TwelverShia.net Forum
Sunni Shia Discussion Forum => Quran-Tafseer => Topic started by: MuslimK on February 14, 2015, 03:01:34 PM
-
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/27/Basmala.svg/608px-Basmala.svg.png)
http://www.twelvershia.net/2015/02/14/mutah-in-the-quran/
Edit: Link fixed.
-
The verse they use 4:24 to promote Muta actually refutes it.
And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that ye seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery. (4:24)
The verse is forbidding us to get married on the basis of desire.
-
Salam brother Rationalist, how did you conclude that it's haram to marry from desire from that ayah? It says مسافحين which are people who do out-right zina with random people (as opposed to أخدان, which is also prohibited, which is similar to girlfriend/boy friend in which you have a certain person that you do zina with)
So it forbids doing zina with random people (and another ayah forbids zina both with random people and zina with a specific person). How does this forbid Muslims from getting married out of desire?
wallahu a'lam
-
That's your interpretation for مُسَافِحِينَ because the difference to the 12er is whether to make a niyah or not. The fiqh of your sect allows a person to get temporarily married for only the sake of مُسَافِحِينَ. Whereas the Quran is asking us to be chaste. I mean in Muta you can have lust for a women, ask her to marry you for one day, and that's about it.
Take this ahadith for example.
الحسن بن محبوب ، عن إسحاق بن جرير قال : قلت لابي عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) : إن عندنا بالكوفة امرأة معروفة بالفجور ، أيحل أن أتزوجها متعة ؟ قال : فقال : رفعت راية ؟ قلت : لا ، لو رفعت راية أخذها السلطان ، قال : نعم تزوجها متعة ، قال : ثم أصغى إلى بعض مواليه فأسر إليه شيئا ، فلقيت مولاه فقلت له : ما قال لك ؟ فقال : انما قال لي : ولو رفعت راية ما كان عليه في فتزويجها شئ إنما يخرجها من حرام إلى حلال .
1 – [at-Tahdhib] al-Hasan b. Mahbub from Ishaq b. Jarir. He said: I said to Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام: In Kufa there is a woman with us who is known for promiscuity. Is it allowed to marry her in mut`a? He said: So he said: Did she raise a standard? I said: No, had she raised a standard the Sultan would have arrested her. He said: Yes, marry her in mut`a. He said: Then he listened to one of his clients and confided something to him. So I met his client and said to him: What did he say to you? So he said: He only said to me: Even if she had raised a standard there would not be anything against the marriage. It only takes her out from a haram to a halal.
Now compare it to this verse of the Quran.
The fornicator does not marry except a [female] fornicator or polytheist, and none marries her except a fornicator or a polytheist, and that has been made unlawful to the believers. (quran 24:3)
-
That's your interpretation for مُسَافِحِينَ
No, that's not my interpretation:
http://islamqa.info/en/1114
^Salafi website
Brother the problem here is that you're using an English translation of the Quran to come up with a ruling (saying that it's not permissible to get married based on desire).
-
One of the fundamental reasons for Muslims getting married is desire/lust.
I would actually class Mut`ah as being from the "Akhdaan" or secret lovers category, I do this based on my observation.
It is sufficient for this verse to mention Ihsan (fortification) to cancel out the temporary marriage argument.
-
That's your interpretation for مُسَافِحِينَ
No, that's not my interpretation:
http://islamqa.info/en/1114
^Salafi website
Brother the problem here is that you're using an English translation of the Quran to come up with a ruling (saying that it's not permissible to get married based on desire).
Why are you trying to sugar coat and censor the flexibility of Muta An-Nisa ? Also there is still a problem even after we take the Salafi website's interpretation.
Read this part "Muhsanaat [translated as “chaste”] means that they should be pure, not indulging in zinaa (unlawful sexual conduct), hence they are described as not being musaafihaat, which means promiscuous women who do not refuse anyone who wants to commit immoral acts with them."
Now compare it to this ahadith:
I said to Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام: In Kufa there is a woman with us who is known for promiscuity. Is it allowed to marry her in mut`a? He said: So he said: Did she raise a standard? I said: No, had she raised a standard the Sultan would have arrested her. He said: Yes, marry her in mut`a.
Why did you ignore it ?
Also this
26441 ] 5 ـ أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى في ( نوادره ) : عن ابن أبي عمير ، عن هشام بن الحكم ، عن أبي عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) في المتعة قال : ما يفعلها عندنا إلا الفواجر .
5 – Ahmad b. Muhammad b. `Isa in his Nawadir from Ibn Abi `Umayr from Hisham b. al-Hakam from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام regarding mut`a: None does it amongst us but the dissolute women (al-fawajir).
[ 26437 ] 1 ـ محمد بن الحسن بإسناده عن محمد بن أحمد بن يحيى ، عن أحمد بن محمد ، عن علي بن حديد ، عن جميل ، عن زرارة قال : سأله عمار وأنا عنده عن الرجل يتزوج الفاجرة متعة ؟ قال : لا بأس ، وإن كان التزويج الآخر فليحصن بابه .
1 – Muhammad b. al-Hasan by his isnad from Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Yahya from Ahmad b. Muhammad from `Ali b. Hadid from Jamil from Zurara. He said: `Ammar asked him, and I was with him, about the man who marries the dissolute woman (al-fajira) in mut`a. He said: There is no harm, and if it is the other marriage, then he is to fortify his door.
-
One of the fundamental reasons for Muslims getting married is desire/lust.
I would actually class Mut`ah as being from the "Akhdaan" or secret lovers category, I do this based on my observation.
It is sufficient for this verse to mention Ihsan (fortification) to cancel out the temporary marriage argument.
On shi'achat they attack Umar day and night for opposing Muta. However, I get suspended on shiachat two times. One for accusing someone for saving money for Muta, and the second time for telling the 12ers they do muta with each other and share their experiences about it benefits.
Now if Muta was a chaste form of marriage why would I get suspended for accusing someone of thinking about it? If a 12er told me you are saving money for dowry that's why you are careful with money, would I get offended ?
If a 12er says the Sunni brothers and sisters marry each other and they also share their experience of how marriage is beneficial. Are these points offensive to Sunnis? No. However, if I replace the term Nikah with Muta an Nisa the 12ers find it offensive.
Also this video below. So if someone accuses an Imam's wife of previously doing muta its offensive to 12ers. However, I can point of a historical fact that most of Prophet's (pbuh) wives were previously married and that's not offensive at all.
-
All Muslims believe that Mutah was an established practice by the Prophet (saw). Historically, it was Caliph Umar who forbade the practice -
"Book 007, Number 2801:
Abu Nadra reported: Ibn'Abbas commanded the performance of Mut'a putting lhram for 'Umra during the months of Dhu'I-Hijja and after completing it. then putting on Ibrim for Hajj), but Ibn Zubair forbade to do it. I made a mention of it to Jabir b. Abdullih and he said: It is through me that this hadith has been circulated. We entered into the state of Ihram as Tamattu' with the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him). When 'Umar was Installed as Caliph, he said: Verily Allah made permissible for His Messenger (may peace be upon him) whatever He liked and as He liked. And (every command) of the Holy Qur'an has been revealed for every occasion. So accomplish Hajj and Umra for Allah as Allah has commanded you; and confirm by (proper conditions) the marriage of those women (with whom you have performed Mut'a). And any person would come to me with a marriage of appointed duration (Mut'a), I would stone him (to death). Qatada narrated this hadith with the same chain of transmitters saying: (That 'Umar also said): Separate your Hajj from 'Umra, for that is the most complete Hajj, and complete your Umra." [Sahih Muslim, Book 7, Number 2801 and 2814]
Source: Sahih Muslim Online http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/muslim/007-smt.php
As for the hadith you cited, it's from the book "Minhaj al-Waqifa" which is a book from the sect of Shiism that believes in 7 Imams. This website only deals with Twelver Shiism and their books and beliefs. Your argument is not valid because it comes from a book (al-Wafiqa) that is derived from a sect of Shiism that is nearly dead. Please stick to credible sources.
Finally, your assertion that mutah is not allowed solely for sexual pleasure is incorrect. In Islam, we already have the established principle of relationships solely for sexual pleasure. Two examples.
1) "Slave-women" i.e. women who were captured during wartime. The Qu'ran refers to them as "those who your right hand possesses". A fairly obvious verse that they are for sexual pleasure is the following:
“No woman are permitted to you [the Prophet] in the future, nor is it allowed for you to change your wives for other women, even if there beauty may stun you, except for those whom your right hand possess”.
Al-Qur’an, Surah 33, Ayah 52
By the way, are you aware of the the reason why the verse 4:24 was even revealed? Take a read here:
http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=684&Itemid=59
"Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri said, "We captured some women from the area of Awtas who were already married, and we disliked having sexual relations with them because they already had husbands. So, we asked the Prophet about this matter, and this Ayah was revealed. Consequently, we had sexual relations with these women"
See here? The reason why they initially wanted to marry these women was for sexual pleasure only. They were afraid it was haram because they were already married (to non-Muslim men). This verse was revealed and told them it was okay to have sexual relations with them - not real marriage.
2)The concept of misyar. Qaradawi himself admits that most people who did are already married. He suggests it is a lawful method of fulfilling one's sexual desires without having to fulfill all of the responsibilities a man has towards the woman (i.e. nafaqah). Like Mutah, some have also compared it to prostitution. Why? Because anything in Islam can be abused.
Mutah was permitted by the Prophet and it does have an Islamic basis. Anything can be abused (like misyar).
Mutah is permissible.
-
Source: Sahih Muslim Online http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/muslim/007-smt.php
Yes there were some companions which disagreed but Imam Ali's (as) was not among them.
Please stick to credible sources.
Bring the credible sources. In your entire reply you did not bring on ahadith to prove that Muta cannot be based on lust.
Finally, your assertion that mutah is not allowed solely for sexual pleasure is incorrect. In Islam, we already have the established principle of relationships solely for sexual pleasure. Two examples.
1) "Slave-women" i.e. women who were captured during wartime. The Qu'ran refers to them as "those who your right hand possesses". A fairly obvious verse that they are for sexual pleasure is the following:
“No woman are permitted to you [the Prophet] in the future, nor is it allowed for you to change your wives for other women, even if there beauty may stun you, except for those whom your right hand possess”.
Al-Qur’an, Surah 33, Ayah 52
Read this part of the Quran.
even if there beauty may stun you
You just contradicted yourself.
On top of that right hand posses is a form of ownership. Its not a rental like muta.
By the way, are you aware of the the reason why the verse 4:24 was even revealed? Take a read here:
http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=684&Itemid=59
"Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri said, "We captured some women from the area of Awtas who were already married, and we disliked having sexual relations with them because they already had husbands. So, we asked the Prophet about this matter, and this Ayah was revealed. Consequently, we had sexual relations with these women"
See here? The reason why they initially wanted to marry these women was for sexual pleasure only. They were afraid it was haram because they were already married (to non-Muslim men). This verse was revealed and told them it was okay to have sexual relations with them - not real marriage.
With women who already had husbands ? Are you feeling okay? You did a nice job cutting and paste without pasting the prohibition against it.
(Thus has Allah ordained for you) means, this prohibition was ordained for you by Allah. Therefore, adhere to Allah's Book, do not transgress His set limits, and adhere to His legislation and decrees.
2)The concept of misyar. Qaradawi himself admits that most people who did are already married. He suggests it is a lawful method of fulfilling one's sexual desires without having to fulfill all of the responsibilities a man has towards the woman (i.e. nafaqah). Like Mutah, some have also compared it to prostitution. Why? Because anything in Islam can be abused.
I don't agree with Misyar.
Mutah was permitted by the Prophet and it does have an Islamic basis. Anything can be abused (like misyar).
Mutah is permissible.
According to some companions such as Ibn Abbas, Jabir al Ansar, Abdullah ibn Masood, but not Imam Ali (as).
-
@Muslim,
First of all you seem like a liar, why'd you place "Sunni" as your religion?
All Muslims believe that Mutah was an established practice by the Prophet (saw). Historically, it was Caliph Umar who forbade the practice -
Even though in an authentic narration by `Umar he himself says that the Prophet (saw) was the one who forbade it?
Seems like your historical reading is faulty.
We entered into the state of Ihram as Tamattu' with the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him).
^ This part of the Hadith refers to the Mut`ah of Hajj, not women.
2)The concept of misyar. Qaradawi himself admits that most people who did are already married. He suggests it is a lawful method of fulfilling one's sexual desires without having to fulfill all of the responsibilities a man has towards the woman (i.e. nafaqah). Like Mutah, some have also compared it to prostitution. Why? Because anything in Islam can be abused.
Except that Misyar is nothing like Mut`ah. Misyar is the condition where a man has a wife in one town and another wife in another town so the man makes "Sayr" or travels walking from the house of his first wife to the next town where his second wife lives.
-
Lol misyar is worse than mutah. Mutah was allowed by the Prophet and is a Sunnah. Sunni scholars allow men to use misyar to marry women and them divorce them later. And you guys cry about Taqqiyah? Sad. With Mutah both parties know what they are getting into, in misyar you can fool a woman to marry you for a number of years until you are done with her.
And so what if you disagree with it? There are tons of sunnis that practice it today.
-
Shia scholars say misyar is halal. Plus unlike mutah misyar won't lead to STDs and prostituton since it's permanent.
-
As another brother mentioned, hanafis and shafis are allowed to marry with the intention of divorce.
Misyar allows you to marry and divorce anyone you want, its not permanent at all.
Misyar is not sunnah of the prophet, what kind of sunni are you if you don't even follow the sunnah? The prophet allowed Mutah. That is 100% fact. It is also fact that it was Umar who banned Mutah. Why don't you read your own sahih books that you claim are so perfect?
Your arguments are weak.
-
Bismillah
Salaam brothers. Thank you for your responses.
I'll address your points separately.
To brother Hani:
First of all you seem like a liar, why'd you place "Sunni" as your religion?
Because Sunni refers to someone who follows the Sunnah of the Prophet. No matter what your madhab, all of us claim to be following the Sunnah of the Prophet. You may not think I am a true Sunni. That is your prerogative and I respect that, but you do not have ownership over this term.
However, if it does offend you that much, I will change it.
Even though in an authentic narration by `Umar he himself says that the Prophet (saw) was the one who forbade it?
Why do you have contradictory hadith about this? According to the works of Fakhr al-Dan al-Razi, the top Shafii scholar who wrote over a 100 books, Ali said it was Umar who forbade mutah. Ali said "Had Umar not banned Mut’ah then the only person to fornicate would be a perverted person"
It's located in this book: http://tinyurl.com/mvulbq9
In another part of the same Tafseer al-Kabeer, al-Razi also brings about a quote from Umar who says "Two Mutahs existed during Rasullalah's time and now I prohibit them" Source: http://tinyurl.com/ncbru87
He prohibited both mutah of marriage and mutah of Hajj. I'm not sure why even forbade the mutah of Hajj. Was that also a bidah?
Except that Misyar is nothing like Mut`ah. Misyar is the condition where a man has a wife in one town and another wife in another town so the man makes "Sayr" or travels walking from the house of his first wife to the next town where his second wife lives.
Misyar and mutah are almost synonymous. According to Hanafi and Shafii scholars, men are allowed to engage in misyar marriages with the explicit intent of divorcing the woman after some unspecified duration of the marriage. Even the late Mufti, Sheikh Ibn Baaz gave a fatwa specifically allowing this act: http://oi50.tinypic.com/2ez0ier.jpg
Misyar allows for men to travel to another place (sayr) and find women, offer them marriage with the intention of divorcing them and not having to provide them with nafaqah. At least with mutah, the woman and the man agree when to end the marriage. In misyar, the poor woman is in a lose-lose relationship. You may not like it, but it's permissible for many Sunnis to engage in this behavior. Misyar or mutah can both be abused. But you cannot compare them to prostitution. The woman cannot be engaged in multiple relationships and there's a waiting period, iddah, after the marriage is finished (at least for mutah).
-
To brother Rationalist:
I may have addressed some of your points to Hani.
Yes there were some companions which disagreed but Imam Ali's (as) was not among them.
Please see the tradition I listed above in Fakhr al-Razi's book about Ali stating Umar incorrectly forbidding mutah.
even if there beauty may stun you
You've missed the point. It's stating that you cannot simply let your wife go and go with other women for their beauty. Mutah is different - in that it does not necessitate leaving one's wife to engage in Mutah. Similar to misyar, it can be performed simultaneously with mutah.
On top of that right hand posses is a form of ownership. Its not a rental like muta.
This is complete semantics here. Those who your right hand possesses are solely for sexual purposes only. That's what the traditions I posted clearly suggested (see above where the companions wanted to have sexual relations with them, but were afraid due to them being previously married). Those who your right hand possesses can be rental too. Is there anything stopping you from taking one "right hand" woman for one night? Then another "right hand" woman in a different night? Not really. Same for misyar (see Ibn Baaz's fatwa).
With women who already had husbands ? Are you feeling okay? You did a nice job cutting and paste without pasting the prohibition against it.
You've missed the point entirely again. The prohibition is in reference to marrying woman who are already married except those who your right hand possesses - i.e. women capturing during war. That's why those sahabah went ahead and had relations with those women despite being married.
I don't agree with Misyar.
I acknowledge your sentiment, but this is an acceptable practice in the Sunni madhabs.
Please let me know if there is anything else would you like me to elaborate.
-
Because Sunni refers to someone who follows the Sunnah of the Prophet. No matter what your madhab, all of us claim to be following the Sunnah of the Prophet. You may not think I am a true Sunni. That is your prerogative and I respect that, but you do not have ownership over this term.
However, if it does offend you that much, I will change it.
Not offended - just amused.
Tell me - why not pick "Shia"? Isn't this a badge of pride? Isn't this what your 12 Imams called you?
Please find me a narration where your Imams ever called you "Ahlul Sunnah" or "Sunnis".
-----
Also, regarding Mut'a:
Muslim - can you answer me this question:
Would you like your daughter, or your sister, or your mother or your cousin to do Mut'a?
If one of them came up to you and said, "Hey! I've got great news! I did mut'a with this really nice religious boy! He gave me a cigarette lighter as Mahr!!!" - how would you feel?
Be honest.
-
And so what if you disagree with it? There are tons of sunnis that practice it today.
In your fiqh a qazi or a permit in not required to do muta or marriage. Yet, Iran makes these conditions biding. So there will be people who will bend the laws of fiqh.
-
Why do you have contradictory hadith about this? According to the works of Fakhr al-Dan al-Razi, the top Shafii scholar who wrote over a 100 books, Ali said it was Umar who forbade mutah. Ali said "Had Umar not banned Mut’ah then the only person to fornicate would be a perverted person"
It's located in this book: http://tinyurl.com/mvulbq9
Did you even look at the chains of the report. The chain in that report is majhul.
-
Please see the tradition I listed above in Fakhr al-Razi's book about Ali stating Umar incorrectly forbidding mutah.
The report is majhul.
This is complete semantics here. Those who your right hand possesses are solely for sexual purposes only. That's what the traditions I posted clearly suggested (see above where the companions wanted to have sexual relations with them, but were afraid due to them being previously married).
No actually the Quran forbids that condition. Refer to the Quran 4:24 says you cannot marry someone for the sake of lust.
Those who your right hand possesses can be rental too. Is there anything stopping you from taking one "right hand" woman for one night? Then another "right hand" woman in a different night?
Not according to the Quran cause it forbids to go to women for the sake of lust.
You've missed the point entirely again. The prohibition is in reference to marrying woman who are already married except those who your right hand possesses - i.e. women capturing during war. That's why those sahabah went ahead and had relations with those women despite being married.
That's why the Tasfir says the verse was revealing against them. I wonder why you didn't post the entire tafsir. You only posted the part where its agrees with your aqeeda which again is wrong.
I acknowledge your sentiment, but this is an acceptable practice in the Sunni madhabs.
Well in your schools there is an acceptance of 12ers who consider the Quran to be incomplete. There is no fatwa to declare such people as kaffirs.
-
-----
Also, regarding Mut'a:
Muslim - can you answer me this question:
Would you like your daughter, or your sister, or your mother or your cousin to do Mut'a?
If one of them came up to you and said, "Hey! I've got great news! I did mut'a with this really nice religious boy! He gave me a cigarette lighter as Mahr!!!" - how would you feel?
Be honest.
First and foremost, the prophet peace be upon him allowed mutah. We are following the sunnah of the prophet. Your hadith contradict each other even in your sahih sources, by who banned it and especially the exact time it was banned. You cannot tell me sahih muslim is completely sahih, and then pick and choose which hadith are solid and which aren't.
You do know that muta can be used for different reasons right? If there is an older woman that is sick, you can create a muta contract to just take care of her. Muta can be used to get to know another person better before marriage as well, which is why a father may give permission for his daughter for it.
Let me ask you a few questions. Why is misyar allowed? Why is masturbation allowed by certain madhabs? Is masturbation the sunnah of the prophet?
You hate so much on mutah, yet your own scholars have no solution to sexual frustation except to tell men that they can trick women into marrying them and then divorcing them later, or to just resort to masturbation.
At least on the day of judgement I can say I am following the sunnah of the prophet (pbuh), while you are following the sunnah of your own desires.
-
I like how you completely avoided the question.
-
Quran says mutah is haram
-
@Muslim,
Because Sunni refers to someone who follows the Sunnah of the Prophet. No matter what your madhab, all of us claim to be following the Sunnah of the Prophet. You may not think I am a true Sunni. That is your prerogative and I respect that, but you do not have ownership over this term.
I changed it for you, as a Sunni follows the Sunnah and Rasul-Allah (saw) said in the Sahih that what you believe in is prohibited. You can only claim to be Sunni but we won't allow you to fool people into thinking you are a Sunni.
Why do you have contradictory hadith about this? According to the works of Fakhr al-Dan al-Razi, the top Shafii scholar who wrote over a 100 books, Ali said it was Umar who forbade mutah. Ali said "Had Umar not banned Mut’ah then the only person to fornicate would be a perverted person"
Wait wait? Are you actually saying it is not possible to have contradictory Hadith about a Fiqhi ruling? What planet did you get that from? Have you read your books? Like Wasa'il al-Shia? In every single chapter there's contradicting Hadith.
Secondly, are you so out of touch when it comes to `Ilm that you'd quote a Hadith from a SEVENTH CENTURY Tafseer book to back up your argument? (That Hadith is unreliable)
In another part of the same Tafseer al-Kabeer, al-Razi also brings about a quote from Umar who says "Two Mutahs existed during Rasullalah's time and now I prohibit them"
That's true, there were two Mut`ahs in the time of the Prophet (saw), one of which he forbade and the other he kept it. `Umar did what he did for management and he did not deem it "Haram" refer to the explanations on Mut`ah marriage. As for the Mut`ah of women it was forbidden by Rasul-Allah (saw) and other narrations by `Umar clarify this section of his sermon because `Umar explained why he banned both types. Also refer to ibn `Umar's Hadith in which he explains he father's point of view on Mut`ah of Hajj.
Of course if you're quoting only one narration without investigation and research, you won't understand what was going on and you'll end up throwing unqualified accusations left and right.
Misyar and mutah are almost synonymous. According to Hanafi and Shafii scholars, men are allowed to engage in misyar marriages with the explicit intent of divorcing the woman after some unspecified duration of the marriage.
There's a great difference of opinion on this and scholars such as Malik called it an immoral act, research more into this if you know Arabic. It's not a religious ruling that cannot be rejected such as Mut`ah for Shia. I for instance think they're wrong when they say a man can marry a woman and intend to divorce her as that counts as "cheating" and in Islam Rasul-Allah (saw) says: "He who cheats us is not from us."
Misyar allows for men to travel to another place (sayr) and find women, offer them marriage with the intention of divorcing them and not having to provide them with nafaqah.
Here is where the misunderstanding is,
Misyar means nothing more than to have another wife at another location, and that this wife will drop something from her rights, such as having a house, or her husband spending on her, or having an equal amount of nights as the other wives, or not to have kids etc...
Misyar does not say that you can marry with the intention of divorcing! You've mixed two different topics. A man can have the intention of divorcing in ANY regular marriage.
Secondly, Misyar is ALLOWED in the Shi`ee Madhab, so on what bases do you say "The woman is in a lose-lose situation in Misyar" Since your scholars allow it?
Question is, can a man have this intention or not? Here there's a scholarly debate, a lot of scholars say this intention or thought does not invalidate the contract but if he does it then he has sinned and done an immoral act.
The woman cannot be engaged in multiple relationships and there's a waiting period, iddah, after the marriage is finished (at least for mutah).
If they had sexual intercourse.
-
@labelingtheory
First and foremost, the prophet peace be upon him allowed mutah. We are following the sunnah of the prophet. Your hadith contradict each other even in your sahih sources, by who banned it and especially the exact time it was banned. You cannot tell me sahih muslim is completely sahih, and then pick and choose which hadith are solid and which aren't.
He (saw) also later banned it as well so no you're not following his Sunnah at all. It seems pretty clear in our books that Rasul-Allah (saw) banned it. As for the timing, let's say they differed on the timing, some say 7th year and others said 8th year, by what logic does this make Mut`ah permissible? Some scholars say Sufiyan bin Ka`b died in the year 40 others say he died in the year 42, does this mean he never died? Some Shia say the 12th Imams mother was roman others say a black slave, does this mean he had no mother?
Who told you Sahih Muslim is all Sahih? I can find you weak narrations in Sahih Muslim as well as Sahih al-Bukhari.
You do know that muta can be used for different reasons right? If there is an older woman that is sick, you can create a muta contract to just take care of her. Muta can be used to get to know another person better before marriage as well, which is why a father may give permission for his daughter for it.
Mut`ah is a great way of dating isn't it, Can you bring me one narration by your Imams where they say that Mut`ah is allowed so that men can get to know women?
As for taking care for an elderly sick woman, you make it sound so humanitarian man, get real. Look at Shia youth in the west, how often are they doing it to "help elderly women"? As if you can't help her without Mut`ah? If your wife goes to a obstetrician does she have to make a Mut`ah contract with him so he can help her? I doubt there were a lot of "female doctors" in the Prophet's (saw) time, have you heard of any doctors marrying their patients temporarily to treat them?
You hate so much on mutah, yet your own scholars have no solution to sexual frustation except to tell men that they can trick women into marrying them and then divorcing them later, or to just resort to masturbation.
Here's two Fatwas from the most popular Sunni websites online for Fatwas about the two matters you say our scholars tell us to do. Most Sunnies online get their Fatwas from islamweb or islamqa.
Marriage with intention of divorce: They list opinions then conclude it is forbidden and it is forbidden to cheat and trick a woman and it is immoral behavior.
http://fatwa.islamweb.net/fatwa/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=3458
Marriage with intention of divorce: The scholars here also announce clearly its prohibition since it is not permanent and is cheating and quote a couple of the highest Islamic councils in the world.
http://islamqa.info/ar/111841
Masturbation: They declare it is forbidden and has many ill effects on health.
http://fatwa.islamweb.net/fatwa/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=7170
Musturbation: The scholars here also prohibit it and warn from it severely.
http://islamqa.info/ar/40589
MORE IMPORtANTLY, MARRIAGE WITH THE INTENTION OF DIVORCE IS ALLOWED IN THE SHIA MADHAB!
Here's Sistani's Fatwa:
3 (http://www.alseraj.net/ar/fikh/2/?CPhHJNmPYD1075094372&1&30&1) السؤال:
رجل طلق زوجته ثلاثاً منذ عشر سنوات وله منها بنت والآن يريد ان يرجعها لعصمته وهي لم تتزوج من بعد طلاقها ، فهل يجوز إيجاد زوج بنية الطلاق ( محلل ) لهم ؟؟ وان كان لا يجوز فماذا الحكم على من اقدم على هذا العمل ؟؟
الفتوى:
يعتبر في زوال التحريم أن يعقد عليها المحلل عقداً دائماً وان يطأها ، والاحوط ان يكون الوطء في القبل ، وان يفارقها بعد ذلك بطلاق او موت وان تنقضي العدة منه ، ولا يضر ان يكون زواجهما لأجل التحليل فقط .
They ask him about a man who divorced his wife three times and wants her back, can she marry another man with the intention of divorce so she may return to him? Sistani says YES.
Believe it or not, those scholars who allowed marriage with the intention of divorce mainly allowed it for this specific reason.
-
Marriage with intent to divorce is allowed in the Hanafi Madhab, and I'm pretty sure its the same with the Shafii Madhab.
Ibn Abidin clearly says this is allowed.
So I can as a Sunni, use my two of my buddies as a witness, marry without the consent of a girl's father to a girl and then dump her the next day just by saying talaq legally and without sin.
-
Marriage with intent to divorce is allowed in the Hanafi Madhab, and I'm pretty sure its the same with the Shafii Madhab.
Ibn Abidin clearly says this is allowed.
So I can as a Sunni, use my two of my buddies as a witness, marry without the consent of a girl's father to a girl and then dump her the next day just by saying talaq legally and without sin.
Therefore... Mutah is in the Qur'an??
Do you see how your hatred and bias has totally blinded you? Leave sectarianism
-
Therefore... Mutah is in the Qur'an??
Do you see how your hatred and bias has totally blinded you? Leave sectarianism
Mutah is clearly mentioned in the Qur'an, Ibn katheer himself states this.
-
Therefore... Mutah is in the Qur'an??
Do you see how your hatred and bias has totally blinded you? Leave sectarianism
There is literally no difference between mutah and me bringing my two buds along with a girl, having them witness us say the seegha for marriage (takes 10 seconds), divorce her after 3 days with prior intent.
No difference between this and Mutah and many Sunnis do it in the Muslim world today, and its perfectly legal.
-
Therefore... Mutah is in the Qur'an??
Do you see how your hatred and bias has totally blinded you? Leave sectarianism
There is literally no difference between mutah and me bringing my two buds along with a girl, having them witness us say the seegha for marriage (takes 10 seconds), divorce her after 3 days with prior intent.
No difference between this and Mutah and many Sunnis do it in the Muslim world today, and its perfectly legal.
Would it still be different if you decide to change your mind after the marriage? ;D
-
Marriage with intent to divorce is allowed in the Hanafi Madhab, and I'm pretty sure its the same with the Shafii Madhab.
Ibn Abidin clearly says this is allowed.
So I can as a Sunni, use my two of my buddies as a witness, marry without the consent of a girl's father to a girl and then dump her the next day just by saying talaq legally and without sin.
(1) Majority of scholars deemed this kind of marriage contract valid and allowed; meaning the involved parties did not commit fornication or adultary since such intention is neither disclosed nor known to the bride and her gurdian.
(2) Despite of the validity of the contract, should a man establish the will in his heart to divorce the woman he intends to marry after certain part of time, he is by that commits a major sin because such intention is nothing but a cheating, misleading, decieving and taking advantage of people's good will.
The Fiqh Concil of the Islamic World League disallowed this kind of marrioages due to the sinful intention and the unthinkable harm and suffering caused to the wife and her family. [See the resolutions of the Council dated 8/12/2006]
The following is the quote of the issued resolution
منع المجمع الفقهي الإسلامي برابطة العالم الإسلامي في دورته الثامنة عشــرة المنعقــدة بمكة المكرمة في الفترة من 10-14/3/1427هـ الذي يــوافقه 8-12/4/2006م هذا الزواج حين نظر في موضوع: (عقود النكاح المستحدثة) جاء ما يلي: " الزواج بنية الطلاق وهو: زواج توافرت فيه أركان النكاح وشروطه وأضمر الزوج في نفسه طلاق المرأة بعد مدة معلومة كعشرة أيام، أو مجهولة ؛ كتعليق الزواج على إتمام دراسته أو تحقيق الغرض الذي قدم من أجله.
وهذا النوع من النكاح على الرغم من أن جماعة من العلماء أجازوه، إلا أن المجمع يرى منعه ؛ لاشتماله على الغش والتدليس. إذ لو علمت المرأة أو وليها بذلك لم يقبلا هذا العقد. ولأنه يؤدي إلى مفاسد عظيمة وأضرار جسيمة تسيء إلى سمعة المسلمين"
-
Therefore... Mutah is in the Qur'an??
Do you see how your hatred and bias has totally blinded you? Leave sectarianism
Mutah is clearly mentioned in the Qur'an, Ibn katheer himself states this.
As per authentic narration from infallible Shi'ee Imam, and the Madhab of Ahlulbayt , the verse you are talking about was revealed with an addition, which advocated Mutah. However, that is not the same form that verse exits in the Quran, which in fact refutes Mutah and advocates Mutah.
Please shed some light that why was the additional portion of the verse removed, was it abrogation? If yes then it is proof which strengthens the Sunni perspective.