al-Salamu `Aleykum,
Often we've seen books written by orientalist historians that adopt retarded Shiite opinions based on very weak evidence. For instance, we see that a great amount of narrations in the books of all Muslim groups praise Abu Bakr's reign and justice, ONLY a small minority sect (Imami Shia) believe otherwise and use laughable evidence to back up their claims. Then we open a book by some orientalist historian, Lo and behold! He shares the exact same view of the Imami Shia, he shovels loads of authentic evidence down the drain and completely ignores it, and adopts a position that barely has any backing in the entirety of Islamic literature.
Now look at this lovely article here:
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3748/uk-islamic-temporary-marriagesThe author says that Mut`ah is greatly on the rise in Britain:
((The proliferation of "temporary marriages" shows how Muslims in Britain are using Islamic Sharia Law to establish parallel forms of marriage that are otherwise illegal.
An increasing number of Muslims in Britain are reviving the Islamic practice of temporary marriage, according to a recent BBC television documentary focusing on the "taboo subject."))
He talks about it as if it's wide spread between British Muslims! Does this author even know that the vast majority of British Muslims are Pakistanis and Arabs, who are mainly Sunni and do not practice Mut`ah or even understand how Mut`ah is performed? Yet this man wants to picture it like some epidemic, as if Muslim youth are all screwing each other secretly.
Then he says:
((Also known as a "pleasure marriage," Mutah was established within Islam by the Muslim prophet Mohammed himself as a way to reward his jihadists for services rendered to Allah. Although Mutah is sanctioned by the Koranic verse 4:24, the practice was later outlawed by the second Muslim Caliph, Omar I (634-644), who said he viewed temporary marriage as legalized adultery and fornication.))
Where the heck did he get this from? What reward? Also most Muslim scholars do not believe the Qur'an permits Mut`ah, only the Ithna `Ashari sect does. I add, the nation (except Twelvers) agree that it was Rasul-Allah (saw) who banned Mut`ah, not `Umar.
He says:
((Because of the informal nature of temporary marriage, there are no official statistics to show how many of these unions there are in Britain.))
Then maybe you should shut the heck up.
For those interested, the Mut`ah documentary is here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p018rv2lFinally they conclude:
((According to Khola Hasan, "There is no difference between Mutah marriage and prostitution. There is a time limit on the marriage, and the mahr [payment] given as a mandatory gift [from the man to the woman] is the equivalent as a payment to a prostitute."
The BBC documentary concludes that temporary marriage is often being used simply as a way of religiously legitimizing sex.))
Well obviously! Mut`ah is very similar to prostitution especially the way Twelvers do it. When it was allowed as Rukhsah for a limited time that was on the battlefield and then it was forbidden.
((In an interview with the BBC, Omar Ali Grant, from London, and a convert to Shia Islam, says that has had around 13 temporary marriages but argues that he was just trying to find the right person to spend his life with. He concedes they could be used as a cover for premarital sex, but adds: "Sex is not haram [forbidden] per se. In Islam sex doesn't have negative connotations; it is not impure and is not dirty. What Islam is saying is sex has to be between consenting adults who are also responsible. Very often it is said that temporary marriage may amount to some prostitution, but it is not that. Prostitution does occur in certain areas of Muslim society, but then again prostitution happens everywhere."))
Try not to give a reputation that guys embrace Tashayyu` for the girls
3 Replies
3837 Views
February 28, 2016, 02:04:32 PM