Correct Shadi ki 14 sharte (14 terms of right marriage)

[sixfeetunder]

Let us now look at this link provided by our shia brother

http://www.al-islam.org/al-serat/muta/

IN ISLAM the word most commonly employed for marriage is nikah, which means literally 'sexual intercourse'.

According to this author, nikah literally means sexual intercourse. So if you translate the quran as per the this author then

33:50 (Asad) O PROPHET! Behold, We have made lawful to thee thy wives unto whom thou hast paid their dowers, as well as those whom thy right hand has come to possess from among the captives of war whom God has bestowed upon thee. And [We have made lawful to thee] the daughters of thy paternal uncles and aunts, and the daughters of thy maternal uncles and aunts, who have migrated with thee [to Yathrib]; and any believing woman who offers herself freely to the Prophet and whom the Prophet might be willing to wed: [this latter being but] a privilege for thee, and not for other believers - [seeing that] We have already made known what We have enjoined upon them with regard to their wives and those whom their right hands may possess. [And] in order that thou be not burdened with [undue] anxiety - for God is indeed much-forgiving, a dispenser of grace – -

will become

33:50 (Asad) O PROPHET! Behold, We have made lawful to thee thy wives unto whom thou hast paid their dowers, as well as those whom thy right hand has come to possess from among the captives of war whom God has bestowed upon thee. And [We have made lawful to thee] the daughters of thy paternal uncles and aunts, and the daughters of thy maternal uncles and aunts, who have migrated with thee [to Yathrib]; and any believing woman who offers herself freely to the Prophet and whom the Prophet might be willing to have sexual intercourse : [this latter being but] a privilege for thee, and not for other believers - [seeing that] We have already made known what We have enjoined upon them with regard to their wives and those whom their right hands may possess. [And] in order that thou be not burdened with [undue] anxiety - for God is indeed much-forgiving, a dispenser of grace – -

33:53 (Asad) O YOU who have attained to faith! Do not enter the Prophet’s dwellings unless you are given leave; [and when invited] to a meal, do not come [so early as] to wait for it to be readied: but whenever you are invited, enter [at the proper time]; and when you have partaken of the meal, disperse without lingering for the sake of mere talk: that, behold, might give offence to the Prophet, and yet he might feel shy of [asking] you [to leave]: but God is not shy of [teaching you] what is right. And [as for the Prophet’s wives,] whenever you ask them for anything that you need, ask them from behind a screen: this will but deepen the purity of your hearts and theirs. Moreover, it does not behove you to give offence to God’s Apostle - just as it would not behove you ever to marry his widows after he has passed away: that, verily, would be an enormity in the sight of God. -

will become

33:53 (Asad) O YOU who have attained to faith! Do not enter the Prophet’s dwellings unless you are given leave; [and when invited] to a meal, do not come [so early as] to wait for it to be readied: but whenever you are invited, enter [at the proper time]; and when you have partaken of the meal, disperse without lingering for the sake of mere talk: that, behold, might give offence to the Prophet, and yet he might feel shy of [asking] you [to leave]: but God is not shy of [teaching you] what is right. And [as for the Prophet’s wives,] whenever you ask them for anything that you need, ask them from behind a screen: this will but deepen the purity of your hearts and theirs. Moreover, it does not behove you to give offence to God’s Apostle - just as it would not behove you ever to have sexual intercourse with his widows after he has passed away: that, verily, would be an enormity in the sight of God. -


33:49 (Asad) O YOU who have attained to faith! If you marry believing women and then divorce them ere you have touched them, you have no reason to expect, and to calculate, any waiting period on their part: hence, make [at once] provision for them, and release them in a becoming manner.

will become

33:49 (Asad) O YOU who have attained to faith! If you have sexual intercourse with believing women and then divorce them ere you have touched them, you have no reason to expect, and to calculate, any waiting period on their part: hence, make [at once] provision for them, and release them in a becoming manner.

Does anyone see a problem with this?

More to come.

The original meaning of the work nikah is the physical relationship between man and woman. It is also used secondarily to refer to the contract of marriage which makes that relationship lawful. Which of the two meanings is intended can be determined by the context in which it is used.

Please ask any Arabic expert about the above.

[sixfeetunder]

Found something interesting on this link. Our brothers stated earlier that mutah is not only for sex but it might also be for couples to know each other before permanent marriage. Look at this

It is also reprehensible, without any exceptions, to contract a temporary marriage with a virgin, by reason of the words of the Imam Ja'far: 'It is reprehensible, because it is a stain upon her family.' [29] If a contract should nevertheless be concluded, it is not permissible for the man to consummate the marriage, unless the marriage took place with the permission of her father-a condition almost impossible to imagine in Muslim society. 'A virgin may not be married temporarily without her father's permission' (the Imam al-Rida). [30]

Since mutah cannot be done with a married woman that means for mutah you need either a divorced woman or a widow.

I've read quite a bit of what is posted in those links and I see nothing that changes my mind. It infact solidifies my contention that this practice is an abomination.

'A virgin may not be married temporarily without her father's permission' (the Imam al-Rida).

So, the father's permission is a must in case of a virgin lady. Hence, a virgin lady can be married temporarily if her father's permission is granted. Hence, my earlier posts about temporary marriage before permanent marriage - to get to know each other well - is proper. You seriously need to read everything before reaching conclusions.

[anajmi]

I do read and I read everything. Here is what you missed.

It is also reprehensible, without any exceptions, to contract a temporary marriage with a virgin, by reason of the words of the Imam Ja'far: 'It is reprehensible, because it is a stain upon her family.'

The shia obviously consider the permission of the father, above the words of Imam Jafar, that it is reprehensible. The second thing you missed is

a condition almost impossible to imagine in Muslim society.

One would be inclined to think twice about the father agreeing to this proposal!!

[sixfeetunder]

An entire section on that site is dedicated to 'Quranic evidences for the legitimacy of Mut'ah'. It would save us a lot of time if you read stuff properly.

I did. And as I said, I didn't find anything enlightening to change my opinion. Infact, I have refuted a lot of stuff posted on those sites over here and I could post more, but I think I have made my point.

As for the 'On the day of Khaybar' hadith, it has already been debunked in an earlier post I made.

Actually, that was a completely idiotic argument. The hadith says the prophet (saw) banned mutah. Simple. The argument about assess and day of khaybar is a red herring. Also, if you think you have debunked the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir then you shouldn't be quoting Tafsir Ibn Kathir to justify mutah from the Quran.

Since you have not found anything enlightening, it needs no further discussion. We can agree to disagree. But one thing I have known about you is that in your hatred for Shias, you didn't even think before calling Mutah all sorts of names including prostitution. Even for the sake of argument, if we consider that Muta was banned later, it was an act permitted by the Holy Prophet and you have called it prostitution. I am deeply saddened by this kind of attitude from a Muslim. May Allah soften our hearts. Prophet and his respect comes first. Shia and Sunni can go to hell but the Prophet should never be disrespected, directly or indirectly. You can call me whatever you want to but please for the sake of Allah, exercise caution with the name of Muhammad (saw).

Also, I did not debunk the tafsir and never claimed so. I said the hadith has been debunked in the post I made. Please do not mix up words. I do not know if you are deliberately doing it or it is an habit you are unaware of.

[anajmi]

Even for the sake of argument, if we consider that Muta was banned later,

If we consider that mutah was banned later, then we have to consider that there was something wrong with it right? And we should not be afraid to call something what it is. Just because the prophet (saw) might've permitted something at some point of time for some particular reason doesn't mean that it becomes sacred. The fact that he banned it, makes it haraam. And there are no good haraams and bad haraams. The reason the prophet (saw) banned mutah is because it resembles prostitution. Simple.

Also, I did not debunk the tafsir and never claimed so. I said the hadith has been debunked in the post I made. Please do not mix up words. I do not know if you are deliberately doing it or it is an habit you are unaware of.

The hadith has been quoted by Ibn Kathir in his Tafsir while making the point that mutah has been banned. And since you have debunked the hadith, you have debunked the tafsir haven't you? You are a perfect example of the analogy that I posted earlier. This is what I had said.

Scholar - Zina was allowed during the first year of the sun but was banned after that till the day of judgment.
Shia - The Scholar said, Zina was allowed.

[sixfeetunder]

I do read and I read everything. Here is what you missed.

It is also reprehensible, without any exceptions, to contract a temporary marriage with a virgin, by reason of the words of the Imam Ja'far: 'It is reprehensible, because it is a stain upon her family.'

The shia obviously consider the permission of the father, above the words of Imam Jafar, that it is reprehensible. The second thing you missed is

a condition almost impossible to imagine in Muslim society.

One would be inclined to think twice about the father agreeing to this proposal!!

1. The context of it being reprehensible is when there is no intention of permanent marriage and when the intention is only sex. Only then will it become a stain upon her family. And this is the 'condition almost impossible to imagine in a Muslim society'.

2. The father agrees to the proposal when the intention is that of a permanent marriage later and there is a condition of no physical intimacy. I am aware of many such marriages taking place and Muta marriage being used positively.

[anajmi]

I do read and I read everything. Here is what you missed.

It is also reprehensible, without any exceptions, to contract a temporary marriage with a virgin, by reason of the words of the Imam Ja'far: 'It is reprehensible, because it is a stain upon her family.'

The shia obviously consider the permission of the father, above the words of Imam Jafar, that it is reprehensible. The second thing you missed is

a condition almost impossible to imagine in Muslim society.

One would be inclined to think twice about the father agreeing to this proposal!!

The father agrees to the proposal when the intention is that of a permanent marriage later and there is a condition of no physical intimacy.

Then what you are doing is not mutah but an engagement. Just what the bohras do today.

[sixfeetunder]

Even for the sake of argument, if we consider that Muta was banned later,

If we consider that mutah was banned later, then we have to consider that there was something wrong with it right? And we should not be afraid to call something what it is. Just because the prophet (saw) might've permitted something at some point of time for some particular reason doesn't mean that it becomes sacred. The fact that he banned it, makes it haraam. And there are no good haraams and bad haraams. The reason the prophet (saw) banned mutah is because it resembles prostitution. Simple.

Also, I did not debunk the tafsir and never claimed so. I said the hadith has been debunked in the post I made. Please do not mix up words. I do not know if you are deliberately doing it or it is an habit you are unaware of.

The hadith has been quoted by Ibn Kathir in his Tafsir while making the point that mutah has been banned. And since you have debunked the hadith, you have debunked the tafsir haven't you? You are a perfect example of the analogy that I posted earlier. This is what I had said.

Scholar - Zina was allowed during the first year of the sun but was banned after that till the day of judgment.
Shia - The Scholar said, Zina was allowed.

If you consider it banned, then be it. I too agree it was banned by Umar. Allah will judge us.

If I have debunked a hadith, it means I have only debunked a hadith. If that hadith is used in a tafsir, it still means I have debunked the hadith. The tafsir remains as it is. It means the hadith present in the tafsir has been debunked. It does not mean that the tafsir has been debunked. The tafsir is being presented to show you what Ibn Kathir says in his commentary of 4:24. It highlights that he agrees 4:24 is in relation to temporary marriage. Get it or do I need to explain more?

[sixfeetunder]

Then what you are doing is not mutah but an engagement. Just what the bohras do today.

Bohras nowadays elongate their engagements to ridiculous lengths. All whom I know have indulged in foreplay, at least. Mutah marriage is different from this Bohra 'engagement', which ahs no Islamic basis. In the Bohra engagement there is no marriage formula recited nor are there witnesses or any of that stuff. Yes, Mutah can be compared to an 'enagagement' of sorts, when it is done with intention to avoid sin (through the condition of no physical intimacy) during the 'courting' period.

[anajmi]

The tafsir is being presented to show you what Ibn Kathir says in his commentary of 4:24. It highlights that he agrees 4:24 is in relation to temporary marriage. Get it or do I need to explain more?

Do you agree that in the Tafsir of 4:24 Ibn Kathir concludes that mutah has been banned by the prophet (saw)? If yes (there is no way you can say no to that), then the Tafsir of 4:24 is that it refers to mutah marriage which was banned by the prophet (saw)!! Let me give you an analogy of how the shia choose to quote tafsirs.. oh nevermind, I've done that twice already!!

And here is the bottom line. If Ibn Kathir misinterpreted a hadith, then chances are that he has misinterpreted the Quran as well. So, we are back to square one that 4:24 is not referring to mutah. Do you want to go there? Or am I done now?

[aliabbas_aa]

All of muslim sects except 12ers believe and provide evidences for banning of mutah by the rasul saws ,it is same as the prophet pbuh banned alcohol . Before Alchohol was banned even some of the prominent sahabas used to drink Alcohol. but after banning it was a sin which they abhorred

hence now if i call an alchoholic , "drunkard" ,Am i disrespecting the sahabas ?

[humble_servant_us]

Before Alchohol was banned even some of the prominent sahabas used to drink Alcohol. but after banning it was a sin which they abhorred

I like this.


By the way did prophet(pbuh) ever told the sahabas to drink alcohol. Never. But for Mutah he did tell them. Banning or non-banning is next point of debate. But atleast accept that the prophet(pbuh) granted the permission for Mutah. And prophet(pbuh) will NEVER ask people to do anything which is harmful for mankind.

[profastian]

even some of the prominent sahabas used to drink Alcohol.
hence now if i call an alchoholic , "drunkard" ,Am i disrespecting the sahabas ?

Ali or Hamza or Abbas were on the tip of his venomous tongue

[sixfeetunder]

The tafsir is being presented to show you what Ibn Kathir says in his commentary of 4:24. It highlights that he agrees 4:24 is in relation to temporary marriage. Get it or do I need to explain more?

Do you agree that in the Tafsir of 4:24 Ibn Kathir concludes that mutah has been banned by the prophet (saw)? If yes (there is no way you can say no to that), then the Tafsir of 4:24 is that it refers to mutah marriage which was banned by the prophet (saw)!! Let me give you an analogy of how the shia choose to quote tafsirs.. oh nevermind, I've done that twice already!!

And here is the bottom line. If Ibn Kathir misinterpreted a hadith, then chances are that he has misinterpreted the Quran as well. So, we are back to square one that 4:24 is not referring to mutah. Do you want to go there? Or am I done now?

You were unwilling to believe that 4:24 refers to Mutah. But Ibn Kathir says in his commentary about 4:24 that it refers to Mutah marriage. Hence, point proved. Get it?

So, let us analyse what we have concluded. We have concluded that Mutah was originally permitted by the Prophet. It was revealed in the Quran - 4:24, as Ibn Kathir and many others would testify and to which you agreed.

Now, you believe that it was banned later by the Prophet through way of hadith. (Strange, as a Quranic verse can be nullified only by another Quranic verse and not hadith). And I believe that it was banned by Umar ibn al-Khattab (who made many other innovations like the triple talaq).

So, I'd like to conclude my argument here. Peace.

[anajmi]

You were unwilling to believe that 4:24 refers to Mutah.

I still have my reservations about that. I do not believe that 4:24 refers to the mutah marriage of the shia. Even if it does, I believe that it is suggesting the end of it. And please do not tell me that I should believe in it because Ibn Kathir says so!! Here is the beauty of the reference of Ibn Kathir provided by the Shia. They want to say that I should believe in mutah because Ibn Kathir says so. But Ibn Kathir says that mutah was banned by the prophet (saw). So if I am to believe in the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, then I believe that mutah was banned by the prophet (saw).

Strange, as a Quranic verse can be nullified only by another Quranic verse and not hadith

You should remember that the next time you say that 33:33 refers to the Ahlul Bayt because of a hadith.

[sixfeetunder]

You were unwilling to believe that 4:24 refers to Mutah.

I still have my reservations about that. I do not believe that 4:24 refers to the mutah marriage of the shia. Even if it does, I believe that it is suggesting the end of it. And please do not tell me that I should believe in it because Ibn Kathir says so!! Here is the beauty of the reference of Ibn Kathir provided by the Shia. They want to say that I should believe in mutah because Ibn Kathir says so. But Ibn Kathir says that mutah was banned by the prophet (saw). So if I am to believe in the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, then I believe that mutah was banned by the prophet (saw).

Strange, as a Quranic verse can be nullified only by another Quranic verse and not hadith

You should remember that the next time you say that 33:33 refers to the Ahlul Bayt because of a hadith.

Okay. So whatever you believe is your lookout. Let us know if you wish to. As for your comment about 33:33, I think you don't understand the definition of 'Nullify'. What have you been smoking lately?

nul·li·fy/ˈnələˌfī/
Verb:
Make legally null and void; invalidate.
Make of no use or value; cancel out.

[anajmi]

So you agree that 33:33 has not been nullified by hadith! Good.

[sixfeetunder]

So you agree that 33:33 has not been nullified by hadith! Good.

Again, what have you been smoking? Even after showing you the definition of 'nullify', you still act like a jerk. Let me use another word which I hope you can understand. A Quranic verse can only be 'abrogated' by another verse and not a hadith. There is no question of abrogating/nullifying 33:33. You don't know what to apply where. Please do not board a running train. First check where the train will take you and then board it.

[anajmi]

So you agree that 33:33 cannot be nullified/abrogated by hadith! Good.

[ghulam muhammed]

Mosque sermons in Tajikistan tend to focus on issues that affect people's everyday lives.

These days, the hot-button topic of many sermons in Dushanbe has been temporary marriages -- a phenomenon that was almost unheard of in Tajik society until recently.

Recently, at a gathering following Friday Prayers on June 8, prominent Dushanbe Imam Eshon Abdul-Basir Saidov warned women against entering into temporary marriages, which religious leaders say have become a trend in Dushanbe over the past two or three years.

Echoing concerns voiced by his fellow imams, Saidov says dozens of Tajik women have fallen victim to "Iranian-style temporary marriage," known as mut'a.

Fairly widespread, and legally approved in predominantly Shia Iran, mut'a is a fixed-term marriage in Shi'a Islam which automatically dissolves upon the completion of a term agreed upon by both parties prior to the marriage.

Mut'a is not recognized by Sunni Islam, which is followed by the majority of Tajik Muslims.

Nevertheless, says Zurafo Rahmoni, the head of the Culture Department of Tajikistan's Islamic Revival Party, "nowadays we increasingly hear about Tajik women entering into mut'a matrimony with Iranian citizens living here."

*'No Rights Or Protection'*

Tajikistan has a sizeable Iranian community, the majority of which reside in Dushanbe and other major cities.

"These women are ultimately being left with no rights or protection both during and after their so-called marriages," Rahmoni says. "In all cases, the men eventually leave the country, leaving their temporary wives behind. The most painful part is that sometimes children are born into such unions."

Rahmoni blames the trend on the "dire" economic situation that prevails in Tajikistan.

"Many Tajik men have left the country for migrant work," he says. "There are foreign men coming to work in Tajikistan, and that's why the [mut'a] practice is on the rise in Tajikistan. Social and economic hardship are contributing factor to the rise of this phenomenon in recent years."

There are no official statistics about Tajik women who enter mut'a unions, but Rahmoni puts the number at "hundreds."

When contacted by RFE/RL's Tajik Service, however, the Iranian Embassy in Dushanbe said it had never received any complaints from Tajik citizens in connection with such unions involving Iranian nationals.

*'Legalized Prostitution'*

Tajik imams have dubbed mut'a "un-Islamic" and "contradictory to Tajik religious beliefs and traditions."

"Mut'a is an attempt to legalize prostitution," says Imam Saidov. "It shouldn't be recognized as a religious matrimony, and we consider it a sin."

In his Friday sermon, religious leader Saidov said Tajik women's "naivety and lack of awareness of their religious and civil rights" was to blame for their falling victim to temporary marriages.

For Maya, a 25-year-old hairdresser from Dushanbe, her temporary marriage was initially "love at first sight" with a man from a foreign culture.

Maya, who declined to give her full name, said she met her former partner -- an Iranian businessman -- a year ago in a city restaurant popular with well-to-do foreigners.

A marriage proposal came "surprisingly swiftly," and Maya accepted. She says the religious marriage ceremony was conducted by a friend of the groom, with two others attending as witnesses.

"He mentioned something about short-term marriages, but I didn't quite understand it, I thought he was just being cautious," Maya admits. "But he left six months later. I live with my baby daughter. I don't get any support from him, financial or moral."

To prevent such cases, Tajik imams are calling on women not to enter into religious matrimony with foreigners -- namely followers of Shi'a Islam -- without officially registering their marriages with the secular authorities and even signing legal, prenuptial contracts protecting women's rights in marriage and/or divorce.

Tajik laws do not recognize religious marriages -- temporary or otherwise. As a measure aimed at curbing polygamy, Tajikistan has banned mullahs from performing Islamic marriages, or "nikah," unless the couple presents their
official marriage certificate.

Polygamy is a criminal offense in Tajikistan which carries a maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment.

Written and reported by Farangis Najibullah, with additional reporting by RFE/RL Tajik Service correspondent Kayumars Ato in Dushanbe

[Muslim First]

Muta makes Shia sister a prostitute.

Zubayr al-Sahabi married Asma, the daughter of Abu Bakr, in a temporary marriage; from this union were born ‘Abdallah ibn Zubayr and ‘Urwah ibn Zubayr.

Can you quote your source.
I googled

Asma' bint Abu Bakr As-Siddiq
http://www.islamswomen.com/articles/asm ... u_bakr.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asm%C4%81'_bint_Abu_Bakr
http://insideislam.wisc.edu/index.php/archives/12128
http://www.seekingilm.com/archives/449

None of it mentioned Muta Marrage of Asma Bint Abu Bakr

[Muslim First]

Last link yeilds this

As for what is mentioned from Asma’ bint Abi Bakr then Imam An-Nasa’i reports from the way of Muslim Al-Qrri who said, “I entered upon Asma’ bint Abi Bakr and we asked her regarding muta’ah with women and she said ‘We did it during the life of Rasulullah (‘alayhis salam).” ((Nasa’

that does not mean she entered Muta marriage with her Husband'. It does mean Muta was done during lifetime of Prophet.

And what ever you say it is reprihensible and it is prostitutan for Shia sisters.

[anajmi]

Bro Muslim First,

This is now a stale topic. We should end it now. I would just like to point this out.

Zubayr al-Sahabi married Asma, the daughter of Abu Bakr, in a temporary marriage; from this union were born ‘Abdallah ibn Zubayr and ‘Urwah ibn Zubayr.

A temporary marriage that leads to the birth of two sons that are over 20 years apart isn't much temporary is it?

[humble_servant_us]

MF
I think you missed this link

http://www.al-hadi.us/religion/research ... a/2.html#3

[Muslim First]

...and the strongest of narrations (relating to Nikah al-Muta'a) is the narration of Jabir that Muslim recorded, in which Jabir said: 'We used to practice Muta'a for some date and wheat for some days, during the lifetime of the prophet until Umar disallowed its practice'
وأقوى شيء ورد في ذلك حديث جابر عند مسلم كنا نستمتع بالقبضة من التمر والدقيق على عهد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم حتى نهى عنها عمر
Nassbul Raya by al-Zaylai'i:

May Allah bless Hz Umar for disallowing Prostitution and saving 80% of ummah.
Reminder commits shirk routinely by including Taguts like this Ayatulla

http://islamistruth.wordpress.com/2011/ ... ing-quran/

See vedio and especially at 2:20 minute.

[Muslim First]

From
http://www.al-hadi.us/religion/research ... a/2.html#3

It is generally said that the verse Then as to those whom you profit by (Istamta'tum), give them their dowries as appointed is about Nikah al-Muta'a and surely, this practice was legitimate in the beginning of Islam, then it was abrogated. al-Shafi'i and a group of scholars have said that it was allowed, then abrogated, then allowed, then abrogated twice. Others said that it was allowed once, then disallowed and was never allowed after that. It is said that it was permitted when in dire need and this is the opinion of Imam Ahmad

Islam permits up to 4 wives to fulfill any dire need. I do hope enlightened Shia religious leaders prohibit this legal prostitution.

Like mainstream Islam we must say in unision.
No more Muta.
No more slavery.
No more exploitation of women and children.
No more FGM

[humble_servant_us]

May Allah bless Hz Umar for disallowing Prostitution and saving 80% of ummah.

Wow !

Atleast now you have agreed that Hz Umar disallowed Mutah. I think Hz Umar may not need Allah(swt)'s blessing as he seems to be at higher status than the prophet(pbuh) as he could do what even prophet(pbuh) couldn't do.

[sixfeetunder]

May Allah bless Hz Umar for disallowing Prostitution and saving 80% of ummah.

Wow !

Atleast now you have agreed that Hz Umar disallowed Mutah. I think Hz Umar may not need Allah(swt)'s blessing as he seems to be at higher status than the prophet(pbuh) as he could do what even prophet(pbuh) couldn't do.

Let us follow Prophet's sunnah and let MF follow Umar's sunnah. Peace. Also, it will be interesting when Abu Bakr, Zubayr, Abdullah Ibn Zubayr and Urwah Ibn Zubayr pull up MF on Judgement day, for labeling Muta as prostitution.

[sixfeetunder]

May Allah bless Hz Umar for disallowing Prostitution and saving 80% of ummah.

It seems Umar was incapable of 'saving' 80 percent of Ummah. The ummah invented Misyaar and Urfi marriages.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_Misyar

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_'urfi

[anajmi]

Not that I agree with this misyar marriage but there are a couple of key differences between misyar and muta as I read from the article link provided above.

There is no fixed time period for this marriage. Unlike Muta, this marriage can end only with a divorce. And it has to follow all laws of the regular marriage including mahr.

One should also read the criticism of misyar marriage under the same article.

One other important thing to note is that the legality of the misyar marriage is solely discussed on the basis of the shariah requirements for a regular marriage. There are no convoluted interpretations of hadiths and quranic ayahs presented to support it.