Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

This section of the forum is NOT for discussions. It is a database of documents, websites, books and other resources, to provide skeptics with the materials to compose their articles refuting Islam. Please place your links in the appropriate thread. If your material needs a new thread, please advise me first. We do not want to clutter this DB with too many threads that may be similar. Do not copy and paste. Give full references and make sure the source is reliable. If you want to rebut any of the documents posted here, use another thread in other sections of the forum.
User avatar
Aksel Ankersen
Posts: 694
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 3:45 am
Location: Coastlines

Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

Post by Aksel Ankersen »

Hector already wrote an excellent, in-depth article regarding Prophet Muhammad's paedophilia. For our new forum, I'd like to improve the readability by compressing our arguments into a more concise form and arranging them into sub headings (I will hyperlink each of these headings to the relevant post as the thread develops):
  • 1) Summary of Muhammad's paedophilia (a brief reference)
    2) Answers to common apologetics for Muhammad's paedopilia, analysis of how it relates to Muhammad's claim to Prophethood
    3) Islam condones paedophilia, proven from Koran alone
    4) Islam condones paedophilia, proven with supplementary hadith
    5) Effects of paedophilia, victims in the modern Islamic world

I will work on this today, please bear with me until I've written the outline of each topic.

_______________________
Image
بدرود , بدرود , بدرود

User avatar
Aksel Ankersen
Posts: 694
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 3:45 am
Location: Coastlines

Re: Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

Post by Aksel Ankersen »

Evidence Muhammad was a Paedophile

The relevant hadith:
‏عن ‏ ‏عائشة ‏ ‏رضي الله عنها ‏
‏أن النبي ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏‏تزوجها وهي بنت ست سنين وأدخلت عليه وهي بنت تسع ومكثت عنده تسعا


Transliteration: 3an Ayesha Radhiyallahu 3anha:
Inna an-Nabiyya Salla Allahu 3laihi Wasallam tuzawajaha wahiya binthu sita sineen, wa udakhalat 3laihi wahiya binthu tisa3 sineen.


Translation: Narrated 'Aisha (Allah be pleased with her):
"that the Prophet (peace be upon him) married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old."

-Sahih Bukhari, Number 4738


Some apologists will begin by disputing the translation, so firstly I would like to clarify. "Consumate" in this hadith means sexual penetration. The root word used is dakhal, meaning "enter", that is for the man to "enter" the female.

Wiktionary entry on Dakhal (دخل )

Lest anyone think that udakhalat 3laihi means "enter the marriage", see that the verb zawaja (underlined) has already been used, which means joining in marriage. Zawaja does not mean engagement either, in Koran (Sura al-Ahzab verse 37), Allah adresses his Prophet about Zaynab saying: "We joined her (Zawaja) in marriage to thee".

Wiktionary on Zawaja ( زوج)

Since zawaja = joining in married life the only plausible meaning for dakhala is sex, this is the exact usage and translation of dakhala in the Koran when the object of the verb is a woman or women:


حرمت عليكم امهاتكم وبناتكم واخواتكم وعماتكم وخالاتكم وبنات الاخ وبنات الاخت وامهاتكم اللاتي ارضعنكم واخواتكم من الرضاعة وامهات نساءكم وربائبكم اللاتي في حجوركم من نسائكم اللاتي دخلتم بهن فان لم تكونوا دخلتم بهن فلا جناح عليكم وحلائل ابناءكم الذين من اصلابكم وان تجمعوا بين الاختين الا ماقد سلف ان الله كان غفورا رحيما

"You are forbidden to marry your mothers, daughters, sisters, paternal aunts, maternal aunts, nieces, your foster-mothers, your foster-sisters, your mothers-in-law, your step-daughters whom you have brought up and with whose mothers you have had carnal relations. It would not be a sin to marry her if you did not have carnal relations with her mother. You are forbidden to marry the wives of your own sons and to marry two sisters at the same time without any adverse affect to the such relations of the past. God is All-forgiving and All-merciful." (Sarwar's translation)

-Koran Sura an-Nisa, verse 23
This should suffice to prove that, as narrated by authentic hadith, Muhammad literally had sexual relations with a girl of nine.

Indebted to abdulwalid of FFI for his initial explanation.

(edited for typos and to fix links/references)
Last edited by Aksel Ankersen on Wed Jul 08, 2009 6:54 am, edited 5 times in total.
بدرود , بدرود , بدرود

User avatar
Aksel Ankersen
Posts: 694
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 3:45 am
Location: Coastlines

Re: Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

Post by Aksel Ankersen »

Another version

This Arabic text is a slightly different version of the following well-known hadith, it is recorded in Musnad Ahmad.

‘A’ishah states: We came to Medina and Abu Bakr took up quarters in al-Sunh among the Banu al-Harith b. al-Khazraj. The Messenger of God came to our house and men and women of the Ansar gathered around him. My mother came to me while I was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down. Jumaymah, my nurse, took over and wiped my face with some water and started leading me. When I was at the door, she stopped so I could catch my breath. I was then brought while the Messenger of God was sitting on a bed in our house. [My mother] made me sit on his lap and said, "These are your relatives. May God bless you with them and bless them with you!" Then the men and women got up and left. The Messenger of God consummated his marriage with me in my house when I was nine years old. Neither a camel nor a sheep was slaughtered on behalf of me. Only Sa‘d b. ‘Ubaidah sent a bowl of food which he used to send to the Messenger of God.

-Tabari vol 9 page 131

Here is the Arabic from Ibn Habal:


فى السنة الحادية عشر من النبوة ، تزوج المعصوم من عائشة الصديقة وهى بنت ست سنين لما كان محمد جالسا بمنزلهم واحضرتها امها وهى تلهو مع الاطفال وتتأرجح على ارجوحة بين عزقين ، واجلستها على حجر محمد وهو جالس على سرير لهم وقالت هؤلاء اهلك فبارك الله لك، وبنى بها وهى بنت تسع سنين وهى بالمدينة ، فخرج القوم واغلقوا الباب عليهما فبنى بها فى بيتها وهى بنت تسع سنوات عندئذ، علما بانها كانت فى الثامنة عشر عند وفاة محمد،يقول بعض كتاب السير ان الرسول اراد بهذه الزيجة توطيد العلاقة بينه وبين ابى بكر الصديق لذلك تزوج طفلته ،وفى ذلك الاعتبار يا اولى الابصار
The underlined words - وبنى بها - wa bana biha literally say: "and (Muhammad) built with her".

"Built with her" is another euphemism, the phrase bana biha (like dakhala biha) is understood as meaning sex in both modern and classical Arabic (Such was the usage of bana biha in Kitab at-tabaqat al-kabir by Muhammad ibn Sa‘d d.845 AD, see here, page 10)

Regarding Aysha at the time of this act we also read - وهى بنت تسع سنين - wahiya binthu tisa3 sineen - "and she was a girl of nine years".

Again, the coarseness of the deed is apparent, Aysha's marriage is not - as we are often led to believe - just another old fashioned marriage of convenience with partners of mismatched age... Muhammad wanted not only marriage but a physical relationship with a little girl, and this is recorded in great detail in hadith.
Last edited by Aksel Ankersen on Mon Jul 06, 2009 8:42 am, edited 4 times in total.
بدرود , بدرود , بدرود

User avatar
ixolite
Posts: 3089
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:19 am
Location: Berlin, D
Contact:

Re: Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

Post by ixolite »

Aksel Ankersen wrote:Hector already wrote an excellent, in-depth article regarding Prophet Muhammad's paedophilia.
Which is here:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10197

User avatar
Ace
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 6:33 pm

All About Aisha and Age of Marriage

Post by Ace »

Note :

:arrow: PLEASE SEND ME A MESSAGE IF YOU CAN'T FIND YOUR ANSWER :arrow:


Image


Image

Claim : Many Muslims argue that ayisha was older than 9 when muhammed married her and older than 6 when he molested her.

My response :

A.Hadiths from Aisha about her age

B.Hadiths from Aisha showing that she was not pubescent.

C.Verse from quran on how to divorce your wife if she is a child.

D.Tafsirs of those verses

E.Anwers o common excuses




A.Hadiths from Aisha about her age


*These hadiths are from Sahih Bukhari, (Sahih = authentic in Arabic) (Bukhari = Name of the guy who collected these hadiths)

*The chain of narration is strong for two reasons ;

1.The narrator is Aisha herself.

Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234:

2.Quran also says ;


33:6 The Prophet is closer to the believers than their selves, and his wives are (as) their mothers. And the owners of kinship are closer one to another in the ordinance of Allah than (other) believers and the fugitives (who fled from Mecca) except that ye should do kindness to your friends. This is written in the Book (of nature)
33:32 O ye wives of the Prophet! Ye are not like any other women. If ye keep your duty (to Allah), then be not soft of speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease aspire (to you), but utter customary speech
33:33 And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance; and establish regular Prayer, and give regular Charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger. And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, ye members of the Family, and to make you pure and spotless.
SwordofAllah87 claiming that people who deny what Aisha says are KAFEERS and not Muslims ;




I have already posted the authentic hadiths on that matter,now let's see the supporting hadiths :

List of Sahih Hadiths :

Sahih Bukhari :

Sahih Bukhari 5:58:234,
Sahih Bukhari 5:58:236,
Sahih Bukhari 7:62:64,
Sahih Bukhari 7:62:65,
Sahih Bukhari 7:62:88,
Sahih Bukhari 7:62:163,
Sahih Bukhari 8:73:151,

Sahih Muslim :

Sahih Muslim 8:3309,
Sahih Muslim 8:3310,
Sahih Muslim 8:3311,
Sahih Muslim 31:5981,
Sahih Muslim 31:5982,

Sunan Abu Dawud

Abu Dawud 2:2116,
Abu Dawud 3:4913,
Abu Dawud 41:4915,
Abu Dawud 41:4916,
Abu Dawud 41:4917,
Abu Dawud 41:4918


Ask him these questions and right them down ;

when did he make his message public answer: 43

How old was muhammed when khadija died ? answer 50

How many years after that he married aisha ? answer 3 years

so muhammed married aisha at 53 and he spread islam at 43,...10 years gap


so from the time muhammed made his message pubic to marrige to aisha there is a 10 year gap, so if aisha was older than 10 then she could have remebered a time when her parents were non muslims but we read ,

Sahih Bukhari
Volume 5, Book 58, Number 245:

Narrated 'Aisha:

(the wife of the Prophet) I never remembered my parents believing in any religion other than the true religion (i.e. Islam), and (I don't remember) a single day passing without our being visited by Allah's Apostle in the morning and in the evening. When the Muslims were put to test (i.e. troubled by the pagans),....

Muhammed recived the first message when he was 40, 10 years later khadija died.He was single for three years then he married aisha at 53 years of age


Image


Consistency with other hadiths :


1.Muhammed died at the age of 63 ,and married aisha at 53. (9 years later)

so if he married aisha when she was nine, you would expect her to be 18 when muhammed died.
Bukhari

Volume 5, Book 58, Number 242:

Narrated Ibn Abbas:

Allah's Apostle started receiving the Divine Inspiration at the age of forty. Then he stayed in Mecca for thirteen years, receiving the Divine Revelation. Then he was ordered to migrate and he lived as an Emigrant for ten years and then died at the age of sixty-three (years).
Sahih Muslim
Book 008, Number 3311:

'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.


Image



Aisha owned dolls (which as we know is NOT allowed in islam (if you have reached puberty):

Sahih Muslim
Book 031, Number 5981:
'A'isha reported that she used to play with dolls in the presence of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and when her playmates came to her they left (the house) because they felt shy of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), whereas Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) sent them to her.

Book 41, Number 4914:
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:

When the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) arrived after the expedition to Tabuk or Khaybar (the narrator is doubtful), the draught raised an end of a curtain which was hung in front of her store-room, revealing some dolls which belonged to her.

He asked: What is this? She replied: My dolls. Among them he saw a horse with wings made of rags, and asked: What is this I see among them? She replied: A horse. He asked: What is this that it has on it? She replied: Two wings. He asked: A horse with two wings? She replied: Have you not heard that Solomon had horses with wings? She said: Thereupon the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) laughed so heartily that I could see his molar teeth.

Image



Description of Aisha from herself and other when she married :

A long hadith,Muhammed is asking people about aisha,after he suspected that she has cheated on him :
Sahih Bukhari

Volume 3, Book 48, Number 829: and
Volume 6, Book 60, Number 274:
Narrated Aisha:

.......On that Allah's Apostle called Buraira and said, 'O Burair. Did you ever see anything which roused your suspicions about her?' Buraira said, 'No, by Allah Who has sent you with the Truth, I have never seen in her anything faulty except that she is a girl of immature age, who sometimes sleeps and leaves the dough for the goats to eat.'

......I was a young girl and did not have much knowledge of the Quran. I said. 'I know, by Allah, that you have listened to what people are saying and that has been planted in your minds and you have taken it as a truth.
Image



Evidence from other hadiths :


Sahih Bukhari
Volume 7, Book 62, Number 63:
Narrated Sahl bin Sad:

While we were sitting in the company of the Prophet a woman came to him and presented herself (for marriage) to him. The Prophet looked at her, lowering his eyes and raising them, but did not give a reply. One of his companions said, "Marry her to me O Allah's Apostle!" The Prophet asked (him), "Have you got anything?" He said, "I have got nothing." The Prophet said, "Not even an iron ring?" He Sad, "Not even an iron ring, but I will tear my garment into two halves and give her one half and keep the other half." The Prophet; said, "No. Do you know some of the Quran (by heart)?" He said, "Yes." The Prophet said, "Go, I have agreed to marry her to you with what you know of the Qur'an (as her Mahr)." 'And for those who have no courses (i.e. they are still immature). (65.4) And the 'Iddat (the time you have to wait before divorcring your wife) for the girl before puberty is three months (in the above Verse).

Image



Tafsirs :


065.004
Such of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the prescribed period, if ye have any doubts, is three months, and for those who have no courses (it is the same): for those who carry (life within their wombs), their period is until they deliver their burdens: and for those who fear Allah, He will make their path easy.


Surah 65 (Talaq) which means Divorce talks about ,obviously, divorcing your wife and how you have to wait 3 months after her menstruation before divorcing her.Ayah 5 talks about divorcing women whose menstruation has stopped due to her older age and the young, who have not reached the years of menstruation.

Tafsir Ibn Kathir (most widely accepted Tafsir in Islamic World)


The `Iddah of Those in Menopause and Those Who do not have Menses
Allah the Exalted clarifies the waiting period of the woman in menopause. And that is the one whose menstruation has stopped due to her older age. Her `Iddah is three months instead of the three monthly cycles for those who menstruate, which is based upon the Ayah in (Surat) Al-Baqarah. [see 2:228] The same for the young, who have not reached the years of menstruation. Their `Iddah is three months like those in menopause. This is the meaning of His saying;

http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=65&tid=54196

Tafsir al-Jalalayan (another crediable tafsir)
And [as for] those of your women who (read allā’ī or allā’i in both instances) no longer expect to menstruate, if you have any doubts, about their waiting period, their prescribed [waiting] period shall be three months, and [also for] those who have not yet menstruated, because of their young age, their period shall [also] be three months — both cases apply to other than those whose spouses have died; for these [latter] their period is prescribed in the verse: they shall wait by themselves for four months and ten [days] [Q. 2:234]. And those who are pregnant, their term, the conclusion of their prescribed [waiting] period if divorced or if their spouses be dead, shall be when they deliver. And whoever fears God, He will make matters ease for him, in this world and in the Hereafter.

http://www.altafsir.com and search for 65:4 and 5



Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs
(And for such of your women as despair of menstruation) because of old age, (if ye doubt) about their waiting period, (their period (of waiting) shall be three months) upon which another man asked: “O Messenger of Allah! What about the waiting period of those who do not have menstruation because they are too young?” (along with those who have it not) because of young age, their waiting period is three months. Another man asked: “what is the waiting period for those women who are pregnant?” (And for those with child) i.e. those who are pregnant, (their period) their waiting period (shall be till they bring forth their burden) their child. (And whosoever keepeth his duty to Allah) and whoever fears Allah regarding what he commands him, (He maketh his course easy for him) He makes his matter easy; and it is also said this means: He will help him to worship Him well.

http://www.altafsir.com and search for 65:4 and 5

Tafsir Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahidi
(And for such of your women as despair of menstruation…) [65:4]. Said Muqatil: “When the verse (Women who are divorced shall wait, keeping themselves apart…), Kallad ibn al-Nu‘man ibn Qays al-Ansari said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, what is the waiting period of the woman who does not menstruate and the woman who has not menstruated yet? And what is the waiting period of the pregnant woman?’ And so Allah, exalted is He, revealed this verse”. Abu Ishaq al-Muqri’ informed us> Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Hamdun> Makki ibn ‘Abdan> Abu’l-Azhar> Asbat ibn Muhammad> Mutarrif> Abu ‘Uthman ‘Amr ibn Salim who said: “When the waiting period for divorced and widowed women was mentioned in Surah al-Baqarah, Ubayy ibn Ka‘b said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, some women of Medina are saying: there are other women who have not been mentioned!’ He asked him: ‘And who are they?’ He said: ‘Those who are too young [such that they have not started menstruating yet], those who are too old [whose menstruation has stopped] and those who are pregnant’. And so this verse (And for such of your women as despair of menstruation…) was revealed”.

Sahih Bukhari
Volume 7, Book 62, Number 63:

Narrated Sahl bin Sad:

While we were sitting in the company of the Prophet a woman came to him and presented herself (for marriage) to him. The Prophet looked at her, lowering his eyes and raising them, but did not give a reply. One of his companions said, "Marry her to me O Allah's Apostle!" The Prophet asked (him), "Have you got anything?" He said, "I have got nothing." The Prophet said, "Not even an iron ring?" He Sad, "Not even an iron ring, but I will tear my garment into two halves and give her one half and keep the other half." The Prophet; said, "No. Do you know some of the Quran (by heart)?" He said, "Yes." The Prophet said, "Go, I have agreed to marry her to you with what you know of the Qur'an (as her Mahr)." 'And for those who have no courses (i.e. they are still immature). (65.4) And the 'Iddat for the girl before puberty is three months (in the above Verse).


And the 'Iddat for the girl before puberty is three months (in the above Verse).


http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamental ... 2.sbt.html




Tafsir Regarding Female Orphans :


Some times muslims want to use this verse to shows that marrying children is not allowed in Islam ;

004:002To orphans restore their property (When they reach their age), nor substitute (your) worthless things for (their) good ones; and devour not their substance (by mixing it up) with your own. For this is indeed a great sin
004.006
Make trial of orphans until they reach the age of marriage; if then ye find sound judgment in them, release their property to them; but consume it not wastefully, nor in haste against their growing up. If the guardian is well-off, Let him claim no remuneration, but if he is poor, let him have for himself what is just and reasonable. When ye release their property to them, take witnesses in their presence: But all-sufficient is Allah in taking account.
Few problems with this verse :


First of all it doesn't specify age of marriage, it's about when you should give the inheritance to orphans.
and as you can read it says ;


Image

Make trial of orphans until they reach the age of marriage; if then ye find sound judgment in them
since the it says IF THEN , age of marriage has nothing to do with being sound in judgment.


It's about male orphans not the girls.


The verse concerning the FEMALE orphans ;

004.127
YUSUFALI: They ask thy instruction concerning the women say: Allah doth instruct you about them: And (remember) what hath been rehearsed unto you in the Book, concerning the orphans of women to whom ye give not the portions prescribed, and yet whom ye desire to marry, as also concerning the children who are weak and oppressed: that ye stand firm for justice to orphans. There is not a good deed which ye do, but Allah is well-acquainted therewith.




Tafsir of That verse :


Ibn Kathir Explains :
The Ruling Concerning Female Orphans

Al-Bukhari recorded that `A'ishah said about the Ayah,

[وَيَسْتَفْتُونَكَ فِى النِّسَآءِ قُلِ اللَّهُ يُفْتِيكُمْ فِيهِنَّ]

(They ask your instruction concerning women. Say, "Allah instructs you about them...) until
and few lines later it shows that it's possible for caretakers and guardians to MARRY the orphans ,which is more evidence for my argument.
(whom you desire to marry...) "It is about the man who is taking care of a female orphan, being her caretaker and inheritor. Her money is joined with his money to such an extent, that she shares with him even the branch of a date that he has. So he likes (for material gain) to marry her himself, and hates to marry her to another man who would have a share in his money, on account of her share in his money.

http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=4&tid=12381
supporting Hadith

Sahih Bukhari
Volume 7, Book 62, Number 2:

Narrated 'Ursa:

that he asked 'Aisha about the Statement of Allah: 'If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphan girls, then marry (other) women of your choice, two or three or four; but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (the captives) that your right hands possess. That will be nearer to prevent you from doing injustice.' (4.3) 'Aisha said, "O my nephew! (This Verse has been revealed in connection with) an orphan girl under the guardianship of her guardian who is attracted by her wealth and beauty and intends to marry her with a Mahr less than what other women of her standard deserve. So they (such guardians) have been forbidden to marry them unless they do justice to them and give them their full Mahr, and they are ordered to marry other women instead of them."
Image



Answers to common excuses :
Morality of Muhammad's time is different from what we have now, traditions were different so you can't judge him .
well,based on this verse muhammed received his wisdom from Allah ;
3:164 Allah did confer a great favour on the believers when He sent among them a messenger from among themselves, rehearsing unto them the Signs of Allah, sanctifying them, and instructing them in Scripture and Wisdom, while, before that, they had been in manifest error

so either :

a.in Allah's wisdom it's ok to marry 6 year olds and have sex with them when they are nine.

b.This verse is fabricated,which makes the Quran wrong.

c.Muhammed marrige to Aisha (mother of all believrs was a mistake)

Abu Bakr,or other people, asked muhammed to marry Aisha
Not only it was Muhammed who asked abu bakr for the marrige :

Sahih Bukhari 007.062.018

Volume 7, Book 62, Number 18:
Narrated 'Ursa:

The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry."
and even if Abu Bakr asked for the marriage , Muhammed could say no.

Marrige was for political reasons

Then why Muhammed had sex with Aisha,when she was nine ? , a political move ?


The word in 65:4 (NISA) is referring to women,so it can't be regarding the infants ;

Let's see what female infants are called in the quran ;
004.127
YUSUFALI: They ask thy instruction concerning the women say: Allah doth instruct you about them: And (remember) what hath been rehearsed unto you in the Book, concerning the orphans of women to whom ye give not the portions prescribed, and yet whom ye desire to marry, as also concerning the children who are weak and oppressed: that ye stand firm for justice to orphans. There is not a good deed which ye do, but Allah is well-acquainted therewith.

‏ويستفتونك في النساء قل الله يفتيكم فيهن ومايتلى عليكم في الكتاب في يتامى النساء اللاتي لاتؤتونهن ماكتب لهن وترغبون ان تنكحوهن والمستضعفين من الولدان وان تقوموا لليتامى بالقسط وماتفعلوا من خير فان الله كان به عليما

and meaning of the word LAM means never before

as seen in verse
فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ فَرِجَالًا أَوْ رُكْبَانًا ۖ فَإِذَا أَمِنتُمْ فَاذْكُرُوا اللَّهَ كَمَا عَلَّمَكُم مَّا لَمْ تَكُونُوا تَعْلَمُونَ

2:239But if you are in danger, [pray] walking or riding; [228] and when you are again secure, bear God in mind - since it is He who taught you what you did not previously know.





Image







Fatwas :



Islam Online
Islam does not specify a certain minimal age for marriage; rather, it placed a certain age for shouldering religious obligations in general. This age is the age of puberty, either by natural sign (the ability to ejaculate semen for a boy and menstruation for a girl) or by reaching the age of 15 lunar years. However, reaching this age is not necessary for validating the marriage contract, for it is up to the guardians to conduct marriages before [the bride or groom or both] have reached this age.
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Sate ... 9503547512
IslamWeb
As regards, the age of getting married for a girl, it is when she becomes physically fit for sexual intercourse. However, she can get married before this time, but the husband should not consummate the marriage with her unless she becomes physically fit.

It is confirmed in Sahih Al Bukhari that the Prophet ( sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam ( may Allaah exalt his mention )) married Aisha, may Allaah be pleased with her when she was 6 years of age, and consummated the marriage with her when she was 9 years of age.

The guardian of a girl should take the initiative to marry her off if he finds a suitable person who has the required characteristics that the Prophet ( sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam ( may Allaah exalt his mention )) illustrated when he said: If any man whose religion and character are satisfactory proposes to marry one of your women, marry him, otherwise there will be great mischief and corruption on earth”. (Al-Thirmidhi and others).

http://quran.islamweb.net/ver2/Fatwa/Sh ... on=FatwaId
IslamQA
Question :

Is it acceptable to marry a girl who has not yet started her menses?
I have not yet reached the age of puberty. Is it correct that a girl could get married before her menses start, or is that just a traditional myth?.


Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

Marriage to a young girl before she reaches puberty is permissible according to sharee’ah, and it was narrated that there was scholarly consensus on this point.

http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/12708

stuff to add ;


http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamental ... l#019.4460
If you like my posts, you can find more articles on Islam here ;

http://www.debatefaith.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=13" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


My Youtube

http://www.youtube.com/user/AceoIogy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
Aksel Ankersen
Posts: 694
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 3:45 am
Location: Coastlines

Re: Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

Post by Aksel Ankersen »

Sorry to make posts in Arabic, but it will be useful for anyone arguing this to have an explanation of the original wording of a hadith rather than rely on disputed English translations.

Reliability of the narration

Aside from disputing the translation, the most common objection I have encountered is questioning the reliability of the narrators. The hadith which state Muhammad to have slept with his nine year old wife are not, as some will tell you, related mainly on the authority of Hisham Ibn Urwa - whose memory is supposed to have been failing in latter life - most versions of that hadith are reported directly from Aisha herself.

Aisha (in her adult life) was a scholar, well versed in hadith and Koran, as seen here:

Narrated Hisham's father: It was mentioned before 'Aisha that Ibn 'Umar attributed the following statement to the Prophet "The dead person is punished in the grave because of the crying and lamentation Of his family." On that, 'Aisha said, "But Allah's Apostle said, 'The dead person is punished for his crimes and sins while his family cry over him then." She added, "And this is similar to the statement of Allah's Apostle when he stood by the (edge of the) well which contained the corpses of the pagans killed at Badr, 'They hear what I say.' She added, "But he said now they know very well what I used to tell them was the truth." 'Aisha then recited: 'You cannot make the dead hear.' (30.52) and 'You cannot make those who are in their Graves, hear you.' (35.22) that is, when they had taken their places in the (Hell) Fire.

-Sahih Bukhari book 59 number 316

Aisha was literate, as seen here:

Narrated Amra: Aisha said that Buraira came to seek her help in the writing of her emancipation. 'Aisha said to her, "If you wish, I will pay your masters (your price) and the wala' will be for me." When Allah's Apostle came, she told him about it. The Prophet said to her, "Buy her (i.e. Buraira) and manumit her, for the Wala is for the one who manumits." Then Allah's Apostle ascended the pulpit and said, "What about those people who stipulate conditions which are not in Allah's Laws? Whoever stipulates such conditions as are not in Allah's Laws, then those conditions are invalid even if he stipulated a hundred such conditions."

- Sahih Bukhari book 50 number 893
Many hadith were written down by literate Sahaba (companions) of Muhammad such as Aisha and Fatima and the Isnad stretches no further than this, which is of course more reliable than a report by Hisham Ibn Urwa who was only Tabi‘ al-Tabi‘in (i.e. a third hand account by one who knew the Sahaba only indirectly.)

The hadith from Aisha on her age of marriage are as follows, from three Sahih collections:

Sahih Bukhari book Kitab al-Ansar, number 234

Sahih Bukhari Kitab al-Nikah, number 64 & 65

Sahih Bukhari Kitab al-Adab, number 151

Sahih Muslim, Kitab al-Nikah, 3309, 3310, 3311 & 3312

Sunan Abu Dawud, Kitab al-Adad, 4915 and 4917

Therefore, there's no need to rely on Hisham, or any narrator chains from Iraq.
بدرود , بدرود , بدرود

User avatar
Aksel Ankersen
Posts: 694
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 3:45 am
Location: Coastlines

Re: Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

Post by Aksel Ankersen »

Just to show we're not kidding...

This is a screenshot from al-islam.com with the crucial phrases - ثم ‏ ‏بنى ‏ ‏بها - thumma bana biha - "then (Muhammad) built with her".

And also - وهى بنت تسع سنين - wahiya binthu tisa3 sineen - "she was a girl of nine years".

You can show anyone who asks this pure Arabic hadith from an Islamic database.


Image

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... ?hnum=3607

The English translation:

Narrated Urwah

"Khadeejah died three years before the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) migrated to Madeenah. He stayed alone for two years or thereabouts, then he married ‘Aa’ishah when she was six years old, then consummated the marriage when she was nine years old."
Last edited by Aksel Ankersen on Mon Jul 06, 2009 8:45 am, edited 4 times in total.
بدرود , بدرود , بدرود

User avatar
amaar khan
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 1:56 pm
Contact:

Re: Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

Post by amaar khan »

a complete e-book regarding pedophilia in islam
http://www.islam-watch.org/Amarkhan/ped ... -islam.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
French Kiss Miracle:
Narated By 'Aisha : The Prophet used to kiss her and suck her tongue when he was fasting.(Abu dawud 7:2380)

User avatar
Aksel Ankersen
Posts: 694
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 3:45 am
Location: Coastlines

Re: Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

Post by Aksel Ankersen »

Age of menarche throughout history and around the world

A common form of special pleading introduced to defend Muhammad's marriage to a very young bride is the claim that females matured faster in ancient times, and also in hot climates such as Arabia.
Average age at menarche in Europe, 1830-1950's

Image

(Tanner 1955)

Throughout the Northern Hemisphere, for the past 200 years, age at menarche has been decreasing in linear fashion. This correlates with the Industrial Revolution, changes in diet and the move of the poulation to more densely inhabited cities (with an associated pheremone effect), so it would be unrealistic to extrapolate the trend back 1400 yrs; nevertheless, average age at menarche was about 17-18 in pre-industrialized society.

There is also no significant climatic effect on the age at which girls reach nubility (i.e. between warm Arabia and cold Europe).

For the period 1840-1880 the following mean ages of menarche were determined. (Bojlen and Bentzon 1968)

  • Manchester (1832) 14.7 years
    Jamaica (1842) 14.3 years
    Calcutta (1845) 13.2 years
    Bombay (1846) 13.8 years
    Madeira (1846) 15.9 years
    Barbados (1848) 16.4 years
    West Greenland (1865) 14.4 years
    Denmark (1860) 16.3 years
    London (1869) 15.5 years


It is difficult to determine the average age of menarche in the medieval period, as there were no statistics then.

However, the medical authors of the time anecdotally confirm the statistics of the 18th century: Pseudo-Albertus Magnus claims girls typically had their first period at 14 years of age in his time - 13th century AD. Trotula of Salerno writing in the 11th century cites 13-15 years as an average.

As such, at no time in recorded history was it “normal” for girls to be physically mature at nine years of age.

References


*Bojlen and Bentzon (1968) "The Influence of Climate and Nutrition on Age at Menarche: A Historical Review and A Modern Hypothesis"

*Tanner (1955) Growth at adolescence. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford

*Pseudo-Albertus Magnus De Secretis Mulierum

*Trotula of Salerno De Mulierum Passionibus
بدرود , بدرود , بدرود


User avatar
ixolite
Posts: 3089
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:19 am
Location: Berlin, D
Contact:

Re: Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

Post by ixolite »

Girls in the juvenile justice system have high rates of past sexual abuse. To better understand the relationship between sexual abuse and justice system involvement, we analyzed survey interviews with 169 young women involved or at risk of involvement with juvenile justice, comparing girls who experienced sexual abuse with those who did not. Girls experiencing sexual abuse had more negative mental health, school, substance use, risky sexual behavior, and delinquency outcomes. These findings highlight a need for interventions to assist girls who have experienced abuse and efforts to prevent abuse and improve child welfare and social service systems.
http://vaw.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/12/5/456" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
This study explores the associations of sexual revictimization (experiencing sexual abuse in childhood and adulthood) in a sample of 230 African American women who are low-income. Data indicate that women who experience sexual revictimization are more at risk for emotional stress and psychological pathology than women with no history of abuse. In addition, women who are revictimized appear to be at greater risk for emotional problems than women sexually abused only as a child or sexually assaulted only as adults. Revictimization also appears to be associated with an increased probability of engaging in prostitution, even higher than women with childhood- or adult-only victimization, who showed increased probability when compared to women never abused. Finally, women who are revictimized showed increased HIV risk, in that they were 4 times less likely than other women to consistently use condoms, but no more likely to be in monogamous relationships or less likely to have multiple partners.
http://jiv.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/21/4/503" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
This clinical report serves to update the statement titled "Guidelines for the Evaluation of Sexual Abuse of Children," which was first published in 1991 and revised in 1999. The medical assessment of suspected sexual abuse is outlined with respect to obtaining a history, physical examination, and appropriate laboratory data. The role of the physician may include determining the need to report sexual abuse; assessment of the physical, emotional, and behavioral consequences of sexual abuse; and coordination with other professionals to provide comprehensive treatment and follow-up of victims.
http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cg ... ;116/2/506" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
ixolite
Posts: 3089
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:19 am
Location: Berlin, D
Contact:

Re: Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

Post by ixolite »

The purposes of this study were to characterize milk production, milk composition, and the lactational behavior of adolescent mothers, and to compare their lactational performance with that of adult females.

...

The amount of milk adolescents produced at 6, 12, 18, and 24 weeks postpartum ranged from 37–54% less (P < .05) than that of the adults and resulted in a 45% weaning rate at 18 weeks postpartum in the younger group.
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve ... 9X97000360" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Management of teenage pregnancy
http://onlinetog.org/cgi/content/full/9/3/153" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
ixolite
Posts: 3089
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:19 am
Location: Berlin, D
Contact:

Re: Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

Post by ixolite »

Brain development during puberty: state of the science

In recent years, neuroimaging techniques have shown
that the development of the human brain is far more
protracted than previously thought (see Paus, 2005, for
review). In particular, the adolescent brain is subject to
considerable structural change, most notably the prefrontal
cortex. Adolescence is also characterized by major hormonal
and physical changes, and dramatic developments
in identity, self-consciousness and cognitive flexibility
(Rutter, 1993; Coleman & Hendry, 1990).

...

Post-mortem studies carried
out in the 1970s and 1980s demonstrated that the structure
of the prefrontal cortex undergoes significant changes
during puberty and adolescence (Huttenlocher, 1979;
Huttenlocher, De Courten, Garey & Van Der Loos,
1983; Yakovlev & Lecours, 1967). Two main changes
were revealed in the brain before and after puberty.
Firstly, as neurons develop, they build up a layer of
myelin around their extension, or axon. Myelin acts as
an insulator and vastly increases the speed of transmission
of electrical impulses from neuron to neuron. Whereas
sensory and motor brain regions become fully myelinated
in the first few years of life, axons in the frontal
cortex continue to be myelinated into adolescence
(Yakovlev & Lecours, 1967). As a result, the transmission
speed of neural information in the frontal cortex should
steadily increase throughout childhood and adolescence.
The second change pertains to changes in synaptic
density in the prefrontal cortex. Early in postnatal development,
the brain begins to form new synapses, so that the
synaptic density (the number of synapses per unit volume
of brain tissue) greatly exceeds adult levels. This
process of synaptic proliferation, called synaptogenesis,
lasts up to several months, depending on the species of
animal and brain region, and is followed by a period of
synaptic elimination (or pruning) in which frequently
used connections are strengthened and infrequently used
connections are eliminated.
http://www.icn.ucl.ac.uk/sblakemore/SJ_ ... _DS_05.pdf

User avatar
ixolite
Posts: 3089
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:19 am
Location: Berlin, D
Contact:

Re: Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

Post by ixolite »

In case of "paedo's don't have relationships with adult women / aren't married"-excuse:
The onset of pedophilia usually occurs during adolescence. Occasional pedophiles begin their activities during middle age but this late onset is uncommon. In the United States, about 50% of men arrested for pedophilia are married.
http://www.minddisorders.com/Ob-Ps/Pedophilia.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
ixolite
Posts: 3089
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:19 am
Location: Berlin, D
Contact:

Re: Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

Post by ixolite »

The following 4 posts contain the missing posts from Hector's thread "Evidence Muhammad was a pedophile"

Hector wrote:DEFINITIONS OF PEDOPHILIA


http://theearthcenter.com/ff45earthtalk1.html

APA Positions

Pedophilia has been categorized as a mental illness under paraphilias, which are sexual and gender identity disorders. According to the Introductory Textbook of Psychiatry Second Edition published by the APA, "The pedophile chooses a child of the same or opposite sex as a sexual partner." Pedophilia can be categorized into five subcategories, depending on the circumstance.

Fixated (or exclusive type) pedophilia: The fixated pedophile considers himself to be trapped in childhood; he has few adult relationships and relate better with children. Fixated pedophiles are typically men who are interested in boys.

Regressed (or nonexclusive type) pedophilia: The regressed pedophile views the child as an adult substitute and relate to her as an adult. Typically, the regressed pedophile is a heterosexual male who is married, and they most often molest eight or nine year old girls.

Cross-sex pedophilia: Male pedophiles who molest young girls by befriending her and then gradually engaging in sexual activities. The activities range from folding and oral stimulation but rarely intercourse.

Same-sex pedophilia: They deny being homosexual but seek out same-sex children as they are more aroused by them than by adults.
Female pedophilia: While not commonly reported, female pedophilia is a reality. A typical scenario is a young male or female engaging in sexual activities with adult women.

Furthermore, the APA DSM-IV-TR criteria for pedophilia are:
A. Over a period of 6 months recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger)
B. The person has acted on these sexual urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies caused marked distress or interpersonal difficulty;
C. The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A.


A summary is also found in:
http://www.psych.org/news_room/press_re ... philia.pdf


The APA definition is only a guideline and has been used to define types of pedophilia. For instance the FBI has its own definitions based on the APA's definition but is not identical. Other accepted authorities on pedophilia also have their own clinical definitions, which are also accepted in clinical circles and the courts.


http://www.csom.org/train/supervision/m ... 02_04.html

The Regressed or Situational Child Molester
According to the Groth Typology, the second type of child molester is known as regressed (or situational). Their primary sexual attraction is to adult females. That is, if you asked them the question about the ideal sexual partner, they would more than likely describe an age-appropriate member of the opposite sex.

The regressed or situational offender's sexual involvement with children often develops as a result of their responses to external stress and situational difficulties that they experience. In other words, these molesters usually turn to children as a way to cope with the stress they are dealing with in their lives - as a way to feel better about their situations and themselves.

Sex offender-specific treatment providers and supervision agents are typically able to identify a variety of specific short and long-term stressors in the lives of regressed/situational molesters. Their sexual abuse of children may increase or decrease in frequency depending upon their levels of stress and, unlike fixated child molesters, they may go for months or even years without molesting.

In many instances, these individuals replace the conflicted and problematic relationships they are having with adult women by becoming sexually involved with children. They place pseudo-adult status on their victims and then view them as they would their peers.

Unlike the victims of fixated molesters, the victims of regressed/situation molesters are usually female. Most, though not all, incest offenders fit the description of regressed/situation molesters. In general, regressed/situational molesters' victims may be a little older than those of the fixated molester. In addition, while the sexually abusive behavior may begin prior to the time when the victim enters puberty, it may continue after the victim enters puberty. (sounds familiar?) Also, and unlike the fixated molester, the regressed molester typically is involved in consensual, age- appropriate sexual behavior, or has been at some point in his life.

Whereas fixated molesters' attention is overwhelmingly focused upon the arousal of the child, regressed/situational molesters' focus primarily upon their own arousal and release. Regressed/situational molesters are also more likely to use alcohol or other illicit drugs as a part of their offense pattern.


Note that the clinical definitions are not the only definitions of pedophilia. There are also numerous legal definitions of child sex abuse (which is a more technical term for pedophilia: note that the US legal system doesn't actually define pedophilia although common usage refers to child sex abuse).



http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2241.html

Section 2241: Aggravated Sex Abuse

(c) With Children. -

Whoever crosses a State line with intent to engage in a sexual act with a person who has not attained the age of 12 years, or in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison, knowingly engages in a sexual act with another person who has not attained the age of 12 years, or knowingly engages in a sexual act under the circumstances described in subsections (a) and (b) with another person who has attained the age of 12 years but has not attained the age of 16 years (and is at least 4 years younger than the person so engaging), or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for any term of years or life, or both. If the defendant has previously been convicted of another Federal offense under this subsection, or of a State offense that would have been an offense under either such provision had the offense occurred in a Federal prison, unless the death penalty is imposed, the defendant shall be sentenced to life in prison.

Pedophilia then, may be defined as:
1. various legal definitions proscribing sexual acts on children or minors by legal adults,
2. clinical definition as per the APA DSM-IV-TR or related clinical definitions.

Note: Cultural factors and marriage are not mitigating circumstances or valid excuses.

Don't decide whether the debate is worth continuing. You are giving yourself an unfair option. You are the one who challenged me about logic - prove your case or shut up.



According to an article on the site of the University Of Missouri-Kansas City:

http://www.umkc.edu/sites/hsw/issues/pedophil.html

Regressed (or nonexclusive type) pedophilia. On the other hand, the regressed pedophile is not ordinarily attracted to children. Those with regressed pedophilia are typically heterosexual married males and most likely to sexually molest 8 or 9 year old female children. Some pedophiles complain of anxiety or tension related to employment or marital relationship as precursors to pedophilic impulses, as well as alcohol or drug usage. They view the child as an adult substitute, and relate to the child in an adult to adult manner. The first sexual encounter is usually sudden and unplanned.


And again at the site of North Carolina Wesleyan College we read:

http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/428/42 ... PEDOPHILES

In the most common typology (the Burgess, Groth, and Holmstrom model), there are two (2) main types of pedophiles: the SITUATIONAL and the PREFERENTIAL. The difference between these two main types is that situational pedophiles will stalk almost any vulnerable group (the elderly, the handicapped, etc.) and the preferential pedophile will stick to children of a certain age range. The situational type also prefers children, but will select "second-best" victims when under stress. The preferential type doesn't experience stress.

Within the SITUATIONAL type, there are three (3) subtypes:

(1) the REGRESSED pedophile. This subtype leads the most stable life of the situational types. They prefer female victims, and enjoy seducing strangers. Oral and vaginal intercourse is their goal. They are the only one of the situational types who use child pornography and may surf the Internet looking for victims, but will settle for old ladies in nursing homes or just about any vulnerable group when there is a crisis in their life. They tend to always keep a "stable" of potential victims in various stages of seduction.

(2) the INDISCRIMINATE pedophile. This subtype behaves like a wife-swapper, a charming, "cool" character who is willing to try anything, even incest, bestiality, you-name-it. This person waits a long time until they get to know you, and then they want to bring you into their "world". That world often consists of child pornography and helping them obtain child victims, or any other vulnerable group, but they will soon make it clear they prefer children and at a certain age. THE MAIN SOURCE OF NEW VICTIMS FOR PEDOPHILES IS A REFERRAL (SNOWBALL) FROM AN OLD VICTIM.

(3) the IMMATURE pedophile. This subtype, also known as the naive pedophile, will appear to be "mental" or quite strange. They tend to stalk around their own neighborhood, and will usually not travel great distances to get new victims. Their preferred form of intercourse is anal, then oral, but there are often times when they are completely happy just having fondled their victims. There are also times when they don't care what age their victim is. They tend to lead stressful lives.

http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewt ... 265#166265

User avatar
ixolite
Posts: 3089
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:19 am
Location: Berlin, D
Contact:

Re: Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

Post by ixolite »

Hector wrote:DEBUNKING MOIZ AMJAD'S APOLOGETICS THAT AISHA WAS NOT NINE-YEARS-OLD

INTRODUCTION

Some modernist Islamic apologists try to cast doubt on the age of Aisha when she married and had sex with Muhammad despite the many sahih hadiths in which Aisha explicitly and directly states that she was nine years old at the time. They are clearly embarrassed that their pedophile Prophet married and had sex with a nine-year-old CHILD, and they sometimes seek to explain that Aisha was in fact not nine-years-old as the SAHIH HADITHS of Aisha’s own testimony claim, but some other ages derived from misquotations, indirect sources, fuzzy dating techniques, and downright slander.

The most common of these arguments is propounded by the “Learner”, or Moiz Amjad, based on the work of Habib ur Rahman Kandhalwi (urdu) as presented in his booklet, "Tehqiq e umar e Siddiqah e Ka'inat").
http://www.understanding-islam.com/rela ... ion&did=89
http://www.understanding-islam.com/ri/mi-004.htm

Other transmitters of these arguments include TO Shavanas and Zahid Aziz.
http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_1 ... prover.htm
http://www.muslim.org/islam/aisha-age.php


I will now proceed to show the polemics of Moiz Amjad to be illogical rubbish. The question that escapes the minds of the simpletons accepting Amjad’s polemics is ‘why they would believe sources that clearly derive different ages for Aisha when she first had sex with Muhammad.’

When one examines the work of Amjad, one sees that his arguments contradict and debunk each other. His argument # 5 says she was 14 to 21 years old. However, his argument # 6 says she was 15+, his argument # 7 says she was 17 or 18, his argument # 8 says Aisha was 14+, his argument # 9 says she was 12+, and his argument # 12 says she was 12.

In other words, each and every one of his evidence contradicts and debunks all the others. Which of these so-called arguments is correct? They can’t all be correct. Sadly, Amjad does not have a clue.

The simplest answer is that Amjad has used doubtful data and assumptions for his calculations. In reality, all his arguments are false. Instead of using SAHIH hadiths, Amjad uses non-sahih source material. Instead of using specific and clear age testimony, Amjad uses events that cannot possibly be dated with any degree of accuracy. Instead of using traditions of acknowledged authenticity, Amjad prefers to believe unsubstantiated slander and misquotations. Hardly solid foundation for establishing Aisha’s age when she first had sex with Muhammad. No wonder Amjad cannot provide a consistent answer to the question of Aisha’s age.

His argument appears to be that because he himself, using spurious information, derives multiple conflicting ages for the one specific event in Aisha’s life, then we must throw out what we know about her age at this event. In effect, Amjad is saying that just because he is using rubbish data, we have to throw out the sahih hadiths. I’m afraid to inform Amjad’s followers that this is not the logical outcome. Rather than discarding the good with the bad, we will merely throw out the bad; in this case, Amjad’s feeble attempt to obfuscate our understanding that Aisha was aged nine when she married and had sex with Muhammad.

I am greatly indebted to the following for this analysis:
* Dr Ali Sina at http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/si ... ha_age.htm
* Dr Shaykh Gibril Fouad Haddad, teacher of Fiqh at Sunnipath.com and Livingislam.org at http://www.ummah.org.uk/forum/showthrea ... ge=7&pp=20
* The muslimhope website at http://www.muslimhope.com/aishanine.htm




THE FIRST ARGUMENT
Moiz Amjad wrote:Most of these narratives are reported only by Hisham ibn `urwah reporting on the authority of his father. An event as well known as the one being reported, should logically have been reported by more people than just one, two or three.
This is a classic STRAW MAN. There is no requirement in Islam for multiple narrations. Even a single sahih hadith is sufficient to establish Islamic laws and practices.

Shaykh Haddad also debunks the claim that most of these narratives are reported only by Hisham ibn Urwah.
Gibril Haddad wrote:Try more than eleven authorities among the Tabi`in that reported it directly from `A'isha, not counting the other major Companions that reported the same, nor other major Successors that reported it from other than `A'isha.


THE SECOND ARGUMENT
Moiz Amjad wrote:It is quite strange that no one from Medinah, where Hisham ibn `urwah lived the first seventy one years of his life has narrated the event [from him], even though in Medinah his pupils included people as well known as Malik ibn Anas. All the narratives of this event have been reported by narrators from Iraq, where Hisham is reported to have had shifted after living in Medinah for seventy one years.
Another STRAW MAN. There is no requirement for a hadith to be narrated in Medinah for it to be considered sahih. Also, many events in the Prophet’s life were narrated by single narratives as well. Does that make them invalid? No. To demand multiple, independent narrations from Medinans is just setting up a standard that does not exist – i.e. a straw man.

Shaykh Haddad also refutes this argument by listing the people from Medinah who reported this event.
Gibril Haddad wrote:Al-Zuhri also reports it from `Urwa, from `A'isha; so does `Abd Allah ibn Dhakwan, both major Madanis. So is the Tabi`i Yahya al-Lakhmi who reports it from her in the Musnad and in Ibn Sa`d's Tabaqat. So is Abu Ishaq Sa`d ibn Ibrahim who reports it from Imam al-Qasim ibn Muhammad, one of the Seven Imams of Madina, from `A'isha. All the narratives of this event have been reported.

In addition to the above four Madinese Tabi`in narrators, Sufyan ibn `Uyayna from Khurasan and `Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn Yahya from Tabarayya in Palestine both report it.


THE THIRD ARGUMENT
Moiz Amjad wrote:Tehzeeb al-Tehzeeb, one of the most well known books on the life and reliability of the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet (pbuh) reports that according to Yaqub ibn Shaibah: "narratives reported by Hisham are reliable except those that are reported through the people of Iraq". It further states that Malik ibn Anas objected on those narratives of Hisham which were reported through people of Iraq (Vol. 11, pg. 48 - 51).

The actual statements, their translations and their complete references are given below:

Image

Yaqub ibn Shaibah says: He [i.e. Hisham] is highly reliable, his narratives are acceptable, except what he narrated after shifting to Iraq. (Tehzeeb al-Tehzeeb, Ibn Hajar Al-`asqalaaniy, Arabic, Dar Ihya al-turath al-Islami, Vol. 11, pg. 50)

Image

I have been told that Malik [ibn Anas] objected on those narratives of Hisham which were reported through people of Iraq. (Tehzi'bu'l-tehzi'b, Ibn Hajar Al-`asqala'ni, Arabic, Dar Ihya al-turath al-Islami, Vol. 11, pg. 50)
According to Shaykh Haddad, Amjad’s third argument is either misrepresentation or a lie. Apparently, the slander against Hisham ibn Urwah is unfounded and unsupported by closer reading of Amjad’s own reference.
Gibril Haddad wrote:Rather, Ya`qub said: "Trustworthy, thoroughly reliable (thiqa thabt), above reproach except after he went to Iraq, at which time he narrated overly from his father and was criticized for it." Notice that Ya`qub does not exactly endorse that criticism.

As for Malik, he reports over 100 hadiths from Hisham as is evident in the two Sahihs and Sunan! to the point that al-Dhahabi questions the authenticity of his alleged criticism of Hisham.

Indeed, none among the hadith Masters endorsed these reservations since they were based solely on the fact that Hisham in his last period (he was 71 at the time of his last trip to Iraq), for the sake of brevity, would say, "My father, from `A'isha? (abi `an `A'isha)" and no longer pronounced, "narrated to me (haddathani)".

Al-Mizzi in Tahdhib al-Kamal (30:238) explained that it became a foregone conclusion for the Iraqis that Hisham did not narrate anything from his father except what he had heard directly from him.

Ibn Hajar also dismisses the objections against Hisham ibn `Urwa as negligible in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib (11:45), saying: "It was clear enough to the Iraqis that he did not narrate from his father other than what he had heard directly from him".

In fact, to say that "narratives reported by Hisham ibn `Urwa are reliable except those that are reported through the people of Iraq" is major nonsense as that would eliminate all narrations of Ayyub al-Sakhtyani from him since Ayyub was a Basran Iraqi, and those of Abu `Umar al-Nakha`i who was from Kufa, and those of Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman from Kufa (the Shaykh of Abu Hanifa), and those of Hammad ibn Salama and Hammad ibn Zayd both from Basra, and those of Sufyan al-Thawri from Basra, and those of Shu`ba in Basra, all of whom narrated from Hisham!


THE FOURTH ARGUMENT
Moiz Amjad wrote:Meezaan al-Ai`tidaal, another book on the [life sketches of the] narrators of the traditions of the Prophet (pbuh) reports that when he was old, Hisham's memory suffered quite badly (Vol. 4, pg. 301 - 302)

The actual statement, its translation and its complete references is given below:

Image

When he was old, Hisham's memory suffered quite badly (Meezaan al-Ai`tidaal, Al-Zahabi, Arabic, Al-Maktabah al-Athriyyah, Sheikhupura, Pakistan, Vol. 4, pg. 301).
This is another slander in which the slanderer does not correlate Hisham’s memory loss with the ‘Aisha’s age’ hadiths. Hisham was born in 61 A.H. and died in 146 A.H. at Baghdad – meaning he was 85 years old when he died. He moved to Iraq when he was 71 years old. When did his memory fail him? The slanderer provide no answers.

In fact, Shaykh Haddad accuses Moiz Amjad of outright lying!
Gibril Haddad wrote:An outright lie, on the contrary, al-Dhahabi in Mizan al-I`tidal (4:301 #9233) states: "Hisham ibn `Urwa, one of the eminent personalities. A Proof in himself, and an Imam. However, in his old age his memory diminished, but he certainly never became confused. Nor should any attention be paid to what Abu al-Hasan ibn al-Qattan said about him and Suhayl ibn Abi Salih becoming confused or changing! Yes, the man changed a little bit and his memory was not the same as it had been in his younger days, so that he forgot some of what he had memorized or lapsed, so what? Is he immune to forgetfulness? [p. 302] And when he came to Iraq in the last part of his life he narrated a great amount of knowledge, in the course of which are a few narrations in which he did not excel, and such as occurs also to Malik, and Shu`ba, and Waki`, and the major trustworthy masters. So spare yourself confusion and floundering, do not make mix the firmly-established Imams with the weak and muddled narrators. Hisham is a Shaykh al-Islam. But may Allah console us well of you, O Ibn al-Qattan, and the same with regard to `Abd al-Rahman ibn Khirash's statement from Malik!"


THE FIFTH ARGUMENT
Moiz Amjad wrote:According to the generally accepted tradition, Ayesha (ra) was born about eight years before Hijrah. But according to another narrative in Bukhari (Kitaab al-Tafseer) Ayesha (ra) is reported to have said that at the time Surah Al-Qamar, the 54th chapter of the Qur'an , was revealed, "I was a young girl". The 54th Surah of the Qur'an was revealed nine years before Hijrah. According to this tradition, Ayesha (ra) had not only been born before the revelation of the referred surah, but was actually a young girl (jariyah), not an infant (sibyah) at that time. Obviously, if this narrative is held to be true, it is in clear contradiction with the narratives reported by Hisham ibn `urwah. I see absolutely no reason that after the comments of the experts on the narratives of Hisham ibn `urwah, why we should not accept this narrative to be more accurate.

The actual statements referred to in the above paragraph, their translations and their complete references are given below:

Image

Ayesha (ra) said: I was a young girl, when verse 46 of Surah Al-Qamar, [the 54th chapter of the Qur'an ], was revealed. (Sahih Bukhari, Kitaab al-Tafseer, Arabic, Bab Qaulihi Bal al-saa`atu Maw`iduhum wa al-sa`atu adhaa wa amarr)
The precise date of the revelation of Surah al-Qamar is unknown. Ibn Hajar, Maududi, and other traditionalists said it was revealed 5 years before Hijrah (muslimhope). Zahid Aziz said it was revealed before 6 BH. Khatib said it was revealed in 8 BH. Amjad does not name his source for his claim that the verse was revealed in 9 BH. The point is that the precise date of revelation of Surah al-Qamar is unknown, and using an imprecise date to calculate Aisha’s age is not only ridiculous but stupid. However, if an estimate must be used, then why not use Ibn Hajar’s estimate which is more authoritative and traditionally accepted than Amjad’s unnamed source?

Shaykh Haddad confirms this. He also proves that the traditional estimate of the revelation of Surah al-Qamar is consistent with Aisha’s age being nine years.
Gibril Haddad wrote:Not true. The hadith Masters, Sira historians, and Qur'anic commentators agree that the splitting of the moon took place about five years before the Holy Prophet's (upon him blessings and peace) Hijra to Madina.

Thus it is confirmed that our Mother `Aisha was born between seven and eight years before the Hijra and the words that she was a jariya or little girl five years before the Hijra match the fact that her age at the time Surat al-Qamar was revealed was around 2 or 3.

A two year old is not an infant. A two year old is able to run around, which is what jariya means. As for "the comments of the experts" they concur on 6 or 7 as the age of marriage and 9 as the age of cohabitation.
Thus, Amjad’s attempt to throw doubt on Aisha’s age by using a non-traditional (i.e. spurious) estimate for the date of revelation of Surah al-Qamar is easily debunked.

This is what Amjad later said, which totally debunks his own argument above.
The incident of the shaqq-al-Qamar (splitting of the moon) that has been mentioned in it, determines its period of revelation precisely. The traditionists and commentators are agreed that this incident took place at Mina in Makkah about five years before the Holy Prophet's Hijra to Madinah.

Ibn Hajar in his commentary "Fath al-Baariy" has indeed mentioned that the incident of the splitting of the moon took place around 5 years before the Hijrah. Nevertheless, this statement does not qualify as an "agreement" of 'traditionalists and commentators'. Maududi's referred statement, in my opinion, is not adequately substantiated. A more accurate statement would have been that all the commentators and traditionalists agree on the point that the incident of the splitting of the moon took place while the Prophet (pbuh) was in Mekkah.

As for the time of the revelation of Surah Al-Qamar, it can be estimated through the sequence of the revelation of the Surahs as given in Ibn Shihaab's "Tanzeel al-Qur'an"[2], Suyutiy's "Al-Ittiqaan"[3], and Al-Zarkashiy's "Al-Burhan fi Uloom al-Qur'an"[4]. According to each of these sources, the period of revelation of Surah Al-Qamar was the same as that of Al-Balad (90), Qaaf (50), Al-Humazah (104), Al-Tariq (86), Al-Jinn (72) and Saad (38 ). All of these Surahs are generally held to be revealed during the initial period of prophethood. Maududi, in his commentary, has acknowledged that each of these Surahs was revealed during the initial period of the Prophet's ministry.
So now we have Amjad backtracking on his claim that the date of revelation of Surah al-Qamar can be determined precisely. Initially he claimed it was in 9BH. Now he says it’s some undefined time in the Meccan period. Thus, it can be seen that Amjad himself has finally seen the absurdity of his own argument.



THE SIXTH ARGUMENT
Moiz Amjad wrote:According to a number of narratives, Ayesha (ra) accompanied the Muslims in the battle of Badr and Uhud. Furthermore, it is also reported in books of hadith and history that no one under the age of 15 years was allowed to take part in the battle of Uhud. All the boys below 15 years of age were sent back. Ayesha's (ra) participation in the battle of Badr and Uhud clearly indicate that she was not nine or ten years old at that time. After all, women used to accompany men to the battle fields to help them, not to be a burden on them.

A narrative regarding Ayesha's (ra) participation in Badr is given in Muslim, Kitaab al-jihaad wa al-siyar, Arabic, Bab karahiyah al-isti`anah fi al-ghazwi bikafir. Ayesha (ra) while narrating the journey to Badr and one of the important events that took place in that journey, says:

Image

When we reached Shajarah.

It is quite obvious from these words that Ayesha (ra) was with the group traveling toward Badr.

A narrative regarding Ayesha's (ra) participation in the battle of `uhud is given in Bukhari, Kitaab al-jihaad wa al-siyar, Arabic, Baab Ghazwi al-nisaa wa qitalihinna ma`a al-rijaal.

Image

Anas reports that On the day of Uhud, people could not stand their ground around the Prophet (pbuh). [On that day,] I saw Ayesha (ra) and Umm-e-Sulaim (ra), they had pulled their dress up from their feet [to save them from any hindrance in their movement]."

As far as the fact that children below 15 years were sent back and were not allowed to participate in the battle of `uhud, it is narrated in Bukhari, Kitaab al-maghaazi, Baab ghazwah al-khandaq wa hiya al-ahzaab, Arabic.

Image

Ibn `umar (ra) states that the Prophet (pbuh) did not permit me to participate in Uhud, as at that time, I was fourteen years old. But on the day of Khandaq, when I was fifteen years old, the Prophet (pbuh) permitted my participation."
Ali Sina refuted this argument:
Sina wrote:This is a weak excuse. When the Battle of Badr and Uhud occurred Ayesha was 10 to 11 years old. She did not go to be a warrior, like the boys. She went to keep Muhammad warm during the nights. Boys who were less than 15 were sent back, but this did not apply to her.
Women and young children went to the battlefields to perform other functions.
muslimhope wrote:The women and young children went on the battlefield after the battle and gave water to the wounded Muslims and finished off the enemy wounded. al-Tabari vol.12 p.127,146. During the days of the battle, the women and children were there to dig graves for the dead. al-Tabari vol.12 p.107.
Therefore, it is clear that the fifteen-year age threshold applied only to boys, and Amjad’s line of argument is clearly false.

Shaykh Haddad also showed that Amjad had used false or incomplete information.
Gibril Haddad wrote:First, the prohibition applied to combatants. It applied neither to non-combatant boys nor to non-combatant girls and women. Second, `A'isha did not participate in Badr at all but bade farewell to the combatants as they were leaving Madina, as narrated by Muslim in his Sahih. On the day of Uhud (year 3), Anas, at the time only twelve or thirteen years old, reports seeing an eleven-year old `A'isha and his mother Umm Sulaym having tied up their dresses and carrying water skins back and forth to the combatants, as narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim.
So, Aisha did not participate in Badr at all, despite Amjad’s assertion. It is also illuminating to know that Amjad had partially quoted the Uhud hadiths to falsely convey the impression that Aisha participated at Uhud when the hadiths are clear in that she was merely carrying water skins to the combatants. The last part of the hadith was omitted, either deliberately or inadvertently, an act some people may consider disingenuous.
Sahih Bukhari: Volume 4, Book 52, Number 131:
Narrated Anas: On the day (of the battle) of Uhad when (some) people retreated and left the Prophet, I saw 'Aisha bint Abu Bakr and Um Sulaim, with their robes tucked up so that the bangles around their ankles were visible hurrying with their water skins (in another narration it is said, "carrying the water skins on their backs"). Then they would pour the water in the mouths of the people, and return to fill the water skins again and came back again to pour water in the mouths of the people.


THE SEVENTH ARGUMENT
Moiz Amjad wrote:According to almost all the historians Asma (ra), the elder sister of Ayesha (ra) was ten years older than Ayesha (ra). It is reported in Taqreeb al-Tehzeeb as well as Al-Bidaayah wa al-Nihayah that Asma (ra) died in 73 hijrah when she was 100 years old. Now, obviously if Asma (ra) was 100 years old in 73 hijrah she should have been 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijrah. If Asma (ra) was 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijrah, Ayesha (ra) should have been 17 or 18 years old at that time. Thus, Ayesha (ra), if she got married in 1 AH (after hijrah) or 2 AH, was between 18 to 20 years old at the time of her marriage.

The relevant references required in this argument are provided below:

For the Difference of Ayesha's (ra) and Asma's (ra) Age:

According to Abd al-Rahman ibn abi zannaad:

Image

Asma (ra) was ten years older than Ayesha. (Siyar A`la'ma'l-nubala', Al-Zahabi, Vol. 2, pg. 289, Arabic, Mu'assasatu'l-risala'h, Beirut, 1992)

According to Ibn Kathir:

Image

She [i.e. Asma] was ten years elder to her sister [i.e. Ayesha]. (Al-Bidaayah wa al-Nihaayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol. 8, pg. 371, Arabic, Dar al-fikr al-`arabiy, Al-jizah, 1933)

For Asma's (ra) Age at Her Death in 73 AH

According to Ibn Kathir:

Image

She [i.e. Asma] witnessed the killing of her son during that year [i.e. 73 AH], as we have already mentioned, five days later she herself died, according to other narratives her death was not five but ten or twenty or a few days over twenty or a hundred days later. The most well known narrative is that of hundred days later. At the time of her death, she was 100 years old. (Al-Bidaayah wa al-Nihaayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol. 8, pg. 372, Arabic, Dar al-fikr al-`arabiy, Al-jizah, 1933).

According to Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaaniy:

Image

She [i.e. Asma (ra)] lived a hundred years and died in 73 or 74 AH." (Taqreeb al-Tehzeeb, Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaaniy, Pg. 654, Arabic, Bab fi al-nisaa, al-Harf al-alif, Lucknow)
Amjad’s objection to Sina’s analysis is similar to that of the previous argument.
Sina wrote:When someone gets that old, people don't care too much about her exact age. It is very easy to say she was 100 years old when in fact she was only 90. The difference is not noticeable to the younger folks and 100 is a round figure. Assuming the Hadith is authentic, it could be an honest mistake. Since in those days people did not carry birth certificates, it is very much likely that the person who reported her age to be 100 did not know that she was 10 years older than Ayesha and did not sit to make the calculations and deductions. She was not an important person and it did not occur to anyone that 1300 years later it would become the subject of a controversy. This could be a genuine mistake by the narrator of the Hadith.
Moiz Amjad wrote:Once again, the author is only pointing out towards a possibility. It should be kept in mind that the author is trying to establish that Ayesha (ra) was nine years old at the time of her marriage with the Prophet (pbuh). The author should be reminded that pointing out mere possibilities of error in the given information would not serve his purpose. Obviously, contrary to what the author contends, it is also "Possible" that the information given in the given in the cited paragraph is correct.

The author should also keep in mind that the target of my writings on the issue is not to "prove" that Ayesha (ra) was "X" years old at the time of the consummation of her marriage with the Prophet (pbuh). On the contrary, my objective was merely to show that the generally held view regarding Ayesha's (ra) age at the time of her marriage with the Prophet (pbuh) is not based upon contradiction-free information.
Apparently Amjad is not worried that his arguments all derive conflicting ages for Aisha, thus debunking each other.

Shaykh Haddad also challenges the accuracy of the information, thus casting doubt on Amjad’s source material.
Gibril Haddad wrote:Well, Ibn Kathir based himself on Ibn Abi al-Zinad's assertion that she was ten years older than `A'isha, however, al-Dhahabi in Siyar A`lam al-Nubala' said there was a greater difference than 10 years between the two, up to 19, and he is more reliable here.

Ibn Hajar reports in al-Isaba from Hisham ibn `Urwa, from his father, that Asma' did live 100 years, and from Abu Nu`aym al-Asbahani that "Asma' bint Abi Bakr was born 27 years before the Hijra, and she lived until the beginning of the year 74." None of this amounts to any proof for `A'isha's age whatsoever.
Using inaccurate data, Amjad assumes Asma was older than Aisha by 10 years when a more reliable source says the age difference is up to 19 years. Taking this more reliable information calculates Aisha’s age at around nine years old, completely in accordance with the sahih hadiths where Aisha herself said she was nine years old.



THE EIGHTH ARGUMENT
Moiz Amjad wrote:Tabari in his treatise on Islamic history, while mentioning Abu Bakr (ra) reports that Abu Bakr had four children and all four were born during the Jahiliyyah - the pre-Islamic period. Obviously, if Ayesha (ra) was born in the period of jahiliyyah, she could not have been less than 14 years in 1 AH - the time she most likely got married.

The original statement in Tabari, its translation and reference follows:

Image

All four of his [i.e. Abu Bakr's] children were born of his two wives - the names of whom we have already mentioned - during the pre-Islamic period. (Tarikh al-umam wa al-mamloo'k, Al-Tabari, Vol. 4, Pg. 50, Arabic, Dar al-fikr, Beirut, 1979)
Shaykh Gibril Haddad says that the evidence Amjad provided above is false.
Gibril Haddad wrote:Al-Tabari nowhere reports that "Abu Bakr's four children were all born in Jahiliyya" but only that Abu Bakr married both their mothers in Jahiliyya, Qutayla bint Sa`d and Umm Ruman, who bore him four children in all, two each, `A'isha being the daughter of Umm Ruman.


THE NINTH ARGUMENT
Moiz Amjad wrote:According to Ibn Hisham, the historian, Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam quite some time before `umar ibn al-Khattab (ra). This shows that Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam during the first year of Islam. While, if the narrative of Ayesha's (ra) marriage at seven years of age is held to be true, Ayesha (ra) should not have been born during the first year of Islam.

According to Ibn Hisham, Ayesha (ra) was the 20th or the 21st person to enter into the folds of Islam (Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, Ibn Hisham, Vol. 1, Pg. 227 - 234, Arabic, Maktabah al-Riyadh al-hadithah, Al-Riyadh) While `umar ibn al-khattab was preceded by forty individuals (Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, Ibn Hisham, Vol. 1, Pg. 295, Arabic, Maktabah al-Riyadh al-hadithah, Al-Riyadh).
Muslimhope shows that even if we were to believe that Aisha accepted Islam before Umar, it doesn’t mean this took place during the first year of Islam since Umar converted in 617AD, about 4 years after Aisha’s birth in 613AD. Thus, Amjad had made a miscalculation here.
muslimhope wrote:1. Nobody today really knows the order. In general there is lengthy disagreement on the order of who accepted Islam, as al-Tabari vol.5 p.80-87; vol.12 p.38 discuss. If they cannot even agree on the first five men, how can they know the 21st?

2. A’isha never converted to Islam, because she never remembered a time when Mohammed did not come by twice a day and her parents were not Muslims. This is prior to the first migration to Ethiopia (617 A.D.) (Bukhari 5:245 p.158).

3. ‘Umar became a Muslim just after the first migration to Ethiopia (617 A.D.) according to Ibn Ishaq p.155,156. So what Ibn Hisham counts as A’isha’s "conversion" could be between birth and three years old.
Besides disputing the claim that Ibn Hisham reported that Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam quite some time before `umar ibn al-Khattab, Shaykh Haddad also casts doubt on Amjad’s logic.
Gibril Haddad wrote:Ibn Hisham lists `A'isha among "those that accepted Islam because of Abu Bakr." This does not mean that she embraced Islam during the first year of Islam. Nor does it mean that she necessarily embraced Islam before `Umar (year 6) although she was born the previous year (year 7 before the Hijra) although it is understood she will automatically follow her father's choice even before the age of reason.


THE TENTH ARGUMENT
Moiz Amjad wrote:Tabari has also reported that at the time Abu Bakr planned on migrating to Habshah (8 years before Hijrah), he went to Mut`am - with whose son Ayesha (ra) was engaged - and asked him to take Ayesha (ra) in his house as his son's wife. Mut`am refused, because Abu Bakr had embraced Islam, and subsequently his son divorced Ayesha (ra). Now, if Ayesha (ra) was only seven years old at the time of her marriage, she could not have been born at the time Abu Bakr decided on migrating to Habshah. On the basis of this report it seems only reasonable to assume that Ayesha (ra) had not only been born 8 years before hijrah, but was also a young lady, quite prepared for marriage.

Unfortunately, I do not have the primary reference to this argument at the moment. The secondary reference for this argument is: Tehqiq e umar e Siddiqah e Ka'inat, Habib ur Rahman Kandhalwi, Urdu, Pg. 38, Anjuman Uswa e hasanah, Karachi, Pakistan

Muslimhope shows that Amjad’s logic is wrong and not based on fact.
muslimhope wrote:Even if this account is accurate, Arabs both then and today often betrothed girls soon after they were born. Abu Bakr had other daughters and it might have been one of them.
Shaykh Haddad also casts doubt as to the veracity of Amjad’s Tabari evidence, admittedly derived from a secondary reference that Amjad never checked.
Gibril Haddad wrote:Not at all, there is no mention of emigration in Tabari's account of Abu Bakr's discussion with Mut`im. Nor did he ever ask him to take `A'isha because there had been only some preliminary talk, not a formal arrangement. Umm Ruman, Abu Bakr's wife, reportedly said: "By Allah, no promise had been given on our part at all!" Rather, al-Tabari said that when news of the Prophet's interest in `A'isha came, he went to see Mut`im. Then Mut`im's wife manifested her fear that her son would become Muslim if he married into Abu Bakr's family. Abu Bakr then left them and gave his assent to the Prophet, upon him blessings and peace.



THE ELEVENTH ARGUMENT
Moiz Amjad wrote:According to a narrative reported by Ahmad ibn Hanbal, after the death of Khadijah (ra), when Khaulah (ra) came to the Prophet (pbuh) advising him to marry again, the Prophet (pbuh) asked her regarding the choices she had in her mind. Khaulah said: "You can marry a virgin (bikr) or a woman who has already been married (thayyib)". When the Prophet (pbuh) asked about who the virgin was, Khaulah proposed Ayesha's (ra) name. All those who know the Arabic language, are aware that the word "bikr" in the Arabic language is not used for an immature nine year old girl. The correct word for a young playful girl, as stated earlier is "Jariyah". "Bikr" on the other hand, is used for an unmarried lady, and obviously a nine year old is not a "lady".
The complete reference for this reporting of Ahmad ibn Hanbal is: Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Vol 6, Pg 210, Arabic, Dar Ihya al-turath al-`arabi, Beirut.
Sina has refuted this argument.
Sina wrote:This explanation is absolutely incorrect. Bikr means virgin and, just as in English is not age specific. In fact Ayesha was the second wife of Muhammad (after Khadijah) but Muhammad did not consummate his marriage with her for three years because she was too young. Instead he had to content himself with Umma Salamah, until Ayesha matured a little bit more. It would not have made sense to marry a beautiful woman like Ayesha and wait for three years to take her home.
And Amjad has agreed:
Moiz Amjad wrote:The author is quite right. Bikr in the Arabic language does, in fact, mean 'virgin'. However, I was actually referring to the usage of the word, not its literal meaning. It is correct that literally the word 'Bikr', like the word "virgin" refers to a biological reality, however, also just as the word 'virgin', the word 'Bikr', in the Arabic language, is used for a young woman, who has not yet had sexual contact, not for a child.


THE TWELFTH ARGUMENT
Moiz Amjad wrote:According to Ibn Hajar, Fatimah (ra) was five years older than Ayesha (ra). Fatimah (ra) is reported to have been born when the Prophet (pbuh) was 35 years old. Thus, even if this information is taken to be correct, Ayesha (ra) could by no means be less than 14 years old at the time of hijrah, and 15 or 16 years old at the time of her marriage.

Ibn Hajar's original statement, its translation and reference follows:

Image

Fatimah (ra) was born at the time the Kaa`bah was rebuilt, when the Prophet (pbuh) was 35 years old... she (Fatimah) was five years older that Ayesha (ra). (Al-Isabah fi Tamyeez al-Sahaabah, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaniy, Vol. 4, Pg. 377, Arabic, Maktabah al-Riyadh al-Haditha, al-Riyadh, 1978)
Using Fatima’s age difference with Aisha to refute the Aisha’s Age sahih hadiths is a logical fallacy because the biography of Fatima is conflicting. Nobody knows for sure when Fatima was born (when her father was a nobody), and though her death was well-recorded her age at death is not known for certain.

The traditional account is that she was born on Friday, 20th jumada ` th-thaaniyah in the fifth year after the declaration of the prophet - hood (615 AD), which means she was about the same age as Aisha.
http://www.hadith.net/english/prophet/fatimah.htm
http://www.ummah.net/khoei/fatima.htm
The most predominant view in the traditions transmitted by our traditionists is that Fatimah az-Zahra' was born in Mecca, on the twentieth of Jumada 'l-Akhirah, in the fifth year of the Prophet's apostolic career. It is also asserted that when the Prophet died, Fatimah was eighteen years and seven months old.

It is reported on the authority of Jabir ibn Yazid that (the fifth Imam) al-Baqir was asked: "How long did Fatimah live after the Messenger of Allah?" He answered: "Four months; she died at the age of twenty-three." This view is close to that reported by the traditionists of the (Sunni) majority. They have asserted that she was born in the forty-first year of the. Messenger of Allah's life. This means that she was born one year after the Prophet was sent by Allah as a messenger. The scholar Abu Sa'id al-Hafiz relates in his book Sharafu' n-Nabiyy that all the children of the Messenger of Allah were born before Islam except Fatimah and Ibrahim, who were born in Islam.

Reference: Abu Ali al-Fadl ibn al-Hasan ibn al-Fadl at-Tabrisi (c. 468/1076 - 548/1154)
http://home.swipnet.se/islam/A_Personal ... a(a.s).htm

Some say she was born ten years earlier than Aisha. Those who believe this also believe Fatima was aged 29 years when she died, not the 18 years traditionally believed.
muslimhope wrote:Sunan Nasa’i vol.1 #29 p.115-116 actually says that Fatima was 29 years old when she died (six months after Mohammed), which makes her ten years older than A’isha. So somebody forgot a date somewhere. The authoritative hadiths of Sunan Nasa’i would generally be trusted more than Ibn Hajar, Regardless, though A’isha was younger.
Sina has refuted the accuracy of Amjad’s information:
Sina wrote:Of course this information cannot be taken as correct. If Ayesha was five years older than Fatimah, and Fatimah was born when the Prophet was 35 years old, then Ayesha was only 30 years younger than the Prophet. So at the time of her marriage when the Prophet was 54, Ayesha must have been 24 years old. This is not certainly correct, for the reasons explained above and also it contradicts the Hadith that the apologist quoted about the age of Asma, Ayesha’s sister, who according to that Hadith was 10 years older that Ayesha and died in 73 Hijra. So at the time of Hijra Asma must have been 100 –73 = 27 years old, but according to this Hadith she was 34 years old.
Shaykh Gibril Haddad showed that Ibn Hajar was merely reporting what some narrators reported, not his own conclusion, and Amjad chose the wrong narration and also wrongly attributed that narration to Ibn Hajar, who was merely the reporter.
Gibril Haddad wrote:Ibn Hajar mentions two versions: (1) al-Waqidi's narration that Fatima was born when the Prophet was 35; and (2) Ibn `Abd al-Barr's narration that she was born when he was 41, approximately one year more or less before Prophethood, and about five years before `A'isha was born. The latter version matches the established dates.
In conclusion, Fatima’s birth date is uncertain. Despite this, Amjad used a non-traditional estimate to cast doubt on Aisha’s age, when the traditional account exactly matches the established facts. Note that Amjad omitted the traditional account in his Ibn Hajar reference, choosing instead one that is clearly in error. Some might view this deliberate omission to be disingenuous.



THE THIRTEENTH ARGUMENT
Moiz Amjad wrote:In my opinion, neither was it an Arab tradition to give away girls in marriage at an age as young as nine or ten years, nor did the Prophet (pbuh) marry Ayesha (ra) at such a young age. The people of Arabia did not object to this marriage, because it never happened in the manner it has been narrated.
No credence should be given to mere ‘opinion’ when there are sahih hadiths that explicitly state that Aisha married and had sex with Muhammad when she was nine years old.

Although an ad hominem, this neatly summarizes what a Muslim scholar thinks about Moiz Amjad’s scholarship.
Gibril Haddad wrote:Those that itch to follow misguidance always resort to solipsisms because they are invariably thin on sources. In this particular case "the Learner" proves to be ignorant and dishonest. It is no surprise he moves on every single point, without exception, from incorrect premises to false conclusions.


CONCLUSION

Moiz Amjad has presented a series of arguments as to why the generally accepted ‘Sunni’ understanding of Aisha’s age (i.e. nine-years-old) when she married and had sex with Muhammad, based on commonly known narratives, is erroneous and contradictory.

However, on closer inspection, it appears he has produced arguments that can be broadly categorized into these categories:

A. Unjustified slanders against Hisham ibn Urwah and the Iraqi narrators.
B. The use of non-sahih information to refute otherwise sahih hadiths.
C. The use of secondary, indirect sources in preference of direct testimonies.
D. The use of ‘imprecise’ dating in preference to specific dates and statements of age.
E. The use of misquoted references and erroneous information.
F. The use of incorrect logic.
G. Personal opinion.

For these reasons, I reject Moiz Amjad’s attempt to discredit the ‘Aisha age’ hadiths, particularly those of Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim.

It astounds me that Moiz Amjad is apparently unperturbed that his arguments derive conflicting ages for when Aisha married and had sex with Muhammad. A reasonable person would see that this means that his arguments debunk each other.

For the sake of scholarship I will now attach all the ‘Aisha age’ hadiths, both sahih and less sahih, noting that there is NO CONTRADICTION in the sahih hadiths of Bukhari, Muslim and Ibn Majah, and also those of Abu Dawud. The only “minor” contradictions are with those of ‘lesser’ authenticity such as the works of Tabari.

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3309:
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house at the age of nine. She further said: We went to Medina and I had an attack of fever for a month, and my hair had come down to the earlobes. Umm Ruman (my mother) came to me and I was at that time on a swing along with my playmates. She called me loudly and I went to her and I did not know what she had wanted of me. She took hold of my hand and took me to the door, and I was saying: Ha, ha (as if I was gasping), until the agitation of my heart was over. She took me to a house, where had gathered the women of the Ansar. They all blessed me and wished me good luck and said: May you have share in good. She (my mother) entrusted me to them. They washed my head and embellished me and nothing frightened me. Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) came there in the morning, and I was entrusted to him.

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3310:
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3311
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64
Narrated 'Aisha:
that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 65
Narrated 'Aisha:
that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death)." what you know of the Quran (by heart)'

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88
Narrated 'Ursa:
The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Number 236.
Narrated Hisham's father:
Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Number 234
Narrated Aisha:
The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

Abu Dawud, Vol. 2, Number 2116
Aisha said, "The Apostle of Allah married me when I was seven years old." (The narrator Sulaiman said: "Or six years."). "He had intercourse with me when I was 9 years old."

Sunan Abu-Dawud Book 41, Number 4915
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:
The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) married me when I was seven or six. When we came to Medina, some women came. According to Bishr's version: Umm Ruman came to me when I was swinging. They took me, made me prepared and decorated me. I was then brought to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him), and he took up cohabitation with me when I was nine. She halted me at the door, and I burst into laughter.

Sunan Abu-Dawud Book 41, Number 4916
Narrated AbuUsamah: The tradition mentioned above (No. 4915) has also been transmitted by AbuUsamah in a similar manner through a different chain of narrators. This version has: "With good fortune." She (Umm Ruman) entrusted me to them. They washed my head and redressed me. No one came to me suddenly except the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) in the forenoon. So they entrusted me to him.

Sunan Abu-Dawud Book 41, Number 4917
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin: When we came to Medina, the women came to me when I was playing on the swing, and my hair was up to my ears. They brought me, prepared me, and decorated me. Then they brought me to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) and he took up cohabitation with me, when I was nine.

When Hadrat ‘A’isha passed nine years of married life, the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) fell in mortal sickness. On the 9th or the 12th of Rabi-ul-Awwal 11 A.H., he left this mortal world…Hadrat ‘A’isha was eighteen years of age at the time when the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) passed away and she remained a widow for forty-eight years till she died at the age of sixty-seven." Sunan Nasa’i 1 #18 p.108

A’isha was married when she was six years old, and nine when she went to Mohammed’s house. Ibn-i-Majah 3:1876 p.133

A’isha was married at seven, went to Mohammed’s house at nine, and was 18 when Mohammed died. According to al-Zawa’id, its isnad is sahih according to the condition of Bukhari. However Abu ‘Ubaida did not hear from his father, so it is munqata (has a gap) Ibn-i-Majah 3:1877 p.134

‘Aisha was 6 (or 7) years old when she was married, and the marriage was consummated when she was nine years old. al-Tabari vol.9 p.129-131. Muhammad b. ‘Amr is one of the transmitters.

‘Aisha was 6-7 when married, and came the marriage was consummated when she was 9-10, three months after coming to (sic – from) Mecca. al-Tabari vol.7 p.7. The chain of transmission includes an unnamed man from the Quraysh.

Aisha said she was nine years old when the act of consummation took place and she had her dolls with her. Mishkat al-Masabih, Vol. 2, p 77
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewt ... 266#166266

User avatar
ixolite
Posts: 3089
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:19 am
Location: Berlin, D
Contact:

Re: Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

Post by ixolite »

Hector wrote:DEBUNKING SHANAVAS' APOLOGETICS THAT AISHA WAS NOT NINE-YEARS-OLD

INTRODUCTION

Some modernist Islamic apologists try to cast doubt on the age of Aisha when she married and had sex with Muhammad despite the many sahih hadiths in which Aisha explicitly and directly states that she was nine years old at the time. They are clearly embarrassed that their pedophile Prophet married and had sex with a nine-year-old CHILD, and they sometimes seek to explain that Aisha was in fact not nine-years-old as the SAHIH HADITHS of Aisha’s own testimony claim, but some other ages derived from indirect sources, fuzzy dating techniques, and downright slander.

The most common of these arguments is propounded by the “Learner”, or Moiz Amjad, based on the work of Habib ur Rahman Kandhalwi (urdu) as presented in his booklet, "Tehqiq e umar e Siddiqah e Ka'inat"). Other transmitters of these arguments include TO Shavanas and Zahid Aziz.

http://www.understanding-islam.com/rela ... ion&did=89
http://www.understanding-islam.com/ri/mi-004.htm
http://www.muslim.org/islam/aisha-age.php

The article by T.O. Shanavas appears in the following website:
http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_1 ... prover.htm

I will now proceed to show the polemics of T.O. Shanavas to be illogical rubbish. The question that escapes the minds of the simpletons accepting the polemics of Shanavas and Amjad is ‘why they would bother using sources that clearly derive different ages for Aisha when she first had sex with Muhammad.’

When one examines the work of Shanavas, one sees that his arguments contradict and debunk each other. His evidence # 2 says Aisha was 14 years old. However his evidence # 3 says she was 12, his evidence # 4 says she was 17 or 18, his evidence #5 says she was 15+, and his evidence # 6 says she was 14-21.

In other words, each and every one of his evidence contradicts and debunks all the others. Which of these so-called evidence is correct? They can’t all be correct. Sadly, Shanavas does not have a clue.

The simplest answer is that Shanavas has used doubtful data and assumptions for his calculations. In reality, all his arguments are false. Instead of using SAHIH hadiths, Shanavas uses non-sahih source material. Instead of using specific and clear age testimony, Shanavas uses events that cannot possibly be dated with any degree of accuracy. Instead of using traditions of acknowledged authenticity, Shanavas prefers to believe unsubstantiated slander and misquotations. Hardly solid foundation for establishing Aisha’s age when she first had sex with Muhammad. No wonder Shanavas cannot provide a consistent answer to the question of Aisha’s age.

His argument appears to be that because he himself, using spurious information, derives multiple conflicting ages for the one specific event in Aisha’s life, then we must throw out what we know about her age at this event. In effect, Shanavas is saying that just because he is using rubbish data, we have to throw out the sahih hadiths. I’m afraid to inform Shanavas’ followers that this is not the logical outcome. Rather than discarding the good with the bad, we will merely throw out the bad; in this case, Shanavas’ feeble attempt to obfuscate our understanding that Aisha was aged nine when she married and had sex with Muhammad.

I am greatly indebted to the following for this analysis, particularly Shaykh Haddad, whose knowledge of Islamic literature has been invaluable.
* Dr Shaykh Gibril Fouad Haddad, teacher of Fiqh at Sunnipath.com and Livingislam.org at http://www.ummah.org.uk/forum/showthrea ... ge=7&pp=20
* Dr Ali Sina at http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/si ... ha_age.htm
* The muslimhope website at http://www.muslimhope.com/aishanine.htm



ANALYSIS
Shanavas wrote:EVIDENCE # 1 Reliability of Source

A. Most of these narratives printed in the Hadith books are reported only by Hisham ibn `urwah reporting on the authority of his father. First of all, more people than just one, two or three should logically have reported.

B. It is strange that no one from Medinah, where Hisham ibn `urwah lived the first seventy one years of his life has narrated the event, even though in Medinah his pupils included people as well known as Malik ibn Anas.

C. The origins of the report of the narratives of this event are people from Iraq, where Hisham is reported to have shifted after living in Medinah for seventy-one years.

D. Tehzibu'l-tehzib, one of the most well known books on the life and the reliability of the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet (pbuh) report that according to Yaqub ibn Shaibah: "He [Hisham] is highly reliable, his narratives are acceptable, except what he narrated after moving over to Iraq." (REF: Tehzi'bu'l-tehzi'b, Ibn Hajar Al-`asqala'ni, Dar Ihya al-turath al-Islami, 15th century. Vol 11, p. 50).

It further states that Malik ibn Anas objected on those narratives of Hisham which were reported through people of Iraq: “I have been told that Malik [ibn Anas] objected on those narratives of Hisham which were reported through people of Iraq." (REF: Tehzi'b u'l-tehzi'b, Ibn Hajar Al-`asqala'ni, Dar Ihya al-turath al-Islami, Vol.11, p. 50)

E. Mizanu'l-ai`tidal, another book on the life sketches of the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet (pbuh) reports: "When he was old, Hisham's memory suffered quite badly" (REF: Mizanu'l-ai`tidal, Al-Zahbi, Al-Maktabatu'l-athriyyah, Sheikhupura, Pakistan, Vol. 4, p. 301)

CONCLUSION: Based on these references, Hisham’s memory was failing and his narratives while in Iraq were unreliable. So, his narrative of Ayesha’s marriage and age are unreliable.
REBUTTAL:
This slander against Shaykh al-Islam Hisham ibn Urwah, Aisha’s own grand-nephew, has been debunked by Shaykh Gibril Haddad.
Gibril Haddad wrote:A. Try more than eleven authorities among the Tabi`in that reported it directly from `A'isha, not counting the other major Companions that reported the same, nor other major Successors that reported it from other than `A'isha.

B. Not so. Al-Zuhri also reports it from `Urwa, from `A'isha; so does `Abd Allah ibn Dhakwan, both major Madanis. So is the Tabi`i Yahya al-Lakhmi who reports it from her in the Musnad and in Ibn Sa`d's Tabaqat. So is Abu Ishaq Sa`d ibn Ibrahim who reports it from Imam al-Qasim ibn Muhammad, one of the Seven Imams of Madina, from `A'isha. All the narratives of this event have been reported.

C. Not so. In addition to the above four Madinese Tabi`in narrators, Sufyan ibn `Uyayna from Khurasan and `Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn Yahya from Tabarayya in Palestine both report it.

Nor was this hadith reported only by `Urwa but also by `Abd al-Malik ibn `Umayr, al-Aswad, Ibn Abi Mulayka, Abu Salama ibn `Abd al-Rahman ibn `Awf, Yahya ibn `Abd al-Rahman ibn Hatib, Abu `Ubayda (`Amir ibn `Abd Allah ibn Mas`ud) and others of the Tabi`i Imams directly from `A'isha.

This makes the report mass-transmitted (mutawatir) from `A'isha by over eleven authorities among the Tabi`in, not counting the other major Companions that reported the same, such as Ibn Mas`ud nor other major Successors that reported it from other than `A'isha, such as Qatada!

D. Rather, Ya`qub said: "Trustworthy, thoroughly reliable (thiqa thabt), above reproach except after he went to Iraq, at which time he narrated overly from his father and was criticized for it." Notice that Ya`qub does not exactly endorse that criticism.

As for Malik, he reports over 100 hadiths from Hisham as is evident in the two Sahihs and Sunan! to the point that al-Dhahabi questions the authenticity of his alleged criticism of Hisham.

Indeed, none among the hadith Masters endorsed these reservations since they were based solely on the fact that Hisham in his last period (he was 71 at the time of his last trip to Iraq), for the sake of brevity, would say, "My father, from `A'isha? (abi `an `A'isha)" and no longer pronounced, "narrated to me (haddathani)".

Al-Mizzi in Tahdhib al-Kamal (30:238) explained that it became a foregone conclusion for the Iraqis that Hisham did not narrate anything from his father except what he had heard directly from him.

Ibn Hajar also dismisses the objections against Hisham ibn `Urwa as negligible in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib (11:45), saying: "It was clear enough to the Iraqis that he did not narrate from his father other than what he had heard directly from him".

In fact, to say that "narratives reported by Hisham ibn `Urwa are reliable except those that are reported through the people of Iraq" is major nonsense as that would eliminate all narrations of Ayyub al-Sakhtyani from him since Ayyub was a Basran Iraqi, and those of Abu `Umar al-Nakha`i who was from Kufa, and those of Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman from Kufa (the Shaykh of Abu Hanifa), and those of Hammad ibn Salama and Hammad ibn Zayd both from Basra, and those of Sufyan al-Thawri from Basra, and those of Shu`ba in Basra, all of whom narrated from Hisham!

E. An outright lie, on the contrary, al-Dhahabi in Mizan al-I`tidal (4:301 #9233) states: "Hisham ibn `Urwa, one of the eminent personalities. A Proof in himself, and an Imam. However, in his old age his memory diminished, but he certainly never became confused. Nor should any attention be paid to what Abu al-Hasan ibn al-Qattan said about him and Suhayl ibn Abi Salih becoming confused or changing! Yes, the man changed a little bit and his memory was not the same as it had been in his younger days, so that he forgot some of what he had memorized or lapsed, so what? Is he immune to forgetfulness? [p. 302] And when he came to Iraq in the last part of his life he narrated a great amount of knowledge, in the course of which are a few narrations in which he did not excel, and such as occurs also to Malik, and Shu`ba, and Waki`, and the major trustworthy masters. So spare yourself confusion and floundering, do not make mix the firmly-established Imams with the weak and muddled narrators. Hisham is a Shaykh al-Islam. But may Allah console us well of you, O Ibn al-Qattan, and the same with regard to `Abd al-Rahman ibn Khirash's statement from Malik!"
Thank you, Shaykh Gibril Haddad. It seems that Shanavas had either misquoted or misrepresented his own references. Thus, it appears the slander against Hisham ib Urwa is unfounded and unsupported by authoritative Islamic texts. I must also add that Shanavas’ requirements that the Aisha age hadiths be transmitted by multiple narrators and by non-Medinans are straw man arguments. Nowhere in Sunni Islam is there the requirement for multiple narrators nor by Medinans only. These are non-existent standards that Shanavas created to support his specious arguments.


Shanavas wrote:EVIDENCE # 2 Betrothal
According to Tabari (also according to Hisham ibn ‘urwah, Ibn Hunbal and Ibn Sad), Ayesha was betrothed at seven years of age and began to cohabit with Prophet at the age of nine years. However, in another work, Al- Tabari says:

"All four of his [Abu Bakr's] children were born of his two wives -- the names of whom we have already mentioned -- during the pre-Islamic period."(REF: Tarikhu'l-umam wa'l-mamlu'k, Al-Tabari (died 922), Vol. 4, p. 50, Arabic, Dara'l-fikr, Beirut, 1979)

If Ayesha was betrothed in 620 CE (at the age of 7 years) and started to live with Prophet in 624 CE or 2 AH (at the age of nine years), she was born in 613 CE {(Year of living with Prophet MINUS Ayesha’a age at that time of living with Prophet EQUALS the date of birth of Ayesha (624CE – 9 yrs = 613 CE)}. So, based on one account of Al-Tabari the numbers show that Ayesha must have born (613 CE) three years after the beginning of revelation (610 CE). And yet another place Tabari says that Ayesha was born in Pre-Islamic time (in Jahilliyyah). If she were born in pre-Islamic time (before 610 CE), she would have be at least 14 years old. So, Tabari contradicts himself.

CONCLUSION: Al-Tabari is unreliable in the matter of determining Ayesha’s age.
REBUTTAL:
Shaykh Gibril Haddad says that the evidence Shanavas provided above is false.
Gibril Haddad wrote:Al-Tabari nowhere reports that "Abu Bakr's four children were all born in Jahiliyya" but only that Abu Bakr married both their mothers in Jahiliyya, Qutayla bint Sa`d and Umm Ruman, who bore him four children in all, two each, `A'isha being the daughter of Umm Ruman.
Thus, Tabari wasn’t so unreliable after all. The ‘so-called’ contradiction charge against Tabari was due to a misquotation.


Shanavas wrote:EVIDENCE # 3 The Age of Ayesha in Relation to the Age of Fatima

According to Ibn Hajar, “ Fatimah (ra) was born at the time the Ka`bah was rebuilt, when the Prophet (pbuh) was 35 years old... she (Fatimah) was five years older that Ayesha (ra).” (REF: Al-isabah fi tamyizi'l-sahabah, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Vol. 4, P. 377, Maktabatu'l-Riyadh al-haditha, al-Riyadh, 1978)

So, based on Ibn Hajar, Fatima was born when Prophet was 35 years old and Ayesha was 5 years younger than Fatima. If Ibn Hajar’s statement is factual, Ayesha was born when Prophet was forty years old (Prophet’s age at the birth of Fatima PLUS 5 years = 40 years). If Ayesha was married to Prophet when he was 52 years old, Ayesha’ age at marriage would be 12 years {(Prophet’s age at the time of marriage MINUS Prophet’s age at Ayesha’s birth (52 yrs – 40 years = 12 yrs)}.

CONCLUSION: Ibn Hajar, Tabari and Ibn Hisham and Ibn Humbal contradict each other. So, the marriage of Ayesha at seven years of age is a myth.
REBUTTAL:
Using Fatima’s age difference with Aisha to refute the Aisha’s Age sahih hadiths is a logical fallacy because the biography of Fatima is conflicting. Nobody knows for sure when Fatima was born (when her father was a nobody), and though her death was well-recorded her age at death is not known for certain.

The traditional account is that she was born on Friday, 20th jumada ` th-thaaniyah in the fifth year after the declaration of the prophethood (615 AD), which means she was about the same age as Aisha. http://www.hadith.net/english/prophet/fatimah.htm
http://www.ummah.net/khoei/fatima.htm
The most predominant view in the traditions transmitted by our traditionists is that Fatimah az-Zahra' was born in Mecca, on the twentieth of Jumada 'l-Akhirah, in the fifth year of the Prophet's apostolic career. It is also asserted that when the Prophet died, Fatimah was eighteen years and seven months old.

It is reported on the authority of Jabir ibn Yazid that (the fifth Imam) al-Baqir was asked: "How long did Fatimah live after the Messenger of Allah?" He answered: "Four months; she died at the age of twenty-three." This view is close to that reported by the traditionists of the (Sunni) majority. They have asserted that she was born in the forty-first year of the. Messenger of Allah's life. This means that she was born one year after the Prophet was sent by Allah as a messenger. The scholar Abu Sa'id al-Hafiz relates in his book Sharafu' n-Nabiyy that all the children of the Messenger of Allah were born before Islam except Fatimah and Ibrahim, who were born in Islam.

Reference: Abu Ali al-Fadl ibn al-Hasan ibn al-Fadl at-Tabrisi (c. 468/1076 - 548/1154)
http://home.swipnet.se/islam/A_Personal ... a(a.s).htm

Some say she was born ten years earlier than Aisha. Those who believe this also believe Fatima was aged 29 years when she died, not the 18 years traditionally believed.
muslimhope wrote:Sunan Nasa’i vol.1 #29 p.115-116 actually says that Fatima was 29 years old when she died (six months after Mohammed), which makes her ten years older than A’isha. So somebody forgot a date somewhere. The authoritative hadiths of Sunan Nasa’i would generally be trusted more than Ibn Hajar, Regardless, though A’isha was younger.
Sina has refuted the accuracy of Shanavas’ information:
Sina wrote:Of course this information cannot be taken as correct. If Ayesha was five years older than Fatimah, and Fatimah was born when the Prophet was 35 years old, then Ayesha was only 30 years younger than the Prophet. So at the time of her marriage when the Prophet was 54, Ayesha must have been 24 years old. This is not certainly correct, for the reasons explained above and also it contradicts the Hadith that the apologist quoted about the age of Asma, Ayesha’s sister, who according to that Hadith was 10 years older that Ayesha and died in 73 Hijra. So at the time of Hijra Asma must have been 100 –73 = 27 years old, but according to this Hadith she was 34 years old.
Shaykh Gibril Haddad showed that Ibn Hajar was merely reporting what some narrators reported, not his own conclusion, and Shanavas chose the wrong narration and also wrongly attributed that narration to Ibn Hajar, who was merely the reporter.
Gibril Haddad wrote:Ibn Hajar mentions two versions: (1) al-Waqidi's narration that Fatima was born when the Prophet was 35; and (2) Ibn `Abd al-Barr's narration that she was born when he was 41, approximately one year more or less before Prophethood, and about five years before `A'isha was born. The latter version matches the established dates.
In fact, we know Ibn Hajar believed that Aisha was nine years old when Muhammad married and had sex with her, therefore he couldn’t have believed the conflicting narration by al-Waqidi.
muslimhope wrote:Ibn Hajar’s Isabah IV, p.359-360 supports her being married by 9 years old
In conclusion, Fatima’s birth date is uncertain. Despite this, Shanavas used a non-traditional estimate to cast doubt on Aisha’s age, when the traditional account exactly matches the established facts. Note that Shanavas omitted the traditional account in his Ibn Hajar reference, choosing instead one that is clearly in error. Some might view this deliberate omission to be disingenuous.


Shanavas wrote:EVIDENCE # 4 The Age of Ayesha in Relation to the Age of Asma
According to Abda'l-Rahman ibn abi zanna'd: “Asma (ra) was ten years older than Ayesha. (REF: Siyar A`la'ma'l-nubala', Al-Zahabi, Vol. 2, p. 289, Arabic, Mu'assasatu'l-risalah, Beirut, 1992)

According to Ibn Kathir: "She [Asma] was elder to her sister [Ayesha] by ten years". (REF: Al-Bidayah wa'l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol. 8, p. 371, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933)

According to Ibn Kathir: "She [Asma] saw the killing of her son during that year [i.e. 73 AH], as we have already mentioned, and five days later she herself died. According to other narratives she died not after five days but ten or twenty or a few days over twenty or a hundred days later. The most well known narrative is that of hundred days later. At the time of her death, she was 100 years old." (REF: Al-Bidayah wa'l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir (died 1333), Vol. 8, Pg. 372, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933)

According to Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani: "She [Asma (ra)] lived a hundred years and died in 73 or 74 AH." (REF: Taqribu'l-tehzib, Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani, Pg 654, Arabic, Bab fi'l-nisa', al-harfu'l-alif, Lucknow)

According to almost all the historians Asma (ra), the elder sister of Ayesha (ra) was ten years older than Ayesha (ra). If Asma was 100 years old in 73 AH, she should have been 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijra { Asma’s age MINUS 73 hijrah EQUALS the age of Asma at the time of Hijrah( 100 – 73 or 74 = 27 or 28 )}.

If Asma (ra) was 27 or 28 years old at the time of Hijrah, Ayesha (ra), being younger by 10 years, should have been 17 or 18 years old {Asma’s age at the time of Hijarah MINUS the age difference between Asma and Ayesha EQUALS the age of Ayesha at the time of Hijarh (27 or 28 –10 = 17 or 18 yrs)}. Thus, Ayesha (ra), being 17 or 18 years of at the time of Hijra, she started to cohabit with Prophet between 19 to 20 years old (The Age of Ayesha at the time of Hijra + the year of Ayesha cohabiting with Prophet (19-20 + 1-2 Hijra) = The Age of Ayesha when she cohabit with Prophet (19 or 20 years).

Based on Hajar, Ibn Katir, and Abda'l-Rahman ibn abi zanna'd, age of Ayesha at the time living with Prophet would be 19 or 20 years. In evidence # 3, Ibn Hajar suggests that Ayesha is 12 years old and in evidence # 4 he contradicts himself with a seventeen or eighteen-year-old Ayesha (ra). What is the correct age, twelve or eighteen?

CONCLUSION: Ibn Hajar is an unreliable source for Ayesha’s age.
REBUTTAL:
This is another straw man argument. Aisha’s age when she married and had sex with Muhammad is usually determined from the hadiths of Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim and Sunan Abu Dawud.

Sina has refuted the accuracy of the information:
Sina wrote:Of course this information cannot be taken as correct. If Ayesha was five years older than Fatimah, and Fatimah was born when the Prophet was 35 years old, then Ayesha was only 30 years younger than the Prophet. So at the time of her marriage when the Prophet was 54, Ayesha must have been 24 yeas old. This is not certainly correct, for the reasons explained above and also it contradicts the Hadith that the apologist quoted about the age of Asma, Ayesha’s sister, who according to that Hadith was 10 years older that Ayesha and died in 73 Hijra. So at the time of Hijra Asma must have been 100 –73 = 27 years old, but according to this Hadith she was 34 years old.
Shaykh Haddad also challenges the accuracy of the information:
Gibril Haddad wrote:Well, Ibn Kathir based himself on Ibn Abi al-Zinad's assertion that she was ten years older than `A'isha, however, al-Dhahabi in Siyar A`lam al-Nubala' said there was a greater difference than 10 years between the two, up to 19, and he is more reliable here.

Ibn Hajar reports in al-Isaba from Hisham ibn `Urwa, from his father, that Asma' did live 100 years, and from Abu Nu`aym al-Asbahani that "Asma' bint Abi Bakr was born 27 years before the Hijra, and she lived until the beginning of the year 74." None of this amounts to any proof for `A'isha's age whatsoever.
Using inaccurate data, Shanavas maligns Ibn Hajar’s reliability. He assumes Asma was older than Aisha by 10 years when a more reliable source says the age difference is up to 19 years. Taking this more reliable information calculates Aisha’s age at around nine years old, completely in accordance with the sahih hadiths where Aisha herself said she was nine years old.


Shanavas wrote:EVIDENCE # 5 Battles of Badr and Uhud
A narrative regarding Ayesha's (ra) participation in Badr is given in Muslim, Kitabu'l-jihad wa'l-siyar, Bab karahiyati'l-isti`anah fi'l-ghazwi bikafir. Ayesha (ra) while narrating the journey to Badr and one of the important events that took place in that journey says: "when we reached Shajarah". It is quite obvious from these words that Ayesha (ra) was with the group travelling towards Badr.

A narrative regarding Ayesha's (ra) participation in the battle of `uhud is given in Bukhari, Kitabu'l-jihad wa'l-siyar, Bab Ghazwi'l-nisa' wa qitalihinna ma`a'lrijal: "Anas reports that On the day of Uhud, people could not stand their ground around the Prophet (pbuh). [On that day,] I saw Ayesha (ra) and Umm-i-Sulaim (ra), they had pulled their dress up from their feet [to avoid any hindrance in their movement]."

CONCLUSION: Ayesha (ra) was present in the battles of Uhud and Badr.

It is narrated in Bukhari, Kitabu'l-maghazi, Bab ghazwati'l-khandaq wa hiya'l-ahza'b: "Ibn `umar (ra) states that the Prophet (pbuh) did not permit me to participate in Uhud, as at that time, I was fourteen years old. But on the day of Khandaq, when I was fifteen years old, the Prophet (pbuh) permitted my participation."

Summary: Based on the above narratives, (a) the children below 15 years were sent back and were not allowed to participate in the battle of `uhud, (b) Ayesha participated in the battles of Badr and Uhud

CONCLUSION: Ayesha's (ra) participation in the battle of Badr and Uhud clearly indicates that she was not nine old but at least 15 years old or older. After all, women used to accompany men to the battlefields to help them, not to be a burden on them. This account is another contradiction about Ayesha’s age.
REBUTTAL:
Ali Sina refuted this argument:
Sina wrote:This is a weak excuse. When the Battle of Badr and Uhud occurred Ayesha was 10 to 11 years old. She did not go to be a warrior, like the boys. She went to keep Muhammad warm during the nights. Boys who were less than 15 were sent back, but this did not apply to her.
Women and young children went to the battlefields to perform other functions.
muslimhope wrote:The women and young children went on the battlefield after the battle and gave water to the wounded Muslims and finished off the enemy wounded. al-Tabari vol.12 p.127,146. During the days of the battle, the women and children were there to dig graves for the dead. al-Tabari vol.12 p.107.
Therefore, it is clear that the fifteen-year age threshold applied only to boys, and Shanavas’ line of argument is clearly false.

Shaykh Haddad also showed that Shanavas had used false or incomplete information.
Gibril Haddad wrote:First, the prohibition applied to combatants. It applied neither to non-combatant boys nor to non-combatant girls and women. Second, `A'isha did not participate in Badr at all but bade farewell to the combatants as they were leaving Madina, as narrated by Muslim in his Sahih. On the day of Uhud (year 3), Anas, at the time only twelve or thirteen years old, reports seeing an eleven-year old `A'isha and his mother Umm Sulaym having tied up their dresses and carrying water skins back and forth to the combatants, as narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim.
So, Aisha did not participate in Badr at all, despite Shanavas’ assertion. It is also illuminating to know that Shanavas may have partially quoted the Uhud hadiths to falsely convey the impression that Aisha participated at Uhud when the hadiths are clear in that she was merely carrying water skins to the combatants. The last part of the hadith was omitted, either deliberately or inadvertently, an act some people may consider disingenuous.
Sahih Bukhari: Volume 4, Book 52, Number 131:
Narrated Anas: On the day (of the battle) of Uhad when (some) people retreated and left the Prophet, I saw 'Aisha bint Abu Bakr and Um Sulaim, with their robes tucked up so that the bangles around their ankles were visible hurrying with their water skins (in another narration it is said, "carrying the water skins on their backs"). Then they would pour the water in the mouths of the people, and return to fill the water skins again and came back again to pour water in the mouths of the people.

Shanavas wrote:EVIDENCE # 6 Surat al Qamar
According to the generally accepted tradition, Ayesha (ra) was born about eight years before Hijrah. But according to another narrative in Bukhari (kitabu'l-tafseer) Ayesha (ra) is reported to have said: "I was a young girl (jariyah)" when Surah Al-Qamar was revealed. (REF: Sahih Bukhari, kitabu'l-tafsir, Bab Qaulihi Bal al-sa`atu Maw`iduhum wa'l-sa`atu adha' wa amarr)

The 54th surah of the Qur'an was revealed eight years before Hijrah (REF: The Bounteous Koran, M.M. Khatib, 1985). So, it was revealed in 614 CE {Year of Hijrah MINUS year of revelation of Al Qamar (622 CE – 8 = 614 CE)}. If Ayesha started living with Prophet (pbuh) at the age of nine in 623 CE or 624 CE, she was a newborn infant (a sibyah) {Year of Ayesha living with Prophet MINUS age of Ayesha when she started to live with Prophet (623 CE or 624 CE– 9 years=614 0r 615) at the time the Surah Al-Qamar was revealed.

According to the above tradition, Ayesha (ra) was actually a young girl (jariyah), not an infant (sibyah) in the year of revelation of Al Qamar. “Jariyah” means young playful girl (Lane’s Arabic English Lexicon). So, Ayesha, being a Jariyah not a sibyah (infant), must be somewhere between 6-13 years at the time of revelation of Al-Qamar, and thereby she must have been 14-21 years (6-13 + 8= 14-21 years) at the time she married Prophet.

CONCLUSION: This tradition also contradicts the marriage of Ayesha at the age of nine.
REBUTTAL:
The precise date of the revelation of Surah al-Qamar is unknown. Ibn Hajar, Maududi, and other traditionalists said it was revealed 5 years before Hijrah (muslimhope). Zahid Aziz claimed it was revealed before 6 BH. Khatib said it was revealed in 8 BH. Amjad does not name his source for his claim that the verse was revealed in 9 BH. The point is that the precise date of revelation of Surah al-Qamar is unknown, and using an imprecise date to calculate Aisha’s age is not only ridiculous but stupid. However, if an estimate must be used, then why not use Ibn Hajar’s estimate which is more authoritative and traditionally accepted than that of Khatib’s?

Shaykh Haddad confirms this. He also proves that the traditional estimate of the revelation of Surah al-Qamar is consistent with Aisha’s age being nine years.
Gibril Haddad wrote:Not true. The hadith Masters, Sira historians, and Qur'anic commentators agree that the splitting of the moon took place about five years before the Holy Prophet's (upon him blessings and peace) Hijra to Madina.

Thus it is confirmed that our Mother `Aisha was born between seven and eight years before the Hijra and the words that she was a jariya or little girl five years before the Hijra match the fact that her age at the time Surat al-Qamar was revealed was around 2 or 3.

A two year old is not an infant. A two year old is able to run around, which is what jariya means. As for "the comments of the experts" they concur on 6 or 7 as the age of marriage and 9 as the age of cohabitation.
Thus, Shanavas’ attempt to throw doubt on Aisha’s age by using a non-traditional (i.e. spurious) estimate for the date of revelation of Surah al-Qamar is easily debunked.


Shanavas wrote:EVIDENCE # 7. Arabic Term
According to a narrative reported by Ahmad ibn Hanbal, after the death of Khadijah (ra), when Khaulah (ra) came to the Prophet (pbuh) advising him to marry again, the Prophet (pbuh) asked her regarding the choices that she had in her mind. Khaulah said: "You can marry a virgin (bikr) or a woman who has already been married (thayyib)". When the Prophet (pbuh) asked the identity of the bikr (virgin), Khaulah proposed Ayesha's (ra) name.

All those who know the Arabic language, are aware that the word "Bikr" in the Arabic language is not used for an immature nine-year-old girl. The correct word for a young playful girl, as stated earlier is "Jariyah". "Bikr" on the other hand, is used for an unmarried lady without conjugal experience prior to marriage, as we understand the word, virgin, in English. Therefore, obviously a nine-year-old girl is not a "lady" (Bikr). (REF: Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Vol. 6, p. .210, Arabic, Dar Ihya al-turath al-`arabi, Beirut.)

CONCLUSION: The literal meaning of the word, Bikr (virgin), in the above Hadith is adult women with no sexual experience prior to marriage. Therefore, Ayesha was an adult woman at the time of her marriage.
REBUTTAL:
Sina has refuted this argument.
Sina wrote:This explanation is absolutely incorrect. Bikr means virgin and, just as in English is not age specific. In fact Ayesha was the second wife of Muhammad (after Khadijah) but Muhammad did not consummate his marriage with her for three years because she was too young. Instead he had to content himself with Umma Salamah, until Ayesha matured a little bit more. It would not have made sense to marry a beautiful woman like Ayesha and wait for three years to take her home.
Shaykh Haddad confirms this.
Gibril Haddad wrote:This is ignorant nonsense, bikr means a virgin girl, a girl who has never been married even if her age is 0 and there is no unclarity here whatsoever.

Shanavas wrote:EVIDENCE # 8. The Qur’anic Text

All Muslims agree that the Qur’an is the book of guidance. So, we need seek the guidance from the Qur’an to clear the smoke and the confusion created by the eminent men of the classical period of Islam in the matter of the age of Ayesha at her marriage. Does the Qur’an allow or disallow marriage of an immature child of seven years of age?

There are no verses that explicitly allow such marriage. However, I found a verse that guides us in our duty to raise a child deprived with the death of one or both parents. I believe that guidance of the Qur’an on the topic of raising orphans is also valid in the case of our own children. The Verse states:

“And make not over your property (property of the orphan), which Allah had made a (means of) support for you, to the weak of understanding, and maintain them out of it, clothe them and give them good education. And test them until they reach the age of marriage. Then if you find them maturity of intellect, make over them their property……” (Qur’an 4:5-6).

In the matter of children who has lost a parent, a Muslim is ordered to (a) feed them, (b) clothe them, (c) educate them, and (d) test them for maturity “until the age of marriage” before entrusting them with management of finances. Here the Qur’anic verse demands meticulous proof of their intellectual and physical maturity by objective test results before the age of marriage in order to entrust their property to them.

In the light of the above verses, no responsible Muslims would hand over financial management to a seven or nine year old immature girl. If we cannot trust a seven-year-old to manage the financial matters, she cannot be intellectually or physically fit for marriage also. Ibn Hambal (REF:Musnad Ahmad ibn Hambal, vol.6, p 33 and 99) claims that Ayesha at the age of nine was rather more interested to play with toy-horses than to take up the responsible task of a wife. Therefore, I would not believe that Abu Baker, a great Moimin, would betroth his immature seven-year-old daughter to fifty-year-old Prophet. Similarly, I would not believe that Prophet (pbuh) would marry a seven-year-old immature girl.

Another important duty demanded from the guardian of a child is “to educate them.” Let us ask the question, “How many of us in the Islamic Center believe that we can educate our children satisfactorily before they reach the age of seven or nine years?”

The answer is “none.” It is a logically impossible task to educate a child satisfactorily before the child attains the age of seven. Then, how can we believe that Ayesha was educated satisfactorily at the claimed age of seven at the time of her marriage? Abu Baker (ra) was a better judicious man than all of us. So, he definitely would have judged that Ayesha was a child at heart and was not satisfactorily educated as demanded by the Qur’an. He would not have married her to any one. If a proposal of marrying the immature and yet to be educated seven-year-old Ayesha came to Prophet (pbuh) he would have rejected it outright because neither Prophet (pbuh) nor Abu Baker (ra) would violate any clause in the Qur’an.

CONCLUSION: Marriage of Ayesha (ra) at the age of seven years would violate the maturity clause or requirement of the Qur’an. Therefore, the story of the marriage of the seven-year-old immature Ayesha is a myth.
REBUTTAL:
This argument is not correct. The Quran permits Muslim men marrying pre-pubescent girls. The evidence is as follows:

1. Surah 65:4 explicitly states that Muslim men can divorce pre-pubescent girls
Hilali & Khan: And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the 'Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubts (about their periods), is three months, and for those who have no courses [(i.e. they are still immature) their 'Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise, except in case of death] . And for those who are pregnant (whether they are divorced or their husbands are dead), their 'Iddah (prescribed period) is until they deliver (their burdens), and whosoever fears Allâh and keeps his duty to Him, He will make his matter easy for him.
2. Corroborating evidence from the tafsir of Ibn Kathir
The `Iddah of Those in Menopause and Those Who do not have Menses

Allah the Exalted clarifies the waiting period of the woman in menopause. And that is the one whose menstruation has stopped due to her older age. Her `Iddah is three months instead of the three monthly cycles for those who menstruate, which is based upon the Ayah in (Surat) Al-Baqarah. [see 2:228] The same for the young, who have not reached the years of menstruation. Their `Iddah is three months like those in menopause.
3. Corroborating evidence from Sahih Bukhari
Sahih Bukari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 63:

Narrated Sahl bin Sad: While we were sitting in the company of the Prophet a woman came to him and presented herself (for marriage) to him. The Prophet looked at her, lowering his eyes and raising them, but did not give a reply. One of his companions said, "Marry her to me O Allah's Apostle!" The Prophet asked (him), "Have you got anything?" He said, "I have got nothing." The Prophet said, "Not even an iron ring?" He Sad, "Not even an iron ring, but I will tear my garment into two halves and give her one half and keep the other half." The Prophet; said, "No. Do you know some of the Quran (by heart)?" He said, "Yes." The Prophet said, "Go, I have agreed to marry her to you with what you know of the Qur'an (as her Mahr)." 'And for those who have no courses (i.e. they are still immature). (65.4) And the 'Iddat for the girl before puberty is three months (in the above Verse).
Thus, rather than disallowing marriage to pre-pubescent girls, the Quran actually condones it.


Shanavas wrote:EVIDENCE # 9. Consent in Marriage

A women must be consulted and get her permission to make the marriage valid (REF:Mishakat al Masabiah, translation by James Robson, Vol. I, p.665). So, in the Muslim marriage, a credible permission from women is a pre-requisite for the marriage to be valid. By any stretch of imagination, the permission by a seven-year-old immature girl cannot be a valid authorization for marriage. It is unconceivable to me that Abu Baker, an intelligent man, would take seriously the permission of a seven-year-old girl to marry a fifty-year-old man. Similarly, Prophet would not have accepted permission given by an immature girl who, according to Muslim, took her toys with her when she went live with Prophet (pbuh).

CONCLUSION: Prophet (pbuh) did not marry seven-year-old Ayesha because it would have violated the requirement of valid permission clause of Islamic Marriage Decree. Therefore, Prophet married intellectually and physically mature Lady Ayesha.
REBUTTAL:
Shanavas is apparently unaware of the sahih hadith of Bukhari which states that a virgin’s permission is her silence. Since Aisha was a virgin, her permission would have been her silence.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 67:

Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "A matron should not be given in marriage except after consulting her; and a virgin should not be given in marriage except after her permission." The people asked, "O Allah's Apostle! How can we know her permission?" He said, "Her silence (indicates her permission)."


CONCLUSION
It can be seen from the analysis above that T.O. Shanavas produces illogical and contradictory evidence based on spurious data to support his case that Aisha was not aged nine when she married and had sex with Muhammad.

For the reason that all his so-called evidence come up with different ages for Aisha and for his use of non-sahih material to debunk sahih hadiths, and for his acceptance of unsubstantiated slander, it is clear he has not made his case. None of his so-called evidence stands the test of critical examination. In many cases, it appears that misquoting and misrepresentation may have taken place. In other cases, it appears that less authoritative sources are preferred over more authoritative sources that support the traditional case.

Shanavas also maligned the scholarship of Ibn Hajar and Tabari, calling them contradictory. Shaykh Gibril Haddad shows that this accusation against Ibn Hajar and Tabari is unwarranted.

Thus, Shanavas is debunked and the fact remains that Aisha was aged nine-years-old when she married and had sex with Muhammad as proven by the relevant sahih hadiths.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewt ... 267#166267

User avatar
ixolite
Posts: 3089
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:19 am
Location: Berlin, D
Contact:

Re: Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

Post by ixolite »

Hector wrote:DEBUNKING PARWEZ'S APOLOGETICS THAT AISHA WAS NOT NINE-YEARS-OLD

INTRODUCTION
Some modernist Islamic apologists try to cast doubt on the age of Aisha when she married and had sex with Muhammad despite the many sahih hadiths in which Aisha explicitly and directly states that she was nine years old at the time.

This article seeks to debunk one such Islamic apology from Parwez at http://www.tolueislam.com/Parwez/tkn/TK_III.htm

In the interest of intellectual curiosity I will attempt to add to this debate. However, I will apply the following rules, modeled on Islamic ones so as to be fair to both sides of the argument.

Rule No. 1: More ‘authentic’ narrations have precedence of less ‘authentic’ ones.

Rule No. 2: Internally contradictory arguments are automatically discredited and disqualified.

Rule No. 3: Imprecise dating is given less credence than more exact ones.

I note that Islamist Apologies of Aisha’s Age have common threads:
1. They generally use non-sahih material to debunk sahih hadiths.
2. They utilize indirect evidence in preference to more direct evidence.
3. They generate contradictory ages, betraying their spurious data and inconsistent logic.

I note the starting point in Parwez’s polemic is the age difference between Muhammad’s daughter, Fatima Zahra, and Aisha. Parwez uses suspect data to infer this, and bases his entire argument on this inference. However, the biography of Fatima Zahra is uncertain. Nobody knows for sure when she was born. Although her date of death is known, her age at death is uncertain. Therefore, to use Fatima Zahra’s life history to infer Aisha’s age is a logical fallacy.

Further, his polemics are not consistent with the traditional Muslim understanding of Muhammad’s biography. According to tradition, Muhammad was born around 570 AD, received his Revelation in 610 AD, migrated to Medinah in 622 AD and died in 632 AD. This means that he was aged 40 when he began his apostolic career, aged 52 when he migrated, and died when he was 62 years old.

The Islamist seems unaware that he has debunked himself by producing several different and conflicting estimates of Aisha’s age. These estimates range from 15 to 19. They cannot all be correct. In fact, it would be fair to say they are all wrong as will be proven below.

I am greatly indebted to the following for this analysis:
* Dr Shaykh Gibril Fouad Haddad, teacher of Fiqh at Sunnipath.com and Livingislam.org at http://www.ummah.org.uk/forum/showthrea ... ge=7&pp=20
* The muslimhope website at http://www.muslimhope.com/aishanine.htm

Ayesha's® Age at the time of her marriage

Section 3

The logic that is usually presented to support the marriage of minors is that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) married Ayesha® when she was six years old, and that by the time she was nine, she was sent off with him. As this is a very important matter, we thought it proper that the research on this issue be included here. For the first time, it explains a very important and rather crucial fact.

There are a few matters that are unanimously agreed to in our society; that is nobody has any difference of opinion about them. One of these is that Ayesha® was six years old at the time of her Nikah, and that by the time she was nine, she was sent to live with her husband. This misconception is accepted as a fact, to the extent that nobody ever feels the need for any research in this respect. Its foundation is based on those accounts that are in the compilations of "Bokhari", "Tabri" and "Tabqat Ibne Saad" and others. However, one finds in these and other similar history books, such assertions that in fact contradict these accounts. On the contrary, they prove that Ayesha® was much older at the time of her marriage.
This is UNTRUE. All the sahih hadiths of Aisha’s age are totally consistent that she was aged six when she was betrothed (zawaj), aged nine when she married (nikah) and consummated her marriage (i.e. had sex) with Muhammad.

Only by the introduction of non-sahih materials is the Aisha Age issue blurred.
Before we analyze this matter in light of historical evidence, it is necessary to understand one or two vital pre-requisites. Firstly, the laws in The Quran concerning marriage and divorce were revealed long after the migration of Nabi Muhammad (PBUH) from Makkah to Madina. Ayesha's® Nikah or sending-off happened either before or during the years of Migration. Therefore it is obvious that it happened before the relevant Quranic laws were revealed. As would be discussed later it was customary among Arabs to negotiate or finalize a proposal before marriage. This was the same as what in our society is called as giving one's word or getting engaged. The Quran mentions Nikah only, it does not mention any promises or engagements. As such, when those historical accounts state that Ayesha's® Nikah was performed at the age of six and she was sent-off at the age of nine, they were according to Arab society, reporting on getting engaged or the proposal being fixed; and 'sending-off' meant marriage. However, the real crucial question as to how old she was at the time of marriage, still remains.
Parwez is confused: Aisha’s zawaj was performed when she was six and her nikah was performed when she was aged nine, according to Imams Bukhari and Muslim.

http://www.exmuslim.com/com/evidence.htm
In Sahih Bukhari, vol. 7, #64, the root word used is "dakhala". From the Hans-Wehr Arabic-English Dictionary p273, it means "to enter, to pierce, to penetrate, to consummate the marriage, cohabit, sleep with a woman".

This is corroborated by the hadith of Sunan Abu Dawud Vol. 2, Number 2116:

Aisha said, "The Apostle of Allah married me when I was seven years old." (The narrator Sulaiman said: "Or six years."). "He had intercourse with me when I was 9 years old."


Secondly, Arabs did not have any calendar at that time, so they could not fix the date, day or month and the year of an occasion like we do today. The Hijra year was in fact first recognized in the time of Omer®. Till then they used to fixe the time of death or the birth of a person with reference to some special occasions or they referred to the birth of other children. Even in our society, elderly ladies fix or estimate or determine ages in this manner. For example, they will say that when Kangra was struck by an earthquake, Zaid was still a nursing baby and Umar was born three years after Zaid. Even our Messenger of God (PBUH) has been mentioned in history as having been born in Am Alfeel, the 'year of Elephants', which is the time when the governor of Yemen attacked Makkah with an army of elephants. It is obvious, when the time references to events are fixed in this manner, then it would not be surprising if ages varied, not by months, but by years. (Further examples would-be given in this section). Furthermore, if on the occasion of birth you do not mention the month, but just count the year, then when fixing somebody's age the difference of more or less of a year would be quite likely. For instance, if it is said that so and so was born in 1920; then if that person was born in January, the year 1920 should be counted while calculating the age; but if that person was born in December, then the age would be counted from 1921. Therefore for the purpose of estimating time in our history, this phenomenon should be kept in mind.
This is untrue. There are many sahih hadiths where Aisha herself tells of her age. To infer an inaccuracy in these testimonies is tantamount to accusing Aisha of being unable to count. Besides, the point remains unchallenged even if we were to accept Aisha’s age to be either eight or ten.
Thirdly as mentioned above, we started our calendar during the time of Omer® and on a regular basis it was promulgated from the time of Migration (Hijra). Although migration happened in the month of Rabiul Awal, the year of Hijra was counted from Muharram and the whole year was completed. Prior to the Migration, years were counted from the time when the Messenger of God (PBUH) started receiving the Revelation. He was forty years old when he was made the Messenger of God, (PBUH) and after that he stayed in Makkah for thirteen years. Then he migrated. That is, at the time of Migration he had completed fifty-three years of his age, and the fifty-fourth year had started. If the year of revelation is included, that is the fortieth year of his age, then the time of Migration would be the fifteenth year of the Revelation. On the other hand, if this first year is not included, then it would be the fourteenth year of Revelation. It is necessary to keep these points in mind because they affect the problem under consideration.
The ambiguity here is in the range of a few months at most, not years. To infer from a fuzziness of a few months to derive an ambiguity of two years is disingenuous, as Aisha would know when she was aged nine or seven or eleven.

(1) "Asad Alghaba" (Vol. IV, p. 377) mentions:

Fatima® was approximately five years older than Ayesha®

Therefore to gauge the year of birth of Ayesha®, we will have to find Fatima's® year of birth.
Even if we were to accept this, we note that Asad Alghaba does not carry the distinction of being sahih. Therefore, if calculations derived from non-sahih material contradict that of multiple and consistent sahih hadiths, it is clear that the non-sahih material is in error and not the sahih hadiths.

This is a logical fallacy in which the Islamist utilizes suspect source material to refute more authoritative (and hence considered genuine) data. Using Fatima’s age difference with Aisha to refute the Aisha’s Age sahih hadiths is a logical fallacy because the biography of Fatima is conflicting. Nobody knows for sure when Fatima was born, and though her death was well-recorded her age at death is not known for certain.

The traditional account is that she was born on Friday, 20th jumada ` th-thaaniyah in the fifth year after the declaration of the prophet - hood (615 AD), which means she was about the same age as Aisha. If so, she was about 1 to 2 years younger than Aisha, not five years older. Sunan Nasa’i vol.1 #29 p.115-116 said she was 10 years older than Aisha (see below). Thus, her date of birth is uncertain.

http://www.hadith.net/english/prophet/fatimah.htm
http://www.ummah.net/khoei/fatima.htm

Shaykh Gibril Haddad also showed that Ibn Hajar reported two different versions of when Fatima was born.
Gibril Haddad wrote:Ibn Hajar mentions two versions: (1) al-Waqidi's narration that Fatima was born when the Prophet was 35; and (2) Ibn `Abd al-Barr's narration that she was born when he was 41, approximately one year more or less before Prophethood, and about five years before `A'isha was born. The latter version matches the established dates.
In conclusion, Fatima’s birth date is uncertain. Despite this, Parwez used a non-traditional estimate to cast doubt on Aisha’s age, when the traditional account exactly matches the established facts.


(2) "Asad Alghaba" quotes again:

Abbas® went to Ali's® place, where he heard Fatima® saying to Ali®, "I am older than you". This prompted Abbas® to say that Fatima® was born when the Quraish were building Kaaba, and Ali® had been born a few years earlier (Vol. IV p. 280).
This is a blatant error. If Fatima is older than Ali, then Ali cannot have been born ‘a few years earlier’ than Fatima. Straight away, this argument collapses due to a stupid Islamist error.

The same book mentions at another place on (p. 377):

Fatima® was born in the year when Kaaba was being built, and Messenger of God's (PBUH) age was then thirty-five years.

"Tabqat Ibne Saad" (a book) tells us (Vol. VIII, p. 11):

Fatima® is the daughter of Allah's Messenger (PBUH). Her mother is Khadija®, daughter of Khuwailad bin Asad bin Abdul Uza bin Qasa. Fatima® was born to Khadija® during those days when the Quraish (the tribe) were building the "House of God". And this happened five years before revelation.

At another place it says:

Once Abbas® visited Ali's® house. There, Fatima® was saying to Ali® that she was older than him in age. Abbas® informed her, "Look Fatima, you were born during that time when Quraish were building Kaaba and the Messenger of God (PBUH) was thirty-five year old. And listen, Ali® you were born a few years before that" (Vol. VIII, p. 17).
The most charitable interpretation is that Fatima herself was unsure of when she was born, because she believed that she was older than Ali, although Abbas claimed that Ali was born a few years before her. In light of this uncertainty, can a sound determination of Aisha’s age be derived? The answer must be no.
One finds this statement about Fatima's® death in "Isteeab" (a book):

How old was Fatima® at the time of her death? There is difference of opinion. Zubair bin Bakar quoted from Abdullah Bin Alhasan that he was with Hasham Bin Abdulmalik, and Kalbi was there, too. Hasham inquired from Abdullah bin Al-Hasan "O Abu Mohammed, how old was Fatima® daughter of Allah's Messenger (PBUH)?" Abdullah Bin Alhasan replied, "Thirty years". After this Hasham asked Kalbi, "How old was Fatima®?" Kalbi answered, "Thirty-five years". This made Hasham point out to Abdullah Ibne Alhasan, "O Abu Mohammed, listen to what Kalbi is saying" Hasham preferred Kalbi's statement more. This made Abdullah Ibne Alhasan remark, "O leader of the Momins, ask me about my mother, and ask Kalbi about his mother". (Vol. VI, p. 752).

Fatima® died in 11 A.H. If she was thirty years old at that time, then she must have been born five years before the Revelation to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH). (The difference of months should be taken into account).

There is no doubt that, like other incidents, one finds many accounts about Fatima's® age at the time of her death. For example one quotes her age as twenty-four years; another estimates it at a little over eighteen years. But it appears that the correct estimate is that she was about thirty years old at the time of her death, and that she was born about five years before the Revelation.

This shows that Ayesha® was born when the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) was forty years old, about five years after the birth of Fatima®, meaning the year when he was made the Nabi (PBUH) (Refer to historical account at the end).
This is uncertainty heaped upon uncertainty. If Fatima’s age is uncertain, it is impossible to use Fatima’s age as the starting point to calculate Aisha’s age. The axiom “garbage in garbage out” is applicable in this case.

Parwez provides no evidence as to why he deems the estimate that Fatima died when she was about thirty years old to be correct – I suggest this is merely supposition and wishful thinking devoid of evidence. He claims that Fatima died in 11 AH, implying she was born in 19 BH, before the beginning of her father’s apostolic career. Parwez also claims Fatima was born five years before the Revelation, imply the date of Revelation to be 14 BH.

These facts do not accord with the traditionalist views. Fatima was born in the fifth year of Muhammad’s apostolic career, not before. She was aged only 18 years when she died, not 30. It is generally accepted that Muhammad died in 632 AD when he was 62 years old. We also know that Fatima died about four months after Muhammad. If we accept the traditional view of her birth date, then she was aged 18. However, if she was aged 30 when she died, she would have been born in 602 AD when Muhammad was only 32 years old.

However, Parwez accepted the assertion in Asad Algabra and Tabqat Ibne Saad that Muhammad was 35 years old when Fatima was born. Clearly the arithmetic is wrong here, proving Parwez’s account to be inconsistent with his asserted claims and thus must be in error.

Also, Parwez’s account of Fatima’s birth would date the Revelation in 14 BH when the traditional account is that it was in 610 AD or 12 BH.

In conclusion, Fatima’s age at death is highly uncertain. The traditionalists say she was 18 years 7 months old when she died. However Imam al-Baqir said she was aged 23. Sunan Nasa’i said she was aged 29. I must say that the traditionalist account is the most consistent of all the estimates of Fatima’s age at death.
The most predominant view in the traditions transmitted by our traditionists is that Fatimah az-Zahra' was born in Mecca, on the twentieth of Jumada 'l-Akhirah, in the fifth year of the Prophet's apostolic career. It is also asserted that when the Prophet died, Fatimah was eighteen years and seven months old.

It is reported on the authority of Jabir ibn Yazid that (the fifth Imam) al-Baqir was asked: "How long did Fatimah live after the Messenger of Allah?" He answered: "Four months; she died at the age of twenty-three." This view is close to that reported by the traditionists of the (Sunni) majority. They have asserted that she was born in the forty-first year of the. Messenger of Allah's life. This means that she was born one year after the Prophet was sent by Allah as a messenger. The scholar Abu Sa'id al-Hafiz relates in his book Sharafu' n-Nabiyy that all the children of the Messenger of Allah were born before Islam except Fatimah and Ibrahim, who were born in Islam.

Reference: Abu Ali al-Fadl ibn al-Hasan ibn al-Fadl at-Tabrisi (c. 468/1076 - 548/1154)
http://home.swipnet.se/islam/A_Personal ... a(a.s).htm
muslimhope wrote:Sunan Nasa’i vol.1 #29 p.115-116 actually says that Fatima was 29 years old when she died (six months after Mohammed), which makes her ten years older than A’isha. So somebody forgot a date somewhere. The authoritative hadiths of Sunan Nasa’i would generally be trusted more than Ibn Hajar, Regardless, though A’isha was younger.
(3) If we accept the account that Ayesha's® age was six years at the time of Nikah or engagement as correct, then it would mean that she was born in the fourth year of their calendar. This would be the fourth year after the Revelation or when Messenger of God (PBUH) was forty-four years old. Since the occasion of Nikah (or engagement) is also quoted as having happened in the tenth year of Revelation, this meaning that Messenger of God (PBUH) was fifty at that time. This statement has many reasons to be wrong. For example, Ibne Saad has quoted in "Tabqat" to have said that when the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) sent his proposal for Ayesha® to Abu Bakr®, he replied, "O Messenger of Allah (PBUH), I have already promised her to Mutam Bin Adi Bin Nofil Bin Abd Munaf for his son Jabeer. Therefore, give me enough time to get her back from them" So Abu Bakr® acted accordingly.
Parwez continues to confuse zawaj and nikah. Further, Ibne Saad’s story does not prove when Aisha was born.


If Ayesha® was six year old at that time, then it would mean that she had been engaged to Jabeer at the age of four or five years. One never finds such examples among Arabs, that they would get their four or five year old girls engaged for marriage.
This is mere opinion and the logical fallacy of argumentum ad ignorantiam. Besides, the fact that Muhammad did not always conform to the standards of the Arabs of his time, but instead lived by a different rule, suggests that it is impossible to infer anything pertaining to Muhammad’s behavior from the culture of his time.

Nevertheless, it appears Parwez is plain wrong.
Gibril Haddad wrote:- Abu Tughlub ibn Hamdan married the daughter of `Izz al-Dawla Bakhtyar when she was three and paid a dowry of 100,000 dinars. This took place in Safar 360 H. (Ibn al-Athir, al-Kamil).

- Al-Shafi`i in al-Umm reported that he saw countless examples of nine-year old pubescent girls in Yemen. Al-Bayhaqi also narrates it from him in the Sunan al-Kubra as does al-Dhahabi in the Siyar.

- Al-Bayhaqi narrated with his chains in his Sunan al-Kubra no less than three examples of Muslim wives that gave birth at age nine or ten.

- Hisham ibn `Urwa himself married Fatima bint al-Mundhir when she was nine years old (al-Muntazam and Tarikh Baghdad).

- `Umar married Umm Kulthum the daughter of `Ali and Fatima at a similar age per `Abd al-Razzaq, Ibn `Abd al-Barr and others.


Besides, "Bokhari" quotes in (Vol. 2, p. 204):

Ayesha® said, "When verse (54:46) of Surah Al-Qamar (The Moon) was revealed, I was a toddler playing about".

Surah Al-Qamar (The Moon) of the Quran was revealed in 5th year of Revelation Ayesha® must at least have been of such an age at that time, that she knew that these were Quranic verses, and also that she remembered this incident afterwards. If we can imagine the fourth year of Revelation as her year of birth, then in the fifth year she would be a year old. A baby of one year cannot walk or play about much, and neither is it possible for such a small child to remember Quranic verses. Contrary to this, if her year of birth is considered to be the first year of Revelation, then she would be about five or six year old at the time of Surah Al-Qamar's revelation. At that time she would have been about five or six years old; and capable of remembering something about Quranic verses. (In this respect, it is worth noting that account which has been written at the end).
Since the unsubstantiated opinions of Islamic scholars, however eminent, are not sahih, it is disingenuous to use the revelation of Surah Al-Qamar to infer Aisha’s age. This is merely uncertainty heaped upon more uncertainty.

Further, the precise date of the revelation of Surah al-Qamar is unknown. There is no verifiable evidence to back Parwez’s claim that Surah al-Qamar was revealed in the fifth year of the Revelation. This is merely unsubstantiated opinion devoid of evidence. According to Ibn Hajar, Maududi, and other traditionalists Surah al-Qamar was revealed 5 years before Hijrah, i.e. in the seventh year of the Revelation. Zahid Aziz said it was revealed before 6 BH. Maulana Muhammad Ali claimed it was revealed no later than the fifth year of the Revelation (i.e. 7 BH). Khatib said it was revealed in 8 BH. Moiz Amjad does not name his source for his claim that the verse was revealed in 9 BH. The point is that the precise date of revelation of Surah al-Qamar is unknown, and using an imprecise date to calculate Aisha’s age is not only ridiculous but stupid. However, if an estimate must be used, then why not use Ibn Hajar’s estimate which is more authoritative and traditionally accepted than Parwez’s unnamed source?

Shaykh Haddad confirms this. He also proves that the traditional estimate of the revelation of Surah al-Qamar is consistent with Aisha’s age being nine years.
Gibril Haddad wrote:The hadith Masters, Sira historians, and Qur'anic commentators agree that the splitting of the moon took place about five years before the Holy Prophet's (upon him blessings and peace) Hijra to Madina.

Thus it is confirmed that our Mother `Aisha was born between seven and eight years before the Hijra and the words that she was a jariya or little girl five years before the Hijra match the fact that her age at the time Surat al-Qamar was revealed was around 2 or 3.

A two year old is not an infant. A two year old is able to run around, which is what jariya means. As for "the comments of the experts" they concur on 6 or 7 as the age of marriage and 9 as the age of cohabitation.
Note how Parwez attempts to claim that Aisha remembered this event when she was a toddler –a misreading of the hadith. There is a more valid explanation that he conveniently omits and that is, Aisha calculated the timing of the Surah al-Qamar’s revelation by working backwards in time, and deduced that when the surah was revealed she was a toddler. She didn’t have to know or remember Quranic verses when she was a toddler as Parwez claims. Being Muhammad’s companion, she most likely knew the timing of the verse revelations, and could easily calculate how old she was when Surah al-Qamar was revealed. To claim that she ‘remembered’ or ‘knew’ the Quranic verses when she was a ‘toddler’ is a proposition that cannot be supported by the most direct and literal reading of the hadith.

All the accounts written above attempt to explain that Ayesha® was born when the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) was in his fortieth year of age.

(4). The incident that is considered as Nikah or engagement, happened in Shawal (a lunar month) in the tenth year of Revelation, ("Tabqat Ibne Saad" Vol. 8, p. 40) when the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) was fifty years old. As such, if the first year is not counted, this, makes Ayesha's® age approximately ten years at that time. If you count the first year then her age would be eleven. The issue of real importance is of actual marriage and not the engagement, so we should go further.
This argument introduces an error where none exists. Aisha herself testified that she was nine years old, therefore unless she could not count, she cannot possibly have been ten or eleven.

This line of argument is a logical fallacy of omission (by ignoring the sahih Aisha age hadiths). If one considers all the evidence, it is clear there is NO inconsistency. Aisha was aged nine when she married and had sex with Muhammad.

Again, Parwez mistakes nikah for zawaj, thereby adding three years to Aisha’s age.

(5). As regards marriage, consensus of opinion agrees upon its taking place after the Hijra (The Migration). Therefore we should first examine the timing of Migration.
How many years did the Nabi (PBUH) stay in Makkah after the Revelation? There are varied accounts about this. One of these states that when the Revelation descended upon him, he was forty-three years old, and he stayed in Makkah for ten years after that.

Another account runs like this:

A person came to Ibne Abbas® and said that the Revelation descended upon the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) for ten years in Makkah, and for ten years in Madina. Ibne Abbas® said, "Who says this? The Revelation descended upon him in Makkah for fifteen years or more".

In an another account, however, Ibne Abbas® has also been quoted as saying that he stayed in Makkah for thirteen years. Thus it is generally accepted that the Nabi (PBUH) stayed for thirteen years, and after that he migrated. (Refer to "Tabqat Ibne-Saad" Vols. 1, pp. 333-334; "Tarikh Tabri" Vol. I, p. 54 and 135-36). Per chance, I have in front of me the Urdu translation of these Vols. that were published in Hyderabad Deccan, India. Both these references are from there. The reason for the contradiction that shows up between thirteen and fifteen years, may be because the Messenger of God (PBUH) was fifty-three years old and fifty-fourth had started when he migrated; and he was in his fortieth year when the Revelation commenced. Now if the fortieth year of this age is not counted then the stay of Makkah would be of thirteen years, and the Migration would have commenced by the beginning of the fourteenth year. If the fortieth year is counted then the stay in Makkah would be of fourteen years, and Migration would then happen in the fifteenth year. Most probably Ibne Abbas® was quoting the same in that account. Taking this into consideration, Ayesha® was either thirteen years old at the beginning of Migration; or she might have completed her thirteen years and would be in her fourteenth year; or she might have completed her fourteenth year, and would be in her fifteenth. (Again refer to the account quoted at the end).
Therefore, due to the inherent inaccuracy and uncertainty, it is impossible to use Muhammad’s stay in Mecca as the starting point to calculate Aisha’ age. The axiom “garbage in garbage out” would immediately rule this out. Hence, all derivations based on this line of argument are suspect and should be ignored due to their spurious data material.

The calculation of Aisha’s age to be 13-15 at the time of the Migration presupposes she was born when Muhammad was 40 years old. This has already been debunked as the premises are suspect, for example, the supposed age of Muhammad when Fatima was born and that she was five years older than Aisha.

According to traditional, and more authoritative, accounts, Fatima was not born five years before Aisha but two years after. Fatima was also not born when her father was aged 40. The Muhammad = 35 years when Fatima was born is further debunked when one does the arithmetic on Parwez’s own account. He should have been only 32 years old, not 35.

(6). Now we have to see how long after the Migration, she got married? According to the general records, at the time of matrimony or engagement Ayesha's® age was six years and at the time of the send-off she was nine years old. Her wedding took place in the month of Shawwal (10th Lunar Month) at Madina. As she got engaged three years before Migration, according to this account she should have married in the first year of Migration, during the month of Shawwal. But this is not true for the following reasons:

a. In "Tabqat Ibne Saad", Ayesha® has told in detail that when the Nabi (PBUH) and Abu Bakr® migrated to Madina, the Nabi (PBUH) left his daughter and Abu Bakr® left his family behind in Makkah. After their resettlement they called them to Madina ("Tabqat", Vol. VIII, p.43).

b. In Bokhari's compilation, Ayesha® is quoted to have said, "When we came to Madina, I had fever and I lost all my hair on my head. Then when my hair started-growing again and become shoulder length we got married.
("Bokhari", Vol. II, p.204).

These assertions show:

(i) Ayesha® remained in Makkah for a while after the Migration. It should be remembered that the Migration occurred during the month of Rabiul Awal (3rd Lunar Month).

(ii) After coming to Madina she lost all her hair from her head, due to her illness.

(iii) After all her hair grew again and became shoulder length, did she get married.
If it is accepted that she was sent off in the first year of Migration in Shawwal, (10th Lunar Month) then it means that the above mentioned incidents happened within eight months. (From Rabiul Awal to Shawwal). If it is accepted that after the Migration, it must have taken her three or four months to come to Madina from Makkah, and she remained sick for a month, then this would leave only three or four months till marriage. It is clear that in this time, new hair cannot grow shoulder length under any circumstances. This is so obvious that even Ainee, "Bokhari's" narrator had stated that her wedding took place seven months after Migration. She was sent off, after the Battle of Badar in Shawwal, 2 A.H. (Ainee's Vol. VIII, p .96).

c. "Istiab", too, has supported this as follows:
The Messenger of God had engaged Ayesha® three years before Migration in Shawal, tenth year of Revelation, and he brought her home eighteen months after Migration in the month of Shawal. (Vol. II, p.744)

d. In "Asad Alghaba" it is stated:
Fatima®, daughter of the Nabi (PBUH) was married four months after Ayesha's® marriage". (Vol. IV, p. 377)
Fatima® got married in Muharram (1st month of Lunar year). Hence the question is in Muharram of which year of Migration? "Bokhari" (Vol. III, p. 8) gives a long narration of it as follows:

Ali® 'cousin of the Nabi (PBUH)' said that he had one (female) camel that he received as his share from the booty of the Battle of Badr, and one more (female) camel that the Messenger of God (PBUH) gave him out of his share. (This constitutes a gift from the bounty of the commander, which is one-fifth of the spoils of war as per Quranic injunctions). I thought I could bring Fatima®, daughter of the Nabi (PBUH) home in marriage. I talked to a goldsmith from the Banu Qainuqah tribe that he should come along with me to get some Azkhar grass. I intended to sell it to the goldsmith, and whatever money I would collect, I would use for the wedding party.

After that it has been described how Hamza®, the Nabi's (PBUH) uncle, ripped open these camel's stomachs, but as this is irrelevant to our purpose, it has not been copied here.

This makes it quite clear that till the Battle of Badr, Ali® had not been married. The Battle of Badr was fought in Ramadhan (9th Lunar month) 2 A.H. Therefore, the earliest his marriage could have taken place, would be in Muharram 3, A.H. ("Asad Alghaba" had erroneously written it as 2 A.H.).

Since Ayesha® got married four months earlier, her marriage could have happened in Shawwal in the second A.H. and not in the first A.H.
The logic and the data source are suspect for this line of reasoning.

a. Tabqat Ibne Saad is not sahih.

b. The claim that Aisha’s married Muhammad when her hair was shoulder-length is suspect. Bukhari claimed her hair grew again in 5:234 without mentioning the length. Abu-Dawud said in 41:4917 that Aisha’s hair had come up to her ears.

The rest of the case is entirely composed of supposition: namely “if” this and “if” that.

There is no evidence Aisha took three to four months to travel from Mecca to Medinah – this is mere supposition devoid of proof.

In any case, Imam Muslim claimed that Aisha’s hair came down to her ear lobes (8:3309). This can mean either Aisha lost the hair from the top of her head only, or that she had lost the hair from the base of her head and her hair length was down to her ear lobes. Therefore, it may not take as long as the Apologist claims for Aisha to have grown her hair to shoulder-length again.

c. Istiab is not sahih.

d. Asad Alghaba is not sahih. In any case, the apologist admitted that Asad Alghaba is prone to error as he claimed Ali’s marriage as 2AH instead of 3AH.

Therefore, the Islamist case is based entirely in supposition and non-sahih material.


(7). The above details explain that Ayesha® was fifteen years old at the time of her marriage if her year of birth is not added; but if it is added then, she would be sixteen years old. This is two years older than she was at the time of Migration.
The entire case is suspect as it depends on Aisha’s age at the time of the Migration, put here as between thirteen and fifteen. This is based on the conflicting accounts of Muhammad’s stay in Mecca, Fatima’s birth date and age difference with Aisha (see points 1 & 2), and the spurious date of revelation of Surah Al-Qamar (see point 5).


According to the account from Abbas® which has been quoted earlier, the Messenger of God (PBUH) remained in Makkah for fifteen years after the Revelation. There we tried to explain the discrepancy in the duration of the stay whether it was thirteen or fifteen years. But if the account that the Nabi (PBUH) stayed in Makkah for full fifteen years and migrated in the sixteenth year is taken as literally correct, then this makes Ayesha's® age as seventeen years at the time of marriage. Ibne Abbas® account is supported by "Tabri's" following statement.
"Ibne Abbas® and Ibne Khantalah related that Messenger of God (PBUH) died at the age of sixty-five. ("Tabri" translated in Urdu, Hyderabad, India Vol. I, part III, p. 599). In brief, he became a Nabi at the age of forty, remained in Makkah after that for fifteen years, and thereafter was in Madina for ten years; sixty-five years as a whole".
Again, this presupposes that Aisha was born when Muhammad was 40 years old. This has already been debunked.

Secondly, it appears that Parwez is not the least perturbed by the inconsistency that arises. Here he claims Aisha was aged 17 at the time of the marriage. However, in the last section he claimed she was 15 or 16.

Besides this evidence, there is another stronger testimony that tells us that Ayesha® was seventeen years old at the time of Migration. As such she was nineteen years old at the time of her sending-off from her house. Asmaa®, daughter of Abu Bakr®, was Ayesha's® elder sister. Sheikh Wali-ud-Din Abi Abdullah Mohammed Bin Abdullah Khatib writes about her in his book (Akmal Fi Asma Ur-Rijal):

Here is Asmaa®, daughter of Abu Bakr Siddique®. She is famous as Zat Al-Nataqain, because the night the Nabi (PBUH) migrated, she tore her scarf into two pieces. She used one piece to tie her tiffin carrier, and the other was used either to fasten the leathered water carrier or as her head-scarf. She is the mother of Abdullah Bin Zubair®, embraced Islam in Makkah. It is stated that at that time only seventeen people had embraced Islam. She was ten years older than Ayesha®. After her son Abdullah Bin Zubair's® dead body, which had been hung on a wooden peg following his murder, was taken down and buried, she died about ten or twenty days later, at the ripe old age of hundred years. It was year seventy-three of Migration (A.H.). Many people have quoted her for the Nabi's (PBUH) customs and historical accounts. (Akmal has been published with Mishkat's Urdu translation. See p.472)

Asmaa® was one hundred years old at the time of her death in the year seventy-three of Migration (A.H.). This tells us that her age at the time of Migration, was twenty seven years. Since Ayesha® was ten years younger than Asmaa®, Ayesha® was approximately nineteen years old at the time of her marriage.

This also conforms what Kalbi said to Hisham Bin Abdul Malik (Ummayad Caliph), that Fatima's® age was thirty-five years. Thus it can be estimated that if Ayesha® was seventeen years old at the time of Migration, then Fatima® would be approximately twenty two years old and nearing thirty-three at the time of her death. If the year of birth and the year of death, too, are added then she would be thirty-five years old.
Akmal Fi Asma Ur-Rijal is not sahih. This account is promulgated by Muslim historians, none of whom are sahih.

In any case, the above details explain the fact that Ayesha's® age at the time of her marriage was seventeen years according to some accounts, or nineteen years according to others. It was definitely not less than fifteen or sixteen years. Therefore, all these historical accounts show that she was nine years old at the time of her marriage; that she used to play on the swings with other children; that even after her marriage to the Nabi (PBUH) she used to play with her dolls, are not rational and are hence unacceptable. The Nabi (PBUH) got his own daughters married, and none of them was sent-off as a minor. Fatima® was married off last, and she was at least twenty one or twenty two at that time. This was the marriage age, although Ali®, to whom she was to be married, was present in the house all along.
Parwez does not appear to realize he has debunked himself. Here he claims Aisha was aged 19 when she married Muhammad. However, in the last two sections he claimed she was aged 15-16 or 17. Now we have three differing estimates, each of which contradicting each other and destroying the credibility of Parwez’s methods.

Secondly, all these accounts of Aisha’s ages between thirteen and nineteen are not rational as their source data are non-sahih or contradictory. In contrast, the sahih hadiths are clear and consistent in claiming Aisha’s age to be nine years old when she married and had sex with Muhammad.

Thirdly, he dismissed the fact that Aisha was still playing with dolls without providing any supporting evidence. The fact is, he had already made up his mind that she was aged between 15 and 19, and the doll-playing is merely an embarrassing fact that completely debunks his case.

Shaykh Haddad also challenges the accuracy of Parwez’s information, thus casting doubt on his source material.
Gibril Haddad wrote:Well, Ibn Kathir based himself on Ibn Abi al-Zinad's assertion that she was ten years older than `A'isha, however, al-Dhahabi in Siyar A`lam al-Nubala' said there was a greater difference than 10 years between the two, up to 19, and he is more reliable here.

Ibn Hajar reports in al-Isaba from Hisham ibn `Urwa, from his father, that Asma' did live 100 years, and from Abu Nu`aym al-Asbahani that "Asma' bint Abi Bakr was born 27 years before the Hijra, and she lived until the beginning of the year 74." None of this amounts to any proof for `A'isha's age whatsoever.
Using inaccurate data, Parwez assumes Asma was older than Aisha by 10 years when a more reliable source says the age difference is up to 19 years. Taking this more reliable information calculates Aisha’s age at around nine years old, completely in accordance with the sahih hadiths where Aisha herself said she was nine years old.


Finally, it seems prudent that I should repeat once again that important fact about history that I have mentioned many times before. It is a fact we find many conflicting narrations about the same event. For example Tabri himself has all these statements about the age of the Nabi (PBUH) saying that he was sixty years old, sixty-three years old or also that he was sixty-five years old. ("Tabri" Vol. I, part II). Take, for instance, the accounts about Fatima's® death. It has been narrated that she remained alive only three days after the Nabi's (PBUH) death; or one month; or two months; or three months and five days; or four months and some think she lived for six months after his death (The Nabi's (PBUH) biography by Shibli-Vol.1, p. 427). This difference is, nevertheless, of a few days or months, but in the case of Sodah's® (The Nabi's (PBUH) wife) death, Waqdi writes that it happened in 54 A.H.; but Bokhari writes in history that the death occurred during Omer's® period of caliphate, that is before 23 A.H. (The Nabi's (PBUH) biography by Shibli-Vol.1, p. 404). Just see how glaring the difference is.
Therefore, it is imprudent to blindly use Tabari as a source of factual material in calculating Aisha’s age when there are perfect good sahih hadiths that are all consistent in that she was aged nine when she consummated her marriage to Muhammad. He reports many narratives, some of which are conflicting. However, despite this, Tabari is consistent in his view that Aisha was aged nine when she consummated her marriage to Muhammad.

‘Aisha was 6 (or 7) years old when she was married, and the marriage was consummated when she was nine years old. al-Tabari vol.9 p.129-131. Muhammad b. ‘Amr is one of the transmitters.

‘Aisha was 6-7 when married, and came the marriage was consummated when she was 9-10, three months after coming to (sic – from) Mecca. al-Tabari vol.7 p.7. The chain of transmission includes an unnamed man from the Quraysh.


Besides, Sawdah’s life story is a red herring to the question of Aisha’s age.


If these contradictions do not touch a Quranic principle or reflect adversely upon the Nabi's (PBUH) character, then either of the accounts could be acceptable without objection. For example, Sodah's® death whether it happened in 23 A.H. or 54 A.H. does not affect The Quran or the character of the Nabi (PBUH). But for those accounts and matters that do reflect upon the Nabi (PBUH) or The Quran, utmost care should be taken about them. The principle in this respect should be that anything that goes against The Quran or the character of the Nabi (PBUH) can never be true, no matter how authentic it is regarded by the standards of history. The narrations and statements on historical events cannot reach an absolute level of surety. The Quran in comparison, is a certain evidence, and it is definitely known fact that the Messenger of God (PBUH) never said or did anything that would go against The Quran, or against human honour! Therefore, we should always rate opinions below sterling facts. If we are careful enough about our history then this would save us from many entangling problems in respect of Islam. Importantly, this would also extricate us from unjustified criticism which daily the non-Muslims direct at us, on the basis of these historical narrations. A vital need of the day is that the history of Islam's early phase be reviewed according to the above standards, so that all the false and fabricated narrations that mar the character of Messenger of God (PBUH) and his companions be deleted from the history of Islam. Unfortunately until someone can do that, we should always assert that such accounts are of doubtful authenticity and that more research is needed to ascertain their status.
This last passage is a massive red herring. Aisha’s age was never recorded in the Quran. She is not even mentioned in it.

Further, it is a circular argument: Reject all accounts that adversely reflect on Muhammad, but accept all accounts that reflect well on him, because anything that goes against the Quran and or the character of the Nabi can never be true.


CONCLUSION
This entire Islamist case is built on supposition and non sahih material in its attempt to estimate Aisha’s age when she married and had sex with Muhammad. In particular, it assumes Aisha was born when Muhammad was forty years old. However, it can be seen that this premise was derived from various uncertainties:

a. Parwez mistakes zawaj and nikah. He claims Muhammad waited three years after nikah before he consummated the marriage. This is not true as the sahih hadiths said Muhammad consummated the marriage when Aisha was aged nine.

b. the age difference between Aisha and Fatima – the Islamist assumes Fatima was older than Aisha by five years based on a non-sahih source. The generally accepted account is that Fatima was younger than Aisha by two years.

c. the date at which Fatima was born. Fatima herself was unsure of when she was born.

d. there were also conflicting accounts of Fatima’s age when she died, and

e. the date of revelation of Surah al-Qamar – Parwez’s version is based on an anonymous and unsubstantiated opinion of Islamic scholars and hence, is not sahih. The traditional account is totally consistent with Aisha’s age being nine years when she consummated her marriage with Muhammad.

f. the Islamist also provides different estimates of Aisha’s age, varying from 15 to 19. Now, any rationale objective person would see that these different estimates, taken from different lines of arguments and data sources, debunk each other. They cannot all be correct. Some, if not all, are patently wrong. Which is correct and which are wrong? Sadly, the Islamist is not bothered with this contradiction and the fact that his arguments are self-debunking.

Therefore, it appears the Islamist has not proven his case that the traditional account, of Aisha’s age of nine when she married and had sex with Muhammad, is in error.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewt ... 270#166270

Plamienka
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 11:34 am

Re: Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

Post by Plamienka »

Here I add a hadith proving, that Aisha had her first menses when she was already married to Muhammad.
If nothing, this proves 100% that she was pre-pubertal when the old prophit had sex with her.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 2, Book 26, Number 631:
Narrated Al-Qasim bin Muhammad:
' Aisha said, "We set out with Allah's Apostles in the months of Hajj,
and (in) the nights of Hajj, and at the time and places of Hajj and in
a state of Hajj. We dismounted at Sarif (a village six miles from
Mecca). The Prophet then addressed his companions and said, "Anyone
who has not got the Hadi and likes to do Umra instead of Hajj may do
so (i.e. Hajj-al-Tamattu) and anyone who has got the Hadi should not
finish the Ihram after performing ' Umra). (i.e. Hajj-al-Qiran). Aisha
added, "The companions of the Prophet obeyed the above (order) and
some of them (i.e. who did not have Hadi) finished their Ihram after
Umra." Allah's Apostle and some of his companions were resourceful and
had the Hadi with them, they could not perform Umra (alone) (but had
to perform both Hajj and Umra with one Ihram). Aisha added, "Allah's
Apostle came to me and saw me weeping and said, "What makes you weep,
O Hantah?" I replied, "I have heard your conversation with your
companions and I cannot perform the Umra." He asked, "What is wrong
with you?' I replied, ' I do not offer the prayers (i.e. I have my
menses).' He said, ' It will not harm you for you are one of the
daughters of Adam, and Allah has written for you (this state) as He
has written it for them. Keep on with your intentions for Hajj and
Allah may reward you that." Aisha further added, "Then we proceeded
for Hajj till we reached Mina and I became clean from my menses.

best regards
Plamienka

User avatar
ixolite
Posts: 3089
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:19 am
Location: Berlin, D
Contact:

Re: Paedophilia in Islam (revisited)

Post by ixolite »

From Grand Ayathollah Sistani:
2419. If a person contracts Nikah with a non-baligh girl, it is haraam to have sexual intercourse before she has completed her nine years. But if he commits sexual intercourse with her, she will not be haraam for him when she becomes baligh, even if she may have suffered Ifza (which has been described in rule 2389), though as a precaution, he should divorce her.

2389. If the husband comes to know after Nikah that his wife had, at the time of Nikah, any one of the following six deficiencies, he can annul the marriage:
...
Presence of flesh or a bone in the woman's uterus, which may or may not obstruct sexual intercourse or pregnancy. And if the husband finds that the wife at the time of Nikah, suffered from 'Ifdha' - meaning that her urinary and menstrual tract have been one, or her menstrual passage and rectum have been one, he cannot annul the marriage. As an obligatory precaution, he will have to pronounce talaq if he wants to dissolve the marriage.
http://www.sistani.org/html/eng/main/in ... eng&part=3" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
(note that it does redirect to the homepage, if you click the link)

Ifdha is a fistula:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesicovaginal_fistula" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Note that the consequences of pre-mature intercourse are apparently well known in islamic countries.

Post Reply