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

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 [size=20pt]which is Marfu’u[/size] 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.”

A Shia scholar al-Hurr al-Amili in his “Wasailu shia” (21/26) narrated:

“And from him from al-Hasan b. `Ali [Abu ‘l-Hasan – in at-Tahdheeb, Abu ‘l-Hasan `Ali – in al-Istibsar] from one of our companions going up to Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام. He said: Do not do mut`a with the mu’mina as you would humiliate her.”

The Shaykh said: This is shaadh (odd), and it is possible that his intent by it is when the woman is from a noble family which scandal would be attached to and humiliation attached to her, and that would be disliked.

I say: And there has preceded what indicates upon permission and there is coming what indicates upon it.

The above are narrations from shia books, with explanation from shia scholars. We can easily deduce that these narrations clearly prohibits Mut'ah for believing women, in the words used in these narrations, it will humiliates her! I wonder why anyone would be propagating what will humiliate another individual, not to mention a Muslimah! Subhanallah!

Mr Sino since exactly when did you become like this?! Imagine you even "honestly-mistakenly" copied-pasted (1) the sanad which says "from some of our companions" and (2) that the hadith is Mar'fu?! ma sha Allah.

Those two things absolutely make the hadith Da'if Jiddan (very weak) at best. And Mawdoo (fabricated) if we are to be very strict. Oh boy! What were you thinking?! Anyway here's the hadith, comment by Sheik Tusi himself who recorded it and reference:

Aḥmad b. Muḥammad – Abu al-Ḥasan – one of our companions – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

Do not do mut’ah with a muminah (believing woman), thereby humiliating her.

Then, al-Tusi himself declares:
This report has a disconnected chain, mursal.

So, it is da'if; and that basically deals with it

Ref: {Abu Ja’far Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-Tusi, al-Istibsar (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyah) [annotator: Sayyid Ḥasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 3, p. 143, Ch. 93, # 4}

NB: Please quote more of this kind of hadith. I wanna see them.

sino:

@Op Alhamdulilah you did find about the prohibition by the Prophet (SAW), as regards to the shias stand, they have no authentic proof they hold on to except conjectures and assumptions... Allah (SWT) says:

"And most of them follow not except assumption. Indeed, assumption avails not against the truth at all. Indeed, Allah is Knowing of what they do." (Qur'an 10:36)

you've never tell NL members you've become "baba suwe". In fact I like you brother when you use those big words [like Reckless attitudes, delusional] and now "conjectures and assumptions"

# You mean Imam Hazm, one of your greatest Aimmah of OLD and Allamah Nasir din al-Albani, of this age, are assuming and conjecturing that: Abdullah ibn Abbas, Ibn Mas'ud, Amr ibn Hurayth, Asma bint Abi bakr, Mu'awiyah ibn Abi Sufyan, Abu Sa'id al-khudri, Jabir ibn Abdullah, to mention but few from the Sahabah; then Sa'id ibn jubayr, Tawus and ALL the Sunni jurists of Madinah from among the Tabi'in DID CONTINUE TO BE PRACTICING MUT'AH LONG LONG AFTER THE DEMISE OF THEIR PROPHET?

Ma sha Allah

AlBaqir:
I see you must have been having sleepless nights concerning this thread and especially the question. Even your Shuyukh have no choice than to innovate "marriage with an intention of divorce".
Why did Allah allowed a man to marry up to 4 wives even at the same time he can have s.ex with women "whom his hands possess" yet none of the wives can ever has more than their husband, a man?! That's awesome!

You're not even ashamed of yourself for defending evil. The restricted polygamy you mentioned is sanctioned by Allah(SWT). Your fornication mut'ah of sleeping with the wives of other men is from your shameless scholars! Your scholars telling you to be sleeping with harlots and prostitutes in the name of mut'ah is a shameful act! Only insane human beings would take to your ideology!

MrOlai:


You're not even ashamed of yourself for defending evil.

# You call it evil? What Allah and His Prophet sanctioned! What Prominent Sahabah did practiced during and after the demise of the Prophet! Evil?!

MrOlai:


The restricted polygamy you mentioned is sanctioned by Allah(SWT).

So also is Mut'ah is sanctioned by Allah in His book. I have quoted many of your Tafasir including Ibn Kathir. Ibn Abbas, Ibn Mas'ud, and many others, all confirmed surah Nisa: 24 was revealed to validate Mut'ah. Yet you dare call it "Evil".

MrOlai:


Your fornication mut'ah of sleeping with the wives of other men

so much ignorance! Your emotions has fully absolved your senses. For the record, married women doesn't practice Mut'ah just like married women cannot marry second husband while the present is still alive.

MrOlai:


is from your shameless scholars! Your scholars telling you to be sleeping with harlots and prostitutes in the name of mut'ah is a shameful act! Only insane human beings would take to your ideology!

Your dreams have been exposed to be nothing but dreams. Far from reality. None of our Scholars ever said what you and liars like you fabricated in their names. Its so cheap and disgraceful to fabricate lies to prove a point.

[s]

AlBaqir:

# You call it evil? What Allah and His Prophet sanctioned! What Prominent Sahabah did practiced during and after the demise of the Prophet! Evil?!
So also is Mut'ah is sanctioned by Allah in His book. I have quoted many of your Tafasir including Ibn Kathir. Ibn Abbas, Ibn Mas'ud, and many others, all confirmed surah Nisa: 24 was revealed to validate Mut'ah. Yet you dare call it "Evil".
so much ignorance! Your emotions has fully absolved your senses. For the record, married women doesn't practice Mut'ah just like married women cannot marry second husband while the present is still alive.
Your dreams have been exposed to be nothing but dreams. Far from reality. None of our Scholars ever said what you and liars like you fabricated in their names. Its so cheap and disgraceful to fabricate lies to prove a point.

[/s]

The evils of sleeping with the wives of other men in the name of mut'ah is sanctioned by your shameless scholars! Not by Allah(SWT) and not by the Prophet (SAW)! Fairuza, will still end up being the wife of somebody one day, despite all the evils she is doing now! Whether single or married, you're still committing zina(fornication/adultery) with somebody's wife!

In Ideal Islam situation, all your shameless scholars, who are sleeping with other men's wives and still encouraging people to to the same, would have been stoned to death!

If you're convinced of the evils you're supporting now, then, pray to Allah(SWT) that your daughters, your sisters and your mother should suffer the same fate Fairuza is suffering in UK(ie sleeping with different men and collecting money)!

This is one of your scholars telling house help/cook/chef to bleep the daughter of the house owner!

https://www.google.com.ng/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DgAj3OluD87U&ved=0CBoQuAIwAGoVChMIxobpvtCByQIVhaYeCh19VwLk&usg=AFQjCNGLXdItwgPZCTpJpgw7ih5ypSCRrA&sig2=Fc-EJpFLZlI1Kt2hhjc0WA

Shameless evil human beings!

^^^This is a painful story of a Muslim sister that one of your evil people nearly spoilt her life! The evil man of yours f*cked hell out of the sister for four years! He did the same thing to other innocent girls! Listen to her:


"I was fourteen years old and my relationship with my parents was on the edge just like any other teenager. I started to become interested in boys. I felt as if no one understood me, not even my friends. I especially didn’t feel pretty with my braces.

It all changed when I met him. It was fascinating to know that a college student would care so much about me. He was the most wonderful person. He treated me like a queen, and soon we became the best of friends. I felt I could tell him anything. As our friendship progressed, we talked about different topics including religion. He had different beliefs than me; he was Shia while I was Sunni. We always argued upon the differences. He had a way with making things sound bettter than what they were. Soon I became very confused.

One day he mentioned the idea of Mutah. He told me that it was a type of temporary marriage, which was Halal even in Sunni books. At first I didn’t believe him, but he used sources such as Bukhari and Muslim. I took his word for it, and before I realized, I was into a lot of trouble. I was in Mutah for four years. As time went by, I learnt that I had lost my honor and dignity to someone who had done this to several other girls.

I hope to inform and educate the people about the disease of Mutah, which is spreading rapidly in the Sunni community. It is the goal of certain Shia individuals to do Mutah with innocent girls, who lack knowledge of religion and experience of life. They convince them with their beliefs, and create confusion in their minds. I beg every sister, brother, father, mother, and friend to take a closer look at their dear ones, and make sure they do not become victims to the concept of Mutah.

Mutah is a form of temporary marriage whereby a man can “marry” a woman for an agreed amount of time and money (mahr). In Mutah, the husband is not financially responsible for the wife. There are no set limits in this kind of marriage by the Shia. According to Shia beliefs, no witnesses nor a permission of the guardian is needed (the Sunni father does not believe in Mutah), and there is no limit on the number of times one can do Mutah.

Also, the time period can be as little as one hour to as long as sixty years. In addition, a man who is permanently married can do as many Mutah as he feels like, even with married women. This is very similar to prostitution indeed.

Every day, more and more girls in our community are falling victim to this idea of Mutah presented by the Shia individuals. These girls are helpless in asking anyone for help, especially their parents. Please, teach and inform one another about the idea of Mutah, and our beliefs regarding it. Please do it for the honor and dignity of our Islam and for the love of Allah!

If everyone practised Mutah, which is what Shi’ism encourages, then we’d all probably die of STDs. There are Shia[code][/code] hadith which say that a man should perform Mutah with a thousand women. The medical implications of the implementation of these Shia beliefs would mean an epidemic of diseases. It is well-known that Shia guys are engaging in Mutah, oftentimes preying on innocent Sunni and Shia girls. This has become a major problem on university campuses world-wide."

Yours Truly,
A Concerned Muslim Sister
https://www.nairaland.com/828367/plea-muslim-sister

AlBaqir:


Mr Sino since exactly when did you become like this?! Imagine you even "honestly-mistakenly" copied-pasted (1) the sanad which says "from some of our companions" and (2) that the hadith is Mar'fu?! ma sha Allah.

Those two things absolutely make the hadith Da'if Jiddan (very weak) at best. And Mawdoo (fabricated) if we are to be very strict. Oh boy! What were you thinking?! Anyway here's the hadith, comment by Sheik Tusi himself who recorded it and reference:

Aḥmad b. Muḥammad – Abu al-Ḥasan – one of our companions – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

Do not do mut’ah with a muminah (believing woman), thereby humiliating her.

Then, al-Tusi himself declares:
This report has a disconnected chain, mursal.

So, it is da'if; and that basically deals with it

Ref: {Abu Ja’far Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-Tusi, al-Istibsar (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyah) [annotator: Sayyid Ḥasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 3, p. 143, Ch. 93, # 4}

NB: Please quote more of this kind of hadith. I wanna see them.



you've never tell NL members you've become "baba suwe". In fact I like you brother when you use those big words [like Reckless attitudes, delusional] and now "conjectures and assumptions"

# You mean Imam Hazm, one of your greatest Aimmah of OLD and Allamah Nasir din al-Albani, of this age, are assuming and conjecturing that: Abdullah ibn Abbas, Ibn Mas'ud, Amr ibn Hurayth, Asma bint Abi bakr, Mu'awiyah ibn Abi Sufyan, Abu Sa'id al-khudri, Jabir ibn Abdullah, to mention but few from the Sahabah; then Sa'id ibn jubayr, Tawus and ALL the Sunni jurists of Madinah from among the Tabi'in DID CONTINUE TO BE PRACTICING MUT'AH LONG LONG AFTER THE DEMISE OF THEIR PROPHET?

Ma sha Allah

LOL! Now this is hilarious

Firstly, this is not my first time of quoting these narrations, and I included the so called grading from your scholars when I did the very first time I posted "my copy and paste". I am not deceitful, I wouldn’t stoop so low to try and deceive people by selectively removing the grading because it doesn’t support my argument, I’m way above that. Alhamdulilah!

Secondly, posting the narration was never about the authenticity, I had told you that I can’t accept any narration from your books as authentic, you guys are masters of fabrications…No wonder you rely heavily on our books, and yet you still undermine us…Lets read what your scholars say about the narrations found in your books:

Jafar al Najafi (Died 1227Hijri) who was the leader of the Shiites at his time said in Kashf el ghita’a ” كشف الغطاء ” Page 40 about the authors of the four Main Shii Books:
والمحمدون الثلاثة كيف يعول في تحصيل العلم عليهم ، وبعضهم يكذب رواية بعض … ورواياتهم بعضها يضاد بعضاً … ثم إن كتبهم قد اشتملت على أخبار يقطع بكذبها كأخبار التجسيم والتشبيه وقدم العالم ، وثبوت المكان والزمان

[b]And the Three scholars How can we be expected to take knowledge from them? When each Falsifies the narrations of the other…and their narrations contradict one another…[/b]And their Books contain News which is clearly lies like The Tajseem of Allah and the Tashbeeh and …”

Now the Modern Marja’a Abu al Qassim al Khoei’i Destroys the credibility of the modern day Books:

فالإجماع الكاشف عن قول المعصوم نادر الوجود ، وأما غير الكاشف عن قوله فهو لا يكون حجة ، لأنه غير خارج عن حدود الظن ، فأصحاب الأئمة وإن بذلوا غاية جهدهم واهتمامهم في أمر الحديث وحفظه من الضياع ، إلا أنهم عاشوا في دور التقية ولم يتمكنوا من نشر الأحاديث علناً فكيف بلغت هذه الأحاديث حد التواتر أو قريبا منه ، فالواصل إلى المحمدين الثلاثة [ الكليني وابن بابويه والطوسي ] إنما وصل إليهم عن طريق الآحاد فطرق الصدوق إلى أرباب الكتب مجهولة عندنا ولا ندري أيا منها كان صحيحاً وأيا منها كان غير صحيح ومع ذلك كيف يمكن دعوى العلم بصدور جميع هذه الروايات عن المعصومين ، وليت شعري إذا كان مثل المفيد والشيخ مع قرب عصرهما وسعة اطلاعهما لم يحصل القطع بصدور جميع هذه الروايات عن المعصومين فمن أين حصل القطع لجماعة المتأخرين عنهما زماناً ورتبة ؟! ) ، المصدر : معجم رجال الحديث ( المقدمة الأولى

Basically he says That there is No ijma’a that the Infallible Imam Said something except for in rare cases…for the fellows of the Imams lived in the age of Taqqiyah thus they had to lie and weren’t able to spread the knowledge of the Imams So How is it that The Hadiths have reached the Tawatur? Because all news prove that what reached the three scholars Kulayni, Ibn Babaweih and Al Tusi reached them through Ahad Hadith (Weak hadiths) because the methods used by Sheikh Saduk to the mother books are ambiguous and we don’t which is correct from which isn’t so how can we say our hadiths come from the infallibles? …And how can the late scholars say for sure that their Hadiths are from the infallible?!

source: Mu’ujam Rijal al Hadith, first introduction.

Muhammad el Hussainy in his book “Buhooth fi Ilm al Rijjal” “بحوث في علم الرجال ” :
في الفائدة الرابعة :
( إن أرباب الجرح والتعديل كالشيخ النجاشي وغيرهما لم يعاصروا أصحاب النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم وأمير المؤمنين عليه السلام ومن بعدهم من اصحاب الأئمة عليهم السلام حتى تكون أقوالهم في حقهم صادرة عن حس مباشر وهذا ضروري وعليه فإما ان تكون تعديلاتهم وتضعيفاتهم مبنية على امارات اجتهادية وقرآئن ظنية أو منقولة عن واحد بعد واحد حتى تنتهي الى الحس المباشر أو بعضها اجتهادية وبعضها الآخر منقوله ولا شق رابع ، وعلى جميع التقادير لا حجية فيها أصلاً فإنها على الأول حدسية وهي غير حجة في حقنا اذ بنأ العقلاء القائم على اعتبار قول الثقة انما هو في الحسيات أو ما يقرب منها دون الحدسيات البعيدة وعلى الثاني يصبح أكثر التوثيقات مرسلة لعدم ذكر ناقلي التوثيق الجرح في كتب الرجال غالباً والمرسلات لا اعتبار بها

“The Fathers of Ta’adeel and Jarh like sheikh Najashi and others didn’t live in the time of companions of Muhammad PBUH or Ali PBUH or the Imams PBUH so that their narrations could come directly from them. So Either their weakening or strengthening of Hadith is just from guess work or personal Ijtihad or transmitted one by one until they reach the imam, However It is not a Hujja on us because it is mostly hearsay…”
If we are to apply the Sunni methodology to scrutinize your books, nothing would be found as authentic except maybe a few narrations…


Thirdly, you should be the one ashamed that your scholars could try to explain a weak narration, by saying[b] “it is possible that his intent by it is when the woman is from a noble family which scandal would be attached to and humiliation attached to her, and that would be disliked” [/b] and this: “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.” How can any sane individual rationalize this?

I hope you read the narrations from your brothers (Ismaili and Zaidi Shi’ah), clearly indicating its prohibition by the Prophet (SAW)and the ahl-l-bayt, perhaps they were influenced by the sunni right?!

Fourthly, we have authentic narrations in our books, Mut’ah was prohibited by the Prophet (SAW), fortunately, same narration of this prohibition can also be found in your books, but you would rather hold on to conjectures by your scholars who themselves seem confused, than hold on to the truth! I had already addressed all your skepticism and conjectures about those who you have listed, and FYI, an authentic hadith from the Prophet (SAW) defeats any other opinion that can slightly or strongly permit Mut'ah.

Only Allah Guides!

@MrOlai, please exercise caution with the words you use, May Allah (SWT) continues to guide us ameen.

^Then you have no case against Shi'a. A wise man deals with his problem first. Shia simply deal with you guys from your books.
You are so hilarious these past days.

sino:

LOL! Now this is hilarious
Firstly, this is not my first time of quoting these narrations, and I included the so called grading from your scholars when I did the very first time I posted "my copy and paste". I am not deceitful, I wouldn’t stoop so low to try and deceive people by selectively removing the grading because it doesn’t support my argument, I’m way above that. Alhamdulilah!
Secondly, posting the narration was never about the authenticity, I had told you that I can’t accept any narration from your books as authentic, you guys are masters of fabrications…No wonder you rely heavily on our books, and yet you still undermine us…Lets read what your scholars say about the narrations found in your books:
Jafar al Najafi (Died 1227Hijri) who was the leader of the Shiites at his time said in Kashf el ghita’a ” كشف الغطاء ” Page 40 about the authors of the four Main Shii Books:
والمحمدون الثلاثة كيف يعول في تحصيل العلم عليهم ، وبعضهم يكذب رواية بعض … ورواياتهم بعضها يضاد بعضاً … ثم إن كتبهم قد اشتملت على أخبار يقطع بكذبها كأخبار التجسيم والتشبيه وقدم العالم ، وثبوت المكان والزمان
[b]And the Three scholars How can we be expected to take knowledge from them? When each Falsifies the narrations of the other…and their narrations contradict one another…[/b]And their Books contain News which is clearly lies like The Tajseem of Allah and the Tashbeeh and …”
Now the Modern Marja’a Abu al Qassim al Khoei’i Destroys the credibility of the modern day Books:
فالإجماع الكاشف عن قول المعصوم نادر الوجود ، وأما غير الكاشف عن قوله فهو لا يكون حجة ، لأنه غير خارج عن حدود الظن ، فأصحاب الأئمة وإن بذلوا غاية جهدهم واهتمامهم في أمر الحديث وحفظه من الضياع ، إلا أنهم عاشوا في دور التقية ولم يتمكنوا من نشر الأحاديث علناً فكيف بلغت هذه الأحاديث حد التواتر أو قريبا منه ، فالواصل إلى المحمدين الثلاثة [ الكليني وابن بابويه والطوسي ] إنما وصل إليهم عن طريق الآحاد فطرق الصدوق إلى أرباب الكتب مجهولة عندنا ولا ندري أيا منها كان صحيحاً وأيا منها كان غير صحيح ومع ذلك كيف يمكن دعوى العلم بصدور جميع هذه الروايات عن المعصومين ، وليت شعري إذا كان مثل المفيد والشيخ مع قرب عصرهما وسعة اطلاعهما لم يحصل القطع بصدور جميع هذه الروايات عن المعصومين فمن أين حصل القطع لجماعة المتأخرين عنهما زماناً ورتبة ؟! ) ، المصدر : معجم رجال الحديث ( المقدمة الأولى
Basically he says That there is No ijma’a that the Infallible Imam Said something except for in rare cases…for the fellows of the Imams lived in the age of Taqqiyah thus they had to lie and weren’t able to spread the knowledge of the Imams So How is it that The Hadiths have reached the Tawatur? Because all news prove that what reached the three scholars Kulayni, Ibn Babaweih and Al Tusi reached them through Ahad Hadith (Weak hadiths) because the methods used by Sheikh Saduk to the mother books are ambiguous and we don’t which is correct from which isn’t so how can we say our hadiths come from the infallibles? …And how can the late scholars say for sure that their Hadiths are from the infallible?!
source: Mu’ujam Rijal al Hadith, first introduction.
Muhammad el Hussainy in his book “Buhooth fi Ilm al Rijjal” “بحوث في علم الرجال ” :
في الفائدة الرابعة :
( إن أرباب الجرح والتعديل كالشيخ النجاشي وغيرهما لم يعاصروا أصحاب النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم وأمير المؤمنين عليه السلام ومن بعدهم من اصحاب الأئمة عليهم السلام حتى تكون أقوالهم في حقهم صادرة عن حس مباشر وهذا ضروري وعليه فإما ان تكون تعديلاتهم وتضعيفاتهم مبنية على امارات اجتهادية وقرآئن ظنية أو منقولة عن واحد بعد واحد حتى تنتهي الى الحس المباشر أو بعضها اجتهادية وبعضها الآخر منقوله ولا شق رابع ، وعلى جميع التقادير لا حجية فيها أصلاً فإنها على الأول حدسية وهي غير حجة في حقنا اذ بنأ العقلاء القائم على اعتبار قول الثقة انما هو في الحسيات أو ما يقرب منها دون الحدسيات البعيدة وعلى الثاني يصبح أكثر التوثيقات مرسلة لعدم ذكر ناقلي التوثيق الجرح في كتب الرجال غالباً والمرسلات لا اعتبار بها
“The Fathers of Ta’adeel and Jarh like sheikh Najashi and others didn’t live in the time of companions of Muhammad PBUH or Ali PBUH or the Imams PBUH so that their narrations could come directly from them. So Either their weakening or strengthening of Hadith is just from guess work or personal Ijtihad or transmitted one by one until they reach the imam, However It is not a Hujja on us because it is mostly hearsay…”
If we are to apply the Sunni methodology to scrutinize your books, nothing would be found as authentic except maybe a few narrations…
Thirdly, you should be the one ashamed that your scholars could try to explain a weak narration, by saying[b] “it is possible that his intent by it is when the woman is from a noble family which scandal would be attached to and humiliation attached to her, and that would be disliked” [/b] and this: “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.” How can any sane individual rationalize this?
I hope you read the narrations from your brothers (Ismaili and Zaidi Shi’ah), clearly indicating its prohibition by the Prophet (SAW)and the ahl-l-bayt, perhaps they were influenced by the sunni right?!
Fourthly, we have authentic narrations in our books, Mut’ah was prohibited by the Prophet (SAW), fortunately, same narration of this prohibition can also be found in your books, but you would rather hold on to conjectures by your scholars who themselves seem confused, than hold on to the truth! I had already addressed all your skepticism and conjectures about those who you have listed, and FYI, an authentic hadith from the Prophet (SAW) defeats any other opinion that can slightly or strongly permit Mut'ah.
Only Allah Guides!
@MrOlai, please exercise caution with the words you use, May Allah (SWT) continues to guide us ameen.

Thanks, Brother.

MrOlai:


Thanks, Brother.

You are welcome bro.

you people get time sha