Non Contracted Mu'tah

[lolwatever]

hold on, is the convincing fatwa the one by ibn baz or no? what did inb baz use to say its ok?

lol no the arabic one is by (i think ibn uthaymeen...) he quoted the fiqh principle saying that intention is like a condition and its just deceieving.. hence its haram

the first link.. that'st he ibn baz fatwa in audio form.. he's speaking himself... he was an old man hence the cranky voice.

salam

 

[Malaikah]

the first link.. that'st he ibn baz fatwa in audio form.. he's speaking himself... he was an old man hence the cranky voice.

but what did he say?? youre forgetting not every one understands arabic lol

 

[Umar001]

I think the problem is that you are extrapolating what he said to imply something that wasnt mentioned explicity in the article. I think its probably best not to do that, as it could result with misinterpretation. If you really wanna know the answer inshaallah just look up the issue a bit more and see what the shiek had to say on the issue.

My gut instinct tells me that he probably agrees that marriage with the intention of divorce even though it is not mentioned in the contract is haram, just because he doesnt want to call it mut'ah doesnt mean it automatically makes it ok...

Thank you for your helping me on realising my mistake, though it would help me alot if you showed me where I done wrong, I am just reading the article and understanding.

I dont know what am doing wrong, the shaikh put his position and that is the position I take, what am I doing wrong? Please point it out clearly and be patient with me inshaAllah.

^ actually ibn baz reckons its ok. he's got a fatwa on it somewhere..... but i'm not in a position to say whether he's right or wrong coz i hav no idea.

and btw i havnt read the original article.. but doesnt mutah entail no wali involved n stuff? which what makes it even more haram?

I have read that it is just temporary as explained above.

 

[Malaikah]

Ok from the Above I understand that it is allowed if its not in the contract, BUT the only reason it would then not be allowed is if deception is INVOLVED.

The shaykh says "If the women knew that the man only intends to be married with her for that specific time, she would not agree to the marriage nor would her family."

But what if one told the woman and she agreed also?

Then this would be allowed, right?

Ok... see that reasoning there? That wasnt the opinion the the sheikh... he never said that explicitly in the article... but he did mention that some scholars reckon its ok, and not that he thinks so...

so do you see how you kinda extrapolated that a bit too much there? but its ok anyway because you were asking, not demanding that it is true.. so no harm done inshaallah.

lolwatever... can u give a summary of the arabic thing please? what did sheikh ibn baz say to support his stance?

 

[Umar001]

Assalamu Aleykum,

Ok from the Above I understand that it is allowed if its not in the contract, BUT the only reason it would then not be allowed is if deception is INVOLVED.

The shaykh says "If the women knew that the man only intends to be married with her for that specific time, she would not agree to the marriage nor would her family."

But what if one told the woman and she agreed also?

Then this would be allowed, right?

Ok... see that reasoning there? That wasnt the opinion the the sheikh... he never said that explicitly in the article... but he did mention that some scholars reckon its ok, and not that he thinks so...

In my opinion, such a marriage is not Mut'ah since it does not meet the definition of Mut'ah. However, it is still forbidden since it is a type of deception of the wife and her family. The Prophet (sallallaahu ‘alaihi-wasallam) has forbidden deception and mendacity. If the women knew that the man only intends to be married with her for that specific time, she would not agree to the marriage nor would her family. In the same way, he would not be pleased to marry his daughter to a man who intends to divorce her when he has fulfilled his need from her. How can he be pleased with doing to others what he would not be pleased to have done to himself? This goes against the foundation of faith.

If you mean that I need to have the Shaykh say in english "The reason it is forbiden is because there is deception, if the deception is not there then it is not forbiden"

Then I see your point, but anyone who reads it can see for themselves, the shaykh says

so do you see how you kinda extrapolated that a bit too much there? but its ok anyway because you were asking, not demanding that it is true.. so no harm done inshaallah.

In my opinion, such a marriage is not Mut'ah since it does not meet the definition of Mut'ah.

So it is not Mut'ah.

But,

However, it is still forbidden since it is a type of deception of the wife and her family.

So am wondering, if there was no deception then what would it be?

If you have a pie, and someone says, its not forbiden because its nto a pork pie, however it has abit of alchol so its forbiden.

Then if you make the same pie without the alchol is it still forbiden?

Not that I make pies with alchol ;D ;D

Anyhow thank you for your patience sis. and I do understand what you mean kinda, Im jus a person that is very curious and I find it nice sharing opinions.

 

[lolwatever]

Ok... see that reasoning there? That wasnt the opinion the the sheikh... he never said that explicitly in the article... but he did mention that some scholars reckon its ok, and not that he thinks so...

so do you see how you kinda extrapolated that a bit too much there? but its ok anyway because you were asking, not demanding that it is true.. so no harm done inshaallah.

lolwatever... can u give a summary of the arabic thing please? what did sheikh ibn baz say to support his stance?

http://binbaz.org.sa/index.php?pg=mat&type=audio&id=2222

i just listened to that one... basically he said that as long as its not a condition that's set (i.e. agreed in the contract that after one month he'll divorce her) then the marriage is correct. He believes that to be the correct opinion.

But i think the paragraph i quoted leaves withotu doubt that its not the corrrect opinion becasue the hadith is so clear "whoever's intention was to make hijrah for the sake of Allah and his messenger then his hijrah was to Allah and his messenger..." i.e. intending to do soemthign and doing it.. is xact same thign as declearing ur gonna do it and then doing it....


also he's got a different fatwa on this link:
http://binbaz.org.sa/index.php?pg=mat&type=audio&id=2173

it's a bit different and it makes a bit more sense... there's no evidence presented, except that in here he's saying "if he marries someone with intention that if he likes her he'll stick with her.. and if they're not compatable they'll part... then that's fine as long as no timing is set for a divorce"....

and he mentions that sort of marriage is ok if someone is in a country away from home and he doesnt want to fall into haram etc...

and allah knows best.

sorry for late reply i thought i pressed the submit button.. i must hav closed the window thinking i posted the translation!!!!

sorry if im off topic coz i havnt even read the original fatwa lol!

tc salams