neverchadlite
Sailing Master of the Narcy Pirates 🏴☠️🏴☠️
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2023
- Posts
- 120
- Reputation
- 389
And anyone who defends this view is a pedophile. It doesn't matter if he's an imam or a scholar.
Inb4 "not a word
". This thread is for muslims only.
Tagging Muslims and ex-Muslims
@SecularIslamist
@BearBoy
@Birdcell
@Gengar
@Xangsane
@human304
@RAMU KAKA
@OGJBSLAYER
@TsarTsar444
@wsada
Let's have a civilized discussion.
First let us understand that there was no proper historian at the time of the Prophet and no one till 80-90 years later. All the history that we know today got transferred through zubaani riwayaat (word of mouth).
The problem with the present day Islamic law is that most of it is not based on the spirit of the Quran. This is because of the belief of Muslim theologians (particularly the Salafi ideologues, commonly known as the Wahabis) that hadiths have an overriding effect on the Quran.
Ibn Khaldoon, one of the greatest historians of his era, explained the correct principle in his Muqaddamah (Preface) that — whenever you hear a story, try to evaluate it on the basis of rationale and reason before considering it authentic.
The problem is, many people start believing in stories without proper investigation and stubbornly refuse to accept knowledge and reason based arguements.
The Marriage of Ai'sha
In matters of historical incidents, Ibn Khaldoon rightly points out that the real thing is — “their possibility of taking place.” They cannot merely be accepted on the basis that their chain of narration contains — such and such a person and that it has been narrated through several chains.
It is an absurd statement that only girls of younger age, especially the ones who haven’t reached puberty play with dolls. Saying that, there are some logical questions that arise which need to be answered first in order to validate the age mentioned in such narrations.
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 reliable 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 believe that it really was an accepted norm.
In my opinion, the age of Hz. Aisha has been grossly misreported in the narratives of the incident. Not only that, I think that the narratives reporting this event are not only highly unreliable but also that on the basis of other historical data, the event reported, is quite an unlikely happening.
Events leading to the marriage...
The prophet had become alone after the death of his beloved wife, Khadijah. One of female companions of the Prophet, Khawla bint Hakim encountered Muhammad on the streets and said,
Do you think Khawla, in all her senses can offer a child of mere 6 years for marriage?? Does reason comprehend such a thing?
A martial bond is not only needed to satisfy one’s sexual needs, but also for companionship and sharing responsibilities. If this suggestion was given with sanity prevailing, the question which arises is: which of these needs can be fulfilled by a six year old girl?
In the booklet Prophet of Islam, which was later incorporated in 1948 as the first chapter of his book Living Thoughts of the Prophet Muhammad, Moulana Muhammad Ali writes a lengthy footnote as follows:
In a society without a birth registry and where people did not celebrate birthdays, most people estimated their own age and that of others. Aisha would have been no different. What's more, Aisha had already been engaged to someone else before she married Muhammad, suggesting she had already been mature enough by the standards of her society to consider marriage for a while.
Khawla had suggested her name in marriage after great deliberation. Believing in Aisha’s abiity to handle the Prophet's household.
Those who manipulate her story to justify the abuse of young girls, and those who manipulate it in order to depict Islam as a religion that legitimises such abuse have more in common than they think. Both demonstrate a disregard for what we know about the times in which Muhammad lived, and for the affirmation of female autonomy which her story illustrates.
Hisham bin Urwah
Hisham bin Urwah is the main narrator of this hadith. His life is divided into two periods: in 131A.H - the Madani period ended, and the Iraqi period started, Hisham was 71 years old during this time. Hafiz Zehbi has spoken about Hisham’s loss of memory in his later (Iraqi) period. His students in Madina, Imam Malik and Imam Abu Hanifah, do not mention this hadith. Imam Malik and the people of Madina even criticised Hisham for his ubreliable Iraqi Hadiths.
All the narrators of this hadith are Iraqis who had heard it from Hisham. Allameh Kandhulvi says that the words spoken in connection with Hz. Aisha’s age were — “tissa ashara”, meaning 19, when Hisham only heard (or remembered), tissa, meaning nine.
Historian Ibn Ishaq in his Sirat Rasulallah has given a list of the people who accepted Islam in the first year of the proclamation of Islam, in which Hz Aisha’s name is mentioned as Abu Bakr’s “little daughter Aisha”. If we were to accept Hisham’s calculations, Aisha was not even born at that time.
Recent studies into the matter have established beyond doubt that Aisha was a young woman of 21 when she moved into the Prophet's house. Muhammad himself married off his daughters Fatima at 21 and Ruquiyya at 23. Besides, Abu Bakr, Aisha’s father, married off his eldest daughter Asma at the age of 26. Aisha was about 18 years old at migration and 21 when she moved into the Prophet’s house. The Ahaadith which reports her age to be eight or nine years at the time of marriage holds no truth whatsoever.
How did I derive these conclusions?
By examining the work done by Javed Ahmed Ghamidi and his Al-Mawrid Institute
[1]
. As opposed to accepting whatever has been passed on to us, with the help of Javed Ghamidi's extensive work on the subject, I have been able to cross-examine several such narrations.
What are hadeeth in the first place?
The ahadeeth (plural) are narratives which record the words, deeds and tacit approvals of the Prophet Muhammad. They are mostly akhbar-i ahad (isolate reports). It is absolutely evident that they do not add to the contents of religion stated in the Quran. In technical terms, they do not add any article of faith or any deed to religion. This is also a reality that the Hadith literature is the largest and most important source which records the biography, history and the life of the Prophet.
We will first have a look at the principles on the basis of which a Hadith is accepted or rejected.
In Islam, the Quran is the meezan (the scale of truth) and the furqan (the distinguisher between truth and falsehood). Thus no further explanation is required of the fact that if anything is against the Quran, then it must stand rejected.
Established facts derived from knowledge and reason also have the same status in this regard. Those who oppose these are regarded by it as people who follow their base desires.
Edit 1: I have been asked why are muslims is in such disagreement. And also if my answer is a mere logical justification.
For the differences, they will always be there (As with every community). The ideology of ibn Kathir differs greatly from Waheeduddin Khan; Tahir ul Qadri differs greatly from Jamal al din Afghani; ibn Taymiyyah differs greatly from Javed Ghamidi and so on.
These differences will not cease to exist. Saying that, the majority of ‘orthodox’ muslims hold on to a more ‘rigid/blind faith’ type of Islam while the one's in relative minority adhere to cross checking and asking questions (Afghani, Abduh, Waheeduddin Khan, Javed Ghamidi, G.A Parvez etc).
Its quite natural that any explanation based on cross checking and research would be sneered upon by non- muslims as they have been accustomed to the explanations given by the Islamic orthodoxy.
My suggestion — if it appeals to your reason, you can accept it. If you feel it's a lousy justification, you are free to disagree. I have no intention of preaching religion or parroting about the greatness of the prophet.
Inb4 "not a word
". This thread is for muslims only.Tagging Muslims and ex-Muslims
@SecularIslamist
@BearBoy
@Birdcell
@Gengar
@Xangsane
@human304
@RAMU KAKA
@OGJBSLAYER
@TsarTsar444
@wsada
Let's have a civilized discussion.
First let us understand that there was no proper historian at the time of the Prophet and no one till 80-90 years later. All the history that we know today got transferred through zubaani riwayaat (word of mouth).
The problem with the present day Islamic law is that most of it is not based on the spirit of the Quran. This is because of the belief of Muslim theologians (particularly the Salafi ideologues, commonly known as the Wahabis) that hadiths have an overriding effect on the Quran.
Ibn Khaldoon, one of the greatest historians of his era, explained the correct principle in his Muqaddamah (Preface) that — whenever you hear a story, try to evaluate it on the basis of rationale and reason before considering it authentic.
The problem is, many people start believing in stories without proper investigation and stubbornly refuse to accept knowledge and reason based arguements.
The Marriage of Ai'sha
In matters of historical incidents, Ibn Khaldoon rightly points out that the real thing is — “their possibility of taking place.” They cannot merely be accepted on the basis that their chain of narration contains — such and such a person and that it has been narrated through several chains.
It is an absurd statement that only girls of younger age, especially the ones who haven’t reached puberty play with dolls. Saying that, there are some logical questions that arise which need to be answered first in order to validate the age mentioned in such narrations.
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 reliable 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 believe that it really was an accepted norm.
In my opinion, the age of Hz. Aisha has been grossly misreported in the narratives of the incident. Not only that, I think that the narratives reporting this event are not only highly unreliable but also that on the basis of other historical data, the event reported, is quite an unlikely happening.
Events leading to the marriage...
The prophet had become alone after the death of his beloved wife, Khadijah. One of female companions of the Prophet, Khawla bint Hakim encountered Muhammad on the streets and said,
The prophet asked if she had any such woman in notice. Khawla replied in the affirmative and said yes. There are two one is unmarried (Ai'sha bint Abu bakr) and the other is a widowed woman of 53 (Sawda bint Zama).
Do you think Khawla, in all her senses can offer a child of mere 6 years for marriage?? Does reason comprehend such a thing?
A martial bond is not only needed to satisfy one’s sexual needs, but also for companionship and sharing responsibilities. If this suggestion was given with sanity prevailing, the question which arises is: which of these needs can be fulfilled by a six year old girl?
- Could sexual relations be established with her?
- Could the companionship of a wife be available through her?
- Could she have been able to look after kids?
- Could she have looked after household affairs?
In the booklet Prophet of Islam, which was later incorporated in 1948 as the first chapter of his book Living Thoughts of the Prophet Muhammad, Moulana Muhammad Ali writes a lengthy footnote as follows:
If she was 6 years old at the time of her marriage with the prophet, then it would make her 3 or 4 years old when she was engaged with Jubayr!!
In a society without a birth registry and where people did not celebrate birthdays, most people estimated their own age and that of others. Aisha would have been no different. What's more, Aisha had already been engaged to someone else before she married Muhammad, suggesting she had already been mature enough by the standards of her society to consider marriage for a while.
Khawla had suggested her name in marriage after great deliberation. Believing in Aisha’s abiity to handle the Prophet's household.
Those who manipulate her story to justify the abuse of young girls, and those who manipulate it in order to depict Islam as a religion that legitimises such abuse have more in common than they think. Both demonstrate a disregard for what we know about the times in which Muhammad lived, and for the affirmation of female autonomy which her story illustrates.
Hisham bin Urwah
Hisham bin Urwah is the main narrator of this hadith. His life is divided into two periods: in 131A.H - the Madani period ended, and the Iraqi period started, Hisham was 71 years old during this time. Hafiz Zehbi has spoken about Hisham’s loss of memory in his later (Iraqi) period. His students in Madina, Imam Malik and Imam Abu Hanifah, do not mention this hadith. Imam Malik and the people of Madina even criticised Hisham for his ubreliable Iraqi Hadiths.
All the narrators of this hadith are Iraqis who had heard it from Hisham. Allameh Kandhulvi says that the words spoken in connection with Hz. Aisha’s age were — “tissa ashara”, meaning 19, when Hisham only heard (or remembered), tissa, meaning nine.
Historian Ibn Ishaq in his Sirat Rasulallah has given a list of the people who accepted Islam in the first year of the proclamation of Islam, in which Hz Aisha’s name is mentioned as Abu Bakr’s “little daughter Aisha”. If we were to accept Hisham’s calculations, Aisha was not even born at that time.
Recent studies into the matter have established beyond doubt that Aisha was a young woman of 21 when she moved into the Prophet's house. Muhammad himself married off his daughters Fatima at 21 and Ruquiyya at 23. Besides, Abu Bakr, Aisha’s father, married off his eldest daughter Asma at the age of 26. Aisha was about 18 years old at migration and 21 when she moved into the Prophet’s house. The Ahaadith which reports her age to be eight or nine years at the time of marriage holds no truth whatsoever.
How did I derive these conclusions?
By examining the work done by Javed Ahmed Ghamidi and his Al-Mawrid Institute
[1]
. As opposed to accepting whatever has been passed on to us, with the help of Javed Ghamidi's extensive work on the subject, I have been able to cross-examine several such narrations.
What are hadeeth in the first place?
The ahadeeth (plural) are narratives which record the words, deeds and tacit approvals of the Prophet Muhammad. They are mostly akhbar-i ahad (isolate reports). It is absolutely evident that they do not add to the contents of religion stated in the Quran. In technical terms, they do not add any article of faith or any deed to religion. This is also a reality that the Hadith literature is the largest and most important source which records the biography, history and the life of the Prophet.
We will first have a look at the principles on the basis of which a Hadith is accepted or rejected.
- The Chain of Narration of Hadith -
- Text of a Hadith -
- Nothing in it should be against the Quran
- 2. Nothing in it should be against established facts derived from knowledge and reason.
Established facts derived from knowledge and reason also have the same status in this regard. Those who oppose these are regarded by it as people who follow their base desires.
Edit 1: I have been asked why are muslims is in such disagreement. And also if my answer is a mere logical justification.
For the differences, they will always be there (As with every community). The ideology of ibn Kathir differs greatly from Waheeduddin Khan; Tahir ul Qadri differs greatly from Jamal al din Afghani; ibn Taymiyyah differs greatly from Javed Ghamidi and so on.
These differences will not cease to exist. Saying that, the majority of ‘orthodox’ muslims hold on to a more ‘rigid/blind faith’ type of Islam while the one's in relative minority adhere to cross checking and asking questions (Afghani, Abduh, Waheeduddin Khan, Javed Ghamidi, G.A Parvez etc).
Its quite natural that any explanation based on cross checking and research would be sneered upon by non- muslims as they have been accustomed to the explanations given by the Islamic orthodoxy.
My suggestion — if it appeals to your reason, you can accept it. If you feel it's a lousy justification, you are free to disagree. I have no intention of preaching religion or parroting about the greatness of the prophet.
Last edited:
