Mut’ah (Temporary Marriage)

To many, the above topic needs no explanation. Linguistically, Mut’ah denotes pleasure and enjoyment, but in Shi’ah creed, it means Temporary Marriage where you pay a certain amount of money to a woman to sate your sexual appetite for a short time.

Al-Kafi, a collection of Shi’ah hadeeth, and one of the most important among four of such books, gave insight on the fiqh of Mut’ah in this weird ideology, which, in essence, advocates zinaa by other than its name; throwing to the dogs the genuine tenets of Islam of morality and chastity. Therefore, what will follow is not the position of real Islam, but an exposition of teachings from apocryphal ‘hadeeth’ in the Shi’ah creed on Mut’ah.

This so-called limited-period marriage has no provision for a divorce or inheritance in it. The woman does not have equal rights as do the stipulated one-to-four-wives allowed menfolk. “She is like a hired woman”; and the child out of such temporary sexual misadventure is not entitled to a share in the heritage of his supposed father.

In normal Islamic marriages, people must witness the contract, which has to be openly declared with the amount of the dowry paid so that those present could bear witness, and convey to others that the bridegroom consorts with his wife in a legal wedding, not debauchery. However, in Mut’ah there is no need for witnesses or open declarations. The two can arrange how long they intend to have coital intimacy and at what price, even “One fistful of wheat” suffices.

What is the period of waiting between one Mut’ah arrangement and another? In other words, how long is the period a woman can wait after finishing a temporary marriage with a man before she can go into another Mut’ah in the Shi’ah ideology? There is no ‘Iddah', waiting period, in Mut’ah. A woman can sleep with as many men as possible by contracting Mut’ah arrangements at quick successions, even on the same day. The least compensation she can receive from each ‘husband’ is ‘one dirham’ (i.e. 2.975 grams of silver, which is about NGN 500 today).

The cheaper the amount paid for Mut’ah the better, but where a woman gives herself free of charge a great recompense awaits her. One Shi’ah hadeeth in the book under discussion says:

“For the woman who donates back her compensation to the person who contracts Mut’ah with her and for the woman who foregoes her dowry, Allah will reward her with 40,000 cities of light and 70,000 dresses of velvet and silk brocade…And Allah will reward her with 70,000 more dresses from Heaven for each quarter of a dirham she donates back… And for each quarter of a dirham, Allah will also assign 1,000 angels who will continue writing virtues in her account until the Day of Judgment.”

The man is also encouraged to make Mut’ah arrangements with as many girls as he desires, even if the number reaches one thousand, because they are ‘as hired girls’.

Therefore, according to their own revered scriptures, when you come across a beautiful damsel just contract Mut’ah; never mind that she could be a married woman, ‘an adulteress’, or a woman of lesser virtue. What is important is Mut’ah; just do it! Yes, the woman could be anybody – ‘a virgin, married, widowed’ and may profess any religion (Christianity, Judaism or Islam) – with the exception of a Majusiyyah (Magian); but where one is ‘helpless’ and in dire need, even a ‘Majusi’ woman will do.

A Mut’ah love-vendor, one who arranges ‘a man and woman’ to engage in temporary sexual pleasure, has equal reward like the ‘couple’ he brings together in Mut’ah (I am sure the irony is lost on them here. Indeed, they shall share in the recompense; it is just not the one they have in mind). And what is that reward? Whoever engages in ‘Mut’ah once’ Hellfire shall not touch him; on his second Mut’ah, he shall be elevated to the high position of virtuous inhabitants of Jannah; if he contracts his third Mut’ah, he shall be Prophet’s companion in Paradise. With Mut’ah, you can reach the position of the Prophet according to a Shi’ah hadeeth:

“One who engages in Mut’ah once attains the status of Imam al-Hussain. One who engages in it twice becomes equal in status to Imam al-Hassan. The one who performs it three times reaches the position of Imam Ali. And he who practices it four times acquires the level and position [equal to that] of the Prophet.”

Moreover, every act of Mut’ah is rewarded, from the moment he stretches out his hand to touch the woman, his every move during pre-intimacy, copulation, and to the time ‘the two take a bath’, all is recorded for them as acts of virtue. In fact, their sins are shaved off their bodies ‘equal to the amount of hair’ on each one of them.

Why is anyone surprised at the large number of youth among the adherents of Shiism, with these types of teachings encouraging them into depraved sexual orgies and satisfying their carnal desires with multiple partners by paying peanuts or free of charge, in addition to the rewards they will garner in the Hereafter?

No doubt, you see the appeal to a young, virile and largely unschooled Muslim man or woman. He is too poor to contract a proper marriage; he has urges he knows cannot be satisfied through fornication and somehow, providence sends him a ‘Mallam’ with a huge turban and matching beard, telling him there is a ‘halaal’ way out. Then ‘Mallam’ gives him all the gobbledygook in their books as quoted above as actual means of drawing closer to his Lord. Surely, in his shoes, and given the same level of knowledge, you would fall into the same trap.
May Allah guide us on/to the right path ameen

.

I pray to Allah subhana watahala to guide us.

Alimtoheeb:
I pray to Allah subhana watahala to guide us.

Ameen brother

@OP. Jazakumullah khaeran!

This is one of the evils shia people are spreading on the land! May Allah(SWT) in His mercy protect the Muslims all over the world from their fitnah (Amin).

MrOlai:
@OP. Jazakumullah khaeran!

This is one of the evils shia people are spreading on the land! May Allah(SWT) in His mercy protect the Muslims all over the world from their fitnah (Amin).

Mr Olai, how can you call something that at a point in time was permitted by the Prophet "evil"? From all account, Sunnis agree that mut'ah was at a point in time-during the lifetime of the holy Prophet-permissible and also practiced by the sahabah.

The Shia differ in that they insist mut'ah was never made forbidden later on by the Prophet (s), but it was prohibited by the second Sunni caliph Umar and see that prohibition as bid'ah.

That is the point of contention: whether it ceased to be permissible or not.

Aside, it can be described as a "discontinued Sunnah" at worst, and was practiced during the lifetime of the Prophet by the sahabah. Your Hadith books record sahabah who were born out of mut'ah. How can you then refer to it as evil? Mut'ah marriage carry all the conditions of permanent Islamic marriage, and the only exception being that it is with a limited timeframe/expiration. Also, a virgin or a dependent female cannot practice it on her own without the consent of her male family guardian. Likewise in permanent marriage, a dependent must seek permission of her male guardian.

As for the article, I stopped reading where it is stated that a child born out of mut'ah cannot inherit from his father. I also wanted to stop before that where I read that mut'ah is about a man paying a woman to satisfy desires. These are fabrications and lies just to discredit the Shia for holding on to a Sunnah and rejecting a bid'ah by Umar and nothing more. Mut'ah is a remedy to pro$titution and widows and divorcees.

Since you refer to it as "one of the evils Shia people are spreading on the land", can you tell us more about "the evils Sunni people are spreading in the land?" Have you heard of MISYAR pro$titution? At least mut'ah is Sunnah and supported in the Quran in verse 4:24. But misyar practiced in Saudi is not. What of JIHADUN NIKAH (Sunni girls ganged ra.ped by Sunni fighters as their contribution to "jihad" ) practiced in Syria by Sunni terrorists? Is that not evil? What of adult brea$feeding? Is that good and Islamic to you?

You guys should stop your filthy ignorance against the Shia. This hate of yours will not stop the Shia ideology and the teachings of the Ahlul Bayt, which is nothing but pure Islam in accordance with the Holy Quran and the Sunnah. You cannot fight a faith or beliefs which live in people's minds and hearts with lies and intimidation. It wouldn't work. It will only depict you as filthy or a foul ignoramus. And by Allah, these false accusations and propaganda will only harm Islam in general and all of us as Muslims in eyes of non Muslims. Even in the bible mut'ah is there. It can be compared to concubinage which prophets of Allah are recorded to have practiced, e.g. Prophet Solomon (as).

May Allah guide us all.

ShiaMuslim:


Mr Olai, how can you call something that at a point in time was permitted by the Prophet "evil"? From all account, Sunnis agree that mut'ah was at a point in time-during the lifetime of the holy Prophet-permissible and also practiced by the sahabah.

The Shia differ in that they insist mut'ah was never made forbidden later on by the Prophet (s), but it was prohibited by the second Sunni caliph Umar and see that prohibition as bid'ah.

That is the point of contention: whether it ceased to be permissible or not.

Aside, it can be described as a "discontinued Sunnah" at worst, and was practiced during the lifetime of the Prophet by the sahabah. Your Hadith books record sahabah who were born out of mut'ah. How can you then refer to it as evil? Mut'ah marriage carry all the conditions of permanent Islamic marriage, and the only exception being that it is with a limited timeframe/expiration. Also, a virgin or a dependent female cannot practice it on her own without the consent of her male family guardian. Likewise in permanent marriage, a dependent must seek permission of her male guardian.

As for the article, I stopped reading where it is stated that a child born out of mut'ah cannot inherit from his father. I also wanted to stop before that where I read that mut'ah is about a man paying a woman to satisfy desires. These are fabrications and lies just to discredit the Shia for holding on to a Sunnah and rejecting a bid'ah by Umar and nothing more. Mut'ah is a remedy to pro$titution and widows and divorcees.

Since you refer to it as "one of the evils Shia people are spreading on the land", can you tell us more about "the evils Sunni people are spreading in the land?" Have you heard of MISYAR pro$titution? At least mut'ah is Sunnah and supported in the Quran in verse 4:24. But misyar practiced in Saudi is not. What of JIHADUN NIKAH (Sunni girls ganged ra.ped by Sunni fighters as their contribution to "jihad" ) practiced in Syria by Sunni terrorists? Is that not evil? What of adult brea$feeding? Is that good and Islamic to you?

You guys should stop your filthy ignorance against the Shia. This hate of yours will not stop the Shia ideology and the teachings of the Ahlul Bayt, which is nothing but pure Islam in accordance with the Holy Quran and the Sunnah. You cannot fight a faith or beliefs which live in people's minds and hearts with lies and intimidation. It wouldn't work. It will only depict you as filthy or a foul ignoramus. And by Allah, these false accusations and propaganda will only harm Islam in general and all of us as Muslims in eyes of non Muslims. Even in the bible mut'ah is there. It can be compared to concubinage which prophets of Allah are recorded to have practiced, e.g. Prophet Solomon (as).

May Allah guide us all.

Your first point that mut'ah was permitted before and......

Mut'ah (contract marriage) is one of the many types of jaahiliyah (days of ignorance) marriages.

When Islam came, it would be unwise to mention all the prohibited matters at once because this would push the people away and make them fed-up. Therefore the commandments and prohibitions came in stages.

The stages of alcohol prohibition is not unknown to us all.
However, it is not a condition for prohibitions to always come in stages as is the case of alcohol. It could come at once, so far it's the right time and Allah knows that the Ummah is spiritually upright enough to assimilate it.

So Islam only left them to continue with this act of mut'ah because they were too new to Islam and there were more fundamental matters to address at the moment. It is not as you claim that it was a sunnah and recommended act.

For Allah's sake mut'ah is prostitution, there's no better way to describe it than that.
You meet a woman, ask for her hand in marriage for a time period eg one or two days, months, years etc then after that you break up and nothing else. And of course the woman gets a dowry for that mut'ah, just like the prostitute gets paid by her clients.

Then, the shia sheikhs shamelessly fabricated narrations to encourage mut'ah such as whoever does one mut'ah gets the reward of fasting for so years, if you do two you get reward for maybe a lifetime of jihad, and whoever doesn't do mut'ah then he's religion is crooked or something like that and even greater.

Misyar, is not the same as mut'ah and they are not even similar, the gang rape and others are clear misguidance so that is not a justification.

Newnas:

Your first point that mut'ah was permitted before and......
Mut'ah (contract marriage) is one of the many types of jaahiliyah (days of ignorance) marriages.
When Islam came, it would be unwise to mention all the prohibited matters at once because this would push the people away and make them fed-up. Therefore the commandments and prohibitions came in stages.
The stages of alcohol prohibition is not unknown to us all.
However, it is not a condition for prohibitions to always come in stages as is the case of alcohol. It could come at once, so far it's the right time and Allah knows that the Ummah is spiritually upright enough to assimilate it.
So Islam only left them to continue with this act of mut'ah because they were too new to Islam and there were more fundamental matters to address at the moment. It is not as you claim that it was a sunnah and recommended act.
For Allah's sake mut'ah is prostitution, there's no better way to describe it than that.
You meet a woman, ask for her hand in marriage for a time period eg one or two days, months, years etc then after that you break up and nothing else. And of course the woman gets a dowry for that mut'ah, just like the prostitute gets paid by her clients.
Then, the shia sheikhs shamelessly fabricated narrations to encourage mut'ah such as whoever does one mut'ah gets the reward of fasting for so years, if you do two you get reward for maybe a lifetime of jihad, and whoever doesn't do mut'ah then he's religion is crooked or something like that and even greater.
Misyar, is not the same as mut'ah and they are not even similar, the gang rape and others are clear misguidance so that is not a justification.

Mut'ah is not a pre-Islamic Jahiliyyah practice as you claimed. what would happen to verse 4:24? you cannot therefore compare Mut'ah to a Jahiliyyah practice like alcohol consumption. in the Holy Quran Allah (swt) first revealed in verse 2:219 that in alcohol is greater harm than good. then in verse 4:43 it was revealed not to approach prayer in a state of drunkenness. Then in verse 5:90 it was revealed that alcohol is an abomination and the work of shaitan, so avoid it.

no where in the Holy Quran after the revelation of verse 4:24 was Mut'ah gradually discouraged. you may provide us with a verse, like in the case of alcohol, where Mut'ah was forbidden. you cannot!

secondly, there were sahaba born out of Mut'ah and there are records in Sunni Sihah books that it was practiced after the death of the Prophet (s) by Sahaba revered highly by Sunnis, and the idea of it being prohibited came during the time of the second Sunni caliph Umar Ibn al-Khattab.

the Shia sheikhs could not have "fabricated" hadiths in highly revered Sunni books such as Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim even though there are numerous Shia narrators accepted as trustworthy in the Sihah hadith of the Sunnis. and yet, many hadiths did not find their way into Bukhari and Muslims because hadiths in Bukhari and Muslim were cherry picked to conform to certain ways, beliefs and concepts held by the authorities of the time.

clearly, Mut'ah marriage is a subject of dispute between the Sunnis and Shia. again, you come to my point that the contention is whether or not Mut'ah was forbidden by the Prophet (s) in the long run or whether he never forbade it. it is wrong to call it "evil" when it is authorized in the Quran and there is no verse prohibiting or abrogating it in the Quran. the Quran takes precedence over hadiths. the hadiths cannot abrogate the Quran if the Quran does not abrogate itself. in fact, we do not even believe in abrogation. what is in the Quran is valid for all times.

it is true you cannot compare Misyar and Mut'ah. it did not even exist in the time of Jahiliyyah, nor was it practiced at the time of the Prophet (s). Misyar has no place in the Quran and Sunnah. complete bid'ah and can rightly be called pro$titution.

you are clutching at straws and trying hard to make a response. the facts are there regardless of the adjectives you use to label a Sunnah of the Prophet (s).

ShiaMuslim:



Mut'ah is not a pre-Islamic Jahiliyyah practice as you claimed. what would happen to verse 4:24? you cannot therefore compare Mut'ah to a Jahiliyyah practice like alcohol consumption. in the Holy Quran Allah (swt) first revealed in verse 2:219 that in alcohol is greater harm than good. then in verse 4:43 it was revealed not to approach prayer in a state of drunkenness. Then in verse 5:90 it was revealed that alcohol is an abomination and the work of shaitan, so avoid it.

no where in the Holy Quran after the revelation of verse 4:24 was Mut'ah gradually discouraged. you may provide us with a verse, like in the case of alcohol, where Mut'ah was forbidden. you cannot!

secondly, there were sahaba born out of Mut'ah and there are records in Sunni Sihah books that it was practiced after the death of the Prophet (s) by Sahaba revered highly by Sunnis, and the idea of it being prohibited came during the time of the second Sunni caliph Umar Ibn al-Khattab.

the Shia sheikhs could not have "fabricated" hadiths in highly revered Sunni books such as Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim even though there are numerous Shia narrators accepted as trustworthy in the Sihah hadith of the Sunnis. and yet, many hadiths did not find their way into Bukhari and Muslims because hadiths in Bukhari and Muslim were cherry picked to conform to certain ways, beliefs and concepts held by the authorities of the time.

clearly, Mut'ah marriage is a subject of dispute between the Sunnis and Shia. again, you come to my point that the contention is whether or not Mut'ah was forbidden by the Prophet (s) in the long run or whether he never forbade it. it is wrong to call it "evil" when it is authorized in the Quran and there is no verse prohibiting or abrogating it in the Quran. the Quran takes precedence over hadiths. the hadiths cannot abrogate the Quran if the Quran does not abrogate itself. in fact, we do not even believe in abrogation. what is in the Quran is valid for all times.

it is true you cannot compare Misyar and Mut'ah. it did not even exist in the time of Jahiliyyah, nor was it practiced at the time of the Prophet (s). Misyar has no place in the Quran and Sunnah. complete bid'ah and can rightly be called pro$titution.

you are clutching at straws and trying hard to make a response. the facts are there regardless of the adjectives you use to label a Sunnah of the Prophet (s).

very interesting read. Honestly I have never known all this before... From your post my question to you is, Are you saying as a muslim, anytime I travel to a another state and approach a new muslima Lady and i make my intentions to her to come stay with me for few days and I will pay her in return and she accepts (mutual agreement agreement) in the name of Mutah Are you saying that is Halal and such is Mutah as you posted with quotes from Quran? Please elucidate further. I Appreciate zz

Nafizzey:

very interesting read. Honestly I have never known all this before... From your post my question to you is, Are you saying as a muslim, anytime I travel to a another state and approach a new muslima Lady and i make my intentions to her to come stay with me for few days and I will pay her in return and she accepts (mutual agreement agreement) in the name of Mutah Are you saying that is Halal and such is Mutah as you posted with quotes from Quran? Please elucidate further. I Appreciate zz

I think your question is very personal. What you choose to do and with who is a matter of individual choices. Mut'ah is never meant to be obligatory. You don't have to do it. But theoretically, it is very much wrong to make forbidden in the religion of Allah what Allah has made permissible. I'm certain majority of Shia if not the overwhelming majority settle for permanent marriage and not mut'ah. They even settle for monogamy and not polygamy. The Almighty says: Marry One.... Just like polygamy that Christians can use as a weapon to try to tarnish the image of Muslims with, the case of mut'ah for the Shia is same. People use it as an excuse to label the Shia because they simply say this option was not made forbidden, regardless if individuals do practice it or not. For the conditions to do mut'ah (which must be in writing) and how to do it and with who you can do it, i.e if you choose to do it and you have a person who also makes a personal choice to do it, please review:

www.mutah.com

Hash86:

.

Obviously you will run into confusion when you find out that prominent Sahabah practiced Mut'ah AFTER the demise of the Prophet. On one hand you have labeled Mut'ah a Zina, and on the other hand you can never call these Sahabah adulterers.

AlBaqir:
Nikkah Mut’a (temporary marriage) in Summary

There is absolutely no debate between the Sunni and Shi'a as to the validity of Mut'a as both school believed it was established by the Prophet. The point of difference is whether it was later prohibited or not.

While the bulk of Sunni school believed it to have been prohibited, few of them and the entire Shi'i school believed in its validity till the end of days.

Nikah al-Mut'ah, or simply mut'ah, is marriage between two consenting adults for a specified period of time.

From Quranic perspective
Qur'an states:

“Those of them with whom you contract mut'ah, give them their prescribed dowries; and there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is prescribed. Verily, Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise” {surah an-Nisa: 24}

# Imam Ibn Jarir al-Tabari (d.310H) in his Tafsir [Jami al-Bayan fi Tawil al-Qur'an (Dar al-Fikr; 1415 H), vol. 5, p. 19],

# Imam 'Abd al-Razzaq (d. 211H) in his al-Musannaf [vol. 7, p. 498, # 14022],

# Imam al-Hafiz ibn Kathir (d. 774H) in his Tafsir al-Quran al-'Azim [( 2nd edition, 1420 H), vol. 2, p. 259],

# Imam al-Hakim (d. 410H) document with more or less similar versions:

“Abu Naḍrah: I read to Ibn Abbas: {Those of them with whom you contract mut'ah, give them their prescribed dowries} [4:24]. He said: “{Those of them with whom you contract mut'ah for a specified period }”.

Abu Naḍrah said: I said, “We do not recite it like that!” Ibn Abbas replied, “I swear by Allāh, Allāh certainly revealed it like that.”

Al-Hakim and Imam al-Dhahabi (d. 748 H) comments: This hadith is Sahih upon the standard of (Imam) Muslim.

Source: {al-Mustadrak 'ala al-Ṣaḥihayn (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1411 H), vol. 2, p. 334, # 3192}

Imam Ibn Kathir gives further information [ref. cited above]:

“Ibn Abbas, Ubayy b. Ka'b, Sa'id b. Jubayr and al-Suddi used to recite: {Those of them with whom you contract mut'ah for a specified period, give them their prescribed dowries}”

So absolutely this ayah legislated Mut'ah and there are countless Sahih ahadith in Sunni and Shi'i reference books that proved its validity.

On AHADITH PERSPECTIVE
On the other hands, there are "sihah" ahadith, ONLY in Sunni books which claim that the holy Prophet, salallahu alahi wa ahli, later prohibited Nikah al-Mut'ah [forever] at three different periods and locations after approving it intermittently.

Shi'a school however argued that since there exist an ayah in the Qur'an that legislated Mut'a, NO hadith can ever abrogate an ayah of the Qur'an as Allah Himself declare that “whatever ayah We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it…”{al-Baqarah:106; an-Nahl:101}.

This alone questions the integrity of the ahadith that claims the Prophet later prohibited Mut'a after its legislation.

Various other counter argument were presented by the Sunni that certain ayah [e.g surah al-Mu'minin: 1-7] already abrogated the ayah of Mut'ah, but chronologically, a previous ayah or surah [e.g revealed in Makka] can never abrogate later ayah or surah [e.g revealed in Madina].

This Mut'a dialogue usually goes back and forth between the two schools but what is obvious is, apart from the existing ayah of Mut'ah in the Qur'an, what seem to be the last saying of the Prophet [chronologically] on Nikkah al-Mut'a is documented by both Imam Bukhari and Muslim in their respective Sahih:

'Abd Allāh (b. Mas'ud):

We were on an expedition with the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, and we had nothing with us. So, we said, “Should we castrate ourselves?” But, he forbade us to do that. Then, he permitted us to do nikah (marriage) with the woman, giving her a garment (as the dowry). Then, he recited to us {O you who believe! Do not make ḥarām the good things which Allah has made halal for you; and do not exceed the limits; surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits}.

{al-Bukhari al-Ju'fi, al-Jami al-Sahih al-Mukhtaṣar (Beirut: Dar Ibn Kathir; 3rd edition, 1407 H), vol. 5, p. 1953, # 4787}

(The) ayah said to have been recited by the Prophet for the validity of Mut'ah in the above hadith is in Surah al-Maida: 87 and this is what Umm Mu'minin 'Aisha said about this Surah (al-Maidah) as a whole:

Jubayr b. Nufayr:

I went to Aisha and she said, “Do you recite Surah al-Maidah?” I said, “Yes”. She said, “For, verily, it was the last sūrah to be revealed. So, whatsoever you find in it to be ḥalal, then declare it halal; and whatsoever you find in it to be ḥarām, declare it haram.”

Then I asked her about the character of the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, and she said, “The Quran.”

Sheik Shuaib al-Arnaut said: Its chain is Sahih.

Source: {Musnad (Cairo: Muasassat Qurṭubah), vol. 6, p. 188, # 25588; also al-Hakim in his al-Mustadrak ala al-Sahihayn (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al’Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1411 H), vol. 2, p. 340, # 3210}.

# Imam Hakim and al-Dhahabi also declare this hadith as Sahih.

Incidentally, the revelation of this last Surah was completed at the Prophet's last Hajj [few months to his death], and the last Sunni claim of prohibition of Mut'a by the Prophet was a year and half earlier at fat'h Makkah (conquest of Makkah).

# IN SUMMARY
One of Sunni grand Ulama, Imam Ibn Hazm (456H) summarized this whole dialogue in this epilogue:

“A group of the Salaf, may Allah be pleased with them, were FIRM in declaring it (Mut'a) halal AFTER the Messenger of Allāh. Those of them from the Sahabah, may Allah be pleased with them, were Asma bint Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, Jabir b. 'Abd Allāh Ibn Mas'ud, Ibn Abbas, Mu'āwiyah b. Abu Sufyan, 'Amr b. Ḥurayth, Abu Sa'id al-Khudri, and Salamah and Ma'bad – sons of Umayyah b. Khalaf. Jabir b. 'Abd Allah also reported it (i.e. declaration of mut'ah as halal ) from all the Sahabah during the time of the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, and during the time of Abu Bakr and 'Umar until near the end of the caliphate of 'Umar.

Ibn al-Zubayr had contradictory opinions on its permissibility, while Ali expressed no opinion concerning it. It is narrated that 'Umar b. al-Khattab only denied it if two just people did not act as its witnesses, and he considered it permissible if two just people acted as witnesses to it.

And among the Tabi'in were: Tawus, 'Ata, Sa'id b. Jubayr, and the rest of the jurists of Makkah, may Allāh honour it

Source: {al-Muhalla (Dar al-Fikr li al-Ṭaba'ah wa al-Nashr wa al-Tawzi‟), vol. 9, pp. 519-520}

# Allamah Muḥammad Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Albani also discard the claim of those who said Abdullah Ibn Abbas later retracted from his practice and claim on the validity of Mut'a:

"The summary is: three opinions are narrated from Ibn 'Abbās, may Allaah be pleased with him, about mut'ah:

The one: he permitted it unconditionally.

The second: he permitted it in cases of necessity.

The last: he forbade it unconditionally, but this is from what is NOT authentically transmitted from him, unlike the first two opinions which are authentically transmitted from him”

Source: {Irwa al-Ghalil fī Takhrij Ahadith Manar al-Sabil (Beirut: al-Maktab al-Islami; 2nd edition, 1405 H), vol. 6, p. 319, # 1903}

Lastly, while it is laughable when uninformed Sunni [esp. those from among the Salafiyyah] often accuse the Shi'a of committing Zina in the name of Mut'a, they dare not say the same to these Salafs from among the Sahaba and Tabi'in who uphold Mut'a.

On the other hand, many of them are ignorant of a plain Bid'ah form of marriage, established by their Ulama, called al-Zawāj bi niyyah al-ṭalāq (marriage with the intention of divorce). It is also known as Misyar Nikkah [Traveler's marriage], where a Muslim male traveler can contract Nikkah with woman of his choice with an intention to divorce her after the expiration of his stay in the foreign land.

This seem Mut'a but its absolutely not. It is a practice with NO Kitab wa Sunnah reference other than twisting and gymnasium of Sharia by Sunni Ulama.

{see for example: Majmu al-Fatawa, vol.32, pp. 106-107; Fiqh al-Sunnah (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-'Arabi; 3rd edition, 1397 H), vol. 2, p.45}.

The conditions, rulings and regulations on Mut'a is far beyond this write up.

https://www.nairaland.com/2767419/mutah

I ask the OP and every sensible Muslim on this forum: What is Islamic solution to sex.ual desire and need of, for example, a Muslim Soldier on a mission in a foreign land for about 3-5 years far away from his wife(s)?

* This is one of rare reality where Mut'ah was legislated by Allah and His Prophet.

* Even your Uthaymeen, Ibn Baz had no choice but to approved a BID'AH (INNOVATION) form of marriage called "Marriage with intention of divorce". Also known as "Traveller's marriage.

I passionately await your answer to the question.

AlBaqir:


Obviously you will run into confusion when you find out that prominent Sahabah practiced Mut'ah AFTER the demise of the Prophet. On one hand you have labeled Mut'ah a Zina, and on the other hand you can never call these Sahabah adulterers.

No one is labeling any sahaba an adulterer rather you are. The hadith of Ahl Bayt Imam Aliy(ra) is very clear and it's saheeh, this similar narration is found in your books, so I don't know why you'll prefer to play games and laugh over things which are not funny, you've all suddenly become Shia of Ibn Abbas(ra), while Ahl Sunnah now refute you with Prophet Muhammad(saw) and Aliyy(ra).

“Those of them with whom you contract mut'ah, give them their prescribed dowries; and there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is prescribed. Verily, Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise” {surah an-Nisa: 24}

Ya Akhi read the verse from 19 and understand the context, this verse has nothing to do with Mu'tah, in fact it's the other way round. It refers to a right Shariah marriage not Mut'ah.

Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those (captives and slaves) whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allah ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you seek (them in marriage) with Mahr (bridal money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage) from your property, desiring chastity, not committing illegal sexual intercourse, so with those of whom you have enjoyed sexual relations, give them their Mahr as prescribed; but if after a Mahr is prescribed, you agree mutually (to give more), there is no sin on you. Surely, Allah is Ever All-Knowing, All-Wise. (4:24)

As we all know this marriage as been prohibited by Aliyy(ra) to the extent he scolded Ibn Abbas(ra), both Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim narrated from no one else than Aliyy(ra) himself that it was the Prophet (not Omar) who prohibited Mu'tah. Ali even called Ibn Abbas a LOST man due to Ibn Abbas previous stance of permitting Mut'ah in EXTREME (Rukhsa) situation.

The sahabas who were wrong to have engaged in it probably due to some reasons never portrayed it in the light of Tashayyu. It's a virtuous act and if one does it, his status is raised according to Tashayyu. This was never the positions of the sahabas!

BeansAndBread:


No one is labeling any sahaba an adulterer rather you are. The hadith of Ahl Bayt Imam Aliy(ra) is very clear and it's saheeh, this similar narration is found in your books, so I don't know why you'll prefer to play games and laugh over things which are not funny, you've all suddenly become Shia of Ibn Abbas(ra), while Ahl Sunnah now refute you with Prophet Muhammad(saw) and Aliyy(ra).

Very funny man. Its a very simple case. You and your likes labeled Mut'a as Adultery/Fornication. Surprisingly you have handful of Sahabah who fully engaged in it throughout their life. If we are to go by your rulings of Mut'ah is Adultery, then those Sahabah have committed it.

# @underlined, kindly present those ahadith from Sunni and Shi'i sources and lets have a good look at it. Mind you do not forget to put Shi'i grading of the so-called hadith where Imam Ali (as) forbade Mut'a.

BeansAndBread:


Ya Akhi read the verse from 19 and understand the context, this verse has nothing to do with Mu'tah, in fact it's the other way round. It refers to a right Shariah marriage not Mut'ah.

Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those (captives and slaves) whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allah ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you seek (them in marriage) with Mahr (bridal money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage) from your property, desiring chastity, not committing illegal sexual intercourse, so with those of whom you have enjoyed sexual relations, give them their Mahr as prescribed; but if after a Mahr is prescribed, you agree mutually (to give more), there is no sin on you. Surely, Allah is Ever All-Knowing, All-Wise. [/color] (4:24)

# While the bold part above is crystal clear, you even underlined the Mahr part.

# @blue colored and bold part^. Quran used "Istamtatum". Meaning "Those women you derive pleasure from (Istamtahtum)", give them their Mahr. Observe the same word "Istamtahtum" were repeatedly used in several ahadith on Mut'ah in your "Sahih ahadith".

Cant you see this second portion is completely different from the first?

# Your prestigious Tafsir Ibn Kathir documented that Ibn Abbas, Ubayy b. Kabb, Sa'id b. Jubayr and al-Suddi even always go further in the Tawil of this verse by adding "for a specified period" to it, after confirming the verse was revealed because of Mut'ah.

BeansAndBread:


As we all know this marriage as been prohibited by Aliyy(ra) to the extent he scolded Ibn Abbas(ra), both Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim narrated from no one else than Aliyy(ra) himself that it was the Prophet (not Omar) who prohibited Mu'tah. Ali even called Ibn Abbas a LOST man due to Ibn Abbas previous stance of permitting Mut'ah in EXTREME (Rukhsa) situation.

# Who are "we"? Salafiyah or Wahabiyah? Indeed Ali scolded Ibn Abbas according to your hadith. So why did Ibn Abbas continued to practice Mut'ah?

Again kindly bring forth the hadith. I pray its hadith that talks about "Mut'ah being forbidden on the day of Khaybar".

# @bold, Its time you let your ego be dropped. All Sunni ahadith that Ibn Abbas permit Mut'ah in extreme situation or later abandoned it completely are graded Da'eef by your Ulama. It is left for you to accuse Ibn Abbas of "stubborn-head" or "Bid'ah.

Apart from Ibn Abbas, Countless Sahabah continue to practice Mut'ah after the demise of the Prophet until Umar forbade it during his Khilafah in the case of Amr ibn Hurayth, another Sahabi who impregnated a slave as a result of Mut'ah.

BeansAndBread:


The sahabas who were wrong to have engaged in it probably due to some reasons never portrayed it in the light of Tashayyu. It's a virtuous act and if one does it, his status is raised according to Tashayyu. This was never the positions of the sahabas!

Ma sha Allah! Sahabah were WRONG engaging in Mut'ah. Jabir ibn Abdullah al-Ansari, Asma bint Abu Bakr, Abdullah ibn Mas'ud, Abdullah ibn Abbas, AMR ibn Hurayth, Abu Sa'id al-Khudri, Salamah ibn Umayyah b. Khalaf and his brother, Ma'bad etc and not to forget Abu Bakr and Umar who allowed Mut'ah to continue during their Khulafau until Umar forbade it for a purpose.

Jabir ibn Abdullah reported Mut'ah being practiced by all the Sahabah during the time of the Messenger of Allah and during the time of Abu Bakr and Umar until near the end of the Caliphate of Umar. This hadith is SAHIH 100% but because you are averse to it, you deemed accusing your lofty Sahabah of engaging in "Evil, Bid'ah, Zina?"

BeansAndBread:


As we all know this marriage as been prohibited by Aliyy(ra) to the extent he scolded Ibn Abbas(ra), both Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim narrated from no one else than Aliyy(ra) himself that it was the Prophet (not Omar) who prohibited Mu'tah. Ali even called Ibn Abbas a LOST man due to Ibn Abbas previous stance of permitting Mut'ah in EXTREME (Rukhsa) situation.
!

Imam Muslim documents:

Muḥammad b. ‘Abd Allah b. Numayr – my father – ‘Ubayd Allah – Ibn Shihab – al-Ḥasan and ‘Abd Allah, sons of Muḥammad b. ‘Ali – their father:

‘Ali heard Ibn ‘Abbas' allowing mut’ah with women. So, he said, “Don’t be hasty, O Ibn ‘Abbas', for the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, forbade it on the Day of Khaybar as well as the flesh of domestic asses.”
Ref: Sahih Muslim (Beirut: Dar Iḥya al-Turath al-‘Arabi) [annotator: Muḥammad Fuad ‘Abd al-Baqi], vol. 2, p. 1027, # 1407 (31)

Here, we see Amir al-Muminin, ‘alaihi al-salam, supposedly citing the ban at Khaybar to stop Ibn ‘Abbas' from allowing mut’ah after the Prophet had died. This suggests that the ban at Khaybar was a permanent one. It is the only logical explanation for the action attributed to ‘Ali.

Interestingly, we often see the Ahl al-Sunnah quote this hadith as well as evidence of the permanent prohibition of mut’ah. The Battle of Khaybar occurred in 7 H. So, mut’ah supposedly had been banned eternally since then. But, Imam Muslim has another interesting report:

Ishaq b. Ibrahim – Yahya b. Adam – Ibrahim b. Sa’d – ‘Abd al-Malik b. al-Rabi' b. Sabrah al-Juhani – his father (al-Rabi') – his grandfather (Sabrah):

The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, ORDERED us to perform mut’ah in the Year of the Conquest as we entered Makkah. Then, we did not come out of it until he forbade us from it."
Sahih Muslim, vol. 2, p. 1023, # 1406 (22)

What? But, this was in 8 - 9 Hijrah, a year or two years after Khaybar! What happened to the permanent ban, which ‘Ali supposedly quoted against Ibn ‘Abbas'? Was Ali (and Ibn Abbas) not aware of the so-called Banned on day of Conquest of Makkah?

# Furthermore, Sahih Bukhari in the book of "Military expedition led by the Prophet (al-Maghazi)" hadith No. 257 - 259: Ibn Umar and Jabir ibn Abdullah reported that (ONLY) The meat of donkey was prohibited on the day of Khaybar. They never made mention of Mut'ah being forbidden as against the alleged Ali's claim of Mut'ah also being Prohibited. And obviously all (Ali, Jabir, Ibn Umar et all) were present at Khaybar.

# It is worthy of note that Khaybar (fortress of the Jews) located at Madina's outskirt was conquered within three (3) days of arrival of Islamic forces. First batch led by Abu Bakr went to conquer the fortress on the first day but they never achieved victory and they turned back. Second batch led by Umar went the next day (day 2) but they too never achieved victory and they turned back. Then Prophet appointed Ali ibn Abi Talib (as) the Third day and he conquered the fortress. Part of war booty gained were donkeys which some companions cooked and ate until Prophet prohibited it. So how was it possible for the Sahabah to have missed their wives in 3 days making the Prophet allowed them to perform Mut'ah and then forbade the Practice (within that shortest period of 3days of rigorous preparations for battle)? It is a big lie to affirmed Mut'ah was practiced and forbidden at Khaybar. Observe Mut'ah was (usually) legislated on Prophet's expedition when Sahabah are in need of women with their wives absent.

# Let me allow you to breathe because more are still coming in sha Allah.

^THE SO-CALLED HADITH FROM SHI'I SOURCE

# Sheik Tusi (d. 460 H) document:

Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Yahya – Abu al-Jawza – al-Ḥusayn b. ‘Alwan – ‘Amr b. Khalid – Zayd b. ‘Ali – his fathers – ‘Ali, peace be them:

The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his family, forbade the meat of domestic donkey and the marriage of mut’ah.

Ref: al-Istibsar (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Ḥasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 3, p. 142, Ch. 92, # 5 (511)

# He also documents in his Tahdhīb: .

Muhammad b. Yahya – Abu Ja’far – Abu al-Jawza – al-Ḥusayn b. ‘Alwan – ‘Amr b. Khalid – Zayd b. ‘Ali – his fathers – ‘Ali, peace be upon them:

The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his family, forbade the meat of domestic donkey and the marriage of mut’ah on the Day of Khaybar.

Ref: Tahdhib al-Aḥkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Ḥasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 251, Ch. 24, # 10 (1085)

Sheik Ali Muhsin writes:

This report has a da'if chain, due to ‘Amr b. Khalid al-Wasiti, for there is no tawthīq (accreditation) for him in the books of al-rijāl. There is also dispute about his sect. It is said that he was from the Ahl al-Sunnah. However, the widespread opinion is that he was from the leaders of the Zaydīyyah, and he narrated most of his reports from Zayd b. ‘Alī, including this report. One of the narrators of this ḥadīth is also al-Ḥasan b. ‘Alwān, and he was a Sunnī by sect. As for the statement of al-Najāshī in his tarjamah, it is inconclusive. It is possible that the tawthīq in it refers to him or to his brother, al-Ḥasan; and there is no other tawthīq for him. For this reason, we stop short about him, even those some of the great ‘ulamā call him thiqah while others declare him ḍa’īf. In conclusion, this ḥadīth has a Zaydī reporter, and another who belonged to the Sunnī sect; and tawthīq is not established for both of them. As for the tawthīq that is said for them both, it is neither reliable nor trustworthy.

Ref: Alī Āl Muḥsin, Lillāh wa li al-Ḥaqīqah (2nd edition, 1425 H), vol. 1, p. 209


* Allamah Majlisi also writes about the hadith:

Ḍa’īf or Muwaththaq.

But then, he immediately proclaims what he believes to be the most correct position on it:

The most apparent is that it is from the FABRICATIONS of the Zaydiyyah, as obvious from most of their reports.

Ref: Malādh al-Akhyār fī Fahm Tahdhīb al-Akhbār (Qum: Maktabah Āyatullāh al-Mar’ashī; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 32, # 10

ShiaMuslim:


I think your question is very personal. What you choose to do and with who is a matter of individual choices. Mut'ah is never meant to be obligatory. You don't have to do it. But theoretically, it is very much wrong to make forbidden in the religion of Allah what Allah has made permissible. I'm certain majority of Shia if not the overwhelming majority settle for permanent marriage and not mut'ah. They even settle for monogamy and not polygamy. The Almighty says: Marry One.... Just like polygamy that Christians can use as a weapon to try to tarnish the image of Muslims with, the case of mut'ah for the Shia is same. People use it as an excuse to label the Shia because they simply say this option was not made forbidden, regardless if individuals do practice it or not. For the conditions to do mut'ah (which must be in writing) and how to do it and with who you can do it, i.e if you choose to do it and you have a person who also makes a personal choice to do it, please review:

www.mutah.com

Highlighted part settles the whole hullabaloo

AlBaqir:
I ask the OP and every sensible Muslim on this forum: What is Islamic solution to sex.ual desire and need of, for example, a Muslim Soldier on a mission in a foreign land for about 3-5 years far away from his wife(s)?

* This is one of rare reality where Mut'ah was legislated by Allah and His Prophet.

* Even your Uthaymeen, Ibn Baz had no choice but to approved a BID'AH (INNOVATION) form of marriage called "Marriage with intention of divorce". Also known as "Traveller's marriage.

I passionately await your answer to the question.

Problem here is, is it not being taken advantage of by many who are not on a mission?. It does makes sense by "mission" you highlighted. However, when we hear "mut'ah marriage", it seems average Muslims understand it to mean temporary whether on "mission" or not. That's pretty wrong.

As for your references about the Shuyuk you cited, that may be correct. So in my opinion, "mu'tah marriage" is a condition in Shi'ite theology. Unfortunately, there is a similar approach in Sunni, actually Islam as a whole and it has nothing to do with "immorality". It is more of rare condition(s)

Empiree:
Problem here is, is it not being taken advantage of by many who are not on a mission?. It does makes sense by "mission" you highlighted. However, when we hear "mut'ah marriage", it seems average Muslims understands it to mean temporary whether on mission or not. That's pretty wrong.

@underlined, "mission" is an example of a rare case where Mut'ah could be necessary.

Empiree, you will agree with me this is not the first time this Mut'ah discussion will surface. There are lots of thread on it already so I see no reason why this present thread was opened. As usual it is a way of "exposing and bashing" Shi'ism and you pretty know how I used to respond to something like that. Some new Wahabi recruits here, who knew nothing about their backyard, are on a mission and I need to check them on areas concerning my beliefs.


# My stand to Mut'ah remain the same. Mut'ah is a valid marriage in Islam proving by Kitab wa Sunnah yet it remain to be apply under necessity as people have abused it just like every other practice have been abused in Islam. In fact according to Shi'i traditions, Mut'ah could be Halal, Mubah or Haram depending on the circumstances. We can never rule over a valid legislation because of it being abused. Our mission rather should be educating people, and enforce where necessary. A virgin, a married woman are totally forbidden to practice Mut'ah. Usually it is in the range of widows or divorcee that practice it.

# I have posted this once:

ON MUT'AH Q AND A SESSION

QUESTION
As regard Temporary Marriage (Nikah Mutah), young sisters are being affected psychologically in some circumstances. How can we combat the issue?

REPLY (BY Sayyid Mustafa Qazwini):

"My friends, temporary marriage is not a permission for all people to practice it.

Temporary marriage is not the norm. Its the exception. Remember! The norm is the permanent marriage...to marry a person...establishing a family and raising children.

However for every norm, there is an exception...I do not encourage the young generations to go after temporary marriage. Its not for you guys. You have to think of your futures, to build a stable future for yourselves.

Remember, this temporal relationships are going to affect (you) in a bad way, in a negative way...the more premarital relationships you have, the more destabilize your marriage is going to be (and vice versa)...

So it is not for you (the youth). It is for people who have some special circumstances. It is like an emergency door. We do not use it unless there is an emergency. Otherwise we use the main door. Timed marriage (mut'a) is for exceptional cases..."

Empiree:

As for your references about the Shuyuk you cited, that may be correct. So in my opinion, "mu'tah marriage" is a condition in Shi'ite theology. Unfortunately, there is a similar approach in Sunni, actually Islam as a whole and it has nothing to do with "immorality". It is more of rare condition(s)

@underlined:
That of Sunni called Marriage with the Intention of Divorce (Zawaj Nikah bi Niyat Talaq) is nothing but Bid'ah. It has no root in Islam at all. The marriage is when you go abroad (away from your wife), you can arrange for (another) marriage abroad with intention only known to you that the woman will be divorced once you are about to leave that country. Neither your so-called parents in-law nor the so-called wife has right to question your judgment on divorce.

Apart from the fact that Mut'ah is proven (where we only debate on its validity or forbidden till day of judgment), Mut'ah on the other hand must be a mutual agreement between the two participants. We ask where has that Sunni invented Nikkah ever been practiced?

its very simple, mut'ah is zina and zina is forbidden in Islam

Fundamentalist:


its very simple, mut'ah is zina and zina is forbidden in Islam

One of early Makkan surah, Sura Israi: 32 declares: "And do NOT approach Zina. Verily, it is an indecency, and an evil way"

So, Mr Fundamentalist, did the holy Prophet ordered "Zina" in Madina in the name of "Mut'ah?"

# Imam Ibn Hibban (d. 354 H) documents:

Ahmad b. Ali b. al-Muthanna - Abu Khaythamah - Marwan b. Mu'awiyah al-Fazari - Ismail b. Abi Khalid - Qays b. Abi Hazim:

I heard Ibn Mas'ud saying: "We (the sahabah) were on an expedition with the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him. There were no women with us. So, we said, "O Messenger of Allah, should we castrate ourselves?" But, he forbade us from doing that And he ORDERED US to do nikah with the woman, giving her the garment (as the dowry)." Then Abd Allah recited this verse {O you who believe! Do not make haram the good things which Allah has made halal for you}.

'Allamah al-Albani states: Sahih

And Sheik al-Arnaut concurs: Its chain is Sahih upon the standard of the two Shaykhs.

Ref: Sahih Ibn Hibban bi Tartib Ibn Balban (Beirut: Muasassat al-Risalah; 2nd edition, 1414H)[annotator: Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani and Shu'ayb al-Arnaut], vol.9, p.448, #4141.

* Imam Bukhari reported this same hadith from Abdullah ibn Mas'ud who claimed that it was the Prophet himself that recited the verse above {surah al-Maidah: 87}. [see Sahih Bukhari (Beirut: Dar Ibn Kathir; 3rd edition, 1407 H)[annotator:Dr. Mustafa Dib al-Bagha], vol.5, p.1953, #4787.

If surah al-Maidah was the Last revelation making every halal in it halal and every haram in it haram till day of judgment, and here is the Prophet ordering his Sahabah to practice Mut'ah and even supporting it with a verse in surah Maidah, so I ask you Mr Wahabi fundamentalist, has the Prophet ordered "Zina?"

POST PROPHET ERA
# Here is another hadith post-prophet:

Imam Muslim reports:
. Muhammad b. Rafi - Abd al-Razzaq - Ibn Jurayj - Abu al-Zubayr:
I heard Jabir b. Abd Allah saying, "We (the Sahabah) used to contract Mut'ah by giving a handful of dates and flour (as dowry) during the eras of the Messenger of Allah and Abu Bakr UNTIL 'Umar forbade it in the case of Amr b. Hurayth."

Ref: Sahih Muslim (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi)[annotator: Muhammad Fuad Abd al-Baqi], vol.2, p.1022, #1405(16).

* Observe Jabir ibn Abdullah who revealed the Sahabah practiced Mut'ah during the time of the Prophet till the Khilafah of Umar. So, Abu Bakr and Umar knew about Mut'ah being widely practiced UNTIL Umar banned it in the case of Amr. What happened?

# The Case Of Amr b. Hurayth

Imam Abd al-Razzaq (d. 211 H) documents:

Abd al-Razzaq - Ibn Jurayj Abu al-Zubayr - Jabir b. Abd Allah:

'Amr b. Hurayth arrived from Kufah and did Mut'ah with a slave woman. Then she was brought to 'Umar when she became pregnant, and he interrogated her. So she said, "'Amr b. Hurayth did Mutah with me." Then, he interrogated him, and he informed him through that of an apparent matter." He said, "So, why not other than her?" That was the moment when he (Umar) forbade it"

Ref: al-Masannaf [annotator: Habib al-Rahman al-'Azami], vol.7, p.500, #14029.

# Imam Abd al-Razzaq also documents:

Abd al-Razzāq – Ibn Jurayj – ‘Aṭā:

The person from whom I first heard about mut’ah was Ṣafwān b. Ya’lā. He narrated to me from Ya’lā that Mu’āwiyah did mut’ah with a woman at Ṭāif. So, I denied that upon him. Then, we entered upon Ibn ‘Abbās, and one of us mentioned (mut’ah) to him, and he said, “Yes”. But, it did not settle well in me, until when Jābir b. ‘Abd Allāh arrived. So, we went to him at his house, and the people asked him about various things. Then, they mentioned mut’ah, and he said, “Yes. We did mut’ah during the time of the Messenger of Allāh, Abū Bakr and ‘Umar UNTIL at the last part of the ‘Umar’s caliphate....”

‘Aṭā said:

I heard Ibn ‘Abbās saying: “May Allāh show mercy to ‘Umar. Mut’ah was nothing except a PERMISSION from Allāh the Almighty. He showed MERCY through it to the Ummah of Muḥammad, peace be upon him. If he (‘Umar) had not forbidden it, none would have needed to commit zinā except a wretched person.”

He – ‘Aṭā – said: By Allāh, it is like I am still hearing his statement “except a wretched person”.

'Aṭā said: It is that which is in Sūrah al-Nisā {Those of them with whom you contract mut’ah} till such-and-such period, for such-and-such."
Ref: Ref: al-Masannaf [annotator: Habib al-Rahman al-'Azami], vol.7, p.496-497, #14021

Commenting on this hadith, al-Hafiz ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (d. 852 H) states:

'Abd al-Razzaq recorded it with the chain of Safwan b. Ya'la b. Umayyah: Ya'la narrated to me that Mu'awiyah did Mut'ah with a woman at Ta'if. And its chain is Sahih"

Ref: Fath al-Bari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari (Beirut: Dar al-Ma'rifah Li al-Taba'ah wa al-Nashr; 2nd edition), vol.9, p.151.

# This what made Imam Ibn Hazm grouped all the notable companions of the Prophet who continued to practice Mut'ah after the demise of the Prophet: Jabir b. Abdullah, AMR b. Hurayth, Abdullah b. Mas'ud, Asma bint Abi Bakr, Abdullah b. Abbas, Mu'awiyah etc etc. I have given his account in my previous post. So, were all these Sahabah fornicators, Mr fundamentalist?

^, Hash96, Newnas, BeansAndBread Do you agree with fundamentalist that Mut'ah is Zina with the very facts that Prophet ordered it and Sahabah practised it UNTIL Umar forbade it in the case of Amr . Hurayth, another Sahabi who practiced it with a slave woman and got her impregnated?

Salam alaykum

Double post.

Is it me or Mutah does sound very similar to prostitution?

Very funny man. Its a very simple case. You and your likes labeled Mut'a as Adultery/Fornication. Surprisingly you have handful of Sahabah who fully engaged in it throughout their life. If we are to go by your rulings of Mut'ah is Adultery, then those Sahabah have committed it.

AlBaqir You don't get do you? Mu'tah was prohibited by the Prophet(saw) and it was narrated by Aliyy(ra), this is a saheeh hadith, the sahabas are not "infallibles", we only follow the Sahabas and the Ahlulbayt in their in GOOD/IHSAN not in their errors

# Your prestigious Tafsir Ibn Kathir documented that Ibn Abbas, Ubayy b. Kabb, Sa'id b. Jubayr and al-Suddi even always go further in the Tawil of this verse by adding "for a specified period" to it, after confirming the verse was revealed because of Mut'ah.

Did you also forget that my "prestigious" Tafsir Ibn Kathir stated that mu'tah was abrogated and prohibited till the day of judgment? I wonder why you just cut and paste whatever suits you and leave the remaining! Tafsir Ibn Kathir does not support your stance in anyway http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=682&Itemid=59

# Who are "we"? Salafiyah or Wahabiyah? Indeed Ali scolded Ibn Abbas according to your hadith. So why did Ibn Abbas continued to practice Mut'ah?

@underlined, do you know how you sound(metaphorically) when say this? I never showed in anyway I'm a salafi or a wahabi, don't be in a haste, when you do that, it exposes your low self-esteem! As to why Ibn Abbas(ra) continued, I don't know!

# @bold, Its time you let your ego be dropped. All Sunni ahadith that Ibn Abbas permit Mut'ah in extreme situation or later abandoned it completely are graded Da'eef by your Ulama. It is left for you to accuse Ibn Abbas of "stubborn-head" or "Bid'ah.

You're presenting as if Ibn Abbas(ra) view of mu'tah is the same as the Tashayyu, he viewed that it could be done in extreme cases(Rukhsa) just like you're allowed to eat pork whereas you believe performing Mu'tah is a virtuous that increases ones rank to an Imam Here's Ibn Abbas view:

Ibn ‘Abbas considered that temporary marriage was permitted. Al-Imam Muhammad bin Isma’il al-Bukhari (d256 AH) narrates in his Sahih:

5116 – حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ بَشَّارٍ، حَدَّثَنَا غُنْدَرٌ، حَدَّثَنَا شُعْبَةُ، عَنْ أَبِي جَمْرَةَ، قَالَ: سَمِعْتُ ابْنَ عَبَّاسٍ: سُئِلَ عَنْ مُتْعَةِ النِّسَاءِ «فَرَخَّصَ»، فَقَالَ لَهُ مَوْلًى لَهُ: إِنَّمَا ذَلِكَ فِي الحَالِ الشَّدِيدِ، وَفِي النِّسَاءِ قِلَّةٌ؟ أَوْ نَحْوَهُ، فَقَالَ ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ: «نَعَمْ»

Ibn ‘Abbas was asked regarding temporary marriage with women so he allowed it. On this one of his slaves said, “It is only in harsh condition, when there is lack of women?” or something of that sort. So Ibn ‘Abbas said, “Yes.”

Even with this view, many sahabas rebuked him like Aliyy(ra), Abdullah Ibn Zubayr(ra), Ibn Abi ‘Amirah, Ibn Umar(ra), etc

This is the view of the Rawafidh:

Salih b. `Uqba from his father from Abu Ja`far عليه السلام.  He said: I said: Is there reward for the one who does mut`a?  He said: If he had intended by that the countenance of Allah تعالى and opposition against the one who denied it, he does not speak a word but that Allah has written ten good deeds for him by it, and he does not extend his hand to it but that Allah has written ten good deeds for him.  So when he has approached it, Allah has forgiven him a sin by that, and when he has done ghusl, Allah has forgiven him by the measure of what has passed of water upon his hair.  I said: By the number of hairs?  He said: By the number of hairs.

Was this the belief of Ibn Abbas? Does a RUKHSA (like eating PORK!) make you earn rewards?! As you can see, Mut’ah is one of the greatest form of worship and not just a Rukhsa (as Ibn ‘Abbas believed).

Again kindly bring forth the hadith. I pray its hadith that talks about "Mut'ah being forbidden on the day of Khaybar".

How old was Ibn Abbas(ra) when the Prophet died?

Apart from Ibn Abbas, Countless Sahabah continue to practice Mut'ah after the demise of the Prophet until Umar forbade it during his Khilafah in the case of Amr ibn Hurayth, another Sahabi who impregnated a slave as a result of Mut'ah.

Egbon calm down na, countless sahabas you say? Do you know what countless sahabas means? It's an fact that MAJORITY of the sahabas believed Mu'tah is prohibited, so if you say countless, then the remaining who knew it was prohibited by the Prophet(saw), Abubakar, Umar, Aliyy is far greater than the "countless".

Ma sha Allah! Sahabah were WRONG engaging in Mut'ah. Jabir ibn Abdullah al-Ansari, Asma bint Abu Bakr, Abdullah ibn Mas'ud, Abdullah ibn Abbas, AMR ibn Hurayth, Abu Sa'id al-Khudri, Salamah ibn Umayyah b. Khalaf and his brother, Ma'bad etc and not to forget Abu Bakr and Umar who allowed Mut'ah to continue during their Khulafau until Umar forbade it for a purpose.

The Prophet Muhammad(saw) prohibited Mu'tah in 100% Saheeh Hadiths in which was narrated by Imam Aliyy(ra) himself, the sahabas are not infallible, some might have not heard this prohibition. Are you now a Shia of sahabas or Shia Aliyu(ra)?!

Jabir ibn Abdullah reported Mut'ah being practiced by all the Sahabah during the time of the Messenger of Allah and during the time of Abu Bakr and Umar until near the end of the Caliphate of Umar. This hadith is SAHIH 100% but because you are averse to it, you deemed accusing your lofty Sahabah of engaging in "Evil, Bid'ah, Zina?"

Umar(ra) was confirming the prohibition of the Prophet Muhammad(saw), if the prohibition wasn't truly said by the Prophet(saw) then the people would have challenged Umar(ra).

Concerning Jabir Ibn Abdullah(ra), Ibn Hajar in Fath Al-Bari comments that the last statement by Jabir(then Omar prohibited us from them, and we never returned to them.”) 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.

This is correct because Jabir lived for another 5 decades after the death of Umar 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 Umar, since the prohibition of Umar has supporting evidence from the traditions of the Prophet.

To be continued......

BeansAndBread:


AlBaqir You don't get do you? Mu'tah was prohibited by the Prophet(saw) and it was narrated by Aliyy(ra), this is a saheeh hadith, the sahabas are not "infallibles", we only follow the Sahabas and the Ahlulbayt in their in GOOD/IHSAN not in their errors

@underlined,
CAN HADITH ABROGATE VERSE OF QURAN?
# It is crystal clear based on several Sunni corroborating ahadith/Tafsir (which include Ibn Kathir) that verse 24 of Sura Nisa was revealed to established Mut'ah to the extent that Ibn Kathir recorded that various Sahabah used to do the Tawil of that ayah by reciting it thus:
"Those of them with whom you contract Mut'ah for a specified period, give them their prescribed dowries"

* The point is: Was that ayah 24 of surah Nisa abrogated? Can hadith ever abrogated verse of the Quran? So long the verse existed in the Quran and not abrogated by any verse, hadith can never abrogate verse of Quran. Only Quran (a verse) can abrogate Quran (another verse) and it must be "later verse" abrogating the "previous verse".

@Bold, That Ali (as) reported Mut'ah being prohibited?!
# I have posted the hadith already (in both Sunni and Shi'i sources) perhaps you haven't read it or skipped it. Why would Ali refer to prohibition of Mut'ah at Khaybar (7 Hijrah) as evidence to stop Ibn Abbas from approving it while it is documented (in your Sihah) that Prophet ordered Mut'ah to be performed later at Fath Makkah (conquest of Mecca) in 8-9 Hijrah, then prohibited it; then re-order it at last Hajj, then prohibited it "finally"? Were Ali and Abbas absent from those two occasions (Fath Makkah and Hijjat wadah)? Or cant you discern that ordering of Mut'ah at Fath Makkah has abrogated the prohibition at Khaybar?

Had Ali (as) refer to prohibition at last Hajj, it would have make lot of sense. So using Ali's report of Khaybar is absolutely invalid. Besides, the lies (interpolation) in the hadith has already been exposed. Kindly review it above.

BeansAndBread:


Did you also forget that my "prestigious" Tafsir Ibn Kathir stated that mu'tah was abrogated and prohibited till the day of judgment? I wonder why you just cut and paste whatever suits you and leave the remaining! Tafsir Ibn Kathir does not support your stance in anyway http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=682&Itemid=59

That is where you should feel very sorry for Tafsir Ibn Kathir. Imam ibn Kathir reported ayah 24 of surah Nisai allowed Mut'ah, yet he tried to justify that some ahadith nullified it. How on earth will ahadith (even in their millions) abrogate verse of Quran? Allah says: Whatever ayah We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it... {surah baqarah: 106; an-Nahl:101}. These noble ayah rubbished the entire argument of Ibn Kathir and his likes who tried to justify that hadith can abrogate Quran.

* Note I am not a blind follower. Only things that match Quran in the Tafsir ibn Kathir are agreed with by me. Any other things that doesn't fit Quran is discarded. Another case is the issue of "ayat Rajm (verse of stoning)". Ibn Kathir presented a weird argument that was absolutely against Quran. We save that for another day though there exist a thread on that.

BeansAndBread:


@underlined, do you know how you sound(metaphorically) when say this? I never showed in anyway I'm a salafi or a wahabi, don't be in a haste, when you do that, it exposes your low self-esteem! As to why Ibn Abbas(ra) continued, I don't know!

You said "WE". And I ask "who are we? Salafiyyah or Wahabiyyah?" Its a question. Besides, your ideology and methodology expose who you are even if you do not proclaim yourself to be that. Anyway, if you feel offended by that, pardon my ignorance and judgment.

@underlined, funny. If truly Ali "corrected" Ibn Abbas and he continued to issue fatwa and practice Mut'ah, then Ibn Abbas never agree or believe whatever Ali had said. Or was Ibn Abbas a defiant? Ibn Abbas was a Shi'a of Ali. He was 100% with Ali at Jamal, Siffin and Nahrawan. He accepted Ali as his "Rightly Guided Khalif". Ibn Abbas never disobeyed and he was a reasonable and knowledgeable Sahabi. That so-called hadith that Ali scolded him about Mut'ah was nothing but fabrication because Ibn Abbas passed and practice Mut'ah till he died.

BeansAndBread:

How old was Ibn Abbas(ra) when the Prophet died?

Ibn Abbas was born 3-4 years before Hijrah. That made him 13 - 14 years old when Prophet died. And when Prophet died, he was on the wing of Ali (as).

# Funny enough, you quoted Abdullah ibn Zubair as one of the Sahabah that refuted Ibn Abbas on Mut'ah. How old was Ibn Zubayr when prophet died? Ibn Zubayr was born 2 -3rd year of Hijrah. Meaning he was around 7 - 8 years when Rasul died. Remember his mum Asma bint Abi Bakr used to practice Mut'ah even after the death of the Prophet. There are ahadith where Ibn Zubayr threatened Ibn Abbas when the later's argument on Mut'ah shot his (Ibn Zubayr) mouth. Ibn Abbas asked him to go and ask his mum about Mut'ah.

BeansAndBread:


Egbon calm down na, countless sahabas you say? Do you know what countless sahabas means? It's an fact that MAJORITY of the sahabas believed Mu'tah is prohibited, so if you say countless, then the remaining who knew it was prohibited by the Prophet(saw), Abubakar, Umar, Aliyy is far greater than the "countless".

# Again its a foul play that Ali reported prohibition of Mut'ah at Khaybar. That has been exposed. However, show us a single Sahih hadith where Abu Bakr or Umar reported that Prophet prohibited Mut'ah. Just one SAHIH HADITH.

# Jabir ibn Abdullah claimed "WE used to practice Mut'ah at the eras of the Messenger of Allah, Abu Bakr and Umar UNTIL Umar prohibited it in the case of Amr b. Hurayth, a Sahabi who practiced Mut'ah with a slave girl and got her impregnated. Interestingly, Umar simply "rebuked" Amr for practicing it with a SLAVE GIRL.

# The implication are:

* "WE" means ALL THE SAHABAH

* Abu Bakr and Umar allowed Mut'ah during their Khulafau.

* Umar prohibited it at its own volition. Never quoted prophet to have prohibited it.

BeansAndBread:


The Prophet Muhammad(saw) prohibited Mu'tah in 100% Saheeh Hadiths in which was narrated by Imam Aliyy(ra) himself, the sahabas are not infallible, some might have not heard this prohibition. Are you now a Shia of sahabas or Shia Aliyu(ra)?!

# Again Prophet will never contradict Quran. That is why report of Ali that Prophet prohibited Mut'a at Khaybar is untenable. And justifications for that is ALL sahabah continue to practice Mut'ah until Umar forbade it at later year of his Khilafah.

# Shi'i hadith that Ali reported Mut'ah to have been prohibited at Khaybar is Da'eef. I have posted it already.

BeansAndBread:


Umar(ra) was confirming the prohibition of the Prophet Muhammad(saw), if the prohibition wasn't truly said by the Prophet(saw) then the people would have challenged Umar(ra).

# How was Umar confirming Prophet's prohibition when he never quoted a single hadith from the Prophet that Mut'ah had been prohibited?

Umar, during his Khilafah was a fierce person. People feared him. According to Tafsir Kabir of Imam Fakhr din razi, Umar threatened that whoever practiced Mut'ah will be stoned. This is what scared people but die-hard sahabah like Ibn Abbas, Mu'awiyah ( imagine), et al continued to practice Mut'ah.

BeansAndBread:


Concerning Jabir Ibn Abdullah(ra), Ibn Hajar in Fath Al-Bari comments that the last statement by Jabir(then Omar prohibited us from them, and we never returned to them.”) 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.

This is correct because Jabir lived for another 5 decades after the death of Umar 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 Umar, since the prohibition of Umar has supporting evidence from the traditions of the Prophet.

To be continued......

# This is a big evidence that Sahabah (ALL OF THEM) did indeed continued to practice Mut'ah after the death of the Prophet, during the Khulafau of Abu Bakr and during the time of Umar till he prohibited it.

# Umar did Ijtihad in prohibiting Mut'ah and those who chose to follow his Ijtihad did. Those who never followed (e.g Ibn Abbas, Mu'awiyah [who was even Umar's governor in Syria) continue to practice and pass fatwa on Mut'ah. Then according to Imam Ibn Hazm who listed Sahabah that used to practice Mut'ah, he also listed many Tabi'in that never wavered in practicing Mut'ah.
Umar's Ijtihad can never overruled Quran. And his fatwa is not surprising for he has ruled against Quran in different occassion documented by Imam Muslim and others.

Example of Umar's Ijtihad against Quran

# Case of Tayammum

Imam Muslim (d. 261 H) documents:

Sa'id b. Abd al-Rahman b. Abza - his father:

A man came to Umar and said: "I have seminal discharges and I cannot find water (to perform ghusl)." He ('Umar) said, "DO NOT PERFORM SALAT." So, Ammar said, "Do you remember, O Amir al-Muminin, when I and you were in a military detachment and we had seminal discharges and could not find water and you ('Umar) did not perform the Salat. As for me, I rolled myself in dust and performed the Salat. So, the Prophet, peace be upon him, said, "It was enough for you to strike the soil with your hands and then blow and then wipe your face and palms." Umar said: "Fear Allah, O Ammar!" Therefore, he (Ammar) replied, "If you so like, I would not narrate it."
Ref: Sahih Muslim, vol.1, p.280, #112

# IMPLICATION OF UMAR'S RULING
Like I said in the case of Mut'ah above, those Sahabah who choose to follow Umar's Ijtihad against Quran did.

* Imam Muslim again records:

Shaqiq: I was sitting with Abd Allah (b. Mas'ud) and Abu Musa (al-Ash'ari). So, Abu Musa asked: "O Abu Abd al-Rahman, what is your opinion: If a man had a seminal discharge and could not find water for one month, how should he do about the Salat? 'Abd Allah replied, "He should NOT perform tayammum even if he cannot find water for a month".

Abu Musa then said, "What about this verse in Surat Maidah said, 'And you cannot find water, then perform tayammum with clean soil?" Abd Allah replied, "If they were allowed on the basis of this verse, there is a possibility that they would perform tayammum with soil even if water were available but cold." So, Abu Musa said to Abd Allah, "Have you not heard the statement of Ammar: "The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, sent me on an errand and I had a seminal discharge, but could not find water. So I rolled myself in the soil just as a beast rolls itself. Then, I came to the Prophet, peace be upon him, then and mentioned that to him and he said: "It would have been enough for you to do thus". Then he struck the earth with his hands once and wiped his right hand with the help of his left hand and the exterior of his palms and his face." 'Abd Allah replied: "Didn't you see that 'Umar was NOT satisfied with the statement of 'Ammar?"
Ref: {Sahih Muslim, vol.1, p.280, #110}

NASS VS IJTIHAD
# There is no room for Ijtihad (personal opinion/understanding) when there is an explicit command in the texts (Quran or Sunnah of the Prophet).

Quran declares:

"...And if you are ill, or on a journey, or one of you comes after answering the call of nature, or you have had sexual intercourse with women AND YOU CANNOT FIND WATER, perform tayammum with clean soil and rub therewith your faces and hands" {surah Nisa:43; surah Maidah:6}.

The condition attached in the Quran is crystal clear, and that was the exact state the questioner found himself and that was the condition stated for Umar ibn al-Khattab. Rather than judging with the Quran, he choose to gave his own fatwa of "La tusolli" (Do not pray (if you cannot find water)) even after being reminded by a Senior Sahabi, of the Sunnah of the Prophet, he never ruled by it. So, why would the case of Mut'ah be different?.

Na wa o! this topic again?! Albaqir, the Imams prohibited mut'a, you deny it, you whip up technicalities in translating the Qur'an to support your claims, your scholars bring spurious and ridiculous narrations and explanations to support mut'a. you guys do all these just to go against the sunni, for I see no objective reasons to hold on to mut'a other than sheer arrogance and divisive bias.

You do not wish mut'a for your daughter, or am i wrong? Just like your scholars had explained that mut'ah would humiliate a Muslimah!

And when did our scholars define Misyar as An-niqqah bi niyyahti tolaq?! Please provide evidence for this, for I remember to have posted 2 articles on Misyar, and the definition given is not what you state here.

@BeansAndBread, Jazakumullah khayran for your explanations and rebuttals, may Allah (SWT) continue to keep us firm on the right path ameen.

You can read more about Misyar and Mut'ah on this thread: https://www.nairaland.com/1946601/wont-stop-opposing-sunnah-mutah

sino:
Just like your scholars had explained that mut'ah would humiliate a Muslimah!

Apart from the fact that it has been shown to you that you rely so much on Da'if ahadith in Shia books, you care less for any whatsoever hadith of Shi'i origin. But those ahadith documented by Imam Muslim and Bukhari reported by Rafidha are Sahih

sino:

And when did our scholars define Misyar as An-niqqah bi niyyahti tolaq?! Please provide evidence for this, for I remember to have posted 2 articles on Misyar, and the definition given is not what you state here.

Fasten your seat belt and read your scholars definitions esp question thrown to Ibn Taymiyyah.

# Al-Hafiz ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (d. 852 H) opens the floor about this Sunni-invented marriage:

‘iyad said: “They unanimously agreed that the condition of invalidity is to openly disclose the condition (of time limit). So, if he intends, during the ‘aqd (i.e. the formalization of the marriage) to separate after a period, his marriage is correct. Only al-Awzā’ī disagreed, and he declared it invalid.

Ref: Fatḥ al-Bari Sharḥ Sahih al-Bukhari (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’rifah li al-Ṭabā’ah wa al-Nashr; 2nd edition), vol. 9, p. 150


# Imam An-Nawawi (d. 676):

Al-Qadi said, “They unanimously agreed that whoever contracts an (outwardly) permanent marriage while his (real) intention is to stay with her for only a period of time which he intends, then his marriage is correct and ḥalāl, and is not a mut’ah marriage. The mut’ah marriage is only that which occurs with the (previously) mentioned condition. However, Malik said, ‘It is not from the manners of the people.’ As for al-Awza'i, he disagreed and said, ‘It is a mut’ah marriage, and there is no good in it.’” And Allah knows best

Ref: Sahih Muslim bi Sharḥ al-Nawawi (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi; 1st edition, 1407 H), vol. 9, p. 182


# Sheik Ibn Taymiyyah:

He (Ibn Taymiyyah), may Allah be merciful to him, was asked about a running man, who goes through countries, spending a month or two months in each city, and then leaves it; and he fears that he might commit sin. So, can he marry during the period of his stay in those cities, divorcing her when he travels and giving her right to her? Or can he not? And is the marriage valid or not?

So, he (Ibn Taymiyyah) answered: He can marry. However, he contracts an (outwardly) permanent marriage. He cannot openly disclose any time limit as its condition, so that if he wishes he retains her, and if he wishes he divorces her. But, if he absolutely intends to divorce her at the end of his journey (in the city), the like of that is disliked (makruh), and there is dispute concerning the validity of such marriage. If he intends that when he travels, if he loves her he will retain her, and if otherwise, he will divorce her, that is permissible. However, to (openly) disclose a time limit as a condition, that would be the marriage of mut’ah, which is unanimously agreed to be haram by the four Imāms and others.

Ref: Majmu' al-Fatawa, vol 32, p. 106-107

# Ibn Taymiyyah continue:

The correct opinion is that it is not a mut’ah marriage, and it is not haram. And that is: he intends marriage and is desirous of it, as opposed to the practitioner of al-tahlil. However, he does not want the permanency of the woman with him; and this is not a condition, as the permanency of the woman with him is not obligatory. Rather, he has the right to divorce her. So, when he intends to divorce her after a period, he has intended a permissible affair.

Ref: ^Ibid, vol.32, p.147

# Imam Ibn Qudamah (d. 620 H):

If he marries her without (openly disclosing) any condition (of time limit), except that (in his heart) he intends to divorce her after a month, or after fulfilling his need in this town, then the marriage is valid according to the statement of the generality of the scholars except al-Awza'i. He said: “It is a mut’ah marriage”. The correct opinion is that there is no problem with it, and his intention does no harm."
Ref: al-Mughni (Dar al-kitab al-‘Arabi), vol. 7, p. 573

# Sayyid Sabiq:

The jurists unanimously agree that whoever marries a woman without (openly disclosing) any time limit as a condition, and his intention is to divorce her after a period of time, or after the fulfilment of his need in the town where he resides, then the marriage is valid. But, al-Awza'i disagreed and called it a mut’ah marriage.

Ref: Fiqh al-Sunnah (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi; 3rd edition, 1397 H), vol. 2, p.45

^Bros, where is Misyar in the above?

FYI, the issue with the nikkah with intention of divorce is quite simple, in the validity of nikkah, fixed period nullifies it, thus if someone now contracts a marriage and stating that it is for a fixed time, this kind of nikkah is baatil, void. But in a situation when the person conceals the fact that he intends it for a fixed time, the scholars had divergent views, and since the officiating Imam and the general public are not mind readers, or psychic, then such nikkah is valid based on the apparent. This is not difficult to grasp I believe.

The above is not the definition of Misyar, and any type of marriage (call it any fanciful names) that has a fixed time is prohibited in Islam. SIMPLE!

sino:
^Bros, where is Misyar in the above?

FYI, the issue with the nikkah with intention of divorce is quite simple, in the validity of nikkah, fixed period nullifies it, thus if someone now contracts a marriage and stating that it is for a fixed time, this kind of nikkah is baatil, void. But in a situation when the person conceals the fact that he intends it for a fixed time, the scholars had divergent views, and since the officiating Imam and the general public are not mind readers, or psychic, then such nikkah is valid based on the apparent. This is not difficult to grasp I believe.

The above is not the definition of Misyar, and any type of marriage (call it any fanciful names) that has a fixed time is prohibited in Islam. SIMPLE!

# honestly I don't have time for your dishonesty.

sino:

You do not wish mut'a for your daughter, or am i wrong?

Absolutely I never wished Mut'ah or Sunni-invented marriage with intention of divorce, for my daughter or any Muslimah. I wished permanent stable marriage for them.

# It has been proven (in previous dialogue involving you and I, and on this thread) that Mut'ah is not for every tom, dick and harry (as against your fantasy). It is an exceptional marriage in an exceptional cases (e.g a case of a soldier on a mission of years in foreign land). You can never forbid it because it has been misused. How many of Islamic practices have been abused!

According to Shi'i fiqh based on ahadith of our Aimmah, Mut'ah could be Halal, Makruh or Haram depending on circumstances. A resident married man, a married woman, a virgin; Mut'ah is absolutely HARAM for them.

Subject of mu'tah is eternal debate. At least we can agree from both sides that mut'ah is haram WITHOUT "mission".

What sense does it make for a muslim who intent to marry with pure intention to break it off at specific period?. That's evil intent to begin with.

Anyways, everyone should take chil pill. "Mut'ah" is now worldwide practice now without even know it, especially in the west. They would tell you "I just want to be with him/her for a little while".

Empiree:
Subject of mu'tah is eternal debate. At least we can agree from both sides that mut'ah is haram WITHOUT "mission".

What sense does it make for a muslim who intent to marry with pure intention to break it off at specific period?. That's evil intent to begin with.

Anyways, everyone should take chil pill. "Mut'ah" is now worldwide practice now without even know it, especially in the west. They would tell you "I just want to be with him/her for a little while".

hmm, what of the cases of Muslims who desire to have children but however do not want to stay in marriage with anyone? Is it wrong for any such person to get married to achieve his/ her purpose and afterwards file for divorce?
Or another case where a Muslim enters into a marriage with a terminally ill/ near to the grave ' individual knowing fully well the marriage won't last long at all but still marrying for other purposes Than chchildbearing