₦airaland Forum

Newnas:
presently, I'm in exam period and as a result I won't be able to respond Now.

But in shaa Allah once I finish my exams, all these distortions and viruses that you have mentioned will be clarified.

Newnas:
I would have responded now but its better to respond with solid responses especially the references and that will need a clear mind.

Newnas:
However, what I will say for now is that the aqeedah of the imams of sunnah including Ali, Fatimah and their offsprings is that Allah is pleased with all the companions of Muhammad alyhissolaat wassalaam and that includes Aisha, Hafsoh, Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Abu Hurayrah and all the other companions (both ansaar and muhaajiroon).
And this is what the Quran and Sunnah has stated.

Newnas:
I'll also mention that you have been very skillful in your taqiyyah!
you -rightly- called Aishah ummul mu'mineen (mother of the believers), I know you only said this out of taqiyyah and you don't believe this because to the shia anyone who doesn't believe Aisha is in hell then such a person is a disbeliever.

Newnas:
Allah called her rodiyaLLaahu anhuma and other other wives mothers of the believers, I don't think you know the implication of such title! This motherhood also encompasses Ali bn Abi tolib except if you will say he is not a believer!

Newnas:
The verses of tahrim only show that Aishah and Hafsoh are not infallible, only a deviant will interpret it to mean that they are misguided and deviants. If not Allah wouldn't have given them such great title of Ummul mu'mineen because it would mean giving the believers an evil mother and model, audhubiLLah.

Newnas:
Then we don't deny the fact the virtues of Ali, unlike the shia whose religion is nothing but Ali, Fatimoh and their offsprings! rather we affirm virtue for all the companions as the Quran and sunnah has stated and I am sure you are not ignorant of the texts regarding this.

Newnas:
In fact, If not because of the fear of the ignorant generality falling into your misguidance, I don't see any wisdom in debating a person who curses Abu Bakr and Umar and calls Abu Hurayrah a liar!

This is just a tip of the iceberg, once I finish my exams just know you are in serious soup!

Saifullah01:
Arguing with the Shia's is tantamount to looking for a pin in the darkness. They are Always looking for technicalities to cause 'shubha' (doubts) among believers.

Imagine one of the reason adduced by them above to exclude the wives of the prophet (AS) from his household as being the pronoun used (Kum) is masculine! Every amatuer student of Arabic knows that while feminine pronouns are exclusive to the feminine gender, the masculine pronouns are not, and are used generally to address groups of individual comprising of both males and females (as it is in the case of the prophets household AS).

Saifullah01:
Arguing with the Shia's is tantamount to looking for a pin in the darkness. They are Always looking for technicalities to cause 'shubha' (doubts) among believers.

Imagine one of the reason adduced by them above to exclude the wives of the prophet (AS) from his household as being the pronoun used (Kum) is masculine! Every amatuer student of Arabic knows that while feminine pronouns are exclusive to the feminine gender, the masculine pronouns are not, and are used generally to address groups of individual comprising of both males and females (as it is in the case of the prophets household AS).

The Shia's ideology of condemning the wives of the prophet is similar to the ideology of the khawarij of old, where sin is absolute and condemns a person. Thus to them if a person steal he is condemned to hell! This ideology is contrary to the teachings of the Quran where repentance not only expiate your sins but grants you double rewards, Allah says in the Quran “Except him who repents and believes and does a good deed so these are they of whom Allah changes the evil deeds to good ones and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful” (q25v70)

So for the sake of argument let's assume some of the sahabas and the wives of the prophet are guilty of what the Shia's accuse them of (May Allah forgive and guide us) can the Shia's with certainty claim they didn't repent and ask Allah's forgiveness, and if they did were they forgiven? My advice for my brothers is rather than waste our energy condemning our noble predecessors lets instead do what the Quran advices us; mind our business and pray for forgiveness for them.

“And those who come after them say: Our Lord! forgive us and those of our brethren who had precedence of us in faith, and donot allow any spite to remain in our hearts towards those who believe our Lord! surely Thou art Kind, Merciful.” (Q59v10)

“This is a people that have passed away; they shall have what they earned and you shall have what you earn, and you shall not be called upon to answer for what they did” (q2v141)

Finally, for every interpretation or understanding we claim to derive from the Quran we must ask ourselves some pertinent questions;
1. Do I have any predecessor among the sahabas who understood this verse the way I did.
2. How did the companions of the prophet understood the particular verse
3. How did scholars of the second and third generation after the prophet understood the verse

It would be the height of injustice to knowledge to feign a particular understanding of which neither the prophet (AS) not his sahabas nor the second and third rightly guided generation after them are a party of.

balash:
Where they doing anal or mouth action in the 70s. It's just civilisations

daretodiffer:
Yea, before our great great great great great great great great great great great great..... What about before the prophet (SAW) was born!


Anal and sex during menstruation are explicitly forbidden. However the issue of MouthAction and what have yous should be at the discretion of the couples.




Albaqir, stop derailing the thread. I and many others cannot be bothered with the same old nonsense.

daretodiffer:
Albaqir, stop derailing the thread. I and many others cannot be bothered with the same old nonsense.

daretodiffer:
Yea, before our great great great great great great great great great great great great..... What about before the prophet (SAW) was born!


Anal and sex during menstruation are explicitly forbidden. However the issue of MouthAction and what have yous should be at the discretion of the couples.




Albaqir, stop derailing the thread. I and many others cannot be bothered with the same old nonsense.

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).

lolaed:
This thread shouldn't make home page at all. It contains too many wrong information.

How can you call something that brings about creation filth.

There is a problem with people lifting articles off the Internet. There is a lot of wrong info all around. You need to learn from true scholars and stop spreading falsehood.

I hope tbaba1234 is still on this forum.

and do we have moderators? this shia-sunni nonsense is an unnecessary distraction.
@enieme

enieme:
hmm. Why not just point out the pArt that appears to be incorrect to u? I simply shared a fatwa, don't know what falsehood ur talking about.
There's difference of opinion if you know that. Beds, Simone already made correction about the issue of seamen being reffered to as filth.

lolaed:
I cant read on after the MouthAction part.

It is not outrightly forbidden in the quran or hadith. so I dont see why anybody will make non prohibited acts prohibited for themselves.

lolaed:
This thread shouldn't make home page at all. It contains too many wrong information.

How can you call something that brings about creation filth.

There is a problem with people lifting articles off the Internet. There is a lot of wrong info all around. You need to learn from true scholars and stop spreading falsehood.

I hope tbaba1234 is still on this forum.

and do we have moderators? this shia-sunni nonsense is an unnecessary distraction.
@enieme

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.

Newnas:
Exactly, Allah says your women are tilts for you so approach your tilts as you like.

The Arabic word used in the verse annaa shi'tum, annaa is used to refer to kayf i.e 'how' so it means approach them in anyway you like.

kiss anywhere, touch anywhere, do anything... there is no limit when Allah has permitted a thing except if Allah makes an exemption or if the medical profession shows that it's harmful.

An exemption by Allah is menstrual and anal intercourse.
A medical exemption could be having intercourse with your wife who just finished a surgery in her groin region.

Even in both cases it's permissible to still enjoy other parts of her except the real intercourse.

This matter is very clear to me, if you say it's impermissible then you are either accusing Allah of ignorance by telling Him what He should have exempted, or accusing of forgetfulness by telling Him what He should have done but forgot. These are the dangerous implications of this issue.

Prophet Musa alyhissolaat wassalaam told fir'aun (.... the knowledge is with my Lord, my Lord neither strays nor forgets) Surah taha.

So, Allah knew that this oral intercourse would still come to be, if it were evil He would have prohibited it.

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.

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.

Please avoid digression from the original topic.

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).

Newnas:
arguing with you guys is a waste of time.

Newnas:
arguing with you guys is a waste of time.

lolaed:
Read my previous post before this one and read other people's comments as well.
You may not like to hear that you'r wrong, but look at it this way. For anything wrong that you share with other people, if they make use of it, it's a sin against you.

I don't see how what you posted is fatwa. but it would be right if you can make corrections to it or remove it entirely.

usmanreigns:
thank you sister for that extensive and well prepared lecture .may Allah reward you . Also, I admire your linguistic prowess; please keep it up.

hikmojj:
Nice write up. May Allah preserve you upon righteousness. But please is Sperm an impurity? any evidence? jazakumullah bio khayr.

enieme:
Well, I shared it cos I found it online and I felt I may get other opinions regarding the topic and thankfully that ive got.
Next time I'll just post it in question then,rather than post an inconclusive fatwa

olawonder:
As far as the second aspect is concerned, which

If “MouthAction” means to insert the male privates into the wife’s mouth to the extent that she takes in the filth, whether this filth is semen (Mani) or pre-ejaculatory fluid (Madhi), or the man takes the filth of the woman in his mouth, then this is not permissible. Taking the filth with all its forms in the mouth is unlawful. The fluids which come out are impure, thus make it impermissible to take it orally.

However, if the same act is practiced by using a condom (to prevent the sexual fluids entering the mouth) or the wife merely kisses her husband's privates and the husband kisses her privates and they avoid any areas where there is pre-ejaculatory fluid, then this should be (according to this humble servant and Allah knows best) permissible, although disliked.

It is mentioned in the famous Hanafi Fiqh reference book, and one regarded as a fundamental source in the school, al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya:

“If a man inserts his privates in his wife’s mouth, it is said that it is disliked (makruh), and others said that it is not disliked.” (al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya, 5/372)

This clear text from one of the major Hanafi books indicates that the scholars differed on the issue of inserting the privates in the wife’s mouth. According to some it was disliked whilst others totally permitted it. But it should be remembered that this is in the case when no sexual fluids enter the spouse’s mouth as mentioned in detail earlier. Due to the act being considered against the proper conduct of a Muslim, most scholars have held this practice to be disliked (even in the situation where one does not orally take the filth).

This is what I have on this particular subject. I thought that there was a genuine need to shed some light on it from an Islamic perspective. I hope I have been able to clear the queries people have had on this topic.

And Allah Knows Best

[Mufti] Muhammad ibn Adam
Darul Iftaa
Leicester , UK

The part where the insertion of genital in mouth is 'permissible' is, in my opinion, correct. Because, since there were no condoms in that era, we cannot say it is permissible only if condom is used; in as much as a collection agrees with it, then it should NOT be rules as disliked or not permissible.

enieme:
Well, there's difference of opinion and one can choose to follow whichever school of thought one wishes to on diff issues