharat (purity) is concerned, this type of blood is not exempted, but it is just like the other blood of human beings in general and it does not make any difference.

Stamped: 18th Jumādā al-Ūlā 1409 AH. Ayatullah Khoei.

Click here to see the scanned image of the fatwa with the seal of the Ayatullah

Question:
“Hitting (one’s self) with chains and tatbir are from the rituals that we witness during the month of (Muharram). What is the ruling in the case of this action being harmful to the self along with bringing criticisms of others (towards the sect)?”

Answer:
“It is impermissible if it necessitates considerable harm, or entails degradation and humiliation.”

Source: Sirat al-Najat, v. 2, Q 1404

Grand Ayatullah Sistani

Question:
I want to know the status of beating our backs with knives (Zanjeer) on the day of Ashura? What is it’s status in our Fiqh?
Answer:
The philosophy of mourning during ‘Ashura’, is to respect the symbols of religion and remember the suffering of Imam Hussain, his companions, and his uprising to defend Islam and prevent the destruction of the religion by the Bani Umayyad dynasty. These rites must be done in such a way that in addition to serving that purpose, it draws the attention of others to these lofty goals. So those actions which are not understandable and cause misunderstandings and contempt for the religion must be avoided.
Click here to see a stamped fatwa with a similar reply.
The following question was sent to the liaison office of Ayatullah Sistani in London (najaf.org):
Question:
“Please tell me if cutting yourself in muharram for Imam Husayn (a) is haraam or not.”
Answer:
“Reviving Hussaini traditions is Mustahab but one is not allowed to Harm the body or the noble reputation of the Faith.”
The obligation of following the Hakim in issues such as this one. The Hakim in our era is Ayatullah Khamenei:
Question:
“Are the ahkam wila’iya (orders of the juristic authority) of the Wali Faqih implemented upon all the Muslims globally or is it specific to the area of his authority?”
Answer:
“The Hukm of the Mujtahid who fulfilled the criteria and is accepted by the general masses, is implemented without any bounds in what is related to ordaining society unless his mistake becomes apparent and was contrary to what is certainly proven from the Qur’an and Sunnah.” Fatwa number 134
“It is not permissible to abrogate/break the hukm (order/command/rule) of the (religious) governor/ruler (hakim), who meets all the necessary criterion (for governance/ruling), even by another mujtahid, except if it (the hukm) is contrary to what has been proven, with certainty, by the Qur’an and Sunnah.”
Minhaj al-Saleheen V. 1 page 15

Grand Ayatullah Abul Hassan Esfahani

Ayatullah Esfahani (1860–1946) was the highest ranking Shia jurist and the sole Marja of his time. He openly supported the stance of Ayatullah Muhsin Al-Amin on this issue.
“The usage of swords, chains, drums, horns and the likes today, which have become common in mourning ceremonies on Ashura, is definitely forbidden and against religious doctrine.”
Dayrah al-Ma”arif Tashayu’, v.2, p.531; A’yan al-Shia, v.10, p.378; Professor Hassan Shabir, Tarikh Iraq Mu’asir, v.2, p.340

Grand Ayatullah Muhsin Al-Amin Al-Amuli

Ayatullah Muhsin Al-Amin (~1868-1952), was one of the greatest scholars of his time. He is known for his biographical encyclopaedia, Ayan Al-Shi’ah (62 volumes) and for his very strong opposition to blood shedding rituals. He is known to have boycotted meetings where they were performed.
He wrote the book “Al-Majalis Al-Saniya” (1928) in which he said: “And what some people do injuring themselves with swords and hitting themselves in a way that harms them is from the encouragement of Shaytan”.
In 1927 he wrote “Rissalat Al-Tanzih” specifically to prove the prohibition of blood rituals and he declared them to be innovations (bid’ah). In it he wrote: “It is from the saddening things… using drums and flutes, and cutting the heads in a way that show the Shia in a barbaric way and make the others mock them… and on top of that (they) consider it a kind of worship and attribute it to the purified Ahlubayt (a).”
During his era, Ayatullah Muhsin Al-Amin’s position against blood flagellation was supported by a number of other scholars including: Ayatullah Abul Hassan Esfahani, Sayyid Muhammad Mahdi Al-Qazwini, Abd al-Karim Al-Jazairi, Shaikh Ali Al-Qummi, Shaikh Jafar Al-Budairi & Sheikh Mahdi Al-Hajjar.

Grand Ayatullah Khomeini

Ayatullah Khomeini was known for his very strong attachment to the remembrance of the tragedy of Karbala. He used the struggle of Imam Hussain (a) to inspire the Shia of Iran to revolt against the oppressive Shah (the Iranian uprisings began on Ashura). He would always remind people to involve themselves in mourning for Imam Hussain (a) and asked them to put a great deal of emphasis on the more natural mourning ceremonies. However he was not in favour of blood flagellation and other misguided practices.
His responses when asked about hitting oneself with blades:

“You want to do something for God, but in situations where your actions might harm Islam, refraining is best. Instead participate in chest beating processions endeavour to hold these events with greater glory.”
“In the current situation they are to refrain from blade beating. Passion plays are permitted as long as they do not include the forbidden practices and do not bring disrepute to religion. Reciting of the tragedies of the “master of the unjustly treated” (Imam Hussain (a)) is the noblest and most recommended (of actions) on this occasion.”
“Mourning and chest beating for the “unjustly treated” (the victims of the tragedy of Karbala) is amongst the best of religious practices, but the participants must exert due diligence to avoid wounds and the flowing of blood. If such actions bring about disrepute to the religion then they are forbidden. At any rate it is reccomended that the participants refrain from such actions.”
Click here to see these rulings with the official stamp.
“In his name, the Most High. Do not perform blood matam or the likes in the present state. If it does not include forbidden actions or defamation of the religion than there is no problem. Although, reciting poetry is better and mourning the Sayyid of the Oppressed is of the best forms of worship.”
Istifta’at Imam, v.3, miscellaneous questions, question 37.
“I should speak here about the gatherings and memorial ceremonies that are held in the name of Imam Hussain Ibn Ali (a), neither us nor (other) religious persons say that everything done by anybody is correct and good. Many times some of the grand scholars considered these things deviated and bad and they forbade them. We all know that in the last 20 years and so the respected scholar Hajj Sheikh Abdul Kareem Al-Haeri Al-Yazdi (q), who was among the eminent Shia scholars, forbade the Shia from acting out the events and persons of Ashura, and he replaced them with a gathering for mourning and elegies, and this is what the other scholars do with the actions that contradict with the religious rules and they still forbid it until now.”
“Nahdat Ashura”, page 110-111.
“You should know that in order to preserve your progress then you should preserve these rituals, and of course if there are deviated and wrong actions done by some people who are not informed, then these actions should be stopped. But the mourning ceremonies and the processions should remain strong.”
“Nahdat Ashura”, page page 112.

Ayatullah Mutahhari

“Blood matam in its present form does not have a rational or religious basis. It is a clear instance of deviation. At least, in the present day it causes Shi’ism to be questioned. Activities that do not have any relation to the goals of Imam Husayn (a) are razors, blades and locks. Striking the head with a blade is the same. This is a mistake. Some people take blades and strike their heads making blood flow – for what? This action is not mourning.”
Howzah va Ruhaniyat, v.3
In his book “Al Malahama Al-Husainiya”, Ayatullah Mutahhari adopts Ayatullah Muhsin Al-Amin’s opnion.

Grand Ayatullah Muhammad Baqir Al-Sadr

Ayatullah Al-Sadr speaking about the commemoration of the tragedy of Karbala:
“the commemoration is a thorn in the eyes of the tyrants, and these rituals have implanted in the hearts of the generations the love of Imam Hussain(a.s.) and the love of Islam, therefore we should preserve them although some of them need polish and modification.”
“Al-Shaheed Al-Sadr”, Shaykh Muhammad Rida Al-Numani (a very close student of the sayyid), Published Qom.

Grand Ayatullah Khamenei

Ayatullah Khamenei, in his position as the Hakim Al-Shari’i has given a Hukm forbidding blood flagellation. A hukm is binding on all Muslims, unlike a fatwa.
Question 1450:
Is hitting oneself with swords halal if it is done in secret? Or is your fatwa in this regard universal?
Answer:
In addition to the fact that it is not held in the common view as manifestations of mourning and grief and it has no precedent at the lifetime of the Imams (a.s.) and even after that and we have not received any tradition quoted from the Infallibles (a.s.) about any support for this act, be it privately or publicly, this practice would, at the present time, give others a bad image of our school of thought. Therefore, there is no way that it can be considered permissible.
Question 1449:
In commemorating the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (a.s.) on the tenth of Muharram, some people hit themselves with a machete, or walk bare-footed on fire. Such actions defame Shi‘ism and put it in a bad light, if not undermine it. They cause bodily and spiritual harms on these doing it as well. What is your opinion in this matter?
Answer:
Any practice that causes bodily harm, or leads to defaming the faith, is haram. Accordingly, the believers have to steer clear of it. There is no doubt that many of these practices besmirch the image of Ahlul Bayt’s (a.s.) School of Thought which is the worst damage and loss.
Question 1451:
What is the shar‘i criterion in determining physical or psychological damage?
Answer:
The criterion is noticeable and considerable harm judged by common sense.
Practical Laws of Islam.
“Blood matam is a part of the culture that was made up. It is an issue that has no relation to religion and, without doubt, Allah is not happy with it.”
“It is an incorrect action which some people perform – taking a blade in one’s hand and hitting themselves on the head with it spilling their blood. What do they do this for? How is this action considered mourning? Of course, hitting one’s head with their hands is a form of mourning. You have seen over and over again, a person who has had something bad happen to them, hit themselves on their head and chest. This is a normal sign of mourning. But, have you ever seen a person who has had something bad happen to their most loved (ones) hit themselves on the head with a sword until blood flows down? How is this action considered mourning?”
A speech given to scholars of Kahgiluyeh and Bavir Ahmad, Muharram, 1372

Grand Ayatullah Muhammad Hussain Kashif Al-Ghita

Ayatullah Muhammad Hussain Kashif Al-Ghita (d. 1954) was one of the greatest scholars of his time.
“If we want to act in accordance to jurisprudential principles and the derivation of religious rulings regarding the issue of mourning by hitting the face and other practices like blood matam (which are prevalent in the modern age) we will not find anything except forbiddance. We will not have any choice in issuing a verdict stating that these actions are forbidden. The reason is that there have been no exceptions to the principles of the forbiddance of causing harm to ones body or endangering the life of a human in this regard. Therefore, there is no reason for these actions to have any other ruling than forbiddance. But, most of the people who perform such actions do so more to show themselves off or to be fanatic; they do not perform such actions with pure intentions. This, in itself, is problematic; rather it is also forbidden because of some reasons involved with the age and the location as well.”
Al-Firdus al-Ala’, p.19-22

Grand Ayatullah Lankarani

Q4: I have a question about blood matam or what is known as Qama zani or Tatbir? What is your ruling about using blades, knives, swords and spilling blood during mourning rituals? Is it permissible?
A4: It is necessary to act during Muharram rituals in such manner that it attracts others to the Imam Husain and his holy objective. So it is advisable to narrate the history of Ashura, cry, beat the chest and hold lamentation ceremonies, so it will cause Islam to be disseminated and the memory of those devotions to be revived. But to wound oneself with a poniard or a knife or sword which has no rational basis and justification for Islam’s foes will play a negative role; therefore, it is necessary for the Shiites believing in Imam Hussein’s school to avoid it.
Q&A section at the bottom of the home page.
“Keeping in mind the interest that has been seen throughout the world about Islam and Shiaism after the victory of the Islamic revolution in Iran, and keeping in mind that Islamic Iran has been considered throughout the world as the ‘mother of the Islamic world,’ and keeping in mind that the actions of the Iranian nation are taken as a role model for Islam, it is necessary, while mourning for the Master of the Martyrs, Abi Abdullah al-Husayn (as), to act in such a way that more interest and a stronger love in that personality and his holy mission will occur. It is clear that in this situation blood matam does not play this role; rather it has a negative effect because it cannot be accepted and has no form of proof to be understood by its opponents. Therefore, it is necessary for the Shia’s who love Imam Husayn’s (as) school of thought to refrain from it. If one had an oath in this regard, the oath would not have the conditions of a correct oath.”
Jama’ al-Masa’il, issue 2173.
“Moreover, the use of cutting tools for lamentation is not considered a customary means/method for mourning.”
Email answer [#838505], Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004

Grand Ayatullah Makarem Shirazi

“The mourning congregations have to do their best to hold this ceremony as magnificent as possible, they should not permit anyone to do some acts which vilify the religion and give pretext to the enemies using the name of mourning congregation, acts like using music instruments, striking heads by sword, etc. although some people do these acts due to their passion toward imam Husain (a), but they should express this passion in a way that is acceptable and admitted by Imam Mahdi (a).”
source

Grand Ayatullah Jawad Tabrizi

“Mourning the five people of the cloak is of the most important signs of religion and the secret to the survival of the Shia. But, it is necessary for our dear mourners to refrain from actions which defame the religion and are misused by the enemies of Islam.”
Istafta’at, question 2003, 2012, 2014
Question:
“Hitting (one’s self) with chains and tatbir are from the signs/rituals that we witness during the month of (Muharram). What is the ruling in the case of this action being harmful to the self along with bringing criticisms of others (towards the sect)?”
Answer:
“The inclusion of the aforementioned (acts) under the category of recommended grief for what occurred to the Master of Martyrs is problematic/doubtful.”
Source: Sirat al-Najat, v. 2, Q 1404

Grand Ayatullah Basheer Hussain Al-Najafi

Question:
“Is it permissable to do qama and zanjeer zani hitting yourself with sword and knives?”
Answer:
“Bismahe Subhana
It is permitted unless Mawla Imam Hussain’s (as) and the Ahl-ul-Bayt’s persecution are considered as propaganda or if he is not allowed by his doctor because it might result in death or losing of a body part. Matam-qama or matam-zanjeer should not be done if he is settled in a part of the world where people due to their ignorance or lack of knowledge about Imam Hussain (as) after watching such matam are turned away from Imam Hussain (as). Therefore it should be avoided in front of such people.
Allah Knows Better.”
Source.

Grand Ayatullah Muhammad Ibrahim Jannaati

“One of the practices that is against religious rules in some of the mourning ceremonies is Qameh-Zani (drawing blood through cutting one’s scalp with a machete), a practice which is against reason and against the manner practiced by the imams. This practice in no way can be considered among the authentic religious rituals.”
“Imam Khomeini and the Culture of Ashura”, 1995, page 66.
“Refrain from performing these actions which are inappropriate, cause harm to the religion, and are imbalanced and superstitious. They have no jurisprudential foundations and cause the face of Islam and Shiaism to become damaged.”

Grand Ayatullah Kadhim Al-Haeri

“We have witnessed that blood matam and the likes have caused the face of Islam and Shiaism to be destroyed. The disbelieving enemy in our time uses such actions to attack us; to introduce our religion as a superstitious, barbaric religion.”
“Secondly, regardless whether or not we have the same view of blood matam, it is necessary to obey the commands of the Wali al-Faqih, Ayatollah Khamenei, in this regard. The reason behind this is that he has taken a clear stance in this regard and has not left any room for disobedience. It is obligatory on all Muslims to obey his commands; those who agree with his verdict or perform taqlid to him and those who do not agree with him on this verdict or perform taqlid to someone else. In any case, it is obligatory on all Muslims to follow him because he is the Wali al-Faqih.”
http://www.alhaeri.co/

Grand Ayatullah Mazaheri

Question:
“What jurisprudential ruling does blood matam have?”
Answer:
“Everyone must refrain from this action because the Wali al-Faqih forbids it – even if they follow someone who permits it.”
www.almazaheri.ir

Grand Ayatullah Moslem Malakouti

“The mourning sessions of the Master of the Martyrs, the grandson of the Noble Prophet (s) must be conducted in a method suitable to the Imam (a). It should not cause harm or weaken Islam or the Shia sect; rather, like his movement, it should cause the survival of Islam and Muslims; it should be a source of pride for them being free from all forms of innovation and superstition.”

Grand Ayatullah Noori Hamedani

“The school of thought of the Master of the Martyrs, Abi Abdullah al-Husayn (as) is a school of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil, a school of raising Islamic merits. The history of Ashura which moves people has been the source of energy for all movements against oppression. The reason behind this is it ‘boils the blood’ of the lovers of this school of thought, especially in the present condition where the enemy has been slapped by Islam and its illegitimate benefits have been taken away. Therefore, it is necessary for the mourning sessions to be conducted in a beautiful way; that is a way that is in congruence with Islamic logic. Respected mourners must, instead of hitting their heads with a blade, think about hitting the enemy’s head who is occupying and weakening them, who is usurping their benefits and putting their Islam in danger on a daily basis.”
Istifta’at, v.2, p.597

Ayatullah Salehi Mazandarani

“There are no rational or lexical proofs, nor are there any principles, that can support blood matam in the mourning sessions of the leader of the martyrs, Imam Husayn (a), being permissible, let alone recommended. Furthermore, the principles and secondary rulings testify to its forbiddance. Therefore it is necessary to refrain from it.”

Ayatullah Jawadi Amuli

“Something that causes defamation to the religion and destroys the respect of the mourners is impermissible. It is expected for people to refrain from blood matam and the likes.”

Ayatullah Ibrahim Amini

“Taking into account that the above issue has not been established religiously and it causes defamation to the Shia school in the present age it is necessary for the mourners of Imam Husayn (as) to refrain from it. Mourning for the Leader of the Martyrs, Aba Abdullah al-Husayn (as) is a form of worship that gets one close to Allah, the glorified, and the infallible Imams (as). Therefore, in this issue there is emphasis; moreover, it is obligatory for the lovers of the Ahl al-Bayt to refrain from performing the above mentioned action. The reason behind this is, firstly this action is not considered an act of mourning in the common view and it is only recommended if it is considered that. Secondly, in the present age, this action is considered superstitious and causes defamation to the Shia school.”
“Thirdly, Ayatollah Khamenei strongly forbids such actions and it is necessary for all Muslims and followers of the Wali al-Faqih to obey him and disobeying him is forbidden. Therefore, it is expected from all Shias in mourning sessions to refrain from these actions. (May) Allah, make us amongst the true followers of Imam Hussayn (a).”

Ayatullah Ali Meshkini

“Mourning for that holy personality is a political action; therefore, it must not be mixed with actions that would lessen its political effect, that would be considered superstitious, or that would defame Islam. Even if the person performing blood matam does not have the intention of harming Islam it is still an innovation and forbidden.”
“After accepting what was mentioned, it is problematic according to religious sources; some have even considered it forbidden in and of itself. Muslims must refrain from bringing this into mourning sessions for Hussain (as), which is a form of worship.”

Ayatullah Muhammad Wa’id Zadeh Khurasani

“One of the duties of ulama is to stop the intrusion of innovations and deviations in the domain of religion. Among the obvious deviations is the practice of qameh-zani (striking one’s head with a dagger) in mourning ceremonies for Imam Husayn (A) and qufl-zani (placing a padlock on their bodies) both historic and as a forthright way of confronting of an Imam with the intention of fulfilment of a prayer and removing it on its fulfilment) witnessed during the commemoration of Imam Husayn’s (A) martyrdom. The Shi’ah ulama, well meaning people and reformers have been distressed about this obvious innovation (bid’at).”
“Imam Khomeini and the Culture of Ashura”, 1995, page 140.

Ayatullah Ali Rasti Kashani

“Mourning for Abi Abdullah al-Husayn, the Master of the Martyrs (a), is of the best methods of seeking proximity to Allah and renewing one’s life and Islam. It is upon the Muslims to hold these ceremonies in a grand fashion and to refrain from committing any action which harms Islam or helps the enemies of Islam.”
“It is obligatory on all Muslims to refrain from such actions and to follow the leadership which will make the enemies of Islam loose hope in harming Islam.”

Shaykh Muhammad Al-Tijani Al-Samawi

Shaykh Al-Tijani is the famous author of the book “Then I was Guided”, in which he describes his conversion from Sunni Islam to Shia Islam.
“As for self-flagellation, it is not one of the doctrines of the Shi`as, nor is it a part of their creed. Rather, it is what some commoners do, and Shi`as are not the only ones who practice it. There are some Sunnis, particularly those who follow the [sufi] Aysawi tareeqa, which is well known throughout all of north Africa, who practice rituals more damaging to Islam’s image than what some Shi`as do. Yet by practicing them they do not express their grief for the tragedy that befell Imam al-Husayn, nor for the suffering of Ahl al-Bayt, peace be upon them.
We agree with the author’s statement in his book in this regard, and we would like to work with him to remove this phenomenon from all Muslim lands. There are many sincere Shi`a scholars who prohibit such an abomination and try hard to put an end to it, as al-Musawi himself admits.”
Source

Ayatullah Hassan Tehrani

“In the present conditions, the issue that was mentioned causes harm to the Shia sect and is impermissible. Also, obeying the hukm of the Wali al-Faqih in this matter is necessary.”

Ayatullah Muhammad Abtahi

“One must refrain from committing actions that cause harm to the religion and it is obligatory to obey the commands of the Wali al-Faqih.”

Ayatullah Ustadi

“In accordance with what the Wali al-Faqih said, it is necessary for those who want to hold mourning sessions for Abi Abdullah al-Hussayn (a) to use methods which glorify divine symbols and to refrain from using actions which, in his words, cause harm to the religion. With hope that everyone fall’s under the leader of the martyr’s (a) grace.”

Ayatollah Ahmadi Miyanji

“An action which causes harm to the religion is impermissible. In addition, after the hukm by the supreme leader, there is no more room for questions; it is obligatory to obey his order.”
“An action with causes harm to the religion is impermissible.”

Ayatullah Muhammadi Gilani

“Whatever causes harm to Islam is definitely forbidden, especially when the Wali al-Faqih also forbids it. It obligatory for all to obey the command.”

Ayatullah Mahmoud Shahroudi

Speaking about how mourning activities must be performed:
“In his name, the Most High… But, there are three conditions that must be followed in regards to how they are performed:
2. That which does not cause harm to the religion and the Shia sect, or the Islamic society, or the Islamic republic. The reason is that if harm is caused to any one of these it would be of the greatest sin. Specifying this matter is in the hands of the Wali al-Faqih. This means that if the Wali al-Faqih specifies this matter in special circumstances in that an action is against the good nature of the Islamic society or causes harm to the religion of the Islamic republic and because of this forbids that action – it would be obligatory for all to obey him. In this case no mukhallaf can act in accordance to his own opinion.”

Ayatullah Abbas Mafuzi

“One must refrain from that which causes harm to the religion and obeying the Wali al-Faqih is necessary.”

Ayatullah Shar’i

“The Wali al-Faqih, Ayatollah Khamenei, considers the Ashura movement to be one of the strongest weapons for Shiism. It has been established in history and traditions have been narrated by the infallibles (a) which state that mourning the Master of the Martyrs is of the best forms of worship. There has been strong emphasis on it. He states that cultural Ashura movements must depict and strengthen the message of jihad and self-sacrifice in Islam and in this sect. Blood matam is an action that is not in congruence with the principle purposes of this movement. They cause harm to the Ashura movement. Therefore, it is obligatory on all Muslims to obey the orders and hukms of the Wali al-Faqih of the Islamic world. It is self-evident that taking this lightly and not obeying it will anger Allah.”

Ayatollah Muqtada’i

“By specifying the situation and announcing the hukm forbidding blood matam, for example that which was issued by the wali al-faqih, Ayatollah Khamenei, it becomes obligatory on all Muslims to obey this ruling; disobeying it is forbidden.”

Ayatullah Muhammad Yazdi

“It is necessary for everyone to obey the hukm of the Wali al-Faqih. Disobeying it is a sin and will have different punishments. Many of the mentioned items are clearly against the religion and are forbidden, and some of them cause harm to Islam. In addition to this, obeying the hukm of the Wali al-Faqih, Sayyid Ali Khamenei, is obligatory on all and disobeying it is a sin and will have different punishments. No other opinion can make it permissible to disobey the hukm of the Wali al-Faqih. The right of issuing hukms is limited to the Wali al-Faqih and a verdict (fatwa) does not overrule a hukm.”

Ayatullah Jafar Karimi

“With the jurisprudential opinion of the Wali al-Faqih, Ayatollah Khamenei, in mind, it is religiously forbidden and will be a cause of punishment to perform such actions which were alluded to claiming that they are forms of mourning and by disobeying the order of the Wali al-Faqih which is obligatory to follow.”

Ayatullah Muhsin Kharazi:

“In regards to what was mentioned, it is necessary and obligatory to obey the Wali al-Faqih and the Islamic leader.”

Ayatullah Muhammad Mumin

“Obeying the hukms of the Wali al-Faqih is obligatory.”

Ayatullah Muhsin Haram Pinahi

“It is obligatory to obey the hukms of the Wali al-Faqih.”

Ayatullah Ahmad Adhari Qumi

“Disobeying the Wali al-Faqih is a great sin and causes the holy Islamic government to be weakened. It is not obligatory to observe previous oaths; rather it is forbidden.”

Ayatullah Mussawi Tabrizi

“Mourning in the days of Muharram and Safar and keeping alive the holy mission of Hussayn bin Ali (a) is of the best forms of worship. Any action which causes harm to Islam and the holy mission of Aba Abdullah (a) is forbidden. Obeying the hukm of the wali al-faqih is obligatory.”

Source: http://tatbir.org/?page_id=98

The Prophet's flower

Hussain (PBUH) spent his childhood with Lady Fatimah (PBUH), Imam Ali (PBUH), and especially with Prophet Muhammad (PBUH&HP). The love and affection Prophet Muhammad (PBUH&HP) had towards Hussain (PBUH) was so unique that all the companions were aware of it, had frequently seen its manifestation, and had heard of it repeatedly. Moreover, historians have recorded incidents and narrations in this respect. In one account it has been said that the Prophet's prostration took longer than usual in his prayer. People came to the Prophet and asked, "Were you receiving a revelation or order from Allah during prostration?" Prophet Muhammad (PBUH&HP) replied, "No, my son Hussain had climbed onto my back; I waited until he wished to come down." This is an example showing how the best creature of Allah (SWT) treated Hussain (PBUH) while he was in the best state of worship.  

The companions had seen Prophet Muhammad (PBUH&HP) repeatedly put Hassan and Hussain (PBUT) on his shoulders and play with them. At other times he would kiss Hussain (PBUH) and say, Hussain is from me, and I am from Hussain. May Allah love him who loves Hussain [1] In other traditions the Prophet would say, Hassan and Hussain (PBUT) are my two aromatic flowers from this world [2]

References:

1. al-Tareekh al-Kabeer, al-Bukhari, vol.8, p.414.
2. al-Sahih al-Bukhari, vol.2, p.306.

Who is Imam Hussain (as)?

He is grandson of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and son of Fatima al-Zahra
He and His brother are masters of the youths of Paradise. (1)

He who the Prophet says about Him "Everyone loves Hassan and Hussain, has loved me, and every person hate Them, have hated me" (2)

He who the Omar says about Him "What is over our head, [i.e Islam] has grown by Allah, and then by you the Household [i.e Ahlulbayt] of the Prophet" (3)

He is a member of the Prophet's kinship (Ahlulbayt) that the Holy Quran says about him “I do not ask you for it [i.e prophecy mission] any reward but affection through kinship” [Quran 42:23]

He is one of the Ahlulbayt(4) that the Prophet says about them "Everyone hurt me by hurting my family (Ahlulbayt), have hurt Almighty Allah" (5)

And at the end, Imam Hussein (as) the grandson of the Prophet, with many members of his family, and 72 persons of His companions have brutally massacred in Karbala.

References:
1. al-Tabaqat al-Kubra, vol. 8, p. 30. / al-Mojam al-Kabeer, vol. 3, p. 24.
2. al-Mojam al-Kabeer, vol. 3, p. 40
3. al-Eesabah, vol. 1, p. 333
4. Aisha's narration about exact name of Ahlulbayt. al-Majma al-zawad, vol. 9, p. 186
5. al-Shawahid al-Tanzeel, vol. 2, p. 93

Join the team: Who is Hussain

The damage of a corrupt mullah from Imam Khomeini point of view

October 12, 1979

The damage Islam sustains at the hands of a corrupt mullah is greater than that inflicted by Muhammad-Rida (The king of Iran by the time)! There are some traditions saying, men of hell are bothered by the fetid smell of the corrupt clerics. In this world the people are also bothered by their fetid smell. We do not support the turban; we support Islam. If Islam is with everyone, he will be dignified. Being treacherous to the precepts of Islam on behalf of a cleric is worse than a non-cleric because the former is more harmful than others. There is no purpose behind establishing these courts and it makes no difference if they want to change them into the common public courts.

Imam Khomeini (r.a.)

Age of Aisha (ra) at time of marriage with Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)

Before looking at the original problem of age of Ummul Momineen Aisha let us clarify what really was the year in which Holy Prophet (PBUH) married Ummul Momineen Aisha so that it may be easier to conclude about what was the age of Ummul Momineen Aisha at the time of marriage with Holy Prophet (PBUH).
 

Muhammad Ibne Ismail Bukhari has narrated in Sahih Bukhari from Ummul Momineen Aisha herself that Holy Prophet (PBUH) married Ummul Momineen Aisha three years after the death of his first wife, Ummul Momineen Khadija:

I did not feel jealous of any woman as much as I did of Ummul Momineen Khadijah because Allah's Messenger used to mention her very often. He married me after three years of her death, and his Lord (or Gabriel) ordered him to give her the good news of having a palace of reed in Paradise.

Sahih al-Bukhari hadith #3817
http://sunnah.com/bukhari/63/43

Be like a flower that gives its fragrance to even the hand that crushes it.

Be like a flower that gives its fragrance to even the hand that crushes it.

[Ali ibn Abitalib (K.W.)]
K.W: Karam Allahu Wajhahu (Why?)

Why hasn’t Imam Ali (A.S) been mentioned in the Holy Quran?

Why hasn’t Imam Ali (A.S) been mentioned in the Holy Quran?

Concise answer

One should be aware that although the imam’s names,) especially Imam Ali’s haven’t been mentioned in the Qur’an, nevertheless, their names,) especially Imam Ali’s (, can be found in the Prophet’s sayings. One very good example is the hadith of Ghadir which is considered the official announcement of the appointment of Imam Ali as successor to Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) after his decease. This hadith sanadwise (its chain of narrators) is mutawatir (meaning that the number of narrators narrating it is so high that one becomes sure that the hadith is authentic and that all of the narrators can’t be lying or can’t be mistaken in their narration), and concerning its content and meaning, contains clear evidence on Imam Ali (A.S) being Imam.

Moreover, the Holy Qur’an itself has spoken about Imam Ali (A.S). The most important verse that has spoken about him, is verse 55 of Surah Ma’idah which says: “Only Allah is your Waliyy (one who is in charge of everything) and His apostle and those who believe, those who establish prayer and pay the poor-rate while bowing down in rokoo’.

”It has been stated in both Shia and Sunni history, tafsir and hadith books that this ayah was revealed when Imam Ali (A.S) gave his valuable ring as charity to a needy person while bowing down in Rukoo’. This verse is only talking about Imam Ali (A.S) and no one else is meant by this verse. So, although Imam Ali’s name hasn’t been mentioned in the Qur’an, yet he has clearly been spoken of in it.

There are at least two reasons why Imam Ali’s name hasn’t been mentioned in the Qur’an. First, because the Qur’an usually expresses general matters and instructions, and doesn’t get very specific.

For example, Imam Sadiq (A.S) was asked why the imams haven’t been named in the Qur’an. He answered that concerning wilayah (religious authorithy), the Qur’an has acted the same way that it has regarding salat, zakat, and hajj. The Qur’an hasn’t been very specific on how to perform these acts, and has only said that they have to be done. The Prophet is the one who has thoroughly explained how these acts must be performed. In the same way, the Prophet has become very detailed in relation to those succeeding him, without any need for them to be explicitly named in the Qur’an. The second of many reasons for the above-mentioned issue is that since wilayah was a controversial issue, and there were big chances that others would disagree with it, it was much better and safer for the Qur’an to express it implicitly so that it wouldn’t cause them to go against the Qur’an and Islam itself! It’s very clear that this isn’t to the benefit of the Muslim Ummah and is a good reason for not mentioning the names of the imams in the Qur’an. In other words, if the appointment of Imam Ali as successor was to be clearly mentioned in a verse of the Qur’an, there was a possibility that those who opposed it would somehow falsify or get rid of the verse in order to destroy all of the evidence showing that he is the true successor to the Prophet (PBUH).

As a result, Islam would lose its value as the final religion for mankind in addition to the Qur’an losing its value as an eternal divine book. Moreover, the Qur’an says: “Surely we have revealed the Reminder (the Qur’an), and We will most surely be its guardian.” One of the ways of protecting the Qur’an is to naturally and very normally block the reasons that might provoke falsification and hostility towards it and not let them even come up in the first place. Consequently, two things take place. Firstly, the Qur’an doesn’t clearly mention Imam Ali (A.S). Secondly, the verses regarding his religious authority such as Ayah Tabligh which is the official announcement of his appointment to being successor, and Ayah Tathir which has to do with the infallibility of the imams, are all located in between verses that don’t have anything to do with these subjects so that the Quran stays protected throughout history, and no one thinks about falsifying it because of the truth it is expressing.

Detailed Answer

First of all, one must note that: 1- The imams’ names have been explicitly mentioned in the Prophet’s sayings, especially Imam Ali’s name in which the Holy Prophet of Islam has in many different events, clearly stated that Imam Ali is his successor and the religious authority after him. For example, in the wake of Prophet Muhammad’s prophethood, when he was ordered by Allah to invite his tribe, family, and relatives to Islam, he declared: “The first person to believe in me (answer my call to Islam) will be my wasiyy, minister, and successor.” The only person to answer him was Imam Ali (A.S). In the end, when no one answered the Prophet other than Ali (A.S.), he said: “After me, you (Ali) are my wasiyy, minister and successor.”[1] Another example is the famous hadith of Ghadir in which the Prophet clearly stated that: “Whosoever I am his Mowla, Ali is his Mowla.”[2] Also in the hadith of Manzilah, the Prophet states that: “You (Ali (A.S)) are in comparison with me, like Harun compared with Musa, the only difference (between us and them) is that there is no prophet after me.”[3] The hadiths of the holy Prophet (PBUH) regarding the fact that Imam Ali (A.S) will take his place are mostly Mutawatir (meaning that there is no doubt that the hadith has been said by the prophet because the number of narrators is so high that one becomes sure that it is impossible for the hadith to be an unauthentic one) and this fact has been pointed to in both Sunni and Shia books.[4] In yet another hadith, the Prophet (PBUH) names all of the imams after him for Jaber-ibn-Abdillah-al-Ansari, from Imam Ali until the twelfth and final imam meaning Imam Mahdi (A.S).[5]

So one should be aware that although the imams’ names haven’t been explicitly stated in the Qur’an, yet the holy Prophet, whose words are all true and come from Wahy (divine inspiration)[6], has clearly expressed their names and emphasized on their being imams after him.

2- Imam Ali’s Wilayah (religious authority) has been pointed out in the Qur’an even though his name hasn’t been explicitly mentioned. Both Shia and Sunni commentators of the Qur’an admit that verse 55 of surah Ma’idah has been revealed regarding Imam Ali (A.S) and that he is the only one meant by it.[7] 

“Only Allah is your waliyy and His apostle and those who believe - those who establish salat and give charity while bowing (in rokoo’).”

Given the fact that in Islam there is no ruling saying that giving charity while in rokoo’ (bowing in prayer) is preferred as mustahabb or wajib, one can easily conclude that this verse is pointing to an event that occurred only once. This verse is speaking of the time in which Imam Ali was praying in the masjid. When he went down to rokoo’, a beggar came up to him asking for help, Imam Ali pointed to his finger and the beggar approached him, took off the imam’s ring and left. [8] Thus, the verse is saying that religious authority and supervision of the Islamic ummah are solely [9] for Allah, His messenger and Imam Ali (A.S), and other than them, no one has any authority.
So, till now we have concluded that the imams’ names have been mentioned by the Prophet (PBUH) and Imam Ali’s wilayah has clearly been pointed to in the Qur’an, such that an unprejudiced and unbiased researcher really searching for the truth, can easily reach the conclusion that the Prophet’s (PBUH) standpoint on those succeeding him, was that Imam Ali (A.S) and his children are to succeed him after his passing away. But why haven’t Imam Ali and the other imam’s names been explicitly mentioned in the Qur’an? There can be two reasons behind this issue:
1- “The Qur’an usually speaks in a very general way and mostly teaches us principles, ways and methods (instead of getting very specific) as it has regarding the osool (pillars) and foroo’ (branches) of Islam.” This is what Imam Sadiq (A.S) has said.[10] He goes on to give us three examples: a) Salat. The Qur’an has been general regarding salat; not being specific about how long it is supposed to be and how it is supposed to be performed. On the other hand, the Prophet of Islam (PBUH) has clearly illustrated how to perform it for us and how many rak’ats each prayer should be. b) Zakat. In the Qur’an, zakat has only been mentioned as an Islamic ruling. It was the Prophet who expressed which things have zakat and what the criteria for zakat becoming wajib for each one is.
c) Hajj. The Qur’an says that Hajj is wajib and no more, but the Prophet has explained how it is supposed to be performed.
Therefore, it is wrong to expect to be able to find every detail in the Qur’an. So it is a big mistake not to follow the imams just because of the fact that none of their names have come in the Qur’an. That’s why no one says that noon prayers (which are 4 rak’ats) have to be prayed 2 rak’ats just because the Qur’an hasn’t mentioned how many rak’ats each prayer is.
2- In issues like this, in which there are big chances that others will disagree, it is much better for the Qur’an to express the truth implicitly rather than explicitly, otherwise there is a high possibility that they will end up denying the Qur’an as a whole. It’s very obvious that such a problem isn’t to the benefit of the Muslim ummah. Of course, the Qur’an says: “Surely we have revealed the Reminder (the Qur’an), and We will most surely be its guardian” [11], but one should remember that one of the ways of protecting the Qur’an and not letting others falsify or change it, is for it to speak in a way that others (such as the hypocrites who show that they are Muslims on the outside even though they aren’t within) don’t get sensitive and provoked. In this way, the high respect and value of the Qur’an will be kept, and certain individuals won’t think of changing or falsifying it in a way that will comply with their personal desires and wicked goals or just because they disagree with something. [12]
Shahid Ayatollah Motahhari answers this question in the following way. He says: “The answer to the question that why hasn’t Imam Ali’s khilafah and imamat been mentioned in the Qur’an, is that 1- The Qur’an usually expresses general laws. 2- The Holy Prophet (PBUH) or Allah (s.w.t.) didn’t want such an issue in which people are sensitive about and prefer their own desires (to what Islam wants), to be presented explicitly, and although it wasn’t, people still went against it and falsely interpreted the Prophet’s sayings to their own benefit. In other words even if the Qur’an had clearly stated that Ali (A.S) is successor to the Prophet they still would have found a way around it. The holy Prophet (PBUH) said: (Ali is his Mawla). How much more clear can one get? (Yet they interpreted what he said falsely and according to their will.)Yet there is a big difference between ignoring what the Prophet (PBUH) has said after him passing away regardless of all of its clarity and ignoring what the Qur’an has been completely clear about one day after his demise. That is why I have narrated in my book “Khilafah and Wilayah” that once during Imam Ali’s reign, a Jew wanted to attack and criticize the Muslim ummah for undesirable events that took place in the beginning of Islam. He told Imam Ali (A.S) (and of course what he said really was a negative point) that you (the Muslim ummah) started quarreling over your prophet even before completely burying him after his death. Imam Ali answered: We argued about what he had instructed, not over the Prophet himself, but you (meaning the Jews) disregarded the most important principle of your religion which is tawhid (oneness of God), and asked your prophet to build an idol for you to worship. So there is a big difference between you and us; we didn’t argue about our prophet, we argued about what the interpretation of his saying was (and what he wanted us to do after his death). These two vary tremendously. (Motahhari goes on to say that) there is a big difference between saying that the people back then had misunderstood what the Prophet had said and saying that the Muslims back then rejected what the Qur’an had clearly stated or had falsified it.[13]

So one can say that the main reason behind not mentioning the names of the imams, or at least Imam Ali’s name, is the protection of the Qur’an from falsification and change, and that is why the verses of tathir[14], tabligh[15], and wilayah[16] are all located between verses that are either talking about the Prophet’s wives, different Islamic rulings, or not being friends with The People of the Book (ahlul-kitab), which all have nothing to do with the religious authority of the imams and Imam Ali (A.S), yet the fair and unbiased researcher can with the least consideration tell that this part of the verse is separate from the verses before and after it and is located there for a certain reason.[17]

References:
[1] Ibn-al Bitriq, Al-Umdah, pg.121 & 133, Seyyed Hashem Bahrani, Ghayat-ul-Maram, pg. 320, Allamah Amini, Al-Ghadir, v.2, pg. 278.
[2] This hadith is mutawatir (a hadith that has been narrated so many times by different narrators that one becomes sure that it is authentic) and has been narrated in both Shia and Sunni books. In the book Al-Ghadir, the different “levels of narrators” of the hadith from the first till the fourteenth century (lunar calendar) have been named, in which the foremost are more than 60 narrators from the Prophet’s companions who have narrated the hadith in Sunni books and whose names have been recorded there. Also, in Mir Hamed Hussein’s book, Abaqat, it has been proven that this hadith is mutawatir. See Al-Ghadir, v.1, pg.14-114, Ibn-al-Maghazeli, Managheb, pg. 25-26, Motahhari, Emamat va Rahbari, pg. 72-73.
[3] Al-Umdah, pg.173-175, Ahmad-ibn-Hanbal, Musnad Hanbal, v. 3, pg.32, Al-Ghadir, v.1, pg. 51, v.3, pg. 197-201.
[4] Many efforts have been made in both Al-Ghadir and Abaqat to prove that the traditions concerning Imam Ali’s imamah are mutawatir. Fazel-e-Qooshji, a Sunni scholar, doesn’t reject the fact that some of these traditions are mutawatir. See Sharh-e-Qooshji bar Tajrid-ul-I’tiqad, Khajeh al-Tusi.
[5] Muhammad-ibn-Hassan al-Ameli, Ithbat-ul-Hudat, v.3, pg. 123, Suleiman-ibn-Qandoozi, Yanabee’-ul-Mawaddah, pg. 494, Ghayat-ul-Maram, v.10, pg. 267 (as quoted by Misbah Yazdi, Amoozesh Aqa’ed, v.2, pg. 185).
[6] “Nor does he (The Prophet (PBUH)) speak out of desire, It (what he says) is nothing but divine revelation (from Allah (s.w.t.))” Najm:3-4
[7] See tafsir books, commentaries regarding this verse, such as Fakhr-ul-Din Al-Razi, Al-Tafsir-ul-Kabir, v.12, pg. 25, Tafsir Nemooneh, v.4, pg. 421-430, Jalal-ul-Din Al-Suyuti, Al-Durr-ul-Manthoor, v.2, pg. 393. Also, Sunni hadith references have narrated the hadith; Muhibb-ul-Din Tabari, Thakha’ir-ul-Uqba, pg. 88, Jalal-ul-din Suyuti, Lubab-ul-Nuqul, pg.90, Ala’ul-Din Ali Al-Muttaqi, Kanz-ul-Ummal, v.6, pg. 391, and many other references in which Tafsir Nemooneh has pointed to some of them.
[8] This analysis has been acquired from Shahid Motahhari’s book Emamat va Rahbari, pg. 37.
[9] According to Arabic literature scholars, the word “innama” means “only” and shows that what has been stated in the sentence is something exclusively for the person(s) mentioned.
[10] Koleini, Osool-ul-Kafi, kitab-ul-hujjah, v.1, chapter Ma nassallahu wa rasuluhu alal-a’immah wahedan fawahedan.
[11] This point was mentioned by Ayatollah Hadavi Tehrani in his classes of The Theological Principles of Ijtihad, which will be printed in the second volume of The Theological Principles of Ijtihad.
[12] Ibid
[13] Emamat va Rahbari, pg.109-110, 27th edition, Sadra Press, Tehran, 1381.
[14] “Verily, Allah’s will is to remove all impurity from you, ye household (of the Prophet) and to purify you thoroughly.” This part of the verse has been placed between verse speaking about the wives of the Prophet (PBUH). Ahzab:33
[15] “O Messenger! Proclaim the (message) which hath been sent to thee from thy Lord. If thou didst not, thou wouldst not have fulfilled and proclaimed His mission” This verse is in between verses speaking about haram meat and animal corpses (which are haram). Ma’idah:67
[16] “Verily your Waliyy is Allah and…” which is located after verses regarding not being friends with the Christians and Jews. Maidah:55
[17] This was also pointed to in one of Ayatollah Hadavi’s classes on the theological principles of ijtihad which will be printed in the second volume of the book.
Source: islamquest.net
http://english.tebyan.net/newindex.aspx?pid=286343