Faith Freedom International

[abdullahnoor]

[quote="Some_Guy"]

[veractiy_forever]

[veractiy_forever]

[nomad]

[abdullahnoor]

Hello again VF, I may be a slave but Alhamdullilaah, I have the benefit of Allah’s light with me.

So you decided to slime Abu Bakr too? Keep doing it. The more you post, the more you show that my original six pointer that this is a Muslim hate site, is correct.

[abdullahnoor]

Nomad, cut the buffalo dung. Answer this question.


At what age should a girl be, before she is suited for marriage? More importantly, why do you choose that age?

So do you wish to answer? Or do you wish to talk about everything and anything else, except that question, thereby proving my six pointer in my first post that this is an anti-Islam, Muslim-hate site?

[nomad]

[nomad]

[veractiy_forever]

[nomad]

[nomad]

[veractiy_forever]

[abdullahnoor]

Nomad,

Let me assure you that if the early enemies of Islam had seen Aisha’s marriage as something odd, they would have capitalised on that. Your reason that they did not capitalise is weak.

They had no morals. Muhammad did. So there is nothing wrong calling Muhammad a hypocrite, teaching others to be good, while he lived immorally. So where are the allegations by early enemies of Islam, pertaining to Aisha? Does not the absence of such records show that Aisha’s marriage was a non-issue then?

I see that your magical number age 21. And your magical reasons are.

[nomad]

[abdullahnoor]

Nomad

[rand]

I quoted:
http://www.mafamily.org/Statutory%20Rape%20Report.pdf

abdullahnoor responed:

[abdullahnoor]

I seek forgiveness from Allah the Most Compassionate and Most Merciful, for I have indulged in pride, ego and show. I was so cocksure, confident and filled with pride for being shown the light, that I indulged in riya.

I boasted of my ability to read the minds of anti Muslims and I arrogantly posted.

[Nafion]

I think abdullahnoor may have a “light” in saying no one has answered his post. But read on. Don’t just skim.

The issue of calling the Prophet of Islam a paedophile is an issue of selfish perception remixed in moral relativism. This accusation could actually lead to a better reason for his behaviour. My guess is he was a common Arab, mixed in his common Arab heritage. Therefore he could be no paedophile in his time, hence the lack of objection to this practice during his time. But as you will see, neither could he be a messenger of GOD.

Females from all over the world were married at early ages. According to modern agreement this is bad practice, physically as well as morally.

However I do not think we can make a great moral association from NOW to THEN. There may have been variables different at that time or even the thinking may have been on a different level. So how do we understand this? We can draw a progress report from then to now and try and shoot of everything THEN that does not apply to NOW and we will be left with a bitter taste of the past. Yet the paste is our moral evolutionary path.
We ate raw meat at some time. (Yuck). We kept slaves to depict our personal economic value (How strange). We married many women at once (How insulting – some tribes still do). We rode on donkeys. (My child gets a kick out of this one).
At best all men throughout history are guilty of the atrocities committed against our female member. The messengers of God were no better. Lumping the burden on single men in history is another manly ploy at scapegoat making). Most women will not pick and choose and will never settle for a single man to be the cause of all the suffering inflicted upon them. Whilst many men even come out in history as humanitarians, these men also sat back and remained silent when women were the victims.

That time was that time.

Lets view it another way. If I had lived at that time and had a daughter, would I have married her at that early an age? Yes this could easily be possible if my culture and circumstance permitted it. Yet if she had many suitors I would definitely choose (assuming this is my culture) one that is very popular and has a very transparent lifestyle. If this suitor was “Muhammad” yes then I would choose him - seeing that in those days and that place, age was never a moral issue. But linage was. Yes I would be one of those men who were insensitive to the female gender and more sensitive to culture or tradition.

But when we take the element Prophet hood and cultural reality or practice and mix the two we get a morally embarrassing compound. The issue would be between a man and a messenger of God. A man would follow the culture like me and not question its moral (a term non-existent then) however a messenger is supposed to install these morals with divine assistance. The question I think more in the minds of people is what would a true messenger of God have said about such a practice.

So if I had married my daughter to Abdul nobody. I would not expect much problem about morality but would expect not to benefit from any rise in status nor the entry of my seed into noble lineage. An issue more pressing at that time. However if I married my daughter to Abdul Somebody I would expect her to have better recognition and also I would have more knowledge of her well being. But if I had married my daughter to a messenger of God and this is a practice God disallows then I would expect the messenger to immediately refute my offer or for him never to have made such a proposal.


Calling “Muhammad” a paedophile, I think is political exaggeration. We first have to first prove that this was definitely not the practice THEN. Thereby making his relationship with Aisha an unusual practice. And if he was no Prophet (my belief), and if this was the case and regarding the culture of allowing this ritual, then who! are we to ridicule the past civilisations based on our current moral understanding? This is not to say we cannot criticise and learn from paste mistakes.
Yet never forget that he(Muhammad) was a messenger of God and he could have looked into the future by soliciting advice from Allah.

According to current moral understanding Muhammad will be considered a paedophile and some will stretch it even further to that of a child molester. Now tell me how many modern day paedophiles get little girls by telling their fathers of their interest in their daughters. Most paedophiles use their relative power to fulfil their desires.

From THEN to NOW: If a man THEN told me he was interested in my nine year old daughter for marriage I would consider his proposal based on the variables I stated above. If a man NOW tells me he is interested in my daughter I would call the cops.

Now adullahnoor I will try and answer your question about the age problem by my own sick and twisted analogy. If I had a one-year old daughter who can find all the roots in a polynomial, understands what sex and marriage is all about and is able to give a shocking yet realist view on them and has a complete original view on world politics. Who can also hop skip and jump doing back-flips as well. And when she approaches me with the wish of marring Jack Ripper, who am I to kill her wishes. I think its not the age but the mental and physiological maturity that dictates the needs for such. Some countries have worked it around the age of 18 for the sake of safety and I think it’s quite correct. Although personally I feel it should be a little higher. Woman should also be weary of a man that quotes history to get over protective and kill all their dreams. I think just as men, women should get the choice on their future, for or against- provided they can find all the imaginary roots to some polynomials.

As for the Muhammad being a paedophile, I think it’s one view, rather I think he was a follower of Arab tradition and that he new nothing better as well as nothing divine, unless we wish to call all the nations including all the Arabs that took part in this practice paedophiles.

However this does prove that Muhammad could NEVER be a messenger of God. Since he should have, would have or could have known better. After all he had all mighty Allah as his advisory council. Did the mighty Allah not realise that mankind will soon morph into a more Humane creature; that the acts of his messenger would soon become a burden and embarrassment to the future “Ummah”. Maybe Allah and his messenger shared the same Arab mentality and morality that was acceptable that time.

The marriage to little girl virgins was the perks of the wealthy and famous at that time. And Muhammad was wealthy and famous. He was no different from any other. HE WAS NO PROPHET EITHER.

I am tired of this paedophile thingy I think we should be concentrating more on the absurdities of Islam oral or written.

Nafion

[Muneel]

Heres some interesting read I found about Ayesha's (r.a.) age:

To begin with, I think it is the responsibility of all those who believe that marrying a girl as young as nine years old was an accepted norm of the Arab culture, to provide at least a few examples to substantiate their point of view. I have not yet been able to find a single dependable instance in the books of Arab history where a girl as young as nine years old was given away in marriage. Unless such examples are given, we do not have any reasonable grounds to that effect.

In my opinion, the age of Ayesha (ra) has been grossly misreported in the ahadith. Not only that, I think that the narratives reporting this event are not only highly unreliable but the event reported, is also quite an unlikely happening. Let us look at the issue from an objective stand point. My reservations in accepting the narratives, on the basis of which, Ayeshas (ra) age at the time of her marriage with the Prophet (pbuh) is held to be nine years are:

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.

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, 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.

Tehzibu'l-tehzib, 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)

Mizanu'l-ai`tidal, another book on 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)


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 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.

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.

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 Taqri'bu'l-tehzi'b as well as Al-bidayah wa'l-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.

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.

According to Ibn Hisham, the historian, Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam quite some time before Umar ibn 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. 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 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.

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".

According to Ibn Hajar, Fatimah (ra), the daughter of the Prophet (pbuh), 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.

These are some of the major points that go against accepting the commonly known narrative regarding Ayesha's (ra) age at the time of her marriage.

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.

I hope I have been of some help.

May Allah help us in helping His deen.

Best Regards

The Learner (moizamj@brain.net.pk)

Now, about why a Prophet of God would marry a girl so young I have found that according to Ha'kim (Mustadarak) Ayesha was shown to the Prophet in his dream by an angel saying: A'isha is your wife. This means the marriage was ordained by God Himself.

[abdullahnoor]

Thank you, Nafion for your long lecture. But did I claim in this thread that I wanted to show you people that Muhammad (p) is a true prophet? My main intention in this thread is to show everyone here that this Aisha thing is an overblown mountain, when it is actually a molehill.

It is anti-Muslims who take this opportunistic chance to slime Islam and its teachings.

I am glad you put your thoughts here. It goes to show that at least you recognise an overblown issue when there is one.


Muneel,

To me, at what age Aisha was married is of little consequence. All that really matters is that Aisha married the Prophet (p) in a legitimate manner.

What is my concern is that anti-Muslims now are trying to create discourse and contempt, when there is none in the first place.

Assalamualaikum.

[nomad]

[veractiy_forever]