BBC to post undercover mutah documentary

[muslim720]

First answer then ask. Everytime you're asked something you react without answering.

Answer what?  Do you want me to comment on how mut'ah and misyaar are similar in "some aspects"?  Well, dimwit, I did not make that claim.  You quoted that claim, not me.

You can't back your claims.

The reason we have a hard time engaging with you in a rational discussion - other than your lack of intellect and honesty - is that you ignore our claims and instead focus on something which is not being discussed.

My argument was simple and I will restate it: if mut'ah is an act of Sunnah for Shias, why are they so upset at BBC for producing a documentary on it?

You've been losing more than just sleep for almost 1400 years now and that is along with your ancestors over Shiaism.

Which Shiaism?  The political Shiaism?  Or, the ideological one?  Kaysanites or the other dozen of extinct Shi'i sects?

Explain yourself. I know you can't. Because you never can when asked.

Discouraged for its tendency to be misused, not a discouraged practice.  Still need a dictionary?

And again before quoting it I asked if it was true.

Your deception will not work.  Your main point was whether or not we would welcome a documentary on misyaar given that it is similar to mut'ah in "some aspects", as per Wikipedia (which you quoted).  My answer remains the same: we will wholeheartedly welcome a documentary on misyaar.  The real problem is the following: why are you upset at BBC for bringing mut'ah under the limelight.  Are you saying that you're embarrassed that they released information on "an act of Sunnah"?

Any reference. You've never backed anything you've said.

It is well-known!  In fact, you asked me for reference and you were the one to provide proof to substantiate my claim, lol.

Take a look at your books. Then read and examine satanic verses and you'll know and understand where Rushdie got the material for his book.

Never read the book but if Rushdie referenced the Qur'an in his book, would you also abandon the Qur'an?  Is Rushdie your criteria now?  Did not know that you've taken him in lieu of your 12th Imam.  Not your fault; the timid one won't show himself.

I've never seen and witnessed what you're saying. And you know my mosques, learning centres and my community and people more than me. Well you're living on a different planet than the rest of us.

Yes, nearly a billion and a half Muslims live on another planet where we imagine Shias to engage in mut'ah.  No way any Shia engages in mut'ah on this planet.  We must be mistaken along with BBC and everyone else.

I don't need to watch anything. I'm familiar with the BBC. I know my religion, faith, community and people. I don't need you or the BBC or anyone else to tell or show me.

I imagined you as a stubborn kid with his fingers in his ears, eyes shut and screaming, "I can't hear you, I can't hear you".  Wouldn't be surprised if you actually were doing that.

Prove that he banned it. What was the problem. Why did he banned it.

The fact that it was banned by the Holy Prophet (saw) was attested to by none other than Imam Ali (ra) himself.  I do not need to know the problem with it or why it was banned.  I am sure your scholars would like to know because the ban not only cuts their profit but also kicks them in their family jewels.

[iceman]

This is what I said in post #7

Is this true,

'A misyar marriage (Arabic: نكاح المسيار‎, romanized: nikah al-misyar or more often زواج المسيار zawaj al-misyar "traveller's marriage") is a type of marriage contract in Sunni sects of Islam (some aspects are similar to mutah marriage in Shia Islam)'

And this is how you responded in post #8

"Some aspects", not ALL aspects, are similar to mut'ah marriage. 

Marriage, with the intention to divorce or with pre-agreed expiration date, is haraam and misyar or nikah kitaba has no expiration date.

I respond in post #9

Ok. Lets see if we can get upto a decent discussion.

"Some aspects", not ALL aspects, are similar to mut'ah marriage. 

Which aspects are similar and which aren't?

Your response in post # 11

I am not worried about the parallels.  What differentiates one from the other is that there is no expiration date.  In other words, there is no intent to divorce after a certain period of time which is what makes misyaar halaal (although discouraged by our scholars) and mut'ah haraam.

This is me in post #12

You said,

"Some aspects", not ALL aspects, are similar to mut'ah marriage. 

I asked,

Which aspects are similar and which aren't?

And you responded by saying,

"I am not worried about the parallels"

Therefore avoiding the questioning.

I can pull out many of your short cuts. You have no ground.

[iceman]

Short summary. Sunni: "Mut'ah was banned". Shia: "Ok, what was the reason,why?" Sunni: "Don't know but it was banned" Shia: "Surely there must be a reason for it" Sunni: No answer. Shia: "Well if it was banned then justify the ban" Sunni: No answer just sarcastic comments, abusive language and irrelevant discussion. Conclusion: If Mut'ah was banned then what is the point and need for misyar marriage. Answer. The Sunnis finally realise that Nikah marriage isn't enough and therfore isn't the answer to all situations and conditions. There is no reference of misyar marriage in Qur'an and Sunnah. But Sunnis accept it because they no they have no choice. Mut'ah is there and covers the need and reason for misyar marriage. It doesn't matter Sunnis whether you hold your nose this way or that way. You're still holding your nose.

[Mythbuster1]

What he doesn’t advertise is that he can also perform muta’a marriages – temporary “pleasure marriages”, which ensure that sex with young girls is halaal, or permissible according to Islam. I’ve heard rumours that he is willing to use this religious loophole to organise prostitution with girls as young as 12.

Taken from this article from the independent
 
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/iraq-secret-sex-trade-child-trafficking-clerics-bbc-a9211111.html

Astaghfirullah it’s truly sad that men who claim to be scholars and supposedly follow prophet pbuh and His ahle baith ra would stoop so low to engage in adult acts with children.......FILTH!

Shiite scholars must be hidden pimps😂

[iceman]

What he doesn’t advertise is that he can also perform muta’a marriages – temporary “pleasure marriages”, which ensure that sex with young girls is halaal, or permissible according to Islam. I’ve heard rumours that he is willing to use this religious loophole to organise prostitution with girls as young as 12.

Taken from this article from the independent
 
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/iraq-secret-sex-trade-child-trafficking-clerics-bbc-a9211111.html

Astaghfirullah it’s truly sad that men who claim to be scholars and supposedly follow prophet pbuh and His ahle baith ra would stoop so low to engage in adult acts with children.......FILTH!

Shiite scholars must be hidden pimps😂

Don't be FOOLED by propaganda against the Shia. Well it wouldn't make any difference to you. 😂

Why was Mu'tah banned? Can you justify the ban? 😊 It's as simple as that 😊

[iceman]

Are the following true.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 139: Narrated Abdullah:

"We used to participate in the holy wars carried on by the Prophet and we had no women (wives) with us. So we said (to the Prophet). "Shall we castrate ourselves?" But the Prophet forbade us to do that and thenceforth he allowed us to marry a woman (temporarily) by giving her even a garment, and then he recited: "O you who believe! Do not make unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you."

Mut'ah Banned by Umar

Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 43: Narrated 'Imran bin Husain:

"The Verse of muta was revealed in Allah's Book, so we performed it with Allah's Apostle, and nothing was revealed in Qur'an to make it illegal, nor did the Prophet prohibit it till he died. But the man (omar) just expressed what his own mind suggested"

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3250:
Abu Nadra reported:

"While I was in the company of Jabir b. Abdullah, a person came to him and said that Ibn 'Abbas and Ibn Zubair differed on the two types of Mut'as (muta of Hajj and muta of women), whereupon Jabir said: We used to do these two during the lifetime of Allah's Messenger pbuh Umar then forbade us to do them, and so we did not revert to them"

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3248:
Ibn Uraij reported: 'Ati' reported that

"jibir b. Abdullah came to perform 'Umra, and we came to his abode, and the people asked him about different things, and then they made a mention of temporary marriage, whereupon he said: Yes, we had been benefiting ourselves by this temporary marriage during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet pbuh and during the time of Abi Bakr and 'Umar"

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3249:
Jabir b. 'Abdullah reported:

"We contracted temporary marriage giving a handful of (tales or flour as a dower during the lifetime of Allah's Messenger pbuh and durnig the time of Abu Bakr until 'Umar forbade it in the case of 'Amr b. Huraith"

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3261:
Urwa b. Zabair reported that,

'Abdullah b. Zubair stood up (and delivered an address) in Mecca saying: Allah has made blind the hearts of some people as He has deprived them of eyesight that they give religious verdict in favor of temporary marriage, while he was alluding to a person (Ibn 'Abbas). Ibn Abbas called him and said: You are an uncouth person, devoid of sense. By my life, Mut'a was practised during the lifetime of the leader of the pious (he meant Allah's Messenger, pbuh), and Ibn Zubair said to him: just do it yourselves, and by Allah, if you do that I will stone you with your stones. 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"

[iceman]

To cut this very short since the gents are going all over the place with this. They're trying their best to avoid the main question which is severely bothering them. DID THE PROPHET S.A.W REALLY BAN MUT'AH? Any knowledgeable Sunni out there who can justify this ban by giving a clear explanation of why it was banned. What exactly was the reason and purpose. Is your faith and belief that weak that you can't come up with anything. Or are you just going by the wind that Muhammad s.a.w didn't ban it but someone else did along the line. And you just want to camouflage that by saying Muhammad s.a.w banned it. Where are the hot shots. We hear a lot about the Shias from you. You're quick at that. Lets see how good and quick you are at justifying a part of your belief and faith. 😊 All the best. Take your time. Believe me you'll need it. Good luck!

[muslim720]

This is what I said in post #7

Is this true,

'A misyar marriage (Arabic: نكاح المسيار‎, romanized: nikah al-misyar or more often زواج المسيار zawaj al-misyar "traveller's marriage") is a type of marriage contract in Sunni sects of Islam (some aspects are similar to mutah marriage in Shia Islam)'

And this is how you responded in post #8

"Some aspects", not ALL aspects, are similar to mut'ah marriage. 

I said that NOT because I believe mut'ah and misyaar are similar in "some aspects".  I pointed that out to show you that even what you have quoted (as supporting argument) fails your cause because it does not say what you want us to believe it says.  In other words, even the quote you shared declares similarities in "some aspects" - NOT ALL - between the two marriages.  Therefore, it is for you to plug that hole to make your argument airtight.

I don't think you understand the rules of discussion.  It is enough to cast doubt on your interlocutor's evidence to rule it unworthy of serious contention and that is what I did.  I showed you - using your own evidence - that the two marriages are different and, at best, are similar ONLY in "some aspects" (according to your own evidence).

Bringing up something which declares mut'ah and misyaar similar in "some aspects" is far from proving they are one in the same!

Which aspects are similar and which aren't?

That is not for me to comment on.  Your evidence, your problem!  In fact, I should be challenging you to tell us how mut'ah and misyaar are similar in "some aspects" and different otherwise.

Therefore avoiding the questioning.

As I said, your evidence, your problem.  I will not strengthen your argument because one, I am not stupid to help your case.  And two, I do not believe that mut'ah and misyaar are alike, not even in "some aspects". 

I can pull out many of your short cuts. You have no ground.

First, go pull out your 12th Imam out of the cave!  He has had too much ground to take refuge in.

[Mythbuster1]

Don't be FOOLED by propaganda against the Shia. Well it wouldn't make any difference to you. 😂

Why was Mu'tah banned? Can you justify the ban? 😊 It's as simple as that 😊

Is that it? It’s all propaganda when it comes to Shias!

It’s propaganda against Iran, it was all a propaganda by the umayyads heck it’s EASIER to believe in a man hiding in a cave without proof than to believe the anti shia propaganda propagated by shia haters even if there is a hint of truth in it.

Do you like to keep your head buried in the sand?

BBC has highlighted a shia problem that our prophet pbuh got rid of over 1400 years ago..........this should make a grown man THINK.......well I don’t know bout you.

[iceman]

Is that it? It’s all propaganda when it comes to Shias!

It’s propaganda against Iran, it was all a propaganda by the umayyads heck it’s EASIER to believe in a man hiding in a cave without proof than to believe the anti shia propaganda propagated by shia haters even if there is a hint of truth in it.

Do you like to keep your head buried in the sand?

BBC has highlighted a shia problem that our prophet pbuh got rid of over 1400 years ago..........this should make a grown man THINK.......well I don’t know bout you.

"BBC has highlighted a shia problem that our prophet pbuh got rid of over 1400 years ago..........this should make a grown man THINK.......well I don’t know bout you"

The BBC has highlighted a SHIA PROBLEM? And what problem is that?

"Our Prophet s.a.w got rid of over 1400 years ago" 😕

And what problem was that which went on during the Prophet's s.a.w time? What were the Sahaba upto. Are you trying to tell me something. Don't be afraid just come out with it.

Lets get this straight. The Qur'an speaks about and allows mut'ah. The Prophet s.a.w bans it because there was a problem with it 1400 years ago. What problem was that. Was there actually a problem with mut'ah or was there actually a problem with those abusing it. Now this is getting interesting. 😊

[iceman]

I said that NOT because I believe mut'ah and misyaar are similar in "some aspects".  I pointed that out to show you that even what you have quoted (as supporting argument) fails your cause because it does not say what you want us to believe it says.  In other words, even the quote you shared declares similarities in "some aspects" - NOT ALL - between the two marriages.  Therefore, it is for you to plug that hole to make your argument airtight.

I don't think you understand the rules of discussion.  It is enough to cast doubt on your interlocutor's evidence to rule it unworthy of serious contention and that is what I did.  I showed you - using your own evidence - that the two marriages are different and, at best, are similar ONLY in "some aspects" (according to your own evidence).

Bringing up something which declares mut'ah and misyaar similar in "some aspects" is far from proving they are one in the same!


That is not for me to comment on.  Your evidence, your problem!  In fact, I should be challenging you to tell us how mut'ah and misyaar are similar in "some aspects" and different otherwise.


As I said, your evidence, your problem.  I will not strengthen your argument because one, I am not stupid to help your case.  And two, I do not believe that mut'ah and misyaar are alike, not even in "some aspects". 


First, go pull out your 12th Imam out of the cave!  He has had too much ground to take refuge in.

"what you have quoted (as supporting argument)"

I never quoted it as supporting argument. You know that. You still want to play deceiving tactics then that's down to you.

"that the two marriages are different and, at best, are similar ONLY in "some aspects"

Again I asked you how and you twisted the matter around because you couldn’t answer your claim. Misyar has no legal concept through Qur'an and Sunnah. It's a modern day creation by some Sunnis. They have finally realised that Mu'tah has to be replaced by something. They have learned the hard way that Nikah isn't enough and doesn't solve all matters and problems.

"That is not for me to comment on.  Your evidence, your problem!"

Don't be dishonest with yourself. You made a claim and I questioned you over it. And as usual you can't answer nor explain. I know it's painful for you to admit. Your ego always gets in the way.

"First, go pull out your 12th Imam out of the cave!  He has had too much ground to take refuge in"

I'm not into sarcasm. That's not my thing. So NO COMMENT.

[muslim720]

I never quoted it as supporting argument. You know that. You still want to play deceiving tactics then that's down to you.

Studying for the LSATs, I just finished 30 questions on "argument structure" which tests you on the several components of an argument, namely, premises, intermediate conclusion and conclusion.  I got 26 correct.  Why am I telling you all this?  To remind you that I know argumentation and argument structure.

You posed it as a question but you were actually using it to support your argument.

Here is your post:
"Is this true,

'A misyar marriage (Arabic: نكاح المسيار‎, romanized: nikah al-misyar or more often زواج المسيار zawaj al-misyar "traveller's marriage") is a type of marriage contract in Sunni sects of Islam (some aspects are similar to mutah marriage in Shia Islam)'

Would you also love the BBC to make a documentary on MISYAR MARRIAGE  AS WELL"

Your premise: Is "this" true? 

Now, what is "this"?  The statement you copy-pasted from Wikipedia which says that misyaar and mut'ah are similar in "some aspects".  Your conclusion is proof that you accept the Wikipedia quote so you were not asking but you were making an assertion but putting it in the form of a question.

Your conclusion: Would I like it if the Western media make a documentary on misyaar marriage as well?

Actually, your conclusion - to be fair - is subtle.  Although posed as a question, you are implying that I will not like it if BBC produces a documentary focusing on misyaar.  Why are you implying this?  Because you are accepting the validity of your premise or the validity of "this" which was the Wikipedia statement you copy-pasted.

In short, your argument could be summarized in the following manner: mut'ah and misyaar are similar, therefore, would you (Muslim720) like it if BBC made a documentary on misyaar? 

For you to throw that question at me, you have to accept the validity of your own premise which was the Wikipedia quote that badly backfired on you.

Misyar has no legal concept through Qur'an and Sunnah.

The marriage of Holy Prophet (saw) to Aisha (ra) is cited by some scholars as proof for misyaar.  Even if there is no textual proof supporting misyaar, so what?  Who said we consider it an act so great after committing which every droplet of water you pour over yourself invokes 70,000 angels to pray for your forgiveness.

They have learned the hard way that Nikah isn't enough and doesn't solve all matters and problems.

Who said the purpose of nikah is to "solve all matters and problems"?

Don't be dishonest with yourself. You made a claim and I questioned you over it.

No dimwit, you quoted something in a rush and now your own proof has turned out to be a headache for you.

[Mythbuster1]

"BBC has highlighted a shia problem that our prophet pbuh got rid of over 1400 years ago..........this should make a grown man THINK.......well I don’t know bout you"

The BBC has highlighted a SHIA PROBLEM? And what problem is that?

"Our Prophet s.a.w got rid of over 1400 years ago" 😕

And what problem was that which went on during the Prophet's s.a.w time? What were the Sahaba upto. Are you trying to tell me something. Don't be afraid just come out with it.

Lets get this straight. The Qur'an speaks about and allows mut'ah. The Prophet s.a.w bans it because there was a problem with it 1400 years ago. What problem was that. Was there actually a problem with mut'ah or was there actually a problem with those abusing it. Now this is getting interesting. 😊

Very interesting you are getting Sunnis in a twist because they can’t answer.

Don’t worry about us all we do is propagate lies about Shias and their beliefs, I mean it’s not that hard to find the truth if we studied shiism.

Quran sure does talk about muta but is very very silent on the major pillar of shiism, I am sure the darn Sunnis have twisted the words of Quran or like some shiites believe CHANGED the words to suit themselves.

It’s all propaganda from the time of Sahabas.

If it wasn’t then shiism would have flourished but the Sunnis were so good at their propaganda from the first Sahabas to the umamayads and beyond to this day yet still them darn Sunnis are good at propagating falsehoods and lies.

Well done👍

Go sip on some desi chai and relax you’ve got the Sunnis.

[iceman]

Very interesting you are getting Sunnis in a twist because they can’t answer.

Don’t worry about us all we do is propagate lies about Shias and their beliefs, I mean it’s not that hard to find the truth if we studied shiism.

Quran sure does talk about muta but is very very silent on the major pillar of shiism, I am sure the darn Sunnis have twisted the words of Quran or like some shiites believe CHANGED the words to suit themselves.

It’s all propaganda from the time of Sahabas.

If it wasn’t then shiism would have flourished but the Sunnis were so good at their propaganda from the first Sahabas to the umamayads and beyond to this day yet still them darn Sunnis are good at propagating falsehoods and lies.

Well done👍

Go sip on some desi chai and relax you’ve got the Sunnis.

Still can't justify the ban on Mu'tah. Did the Prophet s.a.w really ban mut'ah. Any explanation to this. No. Just digging dirt on Shiaism and slagging the Shias off. That's all you are and strive on. Misyar marriage, can you prove this based on Qur'an and Sunnah. And what was the need and urge for misyar marriage. So you finally decided that Mu'tah had to be eventually replaced by something. Qur'an isn't silent on anything. As far as the majority pillars of my faith are concerned, been there and discussed it many times over. I'm not going to let you derail the thread. Prove to me with a valid and clear explanation that the Prophet s.a.w banned Mu'tah. You can run but you can't hide. And far as we are concerned you just figure out where your system of Caliphate disappeared. Didn't last very long did it. Man made and brought things don't. 😊

[iceman]

Studying for the LSATs, I just finished 30 questions on "argument structure" which tests you on the several components of an argument, namely, premises, intermediate conclusion and conclusion.  I got 26 correct.  Why am I telling you all this?  To remind you that I know argumentation and argument structure.

You posed it as a question but you were actually using it to support your argument.

Here is your post:
"Is this true,

'A misyar marriage (Arabic: نكاح المسيار‎, romanized: nikah al-misyar or more often زواج المسيار zawaj al-misyar "traveller's marriage") is a type of marriage contract in Sunni sects of Islam (some aspects are similar to mutah marriage in Shia Islam)'

Would you also love the BBC to make a documentary on MISYAR MARRIAGE  AS WELL"

Your premise: Is "this" true? 

Now, what is "this"?  The statement you copy-pasted from Wikipedia which says that misyaar and mut'ah are similar in "some aspects".  Your conclusion is proof that you accept the Wikipedia quote so you were not asking but you were making an assertion but putting it in the form of a question.

Your conclusion: Would I like it if the Western media make a documentary on misyaar marriage as well?

Actually, your conclusion - to be fair - is subtle.  Although posed as a question, you are implying that I will not like it if BBC produces a documentary focusing on misyaar.  Why are you implying this?  Because you are accepting the validity of your premise or the validity of "this" which was the Wikipedia statement you copy-pasted.

In short, your argument could be summarized in the following manner: mut'ah and misyaar are similar, therefore, would you (Muslim720) like it if BBC made a documentary on misyaar? 

For you to throw that question at me, you have to accept the validity of your own premise which was the Wikipedia quote that badly backfired on you.


The marriage of Holy Prophet (saw) to Aisha (ra) is cited by some scholars as proof for misyaar.  Even if there is no textual proof supporting misyaar, so what?  Who said we consider it an act so great after committing which every droplet of water you pour over yourself invokes 70,000 angels to pray for your forgiveness.


Who said the purpose of nikah is to "solve all matters and problems"?


No dimwit, you quoted something in a rush and now your own proof has turned out to be a headache for you.

"Studying for the LSATs, I just finished 30 questions on "argument structure" which tests you on the several components of an argument, namely, premises, intermediate conclusion and conclusion.  I got 26 correct.  Why am I telling you all this?  To remind you that I know argumentation and argument structure"

You're telling me all this because you lack in intellectual discussion. You just want to hide it because your ego is getting the better of you. Let me tell you what you dont want to here. You talk and speak with hate. And that hate is based on grudge which you have against me, my faith, community and people. Where did this grudge come and develope from. Well there's multiple reasons for this. 1, All the nonsense and rubbish that you've been told about us as you've been raised and brought up. You just developed a mindset on that. And you're hell-bent in sticking to it.

2, Your faith and belief. It's man made. It's something you can't justify from Qur'an and Sunnah. Because you believe that Qur'an and Sunnah are silent on the most important matter. And that is governance after Muhammad s.a.w. Your belief and faith is based on incidents and events as they unfolded. And obviously things change and take a different course. Well it's obvious since that's human nature. And that's how things will turn out to be, topsy and turvy. And since your belief and faith depends on it so it will end up contradicting. From here you'll just rely and depend on double standards. And eventually develop a hypocritical element.

3, Don't know much about your ancestors. But when it comes to your kind meaning those who hold extreme views about others and their beliefs usually have an ancestral clash somewhere up there. So they actually go by those ancestral differences. There not actually speaking but infact those differences are talking through them.

"You posed it as a question but you were actually using it to support your argument"

See what I mean. You're the judge, the jury and the executioner. What you assume is what you go by. Even if the facts go against you.

[iceman]

Studying for the LSATs, I just finished 30 questions on "argument structure" which tests you on the several components of an argument, namely, premises, intermediate conclusion and conclusion.  I got 26 correct.  Why am I telling you all this?  To remind you that I know argumentation and argument structure.

You posed it as a question but you were actually using it to support your argument.

Here is your post:
"Is this true,

'A misyar marriage (Arabic: نكاح المسيار‎, romanized: nikah al-misyar or more often زواج المسيار zawaj al-misyar "traveller's marriage") is a type of marriage contract in Sunni sects of Islam (some aspects are similar to mutah marriage in Shia Islam)'

Would you also love the BBC to make a documentary on MISYAR MARRIAGE  AS WELL"

Your premise: Is "this" true? 

Now, what is "this"?  The statement you copy-pasted from Wikipedia which says that misyaar and mut'ah are similar in "some aspects".  Your conclusion is proof that you accept the Wikipedia quote so you were not asking but you were making an assertion but putting it in the form of a question.

Your conclusion: Would I like it if the Western media make a documentary on misyaar marriage as well?

Actually, your conclusion - to be fair - is subtle.  Although posed as a question, you are implying that I will not like it if BBC produces a documentary focusing on misyaar.  Why are you implying this?  Because you are accepting the validity of your premise or the validity of "this" which was the Wikipedia statement you copy-pasted.

In short, your argument could be summarized in the following manner: mut'ah and misyaar are similar, therefore, would you (Muslim720) like it if BBC made a documentary on misyaar? 

For you to throw that question at me, you have to accept the validity of your own premise which was the Wikipedia quote that badly backfired on you.


The marriage of Holy Prophet (saw) to Aisha (ra) is cited by some scholars as proof for misyaar.  Even if there is no textual proof supporting misyaar, so what?  Who said we consider it an act so great after committing which every droplet of water you pour over yourself invokes 70,000 angels to pray for your forgiveness.


Who said the purpose of nikah is to "solve all matters and problems"?


No dimwit, you quoted something in a rush and now your own proof has turned out to be a headache for you.

"Even if there is no textual proof supporting misyaar, so what?"

This is exactly the sound and saying of someone arrogant.

"No dimwit, you quoted something in a rush and now your own proof has turned out to be a headache for you"

No I didn’t. You said something which you couldn't back as usual. Would you like the evidence in black and white again.

"For you to throw that question at me, you have to accept the validity of your own premise which was the Wikipedia quote that badly backfired on you"

It didn't backfire at all. I'm very careful what I say. And very selective before I say. You got caught as usual. You say something without thinking and without looking. Then you can't explain yourself. You don't have a level head. You're not composed.

"In short, your argument could be summarized in the following manner: mut'ah and misyaar are similar, therefore, would you (Muslim720) like it if BBC made a documentary on misyaar"

I never said they were similar. You said some aspects were similar. When I questioned you over it this is what you said;

You said,

"I am not worried about the parallels"

This is what you said.

"Some aspects", not ALL aspects, are similar to mut'ah marriage. 

I asked,

Which aspects are similar and which aren't?

And you responded by saying,

"I am not worried about the parallels"

Now you're just trying to make yourself look good by saving yourself from embarrassment. 😊

[muslim720]

You're telling me all this because you lack in intellectual discussion. You just want to hide it because your ego is getting the better of you.

Or I told you all that to show you I understand argument structure and that you were making an argument, not just asking.

You talk and speak with hate. And that hate is based on grudge which you have against me, my faith, community and people.

Why would I hate the Shi'i community?  Hating other Muslims is a hallmark of the Ithna Ashari, not me.

Your faith and belief. It's man made. It's something you can't justify from Qur'an and Sunnah.

My five pillars of Islam and six fundamentals of faith are clearly specified in both Qur'an and Sunnah.  More than 1400 years have elapsed and not a single Qur'anic verse in favor of Imamah.  It is very clear whose faith and beliefs are man-made.

Because you believe that Qur'an and Sunnah are silent on the most important matter. And that is governance after Muhammad s.a.w.

The Holy Prophet (saw) advised the Sahaba (ra) to elect their own general in a battle should the chosen one, his backup and backup to backup, perish.  The Qur'an also speaks about consultation so you can keep on adding new dimensions to the discussion but it won't help your case.  BBC has released its documentary and you have to take up this issue with them.

Your belief and faith is based on incidents and events as they unfolded. And obviously things change and take a different course. Well it's obvious since that's human nature. And that's how things will turn out to be, topsy and turvy. And since your belief and faith depends on it so it will end up contradicting. From here you'll just rely and depend on double standards. And eventually develop a hypocritical element.

Double standards and hypocritical element like how the father fought Muawiya, the son made peace with him and the younger son rebelled against Muawiya's son all the while the three (father, son and younger son) being "infallible", right?

Don't know much about your ancestors. But when it comes to your kind meaning those who hold extreme views about others and their beliefs usually have an ancestral clash somewhere up there. So they actually go by those ancestral differences. There not actually speaking but infact those differences are talking through them.

Like your Kufan ancestors, descendants of the killers of Imam Hussain (ra), who held extreme views (such as, the Ahlul Bayt r.a. are infallible but only a selected few while cursing the rest of Ahlul Bayt r.a.) and mandated that if there are two authentic Shi'i ahaadith that the Shias should follow the one that opposes Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama'ah, right?

See what I mean. You're the judge, the jury and the executioner. What you assume is what you go by. Even if the facts go against you.

No, I am not the judge; I understand argument structure.

It didn't backfire at all. I'm very careful what I say. And very selective before I say.

Really?  Well it only said that mut'ah and misyaar are similar in "some aspects", not all.  Tell us how are they similar and how are they different!  You quoted it so you should account for what all the explicit and implicit claims in it.

I never said they were similar. You said some aspects were similar. When I questioned you over it this is what you said

No, the quote said that; I only highlighted it for you to show you that your own evidence is not much of a support.

Which aspects are similar and which aren't?

Since it was your supporting evidence making that claim, it is for you to explain the similarities and differences.  To me, misyaar is nothing like mut'ah and those who misuse misyaar (to make it resemble mut'ah) are upon serious misguidance.

[iceman]

Or I told you all that to show you I understand argument structure and that you were making an argument, not just asking.


Why would I hate the Shi'i community?  Hating other Muslims is a hallmark of the Ithna Ashari, not me.


My five pillars of Islam and six fundamentals of faith are clearly specified in both Qur'an and Sunnah.  More than 1400 years have elapsed and not a single Qur'anic verse in favor of Imamah.  It is very clear whose faith and beliefs are man-made.


The Holy Prophet (saw) advised the Sahaba (ra) to elect their own general in a battle should the chosen one, his backup and backup to backup, perish.  The Qur'an also speaks about consultation so you can keep on adding new dimensions to the discussion but it won't help your case.  BBC has released its documentary and you have to take up this issue with them.


Double standards and hypocritical element like how the father fought Muawiya, the son made peace with him and the younger son rebelled against Muawiya's son all the while the three (father, son and younger son) being "infallible", right?


Like your Kufan ancestors, descendants of the killers of Imam Hussain (ra), who held extreme views (such as, the Ahlul Bayt r.a. are infallible but only a selected few while cursing the rest of Ahlul Bayt r.a.) and mandated that if there are two authentic Shi'i ahaadith that the Shias should follow the one that opposes Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama'ah, right?


No, I am not the judge; I understand argument structure.


Really?  Well it only said that mut'ah and misyaar are similar in "some aspects", not all.  Tell us how are they similar and how are they different!  You quoted it so you should account for what all the explicit and implicit claims in it.


No, the quote said that; I only highlighted it for you to show you that your own evidence is not much of a support.


Since it was your supporting evidence making that claim, it is for you to explain the similarities and differences.  To me, misyaar is nothing like mut'ah and those who misuse misyaar (to make it resemble mut'ah) are upon serious misguidance.

"Or I told you all that to show you I understand argument structure and that you were making an argument, not just asking"

I was just asking. But since you're an anti shia and a really desperate one then it doesn't matter what I say your desperation will eventually get in the way.

"Why would I hate the Shi'i community?  Hating other Muslims is a hallmark of the Ithna Ashari, not me"

Ok, lets try this again.you said "Why would I hate the Shi'i community?" Ok, give me something positive and constructive you said about the Shia. Anything.

"My five pillars of Islam and six fundamentals of faith are clearly specified in both Qur'an and Sunnah"

And so are mine. The only difference is you believe in the Qur'an OR the Sunnah when it suits you. You jump from one to the other based on your desire. I believe in the Qur'an AND Sunnah. That's the difference.

"More than 1400 years have elapsed and not a single Qur'anic verse in favor of Imamah"

It's been 1400 years and no one has been able to undermine us. Accusations and allegations one after the other have been challenged head on. Imamah has been proven many times over.

"It is very clear whose faith and beliefs are man-made"

Yep. Those who believe in the unfortunate incident in Saqifa and the coincidental and immature decision made there between a handful of people.

[Mythbuster1]

And so are mine. The only difference is you believe in the Qur'an OR the Sunnah when it suits you. You jump from one to the other based on your desire. I believe in the Qur'an AND Sunnah. That's the difference.


It's been 1400 years and no one has been able to undermine us. Accusations and allegations one after the other have been challenged head on. Imamah has been proven many times over.


Yep. Those who believe in the unfortunate incident in Saqifa and the coincidental and immature decision made there between a handful of people.

You first of all don’t believe in sunnah unless it’s written by liars and deceivers who deceived you into believing in some fairy tale imamate divinity thing!!

You got OWNED with that!

That IS the DIFFERENCE 😜

You couldn’t proof Imamate even if YOUR life depended on it..........you got owned on imamah too, I/we are still waiting for you to produce a clear cut verse on imamate........instead of using a title relating to a major prophet as and twisting it to make belief that it’s about imamah full stop......PROMOTION!!!!😂 that’s the only thing you can produce as evidence.

Better than believing in a man made idea of divine imams that has NO proof in Quran or sunnah..........Something you are having major problems with since the last 1400 years.

1400 years and yet no divine imam EVER ruled according to shiite way of ruling.

It must hurt that no sane people will believe in fairytale divine imams unless you have a screw missing in your head........and ALHAMDULILLAH you are a perfect example of that.

[iceman]

Or I told you all that to show you I understand argument structure and that you were making an argument, not just asking.


Why would I hate the Shi'i community?  Hating other Muslims is a hallmark of the Ithna Ashari, not me.


My five pillars of Islam and six fundamentals of faith are clearly specified in both Qur'an and Sunnah.  More than 1400 years have elapsed and not a single Qur'anic verse in favor of Imamah.  It is very clear whose faith and beliefs are man-made.


The Holy Prophet (saw) advised the Sahaba (ra) to elect their own general in a battle should the chosen one, his backup and backup to backup, perish.  The Qur'an also speaks about consultation so you can keep on adding new dimensions to the discussion but it won't help your case.  BBC has released its documentary and you have to take up this issue with them.


Double standards and hypocritical element like how the father fought Muawiya, the son made peace with him and the younger son rebelled against Muawiya's son all the while the three (father, son and younger son) being "infallible", right?


Like your Kufan ancestors, descendants of the killers of Imam Hussain (ra), who held extreme views (such as, the Ahlul Bayt r.a. are infallible but only a selected few while cursing the rest of Ahlul Bayt r.a.) and mandated that if there are two authentic Shi'i ahaadith that the Shias should follow the one that opposes Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama'ah, right?


No, I am not the judge; I understand argument structure.


Really?  Well it only said that mut'ah and misyaar are similar in "some aspects", not all.  Tell us how are they similar and how are they different!  You quoted it so you should account for what all the explicit and implicit claims in it.


No, the quote said that; I only highlighted it for you to show you that your own evidence is not much of a support.


Since it was your supporting evidence making that claim, it is for you to explain the similarities and differences.  To me, misyaar is nothing like mut'ah and those who misuse misyaar (to make it resemble mut'ah) are upon serious misguidance.

"The Holy Prophet (saw) advised the Sahaba (ra) to elect their own general in a battle should the chosen one, his backup and backup to backup, perish. The Qur'an also speaks about consultation"

This has got nothing to do with who governs after Muhammad s.a.w. It's a totally separate issue. Choosing and general if one gets killed or dealing matters through consultation etc has got nothing to do with divine authority. Its to do with general matters. Muhammad s.a.w wasn't chosen through consultation and neither by the people. So who governs after Muhammad s.a.w has to be chosen by Allah and introduced by Muhammad s.a.w. That's what we believe in.

"so you can keep on adding new dimensions to the discussion but it won't help your case.  BBC has released its documentary and you have to take up this issue with them"

We don't need to add or subtract anything. That's what the Caliphs did. As far as the BBC is concerned we don't take them seriously nor anyone else. Our job is to put facts forward. And to make our position clear regarding false allegations baseless accusations and exaggerated stories based on propaganda concerning us. We've been dealing with this for nearly 1400 years. It doesn't bother us. Whether it's you or the BBC, you can't paint a picture of my community and people on the doings of a handful of people. If someone is abusing the law that's their problem and not the community and faith they belong to. So nice try.

"Since it was your supporting evidence making that claim, it is for you to explain the similarities and differences.  To me, misyaar is nothing like mut'ah and those who misuse misyaar (to make it resemble mut'ah) are upon serious misguidance."

You're beating around the bush. I've made this clear and pointed out your flaw. Already addressed it. Now If you want to keep beating around the bush to hide your embarrassment rather than being a man and owning up to it then that's down to you.

"Double standards and hypocritical element like how the father fought Muawiya, the son made peace with him and the younger son rebelled against Muawiya's son all the while the three (father, son and younger son) being "infallible", right?"

Already dealt with this and addressed it. Not going to fall in your trap by you trying to derail the thread. Stick to the subject and what is being discussed.

Kufans aren't my ancestors. I'm a Syed alhamdulillah. The Ahlul Bayt are my ancestors. I hold on to the book of Allah and the progeny of the Prophet s.a.w. I'm not all over the place like you. Nice try but the entire world now knows who killed Hussain. Your sixth Caliph Yazeed Ibne Muawiya.