What is Mutah?

[Nadir Shah]

Muslim in his Sahih, part I, in the chapter of Nikatu'l-Mut'a, says "Hasan Halwa'i reported to us that he was told by Abdu'r-Razzaq, who was informed by Ibn Jarih, who was told by 'Ata that Jabir Ibn Abdullah Ansari came to Mecca for the Umra and they went to him at his residence. People asked him many questions. When they came to the question of mut'a he said, 'Yes, we used to practice mut'a during the time of the Holy Prophet and during the caliphate of Abu Bakr and Umar.'" Also in the same book in part I, in the chapter of al-Mut'a Bi'l-Hajj wa'l-Umra, it is narrated on the authority of Abu Nazara that he said: "I was in the company of Jabir Ibn Abdullah Ansari when a man came and said, 'There is a difference of opinion between Ibn Abbas and Ibn Zubair concerning the two mut'as, Mut'atu'n-Nisa and Mut'atu'l-Hajj.' Then Jabir said, 'We have performed both of these during the time of the Holy Prophet. Thereafter, when Umar forbade it, we could not do it.'"


Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal in his Musnad, part I, p.25, narrates Abu Nazara's report in another way. Also both narrate another report from Jabir that he said: "In the days of the Holy Prophet and Abu Bakr, we used to practice mut'a for the consideration of a handful of dates and flour until Umar forbade it in the case of Amr Bin Harith."

[Nadir Shah]

Abu Isa Muhammad Bin Sawratu't-Tirmidhi in his Sunan, Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal in his Musnad, PART II, p.95, and Ibn Athir in his Jam'u'l-Usul have reported that a Syrian man asked Abdullah Bin Umar Bin Khattab what he considered about Mut'a-e-Nisa. He said: "Of course, it is lawful." The man said again, "But your father, the caliph, forbade the people to do it." He said, "It was ordered by the Holy Prophet; so if it has been prohibited by my father that order cannot supersede the order of the Holy Prophet. I am the follower of the Holy Prophet's order."

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Why would Hadhrat Umar (ra) forbid it?

These ahadith are all fabricated!

These ahadith are contradicting the Holy Quran. Mut'a is not allowed. Nikaah is allowed. Nikaah is the only means to have sexual relations in Islam. Period.

[Nadir Shah]

I did not come up with these ahadith. The whole tashreeh of Islamic law, ritual and theology is based on these so-called 'Sahih's.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

I know dear brother, however, these ahadith are directly contradicting the Holy Quran, no ifs or buts about it.

Those who do not understand the Arabic of the Quranic verse 4:24 can be fool by others so easily. That verse has been used to justify mut'a. However, a deeper understand would reveal a totally different story. Also, the Holy Quran does not permit fornication, so how could it contradict itself?

The reason why people twist things is because they don't take in the whole of the Quran--they pick and choose.

[Nadir Shah]

Your reply is vague and ambiguous. Mr Bukhari is suppossed to have travelled to the farthest ends of the world (Arabia) to collect these hadith. These books are held in high esteem by scholars.

Here are a few commentries on verse 4:24 :-

Tabari in his Tafsir-e-Kabir, part V and Imam Fakhru'd-din Razi in his Tafsir-e-Mafatihu'l-Ghaib, part III, have confirmed that this verse refers to mut'a.

In Surah ye Nisa, several kinds of marriage and wedlock have been mentioned: nika (permanent marriage), mut'a (temporary marriage), and marriage with mulk-e-Yamin (servants). For permanent marriage Qur'an says in the sura of Nisa: "Then marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice (between them), then only one or what your right hands possess." (4:3)

About Mulk-e-yamin (servants), Allah says: "And whoever among you has not within his power ampleness of means to marry free believing women, then (he may marry) of those whom your right hands possess from among your believing maidens; and Allah knows best your faith: you are sprung the one from the other; so marry them with the permission of their masters and give them their dowries justly." (4:25)

The command in verse 4 of sura Nisa to the effect that: "...as to those by whom you benefitted (from mut'a), give them their dowries as appointed...." was for mut'a, or temporary marriage. It could not be for permanent wedlock, for otherwise, it would mean that in the same chapter the decree regarding permanent wedlock has been repeated twice, which is against the rule, and if it is for mut'a, then it evidently is a permanent and separate decree.

[Nadir Shah]

I know dear brother, however, these ahadith are directly contradicting the Holy Quran, no ifs or buts about it.

Those who do not understand the Arabic of the Quranic verse 4:24 can be fool by others so easily. That verse has been used to justify mut'a. However, a deeper understand would reveal a totally different story. Also, the Holy Quran does not permit fornication, so how could it contradict itself?

The reason why people twist things is because they don't take in the whole of the Quran--they pick and choose.

You mean the whole body of the Shiite Moslem faith?

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

My brother, the explanation you gave is not consistent. If you want to believe it then it is up to you.

The Prophet (saw) had 12 wives in total. He never did mut'a. His (saw) example would have been perfect to show that it is allowed.

This topic is not complicated. Why would Islam, a religion that came as a liberator of women, come to suppress them even more by allowing mut'a?

In mut'a only the female suffers--she is looked upon as a sexual object and nothing more.

The logic of mut'a is inconsistent with the rest of Islamic teachings.

[Nadir Shah]

My brother, the explanation you gave is not consistent. If you want to believe then it is up to you.

The Prophet (saw) had 12 wives in total. He never did mut'a. His (saw) would have been perfect to show that it is allowed.

This topic is not complicated, why would Islam, a religion that came as a liberator of women come to suppress them even more by allowing mut'a.

In mut'a only the female suffers.

The logic of mut'a is inconsistent throughout Islamic teachings.

What is the fountain head of Islamic law? Quran and the Hadith or rational thought? This question is actually funny.

And I remember something about an act being lawful even if it happened in front of the Prophet and he did not stop it.

Before we go into analysing Mutah, are you putting Quranic Injunctions up for scrutiny by human intellect? If you are, good for you.

[Nadir Shah]

This actually shows how futile the idea of a pan-Islamic union or even a Sharia-based modern state is. The two main currents of faith of Islan cannot agree on a the interpretation of a single verse. How can we forsee a general adoption of Sharia based law and morality?

[Mutakhasis]

Both Sunni and Shiites agree that the Prophet (once) allowed mut'ah marriages, BUT the Sunnis claim that the Prophet later forbade it while the Shiites say he never forbade it.

We need to understand that Shiites have reasons -- perfectly legitimate so -- for every single one of their arguments. Just becuase they don't make sense to us and just because they are "wrong" in our opinion doesn't mean they're really wrong.

Your sewage has been answered in post #9

[Mutakhasis]

Nadir Shah, read post #9

[Roshina]

These ahadith are all fabricated!

These ahadith are contradicting the Holy Quran. Mut'a is not allowed. Nikaah is allowed. Nikaah is the only means to have sexual relations in Islam. Period.

I understand why you'd think they're fabricated (since they don't make sense to all Muslims/humans), but they're in Bukhari and in Muslim. And I'm not sure how you can just take away a hadith from Bukhari's collection, considered the most authentic among all six Sunni sources, just because you don't like it.

There are many, MANY hadiths that I don't like; some even contradict the Quran. But Sunni Muslims tell us we must accept all of the ones that are seen as 'authentic' by our classical scholars, and we can't pick and choose.

Sucks, I know.

Why would Hadhrat Umar (ra) forbid it?

Well, Umar did other things, too, that the Prophet either didn't do or didn't approve of. For instance, whereas the Prophet himself said, according to some hadith reports, that he does not want anyone to pray the tarawee prayers with him (because, he feared, Muslims would start considering it as obligatory), Umar later decided that it was better if people did tarawee together. I once read somewhere that he said, "What a good innovation this is!"

Then another thing Umar did was ... the triple talaaq practice. Triple talaaq (when the man says "talaaq" three times to his wife *in the same sitting*, and the wife is divorced) was a common form of divorce in Arabia before Islam. The form of divorce that the Quran advocates doesn't seem at all supportive of triple talaaq, but according to some (Sunni) hadiths, Umar decided that it was okay to get this practice back.

Some scholars say that just because it was an Arab practice does not mean it's an Islamic practice necessarily and should not be allowed in Islam. But others say that if Umar allowed it, then it's okay and Islamic.

So, considering the fact that Umar brought other chances, it makes perfect sense why he would also forbid mut'ah too.

Whether I'm personally okay with it or not isn't the point here; the point is that these are supported by evidence from hadiths -- in Bukhari, more than anywhere else. They're all over the place, so you can verify them for yourself if you don't believe this.

[Mutakhasis]

In the next topic I will clarify why the Shi'ites are not part of the Islaamic Ummah

[Nadir Shah]

Your sewage has been answered in post #9

Malgariya, what shall we do with these conflicting hadith? Messrs Buklhari , Moslem, Hanbal and the others should have been a bit more careful while fabricating stuff.