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
Sign in to follow this  
Abu Hadi

The 'thighing' fatwa

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Abu Hadi said:

I wish that Sayyid Sistani (may Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) continue to bless him and prolong his life) would just come strait out and say 'This is haram', but I also respect his integrity in sticking to the well known principle of not declaring something haram without solid evidence. 

Insha'Allah, I wish all of the marjas would come straight out and admit that it is haram and non-conductive to society.

I wonder what kind of evidence Sistani is looking for, because it has studied and proven that children who are sexualized by adults are psychologically ruined  and end up doing drugs and/ or perpetuating the same dangerous cycle on more innocent children (e.g. Trafficking, child porn, molestation)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Abu Hadi said:

This thread really belongs in the Islamic Law and Jurisprudence forum, but since this is a response to another thread in the Social/Family/Marriage

There have been many detailed discussions of this topic of ShiaChat, the most recent is here. 

 

There are two points when it comes to this fatwa that must be considered. The first is the legal topic. I am posting this first, just so that brothers and sisters, who don't read the whole post know that having any sort of a sexual relationship (not only penetration, which is already clearly haram, no matter what spin you give to these fatawa) with a child who in non Baligh (under the age of 9) is haram, 100%. This is according to Imam Khomeni(رضي الله عنه), Sayyid Sistani(ha), and every other marjaa that I know of. We will talk about Sayyid Sistani in detail, because he is a living marjaa and most who are reading this are muqalid to him. In his book, A Code of Practice For Muslims in the West. I highly recommend this book. If you are going to read one book in the next 5 years, read this one. 

https://www.Sistani.org/english/book/46/

He states (as many other marjaa' state) that it is not permissible to violate the laws in a non Muslim country (any laws) so long as those laws do not directly contradict Sharia (Islamic law). Even the laws against speeding you are not allowed to violate (May Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) forgive me because I think I have violated those laws on (oops) a few occasions) because these laws are a social contract, given the status of a contract in Islamic Law, and because they help to maintain order in the society. Since probably all of you or the vast majority of you(since this is an English Website) live in Western Countries with consent laws (it is 16 in the US where I live) these laws clearly state that it is illegal to have any type of sexual relationship with a boy or girl who is under the age of consent. This law does not contradict Sharia, since it is not wajib for a girl to get married at 9 years old or before, and not wajib for a boy to get married before 16. So according to Sayyid Sistani, this is haram if you live in a Western Country or a country with age of consent laws (I think almost every country in the world has these, except maybe Yemen and a few other countries). So those who live in a Western Country can stop reading here, unless you're interested in reading further. 

Even if you don't live in a Western country, and live in a place like Yemen, it is still highly doubtful whether actually acting on this 'thighing' clause would not be haram. That is because, although this fatwa is contained in the books, it is a discussion to a secondary point regarding another fatwa (as is pointed out by Br. Ali Hussein in the post above). This is not a fatwa that is meant to be acted upon. This is because in the discussion this 'thighing' is put with the conditions (should some weird person decide to act on it) that it does not cause harm to the child, nor is is considered immoral. Now, let me ask you, Oh someone who is considering doing this, how could you possibly say that this would not cause harm to the child (it definitely would cause deep psychological if not physical harm, as many studies on abused children have shown) or that it would not be considered 'immoral'. Whether something is immoral is based on current community standards in the place where someone lives. There may be a few isolated Bedouin or rural communities where this would not be considered immoral, but in 99.9% of communities it would be considered highly immoral. This is the marjaa' saying 'Don't consider doing this' even if you don't live in a place with consent laws.

The second point is that, the only reason they did not say outright it is haram in all times and all places is because first, they did not find a strong hadith or aya from the Qur'an making it haram and the only way they could say outright that it is haram is through this evidence. A marjaa' who is worthy to be emulated is not going to make fatawa based on current opinion of the people. They are going to make it based on evidence. If they don't have evidence, they are not going to make a fatwa. Also, up until very recently it was common for girls in the Muslim world to get married in their early teens. It was also common in some places for girls to be 'betrothed' to a Wakil (guardian) before marriage age with the understanding that he would marry her once she was Baligh (physically mature). This is a practice that still goes on, but it is now uncommon even in most places in the Muslim world. 

For me personally, I am not a big 'fan' of this (non) fatwa, and I wish that Sayyid Sistani (may Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) continue to bless him and prolong his life) would just come strait out and say 'This is haram', but I also respect his integrity in sticking to the well known principle of not declaring something haram without solid evidence. My faith in Islam or my faith in our marjaa' doesn't hinge on a single fatwa. May Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) bless all our marjaa' and prolong their lives and give them the best in this world and the hereafter. 

Alright, some of the points you have made does make sense. However, it’s still all confusing. You’re saying that the maraji3 base their rulings on the Qur'an and ahadith, but based on what Sayyid al khoei (رضي الله عنه) has said, taqleed is not compulsory and following a scholar can be based on his own personal views. Some of their rulings don’t derive from the Qur'an, for example; Imam khomeinis view on transgenderism. He said that transgenderism is permissible, but where is his proof? Sure he had a logical reason for it but did it come from the holy Qur'an or ahadith? It’s linked to homosexuality and it’s one of the signs of the last hour so how can a marja3 say that there is no problem in it.

also you mentioned how the maraji3 don’t come to a conclusion that a certain thing is haram until it is proven by the Qur'an and Sunnah. But penetration of a suckling baby? Seriously? Just like how he used logic to explain why changing one’s sex is permissible under certain circumstances, couldn’t he use logic to explain why penetration of a small child is forbidden? It can psychologically affect the child and it doesn’t have to cause physical harm for it to be not permissible. It’s common sense. There are still psychotic men out there who will take the advantage and use it to fulfill their desires.

There is no narration or Hadith that even talks about it being allowed. Also, this even portrays Islam in such a bad way. Imam Khomeini shouldn’t have made such a statement imo. What do you think non Muslims will think of us? We’re the ones telling them that all of this child rape and penetration contradicts what Islam says and that’s it all based on sick people and their old culture, but then what excuse will we give them once they see this fatwa made by the ayatollahs?

@Ruqaya101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Abu Hadi said:

For me personally, I am not a big 'fan' of this (non) fatwa, and I wish that Sayyid Sistani (may Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) continue to bless him and prolong his life) would just come strait out and say 'This is haram', but I also respect his integrity in sticking to the well known principle of not declaring something haram without solid evidence. My faith in Islam or my faith in our marjaa' doesn't hinge on a single fatwa. May Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) bless all our marjaa' and prolong their lives and give them the best in this world and the hereafter. 

You know whats the problem. If Sunnis were to believe in Tafkhid while it was haram in our faith, you wouldnt have tried to find huge amounts of excuses for them.  But to write a 5 paragraph essay full of excuses that don’t add up honestly, and theyre not logical to anyone but only to people who want to believe them becsuse they think our faith is perfect and they should believe everything or else their faith is shook, that was one long explanation for no reason. AND to say “who said this is immoral maybe in other communities its not”. I’m sorry but I think you went far just to try to make excuses for maraji’. And that “proposal” was disturbing and usually I know you speak logically but sorry mate this was far fetched.

Second, regarding Sayed Sistani or Imam Khomeini about they can’t say its haram without evidence and this matter is taken jurisprudentially without hard feelings. I understand. But what I also understand is that there is no need to issue a controversial fatwa in the first place, and IF they did, it doesnt have to be public. 

If you go on Sistani.org the official website. If you search for any fatwa about Tatbir. You wont find any fatwa regarding Tatbir because its a sensitive issue. Well I just wish they know Tafkhid is more sensitive, disturbing and disgusting and gives loopholes for sick minded people 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam here Sunni school of hought fatwas that allows inter coursing & thighing of 9 years old girls that all Shia scholars are rejecting  intercourse & paying alimony  to minor girls that Imam Khomeini (رضي الله عنه) had same idea also majority of Shia jurists are against thighing too that Imam Khomeini refers to Fatwa in book of Urwa al-Wuthqa (Arabic: العروة الوثقي) is Mohammed Kazem Yazdi's book v2 p811

[15] العروة الوثقى (للسید الیزدی)، ج‏2، ص 811.

that Imam Khomeini in conclusion knows marriage with minor girl is problematic  but if it happens only allows thighing until she reaches to puberty 

"Of course, we would point out that the permission of such agreements depends on the fact that this would be for beneficial for  the minor and does not have a corrupting effect on her."

[17] امام خمینی، سید روح الله،استفتاءات، ج‌3، ص 113، دفتر انتشارات اسلامی، قم، 1422ق.

Imam Khomeini , Istifta'at , v3 , p 113

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urwa_al-Wuthqa

http://en.wikishia.net/view/Al-'Urwa_al-wuthqa_(book)

http://en.wikishia.net/view/Al-Sayyid_Muhammad_Kazim_al-Yazdi

Sunni Fatwas on allowing inter coursing & thighting of 9 years old girl:

ibn Abedin , the Hanafi scholar :

Wife's alimony is obligatory on the couple. It is also obligatory for the minor girl who has the ability of intercourse .

تجب نفقة الزوجة على زوجها ... و لو کانت صغیرة تطیق الوطء

[8]انصارى،قدرت الله،و پژوهشگران مرکز فقهى ائمه اطهار علیهم، موسوعه أحکام الأطفال و أدلتها، ج‌2، ص71 ا،مرکز فقهى ائمه اطهار(ع)، قم،1429‍ ق.

Followers of Maliki's school do not consider puberty as a condition for intercourse, as is the case with the Hanbali's and Shafi'I schools.

 

[9]برای اطلاع بیشتر نک:«موسوعة أحکام الأطفال و أدلتها، ج‌2، ص71»

In some non-Shiite jurists' books, "the couple has the right to take her minor wife, although she can only have sex with her, such as a touch, if she does not need a mother to keep her In such a way, he can have full cohabitation with his wife, but if the wife does not have the ability to communicate and complete intercourse, the couple can uses other parts of her body like as her thighs.

[10] ( وَلِزَوْجٍ جَلْبُ طِفْلَةٍ وَإِنْ صَغِیرَةً إنْ أَمْکَنَ تَمَتُّعٌ بِهَا ) بِالْمَسِّ ( وَأَغْنَتْ عَنْ أُمِّهَا ) أَیْ صَارَتْ ذَاتَ غِنًى عَنْهَا وَلَهُ أَنْ یُجَامِعَهَا جِمَاعًا تَامًّا إذَا کَانَتْ تَحْتَمِلُهُ کَذَاتِ تِسْعٍ ، وَإِذَا کَانَتْ لَا تَحْتَمِلُ جَامَعَهَا قَدْرَ مَا تُطِیقُ مِنْ فَوْقُ أَوْ الْفَخِذَیْنِ. نک: اطفیش،محمد بن یوسف بن عیسى، ج11،ص 330،مکتبة الإرشاد، کتاب در سایت "موقع الإسلام".

https://www.islamquest.net/fa/archive/question/fa12855

https://hawzah.net/fa/Magazine/View/3992/4097/24144/بررسی-فقهی-و-حقوقی-ازدواج-دختربچه-ها


  • لأحکام القرآن للقرطبی 5: 113- 114.موسوعه أحکام الأطفال و أدلتها، ج 2، ص: 59المبحث الرابع: عدم جواز وطء
    (صفحه 48)
  • only Qurtabi rejects thighting between Sunni scholars in "Ahkam al-Qur'an" v2 p:59 ch 4 

  • إمکان وطء الزوجه التی بلغت عشراً مثلًا، فلا یقول أحد من الفقهاء بجواز وطئها حتی فی البالغه الرشیده التی
    (صفحه 49)

  • ما یحرم بالمصاهره، ح 2.موسوعه أحکام الأطفال و أدلتها، ج 2، ص: 71آراء فقهاء أهل السنّه فی جواز وطء
    (صفحه 57)

  • ، ج 2، ص: 93الثانی: أن یمکن وطء مثلها.الثالث: أن تبذل التمکین التامّ من نفسها لزوجها.علی هذا إذا کانت المرأه کبیرهً
    (صفحه 74)

  • الیائسه، هل علیهما عدّه الطلاق أم لا؟و کذا فی صوره الفسخ و وطء الشبهه الموجبین للعدّه فی غیر هذا الموضع
    (صفحه 76)

http://www.ghbook.ir/index.php?name=موسوعه احكام الاطفال و ادلتها : مقارنه تفصيليه بين مذهب الاماميه و المذاهب الاخري جلد 2&option=com_dbook&task=readonline&book_id=1009624002&page=57&chkhashk=9EE12321EE&Itemid=218&lang=fa&tmpl=component

 

«فإن تزوّجتها قبل أن تبلغ تسع سنین فأصابها عیب فأنت ضامن»، المقنع: 309. و کذا فی النهایه للطوسی: 481.

(4) الوسائل 19: 212 الباب 44 من أبواب موجبات الضمان، ح 3.

موسوعه أحکام الأطفال و أدلتها، ج 2، ص: 69

فی الاستبصار «1». و أیضاً ظاهر معتبره السکونی فی الکبیره؛ حیث قال:

«افضی امرأهً»

و المرأه ظاهره فی البالغه.

المطلب الخامس: وجوب نفقتها علی الزوج

یجب علی الزوج إذا أفضی زوجته الصغیره نفقتها ما دامت حیّهً.

قال ابن حمزه: «فإن جامعها و أفضاها حرم علیه وطؤها أبداً، و وجب علیه شیئان: الأرش و الإنفاق علیها مدّه حیاتها» «2».

و به قال ابن سعید «3». و هذا الحکم فی الجمله محلّ وفاقٍ، و لم ینقل فیه الخلاف عن أحدٍ، و ظاهر کلام الشیخ فی الخلاف إجماع الفرقه علیه «4».

و یدلّ علی هذا الحکم أیضاً صحیح

http://www.ghbook.ir/index.php?name=موسوعه احكام الاطفال و ادلتها : مقارنه تفصيليه بين مذهب الاماميه و المذاهب الاخري جلد 2&option=com_dbook&task=readonline&book_id=1009624002&page=57&chkhashk=9EE12321EE&Itemid=218&lang=fa&tmpl=component

Edited by Ashvazdanghe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hesitated to post this because I knew I would get attacked from so many different angles. Unfortunately, at this moment I don't have time to respond to all of them (I have a very busy offline life). BTW, I never said our Marjaa' were perfect, but their level of understanding of the religion is far above the understanding of most 'e-sheiks' or keyboard warriors, some of whom post here. So faced with a conflict between the opinion of an 'e-sheik' and and a marjaa', I'm going to go with a marjaa'. This is a logical decision, for me at least. I will keep this thread open for a little while. I have a feeling how this is going to go. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter even if all the admins and moderators of ShiaChat got together on this and issued a joint statement, people are going to disagree with the topic and use their own reasoning and morals, which I don't think should be so easily dismissed as 'e-sheikh' or 'keyboard warrior' mentality. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:salam:

What will it take for people to realize the problem lies with the concept of unconditional wakil ?

As long as a father can marry his toddler baby to an adult, there will be needs for regulating fatawa like this disguting one, on what are the boundaries of that union.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Abu Hadi said:

I hesitated to post this because I knew I would get attacked from so many different angles. Unfortunately, at this moment I don't have time to respond to all of them (I have a very busy offline life). BTW, I never sayid our Marjaa' were perfect, but their level of understanding of the religion is far above the understanding of most 'e-sheiks' or keyboard warriors, some of whom post here. So faced with a conflict between the opinion of an 'e-sheik' and and a marjaa', I'm going to go with a marjaa'. This is a logical decision, for me at least. I will keep this thread open for a little while. I have a feeling how this is going to go. 

Me too I am very allergical to sheikh google and ayatollah facebook.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone should ask their Marja... 

Any volunteers? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Ibn al-Hussain said:

Though I may as well also read my Fatiha and leave the forums for good after such a post (people couldn't even handle some fatwa of Imam Khomeini I shared and explained about the caliphs and Ayesha few months ago, what are they going to do when they learn that jurists do not accept the concept of modern nation states and that the Western countries we are living in are still considered Daar ul-Harb).

Brother there will always be conflict of opinion or misunderstanding, you know that, you chose this field for yourself. So do not "say fatiha and leave the forums". Your posts are valuable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...