What is Mutah?

[Roshina]

Speechless? I hope you remain that way for a long time and not spew anymore sewage.

You are a dishonest bigot who habitually attacks Islaam and slanders the great men like Abu Bakr. We didn't forget your fabrication of hadeeths and falsifying the sources to suite your adulterous mind.

You still haven't explained to me why you found Richard Dawkins nonsense as sensible. Maybe you spoke too quick as usual without first thinking it over?

You speak about an intellectually mutilated woman, you are a prime example of one, living off the illusion of knowledge.

Bro, you seem not to be used to being provided a different perspective, one that opposes yours. You also seem new at holding discussions.

Please refer to the following links to better your discussion skills.

- Etiquette of Debate
- A few guidelines for the political forum (it's posted in the Politics section but is relevant to debates/discussions of all sorts)

Reminder: Getting personal and abusive is a sign of weakness in thought; it's the weapon of the weak.

Oh, and I guess we have different understanding of what "slandering" is. I've given hadiths for every claim I've made about any caliph, so if you think I'm slandering them, don't blame me; blame those who transmitted and compiled the hadiths.

Manana.

[Roshina]

Qrr, again, your trash has been answered in post #36, at least pretend to be a honest poster

~sighs~ There you go again. Calling a different perspective "trash."

You should not be involved in ANY discussions whatsoever becuase you don't know how to debate. If you're willing to hold a mature discussion with someone who's challenging your views, I'm more than happy to continue. Otherwise, I've said all I wanted, and I've given my refutations of the verses you claim show that mut'ah is haraam (most likely, they're not your own arguments but are pasted from somewhere else, but whatever).

I don't like to hold discussions with people who can't handle an opposing perspective. Anyone who reads those verses can see how much they've been "distorted," if you will, to suit your purpose and how you're going to work MUCH harder than that to convince a Shiite that mut'ah marriages are haraam.

I agree with Nadir Shah that you most probably can't even defend Sunni beliefs in front of Shiites.

[MazloomyarMaseed]

I find it very laughable to see people call others as not part of the Muslim Ummah. According to these guys, anybody who disagrees with them is considered not a Muslim.

As time goes by, I feel ashamed of even calling myself a Muslim.

If i had a chance, I would live on top of the highest mountain, as the world will be destroyed by Bigots of very Faith.

[tor_khan]

If i had a chance, I would live on top of the highest mountain, as the world will be destroyed by Bigots of very Faith.

And this,Maseed, is what I said a couple of weeks ago ...

http://www.pashtunforums.com/showpost.php?p=25099&postcount=34

[MazloomyarMaseed]

Nice Tor Khan roara jan

Me and you think very alike.

You know, I really wanted to live in Waziristan and open up a school or a farm there to live there instead of the west, but as you know the current situation wont allow me to.

Its sad you know, I would rather have my people isolated than live in this turmoil and war between faiths and opportunists.

[شمله ور خراساني]

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.

Shi'ites claim that Mutah marriage was never forbidden. Their source is their bundles of fabrications where they rely on narrations from donkeys and bees.

And when they are confronted with these facts, look at how they react.

Sunni Muslims like to say that mut'ah marriages are unfair to women. But they forget that the process of divorce for women according to Sunni legislation are equally, if not more, unfair, since women don't have a say in whether their husbands should divorce them or not and when they should be divorced. At least mut'ah is entirely mutual, and it's not like only one spouse decides when the contract should end. They decide together.

Divorce process for both women and men is equally fair. A man can divorce his wife without intervener from a Shari'ah court. And a woman only via a Shari'ah court. You consider this unfair because you've been brainwashed by Western Kaafir society. There are a list of legitimate reasons why divorce procedure is as such in Shari'ah.

Your Western standards of fair and unfair is useless information since in the West there are for each single father with children at least a dozen single moms with children who live entirely on benefits and wellfare.

Anyway, I find it helpful to quote the Quran here. Verse 4:24 reads:

"Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those (slaves) whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allah ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you seek them (with a dowry) from your property, desiring chastity, not fornication. So with those among them whom you have enjoyed, give them their required due, but if you agree mutually after the requirement (has been determined), there is no sin on you. Surely, Allah is Ever All-Knowing, All-Wise."

Shiite Muslims use this verse in justification of mut'ah, and the term mut'ah actually appears in this verse. (If you must know, the above verse doesn't use the term of "marriage" (or other verses that have appeared in the Quran to mean marriage) when talking about marriage; it uses, instead, the Arabic term "istamta'tum," from where "mut'ah" comes (literally means "pleasure").

SHi'tes don't even believe in Qur'an. THey believe Qur'an was fabricated by Sunni Muslims. And that the original Qur'an is hidden somewhere in a tunnel together with Mahdi.

So I find it quite amusing to see you defending fornicators and producing fornicators false evidence to justify prositutions.

It is getting better and better with you. First you justify homosexuality, now prostitution. What's next?

[MazloomyarMaseed]

Shi'ites claim that Mutah marriage was never forbidden. Their source is their bundles of fabrications where they rely on narrations from donkeys and bees.

And when they are confronted with these facts, look at how they react.






Divorce process for both women and men is equally fair. A man can divorce his wife without intervener from a Shari'ah court. And a woman only via a Shari'ah court. You consider this unfair because you've been brainwashed by Western Kaafir society. There are a list of legitimate reasons why divorce procedure is as such in Shari'ah.

Your Western standards of fair and unfair is useless information since in the West there are for each single father with children at least a dozen single moms with children who live entirely on benefits and wellfare.





SHi'tes don't even believe in Qur'an. THey believe Qur'an was fabricated by Sunni Muslims. And that the original Qur'an is hidden somewhere in a tunnel together with Mahdi.

So I find it quite amusing to see you defending fornicators and producing fornicators false evidence to justify prositutions.

It is getting better and better with you. First you justify homosexuality, now prostitution. What's next?

I agree with you there, in the west, the father has absolutely no rights over children and the courts always favor in the mothers side.

[شمله ور خراساني]

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.



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.

It is quite amusing to see you solely rely on Shi'a fabrications and Western half-truths taught at your university.

The reason why you spread this lies is because just like your friend, Pir Rokhan, you have animocity to Islam and you spread lies to cast doubt among the ignorant young members.

BUt inshaa allah you will see some evidence that contradicts all the lies and fabciractions you are spreading here on Pashtunforums.

[شمله ور خراساني]

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?

Shi'ism is not Islam. They don't believe that Qur'an is authentic. And they believe it was tampered by companions of the prophet muhammad saww.

Also, the prophet Muhammad saww said in an authentic hadith that his nation/ummah shall not gather upon falsehood. Since Shi'ites base their faith on Usool al Kafi Kulayni where narration from donkeys and bees are reported, how can we gather with them?

It's ironic that a Marxist is coming up with such statements regarding religion.

I made a thread for you in politics section about marxism. Why did you chicken out and not reply to it?

[شمله ور خراساني]

Exactly correct. It's one of the biggest problems among Muslims today and always has been. Do you see how one verse (rather, one word, even!) can be interpreted SO differently, depending on who's doing the interpretation?

Anyone who thinks that the Prophet never did allow mut'ah needs to read some hadiths.

I find it interesting how we're basically talking about how something is right or wrong when it has been discussed (with no conclusion, really) for the last 1400+ years. It's funnier that some of us think something's SO obvious when it's clearly not obvious if it's gonna have led to so much controversy and debate among the scholarly world.

Gosh.

Momin relies on fabricated ahadith to convince others that nationalism is part of faith. When he is confronted with the fact that the hadith is fabricated, he goes arround insulting people for being terrorists and extremists.

Mut'ah was allowed initially, but later forbidden. It is common knowledge among Sunni Muslims. And the reason why we are against Mut'ah is the very same reason why it was forbidden.

Momin has hard time to believe this is true because his knowledge of Islam is even less than yours.

[شمله ور خراساني]

OMG! N WAY! You're KIDDING me, buddy!

Wow. I'm speechless.

Again and again, we see the harms and danger of studying something from only ONE perspective -- that even from the point of view of the people we agree with and not from that of those we disagree with. Again and again, I emphasize the fact that in order to understand Shiism, we should study it from Shiites' perspective, not from Sunnis' (the historical enemies of the Shiites) perspective.

Meh, hopefully we'll learn as we grow older.

This is your impression. Since you have absolutely no knowledge of what you are talking about.

We, Sunni Muslims know exactly what Shi'a believe and where they rely on for their reasoning and beliefs. Their books are online on their prominent Shi'i websites where you can read and download them.

Inshaa allah in near future I will post a very large series of quotes from Shi'i books.

[Nadir Shah]

Shi'ism is not Islam. They don't believe that Qur'an is authentic. And they believe it was tampered by companions of the prophet muhammad saww.

Also, the prophet Muhammad saww said in an authentic hadith that his nation/ummah shall not gather upon falsehood. Since Shi'ites base their faith on Usool al Kafi Kulayni where narration from donkeys and bees are reported, how can we gather with them?

It's ironic that a Marxist is coming up with such statements regarding religion.

I made a thread for you in politics section about marxism. Why did you chicken out and not reply to it?

They believe no such thing. The tampering of Quran is an obsession of Hz Bibi Aisha. In one place she claims a goat ate the Koran :

Ibn Majah, Volume 2, Page 39, Narated A’isha:
The verse of stoning and of suckling an adult ten times were revealed, and they were (written) on a paper and kept under my bed. When the Messenger of Allah (SAWW.) expired and we were preoccupied with his death, a goat entered and ate away the paper.

and in another place the honorable lady claims that Hz Usman fiddled with the Quran.


It is interesting to point out that there are numerous traditions reported in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim which allege that many verses of Qur'an are missing.
Al-Bukhari, Al-Sahih, vol. 8 p. 208;
Muslim, Al-Sahih, vol. 3 p. 1317

Sahih Muslim, Al-Sahih, Kitab al-Zakat, vol. 2 p. 726
Al-Bukhari, Al-Sahih, vol. 8 p. 208

The gathering of Hadith was politically motivated. Consider this:

Imam Ali lived the 35 years of his life with the Prophet. Bibi Aisha lived about 9 years with the Prophet. Abu Huraira lived about a year with the Prophet. Yet in the Sahihs 5374 hadith relate to Abu Huraira, 2210 to Bibi Aisha and only 586 to Imam Ali. Why is this so?

[شمله ور خراساني]

@ Mukhtasis: You're giving us someone's interpretation of why Shiism is bad or un-Islamic. Why should I listen to this particular perspective and not the one posed by Shiites or Shiites-supporters instead? What makes one better than the other?

Both sides are using the same verses and giving different interpretations; why should I accept one, or give more attention to one, while rejecting or ignoring the other?

Both sides are using the exact same Book (Quran) as evidence for their beliefs.

Do you not see what's being done here? Do you not see how it's all about interpretation of the Text and not necessarily people's personal wishes?

I think you should stick only to Shi'i version of Islam since it allows prostitution and they recently even made it possible for men to become transsexuals. Since you are so in favor of a society allowing prostitution and homosexuality, Shi'i version of Islam will suite you better.

[Nadir Shah]

Shi'ites claim that Mutah marriage was never forbidden. Their source is their bundles of fabrications where they rely on narrations from donkeys and bees.

And when they are confronted with these facts, look at how they react.






Divorce process for both women and men is equally fair. A man can divorce his wife without intervener from a Shari'ah court. And a woman only via a Shari'ah court. You consider this unfair because you've been brainwashed by Western Kaafir society. There are a list of legitimate reasons why divorce procedure is as such in Shari'ah.

Your Western standards of fair and unfair is useless information since in the West there are for each single father with children at least a dozen single moms with children who live entirely on benefits and wellfare.





SHi'tes don't even believe in Qur'an. THey believe Qur'an was fabricated by Sunni Muslims. And that the original Qur'an is hidden somewhere in a tunnel together with Mahdi.

So I find it quite amusing to see you defending fornicators and producing fornicators false evidence to justify prositutions.

It is getting better and better with you. First you justify homosexuality, now prostitution. What's next?

If anyone is justifying prostitution, it is the glorious book.

On a side note, what is wrong with homosexuality?

[شمله ور خراساني]

They believe no such thing. The tampering of Quran is an obsession of Hz Bibi Aisha. In one place she claims a goat ate the Koran :

Ibn Majah, Volume 2, Page 39, Narated A’isha:
The verse of stoning and of suckling an adult ten times were revealed, and they were (written) on a paper and kept under my bed. When the Messenger of Allah (SAWW.) expired and we were preoccupied with his death, a goat entered and ate away the paper.

and in another place the honorable lady claims that Hz Usman fiddled with the Quran.


It is interesting to point out that there are numerous traditions reported in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim which allege that many verses of Qur'an are missing.
Al-Bukhari, Al-Sahih, vol. 8 p. 208;
Muslim, Al-Sahih, vol. 3 p. 1317

Sahih Muslim, Al-Sahih, Kitab al-Zakat, vol. 2 p. 726
Al-Bukhari, Al-Sahih, vol. 8 p. 208

The gathering of Hadith was politically motivated. Consider this:

Imam Ali lived the 35 years of his life with the Prophet. Bibi Aisha lived about 9 years with the Prophet. Abu Huraira lived about a year with the Prophet. Yet in the Sahihs 5374 hadith relate to Abu Huraira, 2210 to Bibi Aisha and only 586 to Imam Ali. Why is this so?

So are you a Shi'i Marxist?

Since you are quoting now Al-Islam.org.