The most acceptable form of marriage connects a man and a woman together as husband and wife. Most of such marriages are intimate, sexual, and generally produces biological or adopted offspring. For the most part these marriages are monogamous in nature. Other forms of marriage include levirate and sororate; and the matriolocal and patrilocal living arrangements. The levirate decrees a dead man’s brother to be the widow’s partner. In a period long gone where such practice was in place, it served to “perpetuate the line of a man who died childless. Often, the brother who marries his sister-in-law is a proxy for the deceased and no new marriage is contracted, since all progeny are acknowledged as the seed of the dead man.”

There are four fundamental practices of marriage: monogamy; polygamy or polygyny; polyandry; and (4) group marriage i.e., several husbands having several wives lodging in a common commune. Of all the aforesaid, monogamy is the ubiquitous and readily acceptable practice in the western world. In the traditional or agrarian societies however, polygamy is the norm. “Very few societies have polyandrous marriages: one wife having numerous husbands at the same time. Such marriages occur only in a few cultures -- probably no more than a dozen -- and often take the form of fraternal polyandry, that is, when the husbands are brothers. The cause of such an arrangement is unclear but may be related to the need to keep scarce resources such as small parcels of land inherited by the brothers under the control of a single household.”

Over all, marriage as an institution differs in structure, function, and meaning from one culture to another. Within the Islamic culture and religion, there is the Mut’a which, according to Shahnaz Khan, is a “system of temporary marriage which is rooted in pre-Islamic Arabia . Outlawed for Muslims by the Calipha Omar in the seventh century A.D., mut’a marriage is now only practiced by Shi’a Muslims who live predominantly but not exclusively in Iran . A mut’a marriage may be based on either an oral or written contract between a man and woman. In this form of marriage, each individual contract determines how long the parties will remain married, which could range from one hour to 99 years. The religious and cultural purpose of mut’a marriage is sexual enjoyment for men and financial return for women. However, the exchange of money makes mut’a comparable to prostitution.”

According to Sachiko Murata -- from whom I have generously quoted -- “In Islam marriage is legalized by a contract ('aqd), which, like all other contracts in Islam, consists of a declaration (ijab) and an acceptance (qabul). The woman declares that she is entering into a relationship of marriage with the man, and he accepts her as his wife. However, a man and woman may be forbidden from marrying for several reasons, including but not limited to blood relationship (qaraba); relationship by marriage (musahara); foster relationships because of suckling (rida'); and religious difference.

“The Mut’a has four pillars: (1) The Formula: since it is a contract, mut'a requires a declaration and an acceptance. As in permanent marriage, the declaration is the prerequisite of the woman, (2) The Persons: a man can conclude a contract of mut'a only with a Muslim. It is not permissible to engage in temporary marriage with an unbeliever; (3) The Time Period: the time period of a temporary marriage must be delineated in a manner which allows no possibility of increase or decrease; and (4) The Dower: the contract must mention a dower of known property, whether in cash or kind, whose amount is safe from increase or decrease. In order to gain knowledge of the property, it is sufficient for the woman to see it, but it is not necessary that it actually be weighed, measured, or counted-whatever the case may require.”

Mut’a is a religiously contested issue: According to the Women's International Network News, “temporary or mut'a marriage is one of the most intensely contested moral issues in Islam. The debate is between the 'Shiite' and the 'Sunni' Muslims. While the Shiite considers mut'a marriage to be legitimate, the Sunni forbids it. Both parties agree that mut'a existed during the days of the Prophet and that he encouraged his followers and soldiers to practice it. The Sunnis attribute its permissibility at one point in history to unusual circumstances. The Shiite Ulama (religious authorities) disagree and call for its abolition.” And even in non-religious or non-Islamic societies, the idea generates a lot of controversy and condemnation.

The central argument of the Pro-Mut’a argument goes like this: “Forbidden to you are married woman, except what your right hand possesses. This Allah has written for you, and all other women besides these are permitted to you, so that you may seek them out with your wealth, seeking chastity and not fornication. So when you have contracted temporary marriage [istimt'atum] with them, then give them their words. There is no sin on you for whatever you agree to after this. Indeed, Allah is Knowing, Wise (Al-Qur'an, Surah An-Nisa, Ayah 24).”

And then the central argument of the anti-Mut’a argument, championed by the Wahabi author, Dr. Salamah, goes this way: “Mut'ah…is an open license for sexual pleasure with as many women as one can financially afford. The women who engage in mut'ah are hired women; thus, it can be performed with all women irrespective of their age, character, conduct or religion. It requires no witnesses, nor is there any obligation on the man's part to provide food and shelter to the woman. The only precondition is that the woman agrees to the price and the length of the mut'ah and that the man pays her the compensation when he has relations with her. One can discern for himself whether such a practice leads to sheer promiscuity or promotes chastity…”

Whether one is for or against Mut’a is a personal and religious preference. I however doubt that in an increasingly liberal and westernized world, such a practice will be widely accepted. Looking at the big picture, temporary or short-contract marriage is not an idea whose time has come. Looking at the small picture however, Mut’a may blunt western society’s penchant for legal separations and divorces. Either way, such arrangement will not suit everyone’s sensibility. In fact, such an idea may provoke virulent outcry and protestations, and a call for drastic changes in domestic and marital laws is likely to follow.

However, considering what is available and what is allowed in today’s society -- more so in the western societies where some marriage types can be considered perverse and highly decadent -- asking for a rethink of the marriage institution is unavoidable. Some marriages in the West, especially in the United States , barely survive the seven year anniversary. And in fact, the vast majority does not survive twenty-five years when, ideally, they are supposed to last a life time. What could be more transitory, more impermanent than 7-25 year unions?

Considering the nature of Islam, and considering also what a few people have been doing in the name of the religion, there are those who will automatically reject its code of belief. That’s understandable, but not acceptable. In the learned estimation of Huston Smith, “of all the non-Western religions, Islam stands closest to the West  -- closest geographically, and also closest ideologically; for religiously it stands in the Abrahamic family of religions, while philosophically it builds on the Greeks. Yet despite this mental and spatial proximity, Islam is the most difficult religion for the West to understand. Mistakes begin with its very name. Until recently the West called it Muhammadanism, which is not only inaccurate but also offensive.” Considering this and other factors therefore, I ask that readers digest Mut’a with a liberal mind.

Sabidde@yahoo.com

1. Khan, Shahnaz (1995). “Race, Gender, and Orientalism: Muta and the Canadian Legal System. ” Canadian Journal of Women & the Law. Vol. 8 Issue 1, p.249-261.  
2.  “Levirate and Sororate.” Encyclopædia Britannica. 2007. Britannica Concise Encyclopedia.  8 May 2007 <http://concise.britannica.com/ebc/article-9370107/levirate-and-sororate>.  
3. Murata, Sachiko. (1974). Temporary Marriage in Islamic Law MA dissertation completed in Tehran University (a sizeable portion of the dissertation can be accessed at http://www.al-islam.org/al-serat/muta/
4. Murdock, George Peter (1949). Social Structure. New York : The Macmillan Company.
5. Nagar, Richa (2000). “Religion, Race, and the Debate Over Mut’a in Dar-es-Salaam.” Feminist Studies. Vol. 26 Issue 3, p.661-690.

    

Robot  Villager

# 1 “Marriage differs in structure...Read the full article. Posted by Robot| 12.12.2007 19:14

Oghre  Villager

# 2 blood thirsty and backwards religion, retarded practices, violent disposition and decaying institutions... that is what Islam is, why waste time on this eyesore of a religion? Posted by Oghre| 13.12.2007 06:28

overdryv  Villager

# 3 This piece goes a long way to confirm what I have always believed and that is the marriage institution is a man made thing and is bound to undergo drastic changes or even permanent death. With the trend of things, it is safe to predict that in a few decades, marriage would be entirely erased. Humankind must be prepared for new types of partnerships. In the city where I live, couples now live together and have children without the necessity of getting married and this is accepted in law as an official marriage. Now a lot of people here, men and women have made up their mind never to get married. It is well known that many girls undergo operation to permanently remove their womb. On MUTA, this is obviously a form of prostitution. That such disagreement exists among rival islamic sects as to the propriety of the practice, shows that religion as a man made institution would continue to be a source of strife for the future. This brings me to ponder whether this practice is really from Allah. How many of these practices can one honestly say are divine? Two days ago, I watched a You-tube clip in which a 17-year old muslim girl was stoned to death for having pre-marital sex. I could not help shaking my head for a gruop of people who are still bogged down in the stone age. Posted by overdryv| 13.12.2007 07:10

abidde  Villager

# 4 Clarification: Within an hour of posting this essay, I received a private mail from Dr. Pade Badru, a Professor of Sociology at the University of Louisville, Louisville, KY. He made the following clarification to my essay -- clarifications that are well appreciated: “Polygyny is not synonymous with polygamy. Polygamy is marriage with multiple partners which is broadly divided into two categories: polyandry- which is a situation in which the woman marries more than one husband and the most common will be fraternal polyandry (levirate excluded) and is common among Hopi Indians in North America. This is usually occasioned by sex-ratio that is in favor of women (that's more men than women); also common in matri-focal communities in Africa; Polygyny is in essence a situation where a man marries more than one woman and of course, this is often referred to erroneously as polygamy as you did; both are mutually exclusive….” So, please take note. I deeply regret the slight “misinformation.” Sabella Abidde Posted by abidde| 13.12.2007 12:12