TwelverShia.net Forum
Sunni Shia Discussion Forum => Sahabah-AhlulBayt => Topic started by: confusedshia on October 16, 2017, 11:08:35 PM
-
Salam,
I have heard a number of Sunnis say that Ibn Abbas changed his opinion on muta and later ruled it to be haram. What is the source for this?
-
There's a few narrations suggesting this, I don't recall anything authentic.
-
I quote Farid, that this opinion that Ibn `Abbas held was VERY IMPORTANT. This opinion destroys the entirety of Imami Fiqh and shows the lies and deceit of their main narrators. This is because Ibn `Abbas held one of the most controversial opinions in Islamic Fiqh, he preached it openly, no one harmed him nor did he ever have to resort to Taqiyyah.
-
I quote Farid, that this opinion that Ibn `Abbas held was VERY IMPORTANT. This opinion destroys the entirety of Imami Fiqh and shows the lies and deceit of their main narrators. This is because Ibn `Abbas held one of the most controversial opinions in Islamic Fiqh, he preached it openly, no one harmed him nor did he ever have to resort to Taqiyyah.
Wasn't he corrected by 'Ali?
-
I quote Farid, that this opinion that Ibn `Abbas held was VERY IMPORTANT. This opinion destroys the entirety of Imami Fiqh and shows the lies and deceit of their main narrators. This is because Ibn `Abbas held one of the most controversial opinions in Islamic Fiqh, he preached it openly, no one harmed him nor did he ever have to resort to Taqiyyah.
Wasn't he corrected by 'Ali?
`Ali objected but ibn `Abbas still stuck to his opinion.
-
I quote Farid, that this opinion that Ibn `Abbas held was VERY IMPORTANT. This opinion destroys the entirety of Imami Fiqh and shows the lies and deceit of their main narrators. This is because Ibn `Abbas held one of the most controversial opinions in Islamic Fiqh, he preached it openly, no one harmed him nor did he ever have to resort to Taqiyyah.
Wasn't he corrected by 'Ali?
`Ali objected but ibn`Abbas still stuck to his opinion.
Salaam.
According to Ahlul Sunnah Mutah was declared Haraam forever at Khayber then why did Abdullah ibn Abbas still consider and preach Mutah as Halaal? If a thing is made Haraam by ALLAH (SWT) and/or HIS Prophet (s.a.w.w) then making that thing Halaal is a major sin.
What do you think was the reason that ibn Abbas considered Mutah as Halaal even though others (according to Ahlul Sunnah) such as Imam Ali (a.s), Abdullah ibn Zubair, Uthman ibn Affan, etc believed Mutah to be Haraam on the orders of Prophet (s.a.w.w) at Khayber?
-
We can only speculate.
Possibilities include: He assumed it was made halal after it was made haram in Khaibar, which is accurate, but he wasn't aware of it being made haram after the conquest of Makkah. Another possibility is that he saw it being practiced so he assumed that Ali was wrong. We simply cannot know.
However, none of that should matter to you since you are a follower of Ali, not Ibn Abbas, who said it is haram in both Sunni and Shia texts with authentic chains.
-
However, none of that should matter to you since you are a follower of Ali, not Ibn Abbas, who said it is haram in both Sunni and Shia texts with authentic chains.
Its not about whose follower I am but it is about highly respectable and knowledgeable Sahabi like Abdullah ibn Abbas making Haraam thing permissible. Its strange that ibn Abbas would go against Shariah.
I have a question. Were there any other Sahabi besides Abdullah ibn Abbas who considered as well as preached Mutah as permissible act?
I am asking this question because if all Sahabas considered Mutah haraam then it is major sin for a person who is Aalim to go against Jamaat and misguide people (who come to him to seek Islamic knowledge) regarding permissible and impermissible acts.
Possibilities include: He assumed it was made halal after it was made haram in Khaibar, which is accurate, but he wasn't aware of it being made haram after the conquest of Makkah.
I thought at Khayber Mutah was made Haraam forever (i.e. never to be made Halaal again). Are there any authentic reports of Mutah being made Halaal after the conquest of Khayber?
Another possibility is that he saw it being practiced so he assumed that Ali was wrong. We simply cannot know.
Were Sahabas indulging in Mutah after Prophet (s.a.w.w) made Mutah haraam?
-
Its not about whose follower I am but it is about highly respectable and knowledgeable Sahabi like Abdullah ibn Abbas making Haraam thing permissible. Its strange that ibn Abbas would go against Shariah.
Are you serious? There is not a single faqeeh, dead or alive, that did not make a haram into halal or vice versa. This is due to their ijtihad. They are not purposefully deceiving people into going against what Allah has legislated. All your top maraji' and arbaab al-mathhab have done this, without exception.
Keep in mind that this does not include your version of the Twelve Imams that purposefully deceive people and teach them falsehood to save their own hides.
For more on Mut'ah, refer to this set of articles: http://www.twelvershia.net/2015/02/12/prohibition-mutah-marriages/
-
Are you serious? There is not a single faqeeh, dead or alive, that did not make a haram into halal or vice versa. This is due to their ijtihad. They are not purposefully deceiving people into going against what Allah has legislated. All your top maraji' and arbaab al-mathhab have done this, without exception.
Honestly, I didn't know that Fuqaha did these things based on their ijtihad. I believe its better for Faqeeh and Marja' to avoid giving his opinion on issues/questions whose answers he does not know and say ALLAHU A'lam. It would save him from incurring ALLAH'S (SWT) Anger and Wrath.
Keep in mind that this does not include your version of the Twelve Imams that purposefully deceive people and teach them falsehood to save their own hides.
Can you enlighten me on some of the falsehoods taught by the (Shia version of) Twelve Imams?
For more on Mut'ah, refer to this set of articles: http://www.twelvershia.net/2015/02/12/prohibition-mutah-marriages/
Thanks for the link. I will be reading them.
-
Since Shiites believe Ali and followers of Ali all taught Muta was halal, I see this "Ibn Abbas" thought while "Ali said otherwise", to be fake history. There was a real division, but instead single it out to Ibn Abbas and few others maybe, instead of narrating the truth.
-
Since Shiites believe Ali and followers of Ali all taught Muta was halal, I see this "Ibn Abbas" thought while "Ali said otherwise", to be fake history. There was a real division, but instead single it out to Ibn Abbas and few others maybe, instead of narrating the truth.
Not really, Imam Ali رضي الله عنه's opinions are corroborated in mainstream Islamic literature while only Qommi Shi'is report that Imam Ali رضي الله عنه thought Mut'ah was halal. Not to mention that it just seems absurd to lie about Imam Ali's opinion, which would've been far more widespread and well known than ibn Abbas's; why not just lie about both and just state ALL the Sahaba believed Mut'ah was Haram? I think I know the answer; and it'll have a lot to do with jibt, taghut, possessions etc
-
Since Shiites believe Ali and followers of Ali all taught Muta was halal, I see this "Ibn Abbas" thought while "Ali said otherwise", to be fake history. There was a real division, but instead single it out to Ibn Abbas and few others maybe, instead of narrating the truth.
Not really, Imam Ali رضي الله عنه's opinions are corroborated in mainstream Islamic literature while only Qommi Shi'is report that Imam Ali رضي الله عنه thought Mut'ah was halal. Not to mention that it just seems absurd to lie about Imam Ali's opinion, which would've been far more widespread and well known than ibn Abbas's; why not just lie about both and just state ALL the Sahaba believed Mut'ah was Haram? I think I know the answer; and it'll have a lot to do with jibt, taghut, possessions etc
Exactly, you know the answer, and despite the Quran emphasizing that is the true history in the past, you wish to take away those factors with your history which proves it to be false to begin with. To do away with important factors of Quran in history, is to do away with the truth of history. So your Sunni history is totally unreliable.
-
Exactly, you know the answer, and despite the Quran emphasizing that is the true history in the past, you wish to take away those factors with your history which proves it to be false to begin with. To do away with important factors of Quran in history, is to do away with the truth of history. So your Sunni history is totally unreliable.
What does this have to do with Mut'ah? My Muslim history that came from Muslims from all-sects is the most reliable form of history that world has seen up until our modern times.
-
Exactly, you know the answer, and despite the Quran emphasizing that is the true history in the past, you wish to take away those factors with your history which proves it to be false to begin with. To do away with important factors of Quran in history, is to do away with the truth of history. So your Sunni history is totally unreliable.
What does this have to do with Mut'ah? My Muslim history that came from Muslims from all-sects is the most reliable form of history that world has seen up until our modern times.
Just cause you say so doesn't make it so.
-
Just cause you say so doesn't make it so.
And just because you say the entirety of the Muslim word is possessed by jin and worship jibt and taghut; doesn't make it so either.
My claim is academic and can and has been substantiated. Today, orientalists have almost accepted the entirety of early Islamic history according to Muslim (all sects except 12er Shi'as, even other Shi'a sects) accounts. While the claim that we're all possessed by jibt and taghut is conjecture at best, and insanity at worst
-
Honestly, I didn't know that Fuqaha did these things based on their ijtihad. I believe its better for Faqeeh and Marja' to avoid giving his opinion on issues/questions whose answers he does not know and say ALLAHU A'lam. It would save him from incurring ALLAH'S (SWT) Anger and Wrath.
Look up the thousands of fatwas by Sistani which he answers with a simple: Halal/Haram. Unless he is correct in all of them, then according to what you have said above, he is someone that changes the law of Allah. Of course, nobody would accuse him of such, because we believe that his rulings are sincere and based on his ijtihadaat.
Sunnis dislike him for other reasons, but that is another topic for another time.
Can you enlighten me on some of the falsehoods taught by the (Shia version of) Twelve Imams?
I have collected a few for a future project. For now, open any page in Kitab al Istibsaar and you will find the Imams contradicting one another. Shia scholars call it taqiyyah. Call it whatever you want, it is making halal into haram and vice versa.
-
Since Shiites believe Ali and followers of Ali all taught Muta was halal, I see this "Ibn Abbas" thought while "Ali said otherwise", to be fake history. There was a real division, but instead single it out to Ibn Abbas and few others maybe, instead of narrating the truth.
Which Shias? Only 12er Say Ahlul Bayt say its halaal. All other Shia sects like Zaidi and Ismaili say the Ahlul Bayt said it was haraam.
I see this "Ibn Abbas" thought while "Ali said otherwise", to be fake history.
If you read your history properly Ibn Abbas withdrew from Imam Ali's camp in the later stages. He left from Kufa and went and settled into Makkah.
-
Honestly, I didn't know that Fuqaha did these things based on their ijtihad. I believe its better for Faqeeh and Marja' to avoid giving his opinion on issues/questions whose answers he does not know and say ALLAHU A'lam. It would save him from incurring ALLAH'S (SWT) Anger and Wrath.
How can that be possible? Ijtihad was closed by Abbasids and you want to add that policy back in?
[
-
As for the 12er Shia fiqh we have contradictions such as Muta being conditional marriage or a Sunnah. Which one is it?
From Risalat Al Mutah by Sh. Mufid,
And by this isnad from Ahmad b. Muhammad from Musa b. `Ali b. Muhammad al-Hamdani from a man he named from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام. He said: There is not a man who does mut`a then does ghusl but that Allah creates from every drop (of water) that drops from him seventy angels who seek forgiveness for him until the day of the resurrection, and who curse the avoider of it until the Hour rises. And this is but a little of a lot in this meaning
One must also be careful when doing it as there are also narrations which state that one should not do it if they are needless of it, such as,
Muhammad b. Ya`qub from `Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Ibn Abi `Umayr from `Ali b. Yaqtin. He said: I asked Abu ‘l-Hasan عليه السلام about mut`a. So he said: What do you have to do with that when Allah has made you needless of it.
And in another narration, the Imam speaks of the need to preserve the image of the Shia,
And from them from Sahl from `Ali b. Asbat and Muhammad b. al-Husayn all from al-Hakam b. Miskeen from `Ammar. He said: Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام said to me and Sulayman b. Khalid: I have forbidden mut`a upon you two by me so long as you remain in Madina, for you have increased your entering in upon me and I fear that they take you and it be said: These are the companions of Ja`far
Both narrations from Wasail Shia under the chapter, "Dislike of mut`a when one is free of need from it and it involves abomination or the corruption of the women"
-
However, none of that should matter to you since you are a follower of Ali, not Ibn Abbas, who said it is haram in both Sunni and Shia texts with authentic chains.
Its not about whose follower I am but it is about highly respectable and knowledgeable Sahabi like Abdullah ibn Abbas making Haraam thing permissible. Its strange that ibn Abbas would go against Shariah.
I have a question. Were there any other Sahabi besides Abdullah ibn Abbas who considered as well as preached Mutah as permissible act?
I am asking this question because if all Sahabas considered Mutah haraam then it is major sin for a person who is Aalim to go against Jamaat and misguide people (who come to him to seek Islamic knowledge) regarding permissible and impermissible acts.
Possibilities include: He assumed it was made halal after it was made haram in Khaibar, which is accurate, but he wasn't aware of it being made haram after the conquest of Makkah.
I thought at Khayber Mutah was made Haraam forever (i.e. never to be made Halaal again). Are there any authentic reports of Mutah being made Halaal after the conquest of Khayber?
Another possibility is that he saw it being practiced so he assumed that Ali was wrong. We simply cannot know.
Were Sahabas indulging in Mutah after Prophet (s.a.w.w) made Mutah haraam?
Ibn 'Abbas didn't view it as something openly allowed, he viewed it as Rukhsa, so only in extreme circumstances as was the case during that battle.
-
I believe the 12er Shia have a fiqhi ruling rewarding them do muta just to oppose Umar.
-
The 12er Shia version of Imams would give different answers based on your school.
Ahmad ibn Idris from Muhamad ibn 'Abdul-Jabbar from al-Hassan ibn 'Ali from Tha'alabah ibn Maymoun from Zurarah ibn A'ayun that he said: I asked Imam al-Baqir (as) a question so the Imam gave me the answer then another man came and asked the same question so the Imam gave him a different answer, then another one came and asked about it so the Imam gave him a completely different answer than both of us. when both men left I asked the Imam: "O son of Rassul Allah, two men from 'Iraq and from your Shia came to ask you but you gave each of them different answers." He replied: "O Zurarah, this is good for us so that we may remain safer because if you all agree on this then the people will believe in it and they would be guided to us but we will not remain for long."
Later I said to his son al-Sadiq (as): "Your Shia always walk away from you with different opinions and answers" so he gave me the same reply as his father.
source: al-Kafi 1/65.
al-Majlisi said: Muwaththaq like the Sahih.
al-Behbudi said: Sahih.
Ali ibn Ibrahim from his father from ibn abi Najran from 'Assim bin Humayd from Mansour ibn Hazim who said: I said to al-Sadiq (as): "What is the matter with you, I ask a question and you give me an answer then another man comes and asks it so you give him a completely different one?" The Imam replied: "we answer people in matters of addition and deletion." I said to him: "Then tell me about the companions of Rassul-Allah SAWS do they narrate truthful narrations or do they lie?" the Imam said: "They are truthful" I asked: "Why did they differ?" he replied: "Do you not know that a man used to come to Rassul-Allah SAWS and ask a question then he answers him but later he would answer to the same question differently because the Ahadith they abrogate each other."
source: al-Kafi 1/65.
al-Majlisi said: Hasan.
Also look at this one.
any of these sources, and in Shi'i sources as well, the words: 'on the day of the Battle of Khaybar' are added. The Shi'i report that the great Shi'i ulama' such as al-Shaykh al Tusi considered this saying authentic but maintained that 'Ali was practicing taqiyya or 'dissimulation' when he uttered it-i.e., he was hiding the true situation in order to protect himself. (Wasa'il, IV, 441, hadith 32.)
http://www.al-islam.org/muta-temporary-marriage-in-islamic-law-sachiko-murata/legitimacy-muta#footnote31_i9ixbxm
-
Ibn 'Abbas didn't view it as something openly allowed, he viewed it as Rukhsa, so only in extreme circumstances as was the case during that battle.
Do Ahlul Sunnah agree with the view of Ibn 'Abbas?
*By this I mean do Ahlul Sunnah agree that Mutah becomes Halaal in extreme circumstances as Rukhsa?
-
Look up the thousands of fatwas by Sistani which he answers with a simple: Halal/Haram. Unless he is correct in all of them, then according to what you have said above, he is someone that changes the law of Allah. Of course, nobody would accuse him of such, because we believe that his rulings are sincere and based on his ijtihadaat.
If my opinion is asked regarding what you stated above then I don't agree with what Sistani and other marājiʿ are doing because I believe if by mistake any single of their ruling (no matter how much sincere they be) goes against ALLAH'S (SWT) Law (and Commandments) then they would be held accountable by ALLAH (SWT).
In my view its better for a person to shut his mouth regarding permissible and impermissible matters (those matters of which he has no knowledge) and save his life in Akhirah.
*One such example which came to my mind is Khomeini (through his ijtihaad) allowing a male to transition into a female and vice versa using hormonal treatment and/or undergoing sex reassignment surgery.
I have collected a few for a future project. For now, open any page in Kitab al Istibsaar and you will find the Imams contradicting one another. Shia scholars call it taqiyyah. Call it whatever you want, it is making halal into haram and vice versa.
Is Kitab al Istibsaar available in English language?
-
Ibn 'Abbas didn't view it as something openly allowed, he viewed it as Rukhsa, so only in extreme circumstances as was the case during that battle.
Do Ahlul Sunnah agree with the view of Ibn 'Abbas?
*By this I mean do Ahlul Sunnah agree that Mutah becomes Halaal in extreme circumstances as Rukhsa?
Maybe some early ones did, some changed their opinions when narrations of prohibition reached them.
Some people will tell you the pig is permissible in extreme circumstances.
-
Ibn 'Abbas didn't view it as something openly allowed, he viewed it as Rukhsa, so only in extreme circumstances as was the case during that battle.
Do Ahlul Sunnah agree with the view of Ibn 'Abbas?
*By this I mean do Ahlul Sunnah agree that Mutah becomes Halaal in extreme circumstances as Rukhsa?
The student of Abu Hanifa named Zafar agreed with Muta. However, his line of the Hanafi fiqh is rarely followed.
A very few minority scholars do say it allowed but its reward is at mubah level.
-
Shaykh Imran Hosein is approving Muta.