What the Shi’ah do on ‘Ashoora’ is bid’ah (innovation) and misguidance
I am living in dubai and here huge number of shia are pesent arround us they always say that doing maatum on 9 and 10 muhaaram is right and this is the proof that we love hazrat husain and hazrat yaqoob also said “Hazrat Yaqoob (a.s.) cried and said a word (Hey Yousuf) he cried that in result of he became blind and thier rest sons who were wrong asked him if you cried like this than you will hurt yourself and no dought you will die one day while crying. THEN Haszar Yaqoob (a.s.) replied I cried and tell all my tregedy to ALMIGHTY ALLAH and I know something from GOD” please tell me the answer as soon as possible that beating chest is right or wrong???
Praise be to Allaah.
What the Shi’ah do on ‘Ashoora’ of beating their chests, slapping their cheeks, striking their shoulders with chains and cutting their heads with swords to let the blood flow are all innovations that have no basis in Islam. These things are evils that were forbidden by the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), who did not prescribe for his ummah to do any of these things or anything similar to them to mark the death of a leader or the loss of a martyr, no matter what his status. During his lifetime (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) a number of senior Sahaabah were martyred and he mourned their loss, such as Hamzah ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib, Zayd ibn Haarithah, Ja’far ibn Abi Taalib and ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Rawaahah, but he did not do any of the things that these people do. If it was good, he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) would have done it before us.
Ya’qoob (peace be upon him) did not strike his chest or scratch his face, or shed blood or take the day of the loss of Yoosuf as a festival or day of mourning. Rather he remembered his missing loved one and felt sad and distressed because of that. This is something no one can be blamed for. What is forbidden is these actions that have been inherited from the Jaahiliyyah, and which Islam forbids.
Al-Bukhaari (1294) and Muslim (103) narrated that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “He is not one of us who strikes his cheeks, rends his garment, or cries with the cry of the Jaahiliyyah.”
These reprehensible actions that the Shi’ah do on the day of ‘Ashoora’ have no basis in Islam. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not do them, nor did any of his companions. None of his companions did them when he or anyone else died, although the loss of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was greater than the death of al-Husayn (may Allaah be pleased with him).
Al-Haafiz Ibn Katheer (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: Every Muslim should mourn the killing of al-Husayn (may Allaah be pleased with him), for he is one of the leaders of the Muslims, one of the scholars of the Sahaabah, and the son of the daughter of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), who was the best of his daughters. He was a devoted worshipper, and a courageous and generous man. But there is nothing good in what the Shi’ah do of expressing distress and grief, most of which may be done in order to show off. His father was better than him and he was killed, but they do not take his death as an anniversary as they do with the death of al-Husayn. His father was killed on a Friday as he was leaving the mosque after Fajr prayer, on the seventeenth of Ramadaan in 40 AH. ‘Uthmaan was better than ‘Ali according to Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah, and he was killed when he was besieged in his house during the days of al-Tashreeq in Dhu’l-Hijjah of 36 AH, with his throat cut from one jugular vein to the other, but the people did not take his death as an anniversary. ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab was better than ‘Ali and ‘Uthmaan, and he was killed as he was standing in the mihraab, praying Fajr and reciting Qur’aan, but the people did not take his death as an anniversary. Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq was better than him but the people did not take his death as an anniversary. The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is the leader of the sons of Adam in this world and the Hereafter, and Allaah took him to Him as the Prophets died before him, but no one took the dates of their deaths as anniversaries on which they do what these ignorant Raafidis do on the day that al-Husayn was killed. … The best that can be said when remembering these and similar calamities is that which ‘Ali ibn al-Husayn narrated from his grandfather the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), who said: “There is no Muslim who is afflicted by a calamity and when he remembers it, even if it was in the dim and distant past, he says Inna Lillaahi wa inna ilayhi raaji’oon (verily to Allaah we belong and unto Him is our return), but Allaah will give him a reward like that of the day when it befell him.”
Narrated by Imam Ahmad and Ibn Majaah, end quote from al-Bidaayah wa’l-Nihaayah (8/221).
And he said (8/220): The Raafidis went to extremes in the state of Bani Buwayh in the year 400 and thereabouts. The drums were beaten in Baghdad and other cities on the day of ‘Ashoora’, and sand and straw was strewn in the streets and marketplaces, and sackcloth was hung on the shops, and the people expressed grief and wept. Many of them did not drink water that night, in sympathy with al-Husayn, because he was killed when he was thirsty. Then the women went out barefaced, wailing and slapping their faces and chests, walking barefoot in the marketplaces, and other reprehensible innovations… What they intended by these and similar actions is to impugn the state of Banu Umayyah (the Umayyads), because he was killed during their era.
On the day of ‘Ashoora, the Naasibis of Syria do the opposite of what the Raafidis and Shi’ah do. They used to cook grains on the day of ‘Ashoora and do ghusl and perfume themselves, and wear their finest garments, and they took that day as an Eid for which they made all kinds of food, and expressed happiness and joy, intending thereby to annoy the Raafidis and be different from them.
Celebrating that day is an innovation (bid’ah), and making it an anniversary for mourning is also an innovation. Hence Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:
Because of the killing of al-Husayn (may Allaah be pleased with him), shaytaan caused the people to introduce two innovations: the innovation of mourning and wailing on the day of ‘Ashoora’, by slapping the cheeks, weeping, and reciting eulogies. … and the innovation of rejoicing and celebrating. … So some introduced mourning and others introduced celebration, so they regarded the day of ‘Ashoora’ as a day for wearing kohl, doing ghusl, spending on the family and making special foods. … And every innovation is a going astray. None of the four imams of the Muslims or any other (scholars) regarded either of these things as mustahabb. End quote from Minhaaj al-Sunnah
It should be noted that these reprehensible actions are encouraged by the enemies of Islam, so that they can achieve their evil aims of distorting the image of Islam and its followers. Concerning this Moosa al-Musawi said in his book al-Shi’ah wa’l-Tas-heeh:
But there can be no doubt that striking heads with swords and cutting the head in mourning for al-Husayn on the tenth day of Muharram reached Iran and Iraq and India during the British occupation of those lands. The British are the ones who exploited the ignorance and naiveté of the Shi’ah and their deep love for Imam al-Husayn, and taught them to strike their heads with swords. Until recently the British embassies in Tehran and Baghdad sponsored the Husayni parades in which this ugly spectacle appears in the streets and alleyways. The aim of the British imperialist policy of developing this ugly spectacle and exploiting it in the worst manner was to give an acceptable justification to the British people and the free press that opposed British colonialism in India and other Muslim countries, and to show the peoples of these countries as savages who needed someone to save them from their ignorance and savagery. Images of the parades that marched in the streets on the day of ‘Ashoora’, in which thousands of people were striking their backs with chains and making them bleed, and striking their heads with daggers and swords, appeared in British and European newspapers, and the politicians justified their colonization of these countries on the basis of a humane duty to colonize the lands of these people whose culture was like that so as to lead these peoples towards civility and progress. It was said that when Yaseen al-Haashimi, the Iraqi Prime Minister at the time of the British occupation of Iraq, visited London to negotiate with the British for an end to the Mandate, the British said to him: We are in Iraq to help the Iraqi people to make progress and attain happiness, and bring them out of savagery. This angered Yaseen al-Haashimi and he angrily walked out of the room where the negotiations were being held, but the British apologized politely and asked him with all respect to watch a documentary about Iraq, which turned out to be a film about the Husayni marches in the streets of al-Najaf, Karbala’ and al-Kaazimiyyah, showing horrific and off-putting images of people striking themselves with daggers and chains. It is as if the British wanted to tell him: Would an educated people with even a little civility do such things to themselves?! End quote.
And Allaah knows best.
Kindly read this thoroughly before deciding about haram and halal..
This is one of the favourite areas of exploitation by insisting that these practises are against the Shari'ah. Asking us to prove our mourning rituals from the Qur'an such as crying, chest beating etc. Kindly site me any any verse containing the words Matam, Latmiyah (blood letting) wherein Allah (swt) has declared such practices to be Haraam. No where in the Holy Qur'an has Matam been classified as Haraam. On the contrary, the stories of Prophets include examples of their mourning. As such, the permissibility of Matam is there in Qur'an but not its prohibition. Thus an act, for which there is no restriction of any kind by Islamic Laws, becomes permissible. It is Nasibi who have lied by stating that Matam is against patience and call only for patience instead!
We read in Surah Nisa 004.148:
: Allah loveth not that evil should be noised abroad in public speech, except where injustice hath been done; for Allah is He who heareth and knoweth all things.
This verse makes it clear that the public's relaying of injustice is permissible. Relaying the suffering of a victim is permissible.
Major efforts are made to prove that the term mourning is proof that Matam is Haraam under the Shari'ah. On the contrary breast-beating, bloods letting all come within the term mourning and its purpose is to convey the pains inflicted on the victim, something which the Quran has sanctioned. The Shi'as perform all these acts as Allah (swt) has permitted us to do so, those who are against it is only on account for their love and support for Imam Husayn (as)'s killers.
Mourning and shedding blood is the Sunnah of Prophet Adam (as)
We read in Ahl'ul Sunnah's authority work Ma'arij al Nubuwwah, Chapter 1 page 248:
"Adam was so distressed that he smashed his hands onto his knees and the skin from his hands caused gashes from which bone could be seen".
Those who deem the act of self-harm to be batil should look at the bloodletting actions of Adam (as). If Adam (as) can do this why cannot the Shi'a when mourning for Imam Husayn (as)?
Mourning and hitting one self is the Sunnah of the Prophet (saw)
As evidence we shall cite the following works:
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 92, Number 446
Sunan al Nasai, Volume 3 page 305
Adaab al Mufarad, page 426
Sahih Muslim Volume 1 page 291
Musnad Abu Aawna, Volume 2 page 292
We read in Sahih Bukhari
Narrated 'Ali bin Abi Talib
: That Allah's Apostle came to him and Fatima the daughter of Allah's Apostle at their house at night and said, "Won't you pray?" 'Ali replied, "O Allah's Apostle! Our souls are in the Hands of Allah and when he wants us to get up, He makes us get up." When 'Ali said that to him, Allah's Apostle left without saying anything to him. While the Prophet was leaving, 'Ali heard him striking his thigh (with his hand) and saying, "But man is quarrelsome more than anything else." (18.54)
Ibn Hajr Asqalani in the commentary of this tradition in Fatah al Bari, Volume 3 page 11 writes:
قوله يضرب فخذه فيه جواز ضرب الفخذ عند التأسف
"His statement 'striking his thigh' shows the permission of striking the thigh to express the grief"
If hitting oneself is Haraam then what Fatwa do the Nawasib have for the Prophet (s)? The Pillar of Shari'ah is himself hitting his chest, so if the Shi'a do the same, why are their actions Batil?
Thigh beating is the Sunnah of Sahaba
Musnad Abu Awana, Volume 2 page 141
Sunan Nasai, Volume 3 page 12
Sunan Abu Daud, Volume 1 page 244
"Mu'awyia bin Hakam al-Sulami said: 'I was preforming prayers behind Allah's messenger (pbuh) then a man sneezed, thus I said to him: 'May Allah's mercy be upon you'. Thus the people looked at me, then I said to my self: 'O my, why are you looking at me?' Then they started striking their thighs, therefore I came to know that they want me to remain silent'".
This Hadith has been recorded by Albaani in his 'Sahih Sunan Abu Daud' Volume 1 page 175 Hadith 823
Before deeming self harm to be Haram, perhaps Nawasib should take a closer look at the acts of the Sahaba. The Sahaba's hitting their thighs and the silence of the Prophet (s) proves that such acts of distress are not haraam. It's amusing that these Nasibi Mullah's never raise questions on any action of the Sahaba whether good or bad but they find fault with every act of the Shi'a. If the act of the Sahaba's beating themselves is not Haram then the Shi'as act of beating themselves should not be construed as Haram either.
Proof of head beating from the Qur'an
In Surah adh-Dhaariyaat we read that Sara (as) struck her face when she was told that she would conceive a baby.
"Then came forward his wife in grief, she smote her face and said (what! I) An old barren woman?"Quran 51:29
"Faskath" does not just mean rub or touch, it means slap and this is evidenced from Saheeh Muslim Book 030, Number 5851, Bab Fadail Musa:
The slapping of Prophet Ibraheem (as)'s wife Sara is proven from the Qur'an. The Qur'an tells us to adhere to the ways of the people of Ibraheem (as), so if the Shi'a beat themselves whilst mourning for Imam Husayn (as) such acts are lawful.
Beating oneself at a time of distress is the Sunnah of Prophet Adam (as)
We read in Madarij al Nubuwah, page 221:
"When life was breathed into the spirit of Adam he hit his hand on his head and cried. He made this tradition of beating one's head with one's hand and crying in times of trouble for his descendants."
Hitting one's head in times of trouble is the Sunnah of Prophet Yusuf (as)
"It has been said that when Gebrail (pbuh) went to Yusuf (pbuh) in jail he (Gebrail) said to him: 'Your father has become blind due to the grief for you. Thus he (Yusuf) put his hand on his head and said: 'I wish if my mother didn’t give birth to me and there would not have been the reason for my father's grief."
We have proven that the acts of hitting one's head are not Jahiliyya or Un-Islamic.In fact it is the Sunnah of Prophets Adam (as) and Yusuf (as).
Beating oneself in times of trouble is the Sunnah of Hz. Umar
We read in Ahl'ul Sunnah's authority work Aqd al Fareed, Volume 1 page 342:
ولما نُعي النًّعمان بن مُقَرَّن إلى عمر بن الخطاب وضع يدَه على رأسه وصاح يا أسفي على النعمان
When Hz. Umar received news of the death of Numan ibn Muqran, he placed his hand on his head and wailed: 'O my grief for Numan!'
We find a similar narration in Kanz al Ummal, Vol.8, Page 117, Kitab al Maut:
When Hz. Omar heard of Nu'man ibn Muqran's death he beat his head and screamed, "O what a pity that Nu'man died".
When Hz Umar mourns the death of his friend in such a way, the descendents of Mu'awiya remain silent, but if the Shi'a mourn Imam Husayn (as) through such an act they are deemed Kaffirs. Before accusing us of introducing Bidah into the religion one should know that Hz.Umar introduced this long before ! If such acts of hitting oneself and extreme wailing are prohibited then why was Hz. Umar indulging in this act for?
Allamah Shibli Numani al Hanafi is a renowned Sunni scholar from the Indian subcontinent. In his Sirat-un Nabi (Eng translation Volume 2 pg 74) quoting Sirat Ibn Hisham we read the following about Hamzah (as) martyrdom:
The Holy Prophet (P) returned to Madina and found the whole city gone into mourning. Wherever he went, he heard wailing and lamentation in every house. He was grieved to find that all who were martyred in the battle had their mourners doing their duty to the memory of their dear ones. But there was none to mourn the death of Hamzah (ra). Overwhelmed with grief, the words that there was no one to mourn the loss of Hamzah escaped his lips. The Ansâris were touched to the core when they heard this remark from the Prophet(s). They asked their women to go to the house of the Prophet (S) and mourn for Hamzah. The Prophet (p) thanked them for their sympathy, prayed for their well-being, but added that it was not permissible to lament in memory of the dead. (Women in Arabia were used to wailing and lamenting aloud, they would tear off their garments, dig their nails into their cheeks, slap themselves on the face and put up loud screams. This undesirable practice was from that day stopped for future)"
We read in the History of Tabari Volume 7 page 137:
“The Messenger of God passed by a settlement of the Ansar of the Banu Abdal al-Ashhal and Zafat and heard sounds of lamentation and women weeping. The Messenger of God’s eyes filled with tears and he wept, but then he said “Yet Hamzah has no women weeping for him”. When Saad bin Muadh and Usayd b. Hudayr came back to the settlement of the Banu Abdal al-Ashhal, they told the women to gird themselves up and go and weep for the Messenger of God’s uncle”.
[ref= tarikh_tabari_v7_p137.jpg]History of Tabari Volume 7 page 137 [/ref]
"When Holy Prophet (s) reached Madina, he saw that cries could be heard from most of the houses of Ansaar (the helpers) but not from Hamza's house. Holy Prophet (s) said that wasn't there anyone to cry over Hamza? The helpers (Ansaar) asked their women to mourn over Hamza first and then they may go and cry over their own martyr. The women went to Hamza's house in the evening and kept crying till midnight. When Holy Prophet(s) woke up and asked about it, he was told the whole thing. Holy Prophet(s) blessed them by saying" May Allah be pleased with you and your children."
Madarij un Nabuwat, volume 2 page 179
It has been similarly recorded in Al-Isti'ab that after Holy Prophet's query,"none of the wives of the helpers cried over their own dead but cried for Hamza",
Therefore through no tradition, reference or logic can it be proved that Holy Prophet (s) stopped Ummah from crying over the death of their dear ones.
Our assertion that the words "It is not permissible to mourn over the dead" is a later addition is confirmed when we observe the first edition of Shibli Numani's work. We relied on the Urdu to English translation of Numani's work. Of interest is the fact that the part in brackets wherein the practice of mourning is condemned was added in later editions. The original statement as narrated in the first edition is mentioned above. Look at this report from "Seerat Un Nabi" part 1, page 361, published in 1975 by "Deeni Kutb Khana Islami, Lahore."
"Holy Prophet (s) reached Madina, the whole of Madina had turned into a mourning place, his Excellency could hear voices of people mourning from every house, and Holy Prophet (s) felt grieved that all martyrs were being cried upon by their relatives but there was no one to mourn over Hamza. In severe grief he said: "Isn't there anyone to cry over Hamza?" The Helpers (Ansaar) palpitated when they heard this and therefore all of them asked their wives to go and mourn over Hamza's martyrdom. When Holy Prophet(s) saw that the females of Ansaar (the helpers) were mourning for Hamza, he blessed them and thanked them for their sympathy but he further said "It is not permissible to cry over dead."
After this a whole paragraph from "This was a tradition in Arabia" till "intense love for Hamza" has been removed from the frst edition and further replaced by this new statement. This is the ingenuity of Syed Salman Nadvi who completed this book of his teacher (Shabli Naumani) after his death. This new paragraph is not present in the first edition.
"Women in Arabia were used to wailing and lamenting aloud, they would tear off their garments, dig their nails into their cheeks, slap themselves on the face and put up loud screams. This undesirable practice was from that day stopped for future".
The extreme mourning of Uways al-Qarni (ra)
The most explicit proof of self-inflicted injury comes from Owais al-Qarni the great Muslim Sahabi, praised by both Shi'a and Sunni erudite. He had an immense love for the Holy Prophet (s). When the news reached him in Yemen that two teeth of the Holy Prophet (s) were broken in the battle of Ohad, he extracted all his teeth. When the Holy Prophet (s) got the news in Medina that Owais had struck down all his teeth, he (s) exclaimed
, "Indeed Owais is our devoted friend". This event can be found written in 'Seerate Halbia' vol II, page 295.
The renowned Sunni Scholar Shiekh Farid al Din Attaar in 'Tazkira tul Awliya' pages 15-16 writes:
Hadhrat Uways said: “If you are from amongst companions of the Prophet (s), tell me which tooth of the Holy Prophet (s) was martyred? Also, why did you not break your teeth in adhering to the Prophet (s)?” Upon saying this, he evidenced the fact that his teeth had been broken, and said: “When his (s) tooth was martyred, I broke my tooth, then I thought perhaps it is another tooth, and my continuing to do so, I smashed all of my teeth, and upon doing so I felt comfortable”. Upon witnessing this, the companions proceeded to weep, and they realized that this constituted respect, whilst he had not seen him, he fulfilled the adhered to the obligation to follow the Prophet in its entirety, and taught this lesson when he left this world.
Tazkira tul Awliya, pages 15-16 (Mumtaz Academy, Lahore)
Ibn al Hashimi argues: In regards to the actual rituals of the Shia, these are barbaric practises of self-flagellation, violence, and paganism
Tell us, would Uways Qarni’ss destruction of his teeth with a blunt instrument not fall within your definition of ‘barbaric practises of self-flagellation, violence, and paganism’? If so, did the Prophet (s) agree with your view and condemn this extreme form of self harm?
Mourning following the death of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal
We shall rely on the following esteemed Sunni works:
Tareekh Baghdad, Volume 4 page 422
Hayaat al Haywaan, page 101
قال وسمعت الوركاني يقول يوم مات احمد بن حنبل وقع الماتم والنوح في أربعة أصناف من الناس المسلمين واليهود والنصارى والمجوس
'He (Abu Bakr al-Makki) said: 'I heard al-Warkani saying: 'The day on which Ahmad bin Hanbal died, in it 'Matam' and lamentation took place among four types of people, the Muslims, the Jews, the Christians and the Zoroastrians''.
Heavens mourning at the death of Umar!
We read in Riyadh al Nadira page 187:
"When Hz Umar died the Djinns recited a elegy 'Umar female Djinns are mourning you in a loud voice and they are beating their faces'
If mourning in such a manner is Bidah then why was it necessary for the women of Paradise to mourn in this manner? If it was Bidah why do you think the Sunni scholars coined such a fabricated tale? When Hz. Umar died the women of Paradise beat their faces but if Shi'a women mourn the slaying of Imam Husayn (as) and his supporters, mutilation of their bodies and the imprisonment of their women folk they are deemed evil innovators.
Seven days of mourning of Khalid bin Waleed
We read in Kanz al Ummal Volume Six page 118:
"The narrator said people had attributed the prohibition of elegies to Umar, but the fact is that when Khalid bin Waleed died the women of Banu Mugheer indulged in seven days of mourning. They reddened their chests, wailed, food was distributed and elegies were recited. Umar did not place any prohibition on this mourning".
When Ahl'ul Sunnah's great hero dies elegies and self beating occurs under the watchful eye of Hz. Umar and he takes no remedial steps to quash this alleged Bidah. However when the Shi'a do the same in memory of Imam Husayn (as) the Nasibi' come out in force to oppose them.
An Arabs mourning before the Prophet (s)
Malik's Muwatta Book 18, Number 18.9.29:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Ata ibn Abdullah al-Khurasani that Said ibn al-Musayyab said, "A Bedouin came to the Messenger of Allah, (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) beating his breast and tearing out his hair and saying, 'I am destroyed.' The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, 'Why is that?', and he said, 'I had intercourse with my wife while fasting in Ramadan.' The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, asked him, 'Are you able to free a slave?', and the man said, 'No.' Then he asked him, 'Are you able to give away a camel?', and the man replied, 'No.' He said, 'Sit down,' and someone brought a large basket of dates to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and he said to the man, 'Take this and give it away as Sadaqa.' The man said, 'There is no one more needy than me,' and (the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace), said, 'Eat them, and fast one day for the day when you had intercourse.' "
Worthy of note is the fact that Darr Qathani in his Sharh of Muwatta Volume 2 (this tradition) adds that that 'he was placing mud in his hair'.
The incident should be considered in the light of the following facts:
The Bedouin being a Muslim was Sahabi (companion) of the Holy Prophet (s).
He was beating his chest and tearing his hair in presence of Holy Prophet (s) who neither objected to it nor reprimanded him for the same.
The action of the Bedouin was a result of spiritual pain he suffered as his fast was invalidated.
Sunni traditionists have authentically recorded this incident.
The Bedouin's actions were a direct result of the agony he was going through. It led him to beat, his chest, tear his hair and place dirt in his hair. We suggest to those who deem mourning for Imam Husayn (as) Bidah to look at these Rafidi acts that were performed in the presence of the Prophet (s). If it was Haraam why did not the Prophet (s) tell him to refrain from such actions?
Mourning at the time of Ayesha's death
In the Sunni Magazine Khadim al Deen, published Lahore on the 18th of October 1976 page 20, in the topic of Ayesha we read:
"People were saddened by the death of bibi Ayesha; Masrooq said if certain situations had not arisen then I would have performed Matam for her.
Look at the preparations for mourning bibi Ayesha's death. If mourning is a gate to hell why were the Sahaba making this road for themselves by desiring to mourn her loss in such a manner?
When the Imam of a Fiqh permits an act, then it is not permissible for those of other Madhabs to raise their objections. We deem Ahl'ul bayt (as) our Imams and uphold their words. If they ruled on the permissibility of Azadari, then we care little what the Imams from Mu'awiyah and Yazeed's lineage have to say against it.
Imam Jafer (as) allowed the mourning of Imam Husayn (as)
We read a tradition from Wasail ai Shi'a as quoted in Jahaur aur Kalaam Volume 4 page 370:
"Imam Jafar said 'the daughters of Fatima would slap their faces and shriek. It is permissible to beat yourself and shriek for a pure soul such as Husayn"
The mourning of Banu Hashim
We read in Tareekh Kamil Volume 4 page 42
Umar ibn Sa'd appeared following the killing of Husayn, stayed for the night in Kerbala and then headed in the direction of Kufa. He was accompanied by Husayn (as)'s children and his sisters were also captives. When they passed by the bodies of Husayn and his companions, the women cried and slapped their faces. Zaynab said 'O Muhammad!'
Sayyida Zaynab (as) beat herself on three separate occasions
Al Bidaya wa al Nihaya Volume 8 page 176
Tareekh Kamil page 29
"When the enemy planned to attack the camp of Husayn, Zaynab went to Husayn and asked 'what is this noise outside our tents?' Husayn [ra] replied 'I just saw a dream wherein the Apostle of Allah told me that he would reach me by tomorrow. Upon hearing this Sayyida Zaynab became aggrieved and slapped her face"
Al Bidaya wa al Nihaya, Volume 8 page 177
Tareekh Kamil Volume 4 page 30
Tareekh Tabari Volume 7 Page 324.
"When Sayyida Zaynab listened to the verses from her brother that indicated his death, she mourned by beating her face, tearing her clothes and losing her senses by falling to the ground"
Al Bidaya wa al Nihaya Volume 8 page 93
Tareekh Kamil Volume 4 page 42
Tareekh Tabari Volume 7 Page 370.
Qurat bin Kas narrates that when the women of Bani Hashim passed by the battlefield they wept bitterly by beating their faces.
Baba Fareed Ganj Shakar's self harm mourning for Imam Husayn (as)
Baba Fareed Ganj Shakar of Pak Patan is a major Sunni Sufi Saint. He commands thousands of adherents from the Indian Subcontinent. We read in the Sunni text From Uswa - e - Sufia Uzzaam, Page 8:
He used to lament and cry for Imam Husayn (as) on the day of Ashura so much so that he would fall unconscious. It is narrated from him that there was a saintly man in Baghdad and when the tragedy of Karbala was described to him, he cried so piteously and profusely and smashed his head so hard on the ground out of grief that he died! The same night, people saw him in their dream and enquired of his condition to which he replied: I gave up my life for the love of Ahl - e - Bait (as) hence Allah has pardoned me and I now live with Imam Husayn (as).
I think all this writeup may answer you why Shia believes this way.....