This is new video and he seems to address the issue of mulikyamin here again. He is appealing to men to take on second wife

Also, sheikh insists that Quran speaks of "orphan girls" not slave. Remember albaqir and ikupakuti disagreed with him?. He seems to be talking about ملك اليمين

You are free to disagree with him. The sheikh is explaining other form of nikkah which i was asking sino, and that's mulkiyamin which sunnis largely seen as 'doesn't exist" today due to 'misinterpretation of mulkiya min to mean slaves. I have said it before that mulikiyamin is other form of nikkah that is unconventional. The sheikh gets angry talking about this and really gets emotional that many muslims today may charge a muslim for zina if taken a woman as mulikiyamin. What i want to understand is distinction btw nikāḥ al-mutʿah and mulikiyamin


Enjoy the show if you can

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqkUNpE1waI

AlBaqir:


# Kindly leave "you guys" out of the picture. So, it seems your conclusion now is that Mut'ah is not Zina IF it is done out of necessity but becomes Zina if there is no condition attached?

My conclusion had always been that mut'ah is haram!And I wouldn't leave you guys, you are promoting what the Prophet (SAW) had prohibited, not to even mention that you guys have turned it into prostitution especially in Iran like those men who had sex change, who eventually sell their fake sex for money in the name of mut'ah.

AlBaqir:

1. # Imam Tabari, Ibn Kathir, al-Hakam, Dhahabi, all documents:

Abū Naḍrah: I read to Ibn ‘Abbās: {Those of them with whom you contract mut’ah, give them their prescribed dowries} [4:24]. He (Ibn Abbas) said: “{Those of them with whom you contract mut’ah for a specified period}”. Abū Naḍrah said: I said, “We do not recite it like that!” Ibn ‘Abbās replied, “I swear by Allāh, Allāh certainly revealed it like that.”


2. You yourself just quoted Hadith that Ibn Abbas replied that Mut'ah was practised at the lifetime of the Prophet.

I have challenged you to show me this statement in the Qur'an, it is not there, it was never there, and it can never be there! Secondly, I was referring to the narration where Ibn Abbas was challenged for being lenient, he didn't quote the Qur'an, and didn't quote the Prophet (SAW) directly!

AlBaqir:

# Jabir Ibn Abdullah al-Ansari (a prominent Sahabi for that matter) made two claims which is the conclusion of my point. While he was lecturing the confused Tabi'ieen said:

1. WE USED TO PERFORM MUT'AH. What does he meant by "WE"?

2. During the time of Nabi, Abubakr and Umar UNTIL towards the end of Umar's reign.

* Abubakr ruled for 2 + years

* Umar ruled for 12 years

Kindly do the math. Even if you conclude at 7 years, am good.

Bros, na you be the information minister na, give us the details, who were they? who did they do the mut'ah with? How did they do this their mut'ah?

AlBaqir:

# So, @underlined, in one word, there is no defence for ALL the sahabah that continued to practised MUT'AH after Nabi allegedly prohibited it.




Perhaps, but:
# The point still remains that Sunni best of the best Tabi'ieen like SA'ID Ibn JUBAYR, A'ta, Tawus and the rest of MAKKAN'S jurists (except he with a clear record of retraction) continue to followed the sahabah who enjoyed and enjoined MUT'AH after the death of Nabi.

There is always the excuse of ignorance, and for the record, I have not seen any narration showing any sahabah continued to practice mut'ah after being confronted or challenged...If you want to claim contrary, bring the narration, let us all see!

AlBaqir:


# Kindly tell me how I do not have right to fault an out of placed and suspected Hadith?. Who give right to those who sanctions Hadith into sahih, daeef, mawdoo? No one give anybody the right. They only follow a system looking through the sanad and matn.


# That's a very good point @underline. Why is it so? Sunni have yet another sahih Hadith that says Nabi and his entourage only spent 3 DAYS at Khaybar. Remember, Khaybar was just at outskirt of Madina faah, never and never far away from home (Madina).

3 DAYS outing NEAR Madina, and you want me to believe:

1. Sahabah were caught up by sexual necessity (to the extent of castration) hence Nabi allowed MUT'AH for them then prohibited it? There is NO single reference that Mut'ah was EVER in practice before.


2. Now, again @underlined, how is it possible that Jabir Ibn Abdullah, Abdullah Ibn Umar, Anas Ibn Malik (carrier of Nabi's àgé aluwala), Zahir Al-Aslam, Abdullah Ibn Abbas and THE REST of ALL SAHABAH that participated in the conquest of Khaybar except ONE person, Ali missed the "prohibition of Mut'ah" announcement at Khaybar BUT DO NOT MISSED PROHIBITION OF EATING DONKEY'S meat?

Sino, Please think. Empiree, Lanrexlan, kazlaw2000, Rilwayne001, tintingz, and every sensible human being, tori Olohun am I the one assuming nonsense here ni?


3. Lastly, The same Ali that allegedly cautioned Ibn Abbas over MUT'AH referring to alleged prohibition at Khaybar was quoted in yet another Sunni sahih Hadith thus:

‘Alī, may Allāh be pleased with him, said: ‘If ‘Umar, may Allāh be pleased with him, had not forbidden mut’ah, none would have committed zinā except a wretched person.

* Did he forgot the alleged Khaybar prohibition ni?

See all these your speculations are not knowledge, you are just theorizing, and you want everyone to accept that?! Scholars work with what is available, use a very strict process in authenticating a narration, mind you, this is also the process employed with the Qur'an, so if you want to criticize a narration, please do so academically, not your own assumptions and speculations!

Also, I always praise Allah (SWT) for making Ali (ra) come as the fourth Caliph, for one wouldn't have known that Ali (ra) never changed the rulings of his predecessors (because they were on the truth)...So why didn't Ali (ra) revoke the prohibition by Umar (ra)?! And let me also do what you do, why didn't Ali (ra) quote the Qur'an, at least Ali (ra) is the gate of knowledge, he knows the whole Qur'an and knows the Shari'ah, how can he be comfortable to allow a man change the law of Allah (swt) which according to you was clearly stated in the Qur'an?!

Now you THINK!

AlBaqir:

# Now you are talking from two mouths saying:

1. They might not be aware of final prohibition

2. Might think Prophet's prohibition doesn't matter when necessity present itself.

Bro, do you think at all?

* Jabir, Ali, Ibn Abbas, Ibn Mas'ud, Ibn Umar, to mention but few. All of them participated and reported Hadith from all the 3 occasions (Khaybar, Fat'h Makkah, Hajjat wada) that Nabi allegedly prohibited MUT'AH yet "only Ali refer to old skull Khaybar's prohibition, and not later alleged prohibition"? The rests did not even refer to either of the three occasions!

* Your second assumption is worse. The case of Mu'awiyah or Amr Ibn Hurayth (a Sahabi) who impregnated a slave girl was never out of the so-called "pork-haram-halal" necessity. Kódà Umar gann dasi saying, "why doing MUT'AH and impregnated a SLAVE GIRL? Why not other than her (i.e a free woman)?

See, I am only finding excuses for Ibn Abbas (ra), I can only do that and not pass judgement when I have limited information, and for the fact that Ibn Abbas (ra) compared mut'ah to eating pork, then he probably believed it to be haram as well!

Mu'awiyah did mut'ah when?! And did Amr Ibn Hurayth continued to indulge in mut'ah after the said inciddent?! Ignorance can be used for Amr Ibn Hurayth, because he didn't challenge Umar (ra) nor did he continue to do mut'ah afterwards. By the way, a sahabah involving himself in haram does not justify the acts na abi?! Again, sahabahs are not infallible!

sino:


My conclusion had always been that mut'ah is haram!And I wouldn't leave you guys, you are promoting what the Prophet (SAW) had prohibited, not to even mention that you guys have turned it into prostitution especially in Iran like those men who had sex change, who eventually sell their fake sex for money in the name of mut'ah.

# Indeed?!

# 1. All your so-called ahadith on MUT'AH prohibition are nothing but MYTH. Just, one of it, prohibition at Khaybar is under heavy shell on this thread. Am waiting for your "right thinking" self to defend our scrutiny over it.

NB: Please don't give me that pathetic excuse, "you have no right to say one Hadith is forged". If Qur'an is open to all sort of challenge to verify its authenticity (as a verse in sura Nisa proposes), what is collection of Hadith compiled 100s of years after Nabi's demise?!.

# So, if you take up the challenge of Khaybar, then we proceed to the other so-called prohibition at Fat'h Makkah and Hajjat wada.


2. Please, am not interested in your fantasies over Iran or whatever is going on there, or your usual ways of digressing the main theme of the thread. Please focus on points.

sino:

I have challenged you to show me this statement in the Qur'an, it is not there, it was never there, and it can never be there! Secondly, I was referring to the narration where Ibn Abbas was challenged for being lenient, he didn't quote the Qur'an, and didn't quote the Prophet (SAW) directly!

# The word " istamta" is "MUT'AH". Lobatan. And best of your Mufassirun have reported various sahabah and sunni Tabi'ieen that interpreted the verse to be "MUT'AH verse". So, the report is Mutawattir

Like I said earlier, that is the reason why some of your scholars like Imam Shafi'i, Ibn Hazm et al laboured hard to tender other verses that abrogated the verse.


# On your second point: the point remained that you have a sahih Hadith which clearly established Ibn Abbas belief on MUT'AH when he claimed and sworn to Allah that the verse do not only refer to MUT'AH but also used to be read with " for a specific period". And interestingly, Ubai Ibn Kaab (best Quranic reciter) and few other sahabah recited the ayah with same phrase as Ibn Abbas.

sino:

Bros, na you be the information minister na, give us the details, who were they? who did they do the mut'ah with? How did they do this their mut'ah?

# Please stop messing with yourself. I am not hear to win any medal. You might oppose something, fine but be sincere to your intellect. The challenge is still there for you:

* Jabir reported that "We used to practice MUT'AH at the time of Nabi, Abubakr and Umar UNTIL towards the last reign of Umar because of the case of Amr Ibn Hurayth (a Sahabi that impregnated a slave girl in MUT'AH relationship).

Again Mr sino:

1. Who were "WE"

2. From Abubakr reign to Umar's last years of governing, how many years is that?

Don't be ridiculous, man.

sino:

There is always the excuse of ignorance, and for the record, I have not seen any narration showing any sahabah continued to practice mut'ah after being confronted or challenged...If you want to claim contrary, bring the narration, let us all see!

* The question is NO sahabah other than Ibn Abbas was confronted on MUT'AH yet He NEVER surrender on MUT'AH verdict (whether with or without condition)

# Umar after MUT'AH was practised under his watchful eyes for years since the time of Abubakr ONLY imposed punishment on sahabah who used to practice MUT'AH. Umar NEVER EVER cited or reminded people of an alleged prohibition of Mut'ah.

sino:


See all these your speculations are not knowledge, you are just theorizing, and you want everyone to accept that?! Scholars work with what is available, use a very strict process in authenticating a narration, mind you, this is also the process employed with the Qur'an, so if you want to criticize a narration, please do so academically, not your own assumptions and speculations!

# Absolutely those challenges are big weight on your spine. Wallahi, they are powerful "theories".

Alhamdulillah you made mention of the Qur'an. So let me cite an ayah:

"Do they not contemplate Qur'an, had it been from other than Allah, they would have seen MUCH DISCREPANCIES in it"

# So, this is an open challenge. And here you are very afraid and pathetic of my "theories" upon that distorted, fake Hadith. I don't need to be a Saudi or Sunni scholar before I can challenge any Hadith written 100s of years after the sahabah. Those so-called books of ahadith are not infallible books. They are filled with errors and fabrications.

For your information, we have cases today whereby some ahadith have been EXPUNGED from sahih Muslim, Sunan Tirmidhi etc, whereas are used to be part of those books 100s of years back.

* So, my "theories" are 100% valid against that myth of a Hadith.

sino:

Also, I always praise Allah (SWT) for making Ali (ra) come as the fourth Caliph, for one wouldn't have known that Ali (ra) never changed the rulings of his predecessors (because they were on the truth)...So why didn't Ali (ra) revoke the prohibition by Umar (ra)?! And let me also do what you do, why didn't Ali (ra) quote the Qur'an, at least Ali (ra) is the gate of knowledge, he knows the whole Qur'an and knows the Shari'ah, how can he be comfortable to allow a man change the law of Allah (swt) which according to you was clearly stated in the Qur'an?!

Now you THINK!

# I can NEVER fall for your little tactics of derailing. If you want my reply on the above, tag me on public thread. Focus on the theme of the thread.

sino:

See, I am only finding excuses for Ibn Abbas (ra), I can only do that and not pass judgement when I have limited information, and for the fact that Ibn Abbas (ra) compared mut'ah to eating pork, then he probably believed it to be haram as well!

# Please stand down on Ibn Abbas. There's nothing for you on his case. Whichever way you look at it, it is lose lose lose situation for you.

sino:

Mu'awiyah did mut'ah when?! And did Amr Ibn Hurayth continued to indulge in mut'ah after the said inciddent?! Ignorance can be used for Amr Ibn Hurayth, because he didn't challenge Umar (ra) nor did he continue to do mut'ah afterwards. By the way, a sahabah involving himself in haram does not justify the acts na abi?! Again, sahabahs are not infallible!

# I have presented an athar about Mu'awiyah at the opening of this thread. There's no story on that. And as to "when"? The athar is informative in the fact that the Tabi that witnessed the scene and became bemused by it, going via his biography indicate the "when".

# Case of Amr:

1. Umar too didn't challenge Amr on any prohibition verdict. He even rebuked Amr, " why doing MUT'AH with a slave and got her impregnated, why not with a free woman".

2. Umar's imposed "personal" ruling and punishment of stoning on whoever continue to practice MUT'AH under his watch (as a result of Amr's case).

3. Lastly, @underline:

# Do you now agree there is no "ignorance excuse" of sahabah practising MUT'AH?

# Saying Prophet prohibited MUT'AH while "WE" used to practice MUT'AH after his demise completely make them: people of Zina and devifiant to Prophet's instruction.

AlBaqir:


# Why didn't Prophet prescribed fasting for those who intend to castrate themselves when their sexual urge was uncontrollable and their wives were not available with them?


# And can fasting suppress sexual desires? It can for some, and it cannot for some (especially after iftar).

A golden example: Allah revealed the secret acts of some sahabah in the holy month of Ramadan. Note: part of the initial rules and obligations of Ramadan fasting is NO SEX with your couple during the days and NIGHT. Yet, some sahabah were not able to keep up with this rule. Then, Allah revealed:

Surah Al-Baqara, Verse 187:

It is made lawful to you to go into your wives on the night of the fast; they are an apparel for you and you are an apparel for them; Allah knew that you acted unfaithfully to yourselves, so He has turned to you (mercifully) and removed from you (this burden); so now be in contact with them and seek what Allah has ordained for you, and eat and drink until the whiteness of the day becomes distinct from the blackness of the night at dawn, then complete the fast till night, and have not contact with them while you keep to the mosques; these are the limits of Allah, so do not go near them. Thus does Allah make clear His communications for men that they may guard (against evil).

Empiree,

And let those who find not the financial means for marriage keep themselves chaste, until Allah enriches them of His Bounty. And such of your slaves as seek a writing (of emancipation), give them such writing, if you know that they are good and trustworthy. And give them something yourselves out of the wealth of Allah which He has bestowed upon you. And force not your maids to prostitution, if they desire chastity, in order that you may make a gain in the (perishable) goods of this worldly life. But if anyone compels them (to prostitution), then after such compulsion, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to those women, i.e. He will forgive them because they have been forced to do this evil action unwillingly). (Qur'an 24:33)

Well, I don't think I need to write much after the above...Allah (SWT) said keep yourself chaste, and didn't say contract mut'ah!

And AlBaqir was asking why a slave girl with regards to Umar (ra)'s statement to Amr Ibn Hurayth, well, the above verse gives a probable insight to the reason behind Umar's statement.

sino:


And AlBaqir was asking why a slave girl with regards to Umar (ra)'s statement to Amr Ibn Hurayth, well, the above verse gives a probable insight to the reason behind Umar's statement

Sometimes I ask myself if you think before you post at all. And what an unintelligent "probable insight".

# So your theory is that, Amr Ibn Hurayth actually forced "her slave" into fornication while she wish to be chaste?!

1. If that is the case, why did the report claimed it was MUT'AH?

2. Why did Umar not punished him for Zina, 100 lashes or stoning to death?

3. Why did Umar challenged him on alternative?

4. Did Umar covered the "Zina" up or were the narrators that covered it up, and smuggled that Amr performed "MUT'AH" instead of saying "he forced his slave into prostitution"?

You like chewing more than you can swallow.

Sino, is your last post to me in reference to the video I posted up there? . In that case, obviously that's referring to men but sheikh is talking about overwhelming single females who can't find husbands bcus most male can't afford to take on second wife etc. .

So that verse appears to be talking to men.

sino:


Empiree,

And let those who find not the financial means for marriage keep themselves chaste, until Allah enriches them of His Bounty. And such of your slaves as seek a writing (of emancipation), give them such writing, if you know that they are good and trustworthy. And give them something yourselves out of the wealth of Allah which He has bestowed upon you. And force not your maids to prostitution, if they desire chastity, in order that you may make a gain in the (perishable) goods of this worldly life. But if anyone compels them (to prostitution), then after such compulsion, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to those women, i.e. He will forgive them because they have been forced to do this evil action unwillingly). (Qur'an 24:33)

Well, I don't think I need to write much after the above...Allah (SWT) said keep yourself chaste, and didn't say contract mut'ah!

And AlBaqir was asking why a slave girl with regards to Umar (ra)'s statement to Amr Ibn Hurayth, well, the above verse gives a probable insight to the reason behind Umar's statement.

Jazakumullah khaeran my Brother! The truth is crystal clear!

MrOlai:


Jazakumullah khaeran my Brother! The truth is crystal clear!

You contributed nothing in this thread after you are confronted. So you do not have the right to keep posting nonsense pics and accusing ppl.

Besides, sino's so post you quoted is for something else

AlBaqir:


# Indeed?!

# 1. All your so-called ahadith on MUT'AH prohibition are nothing but MYTH. Just, one of it, prohibition at Khaybar is under heavy shell on this thread. Am waiting for your "right thinking" self to defend our scrutiny over it.

NB: Please don't give me that pathetic excuse, "you have no right to say one Hadith is forged". If Qur'an is open to all sort of challenge to verify its authenticity (as a verse in sura Nisa proposes), what is collection of Hadith compiled 100s of years after Nabi's demise?!.

# So, if you take up the challenge of Khaybar, then we proceed to the other so-called prohibition at Fat'h Makkah and Hajjat wada.


2. Please, am not interested in your fantasies over Iran or whatever is going on there, or your usual ways of digressing the main theme of the thread. Please focus on points.

Bring academic analysis and not this your prejudiced opinions! If this is how to claim hadith are fabricated, then we wouldn't even have the Qur'an as an authentic book!

AlBaqir:

# The word " istamta" is "MUT'AH". Lobatan. And best of your Mufassirun have reported various sahabah and sunni Tabi'ieen that interpreted the verse to be "MUT'AH verse". So, the report is Mutawattir

Like I said earlier, that is the reason why some of your scholars like Imam Shafi'i, Ibn Hazm et al laboured hard to tender other verses that abrogated the verse.

You can lie for africa! Go to the thread I had presented the link previously, were you made similar claim of which I debunked! I don't have the luxury of time to go back and forth on this! A brother gave a challenge on here too, but you stylishly avoided that post

AlBaqir:

# On your second point: the point remained that you have a sahih Hadith which clearly established Ibn Abbas belief on MUT'AH when he claimed and sworn to Allah that the verse do not only refer to MUT'AH but also used to be read with " for a specific period". And interestingly, Ubai Ibn Kaab (best Quranic reciter) and few other sahabah recited the ayah with same phrase as Ibn Abbas.

Bros, bring where such recital is in the Qur'an, if it is not there, and was never there, then it was their personal opinion, they didn't say the Prophet (SAW) told them that it is mut'ah abi?! There is no sababu nuzul that states it was revealed in the case of mut'ah, no prophetic tradition stating that the Prophet (SAW) used it to declare permissibility of mut'ah, why will you, based on odd narrations claim that it is so?! Even Ibn Abba (ra) did not use it as a defence for his leniency! Aba! Na so you desperate so?! And you said you will never participate in it, I wonder why your blood come dey hot like this?! I hope your wife is with you in Iran o....

AlBaqir:

# Please stop messing with yourself. I am not hear to win any medal. You might oppose something, fine but be sincere to your intellect. The challenge is still there for you:

* Jabir reported that "We used to practice MUT'AH at the time of Nabi, Abubakr and Umar UNTIL towards the last reign of Umar because of the case of Amr Ibn Hurayth (a Sahabi that impregnated a slave girl in MUT'AH relationship).

Again Mr sino:

1. Who were "WE"

2. From Abubakr reign to Umar's last years of governing, how many years is that?

Don't be ridiculous, man.

"We" can just be 2 people and can be more. If you claim they are plenty, then you should be able to get the information I requested for na. So the sahabas practiced mut'ah a lot, and we do not have ample narrations of how, why, where and when? Does that make sense?!

AlBaqir:

* The question is NO sahabah other than Ibn Abbas was confronted on MUT'AH yet He NEVER surrender on MUT'AH verdict (whether with or without condition)

Bros, give me just 1 narration that says Ibn Abbas (ra) did mut'ah himself after he was challenged. Ibn Abbas (ra) clarified himself, he said mut'ah is like eating PORK, everyone knows that PORK is HARAM!

AlBaqir:

# Umar after MUT'AH was practised under his watchful eyes for years since the time of Abubakr ONLY imposed punishment on sahabah who used to practice MUT'AH. Umar NEVER EVER cited or reminded people of an alleged prohibition of Mut'ah.

Here is what Umar (ra) did:

Ibn Umar (ra) said that when Omar ibn Khattab (ra) became the Caliph he addressed the people and said: Verily, Allaah's Messenger (SAW) granted us the permission of temporary marriage three times. Then he declared it unlawful. By Allaah! I do not know any one contracting a temporary marriage while he is fortified by wedlock, but I shall stone him to death except that he presents four men who bear testimony that Allaah's messenger (SAW) made it lawful after he had made it unlawful. (Source: Sunan Ibn Majah, Chapter: Prohibition of Nikkah Mut’ah haith number 1963 Grade: Hassan by Albaniy)

Guess what?! No one stood up to quote the verse of Mut'ah or cite the Prophet (SAW)....I guess they were too afraid of Umar.

AlBaqir:


# Absolutely those challenges are big weight on your spine. Wallahi, they are powerful "theories".

Alhamdulillah you made mention of the Qur'an. So let me cite an ayah:

"Do they not contemplate Qur'an, had it been from other than Allah, they would have seen MUCH DISCREPANCIES in it"

# So, this is an open challenge. And here you are very afraid and pathetic of my "theories" upon that distorted, fake Hadith. I don't need to be a Saudi or Sunni scholar before I can challenge any Hadith written 100s of years after the sahabah. Those so-called books of ahadith are not infallible books. They are filled with errors and fabrications.

For your information, we have cases today whereby some ahadith have been EXPUNGED from sahih Muslim, Sunan Tirmidhi etc, whereas are used to be part of those books 100s of years back.

* So, my "theories" are 100% valid against that myth of a Hadith.

O ga o! Go online and see people with shallow knowledge and poor comprehnsion claim that there are discrepancies in the Qur'an, but shouting that this does not make sense or this is in contrary to this does not mean you have an idea of what you are talking about....Again, go to a reputable madrasah and learn and stop this your armchair hadith analyst based on your biased opinions and belief systems...We know that you only believe in hadiths that seemingly supports your weird beliefs, and turn blind eyes to the ones that clearly destroys them.

AlBaqir:

# I can NEVER fall for your little tactics of derailing. If you want my reply on the above, tag me on public thread. Focus on the theme of the thread.

Just say you do not have a response, I will understand.

AlBaqir:

# Please stand down on Ibn Abbas. There's nothing for you on his case. Whichever way you look at it, it is lose lose lose situation for you.

Nope, you are the one on the loosing end here, Ibn Abbas (ra) didn't do mut'ah, and there is a narration where he explained what he meant by permitting mut'ah stating that it is like eating PORK, and PORK is HARAM. So no escape for you on this one

AlBaqir:

# I have presented an athar about Mu'awiyah at the opening of this thread. There's no story on that. And as to "when"? The athar is informative in the fact that the Tabi that witnessed the scene and became bemused by it, going via his biography indicate the "when".

# Case of Amr:

1. Umar too didn't challenge Amr on any prohibition verdict. He even rebuked Amr, " why doing MUT'AH with a slave and got her impregnated, why not with a free woman".

2. Umar's imposed "personal" ruling and punishment of stoning on whoever continue to practice MUT'AH under his watch (as a result of Amr's case).

3. Lastly, @underline:

# Do you now agree there is no "ignorance excuse" of sahabah practising MUT'AH?

# Saying Prophet prohibited MUT'AH while "WE" used to practice MUT'AH after his demise completely make them: people of Zina and devifiant to Prophet's instruction.

Abeg tell us when Muawiyah did mut'ah! You are really funny, you just make up stories in your head and want right thinking Muslims to follow you in such self delusion?!

I have quoted a challenge made by Umar (ra), go and bring a rebuttal for that!

Amr ibn Hurayth impregnated a slave girl and claim he did mut'ah with her. Please inform us what is the ruling for a pregnancy from mut'ah?! Does the man have to be responsible for the upkeep?! Does the woman get anything except for the cheap thing which was used to contract the mut'ah?! What right does the slave girl have in such a relationship?! Why wouldn't Umar (ra) ask him why he had to do such with a slave girl with so many limitations?! Of course, Amr might not have been able to convince a free woman into such a relationship, hence he went for a slave who cannot reject him. Again, Amr did not continue with contracting mut'ah up and down after that, does it not suggest he wasn't aware of the prohibition in the first instance?! Wouldn't Amr ibn Hurayth protest against the ruling of Umar (ra) if he was sure that the Prophet (SAW) allowed it forever?!

Empiree:
You contributed nothing in this thread after you are confronted. So you do not have the right to keep posting nonsense pics and accusing ppl.

Besides, sino's so post you quoted is for something else

Because Nairaland is your father's property? Abi?

AlBaqir:


Sometimes I ask myself if you think before you post at all. And what an unintelligent "probable insight".

# So your theory is that, Amr Ibn Hurayth actually forced "her slave" into fornication while she wish to be chaste?!

1. If that is the case, why did the report claimed it was MUT'AH?

2. Why did Umar not punished him for Zina, 100 lashes or stoning to death?

3. Why did Umar challenged him on alternative?

4. Did Umar covered the "Zina" up or were the narrators that covered it up, and smuggled that Amr performed "MUT'AH" instead of saying "he forced his slave into prostitution"?

You like chewing more than you can swallow.

First of all, does the slave girl belong to Amr Ibn Hurayth?! Because if she was his slave, then there would have been no case to begin with!

This is probably a case of ignorance on the part of Amr, since his excuse for impregnating a slave girl is that he did mut'ah. The slave girl had no choice because she was a slave! She had no say per se, she might be looking for a way to gain her freedom...So you chew on the possibilities, and stop thinking in one direction!

Empiree:
Sino, is your last post to me in reference to the video I posted up there? . In that case, obviously that's referring to men but sheikh is talking about overwhelming single females who can't find husbands bcus most male can't afford to take on second wife etc. .

So that verse appears to be talking to men.

Nope, my post is a response to you and AlBaqir with respect to not being able to do Nikkah due to some constraint like lack of money etc. AlBaqir wants us to believe that it is impossible to stay chaste (for some people), and fasting is not 100% solution. I would have even asked him when is it likely for one to be sexually active and start contracting mut'ah, I mean we have 12 years old who are sexually active, perhaps they can start doing that from that age....

MrOlai:


Jazakumullah khaeran my Brother! The truth is crystal clear!

Wa iyyakum brother, except we want to deceive ourselves, the truth is CRYSTAL CLEAR ma sha ALLAH!

sino:

Here is what Umar (ra) did:

Ibn Umar (ra) said that when Omar ibn Khattab (ra) became the Caliph he addressed the people and said: Verily, Allaah's Messenger (SAW) granted us the permission of temporary marriage three times. Then he declared it unlawful. By Allaah! I do not know any one contracting a temporary marriage while he is fortified by wedlock, but I shall stone him to death except that he presents four men who bear testimony that Allaah's messenger (SAW) made it lawful after he had made it unlawful. (Source: Sunan Ibn Majah, Chapter: Prohibition of Nikkah Mut’ah haith number 1963 Grade: Hassan by Albaniy)

Guess what?! No one stood up to quote the verse of Mut'ah or cite the Prophet (SAW)....I guess they were too afraid of Umar.

Inna lillahi Wa inna ilayhi rajiun The Hadith is Da'if. Before given you my proof, let me ask you the following:


# Why didn't Umar stoned Amr Ibn Hurayth when he impregnated a slave girl he had MUT'AH with? Why did Umar even proposed Amr should have done MUT'AH with other than a slave? Is MUT'AH with slave not merit Umar's punishment of stoning?

# Did Umar forgot this alleged Hadith ni only for him to remember few years to the end of his reign? MUT'AH were continuously being performed by SAHABAH during Abubakr, and Umar's reign UNTIL toward the last reign of Umar!


# Why did Ali said, "Had Umar not banned MUT'AH for people, only a wretched would have commit Zina"? Was it Umar's ban or Nabi's ban? It even clearly showed that People were seriously into MUT'AH then.


Too much discrepancies (as Qur'an puts it).

Ahlu Sunnah, fear Allah with all these fabrications in the name of Rasul and your sahabah.



# SO TO THE HADITH:

NOTE: The hadith is actually ḍa’if. Concerning one of its narrators,

1. al-Hafiz (d. 852 H) states:

Aban b. ‘Abd Allah b. Abi Hazim b. Sakhr b. al-‘Aylah al-Bajali al-Ahmasi al-Kuf: Sadūq (very truthful), there is weakness in his memory.

Source: Aḥmad b. ‘Alī b. Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī, Taqrīb al-Tahdhīb (Beirut: Dār al-Maktabah al-‘Ilmiyyah; 2nd edition, 1415 H) [annotator: Muṣtafā ‘Abd al-Qādir ‘Aṭā], vol. 1, p. 51, # 140 108


2. Imam Ibn Hibban (d. 354 H) give us more details


Aban b. ‘Abd Allah al-Bajalī, from the people of Kūfa, and he was the one called Abān b. Abī Ḥāzim. He narrated from Abān b. Taghlib and the people of Kūfah. Al-Thawrī, Wakī’ and the people narrated from him. He was one of those whose mistakes were terrible, and who narrated manākīr (repugnant reports) without corroboration. Al-Hamdānī informed us, and said: I heard ‘Amr b. ‘Ali saying: “I never heard Yahya b. Sa'id al-Qaṭṭān ever narrating anything from him” – he meant Aban al-Bajali.

Source: Abū Ḥātim Muḥammad b. Ḥibbān b. Aḥmad al-Tamīmī al-Bustī, Kitāb al-Majrūḥīn [annotator: Maḥmūd Ibrāhīm Zāyad], vol. 1, p. 99

So, how on earth can such Hadith be "Hasan"? Aban was in a worst situation. I wonder how Albani made such blunder grading the Hadith " hasan". I can give you link to those books for verification.



# Anyway, the theme of this thread is 100% established: Sahabah continue to approve and perform MUT'AH after the demise of Nabi. Tabi'ieen too followed suit. So, if MUT'AH was Zina, they ALL committed ZINA (ADULTERY AND FORNICATION) 100%..

sino:

First of all, does the slave girl belong to Amr Ibn Hurayth?! Because if she was his slave, then there would have been no case to begin with!

This is probably a case of ignorance on the part of Amr, since his excuse for impregnating a slave girl is that he did mut'ah. The slave girl had no choice because she was a slave! She had no say per se, she might be looking for a way to gain her freedom...So you chew on the possibilities, and stop thinking in one direction!

# In Sunni interpretation of Islam, sex with your slave girl is halal. It is neither marriage nor MUT'AH.

So, the fact that the Hadith says it was MUT'AH that Amr admitted to have done with the slave girl, and Umar even proposed, "why not with other than a slave", clearly showed that the slave was not Amr's.

There's no escape bro.

sino:


Nope, my post is a response to you and AlBaqir with respect to not being able to do Nikkah due to some constraint like lack of money etc.

oh I see. Actually I don't think my arguments since the beginning of this thread is about @bold. It is actually and more accurately is in line with points raised in the video i posted.

My argument about muta since the beginning of this thread is about validity and practice of muta AFTER the demise of nabi (saw). I don't think I have raised issue with constraint about muta so far. I raised it when I posted the video.

AlBaqir wants us to believe that it is impossible to stay chaste (for some people), and fasting is not 100% solution

if this is what he meant @underlined, I am sorry to disappoint you that he's right PRACTICALLY. I would imagine you would know this?. It is true that that's what Quran said (to stay chase). Thats theory. People can quote quran but when it comes to practical you know that it is not easy. Many would fall into zina. This is the reality. I don't think you viewed screenshots I posted few days ago. The sheikh said zina is everywhere but marriage is delayed. Why don't people fast?. I won't deceive myself. Don't take this to mean albaqir or me are underrating the solutions proferred by Quran and sunnah. Not at all. I'm am saying that majority of people including anti-muta actually commit zina while condemning muta. My argument for validity of muta is that it is not zina. If anyone says it is zina the implication is that you are accusing nabiy (saw) of recommending zina to sahaba at some point. That's why I said all arguments to ridicule muta are not valid except where it is reported he (saw) banned it at khaybar.

I would have even asked him when is it likely for one to be sexually active and start contracting mut'ah, I mean we have 12 years old who are sexually active, perhaps they can start doing that from that age....

question I would like to ask you is that what solution do you have for these kids today who are sexually active and actually committing zina everyday? . Please don't tell me they need to fast bcus practically they wont unless you want to deceive yourself.

Anyways, I would like you to watch the video. If it's 44mins but the real concern actually started at around 18mins. I want to know your view. The sheikh said there exist other type of marriage similar to our normal marriage and that even sunni recognizes it with conditions.

But if u insist there is no alternative marriage, why do Arab sunni invented misyar which also has elements of muta?. Misyar is not even mentioned in the kitab and sunnah.

Let me remind you again that this is not about ignoring ayah of quran you quoted but I'm saying to you practically that most people do not abide by the injunction. They would commit zina. Maybe I should post the video for you to see. Will do that as soon as I get the chance. It says not all sunni ulama considered muta to be zina. The other video I posted says there is other type of marriage designed for specific female to avoid zina.

Remember people, that Quran can not be translated. We can only explain Quran. We should all know that by now.

AlBaqir:


# In Sunni interpretation of Islam, sex with your slave girl is halal. It is neither marriage nor MUT'AH.

could this be mulikiyamin we talked about?.

Empiree:
could this be mulikiyamin we talked about?.

# For example the word @ underlined is used in sura Nisa:24; sura Mu'min:6; and Sunni translate it straight away to mean Slave. Trust me, there are disgusting ahadith on this master-slave sex of a thing.

# Anyway, the point remain that if the slave impregnated by Amr was his, there is no brouhaha. The fact that it raises hair brow, and he confirmed he did MUT'AH with the girl clearly confirmed she was not his.

AlBaqir:


# For example the word @ underlined is used in sura Nisa:24; sura Mu'min:6; and Sunni translate it straight away to mean Slave. Trust me, there are disgusting ahadith on this master-slave sex of a thing.

is mulikatyamin used in reference to nikkah muta'h?. I don't even think istimta means 'temporarily'.

# Anyway, the point remain that if the slave impregnated by Amr was his, there is no brouhaha. The fact that it raises hair brow, and he confirmed he did MUT'AH with the girl clearly confirmed she was not his.

is their any report in the time nabi (saw) about children borne of muta'h and what was nabi's reaction?

Empiree:
is mulikatyamin used in reference to nikkah muta'h?. I don't even think istimta means 'temporarily'.

# The word "istimta" a derivative of "Mut'ah" from the same root word "m-t-a" simply means "to enjoy i.e pleasurable enjoyment".

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, Allāh is All-Knowing, All-Wise” {surah an-Nisa: 24}



* The ayah is yet ALONE ayah and was usually read ALONE, but was "smuggled " into a context and made as part of verse 24. So, many ayah were LONERS like that but today due to arrangement of the Caliphas NEVER enjoy being a lone ayah.

* Abdullah Ibn Abbas and Ubai Ibn Kaab used to read the ayah with "FOR A SPECIFIED PERIOD". Both confirmed the ayah to be " verse of Mut'ah "

Empiree:

is their any report in the time nabi (saw) about children borne of muta'h and what was nabi's reaction?

# Ibn Abi'l Hadid, a Sunni Mu'tazila documents in his work that Abdullah and Urwah Ibn Zubair were born out of Mut'ah between Asma bint Abubakr (whom Imam Ibn Hazm reported to have been a MUT'AH fan: see the OP) and Zubair Ibn Awwam.

MrOlai:


Because Nairaland is your father's property? Abi?

You are correct indeed. But you have no moral right to condemn muta'h and shia on this if you can not come up with your own academic research on this subject rather than copy paste or hide behind sino

AlBaqir:

# Ibn Abi'l Hadid, a Sunni Mu'tazila documents in his work that Abdullah and Urwah Ibn Zubair were born out of Mut'ah between Asma bint Abubakr (whom Imam Ibn Hazm reported to have been a MUT'AH fan: see the OP) and Zubair Ibn Awwam.

ok thanks

AlBaqir:


# The word "istimta" a derivative of "Mut'ah" from the same root word "m-t-h" simply means "to enjoy i.e pleasurable enjoyment".

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, Allāh is All-Knowing, All-Wise” {surah an-Nisa: 24}



The ayah is yet ALONE ayah and was usually read ALONE, but was "smuggled " into a context and made as part of verse 24. So, many ayah were LONERS like that but today due to arrangement of the Caliphas NEVER enjoy being a lone ayah.

I don't think you properly referenced this ayah. This is sahih international.

istimta in this context refers to enjoyment from ones wife AFTER dowry and other conditions are met.

Arabic meaning is attached

Empiree:
I don't think you properly referenced this ayah. This is sahih international.

istimta in this context refers to enjoyment from ones wife AFTER dowry and other conditions are met.

Arabic meaning is attached

I referenced it 100%. What I quoted was a LONE VERSE revealed as mentioned and recited by Ibn Abbas and Ubai Ibn kaab, the best Qari among the sahabah.

The ayah, today do not enjoy its "loneliness".

Confirm these examples also:

1. "Today I have perfected your religion and chose Islam for you" (In Q.5:3)

2. "Allah only wish to purify you, O Ahl al-Bayt and cleanse you absolutely" (In Q.33:33).

Those two verses JUST LIKE verse of Mut'ah were INDEPENDENT ayah as revealed by various ahadith; but today jampacked within a context respectively.

AlBaqir:


I referenced it 100%. What I quoted was a LONE VERSE revealed as mentioned and recited by Ibn Abbas and Ubai Ibn kaab, the best Qari among the sahabah.

The ayah, today do not enjoy its "loneliness".

Confirm these examples also:

1. "Today I have perfected your religion and chose Islam for you" (In Q.5:3)

2. "Allah only wish to purify you, O Ahl al-Bayt and cleanse you absolutely" (In Q.33:33).

Those two verses JUST LIKE verse of Mut'ah were INDEPENDENT ayah as revealed by various ahadith; but today jampacked within a context respectively.

Okay i get you but do me a favor, kindly quote the entire aya as my attachment and the highlight or underline the exact rea from sura nisa 24?. Thanks

Just trying to get clearer picture. Besides, did you find time to watch the sheikh imran's video?. I want to hear your agreement or disagreement from his view on this

Empiree:
Okay i get you but do me a favor, kindly quote the entire aya as my attachment and the highlight or underline the exact rea from sura nisa 24?. Thanks

Surah An-Nisa, Verse 24:

"And all married women except those whom your right hands possess (this is) Allah's ordinance to you, and lawful for you are (all women) besides those, provided that you seek (them) with your property, taking (them) in marriage not committing fornication. Then as to those whom you profit by, give them their dowries as appointed; and there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is appointed; surely Allah is Knowing, Wise".

# And another vital point that comes to mind is why did Abdullah Ibn Abbas and Ubai Ibn kaab used to recite the verse with an extra phrase "FOR A SPECIFIED PERIOD" to the extent that the former sworn by Allah that the extra phrase was revealed with the verse?

* Remember he sworn when he was confronted by a Tabi'in that the extra phrase was not in the Qur'an just like sino is asking rhetorically.

* Is there explanation for this or Ibn Abbas and Ubai Ibn kaab were just lying to the extent that it influenced many Tabi'ieen of their time?

# I would love to see your opinion on this before I submit mine.

NB: Kindly read Tafsir Ibn Kathir at www.qtafsir.com on the ayah. The moment Ibn Kathir got to that bold part (verse), he started bringing Sunni argument to prove that Mut'ah had been prohibited. If the verse doesn't talk about MUT'AH, why bringing argument against MUT'AH?

* As aside Ibn Kathir, Imam Shafi'i and Imam Ibn Hazm and several others believe the verse on MUT'AH, but always putting argument forward to prove its alleged prohibition.

Empiree:

Just trying to get clearer picture. Besides, did you find time to watch the sheikh imran's video?. I want to hear your agreement or disagreement from his view on this

# Wallahi, I have downloaded the video but haven't find time to watch; and I don't think I can today either but in sha Allah, by tomorrow, I should be more freer.

AlBaqir:


Surah An-Nisa, Verse 24:

"And all married women except those whom your right hands possess (this is) Allah's ordinance to you, and lawful for you are (all women) besides those, provided that you seek (them) with your property, taking (them) in marriage not committing fornication. Then as to those whom you profit by, give them their dowries as appointed; and there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is appointed; surely Allah is Knowing, Wise".

# And another vital point that comes to mind is why did Abdullah Ibn Abbas and Ubai Ibn kaab used to recite the verse with an extra phrase "FOR A SPECIFIED PERIOD" to the extent that the former sworn by Allah that the extra phrase was revealed with the verse?

* Remember he sworn when he was confronted by a Tabi'in that the extra phrase was not in the Qur'an just like sino is asking rhetorically.

* Is there explanation for this or Ibn Abbas and Ubai Ibn kaab were just lying to the extent that it influenced many Tabi'ieen of their time?

# I would love to see your opinion on this before I submit mine.

NB: Kindly read Tafsir Ibn Kathir at www.qtafsir.com on the ayah. The moment Ibn Kathir got to that bold part (verse), he started bringing Sunni argument to prove that Mut'ah had been prohibited. If the verse doesn't talk about MUT'AH, why bringing argument against MUT'AH?

* As aside Ibn Kathir, Imam Shafi'i and Imam Ibn Hazm and several others believe the verse on MUT'AH, but always putting argument forward to prove its alleged prohibition.

isnt where the verse says "APPOINTED"?

Besides, is this ayah the strongest evidence of muta according to shi'a?. If so, from the ayah where istimta appears has nothign to do with MUTA has we know it. It seems to be talking about the same woman you married to and enjoyed. If if we are to isolate the phrased as you previous opinined, it isd still referring to what i just said.

This is Sahih International translation: "...So for whatever you enjoy [of marriage] from them, give them their due compensation as an obligation...."


Muhammad Asad

And unto those with whom you desire to enjoy marriage, you shall give the cowers due to them;


Malik

Give them their dowry as an obligation for the benefit you have received from your marriage relationship.


Pickthall

And those of whom ye seek content (by marrying them), give unto them their portions as a duty.



Yusuf Ali


Seeing that ye derive benefit from them give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed;


So are you saying this phrase, even if taken in isolation, refers to muta marriage other than woman you married to in the same ayah at the beginning of this verse?. What i understand by the phrase is it refers to the mahr i:e bridal money given by the husband to the wife. I have always understood it this way. But i dont mind learning your view further on this for educational purposes. But if this is the strongest Quranic evidence for mut'ah, I am sorry, this is not a sound meaning. You ma have to quote how S. Ali (ra) and other prominent sahaba explained the ayah.

Quote from this book indicates that it is still permissible in certain circumstances but not the way it practiced out by every TD&H as i have suggested earlier



The majority of the Companions hold the view that after the completion of the Islamic legislation, mutah marriage was made absolutely haram. However, Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) holds a different opinion, permitting it in case of dire necessity. A person asked him about marrying women on a haram basis, and he permitted him to do so. A servant of his then asked, "Is this not under hard conditions, when women are few and the like?" and he replied, "Yes." (Reported by Al-Bukhari) Later, when Ibn Abbas saw that people had become lax and were engaging in haram marriages without necessity, he withdrew his ruling and retracted his previous opinion. (Zad Al-Ma`ad, vol. 4, p. 7)

http://www.islamopediaonline.org/fatwa/muta-marriage-marriage-sunni-view

So basically, only Ibn Abbas had different view

sino:


Nope, my post is a response to you and AlBaqir with respect to not being able to do Nikkah due to some constraint like lack of money etc.

Now read this. Remember i asked you like twice if there is other form of nikkah besides "conventional marriage" as we know it?. You said nikah is nikah which means there is nothing like mulikayamin or muta etc. Now read this


Misyar now ‘a widespread reality’

“Misyar is widespread because many need to keep their marriages a secret, either due to the objection of the first wife or other family pressures,” Ali Al-Bakr, faculty member at KSU, told a local daily. Getting married in the Kingdom is no longer easy, according to one report, thanks to countless social and economic obstacles, including extortionate dowries, costly wedding extravaganzas and lack of housing.
In a misyar marriage the woman waives some of the rights she would enjoy in a normal marriage. Most misyar brides don’t change their residences but pursue marriage on a visitation basis. Some marriage officials say seven of 10 marriage contracts they conduct are misyar, and in some cases are asked to recommend prospective misyar partners.

http://www.arabnews.com/saudi-arabia/news/642991


Wallahi, mrolai has no case against shi'a. He needs to read this. Why condemn shi'a for holding on to alternative nikkah (mut'ah) while Sunni arabs do the very similar nikkah(misyar)?. See what the excerpt says, and watch sheikh Imran Hosein lecture i posted up there, he said something similar. And i have said the same that this alternative nikkah helps people from falling into zina. Now sino, why didnt saudi uphold kitab and sunnah injunctions which state to be chaste or fast instead of fornication?. Does the nikkah arrangement by Saudi constitutes zina or not?. Remember the reason for misyar in Saudi is bcus of growing cost of marriage to maintain their wife which Quran directly addressed. Why not order people to be chaste instead of giving them "plan B" solution to conventional marriage?


The article states further,

Some people believe that these factors have led to the widespread practice of misyar, which has flexible conditions compared with traditional marriages, as a last resort. “It remains an option, albeit a temporary one, which is, nevertheless, seen as unfair to women in many cases,” said a national.

Now, do you still believe there is no alternative nikkah?. You said marriage is marriage. Traditional marriage mentioned in this article refers to conventional marriage i have been talking about. Evidently, if Saudi did not employ this tactic, ,millions of their women would not be married bcus men can simply not afford the responsibilities. This is very similar to what the video said.


Functions of Misyra and Muta are the same. نقطة


And, please don't forget to read comments below the article

This is one of the comments. I can't stop laughing

Remember you made fun of albaqir earlier, what's the difference now

Misyar marriage is similar to Muta marriage which is practiced in Iran. I went there in April and was offered a temporary wife for week. I wasn't sure of this was permitted. So their scholar showed me evidence that temporary marriages were allowed by the Prophet. I phoned home to ask Sheikh Qaradawi. He said yes Muta marriages were done but later stopped. Anyway, I was in the mood. So I did it to the pretty Iranian lady. She was a widowed aged 32. She was very lovely. I got photo of her on my Facebook. The divorce was automatic after 7 days. I paid her 400 dollars marriage gift. No strings attached. It was so easy. Hassle free.

Definitely, this would be strange to me too if I am in that region

Exactly what Saudi is doing in times of Hajj. I remembered my sister-in-law went for Umra this year and she was issued certificate of marriage to another man. But my brother to whom she is married to (was not with her) rejected the idea. So i don't get the idea of condemning shi'a now. Mrolai, over to you