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  
KarbalaWarrior

Shia female perspective on Mutah & Nikah (permanent marriage)

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Diaz said:

Yes because they believe what the Sahaba says. If the messenger ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) banned it then why some people practiced it until the time of Umar?

please do not compare Mutah with alcohol

Actually, it is the 12er Shi'as who follow the opinion of a Sahabi while ignoring the clear prohibition of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم.  The Sunnis, Zaydis, and Ismailis and the rest of the Muslims reject the positions that a Sahaabi here and there had.  In fact, there are literally thousands of things that Muslims disagree with a companion here and there.

And of course I'll compare Mutah to alcohol, because:

1 hour ago, AStruggler said:

Yes. If certain individuals of that time who managed to gain popularity, were misguiding the Muslim society by altering the laws which were legislated by the Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) (and presented by the Prophet (s)), then it makes sense.

And lol, don't compare mut'ah to alcohol. Mut'ah was a special ruling that came with Islam. Alcohol drinking was a habit that the people naturally indulged in from before.

Do you sincerely believe that Mut'ah is a special ruling that Arabs weren't practicing before?  That seems to be your source of confusion.  The reality is, Mutah is exactly like alcohol, a habit that pre-Islamic Arabs engaged in until Islam prohibited it.

And do you sincerely believe that the Zaydis and the Ismailis take the ruling of the prohibition of Mutah from "certain individual of the time who managed to gain popularity?"  LOL, that's almost as hard to believe as an infallible Imam changing the rulings of the religions just to "oppose the Sunnis."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SoRoUsH said:

Yes. There are certainly some from Imam Ridha (عليه السلام). 

Plus, we need to be very careful to not arbitrarily abrogate teachings of our Imams (عليه السلام). We can't claim that later narrations abrogate earlier narrations. We have no reason or justification for this. 

 

I see...

Share this post


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

Until Umar prohibited it, not Islam.

Not true, the Muslims, Sunni and Shi'a alike report with mutawatir chains that the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم banned Mutah.  12er Shi'as take the position of a handful of Companions (which is perfectly legit) which didn't know the prohibition.  I don't have a problem with the brothers here following the position of a Companion, but the reality is, the tawatur nature of the reports, combined with the fact that they come from every Islamic sect (except the 12ers) should be more than enough evidence to dispel the myth the Umar banned Mutah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Cyrax said:

Actually, it is the 12er Shi'as who follow the opinion of a Sahabi while ignoring the clear prohibition of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم.  The Sunnis, Zaydis, and Ismailis and the rest of the Muslims reject the positions that a Sahaabi here and there had.  In fact, there are literally thousands of things that Muslims disagree with a companion here and there.

And of course I'll compare Mutah to alcohol, because:

Do you sincerely believe that Mut'ah is a special ruling that Arabs weren't practicing before?  That seems to be your source of confusion.  The reality is, Mutah is exactly like alcohol, a habit that pre-Islamic Arabs engaged in until Islam prohibited it.

And do you sincerely believe that the Zaydis and the Ismailis take the ruling of the prohibition of Mutah from "certain individual of the time who managed to gain popularity?"  LOL, that's almost as hard to believe as an infallible Imam changing the rulings of the religions just to "oppose the Sunnis."

Before I reply to your post, did you at least check the link that I posted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Cyrax said:

Do you sincerely believe that Mut'ah is a special ruling that Arabs weren't practicing before?  That seems to be your source of confusion.  The reality is, Mutah is exactly like alcohol, a habit that pre-Islamic Arabs engaged in until Islam prohibited it.

To be honest, I haven't ever researched or heard about mut'ah existing before Islam, this is the first time I've heard of such a thing. Mut'ah itself is an Islamic notion, it just dosen't make sense.

I feel saying this is like saying the Toronto Raptors basketball team existed before the sport basketball existed. 

Mut'ah is a proper marriage contract with a marriage formula.

I don't know, perhaps you're ignorantly and equating mut'ah to the non-Muslim type of casual sex. Yeah, something like this may have occurred before Islam, but do not label it as mut'ah. 

However, anyone can say anything, any lost sheep can let out a baa or bleat. If you claim mut'ah existed before Islam then firstly, elaborate, so we have a clearer understanding of what you mean by this. Secondly, prove that what you say happened. 

Edited by AStruggler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Cyrax said:

And do you sincerely believe that the Zaydis and the Ismailis take the ruling of the prohibition of Mutah from "certain individual of the time who managed to gain popularity?"  LOL, that's almost as hard to believe as an infallible Imam changing the rulings of the religions just to "oppose the Sunnis."

In all honesty, I don't even think about the Zaydis and Ismailis. I'm sure the Ismailis are doing fine with that old white man leader of theirs. Secondly, since when were these sects used as a means to validate/invalidate the beliefs of the twelvers LOL.

May Allah guide you. So you believe that after the passing of the Holy Prophet (s), Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) just left this newly established religion in the hands of the clueless people, with no plans to guard it and let more people be truly guided by it.

Do not misunderstand. This is a much deeper discussion. Do not be so quick to jump to your delusions. I'll be honest, I'd have to learn about this more myself before being able to have a serious discussion on it, but perhaps the Imams (a) were not "changing" the rulings but simply attracting a greater focus of the people towards the specific ruling, by emphasizing it more...The rulings of Islam could've always been there but the Imams were just telling people about it more...Not changing it...It was Umar who changed stuff...And if it seemed to have changed from mustahab to simply jaiz, maybe it was always a conditional ruling from the start and so changed according to the changing conditions.

Edited by AStruggler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

8 hours ago, Cyrax said:

Not true, the Muslims, Sunni and Shi'a alike report with mutawatir chains that the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم banned Mutah.  12er Shi'as take the position of a handful of Companions (which is perfectly legit) which didn't know the prohibition.  I don't have a problem with the brothers here following the position of a Companion, but the reality is, the tawatur nature of the reports, combined with the fact that they come from every Islamic sect (except the 12ers) should be more than enough evidence to dispel the myth the Umar banned Mutah.

Possible to show us what are the Shia mutawatir hadiths of banning mutah?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, AStruggler said:

To be honest, I haven't ever researched or heard about mut'ah existing before Islam, this is the first time I've heard of such a thing. Mut'ah itself is an Islamic notion, it just dosen't make sense.

السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته

Akhi, this is well known among everybody, do you believe the Mutah was introduced by the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم?  Like the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم says, "البينة على المدعي واليمين على من أنكر".  Please provide your evidence, as of right now, there is no evidence to suggest that Mut'ah was introduced by the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم.  Here is a quote from al-Islam.org

Quote

This verse was revealed towards the beginning of the Prophet's stay in Medina, which lasted from AH 1/CE 622 to 10/632. At that time the men of Medina used to 'seek enjoyment' from women for a limited period of time in exchange for a specified sum of money.

By its revelation this verse in effect confirmed an existing situation; and it emphasized that men must fulfill their promises concerning the agreed upon sum. In Medina this custom was looked upon as one kind of temporary marriage and was referred to by the term istimta', the same word employed in the Qur'anic verse-even though the literal meaning of the word is 'to seek benefit' or 'to take enjoyment'.

Akhi, I'm not trying to be a jerk, but this is like ABCs of this topic, أحسن الله إليك.

7 hours ago, AStruggler said:

In all honesty, I don't even think about the Zaydis and Ismailis. I'm sure the Ismailis are doing fine with that old white man leader of theirs. Secondly, since when were these sects used as a means to validate/invalidate the beliefs of the twelvers LOL.

Actually, I didn't use it to invalidate your practice, and in fact I even said that you taking the position of a Sahaabi on this issue is completely legit.  I was just pointing out to the people here that this isn't a Sunni vs Shi'a issue, its a 12er versus the rest of the Muslim issue.

7 hours ago, AStruggler said:

May Allah guide you. So you believe that after the passing of the Holy Prophet (s), Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) just left this newly established religion in the hands of the clueless people, with no plans to guard it and let more people be truly guided by it.

I believe that yes, the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم left the religion in the hands of the "Greatest Ummah that was brought forth to the people" (3:110).  You make takfeer of them and call them clueless, I confirm what Allah said about them.

3 hours ago, Abu Nur said:

 

Possible to show us what are the Shia mutawatir hadiths of banning mutah?

Would you like me to list them or are links fine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Diaz said:

Before I reply to your post, did you at least check the link that I posted?

Yes I did, بارك الله فيك, but I didn't see anything regarding the mutawatir reports found in Sunni and Shia sources banning it and why the Shi'as reject the mutawatir corroborated reports for an opinion of a Sahabi.

I noticed you like AStrugglers post, do you also believe that Mut'ah isn't a pre-Islamic practice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Abu Nur said:

Only Shia hadiths I'm interested, it is possible to link them jazakaAllah Khayran.

إن شاء الله، تفضل

https://alkazemalzaidy2013.wordpress.com/tag/قول-أئمة-الزيدية-في-زواج-المُتعة/

Now I was wondering, does that mean you accept that the hadeeth the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم banned Mut'ah is mutawatir in Sunni sources?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, AStruggler said:

Do not be so quick to jump to your delusions. I'll be honest, I'd have to learn about this more myself before being able to have a serious discussion on it, but perhaps the Imams (a) were not "changing" the rulings but simply attracting a greater focus of the people towards the specific ruling, by emphasizing it more...The rulings of Islam could've always been there but the Imams were just telling people about it more...Not changing it...It was Umar who changed stuff...And if it seemed to have changed from mustahab to simply jaiz, maybe it was always a conditional ruling from the start and so changed according to the changing conditions.

Let me get this straight:

1) You didn't know that Mut'ah was a practice that was pre-Islamic, and thought the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم introduced it.

2) You admit that you to learn more about this, yet you say to me "do not be so quick to jump to" my "delusions."

3) You criticize Umar for changing the ruling on Mut'ah (despite the overwhelming evidence the Mut'ah was banned by the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم) but then find the idea that the Imams would "seem to have changed" the ruling on Mut'ah just to oppose Sunnis a completely valid position.

Just as an addition: why do you suppose the other Shi'a sects decided to support Umar's position here, when they oppose him on other issues like Taraweeh and Tathweeb, بارك الله فيك

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something interesting I read: 

Yahya Ibn Aktham asked a Shaikh from Basra: ‘Why do you permit Mut’ah?’

He answered: ‘Due to Umar Ibn al-Khattab’.

Yahya asked: ‘How is that? Umar was the most strict one against it?’

He answered: ‘Yes, it is a Sahih narration that Umar ascended the pulpit and said: ‘Allah and His Prophet permitted you two types of Mut’ah, but I forbid you on both and will punish those who commit the same’, so we accepted the testimony of Umar (that Allah and His Prophet permitted it) but we did not accept his prohibition’.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Cyrax said:

just to oppose Sunnis

Nah, not just to oppose the Sunnis, to oppose the fitna and misguidance being spread by Sunnis or other Muslims

Yeah, that sounds more correct^

I don't think the problem was about the fitna-makers being Sunni or any other sect or type of people, the problem was simply that they were fitna-makers...And it was the fitna and misguidance that needed to be opposed... 

This is all according to my humble and fallible understanding 

 

Edited by AStruggler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest hikarii
9 hours ago, Cyrax said:

does that mean you accept that the hadeeth the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم banned Mut'ah is mutawatir in Sunni sources?

This doesn't add up because there are quite a few Sunni Hadith which say that Umar publicly declared that he is abrogating Muta despite it being permissible at the time of the Prophet: Abi Nadhra said: ‘I said to Jabir bin Abdullah that Ibn Zubair prohibitis Mut’ah while Ibn Abbas allows it. He (Jabir) replied: ‘Through me this hadith has been circulated, we performed Mut’ah with Allah’s messenger ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)), and Abu Bakr, but when Umar become caliph he addressed the people and said: ‘The Qur'an is the same Qur'an, Allah’s apostle is the same apostle, and there were two types of Mut’ah during the time of Allah’s Messenger, one was the Mut’ah of Hajj whilst the other was Mut’ah regarding women’’. 
Musnad Ahmed bin Hanbal, Volume 1 page 52 Hadith 369

This clearly means that it was permissible at the time of the Prophet but was abrogated by Umar.

 

The same Hadith can be found in numerous Sunni works.

Not only that but all Sunni Scholars accept these hadith of Umar abrogating Mutah as Sahih.

Shaykh Shu’aib al-Arnaout stated about the authenticity of the above tradition:

“The chain is Sahih according to Muslim’s standards, the narrators are reliable and they are the narrators of the two Sheikhs (Bukhari & Muslim) except Abi Nadhra who is just a narrator of Muslim.”

And Sunni Scholars even directly acknowledge this fact including in Ahl’ul Sunnah’s esteemed work al Awail, wherein we read:

“The first to make Mut’ah haraam was Umar”
Kitab al-Awail, page 1 by Hilal al-Hasan al-Askari (Madina, Saudi Arab)

 

Furthermore even in Sunni books, there is a division regarding the matter and some scholars consider mutah to be HALAL under certain circumstances.

In Sahi Bukhari Arabic-English, v7, Hadith #51 we read:

“Narrated Abu Jamra: I heard Ibn Abbas (giving a verdict) when he was asked about the Mut’ah with the women, and he permitted it (Nikah al-Mut’ah). On that a freed slave of his said to him, “That is only when it is very badly needed and (qualified permanent) women are scarce, or similar cases.” On that, Ibn Abbas said, “Yes.” 

 

And in 

Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Volume 5, Page 228 we read:

Ibn Abbas narrated “Rasulullah (s) gave us the order to practise Mut’ah, it existed, Urwah ibn Zubayr said, ‘Abu Bakr and Umar stopped this’, Ibn Abbas responded saying ‘I’m telling you what Rasulullah (s) deemed halaal and you’re telling me what Abu Bakr and ‘Umar did, I see that you shall be destroyed”.

 

Make no mistake, the Shia consider Muta to be Halal. It is in fact, the Sunnis who are unsure about their stance regarding it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition to numerous authentic narrations supporting Muta'a, we ought to pay attention to narrations about sexual interactions, too. 

It should be known that in our narrations, a woman ought to fulfill a man's sexual needs, even when it is very inconvenient, such as when she's riding on a camel's back and her spouse demands it. 

This command to women to satisfy their spouse's sexual needs often and regularly, and even when inconvenient, is misinterpreted by Liberals and Feminists to portray an oppressive patriarchy within a marriage. To repeat, this is a misinterpretation. 

A better, more accurate interpretation, considering the permission of Muta'a and forbiddance of masturbation, is that sexual needs and urges aren't easily dismissible or avoidable. Once the need or desire appears in a man's mind or heart, it remains there until it is addressed. And it should be addressed sooner rather than later. When it is satisfied, it's removed from the consciousness and thoughts until later. This would, in turn, allow the man to continue functioning optimally, physically and mentally. If physiological needs are suppressed, often and regularly, physical and mental side effects, such as depression or hopelessness may appear.

When one is hungry, they cannot think or perform physical activities optimally. When one has sexual needs, they cannot think or function optimally. Our hormones and physiological needs don't follow our wishes. You can't wish your hunger away. 

Muta'a provides a sanctioned means for men and women to address their sexual needs, without resorting to sins, whether it's fornication or masturbation (which is a type of fornication).

 

The aversion against Muta'a shares the same roots as the aversion against any recreational sexual activities, even between a husband and wife. Sadly, sexual activities are seen as based, impious, carnal desires of the flesh, hindering our spiritual growth. This view is absolutely inaccurate! 

For example, In Catholicism sexual intercourse, if not for procreative purposes, is "frowned upon", if not directly forbidden. This is because they hold a dualistic flesh-vs-spirit viewpoint.  In Islam, especially Shia Islam, sexual activities with a permitted partner are encouraged. We do not hold a dualistic flesh-vs-spirit viewpoint. Our spirit advances, when our flesh is healthy.

Edited by SoRoUsH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, AStruggler said:

This is all according to my humble and fallible understanding 

The reason you went through all those mental gymnastics, akhi, is because you have adopted a position and you are now trying to look for evidence for it.  Rather than extracting your position from the available evidence.

14 hours ago, Guest hikarii said:

This doesn't add up because there are quite a few Sunni Hadith which say that Umar publicly declared that he is abrogating Muta despite it being permissible at the time of the Prophet: Abi Nadhra said: ‘I said to Jabir bin Abdullah that Ibn Zubair prohibitis Mut’ah while Ibn Abbas allows it. He (Jabir) replied: ‘Through me this hadith has been circulated, we performed Mut’ah with Allah’s messenger ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)), and Abu Bakr, but when Umar become caliph he addressed the people and said: ‘The Qur'an is the same Qur'an, Allah’s apostle is the same apostle, and there were two types of Mut’ah during the time of Allah’s Messenger, one was the Mut’ah of Hajj whilst the other was Mut’ah regarding women’’. 
Musnad Ahmed bin Hanbal, Volume 1 page 52 Hadith 369

This clearly means that it was permissible at the time of the Prophet but was abrogated by Umar.

You should do at least SOME research before just posting anything that comes to mind.  All you had to do was go to Wikipedia (forget about the hundreds of articles addressing this, but I don't want to link to an "anti-Shia site" so the link doesn't get deleted)

Quote

Some Sunni commentators of hadith have put Imran ibn Hussain among the Salaf in favor of Nikah Mut'ah after Muhammad, based on this narration.[16]

However, the major Sunni opinion is that this hadith actually refers to the Mut'ah of Hajj. Sunni Muslims believe that this view is strengthened by the fact that in both Sahih's, the hadith is included under Hajj-related topics. Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi, a 13th century Sunni Islamic scholar, the author of the commentary of Sahih Muslim supports the view that this hadith concerning Mut'ah refers to the Mut'ah of Hajj.[17]

Ibn Kathir, a 14th century Sunni Islamic scholar wrote on his commentary of Al-Baqara, 196:

This last Hadith proves that Tamattu` (doing Mut'ah) is legislated. It is reported in the Two Sahihs that `Imran bin Husayn said, "We performed Hajj At-Tamattu` in the lifetime of Allah's Messenger and then the Qur'an was revealed (regarding Hajj At-Tamattu`). Nothing was revealed to forbid it, nor did he (the Prophet) forbid it until he died. And somebody said what he wished (regarding Hajj At-Tamattu`) according to his own opinion.[18]

Ibn Kathir thus believed that "The verse of Mut'ah" mentioned in the hadith refers to Al-Baqara, 196.

The same view was held by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, a 14th century Sunni Islamic scholar[19] and Ibn al-Jawzi.[20]

 

14 hours ago, Guest hikarii said:

And Sunni Scholars even directly acknowledge this fact including in Ahl’ul Sunnah’s esteemed work al Awail, wherein we read:

“The first to make Mut’ah haraam was Umar”
Kitab al-Awail, page 1 by Hilal al-Hasan al-Askari (Madina, Saudi Arab)

Who is this and what is Kitab al-Awail?  LOL, did you just copy and paste that from Shiapen without changing anything?  Have you read any counter article(s) written against it?

14 hours ago, Guest hikarii said:

In Sahi Bukhari Arabic-English, v7, Hadith #51 we read:

“Narrated Abu Jamra: I heard Ibn Abbas (giving a verdict) when he was asked about the Mut’ah with the women, and he permitted it (Nikah al-Mut’ah). On that a freed slave of his said to him, “That is only when it is very badly needed and (qualified permanent) women are scarce, or similar cases.” On that, Ibn Abbas said, “Yes.” 

That sounds like NOTHING like the Shi'as here recommend.  I would love it if the Shi'as adopt the position of the Ahl Albayt Scholar ibn Abbbas on this, unfortunately, what we have is a very warped view of this.

14 hours ago, Guest hikarii said:

Make no mistake, the Shia consider Muta to be Halal. It is in fact, the Sunnis who are unsure about their stance regarding it.

Nope, the four madhhab, the Dhahiri, the Ahl al-Hadeeth, the Zaydis and the Ismailis have consensus that Mut'ah was banned by the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم, and they ALL report the same incident.  It is the 12er Shi'as who are confused on this issue: ranging from is it makrooh or musthabb?  All the way to is it permissible to practice it with a lady of the night.  Every single Marja3 has a completely different view on the rulings regarding Mut'ah, while every single non-12er Muslim agrees that it is haraam.

Edited by Cyrax

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SoRoUsH said:

A better, more accurate interpretation, considering the permission of Muta'a and forbiddance of masturbation, is that sexual needs and urges aren't easily dismissible or avoidable. Once the need or desire appears in a man's mind or heart, it remains there until it is addressed. And it should be addressed sooner rather than later. When it is satisfied, it's removed from the consciousness and thoughts until later. This would, in turn, allow the man to continue functioning optimally, physically and mentally. If physiological needs are suppressed, often and regularly, physical and mental side effects, such as depression or hopelessness may appear.

I can guarantee you that the depression and hopelessness that the women who practice Mut'ah or have their spouses practice Mut'ah FAR outweighs any supposed hopelessness that may appear in a man if a woman doesn't satisfy him even "when she's riding on a camel's back."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

I can guarantee you that the depression and hopelessness that the women who practice Mut'ah or have their spouses practice Mut'ah FAR outweighs any supposed hopelessness that may appear in a man if a woman doesn't satisfy him even "when she's riding on a camel's back."

No. That may happen only if they've been influenced by society's misguided view of Mutaa, which sees it as degrading or debasing for women. Muta'a is neither degrading nor debasing for either men or women, since it's a recommended Sunna. It's the misguided view of it that has caused so much problem, for men and women, mentally and physically.

According to Imam Ali (عليه السلام), if Umar had not forbidden it, no one would commit fornication, including masturbation, except the wretched, perverted ones. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SoRoUsH said:

No. That may happen only if they've been influenced by society's misguided view of Mutaa, which sees it as degrading or debasing for women. Muta'a is neither degrading nor debasing for either men or women, since it's a recommended Sunna. It's the misguided view of it that has caused so much problem, for men and women, mentally and physically.

According to Imam Ali (عليه السلام), if Umar had not forbidden it, no one would commit fornication, including masturbation, except the wretched, perverted ones. 

 

Dude, do you seriously believe that?  People committed Zina during Jahiliyyah, the time of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم and during the rule of Abu Bakr, why didn't Mut'ah prevent it then?

I seriously don't know how you can possibly belief this.  It is in fact the opposite, the only way any one can accept this is if they are a 12er Shi'I and believe it to be a Sunnah.

I would love for the some of the women on this forum to comment on this: do you seriously believe that Mut'ah has less of a harm on the woman who is practicing it, or whose husband is practicing it then it does for a man to not have his desires fulfilled even if he is riding on a camels back?  There is no way you'll even get 10% of 12er women to agree to that, let alone any tangible percentage from a non-12er women, Muslim or otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

Dude, do you seriously believe that? 

Yes!

3 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

There is no way you'll even get 10% of 12er women to agree to that, let alone any tangible percentage from a non-12er women, Muslim or otherwise.

It really doesn't matter now who and how many people believe this. Our societies and mindsets have been polluted for centuries with this misguided view of Muta'a. It would take serious effort and a long time to re-direct people back to the path of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) on this issue. 

Anyways, you can continue to debate and discuss this matter with others. I have no reason to further debate this topic. 

Have a nice day!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SoRoUsH said:

Yes!

So you believe that, even though Zina occurred in pre-Islamic society, during the time of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم and the rule of Abu Bakr, that Zina would not have happened had Omar not banned Mut'ah?!

14 minutes ago, SoRoUsH said:

It really doesn't matter now who and how many people believe this. Our societies and mindsets have been polluted for centuries with this misguided view of Muta'a. It would take serious effort and a long time to re-direct people back to the path of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) on this issue.

Then why don't you try?  In the next statement you say:

16 minutes ago, SoRoUsH said:

I have no reason to further debate this topic. 

Couldn't a good reason to be to at least try to educate and re-direct ONE person back to the path of Ahl al Bayt عليهم السلام? (it is عليهم not عليه because they are a plural and not a singular بارك الله فيك).

But if you don't want to keep this discussion going then خير إن شاء الله.  I apologize if I had upset you بارك الله فيك or spoke to you in an inappropriate way.

السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/21/2020 at 6:29 PM, Cyrax said:

I believe that yes, the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم left the religion in the hands of the "Greatest Ummah that was brought forth to the people" (3:110). 

الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِي وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ الْإِسْلَامَ دِينًا

None have power to change the religion even by your "greatest ummah's" hands. It was already perfected by God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Green Knight said:

الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِي وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ الْإِسْلَامَ دِينًا

None have power to change the religion even by your "greatest ummah's" hands. It was already perfected by God.

Of course akhi, I don't think any one can disagree with that, that's how you know Mut'ah is haram

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/21/2020 at 8:20 PM, Cyrax said:

إن شاء الله، تفضل

https://alkazemalzaidy2013.wordpress.com/tag/قول-أئمة-الزيدية-في-زواج-المُتعة/

Now I was wondering, does that mean you accept that the hadeeth the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم banned Mut'ah is mutawatir in Sunni sources?

whole of your link  is based on Zaidi doctrine that affected with Sunni doctrine & refuting some wrong conditions in name of Muta not original & true Mutah  condition.

منتزع من مبحثنا (الزواج بين مفهوم الزواج الشرعي والمتعة)) ، يجده المهتم ضمن (مجموعة الرسائل المهمة حول الزيدية) .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/22/2020 at 11:39 PM, Cyrax said:

Of course akhi, I don't think any one can disagree with that, that's how you know Mut'ah is haram

Mutah existed before Umar was nominated into power. Do you deny this?

Edited by The Green Knight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/22/2020 at 4:06 PM, SoRoUsH said:

If

blockquote widget

On 1/22/2020 at 4:06 PM, SoRoUsH said:

If physiological needs are suppressed, often and regularly, physical and mental side effects, such as depression or hopelessness may appear.

When one is hungry, they cannot think or perform physical activities optimally. When one has sexual needs, they cannot think or function optimally. Our hormones and physiological needs don't follow our wishes. You can't wish your hunger away

Islam does not ask us to perform actions which will result in depression and hopelessness. Yet, if someone is unmarried and cannot do mutah, Islam does ask him to suppress his physiological needs, control his hunger, diminish the sexual urge, repress the carnal desire for as long as marriage/mutah doesn't take place. If such actions had meant that this will cause depression and hopelessness, then Islam would have allowed sexual sins before marriage - because Islamic rules are not designed to cause any depression. 

Rather, if a person is unmarried and suppresses his sexual desire as required by Islam, then instead of any depression or hopelessness, he would have a great feeling of contentment, satisfaction, joy and he would have immense degree of hope. There is a hadith that when a person lowers his gaze, Allah creates a feeling of charm in his heart which only he himself can understand (not verbatim). This hadith clarifies that sexual desires have to be suppressed before marriage, and doing so in the proper manner should result in inner peace and charm, rather than any depression or hopelessness. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Liggel said:

Yet, if someone is unmarried and cannot do mutah, Islam does ask him to suppress his physiological needs, control his hunger, diminish the sexual urge, repress the carnal desire for as long as marriage/mutah doesn't take place

Men and women are strongly encouraged to get married as soon as possible. Marriage ought to be an urgent priority. 

The wait before marriage shouldn't be long, because as I said earlier, if physiological needs are suppressed, often and regularly, physical and mental side effects, such as depression or hopelessness may appear.

Waiting to get married shouldn't be considered a reliable option. What do I mean? What I mean is that we can't determine, in advance, for example, that we won't get married until we're 25 or 30 years old. We should always seek marriage as the very next thing we got to do. It should never be put on the back burner. 

We ought to view marriage as an urgent priority, because waiting for long results in negative physical and psychological outcomes.

We have multiple authentic narrations that state it's a blessing for a father, if his daughter gets her first menstruation in her husband's home. Think about this! 

As early as puberty is reached, men and women are encouraged, urgently, to get married. Puberty is reached more or less between the ages of 10 and 15. 

When it comes to marriage, Muta'a or Nikah, we don't seem to be on the same page as the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). Most parents and families talk about how marriage is important, but when it comes to getting their children married, they make it so hard with their outrageous demands and conditions.

So, I'll repeat what I said in my earlier post, our hormones and physiological needs don't follow our wishes. You can't wish your hunger away. 

If we can't get married, Nikah or Muta'a, and we have to wait, we shouldn't make the waiting period the new normal. Marriage is an urgent priority.

Edited by SoRoUsH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, SoRoUsH said:

We have multiple authentic narrations that state it's a blessing for a father, if his daughter gets her first menstruation in her husband's home. Think about this! 

Will you get your daughters married and living with their husbands before the age of 13?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, SoRoUsH said:

our hormones and physiological needs don't follow our wishes. You can't wish your hunger away.

If you are hungry but don't have any money to buy food, and then you enter a restaurant and go to the kitchen and start smelling good food and look at all the people having delicious meals.....and you know you cannot have any of this food, then yes you will become depressed and hopeless. 

Such a hungry man should not have entered the restaurant in the first place. If he is getting depressed, then he is to be blamed himself for entering the kitchen. He has himself ignited his hunger to extreme and excessive levels.  

When he already knew he had no money to buy food, he should have stayed as far away from the kitchen as possible. If he now steals food or snatches it from someone, because of his excessive, out-of-control hunger then he can be punished for it. 

If the hungry man always keeps himself away from the kitchen, then gradually his stomach and body will get adapted to the hunger and he would not be disturbed by pangs of hunger any more.

Islam tells unmarried (hungry) people to not even think about going near to the restaurant / kitchen (of sexual sins) - otherwise their hunger will go out of proportion and will make them depressed and hopeless. Then then they will fall into sins. If unmarried people sin, they cannot blame their sexual desires because the desire given by Allah is never meant to be that high that it would compel a man to sin. 

Ofcourse marriage/mutah should be urgent priority for today's youth. But one has to acknowledge that many young people try their level best and put in utmost effort to get married, but still have to go through extended periods of unmarried life. This is a divine test of sexual patience but it is not designed to cause depression or hopelessness. Rather, sexual abstinence before marriage - however long it may be - is meant to give a feeling of charm and happiness and beautiful taste of chastity and greatest hope of immense reward from Allah for his unlimited blessings. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Liggel said:

Rather, sexual abstinence before marriage - however long it may be - is meant to give a feeling of charm and happiness and beautiful taste of chastity and greatest hope of immense reward from Allah for his unlimited blessings. 

As my last response, I'll just add that you neither know about the narrations of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) on marriage and sex nor the science of sexuality and its link to physical and psychological health. 

If you want to live inside an imaginary bubble of cultural, yet unislamic, teachings, go ahead. But don't pretend you're following the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), at least on these issues. 

 

I won't continue discussing this any further. I've made many posts in these topics already. The mental thickness that comes with cultural habits gets frustrating and exhausting to penetrate through after a while. 

Believe as you wish. 

Edited by SoRoUsH

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...