Sublime morality of marriage with a young girl

[LilyM]

Faith101:

The prophet, peace be upon him, was engaged to Aisha when she was 7 and the marriage was consumated when she was 9 or 10 years old. At that age, she had reached puberty, as is evident by many ahadith. This was something that was completely accepted in the society in which they lived. It was normal, accepted, and practiced by many with no problems …

It is from her that we learn who the prophet was as a husband, and from this he becomes the role model of what a husband should be like.

Interesting … if Mohammed was such a good role model then why is his behaviour not only illegal today but completely repugnant to us too! Jesus at least in his behaviour (apart of course from his claims to be God incarnate) would be nearly if not actually irreproachable in any time and place.

 

[Eden]

Engaged at the age of seven? Had adult relations at the age of 9 or 10? My goodness.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

LilyM:

Interesting … if Mohammed was such a good role model then why is his behaviour not only illegal today but completely repugnant to us too! Jesus at least in his behaviour (apart of course from his claims to be God incarnate) would be nearly if not actually irreproachable in any time and place.

Not entirely correct. To be fair even the scriptures suggest that Christ’s detractors accused him of drinking too much, drunkenness, and associating himself with whores and tax collectors. These accusations gave lots of ammunition to the early persecutors of the Church.

And to be fair to the Muslim position, in a time when 35 years old was considered a ripe old age, marriage at the age of puberty was not unusual.

I’m not a scholar of the Koran, nor do I understand all of the facts surrounding the wives of Muhammad, but let’s not be accused of judging the cultural mores of the 7th century by the legal standards of modern civilization.

 

[Cyber_Knight]

Robert in SD:

I’m not a scholar of the Koran, nor do I understand all of the facts surrounding the wives of Muhammad, but let’s not be accused of judging the cultural mores of the 7th century by the legal standards of modern civilization.

He was the so called ‘seal of the prophets’ why did he follow such tradition? Didnt he know the implication to the modern society? There will be no other prophet but him to correct his behaviour later UNLIKE he corrected Jesus’ message to the Christians.

 

[Loboto-Me]

What a wonderful example and role model for a husband. When asked who he loved the most among humans, he answered Aisha. So his poor other wives who’d been faithful and gave him children were basically told that they less lovable than a little girl named Aisha. Hmmm, I’m sure happy my husband doesn’t follow rolemodels like that. Even us as parents would never tell the world that we love one child more than the others.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Robert in SD:

Not entirely correct. To be fair even the scriptures suggest that Christ’s detractors accused him of drinking too much, drunkenness, and associating himself with whores and tax collectors. These accusations gave lots of ammunition to the early persecutors of the Church.

There really is no moral equivalence between those clearly baseless charges, except associating with a whore named Mary Magdalene, and a 53 year old man having sex with a 9 year old child.
Robert in SD:

And to be fair to the Muslim position, in a time when 35 years old was considered a ripe old age, marriage at the age of puberty was not unusual.

Where did you get this? Muhammad and most of his companions, if they were not killed in wars, lived to past 60. That life-span is not considered unusual until the late 19th century, but you don’t see people condoning child sex in the Victorian age, do you?

I think your facts are wrong.
Robert in SD:

I’m not a scholar of the Koran, nor do I understand all of the facts surrounding the wives of Muhammad,

I’m here to help you, buddy.
Robert in SD:

but let’s not be accused of judging the cultural mores of the 7th century by the legal standards of modern civilization.

Some morality is absolute, particularly for a man who claimed to possess ‘sublime morals’, and an example for humanity FOREVER. The Quran entreats Muslims to ‘follow his example’.

33:21
Yusuf Ali: Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah.

Muhammad himself tells Muslims to ‘follow’ him in 3:31

Yusuf Ali Say: “If ye do love Allah, Follow me: Allah will love you and forgive you your sins: For Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.”

That is why Muslims call Muhammad al-Insan al-Kamil, the perfect human being for all time.

As such cultural and temporal relativism cannot apply.

Chau,
Rodrigo

 

[PaulDupre]

Wow, Joseph Smith really was, as he claimed, “the Muhammad of his generation”. He also bedded very young girls and had multiple wives, introduced new scriptures intended to correct the errors of the bible, and denied the essential divinity of Jesus.

Solomon was right: there is nothing new under the sun.

 

[pro_universal]

Rodrigo, as a spanish speaker, I find your use of the terms:

Hasta luego,
Mata Moro

…Totally reprehensible. They identify you as a hate-monger, and hate mongers have no place in our Church or in this world.

This argument about Muhammad is ridiculous. The man was clearly respected by every single person who wrote about him or who recorded a primary account of his life. To argue that he was a scoundrel when there is not even one writing by a person who knew him to indicate that is simply historical fraud.

It’s like arguing that Jesus must have been a terrorist, because “he moved from place to place without keeping a steady residence, just like a terrorist”, even though there is no one shred of writing to support the claim.

Please, let’s not let our hatred or desire to be “Moor killers” turn a Catholic board into a propaganda piece for frauds.

 

[Cyber_Knight]

pro_universal:

Rodrigo, as a spanish speaker, I find your use of the terms:

…Totally reprehensible. They identify you as a hate-monger, and hate mongers have no place in our Church or in this world.

whose Church? you mean your mosque?

This argument about Muhammad is ridiculous. The man was clearly respected by every single person who wrote about him or who recorded a primary account of his life.

Marry to a 9 year old girl, was clearly respected? Only muslims would say that and you keep on going taqiyya around here.

To argue that he was a scoundrel when there is not even one writing by a person who knew him to indicate that is simply historical fraud.

Its the time to reveal the truth. Rodrigo may not like famour writter you would (i guess) quote in the next post but I guess the truth cannot be applied only to those famous writers.

It’s like arguing that Jesus must have been a terrorist, because “he moved from place to place without keeping a steady residence, just like a terrorist”, even though there is no one shred of writing to support the claim.

your depiction of Jesus being a terrorist is funny. Cant you find something worth to write here for example?

Please, let’s not let our hatred or desire to be “Moor killers” turn a Catholic board into a propaganda piece for frauds.

We discuss intellectually, words are our weapons. We do not violent, we do not spread hatred, we only want to see people know about it.

 

[pro_universal]

whose Church? you mean your mosque?

I mean the Church I go to, where we learn things like to love our enemies and make peace. At the Catholic university I went to, we learned to defend the faith with reason, not insults and garbage propaganda. You are clearly not hearing the same message.

Marry to a 9 year old girl, was clearly respected? Only muslims would that such way and you keep on going taqiyya around here.

It was world standard to marry young and die young in those days. Puberty, not a number, was the determining factor. If you want to argue that Ayesha was not of age to be married, why can’t you produce any evidence that she wasn’t ready? The fact that no one complained is pretty good evidence itself that there was nothing unusual about the marriage.

your depiction of Jesus being a terrorist is funny. Cant you find something worth to write here for example?

You need to reread my post. It was an analogy to demonstrate how ridiculous it is to make assumptions about the character of historical figures when you have zero evidence to support your conclusion.

Find me one source written by a person who had contact with Muhammad that says his marriages or behavior was bad. If you can’t do that, how can you continue to pretend that this is a fact?

We discuss intellectually, words are our weapons. We do not violent, we do not spread hatred, we only want to see people know about it.

If you don’t want to spread hatred, then stop typing and start learning. Look up the words “Mata moros” in a translator if you don’t believe me when I accuse rodrigo of being a hate monger.

 

[Cyber_Knight]

pro_universal:

I mean the Church I go to, where we learn things like to love our enemies and make peace. At the Catholic university I went to, we learned to defend the faith with reason, not insults and garbage propaganda. You are clearly not hearing the same message.

you are clearly not reading Galatian 1:6

It was world standard to marry young and die young in those days. Puberty, not a number, was the determining factor. If you want to argue that Ayesha was not of age to be married, why can’t you produce any evidence that she wasn’t ready? The fact that no one complained is pretty good evidence itself that there was nothing unusual about the marriage.

so hand’s in to the marriage by her father while she was playing with her doll considered she was ready to consume a marriage? to have sexual activity? gimme a break muslim!

You need to reread my post. It was an analogy to demonstrate how ridiculous it is to make assumptions about the character of historical figures when you have zero evidence to support your conclusion.

Your analogy is ridiculous. Not even close to what we are talking about right at moment

Find me one source written by a person who had contact with Muhammad that says his marriages or behavior was bad. If you can’t do that, how can you continue to pretend that this is a fact?

No body dare against muhammad. dont you know he killed all his opponent? making a poem about him as an insult, and result death let alone people who questioning his marriage with a young girl!! if he was not a child lover, why didnt he marry aisha’ mother?

If you don’t want to spread hatred, then stop typing and start learning. Look up the words “Mata moros” in a translator if you don’t believe me when I accuse rodrigo of being a hate monger.

I dont spread hatred. I spread the truth. If you dont want to listen then do not join this forum. As easy as you click your mouse on the log out icon!

 

[pro_universal]

No body dare against muhammad. dont you know he killed all his opponent? making a poem about him as an insult, and result death let alone people who questioning his marriage with a young girl!! if he was not a child lover, why didnt he marry aisha’ mother?

I’m going to make a habit of only replying to the parts of your posts that do not involve name calling or claiming that I am a muslim.

As for this, do you realize the problem with your logic here? If there’s no record of insults to Muhammad, how can you claim that there’s good reason to believe he was a bad person?

That’s like saying “there’s no record of what Johnny Appleseed was like, therefore, I can say that he’s anything I want.” If you don’t have any historical evidence to prove that Ayesha was underdeveloped, you have no leg to stand on. (Girls do sometimes reach puberty even before 9…this would have been unquestionable as a time of marriage in Europe in those days.)

So I’ll ask again: Do you have any evidence to support your claim, or is this just your opinion based on the precisely 0 personal experience you have with the history of Muhammad?

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

pro_universal:

Rodrigo, as a spanish speaker, I find your use of the terms:

mata moro

…Totally reprehensible. They identify you as a hate-monger, and hate mongers have no place in our Church or in this world.

Dear pro_universal,
I was wondering why nobody here picked up on the title. You’ll have to concede that the title ‘mata moro’ was given to battle-hardened Christian warriors. The name is even given to a Portugese district.

I really don’t care about your ad hominems. Please take them away.

pro_universal:

This argument about Muhammad is ridiculous. The man was clearly respected by every single person who wrote about him or who recorded a primary account of his life. To argue that he was a scoundrel when there is not even one writing by a person who knew him to indicate that is simply historical fraud.

So was Hitler respected by Nazis, and Stalin by the communists. Doesn’t mean a thing.

As for the one person: so you think his wife, Aisha, who wrote that she was 9 years old when he had sex with her was lying?

pro_universal:

It’s like arguing that Jesus must have been a terrorist, because “he moved from place to place without keeping a steady residence, just like a terrorist”, even though there is no one shred of writing to support the claim.

The definition of a terrorist is someone who kills innocents, not an itinerant.

pro_universal:

Please, let’s not let our hatred or desire to be “Moor killers” turn a Catholic board into a propaganda piece for frauds.

Puh leeze – if you say we’re frauds then you have to supply the evidence. If not, who cares?

If anything, you’re the fraud for accusing Jesus of being a terrorist solely because he was itinerant.

Chau,
Mata Moro.

 

[Cyber_Knight]

pro_universal:

I’m going to make a habit of only replying to the parts of your posts that do not involve name calling or claiming that I am a muslim.

LOL. then stop taqiyya so I wont call you muslim again

As for this, do you realize the problem with your logic here? If there’s no record of insults to Muhammad, how can you claim that there’s good reason to believe he was a bad person?

FROM THE SIRAT RASUL ALLAH, by Ibn Ishaq (A. Guilaume’s translation “The Life of Muhammad”) page 675, 676.
"UMAYR B. ADIYY’S JOURNEY TO KILL ASMA D. MARWAN
"She was of B. Umayyya b. Zayd. When Abu Afak had been killed she displayed disaffection. Abdullah b. al-Harith b. Al-Fudayl from his father said that she was married to a man of B. Khatma called Yazid b. Zayd. Blaming Islam and its followers she said:
“I despise B. Malik and al-Nabit
and Auf and B. al-Khazraj.
You obey a stranger who is none of yours,
One not of Murad or Madhhij. {1}
Do you expect good from him after the killing of your chiefs
Like a hungry man waiting for a cook’s broth?
Is there no man of pride who would attack him by surprise
And cut off the hopes of those who expect aught from him?”

Hassan b. Thabit answered her:

        "Banu Wa'il and B. Waqif and Khatma
        Are inferior to B. al-Khazrahj.
        When she called for folly woe to her in her weeping,
        For death is coming.
        She stirred up a man of glorious origin,
        Noble in his going out and in his coming in.
        Before midnight he dyed her in her blood
        And incurred no guilt thereby."


        When the apostle heard what she had said he said, "Who will rid me of Marwan's daughter?"  Umayr b. Adiy al-Khatmi who was with him heard him, and that very night he went to her house and killed her.  In the morning he came to the apostle and told him what he had done and he [Muhammad] said, "You have helped God and His apostle, O Umayr!"  When he asked if he would have to bear any evil consequences the apostle said, "Two goats won't butt their heads about her", so Umayr went back to his people.
         Now there was a great commotion among B. Khatma that day about the affair of bint [girl] Marwan.  She had five sons, and when Umayr went to them from the apostle he said, "I have killed bint Marwan, O sons of Khatma.  Withstand me if you can; don't keep me waiting."  That was the first day Islam became powerful among B. Khatma; before that those who were Muslims concealed the fact.  The first of them to accept Islam was Umayr b. Adiy who was called the "Reader", and Abdullah b. Aus and Khuzayma b. Thabit.  The day after Bint Marwan was killed the men of B. Khatma became Muslims because they saw the power of Islam."

 

[Cyber_Knight]

pro_universal:

So I’ll ask again: Do you have any evidence to support your claim, or is this just your opinion based on the precisely 0 personal experience you have with the history of Muhammad?

Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151
Narrated 'Aisha: I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah’s Apostle used to enter they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13)

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

pro_universal:

If you don’t have any historical evidence to prove that Ayesha was underdeveloped, you have no leg to stand on. (Girls do sometimes reach puberty even before 9…this would have been unquestionable as a time of marriage in Europe in those days.)

I think I mentioned Aisha herself said she was a ‘young girl’. This is taken by Muslims to mean she was not a woman – i.e. immature.

Secondly, I said some respected Muslim scholars claim she was below the age of puberty. Ever heard of Ibn Hajar?

I’m sure some girls do achieve precocious puberty but unless you have any evidence to support Aisha achieving puberty by nine, why do you even ask me for evidence to the contrary?

I tell you what, since you’re pretty sure of yourself, let’s be fair:

I provide evidence that she had not reached puberty and you provide the contrary. Let’s see who is able to provide the evidence, shall we?

Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151
Narrated 'Aisha: I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah’s Apostle used to enter they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13)

See that bit about Aisha being a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty?

Your turn, Mr pro_universal.

Hasta luego,
Mata Moro

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Correction: I wrote above that Aisha wrote that she was 9 when she had sex with Muhammad. This should be:

Aisha narrated that she was 9 when she had sex with Muhammad.

Sorry, I ‘wrote’ too fast.

 

[pro_universal]

Rodrigo,

You are relying entirely on one single collection for this claim. There are many more scholars (including the earliest biography of Muhammad) that put Ayesha’s age older. I will list below, but first:

The dolls hadith is worthless. You admit that Aisha was with Muhammad for some time before the marriage was consumated. Without dates, how do you know when the doll incident occurred?

Second: If you accept that she was 9 (a number that was calculated based on other factors), how do you know that she had not hit puberty by that age?

Here are the sources that date Aisha much older:

The earliest biography (I am told by an arabic speaker, I do not read arabic so I have to rely on this citation) puts aisha at not less than 14 at the time of marriage based on her accepting Islam before Umar ibn al-Katthab. This is from Ibn Hisham, in Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah.

Hadith quotes:

“In the time before Islam, Abu Bakr married two women. The first was Fatila daughter of Abdul Uzza, from whom Abdullah and Asma were born. Then he married Umm Ruman, from whom Abdur Rahman and Aisha were born. These four were born before Islam.” Tarikh Tabari, vol. 4, p. 50

Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 37, Number 494:
Narrated Aisha:

(wife of the Prophet) 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 reading the above, note that Aisha was not betrothed to Muhammaed until the second year of the hijra, and then there is the time lapse between betrothal and consummation. If she were born in the same year as Muhammad began preaching, that makes her something like 14 or 15 at the age of marriage. That’s even legal in the United States today.

 

[pro_universal]

Specifically on your signature line:

I was wondering why nobody here picked up on the title. You’ll have to concede that the title ‘mata moro’ was given to battle-hardened Christian warriors. The name is even given to a Portugese district.

Yes, there are also mexican towns named after it. What the Spanish did during the reconquista was atrocious. If you think that is a shining example of Christianity, I urge you not to tell anyone about your beliefs, because it will damage our reputation.

There are many, many societies I’d rather hold up as an example of Christian living before the war-mongering Spanish of the late 15th and 16th centuries.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

pro_universal:

Rodrigo,

You are relying entirely on one single collection for this claim. There are many more scholars (including the earliest biography of Muhammad) that put Ayesha’s age older. I will list below, but first:

The dolls hadith is worthless. You admit that Aisha was with Muhammad for some time before the marriage was consumated. Without dates, how do you know when the doll incident occurred?

Dear pro_universal,
I’m aware of this entire issue and would welcome your discussion on the matter.

The dolls hadiths is not worthless as you claim because the dating is well-known. She brought her dolls with her when she went to live with Muhammad in Medina – after her dukhla. Thus, according to the respected Islamic scholars’ reasoning of playing with dolls only being permitted for girls before puberty, she didn’t achieve puberty at the age of 9.

We know that Muhammad had sex with Aisha in her house.

Tabari IX:131 “My mother came to me while I was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down. 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 brought in while Muhammad was sitting on a bed in our house. My mother made me sit on his lap. The other men and women got up and left. The Prophet 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.”

Then he took her home with him:

Sahih Muslim Book 8, Number 3311
'A’isha reported that Allah’s Apostle married her when she was seven years old, and she was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he died she was eighteen years old.

The chain of events is clear: he had sex with her in her house, and when he took her home with him she still had her dolls with her – meaning she must have been still before the age of puberty.

We also know from Ibn Hajar in Fateh al-Bari that she was still playing with dolls at the age of 14, from an Abu Dawud hadith.

Sunan Abu Dawood, Vol. 3, #4914
The Messenger of Allah returned from the battle of Tabook or Khaibar (the narrator of the hadith was in doubt about whether he was told “Tabook or Khaibar.”). There was a curtain covering her ‘sahwah’ (chamber or small room in front of the house). The wind blew a side of the curtain and uncovered Aisha’s dolls. He said: What is this, O Aisha? She said: My dolls. The he saw amongst them a horse with two wings from scraps of cloth. He said: What is this which I see amongst them (amongst the dolls)? She said: A horse. He asked: What is upon it? She said: Two wings. He asked (in astonishment): A horse with two wings? She said: Didn’t you hear that Sulaiman (Solomon - AS) had horses with wings? She said: Then he laughed until I saw his molar teeth. [Abu Daawood, An-Nasaa’iee as-Sunan al-Kubraa, Albani (ra) says the chain of narrators of an-Nasaa’ee is authentic (Saheeh). As for the chain of narrators of Abu Daawood, Albani (ra) has also declared it to be authentic (saheeh)].

Shaykh Muhammad Shams al-Haqq al-'Adheem Aabaadee, in his Sharh (explanation) of Sunan Abu Daawood, says: This hadith and the one before it (Hadith #20) is used as an evidence of permissibility of possession of dolls and toys for the purpose of little girls playing with them. This (permission) is a special exception from the general prohibition of possession of images (suwar).

This position has been stated with certainty by al-Qaadee 'Iyaad, and he has quoted it as the opinion of the Jumhoor (Majority of Scholars). He also said that the Jumhoor has allowed the sale of toys (dolls) for little girls, in order to train and prepare them from childhood for their household affairs and the raising of their children.

Ibn Hajar said that Aisha was before the age of puberty based on all the facts.

And then there are the Aisha was a young girl hadiths. Don’t forget those.
pro_univeral:

Second: If you accept that she was 9 (a number that was calculated based on other factors), how do you know that she had not hit puberty by that age?

See above.

pro_universal:

Here are the sources that date Aisha much older:

The earliest biography (I am told by an arabic speaker, I do not read arabic so I have to rely on this citation) puts aisha at not less than 14 at the time of marriage based on her accepting Islam before Umar ibn al-Katthab. This is from Ibn Hisham, in Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah.

cont