lanrexlan:
Have you ever made any contribution that is meaningful on this thread?!

NO

lanrexlan:
Have you ever made any contribution that is meaningful on this thread?!

Zero he made. He and mrolai only know how to copy paste without meaningful contributions. This only puts me off. That's why i was never interested in Mut'h topics until this one. DOnt know why i am so much interested in thread. This thread made me aware of the details of mut'ah due to my approach to kick out unnecessary rants like mrolai. He left bcus he had nothing to offer academically, but to post pics and download nonsense from net

AlBaqir:


This Hadith is best explains by what al-Bukhari, Muslim and Ahmad and others documented:

Qutaybah b. Sa'īd ­ Jarīr ­ Ismā'īl ­ Qays ­ `Abd Allāh (b. Mas'ūd):

"We were on an expedition with the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, and we had nothing with us. So, we said, "Should we castrate ourselves?" But, he forbade us to do that. Then, he permitted us to do nikāḥ (marriage) with the woman, giving her a garment (as the dowry). Then, he recited to us {O you who believe! Do not make ḥarām the good things which Allāh has made ḥalāl for you; and do not exceed the limits; surely Allāh does not love those who exceed the limits}."

You don’t make Haram what Allah and His Messenger have made Halal.

I said it, you would look for narrations in sunni books to try to validate the ones in your books, but it is always an epic fail!

He didn't make it haram, he only said he disliked it, he did it once and disliked it, and swore not to do it again. The right question is what would make a man do something supposedly halal and feel guilty?! Only sins cause this kind of guilty feelings for a soul still having Allah's light. But since you want us to believe that he made haram what Allah (SWT) had made halal, that was why he couldn't even marry publicly, compared to the secret mut'ah, then this kind of punishment is quite questionable. Imagine the Imam telling him he didn't obey Allah (SWT) for not doing mut'ah?! So everyone not doing mut'ah are in trouble right?!

AlBaqir:


By "He who splits the grain and sprout off the shoot", it has never ever cross my mind not to mention of practicing mut'a. Why? Mut'a is delicately designed for those in dare need or who could not control their intimate desire or fear not to fornicate. I am none of these therefore do not need it. Same goes for multiple marriage.

https://www.nairaland.com/1946601/wont-stop-opposing-sunnah-mutah/1#27257716

This is your above statement when asked if you will do mut'ah, you swore it never crossed your mind to practice it, i am afraid you are in danger of tribulations as documented in this narration in question, heck the whole sunni community ought to have been finding it difficult to marry in public, I guess we are just immune since we have remain resolute that the prophet (SAW) prohibited mut'ah forever!

AlBaqir:

Allamah Majlisi declares: Majhul

Source: Muḥammad Bāqir al-Majlisī, Mir-āt al-‘Uqūl fī Sharḥ Akhbār Āl al-Rasūl (Tehran: Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmīyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muḥsin al-Ḥusaynī al-Amīnī], vol. 20, p. 232

And al-Jawāhirī declares concerning one of its narrators:
Al-Qāsim b. ‘Urwah, Abū Muḥammad, freed slave of Abū Ayyūb al-Khawzī: MAJHUL.

Source: Muḥammad al-Jawāhirī, al-Mufīd min Mu’jam al-Rijāl al-Ḥadīth (Qum: Manshūrāt Maktabah al-Maḥalātī; 2nd edition, 1424 H), p. 464, # 9521

Your deceit is legendary! the first hadith you quote is graded sahih by Majilisi:

H 9877, Ch. 95, h 2 Al-Husayn from Muhammad has narrated from Ahmad ibn Ishaq al-Ash’ariy from Bakr ibn Muhammad al-Azdiy who has said the following: “In response to my question before abu ‘Abd Allah, ‘Alayhi al-Salam, about al-Mut‘ah (advantageous marriage) if it is one of the four, he (the Imam) said, ‘No, it is not one of the four.’”

Then you stylishly omitted the following hadith:

H 9878, Ch. 95, h 3 Muhammad ibn Yahya has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from ibn Mahbub from ibn Ri’ab from Zurarah ibn ‘A‘yan who has said the following: “I once asked him (the Imam), ‘Alayhi al-Salam, ‘How many is lawful for al-Mut‘ah (advantageous marriage)?’ He (the Imam) said, ‘It is as many as you wish.’”

which is also grade sahih by Majilisi...By the way, majhul was never an issue with regards to authenticating narrations, cos Majilisi himself had stated:

“We do not need sanad(chain) for the four books of Usool(principles) and when we place the Sanad we do it just out of blessing and to follow the Sunnah of our predecessors”

Source: [Rasael abi al Ma’ali lil Majlisi page 459]

This is not to mention the compiler of Al-Kafi had already claimed authenticity for his collections....But I know you too well, I wouldn't bother much about this recorded facts....

So this woman is not a wife or slave recognized in the shari'ah, and you can just get as many as you wish according to the Imams...Interesting!

AlBaqir:

And, al-Majlisī submits: Majhūl.


Source: Muḥammad Bāqir al-Majlisī, Mir-āt al-‘Uqūl fī Sharḥ Akhbār Āl al-Rasūl (Tehran: Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmīyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muḥsin al-Ḥusaynī al-Amīnī], vol. 20, p. 233


This basically establishes that there is NO authentic basis for referring to mut'ah wives as rented/hired women.

But then, let us assume, for the sake of argument, that she is rented. Is it really for sex? There are two possibilities here:

(i) The woman is rented for sex in mut'ah. Therefore, there can be no mut'ah without intercourse.

(ii) The woman is not rented for sex in mut'ah. As such, there can be mut'ah without intercourse.

There is no third way to this. If mut'ah is only a "rental" of the woman for sex, then any mut'ah without sex is no mut'ah.


We have given you Athar where your Tabi’ieen liken MUT’AH to be more halal than drinking water, and even a Sunni tabi did MUT’AH with between 60 to 90 women. Apparently, that’s not all about sex sex as your brain is programmed to believe. We have quoted Shia Hadith earlier which confirmed that Mut’ah can be done without sex.

You know an hadith being weak does not mean fabricated, so there may still be element of truth in these narrations, and looking at the way you guys have been practicing mut'ah, one can easily conclude that you believe in these narrations as being authentic, hence acting on it. If mut'ah is not for sex, why are you relying on narrations which indicates such?! Do you pay dowry for just having a companionship with a woman?! You should make up your mind AlBaqir, why would an able bodied man go into temporary marriage just for companionship, after you have claimed the reason for mut'ah still being valid is the urge for sex?! It's like your Imams makes it difficult for you to know where you stand...

AlBaqir:

Al-Majlisī says: Ḍa’īf.

Then, he adds:

“His statement, peace be upon him (to be seen at the place of blemish) meaning, the people see him at a place where whosoever they find there is condemned, due to their abhorrence of mut'ah, hence that becomes a cause of harm to him and to his brothers.”

Source: Muḥammad Bāqir al-Majlisī, Mir-āt al-‘Uqūl fī Sharḥ Akhbār Āl al-Rasūl (Tehran: Dār al-
Kutub al-Islāmīyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muḥsin al-Ḥusaynī al-Amīnī], vol. 20, p. 234


This seems to be a conditional ban imposed to curb the harm which accrues to righteous Shī’īs from ignorant Sunnīs. Wherever the practice of mut'ah would not put the Shee'ah in danger, then the prohibition would not apply. In any case, the ḥadīth is ḍa’īf. Meanwhile, if its texts does question the legitimacy of mut'ah, then it is in contradiction to the Verse of al-Mut'ah, and therefore mawḍū’.

LOL, this is the most pathetic defense I have read in days, so because sunnis would condemn you if you are found in mut'ah houses?!
i know any narration that speaks against mut'ah is automatically da'if and fabricated, bye bye to science of hadith

but the Imam said : ‘Stay away from it. Do you not feel ashamed of being seen in a place for which your virtuous brothers in belief and friends feel embarrassed?

So where does ignorant sunnis and those who abhor mut'ah come from?! As mentioned above, we know the reason for da'if, it speaks against mut'ah

AlBaqir:

Imām ‘Abd al-Razzāq of the Ahl al-Sunnah is not left out either:

Abd al-Razzāq ­ Ibn Jurayj ­ Abū al-Zubayr ­ Jābir b. ‘Abd Allāh:

"We, the Ṣaḥābah of the Prophet, peace be upon him, did mut'ah until `Amr b. Ḥurayth was forbidden."
Jābir also said, “When the time expires, and both (spouses) wish to repeat (the mut'ah), then he must give her another dowry". One of us asked him, "How long is her `iddah?" He said, "A single menstruation."

Source: Abū Bakr ‘Abd al-Razzāq b. Hamām al-Ṣa’nānī, al-Muṣannaf [annotator: Ḥabīb al-Raḥman al-A'ẓamī], vol. 7, p. 499, # 14025

This does not give credence to the narration I had presented, I had said you would look for anything from sunnis to support your practice, but this information is not from the Prophet (SAW), cannot be found in the Qur'an, so it means nothing to me, coupled with the fact that Ibn Jurayj had been recorded to have retracted his fatwa on mut'ah after permitting it. So you can just make a woman "statusless" in the society by just being with her in perpetual mut'ah?! Yeah very honourable for your Muslim sisters...

lanrexlan:
6 pages and yet no conclusion?! The thread has been derailed already.

@sino, few questions for you.

1) All those sahaabahs who performed mut'ah during the lifetime of the Nabi, after his demise and some tabi'een were they wrong or ignorant of the hadith of the Prophet prohibiting it?

The right question is, who were these sahabah?! Do you have their names?! I had already brought possible explanations for those mentioned, some were wrongly mentioned like Asma bint Abu Bakr (ra), Ibn Abbas (ra), explained himself in another narration using eating Pork as an example. The most notable case is Amr Ibn Hurayth (ra), and his case can easily be explained as being ignorant of the prohibition. Since we do not have the list of these tabi'een and Makkan jurists, and we do not know whether they knew for sure about this prohibition, and for the fact that one of them who was named, Ibn Jurayj, retracted his "fatwa" after he had permitted it, indicating the possibility of acquiring new knowledge which must have facilitated his retraction, all points to ignorance as an excuse.

So if they were aware of the prohibition made by the prophet (saw), or that reiterated by Umar (ra), and still went ahead to practice mut'ah, then they were wrong, but before I can say that for sure, i must have incontrovertible evidence(s) that they knew of these prohibitions already mentioned.

lanrexlan:

2) You said mut'ah is only a necessity for those soldiers during war or an expedition but there is an hadith that says some companions said WE WERE YOUNG........... .If mut'ah was meant for married men who have no access to their spouses, what about unmarried young men? Why did the Nabi recommend mut'ah for them? Why not fasting?

The narration is still the same as the one that mentioned expedition, and mentioned "we had no women with us" possibly indicating their wives... I was not the one who said it is only for married men, I only asked pertinent questions as who and who should qualify to participate in mut'ah. Qur'an had already stated what singles who are unable to marry should be patient, hence if they are to go into mut'ah, then there would be an explicit verse that would give a clear indication of this permission, not to mention other authentic narration advising young singles to engage in fasting so as to reduce their sexual urge... If mut'ah is a continuous permission, I'm afraid people would not get married, especially in this harsh financial conditions, since you have no obligation to your female mut'ah partner, even if she gets pregnant. You should note that these conditions are not stated in the Qur'an or by the Prophet (SAW), but still we are to believe it was a new legislation?!

lanrexlan:

3) If mut'ah is akin to eating pork, we know unlawful becomes lawful at the time of necessity and a person is ONLY ALLOWED to take what will cure/satisfy his hunger at that time WITHOUT taking extra along. If mut'ah is similar to eating of pork, is a person who practised mut'ah only allowed to have intimacy that would his sexual urges? Like 1minute or how would we measure that?

Well, personally, i see mut'ah as the kind of "permission" given to drinking wine before it was totally prohibited. Ibn Abbas (ra) brought the explanation using pork. As I have already asked those who claim it is in the Qur'an, to present details of this new legislation instead of using semantics, but no such information can be found in the Qur'an, the best gotten from the Prophet (SAW) is the permission to do mut'ah for a stated period of time, after which he forbade it.

lanrexlan:

4) You said that the mut'ah during the time of the Prophet wasn't a sin but the mut'ah today is a sin. Does that include all those mut'ah marriages practised by the companions and tabe'een after the death of the Nabi? If it was to be sin, is it major sin or minor sin?

The reason why it is a sin is because we have authentic hadith that states the Prophet (SAW) prohibited it. So it is haram to participate in mut'ah, and it is going against the Prophet (SAW), which is going against Allah (SWT). I have already explained the cases of the sahabah and tabi'een above.

lanrexlan:

5) You said that


Do you think the Nabi would legislate something like nikkah (whether temporary or permanent) without a verse to back it up??

The Prophet (SAW) does not speak of his own desire or opinion on religious matter, thus I believe that permission of mut'ah during those cases as established in authentic narrations is valid, and when authentic narrations also stated clearly of the Prophet (SAW) prohibition forever, that then becomes the final legislation sanctioned by shar'ah on mut'ah, so it will take more than speculations and assumptions and theories to overrule this facts. If you can't find mut'ah in the Qur'an, nor can you find its details, then it was never part of the Qur'an! Allah (SWT) the all wise, made the permission through the words of His messenger, and thereafter prohibited it once it served its purpose.

PS: Assalam alaykum bro, how have you been?!

Empiree:
Zero he made. He and mrolai only know how to copy paste without meaningful contributions. This only puts me off. That's why i was never interested in Mut'h topics until this one. DOnt know why i am so much interested in thread. This thread made me aware of the details of mut'ah due to my approach to kick out unnecessary rants like mrolai. He left bcus he had nothing to offer academically, but to post pics and download nonsense from net

if you and albaqir are expecting anything you will call meaningful then sorry to disappoint you, you won't get it from me. I know say na una be Mr researchers

AlBaqir:


# 1. The truth is the same sexual urge that drove those sahabah to the point of contemplating castrating themselves is the same till Qiyamat. So, Yes this age and time still needs it.

# 2. Obviously, there's absolutely nothing meritorious like permanent Nikkah. Observe mut'ah is designed for a purpose at specific place and time, therefore it's not about "why can't we use the money for permanent nikkah". Mut'ah becomes haram for a resident with all the capability to do permanent marriage yet refuse to and hiding under Mut'ah. Kindly see my post on the conditions and guidelines to Mut'ah practice (on this thread).

I understand your point of view but it is indeed saddening that nowadays to see residents with capacity to marry engaging in it. They see mut'ah as an avenue to have intimacy with just a payment and since many aren't ready to father a baby, they go for this 'cheap escape', i.e. sex and just pay.

AlBaqir:
# The truth is Islam made women sacrifice more than their husband. Imagine a man is entitled to marry up to 4 wives + several concubines yet woman has no such luxury.

* Is this injustice? Islam comes out with certain philosophical arguments:

1. GENERALLY man's sexual desires is far higher than woman's. And while woman's urge EVENTUALLY weakens or dies at certain age bracket, man's don't till death comes. While it is GENERALLY easier for women to control her sexual feelings, men generally finds it difficult to do same (hence 99% of cases of sexual harassment and rape, men are chief culprits).

@bold, that is why baba 70 also want to marry omoge 23years, baba wants to 'renew' blood

You are right to some extent but on the aspect of women being able to control their sexual desires more, I don't quit agree unless you can back it up proofs. If I am not wrong, I think masturbation is more rampant among the female folks (Though I wish I could find stats for this).

AlBaqir:

2. For a woman to have two husband at a time will not only constitute problems and danger but also is GENERALLY seen as immoral in every society. The case is not for men.

Saheeh, except some crazy countries.

AlBaqir:

3. Can leads to wrong Child(ren)'s ownership

Therefore, in truth women endured more because they have tendency and capacity to endure, and their reward is far far higher than that of men.

Agreed.

AlBaqir:

Shia have ahadith about every pain a pregnant woman undergo equivalent to the stage of Jihad. Think about that in line with a woman that misses her husband while Ògá adé have luxury of Mut'ah or even the formulated Misyar nikkah to ease himself.

So will the woman (the wife) be rewarded for her patience while Ògá adé is busy playing 'away match'?? Secondly, will the wife be aware that Ògá adé is 'lamoshuaging' another woman outside? Will she be carried along as regards the mut'ah marriage?

If not, then I don't think this comparison with polygamy is 100% in line with mut'ah

AlBaqir:


Consider the following:

1. A Muslim soldier or a businessman, sailors etc out within the reach of his wife(s), and the beast came calling and uncontrollable. What is Islamic solution to it?

* Shia says MUT'AH

* Some Sunni says "nikkah with intention of divorce".

* Other Sunnis says fasting.

NB: While fasting can work for some, it absolutely cannot for others. Even sahabah led by Umar broke the rules of "do not have sex during Ramadan night" before Allah then grant them the permission. So, we are left with either Mut'ah or Misyar.

I think if the wife of soldiers and sailors can endure the sexual urge emanated from missing their spouses, why shouldn't the husband also ready to make the same sacrifice since it is just for a short period?! For the sake of Allah and the sake of love!

AlBaqir:

2. A divorcee or widow with for example 4 - 5 children, not even ready of going back into any so-called marriage which is usually gonna be polygamous. All she thinks now is herself and proper upkeep of her children. And as human being, nature demands once in a while. What is Islam solution to her problem?

Now in this case, who will she contract mut'ah with?! A married man or an unmarried man?! Sincerely, her case will just turn to a sugarmumsy case faah.


Thanks for your reply

sino:

The right question is, who were these sahabah?! Do you have their names?! I had already brought possible explanations for those mentioned, some were wrongly mentioned like Asma bint Abu Bakr (ra), Ibn Abbas (ra), explained himself in another narration using eating Pork as an example. The most notable case is Amr Ibn Hurayth (ra), and his case can easily be explained as being ignorant of the prohibition. Since we do not have the list of these tabi'een and Makkan jurists, and we do not know whether they knew for sure about this prohibition, and for the fact that one of them who was named, Ibn Jurayj, retracted his "fatwa" after he had permitted it, indicating the possibility of acquiring new knowledge which must have facilitated his retraction, all points to ignorance as an excuse.


So if they were aware of the prohibition made by the prophet (saw), or that reiterated by Umar (ra), and still went ahead to practice mut'ah, then they were wrong, but before I can say that for sure, i must have incontrovertible evidence(s) that they knew of these prohibitions already mentioned.

The opinion of Ibn Abbas here is that mutah is only to be performed in situations that are similar to the situations in which mutah was first made permissible. Will you agree with this stance of Ibn Abass? And the pork argument doesn't fly akhee.

But how would they be unaware of the prohibition if mut'ah was prohibited at the battle of Khaybar?! Where many Muslims participated?!

sino:


The narration is still the same as the one that mentioned expedition, and mentioned "we had no women with us" possibly indicating their wives... I was not the one who said it is only for married men, I only asked pertinent questions as who and who should qualify to participate in mut'ah. Qur'an had already stated what singles who are unable to marry should be patient, hence if they are to go into mut'ah, then there would be an explicit verse that would give a clear indication of this permission, not to mention other authentic narration advising young singles to engage in fasting so as to reduce their sexual urge... If mut'ah is a continuous permission, I'm afraid people would not get married, especially in this harsh financial conditions, since you have no obligation to your female mut'ah partner, even if she gets pregnant. You should note that these conditions are not stated in the Qur'an or by the Prophet (SAW), but still we are to believe it was a new legislation?!

"Possibly", well let us agree on the first sentence. Secondly, if these conditions weren't stated in the Qur'an, on what conditions did the Prophet permitted the companions to engage in it? Or the command was just that "Go and perform mut'ah and give the woman her mahr". Without the waliy of the lady, without an witness?

@the bold is also my fear. People will certainly hide behind it and abuse it but many things have been abused in our society today, even polygamy isn't spared.

sino:

Well, personally, i see mut'ah as the kind of "permission" given to drinking wine before it was totally prohibited. Ibn Abbas (ra) brought the explanation using pork. As I have already asked those who claim it is in the Qur'an, to present details of this new legislation instead of using semantics, but no such information can be found in the Qur'an, the best gotten from the Prophet (SAW) is the permission to do mut'ah for a stated period of time, after which he forbade it.

Drinking of wine was widespread among the Arabs even before the advent of the Prophethood of Muhammed (Peace upon him and his household) and they were cases of Sahaabahs who were drinking. So that's why Allah made the prohibitions in stages. Allah NEVER gave anyone the permission to drink to wine (except for necessity) rather wine consumption was one of the vices rampant among Arabs then.

So I am afraid mut'ah doesn't fit in cos it seems to be a 'new legislation' which was allowed at least on two occasions.

sino:

The reason why it is a sin is because we have authentic hadith that states the Prophet (SAW) prohibited it. So it is haram to participate in mut'ah, and it is going against the Prophet (SAW), which is going against Allah (SWT). I have already explained the cases of the sahabah and tabi'een above.

So if it is a sin, what's the huddud for it? What should be the punishment imposed on a man found practising mut'ah? Is it the punishment doted out to fornicators and fornicatresses?! Lesser or multiplied?! I would love to see evidences.

sino:

The Prophet (SAW) does not speak of his own desire or opinion on religious matter, thus I believe that permission of mut'ah during those cases as established in authentic narrations is valid, and when authentic narrations also stated clearly of the Prophet (SAW) prohibition forever, that then becomes the final legislation sanctioned by shar'ah on mut'ah, so it will take more than speculations and assumptions and theories to overrule this facts. If you can't find mut'ah in the Qur'an, nor can you find its details, then it was never part of the Qur'an! Allah (SWT) the all wise, made the permission through the words of His messenger, and thereafter prohibited it once it served its purpose.

So what you are saying in essence is that the main purpose of mut'ah was to serve the sexual urges of men of war on expedition. But akhee, there were tons of wars and expeditions after the demise of the Nabi. So how would you expect soldiers and men on expeditions at that time to fulfill their sexual urges? Don't you think it's impartial?

sino:
PS: Assalam alaykum bro, how have you been?!

Wa alaykum Salaam Warahmatulah Wabarokatuh dearest akhee, Alhamudulilah I have been fine by Allah's mercy. How are you and your beloved family? May Allah's mercy always abide with you (Aamen)

Empiree:
Zero he made. He and mr.olai only know how to copy paste without meaningful contributions. This only puts me off. That's why i was never interested in Mut'h topics until this one. DOnt know why i am so much interested in thread. This thread made me aware of the details of mut'ah due to my approach to kick out unnecessary rants like mr.olai. He left bcus he had nothing to offer academically, but to post pics and download nonsense from net

Don't mind those robots, always attacking the messenger and not the message. Products of blind followership.


@bold, it is 'imisi' from awon Ruhaniyahs

lanrexlan:


Drinking of wine was widespread among the Arabs even before the advent of the Prophethood of Muhammed (Peace upon him and his household) and they were cases of Sahaabahs who were drinking. So that's why Allah made the prohibitions in stages. Allah NEVER gave anyone the permission to drink to wine (except for necessity) rather wine consumption was one of the vices rampant among Arabs then.

So I am afraid mut'ah doesn't fit in cos it seems to be a 'new legislation' which was allowed at least on two occasions.

You grabbed my point. This is what i was telling him all along based on evidences presented Hence, it can not zina by definition standard.

lanrexlan:

You are right to some extent but on the aspect of women being able to control their sexual desires more, I don't quit agree unless you can back it up proofs. If I am not wrong, I think masturbation is more rampant among the female folks (Though I wish I could find stats for this).

# One websites opens its article thus:

"An old joke observes that 98 percent of people masturbate--and the other 2 percent are lying. But
according to a recent study based on a representative
sample of American adults, only 38 percent of women
said they'd masturbated at all during the past year. The
figure for men was 61 percent"
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-sex/200903/how-common-is-masturbation-really


# Masturbation Facts and Statistics
https://www.statisticbrain.com/masturbation-statistics/

* But the truth is statistics are usually based on those who admitted to the truth. Millions couldn't come out to admit.

# Here's another interesting research:
Sexual Desire in Women
Sexual desire in females is both more complex and more
fragile than it is in males— less tied to biology, more
linked to psychology. It is generally more variable; related to how they feel about themselves, what is going on in their lives, to say nothing of a partner's lovemaking style.
But experts agree that, in general, sexual desire is lower
among females than among males, so a drop in female
desire for any reason may be more problematic in
relationships.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/basics/low-sexual-desire/sexual-desire-in-women

# @underline^^, Compare to that of men which is a pure biological force.
https://www.psychologies.co.uk/love/wise-words-esther-perel-on-sex-and-relationships-3.html


# Anyway, let's even assume that masturbation is higher in women compare to their male counterparts. The question would be why?

* USUALLY, man is bold enough to seek and demand sex to the extent of rape. On the other hand, USUALLY, women do not have that boldness therefore save haven might be masturbation.

lanrexlan:

So will the woman (the wife) be rewarded for her patience while Ògá adé is busy playing 'away match'?? Secondly, will the wife be aware that Ògá adé is 'lamoshuaging' another woman outside? Will she be carried along as regards the mut'ah marriage?

If not, then I don't think this comparison with polygamy is 100% in line with mut'ah

# Obviously, according to Qur'an, there's excellent reward for patience.

# As per awareness, generally man do not need permission of his wife to marry either second or more wife, or engage in Mut'ah.

lanrexlan:

I think if the wife of soldiers and sailors can endure the sexual urge emanated from missing their spouses, why shouldn't the husband also ready to make the same sacrifice since it is just for a short period?! For the sake of Allah and the sake of love!

# I think this is answered by some of the post above: men are usually being drive by biological force far powerful than women.

# However, there are lots of men that do and that can control their desires over long period of time. Its just that some cannot.

lanrexlan:

Now in this case, who will she contract mut'ah with?! A married man or an unmarried man?! Sincerely, her case will just turn to a sugarmumsy case faah.

Thanks for your reply

# Sugarmummy/sugar daddy is a social problem associated with our society just like the Christian or western or communist society averse to multiple marriage and see a man that practice it as "slave of sex or unfaithfulness" despite the fact that promiscuity, formication and adultery is prevalent in their midst.

# Environment where Mut'ah is known and being practiced, nobody sees it as "sugar mummy/sugar daddy thing". Islam does not hide, fear or shy in its laws to the believers.

lanrexlan:
The opinion of Ibn Abbas here is that mutah is only to be performed in situations that are similar to the situations in which mutah was first made permissible. Will you agree with this stance of Ibn Abass? And the pork argument doesn't fly akhee.

But how would they be unaware of the prohibition if mut'ah was prohibited at the battle of Khaybar?! Where many Muslims participated?!

I do not agree with Ibn Abbas (ra), indeed, the reason for permissions during the life of the Prophet (SAW) were peculiar, but Ibn Abbas was challenged, even if he opined that he meant permissible in such situation as documented during the life of the Prophet (SAW).

@ bold, you would have to tell that to Ibn Abbas (ra)...

There are so many theories we can start discussing, but it remains theories, speculations and assumptions, that would only make us start having doubts, making claims of fabrications which cannot be substantiated and all for what?! Is mut'ah the key to Jannah?! There are authentic narrations clearly stating that it was prohibited by the Prophet (SAW), whether the whole sahabah heard it or not is not important, what is important is that those who narrated this prohibition are reliable such as Ali (ra) etc.

lanrexlan:

"Possibly", well let us agree on the first sentence. Secondly, if these conditions weren't stated in the Qur'an, on what conditions did the Prophet permitted the companions to engage in it? Or the command was just that "Go and perform mut'ah and give the woman her mahr". Without the waliy of the lady, without an witness?

We work with what can be established from the Qur'an and the authentic hadith. If mut'ah was a new legislation, then we ought to have the details from the Qur'an or the Prophet (SAW) himself. From the narrations which showed permission from the Prophet (SAW) did you find any details beyond for a stipulated period and give them something (e.g garment)?! You would see this is not a marriage as sanctioned in the Qur'an, but the companions understood what to do, have you asked yourself, why they never asked the Prophet (SAW) what they should do?!

lanrexlan:

@the bold is also my fear. People will certainly hide behind it and abuse it but many things have been abused in our society today, even polygamy isn't spared.

If a bad man abuses polygamy, or even marriage itself, he would never say Allah and the Prophet (SAW) permitted me to do such and such, but what we find is that shi'ahs practice this their mut'ah and use the Qur'an and the Prophet (SAW) to back up their practice. Even from the narrations from their books (albeit arbitrarily authenticated), there happens to be good reasons to find this practice not being in line with Islamic ideals.

lanrexlan:

Drinking of wine was widespread among the Arabs even before the advent of the Prophethood of Muhammed (Peace upon him and his household) and they were cases of Sahaabahs who were drinking. So that's why Allah made the prohibitions in stages. Allah NEVER gave anyone the permission to drink to wine (except for necessity) rather wine consumption was one of the vices rampant among Arabs then.

So I am afraid mut'ah doesn't fit in cos it seems to be a 'new legislation' which was allowed at least on two occasions.

Arabs were also having sex and giving a token for sex before the advent of Islam...Examples of a new legislation includes how we perform our Nikkah, how we pray, how we dress, etc. all these have explicit details in the Qur'an and the sunnah of the Prophet (SAW). There is nothing new about contracting a temporary "marriage" if the details are not special other that a specified period and a token to be given for the duration.
Why I made reference to wine is because it wasn't deemed haram from the onset, it was permitted (not explicitly), and companions during the early part of Islam drank, even the Qur'an states that there is good in it although the bad is more. Then it was finally prohibited. Such can also be said of mut'ah, the Prophet (SAW) permitted it, and then he forbade it.

lanrexlan:

So if it is a sin, what's the huddud for it? What should be the punishment imposed on a man found practising mut'ah? Is it the punishment doted out to fornicators and fornicatresses?! Lesser or multiplied?! I would love to see evidences.

It is zina, once it is established, the Prophet (SAW) prohibited it, such relationship is no longer recognized in the shari'ah, for evidences:

Allah (SWT) says:
"And those who guard their private parts

Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they are not to be blamed

But whoever seeks beyond that, then they are the transgressors" (Qur'an 70:29-31)

This above verse stands till the last day, your wives, and those your right hand possesses(slaves), mut'ah women are not mentioned here, or in any other verse like the above in the Qur'an!

lanrexlan:

So what you are saying in essence is that the main purpose of mut'ah was to serve the sexual urges of men of war on expedition. But akhee, there were tons of wars and expeditions after the demise of the Nabi. So how would you expect soldiers and men on expeditions at that time to fulfill their sexual urges? Don't you think it's impartial?

What is impartial is to let men enjoy themselves as much as they want, and tell the woman (especially the married) to remain chaste, what about when the urges come for them too? What about the single men at home who have urges too?! But Allah (SWT) is the Just, Allah (SWT) says:

"And let those who find not the financial means for marriage keep themselves chaste, until Allah enriches them of His Bounty." (Qur'an 24:33)

Also as quoted above, Allah (SWT) instructs us to guard our private parts against illegal sexual intercourse except with our wives and slaves, if you do not have any of such, then you remain chaste! Moreover, it is legislated for a married man not to be away from his wife for a long period of time, leaving her hanging, so expeditions are meant to be periodic.

lanrexlan:

Wa alaykum Salaam Warahmatulah Wabarokatuh dearest akhee, Alhamudulilah I have been fine by Allah's mercy. How are you and your beloved family? May Allah's mercy always abide with you (Aamen)

Alhamdulillah, the family is fine. Allahuma Ameen, many thanks.

sino:
@ bold, you would have to tell that to Ibn Abbas (ra)...

O ya akh lanrexlan, go dig up his qabr

sino:


I do not agree with Ibn Abbas (ra), indeed, the reason for permissions during the life of the Prophet (SAW) were peculiar, but Ibn Abbas was challenged, even if he opined that he meant permissible in such situation as documented during the life of the Prophet (SAW).

You are still not getting the point. I quite agreed that the reason for its permissions were peculiar. But ask you akhee, weren't there tons of wars and expeditions after the demise of the Nabi? When the needs (wars and expeditions) arose again then, is it permissible to perform mut'ah?

sino:

@ bold, you would have to tell that to Ibn Abbas (ra)...

I need Angel Castiel to teleport me to the time and age of Ibn Abass in the desert of Arabia.

sino:

We work with what can be established from the Qur'an and the authentic hadith. If mut'ah was a new legislation, then we ought to have the details from the Qur'an or the Prophet (SAW) himself. From the narrations which showed permission from the Prophet (SAW) did you find any details beyond for a stipulated period and give them something (e.g garment)?! You would see this is not a marriage as sanctioned in the Qur'an, but the companions understood what to do, have you asked yourself, why they never asked the Prophet (SAW) what they should do?!

"Give them something", it sounds like the example you brought as regards Arabs engaging in sex for money. The companions understood what to do because they have been doing it before and the Prophet just authenticated it for them?

If it is not a new legislation, then what is it?

sino:

If a bad man abuses polygamy, or even marriage itself, he would never say Allah and the Prophet (SAW) permitted me to do such and such, but what we find is that shi'ahs practice this their mut'ah and use the Qur'an and the Prophet (SAW) to back up their practice. Even from the narrations from their books (albeit arbitrarily authenticated), there happens to be good reasons to find this practice not being in line with Islamic ideals.

That has always been the bone of contention for ages between Shi'as and Sunnis i.e. Did Mut'ah continue after the demise of the Nabi?

sino:

Arabs were also having sex and giving a token for sex before the advent of Islam...Examples of a new legislation includes how we perform our Nikkah, how we pray, how we dress, etc. all these have explicit details in the Qur'an and the sunnah of the Prophet (SAW). There is nothing new about contracting a temporary "marriage" if the details are not special other that a specified period and a token to be given for the duration.

Akhee, I am afraid this comparison isn't the same. The implication of what you are saying is that the Nabi legislated the "having sex for a token" which the Arabs were already engaged in by commanding mut'ah! That is the meaning of the analogy!

sino:

Why I made reference to wine is because it wasn't deemed haram from the onset, it was permitted (not explicitly), and companions during the early part of Islam drank, even the Qur'an states that there is good in it although the bad is more. Then it was finally prohibited. Such can also be said of mut'ah, the Prophet (SAW) permitted it, and then he forbade it.

Wine was already widespread among the Arabs. They were drunkards among them before the 'advent' of Islam. Allah NEVER made alcohol permissible for them, they were already in the mess. In order not to make them 'run away' from Islam at the start, that's why the prohibition was in stages.

Mut'ah isn't the same with that. No record of any one performing mut'ah before the the first legislation. Moreover, mut'ah wasn't prohibited in stages. I see NO correlation whatsoever between alcohol prohibition and the acclaimed mut'ah prohibition!

sino:

It is zina, once it is established, the Prophet (SAW) prohibited it, such relationship is no longer recognized in the shari'ah, for evidences:

Allah (SWT) says:
"And those who guard their private parts

Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they are not to be blamed

But whoever seeks beyond that, then they are the transgressors" (Qur'an 70:29-31)

This above verse stands till the last day, your wives, and those your right hand possesses(slaves), mut'ah women are not mentioned here, or in any other verse like the above in the Qur'an!

What about before the prophet prohibited it? So in essence, Zina was made lawful before the Nabi forbade it?

sino:

What is impartial is to let men enjoy themselves as much as they want, and tell the woman (especially the married) to remain chaste, what about when the urges come for them too? What about the single men at home who have urges too?! But Allah (SWT) is the Just, Allah (SWT) says:

"And let those who find not the financial means for marriage keep themselves chaste, until Allah enriches them of His Bounty." (Qur'an 24:33)

Do you know the implication of what you wrote?! It means the Nabi was impartial for legislating mut'ah during those occasions as narrated in the Ahadith! I only inferred from your submission akhee unless you are referring to those practising mut'ah without at home without any just cause to justify it.

Is polygamy impartial?!

sino:
Also as quoted above, Allah (SWT) instructs us to guard our private parts against illegal sexual intercourse except with our wives and slaves, if you do not have any of such, then you remain chaste! Moreover, it is legislated for a married man not to be away from his wife for a long period of time, leaving her hanging, so expeditions are meant to be periodic.

I never argued this. Expeditions are periodic, so was the legislation of mut'ah during the lifetime of the Nabi. I am curious, what was the longest duration of those expeditions and wars in which mut'ah was made permissible?

sino:

Alhamdulillah, the family is fine. Allahuma Ameen, many thanks.

Alhamudulilah

Empiree:
You grabbed my point. This is what i was telling him all along based on evidences presented Hence, it can not zina by definition standard.

Yes, it can become Zina by the situations, circumstances and the people who practised it during or after the demise of the Nabi. So comparison with alcohol or pork is out of it

Empiree:
O ya akh lanrexlan, go dig up his qabr

I am not muscular enough to be digging grave

You remind of the Winchester boys (Supernatural Series). This is one of the works, digging graves and burning bodies to stop ghosts and vengeful spirits.

AlBaqir:


# One websites opens its article thus:

"An old joke observes that 98 percent of people masturbate--and the other 2 percent are lying. But
according to a recent study based on a representative
sample of American adults, only 38 percent of women
said they'd masturbated at all during the past year. The
figure for men was 61 percent"
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-sex/200903/how-common-is-masturbation-really


# Masturbation Facts and Statistics
https://www.statisticbrain.com/masturbation-statistics/

* But the truth is statistics are usually based on those who admitted to the truth. Millions couldn't come out to admit.

# Here's another interesting research:
Sexual Desire in Women
Sexual desire in females is both more complex and more
fragile than it is in males— less tied to biology, more
linked to psychology. It is generally more variable; related to how they feel about themselves, what is going on in their lives, to say nothing of a partner's lovemaking style.
But experts agree that, in general, sexual desire is lower
among females than among males, so a drop in female
desire for any reason may be more problematic in
relationships.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/basics/low-sexual-desire/sexual-desire-in-women

# @underline^^, Compare to that of men which is a pure biological force.
https://www.psychologies.co.uk/love/wise-words-esther-perel-on-sex-and-relationships-3.html


# Anyway, let's even assume that masturbation is higher in women compare to their male counterparts. The question would be why?

* USUALLY, man is bold enough to seek and demand sex to the extent of rape. On the other hand, USUALLY, women do not have that boldness therefore save haven might be masturbation.

Thanks for the statistics. Really appreciate.

AlBaqir:

# Obviously, according to Qur'an, there's excellent reward for patience.

Naam

AlBaqir:

# As per awareness, generally man do not need permission of his wife to marry either second or more wife, or engage in Mut'ah.

He may not need her permission, but she would be certainly aware that her husband is taking a new wife even if it is at the last minute. Will the wife aware as regards mut'ah?

AlBaqir:

# I think this is answered by some of the post above: men are usually being drive by biological force far powerful than women.

# However, there are lots of men that do and that can control their desires over long period of time. Its just that some cannot.

But how will we know the truthful ones from the insincere ones? Almost impossible, the same way we can't know the man who is sincere with polygamy or not. I hope you get the drift.

AlBaqir:

# Sugarmummy/sugar daddy is a social problem associated with our society just like the Christian or western or communist society averse to multiple marriage and see a man that practice it as "slave of sex or unfaithfulness" despite the fact that promiscuity, formication and adultery is prevalent in their midst.

# Environment where Mut'ah is known and being practiced, nobody sees it as "sugar mummy/sugar daddy thing". Islam does not hide, fear or shy in its laws to the believers.

Thanks for replies. Really appreciate your time.

Let's just say sino's position, which majority sunni hold up, including myself, is to be on the "safe side" which i quite agree with. But i am not gonna agree with parallel drawn btw mut'ah, wine and pork. Also, one notices that it is easy to condemn mut'ah from afar as many of us sunni do without scrutiny not knowing that mut'ah is much more deeper than that. It is better to go through it academically as we have done so far than simply rubbishing it. That makes no sense


The actual act of zina is much prevalent than mut'ah itself. It seems I and lanrexlan are actually on the same page here. He sees what i see. I have just one step toward agreeing with Shi'a on mut'ah ONLY IF they can establish undiluted proof(s) that Nisa ayah 24 was revealed about mut'ah and there should be isnad reaching some sahaba. This thread is encyclopedia on its own.

lanrexlan:
Thanks for the statistics. Really appreciate.
Thanks for replies. Really appreciate your time.

# Nah! You deserve the thanks. The thread was going in circles and getting derailed and insane but you've put sanity back to it.

lanrexlan:

He may not need her permission, but she would be certainly aware that her husband is taking a new wife even if it is at the last minute. Will the wife aware as regards mut'ah?

# Obviously.

# @underline, just like every Muslim woman knows her husband can decided to take in another wife, a shia woman knows and very much aware her husband can perform Mut'ah when there's a need for him to.

* The truth is in those two scenario, even if the woman grumbles and protest, it doesn't stop the man. And at the end women usually gbaf'Olohun setting condition, "at least he should make sure am getting my normal attention and rights".

lanrexlan:

But how will we know the truthful ones from the insincere ones? Almost impossible, the same way we can't know the man who is sincere with polygamy or not. I hope you get the drift.

# Ìjà ò dé, o npe rare l'okunrin (fight/war hasn't come, and you are bragging you are a man). Every man (especially the married that have tasted sex) can only access himself at that long time of sex absence when that biological force overtakes him.

* Islam doesn't judge or legislate its laws based on the strongest but the weakest.

* While in the absence of your wife(s), how much is the % of your sexual urge (sincerity) that makes you feel you need Mut'ah? Am afraid there's no meter to measure this if you consider:

1. Hadith exists that talks about some sahabah intending castration. Is that a measure? No.

2. Hadith exists that says Nabi just ORDERED it without anyone complaining any necessity.

All in all, one needs to train himself physically and spiritually but the truth is everybody cannot be that good. Imagine the initial legislation of Ramadan fasting of "no sex at night for 1 month" yet some sahabah were secretly having sex perse perse with their wives until Allah exposed them, and lifted the restraint.
..........
Finally, sex is one of the siffat (attribute) of our animal self. It weakens our real self (ruh) from its spiritual development (except for those whose ruh have reached a stage it cannot be draw back anymore). According to the experts of irfan, this is where ghusl is very very important to lift the ruh.

Empiree:
I have just one step toward agreeing with Shi'a on mut'ah ONLY IF they can establish undiluted proof(s) that Nisa ayah 24 was revealed about mut'ah and there should be isnad reaching some sahaba. This thread is encyclopedia on its own.

# Dont let us drag ourselves back again. We have clearly established lots of Sunni sahih ahadith reaching Ibn Abbas, Ibn Mas'ud, Ubai Ibn Kaab, best of Sunni Qur'anic reciter and Mufassir among the sahabah. And its so serious that these sahabah's mushaf reads the ayah with, "for a specific period" which is not in the present Qur'an. There's no running away from the fact that Q.4:24 established Mut'ah. Here's another to initial evidences I have posted before:

Imam Tabari documents:

Abū Kurayb ­ - Yaḥyā b. ‘Īsā ­ - Naṣīr b. Abī al-Ash'ath ­- Ibn Ḥabīb b. Abī Thābit ­- his father:

Ibn ‘Abbās gave me a muṣḥaf. He said, "This is upon the qirāat of Ubayy b. Ka'b".

Abū Kurayb narrated that Yahyā said: "I saw the muṣḥaf with Nuṣayr. In it was {Those of them with whom you contract mut'ah for a specified period}

Source: Abū Ja’far Muḥammad b. Jarīr b. Yazīd b. Kathīr b. Ghālib al-Āmulī al-Ṭabarī, Jāmi al-
Bayān fī Tāwīl al-Qur’ān (Dār al-Fikr; 1415 H) [annotator: Ṣidqī Jamīl al-`Aṭṭār], vol. 5, p. 18

All the Sunni sahih evidences that support this fact only made most of Sunni scholars argued:

1. that Hadith had abrogated it

2. that some other ayah had abrogated it.


# On the other hands, Shi'a only expose Sunni books to put in their face that most things they accused Shi'a of guilty of, are very much more stated in their books. Note, Shia never needs proof from Sunni books to believe in whatever he belief in or practice.

Sheik Al-Kulayni (d. 329 H) documents:


`Alī ­ his father ­ Ibn Abī `Umayr ­ `Umar b. Uzaynah ­ Zurārah:

`Abd Allah b. `Umayr al-Laythī went to Abū Ja'far, peace be upon him, and said to him, "What is your opinion of mut'ah with women?" So, he (Abu Ja’far) said, "Allāh made it ḥalāl in His Book and upon the tongue of His Prophet, peace be upon him and his family. Therefore, it is ḥalāl till the Day of al-Qiyāmah."

Then he (al-Laythī) said, "O Abu Ja'far! Someone of your calibre saying this, despite that `Umar had made it ḥarām and had forbidden it?!"

He (Abu Ja'far) said, "Even if he did so." He (al-Laythī) said, "I seek refuge for you with Allāh from that, from making ḥalāl something that `Umar made ḥarām."

He (Abu Ja'far) said to him, "You follow the teaching of your companion and I follow the teaching of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his family. So, invoke the curse of Allāh (upon the wrong party between us) ­ (I say) that the truth is what the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him and his family, said, and that the falsehood is what your companion said."

`Abd Allāh b. `Umayr then advanced and said, "Would it make you happy if your wives, daughters, sisters and the daughters of your uncle do (mu'tah)?" So, Abū Ja'far, peace be upon him, turned away from him when he mentioned his wives and the daughters of his uncle"

Source: Abu Ja’far Muḥammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Alī Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 449, # 4

lanrexlan:
You are still not getting the point. I quite agreed that the reason for its permissions were peculiar. But ask you akhee, weren't there tons of wars and expeditions after the demise of the Nabi? When the needs (wars and expeditions) arose again then, is it permissible to perform mut'ah?

Of course I get you, are you doubting the authenticity of the narrations that stated the Prophet (SAW) prohibited it too?! It is established that it was forbidden by the Prophet (SAW), therefore, such practice remains forbidden. You should read all the narrations that speaks on prohibition, you would then see that Ibn Abbas's opinion cannot be substantiated with regards to permission due to necessity. The reason why necessity makes some haram permissible, is to save lives, and abstaining from sex isn't life threatening. The categorical prohibition from the Prophet (SAW) using the word forever, made it sealed, and not to be revisited again, no matter the number of wars and expeditions that may come.

lanrexlan:

I need Angel Castiel to teleport me to the time and age of Ibn Abass in the desert of Arabia.

Empiree is there for you na, "wan ni awon ruhaniyah lowo"

lanrexlan:

"Give them something", it sounds like the example you brought as regards Arabs engaging in sex for money. The companions understood what to do because they have been doing it before and the Prophet just authenticated it for them?

The narrations available stated this, They did mut'ah with garment, cloak or even dates, these are things. The Prophet (SAW) permitted them to do mut'ah as stated, the cases were peculiar, and afterwards, he forbade them never to do it again. So yes, you may say the Prophet (SAW) authenticated it for those peculiar cases...

lanrexlan:

If it is not a new legislation, then what is it?

If you read through all the narrations of mut'ah, what is most prominent is the permission being granted, you don't grant permission for something new, you tell them that this is new, unlike what you know of before, and this is how to go about it. Does it make sense to tell someone go and do something in which the person is ignorant of?! Wouldn't this person ask relevant questions?! Mut'ah is mut'ah, it was allowed for peculiar reasons and then forbidden permanently.

lanrexlan:

That has always been the bone of contention for ages between Shi'as and Sunnis i.e. Did Mut'ah continue after the demise of the Nabi?

Continuation of a practice after being prohibited isn't something special that should cause doubts, a case of a companion drinking alcohol was reported, do we now say wine isn't prohibited?! Yes there are reports of such, but also Umar (ra) reiterated the prohibition and no companion challenged him. This means they all agreed that it was prohibited!

lanrexlan:

Akhee, I am afraid this comparison isn't the same. The implication of what you are saying is that the Nabi legislated the "having sex for a token" which the Arabs were already engaged in by commanding mut'ah! That is the meaning of the analogy!

Bro, I do not shy away from stating facts, the Prophet (SAW) permitted those who were requesting to castrate themselves to do mut'ah giving a garment according to one of the narrations on mut'ah. The Prophet (SAW) new better and gave the permissions, and within this divinely inspired wisdom, he (SAW) prohibited it forever!

lanrexlan:

Wine was already widespread among the Arabs. They were drunkards among them before the 'advent' of Islam. Allah NEVER made alcohol permissible for them, they were already in the mess. In order not to make them 'run away' from Islam at the start, that's why the prohibition was in stages.

Mut'ah isn't the same with that. No record of any one performing mut'ah before the the first legislation. Moreover, mut'ah wasn't prohibited in stages. I see NO correlation whatsoever between alcohol prohibition and the acclaimed mut'ah prohibition!

I understand you bro, it really doesn't matter if you do not see any correlation between the two, it still doesn't change the fact that the Prophet (SAW) prohibited mut'ah.

lanrexlan:

What about before the prophet prohibited it? So in essence, Zina was made lawful before the Nabi forbade it?

If necessity was what permitted mut'ah in the first instance (you should read all the narrations on permission), which made the cases peculiar, then the permission wasn't making zina lawful. It should be noted that there is no authentic narration that claimed sahabas did mut'ah during the time of the Prophet (SAW) when they were at home, nor any narration stating that the Prophet (SAW) told them when, where and how to do mut'ah. However, since mut'ah was prohibited by the Prophet (SAW), such actions automatically falls under zina, since it becomes illegal sexual relations.

lanrexlan:

Do you know the implication of what you wrote?! It means the Nabi was impartial for legislating mut'ah during those occasions as narrated in the Ahadith! I only inferred from your submission akhee unless you are referring to those practising mut'ah without at home without any just cause to justify it.

Is polygamy impartial?!

I was speaking generally and particularly on the claim of continuous permission of mut'ah. The women were not with the Prophet (SAW), so the cases of permission were peculiar.

Polygyny isn't the standard form of marriage in Islam, it is allowed for reasons which are peculiar too. It also comes with a strict caveat by Allah (SWT) in the Qur'an, unlike mut'ah, you can find details of this in the Qur'an and from the Prophet (SAW), a woman in polygyny has a full right as a wife, and she has the option to leave such marriage if she wants. But this mut'ah, the woman has no right whatsoever, except for what is given for the dowry. Her status is unknown, and she cannot demand anything except what she asks as her dowry and if she gets pregnant, the man has no obligations to fulfill, for the fact that it is temporary, the man might not even know she is pregnant. If such marriage isn't forbidden, we should be asking ourselves what ideals does Islam really preaches.

lanrexlan:

I never argued this. Expeditions are periodic, so was the legislation of mut'ah during the lifetime of the Nabi. I am curious, what was the longest duration of those expeditions and wars in which mut'ah was made permissible?

I do not have the details of how long those expeditions were, but I think it is irrelevant, since we know that the permission wasn't due to the duration of the expedition, rather it was due to some sahabah wanting to castrate themselves. Regardless, Islam frowns at being away from your spouse for a protracted period of time, it can be a basis for divorce. So to use the excuse of being away from your wife for long holds no water!

lanrexlan:

Alhamudulilah

Ma sha Allah!

Empiree:
O ya akh lanrexlan, go dig up his qabr

This is absolutely hilarious

Lanre pele ku ise o!

Just checking if you guys have made conclusion

AlBaqir:


# Dont let us drag ourselves back again. We have clearly established lots of Sunni sahih ahadith reaching Ibn Abbas, Ibn Mas'ud, Ubai Ibn Kaab, best of Sunni Qur'anic reciter and Mufassir among the sahabah. And its so serious that these sahabah's mushaf reads the ayah with, "for a specific period" which is not in the present Qur'an. There's no running away from the fact that Q.4:24 established Mut'ah. Here's another to initial evidences I have posted before:


Source: Abu Ja’far Muḥammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Alī Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 449, # 4

"Rule Of Thumb" applies here. The same rule that applies to issue of rajam blemishing Qur'an of a "missing verse". Therefore, no matter who said what, it is irrelevant bcus only Allah and His messenger have the right to say such, that, a verse of mut'a is not in present Qur'an. That's forgery. It is the same claim as ghost "verse of rajm". It doesn't matter if it in Sunni books. The claim is invalid without authority of the messanger(saw).



But if they said "we understood ayah 24 of surah nisa was revealed about mut'ah", this would have been more acceptable. Therefore, i dismiss so called "ayah of mut'ah" in the Qur'an. However, until Sunnis remove the "evidences" you cited, they gonna have hard time proving mut'ah wrong. So i am free from both sides of this topic.

sino:


This is absolutely hilarious

Lanre pele ku ise o!

Shebi na you gimme work

sino:


Of course I get you, are you doubting the authenticity of the narrations that stated the Prophet (SAW) prohibited it too?! It is established that it was forbidden by the Prophet (SAW), therefore, such practice remains forbidden. You should read all the narrations that speaks on prohibition, you would then see that Ibn Abbas's opinion cannot be substantiated with regards to permission due to necessity. The reason why necessity makes some haram permissible, is to save lives, and abstaining from sex isn't life threatening. The categorical prohibition from the Prophet (SAW) using the word forever, made it sealed, and not to be revisited again, no matter the number of wars and expeditions that may come.!

No need dragging this over and over. It is not about doubting the narrations, you and Baqir have tackled the hadith traced to Ali and I don't wanna start the saga again.

@bold, if sex isn't life threatening, then how is it a necessity in the first instance? If those sahabahs didn't had sex then, will they die ni?

sino:

Empiree is there for you na, "wan ni awon ruhaniyah lowo" !

Ruhaniyyah can't travel to the other world

sino:


The narrations available stated this, They did mut'ah with garment, cloak or even dates, these are things. The Prophet (SAW) permitted them to do mut'ah as stated, the cases were peculiar, and afterwards, he forbade them never to do it again. So yes, you may say the Prophet (SAW) authenticated it for those peculiar cases...!

Understood

sino:

If you read through all the narrations of mut'ah, what is most prominent is the permission being granted, you don't grant permission for something new, you tell them that this is new, unlike what you know of before, and this is how to go about it. Does it make sense to tell someone go and do something in which the person is ignorant of?! Wouldn't this person ask relevant questions?! Mut'ah is mut'ah, it was allowed for peculiar reasons and then forbidden permanently.!

What you are insinuating is that the Prophet has taught them about mut'ah before and that's why they didn't ask questions??

sino:

Continuation of a practice after being prohibited isn't something special that should cause doubts, a case of a companion drinking alcohol was reported, do we now say wine isn't prohibited?! Yes there are reports of such, but also Umar (ra) reiterated the prohibition and no companion challenged him. This means they all agreed that it was prohibited!!

They didn't challenge because they were probably 'afraid' of him

sino:

Bro, I do not shy away from stating facts, the Prophet (SAW) permitted those who were requesting to castrate themselves to do mut'ah giving a garment according to one of the narrations on mut'ah. The Prophet (SAW) new better and gave the permissions, and within this divinely inspired wisdom, he (SAW) prohibited it forever!!

No problem o, we will going in circles ni.

sino:

I understand you bro, it really doesn't matter if you do not see any correlation between the two, it still doesn't change the fact that the Prophet (SAW) prohibited mut'ah.!

"Understood"

sino:

If necessity was what permitted mut'ah in the first instance (you should read all the narrations on permission), which made the cases peculiar, then the permission wasn't making zina lawful. It should be noted that there is no authentic narration that claimed sahabas did mut'ah during the time of the Prophet (SAW) when they were at home, nor any narration stating that the Prophet (SAW) told them when, where and how to do mut'ah. However, since mut'ah was prohibited by the Prophet (SAW), such actions automatically falls under zina, since it becomes illegal sexual relations.!

Nobody even made mentioned of mut'ah at home, Baqir even said it is haram!

sino:

I was speaking generally and particularly on the claim of continuous permission of mut'ah. The women were not with the Prophet (SAW), so the cases of permission were peculiar.!

Understood

sino:


I do not have the details of how long those expeditions were, but I think it is irrelevant, since we know that the permission wasn't due to the duration of the expedition, rather it was due to some sahabah wanting to castrate themselves. Regardless, Islam frowns at being away from your spouse for a protracted period of time, it can be a basis for divorce. So to use the excuse of being away from your wife for long holds no water!!

Irrelevant? Really akhee? If the expedition was three days, do you think the Prophet would legislate mut'ah? The permission should have something to do with the duration. Why will a man want to castrate himself because he missed his wife just 6days or 7days or even 2 weeks? Is sex food for him ni?

sino:
Ma sha Allah!

Thanks for your replies and time akhee. Jazakumullah khairan

AlBaqir:


# Nah! You deserve the thanks. The thread was going in circles and getting derailed and insane but you've put sanity back to it.

AlBaqir:

# Obviously.

# @underline, just like every Muslim woman knows her husband can decided to take in another wife, a shia woman knows and very much aware her husband can perform Mut'ah when there's a need for him to.

Case closed if she is aware of it, then in that case, she can't feel cheated.

AlBaqir:

* The truth is in those two scenario, even if the woman grumbles and protest, it doesn't stop the man. And at the end women usually gbaf'Olohun setting condition, "at least he should make sure am getting my normal attention and rights".

Exactly. A woman who is aware of the permissibility of her husband to marry more than one should be prepared that he may marry at any time. Same with a shi'i woman as regards, grumbling won't stop that.

AlBaqir:

# Ìjà ò dé, o npe rare l'okunrin (fight/war hasn't come, and you are bragging you are a man). Every man (especially the married that have tasted sex) can only access himself at that long time of sex absence when that biological force overtakes him.

* Islam doesn't judge or legislate its laws based on the strongest but the weakest.

True

AlBaqir:
* While in the absence of your wife(s), how much is the % of your sexual urge (sincerity) that makes you feel you need Mut'ah? Am afraid there's no meter to measure this if you consider:

And Allah is Knower of what is in the breasts of men.

AlBaqir:
1. Hadith exists that talks about some sahabah intending castration. Is that a measure? No.

2. Hadith exists that says Nabi just ORDERED it without anyone complaining any necessity.

All in all, one needs to train himself physically and spiritually but the truth is everybody cannot be that good. Imagine the initial legislation of Ramadan fasting of "no sex at night for 1 month" yet some sahabah were secretly having sex perse perse with their wives until Allah exposed them, and lifted the restraint. ..........

May Allah bless you for the bold. And Ramadan was ONLY for a month o. Allah Mustaan

AlBaqir:

Finally, sex is one of the siffat (attribute) of our animal self. It weakens our real self (ruh) from its spiritual development (except for those whose ruh have reached a stage it cannot be draw back anymore). According to the experts of irfan, this is where ghusl is very very important to lift the ruh.

You are right, it has no respect for anyone. I was telling a brother that it is not about "I am an Hafiz of the Qu'ran" when you are alone with a lady. All those of the Quran would fly away from your head (even the verses of Zina) EXCEPT if Allah has bestowed His mercy upon you. May Allah safeguard our Imaan and make us not to be slaves to our lower desires (Aamen)

No sisters contributed on this thread bcuz it is not in their favor? It is men's WORLD

lanrexlan:
May Allah safeguard our Imaan and make us not to be slaves to our lower desires (Aamen)

And there many out there offering this common prayer "May God grant you your desires". Chai, sometimes i don't know if to say ameen to that du'a. I get confused.


BTW, Yoruba self get rich language coined in Arabic and English. "DESIRE" perfectly worded in yoruba "disaya" Di Si Aya still gives the same meaning. Incredible!

Empiree:
"Rule Of Thumb" applies here. The same rule that applies to issue of rajam blemishing Qur'an of a "missing verse". Therefore, no matter who said what, it is irrelevant bcus only Allah and His messenger have the right to say such, that, a verse of mut'a is not in present Qur'an. That's forgery. It is the same claim as ghost "verse of rajm". It doesn't matter if it in Sunni books. The claim is invalid without authority of the messanger(saw).



But if they said "we understood ayah 24 of surah nisa was revealed about mut'ah", this would have been more acceptable. Therefore, i dismiss so called "ayah of mut'ah" in the Qur'an. However, until Sunnis remove the "evidences" you cited, they gonna have hard time proving mut'ah wrong. So i am free from both sides of this topic.

# First, I don't agree the analogy of "Mut'ah verse" with "Ayat rajm" can be synchronised therefore no need to disregard it using rajm excuse.

* Ayat Rajm does not exist at all. And Sunni scholar's explanation is even not tenable.

* Ayat Mut'ah exist as majority from the past and present believe the verse as it is today. For example:

Imam Tabari documents:

Muḥammad b. al-Muthannā Muḥammad b. Ja'far ­
Shu'bah:

"I asked al-Ḥakam concerning this verse {Also [forbidden for marriage are] women already married, except those whom your right hands possess} up till { Those of them with whom you contract mut'ah} [4:24], "Is it abrogated?" He said, "NO ".....

Source: Abū Ja’far Muḥammad b. Jarīr b. Yazīd b. Kathīr
b. Ghālib al-Āmulī al-Ṭabarī, Jāmi al-Bayān fī Tāwīl al-
Qur’ān (Dār al-Fikr; 1415 H) [annotator: Ṣidqī Jamīl al-
`Aṭṭār], vol. 5, p. 19


# Where the problem seem to exist is the extra wording "for a fixed period" added to the verse. Funny enough, Shia don't have such extra word in any of her book (as far as I know). This is where Sunni find themselves in hot water although it seems ALL Sunni ulama kept silent on that extra word.


Second, is there explanation for that extra word? Two possible explanation exists:

1. It might be part of "Hikmah" which were used to be recited alongside verses of the Qur'an:

Surah Al-Ahzab, Verse 34:

And keep to mind what is recited in your houses of the verses of Allah and the hikma; surely Allah is Knower of subtleties, Aware.

2. It might also be another style of recitation as Sunni believe there were seven different recitations revealed for the Prophet (Sahih Bukhari, I have initially posted some of those ahadith). This different styles of recitation were so different from each other that it caused uproar between Umar and another Sahabi until they dragged themselves to the Prophet, who was said to have approved the two different.

lanrexlan:


You are right, it has no respect for anyone. I was telling a brother that it is not about "I am an Hafiz of the Qu'ran" when you are alone with a lady. All those of the Quran would fly away from your head (even the verses of Zina) EXCEPT if Allah has bestowed His mercy upon you. May Allah safeguard our Imaan and make us not to be slaves to our lower desires (Aamen)

# Wallahi.

Qur'an says concerning the word of an infallible Prophet:

Surah Yusuf, Verse 53:

"And I do not declare myself free, most surely (man's) self is wont to command (him to do) evil, except such as my Lord has had mercy on, surely my Lord is Forgiving, Merciful."


# The fact that not every self is the recipient of that mercy, I believe many other things a put in place as gift to weaker souls. Here's an Hadith sahih in both Sunni and Shia books:

Imam Tabari documents:

"....

Al-Hakam said: " `Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, said: `If `Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, had not forbidden
mut'ah, none would have committed zina except a wretched person."

# I think am done on this thread unless my attention is called again.

Thanks for your time and maturity display. May Allah bestow you more wisdom.

Wa Salam alaykum

lanrexlan:


Shebi na you gimme work

With this work, You fit get the six packs wey you dey been look for o

nb: sisters are looking for brothers with six packs nowadays o

lanrexlan:
No need dragging this over and over. It is not about doubting the narrations, you and Baqir have tackled the hadith traced to Ali and I don't wanna start the saga again.

@bold, if sex isn't life threatening, then how is it a necessity in the first instance? If those sahabahs didn't had sex then, will they die ni?

One of the narrations states castration was what brought about the necessity for the permission, you would agree with me that castration is an extreme action to take, since sex itself isn't haram in itself. One of the narration also depicts a reasoning which a sahabah brought to explain the permission and prohibition by the Prophet (SAW).

"....Ibn Shihab said. Khalid b. Muhajir b. Saifullah informed me: While I was sitting in the company of a person, a person came to him and he asked for a religious verdict about Mut'a and he permitted him to do it. Ibn Abu 'Amrah al-Ansari (Allah be pleased with him) said to him: Be gentle. It was permitted in- the early days of Islam, (for one) who was driven to it under the stress of necessity just as (the eating of) carrion and the blood and flesh of swine and then Allah intensified (the commands of) His religion and prohibited it (altogether)..." (Sahih Muslim)

All in all, the prohibition still stands.

lanrexlan:

Ruhaniyyah can't travel to the other world

Well, he should be able to get you one who has been alive since the time of Ibn Abbas (ra), but i understand if you are scared sha

lanrexlan:

Understood


What you are insinuating is that the Prophet has taught them about mut'ah before and that's why they didn't ask questions??

Perhaps, and it is also possible that it was a pre-islamic practice as some claim based on history.

lanrexlan:

They didn't challenge because they were probably 'afraid' of him

Yeah, Umar (ra) kept terrifying and tormenting them even after he died

lanrexlan:

No problem o, we will going in circles ni.


"Understood"


Nobody even made mentioned of mut'ah at home, Baqir even said it is haram!

Of course it is haram, reason I am quite amazed as to the huge promotion by the twelver shi'as who are the only group who still believe it is permitted till now, and that should raise a red flag, as well as the supposed "abuse" within their community.

I watched a documentary on bbc, were they interviewed a transgender who sells his body for money in the name of mut'ah. I am not swayed by AlBaqir's arguments, because the reality and information from their books and scholars are in contradiction.

Here is an example:

"Salamun Alaykum,

The following question was kindly answered by Mulla Asgher.

Regards

Abbas Jaffer
Moderator - 'Aalim Network

--------------------------------------------------------------

Question:

Is it haram for a woman to make a living at mutah by marrying a man for a short period, receiving a mahr, then observing iddah and marrying another man for a short period and so on so that she is married to say half a dozen men in the year? If it is haram what makes it haram if she is observing the rules for mutah properly? And if it is not haram, does she deserve to be condemned as immoral (or do the men who marry her deserve that)?

----------------------------------------------------------------

Answer:

It is not haram for her to make a living in this way if she follows the rules of Sharia properly. Nor does she deserve to be condemned. This also applies to the men who marry her.

Wasalaam"

I don't know how you would understand the above, but it's very disturbing! By the way this would mean this woman would have to be in a place easily accessible to the men (are they on expedition? or maybe they are on travel...), so as to contract mut'ah with her, I wonder why we should condemn prostitution, if the above is allowed in Islam?!

lanrexlan:

Understood


Irrelevant? Really akhee? If the expedition was three days, do you think the Prophet would legislate mut'ah? The permission should have something to do with the duration. Why will a man want to castrate himself because he missed his wife just 6days or 7days or even 2 weeks? Is sex food for him ni?

Arabs are known for their perversion, Islam came to restructure their lives, I have close relatives who have mentioned how perverted some of them can be even during the month of hajj... The reason why I said the duration of the expedition is irrelevant, the Prophet (SAW) was among them during those periods, he had better information and the divine wisdom to permit it, and I would aslo trust that divine wisdom, especially when it correlates with the Ideals Islam came to preach, when he prohibited it forever!

AlBaqir mentioned that mut'ah is a solution to widows and divorced women, but he also mentioned that women can control their desires better than men, so it is still not a solution for these women, because what they need is a father figure for their children and a man to take care of their needs, but if the children keep seeing different men come in and out severally, what would that be teaching them?! And if she doesn't have children, how would changing men like clothes help her find security and comfort?!

There are so many baggage that comes with this mut'ah, but I guess it doesn't matter, once the men's desires are satisfied, it all good and dandy!

lanrexlan:

Thanks for your replies and time akhee. Jazakumullah khairan

Wa anta, jazakallah khayran, many thanks.