Talk:Self-flagellation

Recent discussion in the Roman Catholic Church

Maria Faustyna Kowalska (1905-1938), a recently canonised Polish Roman Catholic nun who kept a diary record of her mystical experiences, heard a voice in her soul telling her that an hour of meditation on Jesus' Passion brought more spiritual merit than a year of self-flagellation even to the blood (Diary 369). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:115F:4404:2700:81C4:B3D7:1D66:2854 (talk) 18:28, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

References

Shia in Saudi Arabia

My English is not perfect but this sentence looks confusing : "These practices happen in most Shia countries of the world, though in Saudi Arabia they are strictly forbidden in every form." Doesn't that imply that Saudi Arabia is a Shia country ? Because according to the article 10–25% are Shia Muslim, and the predominant form of Islam is wahhabism. Xerxes ^(contact) 22:12, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes well such practices are prohibited in Saudi Arabia, it being a dominant Sunni state, also Saudi Arabia housing Mecca and Medina (the home of the Prophet P.B.U.H) denounces any such acts and revers to peace and tranquility to avoid further sectarianism Natalia Azhar (talk) 10:05, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Notice

This article mentioned here:

• Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Religion#Self-flagellation_in_Hinduism (permalink)

I request a review of the section in question. --David Tornheim (talk) 22:58, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

What about the Hindu practice of extreme piercing?

https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-52328213 (Warning of graphic pictures) 92.9.115.251 (talk) 22:33, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Sorry for my above irrelevant comment since this post is about flagellation as a specific form of self-inflicted pain in religious practices. I couldn't remove my comment. 92.9.115.251 (talk) 22:39, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Self-flagellation is not a practice in mainstream Islam

The caption at the bottom of the main image is fundamentally incorrect and misleading, violating Wikipedia’s policies and commitment to accuracy. This has been highlighted and corrected a multitude of times yet a certain lone editor, @ThaesOfereode frequently reverts such edits with no provided justification. While the repeated nature of this particular action suggests some sort of personal agenda, I will embody WP:GOODFAITH and revert it back to my edit, where they can then discuss their grievances and we can perhaps come to a resolution. I believe this is in everyone’s best interests in order to avoid an WP:EDITWAR due to their persistence in favouring their preferred wording over that of multiple other editors. I have also posted a template message on their talk page in case they may be unaware of the effects that their disruptive behaviour is causing. RandomRighteousEdditor (talk) 18:11, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

@RandomRighteousEdditor: I have reverted you only once, well within the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia (see here for more). Other reversions I've made on this page are due to other editors attempting to insert unverifiable information, against the verifiability policy. Please cite a reliable source stating the claim made here. If a claim cannot be appropriately sourced, the claim should be removed. ThaesOfereode (talk) 18:46, 9 July 2025 (UTC)