Mutah

The one and only free public forum for Bohras. The focus of this forum is the reform movement, the Dawoodi Bohra faith and, of course, the corrupt priesthood. But the discussion is in no way restricted to the Bohras alone.
Al-Uqul

Re: Mutah

#91

Unread post by Al-Uqul » Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:34 pm

omabharti wrote:
Al Aqul
Brother u urself masturbate on a Regurlar bases.............
so do all the guys on this forum
AA
You are ASSuming lot of things and making an ASS of yourself. Please do not speak or assume for other people of this forum
speak for yourself.

i do mutah when i need sexual releasing :) but its a fact 88 percent of guys masturbate especially muslim guys especially from the Sub-continent

Al-Uqul

Re: Mutah

#92

Unread post by Al-Uqul » Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:34 pm

omabharti wrote:
Al Aqul
Brother u urself masturbate on a Regurlar bases.............
so do all the guys on this forum
AA
You are ASSuming lot of things and making an ASS of yourself. Please do not speak or assume for other people of this forum
speak for yourself.

Al-Uqul

Re: Mutah

#93

Unread post by Al-Uqul » Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:35 pm

I have Borrowed This Explanation From What is the philosophy behind temporary marriage? 180 Questions:enquieries About islam Volume One Practical Laws,Written and compiled By the Twelver shi'a Shaykh Nasir Makarim Shirazi
i Advise this Volume it explains everything from mutah to why Islam cuts of the hand ,this book puts a great perspective on the Wisdom Behind allah's Laws
It can be downloaded at www.ziaraat.com Books Section
It is a general and universal rule that if man’s natural impulses are
not satiated in the correct manner, he will resort to incorrect and
devious means in order to satiate himself. In reality, the natural
desires cannot be eliminated; and upon the supposition that they
could be eliminated, such an act would not at all be rational for then
it would be tantamount to opposing the laws of Creation.
Thus, the correct option would be to satiate them in a rational
manner and utilize them constructively.It cannot be denied that sexual desire is one of the strongest natural
impulses existing within man to the extent that some of the
psychoanalysts are of the opinion that it is the only primitive and
primary impulse within man while all the other impulses are
secondary in nature.Now, in numerous circumstances and environments, a great
number of individuals belonging to a particular age-group are
unable to enter into a permanent marriage, or married individuals,
who have embarked upon protracted journeys or other
commitments, are faced with the dilemma of their sexual desires
remaining unfulfilled. his issue has become especially acute in our
times wherein the matrimonial age, due to the protracted period of
education and other intricate social issues, has gone up and rarely
can a youth enter into wedlock at a lower age during which he faces
a period of heightened sexual tendencies.What should be done in such circumstances?
Should the people be encouraged to suppress this impulse (like the
monks and the nuns)?Or should they be left free to indulge in profligacy, and the
ignominious and scandalous scenarios that presently exist be
permitted?Or that we should adopt a third alternative – one, which neither
brings about the problems of a permanent marriage nor leads to
sexual licentiousness?In summary, permanent marriage, in itself, has never been able to
cater to the sexual needs of all the sections of the society - neither
in the past nor today. We stand at a crossing - either to permit
‘prostitution’ (just as the material world of today has endorsed it
and has officially recognized it) or accept the idea of temporary
marriage. Those who oppose both prostitution as well as temporary
marriage have not presented a solution for this problem.
The blueprint of temporary marriage neither possesses the strict
conditions that are associated with permanent marriage so as to be
inharmonious with educational engagements or lack of financial
affluence, nor does it lead to the harmful ways of sexual wantonness
and prostitution.

Al-Uqul

Re: Mutah

#94

Unread post by Al-Uqul » Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:36 pm

Criticisms levelled against temporary marriage -
However, there are certain objections and criticisms that need to be
discussed, albeit concisely:
1. At times it is asked, what is the difference between ‘temporary
marriage’ and ‘prostitution’? Both of them can be considered to be
prostitution in exchange for a certain sum of money. This kind of
marriage is, in fact, a veil over prostitution and sexual pollution!
The only difference between the two lies in the recitation of two
simple sentences (recitation of the marriage formula.)
Answer: Those who make this criticism apparently do not have any
awareness about the concept of temporary marriage. This is because
temporary marriage, like permanent marriage, is governed by rules
and ordinances. A woman entering into a temporary marriage must
make herself available solely for this husband for the entire
duration of the marriage, and must necessarily observe the ˜Iddah
after the termination of the term. In other words, she has to refrain
from entering into any kind of matrimony with any other male for a
period of forty five days at least, so that it becomes clear in case she
bears the child of the first person. The observance of this ˜Iddah is
obligatory upon her even if she had resorted to the use of
contraceptives to prevent conception.If she happens to conceive,
this child like the children that result from a permanent marriage,
would have to be looked after and supported by the man, and all the
rules that are associated with children would come to be associated
with this child too. However, prostitution does not have any of
these rulings associated with it. Can these two issues ever be
compared with each other?Of course, temporary marriage does differ from permanent
marriage with respect to the issues of inheritance (between the
temporary spouses)106, maintenance, and some other rulings;
however these differences do not place it on par with prostitution.
In any event, temporary marriage is a form of marriage which
possesses its own ordinances and stipulations.
2. Temporary marriage becomes a reason for some lustful
individuals to misuse this ruling and use it as a pretext to indulge in
every kind of prostitution and profligacy; consequently respectable
individuals never enter into it while women of good repute tend to
avoid it.Answer: Is there any law in the world that has not been abused?
Should a rule, which is a social requirement and is in accordance
with the human innate, be suppressed because of it being misused,
or should those, who misuse it, be taken to task?Supposing some individuals misuse the pilgrimage to the House of
Allah and engage themselves in peddling drugs in the course of their trip; should the people be prevented from participating in thisgreat Islamic congregation or should those, who misuse the
occasion, be brought to justice?If we observe that nowadays respectable individuals experience an
aversion with respect to this Islamic statute, the fault lies not in the
statute but in those who act upon it, or to put it more correctly, in
those who misuse it. If, in our present day society, temporary
marriage were to be portrayed in its correct form and the Islamic
government were to implement it under the governance of specific
rules and stipulations, not only would its misuse be prevented but
even respected individuals (during social exigencies) would not
experience an aversion towards it.3. They say: Temporary marriage results in guardian-less
individuals, such as illegitimate children, being handed out to the
society.Answer: In view of what we have mentioned previously, the answer
to this objection is quite plain since according to (man-made) law,
illegitimate children are neither affiliated to the father nor to the
mother whereas children resulting from temporary marriage do not
possess the slightest difference from those that result from
permanent marriage - neither with respect to inheritance nor with
respect to social rights and privileges - apparently this objection
stems from their lack of attention towards this reality.

Al-Uqul

Re: Mutah

#95

Unread post by Al-Uqul » Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:38 pm

Russell and temporary marriage
In conclusion it appears expedient to present what Bertrand Russell,
the well-known English scholar, has stated in his book Marriage and
Morals under the topic Trial Marriage. After mentioning the scheme
of Ben B. Lindsey, one of the judges for juvenile delinquency, in
connection with ‘companionate marriage’, he states as follows:
“His view is that young people should be able to enter upon a new
kind of marriage distinguished from ordinary marriage by 3
characteristics. First, that there should be for the time being no
ntention of having children and that accordingly the best available
birth-control information should be given to the young couple.
Second, that so long as there are no children and the wife is not
pregnant divorce should be possible by mutual consent. And third,
that in the event of divorce, the wife should not be entitled to
alimony.”After mentioning Lindsay’s idea, which was presented above, Russell
goes on to state as follows: He holds, and I think rightly, that if such
an institution were established by law, a very great many young
people, for example, students at universities, would enter upon
comparatively permanent partnerships, involving a common life,
and free from the Dionysiac characteristics of their present sex
relations.( Marriage and Morals, pg. 84)As you notice, the above plan with respect to temporary marriage is
in many ways similar to the Islamic concept of temporary marriage
except that the conditions and stipulations which Islam has laid out
for it are more lucid and perfect in various respects. In the Islamic
temporary marriage there is no prohibition in preventing
conception, separation is simple and alimony too is not
obligatory(Tafs|r-e-Nam}nah, vol. 3, pg. 341)
i have little time so inshaallah this subject shall be continued tommorrow ,i hope admin doesnt delete my posts,i tried my best to shorten them,and heed the threat like the ''kothari'' sunnah of shutting me up

Saeed al Khair
Posts: 166
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 5:08 pm

Re: Mutah

#96

Unread post by Saeed al Khair » Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:52 pm

Dear Uqul
My Bohra friends in Mumbai as well as In Karachi are inrested in Mutah. Kindly advise how they can take Barakat from this lovely institution.

anajmi
Posts: 13417
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

Re: Mutah

#97

Unread post by anajmi » Mon Jun 21, 2010 4:04 pm

:D Mutah light areas allow you to mutahnicate and earn sawab for mutahnication.

Al-Uqul

Re: Mutah

#98

Unread post by Al-Uqul » Tue Jun 22, 2010 4:07 am

anajmi wrote::D Mutah light areas allow you to mutahnicate and earn sawab for mutahnication.
I wish arranged mutah Did Exist !instead of Travelling all the Way to Qom .....and Yes,Per Hadiths of Imam Muhammad al-Baqir (a.s),Every Drop of Water that comes of off you from your After-ghusl in it lies Huge Baraka'at.I am Happy allah used this as a means to come into paradise with Prophet muhamamd,ali,hassan wa ahsayn(a.s).Imam Al-sadiq (pbuh)Said:i do not like that a Beleiver diés without having practiced Mutah''.

Al-Uqul

Re: Mutah

#99

Unread post by Al-Uqul » Tue Jun 22, 2010 4:14 am

Saeed al Khair wrote:Dear Uqul
My Bohra friends in Mumbai as well as In Karachi are inrested in Mutah. Kindly advise how they can take Barakat from this lovely institution.
Well,i dont know about India.... i know in Iran you can Get a mutah contract By all Local Police stations,a Shaykh Will Recite the formula for you All.they will need a Dowry wich can be a few Riyals,and consent of her Guardians.if they go to western country some shaykhs say depending on the Urf(what is common law) of the place you may not need the consent of her guardian and you may do it. You Must Consult your Bohra Shuyukh and follow the Rules Set by your musta'ali School of Thought!I coming froma Ithna Ashari akhbari shia (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akhbari -)backround would not follow the ijtihad of twelver shaykhs but hed masoumeen and take precaustions and ask the wali of the girl regardless of her religion.I heard in Brasill the girls are quiet easy going and liberal towards Sex and see it like Drinking water.You must find otu yourself.
Hope i helped .W.s

Al-Uqul

Re: Mutah

#100

Unread post by Al-Uqul » Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:43 am

Did temporary marriage exist during the time of the Noble
Prophet ?
The general consensus of the Islamic scholars indicates that
temporary marriage was lawful during the initial period of Islam
and, in fact, the essentials of religion too emphasize this lawfulness -
(and the difference of opinion that exists in connection with verse
24 of Suratul Nisa :“Then as to those whom you profit by, give them their dowries as
appointed.”as to whether or not it establishes the legitimacy of mut˜ah does not,
in any way, serve to oppose the incontrovertible nature of the
statute. This is because even the opponents are of the belief that the
legitimacy of this statute has been established by means of the
sunnah of the Noble Prophet – and the Muslims, during the
initial stages of Islam, even acted upon this ruling. Also, the famous
sentence that has been reported from ˜Umar:
“Two mut˜ahs existed during the time of the Prophet of All{h and I
prohibit them and shall punish (those who act upon them), (and
these are) mut˜ah of the women and «ajj of Tamattu˜), is a clear
proof of the existence of this statute during the period of the Noble
Prophet _; however, the opponents of this ruling claim that it was
abrogated and prohibited later on.”Kanz al-˜Irfan, vol. 2, pg. 158. In Tafsir Qurtubi and Tafsir Tabari(all sunni sources) , a traditionsimilar to the above mentioned tradition has been mentioned. It has also found
a mention in ‘The Chapter Of Nikah’ in vol. 7 of Sunan of Beyhaqi(one of 4 sunni authentic sources)
Interestingly, the traditions which they present to substantiate
their claims of abrogation are contradictory and inconsistent. Some
traditions state that the Noble Prophet himself abrogated this
statute and as such, the nullifier of this ruling would be the sunnah
of the Noble Prophet . Other traditions state that it was abrogated
by the verse of Divorce:“O Prophet! when you divorce women, divorce them for their
prescribed time.”However, it ought to be known that this verse has no connection
with the issue under discussion since this verse deals with divorce
whereas there is no divorce in a temporary marriage - the
separation taking place when the term (of marriage) reaches
termination.On the one hand, it is conclusively and categorically known that this
ruling was lawful during the time of the Noble Prophet _ while on
the other hand there is authentic evidence to prove that it had been
abrogated. Thus, according to an indisputable law, proved in
methodology, we shall judge that this statute continues to exist.
The well-known sentence of ˜Umar is also a clear testimony of the
fact that this ruling had certainly not been abrogated during the
period of the Noble Prophet .It is quite evident that none, except the Noble Prophet , possesses
the authority to abrogate laws and rulings, and it is only he , who
can abrogate and annul certain laws in accordance with divine
orders. After the Noble Prophet’s death, the door to abrogation of
laws was completely closed or else every person, according to his
individual reasoning, would seek to abrogate portions of the divine laws and consequently there would be no such thing as an eternal and everlasting Shari˜ah.

Al-Uqul

Re: Mutah

#101

Unread post by Al-Uqul » Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:46 am

Fundamentally, individual reasoning vis-àvis
explicit sayings of the Noble Prophet lacks validity and
authenticity.Significantly, in the book sahih Tirmidi, which is one of wellknown
imams of the Ahlus Sunnah, and also from al-Daraqutni , we
are informed of the following incident(Tafsir Qurtubi, vol. 2, pg. 762, under verse 195 of Suratul Baqarah.):Once, an inhabitant from Syria approached ˜Abdullah b. ˜Umar and
questioned him about hajj-e-Tamattu˜, whereupon he expressly
declared it to be permissible. The man said: “But your father has
prohibited it!” ˜Abdullah b. ˜Umar turned furious and said: “If my
father prohibits it while the Noble Prophet permits it, should I
forsake the sacred sunnah of the Noble Prophet and follow my
father’s statements? Arise and go away from my presence!”
Another tradition, possessing the same form as that seen in the
above tradition, has also been reported from ˜Abdullah b. ˜Umar, but
in connection with temporary marriage.sunni source-Sharh Lum˜ah, vol. 2, ‘The Book of Nikah
It has been reported from the sunni book ‘Muhadhirat’ of Raghib that one
of the Muslims entered into a temporary marriage. He was asked:
“Who informed you that it was legitimate?” He replied: “˜Umar!”
Astonished, they asked him: “How is such a thing possible when
˜Umar has himself prohibited it and has even threatened to punish
the people for it?” He said: “I too base my reasoning upon this, for
˜Umar had said: ‘The Noble Prophet _ had permitted it but I
prohibit it.’ I accept its legitimacy from the Noble Prophet but
shall never accept its prohibition from anyone else!”
Another point that needs to be mentioned here is that those, who
claim that this rule has been abrogated, face some serious problems:
Firstly: In numerous traditions from Sunni sources it has been
explicitly stated that this ruling had not been abrogated during the
life-time of the Noble Prophet _ but, rather, its prohibition came
into effect during the time of ˜Umar. Thus, the proponents of
abrogation need to provide an explanation for all these traditions,
which are twenty four in number. ˜Allamah Amini has mentioned
them in detail in volume six of his book al-Ghadir and two examples
of them are presented below:
1. It has been reported in Tirmidhi that Jebir b. ˜Abdullah
Ansari said: “During the time of the Noble Prophet _ we used to
easily enter into temporary marriage and this continued till ˜Umar
totally prevented ˜Amr b. harith from entering into it.”al-Ghadir, vol. 6, pg. 206
2. In the books Muwatta of Malik and Sunan Kubra of Behaqi it has
been reported from ˜Urwah b. Zubar that one day, a lady by the
name of Khaulah Bint hakim approached ˜Umar and informed him
that one of the Muslims, Rabi˜ b. Umayyah, had committed mut˜ah.
Hearing this ˜Umar said: “Had I prohibited this act previously, I
would have had him stoned (but now, from this very moment, I shall
prohibit it).”al-Ghadir, vol. 6, pg. 210
In the book Bidayah al-Mujtahid of Ibn Rushd al-Andulusi too we
read that Jabir b. ˜Abdullah Ansari said: “Temporary marriage was
customary and usual amongst us during the time of the Noble
Prophet , during the caliphate of Abu Bakr and (the first) half of
the caliphate of ˜Umar. Afterwards ˜Umar prohibited it.”Bidayah al-Mujtahid, The Book of Nikah

Al-Uqul

Re: Mutah

#102

Unread post by Al-Uqul » Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:47 am

Secondly: The traditions that state that this ruling had been
abrogated during the life-time of the Noble Prophet are
ambivalent and contradictory in nature.Some of them say that it
was abrogated in the battle of Khaibar, some report it to have been
abrogated on the day of the conquest of Makkah, some others
specify that it was during the battle of Tabuk, while yet others
declare that it took place during the battle of Auts, etc. Thus, all of
these traditions, which advocate the abrogation of this ruling,
appear to be fabricated as they differ so vastly from each other.
In view of what we have mentioned above, it becomes plain that the
statement of the author of the commentary al-Manar, when he says:
“Previously, in the third and fourth volume of the magazine al-
Manar, we had expressly stated that it was ˜Umar, who had
prohibited mut˜ah, but later we happened to come across some
traditions, which indicated that it had been abrogated during the
time of the Noble Prophet and not during the time of ˜Umar, and
accordingly, we rectify our previous statements and seek
forgiveness for it ( Tafsir al-Manar, vol. 5, pg. 16 ) is a prejudiced declaration.
This is because vis-àvis
these contradictory traditions that declare the abrogation to
have taken place during the time of the Noble Prophet _, we have
traditions, which expressly declare the ruling to have continued till
the time of ˜Umar. Thus, neither is there a necessity to apologize nor
a need to seek forgiveness; the evidences presented above indicate
that it was the original declaration of the author that had been true
and correct, and not his second one!”
It is evident that neither ˜Umar nor anyone else - not even the
Imams of the Ahlul Bayt, who are the genuine successors of the
Noble Prophet - can abrogate laws that had existed during the
life-time of the Noble Prophet . Basically, abrogation after the
death of the Noble Prophet and the termination of revelation is
absolutely meaningless and inconceivable. It is also a matter of
immense astonishment that some individuals attribute the
utterance of ˜Umar to his ‘individual reasoning’ (ijtihad), for ijtihad
vis-à-vis ‘nass’ (explicit text of the Noble Prophet ) is neither
permissible nor acceptable.
-Tafsir-e-Namunah, vol. 3, pg. 337

Al-Uqul

Re: Mutah

#103

Unread post by Al-Uqul » Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:49 am

The Purpose of Iddah by shaykh makarim shirazi -
In verse 228 of Suratul Baqarah, we read:
“And the divorced women should keep themselves in waiting for
three courses.”The question that crops up here is: What is the philosophy behind
this Islamic ruling?Since the breaking up of families generally tends to inflict
irreparable damage upon the fabric of a society, Islam has set
stipulations which, till the maximum possible limit, seek to prevent
such matrimonial break-ups. On the one hand it regards divorce as
‘the most abominable of the permissible acts’, while on the other
hand, by referring the matrimonial disputes to the family courts
established by the relatives, and initiating reconciliatory measures
through the relatives of the disputing spouses, it has sought to
prevent this occurrence.One of these stipulations, which is itself a cause for delaying the
divorce and weakening this matrimonial break-up, is the
observance of ˜Iddah - the duration of which has been set to be three
Qara, which means to become clean, three times, from menstruation.
˜Iddah - A means for reconciliation and return
At times, due to certain factors, the mentality of a person comes to
possess such a state that a small dispute inflames feelings of revenge
so intense as to blanket the intellect and conscience, and
predominantly, the division of a family occurs in these
circumstances. However, it frequently happens that a short while
after the dispute the husband and the wife come to their senses and
repent for their actions, especially when they realize that they
would have found themselves in great difficulty had their family
broken up.It is here that the verse, under discussion, states: The women must
observe ˜Iddah and remain patient till this wave passes by and the
dark clouds of strife and animosity disperse from the skies of their
lives.In particular, the stipulation of Islam asking a woman to refrain
from going out of the house during the period of ˜Iddah serves to
stimulate the faculty of reflection within her and is very effective in
the betterment of her relationship with her husband.
And it is for this reason that we read in the first verse of Suratul
Talaq “Do not drive them out of their houses, nor should they themselves
go forth, unless they commit an open indecency; and these are the
limits of Allah, and whoever goes beyond the limits of Allah, he
indeed does injustice to his own soul. You do not know that Allah
may, after that, bring about reunion.”Usually, reminiscence of the warm and sweet moments of the life
before divorce is sufficient to bring back the lost love and brighten
the dimmed light of affection.
˜Iddah - A means to protect the generation :
Another philosophy behind the ˜Iddah is to make a woman
cognizant of her state with respect to pregnancy. It must be
admitted that although witnessing one phase of menstruation is
usually indicative of absence of pregnancy in a woman, at times it
has been observed that a woman, despite bearing a child,
menstruates in the initial phase of her pregnancy and hence, in
order to be absolutely sure that she does not bear a child from her
previous husband, it has been ordered that she should witness three
periods of menstruation after which she can enter into another
marriage.

Al-Uqul

Re: Mutah

#104

Unread post by Al-Uqul » Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:55 am

I take responsibilty that this is from shaykh shirazi's websites and i have modified it as best as possible and,deleted spacesand lines and corrected the spelling errors in the book.inshaallah i ask Admin to allow this peice.
Why are men permitted to have more than one spouse whereas
the women are not?
By shaykh makarim shirazi :The Noble Qur`an has permitted polygamy (but, with strict
conditions and within prescribed limits) and here we have to face
up to a barrage of objections and assaults of the opponents, who,
armed with a cursory study and influenced by imprudent
sentiments, have set out to oppose this Islamic ruling. The
Westerners, in particular, tend to criticize us by saying that Islam
has permitted the males to create a harem and take for themselves
an unlimited number of spouses. As a matter of fact, Islam has
neither permitted the construction of harems - as they take it to
mean - nor has it permitted unconditional and unqualified
polygamy.Explanation: Studying the conditions that prevailed in different
regions before the onset of Islam, we infer that unreserved
polygamy was a routine affair in those days even to the extent that
on some occasions, when the polytheists would convert into
Muslims they would have in their possession around ten spouses.
Thus, multiplicity of wives is not an invention of Islam; on the
contrary, Islam has confined it within the framework of the
necessities of human life and qualified it by means of strict
conditions.Islamic laws are determined on the basis of the actual needs of
humans and not on the basis of external propaganda and illconsidered
sentiments. The issue of polygamy too has been given
consideration from this angle. This is because none can deny the
fact that men, in the various goings-on of life, are more exposed to
peril than the women, and they are the ones, who predominantly
bear the brunt of actual casualties in battles and other catastrophes.
It cannot also be denied that the sexual life-span of men is more
than that of women since women, at a certain age lose their sexual
strength whereas men do not.In addition, during menstruation and certain phases of pregnancy
the women are obliged to observe a restriction of sexual activity
whereas the men have no such restrictions.Apart from all the above there are women who, due to various
reasons, lose their husbands and are usually not sought by the men
as a first-wife, and in the absence of polygamy, they would always
have to remain without a spouse; we read in numerous newspapers
that this group of widowed women, due to the restrictions placed
upon the issue of polygamy, complain of the tangles of life and
regard this curb as a kind of sentimental oppression which they are
subjected to.Taking these realities into consideration, in such instances wherein
the balance between men and women is disrupted due to certain
factors, we are left with no option except to select one of the
following three alternatives:
1. Men should, at all times, content themselves with just one spouse,
while the extra women should remain without a spouse for the rest
of their lives, suppressing and killing all their innate needs and
internal desires.
2. Men should have only one official and legal spouse, but are
permitted to establish illicit physical relationships with women,
who are without spouses, and keep them as mistresses and
paramours.
3. Those, who possess the means, should be permitted to govern
more than one spouse. Individuals, who would not be
inconvenienced physically, economically and ethically, and who
possess the ability to maintain equity and even handedness amongst
all their spouses and children, should be permitted to take more
than one spouse for themselves.Undoubtedly, there exists no other alternative than these three.
If we were to choose the first alternative, we would have to wage a
battle against human innate instincts and spiritual requirements,
and disregard these sentiments and feelings of the women - a battle
which we would never win. On the assumption that this scheme is
actually put into practice, the inhumane aspect associated with it is
something which is clear for everyone to see.
In other words, when necessary, this issue should not always be
scrutinized from the viewpoint of the first wife but should also be
analyzed from the standpoint of the second wife. Those who
consider polygamy to be the cause of the sufferings of the first wife,
view this issue from only one perspective. It ought to be studied
from three perspectives - from the standpoint of the male, the first
spouse and the second spouse, and the issue should be judged after
taking into regard the interests and well-being of all three of them.
As for the second alternative, if we were to select it, we would have
to legalize and formalize prostitution. In addition, the women, who
are kept as mistresses and used for sexual gratification, would
neither have any security nor a future for themselves, and their
status would be ruined, and these are things that no rational person
should ever accept.Thus, the only alternative that remains is the third one, which not
only responds positively to the innate desires and the inherent
needs of the women, but it also keeps women away from the evil
consequences of prostitution. It prevents disruption of the lives of
this group of women and thus serves to protect society from a
multitude of sins.It must be noted that although polygamy is a social necessity in
certain instances and is one of the incontestable rulings of Islam,
fulfilling the conditions necessary for it in the present times differs
vastly from that of the past. In the simple and Spartan life of the
past, it was easy for everyone to maintain equity amongst the
spouses but in the present times, those who wish to make use of this
ruling must ensure that comprehensive equity is observed.
Basically, polygamy should not be pursued for the sake of carnal and
physical desires.Interestingly, the very opponents of polygamy (such as the
Westerners), during the course of history, have encountered events
that have clearly manifested their need for it. For example, after
World War II, the need for polygamy was intensely felt in the wartorn
countries, especially Germany, which even compelled some of
their intellectuals to reconsider their views with respect to the
prohibition of polygamy. In addition, they conducted a study of the
Islamic program of multiplicity of wives from al-Azhar University.
However, severe objections on the part of the Church forced them
to shelve their plans; the consequence of which was wild and
outrageous profligacy that eventually engulfed the length and
breadth of the war-torn countries.Apart from the above, the inclination of some of the men to possess
more than one spouse is something that cannot be denied, although
if it were to arise as a result of carnal desires, it is not to be taken
into regard. A wife’s inability to conceive and the husband’s intense
desire to have a child provide a rational support to such an
inclination. There may be instances where the inability of the wife
to satisfy the intense sexual desires of the husband leaves him with
no alternative except to turn towards a second marriage – at times
even compelling him to resort to illegitimate means to achieve his
objective in the absence of legitimate ones. Hence, in cases such as
these, his inclination cannot be regarded as being illogical or
irrational. It is for this reason that even in countries that prohibit
polygamy, in reality, relationships with several women are widely
prevalent whereby one male tends to have illicit relationships with
several women at the same time.
The well-known French historian Gustav Lebon considers the issue
of Islamic polygamy, which is bound and limited by conditions, to be
one of the distinguishing features of this religion. Comparing it with
the free and illicit relationship of a male with several females in
Europe, he states: In the West too, despite the fact that the weather
and natural environment do not warrant such a custom (polygamy),
monogamy is something that we come across only in books of law!
For, I do not suppose that the presence of traces of this custom, in
our actual socialization, can be denied! Honestly, I am at a loss and
fail to comprehend what the legal, but confined, polygamy of the
East lacks in comparison to the phoney polygamy of the West? In
fact, I declare that the former is better and more seemly than the
latter, in every respect.Source -Le Civilisation des Arabes (tarikh-e-Tamaddun-e-Islam Wa Arab), translated
by Fakhr Gilaani, pg. 509 )
Of course it is not to be denied that some of the so-called Muslims,
without taking into regard the Islamic ideology behind this rule,
have sought to misuse it, maintaining ignominious harems for
themselves and violating the rights of their wives. This flaw is not in
the law but rather in the individuals themselves, and their deeds
should not be regarded as the laws of Islam. Is there any law, which,
despite its excellence, is not put to misuse by profiteering
individuals for their personal benefit?
Question: At this juncture some may question that if women find
themselves in the abovementioned circumstances; would they be
permitted to take two husbands for themselves too?
The answer to the above question is not very difficult:
Firstly: (Contrary to what is popular among the general public) the
sexual desire in men is several times more than that in women;
books relating to sexual issues state frigidity to be the disorder
which is prevalent in the majority of women whereas, in the case of
men, it is just the opposite. Even with respect to animals it has been
observed that sexual advancements are usually initiated by the
males of the species.Secondly: Polygamy, in the case of men, does not entail any social or
legal complications whereas, if the women were to possess two
husbands, it would lead to numerous problems - the simplest of
them being the issue of genealogy of the child, for it would not be
known to which of the husbands it belongs, and such a child would
certainly not be cared for and supported by any of the husbands.
Some of the scholars are of the opinion that a child, whose father’s
identity is unknown, tends to be less loved and cared for by the
mother. Thus, such children find themselves deprived and denied
with respect to love and affection, and unclear about their legal
rights.It may perhaps be unnecessary to mention that resorting to
contraceptives such as pills or the like can never yield certainty or
confidence that a child will not be conceived, for there have been
innumerable instances where women, who have used them or made
mistakes while using them, have conceived children. Thus, no
woman can, by trusting and relying upon such measures, take
multiple spouses for herself.

ghulam muhammed
Posts: 11653
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: Mutah

#105

Unread post by ghulam muhammed » Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:46 pm

A plea from a Muslim sister--

One day he mentioned the idea of Mut'a. He told me that it was a type of temporary marriage, which was halal even in Sunni books. At first I didn t believe him, but he used sources such as Bukhari and Muslim. I took his word for it, and before I realized, I was into a lot of trouble. I was in Mut'a for four years. As time went by, I learnt that I had lost my honor and dignity to someone who had done this to several other girls. Allah helped me open my eyes and realize what I had gotten myself into. By now, I was on the verge of switching beliefs to be a Shia. At this point, I decided to really search for the truth. Since I cannot present the whole research, I have tried to give a very brief idea about Mut'a.

It is the goal of certain Shia individuals to do Mut'a with innocent girls, who lack knowledge of religion and experience of life. They convince them with their beliefs, and create confusion in their minds. I beg every sister, brother, father, mother, and friend to take a closer look at their dear ones, and make sure they do not become victims to the concept of Mut'a.

Mut'a is a form of temporary marriage where a man can marry a woman for an agreed amount of time and money(mahr). In Mut'a, the husband is not financially responsible for the wife. There are no set limits in this kind of marriage by the Shias. According Shia beliefs, no witnesses nor a permission of the guardian is needed (the Sunni father does not believe in Mut'a), and there is no limit on the number of Mut'a one can do.

Also, the time period can be as little as one hour to as long as sixty years. In addition, a man who is permanently married can do as many Mut'a as he feels like, even with married women. This is very similar to prostitution indeed

In the history of Islam, The Prophet allowed Mut'a twice in his lifetime. The first time the Prophet allowed it for three days, at the war of Khaiber, and after three days it was made haram . Once Ali argued with a man who believed in Mut'a and told him that the Prophet made Mut'a and the meat of donkey haram on the day of Khaiber (Bukhari vol. 7, pg. 287 and vol. 4 pg. 134). This hadith can also be found in Shia hadith books, which I will mention later. The second time the Prophet allowed it was at the conquest of Mecca, for three days, and then he made it haram again till the day of Judgment (Muslim vol. 4 pg. 133). Notice, the practice of Mut'a was then made haram till the Day of Judgement.This is confirmed with the hadiths in the following books: Imam Ahmed s Musnad vol. 16 pg. 192-193, Muslim vol. 4, pg. 132, Bayhaki vol. 7 pg. 293-294. Since there was a time when Mut'a was halal. Therefore, one can find hadith saying that it was halal. However, the latter hadith, which follows the final order of jurisprudence set by the the Prophet, takes precedence over the former hadith.

The Shia themselves have a hadith narrated by Ali (r.a.a) which states that the Prophet made Mut'a haram on the day of Khaiber (Book of Tahdeeb: vol. 7, pg. 251, rewaya 10). The author states that Ali lied for the purposes of Taqiya. In Book of Istebsar: vol. 3, pg. 142, rewaya 5, there is a declaration by Ali that Mut'a is haram. Again they accuse Ali of lying for Taqiya.

If Mut'a is not an excuse for satisfying lust, then what is it! It seems to be the easiest solution for adultery. If Mut'a really was to be done in case of need then why is it permissible for a married person to do Mut'a? Also, if one cannot marry due to financial insecurity then how can one be responsible for supporting the child and not be able to support the wife? And how is he going to know if the child is actually his, not someone else's?

The Shia also use the Qur an, Surah 4 ayah 24, as a reference to support Mut'a. They use this Ayah without consideration of the previous or following verses. The Ayah cannot be looked at alone. An example of this is Surah 107 verse 4 "So woe to the worshipers," If we look at this Ayah alone we would think Allah is angered by the worshipers, but if we read on it says in verse 5 "who are neglectful of their prayers." This gives a better understanding of what Allah is telling us. If we read till the end, we will get a better understanding of what Allah is trying to say.

Also in the Quran, we see that when ever Allah mentions marriage he also teaches us about divorce. When a man marries a chaste woman, and wants to leave her, he has to first divorce her. This can be seen in the following surah and Ayahs, 65:1, 2:231, 2:232, 2:236, 2:37, 33:49, 66:5

In Mut'a, there is no divorce; once you pay the set amount of money and the assigned time ends there is no rights, no duty, no inheritence laws, or divorce process. The only law is that the woman waits for a period of 45 days before she enters into another Mut'a, while the man can have immediate one, even while he is married or in another Mut'a. This goes against what Allah assigned for marriage in the Qura'n. In Surah 2 Ayah 228 Allah says, Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for three monthly periods and it is not lawful for them to hide what Allah hath created in their wombs. If they have faith in Allah and the last day." In Mut'a she can be pregnant with the child of her first Mut'a husband and be married to her second Mut'a husband or the permanent. In the book of Mustadrak-Alwasa il (Shia authentic hadith book) vol. 7 book 3 pg. 506 rewayah 8762 ,it states that the prophet said that who ever cannot find the ability to get married let him fast, my ummah s protection is fasting. Also in Beharul-Alanwaar(Shia hadith book in vol.14 pg. 327 rewayah 50:21) it states that Imam Ali said and seek protection from women desire by fasting. What is the need for fasting if Mut'a is OK ? It is obvious that this contradict this idea .I hope and pray that we will take this matter seriously.

Everyday more and more girls in our community are falling victims to this idea presented by the Shia individuals. These girls are helpless in asking anyone for help, especially their parents. Please, teach and inform one another about the idea of Mut'a, and our beliefs regarding it. Please do it for the honor and dignity of our Islam and for the love of Allah!

http://www.islamicweb.com/beliefs/cults/muta_story.htm

incredible
Posts: 1034
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:44 pm

Re: Mutah

#106

Unread post by incredible » Sat Jul 10, 2010 1:45 am

explaination is quite good but question still remains,do bohra belives in Mutah?

SBM
Posts: 6467
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 4:01 am

Re: Mutah

#107

Unread post by SBM » Sat Jul 10, 2010 8:05 am

^
I had asked my Aamil when I was in good terms with him and he emphatically told me that DB's are NOT allowed Mutah. It is unacceptable.
Aqs and others who have taken Sabaq can be in better position to second or refute my information.

incredible
Posts: 1034
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:44 pm

Re: Mutah

#108

Unread post by incredible » Sat Jul 10, 2010 8:14 am

omabharti wrote:^
I had asked my Aamil when I was in good terms with him and he emphatically told me that DB's are NOT allowed Mutah. It is unacceptable.
Aqs and others who have taken Sabaq can be in better position to second or refute my information.

did he explain you why bohra dont belive in mutah? when imam Ali(a.s) himself allowed and performed mutah(according to ithna asharis).

SBM
Posts: 6467
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 4:01 am

Re: Mutah

#109

Unread post by SBM » Sat Jul 10, 2010 10:35 am

^
No, for that I had to attend Sabak and take the Oath of not disclosing anything I learned.and since I am a firm believer that knowledge not shared is knowledge not gained and knowledge gets rotten

incredible
Posts: 1034
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:44 pm

Re: Mutah

#110

Unread post by incredible » Sat Jul 10, 2010 10:46 am

omabharti wrote:^
No, for that I had to attend Sabak and take the Oath of not disclosing anything I learned.and since I am a firm believer that knowledge not shared is knowledge not gained and knowledge gets rotten

agree with you on that...

do u have any idea why this knowledge is tend to keep so secretive? i mean when Allah can reveal quraan why this simple things need to be kept so secretive.

anajmi
Posts: 13417
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

Re: Mutah

#111

Unread post by anajmi » Sat Jul 10, 2010 11:36 am

To fool people.

Mubarak
Posts: 471
Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2008 4:01 am

Re: Mutah

#112

Unread post by Mubarak » Sat Jul 10, 2010 1:48 pm

incredible wrote:
omabharti wrote:^
I had asked my Aamil when I was in good terms with him and he emphatically told me that DB's are NOT allowed Mutah. It is unacceptable.
Aqs and others who have taken Sabaq can be in better position to second or refute my information.

did he explain you why bohra dont belive in mutah? when imam Ali(a.s) himself allowed and performed mutah(according to ithna asharis).
Per Dawoodi Bohras, Mola Ali (a.s.) neither allowed others nor performed himself the Mutah.

Marriage is halal and Mutah (temporary marriage) is haram because per DB, marriage must have ‘vali’, two male or four women witness, categorical consent from girl, Iddat on divorce or death. These conditions are absent in Mutah.

Mutah is characterless shame, which will harm morale of society. Ithnashari Shia believes in Mutah as halal, but we Dawoodi Bohras categorically classify Mutah as haram.

Imam Ali Zain-ul-Abedeen a.s. said, "The most painful situation in the episode of Karbala was not the martyr of my family and friends but the unveiling of scarf from our women’s head."

Non Dawoodi Bohras Shia sects, to justify their lust fabricate false hadiths/rivayat and tag it on Mola Ali (a.s.)!!!

Both Burhanuddin sahib and Engineer Asger sahib practice against above statement of Imam Ali Zain-ul-Abedeen a.s.: Burhanuddin sahib & male kothar members enjoys their hands and feet’s kissed by gair-mehram ladies, Yusuf Najmuddin (YN) enjoys shaking hands with the then British officers wives, Mazoon Kozema enjoys swimming with Nafisa Ali, dozens of Kothar women’s photos without scarf published in many books…. Same is Engineer Asger, anti Imam Ali Zainul Abedeen, he profess women not to burden themselves with scarf, not to sit in iddats, no need of ‘vali’ in nikah, indeed Engineer considers Bohras as the most ‘gumrah’ sect!!! Irony is he is Secretary of Bohras (Youth) Central Board and ask Burhanuddin to act per Bohras faith, the very faith he himself consider as ‘gumrah’!!!

Burhanuddin sahib & his parasite family and Engineer Asger Ali - all are anti-Dawoodi Bohras - their practice of Fatimi Dawat principles is shame like Mutah.

incredible
Posts: 1034
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:44 pm

Re: Mutah

#113

Unread post by incredible » Sat Jul 10, 2010 2:39 pm

Mubarak wrote:
incredible wrote:
did he explain you why bohra dont belive in mutah? when imam Ali(a.s) himself allowed and performed mutah(according to ithna asharis).
Per Dawoodi Bohras, Mola Ali (a.s.) neither allowed others nor performed himself the Mutah.

Marriage is halal and Mutah (temporary marriage) is haram because per DB, marriage must have ‘vali’, two male or four women witness, categorical consent from girl, Iddat on divorce or death. These conditions are absent in Mutah.

Mutah is characterless shame, which will harm morale of society. Ithnashari Shia believes in Mutah as halal, but we Dawoodi Bohras categorically classify Mutah as haram.

Imam Ali Zain-ul-Abedeen a.s. said, "The most painful situation in the episode of Karbala was not the martyr of my family and friends but the unveiling of scarf from our women’s head."

Non Dawoodi Bohras Shia sects, to justify their lust fabricate false hadiths/rivayat and tag it on Mola Ali (a.s.)!!!

Both Burhanuddin sahib and Engineer Asger sahib practice against above statement of Imam Ali Zain-ul-Abedeen a.s.: Burhanuddin sahib & male kothar members enjoys their hands and feet’s kissed by gair-mehram ladies, Yusuf Najmuddin (YN) enjoys shaking hands with the then British officers wives, Mazoon Kozema enjoys swimming with Nafisa Ali, dozens of Kothar women’s photos without scarf published in many books…. Same is Engineer Asger, anti Imam Ali Zainul Abedeen, he profess women not to burden themselves with scarf, not to sit in iddats, no need of ‘vali’ in nikah, indeed Engineer considers Bohras as the most ‘gumrah’ sect!!! Irony is he is Secretary of Bohras (Youth) Central Board and ask Burhanuddin to act per Bohras faith, the very faith he himself consider as ‘gumrah’!!!

Burhanuddin sahib & his parasite family and Engineer Asger Ali - all are anti-Dawoodi Bohras - their practice of Fatimi Dawat principles is shame like Mutah.


Your post don't even make sense

Al-Uqul

Re: Mutah

#114

Unread post by Al-Uqul » Sun Jul 11, 2010 12:24 pm

ghulam muhammed wrote:A plea from a Muslim sister--
thats entirely her Fault.i remember this article when i first became shiah.it hasnt been verified.and Still if such a gril existed then people make use of misyar sunni marriage in Worser ways and on a rapid pace.http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php ... -the-rise/ the saudis go to egypt or the subcontinent and trick these girls into such shamefull action.people can misuese nything,this doesnt mean allah ahs forbade it.muslims take their right and werong from allah not men.the verse u quoted woe to those worshippers neglecfull of their prayers refers to those who dont use aliyan waliyallah in salah.i pointed this out earlier.lol!the sunni mufassirun stated it refers to mutah! also ali didnt do any taqiyah,this hadith has been rejected by shaykh sadouq and the TAQIYAH was on part of the ZAydi narrater in a Amm(sunni)hostile environment!not on ali!last but not least do you have to keep bringing stuff thats been refuted above and bring the SAME lies?why can wahabis never be honest?a woman as proved earlier may have only one husband at a time mutah or permanent and she must wait 45 days to do it over again!marriage needs divorce mutah does not because the divorce happens by this experation. this has been dicussed throughly here http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/and refuted the allegations.those who deny mutah are 'munafiqs.imam sadiq said thsoe who dont beelive in mutah do not belong to us(ahl al bayt)''www.answering-ansar.org/.../mutah/en/index.php

Al-Uqul

Re: Mutah

#115

Unread post by Al-Uqul » Sun Jul 11, 2010 12:35 pm

omabharti wrote:^
I had asked my Aamil when I was in good terms with him and he emphatically told me that DB's are NOT allowed Mutah. It is unacceptable.
Aqs and others who have taken Sabaq can be in better position to second or refute my information.
you see wikipedia stated tayyibis allow mutah.did qadhi numan forbid it or allow it?plz refrence me.and also incredible mutah is allowed.even sunni scholars allow mutah from tunisia.http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php ... ric-sunni/ since dawoodis forbid it it proves its a false Faith.i wonder how the ismailis think of it.any sulaymani out there?i think we both know this cult wich the dai died before giving nass proves their falsehood.can a dai die with not giving nass?anybody seriouis?yet we see the ismaili have never had this problem.

Al-Uqul

Re: Mutah

#116

Unread post by Al-Uqul » Sun Jul 11, 2010 12:37 pm

Aqs and others who have taken Sabaq can be in better position to second or refute my information.[/quote]


did he explain you why bohra dont belive in mutah? when imam Ali(a.s) himself allowed and performed mutah(according to ithna asharis).[/quote]

Per Dawoodi Bohras, Mola Ali (a.s.) neither allowed others nor performed himself the Mutah.

Marriage is halal and Mutah (temporary marriage) is haram because per DB, marriage must have ‘vali’, two male or four women witness, categorical consent from girl, Iddat on divorce or death. These conditions are absent in Mutah.

Mutah is characterless shame, which will harm morale of society. Ithnashari Shia believes in Mutah as halal, but we Dawoodi Bohras categorically classify Mutah as haram.

Imam Ali Zain-ul-Abedeen a.s. said, "The most painful situation in the episode of Karbala was not the martyr of my family and friends but the unveiling of scarf from our women’s head."

Non Dawoodi Bohras Shia sects, to justify their lust fabricate false hadiths/rivayat and tag it on Mola Ali (a.s.)!!!

Both Burhanuddin sahib and Engineer Asger sahib practice against above statement of Imam Ali Zain-ul-Abedeen a.s.: Burhanuddin sahib & male kothar members enjoys their hands and feet’s kissed by gair-mehram ladies, Yusuf Najmuddin (YN) enjoys shaking hands with the then British officers wives, Mazoon Kozema enjoys swimming with Nafisa Ali, dozens of Kothar women’s photos without scarf published in many books…. Same is Engineer Asger, anti Imam Ali Zainul Abedeen, he profess women not to burden themselves with scarf, not to sit in iddats, no need of ‘vali’ in nikah, indeed Engineer considers Bohras as the most ‘gumrah’ sect!!! Irony is he is Secretary of Bohras (Youth) Central Board and ask Burhanuddin to act per Bohras faith, the very faith he himself consider as ‘gumrah’!!!

Burhanuddin sahib & his parasite family and Engineer Asger Ali - all are anti-Dawoodi Bohras - their practice of Fatimi Dawat principles is shame like Mutah.[/quote]



Your post don't even make sense[/quote]
his post makes no sence at all.i do agree both engineer and burhanudeen are munafiqs thats no question about it.

Hussain_KSA
Posts: 874
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 4:01 am

Re: Mutah

#117

Unread post by Hussain_KSA » Mon Jul 12, 2010 10:12 am

I strongly recommend to all of the participant to ignor this topic and stop writing on it.