
For the past few months I have delved into every major comparitive fiqh book of the Imams of Islam I could find. I have asked several qualified students and scholars regarding the issue of muta’ah, and it is within this post that I would like to state my conclusionary views on muta’ah by responding to Br Rand Talas’s question(s). He stated (asked):
Assalamu Alaikum
Mashallah, this article really helped, as the AnsweringAnsar website has some disturbing information. However, as mentioned in Ibn Hazm’s Muhalla, muta’ah was allowed in the time of the khilafa of Abu Bakr and Umar, and it was only at the end of Umar’s reign that Umar disallowed it. So why did Umar allow it for some time, and then prohibit it later? The Shia claim that the Prophet had never prohibited it, and that the Sunnis innovated with regards to it by following Umar.

In part one of this study we reviewed the opinions held by some of the Sahaba as well as tabi’in that muta’ah was in fact permitted. The question arises how then can later ijma’ arise that muta’ah is forbidden? What are the proofs for their claims?

Imam Ash-Shawkani states in his Nayl-Al-Awtar:
“Ibn Hazm reported in his Al-Muhalla from a group of the companions other than Ibn ‘Abbas [the permissibility of muta'ah] saying: ‘And it is established that a group of the salaf declared it Halal after Rasulullah. From them are Asmaa’ bint Abi Bakr, Jabir ibn Abdullah, Ibn Mas’ud, Ibn ‘Abbas, Mu’awiyah, Amru ibn Hurayth, Abu Sa’id, Salamah, and the children of Ummayyah ibn Khalaf.