The Institution of Temporary Marriage in Islam
Before entering a discussion on the legality of temporary marriage in Islam, it is necessary to realise its importance, or lack thereof, in the schism. The truth of the matter is that the difference of opinion between the Shia Muslims and the Sunnis on its legitimacy is just another jurisprudential difference, just like many other that exist, not only between the two groups, but between the various schools of Islamic law in Sunnism.
The attempts of Sunni propagandists and all too often laymen to demonise temporary marriage, based on either pure bias or extreme ignorance, is uncannily familiar to us Muslims, having seen similar ploys led by the Orientalists against issues such as hijab, polygamy, circumcision and many other Islamic concepts. It is indeed a shame to see our brethren cling to the issue of Mutah like a drowning man clings to a life preserve, when the reality is temporary marriage has not only a pretext in the Holy Quran and the Prophetic Traditions, but was practiced by respected companions and their disciples. We hope this essay shall act as a light for those who truly seek wisdom, and for those whose mind has not been plagued with pre-conceived notions and an excessive prejudice.
1) The legality of temporary marriage
Fixed-term marriage is a type of union in which the couple decides beforehand the period of time for which it will last, after which the marriage will come to an end, without a divorce. In Shia fiqh, it is permissible to be contracted with a Muslim, or a Kitabi woman. After the marriage a 45-day iddah is to be observed, contrary to what some of the Wahabi sheiks have been insinuating – that Shias do not believe in iddah for Mutah. No Shia scholar from the old and the new have ever made such a claim!
Imam al-Sadiq was asked about the 'iddah of Mutah, to which he said, “45 days, or a proper menstrual cycle.”
(Wasail al-Shia, Hurr al-Amili, volume 21, page 52)
The Quran
This type of union has a Quranic basis, and to the surprise of many of the Sunnis, has been legislated in the book of Allah, in the following verse, known as the verse of Mutah:
[Forbidden to you] are married woman, except what your right hand possesses. This Allah has written for you, and all other women besides these are permitted to you, so that you may seek them out with your wealth, seeking chastity and not fornication. So when you have contracted temporary marriage with them, then give them their due. There is no sin on you for whatever you agree to after this. Indeed, Allah is the Knowing, Wise. (4:24)
وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاء إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ كِتَابَ اللّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ وَأُحِلَّ لَكُم مَّا وَرَاء ذَلِكُمْ أَن تَبْتَغُواْ بِأَمْوَالِكُم مُّحْصِنِينَ غَيْرَ مُسَافِحِينَ فَمَا اسْتَمْتَعْتُم بِهِ مِنْهُنَّ فَآتُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُنَّ فَرِيضَةً وَلاَ جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ فِيمَا تَرَاضَيْتُم بِهِ مِن بَعْدِ الْفَرِيضَةِ إِنَّ اللّهَ كَانَ عَلِيمًا حَكِيمًا
This verse alone should be sufficient to destroy the Wahabi claims that Mutah is nothing more than a form of prostitution. If it was immoral, then how could it possible be allowed in the Holy Quran. Surely we seek refuge from such blasphemy! All too often, the opponent will try and wriggle out of the conundrum he has found himself in by claiming the verse is not referring to Mutah at all, because the word used is “istamta’tum” (done Mutah with), but which can also be taken simply to mean ‘seek pleasure from’. However, this does not match with the traditional Sunni exegesis and arguments.
Abu Nadhra narrated:
I read for Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, “Then as to those whom you sought enjoyment from, give them their dowries as appointed” and he said to me, ““Then as to those whom you seek enjoyment from for a prescribed time.” I said, “We do not read it like that.” Ibn Abbas said, “By Allah, it was revealed like that.”
This hadith is authentic to the standards of Muslim.
(Mustadrak, Hakim, Volume 2 Page 276 and was declared authentic by Dhahabi in his Takhlis)
The above authentic narration demonstrates two things. Firstly, to the testimony of the great companion Abdullah Ibn Abbas, 4:24 is indeed referring to temporary marriage, and he was very clear on this. Secondly, one notices that Ibn Abbas added the term “for a prescribed time” (ajilin musama) to the verse. We ask our Sunni brethren, is this not tahreef which you continuously accuse us of believing in?
Furthermore, in both Tafseer Ibn Kathir (http://quran.al-islam.com/Tafseer/DispTafsser.asp?l=arb&taf=KATHEER&nType=1&nSora=4&nAya=24) and Tafseer al-Kabeer Volume 3 on page 95, we see that they both hold the verse is referring to temporary marriage, and this is the mainstream classical view held my most Muslims.
Now that we have ascertained the subject of 4:24, we move on to the next retarded argument put forth by our beloved brethren. Was the verse abrogated? It is claimed that 4:24 was abrogated by the following verse:
“As for those who guard their private parts except from their spouses or what their right hand possess” (23:5)
To this our simple reply is, 23:5 is a Makkan verse and 4:24 is a Medinite verse. So this Sunni argument does not tally chronologically.
Furthermore, in an authentic hadith recorded by Imam Suyuti in his Tafsir, we find the testimony of Imam Ali that the verse was not abrogated. It is often claimed by the Sunnis that the supposed silence of the Imams on the legitimacy of Mutah proves they agreed with it being forbidden. What silence? There are hundreds of traditions in which the Imams, including Ali, defend the Islamic law and oppose what is halal being made haram:
Narrated Abdulrazaq and Abu Dawoud in (book) Nasikh and narrated ibn Jareer from al-Hakam that he was asked whether the verse on Mut'ah has been abrogated, he said: "No, Ali said that if it were not Umar forbidding it, no one would commit (the sin) of fornication except the wretched.”
(Tafseer Dur al-Manthur, Volume 2 page 140)
http://www.al-eman.com/Islamlib/viewchp.asp?BID=248&CID=104#s1
The above tradition has been transmitted with an authentic isnad, Muhammad bin al-Muthna was labelled trustworthy by Imam Dhababi. Muhammad bin Jafar is one of the most accurate narrators in the words of Dhahabi, as was Shuba Ibn Hajjaj and Al-Hakam bin Utebah al-Kindi (refer to Mizan al ’Itidal fi Naqd al-Rijal)
Hadith
Moving on, we would like to take a look at the status of temporary marriage during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet Mohammed.
The following are a selection of hadiths from Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim on this issue:
Sahih Bukhari
Volume 7, Book 62, Number 13o:
Narrated 'Abdullah:
We used to participate in the holy battles led by Allah's Apostle and we had nothing (no wives) with us. So we said, "Shall we get ourselves castrated?" He forbade us that and then allowed us to marry women with a temporary contract and recited to us: -- 'O you who believe ! Make not unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you, but commit no transgression.' (5.87)
Sahih Muslim
Book 007, Number 2874:
Abd Nadra reported: While I was in the company of Jibir, a person came and said: There is difference of opinion amomg Ibn Abbas and Ibn Zubair about two Mut'as (benefits, Tamattul in Hajj and temporary marriage with women), whereupon jibir said: We have been doing this during the lifetime of Allah's Messenger (way peace be upon him), and then 'Umar forbade us to do so, and we never resorted to them.
Sahih Muslim
Book 008, Number 3249:
Jabir b. 'Abdullah reported: We contracted temporary marriage giving a handful of (tales or flour as a dower during the lifetime of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and durnig the time of Abu Bakr until 'Umar forbade it in the case of 'Amr b. Huraith.
Sahih Muslim
Book 008, Number 3247:
Salama b. al. Akwa' and Jabir b. Abdullah reported: Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) came to us and ordered us to contract temporary marriage.
The above hadiths highlight three important points: It was indeed Omar who forbade Mutah and that many companions opposed this, points we shall get to later, and thirdly the Prophet actively permitted, nay encouraged, his followers to do Mutah. This is important as when we put forth these hadiths to Sunnis, the usual point they make is, “Well, alcohol was also allowed during the early days of Islam but was banned later. Likewise, Mutah was allowed but was banned later at Khaybar.” Our reply is simple. Look at the below hadiths. Do we ever read the Prophet advising or ordering his companions to drink alcohol? Never, God forbid.
عَبْدِ الْمَلِكِ بْنِ الرَّبِيعِ بْنِ سَبْرَةَ الْجُهَنِيِّ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ جَدِّهِ، قَالَ أَمَرَنَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم بِالْمُتْعَةِ عَامَ الْفَتْحِ حِينَ دَخَلْنَا مَكَّةَ
Abdul Malik Ibn Rabe’ Ibn Sabra al-Juhni, narrates from his father, from his grandfather, that he said: The Messenger of Allah ordered us to do Mutah in the year of the conquest upon entering Makkah”.
(Sahih Muslim #3490, Book of Marriage)
In the Mohammed Muhsin Khan, the above hadith’s translation was deliberately adulterated, and the word “ordered” was changed to “permitted”, whilst we can clearly see in the Arabic original, the word “amarna” is used, which means ‘ordered us’. Now, the question we pose is, “Will the Prophet of God, the best of creation, ever ORDER his companions to commit prostitution or commit an immoral act?” Surely not, just like he did not order or even encourage his companions to drink alcohol during the days it was permitted. A similar narration is found in Fakhr Razi’s tafsir.
عمران بن الحصين فانه قال: نزلت آية المتعة في كتاب الله تعالى ولم ينزل بعدها آية تنسخها وأمرنا بها رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وتمتعنا بها
Imran Ibn Husain narrated, “The verse of Mutah was revealed in the book of Allah, and there did not came any other verse after that to abrogate it; and the Prophet ordered us to do it, so we did it at the time of Allah's Apostle”
(Tafseer al-Kabeer, Razi)
The Companions and Mutah
To the surprise of the Sunnis who we have debated with, the companions of the Holy Prophet used to have similar debates with regards to the legitimacy of Mutah. This is proof that Mutah is a matter of jurisprudence, which the Muslims, Sunni and Shia, disagree upon, just like other matters over which there are disagreements between the Sunnis themselves and their multiple schools of jurisprudence. How can the Sunnis claim that Mutah is immoral, and how can the Sunnis laughably and pathetically claim, that Shiism is immoral and wrong, due to the consensus it has reached over Mutah, when the companions who are considered by the Sunnis all to be guiding stars and pious upright individuals, debated over this issue and some of them ruled on Mutah’s legitimacy.
The list of companions who permitted this is extensive, but Ibn Hazm, the Wahabi darling, lists some of them:
“After the Prophet Mohammed’s death, Mutah was considered to be permissible by Ibn Mas’ood, Muawiya, Abu Sa’eed, Ibn Abbas, Salama, the sons of Ummaya Ibn Khalaf, Jabir, Amr Ibn Huraith…and from the tabi’een (second generation of Muslims) it was considered permissible by Tawoos, Saeed Ibn Jubayr, Ataa’, and all the jurists of Makkah.”
(Muntaqa, Volume 2, Page 520)
All the early scholars of Makkah!!! Ibn Abbas, the scholar of this ummah! etc. How come when these people say Mutah is halal, the Sunnis claim it is a legitimacy exercise of ijtehad, but when the Shia reach similar verdicts, they are labelled the worst of labels, and are attacked in public forums and universities and literature.
Ibn Abbas (ra)
Ibn Abbas was one of the most prominent companion to consider Mutah legitimate, and his disciples Saeed Ibn Jubayr and Tawoos reached similar rulings, and this latter fact is admitted by the Islam Online website, run by Sh.Qaradawi.
Ibn Hajar writes in Fathul Bari fi Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari:
قال ابن بطال: روى أهل مكة واليمن عن ابن عباس إباحة المتعة، وروي عنه الرجوع بأسانيد ضعيفة وإجازة المتعة عنه أصح، وهو مذهب الشيعة.
Ibn Batal said: “The People of Mecca and Yemen narrated from Ibn Abbas that Mutah is permissible. It is narrated by a weak chain that Ibn Abbas revoked its permissibility. His considering Mutah to be permissible is more verifiable, and that is the school of the Shia.”
(Fathul Bari, Ibn Hajar, Volume 9 Page 73)
Sahih Muslim
Book 007, Number 2854:
Muslim al-Qurri reported: I asked Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with them) about Tamattu' in Hajj and he permitted it, whereas Ibn Zubair had forbidden it. He (Ibn 'Abbas) said: This is the mother of Ibn Zubair (Asma’ Bint Abu Bakr) who states that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) had permitted it, so you better go to her and ask her about it. He (Muslim al-Qurri said): So we went to her and she was a bulky blind lady and she said: Verily Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) permitted it.
Asma Bint Abu Bakr, as we can see, from the above hadith was referred to by Ibn Abbas as he was debating Mutah! Why was this? Because Asma’ herself did Mutah with Zubayr Ibn Awwam, one of the Ashara Mubashara bil Jannah in Sunni hadith, and of this marriage two sons were born!
Yes, indeed this marriage took place in the period Sunnis admit Mutah was permissible, but if it is indeed prostitution or immoral, how could the daughter of the great companion Abu Bakr do it? Did Abu Bakr raise his daughters to be prostitutes? Is this what the Sunnis accuse him of? We say, no, Asma was merely doing something halal, but why don’t the Sunnis label her a whore, astaghfurillah! (Reference: Tafseer Kabeer, Volume 3 p. 95, Sunan al Kabeer, Bayhaqi, Volume 7, page 5)
Our brothers might then say, Asma’ and Zubayr were still affected by the Jahiliya mentality. We reply by saying, this marriage occurred in Medina, 15 or 16 years after they converted: years after the boycott, the hijra, Badr and other significant issues in the history of Islam. Is it seriously feasible to claim these two prominent individuals had yet to give up their Pre-Islamic penchant for “prostitution and immorality”, as the Sunnis put it. Furthermore, Asma’ was only 14 when she converted to Islam.
The Sunnis will say, ‘Yes Ibn Abbas did initially believe in the permissibility of Mutah, but then recanted his view after Imam Ali briefed him on this’, and will point to a hadith in Sahih Muslim where Imam Ali and Ibn Abbas discuss this issue. We completely knock down this fairy tale of Ibn Abbas recanting his view, by pointing to the following hadith. Here it is said that Abdullah Ibn Abbas is blind. However, he was not blind during the lifetime of Ali, and only lost his eyesight towards the end of his life!
Sahih Muslim
Book 008, Number 3261:
'Urwa b. Zabair reported that 'Abdullah b. Zubair (Allah be pleased with him) stood up (and delivered an address) in Mecca saying: Allah has made blind the hearts of some people as He has deprived them of eyesight that they give religious verdict in favour of temporary marriage, while he was alluding to a person (Ibn 'Abbas). Ibn Abbas called him and said: You are an uncouth person, devoid of sense. By my life, Mut'a was practised during the lifetime of the leader of the pious (he meant Allah's Messenger, may peace be upon him), and Ibn Zubair said to him: just do it yourselves, and by Allah, if you do that I will stone you with your stones.
Omar: the one who banned the two mutahs
It is time to deal with the bitter truth that it was not the Prophet of Allah who banned Mutah, but rather Omar Ibn Khattab, a man who has no right to change the religion of Islam.
During his caliphate, Omar made a speech banning both Mutah of women (temporary marriage) and Mutah of hajj. It cannot be denied that this was a very controversial announcement, as many of the companions themselves believed, and rightfully so, that the Prophet of God never forbade them.
“There were two mutahs during the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah that I forbid and will punish who practices them: the Mutah of women and the Mutah of hajj.” (Razi says), “No one denies this narration.”
(Tafsir al-Kabeer, Razi, Volume 4, Page 42)
We see here Ibn Abbas denying the Prophet banned it, and asserting that iw as Omar who did.
Ibn Abbas narrated, “The Messenger of Allah gave us the order to practise Mutah, and it existed.” ‘Urwah ibn Zubayr said, “Abu Bakr and Umar stopped this”. Ibn Abbas responded, “I'm telling you what the Messenger of Allah deemed permissible and you're telling me what Abu Bakr and Umar did. I see that you shall be destroyed.”
(Musnad, Ahmed Bin Hanbal, Volume 5, Page 228)
Even Abdullah Ibn Omar, the caliph’s own son, had a problem with his father’s announcement. Note, many olden-day copies of Sunan Tirmidhi did not have the words “of hajj”, indicating Ibn Omar shared this view for both Mutahs.
“Abdullah ibn Umar was questioned about the mutah of Hajj. He said: It is halal.” The questioner then asked, “But your father has forbidden it?” He replied: When my father forbids something practiced by the Messenger of Allah then what is the better option for me to pursue: to follow the order of my father or that of the Messenger of Allah? The man said: Certainly you have to obey the commandment of the Messenger of Allah.”
(Sunan Tirmidhi #832)
A man asked Ibn Omar when I was with him on mutah with women. Ibn Omar was angered and said, “By Allah, we were not adulterers during the time of the Prophet.”
(Musnad, Ahmed, Volume 2, #5536)
Analysing the Sunni hadiths which claim the Prophet forbade Mutah
The Sunni hadiths which claim that the Prophet Mohammed banned Mutah are confused and dubious. However, the picture that can be drawn is that the Prophet supposedly banned Mutah at Khaybar in 7H, and then later permitted it again at the conquest of Mecca a couple of years later (as if the companions were still unable to remove their jahiliya tendencies 22 years after converting) before banning it until the day of Judgement.
Overall, the hadith which state that Mutah has been made haram until the day of Judgement are ahadi narrations. It is impossible that a religious institution legislated by Allah in his book could be abrogated by an ahadi report, which do not even hold up to close scrutiny. If there was indeed a hadith banning Mutah, why did Omar not rely on it when making his controversial announcement!
Alternative forms of Mutah in Sunnism
Many of the Sunni men of the cloth have legislated and authorized the institution of Misyar, which is the latest craze in Saudi Arabia and Egypt, and has been authorized by the like of Sheikh al-Azhar Mohammed Saeed Tantawi, Yusuf Qaradawi, Bin Bazz, Bin Uthaymeen and most Saudi scholars.
It is the nightmare of women’s right activists, and it is indeed ironic that many Sunnis would like to demonise Mutah when they themselves practice and permit a practice which is nothing more than a visiting man’s marriage.
What misyar involves is a man making a misyar contract with a woman, and he will not be entitled to offer her any maintenance, money or other financial duties. In other words, there are no strings attached and the man need not worry about providing for the women. Now, this man can visit the woman as much as he wants, or as little as he wants, and whenever he visits her, he merely derives sexual pleasure from her, and leaves her until the next time, which can be several months later. In other words, it can involve treating women like a piece of meat.
The Arab Newspaper, Arab News, writes:
To some, it’s an unthinkable act… Those who would not consider it for themselves would not allow it for kin, be it sisters, brothers, sons or daughters. However, among the men who would consider it themselves, only two would find such a marriage acceptable for a female relative… More than 86 percent of the women 20-40 would not even consider such a marriage for themselves… Most of the women respondents called it “legal prostitution” or objected to the lack of women’s rights in misyar marriages… such marriages are not always blissful. Former and current misyar spouses said it can become a nightmare if pregnancy results from the union or if there are already children from former marriages… “Unfortunately, misyar marriage has made it easier for irresponsible, immature individuals to enter a relationship that is supposed to be based on credibility, reliability and respect,” said Abu Zaid, an elderly marriage official. “This isn’t the case. It’s treated as a temporary solution for lust… Many parents and children of misyar wives stated that they felt the woman as being sold short in such a marriage.
Marriage with the Intention of Divorce
In the 1990s Bin Bazz, the esteemed Wahabi theologian and Mufti of Saudi Arabia, issued an edict permitting a man to marry a woman, whilst intending to divorce her and not disclosing this intention to her. The fatwa is as follows, and can be viewed on his Arabic site (http://www.binbaz.org.sa/index.php?pg=mat&type=fatawa&id=26)
To this we say, Allahu Akbar Kabeera. How dare the Wahabis vilify Mutah when their liege-lord Bin Bazz permitted an act which any individual can see is immoral to the first order. In Mutah, both parties are fully aware of the actions, and the women agrees to the date of expiry etc. whereas in that marriage, the women is being deceived. She is deceived into getting married and fulfilling half her religion whilst all the man is interested in is a short-term relationship before leaving the poor women.
La Howla Wa La Quwata Ila Billah Al-Aliyul Adheem
Is Temporary Marriage Immoral?
Some Sunnis like to mention how in their eyes Mutah is immoral, and is nothing more than prostitution, despite the fact it is impermissible to contract a fixed-term or permanent marriage contract with a prostitute.
Question: Is it permissible to marry a lewd woman (prostitute)?
Answer: If a woman is known as a lewd person, it will not be permissible to marry her till she has genuinely repented, and similarly, it is not permissible to marry a man known for his lustful character, till he has genuinely repented.
(Ayatollah Sistani)
It is also mentioned that there exists prostitution houses in Tehran operating under the guise of Mutah, despite the fact a two-month waiting period has to be observed after the expiry of the union. We thus notice that many temporary marriage contracts are in fact illegitimate, and it is certainly an institution which can be easily abused, like many other practices in Islam. If we were to look at the Sunni practice of the three-time divorce, in which a wife is divorced from her husband after he simply says “I divorce you” three times, we would see that this has indeed caused a lot of struggle for the women and is one of main points which the non-Muslims target and label as oppressive to women, and backward.
The Sunni angst and attitude against Mutah truly embodies the infamous proverb “Do not throw stones when you live in the glass house”. Let us flick through the pages of Sahih Muslim, the second most prestigious and authentic Hadith book in their sect, and look at how they have hadiths demeaning the Prophet Mohammed:
Sahih Muslim
Book 008, Number 3424:
' A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Sahla bint Suhail came to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: O Messenger of Allah, I see on the face of Abu Hudhaifa (signs of disgust) on entering of Salim (who is an ally) into (our house), whereupon Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: Suckle him. She said: How can I suckle him as he is a grown-up man? Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) smiled and said: I already know that he is a young man 'Amr has made this addition in his narration that he participated in the Battle of Badr and in the narration of Ibn 'Umar (the words are): Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) laughed.
Sahih Muslim
Book 008, Number 3425:
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hadhaifa, lived with him and his family in their house. She (i. e. the daughter of Suhail came to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: Salim has attained (purbety) as men attain, and he understands what they understand, and he enters our house freely, I, however, perceive that something (rankles) in the heart of Abu Hudhaifa, whereupon Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said to her: Suckle him and you would become unlawful for him, and (the rankling) which Abu Hudhaifa feels in his heart will disappear. She returned and said: So I suckled him, and what (was there) in the heart of Abu Hudhaifa disappeared.
Sahih Muslim
Book 008, Number 3429:
Umm Salama, the wife of Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him), used to say that all wives of Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) disclaimed the idea that one with this type of fosterage (having been suckled after the proper period) should come to them. and said to 'A'isha: By Allah, we do not find this but a sort of concession given by Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) only for Salim, and no one was ging to be allowed to enter (our houses) with this type of fosterage and we do not subscribe to this view.
Allahu Akbar. How can this behaviour be expected of Muslims, and of Arabs? This is against the religion, and the culture, and the fitra. Will our Sunni friends allow their mothers, sisters, wives and daughters to breast-feed us? Why would they not when they see the Prophet’s companions as a precedent?
The role of temporary marriage
Islam, the perfect and complete religion of God, is undoubtedly a doctor for the social problems and issues faced by communities and individuals. One of these issues, and perhaps the most significant, is the natural feeling of sexual desire. Allah has prescribed the solution, so to speak, for the channeling of sexual desire in the form of marriage of the opposite gender, and if not only one wife, two or three or four. However, permanent marriage, as many of the brothers and sisters would be very much aware, is a rather convoluted process unfortunately. Despite the Prophetic advice of marrying young, we find in the Muslim communities a widespread problem involving finance, age and other issues which force the young Muslim man to suppress his sexual desire until he reaches his late-twenties or thirties, when it finally becomes feasible for him to marry.
When permanent marriage is the only legitimate means to have sex, and you live in a community where heterosexual relationships begin at the average age of 15, and when you are bombarded with sexual innuendos and media every day, and when permanent marriage is sadly a distant possibility (we see this problem manifest in both the West and in the lands of the Muslims), then most commonly than not the man or the woman, who are otherwise good Muslims, turn to sin. I do not want to sound melodramatic, but if you are 23 and unmarried it is indeed very likely you have sinned with yourself a number of times, an act which is greater in the eyes of the Lord than we can ever imagine. Brothers from our community are already adopting the western lifestyle and are dating girls. We find that in Morocco 50% of people have had sex before marriage, and there are similar statistics for the rest of the Arab World. The number of AIDS sufferers in Saudi Arabia numbers a staggering 100,000 people, according to the most conservative estimates. Homosexuality is steadily on the rise in the Arab world, as are sex crimes such as rape. The cause of all these problems is the inability for the mature man to channel his sexual feeling and desire into halal; to avoid adultery and committing sin. We find this channel in Mutah. In the words of the great companion, Ibn Abbas, Mutah is nothing but a mercy from Allah. It is certainly a mercy and a blessing for our youth who desperately wish to protect their private parts and get married, but conditions prevent them from that. We ask you, o dear reader, what is worse? A – Doing Mutah or B – Committing Adultery. Open your eyes, and broaden your horizons. This is the religion of intellect, and mercy, and humanity, and compassion. Temporary marriage is the solution for solving the “problem” that all humans “suffer” from, that of the flesh. There are obvious conditions and regulations one must follow. It’s a blessing from Allah, but it may have side effects if abused. It is also important to keep in mind that temporary marriage isn’t always a short-term arrangement to solve carnal problems. There are many other situations in which Mutah is positively used. For instance, if one’s female study partner is a woman, Mutah is quickly contracted so that they can be together in the same room. An elderly lady may require someone to transport her and there are indeed many other situations.
The Position of Temporary Marriage in Shia Islam
Temporary marriage is permissible according to the consensus of the Ja’afari school. Unfortunately, we find some Sunni propagandists resorting to worthless tactics in their war of propaganda and hatred, and try and demonize the position of temporary marriage in Shia Islam, and another tactic employed is trying to cast doubt on its permissibility in Jaafari fiqh.
Imam Ali said, “Temporary Marriage and Donkey Meat were made forbidden by the Prophet on the Day of Khaybar” (Tahdhib al-Ahkam, Volume 7, Page 251)
Do Shias consider this Hadith authentic, and do they claim Imam Ali was saying this in taqiyyah?
The above hadith found in Tahdhib al-Ahkam of Sheikh Tusi, as well as in the two Sunni sahihs, is fabricated. Imam Ali did not say that at all.
The chain of narrators contains Amro Ibn Khaled, who is a Sunni, and Hussain Ibn Alwan, who is also a Sunni. Furthermore, there is a large gap between the sub-narrator and Imam Ali, and it is not possible for him to have heard him say this.
Imam Khoei said in his book, The Prolegomena to the Quran on page 322, “What has been narrated from Imam Ali on the prohibition of Mutah is completely fabricated”.
As for the question of taqiyyah, it has been mentioned by Sheikh al-Tusi in his comments on this hadith, that the individual who was doing taqiyyah (dissimulation) in narrating this hadith, was the Shia narrator Zaid, who narrated this hadith due to pressures from the tyrannical government and their oppression of the adherents of Shia Islam.
Mohammed Kashani writes in Al-Wafi,
"Attributing taqiyah to the commander of the Faithful in relation to such a narration is impossible, but is possible if it is attributed to some of the narrators"
(Volume 3 Page 55)
