|
Title: Traditionalists misinterpreting Verse 4:24 to justify Mutah Post by: Heba E. Husseyn on September 17, 2017, 01:06:18 pm This falsehood of slandering the Noble Quran by the criminals of mainstream traditionalists is too offensive!
'Mutah' means temporary marriage. We know that some circles of both Sunnis and Shiias adhere to the ugly practice of temporary marriage in their falsified culture. Shiias call it "mutah" while Sunnis refer to it as "misyar" or "urfi." I say, if you so-called Muslims (Sunnis and Shiias) want temporary marriage, you scumbags go ahead and do what you like but at least have the courage to keep it in your own damn name. Why the heck must you buggers use the Noble Quran, tampering with the explanation of Quranic Verses and twisting them around to fulfill your own selfish desires when you know too well that the Quran does NOT endorse nor say anything about temporary marriages. Even the concept of such an act does not exist in the Quran. The particular website from where I'm taking this obnoxious information is apparently run by the Shiias. They are claiming that Verse 4:24 of Surah An-Nissa refers to "mutah" or temporary marriage. Let me quote this Verse and then you tell me who on earth would be blind enough to presume that this Verse is about mutah? "And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that ye seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery. And those of whom ye seek content (by marrying them), give unto them their portions as a duty. And there is no sin for you in what ye do by mutual agreement after the duty (hath been done). Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Wise." (V.4:24). Furthermore, to understand Verse 4:24, you must also read the preceding Verse 4:23, quote: "Forbidden unto you are your mothers, and your daughters, and your sisters, and your father's sisters, and your mother's sisters, and your brother's daughters and your sister's daughters, and your foster-mothers, and your foster-sisters, and your mothers-in-law, and your step-daughters who are under your protection (born) of your women unto whom ye have gone in - but if ye have not gone in unto them, then it is no sin for you (to marry their daughters) - and the wives of your sons who (spring) from your own loins. And (it is forbidden unto you) that ye should have two sisters together, except what hath already happened (of that nature) in the past. Lo! Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful." (V.4:23) While Verse 4:23 gives the list of women who are not permissible for marriage to believers, Verse 4:24 mentions all married women are also forbidden, except those "whom your right hands possess." This refers to slaves or captives taken as slaves in the days before slavery was abolished, a change that was gradual for the stability of the society. (http://muslimvilla.smfforfree.com/index.php?topic=29.0) The manipulative traditionalists have turned it around as 'mutah.' Quoting below a nutshell excerpt from Islamquest (http://www.islamquest.net/en/archive/question/fa915#) which has tirelessly tried to spin and twist Verse 4:24 with much illogical babbling :- "Verse 24 of surah Nisa’ and traditions narrated by the Sahabah (companions of the Prophet [pbuh]) from the Prophet (pbuh) all say that the permissibility of such a marriage was indeed legislated by him. This issue is accepted by all and no one objects to it. Even Sunnis who claim that its permissibility has been nullified, have a great argument over what exactly the nullifier is and when it was nullified. This argument is good evidence that its permissibility wasn’t nullified to begin with. Moreover, a large number of the sahabis and tabe’in (those who didn’t live during the Prophet’s time, but lived during the time of his companions) see mut’ah as permissible and never believed in it being nullified. Of course some have tried to question and deny this fact using weak testimony and reasoning, but all of these questions have been answered clearly." They have not answered anything clearly. Far from that, even though Verse 4:24 is so simple to understand. Any educated and truthful person with a shred of common sense would know that Verse 4:24 refers to PERMANENT marriage NOT temporary marriage. But in the above link those depraved minds falsely claim as Verse 4:24 referring to temporary marriage. I repeat. There is NO such thing as temporary marriage in the Quran. There's just one kind of marriage and that starts with the intention of a permanent bond between a man and a woman, unless the unfortunate couple don't get along and they decide on a divorce any time later. That's a different issue, the rules of which are also thoroughly elucidated in the Quran. Permission of consummating relationships with slave women is NOT mutah. Slave women, at the time when slavery existed, simply belonged to their masters as did all slaves. For that reason the Noble Quran has mentioned at length the importance of kind treatment toward all slaves until you find them of wise judgement, then you can free them. Female slaves had NOTHING to do with mutah. Mutah is a typical LIE from the selfish interpolations of the Hadith institution often touted as "traditions." Related topics: Divorce in the Noble Quran. (http://muslimvilla.smfforfree.com/index.php?topic=2426.0) Triple divorce law - wilful misinterpretation by Shariah. (http://muslimvilla.smfforfree.com/index.php?topic=2436.0) Source of the misinterpreted "triple divorce" law. (http://muslimvilla.smfforfree.com/index.php?topic=2437.0) Marriage to orphans has nothing to do with 'mutah' either. (http://muslimvilla.smfforfree.com/index.php?topic=4643.0) Title: Re: Traditionalists misinterpreting Verse 4:24 to justify Mutah Post by: N. Truth Seeker on September 17, 2017, 01:29:15 pm This is much too disgusting. I wouldn't know the country-origin of that website, Islamquest, but it's definitely a Shiia-run outlet. As I've always maintained, such Shiias can be no less deplorable than those wahabis. Shiias with similar mindsets have also tried to distort the commentary of some Quranic Verses to claim that Azar was not Prophet Ibrahim's father .. when it has been plainly and clearly confirmed in the Quran that he was.
Some people seem to have no fear of Allah in their hearts whatsoever. You're right Sister Heba. The least they can do is to keep violations in their own name. They won't even do that, and have the audacity to use the Quran as leverage to benefit their manipulation. How low can the human mind fall? Another related topic: Refuting the Shiia claim that Azar was not Prophet Abraham's father (http://muslimvilla.smfforfree.com/index.php?topic=4609.0) This is another very informative piece by Sister Heba. Must read. Title: Re: Traditionalists misinterpreting Verse 4:24 to justify Mutah Post by: Ruhi_Rose on September 21, 2017, 07:07:11 pm Shocking mutah manipulation. These despicable critters are playing with the Noble Quran as if it's a toy. Taubah. Such people deserve neither guidance nor forgiveness.
Also read the post of Prophet Ibrahim's father. I missed it earlier. Indeed an eye-opener about the intentions of people. I didn't know these folks could go that far, though I did know nothing can be put past them. What exactly is their motive by claiming Azar was not Prophet's Ibrahim's father? Title: Re: Traditionalists misinterpreting Verse 4:24 to justify Mutah Post by: N. Truth Seeker on September 21, 2017, 07:08:16 pm The motive is to highlight their fantasy on infallibility, that all family members of all Prophets are infallible, whereas no human being can be infallible. Even various Prophets made little mistakes once in a while as highlighted in the Quran.
Title: Re: Traditionalists misinterpreting Verse 4:24 to justify Mutah Post by: Ruhi_Rose on September 21, 2017, 07:09:07 pm I see .... |