Sahabah Series: Aisha bint Abi Bakr (RA) - Shaykh Akram Nadwi

On Aisha�s age at the time of marriage

I think too much emphasis is put on Aisha�s age (ra) at the time of her marriage and/or consummation to Muhammad (saaws).

There are two issues at play here: The issues with the narrations that say Aisha (ra) was nine when her marriage with Nabi Muhammad (saaws) was consummated, and the issue with placing modern, �first world� values on illiterate societies.

The issues with the ahadith

First, let�s look at the issues with the hadiths saying Aisha (ra) was nine when her marriage was consummated. I am not going to reinvent the wheel in regards to this topic. Instead, here is an excerpt from someone else�s research:

• Most of these narratives [saying Aisha (ra) was married at 6 and her marriage was consummated at 9] 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 Medinahhis 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 toYaqub ibn Shaibah: �narratives reported by Hisham are reliable except those that are reported through the people of Iraq�. It further states that Malik ibn Anasobjected 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 hadithand 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 asAl-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.

Placing modern, �first world� values on illiterate societies

We need to understand that illiterate societies are different from literate societies when it comes to the age of maturity. To prove my point, let�s go to a quote about Europe in the throes of the Dark Ages (a largely illiterate period of time) and see what they thought of children, since Europe is the gold standard for Western beliefs:

In an oral [illiterate] world there is not much of a concept of an adult and, therefore, even less of a child. And that is why, in all the sources, one finds that in the Middle Ages childhood ended at seven. Why seven? Because that is the age at which children have command over speech. They can say and understand what adults can say and understand. They are able to know all the secrets of the tongue, which are the only secrets they need to know. And this helps us to explain why, until the seventeenth century, the words used to denote young males could refer to men of thirty, forty, or fifty, for there was no word � in French, German, or English � for a young male between the ages of seven and sixteen. The word child expressed kinship, not age. But most of all, the oralism [illiteracy] of the Middle Ages helps us to explain why there were no primary schools. For where biology determines communication competence, there is no need for such schools.

(Above quote from The Disappearance of Childhood by Neil Postman.)

So you see, Aisha�s age (if we accept the hadiths with the younger ages) at the time of marriage and consummation only applies to illiterate societies. Once the determination for adulthood becomes command of the written word over the command of the spoken word, childhood appears. Concepts of pedophilia appear, because the age in which adults need to protect children from the secrets of the adult world extends much further, from seven to, say, seventeen.

Furthermore, to the Evangelical Atheists out there I ask: What part of the theory of evolution and modern primatology states that one must be 18 (or 16 or 21) in order to have children? What evolutionary advantage is there, over the millenia of human existence, in waiting for humans to reach an arbitrary solar year age-wise? The answer is there is no such understanding. Obviously waiting for a woman to reach a certain biological maturity is better for her (and for her child), but biological maturity does not equate with a solar (or lunar) year of age. Case in point � my cousin was menstruating at 8 and was very mature by the age of 14. I, however, did not start menstruating until I was 14 and I was not biologically mature until I was well into my 16th year.

In fact, does it disturb anyone else out there that it is acceptable for a girl of 15-17 years of age to experiment sexually and engage in consensual relationships with her peers, yet it is not acceptable in most states for her to get married? I don�t get this at all. If the individuals we define in American society as children are expected and urged into sexual relations and think about sexual orientation and identity, why is it wrong for them to also get married? Certainly, if they are physically and emotionally mature enough to have sex wouldn�t that make them also physically and emotionally mature enough to get married?

Beyond this debate and regardless of which hadith you accept in regards to Aisha�s (ra) age, that�s why most Muslims don�t marry off their daughters as soon as they have their first period (or encourage them into sexual experimentation)- because it doesn�t make sense in a literate society to do so! A child who is menstruating and has command over the spoken word is not a fully functioning part of literate society, but she is a fully functioning part of illiterate society. In fact, Islam�s revelation in and of itself actually started the liberation of women from the perils of illiterate society because its copious texts and requirements that women be educated changed the way Muslim societies viewed childhood and women themselves. The fact that Western �liberators� outright ignore the protection Islam gives women and instead focus on a marriage that was not even a scandal at the time merely shows that they are not interested in understanding, and without understanding there can be no liberation.

source

Our Mother, Our Teacher (Aisha bint Abu-Bakr)

Of Aisha�s age at marriage

IT is said that Hazrat Aisha was six years old when her nikah was performed with Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) in Makkah, and nine years old when she moved in to live with her husband in Madina after Hijra.

This piece of misinformation has led to the wrong view that child marriage has the sanction of Islam. It must be noted that establishing the authenticity of hadiths, the narrators� circumstances and the conditions at that time have to be correlated with historical facts. There is only one hadith by Hisham which suggests the age of Hazrat Aisha as being nine when she came to live with her husband.

Many authentic hadiths also show that Hisham�s narration is incongruous with several historical facts about the Prophet�s life, on which there is consensus. With reference to scholars such as Umar Ahmed Usmani, Hakim Niaz Ahmed and Habibur Rehman Kandhulvi, I would like to present some arguments in favour of the fact that Hazrat Aisha was at least 18 years old when her nikah was performed and at least 21 when she moved into the Prophet�s house to live with him.

According to Umar Ahmed Usmani, in Surah Al-Nisa, it is said that the guardian of the orphans should keep testing them, until they reach the age of marriage, before returning their property (4:6). From this scholars have concluded that the Quran sets a minimum age of marriage which is at least puberty. Since the approval of the girl has a legal standing, she cannot be a minor.

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, when Hisham was 71 years old. Hafiz Zehbi has spoken about Hisham�s loss of memory in his later period. His students in Madina, Imam Malik and Imam Abu Hanifah, do not mention this hadith. Imam Malik and the people of Madina criticised him for his Iraqi hadiths.

All the narrators of this hadith are Iraqis who had heard it from Hisham. Allama Kandhulvi says that the words spoken in connection with Hazrat Aisha�s age were tissa ashara, meaning 19, when Hisham only heard (or remembered), tissa, meaning nine. Maulana Usmani thinks this change was purposely and maliciously made later.

Historian Ibn Ishaq in his Sirat Rasul Allah has given a list of the people who accepted Islam in the first year of the proclamation of Islam, in which Hazrat Aisha�s name is mentioned as Abu Bakr�s �little daughter Aisha�. If we accept Hisham�s calculations, she was not even born at that time.

Some time after the death of the Prophet�s first wife, Hazrat Khadija, Khawla suggested to the Prophet that he get married again, to a bikrun, referring to Hazrat Aisha (Musnad Ahmed). In Arabic bikrun is used for an unmarried girl who has crossed the age of puberty and is of marriageable age. The word cannot be used for a six-year-old girl.

Some scholars think that Hazrat Aisha was married off so early because in Arabia girls mature at an early age. But this was not a common custom of the Arabs at that time. According to Allama Kandhulvi, there is no such case on record either before or after Islam. Neither has this ever been promoted as a Sunnah of the Prophet. The Prophet married off his daughters Fatima at 21 and Ruquiyya at 23. Besides, Hazrat Abu Bakr, Aisha�s father, married off his eldest daughter Asma at the age of 26.

Hazrat Aisha narrates that she was present on the battlefield at the Battle of Badar (Muslim). This leads one to conclude that Hazrat Aisha moved into the Prophet�s house in 1 A.H. But a nine-year-old could not have been taken on a rough and risky military mission.

In 2 A.H, the Prophet refused to take boys of less than 15 years of age to the battle of Uhud. Would he have allowed a 10-year-old girl to accompany him? But Anas reported that he saw Aisha and Umme Sulaim carrying goatskins full of water and serving it to the soldiers (Bukhari). Umme Sulaim and Umme Ammara, the other women present at Uhud, were both strong, mature women whose duties were the lifting of the dead and injured, treating their wounds, carrying water in heavy goatskins, supplying ammunition and even taking up the sword.

Hazrat Aisha used the kunniat, the title derived from the name of a child, of Umme Abdullah after her nephew and adopted son. If she was six when her nikah was performed, she would have been only eight years his senior, hardly making him eligible for adoption. Also, a little girl could not have given up on ever having her own child and used an adopted child�s name for her kunniat.

Hazrat Aisha�s nephew Urwah once remarked that he was not surprised about her amazing knowledge of Islamic law, poetry and history because she was the wife of the Prophet and the daughter of Abu Bakr. If she was eight when her father migrated, when did she learn poetry and history from him?

There is consensus that Hazrat Aisha was 10 years younger than her elder sister Asma, whose age at the time of the hijrah, or migration to Madina, was about 28. It can be concluded that Hazrat Aisha was about 18 years old at migration. On her moving to the Prophet�s house, she was a young woman at 21. Hisham is the single narrator of the hadith whose authenticity is challenged, for it does not correlate with the many historical facts of the time.

Source

Rejecting the Myth of Sanctioned Child Marriage in Islam

Excellent article :)

Name one thing Muslims and Christians share? Their level effort pointing fingers elsewhere whenever pedophilia comes up. Catholic priests are an obvious and easy target, but when my 16-year-old daughter raised $26,000 in her high school to combat North America's growing child-sex-slavery trade, her grandmother complained that she wasn't doing enough about misogyny and abuse in Somalia, Saudi Arabia and the Sudan. Although she wasn't very clear how Marley would get there. My pen on the other hand? We'll see.

Another similarity? Neither Muslims nor Christians blame Christianity for the problem, but the same can't be said for Islam. You've got to give pedophiles their props though. Most sane people consider them something beyond abhorrent, and yet on this issue they have convinced even Christian leaders to climb into bed with them, and with some Sunni and Shiite scholars to boot. And it's time to pull the sheets back and see what's really going on for the sake of women and children everywhere.

There are really only three reasons to insist -- as so many do -- that Aisha was only 9 years old when Muhammad, the Prophet of Islam (PBUH) married her: Either you are such a crazy Islamophile that you are willing to go to your grave insisting Muhammad could do whatever he wanted, or you are such a crazy Islamophobe that you want to insist he did, or you are such a weirdly religious sex-crazed pervert that you hope accusing him makes it OK for you to do it too.

There is absolutely no other reason to either make or repeat that disgusting claim. Aisha was married in 622 C.E., and although her exact birthday is unknown, Abu Ja'far Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari recorded that it happened before Islam was revealed in 610. The earliest surviving biography of Muhammad, Abu Muhammad 'Abd al-Malik bin Hisham's recension of Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah -- The Life of the Messenger of Godrecords that Aisha accepted Islam shortly after it was revealed -- 12 years before her marriage -- and there is no way she could have done so as an infant or toddler.

Furthermore, it is a matter of incontrovertible historical record that Aisha was involved in the Battles of Badr in 624 and Uhud in 625, in neither of which was anyone under the age of 15 allowed.

Finally, Imam Wali-ud-Din Muhammad ibn Abdullah Al-Khatib, dead for more than 700 years, recorded in the biographical section of Miskat al-Masabih that Asma, her elder sister of 10 years, died at the age of 100, 72 years after Aisha's wedding. This makes Aisha's age at the time of her marriage at least 14, and at the time of her marriage's consummation almost 20.

Although those dates make it obvious that Aisha's child-marriage couldn't have taken place, according to Arab tribal traditions of the time it could have, and apparently it can still happen in Arabia today. A case that recently raged through the international press and Saudi courts -- of an 8-year-old girl who had been married by her father to a 47 year-old "friend" to settle Dad's debts -- shows how little things there have changed. However, that's despite Islam, not because of it.

Prior to Muhammad in Arabia, it is common knowledge that females were considered property, and that female infants were often discarded like refuse when born. However, one of Islam's primary revelations was that men and women had equal status before God, with different though equal rights and obligations. Another was God's condemnation of Arab female sacrifice, proclaiming that girl-children were just as valuable as boy-children to God and to humankind.

Obviously, those ignorant tribal prejudices and practices persist. However the most important reason Aisha's child-marriage couldn't have happened is this: Muhammad couldn't do anything any more than any other Muslim can. Muhammad was the finest example of true Islamic living there could ever be, and having marital relations with a woman of less than the "age of majority" -- an age that varies from culture to culture but presupposes the ability to become pregnant, have children and make decisions for those children as an adult -- was, is and always will be completely contrary to the example set by our Prophet, and the message of Islam's Holy Quran.

The Quran is clear that a divorced woman cannot marry another man until she completes a period of waiting to confirm she isn't already pregnant, and such an impediment would be unnecessary were pregnancy not possible. However, the roots of Islamic pedophilia lie in exactly what the verse (At-Talaq -- "The Divorce" 65:4) about that waiting period says. Yousuf Ali's English translation is a pretty good approximation:

Waalla-ee ya-isna mina almaheedi min nisa-ikum ini irtabtum fa'iddatuhunna thalathatu ashhurin waalla-ee lam yahidna waolatu al-ahmali ajaluhunna an yada'ana hamlahunna waman yattaqi Allaha yaj'al lahu min amrihi yusran.

Such of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the prescribed period, if ye have any doubts, is three months, and for those who have no courses (it is the same): for those who carry (life within their wombs), their period is until they deliver their burdens: and for those who fear Allah, He will make their path easy.

Now, I've discussed the verse with progressive Islamic scholars and learned that "Lam Yahidna" negates menstruation in the past tense and the jussive mode and means "did not menstruate," with the expectation that the woman should be menstruating, since that natural cycle is part of her normal state.

Then again, I know that there are Islamic scholars from Arabia and Pakistan -- another place with long traditions of both child-marriage and misogyny -- and Islamophobes from around the world who interpret it as if it says "has not menstruated yet," with the jussive mode implying the girl is impatient to begin, ensuring that it seems to perpetuate the pre-Islamic practice of having sex with pre-pubescent girls.

Between those two incredibly divergent positions, how does one choose?

When Muslims face difficult questions, we have the Sunnah, an Arabic word meaning "the acts of Muhammad," to guide us, and that's why Aisha's age is such an issue. But the thing is, whether Aisha was still a child when her marriage was consummated has never been a question: all scholars agree that occurred after Aisha's menarche. Islamophobes inevitably claim otherwise, but they do so based on a completely fictitious interpretation of events.

And that means the problem that we should be addressing is the root one, that of men devaluing and disenfranchising girls and women: Husbands and fathers treating girls as property and forcing them to marry against their will.

And in that, the condemnation of the Quran and Sunnah are very clear: The Quran states a woman's consent is essential, and the Sunnah confirms that both Aisha's betrothal and consummation occurred with Aisha's enthusiastic agreement. In fact, some even imply she went against the initial wishes of her Dad!

Those guides unequivocally confirm that men and woman have equal status before God, equal though different rights when wed, and that a woman cannot be given in marriage without her express approval. Absent that, the Sunnah also records that Muhammad dissolved marriages on the woman's testimony alone. That is what Muslims should be proclaiming, rather than the purported right of Muslim men to marry underage brides.

The cause of the confusion is simple. Imam Bukhari, compiler of the famous Hadithcollection (Hadith in this context meaning stories about Muhammad) Sahih Bukhari included one recalling that Aisha said she was 6 when betrothed and 9 when she was wed. However, Bukhari included another recording that Aisha was a young girl and remembered when Surah Al-Qamar was revealed -- 9 years before her wedding -- as well. Obviously, both Hadiths can't be true, and that's the problem with relying too much on Hadiths, and too little on the Quran and common sense.

Even if you believe -- as I do -- that the Quran is a divinely protected book, the same cannot be said about all Hadiths. In fact, there is even an Ayah in the Quran that warns about the dangers of thinking otherwise. Luqman 31:6 cautions:

Wamina alnnasi man yashtaree lahwa alhadithi liyudilla aaan sabeeli Allahi bighayri aailmin wayattakhithaha huzuwan ola-ika lahum aaathabun muheenun.

But there are, among men, those who purchase idle Hadiths, without knowledge (or meaning), to mislead (men) from the Path of Allah and throw ridicule (on the Path): for such there will be a Humiliating Penalty.

While there are Muslim scholars who claim that Luqman 6 is actually a warning about musical performers like Madonna, there are others who respond that unless those performers are Muslim nothing they do throws ridicule on any path but their own. And personally, I think the Ayah is instead a frank and literal warning about the dangers of trafficking in false and idle Hadiths, just like it says.

I also can't think of a better set of examples of what it's talking about than the damage that's been done by confusion over Aisha's age of consummation.

I have read a great deal of speculation about why Hadiths that make Aisha seem immature might be wrong. Most of them came out of what is now Iraq, through one specific source named Hisham ibn Urwah. And it's worth noting that his student Muslim -- who collated the Hadiths of Sahih Muslim -- specifically chose not to include any from his respected teacher after Hisham went to Iraq. Some say it's because Hisham's memory became spotty, others say it was because Iraq was a political hotbed of "anti-Aisha" feeling and some evil men fabricated Hadiths in Hisham's name.

But none of the speculation matters. The only thing you need to realize is that both the tales Bukhari included can't both be true. That fact, put together with the Quran's warning, means that Hadiths can't be as authoritative to Muslims as the Holy Quran and the Sunnah are.

I've been told otherwise by many good Muslims, and I know there are even places in the world where you can spark a riot by saying otherwise, but I think that's part of what Luqman warns us about. I love Hadiths for the illuminating light they can shine on the interpretation of a difficult passage, or on my own attempts navigating a difficult juncture in my life, but I've also participated in Islamic dinner events that have fallen apart discussing the Hadith condemning Muslims who smell their food before they eat it.

Now, the role, authority and validity of individual Hadiths is not an issue that is going to be put to rest by someone like me; there is an entire scholarly science devoted to it. And personally, I think that debate and discussion, both between scholars and "grass-roots" Muslims, is useful and instructive whether the Hadiths being discussed are actually "true" or not, as long as that discussion is respectful of both our religion of Islam and our fellow participants.

But while we're on the subject of how Muslims settle Islamic controversies, there's an important question that begs asking. I actually understand the Islamophobic focus on false and embarrassing Islamic interpretations: they're just trying to score points the best way they know how, with tools we Muslims have given them. But all these facts I've shared are just common knowledge that's easily verifiable and my conclusions little more than simple common sense.

If Muslim scholars are so concerned that Muslim practices follow Islam's revelation and Muhammad's memory, and if they truly want to defend Islam and our Prophet, then what have they been doing for the last thousand years?

No question men (and women) can be pigs when it comes to sex and gender issues -- when I'm asked to explain why we can't eat pork I generally explain the problem might be cannibalism -- but religion is supposed to help us combat those dark urges not pander to them.

And while we're on the subject of marriage, the Quran doesn't condone wife-beating either. In pre-Islamic Arabia, men did not need permission to beat their wives. And although the Arabic root Dzaraba does mean "beat" it also means "heal." Dzaraba denotes action for a higher purpose, such as "striking (or minting) a coin," or "striking out on a new path." Coupled with the Quran's warning to husbands that God is watching everything we do, and a reminder that we must serve our marriage rather than ourselves, particularly after proclaiming married men to be tasked as providers and protectors rather than rulers all in the same passage, in Muhammad's day Islam actually took that permission away, despite misogynist Muslim and Islamophobic claims to the contrary.

With all the suffering in Somalia, so much of it caused by misapplied and misinterpreted misreadings of Islam, why are Somalia's scholars focusing on sexualizing hand-holding?

How is it that Saudi Arabia still allows child marriage when they've known Aisha's real age all along (the biographies I reference are written in Arabic, for Heaven's sake!), or that Pakistan's rape laws cleave to British colonial precedent?

In Pakistan, a woman can be punished for being raped if the rapist denies her claims. But when Muhammad was faced with a woman who told him she'd been raped, he had the man in question executed on the testimony of the woman, whom he pronounced blameless, alone.

The simple truth is that all our Muslim scholars since Islam began have been human, limited by the human ability to pander, avoid conflict by bowing to popular opinion, or make mistakes. And when scholars fail their sacred trust, to transmit Islam with fidelity, they lose their right to any authority, Islamic or otherwise, and frankly, it's up to the rest of us to do a better job of keeping them honest.

Because if any of us care about things like "truth" and "fidelity" as much as so many of us claim, "Too busy to check the facts out for myself" just doesn't seem like much of an excuse.

What's my bottom line? The age Aisha attained before she married the Prophet is one issue we have to put to rest -- for the sake of children everywhere. There is absolutely no question that Aisha was an adult when she consummated her marriage with Muhammad of her own free will, and she lived out her life in the earliest days of Islam the un-harassed and proudly participatory equal of everyone, just like every other man, woman or child under God.

That is our Muslim legacy that we should be striving to live up to, and anyone who claims otherwise is simply crazy, one way or another.

Source