249 replies to this topic

[Haydar Husayn]

ShahBano_BZ, on 25 May 2012 - 12:10 PM, said:

Even if everything points, with concrete evidence, towards the sub-human status of women, I would always remember this thing,  no matter what God says, what Prophets say and religious scripture says and scholars say, that for him I would be always the most precious person on this earth. for him the validity of my existence would never be challenged by the fact whatever status I have in the cosmic scheme of  God.

Nothing points to a sub-human status of women in Islam. This is obvious just from looking at the high regard the likes of Fatima, Khadija, Mariam, (peace be upon them all) are held in. Sure, some hadiths seem quite demeaning of women, but you need to remember that not all woman are the same. This is something that most women have no problem in understanding up until the moment a man says it, and then they get offended.

Quote

Besides,-------Religion is not a buffet lunch, you can't choose and pick things , which you like and ignore which looks unsavory. You have to accept the whole deal or leave the whole package, there is no way in between.

I couldn't agree more.

[Mutah_King]

Haydar Husayn, on 25 May 2012 - 12:56 PM, said:

Nothing points to a sub-human status of women in Islam. This is obvious just from looking at the high regard the likes of Fatima, Khadija, Mariam, (peace be upon them all) are held in. Sure, some hadiths seem quite demeaning of women, but you need to remember that not all woman are the same. This is something that most women have no problem in understanding up until the moment a man says it, and then they get offended.

That is subjective, especially for someone looking at Islam from the outside, you will get varying opinions.  For example, some would consider Islamic laws that deal with slavery (which Islam did institutionalize) to be immoral, others may not.  Some specific personalities are indeed held in very high regard in Islam, but that is not the only thing people take into consideration.

[Ismahan007]

Haydar Husaayn,

brother, ​It's actually quite surprising that you make a comparison between accepting a religion as a form of guidance with people doing filthy things in the name of the religion. you can not compare that with this. totally separate issues we're discussing here. we're talking about human beings being used as an objects to fulfill ones desire and then attributing that to the most purest ppl that ever walked on this earth. I think one has all the right to question the authenticity of those narrations, that doesn't mean we have to also question other aspects of the religion. the wilaya of Amirul-mumineen is quite clear, black and white and doesnt go against the firta of human beings whatever their race or religion. the arocites committed by those corrupt 'sahabs' against Ahlulbayt is something agreed by all schools of thought in Islam whereas with mutah we're the only ppl who has these strange narrations that no aql could comprehend with. Am talking about specific narrations here and not ALL. the idea of mutah is clear and could make some sense, but using that as a disguise to cover for ones irrational behaviors and at most disrespect towards other human beings is where the problem lies. I hope you get the idea here!

Also, like bro Alejadro sosa said, how can we reconcile these supposedly 'sahih narrations' with what the quran and the prophet taught us, like controlling ones desire thru fasting, staying away from the glitters of this life etc, esp women and wealth? it really raises many questions bro..

Edited by Ismahan007, 25 May 2012 - 01:19 PM.

[ShahBano_BZ]

Ismahaan

Have you read text/ scriptures of two other divine religions ?
Judaism
Christianity

[Haydar Husayn]

Ismahan007, on 25 May 2012 - 01:13 PM, said:

Haydar Husaayn,

brother, ​It's actually quite surprising that you make a comparison between accepting a religion as a form of guidance with people doing filthy things in the name of the religion. you can not compare that with this. totally separate issues we're discussing here. we're talking about using human being used as an objects to fulfill ones desire and then attributing that to the most purest ppl that ever walked on this earth. I think one has all the right to question the authenticity of those narrations, that doesn't mean we have to also question other aspects of the religion. the wilaya of Amirul-mumineen is quite clear, black and white and doesnt go against the firta of human beings whatever their race or religion.

What goes with or against our fitra is very subjective. Many people would now say that slavery goes against our fitra, but nobody can deny it is in the Qur'an. You could also just as well argue that what you call 'filthy things' and 'using human beings as objects to fulfill ones desire' (which I think is a misrepresentation anyway) is very much part of the fitra of males.

Anyway, I think the key point you are missing is if our scholars fabricated all these hadiths that you object to (and there are many), then how can you possibly trust such people to preserve any other aspect of our religion? That would be absurd. Who takes narrations from known fabricators?

Regarding the wilayah, even if you take that of Imam Ali to be clear, due to Ghadir, the wilayah of the other Imams doesn't rest on such a well-known event, and some reference to the narrations needs to be made. Even if you prove the wilayah of all of them without resting on the narrations too much, then how would you go about proving that it is so fundamental, and that actions without believing in wilayah are worthless?

Quote

the arocites committed by those corrupt 'sahabs' against Ahlulbayt is something agreed by all schools of thought in Islam

No, Sunnis don't really agree with this. Anyway, even if they did, who's to say these stories weren't fabricated by individuals with a bias in favour of Ali ? Not all pro-Alids were Shia you know.

Quote

whereas with mutah we're the only ppl who has these strange narrations that no aql could comprehend with. Am talking about specific narrations here and not ALL.

Sunnis never had any objection to slave girls. You don't find the concept of buying (or capturing) a girl objectionable? But entering into a mutual contract with a free woman is somehow taking advantage of her?

Quote

the idea of mutah is clear and could make some sense, but using that as a disguise to cover for ones irrational behaviors and at most disrespect towards other human beings is where the problem lies. I hope you get the idea here!

What disrespect? You can't force anyone into muta. It's has to be a mutual decision. Are you trying to say that women are so weak-minded that they aren't capable of entering into contracts without getting taken advantage of?

And can you tell me what irrational behaviour you are speaking of?

Quote

Also, ike bro Alejadro sosa said, how can we reconcile these supposedly 'sahih narrations' with what the quran and the prophet taught us, like controlling ones desire thru fasting, staying away from the glitters of this life, esp women and wealth? it really raises many questions bro..

In case you didn't know, the Prophet had many wives. Many try to spin this as simply marriages for political convenience, but then if that was the case, why marry young women like Juwayriyya (20), Safiyya (17), and Maria (age unknown, but unlikely to be old considering she was a gift). Other wives were in their 20's, and of course there is Aisha who was very young. By the way, it is worth mentioning that Aisha was jealous of all the women mentioned, plus some others like Zaynab bint Jahsh, due to their beauty. Now, considering Aisha was supposed to be quite beautiful herself, this tells you something about their beauty. Anyone who thinks these marriages were simply due to 'political convenience' and nothing more is not being truthful to himself in my opinion.

As for brother Alejandro Sosa's main point, I already answered him, so you can go back and read my response.

[Ismahan007]

ShahBano_BZ, on 25 May 2012 - 12:10 PM, said:

Ismahaan,

Stop doing this to your self, stop hurting yourself for nothing. I know what you are trying to say; once in our history class our Sister said that whenever and wherever a woman is exploited or degraded , it diminishes all other women in some way.

are you trying to say that am being 'emotional' here c'oz am a woman and that's why am arguing for no other reason? that's not the case sister... its about ppl damaging our societies in the name of Islam and our imams to justify their nasty behaviors towards fellow human beings and give the religion bad image. is that hard to understand?

ShahBano_BZ, on 25 May 2012 - 12:10 PM, said:

Listen, you stop looking for answers and justification and explanations where there are none, just accept the things the way they are , make your peace with them, close the door and move on.

well, it has to have answers and 'justifications' if its claimed to be from God, period. you can't stop looking for answers just b'cos your scared of the outcome. we're constantly straggling with our selves to find our way to God and purify ourselves. if the faith you follow doesn't have the answers to all of ur questions then it's not worth following really.

ShahBano_BZ, on 25 May 2012 - 12:10 PM, said:

Besides,-------Religion is not a buffet lunch, you can't choose and pick things , which you like and ignore which looks unsavory. You have to accept the whole deal or leave the whole package, there is no way in between.

Yes I totally agree with you. we can't be picky when it comes to religion to satisfy our ways but having questions regarding certain issues cant be classed as such!

[ShahBano_BZ]

No, I did not say you are being emotional--( besides, there is nothing wrong with being emotional, it's our empathy, the ability to feel the pain and suffering of others, our sense of justice which roars when we see exploitation or degradation of an other human being, the sum total of all that makes a human heart )

It's not just one religion who has   * this nasty behaviour*   regarding human beings----or to be more specific, sub-human beings. All three divine religion trace the same pattern, Though Christianity has a slightly different stance , because Jesus Christ ( May God Bless His Pure Soul ) never used a person for his amusement, so the scholars and Christian Clerics have to gulp down their urge to hurl insults on women. So, even if  every fiber of their being wanted to declare women nothing but a tool of amusement , they can't as their prophet never did so. But apart from that even christian philosophy follow the same train, albeit in a more subdued tones.

would you question the detailed analysis of woman's status, which was done by Mola Ali ?

Inferior in religion-----obviously you know, why it was said----even though the painful part is that we did not ask for it,

Inferior in Mind/ Intellect------what's point of questioning it, the judgement has been passed by the entity whom we consider the custodian of this universe, even though we know we have seen many intelligent and learned women around us, but still---as I said the judgment has been passed.

Inferior in Physique----We know we have poor physique, end of discussion---how much pain and suffering a normal woamn goes through in her life, no one know and admits it. No point in keep on hurting yourself by questioning this thing.


The hidden pattern of thought , which is easily driven from the Sacred Scriptures is that the sole purpose of woman' creation is to award her the below human status of being a tool for amusement, nothing more , nothing else.

Personally I have no interest in knowing that what promises are made to reward a good woman----I have no interest in knowing the wage rate and amount for being used for the amusement of an other person. But , I also see no point in debating the status of woman.

The only thing a woman can do is to close the door on everyone, on the whole world, do not let men hurt her beyond than necessary. Limit the interaction, there is no point in associating with them in any way. And never forget that whatever is said, there is still a man who would never consider you a tool for amusement---you father, bank on his love and protection and close doors on all other aspects. You would be very peaceful.

PS----It seems to me that regarding the above three points, I have done some mistake, like maybe I have forgotten something to add, or what. problem is I have very poor memory where remembering the exact wording and exact source is considered. so if I have missed a point, please point it out.
That I am sure that Mola Ali ( AS ) mentioned 3 things, but I might have confused or blundered up the exact narration.

Edited by ShahBano_BZ, 25 May 2012 - 02:39 PM.

[ShahBano_BZ]

Most important thing----- as you said , " well, it has to have answers and 'justifications' if its claimed to be from God, period."

----------God does not need to provide justification for his system of distribution, and allocation of status.

[Mutah_King]

ShahBano_BZ, on 25 May 2012 - 02:22 PM, said:

The only thing a woman can do is to close the door on everyone, on the whole world, do not let men hurt her beyond than necessary. Limit the interaction, there is no point in associating with them in any way. And never forget that whatever is said, there is still a man who would never consider you a tool for amusement---you father, bank on his love and protection and close doors on all other aspects. You would be very peaceful.

Relax dude, if you want to embrace that philosophy then that is your own prerogative, surely it has been shaped by your own experiences, but I can assure you that there are a lot of good men around.

[ShahBano_BZ]

Mutah_King, on 25 May 2012 - 02:58 PM, said:

Relax dude, if you want to embrace that philosophy then that is your own prerogative, surely it has been shaped by your own experiences, but I can assure you that there are a lot of good men around.

I know---my own husband is quite good,   and using my prerogative, I have decided not to live with him,

and I am fortunate , no bad experience,  sired by a great man and raised in a Catholic convent,
the only men I have a direct encounter is my father and my husband---

[ShahBano_BZ]

^^^^^
no, seriously, aside joking, the goodness of man is irrelevant here in the context of this particular interaction between man and woman; does not make a tiny bit of a difference whether the man is good or bad---terms of agreement, the contract of hire/purchase remains the same. Who cares whether men are good or bad in the first place. It's not likely to change what we are.

That is what I was trying to make Ismahaan understand----no point in pointing out the behaviour of some men---in the end it boils down to same for most, at least, if not for everyone.

[Mutah_King]

ShahBano_BZ, on 25 May 2012 - 04:11 PM, said:

^^^^^
no, seriously, aside joking, the goodness of man is irrelevant here in the context of this particular interaction between man and woman; does not make a tiny bit of a difference whether the man is good or bad---terms of agreement, the contract of hire/purchase remains the same. Who cares whether men are good or bad in the first place. It's not likely to change what we are.

That is what I was trying to make Ismahaan understand----no point in pointing out the behaviour of some men---in the end it boils down to same for most, at least, if not for everyone.

It does make a difference,  what is actually irrelevant here is the nature of the contract.  A good man will not treat a woman as some inferior being, nor will he solely use her for his own amusement.  I don't see the point of locking yourself away from men in general, life is empty without love and affection, and there is all kinds, why deprive yourself based on such generalized fears?  Some men themselves are intellectually deficient as compared to their male counterparts, or can be physically weak, which is why we try to push towards a society where the weak and the strong can peacefully coexist cooperatively and in harmony.

[Haydar Husayn]

ShahBano_BZ, on 25 May 2012 - 02:22 PM, said:

No, I did not say you are being emotional--( besides, there is nothing wrong with being emotional, it's our empathy, the ability to feel the pain and suffering of others, our sense of justice which roars when we see exploitation or degradation of an other human being, the sum total of all that makes a human heart )

Please explain where you see degradation of another human being.

Quote

It's not just one religion who has   * this nasty behaviour*   regarding human beings----or to be more specific, sub-human beings.

How does Islam view women as sub-human? What is your definition of fully human?

Quote

All three divine religion trace the same pattern, Though Christianity has a slightly different stance , because Jesus Christ ( May God Bless His Pure Soul ) never used a person for his amusement, so the scholars and Christian Clerics have to gulp down their urge to hurl insults on women. So, even if  every fiber of their being wanted to declare women nothing but a tool of amusement , they can't as their prophet never did so. But apart from that even christian philosophy follow the same train, albeit in a more subdued tones.

Jesus isn't the Prophet of the Christians, he is their god. The real prophet of Christianity is Paul. As for what he said about women:

1 Corinthians 14:33-36 (NIV)

³⁴ Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. ³⁵ If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

1 Timothy 2 (NIV)

¹¹ A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.  ¹² I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.  ¹³ For Adam was formed first, then Eve.  ¹⁴ And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.  ¹⁵ But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

Regarding Jesus , in the New Testament he is said to have told his disciples to uphold the Law of Moses to the letter. So anything in there you find demeaning to women, he supports (according to Christian scriptures as least).


Matthew 5 (NIV)

¹⁷ “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.  ¹⁸ For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.  ¹⁹ Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. ²⁰ For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Quote

would you question the detailed analysis of woman's status, which was done by Mola Ali ?

Inferior in religion-----obviously you know, why it was said----even though the painful part is that we did not ask for it,

Inferior in Mind/ Intellect------what's point of questioning it, the judgement has been passed by the entity whom we consider the custodian of this universe, even though we know we have seen many intelligent and learned women around us, but still---as I said the judgment has been passed.

Inferior in Physique----We know we have poor physique, end of discussion---how much pain and suffering a normal woamn goes through in her life, no one know and admits it. No point in keep on hurting yourself by questioning this thing.

The point is that Imam Ali explained what he meant by inferior in religion, etc, and they were all true. So why do people impose their own definitions onto that? None of this is an insult anyway, it's just observations.

Quote

The hidden pattern of thought , which is easily driven from the Sacred Scriptures is that the sole purpose of woman' creation is to award her the below human status of being a tool for amusement, nothing more , nothing else.

It would take a very shallow reading of those scriptures to get that impression.

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 [2:187]

O you who believe! it is not lawful for you that you should take women as heritage against (their) will, and do not straiten them in order that you may take part of what you have given them, unless they are guilty of manifest indecency, and treat them kindly; then if you hate them, it may be that you dislike a thing while Allah has placed abundant good in it. [4:19]

do not compel your slave girls to prostitution, when they desire to keep chaste, in order to seek the frail good of this world's life; and whoever compels them, then surely after their compulsion Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. [24:33]

And one of His signs is that He created mates for you from yourselves that you may find rest in them, and He put between you love and compassion; most surely there are signs in this for a people who reflect. [30:21]

O mankind! We have created you from a male and female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Verily, the most honorable of you with Allah is that (believer) who has piety. [49:19]

It is narrated from Ibn Faddal from Yunus b. Ya`qub from the one who heard Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام saying: Most of the good is in women. (Man La Yahduruhu al-Faqih, vol 3, ch 104)

Quote

Personally I have no interest in knowing that what promises are made to reward a good woman----I have no interest in knowing the wage rate and amount for being used for the amusement of an other person. But , I also see no point in debating the status of woman.

How is a woman who of her own free will enters a contract that is for mutual pleasure, being used for amusement? You might as well say she is using the man for amusement.

Quote

The only thing a woman can do is to close the door on everyone, on the whole world, do not let men hurt her beyond than necessary. Limit the interaction, there is no point in associating with them in any way. And never forget that whatever is said, there is still a man who would never consider you a tool for amusement---you father, bank on his love and protection and close doors on all other aspects. You would be very peaceful.

This seems to me to be a rather warped view of inter-gender relations. As for fathers, it is by no means to case that they are always good to their daughters, and plenty of them treat their daughters horribly. There are also plenty of men that treat their wives with love and respect.

[ShahBano_BZ]

"The point is that Imam Ali explained what he meant by inferior in religion, etc, and they were all true. So why do people impose their own definitions onto that? None of this is an insult anyway, it's just observations."

I did not impose my definition onto it, I accepted it the way it was; and that is what I was trying to tell the other girl that with whom she is trying to debate ? It's not said by an ordinary person, so we can debate or challenge it. If we accept their supremacy, if we hold them in esteem next to God, then we have to accept what they said.

Did I try to twist or turn the saying, or tried to draw some other meaning from it ? I did not.

Edited by ShahBano_BZ, 25 May 2012 - 04:40 PM.

[Qa'im]

People tended to skip over macisaac's post #168 and I think it addresses some very relevant points to this topic. It is true that the purpose of mut`a has been to alleviate sexual desires and avoid sin, particularly when permanent marriage is not possible, but it has been misused and misinterpreted. Firstly there is a double standard placed by our cultures that need to be addressed; and that is that divorced women, widows, and generally any woman that has been involved with a man at any point in her life, has a much harder time finding a permanent spouse. Islamically, there is a difference between a woman that has 'made some mistakes' and a woman that has engaged in a legal marriage, permanent or temporary. The former is a sinner, the latter is someone that did a fine act. These women should not be discriminated against as they committed no sin. Of course, there is a factor that shows up in our hadiths that note that a virgin woman is "more beloved to men" as men are more attracted to these women for various reasons. However, that is a statement about human nature and not a fiqh statement. It does not mean that women who engaged in mut`a are worth less, rather, mut`a is a hasana if performed lawfully.

Because of the difficulties of early marriage in the West (economic, cultural, issues of maturity) many men have resorted to mut`a marriages. While mut`a is lawful, they can very quickly become dangerous to our community when they are performed unlawfully. Most men who do mut`a do not know the rules, so I will share a few with you:

• Mut`a is appropriate when one is reviving a Sunna or is in fear of committing sin.
  
• Mut`a is despised when one has no need for it. For example, if you're married, and your wife fulfills what is upon her, then you do not have a need for mut`a. It isn't just about having more women or more intercourse, it's about whether you need it or not. It can be especially damaging to your relationship with your permanent wife. Remember that the Qur'an says, if you cannot do justice between your women, then marry only one.
  
• Mut`a is preferred with a chaste Muslim woman. This means, it is mutahab to do mut`a with a Muslim woman who has only had sexual relations inside a lawful Islamic marriage; or is a virgin (specific rules apply for the latter). Most of the time in the West, men have mut`a with a non-Muslima. It is important to know that the fiqh status of marrying non-Muslimas is debated. It is a legitimate opinion in Shi`a Islam that marrying non-Muslimat permanently or temporarily is makrooh or even haraam. Out of precaution, it is safer to not do it. Moreover, how many non-Muslims are chaste in the West? It is rare to find a practicing Christian or Jewess in the West who has not had haraam relationships and would still be willing to engage in mut`a. Another issue is, it's difficult to engage in mut`a with a Westerner without committing makrooh and haraam acts beforehand - flirting, touching, being alone, going to bars and pubs, etc. My recommendation would be to not deal with Western women at all.
  
• Prostitution is haraam. This is an elementary issue; engaging with prostitutes and furthering their business in any way is haraam. The only exception is when you take the woman from the haraam to halaal - meaning, if you're able to convince the woman to leave her sinful way of life and start living a halal life, then engaging in mut`a with her becomes permissible. However, it is still makrooh if she is known for fornication.
  
• It is not permissible to do mut`a with a virgin Muslima without the permission of her Muslim father. There is some ikhtilaf, but most would agree that you should at least get his permission out of precaution.
  
• A mut`a is not a girlfriend/boyfriend relationship. It requires a dowry, it often requires parental permission, it is preferred to have 2 witnesses, it requires a set time limit.

The problem with men seeking mut`a, often from young non-religious loose women, is that it discourages our women from becoming religious. They see men going for women who are more open to receive them. This is a detrimental problem to our society and thus we need to faciltiate marriage between Muslims in a better way to solve the problems of a highly-sexualized unsegregated Western society that demands a full education and high paying job before marriage. Let alone the cultural discriminations.

[Ismahan007]

Haydar Husayn, on 25 May 2012 - 01:35 PM, said:

What goes with or against our fitra is very subjective. Many people would now say that slavery goes against our fitra, but nobody can deny it is in the Qur'an. You could also just as well argue that what you call 'filthy things' and 'using human beings as objects to fulfill ones desire' (which I think is a misrepresentation anyway) is very much part of the fitra of males.

true, our fitra can be influenced by different factors however we all have universal principles that are shared by all humans. I fail to see for example, how hiring a prostitutes for x amount of time is a common value shared by all men in the world and consider it 'moral'? as far as I know most men despise such a thing which you called it part of their 'fitra'. this aint true and you know it!

Also it can't be compared to 'slavery'. Slavery was a common custom practiced by ALL societies throughout history and not only by 'muslims'. sure the quran mentions about it but then it was part of the daily lives of those people whom the religion was first introduced to and later on vanished.

Haydar Husayn, on 25 May 2012 - 01:35 PM, said:

Anyway, I think the key point you are missing is if our scholars fabricated all these hadiths that you object to (and there are many), then how can you possibly trust such people to preserve any other aspect of our religion? That would be absurd. Who takes narrations from known fabricators?

I did not say all our scholars were fabricators. you should always remember that all these 'scholars' were human beings who were capable of making mistakes, so 'ahadith' will always be open for questions and having doubts in certain part of it doesn't make one also should have doubts in everything.

Haydar Husayn, on 25 May 2012 - 01:35 PM, said:

Regarding the wilayah, even if you take that of Imam Ali to be clear, due to Ghadir, the wilayah of the other Imams doesn't rest on such a well-known event, and some reference to the narrations needs to be made. Even if you prove the wilayah of all of them without resting on the narrations too much, then how would you go about proving that it is so fundamental, and that actions without believing in wilayah are worthless?

I think you have a valid point however like I said above, just bcos one questions excessively unjustified narrations about 'mutah' doesn't mean the whole religion falls apart. if one believes in the wilaya of imam Ali, believing in the rest of the imams will automatically follow. how else you can explain what happens once imam Ali answers the call of His Lord (death), what comes after that then? you can not disconnect one from the other. they r all in one line. plus wilaya is mentioned many times in the quran, in reference to our imams.... doesnt matter if ppl have different understanding.

Haydar Husayn, on 25 May 2012 - 01:35 PM, said:

No, Sunnis don't really agree with this. Anyway, even if they did, who's to say these stories weren't fabricated by individuals with a bias in favour of Ali ? Not all pro-Alids were Shia you know.

the truth is they all have it there in their most regarded books. what we differ is how we interpret certain events, thats all. they dont deny it all what happened to Ahlulbayt but they give it a different explanations than us. plus the effect of past history on us today is obvious for one to deny it. how else we can explain the major disagreement between varies schools of thoughts that we witness today? again, I dont think questioning 'mutah' will mean the religion will fall apart. we're talking about the 'ahadith' that are attributed to our imams that encourages indecent actions such as buying slaves for sex, hiring prostitutes etc for similar purposes. and that's different!

Haydar Husayn, on 25 May 2012 - 01:35 PM, said:

Sunnis never had any objection to slave girls. You don't find the concept of buying (or capturing) a girl objectionable? But entering into a mutual contract with a free woman is somehow taking advantage of her?

its funny you bring sunnis into this? anyway... what do you mean by a 'free woman' here? is a prostitute a free woman? most of these type of 'women' take this root as their last resort for money. doing mutah with supposedly 'free woman' who's a wicked who engages in a nasty 'business' and call it 'it was a mutual agreement' is un islamic and immoral. its against human value if you care what it is. so yes, a man who claims to be a 'muslim' involving himself with such a 'woman' in such situation is taking advantage of her for his own benefit nd is actually encouraging her to further continue once he's done with her... how can such a behavior be supported..?
I believe 'slavery' was a common custom practiced by every society in the world. many reforms was made by the prophet in Arabia but as far as I know the slaves under our prophet and imams guardianship were treated with at most respect and care and were not treated for sexual purposes only.

Haydar Husayn, on 25 May 2012 - 01:35 PM, said:

What disrespect? You can't force anyone into muta. It's has to be a mutual decision. Are you trying to say that women are so weak-minded that they aren't capable of entering into contracts without getting taken advantage of?

like I said above, most of these types of 'women' are forced into these ''business''. they are already damaged goods and come from a damaged background, full stop. you can't pretend they r free when they are in reality are forced by different situations.

Haydar Husayn, on 25 May 2012 - 01:35 PM, said:

In case you didn't know, the Prophet had many wives. Many try to spin this as simply marriages for political convenience, but then if that was the case, why marry young women like Juwayriyya (20), Safiyya (17), and Maria (age unknown, but unlikely to be old considering she was a gift). Other wives were in their 20's, and of course there is Aisha who was very young. By the way, it is worth mentioning that Aisha was jealous of all the women mentioned, plus some others like Zaynab bint Jahsh, due to their beauty. Now, considering Aisha was supposed to be quite beautiful herself, this tells you something about their beauty. Anyone who thinks these marriages were simply due to 'political convenience' and nothing more is not being truthful to himself in my opinion.

does He has to only marry old and ugly 'women' for you to believe that he married them for political, social etc purposes? are you trying to say that our prophet married those women b'cos they were 'young' and 'beautiful' so ultimately for the sake of sex like many men now a days do? I believe our prophet done everything he did for the sake of islam and muslims. not once in his entire life used any one to fulfill his aim. that's the ultimate truth. I don't care how ppl interpret certain aspects of his blessed life to justify themselves. the truth is he did everything for us, to purify us and to teach us what we need to know about life and religion. he needed nothing in this life, everything was subservient for him.
so, all those men who cry out for polygamy/extra women... are all mistaken. its another thing if they say they do it for themselves as long as islam permits, which is permitted anyway but the ridiculous part is when they claim they're 'practicing' islam/reviving the sunnah. its absurd and makes one feel disgusted of them.

Edited by Ismahan007, 25 May 2012 - 06:07 PM.

[alimohamad40]

salaam

Qaim

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

People tended to skip over macisaac's post #168 and I think it addresses some very relevant points to this topic. It is true that the purpose of mut`a has been to alleviate sexual desires and avoid sin, particularly when permanent marriage is not possible, but it has been misused and misinterpreted. Firstly there is a double standard placed by our cultures that need to be addressed; and that is that divorced women, widows, and generally any woman that has been involved with a man at any point in her life, has a much harder time finding a permanent spouse. Islamically, there is a difference between a woman that has 'made some mistakes' and a woman that has engaged in a legal marriage, permanent or temporary. The former is a sinner, the latter is someone that did a fine act. These women should not be discriminated against as they committed no sin. Of course, there is a factor that shows up in our hadiths that note that a virgin woman is "more beloved to men" as men are more attracted to these women for various reasons. However, that is a statement about human nature and not a fiqh statement. It does not mean that women who engaged in mut`a are worth less, rather, mut`a is a hasana if performed lawfully. Because of the difficulties of early marriage in the West (economic, cultural, issues of maturity) many men have resorted to mut`a marriages. While mut`a is lawful, they can very quickly become dangerous to our community when they are performed unlawfully.

good I agree

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

Most men who do mut`a do not know the rules, so I will share a few with you:

• Mut`a is appropriate when one is reviving a Sunna or is in fear of committing sin.
• 
  

Reviving the sunnah always applies and marriage is msutahab in general
even if he isnt afraid of sin marriage and even if he is not doing it to revive the sunnah it is still encouraged in general  you can check the works of abulqasim  alkhoie and also altabatabaie's work in al urwah al wothqa

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

Mut`a is despised when one has no need for it.

absolutely false ,    read in Urwa al qothqa in the chapter of nikah
"the (istihbab) encouragement of marriage  does not stop after the first wife but extends to the multiple wives As well  "

this is the words of  tabatabaie the author of al meezaan  in the book Alurwah al wothqa which is the compilation of the opeion of 5 scholars of that time


abulqasim alkhoie also said: "that the encouragement is not only when one has a need for the marriage "

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

For example, if you're married, and your wife fulfils what is upon her, then you do not have a need for mut`a.

how do you know its not a need? who told you that one wife is enough for one man ?  on what bases have you come  to this conclusion?

if one wife was enough then why would god allow up to four wives for each man???   is he allowing excessiveness?   try to think abuot it

Even if its not a need and its simply a desire ,  still its generally mustahab so you can not say its despised otherwise oyu need to provide evidence because dispised means you are giving a fatwa of karahyah or prohibition  

you need to back your claims

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

It isn't just about having more women or more intercourse, it's about whether you need it or not. It can be especially damaging to your relationship with your permanent wife. Remember that the Qur'an says, if you cannot do justice between your women, then marry only one.

If doing a msutahab or a wajib will create tensions with your permanent wife then there is something fundamentally wrong with her and most likely she is acting upon jealousy which is described by imam ِAli as kufr so are you suggesting that people hsould abide by kufr ?

I can also say " you need to stop praying and females need to stop wearing hijab because it will create tensions with the polytheists and aithiests!!! "

nonesense

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

Mut`a is preferred with a chaste Muslim woman. This means, it is mutahab to do mut`a with a Muslim woman who has only had sexual relations inside a lawful Islamic marriage; or is a virgin (specific rules apply for the latter)
Most of the time in the West, men have mut`a with a non-Muslima. It is important to know that the fiqh status of marrying non-Muslimas is debated. It is a legitimate opinion in Shi`a Islam that marrying non-Muslimat permanently or temporarily is makrooh or even haraam. Out of precaution, it is safer to not do it.

wrong its very msutahab and wajib on the overwhelming majority of us even with kitabis considering the ugly situation that we are in ,,,,  you think pornography and fornication which is eating up the overwhelming majority of our youth doesn’t turn any other permissible alternative as recommended and wajib?

when you have a choice between haraam and makrooh then the makrooh becomes wajib

this is a fundemental issue

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

Moreover, how many non-Muslims are chaste in the West? It is rare to find a practicing Christian or Jewess in the West who has not had haraam relationships and would still be willing to engage in mut`a.

The chaste you are refering to is a mistranslation the verse says " protected " " المحصنات"  and this verse is referring to permenant marriage.   This verse directly encourages the marriage of muslim men to kitabi females and also envourages eating thier food.

encouragement is obviously going to point at the most ideal situation which is marrying a protected female from ahlulkitab

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

Another issue is, it's difficult to engage in mut`a with a Westerner without committing makrooh and haraam acts beforehand - flirting, touching, being alone, going to bars and pubs, etc. My recommendation would be to not deal with Western women at all.

That’s  a very bad  recommendation ,  you don’t have to do sins before marriage you can marry quickly and keep a distance before marriage

I married many times and was not forced to touch or commit sins before the marriage contract...


Even if they do some small sins its better than big sins you have to organize your priorities in a sane fashion.

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

Prostitution is haraam. This is an elementary issue; engaging with prostitutes and furthering their business in any way is haraam.

Fornication is haraam but doing muta with a prostitute with all its negatives its still permissible and much better than the current situation which you see all around you....
This gives you a good understanding of how much tolerance god placed so that people would use marriage instead of curruption..
I mean did god ignore the big harms that come from supporting a prostitute by being with her ?  so how come he still made it permissible ???  obiously to avoid a bigger harm,,,
This tells you alot about the big harm of marriage related curruptions .

just like alcohol Allah says:

it has many harms and many benefits and thier harms overweigh the benefits  

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

The only exception is when you take the woman from the haraam to halaal - meaning, if you're able to convince the woman to leave her sinful way of life and start living a halal life, then engaging in mut`a with her becomes permissible. However, it is still makrooh if she is known for fornication.

even if she does not repent diong muta with her is permissible but  makrooh however the act of watching nudity is haraam
the act of masturbation is haraam, the act of fornication is haraam and hence it becomes obligatory on any porn addict or masturbator to do muta with prostitutes if he has the means to do so as an alternative to the haraam actions because a makrooh becomes a priority if the alternative is  a haraam act..

this is elementary knowledge that if you have to choose between haraam and makrooh then the makrooh becomes recomended and wajib in this case

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

It is not permissible to do mut`a with a virgin Muslima without the permission of her Muslim father. There is some ikhtilaf, but most would agree that you should at least get his permission out of precaution.

false
The common opinion is that rashida needs the permission only as a precaution...  the scholars who gave absolute fatwas said that the rashida does not need permission and their opinion is buttom line because if you have precautions its indicative of the uncertainty of that scholar therefore  in the case of precautionary fatwa you need to follow scholars who are certain and have no precautions in the matter.

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

A mut`a is not a girlfriend/boyfriend relationship. It requires a dowry, it often requires parental permission, it is preferred to have 2 witnesses, it requires a set time limit.

The problem with men seeking mut`a, often from young non-religious loose women, is that it discourages our women from becoming religious. They see men going for women who are more open to receive them.

men preferring loose women or that’s their only option ?  if they prefer loose women then thats very bad and your statement is true

prefer means you give them a choice between two,  one religious and the other loose and he volentarily chooses the loose one....  
I know this is a problem but this has nothing to do with what we are saying ...  
a man should prefer good women but he can marry several times so he can choose the best ones but if his preference is not met in real life then is that his fault ??

offcourse men should prefer good women but if there is no good women then he will logically go for the next good alternative which is not the best

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

This is a detrimental problem to our society and thus we need to faciltiate marriage between Muslims in a better way to solve the problems of a highly-sexualized unsegregated Western society that demands a full education and high paying job before marriage. Let alone the cultural discriminations.

shahbano

there is alot to say in answer to shahbano but in summury if imam ali makes a generalization he is reflecting upon general phenomena and it is not to be used for prejudgement or descrimination between the sexes

there is no superiority and inferiority


that god gives whatever to whoever he wishes and we should not wish what others have because thats the disease of satan when he started comparing himself with adam

the quraan says: the men are leaders over the women due to what god has favoured some upon the other and due to spending thier money ,,,   do not wish what god has favoured some of you upon the other

a man can complain and say: why is the wife not required to work hard and provide for the family ?

why can she sleep at home while i have to work hard all my life in the cold and heat of the terrain?
why dont i have a good immune system like the women and why do i die on average 6 years ealier than them?

why is direct war effort is compulsry on me  and not on the woman?


a woman can also say many things  that she wishes to have which the male posesses

but this thinking is the thinking of satan which always compares and wants to be on top
rising

in arabic its called : العلو   rising  
تلك الدار الاخرة نجعلها للذين لا يريدون علوا في الارض و لا فسادا و العاقبه للمتقين  

the after life is for those who do not rising on earth nor curruption and the end if for those who avoid gods wrath


for example we were recently talking about the hadeeth which describes the females as scorpions with a sweet bite
sorry I cant edit it but ill just paste it, its actually a debate but i have not gotten permission from the other side so i will only paste my own sections
salaam



salaam we must be careful of the femenist mis interpreting of this to imply that the female is inherently bad.... This phrase is a generalization and doesnt apply to all the female kind. using generalization is acceptable as has been done so in the quraan towards the human kind , generalizations reflect upon a general phenomena but are in no way excuse for gender supremacy ideas.,



The way I understood it was a generalization...
When he says thier bite is sweet refering to the luring and the attraction of the man to the woman which is a sweet feeling but when she orders him to be her slave and divert him away from god then thats her poisonous bite.
This trait is not inherent but a very common phenomena which qualifies it as a general phenomena.

I understood it as a negative description. what I meant was that generalizations do not apply to everyone. generalizations inform us about general phenomena in socity.

Imam ali has another generalization where he said :
"people are the slaves of the dunya and religion is merely a mumble on their tongues"

offcourse he is not reffering to all people is he ?

likewise in the quraan God generalizes when he says: " The human kind is indeed ignorant and transgressor" , this quranic generalization obviously doesnt apply to prophets and good people yet Allah uses a generalization to inform about a general phenomena .

Some people try to use these hadeeths to prove that its saying females are inherently bad > or that humans are inherently evil>
I oppose this hypothesis and belive that generalizations are to infrom us about a general phenomena in order to study it. They are not to apply it to everyone of that kind without evidence of them being included in that generalization

a bad generalization is when you use the generalization to make incorrect assumptions stemming purely from the generalization itself and not from facts on the ground.

a good generalization is one which is made for the sake of studying the phenomena, the motives and the drives and one which is not used to judge people based on suspicion and conjecture

salaam and thank you for sharing



salaam
انا قرات
الْمَرْأَةُ عَقْرَبٌ حُلْوَةُ اللَّسْعةِ
و الان قرات

الْمَرْأَةُ عَقْرَبٌ حُلْوَةُ اللَّسْبَةِ

اللسبة بالفتح تعني اللسعه و بالكسر تعني اللعق و الظاهر كلاهما مشتقات لارتباط اللسع باللعق

العقرب يرمز للسم و حلاوة اللعق هي حلاوه الشهوة تجاه النساء

فهو قد يكون تحذير للرجال من الانجراف وراء حلاوة الشهوة و الغفله عن المساوئ التي تسببها المراة السيئه في حاله الانصياع لها

يعني دس السم في العسل فيكون العسل سما لكن حلو لعقه

فالقصد ان لا تغرنك حلاوة اللعق فوراءه عقرب سام

اما الاحتمالات الاخرى فواردة ايضا لكن اذا كان المقصود به العقرب و السم فالتعميم على جنس المراة من باب الاشارة للظاهرة العامه و لا يجيز هذا التعميم الحكم على الجميع بالظن مجردا لانهم من ذلك الجنس المعمم عليه .

التعميمات وردت في القران و الاحاديث و لا يمكن القول بانها تشير الى الاطلاق التام فمثلا

الناس عبيد الدنيا و الدين لعق على السنتهم

و كان الانسان ظلوما جهولا

و كان الانسان اكثر شيئا جدلا

اهل الدنيا كركب يسار بهم و هم نيام

فهذه التعميمات جاءت من باب الاشارة الى الظواهر العامه و لا تفيد الاطلاق التام حيث يستثنى من هذه التعميمات الانبياء و الصالحين

كذلك التعميم على جنس الرجل او المراة اذا جاء بصدد الاشارة الى الظواهر العامه فيجب ان لا يؤخذ حجة لذم الجنس الاخر او الحكم المسبق عليه دون دليل سوى التعميم

كنت اشير ايضا ان التعميم السيء هو التعميم الذي يستخدم لاصدار الاحكام المسبقه على الاخر مجردا لكونه من الجنس الذي وقع عليه التعميم

مثلا كثير من الناس قال ان التعميم على اهل الكوفه او البصرة الذي صدر عن المعصومين يجيز العنصريه و الحكم المسبق على كل من ينتمي الانتماء الجغرافي لتلك المناطق

فمثلا " يا اهل الكوفه يا اهل الغدر و المكر اتبكون و تنتحبون فلقد ذهبتم بعارها و شنارها "

ادخلوا ال فرعون اشد العذاب
و الصحيح انه لا يجوز اطلاق التعميم بسبب الظواهر العامه فحتى ال فرعون فيهم "مؤمن ال فرعون"

المشكله ان الكثير يتحرك من باب الانانيه فيستخدم التعميم بقصد الاطاحه بالعنصر الاخر و العلو او ان يستخدم التعميم لكي يحكم بالظن و هذا ما اردت ان احذر منه
سلام عليكم

[alimohamad40]

Here are the Fatwas with references of the scholars who Encourage polygyny:

Al Tabatabaeie (Tafseer Almeezan):
Translation of the text underlines with red:
The Sayed of Alurwah Alwothqa Al Tabatabaie says in the chapter of marriage after mentioning the Recommendation of marriage " And the Istihbab (Recommendation) is not nullified by the first marriage but includes the polygamy as well" .

Reference: Picture 1
The Islamic Manners and Virtues
by Mohamad Al Ameen Association
First copy 1421 Hijri 2000 Miladi
(this book is quoting Urwat Alwothqa)

Abul Qasim Al Khooie:
Fatwa number 3633: (strongly) there is no difference in the recommendation of marriage between some one who desired it or some one who didnt desire it due to the general nature of the narrations. and because the benefit of it is not limited only to satisfying the desire but it has its benefits including the increase in the generations and the people who say la ilaha illa Allah as its reported from imam baqir that the prophet said: "what stops a faithful from getting a family so that god would give him a breath that will fill the earth with la illaha illa Allah?" ( my translating of the hadeeth is not very accurate)
Fatwa number 3634: The Recommendation doesn't stop at the first marriage but polygamy is also Mustahab , god said " marry what is desirable for you 2, three and four" alnisaa, 3, and whats apparent from the evidence is that the recommendation is not confined in the permanent and the temporary marriage only but extends even further to include the marriage to the right hand Possessions as well (mulk alyameen).
Fatwa number 3635:   The recommendation is within the act itself regardless of whether the one who does it intends to get closer to Allah by that action or no. Yes in order for it to be a worship and rewarding the intention of getting closer to Allah is compulsory

Reference: Picture 2
Compilations of Al-Khooie's son of his fathers lectures
http://www.alkhoei.n...U32/001-020.htm



Mohamad Al Shahroodi:
Question 1: is marriage mubah (neutral) or Mustahab (recomended) in itself? when does it become wajib (Compulsory)? in the book "Urwat alwothqa" it says that marriage in itself is recomended so is this talking about the first marriage and the permanent one only or it includes polygamy and temporary marriages as well since they used the word marriage generally and didn't specify?
Answer 1:     Recommended in itself and it becomes wajib (Compulsory) if the lack of marriage causes the fear of possibly falling into sin and the recommendation includes the permanent and the temporary and the Polygamy as well
Question 2:     Is it permissible for a woman to reject the man just because he wants to marry another wife?  for example she divorces him if she already had married or she rejects him if she has not married him yet? and is it her right to make a condition in the marriage contract stating that he can not marry another wife? or is this haraam in the secondary ruling i.e. creating a sunnah that fights against god's law
Answer 2:   She can not reject because he wants to marry another wife and she cant put a condition that he can not marry

References: Picture 3
I sent this question and have kept it on email as you see in the image captured from the email screen


Ali Al Sistani:
Question:   Two contradictory replies have been received from our office regarding whether polygyny is Mustahab or not. In one reply it was stated that polygyny is Mustahab but in another it was stated that it was not proven whether polygyny is Mustahab or not. Could you clarify this issue? what is the extent of the Istihbab on marriage? Does it Also include the second wife? Is polygyny Mustahab only when the conditions behind it are fulfilled?  
Answer:   In his name the most high,  Marriage in itself is a Mustahab action and there is no difference between the first or second wife

Refrence: picture 4
Fatwa sent by member Ali Fyst, attached is a picture of the answer with stamps


Ali Al Khamenaei :
Question: What is the general Ruling of polygyny in the shariah law, is it Mubah (neutral), or Jaeez (permissible), or Wajib (Compulsry) or Mustahab (Recomended) ?
Answer: Permissible and Recommended in itself
Reference: picture 5
Fatwa asked by the member Wilayah , posted on the folowing link
http://www.shiachat....showtopic=68240


Sadeq Al Shirazi:
Question: What is the general Ruling of polygyny in the shariah law, is it Mubah (neutral), or Jaeez (permissible), or Wajib (Compulsry) or Mustahab (Recomended) ?
Answer: Polygyny in itself and in its Primary hukm is Mustahab (Recomended) in the shariah law

Reference: picture 6
Fatwa asked by the member Wilayah , posted on the folowing link
http://www.shiachat....showtopic=68240

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Edited by alimohamad40, 25 May 2012 - 10:27 PM.

[Qa'im]

Quote

Reviving the sunnah always applies and marriage is msutahab in general
even if he isnt afraid of sin marriage and even if he is not doing it to revive the sunnah it is still encouraged in general you can check the works of abulqasim alkhoie and also altabatabaie's work in al urwah al wothqa

I agree.

Quote

absolutely false , read in Urwa al qothqa in the chapter of nikah
"the (istihbab) encouragement of marriage does not stop after the first wife but extends to the multiple wives As well "

this is the words of tabatabaie the author of al meezaan in the book Alurwah al wothqa which is the compilation of the opeion of 5 scholars of that time


abulqasim alkhoie also said: "that the encouragement is not only when one has a need for the marriage "

The "need" I'm describing is as the Imams described in the ahadith. I'm not saying one should never enter a polygamist marriage, as there are plenty of situations where that would be a better option. Though there are situations where it can do more harm than good, such as harm your relationship with your first wife (especially nowadays when polygamy is an anomaly), or lead to the corruption of the woman you are doing mut`a with, or if you become preoccupied with the bedrooms of women rather than other tasks that are upon you. When you do not explicitly or desperately need mut`a, these are things to consider. Wasa'il ash-Shi`a has a chapter on this called باب كراهة المتعة مع الغنى عنها واستلزامها الشنعة أو فساد النساء ("the Dislike of mut`a when one is needless of it and it involves abomination or the corruption of women")

Quote

how do you know its not a need? who told you that one wife is enough for one man ? on what bases have you come to this conclusion?

It will depend on the couple. If the man is traveling, or at war, or if his wife is seriously ill, you can say that the need for mut`a is there. However when the need no longer exists and the man wants to do mut`a "just for fun", he needs to consider the points the Imams mentioned above.

Quote

If doing a msutahab or a wajib will create tensions with your permanent wife then there is something fundamentally wrong with her and most likely she is acting upon jealousy which is described by imam ِAli as kufr so are you suggesting that people hsould abide by kufr ?

I can also say " you need to stop praying and females need to stop wearing hijab because it will create tensions with the polytheists and aithiests!!! "

nonesense

It is the nature of women to get jealous for her husband, it is a sign of her love for him. She cannot bar him from the halal and I agree with you, but it's not as simple as you say it is. Very few Muslimat, especialy in the West, will accept their husband to constantly find new mut`a wives especially in this day of age. The status of your relationship with your wife is a very serious thing to consider; if she comes to hates you (even for an illegitimate reason) divorce may be inevitable and detrimental to the family unit.

The Qur'anic condition for a polygamy marriage is outlined very clearly in 4:3 "Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one" - polygamy is halal, but there are situations where it is recommended against, and if you cannot deal justly between your wives then it is better for you to marry one.

Quote

wrong its very msutahab and wajib on the overwhelming majority of us even with kitabis considering the ugly situation that we are in ,,,, you think pornography and fornication which is eating up the overwhelming majority of our youth doesn’t turn any other permissible alternative as recommended and wajib?

When you're in fear of committing sin, then marriage is the best option yes. But there are many ahadith which state that it is

1. Desirable to do mut`a with the Shi`a woman
2. Desirable to do mut`a with the chaste woman
3. Makrooh to do mut`a with someone known for fornication

The issue of getting married to a Kitabiyya is in ikhtilaf and it depends on who your marja` is or how you interpret the ahadith. Some say marriage of kitabi women is allowed, permanent and mut`a. Some say it is haraam, permanent and mut`a (possibiltiy of 5:5 abrogated by 60:10). Some interpret that it is allowed for mut`a and not for permanent marriage. The safer position therefore would be to simply get married to a chaste Muslima, because that is muta7ab, while getting married to a Kitabiyya is not agreed upon by the scholars of tha ta'ifa. Just because pornography is available it does not mean we must watch it akhi, and just because zina is around us it does not mean we must fall into it - our resolve and will power must be strong for Allah, and we must aspire to get married in the way Allah has prescribed. It is better not to take risks with our deen.

Quote

when you have a choice between haraam and makrooh then the makrooh becomes wajib

this is a fundemental issue

I agree.

Quote

married many times and was not forced to touch or commit sins before the marriage contract...

Most Western couples that I know go on dates, hug, kiss, talk for long hours, be alone, etc. before entering in a formal relationship. It's not impossible to have mut`a with them, but it is a strange concept to them and most of them have never heard of it and may not accept it. How did you go about your marriages with them? Did you make them say the marriage formula in public conversation, without going on dates with them first? I don't see that happening on a very regular basis, but that is subjective from person-to-person and culture to culture.

Quote

false
The common opinion is that rashida needs the permission only as a precaution... the scholars who gave absolute fatwas said that the rashida does not need permission and their opinion is buttom line because if you have precautions its indicative of the uncertainty of that scholar therefore in the case of precautionary fatwa you need to follow scholars who are certain and have no precautions in the matter.

This is an issue of ikhtilaf as I mentioned in my post. Either way, the common opinion as you mentioned is that you seek the father's permission as a precaution. And there are ahadith to support this idea as well, and is especially the case for a society that guards virginity in their women (like most Muslim cultures). "Precaution" does not mean we ignore it completely akhi. Permission of father is not needed though if the woman is economically independent from her father and is capable of making decisions independently.

Quote

men preferring loose women or that’s their only option ? if they prefer loose women then thats very bad and your statement is true

In some cases it may be the only option, but to most Muslims, marriage and mut`a with other believers is possible. I am 23 years old, I have never entered in marriages, I do not masturbate, I do not watch pornography, nor do I commit any forms of adultery. I do not consider myself a particularly strong person, I simply decided to have a strong willpower and look for a Muslima. I know that some men are on the brink of falling into sin, and I agree, a makrooh is better than a sin. We must do all we can to avoid sins even if it is to do a hated act. But finding a Muslima is also not difficult, there are millions in the world, and in my view it is better to marry a Muslima than to find a prostitute or a secular Western loose woman to fulfill your desires. While Shi`i men are picking up girls at discos or buying prostitutes, our women are becoming depressed and restless. The longterm status of the society is much more important than one's genitals, and that's something to keep in mind.

Quote

Fornication is haraam but doing muta with a prostitute with all its negatives its still permissible and much better than the current situation which you see all around you....
This gives you a good understanding of how much tolerance god placed so that people would use marriage instead of curruption..
I mean did god ignore the big harms that come from supporting a prostitute by being with her ? so how come he still made it permissible ??? obiously to avoid a bigger harm,,,
This tells you alot about the big harm of marriage related curruptions .

My point about prostitutes is that there's a difference between buying the prostitute and marrying her in mut`a. You may want to consider looking at the following:

وعن علي بن إبراهيم ، عن محمد بن عيسى ، عن يونس ، عن محمد بن الفضيل قال : سألت أبا الحسن ( عليه السلام ) عن المرأة الحسناء الفاجرة ، هل تحب للرجل أن يتمتع منها يوما أو أكثر ؟ فقال : إذا كانت مشهورة بالزنا فلا يتمتع منها ولا ينكحها .

ورواه الشيخ بإسناده عن محمد بن يعقوب ، وكذا الذي قبله .

أقول : وتقدم ما يدل على ذلك في المصاهرة

علي بن عيسي في ( كشف الغمة ) نقلا من كتاب ( الدلائل ) لعبدالله بن جعفر الحميري ، عن الحسن بن ظريف قال : كتبت إلى أبي محمد ( عليه السلام ) : قد تركت التمتع ثلاثين سنة ، ثم نشطت لذلك ، وكان في الحي امرأة وصفت لي بالجمال ، فمال قلبي اليها ، وكانت عاهرا لا تمنع يد لامس فكرهتها ، ثم قلت : قد قال الائمة ( عليهم السلام ) : تمتع بالفاجرة فإنك تخرجها من حرام إلى حلال ، فكتبت إلى أبي محمد ( عليه السلام ) أشاوره في المتعة وقلت : أيجوز بعد هذه السنين أن أتمتع ؟ فكتب : انما تحيي سنة وتميت بدعة فلا بأس ، وإياك وجارتك المعروفة بالعهر ، وإن حدثتك نفسك أن آبائي قالوا : تمتع بالفاجرة فانك تخرجها من حرام إلى حلال ، فان هذه امرأة معروفة بالهتك وهي جارة وأخاف عليك استفاضة الخبر منها . فتركتها ولم أتمتع بها ، وتمتّع بها شاذان بن سعد رجل من إخواننا وجيراننا فاشتهر بها حتى علا أمره ، وصار إلى السلطان وغرم بسببها مالا نفيسا وأعاذني الله من ذلك ببركة سيدي

Quote

The chaste you are refering to is a mistranslation the verse says " protected " " المحصنات" and this verse is referring to permenant marriage. This verse directly encourages the marriage of muslim men to kitabi females and also envourages eating thier food.

I'm not talking about 5:5, I am talking about these hadiths:

http://www.tashayyu..../muta/chapter-6

Edited by Qa'im, 25 May 2012 - 10:57 PM.

[Haydar Husayn]

Ismahan007, on 25 May 2012 - 05:54 PM, said:

true, our fitra can be influenced by different factors however we all have universal principles that are shared by all humans. I fail to see for example, how hiring a prostitutes for x amount of time is a common value shared by all men in the world and consider it 'moral'? as far as I know most men despise such a thing which you called it part of their 'fitra'. this aint true and you know it!

I think I've already made it clear that doing muta with prostitutes (or loose women in general) is something despised. However, it is allowed. Surely everyone knows that some things are makrooh, and this is an example. The fact of the matter is, that for some people, they are almos certain to fall into sin (of varying severity) if they don't have recourse to this. Personally, I find the whole thing more than a bit distasteful, but my personal tastes or opinions have nothing to do with what is halal and haram.

Quote

Also it can't be compared to 'slavery'. Slavery was a common custom practiced by ALL societies throughout history and not only by 'muslims'. sure the quran mentions about it but then it was part of the daily lives of those people whom the religion was first introduced to and later on vanished.

You've never heard the expression 'the oldest profession in the world', in reference to prostitution? It was also common in all societies. However, it was still haram in Islam. Drinking alcohol was also common everywhere, but Islam made that haram. If Allah (swt) wanted to, He could have made slavery haram as well, or at least makrooh. However, this was never done, and in fact most, if not all, the Imams had slave girls. If at least they had refrained from taking any, this might have encouraged their followers to do the same.

Quote

I did not say all our scholars were fabricators. you should always remember that all these 'scholars' were human beings who were capable of making mistakes, so 'ahadith' will always be open for questions and having doubts in certain part of it doesn't make one also should have doubts in everything.

Fabricating a hadith isn't a 'mistake', it's attributing lies to an Imam, the Prophet , or to Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì. Now, it's possible some narrator fabricated a hadith, and it was innocently included into a collection of hadiths by a scholar. And if you are only talking about the hadiths on muta with prostitutes, then I guess that is something you could investigate. The problem is however, that I think those hadiths are actually quite strong in their chains of narration, which is why scholars have allowed it, and their are several of these hadiths, with different chains of narration. So I don't think there is any purely objective criteria for dismissing them.

Quote

I think you have a valid point however like I said above, just bcos one questions excessively unjustified narrations about 'mutah' doesn't mean the whole religion falls apart. if one believes in the wilaya of imam Ali, believing in the rest of the imams will automatically follow. how else you can explain what happens once imam Ali answers the call of His Lord (death), what comes after that then? you can not disconnect one from the other. they r all in one line. plus wilaya is mentioned many times in the quran, in reference to our imams.... doesnt matter if ppl have different understanding.

Well, I'm not going to argue against you on this matter, obviously. However, I do think that people apply different standards to different narrations, depending on how much they like them. So you could have a really weak narration, that has no others to back it up, and people will accept it just because it sounds good to them. Or you will have narrations that suddenly appear 800 years after the event, with no chain of narration at all, and people will accept that because they like it. The same goes for various duas. Just because the duas are now famous, and people like them, nobody cares where they came from. However, you can bet that if these hadiths were saying something they didn't like, then all of a sudden, they would be ultra-critical. To me, this is a clear double standard, and people should be more objective and apply the same criteria to the hadiths they like to those they don't like.

Quote

the truth is they all have it there in their most regarded books. what we differ is how we interpret certain events, thats all. they dont deny it all what happened to Ahlulbayt but they give it a different explanations than us. plus the effect of past history on us today is obvious for one to deny it. how else we can explain the major disagreement between varies schools of thoughts that we witness today? again, I dont think questioning 'mutah' will mean the religion will fall apart. we're talking about the 'ahadith' that are attributed to our imams that encourages indecent actions such as buying slaves for sex, hiring prostitutes etc for similar purposes. and that's different!

If you question the fact that muta is something recommended in Islam, then the religion does fall apart if you have objective standards. Because it would imply that there are fabrications on a massive scale in our books, which means nothing can be trusted.

Quote

its funny you bring sunnis into this?

"the arocites committed by those corrupt 'sahabs' against Ahlulbayt is something agreed by all schools of thought in Islam whereas with mutah we're the only ppl who has these strange narrations that no aql could comprehend with."

You are the one who brought 'other schools of thought' into this.

Quote

anyway... what do you mean by a 'free woman' here? is a prostitute a free woman? most of these type of 'women' take this root as their last resort for money. doing mutah with supposedly 'free woman' who's a wicked who engages in a nasty 'business' and call it 'it was a mutual agreement' is un islamic and immoral. its against human value if you care what it is. so yes, a man who claims to be a 'muslim' involving himself with such a 'woman' in such situation is taking advantage of her for his own benefit nd is actually encouraging her to further continue once he's done with her... how can such a behavior be supported..?

Some prostitutes would have been free, and some would have been slaves. However, I didn't realise at the time that you were only talking about muta with prositutes. I thought you were making a more general objection to muta.

Quote

I believe 'slavery' was a common custom practiced by every society in the world. many reforms was made by the prophet in Arabia but as far as I know the slaves under our prophet and imams guardianship were treated with at most respect and care and were not treated for sexual purposes only.

What other job do you think they had? Anyway, at least you seem to acknowledge that they were used for sexual purproses. That's a step up from many people around here.

Quote

like I said above, most of these types of 'women' are forced into these ''business''. they are already damaged goods and come from a damaged background, full stop. you can't pretend they r free when they are in reality are forced by different situations.

I agree. However slaves are always forced into slavery. I don't see how that implies that it should be haram for someone to do muta with a prostitute. It's not like if he doesn't do it, then she will no longer be in that business. It's also worth noting, that for the time period she is in the muta relationship, she has been taken out of haram into halal, as the hadiths say.

Quote

does He has to only marry old and ugly 'women' for you to believe that he married them for political, social etc purposes?

So do you think it is pure coincidence that they were young and beautiful?

Quote

are you trying to say that our prophet married those women b'cos they were 'young' and 'beautiful' so ultimately for the sake of sex like many men now a days do? I believe our prophet done everything he did for the sake of islam and muslims. not once in his entire life used any one to fulfill his aim. that's the ultimate truth. I don't care how ppl interpret certain aspects of his blessed life to justify themselves. the truth is he did everything for us, to purify us and to teach us what we need to know about life and religion. he needed nothing in this life, everything was subservient for him.

You think the Prophet didn't enjoy things in this world? He didn't have favourite foods, or favourite activities? This is a strange opinion.

5 – And from him from his father from Ibn Abi `Umayr from Bakkar b. Kardam and more than one, from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام.  He said: The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله said:  The coolness of my eye has been put in salat, and my pleasure in women.

9 - `Ali b. al-Husayn al-Murtada in the treatise Al-Muhkam wa 'l-Mutashabih transmitting from the tafsir of an-Nu`mani by his forthcoming isnad (later inWasa'il) from `Ali عليه السلام. He said: Verily a group from the companions had forbidden upon themselves women and iftar by day and sleep by night. So Umm Salama informed the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم and he went out to his companions. So he said: Do you renounce women?! Verily I come unto women, and I eat by day, and I sleep by night. So whoso renounces my Sunna, then he is not from me. And Allah sent down “Forbid not the good things which Allah has made lawful for you, nor transgress; verily, Allah loves not the transgressors. But eat of what Allah has provided you lawfully of good things; and fear Allah, in whom you are believers.” (5:87-88) So they said: O Messenger of Allah, verily we have sworn that? So Allah sent down “Allah will not catch you up for a casual word in your oaths – up to His saying - That is the expiation of your oaths when you have sworn, and keep your oaths” (5:89)

Quote

so, all those men who cry out for polygamy/extra women... are all mistaken. its another thing if they say they do it for themselves as long as islam permits, which is permitted anyway but the ridiculous part is when they claim they're 'practicing' islam/reviving the sunnah. its absurd and makes one feel disgusted of them.

Doing muta with prostitutes is obviously not reviving the sunna. However, doing muta in general is, and so is polygamy.

[ImAli]

Quote

when you have a choice between haraam and makrooh then the makrooh becomes wajib

This is just absurd...are there actually people on this earth with that little self control? I mean if you don't have a chaste woman aren't there other options besides finding a streetwalker (like fasting)? Or will you completely lose self control and your body begin doing things independent of what you allow it to do (for example involuntarily masturbate or fornicate)? This just sounds like an excuse to deny personal responsibility.

Edited by ImAli, 26 May 2012 - 10:42 AM.

[alimohamad40]

salaam
Brother Qaim:

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

The "need" I'm describing is as the Imams described in the ahadith. I'm not saying one should never enter a polygamist marriage, as there are plenty of situations where that would be a better option. Though there are situations where it can do more harm than good, such as harm your relationship with your first wife (especially nowadays when polygamy is an anomaly),

god says " we make lawful for you the taybat and prohibit on you the khabaeth"

When you do some thing hallal (taybat) and it harms your wife then it means there is some thing wrong with her...
its like some one getting harmed by your prayer.
Anyway  you must not have a good relation with humans who are harmed by hallal actions (tayybat).

Only bad people are harmed by hallal actions because hallal actions are taybaat and haraam actions are khabaeth
Good people are only harmed by khabaeth and bad people are harmed by tayybat.

Satan is also harmed by tasbeeh and prayer and remembrance of god.    

In the verse of multiple marriage Allah  classified it as taybat when he said : "inka7o ma taba lakum".


when the prophet married other wives he harmed his relationship with aisha and she was very jealous and conspired against him as a result.
Allah said to him  "oh prophet why do you prohibit whats lawful for you seeking the acceptance of your wives?"

a fundamental law in Islam is:
No obedience for a creature in disobeying the creator  
so if  a human is doing the right thing they should not concern themselves with what others have to say including their wife or their parents...

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

or lead to the corruption of the woman you are doing mut`a with,

thats a strange thing,,,,   how does marriage cause the corruption of people ?
any way the prophet advised against sampling and hence whenever you get a muta wife you are supposed to be hoping to turn her into a permanent wife except if she is not a good person.

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

or if you become preoccupied with the bedrooms of women rather than other tasks that are upon you.

now thats talking like the catholic priests
the prophet said " marriage is my lifestyle , whoever refrains from my lifestyle is not from me"
He had many wives
Imam Ali also had 25 wives in his lifetime and he had kids with all of them but am sure the bed did not keep him away from his tasks

The catholic priests who prohibited the lawful on themselves fell into a bigger and uglier prohibition namely sodomy and we see scandal after scandal

and god rejected their celibacy by describing it in the quraan " a celibacy that they made up "

and imam Ali said " every time one door of hallal is closed 1000 doors of haraam are opened" so when the priests or you close the halal doors by inventing conditions which have no bases you are opening 1000 doors for the haraam

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

When you do not explicitly or desperately need mut`a, these are things to consider.

even if you do not need it and you simply desire it then you are encouraged to do so (this applies equally to permanent and muta marriages),,,,

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

Wasa'il ash-Shi`a has a chapter on this called باب كراهة المتعة مع الغنى عنها واستلزامها الشنعة أو فساد النساء ("the Dislike of mut`a when one is needless of it and it involves abomination or the corruption of women")

I am aware of the existence of many hadeeths against temporary marriage but I dont take them because they contradict many hadeeths that support it

I am not surprised that many anti muta hadeeths are results of sunnnie influence which found its way into the shia books...

There are even hadeeths attributed to imam sadiq saying "only the prostitutes do it" about muta thats why i disagree with the conclusions of shaheed Murtadha mutahari in the book " womens rights in islam"  

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

It will depend on the couple. If the man is travelling, or at war, or if his wife is seriously ill, you can say that the need for mut`a is there. However when the need no longer exists and the man wants to do mut`a "just for fun", he needs to consider the points the Imams mentioned above.

this travel and war and seriously ill conditions are made up and have no bases

my question was how do you claim that the man has no need once he has one wife ?  if you claim that the mans need is met 100% with one wife then you are doubting the wisdom of god for allowing him up to four ,,, think about it

and observe around you ....  are the men content with one wife ?  or majority go and commit sins ?
statistics show that 50 - 80 % of married men end up going with other women illegitimately and 70% of the wives dont ever find out about it.
stats also show that the majority of the clients of prostitutes are married men!!!
the global sex market is the biggest market in the world and for every market to exist you need the demand and hence the supply.....  how do you have a demand if you have no need?
compare the numbers of female prostitutes in the world versus males and that ratio will explain to you where the need is coming from males or females.

that need is artificially created by the prohibition of polygyny and hence depriving the men from their natural need so they can sell them products and feed the largest multi billion dollar market in the world.
The women are also victimised in the process because they will have a competition in the absence of polygyny and hence all the divorces and problems

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

It is the nature of women to get jealous for her husband, it is a sign of her love for him.

it is also the nature of the human to love himself and the thief also acts upon the love for himself
the love of possession is a natural human thing but it should not be allowed to cross the lines that god has drawn.... a thief also can argue that his natural love for possession and love for the self made him interested in possessing the belongings of others!!!!

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

She cannot bar him from the halal and I agree with you, but it's not as simple as you say it is. Very few Muslimat, especialy in the West, will accept their husband to constantly find new mut`a wives especially in this day of age. The status of your relationship with your wife is a very serious thing to consider; if she comes to hates you (even for an illegitimate reason) divorce may be inevitable and detrimental to the family unit.

you should not marry such wife to begin with and if you marry her then dont have kids with such wife or keep her temporary only but you have no excuse to abandon your responsibility towards the society and towards the other wives due to the illegitimate desires of a person..

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

The Qur'anic condition for a polygamy marriage is outlined very clearly in 4:3 "Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one" - polygamy is halal, but there are situations where it is recommended against, and if you cannot deal justly between your wives then it is better for you to marry one.

you need to complete the verse it says if you can not be just then one and what your right hand possessed
this includes muta and right hand possession

the right of equal nights is only a title of the permanent wife and if you are un able to be equal then you need to take right hand possession or temporary instead


this issue has nothing to do with the number of wives  but it has to do with being equal,,
you need to be equal between your kids and likewise you need to be equal between your wives

also notice the verse says " if you are afraid"   so who is the "You"  who is given the decision???  the wife? or the man or other people?  

also the verse needs to be translated " marry whats pleasing to you of women, two three and four  etc"  because taybat translates to pleasures

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

When you're in fear of committing sin, then marriage is the best option yes. But there are many ahadith which state that it is

1. Desirable to do mut`a with the Shi`a woman
2. Desirable to do mut`a with the chaste woman
3. Makrooh to do mut`a with someone known for fornication

yes true

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

The issue of getting married to a Kitabiyya is in ikhtilaf and it depends on who your marja` is or how you interpret the ahadith. Some say marriage of kitabi women is allowed, permanent and mut`a. Some say it is haraam, permanent and mut`a (possibility of 5:5 abrogated by 60:10). Some interpret that it is allowed for mut`a and not for permanent marriage. The safer position therefore would be to simply get married to a chaste Muslima, because that is muta7ab, while getting married to a Kitabiyya is not agreed upon by the scholars of tha ta'ifa.

Abrogation of the rule and the remainder of the text !!!   whatever corruption people wanted to insert into islam they said abrogation !!!!  We have to be careful with abrogation claims and examine them..

many versus say "do not initiate aggression against people of other faiths"   they claimed all these versus were abrogated by "the verse of the sword" and hence they gave fatwa in initiating aggression against people even if they have not initiated aggression against us !!!!  

the verse is so clear so I don’t know how they differ over it

it says like this
اليوم أحل لكم الطيبات وطعام الذين أوتوا الكتاب حل لكم وطعامكم حل لهم والمحصنات من المؤمنات والمحصنات من الذين أوتوا الكتاب من قبلكم إذا آتيتموهن أجورهن محصنين غير مسافحين ولا متخذي أخدان ومن يكفر بالإيمان فقد حبط عمله وهو في الآخرة من الخاسرين

" the food of ahlulkitab is hallal for you and your food is hallal for them and the protected females from those who were given the book before you  if you gave them their rent..."

Sourah 5  is the last one that was revealed and sourah 60  is believed to be a makki sourah so how could the earlier abrogate the later?

also the word used in 60:10 is " kawafir"  but ahlulkitab are not that...  

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

Just because pornography is available it does not mean we must watch it akhi, and just because zina is around us it does not mean we must fall into it

statistics say that 87% of men have at least once watched pornography and 50% watch at least once per week
google trends statistics shows that the highest pornography traffic in the world is demanded by pakistan and other “muslim” countries like saudi arabia and so on
If you are immune form the problem it doesn’t mean its not a real problem.

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

- our resolve and will power must be strong for Allah, and we must aspire to get married in the way Allah has prescribed. It is better not to take risks with our deen.

true

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

Most Western couples that I know go on dates, hug, kiss, talk for long hours, be alone, etc. before entering in a formal relationship. It's not impossible to have mut`a with them, but it is a strange concept to them and most of them have never heard of it and may not accept it. How did you go about your marriages with them? Did you make them say the marriage formula in public conversation, without going on dates with them first? I don't see that happening on a very regular basis, but that is subjective from person-to-person and culture to culture.

A date means meeting is there a problem with meeting some one for the sake of marriage ???
Islam even allows the potential wife to take off her hijab for once in order for the proposing husband to see her and this tells you how easy god has made things just to get people married....   things which are usually haraam are not haraam when your intention is marriage and the laws are very lenient to encourage marriage. God has not left any excuse for people to say " it was too hard for me to obey you"  as imam Ali said " he simplified the ways of obedience"  

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

This is an issue of ikhtilaf as I mentioned in my post. Either way, the common opinion as you mentioned is that you seek the father's permission as a precaution. And there are ahadith to support this idea as well, and is especially the case for a society that guards virginity in their women (like most Muslim cultures). "Precaution" does not mean we ignore it completely akhi. Permission of father is not needed though if the woman is economically independent from her father and is capable of making decisions independently.

when you have precaution you need to either follow the precaution or follow another scholar who gives an absolute fatwa without precaution because precaution means the scholar is not sure.
the best thing is to follow another scholar who gives an absolute fatwa either YES or NO  because if you follow many precautions you could be prohibiting many lawful acts and opening 1000s of haraam doors due to the closure of hallal doors ...
the scholars who have given an answer about this matter say that rashida does not need the permission and hence the bottom line is this ....


another important thing about the permission of the father is that the permission issue is more like  a protocol
the father has no right to reject for unislamic reasons and if he did then his authority is null because he is considered as " Adhil"

Udhool is preventing the girl from marriage based on un islamic criteria

so the fathers permission issue is not a red card in the hand of the parents,,, its originally intended for the minor  to protect her from wrong decisions but for the rashida its different.

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

In some cases it may be the only option, but to most Muslims, marriage and mut`a with other believers is possible. I am 23 years old, I have never entered in marriages, I do not masturbate, I do not watch pornography, nor do I commit any forms of adultery. I do not consider myself a particularly strong person, I simply decided to have a strong willpower and look for a Muslima.

its very good that you are successful in this but different people are different in many ways including the health and willpower and all.   Gods laws are supposed to serve everyone including the weak

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

I know that some men are on the brink of falling into sin, and I agree, a makrooh is better than a sin. We must do all we can to avoid sins even if it is to do a hated act. But finding a Muslima is also not difficult, there are millions in the world, and in my view it is better to marry a Muslima than to find a prostitute or a secular Western loose woman to fulfill your desires.

Offcourse if you have that luxury but if you don’t then that’s the next alternative

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

While Shi`i men are picking up girls at discos or buying prostitutes, our women are becoming depressed and restless. The longterm status of the society is much more important than one's genitals, and that's something to keep in mind.

maybe if the women opened the door of polygyny then they would give themselves much better options but what can you do if they dig their own grave ?

lets say 50% are irresponsible and only want to do clubbing and muta  and not take any responsibility and 50% are responsible and married ,,,,  then if each takes one extra wife it will solve the problem that you mentioned

they don’t need to wait for the clubber guy to finish rehab but instead they can open the doors for marrying a married man and that way they will give themselves so much more options.

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

My point about prostitutes is that there's a difference between buying the prostitute and marrying her in mut`a.

there is no difference.... you don’t buy a prostitute you hire her or you rent her

mut3a is renting the woman too that’s why she doesn’t have the right of equal nights and the compulsory nafaqah
The difference is the fornication factor and other issues.

Qa, on 25 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

You may want to consider looking at the following:

وعن علي بن إبراهيم ، عن محمد بن عيسى ، عن يونس ، عن محمد بن الفضيل قال : سألت أبا الحسن ( عليه السلام ) عن المرأة الحسناء الفاجرة ، هل تحب للرجل أن يتمتع منها يوما أو أكثر ؟ فقال : إذا كانت مشهورة بالزنا فلا يتمتع منها ولا ينكحها .

ورواه الشيخ بإسناده عن محمد بن يعقوب ، وكذا الذي قبله .

أقول : وتقدم ما يدل على ذلك في المصاهرة

علي بن عيسي في ( كشف الغمة ) نقلا من كتاب ( الدلائل ) لعبدالله بن جعفر الحميري ، عن الحسن بن ظريف قال : كتبت إلى أبي محمد ( عليه السلام ) : قد تركت التمتع ثلاثين سنة ، ثم نشطت لذلك ، وكان في الحي امرأة وصفت لي بالجمال ، فمال قلبي اليها ، وكانت عاهرا لا تمنع يد لامس فكرهتها ، ثم قلت : قد قال الائمة ( عليهم السلام ) : تمتع بالفاجرة فإنك تخرجها من حرام إلى حلال ، فكتبت إلى أبي محمد ( عليه السلام ) أشاوره في المتعة وقلت : أيجوز بعد هذه السنين أن أتمتع ؟ فكتب : انما تحيي سنة وتميت بدعة فلا بأس ، وإياك وجارتك المعروفة بالعهر ، وإن حدثتك نفسك أن آبائي قالوا : تمتع بالفاجرة فانك تخرجها من حرام إلى حلال ، فان هذه امرأة معروفة بالهتك وهي جارة وأخاف عليك استفاضة الخبر منها . فتركتها ولم أتمتع بها ، وتمتّع بها شاذان بن سعد رجل من إخواننا وجيراننا فاشتهر بها حتى علا أمره ، وصار إلى السلطان وغرم بسببها مالا نفيسا وأعاذني الله من ذلك ببركة سيدي

I'm not talking about 5:5, I am talking about these hadiths:

http://www.tashayyu..../muta/chapter-6

The second one is not saying its haraam....  he told him not to do it because of the situation
the first hadeeth is saying its haraam but there are many that contradict this and thats why the scholars have concluded to the contrary  and the law is just the karahyah

salaam

[macisaac]

alimohamad40, on 26 May 2012 - 11:28 AM, said:

I am aware of the existence of many hadeeths against temporary marriage but I dont take them because they contradict many hadeeths that support it

I am not surprised that many anti muta hadeeths are results of sunnnie influence which found its way into the shia books...

There are even hadeeths attributed to imam sadiq saying "only the prostitutes do it" about muta thats why i disagree with the conclusions of shaheed Murtadha mutahari in the book " womens rights in islam"

And therein you've revealed your real method.  It's not about what the sources really say and actually following it, it's cherry picking the bits you like and dismissing whatever runs counter to that.  You know quite well there's much in them that run counter to these claims you keep making, but instead of taking that balanced approached I was talking about and trying to reconcile them to give a complete picture of things, you just dismiss the parts you don't like out of hand.  In that, you're really no different from those you so vehemently argue against.  

There's so much rubbish in what you have posted here that could be responded to, but to be honest I'd rather not waste my time with it.  The only bit that I couldn't just let stand is this ludicrous way you've tried to interpret away the qualification of chastity in the 5:5 by saying it means protected via marriage (Is your motivation in doing so that you know that prostitutes and loose women aren't exactly "chaste"?).  True, the word muhsan can indeed mean that as well, but think about it for a moment please.. You're realize that if muhsanat here means protected via marriage, it would mean that the aya is saying that married kitabi women are lawful to us..?  Surely you're not claiming such a thing...


Anyhow, the tafsir of the Ahl al-Bayt is what we are commanded to follow, not yours:

In al-Faqih:

وسئل الصادق عليه السلام عن قول الله عزوجل: " والمحصنات من النساء " قال: هن ذوات الازواج، قلت: " والمحصنات من الذين أوتوا الكتاب من قبلكم "؟ قال: هن العفايف "

And as-Sadiq عليه السلام was asked about the saying of Allah عزوجل "the muhsanat from the women" (4:24) He said: They are the ones who have husbands.  I said: "and the muhsanat from those who have been given the Book prior to you" (5:5)?  He said: They are the chaste ones.

And in Tafsir al-`Ayyashi:

عن عبد صالح قال: سألناه عن قوله: " والمحصنات من الذين اوتوا الكتاب من قبلكم " ما هن وما معنى احصانهن؟ قال: هن العفايف من نسائهم.

And from a Righteous Servant (i.e. Imam Musa al-Kazhim عليه السلام  or Imam as-Sadiq عليه السلام ) regarding His saying "the muhsanat from those who have been given the Book prior to you" He said: They are the chaste ones from their women.

[La fata illa Ali]

macisaac, on 23 May 2012 - 06:35 PM, said:

It wouldn’t be that hard if people would bother to learn the sources and rely less on cheap ad hominem attacks based on emotional outbursts, as well as stop trying to pigeon hole Islam to somehow fit in it with Christian or post-Christian sensibilities on such topics.  But, say one where to give it a go, you might do something like this:

There’s a lot of reference made to the jealousy of women being kufr, and so used as a way of shutting down those women who will object to being in a polygamous marriage.  While it is true that there are narrations of such a sort, they can be understood in the context of actual denial of God’s laws and trying to change them to suit one’s feelings or in committing some evil as a consequence of it.  Simply having a preference not to be in such a situation, as well as having the very human reaction of feeling jealousy for one’s spouse shouldn’t always be pinned down to the women being some wicked heathen out to destroy Islam..  So, in reference to the ahadith, one should like in a lot of these things try to find some balance in what they say.  A good example for the jealousy issue would to cite this hadith on the topic:

[ 25296 ] 5 ـ وعن أبي علي الاشعري ، عن محمد بن عبد الجبار ، عن صفوان ، عن اسحاق بن عمار قال : قلت لابي عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) : المرأة تغار على الرجل تؤذيه قال : ذاك من الحب .

5 – And from Abu `Ali al-Ash`ari from Muhammad b. `Abd al-Jabbar from Safwan from Ishaq b. `Ammar. He said: I said to Abu `Abdillah (عليه السلام): The woman is jealous for the man, annoying him.  He said: That is from love.

Should the woman be annoying her husband with her jealousy?  No, but is it that she’s just some evil women whose nearly a kafir?  Of course not, the Imam simply explains it’s normal reaction to the fact of her loving him.




Now, as to the hadiths recommending the performance of mut`a, yes, the hadiths clearly recommend it and encourage its practice, so no one can deny that.  But why do they encourage it so much?  The answer to that might be seen in hadiths like this one:

[ 26398 ] 11 ـ وبالاسناد عن ابن عيسى ، عن ابن الحجاج ، عن العلا ، عن محمد بن مسلم ، عن أبي عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) قال : قال لي : تمتعت ؟ قلت : لا ، قال : لا تخرج من الدنيا حتى تحيي السنة .

11 – And by the isnad from Ibn `Isa from Ibn al-Hajjaj from al-`Ala from Muhammad b. Muslim from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام. He said: He said to me: Have you done mut`a?  I said: No.  He said: Do not leave the world until you have revived the Sunna.

See that part about reviving the Sunna?  Now look at this hadith:

[ 26396 ] 9 ـ محمد بن يعقوب ، عن محمد بن يحيى ، عن أحمد بن محمد ، عن علي بن الحكم ، عن بشر بن حمزة ، عن رجل من قريش قال : بعثت إلى ابنة عم لي كان لها مال كثير : قد عرفت كثرة من يخطبني من الرجال فلم أزوجهم نفسي ، وما بعثت اليك رغبة في الرجال غير أنه بلغني أنه أحلها الله في كتابه وسنها رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) في سنته فحرمها زفر ، فأحببت أن أطيع الله عز وجل فوق عرشه وأطيع رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) وأعصي زفر فتزوجني متعة ، فقلت لها : حتى أدخل على أبي جعفر ( عليه السلام ) فأستشيره ، قال : فدخلت عليه فخبرته ، فقال : افعل صلى الله عليكما من زوج .

9 – Muhammad b. Ya`qub from Muhammad b. Yahya from Ahmad b. Muhammad from `Ali b. al-Hakam from Bishr [Bashir – in al-Kafi] b. Hamza from a man of Quraysh.  He said: The daughter of an aunt of mine who has a lot of property sent to me:  I had known that many men had sought my hand and I have not married myself to them and I have not sent to you desiring men except that it has reached me that Allah has made mut`a halal in His book and the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله سلم legislated [stated – in al-Kafi] it in his Sunna, then Zufar made it haram, so I love that I should obey Allah عز وجل  above His Throne and obey the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله and disobey Zufar.  So marry me (in) mut`a.  So I said to her: (Wait) until I enter upon Abu Ja`far عليه السلام and take his counsel.  So I entered and sought his counsel.  So he said: Do it, Allah bless you (two) from a spouse (?).

There it’s explicitly being done as a way of re-emphasizing its legitimacy in against those who said it was haram.



But what about without that motivation in mind?  Should one still be obsessed over getting as many mut`a as you can to fill your near infinite sexual needs?

[ 26423 ] 4 ـ وعن عدة من أصحابنا ، عن سهل بن زياد ، عن محمد بن الحسن بن شمون قال : كتب أبو الحسن ( عليه السلام ) إلى بعض مواليه لا تلحوا على المتعة انما عليكم إقامة السنة فلا تشغلوا بها عن فرشكم وحرائركم فيكفرن ويتبرين ويدعين على الآمر بذلك ويلعنونا .


4 – And from a number of our companions from Sahl b. Ziyad from Muhammad b. al-Hasan b. Shammun.  He said: Abu ‘l-Hasan عليه السلام wrote to some of his supporters: Do not insist on mut`a, only the establishment of the Sunna is upon you.  So do not preoccupy (yourself) with it from your beds and free (women), then they would do kufr and bara’at and call upon the authorities to you by that, and they would curse us.



Now what about having mut`a with a loose women or even a prostitute, something else that gets brought up here with long lists of fatawa to somehow prove the point.  Thing is there’s a clear difference between saying something is a legitimate marriage (i.e. it’s not fornication and so no punishment for it) and then actually encouraging one to engage in it..  In the case of going with such a woman, one can fiqhi see the argument that the haram does not make the halal haram, so the woman’s haram lifestyle doesn’t in itself make the halal route (marriage) forbidden.  But should you do it?

[ 26436 ] 4 ـ وعن علي بن إبراهيم ، عن محمد بن عيسى ، عن يونس ، عن محمد بن الفضيل قال : سألت أبا الحسن ( عليه السلام ) عن المرأة الحسناء الفاجرة ، هل تحب للرجل أن يتمتع منها يوما أو أكثر ؟ فقال : إذا كانت مشهورة بالزنا فلا يتمتع منها ولا ينكحها .


4 – And from `Ali b. Ibrahim from Muhammad b. `Isa from Yunus from Muhammad b. al-Fudayl.  He said: I asked Abu ‘l-Hasan عليه السلام about the beautiful dissolute woman, is it beloved [is it permissible – in al-Kafi] for the man to do mut`a with her for a day or more?  So he said: If she is famous with fornication, then do not do mut`a with her and do not marry her.


[ 26434 ] 2 ـ وعن علي بن إبراهيم ، عن أبيه ، عن ابن أبي عمير ، عن عبدالله بن أبي يعفور ، عن أبي عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) ، قال : سألته عن المرأة ولا يدري ما حالها ، أيتزوجها الرجل متعة ؟ قال : يتعرض لها ، فإن أجابته إلى الفجور فلا يفعل .


2 – And from `Ali b. Ibrahim from his father from Ibn Abi `Umayr from `Abdullah b. Ya`fur from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام.  He said: I asked him about the woman whose state is not known, does the man marry her in mut`a?  He said: Present (it) to her, and if she responds to him with promiscuity then do not do it.


[ 26435 ] 3 ـ وعن عدة من أصحابنا ، عن أحمد بن محمد البرقي ، عن داود بن إسحاق الحذاء ، عن محمد بن الفيض قال : سألت أبا عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) عن المتعة ؟ قال : نعم ، إذا كانت عارفة ـ إلى أن قال : ـ واياكم والكواشف والدواعي والبغايا وذوات الازواج ، قلت : ما الكواشف ؟ قال : اللواتي يكاشفهن وبيوتهن معلومة ويؤتين ، قلت : فالدواعي ؟ قال : اللواتي يدعون إلى أنفسهن وقد عرفن بالفساد ، قلت : فالبغايا ؟ قال : المعروفات بالزنا ، قلت : فذوات الازواج ؟ قال : المطلقات على غير السنة .


3 – And from a number of our companions from Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Barqi from Dawud b. Ishaq the shoemaker from Muhammad b. al-Fayd.  He said: I asked Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام about mut`a.  He said: Yes, when she is `arifa – until he said: And beware of the uncoverers and the inviters and the wh.ores and the ones with husbands.  I said: What are the uncoverers?  He said: Those who are uncovered and their houses are known and come to.  I said: So the inviters?  He said: Those who invite to themselves and are known with corruption.  I said: So the who.res?  He said: The ones who are known with fornication.  He said: So the ones with husbands?  He said: The divorced upon other than the Sunna.




Now, in the encouragement of mut`a being to revive the Sunna, would anyone in their right mind say that going with prostitutes is something from the Sunna?!  And make no mistake about it too, prostitution is something clearly that is haram in Islam, with a punishment associated with even “just” arranging it (i.e. pimping):


[ 34483 ] 1 ـ محمد بن يعقوب ، عن علي بن إبراهيم ، عن أبيه ، عن محمد بن سليمان ، عن عبدالله بن سنان ، قال : قلت لأبي عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) : أخبرني عن القواد ما حده ؟ قال : لا حد على القواد ، أليس إنما يعطى الأجر على أن يقود ؟ ! قلت : جعلت فداك ، إنما يجمع بين الذكر والانثى حراما ، قال : ذاك المؤلف بين الذكر والانثى حراما ، فقلت : هو ذاك ، قال : يضرب ثلاثة أرباع حد الزاني خمسة وسبعين سوطا ، وينفى من المصر الذي هو فيه . . الحديث .

1 – Muhammad b. Ya`qub from `Ali b. Ibrahim from his father [from Salih b. as-Sindi – additional in al-Faqih] from Muhammad b. Sulayman from `Abdullah b. Sinan.  He said: I asked Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام: Inform me about the procurer (al-qawwad, used for pimp but also means a procurer), what is his hadd?  He said: There is no hadd upon the procurer.  Is it not that he is only given the wage for what he procures?  I said: May I be made your ransom! However, he brings together the male and the female in a haram manner.  He said: That is the combiner (al-mu’allif) between the male and the female in a haram manner.  So I said: He is that.  He said: He is struck with three fourths of the hadd of the fornicator, seventy-five lashings, and he is exiled from the city which he is in (- to the rest of the hadith)


[ 34484 ] 2 ـ قال : وفي خبر آخر : لعن رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) الواصلة والمؤتصلة ـ يعني : الزانية والقوادة في هذا الخبر ـ .

2 – He said: And in another narration: The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله cursed the connector (al-waasila, fem.) and the connected (al-mu’tasila, fem.) – meaning the fornicatress (i.e. prostitute) and the madam in this report.




Now what about engaging in mut`a when you already have a wife?  Now that could be argued either way.  Generally it would be considered permissible, though the above recommendation either seem not to apply or at least not be so strong, for example:

[ 26421 ] 2 ـ وعنه ، عن المختار بن محمد بن المختار ، وعن محمد بن الحسن ، عن عبدالله بن الحسن العلوي جميعا ، عن الفتح بن يزيد قال : سألت أبا الحسن ( عليه السلام ) عن المتعة ؟ فقال : هي حلال مباح مطلق لمن لم يغنه الله بالتزويج فليستعفف بالمتعة ، فإن استغنى عنها بالتزويج فهي مباح له إذا غاب عنها .


2 – And from him from al-Mukhtar b. Muhammad b. al-Mukhtar and from Muhammad b. al-Hasan from `Abdullah b. al-Hasan al-`Alawi all from al-Fath b. Yazid.  He said: I asked Abu ‘l-Hasan عليه السلام about mut`a.  So he said: It is absolutely halal (and) permissible for the one whom Allah has not made him free of need by marriage so he seeks chastity by mut`a.  So he is without need of it by marriage, then it is permissible for him if he is absent from her.


See the conditionality of availability of the wife above?  So it’s not necessarily just cut and dry, it’s the man’s right and that’s that as some might think it is.



And what about engaging in mut`a with non-Muslim women (which is generally what we’d be talking about here in these societies).  Well, if you have a Muslim wife already, you really should think twice about it:

[ 26471 ] 7 ـ محمّد بن عليّ بن الحسين بإسناده عن سعدان ، عن أبي بصير ، عن أبي عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) قال : لا تزوجوا اليهودية ولا النصرانية على حرة متعة وغير متعة .


7 – Muhammad b. `Ali b. al-Husayn by his isnad from Sa`dan from Abu Basir from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام.  He said: Do not marry the Jewish woman nor the Christian woman upon a free woman in mut`a or in other than mut`a.

And then this one about marrying a dhimmi upon (i.e. while you are already married to) a Muslima:

[ 26303 ] 4 ـ محمد بن علي بن الحسين بإسناده عن الحسن بن محبوب ، عن هشام بن سالم ، عن أبي عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) في رجل تزوج ذمية على مسلمة قال : يفرق بينهما ويضرب ثمن حد الزاني اثني عشر سوطا ونصفا ، فان رضيت المسلمة ضرب ثمن الحد ولم يفرق بينهما ، قلت : كيف يضرب النصف ؟ قال : يؤخذ السوط بالنصف فيضرب به .

4 – Muhammad b. `Ali b. al-Husayn by his isnad from al-Hasan b. Mahbub from Hisham b. Salim from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام regarding a man who married a dhimmi woman upon a Muslim woman.  He said: They are separated and he is struck an eighth of the hadd of the fornicator, twelve and a half lashes.  So if the Muslim woman accepts (or, is content) he is struck an eighth of the hadd and they are not separated.  I said: How is he struck the half?  He said: The lash is taken by the middle (or, the half) and he is struck with it.


Even if you don't have a Muslim wife yet, still going with such non-Muslim women should be something to think twice about considering the many reports that speak against it, which if folks are interested I could go more into in sha Allah, but I think this post is already long enough.


So we see that just with a little bit of looking at the sources, a lot of this stuff can easily be responded to (and minus the need for emotional character assassinations).   Key is balance, something I find blatantly missing from most of these discussions on both sides of the argument.

okay so I was wondering what if a married man hasnt done muta in his life then what is upon him.

On one side Imam Ali says No and Imam Sadiq said dont leave this world till u do it.


So a fair conclusion would be dont insist on it like a craz bunny but do it once and if ur married, even then do it at least once?

[alimohamad40]

macisaac, on 26 May 2012 - 12:50 PM, said:

And therein you've revealed your real method.  It's not about what the sources really say and actually following it, it's cherry picking the bits you like and dismissing whatever runs counter to that.

offcourse you have to cherry pick whats right from whats wrong what are you on about ?
I noticed that you are un-able to dismiss any hadeeth even if it runs directly in contradiction to another hadeeth or an elementary islamic fundemental belief ???

ilm alrijal is cherry picking based on the chain of narrations but what you fail to do is look at the content,,,  you try to reconcile the  contardictory just because the chain is "authentic"!!!

what if we get hadeeths with "authentic" chain saying god is two entities?  try to reconcile it with the oneness of god and give us a balanced view :  

maybe god is 1.5  the average between 1 and 2 , thats a good balanced reconciliation...

macisaac, on 26 May 2012 - 12:50 PM, said:

You know quite well there's much in them that run counter to these claims you keep making,

I dont know which ones?
there are enough evidence to say multiple marriage and muta are generally encouraged so i dismiss anything to the countrary
only in a hypocritical mindset its possible to combine two contradictions.

macisaac, on 26 May 2012 - 12:50 PM, said:

but instead of taking that balanced approached I was talking about and trying to reconcile them to give a complete picture of things, you just dismiss the parts you don't like out of hand.  In that, you're really no different from those you so vehemently argue against.  

how can you reconcile that notion with hadeeths that says:  "only prostitutes practise muta"
or " that it currupts the women"

so how did you reconcile these ones with other hadeeths that encourage ???

whats your balanced reconciliation??? that its half encouraged half discouraged ????  
do you realize that discouragement is oopposite to encouragement ?

please think about what you type and mention the specific balanced view that you want me to have ,,,, tell me your conclusion...

what your doing now is just throwing accusations but you are not saying where is it that i made a false statement

the only difference is I Actually witnessed for what I thuoght was the truth  but you see the truth and keep silent because it doesnt help you with the voting

you know very well that polygamy is mustahab and this doesnt need hadeeths because it was the sunnah of all the imams and many scholars have this openion yet you dont defend what god encourages ???

macisaac, on 26 May 2012 - 12:50 PM, said:

There's so much rubbish in what you have posted here that could be responded to, but to be honest I'd rather not waste my time with it.  

you can refute the rubbish for the benefit of the people
my points are very clear
1) polygyny and muta are generally encouraged by god
2) for the sake of amr bilmaroof and nahi an almunkar it becomes wajib kefie (sufficiency obligation) because its currently disabled
3) if you are afraid of sin without it then  it becomes wajib
4) if you only desire it its okay to do it and doesnt have to be a need
5) if you already have  a wife its okay to do it
6) humans who prevent other husmans from doing the wajib , msutahab or permissible have serious problems of prohibiting the lawful
7) muta with prostitutes is not haraam but makrooh  ( i challenge you to tell us your conclusion about this )

8) when our socity is falling into haraam and the way out of it is by doing makrooh then the makrooh becomes wajib

9) that the disablement of one section of god's marriage system has caused serious damage to the socity and its a duty upon everyone to revive the sunnah and remedy the problem as the prophet said: "whoever saw a engative let him change it with his hands etc"  

tell us your position from these issues without beating around the bush and we will know where you stand

there is no middle ground between whats right and whats wrong

macisaac, on 26 May 2012 - 12:50 PM, said:

The only bit that I couldn't just let stand is this ludicrous way you've tried to interpret away the qualification of chastity in the 5:5 by saying it means protected via marriage (Is your motivation in doing so that you know that prostitutes and loose women aren't exactly "chaste"?).  True, the word muhsan can indeed mean that as well, but think about it for a moment please.. You're realize that if muhsanat here means protected via marriage, it would mean that the aya is saying that married kitabi women are lawful to us..?  Surely you're not claiming such a thing...


Anyhow, the tafsir of the Ahl al-Bayt is what we are commanded to follow, not yours:

In al-Faqih:

وسئل الصادق عليه السلام عن قول الله عزوجل: " والمحصنات من النساء " قال: هن ذوات الازواج، قلت: " والمحصنات من الذين أوتوا الكتاب من قبلكم "؟ قال: هن العفايف "

And as-Sadiq عليه السلام was asked about the saying of Allah عزوجل "the muhsanat from the women" (4:24) He said: They are the ones who have husbands.  I said: "and the muhsanat from those who have been given the Book prior to you" (5:5)?  He said: They are the chaste ones.

And in Tafsir al-`Ayyashi:

عن عبد صالح قال: سألناه عن قوله: " والمحصنات من الذين اوتوا الكتاب من قبلكم " ما هن وما معنى احصانهن؟ قال: هن العفايف من نسائهم.


And from a Righteous Servant (i.e. Imam Musa al-Kazhim عليه السلام  or Imam as-Sadiq عليه السلام ) regarding His saying "the muhsanat from those who have been given the Book prior to you" He said: They are the chaste ones from their women.

you misudnerstand and misrepresent what i said
I didnt say muhsanat means " protected by marriage"  i just said protected
I said dont traslate it as chaste just keep it in the origional meaning  so people can draw thier own conclusion
my point was that the verse has no word " chaste " in it so do not do tahreef just keep the origional meaning and then add your interpretations after the text but dont inlcude the interpretations in the text ...

the word is muhsanat

muhsanat litrally means protected or shielded  

and muhsanat doesnt allways mean protected through marriage ,,,  you could be protected with other than marriage

La fata illa Ali, on 26 May 2012 - 02:16 PM, said:

okay so I was wondering what if a married man hasnt done muta in his life then what is upon him.

On one side Imam Ali says No and Imam Sadiq said dont leave this world till u do it.


So a fair conclusion would be dont insist on it like a craz bunny but do it once and if ur married, even then do it at least once?

ask mac issaac for reconciling these two contradictory instructions ask him lets see he never says his own conclusion because it will not help his votes

ones which say you will get reward for doing it and dont leave this world before you do it and ones that say only the prostitutes do it !!!!
this is about muta

but about polygamy also ask him whats his conclusion? is it generally mustahab? if yes how did my position divert from that ?

Edited by alimohamad40, 26 May 2012 - 06:10 PM.