Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Why Muta when you can do Nikah?

Rate this topic


Ghorbat

Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Salaam

If we were to take our principles from our prophet then shouldn't we also consider their implications and effects applicable in his time? From what I have read so far muta can be justified in a way but it can also be rejected if one wishes to. In the early Islamic periods they didn't have means of contraception such as condom coil pills etc, so it was inevitable to have babies (as it is with poor families in the third world countries in our time) which meant there would be children out of it left with or without mothers/fathers. Isn't it bad to deprive children of their parents?

People also justify muta by its convenience. Their argument is usually for not being financially stable or that not finished study etc. If muta procedure is so simple so is nikah's. Both can be done with recitation of few words. People seem to mistaken nikah with wedding. It appears to them that if they could not afford a wedding thus there is no nikah. WHY? I understand the case with widows and I don't want to criticize them if they were practising muta. What I want to ask is why would a young virgin man or woman would consider muta for sexual convenience when they can do the same thing with nikah. To me that seems more like western relationships where they stay boyfriend/girlfriend for a period of time and when they are "settled" then they consider marriage, and if not then its not. Also, wouldn't a muslim person not feel ashamed knowing that their sisters/brothers or his past or future wife are sleeping with different people for just satisfying their sexual desires?

If Muta was so sacred then our prophet wouldn't have said to fast to control our sexual desires would he? and that divorce would not be the most hated act before Allah....? Also "lowering gaze".. etc.. it just don't add up for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hey ghorbat

i feel the same way, i dont see a point of muta

and it seems like alot of men LOVE muta and misuse it, as in use for lust and simply satisfaction of sexual desires.

To me, muta seems like a loop hole, like probably alot of people do it to engage in extra-martial affairs and then justify sleeping with another women

by bringing forth the concept of mutah.

I also agree with you, i really want to know why students dont just do nikaah rather then this whole muta thing. Possibly because

they arent sure if they want to get married to this person and want to try a live in relationship first?

This thing just doesnt make sense, it seems more like a western approach, but I guess AllahÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì

kind of knows what would potentially happen in the future. I mean at uni here in canada, alot of

students have sex on campus/in dorms without any maritial affairs and they sleep with like

a different person everyday. I guess, Allah(swt) knew these people do exist, so he tried

to make things easier for them by bringing in muta, which is for a limited time and a child born in muta

apparantly has the same rights as a child in a regular marriage. And then when a girl, engages in

muta she cant engage in another muta until like 2 cycles of her periods. I have read this and

I'm not entirely sure about it. But still, I mean lets say God introduced this concept to

prevent men from having illegal sex. But lets say, one day a man just cant

control his hormones, and wants to go to a prostitute, like at that very instance or

that time, how can he even find someone to do mutah with??? Like is it

even easy to find someone who will agree with temporary marriage

within the matter of hours??? I've read some people say you

can do muta with a non-muslim, and then again it just doesnt make any sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why temporarily fulfill your sexual pleasures without any implications or serious responsibilities with someone you want to have sex with (but perhaps not see again ever after ;) ) when you could just seriously commit yourself forever to a girl :huh: .

I wonder what could possibly motivate a man to do such a thing.. its mind boggling really.. I just cant put my finger on it..

Oh yes we are forgetting that critical part about them being irresponsible, lustful, and did I mention lustful? Thought I had..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Some men might misuse mutah but be careful when you generalize. I mean islamically, I can do mutah a gazillion times solely and strictly to satisfy my sexual needs. Or am I reading it wrong? if not, to hell with women who frown upon mutah obsessed men.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some men might misuse mutah but be careful when you generalize. I mean islamically, I can do mutah a gazillion times solely and strictly to satisfy my sexual needs. Or am I reading it wrong? if not, to hell with women who frown upon mutah obsessed men.

If a guy wants to do a gazillion mutahs.. have at it.. just make sure you get yourself tested ;) Also, don't expect me to not look down on you, frown, and judge you ^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some people can't get permanently married (students studying away from home, no job, no house, maybe are in a foreign country and can't legally get married) and have a hard time staying away from sin, so having a mut'ah with someone is a legal way to fulfill desire. Even if it's only for a day, you get to know the person, so you are always on a basis to permanently marry in the future, and your desire is fulfilled, so you can feel better and lower your gaze and focus on other things rather than thinking about your desire. Of course people would rather be in loving, stable relationships.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Basic Members

Some people can't get permanently married (students studying away from home, no job, no house, maybe are in a foreign country and can't legally get married) and have a hard time staying away from sin, so having a mut'ah with someone is a legal way to fulfill desire. Even if it's only for a day, you get to know the person, so you are always on a basis to permanently marry in the future, and your desire is fulfilled, so you can feel better and lower your gaze and focus on other things rather than thinking about your desire. Of course people would rather be in loving, stable relationships.

Because you can have all the fun but not the hassle of a wife

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Some people can't get permanently married (students studying away from home, no job, no house, maybe are in a foreign country and can't legally get married) and have a hard time staying away from sin, so having a mut'ah with someone is a legal way to fulfill desire. Even if it's only for a day, you get to know the person, so you are always on a basis to permanently marry in the future, and your desire is fulfilled, so you can feel better and lower your gaze and focus on other things rather than thinking about your desire. Of course people would rather be in loving, stable relationships.

But ummm you can still be properlyt married while being a student, not having a job etc?

On the flip side, isnt one of the conditions of the marriage is the ability to be financially stable enough to support a child that may be born out of the union? Cant really do that jobless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

But ummm you can still be properlyt married while being a student, not having a job etc?

On the flip side, isnt one of the conditions of the marriage is the ability to be financially stable enough to support a child that may be born out of the union? Cant really do that jobless.

One would think so. But, too often, I dont think people think of these possibilities when they are blinded by the need for immediate gratification and are unable to see beyond the end of their ...ummm......nose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

One would think so. But, too often, I dont think people think of these possibilities when they are blinded by the need for immediate gratification and are unable to see beyond the end of their ...ummm......nose.

mutah: no expencive maher, no expencive wedding, no expencive ring, no expencive etc, immediate "nose"

marriage: broke+ in debt + wait till after wedding to "nose".

i wonderrrr i wonderrrr which do i perfer hmmmmmmmm this is a tough one...

Edited by AlgerianShia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Hmmmm, is muta ALWAYS sexual? I've spoken to people, even on this board who have had non sexual mutas. Some (infact most of the people that have done muta that I have known) do muta to potential permanent marriage partners, in order to get to know one another and fill the gap between agreeing to marry and getting married. Obviously people could have nikkah and still get to know one another before living together but I think the thinking is that its better to walk away from someone you've had a non sexual muta with rather than a non consumated nikkah followed by divorce (if you decide you don't actually like one another).

Another reason some people have non sexual mutas is if they need to spend time alone for whatever reason withe opposite sex, reasons being things like spending alot of time studying together, or sharing accomodation.

In both cases muta could be avoided, as you don't have to have a muta to get to know your potential spouse, just keep your meetings and interactions Islamic, and in the second case maybe avoid those cases where you need to be alone with someone, but I guess people may be thinking why avoid these things if muta gives another solution to those issues.

I'm just making these points because people almost always assume that muta is for one thing and one thing only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

mutah: no expencive maher, no expencive wedding, no expencive ring, no expencive etc, immediate "nose"

marriage: broke+ in debt + wait till after wedding to "nose".

i wonderrrr i wonderrrr which do i perfer hmmmmmmmm this is a tough one...

I understand the attraction to avoid unnecessary expense.

But..... I dont think I was clear about what I meant - I meant that you could end up with a great expense if you act on immediate desire only without thinking it through.... mutah could be a life long financial (which is what you want to avoid) committment to a child and not just a one night stand.

And also....

You are making an assumption that you will get away with a cheap mehr.... some women will demand a lot....but you could definitely shop around and find something in your price range.......:P

Edited by Maryaam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

I'm just making these points because people almost always assume that muta is for one thing and one thing only.

I agree.

I think there is probably more non-sexual mutah (getting to know potential perma-spouse) in real life, but it doesnt seem to be something that is a something sought after by the cyber men demanding mutah (on this forum) - it is just the opposite - married or no.

i would be interested in hearing from someone (male or female) who have done non-sex mutah - their experience and if it was worthwhile for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

My cousins have done non sex mutah, its done in place of an engagement, there is a condition put on it for no physical contact, but it allows them to chill with each other before permanent marriage and get to know each other quite well.

So you think it is a good idea? Were there any drawbaclks? Did any not go forward with the nika?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Forum Administrators

(salam)

I agree.

I think there is probably more non-sexual mutah (getting to know potential perma-spouse) in real life, but it doesnt seem to be something that is a something sought after by the cyber men demanding mutah (on this forum) - it is just the opposite - married or no.

i would be interested in hearing from someone (male or female) who have done non-sex mutah - their experience and if it was worthwhile for them.

Yes, this is practiced a lot in the Arab Shi'i community, put in place instead of engagement to get to know the future spouse and leave the intercourse until permanent marriage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

So you think it is a good idea? Were there any drawbaclks? Did any not go forward with the nika?

Well I think it is yeah, since there is no physical contact and if they were to do a proper permanent nikkah just to get to know each other, they would have to divorce if things didnt work out. With mutah there is no divorce and within the conditions set, the couple can get to know each other without physical contact till their permanent union. I am Pakistani so most from our community don't even know the meaning of the term let alone engage in the practice. Its just that I have a few cousins who have grown up here and are from religious backgrounds that chose to exercise this option right before marriage and it worked well for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Why temporarily fulfill your sexual pleasures without any implications or serious responsibilities with someone you want to have sex with (but perhaps not see again ever after ;) ) when you could just seriously commit yourself forever to a girl :huh: .

I wonder what could possibly motivate a man to do such a thing.. its mind boggling really.. I just cant put my finger on it..

Oh yes we are forgetting that critical part about them being irresponsible, lustful, and did I mention lustful? Thought I had..

(salam)

With all due respect, are you calling people who do mutah irresponsible?

Edited by Hussian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member

You are making an assumption that you will get away with a cheap mehr.... some women will demand a lot....but you could definitely shop around and find something in your price range.......:P

i dont like shopping....:angel:

Edited by AlgerianShia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I think the original post emphasised the fact that a Nikah isn't a wedding - there isn't a whole bunch of cultural celebrations one must partake in when doing a Nikah. Its a simple recital of words to your spouse, in the presence of witnesses under the conduction of an Imam, khalas. Yes there is a mahr etc, but with Nikah there's the months of preparation, invitations, venue, food, honeymoon, etc - the point of a Nikah is just to be Islamically married to your spouse, the marriage may very wel be consummated (with a walimah following as a Sunnah) although cultural traditions place restriction on this and the process lasts up to 6 months.

Some families choose to do Nikah if both sides believe there is a very good chance the couple will get along, but still place restrictions (for traditional purposes) on things like consummation etc. The Islamic matrimony gives the couple a chance to go on dates etc and get to know each other properly.

Then again - whats to stop them from consummating the marriage behind their parents' back? I mean if they're Islamically to do so under the rules of Nikah then why should the only reason be to stop them is that their parents wouldn't approve due to tradition? Even though Islamically, since they would've conducted a Nikah, its completely halal.

So I guess this is where mut3a can come in - in order to pick and choose certain conditions, one of which may very well that no consummation of the marriage is to take place, allowing the couple the freedom to get to know each other and honour their parents' requests that they do not get up to anything - and what would make them feel better about it is that this would now e a religous obligation since it was stipulated in a religous contract) rather than some traditional one that belong to their culture from 'back home'.

Then again - lets get real - we're all human. How many dates can you go out on with the opposite sex without getting up to absolutely anything whatsoever? When Bonafide Hustler mention his cousins having a non sex mut3a, and just chilling with each other, what does this involve? Going out on dates? Chilling at each other's houses with parents present? Did they never put themselves in a position where they may hug, or kiss, or hold hands? Was any of this allowed according to the mut3a?

Personally, I don't see the need for mut3a in a regular matrimony, where there are no special cases or circumstances. I'm quite confident that meetings may take place, and that perhaps the couple may even meet and get to know each other properly (on the phone or online) with proper permission (from the woman's father especially) by the potential husband. I reckon cultural traditions is what gets in the way of having a proper Islamic marriage (hence why some get uppity when they're asked why not do a simple nikah instead of mut3a), people seem to think mut3a is the new simpler nikah lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member

Why do Mut'ah instead of Nikah?

Because I'm too intelligent to risk my life savings in the hands of divorce attorneys.

Feminists hate mut'ah because (yes) the man's wallet is no longer in play. Earn your own money, don't brag about shattering "glass ceilings" and then expect a man to bail you out of your life, only to divorce him for every last cent and play the "victim" in court.

For all you real MEN out there, Muslim or not, before you start getting all airy-fairy about spending your whole like with that lovely special someone, tell her she has to sign a prenup, if she says no or acts offended, DUMP HER, she is a hypocrite and a plunderer, and if she really loved you and wasn't after your money she would have NO OBJECTION to signing it.

That's the real test of a good woman. If she fails, congratulations, you just avoided doing Nikah with a REAL prostitute who could very well have bankrupted you. Streetwalking for money, marrying for money - there's NO DIFFERENCE, her heart is not open to you.

So until I find a woman who's REALLY upstanding and loyal and and I'm 100% sure she doesn't care about the size of a guy's bank account and never will (and guys, these women are rare, BELIEVE ME), I'll continue doing Mut'ah, and having a lot of fun doing it.

Nikah is only for those who are truly worthy to share the rest of your life with, it's YOUR CALL, Allah (swt) has given you this power as a man, don't throw it away it like so many stupid estro-men have thrown away all their other God-given rights as a man. And there is no "law" even in feminist western countries that says you have to get a Nikah right this instant. So Mut'ah it is, until a really solid quality woman comes along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Veteran Member

:dry:

Because I'm too intelligent to risk my life savings in the hands of divorce attorneys.

Feminists hate mut'ah because (yes) the man's wallet is no longer in play. Earn your own money, don't brag about shattering "glass ceilings" and then expect a man to bail you out of your life, only to divorce him for every last cent and play the "victim" in court.

For all you real MEN out there, Muslim or not, before you start getting all airy-fairy about spending your whole like with that lovely special someone, tell her she has to sign a prenup, if she says no or acts offended, DUMP HER, she is a hypocrite and a plunderer, and if she really loved you and wasn't after your money she would have NO OBJECTION to signing it.

That's the real test of a good woman. If she fails, congratulations, you just avoided doing Nikah with a REAL prostitute who could very well have bankrupted you. Streetwalking for money, marrying for money - there's NO DIFFERENCE, her heart is not open to you.

Absolutely, in a world with insincere people who like to use others, prenups are becoming quite common. An ex spouse should not have carte blanche to the holdings of another – especially if the spouse or parents-of-the-spouse have worked very hard to secure a financially comfortable situation for them and their progeny.. Gold diggers are not uncommon and need to be identified and not allowed to profit. Prenups will be the first step to expose these evil intentions. However, there seems to be an old fashioned idea that only men have access to money :wacko: and only women have sticky fingers for the money of others.

The prenuptial type used to be thought of as a man with millions of dollars in assets, about to marry a woman with no money. That stereotype is fast fading. The financially disadvantaged spouse can also be, and often is, male.

So, it is becoming very popular for women to design prenups as well. They do so to protect their own income, businesses and current and potential profits, as well as, any and all, inherited property, trust funds, interests in family businesses and vacation properties.

Women, whose parents have become financially independent, are usually encouraged to insist that their husband, sign a prenuptial agreement. It is also important that the parents of the bride are part of the prenup contract, so that the couple cannot annul it post marriage.

Before marriage, see a lawyer that specializes in this area. Women should especially seek advice, as they are more likely to be weak, ineffective, emotional and incapable of making an intelligent decision [wipes kool-aid from lips] despite the fact that they are often outstanding academically and financially.... an interesting juxtaposition. :Hijabi:

Edited by Maryaam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Interesting take on prenups, sis.

It's true that women are making more money these days, so there are some male gold-diggers, however, I doubt that they would be very common. Men who marry for money are rare for three reaons:

1. Men are shallow. Yes, I SAID IT. We're attracted to beauty before money. I don't know of any man who's willing to marry an ugly woman with millions, but a lot of self-supporting men would marry a pretty woman even if she was poor. John McCain married an heiress, he had to get a prenup, but consider that she was a LOT more attractive than his previous wife (age not being a factor here....)

2. Assuming that a man is self-supporting, he's probably not going to spend all his time figuring out how to seduce a wealthy business maven or heiress. It's just too time-consuming. And considering that girls often develop socially much faster than boys (this is more surroundings than nature, IMO). Girls are socialized much younger, they are already talking about guys when guys are still talking about action figures. And considering that many girls are constantly getting hit on, and boys are not, it's only natural that women learn how to seduce far faster than men. Some men never learn it. And by the time they are working full time, they don't have the time to learn these skills on their own, let alone abuse them for gold-digging purposes. Let's face it, it's not really feasible for a man to do no work and simply expect to live off the earnings of a rich woman. Yeah there are gigolos, but they used to have another job, and plus they aren't really gold-digging per se since they don't actually marry their clients/partners and thus have no access to their life savings.

3. Men don't really have a lot of options when it comes to marrying for money. What have we got going for us? LOOKS? Please. Women are attracted more emotionally than physically, so whereas a pretty gold-digger woman will get a lot of date offers (WITH NO EFFORT ON HER PART) from men just because of her looks, a good-looking male gold-digger will have a hard time advertising himself to a lot of women in the same timespan. He will have to approach THEM and not look like a sleazy player who's macking every chick at the same time. He has to put in all the effort to make an emotional connection on a primal level, and it takes time with each woman, whereas a cute woman can attract several men instantly. Some not-so-charming men take the John McCain route - i.e. political power and fame lead to increased desirability. Fred Thompson is another example of this sort of man. But that's a very long process, and I doubt he ran for the senate JUST to attract a woman. Most men don't know how to come across as "alpha" or "high value" without actually being rich or politically powerful. Sad, because it's really not so hard, once you get down to it.

Of course, when men don't have time to learn how to properly attract quality women who are not after money, that's where the Pickup Artist Training Industry steps in...

Edited by Shia Shahid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Interesting take on prenups, sis.

It's true that women are making more money these days, so there are some male gold-diggers, however, I doubt that they would be very common. Men who marry for money are rare for three reaons:

1. Men are shallow. Yes, I SAID IT. We're attracted to beauty before money. I don't know of any man who's willing to marry an ugly woman with millions, but a lot of self-supporting men would marry a pretty woman even if she was poor. John McCain married an heiress, he had to get a prenup, but consider that she was a LOT more attractive than his previous wife (age not being a factor here....)

2. Assuming that a man is self-supporting, he's probably not going to spend all his time figuring out how to seduce a wealthy business maven or heiress. It's just too time-consuming. And considering that girls often develop socially much faster than boys (this is more surroundings than nature, IMO). Girls are socialized much younger, they are already talking about guys when guys are still talking about action figures. And considering that many girls are constantly getting hit on, and boys are not, it's only natural that women learn how to seduce far faster than men. Some men never learn it. And by the time they are working full time, they don't have the time to learn these skills on their own, let alone abuse them for gold-digging purposes. Let's face it, it's not really feasible for a man to do no work and simply expect to live off the earnings of a rich woman. Yeah there are gigolos, but they used to have another job, and plus they aren't really gold-digging per se since they don't actually marry their clients/partners and thus have no access to their life savings.

3. Men don't really have a lot of options when it comes to marrying for money. What have we got going for us? LOOKS? Please. Women are attracted more emotionally than physically, so whereas a pretty gold-digger woman will get a lot of date offers (WITH NO EFFORT ON HER PART) from men just because of her looks, a good-looking male gold-digger will have a hard time advertising himself to a lot of women in the same timespan. He will have to approach THEM and not look like a sleazy player who's macking every chick at the same time. He has to put in all the effort to make an emotional connection on a primal level, and it takes time with each woman, whereas a cute woman can attract several men instantly. Some not-so-charming men take the John McCain route - i.e. political power and fame lead to increased desirability. Fred Thompson is another example of this sort of man. But that's a very long process, and I doubt he ran for the senate JUST to attract a woman. Most men don't know how to come across as "alpha" or "high value" without actually being rich or politically powerful. Sad, because it's really not so hard, once you get down to it.

Of course, when men don't have time to learn how to properly attract quality women who are not after money, that's where the Pickup Artist Training Industry steps in...

There are famous stories of butt ugly women heiresses and gold digging husbands - Christina Onassis comes to mind - but I dont think that there are many people that marry strictly for money and not many are privy to heirs or heiresses. I think that there are more women (young women with assets) than you perhaps are aware of - and the family - more than the besotted young woman - do push for a contract before marriage where all sign. It is not common - but is becoming more common.

Educated young women make good money - and perhaps you dont believe it, but it is easier to make money on your own than to marry it as it is a sure thing and does not come with strings attached. Maybe uneducated young women do this - I dont know. But nothing is ever free in this world - you end up paying for it one way or another. And - just because your spouse has money - doesnt mean that they are going to share it with you or you will benefit from it.

Women (and men I would think) whose parents have significant financial holdings that will come to them, almost always have a clear pre-nuptial document or trust funds with conditions signed by everyone involved to insure it is solid.

Unless they have a serious self-esteem issue, women are most attracted to men with moderate incomes so they can support the family - who will treat them well and appear to have the capacity to be good fathers.

However, I think if you have any fears that someone only wants you for your money it is a good idea to write a financial contract...or maybe just not marry them. Distrust is not a good way to start a marriage...maybe just marry someone who has wealth equal to or greater than your own.

Edited by Maryaam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

Wow. This has been surprisingly refreshing to read. :) And yes, marrying for money is extremely risky and basically carries the penalty of losing your soul. Though for men, it's also just flat-out impractical. I've never thought anything was so ridiculous as a man not working and waiting for a rich woman to bail him out of his life. If a man has no life or goals, (regardless of money) he's ultimately not attractive to women, no matter what he looks like. And I doubt too many men ever think of doing this. Most "marriage con artists" already have a job, it's just usually not a very lucrative one.

On the other hand, female gold diggers (if they are experienced) rarely have to work for anything, there is no shortage of gullible AFCs (average frustrated chumps), often lawyers or doctors, who will give her everything for nothing because of her body and charms, they have no interest in her goals because they are already able to be providers, but they are NOT high-value men in terms of the attraction dynamic. They will try to buy her since she plays the part of the "weaker" one and of course they will be robbed blind and cheated on. I try to educate men (both Muslims and non-Muslims) to beware of these red flags and not be a CHUMP. There are far better ways to attract women than a bank account, if women can learn charisma and seduction, so can men, and thus sort out the sincere ones from the gold diggers without spending a fortune.

Edited by Shia Shahid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

ok correct me if im wrong .. doesnt Allah say in the qoran that if a man wants to divorce a woman he HAS TO think about it for 2 menstrual periods .. and if he still wants divorce then he can go ahead ?? and doesn't Allah also say that we should not marry for lust??? that's what it says in our holy book if i remember correctly. another thing is that the koran talks about one type of marriage only .. the one where we are required to have two witnesses and give a gift according to our abilities .. isn't that already as simple as can get. i personally believe that God means for us to have one type of marriage, which is an eternal one .. and if things go wrong and we divorce, then that's a horrible thing .. but halal if reasons are good. women are not meant to be used for lust. do you want to have your sisters, mothers, daughters used for lust?? with adultery people are at least aware that they are doing wrong .. but mutah is dangerous in my opinion .. it gives them the green light to do these unhealthy, immoral, and emotionally disturbing acts while using Allah's name and thinking that they will get away with it. Allah knows best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member

(salam)

I am rather surprised by the anti-muta sentiments expressed on this forum.

Whether someone chooses to do muta or marry permanently is irrelevant.

The relevant question is, "has the person adhered to the halal and avoided the haram?"

The answer is clearly yes.

Why live in apartment and not a house? Why live in the countryside and not the city?

Matters of personal choice.

Maybe the brother (or sister for that matter) does not want to get married permanently.

Considering the vast number of restriction imposed on women regarding their activities,

some women choose to do muta in order to maintain their freedom.

Looking down on muta, or calling it irresponsible is a slander against the institution.

The father is 100% responsible for his offspring. The child is the legal heir of both

the his/her paternal and maternal relatives.

If one does not like the institution then do not practice it, however, to look down on those

who do practice muta is to look down on our Prophet(s) and the Imams(as).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...
  • Basic Members

With so many different views, I guess it's time for the correct view. There is no basis for Mutah in Islam anymore. The only way towards fulfilling one's desires is through nikah. I have noticed that many are questioning mutah. This is sufficient proof that shiaism is not the true teachings of Islam, but rather the correct way is the ahle sunnah wal jama'ah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...