[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Sheraz CT: *
Mutah is allowed and that is in Quran.
[/QUOTE]
The Quran I read has no mentioning of it. Can you please, if it is possible for you and you yourself has read it, post a reference. I bet you will go and try to find the reference now :-p
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by armughal: *
a married woman whose husband is with her can not be taken as a slave....
[/QUOTE]
neither can a married woman perform muta.
the notion of "adultery" which you repeatedly mentioned arises with the case of a married man. answer two things
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by jhappi: *
The Quran I read has no mentioning of it. Can you please, if it is possible for you and you yourself has read it, post a reference. I bet you will go and try to find the reference now :-p
[/QUOTE]
no jhappi..read my post again..i said its a hot topic these days..meaning there are other threads already opened..i will just let u go and visit them...moo latkaa ker nahi aana ab mere saamnay dobara :)
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Sheraz CT: *
no jhappi..read my post again..i said its a hot topic these days..meaning there are other threads already opened..i will just let u go and visit them...moo latkaa ker nahi aana ab mere saamnay dobara :)
[/QUOTE]
Here goes all the reference from Quran :-)
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by jhappi: *
Here goes all the reference from Quran :-)
[/QUOTE]
no its still there..u just gotta make an effort :)
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Sheraz CT: *
no its still there..u just gotta make an effort :)
[/QUOTE]
let's say I did not find it:) will you try to help me:)?
armughal sahab, jawab dey dein..
i aint got all day!
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ravage: *
neither can a married woman perform muta.
the notion of "adultery" which you repeatedly mentioned arises with the case of a married man. answer two things
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by jhappi: *
let's say I did not find it:) will you try to help me:)?
[/QUOTE]
i WILL help you my brother, i hope u learn something new today:
Allah, to whom belong Might and Majesty, said:
(...Except the forbidden women) the rest are lawful unto you to seek them with gifts from your property (i.e., dowry), provided that you desire protection (from sin), not fornication. So for whatever you have had of pleasure (Istamta'tum) with them by the contract, give unto them their appointed wages as a duty. And there is no sin for you in what you both agree (in extending the contract) after fulfilling the (first) duty. Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Wise. (Quran 4:24)
: . . | : | . . : : : | | .
4,p, 9 . _8 q_7 | . _8 q, |9 . _8,o 4, o_,e,o,w | |_o_9
: / () / /. () / () . (
In the above verse, the Arabic equivalent of the word "marriage" or any of its derivatives has NOT been used. Rather the derivative of word "Mut'a" (pleasure/temporary marriage) has been used, i.e., "Istamta'tum". The word Istamta'a is the tenth verbal form of the root m-t-a. As we will show shortly, the word Istamta'a has also been widely used in the authentic Sunni collections for Temporary Marriage. Of course, Mut'a is one type of marriage, but some of it's regulations are different than the permanent marriage, including the fact that the couple can extend this contract by mutual agreement as the end of verse specifies.
Moreover, if we look at the Sunni commentaries of Quran, many Sunni scholars such as Fakhr al-Razi confirm that the above verse (4:24) was revealed about the Temporary Marriage (Mut'a). They straightforwardly mentioned that temporary marriage became Halaal (permitted) DUE TO the above verse, but they assert that it was later prohibited. It is astonishing that many Sunni commentators mentioned under the above verse that:
Ali (RA) said: The Mut'a is a mercy from Allah to his servants. If it were not for Umar forbidding it, no one would commit (the sin) of fornication except the wretched (Shaqi; an utmost wrong-doer)."
| | | || : : : || |
o > |,_c |_8, 4_||| o_7 4_o_7 4_e,o|| . |
. . ( / / ()
: ^ | || . . | : : || . | | | |
_o_w ||| , |_o 4_e,o|| . c _8, o_c . | || q_|
(S (_S / () (S / () /
Sunni references:
Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Tha'labi, under commentary of verse 4:24 of Quran;
Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v3, p200, commentary of verse 4:24;
Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, under commentary of verse 4:24 with authentic chain of narrators, v8, p178, Tradition #9042;
Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Suyuti, v2, p140, from several chain of transmitters;
Tafsir al-Qurtubi, v5, p130, under commentary of verse 4:24 of Quran;
Tafsir Ibn Hayyan, v3, p218, under commentary of verse 4:24 of Quran;
Tafsir Nisaboori, by al-Nisaboori (8th century);
Ahkam al-Quran, by Jassas, v2, p179, under commentary of verse 4:24.
A very similar tradition has also been narrated by Ibn Abbas (RA), and was mentioned by al-Tabari and al-Tha'labi in their Tafsir of Quran.
It is interesting to note that Umar did not attribute the prohibition of Mut'a to the Prophet (PBUH&HF). They were others who did that after Umar mainly to justify what he did. Umar clearly mentioned that: "Mut'a WAS permitted at the time of the Prophet and I PROHIBIT it!" The great Sunni scholar, Fakhr al-Razi, who has been given the title of "Imam al-Mushakkikeen" (the leader of ever-questioners/ever-doubtful) by the Sunnis, in his voluminous commentary of Quran mentioned under the verse of Temporary Marriage that:
Umar said: Two types of Mut'a were (legal) during the time of the Prophet and I forbid them both, and I punish those who commit it.
They are: Mut'a of pilgrimage and Mut'a of women.
Sunni references:
Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Fakhr al-Razi, v3, p201 under verse 4:24
Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p52
there is more text regarding this but aisa na ho aap yehi parh ker ghabraa jayen :)
No No keep pasting 
thanks for all the taunts. nice way of dawah:k:
come on yaar..insan hoon ghalti ho jaati hai..i even said that i wont get into any shia sunni debate but our sunni brother just keeps on bringing these topics and try to offend us..i should have more tolerence but its not that easy na
Here is what I found out to be the translation of 4:24
Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus hath Allah ordained (Prohibitions) against you: Except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property,- desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, **after a dower is prescribed, agree Mutually (to vary it), **there is no blame on you, and Allah is All-knowing, All-wise.
the difference in both translation is basically in the varying of agreement. What you posted suggests that it is about contract marriage (Mut'a) while what I found, it simply says about dowry or "haq Meh'r"
:-)
o bhayeeeeeeeeeeeeee you should have also read the text under that ayat..it talks bout the word "Istamta'tum" and that word has been used for temp marriage
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Sheraz CT: *
Rainmaker...if mutah was supposedly a bad thing why would Prophet (pbuh&up) allow it in the first place?
[/QUOTE]
he said that it was present in the arab culture before islam. so technically, it had to be prohibited in the first place rather than be allowed. allah knows best.
Wa'Salam
i havent yet had a single answer to the question of why mutaa is considered immoral while enjoying slave girls (potentially against their will) not? all arguments, lineage, adultery, promiscuity that are used against mutaa apply there as well, in my opinion to a greater degree, since slavery does not have the kind of protection laws mutaa does, in my knowledge.
I think some of you are forgetting about the paganistic roots of mut'a, how it was practiced by the Idol worshipors of Arabia before the advent of Islam. It was the Holy Prophet (pbuh) who outlawed many of the medieval beliefs that prevailed including the practice of mut'a. Thus the vast majority of Islamic scholars have declared that mut'a is not permissable in Islam.
[quote]
I think some of you are forgetting about the paganistic roots of mut'a, how it was practiced by the Idol worshipors of Arabia before the advent of Islam.
[/quote]
so was slavery.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ravage: *
i havent yet had a single answer to the question of why mutaa is considered immoral while enjoying slave girls (potentially against their will) not? all arguments, lineage, adultery, promiscuity that are used against mutaa apply there as well, in my opinion to a greater degree, since slavery does not have the kind of protection laws mutaa does, in my knowledge.
[/QUOTE]
Slaves were had by either war or trading...Slavery (not the kind practiced by the white animals in America) but the one prescribed in Islam was an act of kindness upon the nation that was defeated...
Let's say a nation overcomes another nation, what is to be done about the living inhabitants of the vanquished nation? Do the women of that nation go about being raped by every passerby? Or get by by having promiscous sex for food and shelter...That would spread disease and immorality in the land...As a result Muslims were allowed to own those people under strict Islamic ordinances...They were simple, yet harshly imposed 1) What you wear, your slave shall wear, 2) what you eat, your slave shall eat, 3) what you sleep on, your slave shall sleep on...
As a result of such slavery, the people of the vanquished nation found a place to sleep eat and drink, and all they needed to do was work for their master, who being a Muslim, went to great lengths to provide a suitable atmosphere for his slaves...And since he owned them, the slave girls were rightly the property of the master, to satisfy her basic, her religious and sexual needs, as a result impropriety and promiscuity was stopped...
Muta is merely having sex outside of marriage and is plain and simple adultery...
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Sheraz CT: *
come on yaar..insan hoon ghalti ho jaati hai..i even said that i wont get into any shia sunni debate but our sunni brother just keeps on bringing these topics and try to offend us..i should have more tolerence but its not that easy na
[/QUOTE]
who started the other thread sheeraz...?
:) lajawab, you and I both know that I could come up with an equally
"convincing", thoroughly justification after the act scenario with very limited application.
there are other, less sexually oriented ways of being kind to women who's husbands were killed in battle. if slavery was the answer, would divorcees not become slaves then?
furthermore, slave girls were acquired through trading too. there your whole argument takes even more stretching to fit, no?