Is Mutah Really Halal For Shia?

[Khaled]

Ok, we have two parts here; any principle, rule and regulation, any concession or benefit given, such as mutah, if misused or abused would consider to be wrong. Now before we speak about this particular woman you mention lets get something straight.

Ok, إن شاء الله.

About Mut'ah and what Shia Scholars say about it, which you mention and quote, is this the fatwa or statement of one or two scholars or does the vast majority of the Shia scholars hold the same view? If the vast majority say and agree then we have something to discuss and this can be implemented on the Shia community. But if it's just one or two odd scholars then that is their point of view which they need to elaborate. This can't be implemented and labelled on the entire Shia community.

I only quoted the fatwa you did, but the full thing instead of partially like you did.  I do agree with you, that linking Mut'ah to prostitution because one Shi'i scholar deemed it permissible to do it with a prostitute is wrong and I shut down the brother who was trying to make that claim.  He stopped posting after I called him out for equating Mut'ah with prostitution.  So please, when discussing with me, keep that in mind.

Now the woman you speak about firstly how true this story is or not one needs to look into.

Irrelevant since my point is look at the reaction.  Why would they react that way if Mut'ah is a recommended act?

Secondly this is exactly my point that if we go by the fact that in the Shia community Mutah is something that is practiced commonly then what's all the fuss about.

I didn't say it wasn't practiced, I said its taboo.  The fatwa you linked discouraged Mut'ah if it is considered something shameful in the community.

This woman who is told off not because mutah is seen as taboo but because it isn't a common practice and it is down to exceptional circumstances otherwise why is she told off? Going by your statements and claims she shouldn't be told off but she is. Why, exactly my point that it's based on exceptional circumstances and mutah is there and available for need and if needed. Not for choice or do as you please.

Umm... according to my statements she SHOULD be told off because the community would view a woman committing Mut'ah with more than one man as being something taboo.  This, despite that fact that your scholars made up ahadeeth that doing it four times will put you on the same status as the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم.  Why would they discourage her if that is the case?

None of you belong to the Shia community so why are you so ignorant on this? What do you know about the Shia community? Making claims and then being ignorant. You claimed that the Prophet (s) banned mutah because Allah prohibited it. This definitely needs to be proven from the Qoran.

No it doesn't, anything the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم prohibits he does though by the order of Allah.  This is mainstream Ja'fari and non-Ja'fari views.  You seem to be an exception here

[Khaled]

As far as my Imams are concerned or even the Prophet (s) as a matter of fact, anything attributed to them needs to be looked at and carefully examined. I do not accept anything and everything at face value. Are we clear on this? A lot of things have been attributed to them that this is what they said and this is from them but in fact it's got nothing to do with them. They are either false to begin with or are exaggerated or fabricated full stop.

I agree with you, that's why I think the attribution to the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم and the Imams that Mut'ah is a highly recommended act is a LIE.  I think this is actually one thing we agree on.

My mind is not the tool to judge. Neither is my thought or opinion that important. I'm talking about reality and facts, don't ignore them and don't forget to use sense and logic.

I'm so confused, are we to use or minds or not?

A woman becoming pregnant and giving birth without touching a man isn't against reality and facts or against sense and logic. It all depends on the time and generation. These days this isn't strange or considered impossible. Test tube babies is your answer. But going back to Mother Mary and the birth of Jesus, those where different times.

So, according to you, a woman claiming to get pregnant without a man touching her is possible, because today we have test tube babies.

You've said it yourself. Why do I need to answer something which I've answered in great detail. Which is better nikah or mutah? I say why even ask when facts and statistics are there? In the Shia community which is commonly practiced and which isn't? It's absolutely obvious, NIKAH. Why even ask which is known based on facts and statistics. This is my point that Nikah is commonly practiced and mutah isn't. Why? Not because Mut'ah is taboo but because it's there for exceptional circumstances.

What is your evidence it is there for exceptional circumstances?  Fatwa, hadeeth, anything please.  You keep claiming this, then asking us to prove it, its the strangest argument I have ever seen.

[iceman]

I agree with you, that's why I think the attribution to the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم and the Imams that Mut'ah is a highly recommended act is a LIE.  I think this is actually one thing we agree on.

I'm so confused, are we to use or minds or not?

So, according to you, a woman claiming to get pregnant without a man touching her is possible, because today we have test tube babies.

What is your evidence it is there for exceptional circumstances?  Fatwa, hadeeth, anything please.  You keep claiming this, then asking us to prove it, its the strangest argument I have ever seen.

This was your first post,

"Akhi, I notice that you don't like the tone that the OP asked his question, but because I am interested in what he was asking, I was hoping you can have the conversation with me instead of him.

My research, may Allah guide you and I to that which He loves and approves of, has led me to believe that Mut'ah is a highly recommended act in the Ja'fari Madhhab.  Yet, me experience with Ja'faris, and your posts are an example of this, tend to show a very defensive nature to the act.  The question that non-Ja'faris tend to have is, if the act is recommended; then why isn't it more prevalent in Ja'fari culture?  Why is it that simply asking about it gets this extremely defensive reaction?

I hope you understand my question and my concerns, brother."

Note this,

"has led me to believe that Mut'ah is a highly recommended act in the Ja'fari Madhhab."

Now we clearly need to understand this. And this is exactly where the confusion lies.

Mutah is a HIGHLY RECOMMENDED ACT. What does this mean? Highly recommended act in general or in specific? Is mutah a highly recommended act as tahujjut, night prayer. Is it a highly recommend act as Umrah. Is it a highly recommended act such as ziyarath.

Mutah is not a highly recommended act in in general or itself, it's a highly recommended act compared to this that and the other which will lead to indecent and unappropriate behaviour or sinful acts. And these are based or arise due to exceptional circumstances.

A question we need to ask ourselves again and again that why was mutah permissible during the Prophet's (s) time? This is a very unique and important question which we seem to avoid by shoving it to the side. Surely it was permissible for a reason and purpose. We look into and are aware of many other things but here we choose to remain silent and quiet. WHY?

Then another very unique and important question to why all of a sudden the Prophet (s) banned it. What was the reason and purpose for that ban? Surely these are important and straightforward questions which need to be answered but are deliberately and intentionally avoided. WHY? Because the answers clearly lie in these two questions;

1, Why was mutah permissible during the Prophet's (s) time? What was the reason and purpose?
2, Why was mutah banned by the Prophet (s)? What was the reason and purpose for the ban?

This is where the answers lie and the discussion can be brought to an end with a positive conclusion.

Why are these questions been avoided?  What have we got to hide and cover?

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

Mut'ah Banned by Umar

Refer this article, which refutes this misconception:
http://www.twelvershia.net/2015/02/16/banning-mutah-time-omar/

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.

The Shia websites have fooled you people. The hadeeth is about Mutah of Hajj not Mutah of women.

حَدَّثَنَا مُسَدَّدٌ، حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى، عَنْ عِمْرَانَ أَبِي بَكْرٍ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو رَجَاءٍ، عَنْ عِمْرَانَ بْنِ حُصَيْنٍ ـ رضى الله عنهما ـ قَالَ أُنْزِلَتْ آيَةُ الْمُتْعَةِ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ فَفَعَلْنَاهَا مَعَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم، وَلَمْ يُنْزَلْ قُرْآنٌ يُحَرِّمُهُ، وَلَمْ يَنْهَ عَنْهَا حَتَّى مَاتَ قَالَ رَجُلٌ بِرَأْيِهِ مَا شَاءَ
 Narrated `Imran bin Husain: The Verse of Hajj-at-Tamatu was revealed in Allah's Book, so we performed it with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ), and nothing was revealed in Qur'an to make it illegal, nor did the Prophet (ﷺ) prohibit it till he died. But the man (who regarded it illegal) just expressed what his own mind suggested. [Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 6, Book 60, Hadith 43]

A similar hadeeth can also be found in Sahih Muslim.

حَدَّثَنَا حَامِدُ بْنُ عُمَرَ الْبَكْرَاوِيُّ، وَمُحَمَّدُ بْنُ أَبِي بَكْرٍ الْمُقَدَّمِيُّ، قَالاَ حَدَّثَنَا بِشْرُ، بْنُ الْمُفَضَّلِ حَدَّثَنَا عِمْرَانُ بْنُ مُسْلِمٍ، عَنْ أَبِي رَجَاءٍ، قَالَ قَالَ عِمْرَانُ بْنُ حُصَيْنٍ نَزَلَتْ آيَةُ الْمُتْعَةِ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ - يَعْنِي مُتْعَةَ الْحَجِّ - وَأَمَرَنَا بِهَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ثُمَّ لَمْ تَنْزِلْ آيَةٌ تَنْسَخُ آيَةَ مُتْعَةِ الْحَجِّ وَلَمْ يَنْهَ عَنْهَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم حَتَّى مَاتَ ‏.‏ قَالَ رَجُلٌ بِرَأْيِهِ بَعْدُ مَا شَاءَ
 'Imran b. Husain said: There was revealed the verse of Tamattu' in Hajj in the Book of Allah and the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) commanded us to perform it. and then no verse was revealed abrogating the Tamattu' (form of Hajj), and the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) did not forbid to do it till he died. So whatever a person said was his personal opinion. [Sahih Muslim, Book 7, Hadith 2831]

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.

Ibn Hajar in Fath Al-Bari comments that the last statement{so we did not revert to them} by Jabir(ra) suggests that he sided with the consensus, which is that mutah is prohibited, for if it was permissible, then he would have taught the permissibility of it after the death of Omar(ra).

Ibn Hajar is correct for Jabir lived for another five decades after Omar and never returned to what was supposedly permissible, nor was he known to having preached the permissibility of mutah. This is evidence that he accepted the prohibition of Omar, since the prohibition of Omar has supporting evidence from the traditions of the Prophet – peace be upon him –

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.

Jabir(ra) was not aware that mutah was prohibited by the Prophet(Saws). When he was made aware, he sided with the consensus, which is that mutah is prohibited.

The actions of companions are not binding evidence for the legality of these actions, especially with the existence of clear cut prophetic-narrations in prohibition.

In this case, if a companion were to practice mutah, it does not mean that mutah is permissible. Similarly, the companions that practiced adultery or consuming intoxicants never believed in the permissibility of these actions.

As for those that clearly stated that mutah is permissible, then their opinions are trounced by the opinions of those who spoke of prohibition, since their evidence lies in authentic prophetic traditions. Those that preached the permissibility of mutah were not able to attribute it to the Prophet – peace be upon him – except by saying that it was practiced at his time.

It goes without saying that this is not sufficient evidence, since some people were consuming intoxicant and engaging in adultery at the time as well. It holds nowhere close to as much weight as the clear evidences for the prohibition of mutah.

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

Shia Scholar al-Tusi narrated in his “Tahzeeb al-Ahkam” (7/253):

    (1089) 14 – واما ما رواه أحمد بن محمد عن ابى الحسن عن بعض اصحابنا يرفعه إلى ابي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: لا تتمتع بالمؤمنة فتذلها.
    فهذا حديث مقطوع الاسناد شاذ، ويحتمل ان يكون المراد به إذا كانت المرأة من اهل بيت الشرف فانه لايجوز التمتع بهالما يلحق اهلها من العار ويلحقها هي من الذل ويكون ذلك مكروها دون ان يكون محظورا.

    As for what is narrated from Ahmad bin Muhammad from Abu al-Hassan from some of our companions which is Marfu’u to Abu Abdullah -alaihi salam- that he said: “Do not humiliate the believing woman by having Mutah with her.” and this Hadith has a Maqtu’u Isnad and has Shuzouz in the Matn.

It is possible that what is meant in this narration is that if a believing woman was from a noble household then it is not allowed to have Mutah with her as it will dishonour her parents and disgrace her and this would be Makruh (Disliked) without it being forbidden.”

[iceman]

The first to make Mut’ah haraam was Umar”
Kitab al-Awail, page 1 by Hilal al-Hasan al-Askari (Madina, Saudi Arab)

"Indeed, the Sahaba deemed Umar to be a liar when it came to this issue".

We read in Tafseer Kabeer page 41:

Ali said: “Had Umar not banned Mut’ah then the only person to fornicate would be a wretched person.”
Tafseer al-Kabeer, Volume 4 Page 41

[iceman]

Imam of Ahle Sunnah Abu Auwanah Yaqoob bin Ishaq bin Ibrahim al-Nisaburi al-Isfraeini (d. 316 H) popularly known as Abu Auwanah records the following in his book Mustakhraj Abi Auwanah, Volume 7 page 159 Hadith 2713:

“Yaqoob bin Sufyan – Amr bin Asim – Hamaam – Qatadah – Abi Nadhra said: ‘I said to Jabir bin Abdullah that Ibn Abbas permits Mut’ah while Ibn al-Zubair prohibits it. He (Jabir) replied: ‘It is through me that this hadith has been circulated, I performed Mut’ah along with Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) and a verse was revealed regarding it but then when Umar bin al-Khatab become the caliph, he addressed the people and said: ‘The Quran is the same Quran, the apostle is the same apostle, and there existed two types of Mut’ah at the time of Allah’s apostle, I forbid both and will punish whoever performs them, one is the Mut’ah of Hajj, surely you have to separate your Hajj from your Umra, and the other is Mut’ah al-Nisa, if I catch any person who is married for an appointed duration (Mut’a), I will certainly stone him (to death).”

[iceman]

A similar account can also be read in Tarikh Madina via a variant chain of narration:
Muhammad bin Jaffar – Shu’aba – Qatadah – Abi Nadhra said: ‘Ibn Abbas (ra) used to permit Mut’ah whereas Ibn al-Zubair forbade it, thus I mentioned that to Jabir bin Abdullah and he replied: ‘Through me this hadith been circulated, we performed Mut’ah with Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) but when Umar became the ruler he said: ‘Allah would allow His Messenger to do whatever He wished, verily the Quran’s revelation has been completed, thus perform Hajj and Umra as Allah ordered you in a complete form and perform wedlock with women in a complete form, if I catch a man who has performed temporary wedlock with a woman, surely I will stone him’’’.


Imam Saaduddin Taftazani states in Sharh Maqasid, Volume 3 page 512:
“It has been narrated that Umar said: ‘Three things existed during the time of Allah’s Messenger, I forbid and make them Haram, these are Mut’ah al-Nisa, Mut’ah al-Hajj and “Hay ala Khayr al-Amal”…the answer is that this is issue of Ijtihad”.
Sharh Maqasid, Volume 3 page 512

[iceman]

Imam of Ahle Sunnah Saeed bin Mansur (d. 227 H) records the following admission of Umar in his authority work Sunan Saeed bin Mansur, Volume 1 page 218 Tradition 852:

Saeed – Hushaim – Khalid – Abu Qulabah from Umar bin al-Khatab said: ‘Two types of Mut’ah were there during the time of Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) and I prohibit both and will punish whoever performs it, Mut’ah with women and Mut’ah of Hajj’

Imam Sarkhasi records:

“It is Sahih that Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) prohibited the people from committing Mut’ah and said: ‘Two types of Mut’ah existed during the time of Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) and I prohibit people from them, Mut’ah al-Nisa and Mut’ah al-Hajj’”.

We read in Kanz al-Ummal:
“Two types of Mut’ah were present during the lifetime of Rasulullah (s), I prohibit them both, Mut’ah of Nisa and Mut’ah of Hajj”

In Tafseer Kabeer:
Umar said: “Two Mut’ah’s existed during Rasulullah’s lifetime and I now prohibit both of them.”
Tafseer al Kabeer, by Imam Fakhr ul-Razi, Page 42 & 43

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

The first to make Mut’ah haraam was Umar”
Kitab al-Awail, page 1 by Hilal al-Hasan al-Askari (Madina, Saudi Arab)

The book you quoted is mentioned as a Shia reference on a Shia website.

Shi’a reference:

- al Awail, Abu Hilal al Askari, p 209

https://www.al-islam.org/shiite-encyclopedia-ahlul-bayt-dilp-team/short-history-fadak-after-martyrdom-fatimah


Anyways as explained, Its a misconception that Umar(ra) banned Mutah. Because we have hadeeth of Prophet(saws). So Umar(ra) is relieved from this blame which was made out of ignorance by people. 

It was narrated that Ibn 'Umar said:
"When 'Umar bin Khattab was appointed caliph, he addressed the people and said: 'The Messenger of Allah permitted temporary marriage for us three times, then he forbade it. By Allah, If I hear of any married person entering a temporary marriage, I will stone him to death, unless he can bring me four witnesses who will testify that the Messenger of Allah, allowed it after he forbade it'." [Sunan Ibn majah, Book 9, Hadith 2039 ; Grading: Hasan].

"Indeed, the Sahaba deemed Umar to be a liar when it came to this issue".

wrong. Rather Umar(ra) was praised  by Ali(ra) for upholding the Sunnah and this can be proven from Shia book Nahjul balagha.

Ali said : May Allah reward such and such man, he straightened the curve, cured the disease, abandoned mischief, and established the Sunnah. He departed (from this world) with untarnished clothes and little shortcomings. He achieved the goodness (of this world) and remained safe from its evils. He offered Allah’s obedience and feared Him as He deserved. {Nahjul Balagha Sermon 227}

Shia scholar Ali bin moosa tabreezi in his book miraat al kutub vol 6 page 712 said :

 What is intended by the word fulan here is the second khalipha, even though others say that someone else is intended. The Imami explanation for this is that , it was to win the hearts of his followers.

We read in Tafseer Kabeer page 41:

Ali said: “Had Umar not banned Mut’ah then the only person to fornicate would be a wretched person.”
Tafseer al-Kabeer, Volume 4 Page 41

The narration is unreliable because, it's reported from Al-Hakam bin Abi Utaibah. Al-Hakam, however, was born after the death of Ali according to several scholars. See his biography in Tahtheeb Al-Tahtheeb.

What is authentically reported from Ali(ra) is that Mutah was banned by Prophet(saws). We can see this fact mentioned in the books of different Sects.


In book of twelver Shia:

We read in Shia hadeeth  in Al-Istibsar by Al-Tusi (p. 689) from Mohammad bin Ahmad bin Yahya from Abi Al-Jawza’a from Al-Hussain bin Ulwan from Amr bin Khalid from Zaid bin Ali from his fathers from Ali  that he said: The Messenger of Allah – peace be upon him – forbade the meat of the domestic donkey and mutah marriages.

In book of Ismaili Shia:

In the Isma`eeli book “Da`a’im-ul-Islam” volume 2, pages 228 by their scholar al-Qadi al-Nu`man al-Maghribi.

٨٥٨ وعن رسول الله (صلع) أنه حرم نكاح المتعة، وعن علي (ع) أنه قال: لا نكاح إلا بولي وشاهدين وليس بالدرهم والدرهمين، واليوم واليومين، ذلك السفاح ولا شرط في النكاح

[From Rasul-Allah (saw) that he forbade Mut`ah marriage, and from `Ali (as) that he said: “Marriage is invalid without a custodian and two witnesses, it is not for one or two Dirhams, nor is it for (the period of) a day or two, because that would be unlawful sexual intercourse and there are no conditions in marriage.”]

In the book of Zaydi Shia:

In their main book “Musnad al-Imam Zayd” volume 1 page 271, we read:

عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ جَدِّهِ، عَنْ عَلِيٍّ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمْ، قَالَ: نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ عَنْ نِكَاحِ الْمُتْعَةِ عَامَ خَيْبَرَ

[From his father, from his grandfather, from `Ali may Allah be pleased with them: “Rasul-Allah (saw) has forbidden the Mut`ah marriage on the year of Khaybar.”]


In Book of Sunnis:

In Saheeh Muslim #3417-3421.

Ali narrates: The Messenger of Allah – peace be upon him – prohibited the mutah marriage of woman on Khaibar and consuming the (meat of the) domestic donkey.

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

Imam of Ahle Sunnah Abu Auwanah Yaqoob bin Ishaq bin Ibrahim al-Nisaburi al-Isfraeini (d. 316 H) popularly known as Abu Auwanah records the following in his book Mustakhraj Abi Auwanah, Volume 7 page 159 Hadith 2713:

“Yaqoob bin Sufyan – Amr bin Asim – Hamaam – Qatadah – Abi Nadhra said: ‘I said to Jabir bin Abdullah that Ibn Abbas permits Mut’ah while Ibn al-Zubair prohibits it. He (Jabir) replied: ‘It is through me that this hadith has been circulated, I performed Mut’ah along with Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) and a verse was revealed regarding it but then when Umar bin al-Khatab become the caliph, he addressed the people and said: ‘The Quran is the same Quran, the apostle is the same apostle, and there existed two types of Mut’ah at the time of Allah’s apostle, I forbid both and will punish whoever performs them, one is the Mut’ah of Hajj, surely you have to separate your Hajj from your Umra, and the other is Mut’ah al-Nisa, if I catch any person who is married for an appointed duration (Mut’a), I will certainly stone him (to death).”

The hadeeth of jabir(ra) has already been answered in the previous posts.

 Scholars have explained this by saying that Omar was simply confirming a ban that was first made by the Prophet – peace be upon him.

This is supported by a narration in Sunan Ibn Majah #1953 which states that Umar said: The Messenger of Allah permitted temporary marriage for us three times, then he forbade it.

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

A similar account can also be read in Tarikh Madina via a variant chain of narration:
Muhammad bin Jaffar – Shu’aba – Qatadah – Abi Nadhra said: ‘Ibn Abbas (ra) used to permit Mut’ah whereas Ibn al-Zubair forbade it, thus I mentioned that to Jabir bin Abdullah and he replied: ‘Through me this hadith been circulated, we performed Mut’ah with Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) but when Umar became the ruler he said: ‘Allah would allow His Messenger to do whatever He wished, verily the Quran’s revelation has been completed, thus perform Hajj and Umra as Allah ordered you in a complete form and perform wedlock with women in a complete form, if I catch a man who has performed temporary wedlock with a woman, surely I will stone him’’’.


Imam Saaduddin Taftazani states in Sharh Maqasid, Volume 3 page 512:
“It has been narrated that Umar said: ‘Three things existed during the time of Allah’s Messenger, I forbid and make them Haram, these are Mut’ah al-Nisa, Mut’ah al-Hajj and “Hay ala Khayr al-Amal”…the answer is that this is issue of Ijtihad”.
Sharh Maqasid, Volume 3 page 512

 Scholars have explained this by saying that Omar was simply confirming a ban that was first made by the Prophet – peace be upon him.

This is supported by a narration in Sunan Ibn Majah #1953 which states that Umar said: The Messenger of Allah permitted temporary marriage for us three times, then he forbade it.

Also we find that the narration by Omar is corroborated by Ali, Ibn Omar, Sabra, and Salama. Hence it's a clear evidence that it was Prophet(saws) who forbade Mutah.

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

Imam of Ahle Sunnah Saeed bin Mansur (d. 227 H) records the following admission of Umar in his authority work Sunan Saeed bin Mansur, Volume 1 page 218 Tradition 852:

Saeed – Hushaim – Khalid – Abu Qulabah from Umar bin al-Khatab said: ‘Two types of Mut’ah were there during the time of Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) and I prohibit both and will punish whoever performs it, Mut’ah with women and Mut’ah of Hajj’

Imam Sarkhasi records:

“It is Sahih that Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) prohibited the people from committing Mut’ah and said: ‘Two types of Mut’ah existed during the time of Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) and I prohibit people from them, Mut’ah al-Nisa and Mut’ah al-Hajj’”.

We read in Kanz al-Ummal:
“Two types of Mut’ah were present during the lifetime of Rasulullah (s), I prohibit them both, Mut’ah of Nisa and Mut’ah of Hajj”

In Tafseer Kabeer:
Umar said: “Two Mut’ah’s existed during Rasulullah’s lifetime and I now prohibit both of them.”
Tafseer al Kabeer, by Imam Fakhr ul-Razi, Page 42 & 43

 Scholars have explained this by saying that Omar was simply confirming a ban that was first made by the Prophet – peace be upon him.

This is supported by a narration in Sunan Ibn Majah #1953 which states that Umar said: The Messenger of Allah permitted temporary marriage for us three times, then he forbade it.

Also we find that the narration by Omar is corroborated by Ali, Ibn Omar, Sabra, and Salama. Hence it's a clear evidence that it was Prophet(saws) who forbade Mutah.

[Ibrahim]

As-Salaamu alaikum to all here. If I may offer my opinion, I find it quite strange that aversion to nikkah mut'ah in the Shia community should be considered indicative of anything.

Just as it is human nature to indulge in some things which Allah(swt) has forbidden, it is also unsurprising that people close off to themselves practices which have been made halal.

Opposition to mut'ah in Shia communities is actually not very widespread because mut'ah itself is not widespread. What can be said is that mut'ah has a definitive purpose, and those who have not found themselves in situations which mut'ah is designed for may disapprove of it out of ignorance.

It is this same ignorance which causes polygamy to be stigmatised, or which leads to marriage proposals from individuals of the "wrong" skin colour being rejected.
There are many right and decent things which society stigmatises without wisdom or justification.

Regarding the question of "would you approve of it for your sister/daughter", the response is that this often in fact does happen. It's not unusual for mut'ah to be contracted, with the stipulation that no intercourse will take place, in order for young couples to see if they're compatible before committing to permanent nikah.
This reality is in stark contrast to the ideas of those who try to paint mut'ah as some sort of licence for promiscuity.

So no, mut'ah does not face the level of condemnation within Shia society which is being depicted by some here, and where condemnation does occur, it is often the result of ignorance of the purposes of mut'ah. None of this stands in logical contradiction to it being a mustahab act.

To those who criticise mut'ah, I would say that by doing so you're leaving a very obvious gap in the social structure, whereby a significant minority of the population is forced into celibacy on a semi-permanent basis; and where couples have no opportunity, should they so wish, to get to know one another before lifelong commitment.

How can you account for this?

[Hani]

Among the Shia I met, I was told that Mut`ah is widespread.
Never in the Hadith of the Imam was Mut`ah done for the purpose of "getting to know" someone, it's always clearly highlighted that it's about seeking sexual pleasure (aka Mut`ah).
People can get to know each-other without Mut`ah, who told you talking to the opposite gender is Haram?
No one is forced into celibacy, you can marry another poor person or a person of your level.

[iceman]

Among the Shia I met, I was told that Mut`ah is widespread.
Never in the Hadith of the Imam was Mut`ah done for the purpose of "getting to know" someone, it's always clearly highlighted that it's about seeking sexual pleasure (aka Mut`ah).
People can get to know each-other without Mut`ah, who told you talking to the opposite gender is Haram?
No one is forced into celibacy, you can marry another poor person or a person of your level.

If it's widespread then where does the taboo thing come in? You've been given the wrong information. It wasn't widespread during the Prophet's (s) time and neither is it widespread within us. We follow the Prophet (s). You follower the rulers or personalities after the Prophet (s). That's the difference!

[Ibrahim]

Hani, the contract two individuals make before entering nikah mut'ah can have a wide variety of stipulations, just like permanent nikah. Saying that you've never heard of the Imams of the Ahl Al Bayt(as) referring to mut'ah in a particular context doesn't prove anything.

The observable fact is that mut'ah is used as a means for couples to get to know each other. If you doubt this, it just means you don't know Shia society.
Non-marital relations can't achieve this in the same way. Two non-mahrams talking with each other, as you mention, is completely different from a mut'ah, without intercourse, where a young couple can become much more familiar.

For some people it may be fine to marry someone they've never even met before - they have that choice if they want. But this is not suitable for everyone. Similarly, contracting mut'ah to check for compatibility is not for everyone, but some people prefer to do it that way and that is their right.

Celibacy is the natural result of people closing off temporary marriage, because permanent marriage is not possible for many people. Your idea that poor people can marry poor people as the solution is contrary to the reality across the Muslim world, where young people find themselves unable to marry until well into their twenties or thirties. And what about widowed or divorced older women, who may find it difficult to find suitors for permanent marriage?

You need to consider the wider needs of society as a whole, and the provision of nikah mut'ah is one aspect of this.

[Hani]

Hani, the contract two individuals make before entering nikah mut'ah can have a wide variety of stipulations, just like permanent nikah. Saying that you've never heard of the Imams of the Ahl Al Bayt(as) referring to mut'ah in a particular context doesn't prove anything.

The observable fact is that mut'ah is used as a means for couples to get to know each other. If you doubt this, it just means you don't know Shia society.
Non-marital relations can't achieve this in the same way. Two non-mahrams talking with each other, as you mention, is completely different from a mut'ah, without intercourse, where a young couple can become much more familiar.

For some people it may be fine to marry someone they've never even met before - they have that choice if they want. But this is not suitable for everyone. Similarly, contracting mut'ah to check for compatibility is not for everyone, but some people prefer to do it that way and that is their right.

Celibacy is the natural result of people closing off temporary marriage, because permanent marriage is not possible for many people. Your idea that poor people can marry poor people as the solution is contrary to the reality across the Muslim world, where young people find themselves unable to marry until well into their twenties or thirties. And what about widowed or divorced older women, who may find it difficult to find suitors for permanent marriage?

You need to consider the wider needs of society as a whole, and the provision of nikah mut'ah is one aspect of this.

They refer to it in that context because that's what it's all about, let alone the narrations of already married men who are doing Mut`ah. The common factor between Mut`ah and other pre-marital relations is that they all could lead to adultery which is forbidden. Where's the historical evidence that Mut`ah was ever for purpose of getting to know someone by "marrying them temporarily" before permanent marriage? There's ZERO evidence for this even though humans are humans and their nature never changed. So how were those ancient Shia dealing with this great obstacle of getting to know someone before you modern day geniuses came up with the "Mut`ah as a means of dating" trick? How about going and meeting the parents then getting engaged and meeting your potential wife in safe environments like mature adults rather than doing a bogus "pleasure contract"?
 The solution for people who can't marry until their thirties isn't doing adultery, it's demanding the lazy governments of those countries to do economic reforms and provide jobs for their people. We know a ton of poor people that are married, there's always someone respectable to find, and even if marriage age is late due to social issues that means you must exercise patience during the times of tribulation not that you go and commit what's forbidden. I've not seen a more garbage practice in societies than Mut`ah nor have I seen more harm done to a community than that of Mut`ah. I've heard from countless Iraqis how it's become sex tourism over there since the Iranian pilgrims flooded with their Mut`ah.  So tell the thousands of bastard babies and abandoned Fetuses in Tehran about how great Mut`ah is for society.

[Ibrahim]

Hani, your account of what you believe goes on in Iran and Iraq continues to betray the fact that you have little knowledge of these societies and have probably never visited them.
Evidently, you get your information from highly biased sources with little credibility.

By referring to nikkah mut'ah as "adultery", you are actually showing disrespect to the Holy Prophet(saws), since all Muslims agree that he instructed the sahaaba to perform mut'ah.
Rather than calmly and rationally discussing the subject at hand, you are using such strong language that you are saying things you don't mean; I suggest you reflect on your motivations and reconsider your approach.

Again you are asking for "evidence" of something whose validity isn't in question. It's an observable fact that mut'ah is used by couples to see if they're compatible for permanent nikah, so what point are you trying to make by questioning how frequently this was done in past ages?
Islam is suitable for all times and places and it offers us solutions to life as befits the circumstances we find ourselves in. Having a second, third or fourth wife was common in certain regions historically, whereas it's rare today; either way is valid under Shari'ah. Do you have an objection to this?

Regarding the issues faced by unmarried youth across the Muslim world, the scale of the current problem belies the notion that it can be solved in the manner you suggest.
Asking "lazy governments" to make "economic reforms" is admirable, but it's not a direct solution to the problem.

As an aside, if you don't mind me asking: how many Muslim countries have you travelled to? And what is your means of knowing the societies you discuss?

[iceman]

Hani, your account of what you believe goes on in Iran and Iraq continues to betray the fact that you have little knowledge of these societies and have probably never visited them.
Evidently, you get your information from highly biased sources with little credibility.

By referring to nikkah mut'ah as "adultery", you are actually showing disrespect to the Holy Prophet(saws), since all Muslims agree that he instructed the sahaaba to perform mut'ah.
Rather than calmly and rationally discussing the subject at hand, you are using such strong language that you are saying things you don't mean; I suggest you reflect on your motivations and reconsider your approach.

Again you are asking for "evidence" of something whose validity isn't in question. It's an observable fact that mut'ah is used by couples to see if they're compatible for permanent nikah, so what point are you trying to make by questioning how frequently this was done in past ages?
Islam is suitable for all times and places and it offers us solutions to life as befits the circumstances we find ourselves in. Having a second, third or fourth wife was common in certain regions historically, whereas it's rare today; either way is valid under Shari'ah. Do you have an objection to this?

Regarding the issues faced by unmarried youth across the Muslim world, the scale of the current problem belies the notion that it can be solved in the manner you suggest.
Asking "lazy governments" to make "economic reforms" is admirable, but it's not a direct solution to the problem.

As an aside, if you don't mind me asking: how many Muslim countries have you travelled to? And what is your means of knowing the societies you discuss?

They've actually been brought up in a world full of hatred towards Shias and a lot of nonsense concerning Shiaism. And their mind has developed and matured based on that grudge and hatred. So I completely understand their feelings and emotions.

They speak with a mindset. Unless they discuss with an open and free mind it is going to be hard for them to understand and difficult for us to get through to them. But as for you, very well said and put forward. More Shia brothers like you need to step forward and deal with this propaganda against Shiaism and the misunderstanding it's creating about Shias.