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

Temporary marriage?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

I love how the OP, @smma disappeared after asking just a couple of questions.

Anyways, here's something interesting: the Hanafi madhab says the father's permission is not required if a virgin wants to (permanently) marry. Pakistani civil law actually follows this; makes me wonder why in our culture, the father's permission is given such extreme importance. It's like they don't know their own fiqh rules.

This rule is secretly abused by the youth much, much more frequently than mutah. In fact, people would rather do zina, plain and simple, than mutah; zina can be spontaneous and 'romantic' and 'in the heat of the moment'. The planning and strict rules required by mutah 'kills the mood'. :itsok:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 148
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I think on must consider all these Traditions on Mutah from Sihaah Sitta then decide if it was haram or not. Sahih Bukhari: Narrated 'Abdullah: We used to participate in the holy battle

Im not knowledgeable enough to take part in the conversation, but im following

I cannot accept that line of reasoning. The reason why is because if everything that is coming out of the mouth of the Messenger of Allah(p.b.u.h) is wahiy (revelation from Allah(s.w.a)) and everythin

Posted Images

  • Advanced Member

Mutah is completely allowed and if someone sees it as ugly or immoral or something then let me clear the misunderstanding. 

Mutah and marriage has only one difference. This difference is the time-period. 

The woman is not a 'rag' but a designated honorable wife. Same for the man. 

It is according to Qur'an, Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and narrations from the Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام).

The 2nd Caliph stated it as forbidden but we don't follow the Sunnah of 2nd Caliph. 

Logically, 

Mutah prevents the chances of fornication and adultery. Because people don't marry sometimes because they are not ready enough to get into a lifetime relationship and this decision can have extremely genuine reasons. 

But being a teen and during the adulthood, a person is vulnerable enough to get deviated by evil. 

It's better to have a genuine marital relationship consented by the parents for an appointed time as a solution. 

It is better than having a girlfriend or boyfriend to have a wife for an appointed time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
33 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

Moreover, a woman can write in her contract, stipulating that she does not want her husband to get another wife and that cancels it out entirely.

Not in the Jafri fiqh. No one can make haram something that's been been halal by Allah and His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). The most she can do is reserve the right to divorce him if he marries a second time.

Edited by Sabrejet
Wrong quote
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
5 minutes ago, Sabrejet said:

Not in the Jafri fiqh. No one can make haram something that's been been halal by Allah and His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). The most she can do is reserve the right to divorce him if he marries a second time.

You are right - which is why temporary marriages were prohibited entirely. She cannot divorce him if she did not stipulate it in her marriage contract.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Nightclaw said:

You are right - which is why temporary marriages were prohibited entirely. She cannot divorce him if she did not stipulate it in her marriage contract.

There is no divorce in temporary marriage, so why would there be a condition?

And why are you assuming that a poor helpless woman is duped into a temporary marriage against her own free will? It's a strictly mutual contract; there is consent from both sides. The woman knows what she's getting into when they mutually decide the time period.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Sabrejet said:

There is no divorce in temporary marriage, so why would there be a condition?

And why are you assuming that a poor helpless woman is duped into a temporary marriage against her own free will? It's a strictly mutual contract; there is consent from both sides. The woman knows what she's getting into when they mutually decide the time period.

"The most she can do is reserve the right to divorce him if he marries a second time." - the condition was in response to this, which was what you said. This applies to actually getting married instead of being in the temporary stage.

Let me make something clear - I am not assuming this is trickery of any sort. I am saying that a man can freely use her as he wills once agreed upon. She may think he wants to marry her and wants to accommodate until they can get married when he could very well just want to use her. It is used horrendously, as there are places like this in Iran where women do "temporary marriages" with people who come to visit the graves and memorial sites of their figures while a cleric is issuing this out. They usually take a few hours or a few minutes where, obviously, a fee is paid. It is not prohibited nor shut down by the Iranian government (and there is quite the amount of them) because it is allowed. 

Nonetheless, nobody is making the woman out to be clueless. That is not my point. I am telling you that a man could agree to it and leave her instantly without being held accountable for it. This is very similar to something I do not want to say, but you understand. She is not his wife, but his test object for the time being. This can apply to women, but women are less likely to want to use a man for sexual pleasure as they are emotional creatures, therefore better lovers. This is my stance on it. 

Regardless, we are both [presumably] men. We know how we operate. Allah knows how we operate, hence the prohibitions on unlawful intercourse and it being one of the major sins. There are many other reasons, but these are among the primary ones. The bigger the sin is, the easier it is to do - most of the time, anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 11/22/2020 at 11:42 PM, smma said:

Assalam,

I have read in some places that shia Islam has a concept called " temprory marriage" is this real? What basis does it have in quran/hadith's? Can women also practice it? Just by its name it seems very unislamic to me 

By "temperory marriage" are you referring to "aqd al-misyar" or to "aqd al-mut'a"? :)

Edited by Cool
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
56 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

The same non-Muslims who have more than four boyfriends / girlfriends? Let us not kid ourselves. I met a guy who was strictly against Islam and men having 4 wives, but it was later found out the he enjoyed his wife doing certain activities with a group of men. This is not really an argument, but it is just goes to show the hypocrisy of these people. I have had this discussion with a lot of non-Muslims who had not much left to say about it.

Lame argument. You're putting them all in the same box. There are still many non muslims who believe and practice strictly monagamous relationships. That's what they think of as default just as you think of permanent marriage as default. They say that polygamy is unfair against women and they wouldn't want their daughter to be in a polygamous relationship either.

 

1 hour ago, Nightclaw said:

Polygamy has been prevalent throughout society. Before Islam, men could have up to several wives and slaves, divorcing them and trading them. Islam came to put a restriction on the amount of wives you can have. Moreover, a woman can write in her contract, stipulating that she does not want her husband to get another wife and that cancels it out entirely. If he cannot take care of those wives equally, he is not permitted to get another one. There are rules and regulations to it and explanations that should e examined further rather than taking something at face value and turning into Usain Bolt with it.

Same can be said about mutah. Islam added rules and responsibilities for it. Also there are benefits to it: one who cannot afford permanent marriage (are disabled, poor...) could fulfill their sexual needs. Plus there are rules and regulations that come with it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
30 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

She may think he wants to marry her and wants to accommodate until they can get married when he could very well just want to use her. It is used horrendously,

Just like any Quranic ruling, it can be misused. No denying that. Happens in permanent marriage too - see my previous point about Hanafi fiqh. The man just divorces her after a few weeks, and since divorce is so easy in Hanafi fiqh, its easier to abuse too.

Anyways, let's not pretend that women can't abuse this too (and I've seen this). She can temporary marry someone, making him believe that they'll marry permanently eventually; the poor guy has no idea he's just a rebound or something similar. Most women would rather die than admit that they have needs too; more than men in fact. This is because Allah has given haya and patience to them in large amounts compared to men, as a defense mechanism against predatory men. There is a hadith in our literature to this effect.

 

30 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

in Iran where women do "temporary marriages" with people who come to visit the graves and memorial sites of their figures while a cleric is issuing this out. They usually take a few hours or a few minutes where, obviously, a fee is paid. It is not prohibited nor shut down by the Iranian government (and there is quite the amount of them) because it is allowed.

If it happens in the way you're describing, then it's sad. I didn't know you personally visited and stayed in Iran long enough to make an observation and a judgement. Anyways, our top scholars have all sorts of fatwa preventing this sort of behaviour. Not just about temporary marriage, but in marriage in general. If people are abusing laws and pretending to be scholars, then it's on their head.

 

30 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

Regardless, we are both [presumably] men. We know how we operate. Allah knows how we operate, hence the prohibitions on unlawful intercourse and it being one of the major sins. There are many other reasons, but these are among the primary ones. The bigger the sin is, the easier it is to do - most of the time, anyway.

There is a quote by Ali, something along the lines of "If Umar hadn't banned Mutah, then none but the most wretched would have commited zina". In Jafri fiqh, unlike other schools, istimna is completely haram and comes under the definition of zina. Go figure.

Edited by Sabrejet
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Justsomeone said:

Lame argument. You're putting them all in the same box. There are still many non muslims who believe and practice strictly monagamous relationships. That's what they think of as default just as you think of permanent marriage as default. They say that polygamy is unfair against women and they wouldn't want their daughter to be in a polygamous relationship either.

Quote

This is not really an argument, but it is just goes to show the hypocrisy of these people.

Read next time and try to understand what I say. I specifically said it was not an argument.

If they say polygamy is unfair against women and that they do not want their daughter to be in such a relationship, she does not have to be even if she was a Muslim. She has the right to stipulate such things before marriage.

2 minutes ago, Justsomeone said:

Same can be said about mutah. Islam added rules and responsibilities for it. Also there are benefits to it: one who cannot afford permanent marriage (are disabled, poor...) could fulfill their sexual needs. Plus there are rules and regulations that come with it. 

I know the rules and regulations, for the most part. However, my point was that a man could up and leave and excuse the time he has agreed with his partner in the blink of an eye and is not held accountable. If they are poor, they should follow Allah's instructions:

وَاَنۡكِحُوا الۡاَيَامٰى مِنۡكُمۡ وَالصّٰلِحِيۡنَ مِنۡ عِبَادِكُمۡ وَاِمَآئِكُمۡ ؕ اِنۡ يَّكُوۡنُوۡا فُقَرَآءَ يُغۡنِهِمُ اللّٰهُ مِنۡ فَضۡلِهٖ ؕ وَاللّٰهُ وَاسِعٌ عَلِيۡمٌ
And marry the single among you and the pious of your slaves and maid-servants [both male and female]. If they be poor, Allah will enrich them of His bounty. And Allah is All-Encompassing, Aware.

Nothing in the Qur'an agrees with temporary marriages, in the first place. It states the specific type of woman you are allowed to marry. Islam prohibits such actions. It was allowed shortly under specific circumstances and made prohibited until the Tremendous Day. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
11 minutes ago, Sabrejet said:

Just like any Quranic ruling, it can be misused. No denying that. Happens in permanent marriage too - see my previous point about Hanafi fiqh. The man just divorces her after a few weeks, and since divorce is so easy in Hanafi fiqh, its easier to abuse too.

The temporary marriage is not in the Qur'an. 

Again, stop mentioning schools of jurisprudence. If any of our scholars make a mistake, they always tells us to leave it and refer back to the Qur'an and Sunnah - which is what we do. We do not do blind following. Maliki's also pray with their hands by their sides and the only reason why this was done was because Imam Malik was ordered to be beaten by a judge and he could not fold his arms in prayer, and everyone took this as another way to pray. He did not say this was another way the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) prayed in any of his books or teachings - but everyone does it, not referring to the Qur'an and Sunnah and following blindly, which is the opposite of what these scholars mentioned not to do.

15 minutes ago, Sabrejet said:

Anyways, let's not pretend that women can't abuse this too (and I've seen this). She can temporary marry someone, making him believe that they'll marry permanently eventually; the poor guy has no idea he's just a rebound or something similar. Most women would rather die than admit that they have needs too; more than men in fact. This is because Allah has given haya and patience to them in large amounts compared to men, as a defense mechanism against predatory men. There is a hadith in our literature to this effect.

I am not claiming that women do not abuse this as men do. That is not the point. Read what I said here:

30 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

This can apply to women, but women are less likely to want to use a man for sexual pleasure as they are emotional creatures, therefore better lovers. This is my stance on it.

 

17 minutes ago, Sabrejet said:

If it happens in the way you're describing, then it's sad. I didn't know you personally visited and stayed in Iran long enough to make an observation and a judgement. Anyways, our top scholars have all sorts of fatwa preventing this sort of behaviour. Not just about marriage, but in marriage in general. If people are abusing laws and pretending to be scholars, then it's on their head.

I have not been to Iran, but I have met a lot of Iranians and heard about these things. Of course, you could argue it is hearsay - but these things are actually reported to have happened and there is even a documentary on it. Regardless, why has Khamenei not cracked down on this and issued this to be forbidden? Is he not the supreme authority here? He has enough might and military power to take homes and lands from the innocent Iranian people, but cannot crack down on something as forbidden as you speak of?

19 minutes ago, Sabrejet said:

There is a quote by Ali, something along the lines of "If Umar hadn't banned Mutah, then none but the most wretched would have commited zina". In Jafri fiqh, unlike other schools, istimna is completely haram and comes under the definition of zina. Go figure.

'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) never banned temporary marriage. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) did. 'Umar simply reinforced the ban, as many of the companions who still did it were not present when it was banned.

Masturbation is prohibited entirely. If you think that the Jafari jurisprudence is the only one that states this is prohibited, you have some researching you need to do. Majority of scholars agree upon it being prohibited with evidences from the Qur'an and Sunnah - and this is the correct stance upon it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
48 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

It is used horrendously, as there are places like this in Iran where women do "temporary marriages" with people who come to visit the graves and memorial sites of their figures while a cleric is issuing this out. They usually take a few hours or a few minutes where, obviously, a fee is paid. It is not prohibited nor shut down by the Iranian government (and there is quite the amount of them) because it is allowed. 

This argument is completely illogical and incorrect. 

Firstly, if it happens in Iran then it's about Iran. Only an Iranian can clear it. @Ashvazdanghe

Secondly, temporary marriage is same as permanent marriage except the condition of time. 

Minimal duration for a mutah can be 1/2 an hour. But it's not a surprise to anyone or hidden from anyone. In any of such cases, it would be invalid just like a marriage. 

To conclude, mutah if done in right way can be exploited just like marriage if done in a right way can be exploited.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Just now, Zainuu said:

Secondly, temporary marriage is same as permanent marriage except the condition of time. 

No, because a temporary marriage does not require divorce and a permanent marriage requires an actual divorce - therefore, the woman is not your wife and it is not the same as permanent marriage. 

2 minutes ago, Zainuu said:

Minimal duration for a mutah can be 1/2 an hour. But it's not a surprise to anyone or hidden from anyone. In any of such cases, it would be invalid just like a marriage. 

Right, what was the point of you saying this?

4 minutes ago, Zainuu said:

This argument is completely illogical and incorrect. 

Explain how my argument is illogical and incorrect instead of stating it. What exactly is the problem with it? That it is used horrendously? That is a factual statement, so it is not illogical nor is it incorrect because it is reality.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
31 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

The temporary marriage is not in the Qur'an.

Just like tawassul, it is there, but like Allah has revealed,

أَفَلَا يَتَدَبَّرُونَ الْقُرْآنَ أَمْ عَلَىٰ قُلُوبٍ أَقْفَالُهَ

35 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

Masturbation is prohibited entirely. If you think that the Jafari jurisprudence is the only one that states this is prohibited

I never said that Jafari jursiprudence is the only one to prohibit it, akhi. I have in fact had a look at other school's rulings, along with various ahadith, and turns out that some of them do have some wiggle room in extreme situations. Enough, in fact, that their followers can stretch the definitions and justify it in extreme cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, Nightclaw said:

Imam As-Sadiq said: "There is no problem in marrying the virgin girl without her father's permission if she is happy with this." 
Tadhib by al-Tusi: volume 7, page 380

This Tradition has been marked as Majhool as per Majlisi's grading in Tehzeeb Al-Ahkam volume 7 page 440 (pdf)

As for independent women, i think yes she can marry. But if its not the case, then there are many hadiths that say permission of father is necessary.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, Sabrejet said:

Just like tawassul, it is there, but like Allah has revealed,

أَفَلَا يَتَدَبَّرُونَ الْقُرْآنَ أَمْ عَلَىٰ قُلُوبٍ أَقْفَالُهَ

Tawassul is only accepted if someone is alive. Seeking help from the dead is shirk and prohibited by extent. The verse you have provided has nothing to do with what you mentioned.

5 minutes ago, Sabrejet said:

I never said that Jafari jursiprudence is the only one to prohibit it, akhi. I have in fact had a look at other school's rulings, along with various ahadith, and turns out that some of them do have some wiggle room in extreme situations. Enough, in fact, that their followers can stretch the definitions and justify it in extreme cases.

47 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

In Jafri fiqh, unlike other schools, istimna is completely haram and comes under the definition of zina. Go figure.

This is the same for us, though you made a clear distinction between the schools. If their followers want to blind follow, that is upon them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

This Tradition has been marked as Majhool as per Majlisi's grading in Tehzeeb Al-Ahkam volume 7 page 440 (pdf)

As for independent women, i think yes she can marry. But if its not the case, then there are many hadiths that say permission of father is necessary.

I literally said that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
17 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

No, because a temporary marriage does not require divorce and a permanent marriage requires an actual divorce - therefore, the woman is not your wife and it is not the same as permanent marriage. 

While leaving a temporary marriage, the divorce is not sanctioned. But the period of contract suffices the need of divorce. How:

Their is a waiting period specified after the contract expiration. 

If they leave between the marriage, the husband gives back the dowry. 

So, the basic conditions of a divorce are met in mutah while leaving (either in between or after expiration).

Secondly, she is a designated wife for the appointed time. If you don't accept this it is upto you.

22 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

Right, what was the point of you saying this?

Whatever the time period is, it is not a surprise to anyone. 

If it is a surprise for the woman or man or her guardian, the contract is invalid. Just like a forced permanent marriage is invalid. 

Again I will repeat it is same as a permanent marriage. 

In fact, a temporary marriage with an intention of sex (only) is invalid and not permissible. And I am not stating opinions but speaking from sharia and in the light of narrations of ahlulbayt (عليه السلام).

25 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

Explain how my argument is illogical and incorrect instead of stating it. What exactly is the problem with it? That it is used horrendously? That is a factual statement, so it is not illogical nor is it incorrect because it is reality.

I stated the problems with your argument in my post. You can check it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
2 minutes ago, Zainuu said:

While leaving a temporary marriage, the divorce is not sanctioned. But the period of contract suffices the need of divorce. How:

Their is a waiting period specified after the contract expiration. 

If they leave between the marriage, the husband gives back the dowry. 

So, the basic conditions of a divorce are met in mutah while leaving (either in between or after expiration).

Secondly, she is a designated wife for the appointed time. If you don't accept this it is upto you.

This does not make any sense. Why would the husband give back the dowry? Why was it given to him in the first place? Dowry is only for women, as per the Qur'an. 

The woman cannot be a wife if she is given a time period in which she can be with him. You could do the same with a loose woman and slap the title of "wife" on her, as people do for 30 minutes or so. Is this woman my wife for 30 minutes? 

7 minutes ago, Zainuu said:

Whatever the time period is, it is not a surprise to anyone. 

If it is a surprise for the woman or man or her guardian, the contract is invalid. Just like a forced permanent marriage is invalid. 

Nobody is arguing this. This is not my point.

7 minutes ago, Zainuu said:

Again I will repeat it is same as a permanent marriage. 

In fact, a temporary marriage with an intention of sex (only) is invalid and not permissible. And I am not stating opinions but speaking from sharia and in the light of narrations of ahlulbayt (عليه السلام)

It is not the same as a permanent marriage. If permanent and temporary marriages are the same, so are cats and dogs. They are two separate things.

As for this marriage with the intent of sexual pleasure, show me where in the law and in the narrations of the Ahlul Bayt this is stated.

8 minutes ago, Zainuu said:

I stated the problems with your argument in my post. You can check it. 

You never pointed out the flaws, rather said it was illogical and incorrect without stating how or why.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Nightclaw said:

If they say polygamy is unfair against women and that they do not want their daughter to be in such a relationship, she does not have to be even if she was a Muslim. She has the right to stipulate such things before marriage.

Same can be said about temporary marriage. Point is, just because one thinks it's unfair doesn't mean it really is. You probably just don't know about the deeper implications of it. Whether it is polygamy or temporary marriage. 

You saying it's bad doesn't make it bad. Not polygamy not mutah.

1 hour ago, Nightclaw said:

know the rules and regulations, for the most part. However, my point was that a man could up and leave and excuse the time he has agreed with his partner in the blink of an eye and is not held accountable. If they are poor, they should follow Allah's instructions:

وَاَنۡكِحُوا الۡاَيَامٰى مِنۡكُمۡ وَالصّٰلِحِيۡنَ مِنۡ عِبَادِكُمۡ وَاِمَآئِكُمۡ ؕ اِنۡ يَّكُوۡنُوۡا فُقَرَآءَ يُغۡنِهِمُ اللّٰهُ مِنۡ فَضۡلِهٖ ؕ وَاللّٰهُ وَاسِعٌ عَلِيۡمٌ
And marry the single among you and the pious of your slaves and maid-servants [both male and female]. If they be poor, Allah will enrich them of His bounty. And Allah is All-Encompassing, Aware.

Nothing in the Qur'an agrees with temporary marriages, in the first place. It states the specific type of woman you are allowed to marry. Islam prohibits such actions. It was allowed shortly under specific circumstances and made prohibited until the Tremendous Day. 

I think others are answering this quite well

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
2 minutes ago, Justsomeone said:

Same can be said about temporary marriage. Point is, just because one thinks it's unfair doesn't mean it really is. You probably just don't know about the deeper implications of it. Whether it is polygamy or temporary marriage. 

You saying it's bad doesn't make it bad. Not polygamy not mutah.

I think it is a bit ridiculous that you take a non-Muslim approach to something we both agree on simply to see it as permissible, which does not make any sense to me. There are lots of videos and books that explain polygamy and why it is acceptable, regardless of who has an opinion on it. Allah allows it and we both agree on it, so to argue from a standpoint in which we disagree shows you being disingenuous.

Me saying it is bad does not make it bad, yes. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) saying it is. Not only that, the same saying is stated in your books - though I am sure it was mentioned or explained as being taqiyyah.

7 minutes ago, Justsomeone said:

I think others are answering this quite well

Nobody has answered it, just my other points.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
27 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

This does not make any sense. Why would the husband give back the dowry? Why was it given to him in the first place? Dowry is only for women, as per the Qur'an. 

Agree that dowry is only for the woman. Is their any confusion? This issue in temporary marriage is exactly like it is in the Permanent marriage. Don't confuse it. Dowry is the one that is stated in the quran only, we both know about it and their is no argument on it.

From Sayyed al Sistani (رضي الله عنه) (not the entire ruling but to show that their is amount/dowry that is set):

If a woman appoints a man to be her agent for marrying her to himself for a specified period and a specified amount.

27 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

You could do the same with a loose woman and slap the title of "wife" on her, as people do for 30 minutes or so. Is this woman my wife for 30 minutes? 

In the narrations as well as the rulings, such a woman is designated as a 'wife'. So, I go according to thst. If for you she is a 'loose woman' or 'rag' or 'used'. That is your opinion. 

And a side note here: Please keep such opinions to yourself as it is highly offensive to use such words about a woman in temporary marriage. If you say it again I will ask the mods to kindly delete such comments. 

27 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

As for this marriage with the intent of sexual pleasure, show me where in the law and in the narrations of the Ahlul Bayt this is stated.

Tawzih of Sayyed al Sistani Ruling 2439:

A temporary marriage that is not for the purpose of deriving sexual pleasure is valid.

27 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

You never pointed out the flaws, rather said it was illogical and incorrect without stating how or why.

Leave it now. It's resolved

Edited by Zainuu
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
5 minutes ago, Zainuu said:

Agree that dowry is only for the woman. Is their any confusion? This issue in temporary marriage is exactly like it is in the Permanent marriage. Don't confuse it. Dowry is the one that is stated in the quran only, we both know about it and their is no argument on it.

From Sayyed al Sistani (رضي الله عنه) (not the entire ruling but to show that their is amount/dowry that is set):

If a woman appoints a man to be her agent for marrying her to himself for a specified period and a specified amount.

Is this man stating that a man can have a mahr/dowry like a woman can? If so, where did he get this from? Is this found in the Qur'an? If not, where is this derived from?

6 minutes ago, Zainuu said:

In the narrations as well as the rulings, such a woman is designated as a 'wife'. So, I go according to thst. If for you she is a 'loose woman' or 'rag' or 'used'. That is your opinion. 

If you want to call her your wife, sure. That does not change much.

7 minutes ago, Zainuu said:

Tawzih of Sayyed al Sistani Ruling 2439:

A temporary marriage that is not for the purpose of deriving sexual pleasure is valid.

Okay, so again, where did he get this from?

8 minutes ago, Zainuu said:

Leave it now. It's resolved

I do not mind leaving it, but you still did not point out the problems with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 11/23/2020 at 1:13 PM, smma said:

read that Quranic verse and don't see how it allows temprory marriage.

وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ إِلَّا مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ ۖ كِتَابَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ ۚ وَأُحِلَّ لَكُمْ مَا وَرَاءَ ذَٰلِكُمْ أَنْ تَبْتَغُوا بِأَمْوَالِكُمْ مُحْصِنِينَ غَيْرَ مُسَافِحِينَ ۚ فَمَا اسْتَمْتَعْتُمْ بِهِ مِنْهُنَّ فَآتُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُنَّ فَرِيضَةً ۚ وَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ فِيمَا تَرَاضَيْتُمْ بِهِ مِنْ بَعْدِ الْفَرِيضَةِ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ عَلِيمًا حَكِيمًا {24}

[Shakir 4:24] And all married women except those whom your right hands possess (this is) Allah's ordinance to you, and lawful for you are (all women) besides those, provided that you seek (them) with your property, taking (them) in marriage not committing fornication. Then as to those whom you profit by, give them their dowries as appointed; and there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is appointed; surely Allah is Knowing, Wise.
[Pickthal 4:24] And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that ye seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery. And those of whom ye seek content (by marrying them), give unto them their portions as a duty. And there is no sin for you in what ye do by mutual agreement after the duty (hath been done). Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Wise.
[Yusufali 4:24] Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus hath Allah ordained (Prohibitions) against you: Except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property,- desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, agree Mutually (to vary it), there is no blame on you, and Allah is All-knowing, All-wise.

Tafseer Agha Mehdi Poya:
 

 Muhsanat means well-guarded or protected. They are married women (free and slave), minors and insane females.

"Save those whom your right hands own" signifies "such married women as shall come in your possession as prisoners of war". Such women, when not taken back on payment of ransom or through negotiation, are lawful as wives, even though their previous marriage has not been formally dissolved, provided the infidel woman becomes a Muslim.

Famastamta-tum bihi provides for a temporary marriage, known as muta. It has been specifically made lawful by the Quran and the Holy Prophet, therefore, this provision subsists as unrescinded.

One day, for no reason at all, and having no authority to amend a law given and practiced by the Holy Prophet, the second caliph declared from the pulpit:

"Two mutas (temporary marriage and combining hajj with umra) were in force during the time of the Holy Prophet, but now I decree both of them as unlawful; and I will punish those who practise them."

(Tafsir Kabir, Durr al-Manthur, Kashshaf, Mustadrak and others).

According to Tirmidhi even his son, Ibn Umar, refused to agree with his father's action because it was made lawful by Allah and His Prophet, whose pronouncements could never be revoked by any one after him.

Therefore the Shia school of thought (Islam-original) holds both the mutas lawful. Ali ibn abi Talib reversed the uncalled-for innovation of the second caliph, and thereafter it was never again prohibited.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 11/23/2020 at 12:49 AM, Zainuu said:

It's in Islam. It was banned by Umar. 

I would like to add one more of his wrong ijtihid. 

Surah Talaq of the Quran stipulates that there is no such thing as an impromptu triple divorce at one instance, rather the recital must take place over tree periods (Al-Qur’an Surah 65, verse 1), yet Khalifa Umar ruled that his subjects could divorce their wives by uttering the divorce recital in triplicate on one occasion.

Quote

وَحَدَّثَنَا إِسْحَاقُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ، أَخْبَرَنَا سُلَيْمَانُ بْنُ حَرْبٍ، عَنْ حَمَّادِ بْنِ زَيْدٍ، عَنْ أَيُّوبَ السَّخْتِيَانِيِّ، عَنْ إِبْرَاهِيمَ بْنِ مَيْسَرَةَ، عَنْ طَاوُسٍ، أَنَّ أَبَا الصَّهْبَاءِ، قَالَ لاِبْنِ عَبَّاسٍ هَاتِ مِنْ هَنَاتِكَ أَلَمْ يَكُنِ الطَّلاَقُ الثَّلاَثُ عَلَى عَهْدِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَأَبِي بَكْرٍ وَاحِدَةً فَقَالَ قَدْ كَانَ ذَلِكَ فَلَمَّا كَانَ فِي عَهْدِ عُمَرَ تَتَايَعَ النَّاسُ فِي الطَّلاَقِ فَأَجَازَهُ عَلَيْهِمْ ‏.‏

Abu al-Sahba' said to Ibn 'Abbas: Enlighten us with your information whether the three divorces (pronounced at one and the same time) were not treated as one during the lifetime of Messenger of Allah ﷺ and Abu Bakr. He said: It was in fact so, but when during the caliphate of 'Umar (Allah be pleased with him) people began to pronounce divorce frequently, he allowed them to do so (to treat pronouncements of three divorces in a single breath as one).

https://muflihun.com/muslim/9/3493

:) Interestingly his ijtihad never stopped here, he did away with the need of witnesses altogether, he entitled a man to utter the divorce immediately, without the need for a time to reflect or summon witnesses. But the verse 1 of Surah Talaq states that the final divorce must be made before two just witness.

Want to see more ijtihad :grin:, He ruled that Tayamum cannot be performed as an alternative to water, and was unconvinced by the testimony of the Sahabi Ammar ibn Yasir (Sahih Muslim Book 003, Number 0718) even though an entire verse on Tayamum is in Surah al Maida verse 5.

Quote

Abd al-Rahmin b. Abza narrated It on the authority of his father that a man came to 'Umar and said: I am (at times) affected by seminal emission but find no water. He ('Umar) told him not to say prayer. 'Ammar then said: Do you remember, O Commander of the Faithful, when I and you were in a military detachment and we had had a seminal emission and did not find water (for taking bath) and you did not say prayer, but as for myself I rolled in dust and said prayer, and (when it was mentioned before) the Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: It was enough for you to strike the ground with your hands and then blow (the dust) and then wipe your face and palms. Umar said: 'Ammar, fear Allah. He said: If you so like, I would not narrate it.

A Hadith like this has been transmitted with the same chain of transmitters but for the words: 'Umar said: We hold you responsible for what you claim."

 

Edited by Logic1234
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, Logic1234 said:

I would like to add one more of his wrong ijtihid. 

It was not "banned" by 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him). I gave evidences above that state otherwise, which you have clearly ignored. Provide evidence that it was banned by him first by our books and not the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).

4 minutes ago, Logic1234 said:

Surah Talaq of the Quran stipulates that there is no such thing as an impromptu triple divorce at one instance, rather the recital must take place over tree periods (Al-Qur’an Surah 65, verse 1), yet Khalifa Umar ruled that his subjects could divorce their wives by uttering the divorce recital in triplicate on one occasion.

Doing a quick search could find you all the information you need, and sprinkle it with a little bit of sincere research.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
25 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

Is this man stating that a man can have a mahr/dowry like a woman can? If so, where did he get this from? Is this found in the Qur'an? If not, where is this derived from?

No he is not stating that. Dowry in temporary marriage is same as it is in the Nikah. An amount is fixed which is given to the woman in case of divorce. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
4 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

It was not "banned" by 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him). I gave evidences above that state otherwise, which you have clearly ignored. Provide evidence that it was banned by him first by our books and not the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).

Doing a quick search could find you all the information you need, and sprinkle it with a little bit of sincere research.

I have just edited my comment to add more material to it. I am expecting that you perhaps would like to edit your comment too. 

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

×
×
  • Create New...