Is Muta (Temporary
Marriage) Allowed in Islaam?
By:
Shahid Bin Waheed شاهد
بن وحيد
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
الحمدلله رب العالمين والصلوة والسلام على اشرف الانبياء
وسيدالمرسلين نبينا محمد صل ا لله عليه وعلى آله واصحابه وازواجه اجمعين - امابعد
All the praises and thanks be to Allaah, Sustainer of the Universe, and blessing and salutation to be the most distinguish of the Messengers and foremost among the Prophets, our Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allaah be on him and on his wives, children and Companions.
In this treatise we will inSha
Allaah discuss the topic of Muta متع, while
examining Ayaah 4:24 of the Qur’aan that is often misquoted and/or exploited by
a certain sect claiming to be Muslim. Ayaah 4:24 of the Glorious Qur'aan says:
وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاء إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ كِتَابَ
اللّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ وَأُحِلَّ لَكُم مَّا وَرَاء ذَلِكُمْ أَن تَبْتَغُواْ بِأَمْوَالِكُم
مُّحْصِنِينَ غَيْرَ مُسَافِحِينَ فَمَا اسْتَمْتَعْتُم بِهِ مِنْهُنَّ فَآتُوهُنَّ
أُجُورَهُنَّ فَرِيضَةً وَلاَ جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ فِيمَا تَرَاضَيْتُم بِهِ مِن بَعْدِ
الْفَرِيضَةِ إِنَّ اللّهَ كَانَ عَلِيماً حَكِيماً
Also (forbidden are) women
already married, except those (captives and slaves) whom your right hands
possess. Thus has Allah ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you
seek (them in marriage) with Mahr (bridal money given by the husband to his
wife at the time of marriage) from your property, desiring chastity, not
committing illegal sexual intercourse, so with those of whom you have enjoyed
sexual relations, give them their Mahr as prescribed; but if after a Mahr is
prescribed, you agree mutually (to give more), there is no sin on you. Surely,
Allah is Ever All-Knowing, AllWise.
Muta متع Istamta استمتاع are derived from mata
This word is explained in
Lisanal-Arab, quoting "Zajjaj" as saying about the Ayah 4:24,
"This is an Ayaah while interpreting of which some people have committed a
great blunder owing to their ignorance of Arabic. They have inferred from it
the legality of Muta (temporary marriage, which is unlawful in Islam). The
Arabic idiom does not countenance this use of Istamta استمتاع with regard to a woman in the sense of temporary
connection. Tamata' bil mar'ati means he benefited by a woman
temporarily, but Istamta bikadha means he benefited by her for a
long time."
It must also be noted that
whenever the noun "tamattu" is used to denote temporary
connection, it is followed by the proposition "ba" put
before the word standing for woman as in the above example, but in the
expression (4:24) the pronoun is preceded by the proposition 'min.'
This clearly proves that the proponents of Muta متع are plain ignorant of Qur’aanic Arabic and Islaamic Shariah as well. The root cause of their distortion and disinformation is their ulterior motives and their misguided belief.
The advocates of Muta while using their far fetched imagination and interpretation conveniently forget to observe the very phrase used in the Ayaah 4:24, which by all accounts impeach them for their perjury. Let me quote again the Ayaah 4:24 and highlight the phrase in read text.
Surah An-Nisaa 24
وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ
إِلَّا مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ كِتَابَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ وَأُحِلَّ لَكُمْ مَا
وَرَاءَ ذَلِكُمْ أَنْ تَبْتَغُوا بِأَمْوَالِكُمْ مُحْصِنِينَ غَيْرَ مُسَافِحِينَ فَمَا اسْتَمْتَعْتُمْ
بِهِ مِنْهُنَّ فَآتُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُنَّ فَرِيضَةً وَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ فِيمَا
تَرَاضَيْتُمْ بِهِ مِنْ بَعْدِ الْفَرِيضَةِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ عَلِيمًا حَكِيمًا
Also (prohibited are) women
already married, except those whom your right hands possess: thus hath Allah
ordained (prohibitions) against you: except for these, all others are lawful,
provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property, binding yourself in marriage, and not only for lust.
Seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as
prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, ye agree mutually (to vary
it), there is no blame on you, and Allah is All-Knowing All-Wise.
Thus, the Qur’aanic phrase and/or
words مُحْصِنِينَ
غَيْرَ مُسَافِحِينَ binding
yourself in marriage, and not only for lust is/are more than enough to rule
out the possibility of Muta being meant in the Ayaah 4:24. Those who
like to claim that Ibn Abbas رضی الله عنه believed in the lawfulness of Muta
would be shocked to read the following two Ahadeeth by Imam al-Tirmidhi, who
has devoted a chapter to “Muta.”
حَدَّثَنَا مَحْمُودُ
بْنُ غَيْلَانَ حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ بْنُ عُقْبَةَ أَخُو قَبِيصَةَ بْنِ عُقْبَةَ
حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ الثَّوْرِيُّ عَنْ مُوسَى بْنِ عُبَيْدَةَ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ
بْنِ كَعْبٍ عَنْ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ قَالَ إِنَّمَا كَانَتْ الْمُتْعَةُ فِي أَوَّلِ
الْإِسْلَامِ كَانَ الرَّجُلُ يَقْدَمُ الْبَلْدَةَ لَيْسَ لَهُ بِهَا مَعْرِفَةٌ
فَيَتَزَوَّجُ الْمَرْأَةَ بِقَدْرِ مَا يَرَى أَنَّهُ يُقِيمُ فَتَحْفَظُ لَهُ
مَتَاعَهُ وَتُصْلِحُ لَهُ شَيْئَهُ حَتَّى إِذَا نَزَلَتْ الْآيَةُ إِلَّا عَلَى
أَزْوَاجِهِمْ أَوْ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُهُمْ قَالَ ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ فَكُلُّ
فَرْجٍ سِوَى هَذَيْنِ فَهُوَ حَرَامٌ
Ibn Abbas رضی الله عنه says: Muta
was there only in the early period only in the early period of Islaam until the
Ayaah إِلَّا عَلَى أَزْوَاجِهِمْ أوْ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُهُمْ (23:6) was revealed. Then, he said:
All private parts other than these are unlawful (that is other than those of
the legally wedded wife and the bondwoman one may come to have).
عن علی بن أبی طالب أن النبی صلی الله عليه وسلم نهی عن متعة النساء وعن لحوم الحمرا لأهيلة زمن خيبر
Ali ibn Abi Talib
رضی الله عنه reports that the Prophet Muhammad صلی الله عليه وسلم on
the occasion of the battle of Khyber prohibited Muta with women and from
(eating) the meat of domestic donkeys.
The above Hadeeth
also appears in Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim.
Strangely enough Shia believes in
the lawfulness of Muta, but despite of their so-called claim of love and
obeying Ali رضی الله عنه they elects to oppose and/or disregard no less a
person than him (Ali رضی الله عنه) on the issue of Muta.
وَالَّذِينَ هُمْ لِفُرُوجِهِمْ حَافِظُون إِلَّا عَلَى أَزْوَاجِهِمْ أوْ
مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُهُمْ فَإِنَّهُمْ غَيْرُ مَلُومِينَ َ
(And those who
guard their private parts, save from their wives or from their bondwomen, then,
they are not blameworthy).
Admittedly the Ayaat 23:5-6 are so explicit that it admits of no other interpretation. It shows the unlawfulness of Muta very clearly. In conclusion, seeking wispy support from some rare and unauthentic readings is absolutely absurd. Nevertheless, above facts proves that Muta is not allowed in Islaam.
Friday, July 22, 2005