Mohammad the pedophile

[beanmonster]

How can people follow a person when their own religious text proves him to be a pedophile. This guy explains it in this video.

YouTube - Mohammed or Jesus? Christianity or Islam? Bible or Qu'ran?

[Dylith]

Originally Posted by beanmonster

How can people follow a person when their own religious text proves him to be a pedophile. This guy explains it in this video.

YouTube - Mohammed or Jesus? Christianity or Islam? Bible or Qu'ran?

Both the Bukhari and the Muslim hadith collections place Aisha both at 9 and at much older than 9 when the marriage was consummated.

Both Muslim and Bukhari state that Aisha rode with Muhammad in the Battle of Badr in 624. We see this in the Muslim Hadith collection Book 019, Number 4472. And from Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 131 we know she was at the battle of Uhud. Badr especially started off as raids and weren't planned. In order to go on a raid or to ride with the men you must be at least 15 years old, so claim both Muslim and Bukhari collections. These can be found in Bukahri Volume 5, Book 59, Number 423 and in Muslim Book 019, Number 4466. Both show that there were age restrictions when it came to riding with the parties. If this is the case, then Aisha must have been at least 13 years old when she was married in 622.

Finally, Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 399 states that during the revelation of the 54th Quranic verse Aisha makes the statement that the revelation came when she was a playful little girl. The 54th Quranic sura occured no less than 9 years before 622. Which would have made her older than 9 upon marriage and even older upon consumation.


What happen then? Why the difference?

It was common back then (as we see with other hadiths in these collections) for the first digit of numbers to be left out when it is known. For example 16 would have become simply 6 and 19 would have become simply 9. An easy translational mistake and if this is excepted then it fits in with the other hadith of the collection.

We see it happen in the Night of Decree where 1 was used for 21 and where 5 was used for 25. It was not an uncommon practice.

Also, both Hisham and Tabari (authors of two of the earliest bographies of Muhammad, next to Ishaq's whose origional work has been lost) both claim that Aisha was older than 9 upon consummation.

Tabari says that Aisha was already at a marriagable age in the year 615 before Bakr's immigration to Ethiopia. This means that she would still be of suitable age in 622 when she married Muhammad. Tabari also said that Aisha converted to Islam before Umar did, which means that Aisha had to have been old enough to make such a desicion on her own (aka she was old enough to talk) around 610 a fact which Hishram supports.

Also, Hisham states that Aisha was born before the year 610. Which, at the very least, would have made her twevle in 622 when she was married, and older when it was consummated.

Also, having sex with children before they hit puberty would have gone against custom and there would have been little reason to do so.

It is also widely accepted by historians that Aisha was only 10 years younger than her older sister. At the time of Aisha's marriage, Asma was 28 years old which would have made Aisha 18.

The simple fact is that we have more historical evidence that suggests that Aisha was much older than 9, than we do which suggests that she was that young. It is possible that she was younger, but unlikely, this is mainly believed by Muslims who take Bukhari and Muslim as literal canon, when studied from a secular point of view though the evidence against such a notion is quite large.

[motivez]

Nice post with good information, I don't think I've read anything about possible explanations of the age being incorrect.

My assumption was always that it was a marriage made for political rather than sexual reasons, and if that's the case I don't think it's that big of a deal, different customs in different parts of the world in different times

Do you have a link where that information is available btw? I'd like to do some more reading on the subject.

[Dylith]

The main difference between me and say a conservative Sunni Muslim would be that I also study Islam from a secular point of view. To those who view Muslim and Bukhari as canon the early biographies must obviously be wrong, because they contradict infallible scripture.

Muslims and Bukhari collections (which is where Aisha's age is listed) are Sunni hadiths, and I have studied both (though I hardly know them through and through). I do know enough though to know that they can contradict themselves in situations like these. Many of these hadiths were preserved by word of mouth for 200 years before they were written down at all, so to me, they are all suspect, which is why I like to varify any historical information that I get out of them with other sources (such as Hisham, Tabari, and Ishaq).

As for finding the information, you could read the early biographies, I am not sure if they can be found online. There are decent translations of Tabari and Hisham out there and Karen Armstrong published a more modern biography that uses the remnants of Ishaq's writings (entitled Muhammad: a biography of the prophet)

Vernon O Egger has a book out that deals with early Islam history as well (history of the muslim world to 1405) which I really enjoyed and found quite informative.

I would also agree that Aisha's marriage to Muhammad was mainly political in nature. Aisha was the daughter of Abu Bakr who was a very important figure in early Islam (it was he who took over the Umma after Muhammad died). Family ties were very important and thus many prominent families wanted family ties to Muhammad.

In either case, it is bellieved that Muhammad at least waited until she hit puberty before consummating the union. to those who belive in the Muslim and Bukhari collections this means that Aisha hit puberty at 9 or 10.

Aisha though was also said to have been Muhammad's "favorite" wife (although you are not suppose to show favoritism) and she went on to become a symbol of women's rights and of female stength in the Islamic community. (she played an active role in Islamic politics after Muhammad's death and even presided over the battle of the camel which was named so because Aisha sat on a camel while she watched the battle).

[Rhianann]

Originally Posted by Dylith

Both the Bukhari and the Muslim hadith collections place Aisha both at 9 and at much older than 9 when the marriage was consummated.

Both Muslim and Bukhari state that Aisha rode with Muhammad in the Battle of Badr in 624. We see this in the Muslim Hadith collection Book 019, Number 4472. And from Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 131 we know she was at the battle of Uhud. Badr especially started off as raids and weren't planned. In order to go on a raid or to ride with the men you must be at least 15 years old, so claim both Muslim and Bukhari collections. These can be found in Bukahri Volume 5, Book 59, Number 423 and in Muslim Book 019, Number 4466. Both show that there were age restrictions when it came to riding with the parties. If this is the case, then Aisha must have been at least 13 years old when she was married in 622.

Finally, Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 399 states that during the revelation of the 54th Quranic verse Aisha makes the statement that the revelation came when she was a playful little girl. The 54th Quranic sura occured no less than 9 years before 622. Which would have made her older than 9 upon marriage and even older upon consumation.


What happen then? Why the difference?

It was common back then (as we see with other hadiths in these collections) for the first digit of numbers to be left out when it is known. For example 16 would have become simply 6 and 19 would have become simply 9. An easy translational mistake and if this is excepted then it fits in with the other hadith of the collection.

We see it happen in the Night of Decree where 1 was used for 21 and where 5 was used for 25. It was not an uncommon practice.

Also, both Hisham and Tabari (authors of two of the earliest bographies of Muhammad, next to Ishaq's whose origional work has been lost) both claim that Aisha was older than 9 upon consummation.

Tabari says that Aisha was already at a marriagable age in the year 615 before Bakr's immigration to Ethiopia. This means that she would still be of suitable age in 622 when she married Muhammad. Tabari also said that Aisha converted to Islam before Umar did, which means that Aisha had to have been old enough to make such a desicion on her own (aka she was old enough to talk) around 610 a fact which Hishram supports.

Also, Hisham states that Aisha was born before the year 610. Which, at the very least, would have made her twevle in 622 when she was married, and older when it was consummated.

Also, having sex with children before they hit puberty would have gone against custom and there would have been little reason to do so.

It is also widely accepted by historians that Aisha was only 10 years younger than her older sister. At the time of Aisha's marriage, Asma was 28 years old which would have made Aisha 18.

The simple fact is that we have more historical evidence that suggests that Aisha was much older than 9, than we do which suggests that she was that young. It is possible that she was younger, but unlikely, this is mainly believed by Muslims who take Bukhari and Muslim as literal canon, when studied from a secular point of view though the evidence against such a notion is quite large.

Which proves that education is key. Sometimes people don't read before they speak. Bookburners beware