quote:

---

Originally posted by Humanized:
Hi medosa

i've read your posts in "Orfi" thread.
and i'd like to tell you that "Mutaa" is not accepted by any of the 4 known Madhab.
and most of the articles you will find online , belong to Shiiti Madhab only.
i'm not an islamic shcolar , so i prefer if you really need to know the truth about "Mutaa" to ask a sunni Scholar - and an egyptian lawyer about the Orfi contract.

because your posts are somehow lost between your own opinions and sunni islamic-facts.

God knows best.

---

Hi
Thanks for your comment.

I am well aware that Mutaa has been (dis-allowed) by followers of the 4 Imams, while not so by the Sheiites.

That is why it is not commen in Egypt (while Orfi is ), but common in, as I mentioned before Iraq,Syria...etc.

The fact is that it is a form of Islamic marriage that has been practiced by Muslims including Muhamed himself, since the dawn of Islam, long before the different Mazahibs came to be.

Whether it was forbidden later or not is a matter for debate, and that is where the differences between Mazahibs is, not the fact that it was Halal in Muhameds days!.

You said my posts are somewhat lost between my openions and Sunni Islamic facts. (I do not care which Mazhab rules in which direction, facts are facts, while interpretations are openions !).

I do not think I am lost anywhere.In fact I think those who are lost are the Islamic scholars who are reaching to make those less acceptable aspects of Islam more palatable.

But since you said that, and did not tell me what it is that led you to this conclusion, or how is it that I am lost, I cannot give you a reasoned answer.

If you think any of my statements are not factual, then piont it out and I would respond, ( I do not care if one Mazhab forbids something others do not, as this is not a relative study of Mazahib).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Medosa:
( I do not care if one Mazhab forbids something others do not, as this is not a relative study of Mazahib).

---

i do respect your opinion - but Muslims do not follow personal opinions.

simply you can talk about your opinion or personal experience , but you can't generalize.because your entire concept and your point of view is so far from Figh.

otherwise , if you are talking about Marriage
then you have to give authenticated Hadith - and explain Quranic verses.
which as you said :"this is not a relative study of Mazahib"

quote:

---

Originally posted by Medosa:

You said my posts are somewhat lost between my openions and Sunni Islamic facts. (I do not care which Mazhab rules in which direction, facts are facts, while interpretations are openions !).

---

with all my respect Medosa , we can cut it short , why dont you issue a Fatwa right now about (legal , halal ,orfi ,mutta ,maysir) marriage.
and call it Medosa Fatwa [ im serious and not sarcastic]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Humanized:

sorry - but where do you get your information from Medosa?

did you read about "zawag Albekr - in Hanbali Madhab?
=============================================
1: El-Bekr, not every bride is Bekr for a start.
2: Hanbali is well known to be the most extreme, and strict of all Mazahib, enough said!
=============================================
[b]
In fact the Wali, sometimes in this connection is referred to, or rather substituted by a Wakeel, a word which means an Agent, or some one who acts on the brides behalf.

too many flaws - but you can state and talk about the specific conditions that could lead to such a wakeel or agent - instead of using it a generalization.
=============================================
What is the point of long discussions about specifics , that has nothing to do with the poit being made, which is a woman can be married perfectly correctly without Wali, or Wakeel. That is all , any more details would be showing off.
=============================================

Because in Islam a man can marry a child, (Muhamed married Aisha when she was 6 years old), a parent or guardian was needed, hence the need for a Wali.

wasnt her father Abu-Baker RAA - her wakeel?
=============================================
Of course he did, and that is exactly my point, which is that the need for Wali, or Wakeel happened because children could not understand nor could they give a valid consent.
=============================================

However once a woman is of age, she can marry using a Wakeel, that she nominates, or none at all, see later.

Of course although most countries outlaw the marriage of women below certain age (usually 16, but 14 and 18 in some cases), it REMAINS HALAL IN ISLAM TO MARRY A CHILD !!. And IT IS PRACTICED OPENLY IN SOME COUNTRIES AND THROUGH FORGERY OF BIRTH CETIFICATES ETC…in others.

But back to our point the bride, as I said, can nominate a Wakeel, or if she chose can be HER OWN WAKEEL , silly but true. All she has to say when the Ma’zoon (marriage religious registrar), asks her whom had you appointed as your Wakeel? She answers “myself”.

So an official marriage, is correct and halal without a Wali, or Wakeel. This is the accepted form of marriage today among the more emancipated Muslim women.

Therefore the argument that a Wali is essential for the Orfi marriage, is very week since a Wali is not always needed even for official marriage.

One can only conclude that Islamic scholars, finding themselves unable to rule that Orfi is haram in any shape(as they tried unsuccessfuly with Mutaa). They try to inhibit at least its secret variant, by ruling that the woman should have the Wali as well as the witnesses.

too many assumptions!!

poeple should follow the rules by Islam and law , but when they twist the rules, you cant blame it on Islam nor the law.
and ofc you cant claim that Islam gave them a straight order to go against its rules!! it doesnt make any sense.[/B]

---

============================================

I think you are the one who is lost here.

When the rules are clear and not contradictory, people can follow them .

But when the rules are not only interpreted differently, by different Mazahib, or even scholars, but also stated then repealed, and re-instated, then repealed again!, and one rule cancels another (naskh), what do you expect?

The problem is that Islam has not given a straight order here , using you phrase.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Medosa:
1: El-Bekr, not every bride is Bekr for a start.
2: Hanbali is well known to be the most extreme, and strict of all Mazahib, enough said!

---

not every bride is a Bekr - then why you considered the Walee of a Thayieb is the general rule?

Hanbali - you mean he was wrong? or not accepted? or his Mazhab is a 100% extreme?

I'm afraid im not lost. as i said , you can believe what ever you want and no one can go against you. but at least start your post with IMHO or IMO....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Humanized:
i do respect your opinion - but Muslims do not follow personal opinions.

simply you can talk about your opinion or personal experience , but you can't generalize.because your entire concept and your point of view is so far from Figh.

otherwise , if you are talking about Marriage
then you have to give authenticated Hadith - and explain Quranic verses.
which as you said :"this is not a relative study of Mazahib"

---

I am not interested in Fiqh, nor was I giving openions, only facts and what goes on the ground.

If you think anything I said is not true, point it out, and i will give you references for it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Medosa:
I am not interested in Fiqh, nor was I giving openions, only facts and what goes on the ground.

---

np , facts and what is going on the ground - doesnt prove the failure of mazaheb nor islamic scholars. and has nothing to do with the legality of Orfi or not .

quote:

---

Originally posted by Humanized:
with all my respect Medosa , we can cut it short , why dont you issue a Fatwa right now about (legal , halal ,orfi ,mutta ,maysir) marriage.
and call it Medosa Fatwa [ im serious and not sarcastic]

then we can have X Fatwa , Y Fatwa ,Z Fatwa.....and Nth Fatwa , as long as we dont care about the 4 Mazaheb......and that Facts are Facts to everyone..so logic and common sense will lead our way just fine !!!

---

What made you think I was giving or interested in Fatwas?

And yes, facts are facts.

There is nothing wrong in logic and common sense leading our way, it is at least better than a never ending stream of contradicting dos and dont's.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Medosa:

What made you think I was giving or interested in Fatwas?

And yes, facts are facts.

There is nothing wrong in logic and common sense leading our way, it is at least better than a never ending stream of contradicting dos and dont's.

END OF TALK>>>>>>>>>>>

---

there is nothing wrong in logic /common sense.
but first we learn and get knowledge /awareness. And i assure you medosa that we will never find a contradiction between Dos and Donts.