Is Islam a violent/ lost/ currupted religion.

do polls encourage you to read a thread

yes	50.5%	[ 432 ]
no	49.5%	[ 424 ]
Total Votes:			[ 856 ]

[Brammimond]

Pomnuria Garjzla

afiz

Moreover,there is an anti-islamic tone in your posts.

I have to agree with this statement. Some things that would be common sense to anyone, if we weren't talking about Islam, are being considered a problem with Islam. And also, with your translations, CoolCosmic, you act like the extremists and translate the quran to the extreme.

I couldn't agree more.
cool:look it was an arabic custom back than,nuff said.

[Bright Light]

There are fine.

[The Cunnilinguist]

Brammimond

The Cunnilinguist

Brammimond

I just took a quick glance at exactly what I thought it was,and I made my own translations for the umpteeth time that when the prohpet meant by consumate he basically got engaged with her,and now your going to bring the question of pedphilia,whwat is pedphilia nowadays?and it was an aincent arabic custom back than so in other instead of rather questionng the prophet's AMAL" rather question the arab customs.

Honestly, Brammimond, I have no idea why you're still posting. It's evident from your posts in, oh, say, the last ten pages alone that you don't even read posts before responding, nor do you offer significant evidence to refute Cool's or my claims which are backed by secondary and tertiary sources. You even do that willfully, showing that you have little respect for the research.

First of all ******** off pronto if your going to tell some one post or not,are you the ******** the thread owner?

See, here we have a classic example of how you don't read others' posts. I made a declarative statement, in where I express my own personal bewilderment at your persistence in reactionary posting and the marked disregard for properly reading a post. Nowhere in that paragraph did I tell you to do anything. I did wonder at why you still bother posting, when the posts essentially amount to unverified reactionary ripostes, and crudely formed ones at that.

Brammimond

The Cunnilinguist

I'm not going to just take your word on the issue simply on the merit of your state of "submission to God."

Muhammad had a choice in the matter: to break with the so-called "old Arab tradition," which he did in marrying Aisha in the first place, since Abu Bakr called him "brother."

Sahih Bukhari 7.18

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."

Yes she is,in Islam as long as the person is at mature age they can marry,so what? now don't ******** bring a simple matter of "principle" as I said its an old arab custom.

Again, since you didn't bother to read, this answer is meaningless and superfluous. We've already pointed out the quotes in the shahih hadiths stating clear as day that Aisha was six at marriage and nine at its consummation, and was pre-pubescent the whole time, i.e. she wasn't mature. You don't need to explain or rationalize this for me, any longer. Feel free to post for anyone else.

Brammimond

The Cunnilinguist

Ah, but again, when asked to be married to yet another one of his foster brothers' daughters...

He was trying to prove that its lawful to do so.

Again with the failure to read! What is it with some people?

Sahih Bukhari V.7, B62, N. 37

Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
It was said to the Prophet, "Won't you marry the daughter of Hamza?" He said, "She is my foster niece (brother's daughter). "

Brammimond

The Cunnilinguist

What's with the double standard? And furthermore, how is this not revolting regardless of tradition? She didn't even hit puberty at that point. Surely you're not going to suggest that people married and consummated marriage before adolescence as a matter of tradition back then, are you?

Even in context, it's outright disgusting. And more than that, it showed a level of opportunism not shown by a good majority of other spiritual leaders, even other Muslims. I know, at this point, all you're going to do is tell me to pull my head out of my a**, as you're so fond of saying, but if that's all you're going to post, don't bother. At this point, I'm done arguing with you, and will argue with someone who at least reads what others say, like [ Absolut Terror ].

Also I don't take bullshit you search on wiki,thats almost like searching up nonsense on google,so get hard evidense next time.

The Faithfreedom wiki is NOT Wikipedia. Wiki is open-source software licensed by the Wiki Foundation. I know a guy who has his own wiki hosted on his own website, and he's not Jimbo Wales. Does that mean his wiki is part of Wikipedia?

Brammimond

Cool:I don't care what you thin,your playing it pure ignorance,I proved it to you,and if I could show you the arabic and you could translate it your self than you would see,than again you would concoct some other bullshit,so you know from being being understanding or trying to listen to your evidense I am going to be as stuck and ignorant as you two until you could actually read my posts.

Oh, but I do read your posts, and I have to say I'm not impressed. Ergo the "no lo contendere."

Brammimond

Edit:if you don't like "arguing" with me than ******** off I don't give 2 ******** shits,all you say its "disgusting" look at other ******** customs back in the days of the prohpet,and indian culture too they do things worst,I know because I am part indian,thats all you keep saying "disgusting" if its disgusting than why do you not question the tradition rather than the prohpet?

Well, I thought it would be obvious, because I did sort of spell out the whole thing.

As for Indian (and by that I assume you're implying Hindu) culture, if you want a throwdown on it (i.e. state specifics), I'll be more than willing to argue those points.

Brammimond

as you should know arabs back than had some thing called ancestrial pride and are proud to follow in the foot steps as they're fathers and fore fathers therefore preserving there culture.

Again, I've gone over Muhammad's fickle position on the preservation of his ancestral culture before. Anytime you care to read it, feel free to thumb back to the last few pages.

[CoolCosmic]

Brammimond

Cool:I don't care what you thin,your playing it pure ignorance,I proved it to you,and if I could show you the arabic and you could translate it your self than you would see,than again you would concoct some other bullshit,so you know from being being understanding or trying to listen to your evidense I am going to be as stuck and ignorant as you two until you could actually read my posts.

Just because I am purely ignorant on the arabic language doesnt mean your personal translations are 100% correct. So its best to stick with popular older translations by actual scholars who were not burdened by political correctness. So until you come up with muslim websites whose compendium of translations you trust - for us to use, please excuse me for using those of the MSA website. BTW, what do you think of this source:

http://yaqb.org/

I read your posts, man. If you think there is something I missed or misunderstood, please point it out. I will be happy to review and comment on it.

Brammimond

Edit:if you don't like "arguing" with me than ******** off I don't give 2 ******** shits, all you say its "disgusting" look at other ******** customs back in the days of the prohpet,and indian culture too they do things worst,I know because I am part indian,thats all you keep saying "disgusting" if its disgusting than why do you not question the tradition rather than the prohpet?as you should know arabs back than had some thing called ancestrial pride and are proud to follow in the foot steps as they're fathers and fore fathers therefore preserving there culture.

Like what one moderate muslim had said “Did Mohammed come to earth to follow customs or make an example?”

al-Tabari’s account proves that Mohammad had no problem attacking customs he didn’t like. That leads to the conclusion that the customs he allowed were good for muslims.






And honestly, I enjoy having discussions with you (& Absolute Terror). I dont mind (********) dirty languages. And I can even overlook some insults. smile

[CoolCosmic]

Pomnuria Garjzla

afiz

Moreover,there is an anti-islamic tone in your posts.

I have to agree with this statement. Some things that would be common sense to anyone, if we weren't talking about Islam, are being considered a problem with Islam. And also, with your translations, CoolCosmic, you act like the extremists and translate the quran to the extreme.

I never translated the Quran. I dont even know arabic. I only stick with popular translations that muslims themselves use.

[Elf Lord Chiewn]

CoolCosmic

Pomnuria Garjzla

afiz

Moreover,there is an anti-islamic tone in your posts.

I have to agree with this statement. Some things that would be common sense to anyone, if we weren't talking about Islam, are being considered a problem with Islam. And also, with your translations, CoolCosmic, you act like the extremists and translate the quran to the extreme.

I never translated the Quran. I dont even know arabic. I only stick with popular translations that muslims themselves use.

That's like saying that I cite from KJV, therefore the bible itself is totally against homosexuality.

[CoolCosmic]

Elf Lord Chiewn

Quote:

I never translated the Quran. I dont even know arabic. I only stick with popular translations that muslims themselves use.

That's like saying that I cite from KJV, therefore the bible itself is totally against homosexuality.

I never translated the bible too. I dont even know hebrew & greek. I only stick with popular translations that christians themselves use. like KJV, NAS, NIV. I use this source...

http://bible1.crosswalk.com

[Elf Lord Chiewn]

CoolCosmic

Elf Lord Chiewn

Quote:

I never translated the Quran. I dont even know arabic. I only stick with popular translations that muslims themselves use.

That's like saying that I cite from KJV, therefore the bible itself is totally against homosexuality.

I never translated the bible too. I dont even know hebrew & greek. I only stick with popular translations that christians themselves use. like KJV, NAS, NIV. I use this source...

http://bible1.crosswalk.com

I heart Interlinear Greek. Unfortunately I'm currently without a bible that isn't just a translation, so I'm forced to rely on online resources.

The problem with arguing from a translation is that something will inevitably be lost or butchered. KJV, for example, is not only unauthoritative, it is one of the worst translations in history.

[CoolCosmic]

Elf Lord Chiewn

The problem with arguing from a translation is that something will inevitably be lost or butchered.

That is true. The best thing to do is compare translations side by side.

[Elf Lord Chiewn]

CoolCosmic

The best thing to do is compare translations side by side.

I disagree. The best thing to do is examine the text in its original form.

[CoolCosmic]

Elf Lord Chiewn

CoolCosmic

The best thing to do is compare translations side by side.

I disagree. The best thing to do is examine the text in its original form.

Of course thats the best. But for those who are not native to the language and have no resources to master a new language, translations by scholars are the only alternative. for these majority people, comparing translations side by side is the best.

even the quran is written in classical arabic. its a little different from modern arabic that most arab speakers understand these days.

[Brammimond]

CoolCosmic

Brammimond

Cool:I don't care what you thin,your playing it pure ignorance,I proved it to you,and if I could show you the arabic and you could translate it your self than you would see,than again you would concoct some other bullshit,so you know from being being understanding or trying to listen to your evidense I am going to be as stuck and ignorant as you two until you could actually read my posts.

Just because I am purely ignorant on the arabic language doesnt mean your personal translations are 100% correct. So its best to stick with popular older translations by actual scholars who were not burdened by political correctness. So until you come up with muslim websites whose compendium of translations you trust - for us to use, please excuse me for using those of the MSA website. BTW, what do you think of this source:

http://yaqb.org/

I read your posts, man. If you think there is something I missed or misunderstood, please point it out. I will be happy to review and comment on it.

Brammimond

Edit:if you don't like "arguing" with me than ******** off I don't give 2 ******** shits, all you say its "disgusting" look at other ******** customs back in the days of the prohpet,and indian culture too they do things worst,I know because I am part indian,thats all you keep saying "disgusting" if its disgusting than why do you not question the tradition rather than the prohpet?as you should know arabs back than had some thing called ancestrial pride and are proud to follow in the foot steps as they're fathers and fore fathers therefore preserving there culture.

Like what one moderate muslim had said “Did Mohammed come to earth to follow customs or make an example?”

al-Tabari’s account proves that Mohammad had no problem attacking customs he didn’t like. That leads to the conclusion that the customs he allowed were good for muslims.






And honestly, I enjoy having discussions with you (& Absolute Terror). I dont mind (********) dirty languages. And I can even overlook some insults. smile

But look at all old prophets,because the prohpet said that some one out of they're own tribes drinks from they're cups and dwells in they're cities could make a neccassary prohpet,although it was an arab custom back than the prohpet was still considered arab right?and he sorta had ancestrial pride which was really common in the religoun,but I believe in one hadith that the prohpet said to the nearest affect a children cannot marry unless he matures meaning aisha had her period at least at this time,and I asked one imam at the mosque he said that the prohpet I can't remember which hadith I'll try to get it later that the prohpet only involved in maritals with umm salamah and hazrat khadijah and aisha in later ages which would prove that aisha would have been around 20.
Although sometimes you might get me to loose some of patience I enjoy having a debate with you cool.
cunning:I apologize for the harsh or vulgar I have said,just please next time try to read what I say next time and use sources other than wiki. smile

[Elf Lord Chiewn]

CoolCosmic

Elf Lord Chiewn

CoolCosmic

The best thing to do is compare translations side by side.

I disagree. The best thing to do is examine the text in its original form.

Of course thats the best. But for those who are not native to the language and have no resources to master a new language, translations by scholars are the only alternative. for these majority people, comparing translations side by side is the best.

even the quran is written in classical arabic. its a little different from modern arabic that most arab speakers understand these days.

Isn't that what dictionaries and language guides are for?

[afiz]

Quote:

yet some hadiths are considered “sahih”, or “reliable”. And Bukhari is sahih. Our source of Aisha’s age of marriage.

The only hadiths that are considered sahih are bukhari and muslim. The bukhari is more reliable than the other hadiths and this means that it has lesser errors and corruption than the others. Bukhari and the other hadiths are not 100% free of corruption.

From Bukhari vol. 7, #65:
"Narrated Aisha that the prophet wrote the marriage contract with her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old

FROM THE HADITH OF SAHIH MUSLIM VOLUME 2, #3309
Aisha reported: Allah's Messenger married me when I was six years old,and I was admitted to his house at the age of nine".

Howerver,according to hadith in Bukhari and Muslim, Aisha is said to have joined Muhammad on the raid that culminated in the Battle of Badr, in 624 CE. However, because no one below the age of fifteen was allowed to accompany raiding parties, Aisha should have been at least fifteen in 624 CE and thus at least thirteen when she was married following the Hijra in 622 CE.

A narrative regarding Ayesha’s participation in Badr is given in the hadith of Muslim, (Kitabu’l-jihad wa’l-siyar, Bab karahiyati’l-isti`anah fi’l-ghazwi bikafir). Ayesha, while narrating the journey to Badr and one of the important events that took place in that journey, says: “when we reached Shajarah”. Obviously, Ayesha was with the group travelling towards Badr.


A narrative regarding Ayesha’s 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. [On that day,] I saw Ayesha and Umm-i-Sulaim, they had pulled their dress up from their feet [to avoid any hindrance in their movement].” Again, this indicates that Ayesha was present in the Battles of Uhud and Badr.

Sahih Bukhari as follows:

“On the day (of the battle) of Uhud when (some) people retreated and left the Prophet, I saw Aisha daughter of Abu Bakr and Umm 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.

It should also be noted that Aisha joined the Holy Prophet’s household only one year before the battle of Uhud. According to the common view she would be only ten years of age at this time, which is certainly not a suitable age for the work she did on this occasion. This also shows that she was not so young at this time.

It is narrated in Bukhari (Kitabu’l-maghazi, Bab Ghazwati’l-khandaq wa hiya’l-ahza’b): “Ibn `Umar states that the Prophet did not permit me to participate in Uhud, as at that time, I was 14 years old. But on the day of Khandaq, when I was 15 years old, the Prophet permitted my participation.”

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, and (b) Ayesha participated in the Battles of Badr and Uhud

CONCLUSION: Ayesha’s participation in the Battles of Badr and Uhud clearly indicates that she was not nine years old but at least 15 years old. 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 regarding Ayesha’s age.

According to another narrative in Bukhari and muslim, Ayesha is reported to have said: “I was a young girl (jariyah in Arabic)” when Surah Al-Qamar was revealed (Sahih Bukhari, kitabu’l-tafsir, Bab Qaulihi Bal al-sa`atu Maw`iduhum wa’l-sa`atu adha’ wa amarr).

Chapter 54 of the Quran was revealed eight years before hijrah (The Bounteous Koran, M.M. Khatib, 1985), indicating that it was revealed in 614 CE. If Ayesha started living with the Prophet at the age of nine in 623 CE or 624 CE, she was a newborn infant (sibyah in Arabic) at the time that Surah Al-Qamar (The Moon) was revealed. According to the above tradition, Ayesha was actually a young girl, not an infant 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 old at the time of revelation of Al-Qamar, and therefore must have been 14-21 years at the time she married the Prophet.

CONCLUSION: This tradition also contradicts the marriage of Ayesha at the age of nine.

Again,another narrative from bukhari
“Since I reached the age when I could remember things, I have seen my parents worshipping according to the right faith of Islam. Not a single day passed but Allah’s Apostle visited us both in the morning and in the evening. When the Muslims were persecuted, Abu Bakr set out for Ethiopia as an emigrant.

The mention of the persecution of Muslims along with the emigration to Ethiopia clearly shows that this refers to the fifth or the sixth year of the Call. At that time Aisha was of an age to discern things, and so her birth could not have been later than the first year of the Call.

Again, this would make her more than fourteen at the time of the consummation of her marriage.


From Tabari, volume 9, page 131

"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"......(The
Prophet) married her three years before the Emigration, when she was seven years old and consummated the marriage when she was nine years old, after he had emigrated to Medina in Shawwal. She was eighteen years old when he died.

However,in another narrative of Al-Tabari(also according to Hisham ibn ‘Urwah, Ibn Hunbal and Ibn Sad) says: “All four of his [Abu Bakr’s] children were born of his two wives during the pre-Islamic period(revelations)”

If Ayesha was betrothed in 620 CE (at the age of seven) and started to live with the Prophet in 624 CE (at the age of nine), that would indicate that she was born in 613 CE and was nine when she began living with the Prophet. Therefore, based on one account of Al-Tabari, the numbers show that Ayesha must have born in 613 CE, three years after the beginning of revelation (610 CE). Tabari also states that Ayesha was born in the pre-Islamic era (in Jahiliya). If she was born before 610 CE, she would have been at least 14 years old when she began living with the Prophet. Essentially, Tabari contradicts himself.

Tabari reports that Abu Bakr wished to spare Aisha the discomforts of a journey to Ethiopia soon after 615 CE, and tried to bring forward her marriage to Mut`am’s son. Mut`am refused because Abu Bakr had converted to Islam, but if Aisha was already of marriageable age in 615 CE, she must have been older than nine in 622 CE.

CONCLUSION: Al-Tabari is unreliable in the matter of determining Ayesha’s age.

3)The quotations from Tabari, Bukhari and Muslim show they contradict each other regarding Ayesha’s age making them unreliable concerning aisha's age

According to Ibn Hajar, “Fatima was born at the time the Ka`bah was rebuilt, when the Prophet was 35 years old... she was five years older that Ayesha” (Al-isabah fi tamyizi’l-sahabah, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Vol. 4, p. 377, Maktabatu’l-Riyadh al-haditha, al-Riyadh, 197 cool .

If Ibn Hajar’s statement is factual, Ayesha was born when the Prophet was 40 years old. If Ayesha was married to the Prophet when he was 52 years old, Ayesha’s age at marriage would be 12 years.

CONCLUSION: Ibn Hajar, Tabari an Ibn Hisham and Ibn Humbal contradict each other. So, the marriage of Ayesha at seven years of age is a myth.


4)According to Abda’l-Rahman ibn abi zanna’d: “Asma was 10 years older than Ayesha

According to Ibn Kathir: “She [Asma] was elder to her sister [Ayesha] by 10 years”

According to Ibn Kathir: “She [Asma] saw the killing of her son during that year [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 10 or 20, or a few days over 20, or 100 days later. The most well known narrative is that of 100 days later. At the time of her death, she was 100 years old.”

According to Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani: “She [Asma] lived a hundred years and died in 73 or 74 AH.”

According to almost all the historians, Asma, the elder sister of Ayesha was 10 years older than Ayesha. If Asma was 100 years old in 73 AH, she should have been 27 or 28 years old at the time of the hijrah.

If Asma was 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijrah, Ayesha should have been 17 or 18 years old. Thus, Ayesha, being 17 or 18 years of at the time of Hijra, she started to cohabit with the Prophet between at either 19 to 20 years of age.

Based on Hajar, Ibn Katir, and Abda’l-Rahman ibn abi zanna’d, Ayesha’s age at the time she began living with the Prophet would be 19 or 20. In (3), Ibn Hajar suggests that Ayesha was 12 years old and in (4) he contradicts himself with a 17 or 18-year-old Ayesha. What is the correct age, twelve or eighteen?

CONCLUSION: Ibn Hajar is an unreliable source for Ayesha’s age.

Most of the narratives printed in the books of hadith are reported only by Hisham ibn `Urwah, who was reporting on the authority of his father. First of all, more people than just one, two or three should logically have reported. It is strange that no one from Medina, where Hisham ibn `Urwah lived the first 71 years of his life narrated the event, despite the fact that his Medinan pupils included the well-respected Malik ibn Anas. 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 Medina for most of his life.

Tehzibu’l-Tehzib, one of the most well known books on the life and reliability of the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet, reports that according to Yaqub ibn Shaibah: “He [Hisham] is highly reliable, his narratives are acceptable, except what he narrated after moving over to Iraq” (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 in Iraq: “I have been told that Malik objected on those narratives of Hisham which were reported through people of Iraq” (Tehzi’b u’l-tehzi’b, Ibn Hajar Al-`asqala’ni, Dar Ihya al-turath al-Islami, Vol.11, p. 50).

Mizanu’l-ai`tidal, another book on the life sketches of the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet reports: “When he was old, Hisham’s memory suffered quite badly” (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.

According to Hisham, the historian, Ayesha accepted Islam quite some time before Umar ibn Khattab . This shows that Ayesha accepted Islam during the first year of Islam. While, if the narrative of Ayesha's marriage at seven years of age is held to be true, Ayesha should not have been born during the first year of Islam.


CHRONOLOGY: It is vital also to keep in mind some of the pertinent dates in the history of Islam:

pre-610 CE: Jahiliya (pre-Islamic age) before revelation
610 CE: First revelation
610 CE: AbuBakr accepts Islam
613 CE: Prophet Muhammad begins preaching publicly.
615 CE: Emigration to Abyssinia
616 CE: Umar bin al Khattab accepts Islam
620 CE: Generally accepted betrothal of Ayesha to the Prophet
622 CE: Hijrah (emigation to Yathrib, later renamed Medina)
623/624 CE: Generally accepted year of Ayesha living with the Prophet


According to a narrative reported by Ahmad ibn Hanbal(islamic scholar, 780 - 855)after the death of the Prophet’s first wife Khadijah, when Khaulah came to the Prophet advising him to marry again, the Prophet asked her regarding the choices she had in mind. Khaulah said: “You can marry a virgin (bikr) or a woman who has already been married (thayyib)”. When the Prophet asked the identity of the bikr (virgin), Khaulah mentioned Ayesha’s 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) (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 woman with no sexual experience prior to marriage.” Therefore, Ayesha was an adult woman at the time of her marriage.


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

In the matter of children who have 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 Quranic 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 light of the above verses, no responsible Muslim would hand over financial management to a seven- or nine-year-old immature girl. If we cannot trust a seven-year-old to manage financial matters, she cannot be intellectually or physically fit for marriage. Ibn Hambal (Musnad Ahmad ibn Hambal, vol.6, p. 33 and 99) claims that nine-year-old Ayesha was rather more interested in playing with toy-horses than taking up the responsible task of a wife. It is difficult to believe, therefore, that AbuBakr, a great believer among Muslims, would betroth his immature seven-year-old daughter to the 50-year-old Prophet. Equally difficult to imagine is that the Prophet would marry an immature seven-year-old girl.

Another important duty demanded from the guardian of a child is to educate them. Let us ask the question, “How many of us believe that we can educate our children satisfactorily before they reach the age of seven or nine years?” The answer is none. Logically, it is an 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?

AbuBakr was a more 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 Quran. He would not have married her to anyone. If a proposal of marrying the immature and yet to be educated seven-year-old Ayesha came to the Prophet, he would have rejected it outright because neither the Prophet nor AbuBakr would violate any clause in the Quran.

CONCLUSION: The marriage of Ayesha at the age of seven years would violate the maturity clause or requirement of the Quran. Therefore, the story of the marriage of the seven-year-old immature Ayesha is a myth.

A women must be consulted and must agree in order to make a marriage valid (Mishakat al Masabiah, translation by James Robson, Vol. I, p. 665). Islamically, credible permission from women is a prerequisite for a marriage to be valid.

By any stretch of the imagination, the permission given by an immature seven-year-old girl cannot be valid authorization for marriage.

It is inconceivable that AbuBakr, an intelligent man, would take seriously the permission of a seven-year-old girl to marry a 50-year-old man.

Similarly, the Prophet would not have accepted the permission given by a girl who, according to the hadith of Muslim, took her toys with her when she went live with Prophet.

CONCLUSION: The Prophet did not marry a seven-year-old Ayesha because it would have violated the requirement of the valid permission clause of the Islamic Marriage Decree. Therefore, the Prophet married an intellectually and physically mature lady Ayesha.

It was neither an Arab tradition to give away girls in marriage at an age as young as seven or nine years, nor did the Prophet marry Ayesha 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.

Obviously, the narrative of the marriage of nine-year-old Ayesha by Hisham ibn `Urwah cannot be held true when it is contradicted by many other reported narratives. Moreover, there is absolutely no reason to accept the narrative of Hisham ibn `Urwah as true when other scholars, including Malik ibn Anas, view his narrative while in Iraq, as unreliable. The quotations from Tabari, Bukhari and Muslim show they contradict each other regarding Ayesha’s age. Furthermore, many of these scholars contradict themselves in their own records. Thus, the narrative of Ayesha’s age at the time of the marriage is not reliable due to the clear contradictions.

Quote:

no he wasn’t there but Abu Bakr was a great man nonetheless.

Quote:

And these so called ‘evidences’ were derived from modern historians and from INTERPRETATIONS of obscure hadiths. There is NO DIRECT historical sources for backing up the assertion that Aisha was much older when she had sex.

WRONG, the hadiths were translated by a classical islamic Maulana Muhammad Ali(1874 - 1951) and M. Muhsin Khan. LoL what are you talking about?? The narratives are DIRECTLY quoted from the historical sources

For eg; A report from bukhari “It is reported from Aisha that she said: The Prophet entered into marriage with me when I was a girl of six … and at the time [of joining his household] I was a girl of nine years of age.”
(yup,in the bukhari)

Another report from bukhari “Since I reached the age when I could remember things, I have seen my parents worshipping according to the right faith of Islam. Not a single day passed but Allah’s Apostle visited us both in the morning and in the evening. When the Muslims were persecuted, Abu Bakr set out for Ethiopia as an emigrant.
(yup in the bukhari)

If you know islamic history,which i doubt you don't,you will find that they contradict each other.

Quote:

you are lying. The quran doesn’t show anything about aisha’s age. Neither do the hadiths support your views. Its only your personal INTERPRETATIONS of these texts that gives you your ‘evidences’.

Surely you will need the knowledge of the quran to judge whether a particular report in the hadiths is credible or not. About the hadiths,the support my views(read above)

Quote:

no thanks. The translations of scholars are enough.

Quote:

scholars are even better. That’s why I believe them over personal translations by average muslims like you.

Tabari ,an islamic scholar,reports that Abu Bakr wished to spare Aisha the discomforts of a journey to Ethiopia soon after 615 CE, and tried to bring forward her marriage to Mut`am’s son. Mut`am refused because Abu Bakr had converted to Islam, but if Aisha was already of marriageable age in 615 CE, she must have been older than nine in 622 CE.

Tabari was a scholar so i don't see any reason why you don't believe him since you said that you believe scholars.

Quote:

You wish.

-A person who knows islamic history would not said that prophet muhammad married aisha for sex. Moreover,you did not provide any evidences or reasons to support your bullshit claim.

- A person who have read the hadiths will know that some of the narratives concerning aisha's age contradict each other

-A person who said that wikipedia and apostatesofislam are better sources than islamic websites such as www.muslim.org doesn't know islam because wikipedia is unreliable(see previous post) and apostatesofislam is an anti-islamic website.

- You failed to mention the contradictions in the hadiths and this means that you have not read a real ,or the entire, hadith.You are obviously reading the hadiths from unreliable websites.

-Saying that abu bakr is a great man does not prove that you know well about islam or that you are not anti-islam.

From those evidences,it is obvious that you don't know a ******** about islam ,you are anti-islam,you like to spread propaganda and ANYTHING YOU SAID CONCERNING ISLAM, i say IRRELEVANT.

[Brammimond]

Also I would like to mentsion that islam is not an extremist/ violent religoun and all extremists are in denial thanks to this verse:

Quote:

verily,there is no cumulsion in deen(religoun) :226:2