Nikah Al-Mut’ah, Zina or Sunnah

BOOK ID

Author(s): Toyib Olawuyi

Category: Sunni Shi’a Marriage

Topic Tags: Muta Temporary Marriage Islamic Law Shariah Miscellaneous information: Nikah Al-Mut’ah, Zina or Sunnah?

Toyib Olawuyi

Copyright © 2015 Toyib Olawuyi

All rights reserved.

ISBN-13: 978-1505644388

ISBN-10: 1505644380

Featured Category: Resources for Further Research Responses to Misconceptions Shia beliefs explained

point

All the Sahabah – including Abu Bakr and ‘Umar - considered mut’ah to be halal throughout the lifetime of the Prophet, and throughout the rule of Abu Bakr. For most of the era of ‘Umar, all the Sahabah generally affirmed the permissibility of mut’ah. However, at the end of his caliphate, he made it haram; and that changed everything. The generality of the Sahabah obeyed him; and only a handful remained steadfast in affirming the permissibility of temporary marriage. Some of the Tabi’in also proclaimed it halal. However, the number of the pro-mut’ah elements continued to dwindle among the Ahl al-Sunnah, until none – or almost none - accepted it anymore. The Shi’is, on their part, have remained unshakable and unyielding on the permissibility of temporary marriage – from the time of the Messenger till this very day of ours.

Dedication

بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم

یا أیها الذین آمنوا لا تحرموا طیبات ما أحل الله لکم ولا تعتدوا إن الله لا یحب المعتدین

This book is dedicated to

Imam Muhammad b. ‘Ali al-Baqir,

peace be upon him, and upon his pure fathers and offspring.

Acknowledgments

Special thanks to Tural Islam, Ali Baker and Nader Zaveri for their support and encouragement. In particular, we express our profound gratitude to Ali

p: 1

Baker for his deep insights about the topic of mut’ah. May Allah bless our three brothers and all our loving brothers and sisters from the Shi’ah Imamiyyah and the Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah.

Preface

Mut’ah was unknown on the earth before Allah sent Muhammad, sallallahu ‘alaihi wa alihi. An average Sunni Muslim would be surprised to know this. Our brothers and sisters from the Ahl al-Sunnah have been repeatedly bombarded with severe anti-mut’ah propaganda for several years (or perhaps even decades or centuries), which claims that it was a pagan custom of the pre-Islamic Arabs that was temporarily tolerated by the Prophet – like alcohol – and was then banned eternally by him. However, ask the Sunni ‘alim to produce reliable Sunni evidence that mut’ah was ever practised during the Jahiliyyah period.

That is when things get really messy. He will never be able to give the proof – no matter the spread of his knowledge, and no matter his scholarly standing. Demand also, if possible, the same evidence from one billion Sunni ‘ulama, and you will never get it till the Day of al-Qiyamah. Of course, it does not exist! Mut’ah was introduced to this planet, to this cosmos, for the very first time by none other than the Messenger of Allah, on the Order of his Lord. It was part of His Mercy, made especially for this Ummah, as Imam ‘Abd al-Razzaq (d. 211 H) records:

عبد الرزاق عن ابن جریج عن عطاء قال: لأول من سمعت منه المتعه

p: 2

صفوان بن یعلی، قال: أخبرنی عن یعلی أن معاویه استمتع بامرأه بالطائف، فأنکرت ذلک علیه، فدخلنا علی ابن عباس، فذکر له بعضنا، فقال له: نعم، فلم یقر فی نفسی، حتی قدم جابر ابن عبد الله، فجئناه فی منزله، فسأله القوم عن أشیاء، ثم ذکروا له المتعه، فقال: نعم، استمتعنا علی عهد رسول الله صلی الله علیه وسلم، وأبی بکر، وعمر، حتی إذا کان فی آخر خلافه عمر … قال عطاء: وسمعت ابن عباس یقول: یرحم الله عمر، ما کانت المتعه إلا رخصه من الله عز وجل، رحم بها أمه محمد صلی الله علیه وسلم، فلو لا نهیه عنها ما احتاج إلی الزنا إلا شقی، قال: کأنی والله أسمع قوله: إلا شقی - عطاء القائل - قال عطاء: فهی التی فی سوره النساء } فما استمتعتم به منهن { إلی کذا وکذا من الأجل، علی کذا وکذا

‘Abd al-Razzaq – Ibn Jurayj – ‘Aṭa:

The person from whom I first heard about mut’ah was Safwan b. Ya’la. He narrated to me from Ya’la that Mu’awiyah did mut’ah with a woman at Ṭaif. So, I denied that upon him. Then, we entered upon Ibn ‘Abbas, and one of us mentioned (mut’ah) to him, and he said, “Yes”. But, it did not settle well in me, until when Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah arrived. So, we went to him at his house, and the people asked him about various things. Then, they mentioned mut’ah, and he said, “Yes. We did mut’ah during the time of the Messenger of Allah, Abu Bakr and ‘Umar UNTIL at the

p: 3

last part of the ‘Umar’s caliphate....”

‘Aṭa said:

I heard Ibn ‘Abbas saying: “May Allah show mercy to ‘Umar. Mut’ah was nothing except a PERMISSION from Allah the Almighty. He showed MERCY through it to the Ummah of Muhammad, peace be upon him. If he (‘Umar) had not forbidden it, none would have needed to commit zina except a wretched person.”

He – ‘Aṭa – said: By Allah, it is like I am still hearing his statement “except a wretched person”.

‘Aṭa said: It is that which is in Surah al-Nisa {Those of them with whom you contract mut’ah} till such-and-such period, for such-and-such.(1)

Commenting on this hadith, al-Hafiẓ (d. 852 H) states:

فأخرجه عبد الرزاق من طریق صفوان بن یعلی بن أمیه أخبرنی یعلی ان معاویه استمتع بامرأه بالطائف واسناده صحیح

‘Abd al-Razzaq recorded it with the chain of Safwan b. Ya’la b. Umayyah: Ya’la narrated to me that Mu’awiyah did mut’ah with a woman at Ṭaif. And its chain is sahih.(2)

However, we have seen certain Sunni elements who argue against the authenticity of this riwayah on the basis of Ibn Jurayj’s tadlis. The keen observer notices though that Ibn Jurayj has narrated from ‘Aṭa using the phrases (قال) [he said] and (قال عطاء) [‘Aṭa said] in addition to his ‘an-‘an manner of transmission. ‘Allamah al-Albani (d. 1420 H) explains what both phrases indicate:

روی أبو بکر بن أبی خیثمه بسند صحیح عن ابن جریج قال: " إذا قلت: قال عطاء , فأنا سمعته منه , وإن لم أقل سمعت ".

Abu Bakr b. Abi Khaythamah recorded with

p: 4


1- Abu Bakr ‘Abd al-Razzaq b. Hamam al-Ṣa’nani, al-Muṣannaf [annotator: Habib al-Rahman al-A’ẓami], vol. 7, pp. 496-497, 14021
2- Shihab al-Din Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Fath al-Bari Sharh Ṣahih al-Bukhari (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’rifah li al-Ṭaba’ah wa al-Nashr; 2nd edition), vol. 9, p. 151

a sahih chain that Ibn Jurayj said: Whenever I say: “ ‘Aṭa said”, then I HEARD it from him, even if I do not say “I heard”.(1)

This basically rules out tadlis completely in the above hadith of ‘Abd al-Razzaq. As such, the objection of tadlis is baseless and erroneous. But, there is more! Al-Albani further submits:

قد روی أبو بکر بن أبی خیثمه بسند صحیح عن ابن جریج قال: إذا قلت: قال عطاء فأنا سمعته منه , وإن لم أقل سمعت.

فهذا نص منه أن عدم تصریحه بالسماع من عطاء لیس معناه أنه قد دلسه عنه , ولکن هل ذلک خاص بقوله " قال عطاء" أم لا فرق بینه وبین ما لو قال " عن عطاء " کما فی هذا الحدیث وغیره؟ الذی یظهر لی الثانی , وعلی هذا فکل روایات ابن جریج عن عطاء محموله علی السماع إلا ما تبین تدلیسه فیه , والله أعلم.

Abu Bakr b. Abi Khaythamah has narrated with a sahih chain from Ibn Jurayj that he said: Whenever I say: “ ‘Ata said”, then I HEARD it from him, even if I do not say “I heard”.

This is an explicit statement from him that his omission to say “I heard” from ‘Aṭa does not mean that he has done tadlis from him. However, is this restricted to his statement “ ‘Aṭa said” or is there no difference between it and if he said “from ‘Aṭa” as in this hadith and others? What is apparent to me is the second. Thus, based upon this, all reports of Ibn

p: 5


1- Muhammad Naṣir al-Din al-Albani, Irwa al-Ghalil fi Takhrij Ahadith Manar al-Sabil (Beirut: al-Maktab al-Islami; 2nd edition, 1405 H), vol. 4, p. 244, 1050

Jurayj from ‘Aṭa are considered as what he heard explicitly, except that whose tadlis is clear. And Allah knows best.(1)

Therefore, there is no tadlis in the report of ‘Abd al-Razzaq, and it has a perfectly sahih chain – from Safwan b. Yala from Ya’la; from Ibn ‘Abbas; and from Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah. Al-Hafiẓ has explicitly declared the ‘Abd al-Razzaq – Ibn Jurayj – ‘Aṭa – Safwan b. Ya’la – Ya’la sanad to be sahih. Of course, both Ibn ‘Abbas and Jabir were Sahabis. Therefore, the ‘Abd al-Razzaq – Ibn Jurayj – ‘Aṭa – Ibn ‘Abbas and ‘Abd al-Razzaq – Ibn Jurayj – ‘Aṭa – Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah chains are sahih as well.

That riwayah establishes that:

i. Mut’ah was a “permission” from Allah. This means that the Muslims were forbidden from practising it until He permitted them. This apparently defeats the theory that it was initially allowed and then disallowed. Rather, it was originally haram, and then was permitted by our Lord out of His Mercy to us.

ii. Allah revealed a verse in Surah al-Nisa to authorize the practice of mut’ah. ‘Aṭa recited that ayah, and we will have more to say about it later in this book.

iii. Mu’awiyah practised mut’ah during his caliphate, long after the death of the Prophet, Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman and ‘Ali, ‘alaihi al-salam. His action was supported by both Ibn ‘Abbas and Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah al-Ansari, raḍiyallahu ‘anhuma.

iv. Both Ibn ‘Abbas and Jabir said “yes” to mut’ah, thereby allowing it and declaring it

p: 6


1- Muhammad Naṣir al-Din al-Albani, Irwa al-Ghalil fi Takhrij Ahadith Manar al-Sabil (Beirut: al-Maktab al-Islami; 2nd edition, 1405 H), vol. 3, p. 97, 629. We do not agree with the conjecture of al-Albani here, that the clearly ‘an-‘an reportage of Ibn Jurayj also means that he had “heard” the riwayah.

halal.

v. Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah asserted that mut’ah was allowed by the Prophet till his death, and was also allowed by Abu Bakr till his death. He further claimed that even ‘Umar too allowed it for most of his caliphate, but later banned it at the tail end of his rule.

vi. Ibn ‘Abbas proclaimed that mut’ah was a “mercy” from Allah specially for the Ummah of Muhammad. Whosoever knows how mut’ah truly works can easily confirm this.

vii. Ibn ‘Abbas also declared that if ‘Umar had not banned mut’ah, none would have needed to commit zina except the wretched ones. He is right about this too.

viii. Ibn ‘Abbas was very explicit that it was ‘Umar who banned mut’ah – NOT Allah, and NOT His Messenger.

‘Abd al-Razzaq has another hadith which confirms the last point above:

عبد الرزاق عن ابن جریج قال: أخبرنی أبو الزبیر قال: سمعت جابر بن عبد الله یقول: استمتعنا أصحاب النبی صلی الله علیه وسلم، حتی نهی عمرو بن حریث

‘Abd al-Razzaq – Ibn Jurayj – Abu al-Zubayr – Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah:

“We, the Sahabah of the Prophet, peace be upon him, did mut’ah UNTIL the prohibition of ‘Amr b. Hurayth (from it).”(1)

The only new name here is Abu al-Zubayr. Al-Hafiẓ says about him:

محمد بن مسلم بن تدرس بفتح المثناه وسکون الدال المهمله وضم الراء الأسدی مولاهم أبو الزبیر المکی صدوق إلا أنه یدلس

Muhammad b. Muslim b. Tadrus al-Asadi, their freed slave, Abu al-Zubayr al-Makki: Saduq (very truthful), except that he used to do tadlis.(2)

There is no ‘an-‘an transmission in

p: 7


1- Abu Bakr ‘Abd al-Razzaq b. Hamam al-Ṣa’nani, al-Muṣannaf [annotator: Habib al-Rahman al-A’ẓami], vol. 7, p. 499, 14025
2- Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Taqrib al-Tahdhib (Beirut: Dar al-Maktabah al-‘Ilmiyyah; 2nd edition, 1415 H) [annotator: Muṣtafa ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Aṭa], vol. 2, p. 132, 6310

the above sanad. Therefore, it is hasan. The report is explicit that the Sahabah generally practised mut’ah without interference, from the lifetime of the Prophet, till when ‘Amr b. Hurayth was prohibited from it. ‘Abd al-Razzaq has another riwayah which sheds more light:

عبد الرزاق عن ابن جریج قال: أخبرنی أبو الزبیر أنه سمع جابر بن عبد الله یقول: قدم عمرو بن حریث من الکوفه فاستمتع بمولاه، فأتی بها عمر وهی حبلی، فسألها، فقالت: استمتع بی عمرو بن حریث، فسأله، فأخبره بذلک أمرا ظاهرا، قال: فهلا غیرها؟ فذلک حین نهی عنها

‘Abd al-Razzaq – Ibn Jurayj – Abu al-Zubayr – Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah:

‘Amr b. Hurayth arrived from Kufah and did mut’ah with a slave woman. Then, she was brought to ‘Umar when she became pregnant, and he interrogated her. So, she said, “ ‘Amr b. Hurayth did mut’ah with me.” Then, he interrogated him, and he informed him through that of an apparent matter.” He said, “So, why not other than her?” That was the moment when he forbade it.(1)

The chain is hasan, as our reader can see. It seems that ‘Umar became very angry that ‘Amr b. Hurayth – a Sahabi – did mut’ah with a slave woman. For that reason, he banned it altogether – whether with free women, or with slaves. As Jabir testified in the other athar, this incident took place towards the end of ‘Umar’s caliphate.

Jabir made a clear point, that the Sahabah continued to practise mut’ah until ‘Umar made it haram in the case of

p: 8


1- Abu Bakr ‘Abd al-Razzaq b. Hamam al-Ṣa’nani, al-Muṣannaf [annotator: Habib al-Rahman al-A’ẓami], vol. 7, p. 500, 14029

‘Amr b. Hurayth. Then, they stopped. However, it was not all of them that obeyed ‘Umar’s decree. The vast majority did; but, a few – along with their disciples - continued to uphold the Verse of Mut’ah and the Sunnah. Imam Ibn Hazm (d. 456 H) gives us some of their names:

وقد ثبت علی تحلیلها بعد رسول الله صلی الله علیه وسلم جماعه من السلف، رضی الله عنهم، منهم من الصحابه، رضی الله عنهم، أسماء بنت أبی بکر الصدیق، وجابر بن عبدالله، وابن مسعود، وابن عباس، ومعاویه بن أبی سفیان، وعمرو بن حریث، وأبو سعید الخدری، وسلمه، ومعبد ابنا أمیه بن خلف.

ورواه جابر بن عبدالله، عن جمیع الصحابه مده رسول الله صلی الله علیه وسلم ومده أبی بکر وعمر إلی قرب آخر خلافه عمر. واختلف فی إباحتها، عن ابن الزبیر، وعن علی فیها توقف. وعن عمر بن الخطاب أنه إنما أنکرها إذا لم یشهد علیها عدلان فقط، وأباحها بشهاده عدلی_ن.

ومن التابع_ین: طاووس، وعطاء، وسعید بن جبیر، وسائر ف_قهاء م_ک_ه أع_زها الله.

A group of the Salaf, may Allah be pleased with them, were FIRM in declaring it halal AFTER the Messenger of Allah. Those of them from the Sahabah, may Allah be pleased with them, were Asma bint Abi Bakr al-Siddiq, Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah, Ibn Mas’ud, Ibn ‘Abbas, Mu’awiyah b. Abi Sufyan, ‘Amr b. Hurayth, Abu Sa’id al-Khudri, and Salamah and Ma’bad – sons of Umayyah b. Khalaf.

Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah also reported it (i.e. declaration of mut’ah as halal ) from all the Sahabah during the time of the

p: 9

Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, and during the time of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar until near the end of the caliphate of ‘Umar. Ibn al-Zubayr had contradictory opinions on its permissibility, while ‘Ali expressed no opinion concerning it. It is narrated that ‘Umar b. al-Khaṭṭab only denied it if two just people did not act as its witnesses, and he considered it permissible if two just people acted as witnesses to it.

And among the Tabi’in were: Ṭawus, ‘Aṭa, Sa’id b. Jubayr, and the rest of the jurists of Makkah, may Allah honour it.(1)

So, all the Sahabah – including Abu Bakr and ‘Umar - considered mut’ah to be halal throughout the lifetime of the Prophet, and throughout the rule of Abu Bakr. For most of the era of ‘Umar, all the Sahabah generally affirmed the permissibility of mut’ah. However, at the end of his caliphate, he made it haram; and that changed everything. The generality of the Sahabah obeyed him; and only a handful remained steadfast in affirming the permissibility of temporary marriage. Some of the Tabi’in also proclaimed it halal. However, the number of the pro-mut’ah elements continued to dwindle among the Ahl al-Sunnah, until none – or almost none - accepted it anymore. The Shi’is, on their part, have remained unshakable and unyielding on the permissibility of temporary marriage – from the time of the Messenger till this very day of ours.

But, is it not strange? According to the theory of the Ahl al-Sunnah, the Prophet declared

p: 10


1- Abu Muhammad ‘Ali b. Ahmad b. Sa’id b. Hazm al-Andalusi al-Qurṭubi al-Ẓahiri, al-Muhalla (Dar al-Fikr li al-Ṭaba’ah wa al-Nashr wa al-Tawzi’), vol. 9, pp. 519-520

mut’ah to be haram before his death. Yet, the Sahabah as a whole paid no heed to his words. They continued to regard mut’ah as halal, and also continued to practise it. When Abu Bakr became caliph, he too made zero efforts to enforce the alleged decree of the Messenger. Instead, he allowed the Ummah to freely engage in mut’ah. ‘Umar also did not give a damn: he let the Sahabah marry people temporarily for most of his rule.

However, he became upset when ‘Amr b. Hurayth took it too far by contracting mut’ah with a slave woman. He asked ‘Amr: “So, why not other than her?” At that point, he declared it haram. Then, the same Sahabah who refused to respect the decree of their Prophet followed ‘Umar. Most of them abandoned mut’ah, and started to oppose it. A few of them, however, remained adamantly in defence of it, and used to practise it, till death.

Is this really a credible theory? Do the Ahl al-Sunnah truly want us to view the Sahabah as people who disregarded the words of their Messenger? Is that it? Do Sunnis seriously want us to believe that the words of ‘Umar carried more weight in the sight of the Sahabah than those of Allah and His Prophet? Do they want us to consider the Sahabah as those who indulged in illegal sex during the lifetime of Muhammad, and he did not stop them?! What about Abu Bakr? The Sunni theory assumes that he too

p: 11

condoned the fornication and adultery of the Sahabah during his caliphate.

Is that it? What of caliph ‘Umar? Yeah, he permitted zina among the people until ‘Amr b. Hurayth irritated him by doing it with a slave woman. If ‘Amr had not extended the pleasure to the lowest rung of the caste system, he possibly could have tolerated mut’ah till his death! Interestingly. The great caliph made no attempt to lash or stone ‘Amr for either fornication or adultery. Why was that?!

Or, was it that the generality of the Sahabah only happened to have missed the declaration of the Prophet on mut’ah, as many Sunnis claim? Can a kid believe that? The Messenger supposedly announced its prohibition multiple times in public among his Sahabah. Yet, somehow, that information never reached them until when ‘Umar re-banned it! Was that really it? What about Abu Bakr? He allowed mut’ah throughout his regime. He too never got wind of its prohibition by the Prophet? Where was he when the alleged decree of the prohibition of mut’ah was being publicly announced by the Messenger himself, on different occasions? Was he then on Mars? What of ‘Umar? Our Sunni brothers argue that he knew of the prohibition and had only enforced it.

Good! But then, why did he initially permit it? He forgot the hadith? Why did he not narrate it to Abu Bakr? Moreover, did that hadith reach Ibn ‘Abbas, Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah, Mu’awiyah and other Sahabah from him? Or did those Sahabah

p: 12

happen to miss the public narration of the riwayah once more? If yes, why were they constantly missing the hadith? Then, why did none of the majority of the other Sahabah who followed ‘Umar make any attempt to narrate it to them? Or, did they hear it? If yes, why then did they continue to defend the permissibility of mut’ah? Why did they continue to practise it? Were they deliberately defending and committing zina? But, to what ends was that?

From whatever angle one looks at it, mut’ah is always an impossible situation for our Sunni brothers. If they accept its permissibility, ‘Umar takes a very devastating hit. Yet, if they proclaim its prohibition, a lot of the other Sahabah lose a lot of things within the Ummah! From our judgment, many Sunnis attack mut’ah in order to defend the honour of ‘Umar. However, little do they realize that they are only destroying that of other Sahabah, including Abu Bakr!

But, what is the truth about mut’ah? Did Allah truly reveal an ayah about it? If yes, was it ever abrogated? Can a hadith abrogate a verse of the Qur’an? What is the status of any riwayah that attempts to do that? How exactly is mut’ah practised? What are its conditions, restrictions and formalities? Is it really how most of the Ahl al-Sunnah picture it in their minds? Is it zina in truth? Is it illegal? Is it immoral? Is it a shame or an honour? Can it be contracted with

p: 13

a depraved man, woman or girl? Is it truly a “mercy” from Allah as Ibn ‘Abbas claimed? Or, is it a curse for the Ummah? Is it a legitimate marriage? Or, is it only a perversion? In this book, we will be investigating these and other questions, in order to find what really happened in the early history of Islam, about mut’ah?

We must find out how we got where we are today, so that we could correct any wrong steps in the past and move to our Lord on a smoother path. This, we will be doing in this exploratory research of ours. We seek Allah’s Help in this effort, and we implore Him to forgive us all our mistakes in it, and to accept it as a worthy act of ‘ibadah. And may Allah send His salawat and barakat upon our master, Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah, and upon his purified offspring.

We will leave this preface with a beautiful athar recorded by ‘Abd al-Razzaq about Sa’id b. Jubayr – one of the greatest Imams of the Ahl al-Sunnah throughout history. This is part of what al-Hafiẓ has documented about him:

وقال یعقوب القمی عن جعفر بن أبی المغیره :کان ابن عباس إذا أتاه أهل الکوفه یستفتونه یقول ألیس فیکم ابن أم الدهماء یعنی سعید بن جبیر وقال عمرو بن میمون عن أبیه لقد مات سعید بن جبیر وما علی ظهر الأرض أحد إلا وهو محتاج إلی علمه … وقال أبو قاسم الطبری هو ثقه إمام حجه علی المسلمین قتل فی

p: 14

شعبان سنه خمس وتسعین وهو ابن ٤٩ سنه … وکان سفیان یقدم سعیدا علی إبراهیم فی العلم وکان أعلم من مجاهد وطاووس

Ya’qub al-Qummi narrated that Ja’far b. Abi al-Mughirah said: “Whenever the people of Kufah came to Ibn ‘Abbas to seek his fatwa, he used to say, ‘Is there not among you Ibn Umm al-Dahma?’ referring to Sa’id b. Jubayr’” ‘Amr b. Maymun also reported that his father said: “Sa’id b. Jubayr died while there was no one on the face of the earth who did not need his knowledge” ... Abu Qasim al-Ṭabari said: “He was thiqah (trustworthy), an Imam, a hujjah upon the Muslims. He was murdered in Sha’ban 95 H while he was 49 years old” ... Sufyan used to consider Sa’id superior to Ibrahim in knowledge, and he was more knowledgeable than Mujahid and Ṭawus. (1)

This same Ibn Jubayr examined the Sunni arguments and “proofs” against mut’ah. Then, he drew his conclusion about it. ‘Abd al-Razzaq records:

عبد الرزاق عن ابن جریج قال: أخبرنی عبد الله بن عثمان بن خثیم قال: کانت بمکه امرأه عراقیه تنسک جمیله، لها ابن یقال له أبو أمیه، وکان سعد بن جبیر یکثر الدخول علیها، قلت: یا أبا عبد الله ما أکثر ما تدخل علی هذه المرأه، قال: إنا قد نکحناها ذلک النکاح - للمتعه - قال: وأخبرنی أن سعید قال له: هی أحل من شرب الماء - للمتعه.

‘Abd al-Razzaq – Ibn Jurayj – ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Uthman b. Khaytham:

There was a pious, beautiful Iraqi woman in Makkah. She had a son

p: 15


1- Shihab al-Din Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib (Dar al-Fikr; 1st edition, 1404 H), vol. 4, pp. 11-13, 14

called Abu Umayyah; and Sa’d b. Jubayr(1) used to enter upon her a lot. I said, “O Abu ‘Abd Allah! Why do you frequently enter upon this woman?” He said, “We have married her in that marriage”, referring to mut’ah.

He (Ibn Jurayj) said: He (‘Abd Allah) informed me that Sa’id said to him: “IT IS MORE HALAL THAN THE DRINKING OF WATER,” referring to mut’ah.(2)

Only ‘Abd Allah needs an introduction here. Al-Hafiẓ says about him:

عبد الله بن عثمان بن خثیم بالمعجمه والمثلثه مصغرا القاری المکی أبو عثمان صدوق

‘Abd Allah b. ‘Uthman b. Khaytham al-Qari al-Makki, Abu ‘Uthman: Saduq (very truthful).(3)

Therefore, the report is hasan.

1. Mut’ah In The Qur’an

Nikah al-Mut’ah, or simply mut’ah, is marriage between two consenting adults for a specified period of time. It is a form of marriage, which is why it is called a nikah. Since its duration is fixed, it is also often called “temporary marriage”. The woman, before the mut’ah, must NOT be in a pending marriage with anyone else. Moreover, both parties must be adult believers; and both must be chaste. In exceptional, emergency cases, the man is permitted to enter into a temporary marriage with a chaste Jewish or Christian woman.

However, the woman can only marry a chaste Muslim man – whether in mut’ah or in a permanent marriage. In addition, both parties must mutually agree on the dowry and the length of the union. In the case of a woman who has never married, the consent of her father is obligatory for

p: 16


1- The correct spelling is Sa’id b. Jubayr. A letter has been omitted in “Sa’id”. This is most probably a scribal error. Meanwhile, later in the same athar, the name has been spelt correctly.
2- Abu Bakr ‘Abd al-Razzaq b. Hamam al-Ṣa’nani, al-Muṣannaf [annotator: Habib al-Rahman al-A’ẓami], vol. 7, p. 496, 14020
3- Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Taqrib al-Tahdhib (Beirut: Dar al-Maktabah al-‘Ilmiyyah; 2nd edition, 1415 H) [annotator: Muṣtafa ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Aṭa], vol. 1, p. 513, 3477

the mut’ah. Also, the man cannot have sex with her (i.e. the woman who has never married) throughout the agreed duration of their nikah. After the expiration of the marriage, the woman enters into a period of ‘iddah in temporary unions that involved intercourse. The children of such a marriage are legitimate, and belong to the husband; and they inherit him.

The spouses in mut’ah too may also inherit each other if their marriage contract explicitly provides for it. Meanwhile, unlike in permanent marriages, there is no restriction to the number of temporary marriages a man may contract, simultaneously or consecutively. Also, mut’ah is available to single men and woman, as well as to married men, including those who already have four permanent wives.

During the life of Prophet Muhammad, sallallahu ‘alaihi wa alihi, temporary marriage was legislated and practiced within the Ummah. Allah Himself decreed it in His Book, in the Verse of al-Mut’ah:

فما استمتعتم به منهن فآتوهن أجورهن فریضه ولا جناح علیکم فیما تراضیتم به من بعد الفریضه إن الله کان علیما حکیما

Those of them with whom you contract mut’ah, give them their prescribed dowries; and there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is prescribed. Verily, Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.(1)

This ayah was not revealed like this. Rather, its original version included extra phrases that leave no doubt about its import. For instance, Imam al-Hakim (d. 403 H) records:

أخبرنا أبو زکریا العنبری ثنا محمد بن عبد السلام ثنا إسحاق بن إبراهیم أنبأ النضر بن

p: 17


1- Qur’an 4:24

شمیل أنبأ شعبه ثنا أبو سلمه قال : سمعت أبا نضره یقول قرأت علی ابن عباس رضی الله عنهما {فما استمتعتم به منهن فآتوهن أجورهن فریضه} قال ابن عباس: فما استمعتم به منهن إلی أجل مسمی قال أبو نضره : فقلت ما نقرأها کذلک فقال ابن عباس : والله لأنزلها الله کذلک

Abu Zakariyyah al-‘Anbari – Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-Salam – Ishaq b. Ibrahim – al-Naḍr b. Shumayl – Shu’bah – Abu Salamah – Abu Naḍrah:

I read to Ibn ‘Abbas: {Those of them with whom you contract mut’ah, give them their prescribed dowries} [4:24]. He said: “{Those of them with whom you contract mut’ah for a specified period}”. Abu Naḍrah said: I said, “We do not recite it like that!” Ibn ‘Abbas replied, “I swear by Allah, Allah certainly revealed it like that.”(1)

Al-Hakim comments:

هذا حدیث صحیح علی شرط مسلم

This hadith is sahih upon the standard of (Imam) Muslim.(2)

And Imam al-Dhahabi (d. 748 H) concurs:

علی شرط مسلم

Upon the standard of (Imam) Muslim(3)

Imam Ibn Jarir al-Ṭabari (d. 310 H) also documents:

حدثنا ابن المثنی، قال: ثنا محمد بن جعفر، قال: ثنا شعبه، عن أبی سلمه، عن أبی نضره، قال :قرأت هذه الآیه علی ابن عباس} :فما استمتعتم به منهن {قال ابن عباس} :إلی أجل مسمی{، قال قلت: ما أقرؤها کذلک !قال: والله لأنزلها الله کذلک ثلاث مرات.

Ibn al-Muthanna – Muhammad b. Ja’far – Shu’bah – Abu Salamah – Abu Naḍrah:

I read this verse to Ibn ‘Abbas: {Those of them with whom you contract mut’ah} [4:24]. He said: “{for a specified period}”. I said, “We

p: 18


1- Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah al-Hakim al-Naysaburi, al-Mustadrak ‘ala al-Ṣahihayn (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-’Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1411 H) [annotator: Muṣtafa ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Aṭa], vol. 2, p. 334, 3192
2- Ibid
3- Ibid

do not recite it like that!” He replied, “I swear by Allah, Allah certainly revealed it like that.” He said it three times.(1)

Al-Hafiẓ (d. 852 H) says about its first narrator:

محمد بن المثنی بن عبید العنزی بفتح النون والزای أبو موسی البصری ….ثقه ثبت

Muhammad b. al-Muthanna b. ‘Ubayd al-‘Unaza, Abu Musa al-Basri.... Thiqah (trustworthy), thabt (accurate).(2)

He also states concerning the second narrator:

محمد بن جعفر الهذلی البصری المعروف بغندر ثقه صحیح الکتاب إلا أن فیه غفله

Muhammad b. Ja’far al-Hazali al-Basri, better known as Ghandar: Thiqah (trustworthy), sahih al-kitab (i.e. ahadith from his books are sahih) except that there was some negligence in him.(3)

Ghandar’s negligence, of course, did not affect his riwayat from Shu’bah, as al-Hafiẓ quotes:

وقال ابن أبی حاتم سألت أبی عن غندر فقال کان صدوقا وکان مؤدبا وفی حدیث شعبه ثقه

Ibn Abi Hatim said: “I asked my father about Ghandar and he replied, ‘He was saduq (very truthful), and was a teacher and in the hadith of Shu’bah, he is thiqah (trustworthy).’”(4)

So, apparently, this sanad is sahih too without any doubt.

Al-Ṭabari further records:

حدثنا أبو کریب قال ، حدثنا یحیی بن عیسی قال ، حدثنا نصیر بن أبی الأشعث قال ، حدثنی ابن حبیب بن أبی ثابت ، عن أبیه قال : أعطانی ابن عباس مصحفًا فقال : هذا علی قراءه أبیّ قال أبو کریب قال یحیی : فرأیت المصحف عند نصیر، فیه : (فما استمتعتم به منهن إلی أجل مسمی) .

Abu Kurayb – Yahya b. ‘Isa – Nasir b. Abi al-Ash’ath – Ibn Habib b. Abi Thabit – his father:

Ibn

p: 19


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Jarir b. Yazid b. Kathir b. Ghalib al-Amuli al-Ṭabari, Jami al-Bayan fi Tawil al-Qur’an (Dar al-Fikr; 1415 H) [annotator: Ṣidqi Jamil al-‘Aṭṭar], vol. 5, p. 19
2- Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Taqrib al-Tahdhib (Beirut: Dar al-Maktabah al-‘Ilmiyyah; 2nd edition, 1415 H) [annotator: Muṣtafa ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Aṭa], vol. 2, p. 129, 6283
3- Ibid, vol. 2, p. 63, 5805
4- Shihab al-Din Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib (Dar al-Fikr; 1st edition, 1404 H), vol. 9, p. 85, 129

‘Abbas gave me a mushaf. He said, “This is upon the qiraat of Ubayy b. Ka’b”.

Abu Kurayb narrated that Yahya said: “I saw the mushaf with Nusayr. In it was {Those of them with whom you contract mut’ah for a specified period}.(1)

Commenting upon this same chain with another narration, Prof. Ibn Yasin states:

ورجاله ثقات إلا یحیی بن عیسی صدوق، وابن حبیب هو عبد الله، وسنده حسن.

Its narrators are thiqah (trustworthy), except that Yahya b. ‘Isa is saduq (very truthful) as well as Ibn Habib – and he was ‘Abd Allah, and its chain is hasan.(2)

Imam ‘Abd al-Razzaq (d. 211 H) too reports:

عبد الرزاق عن ابن جریج قال: أخبرنی عطاء أنه سمع ابن عباس یراها الان حلالا، وأخبرنی أنه کان یقرأ} فما استمتعتم] به [منهن إلی أجل فآتوهن أجورهن{

‘Abd al-Razzaq – Ibn Jurayj – ‘Aṭa:

I heard Ibn ‘Abbas while he saw it as halal, and he used to recite {Those of them with whom you contract mut’ah for a period, give them their prescribed dowries}.(3)

This sanad is sahih, as we have discussed in the Preface.

Meanwhile, al-Hafiẓ Ibn Kathir (d. 774 H) has some more relevant information for us:

وکان ابن عباس ، وأبیّ بن کعب ، وسعید بن جُبَیْر ، والسُّدِّی یقرءون : "فما استمتعتم به منهن إلی أجل مسمی فآتوهن أجورهن فریضه".

Ibn ‘Abbas, Ubayy b. Ka’b, Sa’id b. Jubayr and al-Suddi used to recite: {Those of them with whom you contract mut’ah for a specified period, give them their prescribed dowries}.(4)

So, apparently, that extra phrase makes it impossible to apply to

p: 20


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Jarir b. Yazid b. Kathir b. Ghalib al-Amuli al-Ṭabari, Jami al-Bayan fi Tawil al-Qur’an (Dar al-Fikr; 1415 H) [annotator: Ṣidqi Jamil al-‘Aṭṭar], vol. 5, p. 18
2- Prof. Dr. Hikmat b. Bashir b. Yasin, Mawsu’at al-Ṣahih al-Masbur min al-Tafsir bi al-Mathur (Madinah: Dar al-Mathar li al-Nashr wa al-Tawzi’ wa al-Ṭaba’at; 1st edition, 1420 H), vol. 3, p. 239
3- Abu Bakr ‘Abd al-Razzaq b. Hamam al-Ṣa’nani, al-Muṣannaf [annotator: Habib al-Rahman al-A’ẓami], vol. 7, p. 498, 14022
4- Abu al-Fida Isma’il b. ‘Umar b. Kathir al-Qurshi al-Dimashqi, Tafsir al-Qur’an al-‘Aẓim (Dar al-Ṭaybah li al-Nashr wa al-Tawzi’; 2nd edition, 1420 H) [annotator: Sami b. Muhammad Salamah], vol. 2, p. 259

the verse to the permanent marriage as lots of the Ahl al-Sunnah do. The permanent marriage is never contracted “for a specified period”. As such, the verse is explicit in its legislation of temporary marriage.

Ibn ‘Abbas, raḍiyallahu ‘anhu, also made this clear. Al-Ṭabari says:

حدثنا حمید بن مسعده، قال :ثنا بشر بن المفضل، قال :ثنا داود، عن أبی نضره، قال :سألت ابن عباس عن متعه النساء، قال :أما تقرأ سوره النساء؟ قال :قلت بلی. قال: فما تقرأ فیها :فما استمتعتم به منهن إلی أجل مسمی؟ قلت :لا، لو قرأتها هکذا ما سألتک !قال :فإنها کذا.

Hamid b. Mas’adah – Bashar b. al-Mufaḍḍal – Dawud – Abu Nadrah:

I asked Ibn ‘Abbas concerning mut’ah with women. He replied, “Do you not read Surah al-Nisa?” I said, “I do.” He said, “So, do you not read in it {Those of them with whom you contract mut’ah for a specified period} [4:24]?” I said, “No. If I had recite it like that, I would not have asked you!” He said, “Verily, it is like that.”(1)

About the first narrator, al-Hafiẓ comments:

حمید بن مسعده بن المبارک السامی بالمهمله أو الباهلی بصری صدوق

Hamid b. Mas’adah b. al-Mubarak al-Sami or al-Bahili, Basri: Saduq (very truthful).(2)

What of the second narrator? He has an even better verdict:

بشر بن المفضل بن لاحق الرقاشی بقاف ومعجمه أبو إسماعیل البصری ثقه ثبت عابد

Bashar b. al-Mufaḍḍal b. Lahik al-Raqashi, Abu Isma’il al-Basri: Thiqah (trustworthy), thabt (accurate), a devout worshipper of Allah.(3)

And al-Hafiẓ states about the third narrator:

داود بن أبی هند القشیری مولاهم أبو بکر أو أبو

p: 21


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Jarir b. Yazid b. Kathir b. Ghalib al-Amuli al-Ṭabari, Jami al-Bayan fi Tawil al-Qur’an (Dar al-Fikr; 1415 H) [annotator: Ṣidqi Jamil al-‘Aṭṭar], vol. 5, p. 18
2- Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Taqrib al-Tahdhib (Beirut: Dar al-Maktabah al-‘Ilmiyyah; 2nd edition, 1415 H) [annotator: Muṣtafa ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Aṭa], vol. 1, p. 246, 1564
3- Ibid, vol. 1, p. 130, 705

محمد البصری ثقه متقن کان یهم بأخره

Dawud b. Abi Hind al-Qushayri, their freed slave, Abu Bakr or Abu Muhammad al-Basri: Thiqah (trustworthy), extremely precise. He used to hallucinate during the last part of his life.(1)

Thus, this chain too is hasan. Hamid b. Mas’adah was saduq (very truthful), and Dawud’s late-life hallucinations were not serious. Note, in the riwayah, how Ibn ‘Abbas quoted the ayah as evidence of mut’ah.

So, what is that extra phrase “for a specified period”? Was it an interpolation by Ubayy, Ibn ‘Abbas and others like them? Or, is it only a case of tahrif, in which some parts of the Kitab have been expunged? To us, the best explanation of the status of the extra phrase is in this verse:

واذکروا نعمت الله علیکم وما أنزل علیکم من الکتاب والحکمه یعظکم به

And remember the Favours of Allah upon you, and that which He has sent down to you of the Book AND the Hikmah, whereby He instructs you.(2)

This ayah informs us that Allah has sent down two things to this Ummah: the Qur’an and the Hikmah. The same thing is repeated elsewhere:

وأنزل الله علیک الکتاب والحکمه

And Allah sent down to you (O Muhammad) the Book and the Hikmah.(3)

It is often claimed that the “Hikmah” is the Sunnah of the Prophet. However, it is apparently more than that. The Hikmah too used to be “recited” like the Qur’an:

واذکرن ما یتلی فی بیوتکن من آیات الله والحکمه إن الله کان لطیفا خبیرا

And remember that which is recited in your houses

p: 22


1- Ibid, vol. 1, p. 283, 1822
2- Qur’an 2:231
3- Qur’an 4:113

of the Verses of Allah and the Hikmah. Verily, Allah is Subtle, Aware.(1)

So, we know that “for a specified period” was revealed by Allah too within the Verse of al-Mut’ah, as testified by Ibn ‘Abbas. We also know that some of the Sahabah and Tabi’in used to “recite” it. However, we know as well that it is not part of the Qur’an nonetheless. Therefore, that phrase naturally falls under the Hikmah category. Allah revealed it to explain the ayah. It may be recited with the verse, and it may be excluded from it. Some of the Salaf – such as Ibn ‘Abbas, Ubayy b. Ka’b, Sa’id b. Jubayr and al-Suddi - chose to recite it with the ayah.

In the Shi’i books, the Verse of al-Mut’ah is also cited as evidence of its divine legislation. Shaykh al-Kulayni (d. 329 H), for instance, documents:

عده من أصحابنا، عن سهل بن زیاد، وعلی بن إبراهیم، عن أبیه جمیعا، عن ابن أبی نجران، عن عاصم بن حمید، عن أبی بصیر قال: سألت أبا جعفر علیه السلام عن المتعه، فقال: نزلت فی القرآن } فما استمتعتم به منهن فآتوهن أجورهن فریضه فلا جناح علیکم فیما تراضیتم به من بعد الفریضه {

A number of our companions – Sahl b. Ziyad AND ‘Ali b. Ibrahim – his father – Ibn Abi Najran – ‘Asim b. Humayd – Abu Basir:

I asked Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him, concerning mut’ah. So, he replied, “It is revealed in the Qur’an {Those of them with whom you contract mut’ah, give them their

p: 23


1- Qur’an 33:34

prescribed dowries; and there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is prescribed}.(1)

‘Allamah al-Majlisi (d. 1111 H) says about this hadith:

حسن کالصحیح

Hasan ka al-Sahih.(2)

So, this is a hasan hadith which is equal to a sahih hadith.

Al-Kulayni again records:

علی بن إبراهیم، عن أبیه، عن ابن أبی عمیر، عن علی بن الحسن بن رباط، عن حریز، عن عبد الرحمن بن أبی عبد الله قال: سمعت أبا حنیفه یسأل أبا عبد الله علیه السلام عن المتعه فقال: أی المتعتین تسأل؟ قال: سألتک عن متعه الحج فأنبئنی عن متعه النساء أحق هی؟ فقال: سبحان الله أما قرأت کتاب الله عز وجل } فما استمتعتم به منهن فآتوهن أجورهن فریضه { ؟ فقال أبو حنیفه: والله فکأنها آیه لم أقرأها قط.

‘Ali b. Ibrahim – his father – Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – ‘Ali b. al-Hasan b. Rabaṭ – Hariz – ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Abi ‘Abd Allah:

I heard Abu Hanifah asking Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, about mut’ah. So, he (Abu ‘Abd Allah) said, “Which of the two mut’ahs are you asking about?” He (Abu Hanifah) replied, “I (already) asked you about mut’ah of Hajj. So, inform me about mut’ah with women. Is it correct?” He (Abu ‘Abd Allah) said, “Subhan Allah! Do you not read the Book of Allah {Those of them with whom you contract mut’ah, give them their prescribed dowries}?” Then, Abu Hanifah said, “I swear by Allah, it is as though it is a verse I have never read”.(3)

Al-Majlisi comments:

حسن

Hasan.(4)

2. Reign Of The Verse Of Al-Mut’ah

It is absolutely beyond doubt

p: 24


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 448, 1
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 226
3- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, pp. 449-450, 6
4- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 230

that Allah decreed mut’ah with women for the Ummah during the mission of His last Prophet, sallallahu ‘alaihi wa alihi. There are authentic ahadith in both Sunni and Shi’i sources confirming this. So, naturally, the next question is – has the Verse of al-Mut’ah been abrogated? This question stands at the heart of a huge dispute between the Ahl al-Sunnah and the Shi’ah over the legitimacy of mut’ah after the Messenger’s death. The Sunnis argue that mut’ah was abrogated by the Prophet, and that it has thereby become a form of zina (fornication). On the other hand, Shi’is maintain that the Verse of al-Mut’ah was never abrogated, and that mut’ah remains a command of Allah and the valid Sunnah of His Messenger till the Day of al-Qiyamah.

The Shi’i position is well-captured in this hadith of al-Kulayni (d. 329 H):

علی، عن أبیه، عن ابن أبی عمیر، عن عمر بن أذینه، عن زراره قال: جاء عبد الله بن عمیر اللیثی إلی أبی جعفر علیه السلام فقال له: ما تقول فی متعه النساء؟ فقال: أحلها الله فی کتابه وعلی لسان نبیه صلی الله علیه وآله فهی حلال إلی یوم القیامه فقال: یا أبا جعفر مثلک یقول هذا وقد حرمها عمر ونهی عنها؟! فقال: وإن کان فعل، قال: إنی أعیذک بالله من ذلک أن تحل شیئا حرمه عمر، قال: فقال له: فأنت علی قول صاحبک وأنا علی قول رسول الله صلی الله علیه وآله فهلم ألاعنک أن القول ما قال رسول الله صلی الله علیه وآله وأن الباطل ما قال صاحبک، قال: فأقبل عبد

p: 25

الله ابن عمیر فقال: یسرک أن نساءک وبناتک وأخواتک وبنات عمک یفعلن، قال: فأعرض عنه أبو جعفر علیه السلام حین ذکر نساءه وبنات عمه.

‘Ali – his father – Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – ‘Umar b. Uzaynah – Zurarah:

‘Abd Allah b. ‘Umayr al-Laythi went to Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him, and said to him, “What is your opinion of mut’ah with women?” So, he (Abu Ja’far) said, “Allah made it halal in His Book and upon the tongue of His Prophet, peace be upon him and his family. Therefore, it is halal till the Day of al-Qiyamah.”

Then he (al-Laythi) said, “O Abu Ja’far! Someone of your calibre saying this, despite that ‘Umar had made it haram and had forbidden it?!” He (Abu Ja’far) said, “Even if he did so.” He (al-Laythi) said, “I seek refuge for you with Allah from that, from making halal something that ‘Umar made haram.” He (Abu Ja’far) said to him, “Your follow the teaching of your companion and I follow the teaching of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his family. So, invoke the curse of Allah (upon the wrong party between us) – (I say) that the truth is what the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his family, said, and that the falsehood is what your companion said.”

‘Abd Allah b. ‘Umayr then advanced and said, “Would it make you happy if your wives, daughters, sisters and the daughters of your uncle do (mu’tah)?” So, Abu Ja’far, peace be upon

p: 26

him, turned away from him when he mentioned his wives and the daughters of his uncle.(1)

‘Allamah al-Majlisi (d. 1111 H) says:

حسن

Hasan.(2)

Al-Laythi was apparently a Sunni, who held ‘Umar in extremely high esteem. He did not believe in the legitimacy of mut’ah, solely on the premise that ‘Umar forbade it. The Ahl al-Bayt of the Prophet, ‘alaihim al-salam, by contrast, follow his Sunnah, and uphold its legality. So, the official position of the chosen ones from the Messenger’s offspring is that mut’ah is decreed in the Qur’an and its verse had never been abrogated. As such, temporary marriage remains halal till the Last Hour. The Ahl al-Bayt also believe that it is a bid’ah to consider mut’ah to be haram, and that whosoever does so has opposed the Prophet of Allah. Al-Laythi insulted Imam al-Baqir, ‘alaihi al-salam, by asking if it would please him if his wives and the daughters of his uncle did mut’ah. Of course, mut’ah is haram for married women. A woman in Islam can only have one husband at a time. It is also very likely that the daughters of the Imam’s uncle were also already married at that time. Thus, due to al-Laythi’s mocking (or perhaps ignorant) insult, the noble Imam turned away from him.

Interestingly, there are some authentic Sunni riwayat which also confirm this Shi’i hadith. Imam Muslim (d. 261 H) has this surprising one:

حدثنا حامد بن عمرو البکراوی حدثنا عبدالواحد ( یعنی ابن زیاد ) عن عاصم عن أبی نضره قال کنت عند جابر

p: 27


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 449, 4
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 229

بن عبدالله فأتاه آت فقال ابن عباس وابن الزبیر اختلفا فی المتعتین فقال جابر فعلناهما مع رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم ثم نهانا عنهما عمر فلم نعد لهما

Hamid b. ‘Amr al-Bakrawi – ‘Abd al-Wahid b. Ziyad – ‘Asim – Abu Naḍrah:

I was with Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah, a person came and said, “Ibn ‘Abbas and Ibn al-Zubayr disagree concerning the two types of mut’ah.” So, Jabir said, “We practised BOTH of them along with the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him. Then, ‘Umar forbade us from them both, and we have not reverted to them.”(1)

This hadith is significant in many ways. Among them, it establishes that the Prophet himself was practising both types of mut’ah – including that with women - along with his Sahabah. Moreover, Jabir explicitly stated that it was ‘Umar who first banned both of them.

The same fact is reiterated in this hadith of Imam Ahmad (d. 241 H):

حدثنا عبد الله حدثنی أبی ثنا إسحاق ثنا عبد الملک عن عطاء عن جابر بن عبد الله قال کنا نتمتع علی عهد رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم وأبی بکر وعمر رضی الله عنهم حتی نهانا عمر رضی الله عنه أخیرا یعنی النساء

‘Abd Allah (b. Ahmad) – my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) – Ishaq – ‘Abd al-Malik – ‘Aṭa – Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah:

We used to do mut’ah during the time of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, may Allah be pleased with them, until ‘Umar, may Allah be

p: 28


1- Abu al-Husayn Muslim b. al-Hajjaj al-Qushayri al-Naysaburi, Ṣahih Muslim (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-‘Arabi) [annotator: Muhammad Fuad ‘Abd al-Baqi], vol. 2, p. 1022, 1405 (17)

pleased with him, later forbade it, that is (mut’ah with) women.(1)

Shaykh al-Arnauṭ says:

إسناده صحیح علی شرط مسلم

Its chain is sahih upon the standard of (Imam) Muslim.(2)

So, ‘Umar himself initially allowed it. Abu Bakr, on the other hand, had no problem with it throughout his rule.

Imam Muslim equally reports:

حدثنی محمد بن رافع حدثنا عبدالرزاق أخبرنا ابن جریج أخبرنی أبو الزبیر قال سمعت جابر بن عبدالله یقول کنا نستمتع بالقبضه من التمر والدقیق الأیام علی عهد رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم وأبی بکر حتی نهی عنه عمر فی شأن عمرو بن حریث

Muhammad b. Rafi’ – ‘Abd al-Razzaq – Ibn Jurayj – Abu al-Zubayr:

I heard Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah saying, “We used to contract mut’ah by giving a handful of dates and flour (as the dowry) during the time of the Messenger of Allah and Abu Bakr UNTIL ‘Umar forbade it in the case of ‘Amr b. Hurayth.(3)

This one repeats emphatically that the practice of mut’ah continued unimpeded and uninterrupted from the time of the Prophet till ‘Umar forbade it.

It is indeed of great interest that the Sahabah generally were engaging in mut’ah with women – and this naturally included sexual intercourse with them – and the Prophet never rebuked or punished a single one of them! This occurred till his death, and also during the rule of Abu Bakr. If mut’ah were haram, then the intercourse within it would have been zina (fornication or adultery), and it would have been obligatory upon the Messenger to investigate the cases and punish

p: 29


1- Abu ‘Abd Allah Ahmad b. Hanbal al-Shaybani, Musnad (Cairo: Muasassat Qurṭubah) [annotator: Shu’ayb al-Arnaut], vol. 3, p. 304, 14307
2- Ibid
3- Abu al-Husayn Muslim b. al-Hajjaj al-Qushayri al-Naysaburi, Ṣahih Muslim (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-‘Arabi) [annotator: Muhammad Fuad ‘Abd al-Baqi], vol. 2, p. 1022, 1405 (16)

the mut’ah practitioners. After all, they were not doing it in secret. This was how Jabir knew that it was a general practice, in the first place. So, was the Prophet failing in his duties? Or, was he condoning disobedience and illegal sex? Or, was it that he never forbade it – as the Ahl al-Bayt and Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah claimed – and therefore had nothing to probe or penalize in it? What about Abu Bakr? Why would he allow zina to flourish in his domains?

Imam Ahmad still has more reports for us:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثنی أبی حدثنا یونس ثنا حماد یعنی بن سلمه عن علی بن زید وعاصم الأحول عن أبی نضره عن جابر بن عبد الله قال تمتعنا متعتین علی عهد النبی صلی الله علیه و سلم الحج والنساء فنهانا عمر عنهما فانتهینا

‘Abd Allah (b. Ahmad) – my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) – Yunus – Hamad b. Salamah – ‘Ali b. Zayd AND ‘Asim al-Ahwal – Abu Naḍrah – Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah:

We practised two forms of mut’ah during the time of the Prophet, peace be upon him: Hajj and woman. But, ‘Umar forbade us from them both. So, we desisted.(1)

Shaykh al-Arnauṭ comments:

إسناده صحیح علی شرط مسلم

Its chain is sahih upon the standard of (Imam) Muslim.(2)

He also records:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثنی أبی ثنا عفان ثنا حماد أنا علی بن زید وعاصم الأحول عن أبی نضره عن جابر بن عبد الله قال تمتعنا علی عهد رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم متعتین الحج والنساء وقد قال حماد

p: 30


1- Abu ‘Abd Allah Ahmad b. Hanbal al-Shaybani, Musnad (Cairo: Muasassat Qurṭubah) [annotator: Shu’ayb al-Arnaut], vol. 3, p. 356, 14877
2- Ibid

أیضا متعه الحج ومتعه النساء فلما کان عمر نهانا عنهما فانتهینا

‘Abd Allah (b. Ahmad) – my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) – ‘Affan – Hamad – ‘Ali b. Zayd AND ‘Asim al-Ahwal – Abu Naḍrah – Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah:

We practised mut’ah during the time of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, two types of mut’ah: the mut’ah of Hajj (i.e. Hajj al-Tamattu’) and mut’ah with women. But, when ‘Umar forbade us from them both, we desisted.(1)

Al-Arnauṭ again says:

إسناده صحیح

Its chain is sahih(2)

Then, Imam Ahmad tops them with this:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثنی أبی ثنا عبد الصمد ثنا حماد عن عاصم عن أبی نضره عن جابر قال متعتان کانتا علی عهد النبی صلی الله علیه و سلم فنهانا عنهما عمر رضی الله تعالی عنه فانتهینا

‘Abd Allah (b. Ahmad) – my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) – ‘Abd al-Samad – Hamad – ‘Asim – Abu Naḍrah – Jabir:

There used to be two types of mut’ah during the time of the Prophet, peace be upon him. But, ‘Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, forbade us from them both. So, we desisted.(3)

Al-Arnauṭ declares:

إسناده صحیح علی شرط مسلم

Its chain is sahih upon the standard of (Imam) Muslim.(4)

So, the Sahabah were heavily into mut’ah with women till the deaths of both the Prophet and Abu Bakr, and also for a long time during ‘Umar’s rule. They freely practised it, even after the Messenger’s demise, and they freely allowed it.

Meanwhile, when ‘Umar banned mut’ah, his action naturally attracted opposition from some Sahabah. One of them was

p: 31


1- Ibid, vol. 3, p. 363, 14959
2- Ibid
3- Ibid, vol. 3, p. 325, 14519
4- Ibid

‘Abd Allah b. Mas’ud, about whom Imam Muslim reports:

حدثنا محمد بن عبدالله بن نمیر الهمدانی حدثنا أبی ووکیع وابن بشر عن إسماعیل عن قیس قال سمعت عبدالله یقول کنا نغزو مع رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم لیس لنا نساء فقلنا ألا نستخصی ؟ فنهانا عن ذلک ثم رخص لنا أن ننکح المرأه بالثوب إلی أجل ثم قرأ عبدالله { یا أیها الذین آمنوا لا تحرموا طیبات ما أحل الله لکم ولا تعتدوا إن الله لا یحب المعتدین }

Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah b. Numayr al-Hamdani – my father, Waki’ and Ibn Bishr – Isma’il – Qays:

I heard ‘Abd Allah saying, “We were on an expedition with the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, and we had no women with us. So, we said “Should we castrate ourselves?” But, he forbade us to do that. Then, he permitted us to do nikah (marriage) with the woman for a stipulated period, giving her a garment (as the dowry).” Then, ‘Abd Allah recited, {O you who believe! Do not make haram the good things which Allah has made halal for you; and do not exceed the limits; surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits} [5:87].(1)

Ahmad has documented it too:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثنی أبی ثنا وکیع عن بن أبی خالد عن قیس عن عبد الله قال کنا مع النبی صلی الله علیه و سلم ونحن شباب فقلنا یا رسول الله ألا نستخصی فنهانا ثم رخص لنا فی ان ننکح المرأه بالثوب إلی الأجل ثم قرأ عبد الله { لا

p: 32


1- Abu al-Husayn Muslim b. al-Hajjaj al-Qushayri al-Naysaburi, Ṣahih Muslim (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-‘Arabi) [annotator: Muhammad Fuad ‘Abd al-Baqi], vol. 2, p. 1022, 1404 (11)

تحرموا طیبات ما أحل الله لکم }

‘Abd Allah (b. Ahmad) – my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) – Waki’ – Ibn Abi Khalid – Qays – ‘Abd Allah:

“We were with the Prophet, peace be upon him, and we were youths. So, we said to the Messenger of Allah, “Should we castrate ourselves?” But, he forbade us (to do that). Then, he permitted us to do nikah (marriage) with the woman for a stipulated period, giving her a garment (as the dowry).” Then, ‘Abd Allah recited, {Do not make haram the good things which Allah has made halal for you} [5:87].(1)

Shaykh al-Arnauṭ comments:

إسناده صحیح علی شرط الشیخین

Its chain is sahih upon the standard of the two Shaykhs(2)

Apparently, Ibn Mas’ud issued this statement in response someone’s declaration of mut’ah as haram. No doubt, this was ‘Umar. It is indeed of great interest that mut’ah was considered by Ibn Mas’ud to be one of the “good things” mentioned by Allah in His Book. This was clearly why he quoted the ayah in connection with it. Al-Hafiẓ Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani (d. 852 H) has this commentary of that hadith:

وظاهر استشهاد ابن مسعود بهذه الآیه هنا یشعر بأنه کان یری بجواز المتعه

Apparently, Ibn Mas’ud’s use of this verse here as evidence shows that he considered mut’ah to be permissible.(3)

Imam al-Nawawi (d. 676 H) has the same opinion:

)ثم قرأ عبد الله یا أیها الذین آمنوا لا تحرموا طیبات ما أحل الله لکم ( فیه إشاره إلی أنه کان یعتقد اباحتها کقول ابن عباس وأنه لم یبلغه نسخها

(Then,

p: 33


1- Abu ‘Abd Allah Ahmad b. Hanbal al-Shaybani, Musnad (Cairo: Muasassat Qurṭubah) [annotator: Shu’ayb al-Arnaut], vol. 1, p. 432, 4113
2- Ibid
3- Shihab al-Din Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Fath al-Bari Sharh Ṣahih al-Bukhari (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’rifah li al-Ṭaba’ah wa al-Nashr; 2nd edition), vol. 9, p. 102

‘Abd Allah recited, {O you who believe! Do not make haram the good things which Allah has made halal for you} [5:87]) there is an indication in it that he considered it permissible, as Ibn ‘Abbas also did, and that information concerning its abrogation did not reach him.(1)

The last part of al-Nawawi’s submission is only a desperate excuse. As Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah, raḍiyallahu ‘anhu, claimed, the generality of the Sahabah freely practised mut’ah – unimpeded and interrupted – from the time of the Prophet till the rule of ‘Umar! Is it then possible that the information of its alleged abrogation also did not reach any of them – until suddenly, after ‘Umar banned it?

Meanwhile, there are a number of fawaid from the hadith of Ibn Mas’ud:

1. It establishes that mut’ah was NOT practised amongst the Muslims initially. This was why no Muslim did it until after the Messenger “permitted” them. This refutes the claim that the Muslims only carried on the practice of mut’ah from the Jahili era.

2. It also shows that mut’ah is one of the “good things” mentioned by Allah, and made halal by Him, in His Book. We will explain, in the next chapter, how Ibn Mas’ud concluded that Qur’an 5:87 is also about mut’ah, among others.

3. It further confirms that mut’ah is truly a form of nikah (marriage). So, the parties in it are legally husband and wife.

3. Allah Calls Mut’ah “A Good Thing”

We know already that Allah revealed the Verse of al-Mut’ah in His Book:

فما استمتعتم به منهن

p: 34


1- Abu Zakariyyah Yahya b. Sharaf al-Nawawi, Sharh Ṣahih Muslim (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi; 1st edition, 1407 H) vol. 9, p. 182

فآتوهن أجورهن فریضه

Those of them with whom you contract mut’ah, give them their prescribed dowries.(1)

We also know that this ayah came down with some extra words included in it:

فما استمعتم به منهن إلی أجل مسمی فآتوهن أجورهن فریضه

Those of them with whom you contract mut’ah for a specified period, give them their prescribed dowries.

The underlined part, however, is not part of the verse. It is only Allah’s Own Tafsir of it, and it belongs to the Hikmah revealed to Prophet Muhammad, sallallahu ‘alaihi wa alihi. As we have discussed in the first chapter, it is allowed to recite this extra phrase along with the verse (as Ubayy b. Ka’b, Ibn ‘Abbas and some others from the Salaf did), and it is equally allowed to remove it. The words “for a specified period” make it impossible to twist the verse – in desperate attempts - in favour of permanent marriages or concubine relationships. Only mut’ah is conducted “for a specified period”, and the ayah is definitely about it.

Meanwhile, the Verse of al-Mut’ah remains in force till today, and will continue to do so till the Hour. Shaykh al-Kulayni (d. 329 H) records:

علی، عن أبیه، عن ابن أبی عمیر، عن عمر بن أذینه، عن زراره قال: جاء عبد الله بن عمیر اللیثی إلی أبی جعفر علیه السلام فقال له: ما تقول فی متعه النساء؟ فقال: أحلها الله فی کتابه وعلی لسان نبیه صلی الله علیه وآله فهی حلال إلی یوم القیامه

‘Ali – his father – Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – ‘Umar b. Uzaynah

p: 35


1- Qur’an 4:24

– Zurarah:

‘Abd Allah b. ‘Umayr al-Laythi went to Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him, and said to him, “What is your opinion of mut’ah with women?” So, he (Abu Ja’far) said, “Allah made it halal in His Book and upon the tongue of His Prophet, peace be upon him and his family. Therefore, it is halal till the Day of al-Qiyamah.”(1)

‘Allamah al-Majlisi (d. 1111 H) says:

حسن

Hasan(2)

Ayatullah al-Ruhani also comments:

صحیح

Sahih(3)

The ace Sunni exegete, Imam Ibn Jarir al-Ṭabari (d. 310 H), also documents:

حدثنا محمد بن المثنی، قال: ثنا محمد بن جعفر، قال: ثنا شعبه، عن الحکم، قال: سألته عن هذه الآیه} : والمحصنات من النساء إلا ما ملکت أیمانکم {إلی هذا الموضع: }فما استمتعتم به منهن {أمنسوخه هی؟ قال: لا. قال الحکم: قال علی رضی الله عنه: لولا أن عمر رضی الله عنه نهی عن المتعه ما زنی إلا شقی.

Muhammad b. al-Muthanna – Muhammad b. Ja’far – Shu’bah:

I asked al-Hakam concerning this verse {Also [forbidden for marriage are] women already married, except those whom your right hands possess} up till {Those of them with whom you contract mut’ah} [4:24], “Is it abrogated?” He said, “NO”.

Al-Hakam said: “ ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, said: ‘If ‘Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, had not forbidden mut’ah, none would have committed zina except a wretched person.”(4)

We already encountered this sanad in the first chapter. The chain is sahih up to al-Hakam. As for al-Hakam himself, al-Hafiẓ states about him:

الحکم بن عتیبه بالمثناه ثم الموحده مصغرا أبو محمد الکندی الکوفی ثقه ثبت فقیه

p: 36


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 449, 4
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 229
3- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 14
4- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Jarir b. Yazid b. Kathir b. Ghalib al-Amuli al-Ṭabari, Jami al-Bayan fi Tawil al-Qur’an (Dar al-Fikr; 1415 H) [annotator: Ṣidqi Jamil al-‘Aṭṭar], vol. 5, p. 19

إلا أنه ربما دلس

Al-Hakam b. ‘Utaybah, Abu Muhammad al-Kindi al-Kufi: Thiqah (trustworthy), thabt (accurate), a jurist, except that he perhaps did tadlis.(1)

Al-Hakam was without doubt a major jurist of the Ahl al-Sunnah, and this is evident from the action of Shu’bah. He declared explicitly that the Verse of al-Mut’ah was never abrogated. Moreover, by narrating the munqati’ athar of ‘Ali to Shu’bah, he made it absolutely clear to him his understanding that the ayah was about mut’ah. Meanwhile, the fact that the verse is unabrogated is further revealed in the general attitude of the Sunni ‘ulama. A lot of them interpret it as a reference to intercourse in a permanent nikah(2) – a submission that contradicts the authentic ahadith quoted in our first chapter.

However, there is an alternative Sunni view, which insists that the Verse of al-Mut’ah has been abrogated. For instance, Imam Ibn Hazm (d. 456 H) submits:

قوله تعالی}: فما استمتعتم به منهن فآتوهن أجورهن فریضه] {٢٤ / النساء / ٤[ فنسخت بقوله صلی الله علیه وسلم إنی کنت أحللت هذه المتعه ألا وإن الله ورسوله قد حرماها ألا فلیبلغ الشاهد الغائب .

ووقع ناسخها من القرآن موضع ذکر میراث الزوجه الثمن والربع فلم یکن لها فی ذلک نصیب. وقال محمد بن إدریس الشافعی رحمه الله علیه موضع تحریمها فی سوره المؤمن وناسخها قوله تعالی} :والذین هم لفروجهم حافظون إلا علی أزواجهم أو ما ملکت أیمانهم] {... ٥ مکیه / المؤمن / ٢٣ [وأجمعوا علی أنها لیست بزوجه ولا ملک یمین فنسخها الله بهذه الآیه.

His Statement, the Most High: {Those

p: 37


1- Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Taqrib al-Tahdhib (Beirut: Dar al-Maktabah al-‘Ilmiyyah; 2nd edition, 1415 H) [annotator: Muṣtafa ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Aṭa], vol. 1, p. 232, 1458
2- See Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Jarir b. Yazid b. Kathir b. Ghalib al-Amuli al-Ṭabari, Jami al-Bayan fi Tawil al-Qur’an (Dar al-Fikr; 1415 H) [annotator: Ṣidqi Jamil al-‘Aṭṭar], vol. 5, p. 17

of them with whom you contract mut’ah, give them their prescribed dowries} [Al-Nisa, 4:24]. It has been abrogated by his statement, peace be upon him: “I used to allow this mut’ah. Verily, Allah and His Messenger have (now) made it haram. Therefore, let those present inform those who are absent.”

Its abrogation also occurs in the Qur’an where the inheritance of the wife is mentioned, eighth and fourths, and she (the woman in mut’ah) has no share from that. Muhammad b. Idris al-Shafi’i, may the mercy of Allah be upon him, also said that the place of its abrogation is in Surah al-Mumin, and its abrogation is His Statement, the Most High: {And those who guard their private parts, except from their wives or what their right hands possess (i.e. slave-women)...} [Makkan, al-Mumin, 23, verse 5]. And they agreed that she (i.e. the woman in mut’ah) is not a wife, and not a slave-woman. Therefore, Allah abrogated it with this verse.(1)

Apparently, Ibn Hazm also believes that the verse was revealed about mut’ah. His arguments against the temporary marriage are as follows:

(i) The ahadith against mut’ah have abrogated the Verse of al-Mut’ah.

(ii) The verse about the inheritance of wives has abrogated the Verse of al-Mut’ah.

(iii) A verse revealed in Makkah in Surah al-Mumin abrogated the Verse of al-Mut’ah, which was revealed later in al-Madinah!

Well, only an ayah can abrogate an ayah, as Allah Himself declares:

ما ننسخ من آیه أو ننسها نأت بخیر منها أو مثلها

Whatever a verse We abrogate or cause to

p: 38


1- Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad b. Hazm al-Andalusi, al-Nasikh wa al-Mansukh fi al-Qur’an al-Karim (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1406 H) [annotator: Dr. ‘Abd al-Ghaffar Sulayman al-Bundari], p. 33

be forgotten, We bring a better one or one similar to it.(1)

We also read:

وإذا بدلنا آیه مکان آیه والله أعلم بما ینزل قالوا إنما أنت مفتر بل أکثرهم لا یعلمون

And when We change a verse in place of another verse, and Allah knows best of what He sends down, they say, “You are but a forger.” Nay, but most of them know not.(2)

Imam al-Shafi’i (d. 204 H) himself says about it:

ولا ینسخ کتاب الله إلا کتابه لقول الله} ما ننسخ من آیه أو ننسها نأت بخیر منها أو مثلها {وقوله} وإذا بدلنا آیه مکان آیه والله أعلم بما ینزل قالوا إنما أنت مفتر { فأبان أن نسخ القرآن لا یکون إلا بقرآن مثله

The Book of Allah cannot be abrogated except by His Book, due to the Statement of Allah {Whatever a verse We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring a better one or one similar to it} and His Statement {And when We change a verse in place of another verse, and Allah knows best of what He sends down, they say, “You are but a forger”}. So, it is very clear that the abrogation of (a verse of) the Qur’an cannot occur except through (another verse of) the Qur’an.(3)

Imam ‘Abd al-Razzaq (d. 211 H) has this too:

عبد الرزاق قال معمر وقال قتاده وأما قوله نأت بخیر منها أو مثلها یقول آیه فیها تخفیف فیها رخصه فیها أمر فیها نهی

‘Abd al-Razzaq – Ma’mar – Qatadah:

As for His Statement {We bring a better one or one similar to it},

p: 39


1- Qur’an 2:106
2- Qur’an 16”101
3- Muhammad b. Idris al-Shafi’i, Kitab Ikhtilaf al-Hadith, pp. 483-484

He says: “A verse in which there is relief, in which there is permission, in which there is a command, in which there is a prohibition.”(1)

Prof. Ibn Yasin says about this riwayah:

وإسناده صحیح

Its chain is sahih.(2)

Therefore, it is an ayah that abrogates or replaces another ayah. As such, if indeed the Verse of al-Mut’ah has been abrogated, there must be an explicit verse in the Qur’an revealed for that purpose. Whoever is unable to provide an abrogating verse must accept the validity of temporary marriage in the Book of Allah unconditionally.

Secondly, it is perfectly possible for the wife in a valid marriage not to inherit her husband. For instance, Imam al-Bukhari (d. 256 H) documents:

حدثنا أبو عاصم عن ابن جریج عن ابن شهاب عن علی بن حسین عن عمرو بن عثمان عن أسامه بن زید رضی الله عنهما : أن النبی صلی الله علیه و سلم قال :لا یرث المسلم الکافر ولا الکافر المسلم

Abu ‘Asim – Ibn Jurayj – Ibn Shihab – ‘Ali b. Husayn – ‘Amr b. ‘Uthman – Usamah b. Zayd, may Allah be pleased with them both:

The Prophet, peace be upon him, said: “The Muslim does not inherit the kafir, and the kafir does not inherit the Muslim.”(3)

So, where a Muslim is married to a Jewish or Christian woman – and she cannot inherit him – does this in any way affect the validity of their nikah? Of course, it does not. In the same manner, the fact that the spouses in a temporary marriage may not

p: 40


1- ‘Abd al-Razzaq b. Hamam al-Ṣana’ani, Tafsir al-Qur’an (Riyadh: Maktabah al-Rushd; 1st edition, 1410 H) [annotator: Dr. Muṣtafa Muslim Muhammad], vol. 1, p. 55
2- Prof. Dr. Hikmat b. Bashir b. Yasin, Mawsu’at al-Ṣahih al-Masbur min al-Tafsir bi al-Mathur (Madinah: Dar al-Mathar li al-Nashr wa al-Tawzi’ wa al-Ṭaba’at; 1st edition, 1420 H), vol. 1, p. 213
3- Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad b. Isma’il b. Ibrahim b. Mughirah al-Bukhari al-Ju’fi, al-Jami’ al-Ṣahih al-Mukhtaṣar (Beirut: Dar Ibn Kathir; 3rd edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Dr. Muṣṭafa Dib al-Bagha], vol. 6, p. 2484, 6383

inherit each other – depending upon their mutual agreement - does NOT in any way establish its abrogation by any ayah or hadith, nor does it cancel the status of the woman as a “wife”. Mut’ah, obviously, is an exception to the general ruling in the Verse of Inheritance, just as the Muslim-kafirah marriage is.

Finally, al-Shafi’i quotes this verse as the abrogator of temporary marriage in the Qur’an:

والذین هم لفروجهم حافظون إلا علی أزواجهم أو ما ملکت أیمانهم فإنهم غیر ملومین فمن ابتغی وراء ذلک فأولئک هم العادون

And those who guard their private parts, except from their wives or what their right hands possess (i.e. slave-women), for then, they are free from blame. But whoever seeks beyond that, then those are the transgressors.(1)

His argument is that the woman in mut’ah is neither a “wife” nor a “slave-woman”; and, sexual intercourse is not allowed except with those two. However, there are three fatal problems with the use of this noble ayah against mut’ah. First, it was revealed in Makkah, while the Verse of al-Mut’ah came later in al-Madinah. So, if anything, it would be the later abrogating the former! Secondly, Prophet Muhammad allowed and practised mut’ah during the Madinan era, long after the revelation of both Surah al-Muminun and Surah al-Ma’arij in Makkah. If we accepted the Sunni argument, it would mean that he was permitting and indulging in illegal sex! May Allah protect us from such blasphemous thoughts. Lastly, mut’ah is a form of nikah (marriage), which means that both

p: 41


1- Qur’an 23:5-7 and 70:29-31

parties are husband and “wife”. Since those verses have allowed sex with “wives”, then they have defended mut’ah as well!

So, as things stand, there is NO ayah in the entire Qur’an that has abrogated the Verse of al-Mut’ah. Meanwhile, only a verse can abrogate a verse. With that, then, nothing can abrogate the Verse of al-Mut’ah, and it shall remain in force till the Qiyamah. By extension, mut’ah itself is, on the strength of that verse, valid till the end of life on earth.

This is the point of departure between the Shi’ah and the Sunnis. The Ahl al-Sunnah accept the authenticity of ahadith which contradict the Verse of al-Mut’ah, and use them to overturn it. By contrast, the Shi’ah throw out any riwayah that disagrees with any verse of the Kitab. So, naturally, all ahadith against mut’ah – whatsoever their sources or chains – are fabrications (whether intentional or accidental) by Shi’i standards. Al-Kulayni reports:

عده من أصحابنا، عن أحمد بن محمد بن خالد، عن أبیه، عن النضر بن سوید، عن یحیی الحلبی، عن أیوب بن الحر قال: سمعت أبا عبد الله علیه السلام یقول :کل شئ مردود إلی الکتاب والسنه، وکل حدیث لا یوافق کتاب الله فهو زخرف

A number of our companions – Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Khalid – his father – al-Naḍar b. Suwayd – Yahya al-Halabi – Ayyub b. al-Hurr:

I heard Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, saying: “Everything is returned back to the Book and the Sunnah, and EVERY hadith that does not agree with the

p: 42

Book of Allah is a vanity.”(1)

Shaykh al-Majlisi comments:

صحیح

Sahih(2)

And Shaykh Hadi al-Najafi agrees:

الروایه صحیحه الإسناد

The report has a sahih chain(3)

Al-Kulayni here again records:

محمد بن إسماعیل، عن الفضل بن شاذان، عن ابن أبی عمیر، عن هشام بن الحکم وغیره، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: خطب النبی صلی الله علیه وآله بمنی فقال: أیها الناس ما جاء کم عنی یوافق کتاب الله فأنا قلته وما جاء کم یخالف کتاب الله فلم أقله.

Muhammad b. Isma’il – al-Faḍl b. Shadhan – Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – Hisham b. al-Hakam and others – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

The Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, delivered a khutbah at Muna and said, “O mankind! Whatsoever comes to you from me that agrees with the Book of Allah, I truly said it. But, whatsoever comes to you that contradicts the Book of Allah, I never said it.”(4)

Al-Majlisi says:

مجهول کالصحیح

Majhul ka al-Sahih(5)

Prof. ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari also declares:

سند صحیح

A sahih chain(6)

Our beloved teacher, Shaykh al-Saduq (d. 381 H), also thereby submits, in line with the sahih ahadith:

وکل حدیث لا یوافق کتاب الله فهو باطل

Every hadith that does not agree with the Book of Allah is a fabrication.(7)

Ayatullah Ja’far Subhani too says:

أمر الأئمه علیهم السلام بعرض الأحادیث علی الکتاب والسنه، وأن کل حدیث لا یوافق کتاب الله ولا سنه نبیه یضرب به عرض الجدار .وقد تواترت الروایات علی الترجیح بموافقه الکتاب والسنه

The Imams, peace be upon them, ordered that the ahadith must be compared to the Book and the Sunnah, and that every single hadith that

p: 43


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Uṣul min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 1, p. 69, 3
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 1, p. 229
3- Hadi al-Najafi, Mawsu’at Ahadith Ahl al-Bayt (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-‘Arabi; 1st edition, 1423 H), vol. 9, p. 394, 11899
4- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Uṣul min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 1, p. 69, 5
5- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 1, p. 229
6- Prof. ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari, Dirasat fi ‘Ilm al-Dirayah Talkhiṣ Miqyas al-Hidayah (Jami’at al-Imam al-Ṣadiq; 1st edition), p. 259
7- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. ‘Ali b. Husayn b. Babuyah al-Qummi, al-I’tiqadat (Dar al-Mufid; 2nd edition, 1414 H) [annotator: ‘Iṣam ‘Abd al-Sayyid], Ch. 1, p. 22

does not agree with the Book of Allah or the Sunnah of His Prophet must be thrown out. There are mutawatir reports about weighing (ahadith) on the basis of agreement with the Book and the Sunnah.(1)

Ayatullah Makarim al-Shirazi even applies this rule to reject a hadith:

إن هذا الحدیث لا ینسجم مع نص القرآن .ووفقا للقواعد الأصولیه التی عندنا، أن کل حدیث لا یوافق کتاب الله ساقط عن الاعتبار، ولا یمکن التعویل علی أنه حدیث شریف من أحادیث النبی أو المعصومین علیهم السلام.

Certainly, this hadith does not agree with the text of the Qur’an. And, based on the principles of usul with us, that every single hadith that does not agree with the Book of Allah is unreliable, and it is impossible to depend upon the fact that it is a noble hadith from the ahadith of the Prophet or the infallibles, peace be upon them.(2)

So, since mut’ah is halal in the Qur’an, and there is no ayah that has abrogated it, then every single hadith – wherever it comes from – that suggests its illegitimacy is “a vanity”, a fabrication. The only way a Sunni can make a valid argument against temporary marriage is to quote a verse of the Kitab that truly repeals it. Anything short of that is only a child’s play.

Anyway, there is a second ayah – apart from the Verse of al-Mut’ah – which, though NOT revealed about temporary marriage, applies to it:

یا أیها الذین آمنوا لا تحرموا طیبات ما أحل الله لکم ولا تعتدوا إن

p: 44


1- Ja’far al-Subhani, Kulliyat fi ‘Ilm al-Rijal (Qum: Muasassat al-Nashr al-Islami; 3rd edition, 1414 H), p. 27
2- Naṣir Makarim al-Shirazi, al-Amthal fi Tafsir Kitab Allah al-Munzal, vol. 12, p. 34

الله لا یحب المعتدین

O you who believe! Do not make haram the good things which Allah has made halal for you; and do not exceed the limits; surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits.(1)

In the last chapter, we see how Ibn Mas’ud considered mut’ah as one of “the good things” mentioned in this verse. In this report of Imam al-Bukhari, the reason is explicitly given:

حدثنا قتیبه بن سعید حدثنا جریر عن إسماعیل عن قیس قال : قال عبد الله کنا نغزو مع رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم ولیس لنا شیء فقلنا ألا نستخصی ؟ فنهانا عن ذلک ثم رخصلنا أن ننکح المرأه بالثوب ثم قرأ علینا } یا أیها الذین أمنوا لا تحرموا طیبات ما أحل الله لکم ولا تعتدوا أن الله لا یحب المعتدین {

Qutaybah b. Sa’id – Jarir – Isma’il – Qays – ‘Abd Allah (b. Mas’ud):

We were on an expedition with the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, and we had nothing with us. So, we said, “Should we castrate ourselves?” But, he forbade us to do that. Then, he permitted us to do nikah (marriage) with the woman, giving her a garment (as the dowry). Then, he recited to us {O you who believe! Do not make haram the good things which Allah has made halal for you; and do not exceed the limits; surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits}.(2)

Yes, it was the Prophet himself who first quoted the verse in support of mut’ah, and Ibn

p: 45


1- Qur’an 5:87
2- Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad b. Isma’il b. Ibrahim b. Mughirah al-Bukhari al-Ju’fi, al-Jami’ al-Ṣahih al-Mukhtaṣar (Beirut: Dar Ibn Kathir; 3rd edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Dr. Muṣṭafa Dib al-Bagha], vol. 5, p. 1953, 4787

Mas’ud only followed this Sunnah later.

Imam Ahmad (d. 241 H) also documents:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثنی أبی ثنا یحیی بن زکریا قال أخبرنی إسماعیل عن قیس عن بن مسعود قال کنا مع رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم لیس لنا نساء قلنا یا رسول الله ألا نستخصی فنهانا عن ذلک فقال { یا أیها الذین آمنوا لا تحرموا طیبات ما أحل الله لکم }

‘Abd Allah (b. Ahmad) – my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) – Yahya b. Zakariya – Isma’il – Qays – Ibn Mas’ud:

We were with the Messenger of Allah. There were no women with us. So, we said, “O Messenger of Allah, should we castrate ourselves?” But, he forbade us from doing that AND said {O you who believe! Do not make haram the good things which Allah has made halal for you}(1)

Shaykh al-Arnauṭ comments:

إسناده صحیح علی شرط الشیخین

Its chain is sahih upon the standard of the two Shaykhs.(2)

The ayah in question is from al-Maidah, the last revealed surah of the Qur’an. Imam al-Hakim (d. 403 H) reports:

حدثنا أبو العباس محمد بن یعقوب ثنا بحر بن نصر الخولانی قال : قریء علی عبد الله بن وهب أخبرک معاویه بن صالح عن أبی الزاهریه عن جبیر بن نفیر قال حججت فدخلت علی عائشه رضی الله عنها فقالت لی : یا جبیر تقرأ المائده ؟ فقلت : نعم قالت : أما أنها آخر سوره نزلت فما وجدتم فیها من حلال فاستحلوه وما وجدتم من حرام فحرموه

Abu al-‘Abbas Muhammad b. Ya’qub – Bahr b. Nasr al-Khawlani – ‘Abd Allah b. Wahb –

p: 46


1- Abu ‘Abd Allah Ahmad b. Hanbal al-Shaybani, Musnad (Cairo: Muasassat Qurṭubah) [annotator: Shu’ayb al-Arnaut], vol. 1, p. 450, 4302
2- Ibid

Mu’awiyah b. Salih – Abu al-Zahiriyyah – Jubayr b. Nufayr:

I did Hajj and went to ‘Aishah, may Allah be pleased with her, and she said to me, “O Jubayr! Do you recite al-Maidah?” I said, “Yes”. She said, “Verily, it was the last surah to be revealed. So, whatsoever you find in it to be halal, declare it as halal; and whatsoever you find to be haram, declare it as haram.(1)

Al-Hakim submits:

هذا حدیث صحیح علی شرط الشیخین

This hadith is sahih upon the standard of the two Shaykhs.(2)

Imam al-Dhahabi (d. 748 H) agrees:

علی شرط البخاری ومسلم

Upon the standard of al-Bukhari and Muslim.(3)

Imam Ahmad has documented it through his own sanad too:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثنی أبی ثنا عبد الرحمن بن مهدی قال ثنا معاویه عن أبی الزاهریه عن جبیر بن نفیر قال دخلت علی عائشه فقالت هل تقرأ سوره المائده قال قلت نعم قالت فإنها آخر سوره نزلت فما وجدتم فیها من حلال فاستحلوه وما وجدتم فیها من حرام فحرموه وسألتها عن خلق رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم فقالت القرآن

‘Abd Allah (b. Ahmad) – my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) – ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Mahdi – Mu’awiyah – Abu al-Zahiriyyah – Jubayr b. Nufayr:

I went to ‘Aishah and she said, “Do you recite Surah al-Maidah?” I said, “Yes”. She said, “For, verily, it was the last surah to be revealed. So, whatsoever you find in it to be halal, then declare it halal; and whatsoever you find in it to be haram, declare it haram.” Then I asked her about the

p: 47


1- Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah al-Hakim al-Naysaburi, al-Mustadrak ‘ala al-Ṣahihayn (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-’Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1411 H) [annotator: Muṣtafa ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Aṭa], vol. 2, p. 340, 3210
2- Ibid
3- Ibid

character of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, and she said, “The Qur’an.”(1)

Al-Arnauṭ states:

إسناده صحیح

Its chain is sahih(2)

Apparently, nothing declared halal in Surah al-Maidah was ever abrogated. Moreover, the verses of the surah came very late in revelation, and were therefore very close to the time of the Prophet’s death.

We are unsure about that exact military expedition which Ibn Mas’ud was making reference to. However, we know that a lot – perhaps the majority - of its Muslim soldiers were youths as stated by him. He himself died during the rule of ‘Uthman in 32 H(3) and his age was sixty three then(4). This means that he was already 31 during the Hijrah and had reached 33 by the time of the Battle of Badr – the first battle in Islam. So, whenever that expedition was, Ibn Mas’ud was, by all indications, already beyond youthfulness. Therefore, when he said “and we were youths”, he was most probably referring only to the dominant composition of the army.

It seems that this is also what explains the tone of the ayah. The Verse of al-Mut’ah had been revealed before that expedition. So, when these youthful Sahabah talked of castrating themselves instead of going into mut’ah, it looked as though they had made it haram for themselves. As a result, the Prophet quoted Qur’an 5:87 (which also had been revealed before then) to declare that temporary marriage was one of the good things mentioned in that ayah, that it was made halal

p: 48


1- Abu ‘Abd Allah Ahmad b. Hanbal al-Shaybani, Musnad (Cairo: Muasassat Qurṭubah) [annotator: Shu’ayb al-Arnaut], vol. 6, p. 188, 25588
2- Ibid
3- Abu al-‘Ala Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-Rahman b. ‘Abd al-Rahim al-Mubarakfuri, Tuhfat al-Ahwazi bi Sharh Jami’ al-Tirmidhi (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1410 H), vol. 10, p. 208
4- Shams al-Din Muhammad b. Ahmad b. ‘Uthman al-Dhahabi, Tarikh al-Islam wa Wafiyat al-Mashahir wa al-A’lam (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi; 1st edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Dr. ‘Umar ‘Abd al-Salam Tadmuri], vol. 3, p. 389

by Allah, and that the Muslims must not make it haram for themselves. Then, he gave them a direct command. Imam Abu Ya’la (d. 307 H) records:

حدثنا أبو خیثمه حدثنا مروان بن معاویه الفزاری عن إسماعیل بن أبی خالد عن قیس بن أبی حازم قال : سمعت عبد الله بن مسعود یقول کنا نغزو مع رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم لیس لنا نساء فقلنا : یارسول الله ألا نستخصی ؟ فنهانا عن ذلک وأمرنا أن ننکح المرأه بالثوب ثم قرأ عبد الله : { یا أیها الذین آمنوا لا تحرموا طیبات ما أحل الله }

Abu Khaythamah – Marwan b. Mu’awiyah al-Fazari – Isma’il b. Abi Khalid – Qays b. Abi Hazim:

I heard ‘Abd Allah b. Mas’ud saying: “We were on an expedition with the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him. There were no women with us. So, we said, “O Messenger of Allah, should we castrate ourselves?” But, he forbade us from doing that AND HE ORDERED US to do nikah with the woman, giving her the garment (as the dowry)”. Then, ‘Abd Allah recited {O you who believe! Do not make haram the good things which Allah has made halal for you}.(1)

Shaykh Dr. Asad says:

إسناده صحیح

Its chain is sahih(2)

This order, in some other reports, is also termed a “permission” by Ibn Mas’ud. Perhaps, he did this because the Messenger – being the field commander – had the right to temporarily prohibit certain halal things to his soldiers in order to maintain strict discipline, high morale and

p: 49


1- Abu Ya’la Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Muthanna al-Mawṣili al-Tamimi, Musnad (Damascus: Dar al-Mamun li al-Turath; 1st edition, 1404 H) [annotator: Dr. Husayn Salim Asad], vol. 9, p. 260, 5382
2- Ibid

strong energy. Normally, even if Ibn Mas’ud and the others had initially considered mut’ah to be halal, they would nonetheless have needed the Prophet’s permission to go ahead with it, as long as they were still on the military expedition. Obviously, his order to them to perform mut’ah contained two things together: a permission and a command.

Imam Ibn Hibban (d. 354 H) also documents:

أخبرنا أحمد بن علی بن المثنی قال حدثنا أبو خیثمه قال حدثنا مروان بن معاویه عن إسماعیل بن أبی خالد عن قیس بن أبی حازم قال سمعت بن مسعود یقول کنا نغزو مع رسول الله صلی الله علیه وسلم لیس لنا نساء فقالوا یا رسول الله ألا نستخصی فنهانا عن ذلک وأمرنا ان ننکح المرأه بالثوب ثم قرأ عبد الله هذه الآیه یا أیها الذین آمنوا لا تحرموا طیبات ما أحل الله لکم

Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. al-Muthanna - Abu Khaythamah – Marwan b. Mu’awiyah al-Fazari – Isma’il b. Abi Khalid – Qays b. Abi Hazim:

I heard Ibn Mas’ud saying: “We were on an expedition with the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him. There were no women with us. So, we said, “O Messenger of Allah, should we castrate ourselves?” But, he forbade us from doing that AND HE ORDERED US to do nikah with the woman, giving her the garment (as the dowry)”. Then, ‘Abd Allah recited this verse {O you who believe! Do not make haram the good things which Allah has made halal for you}.(1)

‘Allamah al-Albani states:

صحیح

Sahih(2)

And Shaykh al-Arnauṭ concurs:

إسناده صحیح علی شرط الشیخین

Its

p: 50


1- Abu Hatim Muhammad b. Hibban b. Ahmad b. Hibban b. Mu’adh b. Ma’bad al-Tamimi al-Darimi al-Busti, Ṣahih Ibn Hibban bi Tartib Ibn Balban (Beirut: Muasassat al-Risalah; 2nd edition, 1414 H) [annotators: Muhammad Naṣir al-Din al-Albani and Shu’ayb al-Arnaut], vol. 9, p. 448, 4141
2- Ibid

chain is sahih upon the standard of the two Shaykhs(1)

The bottomline of all this is that the Prophet described mut’ah as one of “the good things” which Allah has made halal, mentioned in a verse in Surah al-Maidah. His companion, Ibn Mas’ud, followed him strictly in this Sunnah as well, after him. Well, our brothers from the Ahl al-Sunnah routinely describe mut’ah as “fornication and adultery”. So, we ask: are fornication and adultery good, halal things?

Moreover, one of the very last ayahs of the Qur’an to be revealed re-affirm the halalness of “the good things”:

الیوم أحل لکم الطیبات

Today, the good things are made halal to you.(2)

Once more, this is from al-Maidah where nothing of halal and haram has been abrogated. As such, this verse also re-declares mut’ah to be halal since it is one of “the good things”, according to the Prophet himself.

We equally read these verses:

یسألونک ماذا أحل لهم قل أحل لکم الطیبات

They ask you (O Muhammad) what is halal for them. Say: “The good things are made halal for you.”(3)

And:

الذین یتبعون الرسول النبی الأمی الذی یجدونه مکتوبا عندهم فی التوراه والإنجیل یأمرهم بالمعروف وینهاهم عن المنکر ویحل لهم الطیبات ویحرم علیهم الخبائث ویضع عنهم إصرهم والأغلال التی کانت علیهم

Those who follow the Messenger, the Ummi Prophet, whom they find written with them in al-Tawrat and al-Injil, he orders them with good deeds and forbids them from evil deeds, and he makes the good things halal for them and makes the impure things haram to them, and removes

p: 51


1- Ibid
2- Qur’an 5:5
3- Qur’an 5:4

from them their burden and shackles which they were upon.(1)

We know that he “ordered” the performance of mut’ah. In that case, it is one of the “good deeds”. We also know that he explicitly called mut’ah one of “the good things”. This assures us that he always declared it halal till his death, in line with the Qur’an of his Lord, and never made it haram – not even for a split second.

Meanwhile, let us equally look at this from another angle. In one of the Makkan surahs, Allah declares haram all forms of indecent behaviours:

قل إنما حرم ربی الفواحش ما ظهر منها وما بطن والإثم والبغی بغیر الحق وأن تشرکوا بالله ما لم ینزل به سلطانا وأن تقولوا علی الله ما لا تعلمون

Say: “My Lord has only made haram all indecencies, those of them that are apparent as well as those that are concealed, and sin and rebellion without justice, and that you associate with Allah that for which He has not sent down any authority, and that you say against Allah what you do not know”.(2)

So, fornication and adultery – both of which are indecencies – were already made haram before the Hijrah. Our Sunni brothers say that mut’ah also constitutes fornication and adultery. As such, by their logic, it was banned during the Makkan era by Allah and His Messenger. But then, on what basis was the Prophet practising mut’ah along with his Sahabah after the Hijrah? On what basis was he also “allowing” and “commanding” them

p: 52


1- Qur’an 7:157
2- Qur’an 7:33

to contract temporary marriages? Was he contradicting his Lord? Was he declaring the haram to be halal? Was he encouraging and enforcing fornication and adultery?

Even worse still for our Sunni brothers, this is what the Kitab has said:

قل إن الله لا یأمر بالفحشاء

Say: “Verily, Allah does NOT command indecencies.”(1)

In fact, He actually forbids them:

إن الله یأمر بالعدل والإحسان وإیتاء ذی القربی وینهی عن الفحشاء والمنکر والبغی

Verily, Allah commands justice, good deeds and the giving to the kindred, and He forbids indecencies, and evil deeds and rebellion.(2)

So, we put this to the Ahl al-Sunnah: when Allah commands us to give dowries to mut’ah wives in the Verse of al-Mut’ah, what has He done?

4. The Sunni Contradictions

When exactly was mut’ah banned permanently? This is a question which Sunnis will never be able to firmly answer till the end of the world. This is due to the severe conflicts between their “authentic” ahadith on the matter. For instance, Imam Muslim (d. 261 H) reports:

وحدثنا محمد بن عبدالله بن نمیر حدثنا أبی حدثنا عبیدالله عن ابن شهاب عن الحسن وعبدالله ابنی محمد بن علی عن أبیهما عن علی أنه سمع ابن عباس یلین فی متعه النساء فقال مهلا یا ابن عباس فإن رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم نهی عنها یوم خیبر وعن لحوم الحمر الإنسیه

Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah b. Numayr – my father – ‘Ubayd Allah – Ibn Shihab – al-Hasan and ‘Abd Allah, sons of Muhammad b. ‘Ali – their father:

‘Ali heard Ibn ‘Abbas allowing mut’ah with women. So, he said, “Don’t

p: 53


1- Qur’an 7:28
2- Qur’an 16:90

be hasty, O Ibn ‘Abbas, for the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, forbade it on the Day of Khaybar as well as the flesh of domestic asses.”(1)

The incident, allegedly witnessed by Muhammad b. ‘Ali, apparently took place after the death of the Prophet, sallallahu ‘alaihi wa alihi. Of course, this eye-witness was born only after the Messenger of Allah had passed away. Here, we see Amir al-Muminin, ‘alaihi al-salam, supposedly citing the ban at Khaybar to stop Ibn ‘Abbas from allowing mut’ah after the Prophet had died. This suggests that the ban at Khaybar was a permanent one. It is the only logical explanation for the action attributed to ‘Ali. Interestingly, we often see the Ahl al-Sunnah quote this hadith as well as evidence of the permanent prohibition of mut’ah. The Battle of Khaybar occurred in 7 H. So, mut’ah supposedly had been banned eternally since then.

But, Imam Muslim has another interesting report:

حدثنا إسحاق بن إبراهیم أخبرنا یحیی بن آدم حدثنا إبراهیم بن سعد عن عبدالملک بن الربیع بن سبره الجهنی عن أبیه عن جده قال أمرنا رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم بالمتعه عام الفتح حین دخلنا مکه ثم لم نخرج منها حتی نهانا عنها

Ishaq b. Ibrahim – Yahya b. Adam – Ibrahim b. Sa’d – ‘Abd al-Malik b. al-Rabi’ b. Sabrah al-Juhani – his father (al-Rabi’) – his grandfather (Sabrah):

The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, ORDERED us to perform mut’ah in the Year of the Conquest as we entered Makkah. Then, we did

p: 54


1- Abu al-Husayn Muslim b. al-Hajjaj al-Qushayri al-Naysaburi, Ṣahih Muslim (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-‘Arabi) [annotator: Muhammad Fuad ‘Abd al-Baqi], vol. 2, p. 1027, 1407 (31)

not come out of it until he forbade us from it.(1)

What? But, this was in 8 H, a year after Khaybar! What happened to the permanent ban, which ‘Ali supposedly quoted against Ibn ‘Abbas?

Meanwhile, this must be put in its proper context. Sabrah was one of the soldiers who conquered Makkah with the Messenger of Allah, as Imam Muslim reports:

حدثنا أبو کامل فضیل بن حسین الجحدری حدثنا بشر ( یعنی ابن مفضل ) حدثنا عماره بن غزیه عن الربیع بن سبره أن أباه غزا مع رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم فتح مکه قال فأقمنا بها خمس عشره ( ثلاثین بین لیله ویوم ) فأذن لنا رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم فی متعه النساء

Abu Kamil Fuḍayl b. Husayn al-Jahdari – Bishr b. Mufaḍḍal – ‘Amarah b. Ghaziyyah:

Al-Rabi’ b. Sabrah reported that his father was on an expedition with the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, during the Conquest of Makkah. He (Sabrah) said: “So we stayed there for fifteen days (including thirteen full days), and the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, permitted us to do mut’ah with women.”(2)

As such, when Sabrah “entered Makkah”, he was doing so as part of a military force that had conquered the holy city. As the soldiers were entering as conquerors, the Prophet commanded them to do mut’ah, and they camped in there for fifteen days.

The Year of the Conquest of Makkah is also known as the Year of al-Awṭas, and this is another relevant riwayah of Imam Muslim

p: 55


1- Ibid, vol. 2, p. 1023, 1406 (22)
2- Ibid, vol. 2, p. 1023, 1406 (20)

concerning it:

حدثنا أبو بکر بن أبی شیبه حدثنا یونس بن محمد حدثنا عبدالواحد بن زیاد حدثنا أبو عمیس عن إیاس بن سلمه عن أبیه قال رخص رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم عام أوطاس فی المتعه ثلاثا ثم نهی عنها

Abu Bakr b. Abi Shaybah – Yunus b. Muhammad – ‘Abd al-Wahid b. Ziyad – Abu ‘Umays – Iyas b. Salama – his father (Salama):

The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, allowed mut’ah for three days during the Year of Awṭas. Then, he forbade it.(1)

The annotator, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Baqi, explains:

( عام أوطاس ) هذا تصریح بأنها أبیحت یوم فتح مکه وهو ویوم أوطاس شیء واحد

(Year of Awṭas) this is an explicit statement that it was allowed on the day of the conquest of Makkah, which is also the same as the Day of Awṭas.(2)

So, mut’ah was supposedly made compulsory as the conquering soldiers entered Makkah, and was banned again three days later.

Interestingly, Imam Muslim has this “sahih” report which overturns everything:

وحدثنا أبو بکر بن أبی شیبه حدثنا ابن علیه عن معمر عن الزهری عن الربیع بن سبره عن أبیه أن رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم نهی یوم الفتح عن متعه النساء

Abu Bakr b. Abi Shaybah – Ibn ‘Ulayyah – Ma’mar – al-Zuhri – al-Rabi’ b. Sabrah – his father (Sabrah):

The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, forbade mut’ah with women on the Day of the Conquest.(3)

That same day? Not three days after it? What then are we supposed to believe?

Meanwhile, ‘Umar supposedly considered the ban of

p: 56


1- Ibid, vol. 2, p. 1022, 1405 (18)
2- Ibid
3- Ibid, vol. 2, p. 1023, 1406 (25)

mut’ah after this three-day allowance – which alleged occurred only during the conquest of Makkah - as permanent. Imam Ibn Majah (d. 273 H) tells us:

حدثنا محمد بن خلف العسقلانی. ثنا الفریابی عن أبان بن أبی حازم، عن أبی بکر بن حفص، عن ابن عمر، قال: لما ولی عمر بن الخطاب، خطب الناس فقال: إن رسول الله صلی الله علیه وسلم أذن لنا فی المتعه ثلاثا، ثم حرمها. والله !لا أعلم أحدا یتمتع وهو محصن إلا رجمته بالحجاره إلا أن یأتینی بأربعه یشهدون أن رسول الله أحلها بعد إذ حرمها.

Muhammad b. Khalaf al-‘Asqalani – al-Faryabi – ‘Aban b. Abi Hazim – Abu Bakr b. Hafs – Ibn ‘Umar:

When ‘Umar b. al-Khaṭṭab became the wali, he addressed the people and said, “Verily, the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, permitted us to practise mut’ah for three days. Then, he made it haram. I swear by Allah, if I know of any married person doing mut’ah, I will stone him with stones except if he brings to me four people who testify that the Messenger of Allah (later) declared it halal after prohibiting it.”(1)

Shaykh al-Arnauṭ and two others say:

حدیث صحیح وهذاسند حسن

A sahih hadith, and this chain is hasan.(2)

NOTE: This hadith is actually ḍa’if. Concerning one of its narrators, al-Hafiẓ (d. 852 H) states:

أبان بن عبد الله بن أبی حازم بن صخر بن العیله بفتح العین المهمله البجلی الأحمسی الکوفی صدوق فی حفظه لین

Aban b. ‘Abd Allah b. Abi Hazim b. Sakhr b. al-‘Aylah al-Bajali al-Ahmasi al-Kufi: Saduq (very truthful), there

p: 57


1- Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad b. Yazid b. Majah al-Qazwini, al-Sunan (Damascus: Dar al-Risalah al-‘Alamiyyah; 1st edition, 1430 H) [annotators: Shu’ayb al-Arnauṭ, Muhammad Kamil and Ahmad Barhum], vol. 3, p. 138, 1963
2- Ibid

is weakness in his memory.(1)

Then, Imam Ibn Hibban (d. 354 H) gives more details:

أبان بن عبد الله البجلی من أهل الکوفه وهو الذی یقال له أبان بن أبی حازم، یروی عن أبان بن تغلب وأهل الکوفه، روی عنه الثوری ووکیع والناس. وکان ممن فحش خطؤه وانفرد بالمناکیر، أخبرنا الهمدانی قال سمعت عمرو بن علی یقول: ما سمعت یحیی بن سعید القطان یحدث عنه بشئ قط - یعنی أبان البجلی.

Aban b. ‘Abd Allah al-Bajali, from the people of Kufa, and he was the one called Aban b. Abi Hazim. He narrated from Aban b. Taghlib and the people of Kufah. Al-Thawri, Waki’ and the people narrated from him. He was one of those whose mistakes were terrible, and who narrated manakir (repugnant reports) without corroboration. Al-Hamdani informed us, and said: I heard ‘Amr b. ‘Ali saying: “I never heard Yahya b. Sa’id al-Qaṭṭan ever narrating anything from him” – he meant Aban al-Bajali.(2)

In normal circumstances, a narrator like this is not just ḍa’if, but also munkar. So, his reports are very weak and thrown away. But, here we are again with our Sunni ‘ulama!

Yet, even this “backup” provided by Imam al-Bayhaqi (d. 458 H) does no good either:

وقد حدثنا أبو محمد عبد الله بن یوسف الأصبهانی أنبأ أبو محمد عبد الرحمن بن یحیی الزهری القاضی بمکه ثنا محمد بن إسماعیل الصائغ ثنا أبو خالد الأموی ثنا منصور بن دینار ثنا عمر بن محمد عن سالم بن عبد الله عن أبیه عن عمر بن الخطاب رضی الله عنه قال صعد عمر علی

p: 58


1- Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Taqrib al-Tahdhib (Beirut: Dar al-Maktabah al-‘Ilmiyyah; 2nd edition, 1415 H) [annotator: Muṣtafa ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Aṭa], vol. 1, p. 51, 140
2- Abu Hatim Muhammad b. Hibban b. Ahmad al-Tamimi al-Busti, Kitab al-Majruhin [annotator: Mahmud Ibrahim Zayad], vol. 1, p. 99

المنبر فحمد الله وأثنی علیه ثم قال ما بال رجال ینکحون هذه المتعه وقد نهی رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم عنها ألا وإنی لا أوتی بأحد نکحها إلا رجمته

Abu Muhammad ‘Abd Allah b. Yusuf al-Asbahani – Abu Muhammad ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Yahya al-Zuhri al-Qaḍi – Muhammad b. Isma’il al-Saigh – Abu Khalid al-Umawi – Mansur b. Dinar – ‘Umar b. Muhammad – Salim b. ‘Abd Allah – his father – ‘Umar b. al-Khaṭṭab, may Allah be pleased with him:

‘Umar climbed the pulpit, and thanked Allah and extolled Him. Then, he said, “What is the problem of men who are contracting the nikah of this mut’ah despite that the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, had forbidden it? Take note: if anyone who has contracted its nikah is brought to me, I will stone him.”(1)

Al-Bayhaqi himself expresses doubt about the authenticity of this riwayah immediately after quoting it:

فهذا إن صح یبین أن عمر رضی الله عنه إنما نهی عن نکاح المتعه لأنه علم نهی النبی صلی الله علیه و سلم عنه

So, this one, IF AUTHENTIC, shows that ‘Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, only forbade the nikah of mut’ah because he knew of its prohibition by the Prophet, peace be upon him.(2)

This was perhaps due to the presence of Mansur b. Dinar in the sanad. Al-Hafiẓ documents about him:

منصور بن دینار السهمی :عن الزهری قال النسائی لیس بالقوی وقال البخاری روی عن نافع وحماد فی حدیثه نظر * وقال یحیی بن معین ضعیف قلت … وذکره العقیلی

p: 59


1- Abu Bakr Ahmad b. al-Husayn b. ‘Ali b. Musa al-Bayhaqi, Sunan al-Bayhaqi al-Kubra (Makkah al-Mukarramah: Maktabah Dar al-Baz; 1414 H) [annotator: Muhammad ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Aṭa], vol. 7, p. 206, 13949
2- Ibid

فی الضعفاء … وذکره ابن حبان فی الثقات … وقال أبو زرعه صالح وقال أبو حاتم لیس به بأس وقال العجلی لا بأس به

Mansur b. Dinar al-Sahmi: he narrated from al-Zuhri. Al-Nasai said: “He is not strong.” Al-Bukhari said, “He narrated from Nafi’ and Hammad. THERE IS PROBLEM WITH HIS HADITH.” Yahya b. Ma’in said: “Ḍa’if.” I say: ... And al-‘Aqili has mentioned him in al-Ḍu’afa ... and Ibn Hibban mentioned him in al-Thiqat ... Abd Abu Zur’a said: “Salih” while Abu Hatim said, “There is no problem with him.” Al-‘Ijli also said, “There is no problem with him.”(1)

We have capitalized, in particular, the statement of Imam al-Bukhari (d. 256 H), because it is a jarh mufassar. Imam al-Dhahabi (d. 748 H) has narrated that al-Bukhari himself said:

إذا قلت فلان فی حدیثه نظر، فهو متهم واه.

When I say “there is problem with the hadith of so-and-so”, then he is accused (of fabricating ahadith), weak.(2)

This changes everything, since a jarh mufassar supercedes any praise for the narrator. That then makes this second report mawḍu’ or at least ḍa’if jiddan.

Meanwhile, having exposed the weakness of both riwayahs above, we will nonetheless proceed to take them into consideration within our discourses, in order to leave our opponents with no excuse anywhere.

So, simply put, the second permanent ban of mut’ah occurred a year after the first one. ‘Umar here challenged everyone to bring forward any evidence that the Prophet ever allowed it after this second ban – and none, it seems, ever came forward.

p: 60


1- Shihab al-Din Abu al-Faḍl Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Lisan al-Mizan (Beirut: Manshurat Muasassat al-A’lami li al-Maṭbu’at; 2nd edition, 1390 H), vol. 6, p. 95, 331
2- Shams al-Din Muhammad b. Ahmad b. ‘Uthman al-Dhahabi, Siyar A’lam al-Nubala (Beirut: Muasassat al-Risalah; 4th edition, 1406 H) [annotators of the twelfth volume: Shu’ayb al-Arnauṭ and Ṣalih al-Samar], vol. 12, p. 441, 171

But, what was he even suggesting? Has the Qur’an not banned zina several years before Khaybar and the conquest of Makkah? Was ‘Umar implying that the Prophet could have permitted fornication after the ban by Allah?

Yet, there is a further report of a third permanent ban on mut’ah two years after the conquest of Makkah! This is the hadith by Imam al-Darimi (d. 255 H):

أخبرنا جعفر بن عون عن عبد العزیز بن عمر بن عبد العزیز عن الربیع بن سبره ان أباه حدثه أنهم ساروا مع رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم فی حجه الوداع فقال استمتعوا من هذه النساء ... ثم غدوت فإذا رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم قائم بین الرکن والباب فقال یا أیها الناس انی قد کنت أذنت لکم فی الاستمتاع من النساء الا وان الله قد حرم ذلک إلی یوم القیامه فمن کان عنده منهن شیء فلیخل سبیلها ولا تأخذوا مما آتیتموهن شیئا

Ja’far b. ‘Awn – ‘Abd al-‘Aziz b. ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz – al-Rabi’ b. Sabrah – his father:

We journeyed with the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, during the Farewell Hajj and he said, “Do mut’ah with these women”.... Then, in the morning, the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, stood between al-Rukn and the door and said, “O mankind! Verily, I have been allowing you to do mut’ah with women. But, surely, Allah has made that haram till the Day of al-Qiyamah. So, whoever has something of them with him, let him free her, and do not take

p: 61

back anything from what you gave them (as dowries).”(1)

Shaykh Asad comments:

إسناده صحیح

Its chain is sahih(2)

Imam Ibn Hibban (d. 354 H) has documented it too(3), and al-Albani (d. 1420 H) says about it:

صحیح

Sahih(4)

And al-Arnauṭ agrees:

إسناده صحیح

Its chain is sahih(5)

Here, we are back again at the beginning! Our Sunni brothers consider mut’ah to be a form of fornication, and also declare that the mut’ah wife is no “wife”. Rather, she is a fornicator. Alhamdulillah, fornication was made haram during the Makkan era, before our Prophet migrated to Madinah. Therefore, by Sunni logic, mut’ah was already banned before the Hijrah. But, their books tell us that the following occurred after the Hijrah:

1. The Messenger re-ban mut’ah permanently at Khaybar seven years after the Hijrah. This makes sense since he was only repeating the Qur’anic ban on fornication and adultery.

2. However, the same Prophet “ordered” his Sahabah to indulge in mut’ah – read: to indulge in fornication – during his conquest of Makkah in 8 H!

3. Moreover, after three days – or on that same day – he banned mut’ah again permanently.

4. Then, during his Farewell Hajj in 10 H, he ordered his Sahabah once more, saying: “Do mut’ah with these women”. By Sunni logic, he was only saying: “Do fornication with these women”! Thereafter, he banned it permanently again, for the last time!

If this is not mockery of Allah and His Messenger by the Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah, what then is it? Al-Hafiẓ Ibn Kathir (d. 774 H), meanwhile, thinks he has an

p: 62


1- Abu Muhammad ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Darimi, Sunan (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi; 1st edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Husayn Salim Asad], vol. 2, p. 188, 2195
2- Ibid
3- Abu Hatim Muhammad b. Hibban b. Ahmad b. Hibban b. Mu’adh b. Ma’bad al-Tamimi al-Darimi al-Busti, Ṣahih Ibn Hibban bi Tartib Ibn Balban (Beirut: Muasassat al-Risalah; 2nd edition, 1414 H) [annotators: Muhammad Naṣir al-Din al-Albani and Shu’ayb al-Arnaut], vol. 9, p. 454, 4147
4- Ibid
5- Ibid

explanation:

فقد نص الشافعی علی أنه لا یعلم شیئا أبیح ثم حرم ثم أبیح ثم حرم غیر نکاح المتعه وما حداه علی هذا رحمه الله إلا اعتماده علی هذین الحدیثین کما قدمناه .وقد حکی السهیلی وغیره عن بعضهم: أنه ادعی أنها أبیحت ثلاث مرات وحرمت ثلاث مرات وقال آخرون أربع مرات وهذا بعید جدا والله أعلم.

واختلفوا أی وقت أول ما حرمت فقیل فی خیبر وقیل فی عمره القضاء وقیل فی عام الفتح وهذا یظهر وقیل فی أوطاس وهو قریب من الذی قبله وقیل فی تبوک وقیل فی حجه الوداع.

Al-Shafi’i had explicitly stated that he did not know of anything that was made halal, then made haram, then made halal and then made haram other than the marriage of mut’ah. Nothing drew him, may Allah be merciful to him, to this conclusion except his reliance upon these two hadiths, as we previously discussed. Al-Suhayli and others have also narrated from one of them that he claimed that it (mut’ah) was made halal three times and was made haram three times. The others said: four times. But, this is very unlikely, and Allah knows best.

They disagree on the exact time when it was FIRST made haram. It is said that it was at Khaybar, and it is said that it was at the ‘Umrah al-Qaḍa. It is said that it was during the Year of the Conquest, and this is the most likely; and it is said that it was at Awṭas, and this is nearer to the one before it. It is

p: 63

said that it was at Tabuk, and it is said that it was at the Farewell Hajj.(1)

But, this only worsens things for the Ahl al-Sunnah. On the specific question of zina (fornication and adultery), this is also what this Makkan ayah says:

ولا تقربوا الزنا إنه کان فاحشه وساء سبیلا

And do not approach zina. Verily, it is an indecency, and an evil way.(2)

This verse – by the ijma’ of the whole Ummah – has never been abrogated. It has been in force since before the Hijrah; and it continued unimpeded till the death of the Messenger. In other words, during all those times that the Prophet and his Sahabah were practising mut’ah, this ayah was well in authority. It is thus either of two things (i) mut’ah is a form of zina too or (ii) mut’ah is NOT a form of zina. The Sunnis maintain that temporary is fornication. So, what they are saying – in essence – is that Prophet Muhammad was contradicting his Lord repeatedly, by “allowing” or “commanding” and even “practising” what his Lord had long declared haram! Apparently, if they joined the Shi’ah in saying that mut’ah is NOT a form of zina, then some of their unintentional mockeries of Allah and His Messenger would disappear.

But, even then, they would have to show us which verse of the Qur’an abrogated mut’ah? Of course, this ayah must be proved to have been revealed after the Verse of al-Mut’ah and Surah al-Maidah, and it must be explicit in

p: 64


1- Abu al-Fida Isma’il b. Kathir al-Dimashqi, al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah (Dar Ihya al-Turath al-‘Arabi; 1st edition, 1408 H) [annotator: ‘Ali Shiri], vol. 4, p. 220
2- Qur’an 17:32

its ruling against temporary marriage. We say categorically here: no such verse exists. Meanwhile, since only an ayah can abrogate an ayah (as the Qur’an itself declares), then the Verse of al-Mut’ah remains in force till this day, and till the end of days.

This automatically leads us to another conclusion: all the reports about how mut’ah was banned permanently – only to be unbanned sometime later - are careless fabrications. They were “rushed up” to justify ‘Umar’s ban of that legitimate form of nikah. No wonder, they contain so many serious contradictions among themselves, even in reports by the same individuals, and all of them altogether also oppose the Qur’an!

Unsurprisingly, all these alleged repeated bans of mut’ah were completely unknown to the generality of the Sahabah, as Imam Muslim reports:

حدثنی محمد بن رافع حدثنا عبدالرزاق أخبرنا ابن جریج أخبرنی أبو الزبیر قال سمعت جابر بن عبدالله یقول کنا نستمتع بالقبضه من التمر والدقیق الأیام علی عهد رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم وأبی بکر حتی نهی عنه عمر فی شأن عمرو بن حریث

Muhammad b. Rafi’ – ‘Abd al-Razzaq – Ibn Jurayj – Abu al-Zubayr:

I heard Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah saying, “We used to contract mut’ah by giving a handful of dates and flour (as the dowry) during the eras of the Messenger of Allah and Abu Bakr UNTIL ‘Umar forbade it in the case of ‘Amr b. Hurayth.(1)

They continued to practise mut’ah till the death of the Prophet, and he did not warn, stop or penalize them. Abu

p: 65


1- Abu al-Husayn Muslim b. al-Hajjaj al-Qushayri al-Naysaburi, Ṣahih Muslim (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-‘Arabi) [annotator: Muhammad Fuad ‘Abd al-Baqi], vol. 2, p. 1022, 1405 (16)

Bakr too allowed them to freely go ahead with it throughout his rule. There is a usual Sunni excuse that the information concerning the ban on mut’ah did not reach these Sahabah, and that they continued it due to that! But, does that make any sense? The ban on mut’ah was supposedly announced at least three times in public; and yet, the generality of the Sahabah – including even Abu Bakr - never heard it?! Moreover, did the Sahabah not know of any of the ayahs in the Qur’an which make fornication and adultery haram? If they did, why did they continue to perform mut’ah (considering the Sunni claim that it is fornication), and why did the Messenger and Abu Bakr allow them?

Even more interesting is the dogged refusal of Ibn ‘Abbas, raḍiyallahu ‘anhu, to back down on mut’ah till his death. The Ahl al-Sunnah say that Imam ‘Ali allegedly informed him that mut’ah had been banned at Khaybar:

وحدثنا محمد بن عبدالله بن نمیر حدثنا أبی حدثنا عبیدالله عن ابن شهاب عن الحسن وعبدالله ابنی محمد بن علی عن أبیهما عن علی أنه سمع ابن عباس یلین فی متعه النساء فقال مهلا یا ابن عباس فإن رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم نهی عنها یوم خیبر وعن لحوم الحمر الإنسیه

Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah b. Numayr – my father – ‘Ubayd Allah – Ibn Shihab – al-Hasan and ‘Abd Allah, sons of Muhammad b. ‘Ali – their father:

‘Ali heard Ibn ‘Abbas allowing mut’ah with women. So, he said, “Don’t be

p: 66

hasty, O Ibn ‘Abbas, for the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, forbade it on the Day of Khaybar as well as the flesh of domestic asses.”(1)

Yet, long after ‘Ali’s death, he was still defending mut’ah. Imam Muslim again:

وحدثنی حرمله بن یحیی أخبرنا ابن وهب أخبرنی یونس قال ابن شهاب أخبرنی عروه بن الزبیر أن عبدالله ابن الزبیر قام بمکه فقال إن ناسا أعمی الله قلوبهم کما أعمی أبصارهم یفتون بالمتعه یعرض برجل فناداه فقال إنک لجلف جاف فلعمری لقد کانت المتعه تفعل علی عهد إمام المتقین ( یرید رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم ) فقال له ابن الزبیر فجرب بنفسک فوالله لئن فعلتها لأرجمنک بأحجارک

Harmalah b. Yahya – Ibn Wahb – Yunus – Ibn Shihab – ‘Urwah b. al-Zubayr:

‘Abd Allah b. al-Zubayr stood in Makkah and said, “Allah has made blind the hearts of some people as He made blind their eyesight. They give fatwas allowing mut’ah.” He was referring to a certain man. So, he (the man) called him and said, “You are an uncouth person, devoid of sense! I swear by my life, mut’ah was practised during the time of the Imam of the pious” - he meant the Messenger of Allah. So, Ibn al-Zubayr said to him, “Just do it yourself. By Allah, if you do it, I will stone you with your stones.”(2)

We know the identity of that man in this further hadith of Imam Muslim:

حدثنا حامد بن عمرو البکراوی حدثنا عبدالواحد ( یعنی ابن زیاد ) عن عاصم عن أبی نضره

p: 67


1- Abu al-Husayn Muslim b. al-Hajjaj al-Qushayri al-Naysaburi, Ṣahih Muslim (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-‘Arabi) [annotator: Muhammad Fuad ‘Abd al-Baqi], vol. 2, p. 1027, 1407 (31)
2- Ibid, vol. 2, p. 1023, 1406 (27)

قال کنت عند جابر بن عبدالله فأتاه آت فقال ابن عباس وابن الزبیر اختلفا فی المتعتین فقال جابر فعلناهما مع رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم ثم نهانا عنهما عمر فلم نعد لهما

Hamid b. ‘Amr al-Bakrawi – ‘Abd al-Wahid b. Ziyad – ‘Asim – Abu Naḍrah:

I was with Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah, a person came and said, “Ibn ‘Abbas and Ibn al-Zubayr disagree concerning the two types of mut’ah.” So, Jabir said, “We practised both of them along with the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him. Then, ‘Umar forbade us from them both, and we have not reverted to them.”(1)

It was Ibn ‘Abbas, and he had become blind at that time – apparently during the rebel “caliphate” of Ibn al-Zubayr in Makkah. That was towards the very end of the lifetime of Ibn ‘Abbas. Commenting on these reports and others, ‘Allamah al-Albani concludes:

وجمله القول: أن ابن عباس رضی الله عنه روی عنه فی المتعه ثلاثه أقوال:

الأول: الإباحه مطلقا.

الثانی: الإباحه عند الضروره.

والآخر: التحریم مطلقا , وهذا مما لم یثبت عنه صراحه , بخلاف القولین الأولین , فهما ثابتان عنه.

The summary is: three opinions are narrated from Ibn ‘Abbas, may Allaah be pleased with him, about mut’ah:

The one: he permitted it unconditionally.

The second: he permitted it in cases of necessity.

The last: he forbade it unconditionally, but this is from what is NOT authentically transmitted from him, unlike the first two opinions which are authentically transmitted from him.(2)

So, basically, there is solid evidence that Ibn ‘Abbas continued to defend mut’ah even

p: 68


1- Ibid, vol. 2, p. 1022, 1405 (17)
2- Muhammad Naṣir al-Din al-Albani, Irwa al-Ghalil fi Takhrij Ahadith Manar al-Sabil (Beirut: al-Maktab al-Islami; 2nd edition, 1405 H), vol. 6, p. 319, 1903

in his old age, and there is none that he ever retracted his statements on it. Meanwhile, Sunnis generally excuse the pro-mut’ah positions of the generality of the Sahabah after the Prophet on an desperate argument that the information of its abrogation had not reached them. But, will they say the same about Ibn ‘Abbas? In that case, was he really a stubborn heretic who dared to openly and knowingly oppose Allah and His Messenger? Was that his character? Well, with the persistent Sunni claim that Imam ‘Ali informed him about the ban of mut’ah, we are afraid, there is no other possible conclusion other than that Ibn ‘Abbas was from the Ahl al-Bid’ah.

Interestingly, when he defended mut’ah by stating that it was practised during the time of the Messenger, Ibn al-Zubayr – also a Sahabi – became silenced. Ibn al-Zubayr did not mention anything about its alleged “abrogation” or “ban” as a counter-argument, which is extremely baffling. No doubt, if he had known of any rejection of mut’ah by the noble Prophet, he would have instantly corrected Ibn ‘Abbas on his submission, and would have saved his face. The fact that Ibn al-Zubayr was unable to bring down Ibn ‘Abbas’s suggestion that mut’ah was accepted throughout the Messenger’s lifetime raises a lot of question marks about all Sunni ahadith against it.

This hot exchange between the two took place long after the death of ‘Umar and ‘Ali. Yet, neither Ibn ‘Abbas nor (especially) Ibn al-Zubayr seem to be aware of

p: 69

any claim that mut’ah had been banned by the Prophet of Allah! This tells us that all these anti-mut’ah reports were most probably manufactured only after the period of the confrontation between those two Sunni heavyweights.

5. The Practice Of Mut’ah

point

NOTE: This chapter is only a general, concise explanation of mut’ah, and does not substitute for expert clerical advice and guidance on it.

Mut’ah: A Tool Of Necessity

When a Shi’i Muslim intends to contract mut’ah, there are a number of questions he faces directly. What is the purpose of the intended marriage? What are its benefits? Is there any need for it? With whom should he do the mut’ah, and for how long? What are its conditions and limitations?

Generally, mut’ah is forbidden except in cases of necessity. Shaykh al-Kulayni (d. 329 H) reports:

علی بن إبراهیم، عن أبیه، عن ابن أبی عمیر، عن علی بن یقطین قال: سألت أبا الحسن موسی علیه السلام عن المتعه فقال: وما أنت وذاک فقد أغناک الله عنها، قلت:إنما أردت أن أعلمها، فقال: هی فی کتاب علی علیه السلام، فقلت: نزیدها وتزداد؟ فقال: وهل یطیبه إلا ذاک.

‘Ali b. Ibrahim – his father – Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – ‘Ali b. Yaqṭin:

I asked Abu al-Hasan Musa, peace be upon him, concerning mut’ah, and he said, “What do you have to do with that, for Allah has already made you needless of it?” I said, “I only want to learn about it.” Then he said, “It is in the Book of ‘Ali, peace be upon him.” So, I said, “Do we increase it and is it multiplied?”

p: 70

He said, “Is there anything that pleases him except that?”(1)

Al-Majlisi (d. 1111 H) says:

حسن

Hasan.(2)

This is quite clear and straightforward. If you are not in a state of need – with regards to mut’ah – you have nothing to do with it. So, the Shi’i asks himself if he is really in need of a temporary marriage. If he is not, he abandons the whole idea, as the Imams, ‘alaihim al-salam, want.

The Suitable Mut’ah Wives

After deciding that he is genuinely in need of mut’ah, then he must decide whom to marry temporarily. He is absolutely forbidden from marrying any woman who falls in the forbidden categories(3). The Shi’i man knows this. So, he is only searching outside the forbidden categories. There are some crucial duties upon him, in his search, however.

First and foremost, he must confirm the age of any woman he wishes to marry. She must NOT be underage, as al-Kulayni documents:

علی، عن أبیه، عن ابن أبی عمیر، عن جمیل بن دراج قال: سألت أبا عبد الله عن الرجل یتمتع من الجاریه البکر قال: لا بأس بذلک ما لم یستصغرها

‘Ali – his father – Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – Jamil b. Darraj:

I asked Abu ‘Abd Allah about the man who does mut’ah with the virgin girl. He said, “There is no problem with that, as long as he does not find her to be underage.”(4)

Al-Majlisi says:

حسن

Hasan.(5)

Then, he adds:

قوله : ) ما لم یستصغرها ( أی لم یجدها صغیره غیر بالغه فلا یصح العقد حینئذ

His statement: {as long as he does not find her to

p: 71


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 452, 1
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 233
3- See Qur’an 4:23-25
4- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 463, 4
5- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 252

be underage}, meaning, he does not find her to be a child who has not reached the age of maturity, in which case the union would be invalid.(1)

Al-Kulayni also reports about the age of maturity, for girls, in Islam:

علی، عن أبیه، عن ابن أبی عمیر، عن رجل، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: قلت: الجاریه ابنه کم لا تستصبی؟ ابنه ست أو سبع؟ فقال: لا ابنه تسع لا تستصبی وأجمعوا کلهم علی أن ابنه تسع لا تستصبی إلا أن یکون فی عقلها ضعف وإلا فهی إذا بلغت تسعا فقد بلغت.

‘Ali – his father – Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – a man:

I said, “When does the girl cease to be a child? At the age of six or seven?” So, he said, “No. She ceases to be a child at the age of nine; and they all unanimously agree that a girl of nine years is no longer a child, except if there is weakness in her intelligence. Otherwise, when she reaches the age of nine, she has matured.”(2)

Al-Majlisi declares:

حسن

Hasan.(3)

In reality, the hadith is mursal. However, there is a strengthening shahid for it in this hadith of Shaykh al-Ṭusi (d. 460 H):

عنه عن ابن محبوب عن أبی أیوب عن یزید الکناسی عن أبی جعفر علیه السلام قال: الجاریه إذا بلغت تسع سنین ذهب عنها الیتم وزوجت

And from him (i.e. Ahmad b. Muhammad) – Ibn Mahbub – Abu Ayub – Yazid ak-Kunasi – Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him:

When the girl reaches the age of nine, her orphanhood ceases, and she is

p: 72


1- Ibid
2- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 463, 5
3- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 252

married.(1)

‘Allamah Al-Ruhani comments:

حسن أو صحیحه

Hasan or Sahih.(2)

Al-Kulayni too has this further shahid:

عنه، عن الحسن، عن جعفر بن سماعه، عن آدم بیاع اللؤلؤ، عن عبد الله بن سنان، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: إذا بلغ الغلام ثلاث عشره سنه کتبت له الحسنه وکتبت علیه السیئه وعوقب، وإذا بلغت الجاریه تسع سنین فکذلک وذلک أنها تحیض لتسع سنین.

From him (i.e. Humayd) – al-Hasan – Ja’far b. Sama’ah – Adam – ‘Abd Allah b.Sinan – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

When the boy reaches the age of thirteen, his good deeds are recorded and his evil deeds are also recorded, and he is punished (for his sins and crimes). When the girl reaches the age of nine, she becomes like that too; and that is because she menstruates at the age of nine.”(3)

And al-Majlisi states:

موثق

Muwaththaq.(4)

Al-Ruhani too concurs:

موثق

Muwaththaq.(5)

Al-Kulayni also documents one more shahid:

علی بن إبراهیم، عن أبیه، ومحمد بن یحیی، عن أحمد بن محمد جمیعا، عن ابن أبی عمیر، عن حماد، عن الحلبی عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: قال: إذا تزوج الرجل الجاریه وهی صغیره فلا یدخل بها حتی یأتی لها تسع سنین.

‘Ali b. Ibrahim – his father AND Muhammad b. Yahya – Ahmad b. Muhammad – Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – Hammad – al-Halabi – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

When a man marries a girl while she is still immature, then he must not have sexual intercourse with her until she reaches the age of nine.(6)

Al-Majlisi comments:

صحیح

Sahih.(7)

Al-Ruhani too says:

صحیح

Sahih.(8)

This hadith – which is about permanent marriages –

p: 73


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 10, p. 38, Ch. 1, 133 (133)
2- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 20, p. 106
3- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 7, pp. 68-69, 6
4- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 23, p. 110
5- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (3rd edition, 1412 H), vol. 2, p. 16
6- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 398, 2
7- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 138
8- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 21, p. 88

nonetheless establishes a universal principle: a girl theoretically becomes a woman, capable of having sexual intercourse, at the age of nine. Therefore, the Shi’i man seeking a mut’ah marriage must himself be at least thirteen years old, while the girl must have reached the age of nine. Otherwise, the mut’ah would be unlawful.

Our Shi’i man is above thirteen, alhamdulillah; and he has his eyes on a particular Muslim woman who is above nine too. So, what must he do next? In our modern, heavily Westernized world, the age of consent has been statutorily fixed in most countries. This is why the Shi’i man must be careful here. He does not have to get himself into trouble simply because he wants to do mut’ah. Therefore, in fulfilment of the obligations of taqiyyah, he must respect the statutory age of consent in his country of residence. Usually, the man and the woman are considered legally capable of consensual intercourse starting from the age of 18 (eighteen). The Shi’i man, then, must obey that, as long as he has no other trouble-free option. Taqiyyah is indeed a shield, and a blessing, to the believers.

Now, our man lives in a Western(ized) country, and he has been able to find a woman who is eighteen years old or above. In that case, he must confirm the marital status of the woman he intends to do mut’ah with. If she is married – whether in mut’ah or permanently, then she is automatically and absolutely disqualified(1). Normally,

p: 74


1- See Qur’an 4:24

the man should be able to easily confirm the marital status of the woman through her neighbours, friends or colleagues. In case that becomes difficult, then if he is able to confirm directly from the woman, that is even better. Whatever she says about herself is believed to be true. Al-Kulayni says:

عده من أصحابنا، عن أحمد بن محمد بن عیسی، عن الحسین بن سعید، عن فضاله، عن میسر قال: قلت لأبی عبد الله علیه السلام : ألقی المرأه بالفلاه التی لیس فیها أحد فأقول لها:هل لک زوج؟ فتقول: لا، فأتزوجها؟ قال: نعم هی المصدقه علی نفسها.

A number of our companions – Ahmad b. Muhammad b. ‘Isa – al-Husayn b. Sa’id – Faḍalah – Maysar:

I said to Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, “I met a woman in the wilderness in which there was no one else. So I said to her, ‘Do you have a husband?’ She said, ‘No.’ Do I marry her?” He said, “Yes. She is the trustworthy one concerning herself.”(1)

Al-Majlisi says:

صحیح

Sahih(2)

After determining that the woman has no husband – whether she is single, divorced or widowed and is available for marriage – then, the Shi’i man must establish that she is also morally eligible for mut’ah. The Qur’an has forbidden certain categories of men and women for marriage – whether permanently or temporarily:

الزانی لا ینکح إلا زانیه أو مشرکه والزانیه لا ینکحها إلا زان أو مشرک وحرم ذلک علی المؤمنین

The fornicator shall not marry any but a fornicatress or an idolatress; and the fornicatress, none shall

p: 75


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 462, 2
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 251

marry her but a fornicator or an idolater: and that is made haram for the believers.(1)

Yes, it is haram for the Shi’i man to marry a fornicatress or an idolatress. As such, he must investigate the moral uprightness and tawhid of whoever he seeks to do mut’ah with. If the woman is a Muslimah, but a fornicatress, marriage with her – permanently or temporarily – is haram. Moreover, if she is morally upright but associates others with Allah in His attributes, functions, roles, or in worship of Him or du’a to Him, then mut’ah with her is still forbidden. The same goes for the Muslim woman who wants to practise temporary marriage as well. She must investigate the morality and Islamic monotheism of her proposed husband. If he fails in either, he is haram to her for mut’ah or permanent marriage.

Al-Ṭusi documents in this regard:

أحمد بن محمد بن عیسی عن محمد بن إسماعیل بن بزیع قال: سأل رجل الرضا علیه السلام وانا اسمع عن الرجل یتزوج المرأه متعه ویشترط علیها ان لا یطلب ولدها فتأتی بعد ذلک بولد فینکر الولد فشدد فی ذلک وقال یجحد؟ وکیف یجحد اعظاما لذلک؟ قال الرجل فان اتهمها قال: لا ینبغی لک ان تتزوج إلا مأمونه ان الله یقول: الزانی لا ینکح إلا زانیه أو مشرکه والزانیه لا ینکحها إلا زان أو مشرک وحرم ذلک علی المؤمنین

Ahmad b. Muhammad b. ‘Isa – Muhammad b. Isma’il b. Bazi’:

A man asked al-Riḍa, peace be upon him, while I was listening, about the man who marries the woman

p: 76


1- Qur’an 24:3

in mut’ah and he imposes a condition upon her that he will not seek her child. But, she later comes with a child and he severely denies the child. So, he (al-Riḍa) said, “Does he deny? How can he deny primarily because of that?” Then, the man said, “What if he accuses her (of fornication)?” He (al-Riḍa) said, “It is not appropriate for you to marry except a faithful woman. Verily, Allah the Almighty says: {The fornicator shall not marry any but a fornicatress or an idolatress; and the fornicatress, none shall marry her but a fornicator or an idolater: and that is made haram for the believers}.(1)

Al-Majlisi states:

صحیح

Sahih.(2)

Al-Ruhani concurs:

صحیح

Sahih.(3)

This is equally emphasized in this noble ayah:

الیوم أحل لکم الطیبات وطعام الذین أوتوا الکتاب حل لکم وطعامکم حل لهم والمحصنات من المؤمنات والمحصنات من الذین أوتوا الکتاب من قبلکم إذا آتیتموهن أجورهن محصنین غیر مسافحین ولا متخذی أخدان

Today, the good things are made halal to you; and the food of those who were given the Book is halal for you, and your food is halal for them; and also (halal to you are) the CHASTE ONES from the believing women and the chaste ones from those who were given the Book before you, when you have given them their dowries, taking (them) in marriage, not fornicating (with them), nor taking them as girlfriends.(4)

So, mut’ah is allowed, as a general rule, only with faithful, chaste believing or Muslim men and women, who are not fornicators, adulterers or fornicatresses. Unchaste believing

p: 77


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 269, Ch. 24, 82 (1157)
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 69, 81
3- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 43
4- Qur’an 5:5

women are NOT halal to the Shi’i man. As such, marriage – permanent or temporary - with any unchaste woman or fornicatress is haram. Meanwhile, once a man or a woman has repented from zina, he or she no longer falls in the forbidden categories, as al-Kulayni confirms:

حمید بن زیاد، عن الحسن بن محمد بن سماعه، عن أحمد بن الحسن المیثمی، عن أبان، عن حکم بن حکیم، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام فی قوله عز وجل: والزانیه لا ینکحها إلا زان أو مشرک قال: إنما ذلک فی الجهر ثم قال: لو أن إنسانا زنی ثم تاب تزوج حیث شاء.

Humayd b. Ziyad – al-Hasan b. Muhammad b. Sama’ah – Ahmad b. al-Hasan al-Maythami – Aban – Hakam b. Hakim – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, concerning His Statement, the Almighty {and the fornicatress, none shall marry her but a fornicator or an idolater}:

“That is only in the publicity (of the fornication)”. Then, he (Abu ‘Abd Allah) said, “If a person commits zina, and then repents, they can marry wherever they wish (in the halal categories).”(1)

Al-Majlisi comments:

موثق

Muwaththaq.(2)

Also, to determine the moral and religious status of the Muslim woman, obviously, the Shi’i man must carry out thorough investigations, as al-Kulayni reports:

محمد بن یحیی، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن ابن محبوب، عن أبان، عن أبی مریم، عن أبی جعفر علیه السلام أنه سئل عن المتعه فقال: إن المتعه الیوم لیس کما کانت قبل الیوم إنهن کن یومئذ یؤمن والیوم لا یؤمن فاسألوا عنهن.

Muhammad b. Yahya – Ahmad b. Muhammad – Ibn

p: 78


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 355, 6
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 62

Mahbub – Aban – Abu Maryam:

Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him, was asked about mut’ah. So, he said, “Verily, mut’ah today is not as it used to be in the past. They (i.e. the women) used to be faithful. But, today, they are not faithful. Therefore, investigate about them (i.e. the women).(1)

Al-Majlisi says:

موثق کالصحیح

Muwaththaq ka al-Sahih(2)

If the investigations reveal that she is unchaste or a fornicatress, then the Shi’i man must look for another woman. Interestingly, even where the man is unable to personally get solid evidence of her debauchery, but notices that people widely think of her as being promiscuous, he must forget about her in that case too. Al-Kulayni records:

علی بن إبراهیم، عن محمد بن عیسی، عن یونس، عن محمد بن الفضیل قال:سألت أبا الحسن علیه السلام عن المرأه الحسناء الفاجره هل یجوز للرجل أن یتمتع منها یوما أو أکثر؟ فقال: إذا کانت مشهوره بالزنا فلا یتمتع منها ولا ینکحها.

‘Ali b. Ibrahim – Muhammad b. ‘Isa – Yunus – Muhammad b. al-Fuḍayl:

I asked Abu al-Hasan, peace be upon him, about the beautiful woman who is a prostitute: is it permissible for the man to do mut’ah with her for a day or more?” He said: “If she is famous for zina, then he must NOT do mut’ah with her and also must NOT marry her (permanently).”(3)

Al-Majlisi comments:

موثق

Muwaththaq (Reliable)(4)

However, it may happen that the Shi’i man is unable to determine the moral uprightness of the woman. Perhaps, her neighbours do not know much about her, because she came into

p: 79


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 453, 1
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 235
3- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 454, 6
4- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 237

their community only recently. Or, the Shi’i man is unable to approach her neighbours and colleagues for one good reason or another. Or, she was once famous for zina; but, there have been rumours of her total repentance. What does the Shi’i man do in such a situation? Al-Kulayni has the answer:

علی بن إبراهیم، عن أبیه، عن ابن أبی عمیر رفعه، عن عبد الله بن أبی یعفور، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: سألته عن المرأه ولا أدری ما حالها أیتزوجها الرجل متعه؟ قال: یتعرض لها فإن أجابته إلی الفجور فلا یفعل

‘Ali b. Ibrahim – his father – Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – ‘Abd Allah b. Abi Ya’fur:

I asked Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, about the woman whose state I do not know, does the man marry her in mut’ah? He said, “He presents to her. If she responds to him in favour of unlawful sex, then, he must NOT.”(1)

Al-Majlisi says:

حسن

Hasan.(2)

This is a last resort measure – where no other one is possible - to identify the moral status of the woman. The man proposes a boyfriend-girlfriend relationship, a cohabitation or a concubinage (all of which are forms of zina) with her. If she accepts, then she is a fornicatress. The Shi’i man must NOT contract mut’ah with her. However, if she rejects pre-marital and extra-marital sex, then she is clean for marriage.

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 H) presents the Sunni view on this, as well:

وکذلک المرأه التی زنا بها الرجل فإنه لا یتزوج بها إلا بعد التوبه

p: 80


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 454, 4
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 237

فی اصح القولین کما دل علیه الکتاب والسنه والآثار لکن إذا أراد أن یمتحنها هل هی صحیحه التوبه أم لا فقال عبدالله ابن عمر وهو المنصوص عن أحمد أنه یراودها عن نفسها فإن أجابته لم تصح توبتها وإن لم تجبه فقد تابت

The woman who committed fornication with the man is like that too. He cannot marry her except after repentance, according to the more correct of the two opinions, as established by the Book, the Sunnah and the athar. However, if he intends to test her, whether it is a genuine repentance or not, then ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Umar said – and this is also what is reported from Ahmad (b. Hanbal) – that he should propose fornication to her. If she responds positively to him, her repentance is not genuine. But, if she does not respond positively to him, then she has (genuinely) repented.(1)

Al-Kulayni continues further with the Shi’i position:

محمد بن یحیی، عن محمد بن أحمد، عن أحمد بن الحسن، عن عمرو بن سعید، عن مصدق بن صدقه، عن عمار بن موسی، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: سألته عن الرجل یحل له أن یتزوج امرأه کان یفجر بها؟ فقال: إن آنس منها رشدا فنعم وإلا فلیراودنها علی الحرام فإن تابعته فهی علیه حرام وإن أبت فلیتزوجها.

Muhammad b. Yahya – Muhammad b. Ahmad – Ahmad b. al-Hasan – ‘Amr b. Sa’id – Musaddiq b. Sadaqah – ‘Ammar b. Musa:

I asked Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, about the man, “Can he marry a woman with whom he

p: 81


1- Abu al-‘Abbas Ahmad b. ‘Abd al-Halim b. Taymiyyah al-Harrani, Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 15, p. 328

committed fornication?” So, he said, “If he sees right guidance in her, then yes. If not, he should propose the haram to her. If she follows him, then she is haram to him. But, if she refuses, then he should marry her.”(1)

Al-Majlisi comments:

موثق

Muwaththaq.(2)

Al-Ruhani concurs:

موثق

Muwaththaq.(3)

This one establishes a powerful principle in mut’ah, as well. If a girl is willing to perform zina with the Shi’i man – such as casual sex, boy-friend-girlfriend relationship, cohabitation and concubinage – then, she is haram to him for marriage – permanent or temporary. It is also a sign that she is one of those who have not repented from fornication. Marriage to a woman is halal only if she is chaste or after her genuine repentance.

So, the Muslim woman must be (a) unmarried and available for marriage, (b) chaste and (c) not famous for zina among the people. With these three conditions fulfilled, the stage is set for a valid mut’ah.

Meanwhile, something must be quickly mentioned here. There is a group among Muslims who are known as the Nawasib. These are people who openly express or manifest violence, ill-will, hatred, mockery or insult against any of the Twelve Imams or Sayyidah Faṭimah, ‘alaihim al-salam. The Sunnah has forbidden nikah to such people too, in addition to fornicators and idolaters. Al-Kulayni, for instance, documents:

محمد بن یحیی، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن ابن محبوب، عن جمیل بن صالح، عن فضیل ابن یسار، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: لا یتزوج المؤمن الناصبه المعروفه بذلک.

Muhammad b. Yahya

p: 82


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, pp. 355-356, 1
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 62
3- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 21, p. 314

– Ahmad b. Muhammad – Ibn Mahbub – Jamil b. Salih – Fuḍayl b. Yasar – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

The believer must not marry the Nasibi woman who is well-known with that.(1)

Al-Majlisi states:

صحیح

Sahih.(2)

Al-Ruhani agrees:

صحیح

Sahih.(3)

Al-Kulayni also says:

محمد بن یحیی، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن عبد الرحمن بن أبی نجران، عن عبد الله بن سنان قال: سألت أبا عبد الله علیه السلام عن الناصب الذی قد عرف نصبه وعداوته هل نزوجه المؤمنه وهو قادر علی رده وهو لا یعلم برده؟ قال: لا یزوج المؤمن الناصبه ولا یتزوج الناصب المؤمنه ولا یتزوج المستضعف مؤمنه.

Muhammad b. Yahya – Ahmad b. Muhammad – ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Abi Najran – ‘Abd Allah b. Sinan:

I asked Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, about the Nasibi man, whose Nasibism and enmity (against any of the Twelve Imams or Sayyidah Faṭimah) is well-known, “Can we marry a believing woman to him, while he is capable of rejecting it but does not know of its rejection?” He said, “The believing man cannot marry the Nasibi woman, and the Nasibi man cannot marry a believing woman, and the mustaḍ’af man cannot marry the believing woman.”(4)

Al-Majlisi states:

صحیح

Sahih.(5)

And al-Ruhani concurs:

صحیح

Sahih.(6)

As such, the Shi’i man, and the Shi’i woman, must confirm that their prospective mut’ah partners are not from the Nawasib. Even if such people are absolutely chaste, nikah to them is haram nonetheless.

The other people similarly disqualified are the Khawarij and the Murjiah, according to this hadith of al-Kulayni:

أبو علی الأشعری، عن محمد بن عبد الجبار، عن صفوان بن

p: 83


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 348, 3
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 51
3- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 21, p. 476
4- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 349, 8
5- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 51
6- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 21, p. 476

یحیی، عن عبد الله بن مسکان، عن یحیی الحلبی، عن عبد الحمید الطائی، عن زراره بن أعین قال: قلت لأبی عبد الله علیه السلام :أتزوج بمرجئه أو حروریه؟ قال: لا، علیک بالبله من النساء

Abu ‘Ali al-Ash’ari – Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-Jabbar – Safwan b. Yahya – ‘Abd Allah b. Miskan – Yahya b. al-Halabi – ‘Abd al-Hamid al-Ṭai – Zurarah b. A’yan:

I said to Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, “Can I marry a Murji or Haruri (i.e. Khariji) woman?” He said, “No. You should marry the innocent ones among the women.”(1)

Al-Majlisi comments:

صحیح

Sahih.(2)

Shaykh Hadi al-Najafi too says:

الروایه صحیحه الإسناد

The report has a sahih chain(3)

The Nawasib in our times include those who mock our Twelfth Imam, ‘alaihi al-salam, calling him “the dajjal” or a coward. Others are those who label Imam al-Husayn, ‘alaihi al-salam, “a rebel” for rising against the illegitimate khilafah of Yazid, and those who attribute ignorance to any of the Twelve Imams. Also, those who routinely rush to reject authentic Sunni ahadith, which are in favour of the Twelve Imams or any of them, without any genuine excuse, are among the Nasibis as well. Nothing spurs them into doing that except their Nasibism. As for the Khawarij, they include everyone who identifies the Shi’is generally as kuffar, and everyone kills Shi’is on account of their madhhab, and everyone is pleased with both misdeeds. The Murjiah, on their part, include anyone who believes that whatsoever atrocities a Sahabi is perfectly proved, through even the Sunni books, to have

p: 84


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 348, 2
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 50
3- Hadi al-Najafi, Mawsu’at Ahadith Ahl al-Bayt (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-‘Arabi; 1st edition, 1423 H), vol. 2, p. 87, 1353

committed, he was nonetheless a saint and will be in Jannah. Marriage – temporary or permanent – is forbidden with these people and others like them, no matter their level of chastity.

Mut’ah With Christian And Jewish Women

The above, of course, is the general rule. However, what happens when the Shi’i man in need of mut’ah is unable to find a suitable Muslim spouse? Well, the Book of Allah has made certain concessions in this regard:

الیوم أحل لکم الطیبات وطعام الذین أوتوا الکتاب حل لکم وطعامکم حل لهم والمحصنات من المؤمنات والمحصنات من الذین أوتوا الکتاب من قبلکم إذا آتیتموهن أجورهن محصنین غیر مسافحین ولا متخذی أخدان

Today, the good things are made halal to you; and the food of those who were given the Book is halal for you, and your food is halal for them; and also (halal to you are) the chaste ones from the believing women and the chaste ones from those who were given the Book before you, when you have given them their dowries, taking (them) in marriage, not fornicating (with them), nor taking them as girlfriends.(1)

This verse is in the last revealed Surah of the Qur’an. As such, it is the last law of Allah on the issue of marriage with non-Muslim women, and therefore effectively modifies the previous rulings. So, while mut’ah with non-Muslims is ordinarily haram, our Lord eventually allowed us to marry those of them who follow a religion that once adhered to a scripture from Him. These are primarily Jews and Christians today. Therefore, the

p: 85


1- Qur’an 5:5

Shi’i man is allowed to wed a Jewess or a Christian woman in mut’ah, as long as the following conditions are fulfilled:

(a) she is unmarried and available for marriage;

(b) she is chaste;

(c) the purpose of the union is marriage and not fornication;

(d) she must not be taken as a girlfriend; and

(e) she must be paid her dowry.

However, a Muslim woman is absolutely forbidden from marrying absolutely any non-Muslim man – whether temporarily or permanently(1).

‘Allamah al-Hurr al-‘Amili (d. 1104 H) also records this hadith for the Shi’i man:

محمد بن الحسن بإسناده عن أحمد بن محمد بن عیسی، عن إسماعیل بن سعد الأشعری قال: سألته عن الرجل یتمتع من الیهودیه والنصرانیه قال: لا أری بذلک بأسا، قال: قلت: فالمجوسیه؟ قال: أما المجوسیه فلا.

Muhammad b. al-Hasan with his isnad from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. ‘Isa – Isma’il b. Sa’d al-Ash’ari:

I asked him (i.e. the Imam) about the man who does mut’ah with a Jewess or a Christian woman. He said, “I see no problem with that.” I said, “What about a Zoroastrian woman?” He said, “As for a Zoroastrian woman, then no.”(2)

Ayatullah Sadiq al-Ruhani comments about the report:

موثق

Muwaththaq (Reliable)(3)

The hadith can indeed be found in al-Tahdhib of al-Ṭusi:

وعنه عن إسماعیل بن سعد الأشعری قال: سألته عن الرجل یتمتع من الیهودیه والنصرانیه قال: لا أری بذلک بأسا قال: قلت بالمجوسیه؟ قال: واما المجوسیه فلا.

And from him from Isma’il b. Sa’d al-Ash’ari:

I asked him (i.e. the Imam) about the man who does mut’ah with a Jewess or a Christian woman. He said, “I see no

p: 86


1- Qur’an 2:221
2- Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Hurr al-‘Amili, Tafṣil Wasail al-Shi’ah ila Tahṣil Masail al-Shari’ah (Qum: Muasassat Al al-Bayt ‘Alaihim al-Salam li Ihya al-Turath; 2nd edition, 1414 H), vol. 21, p. 37, Ch. 13, 1 (26465)
3- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 21, p. 439

problem with that.” I said, “What about a Zoroastrian woman?” He said, “As for a Zoroastrian woman, then no.”(1)

Al-Majlisi states:

صحیح

Sahih.(2)

Meanwhile, if the Shi’i man is able to find a chaste Jewess or a Christian woman who agrees to do mut’ah with him, there are still some other conditions which she must consent to. Al-Ṭusi reports:

وروی محمد بن یعقوب عن محمد بن یحیی عن أحمد بن محمد عن الحسن بن محبوب عن معاویه بن وهب وغیره عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام فی الرجل المؤمن یتزوج بالیهودیه والنصرانیه قال: إذا أصاب المسلمه فما یصنع بالیهودیه والنصرانیه، فقلت له: یکون له فیها الهوی فقال: ان فعل فلیمنعها من شرب الخمر واکل لحم الخنزیر، واعلم أن علیه فی دینه فی تزویجه إیاها غضاضه.

Muhammad b. Ya’qub – Muhammad b. Yahya – Ahmad b. Muhammad – al-Hasan b. Mahbub – Mu’awiyah b. Wahb and others – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, who said concerning a believing man who seeks to marry a Jewess or a Christian woman:

“If he finds a Muslim woman, then what is he doing with the Jewess or Christian woman?”

So, I (Mu’awiyah) said to him, “He loves her.”

Then, he said, “If he does, then he must forbid her from drinking alcohol and from eating pork. And know that in his marriage to her, there is a blemish upon him in his religion.”(3)

Al-Majlisi declares:

صحیح

Sahih.(4)

And al-Ruhani concurs:

صحیح

Sahih(5)

Apparently, mut’ah with a Jewish or Christian woman is highly discouraged where a Muslim woman is available, although not forbidden. Moreover, such a marriage constitutes a

p: 87


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 256, Ch. 24, 30 (1105)
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 42, 30
3- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 298, Ch. 26, 6 (1248)
4- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 117, 6
5- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 21, p. 438

blemish on the religion of the man who performs it.

In any case, before a temporary marriage can proceed with a Jewess or Christian woman, she must:

(i) be unmarried and available for marriage;

(ii) be chaste, and not a fornicatress;

(iii) agree to stop drinking alcohol or eating pork throughout the duration of the marriage.

If she agrees, then the Shi’i man may contract the mut’ah with her. Otherwise, he must avoid it altogether.

Let us say that the Shi’i man finds a willing, chaste, qualified Muslim woman, or a chaste Jewess or Christian woman who agrees to avoid alcohol and pork during the marriage. Then, what next?

The Case Of The Virgin Woman

In the case of a “virgin” woman, there are still further steps to take. Note that a “virgin”, in principle, is any woman who has never married. It does not matter whether she still has her hymen undamaged or not. As long as she has never married, she is technically considered a “virgin” by the Shari’ah. To “deflower” her is, then, to have penetrative sex with her, whether her hymen is still intact or had been broken(1). Ayatullah al-Ruhani states:

وعن الشیخ فی کتاب الفروع والحلی والمحقق والمصنف فی جمله من کتبه وأکثر المتأخرین: إن المراد بالبکر غیر المحصن

And from Shaykh in Kitab al-Furu’, and al-Hilli, al-Muhaqqiq and the author in part of his books, and the majority of the later scholars: what is meant by the “virgin” is the one who has never married.(2)

First and foremost, it is makruh (disliked) to do mut’ah with a virgin, as al-Kulayni

p: 88


1- The hymen can be broken on account of consensual sex, masturbation, rape, disease, accident, injury, medical examination, physical exercise, cycling, the use of a tampon during menstruation, and so on. By contrast, there are women whose hymen still remains intact even after having had penetrative sex.
2- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 25, pp. 420-421

documents:

علی بن إبراهیم، عن أبیه، عن ابن أبی عمیر، عن حفص بن البختری، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: فی الرجل یتزوج البکر متعه، قال: یکره للعیب علی أهلها.

‘Ali b. Ibrahim – his father – Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – Hafs b. al-Bakhtari:

Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, said concerning the man who marries the virgin in mut’ah: “It is makruh due to the blemish upon her family.”(1)

Al-Majlisi comments:

حسن

Hasan.(2)

Then, he adds:

ویدل علی کراهه التمتع بالبکر مطلقا

And it proves that mut’ah with a virgin is makruh in all situations.(3)

However, in our view – based upon the apparent text of the hadith – the temporary marriage with the virgin is disliked only where it will constitute a blemish on her family. Otherwise, it is encouraged. This situation can occur where the virgin woman and her family reside within a predominantly Sunni community, where ignorance about mut’ah is severe. The Ahl al-Sunnah generally equate it with fornication, in denial of the Qur’an and their own sahih ahadith. Nonetheless, even in such a circumstance, mut’ah with the virgin woman is not haram (prohibited). Therefore, the Shi’i man may still go ahead with it anyway, if the woman and her family agree.

Al-Ṭusi too has the hadith through another ṭariq:

محمد بن أحمد بن یحیی عن یعقوب بن یزید عن محمد ابن أبی عمیر عن حفص بن البختری عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام فی الرجل یتزوج البکر متعه قال: یکره للعیب علی أهلها.

Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Yahya – Ya’qub b. Yazid – Muhammad b. Abi

p: 89


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 462, 1
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 251
3- Ibid

‘Umayr – Hafs b. al-Bakhtari:

Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, said concerning the man who marries the virgin in mut’ah: “It is makruh due to the blemish upon her family.”(1)

Al-Majlisi says:

صحیح

Sahih.(2)

So, what if our man lives in a Shi’i society, where mut’ah is well-respected? Well, even in such a case or in any other, he is still subject to further restrictions, as long as his proposed temporary spouse is a virgin. Al-Kulayni records:

محمد بن یحیی، عن أحمد وعبد الله ابنی محمد بن عیسی، عن علی بن الحکم، عن زیاد بن أبی الحلال قال: سمعت أبا عبد الله علیه السلام یقول: لا بأس بأن یتمتع بالبکر ما لم یفض إلیها مخافه کراهیه العیب علی أهلها.

Muhammad b. Yahya – Ahmad and ‘Abd Allah, sons of Muhammad b. ‘Isa – ‘Ali b. al-Hakam – Ziyad b. Abi al-Hilal:

I heard Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, saying: “There is no problem in doing mut’ah with the virgin as long as he does not have intercourse with her, for fear of the disgust of the blemish upon her family.”(3)

Al-Majlisi declares:

صحیح

Sahih.(4)

Obviously, if sex is one of the aims of the Shi’i man in seeking a mut’ah, he has to forgo the virgin women.

But, there is a quick issue here, on account of this hadith of al-Kulayni:

علی بن إبراهیم، عن أبیه، عن ابن أبی عمیر، عن حماد، عن الحلبی، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام فی رجل دخل بامرأه قال: إذا التقی الختانان وجب المهر والعده.

‘Ali b. Ibrahim – his father – Ibn Abi

p: 90


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 255, Ch. 24, 27 (1102)
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 41, 27
3- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 462, 2
4- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 251

‘Umayr – Hammad – al-Halabi:

Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, said about a man who has sexual intercourse with a woman: “When the two circumcised parts meet, the dowry and the ‘iddah become compulsory.”(1)

Al-Majlisi says:

حسن

Hasan.(2)

This hadith is explicit. The payment of the dowry becomes “obligatory” only after the mut’ah couple have had intercourse. Before that, it is only voluntary. Does this then mean that the virgin girl receives no dowry – or that the man is not under any obligation to give her – since there is no sex in her mut’ah? Well, the above hadith apparently refers to a marriage – permanent or temporary – where sex is not explicitly ruled out. Therefore, where its exclusion is agreed between the two mut’ah parties as part of their union, and it does not take place, then neither the dowry nor the ‘iddah period is obligatory. However, if a Shi’i man commits to pay the dowry to a virgin without having intercourse with her, then he must fulfil his commitment. Al-Kulayni reports:

عده من أصحابنا، عن سهل بن زیاد، وأحمد بن محمد جمیعا، عن ابن محبوب، عن عبد الله بن سنان، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: سمعته یقول: من اشترط شرطا مخالفا لکتاب الله فلا یجوز له ولا یجوز علی الذی اشترط علیه والمسلمون عند شروطهم فیما وافق کتاب الله عزو جل.

A number of our companions – Sahl b. Ziyad AND Ahmad b. Muhammad – Ibn Mahbub – ‘Abd Allah b. Sinan – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon

p: 91


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 6, p. 109, 1
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 21, p. 185

him:

Whosoever makes a commitment that is contrary to the Book of Allah the Almighty, then it is not permissible for him, and it is not permissible for the beneficiary of the commitment. The Muslims are by their commitments in whatever agrees with the Book of Allah the Almighty.(1)

Al-Majlisi submits:

صحیح

Sahih.(2)

Al-Ruhani also concurs:

صحیح

Sahih.(3)

Al-Ṭusi also documents:

عنه عن الحسن بن موسی الخشاب عن غیاث بن کلوب عن إسحاق بن عمار عن جعفر عن أبیه علیه السلام ان علی بن أبی طالب علیه السلام کان یقول: من شرط لامرأته شرطا فلیف لها به، فان المسلمین عند شروطهم إلا شرط حرم حلالا أو أحل حراما.

From him (al-Saffar) – al-Hasan b. Musa al-Khashshab – Ghiyath b. Kalub – Ishaq b. ‘Ammar – Ja’far – his father, peace be upon him:

‘Ali b. Abi Ṭalib, peace be upon him, used to say: “Whosoever makes a commitment to his wife, he must fulfil it to her, for the Muslims are by their commitments except a commitment that prohibits an halal or permits an haram.”(4)

Al-Ruhani comments:

موثق

Muwaththaq.(5)

Therefore, if the mut’ah husband makes a commitment to the virgin to give her the (full) dowry despite the absence of intercourse, he must fulfil it. In fact, he would be wrong if he pegged its payment to sexual relations with her.

Let us say: our man does not want sex in his temporary marriage. He only seeks companionship. So, he is qualified to go into mut’ah with a willing virgin woman. Moreover, he lives in a society where it is not viewed as a blemish

p: 92


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 169, 1
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 19, p. 165
3- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 190
4- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 467, Ch. 41, 80 (1870)
5- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 190

on the her family. Therefore, the stage is well set for them. Then, what else does he do?

He must enquire about her parents. If she has a father, then the Shi’i man must approach him for consent. Al-Kulayni documents:

محمد بن یحیی عن أحمد بن محمد، عن علی بن الحکم، عن علاء بن رزین، عن ابن أبی یعفور، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: لا تزوج ذوات الآباء من الأبکار إلا بإذن آبائهن.

Muhammad b. Yahya – Ahmad b. Muhammad – ‘Ali b. al-Hakam – ‘Ala b. Zarin – Ibn Abi Ya’fur – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, said:

The virgins who have fathers cannot be married except with the permission of their fathers.(1)

Al-Majlisi says:

صحیح

Sahih(2)

Then, he concludes:

ویدل علی عدم جواز تزویج البکر مطلقا بدون إذن الأب.

And it proves the impermissibility, in all situations, of marriage to the virgin without the permission of the father.(3)

Al-Ruhani declares as well about the hadith:

صحیح

Sahih(4)

So, whether it is for permanent marriage or mut’ah, the consent of the virgin woman’s father is obligatory. Al-Ṭusi records to this effect too:

فاما رواه أحمد بن محمد عن محمد بن إسماعیل عن أبی الحسن ظریف عن ابان عن أبی مریم عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: العذراء التی لها أب لا تتزوج متعه إلا باذن أبیها.

Ahmad b. Muhammad – Muhammad b. Isma’il – Abu al-Hasan Zarif – Aban – Abu Maryam – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

The virgin who has a father cannot be married in mut’ah except with the permission of her father.(5)

Al-Majlisi comments:

موثق کالصحیح

Muwaththaq ka

p: 93


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 393, 1
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 129
3- Ibid
4- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 21, p. 154
5- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 254-255, Ch. 24, 24 (1099)

al-Sahih(1)

Al-Ruhani also states:

صحیح

Sahih(2)

Meanwhile, there is a crucial point which al-Majlisi mentions here, that must be taken note of:

ومنع جماعه من الأصحاب عن التمتع بالبکر مطلقا إلا بإذن أبیها والجد هنا کالأب.

A group of the companions unconditionally forbade mut’ah with the virgin except with the permission of her father; and the grandfather here is like the father.(3)

Therefore, where the father is no more, but the paternal grandfather is still alive, his permission is obligatory too.

The Terms Of The Contract

Our Shi’i man is lucky. The father of the virgin woman is alive, and he gives his permission for the mut’ah. Alternatively, the father is dead, but the grandfather, who is alive, has allowed it. Or, neither the father nor the grandfather is alive. So, the man needs no-one’s permission. Or, the woman is not a virgin, and only her consent matters. In any case, our Shi’i man now has the full go-ahead to contract the temporary marriage with his prospective wife.

As a result, they both want to set the terms of their mut’ah. First, they must agree on the dowry and the exact length of their union, as al-Kulayni reports:

عده من أصحابنا، عن سهل بن زیاد، ومحمد بن یحیی، عن أحمد بن محمد جمیعا، عن ابن محبوب عن جمیل بن صالح، عن زراره، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: لا تکون متعه إلا بأمرین أجل مسمی وأجر مسمی.

A number of our companions – Sahl b. Ziyad AND Muhammad b. Yahya – Ahmad b. Muhammad – Ibn Mahbub – Jamil b. Salih – Zurarah – Abu

p: 94


1- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 39, 24
2- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 21, p. 155
3- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 251

‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, who said:

“Mut’ah does not exist except through two things: a specified term and a specified dowry.”(1)

‘Allamah al-Majlisi says:

صحیح

Sahih(2)

Then, he adds:

ویدل علی اشتراط المهر وتعیین المده فی المنقطع کما هو المذهب.

It proves that the dowry must be given and that the term must be specified, in temporary marriage, which is the standard opinion.(3)

Al-Ṭusi also records:

أحمد بن محمد بن عیسی عن علی بن الحکم عن ابان عن إسماعیل بن الفضل الهاشمی قال: سألت أبا عبد الله علیه السلام عن المتعه فقال: مهر معلوم إلی اجل معلوم.

Ahmad b. Muhammad b. ‘Isa – ‘Ali b. al-Hakam – Aban – Isma’il b. al-Faḍl al-Hashimi:

I asked Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, about mut’ah. So, he said, “A specified dowry for a specified period.”(4)

Al-Majlisi declares:

موثق کالصحیح

Muwaththaq ka al-Sahih(5)

The dowry, for both permanent(6) and temporary(7) marriages, is sometimes called a “wage” in the Qur’an and Sunnah.

Al-Kulayni also records about the exact format of the mut’ah contract:

محمد بن یحیی، عن محمد بن الحسین، وعده من أصحابنا، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن عثمان بن عیسی، عن سماعه، عن أبی بصیر قال: لابد من أن تقول فی هذه الشروط: أتزوجک متعه کذا وکذا یوما بکذا وکذا درهما نکاحا غیر سفاح علی کتاب الله عز وجل وسنه نبیه صلی الله علیه وآله وعلی أن لا ترثینی ولا أرثک وعلی أن تعتدی خمسه وأربعین یوما وقال: بعضهم حیضه.

Muhammad b. Yahya – Muhammad b. al-Husayn AND a number of our companions – Ahmad b. Muhammad – ‘Uthman b. ‘Isa – Sama’ah – Abu Basir:

You must say

p: 95


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 455, 1
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 238
3- Ibid
4- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, pp. 262-263, Ch. 24, 60 (1135)
5- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 54, 59
6- See Qur’an 4:25, 5:5, 33:50, and 60:10
7- See Qur’an 4:24

in these terms: “I marry you in mut’ah for such-and-such days with such-and-such amount, in marriage and NOT for fornication or adultery, upon the Book of Allah the Almighty and the Sunnah of His Prophet, peace be upon him and his family; and upon the condition that you shall not inherit me and I shall not inherit you; and upon the condition that you do ‘iddah for forty-five days” and some of them said, “a menstruation.”(1)

Al-Majlisi comments:

موثق

Muwaththaq.(2)

Al-Kulayni again reports:

علی بن إبراهیم، عن أبیه، عن ابن أبی نصر، عن ثعلبه قال: تقول: أتزوجک متعه علی کتاب الله وسنه نبیه صلی الله علیه وآله نکاحا غیر سفاح وعلی أن لا ترثینی ولا أرثک کذا وکذا یوما بکذا وکذا درهما وعلی أن علیک العده.

‘Ali b. Ibrahim – his father – Ibn Abi Nasr – Tha’labah:

You should say: “I marry you in mut’ah upon the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, in marriage and not for fornication or adultery; and upon the condition that you shall not inherit me and I shall not inherit you; for such-and-such days and for such-and-such amount; and upon the condition that you must observe the ‘iddah.”(3)

Al-Majlisi comments:

حسن موقوف

Hasan Mawquf.(4)

Both hadiths are mawquf. However, they do inform us about how the companions of our Imams understood and practised mut’ah. Also, the fact that these two companions taught the same formula – almost word-for-word - to others suggests that they did not invent it. Rather, they must have learnt it

p: 96


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 455, 2
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 238
3- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 455, 4
4- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 239

from the Ahl al-Bayt. This supposition is strengthened by the fact that both companions were teaching it as part of the religion. They, being righteous traditionists, would never have done that except if they had learnt the sighah from our Imams.

We understand from the two reports that:

(a) the exact number of days for the mut’ah must be explicitly spelt out before both parties agree to it;

(b) the exact amount of the dowry must equally be mutually agreed upon and explicitly stated;

(c) the fact that the marriage is being done in compliance with the Qur’an and Sunnah must also be explicitly declared;

(d) the fact that the intention of the mut’ah is marriage and not fornication or adultery must be stated explicitly as well;

(e) the condition that both parties shall not inherit each other may be explicitly declared, depending on their intention, as we shall soon explain; and

(f) the condition that the woman must observe the required ‘iddah period for their union must be explicitly stated.

As for the dowry, it can be any amount, as long as both parties are satisfied with it. Al-Ṭusi documents:

الحسین بن سعید عن النضر عن عاصم بن حمید عن محمد مسلم قال: سألت أبا عبد الله علیه السلام کم المهر - یعنی فی المتعه -؟ فقال: ما تراضیا علیه إلی ما شاء من الأجل

Al-Husayn b. Sa’id – al-Naḍr – ‘Asim b. Humayd – Muhammad b. Muslim:

I asked Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, “How much is the dowry, that is in mut’ah?” So, he said, “Whatsoever

p: 97

they both mutually agree upon, up to whatsoever length of time he wishes.”(1)

Al-Majlisi proclaims:

صحیح

Sahih.(2)

Al-Ruhani also says:

حسن

Hasan.(3)

Apparently, there is no minimum or maximum amount for the dowry. In the same manner, there is no minimum or maximum time length for the mut’ah.

On The Inheritance Rights Of The Spouses

With regards to the inheritance of the mut’ah wife specifically, it occurs where both parties mutually stipulate it as a condition of their nikah. Al-Kulayni documents:

علی بن إبراهیم، عن أبیه، عن أحمد بن محمد بن أبی نصر، عن أبی الحسن الرضا علیه السلام قال :تزویج المتعه نکاح بمیراث ونکاح بغیر میراث فإن اشترطت کان وإن لم تشترط لم یکن.

‘Ali b. Ibrahim – his father – Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Abi Nasr – Abu al-Hasan al-Riḍa, peace be upon him:

The marriage of mut’ah is marriage with inheritance and marriage without inheritance. If it is stipulated as a condition, then it occurs. But, if it is not stipulated as a condition, it does not occur.”(4)

Al-Majlisi says:

حسن

Hasan.(5)

Al-Ruhani also states:

صحیح

Sahih.(6)

This is also the fatwa of Shaykh al-Ṭusi:

واما المیراث فإنه اشرط انها ترث ورثت وان لم یشترط فلیس لها ولا له میراث ولیس یحتاج إلی أن یشترط انها لا ترث لان من شروط المتعه اللازمه ان لا یکون بینهما توارث

As for inheritance, it is to be stipulated as a condition that she shall inherit and be inherited. If it is not stipulated as a condition, then there is no inheritance for her or for him. There is no need to stipulate that she shall not inherit because one of the default conditions of mut’ah is

p: 98


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 264, Ch. 24, 66 (1141)
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 58, 65
3- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 36
4- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 465, 2
5- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 255
6- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, pp. 48-49

that there is no inheritance between both of them.(1)

He too then documents this shahid:

الحسین بن سعید عن النضر عن عاصم بن حمید عن عن محمد مسلم قال: سألت أبا عبد الله علیه السلام کم المهر - یعنی فی المتعه -؟ فقال: ما تراضیا علیه إلی ما شاء من الأجل، قلت: أرأیت ان حملت فقال: هو ولده فان أراد ان یستقبل أمرا جدیدا فعل ولیس علیها العده منه وعلیها من غیره خمسه وأربعون لیله وان اشترطت المیراث فهما علی شرطهما.

Al-Husayn b. Sa’id – al-Naḍr – ‘Asim b. Humayd – Muhammad b. Muslim:

I asked Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, “How much is the dowry, that is in mut’ah?” So, he said, “Whatsoever they both mutually agree upon, up to whatsoever length of time he wishes.”

I said, “Tell me: what if she gets pregnant?” He said, “It is his child. And if he wishes to renew the union, he can do (that). In such a case, she would not be required to observe the ‘iddah in his case. However, for anyone else, she must observe forty-five nights. Meanwhile, if inheritance is stipulated as a condition (of the mut’ah), then they both must comply with their condition.”(2)

Al-Majlisi comments:

صحیح

Sahih.(3)

Then, al-Ruhani also states:

حسن

Hasan.(4)

There are however a few ahadith that confuse some of our people. Their texts are obscure, most probably due to inadvertent deficiencies in the transmission of the narrators. Nonetheless, these narrators were not infallible, and are therefore excused. We know, of course, with total certainty – based upon the Verse of al-Taṭhir,

p: 99


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 264, Ch. 24
2- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 264, Ch. 24, 66 (1141)
3- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 58, 65
4- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 36

Hadith al-Thaqalayn and several other mutawatir and mu’tabar reports in our sources - that the Ahl al-Bayt as a whole were absolutely uniform and consistent in their teachings. This is why their obscure riwayat are – as a standard Shi’i practice - interpreted in line with their explicit, authentic ahadith.

For instance, al-Kulayni says:

محمد بن یحیی، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن ابن فضال، عن ابن بکیر، عن محمد بن مسلم قال: سمعت أبا جعفر علیه السلام یقول فی الرجل یتزوج المرأه متعه: إنهما یتوارثان ما لم یشترطا وإنما الشرط بعد النکاح.

Muhammad b. Yahya – Ahmad b. Muhammad – Ibn Faḍḍal – Ibn Bukayr – Muhammad b. Muslim:

I heard Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him, saying concerning the man who marries the woman in mut’ah: “Verily, both of them inherit each other as long as they have not stipulated (a specified period as) a condition; and the condition is only after the marriage.”(1)

Al-Majlisi says:

موثق

Muwaththaq.(2)

Explaining it, al-Ṭusi submits:

فالمراد بهذا الخبر إذا لم یشترطا الأجل فإنهما یتوارثان دون أن یکون المراد به شرط المیراث

What is meant in this report is “if they have not stipulated the specified period as a condition”. In such a case, they both inherit each other (by default). What is meant is not the stipulation of inheritance as a condition.(3)

Of course, where no specified period is specified as a condition, then the nikah is not mut’ah. Rather, it is a permanent marriage; and inheritance is automatic in it. But, when a specified period is stipulated as a condition, then it

p: 100


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 465, 1
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 255
3- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 265, Ch. 24, 69 (1144)

becomes mut’ah; and in mut’ah, inheritance is not automatic.

Another hadith that needs clarification is this one by al-Ṭusi:

محمد بن أحمد بن یحیی عن أحمد بن محمد عن البرقی عن الحسن بن الجهم عن الحسن بن موسی عن سعید بن یسار عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: سألته عن الرجل یتزوج المرأه متعه ولم یشترط المیراث قال: لیس بینهما میراث اشترط أولم یشترط.

Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Yahya – Ahmad b. Muhammad – al-Barqi – al-Hasan b. al-Jahm – al-Hasan b. Musa – Sa’id b. Yasar:

I asked Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, about the man who weds the woman in mut’ah, and he does not stipulate inheritance as a condition. He said, “There is no inheritance between them, whether it (i.e. the exclusion of inheritance) is stipulated as a condition or not.”(1)

Al-Ruhani comments:

صحیح

Sahih.(2)

And, al-Ṭusi explains:

هذا الخبر المراد به ما قدمناه من أنه سواء اشترط أو لم یشترط فإنها لا ترث فإنه لیس لها میراث، وإنما یحتاج ثبوته إلی شرط لا ارتفاعه

The meaning of this report is what we previously stated, that whether it (i.e. the exclusion of inheritance) is stipulated as a condition or not, she does not inherit (ordinarily), there is no inheritance for her. Its existence needs a stipulated condition (affirming it), not its exclusion.(3)

Al-Majlisi, also commenting upon this submission of al-Ṭusi, elucidates further:

قوله سواء اشترط أی :نفی المیراث

His statement “whether it is stipulated as a condition”, refers to the exclusion of inheritance.(4)

So, where the parties explicitly exclude inheritance from their mut’ah or they keep completely silent

p: 101


1- Ibid, vol. 7, pp. 264-265, Ch. 24, 67 (1141)
2- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 48
3- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 265, Ch. 24
4- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 59, 66

about it, neither party inherits. If they intend to inherit each other, they must clearly declare it in their contract of nikah.

Mut’ah and its ‘Iddah Periods

Theoretically, mut’ah can be for as short as one second, or as long as one billion years or more. But, whatever the length, the woman may be required to observe an ‘iddah period immediately after the marital union. If they had sexual intercourse during their mut’ah, or if their private parts touch, ‘iddah becomes obligatory upon the woman. Al-Kulayni reports:

علی بن إبراهیم، عن أبیه، عن ابن أبی عمیر، عن حماد، عن الحلبی، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام فی رجل دخل بامرأه قال: إذا التقی الختانان وجب المهر والعده.

‘Ali b. Ibrahim – his father – Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – Hammad – al-Halabi:

Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, said about a man who has sexual intercourse with a woman: “When the two circumcised parts meet, the dowry and the ‘iddah become compulsory.”(1)

Al-Majlisi says:

حسن

Hasan.(2)

Al-Ruhani also declares:

صحیح

Sahih.(3)

Al-Kulayni further documents:

علی، عن أبیه، عن ابن أبی عمیر، عن حفص بن البختری، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: إذا التقی الختانان وجب المهر والعده والغسل.

‘Ali – his father – Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – Hafs b. al-Bakhtari – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

When the two circumcised parts meet, the dowry, the ‘iddah and the bath become obligatory.(4)

Al-Majlisi again states:

حسن

Hasan.(5)

And al-Ruhani once more submits:

صحیح

Sahih.(6)

So, basically, the ‘iddah is not obligatory until when the private parts of both spouses meet. Therefore, the question to ask is: did their private parts meet? If the answer

p: 102


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 6, p. 109, 1
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 21, p. 185
3- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 23, p. 15
4- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 6, p. 109, 2
5- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 21, p. 185
6- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 23, p. 15

is a “yes”, then she must observe the ‘iddah period immediately after their separation.

There are, however, some exceptions. For instance, al-Kulayni records:

حمید بن زیاد، عن ابن سماعه، عن محمد بن زیاد، عن عبد الله بن سنان، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: قضی أمیر المؤمنین علیه السلام فی المتوفی عنها زوجها ولم یمسها قال:لا تنکح حتی تعتد أربعه أشهر وعشرا، عده المتوفی عنها زوجها.

Humayd b. Ziyad – Ibn Sama’ah – Muhammad b. Ziyad – ‘Abd Allah b. Sinan – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

Amir al-Muminin, peace be upon him, decided concerning the woman whose husband died, leaving her, before ever having intercourse with her. He said, “She cannot re-marry until after observing the ‘iddah for four months and ten days, the ‘iddah of the woman whose husband dies.”(1)

Al-Majlisi comments:

موثق

Muwaththaq.(2)

Therefore, the widow must observe the ‘iddah, whether her private parts ever met that of her dead mut’ah husband, or not.

The other exceptions to the ‘iddah rule are given in this hadith of al-Kulayni:

أبو علی الأشعری، عن محمد بن عبد الجبار، والرزاز، عن أیوب بن نوح، وحمید بن زیاد، عن ابن سماعه جمیعا، عن صفوان، عن محمد بن حکیم، عن محمد بن مسلم، عن أبی جعفر علیه السلام قال: التی لا تحبل مثلها لا عده علیها.

Abu ‘Ali al-Ash’ari – Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-Jabbar AND al-Razzaz – Ayyub b. Nuh AND Humayd b. Ziyad – Ibn Sama’ah – Safwan – Muhammad b. Hakim – Muhammad b. Muslim – Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him:

The one whose likes cannot become pregnant,

p: 103


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 6, p. 119, 8
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 21, p. 204

there is no ‘iddah upon her.(1)

Al-Majlisi declares:

حسن.

Hasan.(2)

Al-Ruhani agrees with him:

حسن

Hasan.(3)

This is an obvious reference to underage girls – technically, any female below the age of nine - and women who have absolutely reached their menopause. Normally, mut’ah with an underage girl is not allowed. But, if it happens, then the girl is not required to observe any ‘iddah, even if the man had violated her. As for a woman who has reached her menopause, temporary marriage with her is halal. However, she does not count any ‘iddah after her separation from her mut’ah husband, whether he had intercourse with her or not.

Al-Ṭusi also records:

روی الحسین بن سعید عن ابن أبی عمیر عن حماد ابن عثمان قال: سألت أبا عبد الله علیه السلام عن التی قد یئست من المحیض والتی لا تحیض مثلها قال: لیس علیها عده.

Al-Husayn b. Sa’id – Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – Hammad b. ‘Uthman:

I asked Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, about the one who has despaired of menstruation and the one whose likes do not menstruate. He said, “There is no ‘iddah upon her.”(4)

Al-Ruhani says:

صحیح

Sahih.(5)

This reiterates the points in the hadith of Muhammad b. Muslim: the underage girl and the woman who has reached menopause do not observe any ‘iddah after the mut’ah in any circumstance. As for the underage girl, her mut’ah is also invalid, to begin with. Meanwhile, if a woman has apparently reached her menopause, but there is still some doubt about it, then she must observe the required ‘iddah if her temporary

p: 104


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 6, p. 85, 3
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 21, p. 145
3- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 23, p. 11
4- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 8, p. 66, Ch. 3, 137 (218)
5- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 23, p. 10

husband had intercourse with her.(1)

In any case, most Shi’i men would never go into mut’ah with an underage girl, due to its invalidity; and most of them would not want to do it with women above menopause either. Therefore, a typical temporary wife observes the ‘iddah after it, if the union involved sexual intercourse. If there was no consummation of the nikah, then the woman is free to re-marry immediately after it without counting any ‘iddah – except, of course, where the mut’ah husband died during the marriage, as we have already mentioned.

Let us now go into the various ‘iddah counts for mut’ah. For women whose temporary husbands die, their ‘iddah period is stipulated in this ayah:

والذین یتوفون منکم ویذرون أزواجا یتربصن بأنفسهن أربعه أشهر وعشرا

And those of you who die and leave wives behind them, they (the wives) shall wait for four months and ten days.(2)

The verse is universal, and applies equally to permanent and temporary marriages. It is direct and explicit. The widow in a mut’ah must observe ‘iddah for four months and ten days. It also does not matter, as discussed above, whether she had intercourse with her dead husband or not. Let us bring back al-Kulayni’s hadith once again:

حمید بن زیاد، عن ابن سماعه، عن محمد بن زیاد، عن عبد الله بن سنان، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: قضی أمیر المؤمنین علیه السلام فی المتوفی عنها زوجها ولم یمسها قال:لا تنکح حتی تعتد أربعه أشهر وعشرا، عده المتوفی عنها زوجها.

Humayd b. Ziyad – Ibn

p: 105


1- See Qur’an 65:4
2- Qur’an 2:234

Sama’ah – Muhammad b. Ziyad – ‘Abd Allah b. Sinan – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

Amir al-Muminin, peace be upon him, decided concerning the woman whose husband died, leaving her, before ever having intercourse with her. He said, “She cannot re-marry until after observing the ‘iddah for four months and ten days, the ‘iddah of the woman whose husband dies.”(1)

Al-Majlisi rules:

موثق

Muwaththaq.(2)

Al-Ṭusi also records:

روی محمد بن أحمد بن یحیی عن علی بن إسماعیل عن صفوان عن عبد الرحمن بن الحجاج قال: سألت أبا عبد الله علیه السلام عن المرأه یتزوجها الرجل متعه ثم یتوفی عنها زوجها هل علیها العده؟ فقال: تعتد أربعه أشهر وعشرا فإذا انقضت أیامها وهو حی فحیضه ونصف مثل ما یجب علی الأمه

Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Yahya – ‘Ali b. Isma’il – Safwan – ‘Abd al-Rahman b. al-Hajjaj:

I asked Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, about the woman who is married by her husband in mut’ah, then her husband died and left her: “Must she observe the ‘iddah?” So, he said, “She observes the ‘iddah for four months and ten days. But, if its days expire and he is alive, then it is one and a half month, the like of that which is obligatory upon the slave woman”(3)

Al-Ruhani says:

صحیح

Sahih.(4)

Therefore, where the temporary husband dies, the wife observes an ‘iddah of four months and ten days. But, as the hadith also indicates, where both parties are alive at the expiration of the mut’ah, the woman only observes an ‘iddah of one and a half month

p: 106


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 6, p. 119, 8
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 21, p. 204
3- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 8, p. 157, Ch. 6, 143 (544)
4- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 52

– forty-five days. Al-Kulayni reports this further confirmation:

محمد بن یحیی، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن ابن فضال، عن ابن بکیر، عن زراره قال: عده المتعه خمسه وأربعون یوما کأنی أنظر إلی أبی جعفر علیه السلام یعقد بیده خمسه وأربعین فإذا جاز الاجل کانت فرقه بغیر طلاق.

Muhammad b. Yahya – Ahmad b. Muhammad – Ibn Faḍḍal – Ibn Bukayr – Zurarah:

The ‘iddah of mut’ah is forty-five days. It is as though I am looking at Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him, forming “forty-five” with his hand. When the term (of the mut’ah) expires, there is separation (between the spouses) without divorce.(1)

And al-Majlisi states:

موثق

Muwaththaq.(2)

However, there is some further explanation, which al-Ṭusi has recorded:

محمد بن یعقوب عن علی بن إبراهیم عن أبیه عن ابن أبی عمیر عن ابن أذینه عن زراره عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام أنه قال: عده المتعه ان کانت تحیض فحیضه وإن کانت لا تحیض فشهر ونصف.

Muhammad b. Ya’qub – ‘Ali b. Ibrahim – his father – Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – Ibn Uzaynah – Zurarah – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

The ‘iddah of mut’ah, IF SHE MENSTRUATES, is one menstruation. But, if she does not menstruate, then it is one and a half month.(3)

Al-Ruhani comments:

صحیح

Sahih.(4)

The Sunni Imam, ‘Abd al-Razzaq (d. 211 H), has a similar hadith:

عبد الرزاق عن ابن جریج قال: أخبرنی أبو الزبیر قال: سمعت جابر بن عبد الله یقول: استمتعنا أصحاب النبی صلی الله علیه وسلم، حتی نهی عمرو بن حریث، قال: وقال جابر: إذا انقضی الأجل فبدا لهما أن یتعاودا، فلیمهرها مهرا آخر، قال:

p: 107


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 458, 3
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 244
3- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 8, p. 165, Ch. 6, 172 (573)
4- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 52

وسأله بعضنا کم تعتد؟ قال: حیضه واحده

‘Abd al-Razzaq – Ibn Jurayj – Abu al-Zubayr – Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah:

“We, the Sahabah of the Prophet, peace be upon him, did mut’ah until ‘Amr b. Hurayth was forbidden.”

Jabir also said, “When the time expires, and both (spouses) wish to repeat (the mut’ah), then he must give her another dowry”. One of us asked him, “How long is her ‘iddah?” He said, “A single menstruation.”(1)

This riwayah is hasan, as we have established in the Preface.

Thus, the ‘iddah of forty-five days is only for women who do not menstruate. This obviously refers to women whose likes menstruate, and whose likes get pregnant. However, they do not menstruate, perhaps due to certain medical conditions or situations. For a woman who menstruates, her ‘iddah lasts till the end of a menstrual period.

Then, there is this hadith of al-Kulayni:

علی بن إبراهیم، عن أبیه، عن ابن أبی عمیر، عن عمر بن أذینه، عن إسماعیل ابن الفضل الهاشمی قال: سألت أبا عبد الله علیه السلام عن المتعه فقال: الق عبد الملک بن جریج فسله عنها فإن عنده منها علما فلقیته فأملی علی منها شیئا کثیرا فی استحلالها فکان فیما روی لی ابن جریج قال: لیس فیها وقت ولا عدد إنما هی بمنزله الإماء یتزوج منهن کم شاء وصاحب الأربع نسوه یتزوج منهن ما شاء بغیر ولی ولا شهود فإذا انقضی الاجل بانت منه بغیر طلاق ویعطیها الشئ الیسیر وعدتها حیضتان وإن کانت لا تحیض فخمسه وأربعون یوما فأتیت بالکتاب أبا عبد الله علیه السلام فعرضت علیه فقال: صدق وأقر

p: 108


1- Abu Bakr ‘Abd al-Razzaq b. Hamam al-Ṣa’nani, al-Muṣannaf [annotator: Habib al-Rahman al-A’ẓami], vol. 7, p. 499, 14025

به قال: ابن أذینه و کان زراره بن أعین یقول هذا ویحلف أنه الحق إلا أنه کان یقول: إن کانت تحیض فحیضه وإن کانت لا تحیض فشهر ونصف.

‘Ali b. Ibrahim – his father – Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – ‘Umar b. Uzaynah – Isma’il b. al-Faḍl al-Hashimi:

I asked Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, concerning mut’ah, and he said, “Meet ‘Abd al-Malik b. Jurayj and ask him about it, for he has knowledge of it.” So, I met him, and he dictated to me of it a lot of things concerning its legitimacy. And part of what Ibn Jurayj narrated to me, he said: “There is no specific length or any (maximum) number (of the wives) in it. They are only of the status of slave women: he marries any number of them as he wishes, and the husband of four women (also) marries from them whatever he wishes, with no wali or witnesses. When the (agreed) term expires, she separates from him without divorce, and he gives her the small thing; and her ‘iddah is two menstruations, and if she does not menstruate, then forty-five days.”

Then, I brought the document to Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, and I presented to him. So, he said, “He spoke the truth”, and he confirmed it.

Ibn Uzaynah said: Zurarah b. A’yan used to say, “This”, and he would swear, “is the truth”, except that he used to say: “If she menstruates, then it is a menstruation; and if she does not

p: 109

menstruate, then a month and a half”.(1)

Al-Majlisi declares:

حسن

Hasan.(2)

Ayatullah al-Ruhani also states:

صحیح أو حسن

Sahih or Hasan.(3)

‘Abd al-Malik b. Jurayj (d. 150 H) was a giant Sunni scholar of that era. He was apparently one of the few Salaf who still believed in mut’ah. Imam al-Dhahabi (d. 748 H) documents about him:

قال أبو غسان زنیج: سمعت جریرا الضبی یقول: کان ابن جریج یری المتعه، تزوج بستین امرأه. وقیل: إنه عهد إلی أولاده فی أسمائهن لئلا یغلط أحد منهم ویتزوج واحده مما نکح أبوه بالمتعه.

Abu Ghassan Zunayj said: I heard Jarir al-Ḍabi saying: “Ibn Jurayj believed in the legitimacy of mut’ah. He married sixty women. And it is said that he informed his children of their names, in case one of them made a mistake and married one of those whom his father had married in mut’ah.”(4)

He also records:

وقال محمد بن عبد الله بن عبد الحکم، سمعت الشافعی یقول: استمتع ابن جریج بتسعین امرأه

Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Abd al-Hakam said: I heard al-Shafi’i saying: “Ibn Jurayj did mut’ah with ninety women.”(5)

The practice of Ibn Jurayj is interesting. Mut’ah is technically a tool of necessity. But, was he really pushed by necessity into marrying sixty or ninety women?! Or, was he only abusing it? Well, perhaps, one may say that he was forced by the needs of those women, rather than his own. He only wanted to help them – to keep them company, privately discuss their problems with them, do his best to help them, and maybe also satisfy their sexual needs.

p: 110


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 451, 6
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 232
3- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 51
4- Shams al-Din Muhammad b. Ahmad b. ‘Uthman al-Dhahabi, Siyar A’lam al-Nubala (Beirut: Muasassat al-Risalah; 9th edition, 1413 H) [annotators of the sixth volume: Shu’ayb al-Arnauṭ and Husayn al-Asad], vol. 6, p. 331, 138
5- Ibid, vol. 6, p. 333, 138

So, he would be making a lot of personal sacrifices to help women of Islam (or those of Judaism and Christianity) who had no one by their side.

Anyway, Ibn Jurayj stated that the ‘iddah of a woman who menstruated was two menstruations, and Imam al-Sadiq, ‘alaihi al-salam, confirmed his statement. This then establishes that the ‘iddah for a woman in mut’ah who menstruates is of two types: (i) a menstruation or (ii) two menstruations. Both types are proved in the authentic ahadith of the Ahl al-Bayt. It then depends upon the choice of the two parties, whichever type they agreed upon in their mut’ah contract. Al-Majlisi submits in this regard:

وحمل الزائده علی الحیضه علی الاستحباب لا یخلو من قوه

The classification of the addition upon the (single) menstruation as mustahab (recommended) is not devoid of strength.(1)

So, the two-menstruation type could be classified as the mustahab, and the one-menstruation type as the standard. Nonetheless, what matters most to our research is that both types are correct; and that either of them is validly available to the mut’ah spouses. Meanwhile, if the woman does not menstruate – and her likes do – then, her ‘iddah is immutably fixed at forty-five days. No options are given in such a case.

What then happens if the woman in a concluded mut’ah is pregnant from it? How long is her ‘iddah? Shaykh al-Kulayni reports:

حمید بن زیاد، عن ابن سماعه، عن محمد بن زیاد، عن عبد الله بن سنان، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: الحبلی المتوفی

p: 111


1- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 243

عنها زوجها عدتها آخر الأجلین.

Humayd b. Ziyad – Ibn Sama’ah – Muhammad b. Ziyad – ‘Abd Allah b. Sinan – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

The pregnant wife whose husband dies and leaves her, her ‘iddah is the longer of the two periods.(1)

Al-Majlisi comments:

موثق

Muwaththaq.(2)

The two periods are her standard ‘iddah - had she not been pregnant - and her expected delivery date. For a widow, the ‘iddah is four months and ten days. If she is pregnant, however, and her expected delivery date is more than four months and ten days, then her ‘iddah shall be until she delivers. However, if her expected delivery date is shorter than four months and ten days, then the standard ‘iddah of the widow shall apply. In the same manner, if she prematurely delivers, or she has a miscarriage, before four months and ten days, in that case, her ‘iddah shall be only four months and ten days.

Al-Kulayni also documents:

عده من أصحابنا، عن أحمد بن محمد بن خالد، وعلی بن إبراهیم، عن أبیه، عن عثمان بن عیسی، عن سماعه قال: قال: المتوفی عنها زوجها الحامل أجلها آخر الأجلین إذا کانت حبلی فتمت لها أربعه أشهر وعشر ولم تضع فإن عدتها إلی أن تضع وإن کانت تضع حملها قبل أن یتم لها أربعه أشهر وعشرا تعتد بعدما تضع تمام أربعه أشهر و عشرا وذلک أبعد الأجلین.

A number of our companions – Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Khalid AND ‘Ali b. Ibrahim – his father – ‘Uthman b. ‘Isa – Sama’ah:

The pregnant wife whose husband dies

p: 112


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 6, p. 114, 6
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 21, p. 196

and leaves her, her period shall be the longer of the two periods. If she is pregnant, and four months and ten days pass while she still has not delivered, then her ‘iddah shall be until she delivers. But, if she delivers her pregnancy before the completion of four months and ten days, she observes the ‘iddah after her delivery until the completion of four months and ten days. And that is the longer of the two periods.(1)

Al-Majlisi says:

موثق وعلیه الفتوی

Muwaththaq, and upon it is the fatwa.(2)

Al-Ruhani concurs too:

موثق

Muwaththaq.(3)

This, however, is for a pregnant widow – whether in a permanent marriage or in a mut’ah. What then about the temporary wife who is pregnant and her husband is alive, at the time of their separation? The Qur’an gives the answer very clearly:

وأولات الأحمال أجلهن أن یضعن حملهن

And for those who are pregnant, their (waiting) period is until they deliver their pregnancies.(4)

Al-Kulayni also documents:

علی بن إبراهیم، عن أبیه، عن ابن أبی نجران، عن عاصم بن حمید، عن محمد ابن قیس، عن أبی جعفر علیه السلام قال: الحامل أجلها أن تضع حملها وعلیه نفقتها بالمعروف حتی تضع حملها.

‘Ali b. Ibrahim – his father – Ibn Abi Najran – ‘Asim b. Humayd – Muhammad b. Qays – Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him:

The (waiting) period of the pregnant woman is until she delivers her pregnancy; and upon him (i.e. the husband) is her good maintenance until she delivers her pregnancy.(5)

Al-Majlisi says:

حسن

Hasan.(6)

And al-Ruhani also declares:

صحیح أو حسن

Sahih or Hasan.(7)

This obviously raises the possibility that

p: 113


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 6, pp. 113-114, 1
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 21, p. 195
3- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 56
4- Qur’an 65:4
5- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 6, p. 103, 1
6- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 21, p. 173
7- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 332

the ‘iddah of the mut’ah wife could be as long as nine months.

Children Of Mut’ah

And, whatever pregnancy the woman has from mut’ah is legitimate, and so are all children from it. Al-Ṭusi reports:

أحمد بن محمد بن أبی نصر عن عاصم بن حمید عن محمد بن مسلم عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال قلت له: أرأیت إن حبلت؟ قال: هو ولده.

Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Abi Nasr – ‘Asim b. Humayd – Muhammad b. Muslim:

I said to Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, “Tell me: what if she gets pregnant?” He said, “It is his child.”(1)

Al-Majlisi says:

صحیح

Sahih.(2)

Al-Ruhani agrees:

صحیح

Sahih.(3)

Al-Ṭusi again records:

الحسین بن سعید عن النضر عن عاصم بن حمید عن عن محمد مسلم قال: سألت أبا عبد الله علیه السلام کم المهر - یعنی فی المتعه -؟ فقال: ما تراضیا علیه إلی ما شاء من الأجل، قلت: أرأیت ان حملت فقال: هو ولده فان أراد ان یستقبل أمرا جدیدا فعل ولیس علیها العده منه وعلیها من غیره خمسه وأربعون لیله وان اشترطت المیراث فهما علی شرطهما.

Al-Husayn b. Sa’id – al-Naḍr – ‘Asim b. Humayd – Muhammad b. Muslim:

I asked Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, “How much is the dowry, that is in mut’ah?” So, he said, “Whatsoever they both mutually agree upon, up to whatsoever length of time he wishes.”

I said, “Tell me: what if she gets pregnant?” He said, “It is his child. And if he wishes to renew the union, he can do (that). In such a case, she would not be required to observe the ‘iddah in his

p: 114


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, al-Istibṣar (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 3, p. 152, Ch. 100, 1 (557)
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 67, 78
3- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 43

case. However, for anyone else, she must observe forty-five nights. Meanwhile, if inheritance is stipulated as a condition (of the mut’ah), then they both must comply with their condition.”(1)

Al-Majlisi comments:

صحیح

Sahih.(2)

Al-Ruhani also states:

حسن

Hasan.(3)

Al-Ṭusi further documents:

أحمد بن محمد بن عیسی عن محمد بن إسماعیل بن بزیع قال: سأل رجل الرضا علیه السلام وانا اسمع عن الرجل یتزوج المرأه متعه ویشترط علیها ان لا یطلب ولدها فتأتی بعد ذلک بولد فینکر الولد فشدد فی ذلک وقال یجحد؟ وکیف یجحد اعظاما لذلک؟ قال الرجل فان اتهمها قال: لا ینبغی لک ان تتزوج إلا مأمونه ان الله یقول: الزانی لا ینکح إلا زانیه أو مشرکه والزانیه لا ینکحها إلا زان أو مشرک وحرم ذلک علی المؤمنین

Ahmad b. Muhammad b. ‘Isa – Muhammad b. Isma’il b. Bazi’:

A man asked al-Riḍa, peace be upon him, while I was listening, about the man who marries the woman in mut’ah and he imposes a condition upon her that he will not seek her child. But, she later comes with a child and he severely denies the child. So, he (al-Riḍa) said, “Does he deny? How can he deny primarily because of that?” Then, the man said, “What if he accuses her (of fornication)?” He (al-Riḍa) said, “It is not appropriate for you to marry except a faithful woman. Verily, Allah the Almighty says: {The fornicator shall not marry any but a fornicatress or an idolatress; and the fornicatress, none shall marry her but a fornicator or an idolater: and that is made HARAM for the believers}.(4)

Al-Majlisi declares:

صحیح

Sahih.(5)

And al-Ruhani concurs:

صحیح

Sahih.(6)

Then,

p: 115


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 264, Ch. 24, 66 (1141)
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 58, 65
3- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 36
4- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 269, Ch. 24, 82 (1157)
5- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 69, 81
6- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 43

he explains:

)ویشترط علیها أن لا یطلب ولدها (أی یعزل عنها

(and he imposes a condition upon her that he will not seek her child) meaning, he will use (the contraceptive method of) coitus interruptus with her.(1)

So, even if the man had always used coitus interruptus during the temporary marriage, he is still unable to validly deny the paternity of the child, if pregnancy occurs during their union. This, obviously, is one of the reasons why mut’ah with promiscuous women is not allowed. Note especially this part of the hadith:

قال الرجل فان اتهمها قال: لا ینبغی لک ان تتزوج إلا مأمونه ان الله یقول: الزانی لا ینکح إلا زانیه أو مشرکه والزانیه لا ینکحها إلا زان أو مشرک وحرم ذلک علی المؤمنین

Then, the man said, “What if he accuses her (of fornication)?” He (al-Riḍa) said, “It is not appropriate for you to marry except a faithful woman. Verily, Allah the Almighty says: {The fornicator shall not marry any but a fornicatress or an idolatress; and the fornicatress, none shall marry her but a fornicator or an idolater: and that is made HARAM for the believers}.

Therefore, the temporary wife must be so completely chaste and faithful that if she gets pregnant despite her husband’s regular use of coitus interruptus, there will nonetheless be absolutely no doubt in his mind that he is the genuine father of the child. It is highly significant that the Imam did not endorse even the man’s accusation of zina against the woman as a sufficient reason to deny

p: 116


1- Ibid

his fatherhood of the child. Instead, he warned that the Shi’i man must never marry in mut’ah any woman with the slightest likelihood of committing adultery. Otherwise, the Shi’i man could put himself at a great disadvantage, in which he might be unable to free himself from the paternity of a child that is not biologically his.

Every denial of paternity is a direct claim that the wife had intercourse outside of wedlock. Therefore, the success or failure of the denial by the temporary husband rests squarely on his ability to prove this. Typically, he accuses the wife of adultery, and produces his arguments and evidences or witnesses. If he wins, he frees himself from the unwanted burden. However, the standard of proof in zina cases can be truly very stringent(1). Therefore, the chances of success are sometimes hopelessly low. Meanwhile, if he is unable to prove that his wife committed adultery, then he also cannot deny the paternity of her child. Even logically, a woman who has not committed zina cannot possibly give birth to any illegitimate child - except, perhaps, in cases of rape!

Worse still, the husband in a mut’ah has no access to li’an, which is a relatively easier tool for successfully denying paternity or claiming adultery against the wife, in a permanent marriage(2). Al-Kulayni reports:

محمد، عن أحمد، عن ابن محبوب، عن العلاء بن رزین، عن ابن أبی یعفور، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: لا یلاعن الرجل المرأه التی یتمتع بها.

Muhammad – Ahmad – Ibn Mahbub

p: 117


1- See, for instance, Qur’an 4:15 and 24:4
2- See Qur’an 24:6-9

– al-‘Ala b. Razin – Ibn Abi Ya’fur – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

The man does not do li’an against the woman with whom he does mut’ah.(1)

Al-Majlisi says:

صحیح

Sahih.(2)

Al-Ruhani concurs:

صحیح

Sahih.(3)

Apparently, the temporary husband does not have many good options. As such, whoever intends to practise mut’ah must watch very carefully the chastity, faithfulness and trustworthiness of the woman he seeks to choose as his wife in it.

Renewal Of The Mut’ah

Our Shi’i man contracts his mut’ah with a righteous Muslim, Jewish or Christian woman for a certain period of time. However, as time passes, he sees a lot of good virtues –spiritual or mundane – in her, and wishes to extend their relationship. Al-Kulayni documents that he can do that:

عده من أصحابنا، عن سهل بن زیاد، وعلی بن إبراهیم، عن أبیه جمیعا، عن عبد الرحمن بن أبی نجران، وأحمد بن أبی نصر، عن أبی بصیر قال: لا بأس بأن تزیدک وتزیدها إذا انقطع الاجل فیما بینکما تقول: استحللتک بأجل آخر برضا منها ولا یحل ذلک لغیرک حتی تنقضی عدتها.

A number of our companions – Sahl b. Ziyad AND ‘Ali b. Ibrahim – his father – ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Abi Najran AND Ahmad b. Abi Nasr – Abu Basir:

There is no problem if you renew your union when the period (mutually agreed) between both of you expires. You say, “I seek to marry you for another term”, subject to her consent. That is not permissible for anyone apart from you until she completes her ‘iddah.(4)

Al-Majlisi states:

حسن کالصحیح

Hasan ka al-Sahih.(5)

And referring to the same hadith,

p: 118


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 6, p. 166, 17
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 21, p. 276
3- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 44
4- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 458, 1
5- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 244

al-Ruhani says:

صحیح أبی بصیر عن أبی جعفر علیه السلام فی المتعه

The sahih report of Abu Basir from Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him, on mut’ah.(1)

So, it is marfu’ - and not mawquf as it appears to be - and it is sahih. It does establish directly, of course, that the renewal can only be done after the end of the ongoing mut’ah.

Al-Ṭusi also says:

الحسین بن سعید عن النضر عن عاصم بن حمید عن عن محمد مسلم قال: سألت أبا عبد الله علیه السلام کم المهر - یعنی فی المتعه -؟ فقال: ما تراضیا علیه إلی ما شاء من الأجل، قلت: أرأیت ان حملت فقال: هو ولده فان أراد ان یستقبل أمرا جدیدا فعل ولیس علیها العده منه وعلیها من غیره خمسه وأربعون لیله وان اشترطت المیراث فهما علی شرطهما.

Al-Husayn b. Sa’id – al-Naḍr – ‘Asim b. Humayd – Muhammad b. Muslim:

I asked Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, “How much is the dowry, that is in mut’ah?” So, he said, “Whatsoever they both mutually agree upon, up to whatsoever length of time he wishes.”

I said, “Tell me: what if she gets pregnant?” He said, “It is his child. And if he wishes to renew the union, he can do (that). In such a case, she would not be required to observe the ‘iddah in his case. However, for anyone else, she must observe forty-five nights. Meanwhile, if inheritance is stipulated as a condition (of the mut’ah), then they both must comply with their condition.”(2)

Al-Majlisi states:

صحیح

Sahih.(3)

Al-Ruhani, on his own, submits:

حسن

Hasan.(4)

Imam

p: 119


1- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 57
2- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 264, Ch. 24, 66 (1141)
3- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 58, 65
4- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 36

‘Abd al-Razzaq of the Ahl al-Sunnah is not left out either:

عبد الرزاق عن ابن جریج قال: أخبرنی أبو الزبیر قال: سمعت جابر بن عبد الله یقول: استمتعنا أصحاب النبی صلی الله علیه وسلم، حتی نهی عمرو بن حریث، قال: وقال جابر: إذا انقضی الأجل فبدا لهما أن یتعاودا، فلیمهرها مهرا آخر، قال: وسأله بعضنا کم تعتد؟ قال: حیضه واحده

‘Abd al-Razzaq – Ibn Jurayj – Abu al-Zubayr – Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah:

“We, the Sahabah of the Prophet, peace be upon him, did mut’ah until ‘Amr b. Hurayth was forbidden.”

Jabir also said, “When the time expires, and both (spouses) wish to repeat (the mut’ah), then he must give her another dowry”. One of us asked him, “How long is her ‘iddah?” He said, “A single menstruation.”(1)

This chain is hasan, as we have repeatedly mentioned.

The Shi’i man, therefore, can validly negotiate and start a new temporary marriage with the same woman, even during her ‘iddah. Meanwhile, the new marriage with the same man lawfully overturns and cancels the waiting period. The ability to propose a new mut’ah to her, or to re-marry her, during her ‘iddah is strictly restricted to her fresh ex-husband. Once her waiting period completes, the man loses his monopoly of that right, and she becomes legally available for marriage to every qualified Muslim man. Of course, the success of the renewal attempts depends upon the consent of the woman.

6. Al-Zawaj bi Niyyah Al-Talaq, The Sunni Attempt to Reinvent Mut’ah

After declaring mut’ah to be haram, Sunni Muslims were faced with the very situations which it was meant

p: 120


1- Abu Bakr ‘Abd al-Razzaq b. Hamam al-Ṣa’nani, al-Muṣannaf [annotator: Habib al-Rahman al-A’ẓami], vol. 7, p. 499, 14025

to address. But, unable to backtrack on it, the ‘ulama of the Ahl al-Sunnah instead invented a new form of marriage – called al-zawaj bi niyyah al-ṭalaq (marriage with the intention of divorce) – to cater for their needs. Its nature is exactly as its name suggests: the “marriage” is contracted with a deliberate intention to dissolve it sometimes in the future. To say this in clearer words, it is a temporary form of nikah!

Here, al-Hafiẓ (d. 852 H) opens the floor about this Sunni-invented marriage:

قال عیاض وأجمعوا علی أن شرط البطلان التصریح بالشرط فلو نوی عند العقد أن یفارق بعد مده صح نکاحه الا الأوزاعی فأبطله

‘Iyaḍ said: “They unanimously agreed that the condition of invalidity is to openly disclose the condition (of time limit). So, if he intends, during the ‘aqd (i.e. the formalization of the marriage) to separate after a period, his marriage is correct. Only al-Awza’i disagreed, and he declared it invalid.”(1)

So, when a Sunni man wishes to temporarily marry a woman, he must never disclose his real intention to her. If he does that, it becomes illegal for him to proceed with the marriage. However, as long as he does not tell her, he is allowed to marry her with his hidden intention to divorce her after a period of time. He knows of his secret plan in his heart, but must never let the woman discover it until when it happens.

Imam al-Nawawi (d. 676 H) also mentions:

قال القاضی وأجمعوا علی أن من نکح نکاحا مطلقا

p: 121


1- Shihab al-Din Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Fath al-Bari Sharh Ṣahih al-Bukhari (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’rifah li al-Ṭaba’ah wa al-Nashr; 2nd edition), vol. 9, p. 150

ونیته أن لا یمکث معها الا مده نواها فنکاحه صحیح حلال ولیس نکاح متعه وإنما نکاح المتعه ما وقع بالشرط المذکور ولکن قال مالک لیس هذا من أخلاق الناس وشذ الأوزاعی فقال هو نکاح متعه ولا خیر فیه والله أعلم

Al-Qadi said, “They unanimously agreed that whoever contracts an (outwardly) permanent marriage while his (real) intention is to stay with her for only a period of time which he intends, then his marriage is correct and halal, and is not a mut’ah marriage. The mut’ah marriage is only that which occurs with the (previously) mentioned condition. However, Malik said, ‘It is not from the manners of the people.’ As for al-Awza’i, he disagreed and said, ‘It is a mut’ah marriage, and there is no good in it.’” And Allah knows best.(1)

Of course, it is NOT mut’ah! Al-Awza’i was definitely very wrong. In mut’ah, both parties – again, both parties – mutually and voluntarily agree on the temporary nature of their prospective union, and on the exact time of its end. However, in this Sunni-invented “marriage”, both would-be spouses outwardly agree on a permanent marriage while the man inwardly intends only a temporary relationship. He basically tricks the unsuspecting woman till the very end.

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 H) has his submission too:

وسئل رحمه الله عن رجل رکاض یسیر فی البلاد فی کل مدینه شهرا او شهرین ویعزل عنها ویخاف ان یقع فی المعصیه فهل له ان یتزوج فی مده إقامته فی تلک البلده وإذا سافر طلقها وأعطاها حقها أو لا وهل

p: 122


1- Abu Zakariyyah Yahya b. Sharaf al-Nawawi, Ṣahih Muslim bi Sharh al-Nawawi (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi; 1st edition, 1407 H), vol. 9, p. 182

یصح النکاح أم لا

فأجاب له أن یتزوج لکن ینکح نکاحا مطلقا لا یشترط فیه توقیتا بحیث یکون إن شاء مسکها وإن شاء طلقها وإن نوی طلاقها حتما عند انقضاء سفره کره فی مثل ذلک وفی صحه النکاح نزاع ولو نوی أنه إذا سافر واعجبته أمسکها وإلا طلقها جاز ذلک فأما أن یشترط التوقیت فهذا نکاح المتعه الذی اتفق الأئمه الأربعه وغیرهم علی تحریمه

He (Ibn Taymiyyah), may Allah be merciful to him, was asked about a running man, who goes through countries, spending a month or two months in each city, and then leaves it; and he fears that he might commit sin. So, can he marry during the period of his stay in those cities, divorcing her when he travels and giving her right to her? Or can he not? And is the marriage valid or not?

So, he (Ibn Taymiyyah) answered:

He can marry. However, he contracts an (outwardly) permanent marriage. He cannot openly disclose any time limit as its condition, so that if he wishes he retains her, and if he wishes he divorces her. But, if he absolutely intends to divorce her at the end of his journey (in the city), the like of that is disliked (makruh), and there is dispute concerning the validity of such marriage. If he intends that when he travels, if he loves her he will retain her, and if otherwise, he will divorce her, that is permissible. However, to (openly) disclose a time limit as a condition, that would be the marriage of

p: 123

mut’ah, which is unanimously agreed to be haram by the four Imams and others.(1)

He also states about this same type of “marriage”:

والصحیح أن هذا لیس بنکاح متعه ولا یحرم وذلک أنه قاصد للنکاح وراغب فیه بخلاف المحلل لکن لا یرید دوام المرأه معه وهذا لیس بشرط فإن دوام المراه معه لیس بواجب بل له أن یطلقها فإذا قصد أن یطلقها بعد مده فقد قصد أمرا جائزا

The correct opinion is that it is not a mut’ah marriage, and it is not haram. And that is: he intends marriage and is desirous of it, as opposed to the practitioner of al-tahlil. However, he does not want the permanency of the woman with him; and this is not a condition, as the permanency of the woman with him is not obligatory. Rather, he has the right to divorce her. So, when he intends to divorce her after a period, he has intended a permissible affair.(2)

Ibn Taymiyyah apparently attempts to refine this Sunni invention. He therefore introduces a new condition: the man must intend that if he loves her at the end of his stay in the town, city or country, he may retain her. But then, even if he loves her, he still has the right NOT to retain her after having used her. He is free to divorce her, despite his love for her, and permanently move away from her. To Ibn Taymiyyah, as long as the man holds that in his secret intentions, the marriage is correct.

Imam Ibn Qudamah (d. 620

p: 124


1- Abu al-‘Abbas Ahmad b. ‘Abd al-Halim b. Taymiyyah al-Harrani, Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 32, pp. 106-107
2- Ibid, vol. 32, p. 147

H) submits this fatwa as well:

وان تزوجها بغیر شرط الا أن فی نیته طلاقها بعد شهر أو إذا انقضت حاجته فی هذا البلد فالنکاح صحیح فی قول عامه أهل العلم الا الأوزاعی قال هو نکاح متعه والصحیح انه لا بأس به ولا تضر نیته

If he marries her without (openly disclosing) any condition (of time limit), except that (in his heart) he intends to divorce her after a month, or after fulfilling his need in this town, then the marriage is valid according to the statement of the generality of the scholars except al-Awza’i. He said: “It is a mut’ah marriage”. The correct opinion is that there is no problem with it, and his intention does no harm.(1)

Shaykh Sayyid Sabiq also declares:

اتفق الفقهاء علی أن من تزوج امرأه دون أن یشترط التوقیت وفی نیته أن یطلقها بعد زمن، أو بعد انقضاء حاجته فی البلد الذی هو مقیم به، فالزواج صحیح. وخالف الأوزاعی فاعتبره زواج متعه.

The jurists unanimously agree that whoever marries a woman without (openly disclosing) any time limit as a condition, and his intention is to divorce her after a period of time, or after the fulfilment of his need in the town where he resides, then the marriage is valid. But, al-Awza’i disagreed and called it a mut’ah marriage.(2)

Honestly, we find it insulting to Allah and His Messenger, sallallahu ‘alaihi wa alihi, to equate the divinely legislated mut’ah with this Sunni-invented “marriage”. Their distance, in all ways and manners, is far more than that between the heavens and the

p: 125


1- Abu Muhammad ‘Abd Allah b. Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Qudamah, al-Mughni (Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi), vol. 7, p. 573
2- Sayyid Sabiq, Fiqh al-Sunnah (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi; 3rd edition, 1397 H), vol. 2, p. 45

earth.

So, to do a recap, before the Sunni-invented “marriage” could be valid:

(i) the would-be “husband” must never openly disclose any time limit for the proposed marriage to the would-be “wife”;

(ii) if he openly discloses to the woman that their “marriage” would only be temporary or for a period of time, then it would be invalid;

(iii) however, he is allowed to formulate a time limit for the “marriage” in his mind, and to enforce it;

(iv) yet, he must always pretend to the woman that he is permanently “married” to her, and that he has no premeditated intention of ever leaving her;

(v) the only problem is the open disclosure of a time limit for the proposed or ongoing marital union – whether it is specified or obscure;

(vi) as long as the (would-be) “husband” keeps his time limit for the “marriage” in his heart, serious on carrying it out, there is no problem;

(vii) Ibn Taymiyyah introduced the condition that the man must also uphold a non-binding plan to retain the woman after the intended time limit if he loves her;

(viii) but, if he dumps her despite loving her, there is no blame on him.

To understand how the Ahl al-Sunnah practise their innovated “marriage”, let us illustrate with a scenario. Let us assume that a major Saudi Salafi shaykh is invited by a Salafi organization in the United Kingdom to a Salafi conference. He is to stay in London for three days. However, he is unable to bring any of his three wives along,

p: 126

due to visa problems. Therefore, he will remain without any of his women throughout his three-day stay in England. But, after spending just over twenty four hours in London, he experiences very strong sexual urges. He fears committing adultery. So, he discusses the option of this Sunni-invented “marriage” with his British hosts. They are to help him find a suitable “wife” for it, with whom he satisfies his sexual urges until he leaves the United Kingdom.

His hosts discuss with various Christian, Jewish and Salafi women. There is a pious shaykh from Saudi Arabia, they tell them, and he wants a fourth wife. They must never inform the women that the shaykh only wants a “wife” for about forty-eight hours or less. Otherwise, it would be haram to proceed with the plan. Therefore, the Salafi hosts assure all the women that the marriage is intended to be permanent: it is not a mut’ah, and there is no premeditated time limit to it. One of the women asks whether the shaykh intends to relocate to Britain, or if she is expected to move to Saudi Arabia. They tell her that she will permanently join him in the Arabian kingdom as soon as the necessary immigration processes are completed. They must never let her discover that the Salafi shaykh never intends to stay with her beyond forty-eight hours. If they do, the marriage becomes haram under the Sunni Shari’ah. So, they must absolutely deceive her in order to make the “marriage” lawful!

Luckily, there

p: 127

are four different successful candidates among the women. But, the shaykh cannot marry more than one of them. He already has three wives in Saudi Arabia. Therefore, he has only the option of a single makeshift “wife”, as the women in this innovated “marriage” are counted among the four legitimate wives. As a result, his British hosts devise a plan. He “marries” one of them around 8:00 am. Fortunately, none of them is a virgin in the Shari’i sense, and all of them are financially capable. So, the shaykh has intercourse with her around 9.00 am. Then, he “divorces” her at about 10:00 am. He needs no reason in order to do the divorce, and he owes no one – not even the “divorced wife” – any explanation for it. Then, he “marries” the second “wife”, has sex with her, and “divorces” her too after some hours. Using the same method, he successfully “marries” and sleeps with, and “divorces” all four of the women before he leaves the United Kingdom.

This is al-zawaj bi niyyah al-ṭalaq; and what the shaykh has done is perfectly halal in Sunni fiqh. In fact, he is lawfully allowed to “marry” a qualified woman for just one hour or less, “divorcing” her immediately after enjoying sex with her. He literally has the right to “marry”, sleep with and immediately “divorce” as many women as he wishes on any given day – as long as he does not exceed four wives (in addition to his standard women)

p: 128

at a time, and he is able to flawlessly pull wool over their eyes concerning the true nature of their “marriages”.

The keen observer notices an absolute lack of proof for this Sunni-invented marriage. There is no ayah of the Qur’an to back it, nor any reliable Sunni hadith. Without doubt, it is a blatant bid’ah; and its proponents and practitioners are all, thereby, people of heresy. Moreover, since it is a non-Shari’i union, any sexual contact made within it is indisputably zina.

7. Shi’i Ahadith Misused About Mut’ah

point

We have seen the Ahl al-Sunnah quoting certain ahadith from the Shi’i books in desperate efforts to “prove” mut’ah wrong. We will be examining these riwayat here, with the Grace and Help of Allah. Meanwhile, we strongly advise our brothers and sisters from the Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah and the Shi’ah Imamiyyah: whenever anyone – whether Sunni, Shi’i or otherwise - claims to you that a certain hadith exists in the Shi’i sources, demand adamantly that he must produce (i) its full Arabic text with its chain of narration, (ii) evidence of the reliability of its sanad, (iii) its primary source with the full citation, (iv) a declaration that it does not originate from a ḍa’if source book, (v) a declaration that it does not contradict the Qur’an as interpreted in authentic Shi’i ahadith, and (v) a declaration that it does not contradict superior Shi’i ahadith. When you do this, you have already won 2/3 of the battle to defeat deceit and trickery.

Hadith One

Shaykh al-Ṭusi (d. 460 H)

p: 129

records:

فأما ما رواه محمد بن أحمد بن یحیی عن أبی الجوزا عن الحسین بن علوان عن عمرو بن خالد عن زید بن علی عن آبائه عن علی علیهم السلام قال: حرم رسول الله صلی الله علیه وآله لحوم الحمر الأهلیه ونکاح المتعه.

Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Yahya – Abu al-Jawza – al-Husayn b. ‘Alwan – ‘Amr b. Khalid – Zayd b. ‘Ali – his fathers – ‘Ali, peace be upon them:

The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his family, forbade the meat of domestic donkey and the marriage of mut’ah.(1)

He also documents in his Tahdhib:

واما ما رواه محمد بن یحیی عن أبی جعفر عن أبی الجوزا عن الحسین بن علوان عن عمرو بن خالد عن زید بن علی عن آبائه عن علی علیهم السلام قال: حرم رسول الله صلی الله علیه وآله یوم خیبر لحوم الحمر الأهلیه ونکاح المتعه.

Muhammad b. Yahya – Abu Ja’far – Abu al-Jawza – al-Husayn b. ‘Alwan – ‘Amr b. Khalid – Zayd b. ‘Ali – his fathers – ‘Ali, peace be upon them:

The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his family, forbade the meat of domestic donkey and the marriage of mut’ah on the Day of Khaybar.(2)

Shaykh ‘Ali Al Muhsin comments on it:

هذه الروایه ضعیفه السند بعمرو بن خالد الواسطی، فإنه لم یوثَّق فی کتب الرجال، واختُلف فی مذهبه، فقیل: إنه من أهل السنه .والمشهور أنه من رؤساء الزیدیه، وأغلب روایاته یرویها عن زید بن علی، ومنها هذه الروایه .

ومن جمله رواه هذا الحدیث الحسین بن علوان، وهو سُنِّی المذهب، وعباره النجاشی

p: 130


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, al-Istibṣar (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 3, p. 142, Ch. 92, 5 (511)
2- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 251, Ch. 24, 10 (1085)

فی ترجمته موهمه تحتمل عود التوثیق فیها إلیه أو إلی أخیه الحسن، ولا توثیق آخر له، ولهذا فنحن متوقفون فیه، وإن وثّقه بعض الأعلام، وضعَّفه بعض آخر .

والحاصل أن هذا الحدیث اشتمل علی راوٍ زیدی، وآخر سُنی المذهب، وکلاهما لم یثبت توثیقهما، وما قیل فی توثیقهما لیس محلاً للاعتماد والوثوق.

This report has a ḍa’if chain, due to ‘Amr b. Khalid al-Wasiṭi, for there is no tawthiq (accreditation) for him in the books of al-rijal. There is also dispute about his sect. It is said that he was from the Ahl al-Sunnah. However, the widespread opinion is that he was from the leaders of the Zaydiyyah, and he narrated most of his reports from Zayd b. ‘Ali, including this report.

One of the narrators of this hadith is also al-Hasan b. ‘Alwan, and he was a Sunni by sect. As for the statement of al-Najashi in his tarjamah, it is inconclusive. It is possible that the tawthiq in it refers to him or to his brother, al-Hasan; and there is no other tawthiq for him. For this reason, we stop short about him, even those some of the great ‘ulama call him thiqah while others declare him ḍa’if.

In conclusion, this hadith has a Zaydi reporter, and another who belonged to the Sunni sect; and tawthiq is not established for both of them. As for the tawthiq that is said for them both, it is neither reliable nor trustworthy.(1)

‘Allamah al-Majlisi (d. 1111 H) also declares about the hadith above:

ضعیف أو موثق

Ḍa’if or Muwaththaq.(2)

Apparently,

p: 131


1- ‘Ali Al Muhsin, Lillah wa li al-Haqiqah (2nd edition, 1425 H), vol. 1, p. 209
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 32, 10

the best that the chain of the hadith can be is muwaththaq. However, in line with the Shi’i rijali manhaj, if a muwaththaq-chained hadith contradicts a sahih-chained hadith, the former becomes munkar (rejected) and therefore very ḍa’if. Al-Ṭusi submits:

وأما العداله المراعاه فی ترجیح أحد الخبرین علی الاخر فهو: أن یکون الراوی معتقدا للحق، مستبصرا ثقه فی دینه، متحرجا من الکذب غیر متهم فیما یرویه.

فأما إذا کان مخالفا فی الاعتقاد لأصل المذهب وروی مع ذلک عن الأئمه علیهم السلام نظر فیما یرویه. فان کان هناک من طرق الموثوق بهم ما یخالفه وجب اطراح خبره.

As for the ‘adalah that is required in the preference of one of two reports over another, it is: that the narrator should have the true ‘aqidah, enlightened, trustworthy in his religion, who avoids telling lies, not accused in what he narrates.

But, if he deviates in ‘aqidah from the root of the (Shi’i) sect, and narrates nonetheless from the Imams, peace be upon them, what he narrates is looked at. If there is what contradicts it from the routes of trusted narrators, it becomes obligatory to throw away his report.(1)

As our esteemed reader can clearly see, the report of al-Husayn b. ‘Alwan and ‘Amr b. Khalid above contradicts – not one or two, but – several sahih Shi’i ahadith that explicitly establish the unbroken legitimacy of mut’ah! This makes it severely unreliable, ḍa’if jiddan. Meanwhile, an additional argument against this hadith of al-Husayn and ‘Amr is that it further contradicts the Qur’an – specifically, the Verse of al-Mut’ah

p: 132


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, al-‘Uddah fi Uṣul al-Fiqh (Qum: Muasassat al-Ba’thah; 1st edition, 1417 H) [annotator: Muhammad Riḍa al-Anṣari al-Qummi], vol. 1, pp. 148-149

and several dual-purpose ayahs, which have declared the purity of temporary marriage till the Last Hour. This makes it mawḍu’ (a fabrication) without a doubt. No wonder, after mentioning that the chain of the riwayah of Husayn and ‘Amr is either “ḍa’if or muwaththaq”, al-Majlisi immediately proceeds to proclaim:

الأظهر أنه من مفتریات الزیدیه، کما یظهر من أکثر أخبارهم

The most apparent is that it is from the FABRICATIONS of the Zaydiyyah, as obvious from most of their reports.(1)

So, the hadith is mawḍu’.

Hadith Two

Ahmad b. Muhammad b. ‘Isa al-Ash’ari is also said to have documented:

قال محمد بن أبی عمیر، عن عبد الله بن سنان، قال: سألت أبا عبد الله علیه السلام عن المتعه؟ فقال: لا تدنس نفسک بها

Muhammad b. Abi ‘Umayr – ‘Abd Allah b. Sinan:

I asked Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, about mu’tah. So, he said, “Do not desecrate yourself with it.”(2)

The first problem with this report is that it is from a ḍa’if book. While it is true that Ahmad b. Muhammad b. ‘Isa did write a Nawadir, it has not reached us through authentic means, and there is not enough evidence to establish that what we have today is a true copy of his original book. Rather, ‘Allamah al-Muhsini declares about al-Nawadir as we have it in our hands:

والحق عدم إعتبار أحادیثها المنقوله فی البحار و الوسائل و المستدرک وما یوجد فی النسخه المطبوعه منها

The truth is the UNRELIABILITY of its ahadith which are quoted in al-Bihar, al-Wasail and al-Mustadrak, and whatever is found in the published manuscript

p: 133


1- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 32, 10
2- Abu Ja’far Ahmad b. Muhammad b. ‘Isa al-Ash’ari al-Qummi, Kitab al-Nawadir (Qum: Muasassat al-Imam al-Mahdi; 1st edition, 1408 H), p. 87, 198

from it.(1)

Whoever seeks the detailed arguments about the unreliability of the book’s transmission to al-Majlisi (d. 1111 H), al-Hurr al-‘Amili (d. 1104 H)and to us is strongly referred to the academic research of al-Muhsini on it(2).

Mirza al-Nuri (d. 1320 H) also submits:

وأما ثالثا: فقوله رحمه الله} : ولذا لم ینقل عنه الحر فی الوسائل {فإن فیه أنه من أین علم أن الکتاب کان عنده ولم یعتمد علیه ولذا لم ینقل عنه؟ بل المعلوم المتیقن أنه کغیره من الکتب المعتبره لم یکن عنده، ولو کان لنقل عنه قطعا، فإنه ینقل عن کتب هی دونه بمراتب من جهه المؤلف، أو لعدم ثبوت النسبه إلیه، أو ضعف الطریق إلیه، کفضل الشیعه للصدوق، وتحف العقول، وتفسیر فرات، وإرشاد الدیلمی، ونوادر أحمد بن محمد بن عیسی، والاختصاص للمفید.

And thirdly, as for his statement, may Allah be merciful to him {this is why al-Hurr in al-Wasail did not quote from it}, what is there is: how did he know that the book was with him and he did not rely upon it and so did not quote from it? Rather, what is undoubtably certain is that it, like other authentic books, was not with him. If it had been, he would certainly have quoted from it, because he quoted from books that are inferior to it by degrees in terms of (the unreliability of) the author, or due to the unreliability of its (i.e. the book’s) attribution to him, or the weakness of the chain (of the book) to him, like Faḍl al-Shi’ah of al-Saduq, Tuhaf

p: 134


1- Muhammad Aṣif al-Muhsini, Buhuth fi ‘Ilm al-Rijal (Markaz al-Muṣtafa al-‘Alami li Tarjamah wa al-Nashr), p. 422, 3
2- Ibid, pp. 421-424, 3

al-‘Uqul, Tafsir al-Furat, Irshad of al-Daylami, Nawadir of Ahmad b. Muhammad b. ‘Isa, and al-Ikhtisas of al-Mufid.(1)

He lists al-Nawadir among the ḍa’if books which al-Hurr al-‘Amili relies upon in his Wasail. So, whatever is quoted from it – in al-Bihar, al-Wasail or its published editions – is ḍa’if by default.

Meanwhile, the hadith is equally mawḍu’ on account of its opposition to the Verse of al-Mut’ah and several sahih ahadith.

Hadith Three

Ahmad b. Muhammad b. ‘Isa al-Ash’ari is further said to have recorded:

ابن أبی عمیر، عن هشام بن الحکم، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام، قال: ما تفعلها عندنا إلا الفواجر

Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – Hisham b. al-Hakam – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

None does it, in our view, except the unchaste.(2)

It comes from a ḍa’if book. Therefore, it is ḍa’if. But then, it is also obscure. What exactly is it that is done by the unchaste? It is not mentioned. So, it is not known. However, if it is were a reference to mut’ah, then the hadith would become mawḍu’ due to its contradiction with the Verse of al-Mut’ah and numerous sahih ahadith.

Hadith Four

Shaykh al-Kulayni (d. 329 H) records:

عده من أصحابنا، عن سهل بن زیاد، عن علی بن أسباط، ومحمد بن الحسین جمیعا، عن الحکم بن مسکین، عن عمار قال: قال أبو عبد الله علیه السلام لی ولسلیمان بن خالد: قد حرمت علیکما المتعه من قبلی ما دمتما بالمدینه لأنکما تکثران الدخول علی فأخاف أن تؤخذا، فیقال: هؤلاء أصحاب جعفر.

A number of our companions – Sahl b. Ziyad – ‘Ali b. Asbaṭ

p: 135


1- Mirza Husayn b. Muhammad Taqi al-Nuri al-Ṭabarsi, Khatimah Mustadrak al-Wasail (Qum: Muasassat Al al-Bayt ‘Alaihim al-Salam li Ihya al-Turath; 1st edition, 1415 H), vol. 1, pp. 30-31
2- Abu Ja’far Ahmad b. Muhammad b. ‘Isa al-Ash’ari al-Qummi, Kitab al-Nawadir (Qum: Muasassat al-Imam al-Mahdi; 1st edition, 1408 H), p. 87, 200

AND Muhammad b. al-Husayn – al-Hakam b. Miskin – ‘Ammar:

Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, said to me and Sulayman bl Khalid, “I have made mut’ah (temporary marriage) haram upon you both as long as you are in al-Madinah, because you frequently visit me and I fear that you might be arrested, and it would be said, ‘These are companions of Ja’far.’”(1)

‘Allamah al-Majlisi comments:

ضعیف علی المشهور

Ḍa’if upon the mainstream (standards).(2)

Al-Jawahiri also states about one of its narrators:

سهل بن زیاد: أبو سعید الآدمی، الرازی … ضعیف جزما أو لم تثبت وثاقته

Sahl b. Ziyad, Abu Sa’id al-Adami al-Razi ...: decidedly ḍa’if or his trustworthiness is not established.(3)

About another narrator, he further declares:

الحکم بن مسکین الثقفی : … مجهول

Al-Hakam b. Miskin al-Thaqafi ...: Majhul.(4)

So, it is genuinely ḍa’if.

Those who quote it seek to prove that mut’ah is haram through it. However, it actually establishes the opposite of that! According to the ḍa’if hadith, both ‘Ammar and Sulayman were forbidden to do temporary marriage in Madinah but free to practise it elsewhere. Moreover, the prohibition covered only both of them, and did not extend generally to all Shi’is. Besides, it was done to protect both ‘Ammar and Sulayman from arrest and possible persecution or even execution. The Ahl al-Sunnah had declared mut’ah a form of zina. Therefore, the Sunni government in al-Madinah could arrest the two Shi’is and accuse them of fornication or adultery. They both could be stoned to death, or lashed, depending on their marital status, as a result of their

p: 136


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 467, 10
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 226
3- Muhammad al-Jawahiri, al-Mufid min Mu’jam al-Rijal al-Hadith (Qum: Manshurat Maktabah al-Mahalati; 2nd edition, 1424 H), p. 273, 5630
4- Ibid, p. 191, 3879

mut’ah; and that could soil the name of Imam Ja’far – with whom they were known – among the general Sunni public. From the look of it, in line with the ḍa’if report, the Madinah governorate was stricter against temporary marriage than other Sunni provinces.

In any case, the hadith is ḍa’if. Therefore, it is of no probative value.

Hadith Five

Al-Kulayni documents:

علی بن محمد، عن صالح بن أبی حماد، عن ابن سنان، عن المفضل بن عمر قال: سمعت أبا عبد الله علیه السلام یقول فی المتعه: دعوها أما یستحیی أحدکم أن یری فی موضع العوره فیحمل ذلک علی صالحی إخوانه وأصحابه.

‘Ali b. Muhammad – Salih b. Abi Hammad – Ibn Sinan – al-Mufaḍḍal b. ‘Umar:

I heard Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, saying about mut’ah: “Abandon it. Would any of you be ashamed to be seen at the place of blemish, and that is placed upon his righteous brothers and companions?”(1)

Al-Majlisi says:

ضعیف

Ḍa’if.(2)

Then, he adds:

قوله علیه السلام : ) أن یری فی موضع العوره ( أی یراه الناس فی موضع یعیب من یجدونه فیه ، لکراهتهم للمتعه فیصیر ذلک سببا للضرر علیه وعلی إخوانه

His statement, peace be upon him (to be seen at the place of blemish) meaning, the people see him at a place where whosoever they find there is condemned, due to their abhorrence of mut’ah, hence that becomes a cause of harm to him and to his brothers.(3)

This seems to be a conditional ban imposed to curb the harm which accrues to righteous Shi’is from ignorant Sunnis. Wherever the practice of

p: 137


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 453, 4
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 234
3- Ibid

mut’ah would not put the Shee’ah in danger, then the prohibition would not apply. In any case, the hadith is ḍa’if. Meanwhile, if its texts does question the legitimacy of mut’ah, then it is in contradiction to the Verse of al-Mut’ah, and therefore mawḍu’.

Hadith Six

Al-Kulayni reports:

علی بن إبراهیم، عن أبیه، عن ابن أبی عمیر، عن بعض أصحابنا، عن زراره، عن أبی جعفر علیه السلام قال: قلت له: جعلت فداک الرجل یتزوج المتعه وینقضی شرطها ثم یتزوجها رجل آخر حتی بانت منه ثم یتزوجها الأول حتی بانت منه ثلاثا وتزوجت ثلاثه أزواج یحل للأول أن یتزوجها؟ قال: نعم کم شاء لیس هذه مثل الحره هذه مستأجره وهی بمنزله الإماء.

‘Ali b. Ibrahim – his father – Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – one of our companions – Zurarah:

I said to Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him, “May I be sacrificed for you. The man marries in mut’ah and its term expires. Then, another man marries her until she separates from him. Then, the first (man) re-marries her until she separates from him three times; and she married three husbands. Is it permissible for the first (man) to re-marry her (again)?” He said, “Yes, any number of times he wishes. This one is not like the free woman. This one is rented, and she is of the status of the slave woman.”(1)

Al-Majlisi declares:

حسن وعلیه الأصحاب

Hasan, and upon it are the companions (i.e. the scholars).(2)

However, it is actually mursal and therefore ḍa’if. Al-Majlisi grades it hasan, apparently because he belongs to the camp of Shi’i scholars

p: 138


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 460, 1
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 247

who accept the marasil of Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – as in this case. Our great leader, ‘Allamah al-Khui (d. 1411 H), traces the origin of this practice:

أقول: الأصل فی هذه الدعوی هو الشیخ - قدس سره -، فقد قال فی أواخر بحثه عن خبر الواحد فی کتاب العده …) : ولأجل ذلک سوت الطائفه بین ما یرویه محمد بن أبی عمیر، وصفوان بن یحیی، وأحمد بن محمد بن أبی نصر، وغیرهم من الثقات الذین عرفوا بأنهم لا یروون ولا یرسلون إلا عمن یوثق به، وبین ما أسنده غیرهم(…

I say: The root of this claim was Shaykh, may Allah sanctify his secret, for he had said at the end of his research concerning the solitary report in Kitab al-‘Uddah:

“... It is for this reason that the ṭaifah have equated the reports of Muhammad b. Abi ‘Umayr, Safwan b. Yahya, and other thiqah narrators - whom they know that they did not narrate or do irsal except from those that were trusted - with what others narrated in musnad (fully connected) manners....”(1)

Then, he adds:

فمن المطمأن به أن منشأ هذا الدعوی هو دعوی الکشی الاجماع علی تصحیح ما یصح عن هؤلاء. وقد زعم الشیخ أن منشأ الاجماع هو أن هؤلاء لا یروون إلا عن ثقه، وقد مر قریبا بطلان ذلک.

From what is certain is that the origin of this claim (of Shaykh al-Ṭusi) was the claim of al-Kashi that there was ijma’ (consensus) upon the authentication of whatsoever is authentically transmitted from these people. The Shaykh had claimed that the origin of the

p: 139


1- Abu al-Qasim al-Musawi al-Khui, Mu’jam Rijal al-Hadith wa Tafṣil Ṭabaqat al-Ruwat (5th edition, 1413 H), vol. 1, p. 61

ijma’ was that these people did not narrate except from thiqah narrators, and the fallacy of that has just been mentioned.(1)

So, there was a claim of ijma’ by al-Kashi upon the acceptance of whatsoever Ibn Abi ‘Umayr and a few other people narrated. From this claim of al-Kashi, al-Ṭusi concluded that Ibn Abi ‘Umayr never narrated except from thiqah narrators. His conclusion became accepted among many ‘ulama; and, as such, they accepted all his ahadith indiscriminately, including even where he has not given the name of his source. However, as al-Khui demonstrates, both the ‘ijma itself and the conclusion from it were made in error. He first declares:

ولکن هذه الدعوی باطله

But, this claim (i.e. that they narrated from thiqah narrators only) is fallacious.(2)

Then, with specific reference to Ibn Abi ‘Umayr, he debunks the myth surrounding him:

وهذا ابن أبی عمیر، روی عن علی بن أبی حمزه البطائنی کتابه، ذکره النجاشی والشیخ، وروی محمد بن یعقوب بسند صحیح عن ابن أبی عمیر عن علی بن أبی حمزه وروی بسند صحیح عن ابن أبی عمیر عن الحسین بن أحمد المنقری، والحسین بن أحمد المنقری، ضعفه النجاشی والشیخ. وروی الشیخ بسند صحیح عن ابن أبی عمیر، عن علی بن حدید وعلی ابن حدید ضعفه الشیخ فی موارد من کتابیه وبالغ فی تضعیفه. وتقدمت روایته عن یونس بن ظبیان آنفا. وأما روایته عن المجاهیل غیر المذکورین فی الرجال فکثیره

:And this is Ibn Abi ‘Umayr. He narrated from ‘Ali b. Abi Hamzah al-Baṭaini his book. Al-Najashi and Shaykh mentioned it. Muhammad b. Ya’qub also narrated with

p: 140


1- Ibid
2- Ibid

a sahih chain from Ibn Abi ‘Umayr from ‘Ali b. Abi Hamzah; and he also narrated with a sahih chain from Ibn Abi ‘Umayr from al-Husayn b. Ahmad al-Munqiri, and al-Husayn b. Ahmad al-Munqiri was declared ḍa’if by al-Najashi and Shaykh. Shaykh too narrated with a sahih chain from Ibn Abi ‘Umayr from ‘Ali b. Hadid, and ‘Ali b. Hadid was declared ḍa’if by Shaykh at many places in his two books, and he was extremely emphatic in declaring him ḍa’if. His report from Yunus b. Ẓabyan has been previously mentioned. As for his reports from majhul narrators who are not mentioned in the rijal books, then they are several.(1)

Basically, Ibn Abi ‘Umayr used to narrate from ḍa’if narrators, and even from al-Baṭaini who was a liar! There are sahih chains reaching up to him confirming these crucial facts. As such, the basis for accepting his narrations without question, including his marasil, is defeated by this reality. Worse still, Ibn Abi ‘Umayr himself never claimed that he narrated from reliable narrators only. It was just some ‘ulama who made the apparently erronoeous claim about him. Writing about Ibn Abi ‘Umayr and his colleagues, and the claim that they never narrated except from thiqah narrators, al-Khui further states:

ومن الظاهر أنه لم ینسب إلی أحد هؤلاء إخباره وتصریحه بذلک، ولیس لنا طریق آخر لکشفه

.

From what is apparent is that it is not attributed to any of these people his information or declaration of that, and there is no other way for

p: 141


1- Ibid, vol. 1, p. 64

us to discover it.(1)

The bottomline then is that the marasil of Ibn Abi ‘Umayr are ḍa’if like the other marasil. This is what al-Khui concludes as well:

تقدم عن النجاشی فی أن الأصحاب سکنوا إلی مراسیل ابن أبی عمیر، وذکر مثل ذلک الشیخ فی کتاب العده، ولکنا قد تعرضنا فی المقدمه، إلی أن هذا الکلام لا أساس له، وأنه لا فرق بین مراسیله ومراسیل غیره من الثقات.

We have earlier quoted al-Najashi saying that the companions (i.e. scholars) relied upon the marasil of Ibn Abi ‘Umayr, and Shaykh mentioned the like of that in Kitab al-‘Uddah. However, we have indicated in the Introduction that this statement has no basis, and that there is no difference between his marasil and the marasil of other thiqah narrators.(2)

Therefore, the hadith of Zurarah above is ḍa’if, as it is a mursal report of Ibn Abi ‘Umayr. Those who quote it seek to prove:

(i) the mut’ah wife is “rented” for sex in the marriage; and

(ii) she is like a slave woman.

Well, the comparison of the temporary wife to the slave woman is strictly relative:

(a) a man may have as many slave women with whom he enjoys sexual relations as he wants;

(b) in the same manner, the husband may have mut’ah relationships with as many women as he wants at the same time;

(c) the master of a slave woman needs no wali or witnesses in order to enjoy a concubinage with her;

(d) the husband of a temporary wife needs no wali (except in the case of a virgin)

p: 142


1- Ibid, vol. 1, p. 63
2- Ibid, vol. 15, p. 297, 10043

and no witnesses (except where he voluntarily chooses to have them) in order to formalize the mut’ah with her;

(e) the slave woman exits the concubinage without divorce;

(f) the temporary wife separates from the husband without a divorce.

These are the only areas of similarity between the mut’ah wife and the slave concubine. In everything else, they are different. This hasan or sahih hadith of al-Kulayni, which we have already quoted in full in this book, testifies to this:

لیس فیها وقت ولا عدد إنما هی بمنزله الإماء یتزوج منهن کم شاء وصاحب الأربع نسوه یتزوج منهن ما شاء بغیر ولی ولا شهود فإذا انقضی الاجل بانت منه بغیر طلاق ویعطیها الشئ الیسیر

There is no specific length or any (maximum) number (of the wives) in it. They are only of the status of slave women: he marries any number of them as he wishes, and the husband of four women (also) marries from them whatever he wishes, with no wali or witnesses. When the (agreed) term expires, she separates from him without divorce, and he gives her the small thing.

As for the claim that she is “rented” for sex in the mut’ah, we will have more to say about this. But, first, let us examine the other ahadith which also described her as “rented”. Al-Kulayni gives us the second report, as well:

محمد بن یحیی، عن أحمد بن محمد بن عیسی، عن الحسین بن سعید، ومحمد بن خالد البرقی، عن القاسم بن عروه، عن عبد الحمید، عن محمد بن مسلم، عن أبی جعفر علیه

p: 143

السلام فی المتعه قال: لیست من الأربع لأنها لا تطلق ولا ترث وإنما هی مستأجره.

Muhammad b. Yahya – Ahmad b. Muhammad b. ‘Isa – al-Husayn b. Sa’id AND Muhammad b. Khalid al-Barqi – al-Qasim b. ‘Urwah – ‘Abd al-Hamid – Muhammad b. Muslim:

Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him, said concerning mut’ah: “She is not from the four (permanent wives), because she is not divorced and she does not inherit. She is only a rented woman.”(1)

Al-Majlisi states:

مجهول

Majhul.(2)

And al-Jawahiri declares concerning one of its narrators:

القاسم بن عروه: أبو محمد مولی أبی أیوب الخوزی - مجهول

Al-Qasim b. ‘Urwah, Abu Muhammad, freed slave of Abu Ayyub al-Khawzi: Majhul.(3)

Meanwhile, al-Barqi is equally said to have documented this hadith:

وعنه، عن العباس بن معروف، عن القاسم بن عروه: عن عبد الحمید الطائی، عن محمد بن مسلم، قال: قلت لأبی جعفر علیه السلام : لم لا تورث المرأه عمن یتمتع بها؟ -قال: لأنها مستأجره، وعدتها خمسه وأربعون یوما

And from him – al-‘Abbas b. Ma’ruf – al-Qasim b. ‘Urwah – ‘Abd al-Hamid al-Ṭai – Muhammad b. Muslim:

I said to Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him, “Why does the woman not inherit the one who does mut’ah with her?” He said, “It is because she is a rented woman, and her ‘iddah is forty-five days.”(4)

This is from al-Qasim b. ‘Urwah, the same majhul narrator, and it is therefore also ḍa’if. Besides, Kitab al-Mahasin is also a ḍa’if book, as it has not reached us through authentic means.(5) That compounds the unreliability of the hadith.

And, here is al-Kulayni with the final

p: 144


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 451, 5
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 232
3- Muhammad al-Jawahiri, al-Mufid min Mu’jam al-Rijal al-Hadith (Qum: Manshurat Maktabah al-Mahalati; 2nd edition, 1424 H), p. 464, 9521
4- Abu Ja’far Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Khalid al-Barqi, Kitab al-Mahasin (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah; 1st edition), vol. 2, p. 330, 90
5- See Muhammad Aṣif al-Muhsini, Buhuth fi ‘Ilm al-Rijal (Markaz al-Muṣtafa al-‘Alami li Tarjamah wa al-Nashr), pp. 424-425, 4; Muhammad Aṣif al-Muhsini, Mashra’ah Bihar al-Anwar (Beirut: Muasassat al-‘Arif li al-Maṭbu’at; 2nd edition, 1426 H), vol. 1, p. 14

hadith on this matter:

الحسین بن محمد، عن أحمد بن إسحاق، عن سعدان بن مسلم، عن عبید بن زراره، عن أبیه، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: ذکرت له المتعه أهی من الأربع؟ فقال: تزوج منهن ألفا فإنهن مستأجرات.

Al-Husayn b. Muhammad – Ahmad b. Ishaq – Sa’dan b. Muslim – ‘Ubayd b. Zurarah – his father:

I mentioned mut’ah to him, “Is she from the four?” So, he said, “Marry a thousand of them, for they are rented women.”(1)

And, al-Majlisi submits:

مجهول

Majhul.(2)

This basically establishes that there is NO authentic basis for referring to mut’ah wives as rented women.

But then, let us assume, for the sake of argument, that she is rented. Is it really for sex? There are two possibilities here:

(i) The woman is rented for sex in mut’ah. Therefore, there can be no mut’ah without intercourse.

(ii) The woman is not rented for sex in mut’ah. As such, there can be mut’ah without intercourse.

There is no third way to this. If mut’ah is only a “rental” of the woman for sex, then any mut’ah without sex is no mut’ah. However, as al-Kulayni has reported, mut’ah can be without sex, and still be mut’ah:

محمد بن یحیی، عن أحمد وعبد الله ابنی محمد بن عیسی، عن علی بن الحکم، عن زیاد بن أبی الحلال قال: سمعت أبا عبد الله علیه السلام یقول: لا بأس بأن یتمتع بالبکر ما لم یفض إلیها مخافه کراهیه العیب علی أهلها.

Muhammad b. Yahya – Ahmad and ‘Abd Allah, sons of Muhammad b. ‘Isa – ‘Ali b. al-Hakam – Ziyad

p: 145


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 452, 7
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 233

b. Abi al-Hilal:

I heard Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, saying: “There is no problem in doing mut’ah with the virgin as long as he does not have sex with her, for fear of the disgust of the blemish upon her family.”(1)

Al-Majlisi declares:

صحیح

Sahih.(2)

Even the locus classicus in this matter, the mursal hadith of Ibn Abi ‘Umayr, affirms the same truth. Al-Ṭusi documents:

روی محمد بن یعقوب عن علی بن إبراهیم عن أبیه عن ابن أبی عمیر عن بعض أصحابنا عن زراره عن أبی جعفر علیه السلام قال: قلت له: جعلت فداک تتزوج المتعه وینقضی شرطها ثم یتزوجها رجل آخر حین بانت منه ثم یتزوجها الرجل الأول حین بانت منه ثلاثا وتزوجت ثلاثه أزواج یحل للأول ان یتزوجها؟ قال: نعم کم شاء لیس هذه مثل الحره هذه مستأجره وهی بمنزله الإماء. ومتی تزوج الرجل امرأه متعه وشرطت علیه ان لا یطأها فی فرجها فلیس له إلا ما اشترطت.

Muhammad b. Ya’qub - ‘Ali b. Ibrahim – his father – Ibn Abi ‘Umayr – one of our companions – Zurarah:

I said to Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him, “May I be sacrificed for you. Mut’ah was contracted and its term expires. Then, another man marries her when she separates from him. Then, the first man re-marries her when she separates from him, three times; and she married three husbands. Is it permissible for the first (man) to re-marry her (again)?” He said, “Yes, any number of times he wishes. This one is not like the free woman. This one is rented, and she

p: 146


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 462, 2
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 251

is of the status of the slave woman. And when the man marries a woman in mut’ah, and she imposes a condition upon him that he shall not have sexual intercourse with her, then there is nothing for him except whatever is stipulated as a condition.”(1)

So, then, how exactly is mut’ah a “rental” of the woman for sex?

Hadith Seven

Shaykh al-Ṭusi records:

واما ما رواه أحمد بن محمد عن أبی الحسن عن بعض أصحابنا یرفعه إلی أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: لا تتمتع بالمؤمنه فتذلها.

Ahmad b. Muhammad – Abu al-Hasan – one of our companions – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

Do not do mut’ah with a muminah (believing woman), thereby humiliating her.(2)

Then, al-Ṭusi himself declares:

فهذا الخبر مقطوع الاسناد مرسل

This report has a disconnected chain, mursal.(3)

So, it is ḍa’if; and that basically deals with it.

Hadith Eight

Al-Ṭusi reports:

روی محمد بن أحمد بن یحیی عن أحمد بن محمد عن علی ابن حدید عن جمیل عن زراره قال: سأل عمار وانا عنده عن الرجل یتزوج الفاجره متعه قال: لا بأس وإن کان التزویج الآخر فلیحصن بابه.

Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Yahya – Ahmad b. Muhammad – ‘Ali b. Hadid – Jamil – Zurarah:

‘Ammar asked, while I was with him, about the man who marries the prostitute in mut’ah. He said, “There is no problem. But, if it were the other marriage, then he must fortify his door.”(4)

And, in his Istibsar, he proclaims:

وأما خبر زراره فالطریق إلیه علی بن حدید وهو ضعیف جدا لا یعول علی ما ینفرد بنقله

As for the report of Zurarah, the route to

p: 147


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 270, Ch. 24, 84 (1159)
2- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, al-Istibṣar (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 3, p. 143, Ch. 93, 4 (515)
3- Ibid
4- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 253, Ch. 24, 15 (1090)

him is ‘Ali b. Hadid and he is ḍa’if jiddan. Whatever he alone narrates is not relied upon.(1)

Therefore, the report is ḍa’if jiddan in its sanad.

Al-Majlisi too says about the hadith:

ضعیف

Ḍa’if.(2)

Meanwhile, it also directly contradicts this ayah of the Qur’an:

الزانی لا ینکح إلا زانیه أو مشرکه والزانیه لا ینکحها إلا زان أو مشرک وحرم ذلک علی المؤمنین

The fornicator shall not marry any but a fornicatress or an idolatress; and the fornicatress, none shall marry her but a fornicator or an idolater: and that is made haram for the believers.(3)

On this account alone, the hadith is mawḍu’.

Hadith Nine

Al-Ṭusi documents:

عنه عن سعدان عن علی بن یقطین قال: قلت لأبی الحسن علیه السلام: نساء أهل المدینه قال: فواسق قلت: فأتزوج منهن؟ قال: نعم. ومتی أراد الرجل تزویج المتعه فلیس علیه التفتیش عنها بل یصدقها فی قولها.

From him (i.e. Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Yahya) – Sa’dan – ‘Ali b. Yaqṭin:

I said to Abu al-Hasan, peace be upon him, “The women of al-Madinah.” He said, “Unchaste.” I said, “So, can I marry from them?” He said, “Yes. And when the man intends to contract mut’ah, he does not have to do investigation about her. Rather, he should trust her in her statement.”(4)

Al-Majlisi says:

مجهول

Majhul.(5)

As such, this hadith of ‘Ali b. Yaqṭin is ḍa’if. It also contradicts the Book of Allah, and that makes it mawḍu’.

Hadith Ten

Al-Ṭusi records:

روی محمد بن أحمد بن یحیی عن علی بن السندی عن عثمان بن عیسی عن إسحاق بن عمار عن فضل مولی محمد بن راشد عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: قلت

p: 148


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, al-Istibṣar (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 3, p. 95, Ch. 62, 9 (325)
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 35, 15
3- Qur’an 24:3
4- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 253, Ch. 24, 16 (1091)
5- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 36, 16

انی تزوجت امرأه متعه فوقع فی نفسی أن لها زوجا ففتشت عن ذلک فوجدت لها زوجا قال: ولم فتشت؟!

Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Yahya – ‘Ali b. al-Sindi – ‘Uthman b. ‘Isa – Ishaq b. ‘Ammar – Faḍl, freed slave of Muhammad b. Rashid:

I said, “I married a woman in mut’ah. But, it occurred in my mind that she had a husband. So, I investigated that and discovered that she had a husband.” Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, said, “Why did you investigate?!”(1)

Al-Jawahiri says about one of the narrators:

علی بن السندی: روی ٨٤ روایه، وروی بعنوان علی بن السندی القمی - لم تثبت وثاقته

‘Ali b. al-Sindi: he narrated 84 reports, and he also narrated under the name ‘Ali b. al-Sanadi al-Qummi: his trustworthiness is NOT established.(2)

This makes him majhul and ḍa’if. Al-Jawahiri also states about another narrator:

الفضل مولی محمد بن راشد :مجهول

Al-Faḍl, freed slave of Muhammad b. Rashid: Majhul.(3)

Apparently, the report has a ḍa’if chain. It also contradicts this authentic hadith of al-Kulayni:

محمد بن یحیی، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن ابن محبوب، عن أبان، عن أبی مریم، عن أبی جعفر علیه السلام أنه سئل عن المتعه فقال: إن المتعه الیوم لیس کما کانت قبل الیوم إنهن کن یومئذ یؤمن والیوم لا یؤمن فاسألوا عنهن.

Muhammad b. Yahya – Ahmad b. Muhammad – Ibn Mahbub – Aban – Abu Maryam:

Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him, was asked about mut’ah. So, he said, “Verily, mut’ah today is not as it used to be in the past. They (i.e. the women) used to

p: 149


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 253, Ch. 24, 17 (1092)
2- Muhammad al-Jawahiri, al-Mufid min Mu’jam al-Rijal al-Hadith (Qum: Manshurat Maktabah al-Mahalati; 2nd edition, 1424 H), p. 398, 8183
3- Ibid, p. 458, 9403

be faithful. But, today, they are not faithful. Therefore, investigate about them (i.e. the women).(1)

Al-Majlisi says:

موثق کالصحیح

Muwaththaq ka al-Sahih(2)

Therefore, the man must thoroughly investigate about the woman – including concerning her marital status – before contracting mut’ah with her. Besides, even during their marriage, he must still carry out fresh investigations if he has any suspicions. The Imam, ‘alaihi al-salam, has not placed any time limitations on the obligation to investigate.

Hadith Eleven

Al-Ṭusi reports:

وعنه عن أیوب بن نوح عن مهران بن محمد عن بعض أصحابنا عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: قیل له ان فلانا تزوج امرأه متعه فقیل له ان لها زوجا فسألها فقال أبو عبد الله علیه السلام: ولم سألها؟

And from him (Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Yahya) – Ayyub b. Nuh – Mihran b. Muhammad – one of our companions:

It was said to Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, “So-and-so married a woman in mut’ah. Then, he was informed that she had a husband. Therefore, he asked her.” So, Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, said, “And why did he ask her?”(3)

Al-Jawahiri says about one of the narrators:

مهران بن محمد: مجهول

Mihran b. Muhammad: Majhul.(4)

As such, the hadith is ḍa’if. But, it is also mursal, as our esteemed reader can see. Al-Majlisi too confirms this when he declares concerning it:

مرسل

Mursal.(5)

Therefore, its suffers from compounded unreliability.

Hadith Twelve

Al-Ṭusi documents:

وعنه عن الهیثم بن أبی مسروق النهدی عن أحمد بن محمد بن أبی نصر ومحمد بن الحسن الأشعری عن محمد بن عبد الله الأشعری قال: قلت للرضا علیه السلام: الرجل یتزوج بالمرأه فیقع

p: 150


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 453, 1
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 235
3- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 253, Ch. 24, 18 (1093)
4- Muhammad al-Jawahiri, al-Mufid min Mu’jam al-Rijal al-Hadith (Qum: Manshurat Maktabah al-Mahalati; 2nd edition, 1424 H), p. 632, 12903
5- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 36, 18

فی قلبه أن لها زوجا قال: ما علیه أرأیت لو سألها البینه کان یجد من یشهد ان لیس لها زوج

And from him (i.e. Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Yahya) – al-Haytham b. Abi Masruq al-Hindi – Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Abi Nasr AND Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ash’ari – Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah al-Ash’ari:

I said to al-Riḍa, peace be upon him, “The man marries the woman. Then, it occurs in his mind that she has a husband.” He said, “It is not upon him. Have you seen: if he asks her for proof, there will be someone who will testify that she has no husband?”(1)

Al-Majlisi states about the hadith:

مجهول

Majhul.(2)

Al-Jawahiri also submits about one of the narrators:

محمد بن عبد الله الأشعری: مجهول

Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah al-Ash’ari: Majhul.(3)

Therefore, the hadith is ḍa’if.

Hadith Thirteen

Al-Ṭusi records:

محمد بن أحمد بن یحیی عن العباس بن معروف عن سعدان بن مسلم عن رجل عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: لا بأس بتزویج البکر إذا رضیت من غیر اذن أبویها.

Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Yahya – al-‘Abbas b. Ma’ruf – Sa’dan b. Muslim – a man – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

There is no problem in marrying the virgin when she consents, without the consent of her parents.(4)

Al-Majlisi declares:

مجهول مرسل

Majhul Mursal.(5)

Thus, it is very weak. It equally contradicts this authentic hadith of the same al-Ṭusi:

فاما رواه أحمد بن محمد عن محمد بن إسماعیل عن أبی الحسن ظریف عن ابان عن أبی مریم عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: العذراء التی لها أب لا تتزوج متعه إلا باذن

p: 151


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, pp. 253-254, Ch. 24, 19 (1094)
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 37, 19
3- Muhammad al-Jawahiri, al-Mufid min Mu’jam al-Rijal al-Hadith (Qum: Manshurat Maktabah al-Mahalati; 2nd edition, 1424 H), p. 543, 11077
4- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 254, Ch.24, 20 (1095)
5- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 37, 20

أبیها.

Ahmad b. Muhammad – Muhammad b. Isma’il – Abu al-Hasan Zarif – Aban – Abu Maryam – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

The virgin who has a father cannot be married in mut’ah except with the permission of her father.(1)

Al-Majlisi comments:

موثق کالصحیح

Muwaththaq ka al-Sahih(2)

Al-Ruhani also states:

صحیح

Sahih(3)

That then delivers the fatal blow to it.

Hadith Fourteen

Al-Ṭusi says:

وعنه عن موسی بن عمر بن یزید عن محمد بن سنان عن أبی سعید القماط عمن رواه قال: قلت لأبی عبد الله علیه السلام: جاریه بکر بین أبویها تدعونی إلی نفسها سرا من أبویها أفأفعل ذلک؟ قال: نعم واتق موضع الفرج قال: قلت فان رضیت بذلک؟ قال: وان رضیت بذلک فإنه عار علی الابکار.

And from him from Musa b. ‘Umar b. Yazid – Muhammad b. Sinan – Abu Sa’id al-Qimaṭ – from the one who narrated it:

I said to Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him: “A virgin girl who is still with her parents invites me to herself secretly without the knowledge of her parents. Should I do that?” He said, “Yes, and avoid the place of the vulva.” I said, “So, if she consents to that?” He said, “Even if she consents to that, for it is a shame upon the virgins.”(4)

Al-Majlisi comments:

ضعیف علی المشهور

Ḍa’if ‘ala al-Mashhur.(5)

Al-Jawahiri too states about one of the narrators:

موسی بن عمر بن یزید بن ذبیان: الصیقل - مجهول

Musa b. ‘Umar b. Yazid Dhibyan al-Sayqal: Majhul.(6)

And, about another narrator, Shaykh al-Najashi (d. 450 H) submits:

محمد بن سنان … هو رجل ضعیف جدا لا یعول علیه ولا یلتفت إلی ما تفرد

p: 152


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 254-255, Ch. 24, 24 (1099)
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 39, 24
3- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 21, p. 155
4- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 254, Ch. 24, 21 (1096)
5- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 38, 21
6- Muhammad al-Jawahiri, al-Mufid min Mu’jam al-Rijal al-Hadith (Qum: Manshurat Maktabah al-Mahalati; 2nd edition, 1424 H), p. 628, 12817

به

Muhammad b. Sinan ... he is a man who is ḍa’if jiddan (very weak). He is not relied upon, and no attention is paid to whatever he narrated without corroboration.(1)

As such, the hadith is ḍa’if jiddan. Worse still, it is equally mursal, as its main narrator is unknown.

With that same ḍa’if jiddan chain, al-Tusi proceeds with this further riwayah:

وبهذا الاسناد عن أبی سعید قال: سئل أبو عبد الله علیه السلام عن التمتع من الابکار اللواتی بین الأبوین فقال: لا بأس ولا أقول کما یقول هؤلاء الأقشاب

And with this chain from Abu Sa’id:

Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, was asked about mut’ah with virgins who are still with their parents. So, he said, “There is no problem (with it), and I do not say as these scoundrels say.”(2)

Al-Majlisi says:

ضعیف

Ḍa’if.(3)

We already know of the severe weakness of the sanad, anyway.

Then, al-Ṭusi proceeds to narrate one more hadith through that same chain:

أبو سعید عن الحلبی قال: سألته عن التمتع من البکر إذا کانت بین أبویها بلا اذن أبویها قال: لا بأس ما لم یقتض ما هناک لتعف بذلک.

Abu Sa’id from al-Halabi:

I asked him about mut’ah with the virgin who is still with her parents without the consent of her parents. He said, “There is no problem as long as one does not consummate what is there, so that she could be chaste by that.”(4)

Al-Majlisi declares:

ضعیف علی المشهور

Ḍa’if ‘ala al-Mashhur.(5)

And it is actually ḍa’if jiddan due to Muhammad b. Sinan. Of course, it equally contradicts the sahih hadith of Abu Maryam, quoted above

p: 153


1- Abu al-‘Abbas Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Ahmad b. al-‘Abbas al-Najashi al-Asadi al-Kufi, Fihrist Asma Muṣannafay al-Shi’ah (Qum: Muasassat al-Nashr al-Islami; 5th edition, 1416 H) [annotator: Sayyid Musa al-Shubayri al-Zanjani], p. 328, 888
2- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 254, Ch. 24, 22 (1097)
3- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 39, 22
4- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 254, Ch. 24, 23 (1098)
5- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 39, 23

– a fact that makes its case even more hopeless.

Hadith Fifteen

Al-Tusi records:

الحسن بن محبوب عن إسحاق بن جریر قال: قلت لأبی عبد الله علیه السلام ان عندنا بالکوفه امرأه معروفه بالفجور أیحل ان أتزوجها متعه؟ قال فقال :رفعت رایه؟ قلت: لا لو رفعت رایه اخذها السلطان قال فقال: نعم تزوجها متعه قال: ثم إنه اصغی إلی بعض موالیه فاسر إلیه شیئا، قال: فدخل قلبی من ذلک شئ قال: فلقیت مولاه فقلت له: ای شئ قال لک أبو عبد الله علیه السلام؟ قال: فقال لی: لیس هو شئ تکرهه فقلت: فأخبرنی به قال فقال: إنما قال لی: ولو رفعت رایه ما کان علیه فی تزویجها شئ إنما یخرجها من حرام إلی حلال.

Al-Hasan b. Mahbub – Ishaq b. Jarir:

I said to Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, “With us in Kufah, there is a woman who is famous for prostitution. Is it halal to marry her in mut’ah?” He said, “Did she raise a flag (i.e. openly practises prostitution)?” I said, “No. If she raised a flag, the ruler would arrest her.” So, he said, “Yes. Marry her in mut’ah.” Then, he listened to one of his slaves and confided something to him. As a result, something entered my heart concerning that. Therefore, I met his slave and said to him, “What did Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, say to you?” So, he said to me, “It is not something you dislike.” Then I said, “In that case, inform me of it.” Then he said, “He only said to me:

p: 154

even if she raised a flag, there would not be anything against his marriage of her. He only takes her out of a haram to a halal.”(1)

Al-Majlisi says:

موثق

Muwaththaq.(2)

Al-Ruhani agrees:

موثق

Muwaththaq.(3)

The last part of the hadith is mursal and therefore ḍa’if, as it is narrated to Ishaq by an unnamed, unknown slave. As for the first part, it is muwaththaq.

A muwaththaq hadith is only conditionally authentic, and is inferior to a sahih hadith. This is why, in the case of a conflict between a muwaththaq hadith and a sahih hadith, the former becomes shadh and ḍa’if. Meanwhile, al-Ṭusi himself gives some further information on the muwaththaq hadith:

وأما العداله المراعاه فی ترجیح أحد الخبرین علی الاخر فهو: أن یکون الراوی معتقدا للحق، مستبصرا ثقه فی دینه، متحرجا من الکذب غیر متهم فیما یرویه.

فأما إذا کان مخالفا فی الاعتقاد لأصل المذهب وروی مع ذلک عن الأئمه علیهم السلام نظر فیما یرویه. فان کان هناک من طرق الموثوق بهم ما یخالفه وجب اطراح خبره. وان لم یکن هناک ما یوجب اطراح خبره ویکون هناک ما یوافقه وجب العمل به.

وان لم یکن من الفرقه المحقه خبر یوافق ذلک ولا یخالفه، ولا یعرف لهم قول فیه، وجب أیضا العمل به

As for the ‘adalah that is required in the preference of one of two reports over another, it is: that the narrator should have the true ‘aqidah, enlightened, trustworthy in his religion, who avoids telling lies, not accused in what he narrates.

But, if he deviates in ‘aqidah from the root of the (Shi’i) sect, and narrates nonetheless

p: 155


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 485, Ch. 41, 157 (1949)
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 507, 155
3- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 21, p. 320

from the Imams, peace be upon them, what he narrates is looked at. If there is what contradicts it from the routes of trusted narrators, it becomes obligatory to throw away his report. However, if there is nothing that necessitates throwing away his report, and there is what agrees with it, it becomes obligatory to follow it.

Meanwhile, if there is no report from the saved sect (i.e. Shi’is) which agrees with that, and no report which contradicts it, and no opinion is known from them concerning it, it is equally obligatory to follow it.(1)

In other words, a muwaththaq hadith – which is what a non-Imami Muslim narrates from the Ahl al-Bayt – is authentic only if there is nothing sahih that contradicts it. Al-Ṭusi also adds:

وان کان ما رووه لیس هناک ما یخالفه ولا یعرف من الطائفه العمل بخلافه، وجب أیضا العمل به إذا کان متحرجا فی روایته موثوقا فی أمانته، وان کان مخطئا فی أصل الاعتقاد.

And if there is nothing that contradicts what he narrated, and the ṭaifah (i.e. Shi’is) are not known to have acted contrary to it, it is obligatory to follow it as well, if he is restrained (from telling lies) in his report, trustworthy in his honesty, even if he deviates in the root of ‘aqidah.(2)

So, what saves a muwaththaq hadith is the complete absence of any sahih Shi’i hadith that contradicts it. If there is, the muwaththaq hadith becomes matruk (rejected) and thrown away.

With that in mind, we ask: is there any sahih Shi’i

p: 156


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, al-‘Uddah fi Uṣul al-Fiqh (Qum: Muasassat al-Ba’thah; 1st edition, 1417 H) [annotator: Muhammad Riḍa al-Anṣari al-Qummi], vol. 1, pp. 148-149
2- Ibid, vol. 1, p. 150

hadith which contradicts the muwaththaq hadith of Ishaq b. Jarir above?

First, it directly opposes this ayah of Allah:

الزانی لا ینکح إلا زانیه أو مشرکه والزانیه لا ینکحها إلا زان أو مشرک وحرم ذلک علی المؤمنین

The fornicator shall not marry any but a fornicatress or an idolatress; and the fornicatress, none shall marry her but a fornicator or an idolater: and that is made HARAM for the believers.(1)

This explicitly forbids marriage with fornicators and fornicatresses. The instruction is also general, and the Ahl al-Bayt have applied the verse to both permanent marriage and mut’ah.

It also contradicts this ayah:

الیوم أحل لکم الطیبات وطعام الذین أوتوا الکتاب حل لکم وطعامکم حل لهم والمحصنات من المؤمنات والمحصنات من الذین أوتوا الکتاب من قبلکم إذا آتیتموهن أجورهن محصنین غیر مسافحین ولا متخذی أخدان

Today, the good things are made halal to you; and the food of those who were given the Book is halal for you, and your food is halal for them; and also (halal to you are) the CHASTE ONES from the believing women and the CHASTE ONES from those who were given the Book before you, when you have given them their dowries, taking (them) in marriage, not fornicating (with them), nor taking them as girlfriends.(2)

Only chaste Muslim and Kitabi women are halal for marriage. All others are therefore haram. Of course, there is absolutely no doubt that fornicatresses and prostitutes are NOT chaste women. As such, mut’ah with any unchaste woman – in particular, with a fornicatress or prostitute – is

p: 157


1- Qur’an 24:3
2- Qur’an 5:5

haram in Islam, according to the Book of our Lord.

The third ayah which the muwaththaq hadith of Ishaq b. Jarir contradicts is this:

ومن لم یستطع منکم طولا أن ینکح المحصنات المؤمنات فمن ما ملکت أیمانکم من فتیاتکم المؤمنات والله أعلم بإیمانکم بعضکم من بعض فانکحوهن بإذن أهلهن وآتوهن أجورهن بالمعروف محصنات غیر مسافحات ولا متخذات أخدان

And whoever of you is not able to afford to marry free believing women, let him marry from the believing girls from among those whom your right hands possess, and Allah has full knowledge about your faith. You are one from another. Marry them with the consent of their masters and give them their dowries justly: they being CHASTE, not fornicating, nor taking boyfriends.(1)

So, even a slave girl must be chaste before she can qualify for marriage – whether permanently or in mut’ah. Alhamdulillah, there are hardly any slaves in the world today. Meanwhile, the significance of this verse to our research is in the fact that Allah generally sets lower standards for slaves and higher for free believers(2). Since chastity is strictly required from slave girls before they can qualify for nikah, then the standard is even higher for free Muslimahs! Apparently, the average Muslim woman must indeed be very chaste in order to be suitable for mut’ah.

Thus, what happens to the muwaththaq hadith of Ishaq b. Jarir which opposes these verses? Al-Khui has a clear answer for this:

وقد دلت الأخبار المتواتره علی وجوب عرض الروایات علی الکتاب والسنه وأن ما خالف

p: 158


1- Qur’an 4:25
2- See for instance Qur’an 4:25, 2:178 and 16:75.

الکتاب منها یجب طرحه، وضربه علی الجدار.

The mutawatir reports have proved that it is obligatory to compare reports with the Book and the Sunnah, and that whatsoever contradicts the Book from them must be thrown away and discarded.(1)

Shaykh al-Saduq (d. 381 H) too declares:

وکل حدیث لا یوافق کتاب الله فهو باطل

Every hadith that does not agree with the Book of Allah is a fabrication.(2)

Therefore, the hadith of Ishaq b. Jarir is mawḍu’, a fabrication.

Then, al-Saduq has this hadith too:

روی داود بن سرحان، عن زراره عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام قال: سألته عن قول الله عز وجل: الزانی لا ینکح إلا زانیه أو مشرکه والزانیه لا ینکحها إلا زان أو مشرک " قال: هن نساء مشهورات بالزنا، ورجال مشهورون بالزنا، شهروا بالزنا وعرفوا به، والناس الیوم بتلک المنزله من أقیم علیه حد الزنا أو شهر بالزنا لم ینبغ لاحد أن یناکحه حتی یعرف منه توبه

Dawud b. Sarhan – Zurarah:

I asked Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, about the Statement of Allah, the Almighty {The fornicator shall not marry any but a fornicatress or an idolatress; and the fornicatress, none shall marry her but a fornicator or an idolater}. He said, “They are women who are famous for zina, and men who are famous for zina. They became famous for zina and became known with it; and the people today are of that status. Whoever is judicially punished for zina or is famous for it, it is NOT appropriate for anyone to marry them until repentance is known from them.”(3)

p: 159


1- Abu al-Qasim al-Musawi al-Khui, al-Bayan fi Tafsir al-Qur’an (Beirut: Dar al-Zahra li al-Ṭaba’ah wa al-Nashr wa al-Tawzi’; 4th edition, 1395 H), p. 231
2- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. ‘Ali b. Husayn b. Babuyah al-Qummi, al-I’tiqadat (Dar al-Mufid; 2nd edition, 1414 H) [annotator: ‘Iṣam ‘Abd al-Sayyid], Ch. 1, p. 22
3- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. ‘Ali b. al-Husayn b. Babuyah al-Qummi, Man La Yahduruh al-Faqih (Qum: Manshurat Jama’ah al-Mudarisin fi al-Hawzah al-‘Ilmiyyah; 2nd edition, 1404 H) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 3, pp. 405-406, 4417

The annotator, Prof. ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari, comments:

الطریق صحیح

The chain is sahih.(1)

Al-Ruhani agrees with him:

صحیح

Sahih.(2)

Al-Ṭusi also reports this:

أحمد بن محمد بن عیسی عن أبی المعزا عن الحلبی قال قال: أبو عبد الله علیه السلام لا تتزوج المرأه المعلنه بالزنا ولا تزوج الرجل المعلن بالزنا إلا أن یعرف منهما التوبه.

Ahmad b. Muhammad b. ‘Isa – Abu al-Mua’za – al-Halabi – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

“Do NOT marry the woman who overtly commits zina, and do NOT marry the man who overtly commits zina, EXCEPT when repentance is known from them both.”(3)

Al-Ruhani comments:

صحیح

Sahih.(4)

Al-Kulayni is not left out either:

علی بن إبراهیم، عن محمد بن عیسی، عن یونس، عن محمد بن الفضیل قال:سألت أبا الحسن علیه السلام عن المرأه الحسناء الفاجره هل یجوز للرجل أن یتمتع منها یوما أو أکثر؟ فقال: إذا کانت مشهوره بالزنا فلا یتمتع منها ولا ینکحها.

‘Ali b. Ibrahim – Muhammad b. ‘Isa – Yunus – Muhammad b. al-Fuḍayl:

I asked Abu al-Hasan, peace be upon him, about the beautiful woman who is a prostitute: is it permissible for the man to do mut’ah with her for a day or more?” He said: “If she is famous for zina, then he must NOT do mut’ah with her and also must NOT marry her (permanently).”(5)

Al-Majlisi comments:

موثق

Muwaththaq (Reliable)(6)

Al-Ruhani says:

صحیح

Sahih.(7)

Then, al-Kulayni reports this too:

حمید بن زیاد، عن الحسن بن محمد بن سماعه، عن أحمد بن الحسن المیثمی، عن أبان، عن حکم بن حکیم، عن أبی عبد الله علیه السلام فی قوله عز وجل: والزانیه لا ینکحها إلا زان أو مشرک قال: إنما ذلک فی

p: 160


1- Ibid, vol. 3, p. 406, 4417, footnote 1
2- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 21, p. 319
3- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, al-Istibṣar (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 3, p. 168, Ch. 109, 1 (613)
4- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 21, p. 319
5- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 454, 6
6- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 237
7- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 21, p. 320

الجهر ثم قال: لو أن إنسانا زنی ثم تاب تزوج حیث شاء.

Humayd b. Ziyad – al-Hasan b. Muhammad b. Sama’ah – Ahmad b. al-Hasan al-Maythami – Aban – Hakam b. Hakim – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, concerning His Statement, the Almighty {and the fornicatress, none shall marry her but a fornicator or an idolater}:

“That is only in the publicity (of the fornication)”. Then, he (Abu ‘Abd Allah) said, “If a person commits zina, and then repents, they can marry wherever they wish (in the halal categories).”(1)

Al-Majlisi comments:

موثق

Muwaththaq.(2)

And, of course, we must not forget this hadith of al-Ṭusi:

أحمد بن محمد بن عیسی عن محمد بن إسماعیل بن بزیع قال: سأل رجل الرضا علیه السلام وانا اسمع عن الرجل یتزوج المرأه متعه ویشترط علیها ان لا یطلب ولدها فتأتی بعد ذلک بولد فینکر الولد فشدد فی ذلک وقال یجحد؟ وکیف یجحد اعظاما لذلک؟ قال الرجل فان اتهمها قال: لا ینبغی لک ان تتزوج إلا مأمونه ان الله یقول: الزانی لا ینکح إلا زانیه أو مشرکه والزانیه لا ینکحها إلا زان أو مشرک وحرم ذلک علی المؤمنین

Ahmad b. Muhammad b. ‘Isa – Muhammad b. Isma’il b. Bazi’:

A man asked al-Riḍa, peace be upon him, while I was listening, about the man who marries the woman in mut’ah and he imposes a condition upon her that he will not seek her child. But, she later comes with a child and he severely denies the child. So, he (al-Riḍa) said, “Does he deny? How can he deny primarily because of that?” Then,

p: 161


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 355, 6
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 62

the man said, “What if he accuses her (of fornication)?” He (al-Riḍa) said, “It is not appropriate for you to marry except a faithful woman. Verily, Allah the Almighty says: {The fornicator shall not marry any but a fornicatress or an idolatress; and the fornicatress, none shall marry her but a fornicator or an idolater: and that is made haram for the believers}.(1)

Al-Majlisi states:

صحیح

Sahih.(2)

Al-Ruhani concurs:

صحیح

Sahih.(3)

Meanwhile, al-Kulayni still has more:

علی بن إبراهیم، عن أبیه، عن حماد بن عیسی، عن حریز بن عبد الله، عن محمد ابن مسلم، عن أبی جعفر علیه السلام قال: سألته عن الخبیثه أتزوجها؟ قال: لا.

‘Ali b. Ibrahim – his father – Hammad b. ‘Isa – Hariz b. ‘Abd Allah – Muhammad b. Muslim:

I asked Abu Ja’far, peace be upon him, about the fornicatress, “Can I marry her?” He said, “No.”(4)

Al-Majlisi declares:

حسن

Hasan.(5)

Let us then cap everything with this additional hadith of al-Kulayni:

محمد بن یحیی، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن علی بن الحکم، عن العلاء بن رزین، عن محمد بن مسلم قال: سألت أبا جعفر علیه السلام عن الخبیثه یتزوجها الرجل، قال: لا، وقال: إن کان له أمه وطئها ولا یتخذها أم ولده.

Muhammad b. Yahya – Ahmad b. Muhammad – ‘Ali b. al-Hakam – al-‘Ala b. Zarin – Muhammad b. Muslim:

I asked Abu Ja’far about the fornicatress, “Can the man marry her?” He said, “No.” And he (further) said, “If he has a slave woman, he should have intercourse with her (instead), and he should not take her as the mother of his child.”(6)

And, al-Majlisi states:

صحیح

Sahih.(7)

The bottom-line of all

p: 162


1- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 7, p. 269, Ch. 24, 82 (1157)
2- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H), vol. 12, p. 69, 81
3- Muhammad Ṣadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Ṣadiq (Qum: Muasassat Dar al-Kitab; 3rd edition, 1414 H), vol. 22, p. 43
4- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 353, 1
5- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 56
6- Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari], vol. 5, p. 353, 4
7- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini], vol. 20, p. 57

this is that the hadith of Ishaq b. Jarir fails the full conditions of authenticity. It contradicts the Book of Allah as well as several sahih, muwaththaq and hasan ahadith. As a result, it is mawḍu’¸ thrown out and discarded.

Hadith Sixteen

Shaykh al-Mufid (d. 413 H) records:

وعن الحسن بن جریر قال: سألت أبا عبد الله علیه السلام فی المرأه تزنی علیها أیتمتع بها؟ قال: أرأیت ذلک؟ قلت: لا، ولکنها ترمی به قال: نعم یتمتع بها علی أنک تغادر وتغلق بابک.

Narrated al-Hasan b. Jarir:

I asked Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, about the woman upon whom zina is committed. Can I do mut’ah with her?” He said, “Did you see that?” I said, “No. But, she is accused of it.” He said, “Yes. Do mut’ah with her, upon (the condition) that you leave and lock your door.”(1)

This one is mursal and therefore ḍa’if, as it has no chain of narration. Moreover, its only narrator, al-Hasan b. Jarir, is muhmal (untraceable). Therefore, the hadith is very weak.

Hadith Seventeen

Al-Himyari (d. 300 H), in the book attributed to him, has this hadith:

قال علی بن رئاب: سألت أبا عبد الله علیه السلام عن المرأه الفاجره یتزوجها الرجل المسلم؟ قال :نعم، وما یمنعه؟ إذا فعل فلیحصن بابه مخافه الولد

‘Ali b. Riab said:

I asked Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him, concerning with the prostitute: “Does the Muslim man marry her?” He said, “Yes. And what prevents him? If he does, he must fortify his door, for fear of the child.”(2)

Ayatullah al-Muhsini declares it ḍa’if.(3) In particular, it is

p: 163


1- Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad b. Muhammad b. al-Nu’man al-Ukbari al-Baghdadi, Risalah al-Mut’ah (Beirut: Dar al-Mufid li al-Ṭaba’ah wa al-Nashr wa al-Tawzi’; 2nd edition, 1414 H), p. 12, 29
2- Abu al-‘Abbas ‘Abd Allah b. Ja’far al-Himyari, Qurb al-Isnad (Qum: Muasassat Al al-Bayt ‘Alaihim al-Salam li Ihya al-Turath; 1st edition, 1413 H), p. 166, 609
3- Muhammad Aṣif al-Muhsini, Mashra’ah Bihar al-Anwar (Beirut: Muasassat al-‘Arif li al-Maṭbu’at; 2nd edition, 1426 H), vol. 2, p. 487

from Qurb al-Isnad, a ḍa’if book(1), which has not reached us through any reliable means; and there is also dispute over its exact authorship.

Moreover, the hadith is not about mut’ah specifically. Rather, it addresses marriage generally. Meanwhile, despite that it is intrinsically ḍa’if, it nonetheless also contradicts sahih and muwaththaq reports. This significantly worsens its unreliability. Most importantly, it opposes the Book of Allah, and that makes it mawḍu’.

8. Sunni Athar Misused About Mut’ah

point

There are a few reports in the Sunni books, which some from the Ahl al-Sunnah quote to “prove” that certain Sahabah and Tabi’in later abandoned their positive views of mut’ah. Generally, the views of the Sahabah and others are of zero value in determining the morality and permissibility of anything in Islam.

What matters to a Muslim is only what his Lord says. Of course, Allah has revealed the Verse of al-Mut’ah in His Book, and that ayah is still unabrogated till this very moment. With this fact, nothing else matters to us. Yet, we will look at the reports about the alleged reversal of certain Sahabah and Tabi’in on mut’ah. This is primarily to ensure that history is not distorted.

Athar One

Imam Abu ‘Awanah (d. 316 H) records:

قال یونس قال ابن شهاب وسمعت الربیع بن سبره یحدث عمر بن عبد العزیز،] وأنا جالس [أنه قال :ما مات ابن عباس حتی رجع عن هذا الفتیا

Yusuf – Ibn Shihab:

I heard al-Rabi’ b. Sabrah narrating to ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz [while I was sitting]. He said: “Ibn ‘Abbas did not die until he had

p: 164


1- See Muhammad Aṣif al-Muhsini, Buhuth fi ‘Ilm al-Rijal (Markaz al-Muṣtafa al-‘Alami li Tarjamah wa al-Nashr), pp. 427-428, 6; Muhammad Aṣif al-Muhsini, Mashra’ah Bihar al-Anwar (Beirut: Muasassat al-‘Arif li al-Maṭbu’at; 2nd edition, 1426 H), vol. 1, p. 14 and 405

withdrawn from this fatwa.”(1)

This report is munqati’ (disconnected), and therefore ḍa’if. Al-Rabi’ did not hear from Ibn ‘Abbas, even though they were contemporaries; and he did not give the source of his information either.

No wonder, ‘Allamah al-Albani (d. 1420 H) declares:

وجمله القول: أن ابن عباس رضی الله عنه روی عنه فی المتعه ثلاثه أقوال:

الأول: الإباحه مطلقا.

الثانی: الإباحه عند الضروره.

والآخر: التحریم مطلقا , وهذا مما لم یثبت عنه صراحه , بخلاف القولین الأولین , فهما ثابتان عنه.

The summary is: three opinions are narrated from Ibn ‘Abbas, may Allaah be pleased with him, about mut’ah:

The one: he permitted it unconditionally.

The second: he permitted it in cases of necessity.

The last: he forbade it unconditionally, but this is from what is NOT authentically transmitted from him, unlike the first two opinions which are authentically transmitted from him.(2)

Al-Hafiẓ too is not left out:

وأما ابن عباس فروی عنه أنه أباحها وروی عنه أنه رجع عن ذلک قال ابن بطال روی أهل مکه والیمن عن ابن عباس إباحه المتعه وروی عنه الرجوع بأسانید ضعیفه وإجازه المتعه عنه أصح وهو مذهب الشیعه

As for Ibn ‘Abbas, it is narrated concerning him that he permitted it, and it is also narrated concerning him that he withdrew from that. Ibn Baṭṭal said: The people of Makkah and Yemen narrated that Ibn ‘Abbas permitted mut’ah, and it is (also) narrated concerning him with ḍa’if chains that he withdrew. That he permitted mut’ah (till death) is more authentically transmitted, and it is the madhhab of the Shi’ah.(3)

Ibn ‘Abbas apparently permitted mut’ah till his

p: 165


1- Abu ‘Awanah Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Asfarani, Musnad Abi Awanah (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’rifah; 1st edition, 1419 H) [annotator: Ayman b. ‘Arif al-Dimashqi], vol. 3, p. 23
2- Muhammad Naṣir al-Din al-Albani, Irwa al-Ghalil fi Takhrij Ahadith Manar al-Sabil (Beirut: al-Maktab al-Islami; 2nd edition, 1405 H), vol. 6, p. 319, 1903
3- Shihab al-Din Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Fath al-Bari Sharh Ṣahih al-Bukhari (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’rifah li al-Ṭaba’ah wa al-Nashr; 2nd edition), vol. 9, p. 150

last breath on the earth.

Athar Two

Imam al-Jasas (d. 370 H) submits:

ومما یدل علی رجوعه عن إباحتها ما روی عبد الله بن وهب قال: أخبرنی عمرو بن الحارث أن بکیر بن الأشج حدثه: أن أبا إسحاق مولی بنی هاشم حدثه: أن رجلا سأل ابن عباس فقال: کنت فی سفر ومعی جاریه لی ولی أصحاب فأحللت جاریتی لأصحابی یستمتعون منها؟ فقال: ذاک السفاح، فهذا أیضا یدل علی رجوعه.

From what proves his withdrawal from its permissibility is what ‘Abd Allah b. Wahb narrated: ‘Amr b. al-Harith – Bukayr b. al-Ashja – Abu Ishaq, freed slave of Banu Hashim:

A man asked Ibn ‘Abbas, and said, “I am on a journey, and there is with me a slave-girl belonging to me, and I have companions. So, do I make my slave-girl available to my companions so that they do mut’ah with her?” He said, “That is fornication.”

And this too proves his withdrawal.(1)

Al-Jasas’ conclusion from this athar reveals his deep ignorance about mut’ah. Temporary marriage can be done only with a single man at a time; and after its conclusion, if there was intercourse, the woman observes her obligatory ‘iddah period. What Abu Ishaq was asking about was more like sex slavery or an orgy: the slave girl would be available to his companions generally, and whichever of them wanted sex would just go to her anytime he wanted. What then about the compulsion of ‘iddah which the woman must fulfil after each mut’ah?

Anyway, the riwayah is ḍa’if. This is what al-Hafiẓ (d. 852 H) states about

p: 166


1- Abu Bakr Ahmad b. ‘Ali al-Razi al-Jasas, Ahkam al-Qur’an (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1415 H) [annotator: ‘Abd al-Salam Muhammad ‘Ali Shahin], vol. 2, p. 186

its main narrator:

أبو إسحاق الدوسی مولی بنی هاشم مقبول

Abu Ishaq al-Dawsi, freed slave of Banu Hashim: Maqbul.(1)

Uncorroborated reports of maqbul narrators are ḍa’if; as al-Hafiẓ confirms:

" مقبول " حیث یتابع، وإلا فلین الحدیث

Maqbul (accepted) where he is seconded (i.e. from the same Shaykh). Otherwise, he is weak in hadith.(2)

Of course, this one by Abu Ishaq has no corroboration. As such, it is ḍa’if.

Athar Three

Imam ‘Abd al-Razzaq (d. 211 H) documents:

عبد الرزاق عن ابن عیینه عن إسماعیل عن قیس] عن عبد الله بن مسعود [قال: کنا نغزو مع رسول الله صلی الله علیه وسلم فتطول عزبتنا فقلنا: ألا نختصی یا رسول الله فنهانا، ثم رخص أن نتزوج المرأه إلی أجل بالشئ، ثم نهانا عنها یوم خیبر، وعن لحوم الحمر الانسیه

‘Abd al-Razzaq – Ibn ‘Uyaynah – Isma’il – Qays – [‘Abd Allah b. Mas’ud]:

We were on an expedition with the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, and our celibacy had been prolonged. So, we said, “Should we castrate ourselves?” But, he forbade us. Then, he permitted that we should do nikah (marriage) with the woman for a specified period with something. Then, he forbade us from it on the Day of Khaybar and from the flesh of domestic asses.(3)

However, this same hadith has been recorded by al-Bukhari (d. 256 H) with significant differences:

حدثنا قتیبه بن سعید حدثنا جریر عن إسماعیل عن قیس قال : قال عبد الله کنا نغزو مع رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم ولیس لنا شیء فقلنا ألا نستخصی ؟ فنهانا عن ذلک ثم رخصلنا أن ننکح المرأه

p: 167


1- Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Taqrib al-Tahdhib (Beirut: Dar al-Maktabah al-‘Ilmiyyah; 2nd edition, 1415 H) [annotator: Muṣtafa ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Aṭa], vol. 2, p. 355, 7965
2- Ibid, vol. 1, p. 24
3- Abu Bakr ‘Abd al-Razzaq b. Hamam al-Ṣa’nani, al-Muṣannaf [annotator: Habib al-Rahman al-A’ẓami], vol. 7, p. 506, 14048

بالثوب ثم قرأ علینا } یا أیها الذین أمنوا لا تحرموا طیبات ما أحل الله لکم ولا تعتدوا أن الله لا یحب المعتدین {

Qutaybah b. Sa’id – Jarir – Isma’il – Qays – ‘Abd Allah (b. Mas’ud):

We were on an expedition with the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, and we had nothing with us. So, we said, “Should we castrate ourselves?” But, he forbade us to do that. Then, he permitted us to do nikah (marriage) with the woman, giving her a garment (as the dowry). Then, he recited to us {O you who believe! Do not make haram the good things which Allah has made halal for you; and do not exceed the limits; surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits}.(1)

This version which Jarir transmitted from the same Isma’il mentions no prohibition of mut’ah at Khaybar. Moreover, in it, Ibn Mas’ud quoted Qur’an 5:87 to Qays to defend its permissibility. This apparently took place after the death of the Messenger of Allah, sallallahu ‘alaihi wa alihi.

This is also what yet another narrator transmitted from Isma’il. Imam Ahmad (d. 241 H) records:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثنی أبی ثنا وکیع عن بن أبی خالد عن قیس عن عبد الله قال کنا مع النبی صلی الله علیه و سلم ونحن شباب فقلنا یا رسول الله ألا نستخصی فنهانا ثم رخص لنا فی ان ننکح المرأه بالثوب إلی الأجل ثم قرأ عبد الله { لا تحرموا طیبات ما أحل الله لکم }

‘Abd Allah (b. Ahmad) – my father (Ahmad

p: 168


1- Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad b. Isma’il b. Ibrahim b. Mughirah al-Bukhari al-Ju’fi, al-Jami’ al-Ṣahih al-Mukhtaṣar (Beirut: Dar Ibn Kathir; 3rd edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Dr. Muṣṭafa Dib al-Bagha], vol. 5, p. 1953, 4787

b. Hanbal) – Waki’ – (Isma’il) Ibn Abi Khalid – Qays – ‘Abd Allah:

“We were with the Prophet, peace be upon him, and we were youths. So, we said to the Messenger of Allah, “Should we castrate ourselves?” But, he forbade us (to do that). Then, he permitted us to do nikah (marriage) with the woman for a stipulated period, giving her a garment (as the dowry).” Then, ‘Abd Allah recited, {Do not make haram the good things which Allah has made halal for you} [5:87].(1)

Shaykh al-Arnauṭ comments:

إسناده صحیح علی شرط الشیخین

Its chain is sahih upon the standard of the two Shaykhs(2)

Ahmad reports again:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثنی أبی ثنا محمد بن عبید ثنا إسماعیل عن قیس عن عبد الله قال کنا نغزو مع رسول الله صلی الله علیه و سلم ولیس لنا نساء فقلنا یا رسول الله ألا نستخصی فنهانا عنه ثم رخص لنا بعد فی أن نتزوج المرأه بالثوب إلی أجل ثم قرأ عبد الله { یا أیها الذین آمنوا لا تحرموا طیبات ما أحل الله لکم ولا تعتدوا إن الله لا یحب المعتدین

‘Abd Allah (b. Ahmad) – my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) – Muhammad b. ‘Ubayd – Isma’il – Qays – ‘Abd Allah:

“We were with the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, and we had no women. So, we said to the Messenger of Allah, “Should we castrate ourselves?” But, he forbade us to do it. Then, he permitted us later to do nikah (marriage) with the woman for a stipulated period, giving her a garment (as

p: 169


1- Abu ‘Abd Allah Ahmad b. Hanbal al-Shaybani, Musnad (Cairo: Muasassat Qurṭubah) [annotator: Shu’ayb al-Arnaut], vol. 1, p. 432, 4113
2- Ibid

the dowry).” Then, ‘Abd Allah recited, {Do not make haram the good things which Allah has made halal for you; and do not exceed the limits; surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits } [5:87].(1)

Al-Arnauṭ says:

إسناده صحیح علی شرط الشیخین

Its chain is sahih upon the standard of the two Shaykhs.(2)

We see here that Ibn ‘Uyaynah has fundamentally contradicted three thiqah narrator in his transmission from Isma’il b. Abi Khalid. This makes his report shadh and ḍa’if.

Well, al-Hafiẓ is not going to give up that easily:

وظاهر استشهاد ابن مسعود بهذه الآیه هنا یشعر بأنه کان یری بجواز المتعه فقال القرطبی لعله لم یکن حینئذ بلغه الناسخ ثم بلغه فرجع بعد قلت یؤیده ما ذکره الإسماعیلی أنه وقع فی روایه أبی معاویه عن إسماعیل بن أبی خالد ففعله ثم ترک ذلک قال وفی روایه لابن عیینه عن إسماعیل ثم جاء تحریمها بعد وفی روایه معمر عن إسماعیل ثم نسخ

Apparently, Ibn Mas’ud’s use of this verse here as evidence shows that he considered mut’ah to be permissible. Thus, al-Qurṭubi said, “Maybe news of the abrogation had not reached him at that time. Then, it reached him, and he withdrew.” I (al-Hafiẓ) say: He is supported by what al-Isma’ili (d. 371 H) mentioned that it occurred in the report of Abu Mu’awiyah from Isma’il b. Abi Khalid: “So, he did it. Then, he abandoned that.” He said: And in a report of Ibn ‘Uyaynah from Isma’il: “Then, its prohibition came later.” And in the report of Ma’mar from Isma’il: “Then, it

p: 170


1- Ibid, vol. 1, p. 420, 3986
2- Ibid

was abrogated.”(1)

Even al-Bayhaqi too makes some last-minute efforts:

أخبرنا أبو عمرو الأدیب أنبأ أبو بکر الإسماعیلی فذکر الحدیث بإسناده عن عبد الله بن مسعود فی المتعه قال عقبه وروی أبو معاویه عن إسماعیل بن أبی خالد عن قیس عن عبد الله هذا الحدیث وقال فی آخره ثم ترک ذاک قال وفی حدیث بن المصفی عن بن عیینه عن إسماعیل فی آخره ثم جاء تحریمها بعد وفی حدیث عبد الرزاق عن معمر عن إسماعیل عن قیس بنسخ ذلک یعنی المتعه

Abu ‘Amr al-Adib informed us: Abu Bakr al-Isma’ili (d. 371 H) informed us and he mentioned the hadith with his chain from ‘Abd Allah b. Mas’ud concerning mut’ah. He said at its end: and Abu Mu’awiyah narrated this hadith from Isma’il b. Abi Khalid from Qays from ‘Abd Allah and he said at its end, “Then he abandoned that.” He said, “And in the hadith of al-Musaffa from Ibn ‘Uyaynah from Isma’il. At its end: “Then, its prohibition came later.” And in the hadith of ‘Abd al-Razzaq from Ma’mar from Isma’il from Qays, there is the abrogation of that, that is mut’ah.(2)

The first general problem with these new entries is their lack of clearly defined chains of transmission. With that, it is impossible to investigate their authenticity or make pronouncements on it. Meanwhile, unless their authenticity is known, they remain invalid evidences. Secondly, we see this phrase “So, he did it. Then, he abandoned that” which, obviously, is an interpolation in the unverifiable riwayah of Ibn Mas’ud. He could not have narrated about

p: 171


1- Shihab al-Din Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Fath al-Bari Sharh Ṣahih al-Bukhari (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’rifah li al-Ṭaba’ah wa al-Nashr; 2nd edition), vol. 9, p. 102
2- Abu Bakr Ahmad b. al-Husayn b. ‘Ali b. Musa al-Bayhaqi, Sunan al-Bayhaqi al-Kubra (Makkah al-Mukarramah: Maktabah Dar al-Baz; 1414 H) [annotator: Muhammad ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Aṭa], vol. 7, p. 207, 13958

himself in such a manner. Lastly, the other reports only mention that mut’ah was prohibited or abrogated later, after Ibn Mas’ud had practised it.

But, we know from the more authentic ahadith that he continued to defend the legitimacy, morality and permissibility of mut’ah after the departure of the Messenger. If he had truly narrated about its prohibition or abrogation, why would he do that?! The contradiction of these unverifiable reports against the more authentic athar makes them (i.e. the unverifiable reports) munkar and ḍa’if by default.

Meanwhile, Imam Abu Yusuf al-Ansari (d. 182 H) tables this new hadith as well:

قال حدثنا یوسف عن ابیه عن ابی حنیفه عن حماد عن إبراهیم عن عبدالله بن مسعود رضی الله عنه انه قال شکونا العزوبه فأحلت لنا المتعه ثلاثا قط ثم نسختها آیه النکاح والعده والمیراث

Yusuf – his father – Abu Hanifah – Hammad – Ibrahim – ‘Abd Allah b. Mas’ud, may Allah be pleased with him:

We complained of celibacy. So, mut’ah was made halal for us for three days only. Then, the Verse of al-Nikah, and al-‘Iddah and Inheritance abrogated it.(1)

Concerning Abu Hanifah, Imam Ibn Hibban (d. 354 H), despite his notorious leniency, has this to say:

حدث بمائه وثلاثین حدیثا مسانید ماله حدیث فی الدنیا غیرها أخطأ منها فی مائه وعشرین حدیثا. إما أن یکون أقلب إسناده أو غیر متنه من حیث لا یعلم فلما غلب خطؤه علی صوابه استحق ترک الاحتجاج به فی الاخبار

He narrated 130 full-chained ahadith. He had no other hadith in this world except them. He made mistakes

p: 172


1- Abu Yusuf Ya’qub b. Ibrahim al-Anṣari, al-Athar (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah), p. 151, 698

in 120 of them. He either changed its chain or altered its text, inadvertently. So, since his mistakes were more than his correct transmissions, it is appropriate to forsake taking his reports as hujjah.(1)

As such, he was matruk; and that makes this athar severely weak.

Secondly, Ibrahim in the chain – and he was Ibrahim al-Nakh’ai – was born in 46 H while Ibn Mas’ud died in 32 H. So, the already terribly ḍa’if chain is also munqati’ (disconnected)!

Apart from its general worthlessness, this hadith falsely attributes deep ignorance of mut’ah to Ibn Mas’ud. Whoever forged the riwayah apparently did not know that temporary marriage was a nikah in Islam, and that there was ‘iddah in it, and that there was inheritance in it where both parties agreed on it! Worse still, it is possible to have a valid marriage without inheritance between the two parties – such as one between a Muslim and a non-Muslim. Did the forger know that? Clearly, he did not. In fact, even Ibn Mas’ud himself used to refer to mut’ah as a nikah! Yet, the forger obviously was not aware of that too!

Imam al-Bayhaqi (d. 458 H) then gives us further reports about Ibn Mas’ud:

وعن سفیان قال قال بعض أصحابنا عن الحکم بن عتیبه عن عبد الله بن مسعود قال نسختها العده والطلاق والمیراث قال العدنی یعنی المتعه ورواه الحجاج بن أرطأه عن الحکم عن أصحاب عبد الله عن عبد الله بن مسعود قال المتعه منسوخه نسخها الطلاق والصداق والعده والمیراث

Sufyan – one of our

p: 173


1- Abu Hatim Muhammad b. Hibban b. Ahmad al-Tamimi al-Busti, Kitab al-Majruhin [annotator: Mahmud Ibrahim Zayad], vol. 3, p. 63

companions – al-Hakam b. ‘Utaybah – ‘Abd Allah b. Mas’ud: “It was abrogated by ‘iddah, divorce and inheritance.” Al-‘Adani said: “He meant mut’ah.”

Al-Hajjaj b. Arṭat – al-Hakam – companions of ‘Abd Allah – ‘Abd Allah b. Mas’ud: “Mut’ah was abrogated, and its abrogation was by divorce, dowry, ‘iddah, and inheritance.”(1)

The first one is ḍa’if by default. “One of our companions” in its sanad is unknown. Moreover, al-Hakam b. ‘Utaybah was born in 47 H, while Ibn Mas’ud died in 32 H! So, the chain is equally munqati’.

The second athar is ḍa’if by default, as well.. “Companions of ‘Abd Allah” in its chain are unknown! In addition, this is what al-Hafiẓ submits about al-Hajjaj:

حجاج بن أرطاه الفقیه الکوفی المشهور أخرج له مسلم مقرونا وصفه النسائی وغیره بالتدلیس عن الضعفاء وممن أطلق علیه التدلیس بن المبارک ویحیی بن القطان ویحیی بن معین وأحمد وقال أبو حاتم إذا قال حدثنا فهو صالح ولیس بالقوی

Hajjaj b. Arṭat, the Kufan jurist, well-known. Muslim narrated from him while attaching others with him, and al-Nasai and others qualified him with doing tadlis from ḍa’if narrators. Among those who also described him with tadlis were Ibn al-Mubarak, Yahya b. al-Qaṭṭan, Yahya b. Ma’in and Ahmad. Abu Hatim said, “If he said, ‘he narrated to us’ then he is good. And he is not strong.”(2)

Al-Hafiẓ has placed him in the fourth category of mudalisun. Explaining what that means, he states:

الرابعه :من اتفق علی أنه لا یحتج بشئ من حدیثهم الا بما صرحوا فیه بالسماع لکثره تدلیسهم علی الضعفاء والمجاهیل

p: 174


1- Abu Bakr Ahmad b. al-Husayn b. ‘Ali b. Musa al-Bayhaqi, Sunan al-Bayhaqi al-Kubra (Makkah al-Mukarramah: Maktabah Dar al-Baz; 1414 H) [annotator: Muhammad ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Aṭa], vol. 7, p. 207, 13957
2- Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Muhammad, Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Ta’rif Ahl al-Taqdis bi Maratib al-Mawṣifin bi al-Tadlis (Jordan: Maktabah al-Manar; 1st edition) [annotator: Dr. Aṣim b. ‘Abd Allah al-Qaryuni], p. 49, 118

کبقیه بن الولید

The fourth (category): those about whom there is consensus that they cannot be relied upon as hujjah in anything of their ahadith except what they explicitly declare to have heard, due to the frequency of their tadlis from ḍa’if and majhul narrators, like Baqiyyah b. al-Walid.(1)

With al-Hajjaj being like that, it is very obvious that his riwayah about Ibn Mas’ud above is ḍa’if, as he has narrated it in an ‘an-‘an manner.

Then, ‘Abd al-Razzaq closes this section with this final report on Ibn Mas’ud:

عبد الرزاق عن الثوری عن صاحب له عن الحکم قال: قال ابن مسعود: نسخها الطلاق، والعده، والمیراث.

‘Abd al-Razzaq – al-Thawri – a friend of his – al-Hakam – Ibn Mas’ud:

It was abrogated by divorce, ‘iddah and inheritance.(2)

This one is indeed very easy. The friend of al-Thawri is unknown and al-Hakam did not hear from Ibn Mas’ud. So, it is terribly ḍa’if.

Those who quote these ḍa’if reports seek to establish that Ibn Mas’ud later changed his view about the legitimacy of mut’ah. However, they have no reliable proof. As such, their effort is “dead on arrival”. Meanwhile, according to the tafsir of the Messenger of Allah, as narrated by Ibn Mas’ud (which he also personally adopted), mut’ah is one of the good things mentioned in Qur’an 5:87. So, naturally, to “prove” that mut’ah is abrogated, our opponents must prove that the ayah has been abrogated. Well, no creature can do that, till the Hour!

Athar Four

Imam al-Bayhaqi records:

أخبرنا أبو عبد الله الحافظ أنبأ أبو محمد الحسن بن سلیمان

p: 175


1- Ibid, p. 14
2- Abu Bakr ‘Abd al-Razzaq b. Hamam al-Ṣa’nani, al-Muṣannaf [annotator: Habib al-Rahman al-A’ẓami], vol. 7, p. 505, 14044

الکوفی ببغداد ثنا محمد بن عبد الله الحضرمی ثنا إسماعیل بن إبراهیم ثنا الأشجعی عن بسام الصیرفی قال سألت جعفر بن محمد عن المتعه فوصفتها فقال لی ذلک الزنا

Abu ‘Abd Allah al-Hafiẓ – Abu Muhammad al-Hasan b. Sulayman al-Kufi – Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah al-Haḍrami – Isma’il b. Ibrahim – al-Ashja’i – Bassam al-Sayrafi:

I asked Ja’far b. Muhammad concerning mut’ah, and I described it. So, he said to me, “That is zina.”(1)

This athar does not give the details of what Bassam al-Sayrafi described as mut’ah, which Imam al-Sadiq, alaihi al-salam, allegedly called “zina”. Perhaps, he had (given) a very wrong concept of temporary marriage. Who knows? Anyway, Abu Muhammad al-Hasan b. Sulayman al-Kufi in the sanad is majhul. So, the report is ḍa’if.

Athar Five

Imam Abu ‘Awanah documents:

حدثنا محمد بن إسحاق الصغانی ویحیی بن أبی طالب قالا: ثنا عبد الوهاب بن عطاء قال: أنبا عبد الملک بن جریج، عن عبد العزیز بن عمر، أن الربیع بن سبره، حدثه عن أبیه قال … : إذا کان یوم الترویه قام النبی صلی الله علیه وسلم بین الحجر والرکن فقال: ألا إنی کنت أمرتکم بهذه المتعه، وإن الله قد حرمها إلی یوم القیامه، فمن کان استمتع من امرأه فلا یرجع إلیها، وإن کان بقی من أجله شیء فلا یأخذ منها مما أعطاها شیئا.

قال ابن جریج یومئذ: اشهدوا أنی قد رجعت عنها بعد ثمانیه عشر حدیثاً أروی فیها لا بأس بها.

Muhammad b. Ishaq al-Saghani and Yahya b. Abi Ṭalib – ‘Abd al-Wahhab b. ‘Aṭa – ‘Abd al-Malik b. Jurayj – ‘Abd al-‘Aziz b. ‘Umar – al-Rabi’

p: 176


1- Abu Bakr Ahmad b. al-Husayn b. ‘Ali b. Musa al-Bayhaqi, Sunan al-Bayhaqi al-Kubra (Makkah al-Mukarramah: Maktabah Dar al-Baz; 1414 H) [annotator: Muhammad ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Aṭa], vol. 7, p. 207, 13960

b. Sabrah – his father: ....

On the Day of al-Tarwiyah, the Prophet, peace be upon him, stood between al-Hijr and al-Rukn and said, “I used to ORDER you to perform this mut’ah. However, Allah has (now) made it haram till the Day of al-Qiyamah. Therefore, whosoever is doing mut’ah with any woman, he should not return to her. And even if his period still remains something, he must not take back from her whatever he has given her.”

Ibn Jurayj said on that day, “Testify that I have (now) withdrawn from it after eighteen ahadith that I narrated concerning it that there is no problem with it.”(1)

This athar is often vaunted by our brothers from the Ahl al-Sunnah as evidence that Ibn Jurayj later abandoned mut’ah. However, the most relevant part of it is actually ḍa’if ! Ibn Jurayj had “informed” Wahhab b. ‘Aṭa of the hadith of ‘Abd al-‘Aziz b. ‘Umar. However, the last part of the entire riwayah is different from the main report, and is not part of what Ibn Jurayj “informed” ‘Abd al-Wahhab from ‘Abd al-‘Aziz. Rather, it was ‘Abd al-Wahhab himself who was personally telling his student of what Ibn Jurayj allegedly declared. It is this part that our Sunni brothers present to us; and it is this part that is ḍa’if in its sanad.

Al-Hafiẓ states about ‘Abd al-Wahhab:

عبد الوهاب بن عطاء الخفاف البصری صدوق معروف من طبقه أبی أسامه قال البخاری کان یدلس عن ثور الحمصی وأقوام أحادیث مناکیر

‘Abd al-Wahhab b. ‘Aṭa al-Khaffaf al-Basri: Saduq

p: 177


1- Abu ‘Awanah Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Asfarani, Musnad Abi Awanah (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’rifah; 1st edition, 1419 H) [annotator: Ayman b. ‘Arif al-Dimashqi], vol. 3, p. 31, 4087

(very truthful), well-known, from the ṭabaqah of Abu Usamah. Al-Bukhari said, “He used to do tadlis in ahadith of manakir (repugnancies) from Thawr al-Himsi and several people.”(1)

Interestingly, al-Hafiẓ has put him in the third category of mudalisun. In the Introduction to his book, he has explained what this means:

الثالثه :من أکثر من التدلیس فلم یحتج الأئمه من أحادیثهم الا بما صرحوا فیه بالسماع ومنهم من رد حدیثهم مطلقا ومنهم من قبلهم کأبی الزبیر المکی

The third (category): those who did tadlis A LOT. As a result, the Imams did not take their ahadith as hujjah except that which they explicitly stated to have heard. Among them (i.e. the Imams) were those who rejected their ahadith unconditionally, and among them were those who accepted them, like Abu al-Zubayr al-Makki.(2)

Basically, the above athar is ḍa’if, because ‘Abd al-Wahhab did NOT explicitly state that he “heard” that declaration from Ibn Jurayj. Instead, he only stated: “Ibn Jurayj said”. Of course, both of these statements are different:

(a) I heard Ibn Jurayj saying such-and-such; and

(b) Ibn Jurayj said such-and-such.

In the first one, there is no doubt that the speaker heard Ibn Jurayj. However, in the second, there is no evidence of that. The speaker could simply have heard a third person who claimed that Ibn Jurayj said such-and-such. In these days of ours, we often see Muslim scholars who proclaim on pulpits “the Prophet said such-and-such” and we know that they never heard directly from him. In fact, on several occasions, such ahadith turn out to

p: 178


1- Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Muhammad, Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Ta’rif Ahl al-Taqdis bi Maratib al-Mawṣifin bi al-Tadlis (Jordan: Maktabah al-Manar; 1st edition) [annotator: Dr. Aṣim b. ‘Abd Allah al-Qaryuni], p. 41, 85
2- Ibid, p. 13

be outright fabrications!

Another wonderous aspect of the declaration which ‘Abd al-Wahhab attributed to Ibn Jurayj is his alleged confession that he knew eighteen different ahadith on the permissibility of mut’ah, and yet would disregard them all and turn against them! ‘Abd al-Wahhab would have us believe that Ibn Jurayj was abandoning these eighteen ahadith in favour of this single one he narrated from ‘Abd al-‘Aziz b. ‘Umar?! What do these really people take us for?

Bibliography

1. ‘Abd al-Razzaq b. Hamam al-Sana’ani, Tafsir al-Qur’an (Riyadh: Maktabah al-Rushd; 1st edition, 1410 H) [annotator: Dr. Mustafa Muslim Muhammad]

2. ‘Ali Al Muhsin, Lillah wa li al-Haqiqah (2nd edition, 1425 H)

3. Abu ‘Abd Allah Ahmad b. Hanbal al-Shaybani, Musnad (Cairo: Muasassat Qurṭubah) [annotator: Shu’ayb al-Arnaut]

4. Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah al-Hakim al-Naysaburi, al-Mustadrak ‘ala al-Sahihayn (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-’Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1411 H) [annotator: Mustafa ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Aṭa]

5. Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad b. Hazm al-Andalusi, al-Nasikh wa al-Mansukh fi al-Qur’an al-Karim (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1406 H) [annotator: Dr. ‘Abd al-Ghaffar Sulayman al-Bundari]

6. Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad b. Isma’il b. Ibrahim b. Mughirah al-Bukhari al-Ju’fi, al-Jami’ al-Sahih al-Mukhtasar (Beirut: Dar Ibn Kathir; 3rd edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Dr. Musṭafa Dib al-Bagha]

7. Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad b. Muhammad b. al-Nu’man al-Ukbari al-Baghdadi, Risalah al-Mut’ah (Beirut: Dar al-Mufid li al-Ṭaba’ah wa al-Nashr wa al-Tawzi’; 2nd edition, 1414 H)

8. Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad b. Yazid b. Majah al-Qazwini, al-Sunan (Damascus: Dar al-Risalah al-‘Alamiyyah; 1st edition, 1430 H) [annotators: Shu’ayb al-Arnauṭ, Muhammad Kamil and

p: 179

Ahmad Barhum]

9. Abu ‘Awanah Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Asfarani, Musnad Abi Awanah (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’rifah; 1st edition, 1419 H) [annotator: Ayman b. ‘Arif al-Dimashqi]

10. Abu al-‘Abbas ‘Abd Allah b. Ja’far al-Himyari, Qurb al-Isnad (Qum: Muasassat Al al-Bayt ‘Alaihim al-Salam li Ihya al-Turath; 1st edition, 1413 H)

11. Abu al-‘Abbas Ahmad b. ‘Abd al-Halim b. Taymiyyah al-Harrani, Majmu’ al-Fatawa

12. Abu al-‘Abbas Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Ahmad b. al-‘Abbas al-Najashi al-Asadi al-Kufi, Fihrist Asma Musannafay al-Shi’ah (Qum: Muasassat al-Nashr al-Islami; 5th edition, 1416 H) [annotator: Sayyid Musa al-Shubayri al-Zanjani]

13. Abu al-‘Ala Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-Rahman b. ‘Abd al-Rahim al-Mubarakfuri, Tuhfat al-Ahwazi bi Sharh Jami’ al-Tirmidhi (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1410 H)

14. Abu al-Fida Isma’il b. ‘Umar b. Kathir al-Qurshi al-Dimashqi, Tafsir al-Qur’an al-‘Aẓim (Dar al-Ṭaybah li al-Nashr wa al-Tawzi’; 2nd edition, 1420 H) [annotator: Sami b. Muhammad Salamah]

15. Abu al-Fida Isma’il b. Kathir al-Dimashqi, al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah (Dar Ihya al-Turath al-‘Arabi; 1st edition, 1408 H) [annotator: ‘Ali Shiri]

16. Abu al-Husayn Muslim b. al-Hajjaj al-Qushayri al-Naysaburi, Sahih Muslim (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-‘Arabi) [annotator: Muhammad Fuad ‘Abd al-Baqi]

17. Abu al-Qasim al-Musawi al-Khui, al-Bayan fi Tafsir al-Qur’an (Beirut: Dar al-Zahra li al-Ṭaba’ah wa al-Nashr wa al-Tawzi’; 4th edition, 1395 H)

18. Abu al-Qasim al-Musawi al-Khui, Mu’jam Rijal al-Hadith wa Tafsil Ṭabaqat al-Ruwat (5th edition, 1413 H)

19. Abu Bakr ‘Abd al-Razzaq b. Hamam al-Sa’nani, al-Musannaf [annotator: Habib al-Rahman al-A’ẓami]

20. Abu Bakr Ahmad b. ‘Ali al-Razi al-Jasas, Ahkam al-Qur’an (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1415 H) [annotator: ‘Abd al-Salam Muhammad ‘Ali Shahin]

21. Abu Bakr Ahmad b.

p: 180

al-Husayn b. ‘Ali b. Musa al-Bayhaqi, Sunan al-Bayhaqi al-Kubra (Makkah al-Mukarramah: Maktabah Dar al-Baz; 1414 H) [annotator: Muhammad ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Aṭa]

22. Abu Hatim Muhammad b. Hibban b. Ahmad al-Tamimi al-Busti, Kitab al-Majruhin [annotator: Mahmud Ibrahim Zayad]

23. Abu Hatim Muhammad b. Hibban b. Ahmad b. Hibban b. Mu’adh b. Ma’bad al-Tamimi al-Darimi al-Busti, Sahih Ibn Hibban bi Tartib Ibn Balban (Beirut: Muasassat al-Risalah; 2nd edition, 1414 H) [annotators: Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani and Shu’ayb al-Arnaut]

24. Abu Ja’far Ahmad b. Muhammad b. ‘Isa al-Ash’ari al-Qummi, Kitab al-Nawadir (Qum: Muasassat al-Imam al-Mahdi; 1st edition, 1408 H)

25. Abu Ja’far Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Khalid al-Barqi, Kitab al-Mahasin (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah; 1st edition)

26. Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. ‘Ali b. al-Husayn b. Babuyah al-Qummi, Man La Yahduruh al-Faqih (Qum: Manshurat Jama’ah al-Mudarisin fi al-Hawzah al-‘Ilmiyyah; 2nd edition, 1404 H) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari]

27. Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. ‘Ali b. Husayn b. Babuyah al-Qummi, al-I’tiqadat (Dar al-Mufid; 2nd edition, 1414 H) [annotator: ‘Isam ‘Abd al-Sayyid]

28. Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, al-‘Uddah fi Usul al-Fiqh (Qum: Muasassat al-Ba’thah; 1st edition, 1417 H) [annotator: Muhammad Riḍa al-Ansari al-Qummi]

29. Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, al-Istibsar (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan]

30. Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Ikhtiyar Ma’rifat al-Rijal (Muasassat Al al-Bayt) [annotator: Sayyid Mahdi al-Rajai]

31. Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Ṭusi, Tahdhib al-Ahkam (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Hasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan]

32. Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Jarir b. Yazid b. Kathir b. Ghalib al-Amuli al-Ṭabari, Jami al-Bayan fi Tawil al-Qur’an (Dar al-Fikr;

p: 181

1415 H) [annotator: Sidqi Jamil al-‘Aṭṭar]

33. Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Furu’ min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari]

34. Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulayni al-Razi, al-Usul min al-Kafi (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari]

35. Abu Muhammad ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Darimi, Sunan (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi; 1st edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Husayn Salim Asad]

36. Abu Muhammad ‘Abd Allah b. Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Qudamah, al-Mughni (Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi)

37. Abu Muhammad ‘Ali b. Ahmad b. Sa’id b. Hazm al-Andalusi al-Qurṭubi al-Ẓahiri, al-Muhalla (Dar al-Fikr li al-Ṭaba’ah wa al-Nashr wa al-Tawzi’)

38. Abu Ya’la Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Muthanna al-Mawsili al-Tamimi, Musnad (Damascus: Dar al-Mamun li al-Turath; 1st edition, 1404 H) [annotator: Dr. Husayn Salim Asad]

39. Abu Yusuf Ya’qub b. Ibrahim al-Ansari, al-Athar (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah)

40. Abu Zakariyyah Yahya b. Sharaf al-Nawawi, Sahih Muslim bi Sharh al-Nawawi (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi; 1st edition, 1407 H)

41. Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Taqrib al-Tahdhib (Beirut: Dar al-Maktabah al-‘Ilmiyyah; 2nd edition, 1415 H) [annotator: Mustafa ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Aṭa]

42. Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Muhammad, Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Ta’rif Ahl al-Taqdis bi Maratib al-Mawsifin bi al-Tadlis (Jordan: Maktabah al-Manar; 1st edition) [annotator: Dr. Asim b. ‘Abd Allah al-Qaryuni]

43. Hadi al-Najafi, Mawsu’at Ahadith Ahl al-Bayt (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-‘Arabi; 1st edition, 1423 H)

44. Ja’far al-Subhani, Kulliyat fi ‘Ilm al-Rijal (Qum: Muasassat al-Nashr al-Islami; 3rd edition, 1414 H)

45. Mirza Husayn b. Muhammad Taqi al-Nuri al-Ṭabarsi, Khatimah Mustadrak al-Wasail (Qum: Muasassat Al al-Bayt ‘Alaihim al-Salam

p: 182

li Ihya al-Turath; 1st edition, 1415 H)

46. Muhammad al-Jawahiri, al-Mufid min Mu’jam al-Rijal al-Hadith (Qum: Manshurat Maktabah al-Mahalati; 2nd edition, 1424 H)

47. Muhammad Asif al-Muhsini, Buhuth fi ‘Ilm al-Rijal (Markaz al-Mustafa al-‘Alami li Tarjamah wa al-Nashr)

48. Muhammad Asif al-Muhsini, Mashra’ah Bihar al-Anwar (Beirut: Muasassat al-‘Arif li al-Maṭbu’at; 2nd edition, 1426 H)

49. Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Hurr al-‘Amili, Tafsil Wasail al-Shi’ah ila Tahsil Masail al-Shari’ah (Qum: Muasassat Al al-Bayt ‘Alaihim al-Salam li Ihya al-Turath; 2nd edition, 1414 H)

50. Muhammad b. Idris al-Shafi’i, Kitab Ikhtilaf al-Hadith

51. Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Maladh al-Akhyar fi Fahm Tahdhib al-Akhbar (Qum: Maktabah Ayatullah al-Mar’ashi; 1407 H)

52. Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi, Mir-at al-‘Uqul fi Sharh Akhbar Al al-Rasul (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah) [annotator: Sayyid Muhsin al-Husayni al-Amini]

53. Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani, Irwa al-Ghalil fi Takhrij Ahadith Manar al-Sabil (Beirut: al-Maktab al-Islami; 2nd edition, 1405 H)

54. Muhammad Sadiq al-Husayni al-Ruhani, Fiqh al-Sadiq (3rd edition, 1412 H)

55. Nasir Makarim al-Shirazi, al-Amthal fi Tafsir Kitab Allah al-Munzal

56. Prof. ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari, Dirasat fi ‘Ilm al-Dirayah Talkhis Miqyas al-Hidayah (Jami’at al-Imam al-Sadiq; 1st edition)

57. Prof. Dr. Hikmat b. Bashir b. Yasin, Mawsu’at al-Sahih al-Masbur min al-Tafsir bi al-Mathur (Madinah: Dar al-Mathar li al-Nashr wa al-Tawzi’ wa al-Ṭaba’at; 1st edition, 1420 H)

58. Sayyid Sabiq, Fiqh al-Sunnah (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi; 3rd edition, 1397 H)

59. Shams al-Din Muhammad b. Ahmad b. ‘Uthman al-Dhahabi, Siyar A’lam al-Nubala (Beirut: Muasassat al-Risalah; 4th edition, 1406 H)

60. Shams al-Din Muhammad b. Ahmad b. ‘Uthman al-Dhahabi, Tarikh al-Islam wa Wafiyat al-Mashahir wa al-A’lam (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi; 1st edition, 1407 H)

p: 183

[annotator: Dr. ‘Umar ‘Abd al-Salam Tadmuri]

61. Shihab al-Din Abu al-Faḍl Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Lisan al-Mizan (Beirut: Manshurat Muasassat al-A’lami li al-Maṭbu’at; 2nd edition, 1390 H)

62. Shihab al-Din Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib (Dar al-Fikr; 1st edition, 1404 H)

63. Shihab al-Din Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Fath al-Bari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’rifah li al-Ṭaba’ah wa al-Nashr; 2nd edition)

p: 184

About center

In the name of Allah

هَلْیَسْتَوِیالَّذِینَیَعْلَمُونَوَالَّذِینَلَایَعْلَمُونَ
Are those who know equal to those who do not know?
al-Zumar: 9

Introduction:
Ghaemiyeh Computer Research Institute of Isfahan, from 2007, under the authority of Ayatollah Haj SayyedHasanFaqihImami (God blesses his soul), by sincere and daily efforts of university and seminary elites and sophisticated groups began its activities in religious, cultural and scientific fields.

Manifesto:
Ghaemiyeh Computer Research Institute of Isfahan in order to facilitate and accelerate the accessibility of researchers to the books and tools of research, in the field of Islamic science, and regarding the multiplicity and dispersion of active centers in this field
and numerous and inaccessible sources by a mere scientific intention and far from any kind of social, political, tribal and personal prejudices and currents, based on performing a project in the shape of (management of produced and published works from all Shia centers) tries to provide a rich and free collection of books and research papers for the experts, and helpful contents and discussions for the educated generation and all classes of people interested in reading, with various formats in the cyberspace.
Our Goals are:
-propagating the culture and teachings of Thaqalayn (Quran and Ahlulbayt p.b.u.t)
-encouraging the populace particularly the youth in investigating the religious issues
-replacing useful contents with useless ones in the cellphones, tablets and computers
-providing services for seminary and university researchers
-spreading culture study in the publich
-paving the way for the publications and authors to digitize their works

Policies:
-acting according to the legal licenses
-relationship with similar centers
-avoiding parallel working
-merely presenting scientific contents
-mentioning the sources
It’s obvious that all the responsibilities are due to the author.

Other activities of the institute:
-Publication of books, booklets and other editions
-Holding book reading competitions
-Producing virtual, three dimensional exhibitions, panoramas of religious and tourism places
-Producing animations, computer games and etc.
-Launching the website with this address: www.ghaemiyeh.com
-Fabricatingdramatic and speech works
-Launching the system of answering religious, ethical and doctrinal questions
-Designing systems of accounting, media and mobile, automatic and handy systems, web kiosks
-Holding virtual educational courses for the public
-Holding virtual teacher-training courses
-Producing thousands of research software in three languages (Persian, Arabic and English) which can be performed in computers, tablets and cellphones and available and downloadable with eight international formats: JAVA, ANDROID, EPUB, CHM, PDF, HTML, CHM, GHB on the website
-Also producing four markets named “Ghaemiyeh Book Market” with Android, IOS, WINDOWS PHONE and WINDOWS editions
Appreciation:
We would appreciate the centers, institutes, publications, authors and all honorable friends who contributed their help and data to us to reach the holy goal we follow.

Address of the central office:
Isfahan, Abdorazaq St, Haj Mohammad JafarAbadei Alley, Shahid Mohammad HasanTavakkoly Alley, Number plate 129, first floor
Website: www.ghbook.ir
Email: Info@ghbook.ir
Central office Tel: 03134490125
Tehran Tel: 88318722 ـ 021
Commerce and sale: 09132000109
Users’ affairs: 09132000109

Introduction of the Center – Ghaemiyeh Digital Library