₦airaland Forum

“And in order that it will be known – O brothers – that al-mutaaba’ah cannot be actualized, except when the action is in agreement with the Sharee’ah in six affairs:

The First:as-Sabab (reason, motive); So when the person worships Allaah with act of worship that is accompanied by a motive that is not legislated by the Sharee’ah, then it is an innovation that is rejected back to its doer. An example of that is when some of the people commemorate the twenty-seventh night of Rajab under the pretence that it was the night in which the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) ascended. So tahajjud (the night Prayer) is worship. However, when it is accompanied with this motive, it becomes an innovation. This is because this action of worship is built upon a motive that has not been confirmed in the Sharee’ah. And this description – the conformity of the worship to the Sharee’ah in motive – is an important affair that clarifies many innovations from amongst those that are thought to be from the Sunnah, yet they are not from the Sunnah.

The Second: al-Jins (type); so it is inevitable that the act of worship be in conformity to the Sharee’ah in its jins (type). So if the person worships with an act of worship whose type is not legislated, then it is not accepted. An example of that is if a man were to slaughter a horse, then this sacrifice would not be correct, because it has opposed the Sharee’ah in the type. So the blood sacrifices cannot be done, except with cattle, grazing livestock, camels, cows and sheep.

The Third: al-Qadr (quantity); so if the person increases in the Prayer that is obligatory, then we say that this is an innovation that is not accepted, because it opposes the Sharee’ah in quantity. With all the more reason, if the person prays the noon Prayer for example as five units, then his Prayer is not correct by agreement.

The Fourth: al-Kayfiyyah (manner, mode); so if a man performs ablution, and he begins with washing the feet, then he wipes his head, then he washes his hands, then his face, then we say that his ablution is null and void, because it opposes the Sharee’ah in manner.

The Fifth: az-Zamaan (time); so if the person slaughters in the first days of Dhul-Hijjah, then his blood sacrifice will not be accepted due it opposing the Sharee’ah in time. And I have heard that some of the people slaughter sheep during the month of Ramadaan in order to draw closer to Allaah with blood sacrifice. So this action in this manner is an innovation, because there is nothing with regards to drawing closer to Allaah with slaughtering, except for blood sacrifice, gifts and the ’aqeeqah. As for slaughtering in Ramadaan along with the belief that one will attain the reward of slaughtering, such as the blood sacrifice in ’Eedul-Adhaa, or slaughtering for the sake of meat, then this is permissible.

The Sixth: al-Makaan (place); so if a man performs i’tikaaf in other than a mosque, then his i’tikaaf is not correct. And that is because the i’tikaaf cannot occur, except in the mosques. And if a woman says, ‘I wish to perform i’tikaaf in the musallaa (place of Prayer) in the house,’ then her i’tikaaf is not correct due to opposition of the Sharee’ah in place. And from the examples of that is if a man desires to perform tawaaf. So he finds that the area of tawaaf has become too confined and he finds that whatever is around it has become too confined. So he starts to perform tawaaf from behind the mosque, then his tawaaf will not be correct, because the place of the tawaaf is the house.

So the act of worship cannot be considered a righteous action, except if two conditions are fulfilled with regards to it, the first is al-ikhlaas (sincerity) and the second is al-mutaaba’ah (following the Prophet). And al-mutaaba’ah cannot be fulfilled, except with the six affairs that have been previously mentioned.”

tbaba1234:
Those vowel signs were invented for non arabs.

tbaba1234:
Those red dots are by later scribes, there were no dots or vowel signs...


SubhanAllah!

lanrexlan:
I think they are writing in ancient/old arabic because I can't see a dot on their 'faf' and 'qaf' has one dot on it.

abdoolhapheez:
wa iyyakum brother. Will insha Allah try to share more.thanks for the encouragement.

Sissie:
Thanks, I don't know about writing, who knows I just might come up with something.

pmc01:
AlhamduliLLahi ladhi ahyana ba'da ma amatana wa ilayhi n nushoor.

AlhamduliLLah 'ala ni'matil Islam.

It's been a while really, observing Solah in this quite familiar agbalagba-dominated community Masjid.

The usual signs-
‪#‎ patronizing‬and coercing the 'I no go come Masjid' 'sleepers' and 'VIPs' with 'soul-searching' words and prayers for them to come to the Masjid to observe their Solah.

‪#‎ Then ‬to the Solah, one verse after Surah Al Fatha in each Rakah is just enough, I guess that's by 'popular demand'.

#Then the span of the last Sujud is probably longer than the time spent reciting Fatha and the one ayah that follows. *bukata must biya na, abi*

On the positive side though, some of the Adhkar recited after Solah conform with the Sunnah. For example, I was surprised, but relieved that it was Solatul Ibrahimiyyah that was recited instead of the common 'substitute(s)'prevalent in my dear Ibadan city. *(awa) omo Ibadan, kini s(h)ow*

The koko of this my early morning tori be say these our Babas don try. They have been very steadfast in their Da'wah of ensuring the Islamic legacy passed on to them from their own babas do not die. Even though the knowledge applied in the process might arguably be crude, the passion to see the Muslim community continue to grow and glow is obvious.

Evidently a lot still need to be reformed in these our societies. And this is why the youths should not just be lazy enough to sheepishly follow in the same steps of our dear Babas, without implementing the needed reforms.

It will be a crime on your head if you do not go out there to seek the proper knowledge of Islam, as enshrined in the Qur'an and Sunnah.

We must be genuinely concerned about improving upon the efforts of our fathers in rooting firm the Islamic culture in our communities.

If you continue to concentrate all your efforts in seeking greener pastures, without a care for upliftment of the Muslim community, then I wonder what will happen when the era of babas eventually come to naught.

If these Babas in the focus Masjid for this piece can learn to stick with Solatul Ibrahimiyyah in an environment where it is generally neglected or even resented, then there is hope that these our communities can learn to adapt to the structural changes of returning them back to the path of our righteous predecessors (whom Allah was pleased with and were pleased with their Lord).

Remember the steadfastness of the Ashab Kahf in reforming their community?
www.islamawaren ess.net/ Children/ story11.html

The ball indeed is in our court. Allahu L Musta'an.

tbaba1234:
https://www.nairaland.com/1884467/attack-prophet-mohameds-sa-tomb#26026875

LagosShia:
of course, this goes to show that in the aqeedah of the Wahhabis and their victims, the Prophet (sa) and his family (as) have no sanctity at all. this is ever more so obvious because Allah (swt) has blinded your hearts.

where is the sanctity for the houses of the Prophet (sa) which the Holy Qur'an obliges us to observe?

"O you who have believed, do not enter the houses of the Prophet except when you are permitted for a meal, without awaiting its readiness. But when you are invited, then enter; and when you have eaten, disperse without seeking to remain for conversation. Indeed, that [behavior] was troubling the Prophet, and he is shy of [dismissing] you. But Allah is not shy of the truth. And when you ask [his wives] for something, ask them from behind a partition. That is purer for your hearts and their hearts. And it is not [conceivable or lawful] for you to harm the Messenger of Allah or to marry his wives after him, ever. Indeed, that would be in the sight of Allah an enormity." (33:53)

did you seek the permission of the Prophet (sa) before destroying his house? who gave al-saud the authority to move a stone in Makkah and Madinah?

yes, you would say the Prophet (sa) is no longer with us, and he cannot be sought for permission. so then why do you not leave his house alone? is demolishing his house what the below verse asks us of respect to show the Prophet (sa)?

"Indeed, We have sent you as a witness and a bringer of good tidings and a warner. That you [people] may believe in Allah and His Messenger and honor him and respect the Prophet and exalt Allah morning and afternoon." (48:8-9)

“ًWhoever exalts the symbols of Allah, then that is from piety of the hearts” (Quran 22:32)

tbaba1234:
2011- http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/mecca-for-the-rich-islams-holiest-site-turning-into-vegas-2360114.html -

2012- http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/medina-saudis-take-a-bulldozer-to-islams-history-8228795.html

2013- http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/the-photos-saudi-arabia-doesnt-want-seen--and-proof-islams-most-holy-relics-are-being-demolished-in-mecca-8536968.html

2014- http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saudis-risk-new-muslim-division-with-proposal-to-move-mohameds-tomb-9705120.html

Ok, thanks. Same paper, same garbage.

Sissie:
How come am just seeing this thread.

Now following.

abdoolhapheez:
BEAUTY OF A MUSLIMAH


The hijab is her swagg,she always got it on

Iman in her heart,she's steadfast aiming for jannah
The whispers when she walks by don't make her look over her shoulder
She remains firm of faith even if they mock and tease her

She is on siratal mustaqeem
Far away from shayateen
And she will be under Allah's shade on yaumu-deen

She's following in the footsteps of the mothers of believers
And not trying to imitate these so called divas
Her eyes are set on the ultimate prize,the beautiful gardens of jannah with flowing rivers

AlBaqir:
@sino, dear brother you are very wrong in rejecting ahadith compiled or narrated by the 'heretics' - shi'a or mutazili or Rafida'. Those who used to reject based on Madhhab do that in accordance with their emotional hatred or feeling.

Madhahab is not a criteria of scrutiny. The (Only) criteria are trustworthiness and sound of memory.

If according to your findings, Ibn kathir could label Ibn Abi 'l-Hadeed as a man of letters and eloquent poet, the question is: was he trustworthy and sound in memory?

'Allamah al-Albani writes:

@sino, dear brother you are very wrong in rejecting ahadith compiled or narrated by the 'heretics' - shi'a or mutazili or Rafida'.

Madhahab is not a criteria of scrutiny. The (Only) criteria are trustworthiness and sound of memory.

If according to your findings, Ibn kathir could label Ibn Abi 'l-Hadeed as a man of letters and eloquent poet, the question is: was he trustworthy and sound in memory?

'Allamah al-Albani writes:
"If someone says: 'The narrator of this...was a Shi'a, and also in the chain of the main hadith, there is another Shi'a...Does this not justify attack on the hadith and constitute a fault in it?

So, I answer: "Not at all, because the requirements in the transmission of hadith are ONLY truthfulness and sound memory. As for the madhhab (of the narrator), that is between him and his Lord, and He is sufficient for him."

~Silsilah al-Ahadith al-Sahihah wa Shayhun min Fiqhihah wa Fawaidihah, vol.5 p.262, #2223

Interestingly, even the 'almighty' Imam Bukhari reported MANY (tens of hundreds) from Shi'a in his prestigious Sahih.

And to put the record straight, Ibn Abil Hadid is not a Shi'a but a Mutazilite. Try to read about Mu'tazili belief.

Wa salam.

abdoolhapheez:
Jazakallah khairan..nice poem..'kill the sin and the evil will die'..favorited

AlBaqir:
No matter how hard anybody try to curry-flavored Misyar Nikkah, it is still what it is - a Bid'ah never known in the Shariah. What is known in that 'concept' is Mut'ah.

Part of what you don't know about this weird misyar wedding is that a man can marry a woman with an intention of divorce at so so time. Knowing or not known to the woman doesn't matter. Sheik Ibn Baz ruled.

When a scholar like Sheik Nasir deen al-Albani says : "It is legal but immoral", I find it insincere on his part. These are the people who boast of following nothing but the sunnah. Trying to prove the legality of Misyar nikkah is just like twisting the shariah to suit their emotional need.
*********************

AlBaqir: On the other hand, one thing is crystal clear about
Mut'ah. There is ijma (consensus) that it was practised during the lifetime of the holy prophet (peace be on him and his household) but Ummah till date divided on its legality till the day of judgment - Sahabah, tabi'in, tabi-tabi'in, ulamas alike.
********************

AlBaqir: As per Ibn Zubairs! A sincere mind doesn't based his research rigidly on Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslims only. Young muslims have been trained today to see bukhari and muslim's sahih as par of the holy Quran.

While Sahih Bukhari is trying to convince muslims that Abdullah and Ur'wah ibn Zubair were born long before Mut'a was in existence which it dated to be 7th of Hijrah at khaibar or conquest of makkah at 8th Hijri (just for 3days), other books like sahih Muslim and vast majority of others were saying these personalities of the Sunni were born out of Mut'ah wedlock which suggested that mut'ah was in existence long before that time. Those among the sahaba, tabi'in etc who believe Q.4:24 legalizes mut'a are on the point because these verse is early madina sura.

While you quoted some ahadith in this regard, dubiously, the word "mut'ah" was used alone in some of these hadith thereby the commentators said it is not clear whether it is of hajj or women.

"Muslim al-Qurri said: I asked Ibn Abbas about Mut'a and he permitted it, whereas Ibn Zubair had forbidden it. So Ibn Abbas said: "This is the mother of Ibn Zubair who states that Allah's messenger had permitted it, so you better go to her and ask her about it. He (Muslim al-Qurri) said: So we went to her and she was a bulky blind lady. She said: Verily Allah's Messenger permitted it."
~~Sahih Muslim, Arabic version 1980 Edition pub in Saudi Arabia, vol.2 p.909, hadith #194-195.

NB: In tradition #195, the sub-narrator said: "The narrator used the word 'Mut'a' alone, and I do not know if it was Mut'a of Hajj or Mut'a of women". It is crystal clear that what Ibn Zubair used to forbade was Mut'a of women as it is clear from other hadith.

Interestingly, Ibn Zubair kept on insulting Ibn Abbas by saying his heart is blind simply because he believed in the validity of Mut'a. Ibn Zubair forgot he himself was born out of Mut'a! (Sahih Muslim vol. 1 p.354; al-Iqd al-Fareed vol.2 p.139).

In fact, according to Sharh Ibn Abi al-Hadid vol. 4 p. 489 - 490, Ibn Abbas said:

"O Ibn Zubair! As for the blindness, verily Allah said in Quran that: 'For indeed it is not the eyes that grow blind, but it is the hearts, which are within the bosoms, that grow blind.'(Q.22:46)
'And as for my religious verdicts, there are reasons behind them that neither you nor your companions comprehend them....As for mut'a, you better ask your mother Asma'!...

When Ibn Zubair came back to his mother and ask her about mut'a, she replied: Did I not warn you from facing Ibn Abbas and facing Bani Hashim (the clan of the prophet), because they have answer for everything. O my son! Avoid this blind man for neither human nor unseen creatures (Jinn) can corner him."
*******************

AlBaqir: This is where I will sign off on mut'a issue. I hope those who ignorantly accused shi'a of practicing 'fornication' have learnt that once they do that, they've accused their prophet, notable sahaba whom they adore, of sanctioning and practicing 'fornication'.

@sino, I'd like to send you some books in pdf, they are interesting research books written recently. I hope you will in sha Allah, find it very interesting.
Here's my mail: seeabdwasi@gloworld.blackberry.com

Thanks a lot brother for your time. Wa salam alaykum.

Empiree:
nawa oooo.... This is a case of kettle calling pot black.

<QUESTION>

What is a Nikah Misyar? Is this kind of marriage permitted according to Shari’a?
<ANSWER>
In the name of Allah, Most Compassionate, Most Merciful,

The term “Nikah Misyar” (translated sometimes as “travellers’ marriage” or “marriage of convenience”) is not found in the Qur’an, Sunna or classical works of Islamic jurisprudence. It is a term that has been introduced recently by those discussing a specific type of matrimonial arrangement. However, the concept of such an arrangement can be found being discussed in the works of classical Muslim jurists (fuqaha).

In order to understand the correct Islamic viewpoint regarding Nikah Misyar, it is essential to first be familiar with the exact meaning of this term, as understood by those who have discussed it.

Definition

A Misyar marriage can be defined as an official marriage contract between a man and a woman, with the condition that the spouses give up one, two or several of their rights by their own free will. These include: living together, equal division of nights between wives in cases of polygamy, the wife’s right to housing (sukna) and financial support (nafaqa). In some cases, only one right is relinquished by the spouses, such as living together, but the husband is still required to provide housing for the wife and maintain her financially, whilst in other instances, the wife gives up all her rights including housing and financial support. The bottom line in such arrangements is that the couple agree to live separately from each other, as before their Nikah contract, and see each other to fulfil their needs in a lawful manner when they so desire. At times, a Misyar marriage is contracted on a temporary basis which ends in divorce on the expiration date of the contract.

Islamic Ruling

As for the Islamic ruling concerning such marriages, there are two issues to consider:

1) Validity and permissibility;

2) Appropriateness.

I. Validity and Permissibility

If all the basic requirements for an Islamic marriage contract are fulfilled, then this type of marriage arrangement is permissible and valid, and the couple will not be guilty of being involved in an unlawful illicit relationship. The basic requirements for a valid marriage according to Shari’a are the following:

a) Offer (ijab) from one party and acceptance (qabul) from the other in one session (majlis), and that this offer and acceptance is verbal and thus heard and understood clearly. In other words, the agreement of both parties.

b) The presence of at least two male witnesses (shahidayn), or one male and two female witnesses, who hear and clearly understand the offer and acceptance. (Mukhtasar al-Quduri 2/140 & Fath al-Qadir 3/190)

c) The consent of a legal guardian of the woman (wali) is also a necessary requirement according to the Maliki, Shafi’i and Hanbali Schools of Sunni Islamic Law. However, according to the relied upon position in the Hanafi School, the marriage of a free, sane and adult woman without the approval of her guardian (wali) is valid if the person she is marrying is a “legal” and suitable match (kuf’) for her. Conversely, if the person she is marrying is not a legal match for her, then her marriage would be considered invalid. (Radd al-Muhtar ala ‘l-Durr al-Mukhtar 3/56-57 & I’la al-Sunan 11/69 in the chapter: “Having a guardian is not a pre-requisite for the validity of an adult woman’s marriage”. For more details, please refer to the answer previously posted on this website titled: “Divorced woman marrying without her guardian’s approval”).

d) The absence of a fixed time-period. It is a basic requirement of a valid marriage contract that it does not entail any agreement of it being limited to a specified time such as two moths or five days, since it is essentially the Mut’a marriage that has been explicitly prohibited by the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace).

Classical jurists (fuqaha) have clearly stated the impermissibility and invalidity of time-limited (mu’aqqat) marriages. Imam al-Haskafi, the renowned Hanafi jurist, states:

“A Mut’a and time-limited marriage (nikah mu’aqqat) is invalid, even if the period [of marriage] is unknown to the wife or is prolonged...” (Radd al-Muhtar ala ‘l-Durr al-Mukhtar 3/51. Also see for the Shafi’i School: Mughni al-Muhtaj Sharh al-Minhaj 4/231, for the Hanbali School: Kashshaf al-Qina’ 5/96-97, and the Maliki School: Hashiyat al-Dasuqi ala ‘l-Sharh al-Kabir 2/238-239)

As for when there is no explicit mention of the marriage being limited to a specified time, but both or one of the spouses intend to terminate the marriage some time in the future, the position of the majority of classical scholars is that such a marriage is valid, and the couple will not be guilty of involving themselves in an unlawful relationship.

It is stated in al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya, a renowned Hanafi reference work:

If a man marries a woman unconditionally [i.e. without it being limited to a specified time], and it is in his intention to remain with her for a time that he intends [and then divorce her], then the marriage is valid...” (al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya 1/283)

Likewise, Imam Ibn al-Humam (Allah have mercy on him) states in his Fath al-Qadir:

As for when the husband marries and it is in his intention to divorce her after a period that he intends, then the marriage is valid.” (Fath al-Qadir, 3/152)

The Shafi’is also state that if one marries, and it is in his intention to divorce the wife after a period of time he has in mind, the marriage is considered valid. As for the Hanbalis, they have explicitly stated that if a person marries with the intention of divorcing the woman, even without stating it explicitly in the marriage contract itself, then the marriage is invalid, because it is a temporary marriage, which is invalid by explicit primary texts. (See: al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya, Kuwait)

Since Islam emphasises upholding marriages, the couple will not be obligated to terminate their marriage according to their intention, rather they must not resort to divorce without a genuine reason. Marrying with the intention of ending the marriage after a given period is disliked according to Shari’a, and as such, a marriage contracted with such an intention in mind is also disliked, although valid per se. (Mufti Taqi Usmani, Fiqhi Maqalat 1/258)

So, the basic minimum requirement in order for a marriage to be considered Islamically valid is that there be a valid offer from one party and a corresponding acceptance from the other, in the presence of two male (or one male and two female) witnesses who are able to hear clearly and understand what is happening. The offer, acceptance and the presence of the witnesses must all take place in the same session and at the same place, and there must not be any explicit mention of the marriage being limited to a specified time. The consent of the woman’s guardian is also necessary according to the three Schools, and in some cases, according to the Hanafi School also. As for the payment of dowry (mahr), this is the woman’s right and should be stipulated at the time of the marriage contract, but it is not a pre-requisite for the validly of the marriage.

As such, if the above necessary factors are met, the marriage is valid according to Shari’a, even if it is a “Misyar” marriage. Thus, if the Misyar marriage is limited to a specified time, it is invalid, and the couple’s relationship will be unlawful and sinful. Men who sometimes enter into a “temporary” Misyar marriage while on holiday must realize that if this is explicitly mentioned at the time of contracting the marriage, then it would make such a marriage invalid and unlawful, and more akin to Mut’a. If there is no explicit mention of this, but the man marries with the intention of divorce, then it is disliked, and unlawful [but valid] if it entails harm to the woman.

Giving up Rights

As mentioned earlier, the basic feature which distinguishes Misyar from a standard marriage is that the spouses, and more specifically the wife, gives up one or several of her rights by her own free will.

Islamically, it is permitted for both parties to mutually agree upon relinquishing one or several of their rights, which they would otherwise be entitled to in a standard marriage. The wife may forego her right to housing, spending time with her husband and/or financial support. The husband may give up the right of his wife living with him at his residence.

Sayyida A’isha (may Allah be pleased with her) relates that Sawda bint Zam’a (may Allah be pleased with her) gave up her [right of spending the] day [with the Messenger of Allah] to A’isha, and so the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) used to give A’isha both her day and the day of Sawda (Allah be pleased with both).” (Sahih al-Bukhari, no: 4914)

Sayyida A’isha (may Allah be pleased with her) relates that in his fatal illness, the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace) used to ask, “Where will I be tomorrow? Where will I be tomorrow?” wanting the day of A’isha. His wives gave him permission to be wherever he wished, so he was in the room of A’isha until he passed away by her...” (Sahih al-Bukhari, no: 4185)

It is stated in al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya:

“It is not wrong to marry a woman on a day-time basis (nahariyyat). This means that the man marries her on the condition that he will spend the day with her but not the night.” (al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya 1/283)

It should be noted, however, that if a wife gives up her rights, she is entitled to reclaiming them. She may ask her husband to fulfil all her rights, including that he provide for her financially. The husband can also demand that she move in with him at his residence.

Imam al-Haskafi (Allah have mercy on him) states:

“If a wife grants her right of spending time with the husband to her co-wife, then this is valid, but she has the right to reverse her decision in the future if she so desires.” (See: Radd al-Muhtar ala ‘l-Durr al-Mukhtar, 3/206)

II. Appropriateness

The above discussion was regarding the permissibility and validity of a Misyar marriage. As for whether such a marriage is appropriate according to Shari’a, generally speaking, the answer would have to be no, since it goes against the spirit and objectives of marriage, which is to establish a long-term relationship as a family, and raise righteous Muslim children. The children raised by their mother in a home from which the father is always absent may well suffer psychologically and spiritually.

It is even worse in a situation where the man is only concerned about his own sexual desires and has no regard for his wife. He does not hesitate in marrying and divorcing women as and when he so desires. Some irresponsible men go on holidays to poor countries and marry young women by offering them money, riches and a lavish lifestyle, only to divorce them after a few weeks or months. They do this on a continuous basis, marrying women and then divorcing them, without any regard for the creation of Allah Most High. As a result, the wife finds herself abandoned and leading a solitary life as before the marriage, but traumatized by the experience, while her social status and reputation degraded. Harming and deceiving others are both great sins in the eyes of the Shari’a.

On the other hand, a Misyar marriage may be the only option in certain situations. Some women, as they get older, find it increasingly difficult to marry. In such cases, the woman may marry a man who is not able to fulfil the normal marital duties like financial support or spending adequate time with her. Marrying such a husband is better for her than remaining unmarried.

A young couple may be engaged to one another and have the consent of their respective guardians (wali) to marry. They wish to marry as soon as possible, because they genuinely fear committing Zina, but the man does not have the financial resources to support his wife. This type of marriage could meet their needs allowing them to marry whilst living with their parents until they are ready to move in together.

Some divorced or widowed women, who have their own residence and their own financial resources, genuinely cannot, or do not, want to marry again in the normal manner. Some women, who are burdened with heavy duties and responsibilities, are unable to live with their husbands and serve them. A Misyar marriage may well be suited to them.

In fact, some classical scholars such as Imam Abu ’l-Faraj ibn al-Jawzi (may Allah have mercy on him) have suggested that it may even be healthy for the marriage if both spouses mutually agree to spend time apart from one another or sleep separately, and be together occasionally in order to maintain a high level of sexual passion for one another. (Sayd al-Khatir, P: 605- 606)

As such, in conclusion, whether a Misyar marriage is appropriate or not, this depends on each individual case and scenario. One should thus discuss the particulars of one’s case with a knowledgeable and God-fearing scholar. As for its validity, if all the basic requirements for a standard Islamic marriage are fulfilled, it is valid, keeping in mind that the wife is entitled to reclaiming her rights that she gave up at the time of marriage whenever she so desires.

And Allah knows best

[Mufti] Muhammad ibn Adam
Darul Iftaa
Leicester , UK

Question

What is Misyar / Misyaar Marriage. Is it an acceptable form of Nikah?
Answer

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful

Assalaamu `alaykum waRahmatullahi Wabarakatoh

Misyaar is described as a form of marriage in which the wife gives up her rights from her husband for example living with her in the same house and providing her with necessary expenses etc. The husband may come to see her at her parent’s home at whatever time he chooses for himself, or at a time agreed by the two.

Misyaar is been practiced in Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Wealthy men sometimes enter into a Misyaar marriage while on vacation especially to poor countries for example Egypt and Syria. Families agree to the arrangement because of the money and the hope that their girl will have some fun and visit places that she can only dream about (i.e. luxury hotels and restaurants). They also hope for some gifts at the end of the vacation and that the rich "husband" will give her some money and divorce her. Sometimes the husband keeps the wife for the next vacation and sends her some money now and then.

Many Misyaar wives hope to win the love of their husbands so that they may live with them permanently. Since the wife knows that she will most likely be divorced, she is more cautious of falling pregnant. It is believed that Misyaar merely permits men to have sexual relations without committing the sin of adultery. In Saudi Arabia 30 men and women aged between 20-40 were surveyed regarding Misyaar marriage. Over 60 percent of the men surveyed favoured Misyaar marriage with the majority of the respondents in their 20s.

The opinions of women respondents about Misyaar marriage were in sharp contrast to the males’. More than 86 percent of the women aged between 20-40 would not even consider such a marriage for themselves. Only four women, all in the over 40 category would consider such marriages for themselves or relatives. Most of the women respondents called it “legal prostitution”. Many have assimilated Misyaar to Mut’a (Shi’a temporary marriage)

The Qur’an says:

وَمِنْ آَيَاتِهِ أَنْ خَلَقَ لَكُمْ مِنْ أَنْفُسِكُمْ أَزْوَاجًا لِتَسْكُنُوا إِلَيْهَا وَجَعَلَ بَيْنَكُمْ مَوَدَّةً وَرَحْمَةً إِنَّ فِي ذَلِكَ لَآَيَاتٍ لِقَوْمٍ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ

"And among His signs is this, that He created for you mates from among yourselves, that you may dwell in peace and tranquility with them, and He has put love and mercy between your (hearts): Verily in that are signs for those who reflect" (Surah Rum V:21).

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ اتَّقُوا رَبَّكُمُ الَّذِي خَلَقَكُمْ مِنْ نَفْسٍ وَاحِدَةٍ وَخَلَقَ مِنْهَا زَوْجَهَا وَبَثَّ مِنْهُمَا رِجَالًا كَثِيرًا وَنِسَاءً وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ الَّذِي تَسَاءَلُونَ بِهِ وَالْأَرْحَامَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ عَلَيْكُمْ رَقِيبًا

"O Humans fear your Guardian Lord, Who created you from a single person created of like nature its mate, and from this scattered (like seeds) countless men and women. Fear Allah through whom you claim your mutual rights" (Surah Nisaa V: 1).

The objective and the goal of marriage in Islam is to enable the spouses to dwell in peace and tranquillity which is achieved through equity, equality, and fulfilment of mutual rights. Marriage binds the spouses and leads them to live a common life and form a family that develops into a deep spiritual and sentimental relation­ship. Marriage is not merely an instrument for legalizing sexual relations, but it is an agreement which unites the very existence of the husband and wife and gives a new colour to their life. It turns them into a couple instead of single individuals and makes them complementary to each other.

The concept of Misyaar marriage is void of fulfilling many fundamental rights of the spouses and reducing the institution of Nikah to merely fulfilling ones passion. Man has been created feable and cannot control his desires and passions. Every person should be the judge of himself as to whether such marriages of this nature conform to the teachings of our beloved Nabi (sallallahu alaihi wasallam).

And Allah knows best

Wassalam

Ml. Ebrahim Desai,
Student Darul Iftaa

Checked and Approved by:

Mufti Ebrahim Desai
Darul Iftaa, Madrassah In'aamiyyah

AlBaqir:
@sino, ma sha Allah. At least weve both presented our arguments only for objective mind to take a stance.

Sorry, when you claimed mut'a is just to fulfill sexual desires, have you forgotten that Zubair ibn Awwam and Asma bint Abu bakar had children, Abdullah and Ur'wah through mut'a?

Whats sunni's position on that. Abdullah ibn Zubair later became a top dog in sunni world.
*************
Still on my question- solution to a soldier or bussinessman's sexual desire.
If what you presented is indeed sunni submission, then why is the same sunni sought solution in MISYAR NIKKAH?

This shows there is no ijma to the solution of that question. The listed points remain a theory that can never be practice by ALL. Even prominents and common sahabas failed in controlling this animal desire.

Wa salam.

Asma' bint Abi Bakr (ra)

This is the analysis of the narration of Mut`ah attributed to Asma' (ra).

The narration discussed is this one:

دخلنا على أسماء رضي الله عنها فسألناها عن متعة النساء ، فقالت : فعلناها على عهد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم

[We entered upon Asma' (ra) and asked her about the Mut`ah of women, so she said: "We did it during the time of the messenger (SAWS)."]

The chain of narrators for this Hadith is:

روى شعبة ، عن مسلم القري ، عن أسماء

Shu`bah narrated, from Muslim al-Qurriy, from Asma' (then he mentions it)...

Now four people have narrated this from Shu`bah and they differed in the text of the narration.

(1) abu Dawoud al-Tayalisi from Shu`bah:

A- Yusuf bin Habib, from abu Dawoud al-Tayalisi, from Shu`bah, from Muslim al-Qurriy, from Asma' (he mentions "Mut'ah of women" )

B- Mahmoud bin Ghiylan, from abu Dawoud al-Tayalisi, from Shu`bah, from Muslim al-Qurriy, from Asma' (he mentions "Mut'ah of women" )

sources: Musnad al-Tayalisi, Sunan al-Nasa'i, Mustakhraj abi Na`eem `ala Muslim.

C- `Amro bin `Ali al-Fallas, from abu Dawoud al-Tayalisi, from Shu`bah, from Muslim al-Qurriy, from Asma' (he only mentions "Mut'ah" )

D- `Abdah bin `Abdullah al-Saffar, from abu Dawoud al-Tayalisi, from Shu`bah, from Muslim al-Qurriy, from Asma' (he only mentions "Mut'ah" )

sources: Mu`jam al-Tabarani al-Kabir, Mustakhraj abi Na`eem `ala Muslim.

(2) `Abdul-Rahman bin Mahdi, from Shu`bah, from Muslim al-Qurriy, from Asma' (he only mentions "Mut'ah" )

sources: Sahih Muslim, Mustakhraj abi Na`eem `ala Muslim.

(3) Ghandar, from Shu`bah, from Muslim al-Qurriy that he said: "I do not know whether it is the Mut`ah of women or the Mut`ah of Hajj."

source: Sahih Muslim.

(4) Ruh bin `Ubadah, from Shu`bah, from Muslim al-Qurriy: I asked ibn `Abbas about the Mut`ah of Hajj and he gave me a Rukhsa for it but ibn al-Zubayr used to prohibit it. so he said: This is the mother of ibn al-Zubayr and she narrates that the Prophet (SAWS) used to give a Rukhsa in it, soenter on her and ask her. He said: So we entered on her and she was a big blind woman, she told us: The Prophet (SAWS) gave a Rukhsa for it.

sources: Sahih Muslim, Mustakhraj abi Na`eem `ala Muslim, Mu`jam al-Tabarani al-Kabir, Musnad Ahmad.

Conclusions:

FIRST: The only narrator to mention "Mut`ah of women" in the Hadith is abu Dawoud al-Tayalisi. By doing this, al-Tayalisi differed with those who are much more numerous and reliable in Hadith, such as Ghandar, ibn Mahdi, and Ruh. It should be noted that the narration of the other three is given priority not only because they are are stronger in narrating and more numerous, but also because their narration from Shu`bah in specific is far more reliable.

SECOND: Those who narrated from al-Tayalisi also differed, a group said "Mut`ah of women" and another group only said "Mut`ah". What is more reliable is the narration of those who simply said "Mut`ah" for several reasons:

a- Those who narrated it with the Lafth "Mut`ah" are much more reliable, for example `Amro bin `Ali al-Fallas is from the strong Huffaz, and the sheikh of the authors of the six main books. As for `Abdah bin `Abdullah al-Saffar, Bukhari narrates from him, but the other two men who stated the Lafdh "Mut`ah of women" do not reach their level, this is clear because none of the authors of the six main books narrates from Yunis bin Habib.

b- The Lafth "Mut`ah" is that of the majority from Shu`bah so it gets precedence.

THIRD: The narration of Ruh bin `Ubadah has all the details of the story of how they went to ibn `Abbas (ra) and how he referred them to the mother of his opponent ibn al-Zubayr (ra) to strengthen his argument. This shows that this narration is better memorized and it is one of the factors of giving a narration precedence in case of contradiction.

FOURTH: Muslim bin Qurriy who is the main narrator from Asma' (ra) had doubts in the narration of Muhammad bin Ja`far Ghandar, from Shu`bah, that Muslim said: "I do not know whether it is the Mut`ah of women or the Mut`ah of Hajj." It is popularly known that Ghandar is from the strongest narrators from Shu`bah.

قال أحمد بن حنبل : قال غندر : لزمت شعبة عشرين سنة

Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: Ghandar said: "I stuck with Shu`bah for twenty years."

FIFTH: It is impossible that Asma' bint abu Bakr (ra) did the Mut`ah of women, because the Rukhsa that allowed the Muslims to practice Mut`ah of women was in al-Fath or in Khaybar then it was prohibited forever, and Asma' was not in the army of Ghazwat al-Fath, and she got married to al-Zubayr ibn al-`Awwam (ra) a long time before these events took place, and she did her immigration when she was pregnant with `Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr (ra), and he was the first born in Islam. So it's impossible that she did Mut`ah while she was already married and al-Zubayr (ra) is famous for being extremely jealous.

Narrated Asma' bint Abu Bakr (ra): I conceived `Abdullah bin al-Zubayr at Makkah and went out (of Makkah) while I was about to give birth. I came to Madinah and encamped at Quba', and gave birth at Quba'. Then I brought the child to Allah's Apostle and placed it (on his lap). He asked for a date, chewed it, and put his saliva in the mouth of the child. So the first thing to enter its stomach was the saliva of Allah's Apostle. Then he did its Tahnik with a date, and invoked Allah to bless him. It was the first child born in the Islamic era, therefore they (Muslims) were very happy with its birth, for it had been said to them that the Jews had bewitched them, and so they would not produce any offspring.

source: Sahih al-Bukhari.

Narrated `A'ishah (ra): The first child who was born in the Islamic Land (i.e. Madinah) amongst the Emigrants, was `Abdullah bin al-Zubayr. They brought him to the Prophet (SAWS). The Prophet (SAWS) took a date, and after chewing it, put its juice in his mouth. So the first thing that went into the child's stomach, was the saliva of the Prophet (SAWS).

source: Sahih al-Bukhari.

SIXTH: This narration is no different than that of Jabir ibn `Abdullah (ra) in which he said that they did it in the time of the Prophet (SAWS), it doesn't say that it wasn't later forbidden as was reported by `Ali (ra) and `Umar (ra) and ibn Mas`oud (ra) and others...

AlBaqir:
@sino, here are my final conclusion:

4. Question:
What is Sunni's (only those who deemed Mut'a haram) solution and verdict for a soldier's or a businessman's sexual urge who is on a mission for years or months, away from his family?

Please don't mention fasting for it cannot solve majority's problem. Even sahaba failed in this regard. I Have once iron that out on this forum.

Empiree:
This is amazing, isnt? I didnt even know thread like this exist. I am reading every post here and at the same time looking over my shoulder lol.. It was getting real in my head with tbaba1234 narratives.

The thing is this, stuff that involved incantation etc are just plain haram. I just cant phantom that. I insist on Rawaniyah instead. Just that when a muslim begin this spiritual journey, Jinn may first get in your way a lot like a story i was narrating on another thread. The man was just praying and getting deep into it back in the 60s/70s. Jinn would come in and stole his money and other valuables. At times, they would make noise to distract him. At times, they relieved themselves in his room and they smell worse than shit.

He said one of them even appeared in form of a pretty woman sitting on his table shortly after he took a break and stepped to his terrace in his Lagos Island apartment. He clearly didnt leave any lady inside. Shouldn't expect one. Definitely, she's something else. She wanted to seduced him. But he quickly recognized she's Jinn. She disappeared after few juz. They knew he was being devoted so they came around. They bothered him like that for yrs before finally getting a break. He later encounter 'Rawaniyah'. Rawaniyah are said to be 2nd in rank to Malaika. Most of them are Muslims. They have lots of Dua to offer. We cant see them too. But when the dua reaches certain level, you hear "salam alaikum". Just that many Muslims treat this part of islam with suspicion this days. He said the first time he heard salam sent to him, he was relieved to the bottom. Unlike the Jinn who just came anyhow to steal and run.

Jinn are no no for me. I dont want those fellas. I barely see folks talk about Rawaniyah though. Those are pure ones. Most do not incarnate. Jinn dont cross their line. The only way to attain that is dua, fast, abstaining from intercourse even from your wife for a little while. Nothing else.

I have a story to narrate regarding this Rawaniyah but the victim he's helping, the case in still active. I want to see how it ends before I say anything on it. But looks like the end is nigh. Brief hint though, the case involves a long time family friend who was attacked in 2009 by his mother-in law, his wife etc. They brought him down to the rock bottom. The incident is taking place from 9ja to NY back n fourth. What do they want from this man is really a million $$ question. Above all, Allah knows and Sees All Things.

AlBaqir:
@Sino,
Umar's Sermon
I have said so many about this sermon.

The sermons are too explicit and mutawattir thereby contradict the single report that Umar refer the prohibition to the prophet.

Some versions of the sermon reads:
"Two types of mut'ah existed during the time of Allah's Messenger and I prohibit people from them"

"Two types of mut'ah were present during the lifetime of Rasulullah, I prohibit them both, mut'ah of women and Mut'ah of Hajj"

In Tafsir Kabir of Imam Razi, it reads:
"Two Mut'ah existed during Rasulullah's lifetime and I now prohibit both of them"

In Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbali, Abi Nadhra said: "I said to jabir ibn Abdullah that Ibn Zubair prohibits Mut'ah while Ibn Abbas allows it. He (Jabir) replied:"Through me this hadith has been circulated, we performed Mut'ah with Allah's messenger, and Abu Bakar, but when Umar become caliph he addressed the people and said:"The Quran is the same Quran, Allah's Apostle is the same apostle, and there were two types of mut'ah during the time of Allah's messenger, one was the Mut'ah of Hajj whilst the other was Mut'ah regarding women".
~vol. 1 pg 52 hadith 369

* In fact part of the sermon showed that Umar threatened people with the punishment of stoning - whoever practice Mut'ah. No doubt that is even against the shariah for stoning is for a married man/woman who committed adultery. Here Imam Fakhr deen al-Razi absolved Umar that he just used that to frighten people and not that he meant it.

** Why was Mut'ah of Hajj reversed long after Umar's death and not Mut'ah of woman? After all he prohibited the two together.
*****************

You made a very sound argument that if we assumed that it was Umar who prohibited Mut'a during his days as a caliph, why were Uthman and Ali not revert the practice back?

I don't want to say much about the khilafa of Uthman. That is another subject on its own. But suffice is to say that Uthman's assumption of power was characterized by the oath he made to follow the "Quran, the sunnah of the prophet and the sunnah of the two sheiks (Abu Bakar and Umar)".

Before Umar dies, he appointed 6 candidates: Abdurrahman ibn Awf, Zubair, Talha, Uthman, Ali and (sorry I forgot the last man). His explicit will was that his successor should be choose among the 6 and if there's dispute, and there was 2 parties, the party in which Abdur-Rahman belong should emerge where his successor will be chosen.

At the end Talha, Zubair support Ali. While Abdur-Rahman ibn Awf and x supported Uthman making two parties. However, 'Ali was told: "You are going to be appointed as the khalifa based on three conditions - that you follow Quran, the Sunnah of the prophet and the sunnah of the two sheik"

Ali rejected the third condition. Uthman accepted it and he was made the 3rd khalifa of the muslim.

The 14 years of the reign of Uthman was in line with the sunnah established by the two sheiks. So there's no going back on Mut'a.

'Ali's Khilafa
Imam 'Ali was reported to have said through many narration:
"Had Umar not prohibited mut'a, no one but a wretched will commit zina"

This is an indication that Ali had no power to overrule the prohibition of Umar or continuity of the prohibition by Uthman. Almost 3 decades of both Khilafa - Umar and Uthman.

Imam 'Ali's ruled for 4 years. Years plagued with civil wars not known at his predecessors time. In fact, the very moment he assumed power, the beats of the drums of battle can be heard everywhere.

* Battle of Jamal

* Battle of Siffin

* Battle of Nahrawan

Each of these battles lasted for months. What many historian write about the khilafa of Ali was war war war. Yet shi'a have many traditions attributed to Imam Ali that he approved of Mut'ah. We have sermons, sayings, letters, maxism etc of Imam Ali at the time of Khilafa. All these were missing in the basket of traditions of Ahlu Sunnah.

AlBaqir:
@Sino,
2. Report of Imam Ali (as) Concerning Prohibition of Mut'ah At Khaybar

"Verily the Prophet of God banned the mut'a of temporary marriage and the eating of the meat of domesticated asses."
~Al-Tafsir al-kabir, vol. III pg. 287 - 288.

In Shi'a narration, this hadith is also found but graded as fabrication of the zaidis for many reasons among which is lying attributed to some of the narrators.
Kindly visit: www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/mutah/misuse-of-shia-hadeeth.html

The other part is the 'Matn (content)' of the narration. The hadith also have a k-leg and constitute another reason why shi'a reject the hadith.

* The permission of mut'a first took place in the year Mecca was conquered. So how could 'Ali have claimed that Mut'a was banned on the Day of khaybar (3years before Mecca's conquest)?

NB: There is no Single hadith that ever claimed the prophet permitted Mut'a, before or at khaybar, not to mention of forbidden it at khaybar.

Khaybar is around 90miles off Medina. Abu bakar was the first to launch the attack of the conquest of khaybar but failed. He returned back to Madina with his troops. Umar was appointed the following day to lead the army to khaybar fortress. He alongside his troops failed and ran back. Then Ali was appointed, and he conquered the fortress. The holy prophet (saws) was not part of the mission and absolutely, there was never a complaint from any member of 'Ali's troop as to missing their wives that might have necessitate the permission for mut'ah. The only historical happening of notice at khaybar without the holy prophet's consent was the killing and eating of domesticated donkey, horses. There were groups of muslims who killed and cooked a score of donkeys which had escaped from a farm.

It is this incident that led to the holy prophet's forbid to muslims the meat of horses, mules and donkeys unless consumption was forced by necessity.
~Encyclopedia of Islam" under the chapter "Khaybar" by Veccia Vagleri L.

Therefore the only historical prohibition at khaybar was the eating of asses not Mut'ah.

AlBaqir:
@Sino,
Exposition of The Context of the verse
The context of the verse also indicates it refer to 'temporary marriage'. In the preceding verses, the Quran forbids acts of injustice toward women. "Oh believers, it is not lawful for you to inherit from women against their will; neither debar them, that you may go off with part of what you have given them." ~Q4:19

The most commonly accepted interpretation of this verse is that it forbids the pre-Islamic Arab custom of inheriting stepmothers. When a man died, one of his sons would inherit his wife, as long as she was not his own mother.

The next verse reads in part as follows: "And if you desire to exchange a wife in place of another, and you have given to one a hundred-weight, take of it nothing" ~Q.4:20. In other words, if a man divorces a wife to marry a different wife, he must not take back any of the dower that he has given the first, even if the dower is a very large one and he desires only a small part of it.

The next subject referred to in this passage is the marriage of one's father's wife: "And do not marry women that your fathers married..." ~Q4:22. Both this verse and verse 19 were revealed after Abu Qays ibn al-Aslat died and his wife was inherited and married by his son Muhsin.

In the following verse (4:23) the Quran enumerates the women who are forbidden to men. These are divided into seven kinds stemming from blood relationship and seven more stemming from other causes: "Forbidden to you are your mothers and daughters...". The next verse adds a 15th category of women forbidden to men: "And wedded women, save what your right hands own." It continues with the words quoted above: "Lawful for you is what is beyond all that." In other words, any woman not belonging to one of the 15 categories is permitted, whether by marriage or ownership.

Next the verse states: "that you may seek, using your wealth, in wedlock and not in license." Grammatically, this clause is in apposition to "what is beyond all that". It explains the legitimate mode of seeking relationships with women, whether as the result of marriage or the purchase of slaves.

The next part of this same verse states as follows: "So those of them whom you enjoy, give them their appointed wages." The word 'so' (fa) shows that this part of the verse is the conclusion reached by the previous words. This section is either part of the previous subject matter, or an example of it; in other words, its relation to the previous section is either that of the part which is completing the whole, or the particular example to the universal principle. And since the previous section deals with the different kinds of legitimate sexual relationships, either by marriage or the purchase of slaves, we can conclude that this section of the verse is the exposition of a further kind of marriage, not mentioned previously; a kind which requires that the man pay wages of his wife.

The next verse states that if a man is too poor to marry a free Muslim woman, he should marry a Muslim slave girl...

Finally, this section of the chapter concludes with these words: "God desires to make clear to you, and to guide you to the customs of those who went before you, and to turn towards you; God is All-knowing, All-wise".
~Q.4:26

AlBaqir:
@sino,
Dear brother, salam alaykum. I really enjoyed your line of argument and sincerity. In fact, so far you and lanrexlan have displayed the Quranic injunction of "wisdom, good manners and exhortation" which Quran enjoyed in dialogue. May Allah give us His taofeek to understand more.

So far, I think we've been able to narrow down our dialogue to three areas whereas certain level of agreement and understanding have been reached in other areas.

The remaining three areas are as follow:

1. Sunni Tafsir of ayah 24 of sura Nisa; with Sunni Ulama's view.
i. Exposition of the previous and later ayah to get the explicit of verse 24.

2. The hadith of Imam Ali (as) about 'prohibition of mut'a at khaybar'.

3. Sermon of Umar vs hadith that proved his prohibition simply meant ref to prophet's prohibition.
****************

AlBaqir: 1. Tafsir of Q.4 vs 24
[b]The following are sunni tafsir that affirmed that the above ayah was revealed pertaining to Mut'a [/b]leaving aside their various arguments that it was later forbidden:

*Tafsir kashaf, vol. 1 p. 20 commentary of sura Nisa

* Tafsir Ibn kathir, vol. 1 p.84

* Tafsir Tabari part 5 pg. 9

* Tafsir Qurtubi, vol. 5 p. 60

* Tafsir Khazan, vol. 1 p. 63

* Tafsir Kabir, Fakhr deen Razi, vol 3 p. 95

* Tafsir Durr al-Manthur, vol. 2 p. 140

* Tafsir Ahkam al-Quran, vol. 2 p. 45

* Tafsir Haqqani, vol. 2 p. 3

* Tafsir al-Thalabi, vol. 1 p. 363

* Al-Majmoo, by Imam Nawawi, vol. 16 p. 253

Empiree:
you dont smile at on NL

MrOlai:
@sino. Thanks so much for ur fantastic contributions. May Allah(SWT) in His infinite mercy bless u in manifold. May Allah(SWT) protect, guide & assist u in all ur endeavours. May Allah(SWT) never let u astray, ur kids and generations dat'll come after u. E ko ni mo apada si aburu Insha Allah (Amin). I'm highly impressed! You've really done justice to d topic.
For Albaqir & others dat are spreading evils on d land, well, Allah(SWT) knows how to judge them! My prayer for them is Allah's guidance b4 it's too late!