Wednesday, 28 October 2020

Muhammad the Womanizing Sensualist

 

The following lengthy excerpt is taken from Iranian Muslim scholar Ali Dashti’s book, “23 Years: A Study of Prophetic Career of Mohammad”. This happens to be one of the best treatments on Muhammad and Islam ever produced. In what follows, Dashti highlights the fact of Muhammad being a womanizer who used his god to give himself a license to indulge his carnal, lustful passions.

Ignaz Goldziher remarked that no other religion’s scriptures and records contain anything like the frank and detailed information which the Qur’an, the Hadith, and the biographies give about the career and private life of Islam’s founder. The remark is made appreciatively in Goldziher’s valuable book Le dogme et la loi de 1’1slam, in the course of a chapter in which the historical and well documented fact of the Prophet Mohammad’s growing appetite for women is mentioned. About the lives of Jesus and Moses, let alone Abraham and Noah, whatever information we possess is clouded by dusts of popular mythology and religious and racial prejudice. About the life of Mohammad, hundreds of reports which have not undergone tendentious deformation are available to us in Qur’anic verses, reliable Hadiths, and early biographies. The most important of these sources is the Qur’an, through which knowledge of many contemporary events can be obtained both directly, from certain verses, and indirectly, from the accounts of occasions of revelations given by commentators. The number of verses concerning the Prophet’s private life is quite large.

All the commentators agree that verse 57 of sura 4 (on-Nesa) was sent down after the Jews had criticized Mohammad’s appetite for women, alleging that he had nothing to do except to take wives. The verse says, “Or do they envy the people for what God in His bounty has given them? We gave scripture and wisdom to Abraham’s descendants, and We gave them a great realm.” The Jews were jealous of Mohammad for God’s gifts of prophethood and many wives to him. The second sentence replies to their argument that a genuine prophet would not take so many wives, and obviously refers to the prophets David and Solomon, who were supposed to have had ninety nine wives and a harem of one thousand women respectively, but had not suffered any consequent loss of prophetic status. These suppositions, like other stories of the kings of the children of Israel, were of course embroidered with the exaggerations of fable.

European critics have viewed this appetite for women as excessive and irreconcilable with the spiritual role of a man who preached moderation and renunciation. Some have surmised that Mohammad’s fondness for women prompted those elements of the Islamic legislation which improved women’s status and rights.

Such objections lose weight when the matter is considered from a purely rational, and not emotional, viewpoint. Mohammad was a human, and no human is without weak points. The sexual appetite is a necessary human instinct and an important factor in any person’s thinking and behaviour toward others; it is only reprehensible when it induces socially harmful behaviour. Otherwise there is no point in discussing merits and demerits, or strengths and weaknesses, of a person’s private life. The ideas of Socrates radiated from Athens to all of Greece and to all of mankind; the question whether he led a perverted private life is irrelevant unless he thereby did harm to society. Adolf Hitler could be called chaste because he either lacked or had only a feeble sexual instinct, but instead he had pernicious notions which plunged the world into bloodshed and ruin.

The Prophet Mohammad saw himself as a human who had submitted to God and undertaken to rescue his people from the sink of idolatry. His fondness for women and his marriages to many wives did not impair the validity of his mission or infringe the rights of other persons. The actions and ideas of great leaders of communities should be assessed in the context of the social environment and by the criteria of their benefit to the community and to mankind. Seen in this light, the denial of intellectual and religious freedom to others, which results from giving them only the choice between acceptance of Islam and payment of tribute on humiliating terms, is much more open to question. Moslems also have made misappraisals, but of a very different kind. In order to glorify Islam’s founder, they have said and written things which contradict clear verses in the Qur’an and reports in the reliable early sources. The learned modern Egyptian author Mohammad Hosayn Haykal, who in his Life of Mohammad set out to examine matters with the methods of twentieth century scholarship, took such umbrage at the Western criticisms that in one chapter he even tried to defend the Prophet by denying that he had any great fondness for women at all. A passage from the chapter is quoted below: “Mohammad had twenty years of conjugal life with Khadija and did not then desire to take another wife. . . . . . This was natural and inevitable. Khadija was a wealthy and distinguished woman who had married a poor, but hard-working and honest, employee. She had taken him into her house because, either by nature or by dint of his straitened circumstances, he was free from the frivolous and licentious proclivities of other Qorayshite youths. It was for these reasons that the mature and experienced Khadija devotedly cared for her husband, who was fifteen years younger than herself, and from her own resources helped him to achieve a prosperity in which he could forget his childhood experiences of hardship and dependence on his uncle. The peace and comfort of Khadija’s house enabled him to ripen the thoughts which he had been nurturing for ten or twelve years. Khadija herself certainly concurred with his austere ideas, because as a cousin of Waraqa b. Nawfal she sympathized with ascetics (hanifs) 68 After Mohammad’s appointment to the prophethood, she believed in the truth and divine inspiration of his vision, and became the first convert to Islam. Furthermore Khadija was the mother of the Prophet’s four daughters, Zaynab, Roqayya, Omm Kolthum, and Fatema.69 In such a situation, how could Mohammad take another wife while Khadija was living? Only after her death did he proceed to ask for the hand of A’esha, and as A’esha was then a seven year-old child, to marry Sawda, the widow of os-Sakran b. Amr.” Haykal then states, in an evident attempt to absolve Mohammad of desire for women, that “Sawda possessed neither beauty nor wealth. The Prophet’s marriage to her was an act of charity and helpfulness to the lonely widow of one of the Moslem emigrants to Abyssinia.”

Surely Haykal would have done better to write that the Prophet married Sawda because, being a mature person, she was well fitted to do his housekeeping and look after his four young daughters; though this theory is open to the objection that the Prophet first thought of A’esha, a child whom he could not marry until two years later because she was so young, and then married Sawda because he could not live without a wife– a reason which is in no way blameworthy. Perhaps a further reason was the lack of any other available women at that time, when the Qorayshites would have been unwilling to give a daughter to Mohammad and the Moslems probably did not have any marriageable daughters. The time was the period of two or three years in which the Prophet remained at Mecca after Khadija’s death.

After the move to Madina, however, opportunities arose and the Prophet Mohammad’s strong appetite for women found ample scope. This fact cannot be denied and is sufficiently demonstrated by the following more or less complete list of his wives:

1 Khadija, daughter of Khowayled. She was a distinguished and wealthy woman, and Mohammad was her third husband. She bore him four daughters as well as two sons, named (ol-) Qasem and (ot- )Taher, both of whom died in infancy.

2 Sawda, daughter of Zam’a. She was the widow of a Meccan Moslem emigrant who had died in Abyssinia. M. H. Haykal’s opinion that the Prophet married her out of compassion for a lonely Moslem widow has been discussed above.

3 A’esha, daughter of Abu Bakr os-Seddiq. She was seven years old when she was betrothed and nine years old when she was married to the Prophet, the gap between them being more than forty years. Her age when he died in 11 A.H./632 was sixteen or seventeen years. She was the Prophet’s favourite wife. She was also one of the persons who learned the Qur’an by heart. She was considered an important source of information on words and deeds of the Prophet (Hadith) and customs of the Moslems (Sanna). After the assassination of Othman, she opposed the accession of Ali b. Abi Taleb to the caliphate and was one of the prime movers of the force which unsuccessfully challenged Ali at the battle of the camel in 36/656.

4 Omm Salama, the widow of a Meccan Moslem emigrant to Madina who had died of wounds suffered in the battle of Ohod.

5 Hafsa, daughter of Omar b. al-Khattab. She too was married to the Prophet after she had been left a widow. There is evidence that this marriage had a pragmatic aspect.

6 Zaynab, daughter of Jahsh and former wife of the Prophet’s adopted son Zayd b. Haretha. This marriage can be counted as one of the Prophet’s love-matches. There is a long narrative poem about Zayd and Zaynab. The Prophet’s affection and care for Zaynab were such as to make her a rival of A’esha.

7 Jowayriya, daughter of ol-Hareth b. Abi Derar, the chief of the Mostaleq tribe, and former wife of Mosafe’ b. Safwan. She had been taken prisoner at the time of the defeat of the Banu’l- Mostaleq in 5A.H./627 and given to one of the Moslem warriors as his share of the booty. Her owner wanted to ransom her for a certain price, but she found the price too high and beyond her means. She therefore went to the Prophet’s house to plead for his intercession to get the price lowered. What happened next has been told by A’esha: “Jowayriya was so beautiful and charming that anyone who caught sight of her was captivated. When I saw Jowayriya outside the door of my room, I felt worried because I was sure that God’s Apostle would be carried awayas soon as his eye fell on her. And so he was. After she had gained admission to the Prophet’s presence and made her plea, he said that he would do something better for her; he would pay for her ransom himself and then ask her to marry him. Jowayriya was pleased, and she consented. Asa result of her marriage to the Prophet, the Moslems freed many of the Mostaleq captives because they had become the Prophet’s brothers and sisters in law. I can think of no other woman who did so much good and caused so many blessings for her own kinsfolk.”

8 Omm Habiba, daughter of Abu Sofyan. She had been left a widow when her first husband Obaydollah b. Jahsh died in Abyssinia.   

9 Safiya, daughter of Hoyayy b. Akhtab and former wife of Kenana b. Abi Rabi’, one of the leaders of the Jews at Khaybar. After being taken prisoner, she was selected by the Prophet as his share of the booty. He married her on the eve of his return from Khaybar to Madina.

10 Maymuna, daughter of ol-Hareth of the Helal tribe. One sister of hers was married to Abu Sofyan, and another to Abbas b. Abd ol-Mottaleb. Maymuna was the maternal aunt of Khaled b. ol-Walid (the future conqueror of Syria); reportedly it was after her marriage to the Prophet that Khaled walked into the Moslem camp and professed Islam, and the Prophet made a gift of horses to Khaled.

11 Fatema, daughter of Shorayh.

12 Hend, daughter of Yazid. 13 Asma, daughter of Saba.

14 Zaynab, daughter of Khozayma.

15 Habla, daughter of Qays and sister of ol-Ash’ath b. Qays (a South Arabian chief, subsequently prominent in the conquest of Iran).70

16 Asma, daughter of No’ man. The Prophet did not consummate this marriage.

17 Fatema, daughter of od-Dahhak. This marriage was also left unconsummated.

18 Mariya the Copt, a slave-girl who was sent from Egypt as a gift to the Prophet.71 She bore him a son, Ebrahim, who died in infancy.

19 Rayhana, like Mariya the Copt, fell into the Qur’anic category of “those whom your right hands have acquired”, i.e. she was a slave-girl with whom contractual marriage was unnecessary but concubinage was permissible. She was one of the captives from the Jewish Banu Qorayza and the Prophet’s share of the booty taken from that tribe. She was unwilling to profess Islam and enter into a contractual marriage with the Prophet, preferring to retain the status of a slave in his house.

20 Omm Sharik, of the Daws tribe, was one of four women who gave themselves to the Prophet. In addition to contractual wives and concubines, there were some women in the Prophet’s harem who fell into this third category. Marriage to contractual wives, up to the limit of four, requires formalities such as the provision of dower, the presence of witnesses, and the approval of the woman’s father or other guardian. Concubinage with slave-women is permissible to Moslems if the woman’s husband was a polytheist or other unbeliever. For the Prophet only, marriage to a woman who gave herself was permitted by the last part of verse 49 of sura 33 (ol-Ahztib). The other three women who gave themselves to the Prophet were Maymuna, Zaynab, and Khawla.

Omm Sharik’s gift of herself disturbed A’esha, because Omm Sharik was so beautiful that the Prophet immediately accepted the gift. In extreme jealousy and indignation, A’esha reportedly said, “I wonder what a woman who gives herself to a man is worth.” The incident is cited as the occasion of the revelation of the last part of verse 49, which sanctioned Omm Sharik’s gift and the Prophet’s acceptance. On hearing this, A’esha was reportedly so impertinent as to say, “I see that your Lord is quick to grant your wishes.” Another well authenticated report, quoted by the “Two Shaykhs” Jalal od-Din ol-Mahalli and Jalal od-Din os-Soyuti) in the Tafsir ol-Jalalayn, gives a different version of A’esha’s row with the Prophet. According to this, it was after the affair of Omm Sharik and the revelation of verse 49 that A’esha indignantly said, “I wonder what a woman who gives herself to a man is worth.” Verse 51 was then sent down to rebuke her, and it was after the revelation of verse 51 that she made her remark about the Lord’s quickness to grant the Prophet’s wishes.

Verse 49 of sura 33 defines the Prophet’s rights in the acquisition of wives and concubines: “O Prophet, We have made lawful for you your wives to whom you have paid their rewards, those whom your right hand has acquired out of the booty which God gave you, daughters of your paternal uncles and aunts and daughters of your maternal uncles and aunts who emigrated with you, and (any) female believer if she gives herself to the Prophet (and) if the Prophet wishes to enter into marriage with her – for you only, not for (other) believers.”

Verse 50 continues: “We know well what duties We have imposed on them in the matter of their wives and those whom their right hands have acquired. (This exemption is) in order that no blame shall fall on you. And God is forgiving, merciful.”

A’esha’s protest against the last part of verse 49 brought down the warning in verse 51, which sets forth, or rather sets no limits on, the Prophet’s powers over his wives, depriving them of any sort of right or redress against him: “You may postpone (the turns) of whomsoever of them you will, and you may take to bed whomsoever you will. And if you want (back) any of those whom you have laid off, it will not be a sin (held) against you. That is more likely to make them happy, not sad, and to make all of them content with what you give them. God knows what is in your hearts, and God is knowing, forbearing.”

Zamakhshari, in his Qur’an-commentary entitled ol-Kashshaf, explains the revelation of verse 51 as follows. The Prophet’s wives, who were jealous rivals of each other, began to demand higher subsistence allowances. (This was after the massacre of the men of the Qorayza tribe, when the Moslems had acquired much booty and the Prophet’s wives naturally hoped that part of his one fifth share of this booty might be spent on them). According to A’esha’s account, which Zamakhshari quotes, the Prophet then boycotted his wives for one month until the revelation of verse 51 gave him a free hand in his relations with them. The wives became apprehensive and asked him to give them whatever personal attention and financial help he pleased.

This means that the wives acknowledged the Prophet’s absolute discretion to deal with each of them in any way that he might choose. Zamakhshari in his detailed study interprets verse 51 as giving the Prophet freedom to approach, shun, retain, or divorce each or all of his wives and to marry other women of his community whenever he pleased. Furthermore, according to a statement by Hasan b. Ali which Zamakhshari quotes, if the Prophet wanted a woman’s hand, no other man would have the right to pay court to that woman unless the Prophet changed his mind. Zamakhshari adds that at that time the Prophet had nine wives and was not taking turns regularly or at all with five of them, namely Sawda, Jowayriya, Safiya, Maymuna, and Omm Habiba, but was granting favour and regular turns to the other four, namely A’esha, Hafsa, Omm Salama, and Zaynab. A’esha is again quoted as saying, “There were few days when the Prophet did not call on each of us, but he showed special consideration to the one whose turn had come and with whom he would be spending the night. Sawda b. Zam’a feared that the Prophet might divorce her and therefore said to him, ‘Do not keep my turn! I have given up hope of conjugal relations with you, and I cede my night to A’esha. But do not divorce me, because I would like to be counted as a wife of yours on the Judgement Day!’”

The point of the last part of verse 51 is that deprivation of conjugal rights would make the Prophet’s wives happier. Even though the divine command had endowed him with absolute discretion and deprived them of any right to claim their due from him, the new dispensation was better for them because it would end their rivalry and make them contented in future. 

Perhaps it was to soothe the hurt feelings and wounded pride of the wives that verse 52 of sura 33 was sent down, as the words certainly seem to be a message of consolation and reassurance to them: “It is not permissible for you (to marry) women hereafter, nor to replace them with (other) wives even if their beauty pleases you, with the exception of those whom your right hand has acquired. And God is watchful over everything.” This verse presents a problem, because in the words of A’esha, which every Hadith compiler quotes and deems authentic, “the Prophet did not die without all his wives being permissible for him” (i.e. all his marriages were permissible for him). In Zamakhshari’s opinion, A’esha’s words show that verse 52 was abrogated by custom and by verse 49 (“O Prophet, We have made lawful for you. . . . . . “). But an abrogating verse ought to come after the abrogated oneNevertheless Soyuti, in his treatise on Qur’anic problems entitled ol-Etqan, maintains that in this case the earlier verse abrogated the later one.

When the Prophet’s marital privileges, specified in numerous verses of sura 33, are added up, their astonishing range becomes apparent. He could have more than four wives, the maximum allowed to other believers; he was permitted to marry first cousins who had emigrated to Madina with him; he could take as a wife, without payment of dower and presence of witnesses, any female believer who gave herself to him; he was exempt from the obligation of respect for the equal rights of co-wives; he might postpone or terminate the turns of any of his wives; if he sought a woman’s hand, any other suitor must desist; and after his death, no other men might marry his widows. Moreover the Prophet’s wives had no right to demand higher subsistence allowances. 

In contrast with the privileges and freedoms given to the Prophet, exceptional restrictions were imposed on his wives. They were not like other women; they must not let themselves be seen by the people; they must speak to men from behind curtains; they must abstain from wearing ornaments customary in pagan times; they must be content with whatever subsistence allowances might be granted to them; they must not complain if their turns were not kept; and they must never remarry. The last sentence of verse 53, which is addressed to male believers, states categorically: “It would not be (right) for you to offend God’s Apostle by marrying his wives after him at any future time. That would be an enormity in God’s sight.” In the Talmud there is a similar ban on remarriage of widows of Jewish kings.

Abdolah b. ol-Abbas72 is reported to have said that a man went to see one of the Prophet’s wives, and the Prophet ordered him not to do so again. The man protested that she was the daughter of his paternal uncle and that he and she had no wrong intentions. The Prophet replied, “I am well aware of that, but there are none so jealous as the Lord and myself.” The man took umbrage and walked out, muttering “He forbids me to speak to my cousin. Anyway I shall marry her after his death.” It was then that the revelation of verse 53 of sura 33 took place. (Dashti, pp. 90-95; bold emphasis mine)

One of the verses that Dashti commented on is the following:

Or do they envy men (Muhammad and his followers) for what Allah has given them of His Bounty? Then We had already given the family of Ibrahim (Abraham) the Book and Al-Hikmah (As-Sunnah – Divine Inspiration to those Prophets not written in the form of a book), and conferred upon them a great kingdom.S. 4:54 Hilali-Khan

Here’s how the Muslim expositors interpreted this text:

Or nay are they jealous of people namely of the Prophet for the bounty that God has bestowed upon them in the way of prophethood and abundance of women? In other words they wish that he be deprived of such things saying ‘If he were truly a prophet he would not be concerned with women’. For We gave the House of Abraham his forefather the likes of Moses David and Solomon the Book and wisdom and prophethood and We gave them a mighty kingdom David had ninety–nine women and Solomon had a thousand free women and slavegirls. (Tafsir al-Jalalayn https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=4&tAyahNo=54&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2; bold emphasis ours)

(Or are they jealous) nay, they are jealous (of mankind) of Muhammad and his Companions (because of that which Allah of His bounty hath bestowed upon them?) the Scripture, prophethood and marrying many wives. (For We bestowed upon the house of Abraham) David and Solomon ((of old) the Scripture and Wisdom) knowledge, understanding and prophethood, (and We bestowed on them a mighty kingdom) We honoured them with prophethood and Islam and bestowed upon them sovereignty over the Children of Israel. David had 100 legitimate wives, and Solomon had 300 legitimate wives plus 700 concubines. (Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=4&tAyahNo=54&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2; bold emphasis mine)

The problem with appealing to the examples of David and Solomon is that this ignores the further revelation brought by the Lord Jesus and his inspired emissaries:

“Now it came to pass, when Jesus had finished these sayings, that He departed from Galilee and came to the region of Judea beyond the Jordan. And great multitudes followed Him, and He healed them there. The Pharisees also came to Him, testing Him, and saying to Him, ‘Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?’ And He answered and said to them, ‘Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning “made them male and female,” and said, “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the TWO shall become one flesh”? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.’ They said to Him, ‘Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?’ He said to them, ‘Moses, BECAUSE OF THE HARDNESS OF YOUR HEARTS, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.’ His disciples said to Him, ‘If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry.’  But He said to them, ‘All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given:For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it.’” Matthew 19:1-12 New King James Version (NKJV)

The words of the Lord here clearly indicate that God didn’t approve of such marriages, not even divorce, but simply tolerated them for the time being until the complete and perfect revelation would arrive. This is why the blessed Apostle Paul would write that a man is to have only one wife, in the same way that a woman is to have only one husband:

“Now concerning the things of which you wrote to me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. Let the husband render to his wife the affection due her, and likewise also the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. And likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another except with consent for a time, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again so that Satan does not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. But I say this as a concession, not as a commandment. For I wish that all men were even as I myself. But each one has his own gift from God, one in this manner and another in that. But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am; but if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.” 1 Corinthians 7:1-9 NKJV

Besides, the Hebrew Scriptures themselves testify that God was not pleased with what Solomon did, and even chastened him for having so many women that enticed his heart away from the worship of the one true God:

“But King Solomon loved many foreign women, as well as the daughter of Pharaoh: women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Sidonians, and Hittites—from the nations of whom the LORD had said to the children of Israel, ‘You shall not intermarry with them, nor they with you. Surely they will turn away your hearts after their gods.’ Solomon clung to these in love. And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines; and his wives turned away his heart. For it was so, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned his heart after other gods; and his heart was not loyal to the LORD his God, as was the heart of his father David. For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians, and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites. Solomon did evil in the sight of the LORD, and did not fully follow the LORD, as did his father David. Then Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the abomination of Moab, on the hill that is east of Jerusalem, and for Molech the abomination of the people of Ammon. And he did likewise for all his foreign wives, who burned incense and sacrificed to their gods. So the LORD became angry with Solomon, because his heart had turned from the LORD God of Israel, who had appeared to him twice, and had commanded him concerning this thing, that he should not go after other gods; but he did not keep what the LORD had commanded. Therefore the LORD said to Solomon, ‘Because you have done this, and have not kept My covenant and My statutes, which I have commanded you, I will surely tear the kingdom away from you and give it to your servant. Nevertheless I will not do it in your days, for the sake of your father David; I will tear it out of the hand of your son. However I will not tear away the whole kingdom; I will give one tribe to your son for the sake of My servant David, and for the sake of Jerusalem which I have chosen.’” 1 Kings 11:1-13 NKJV

This is precisely why God had forewarned that Israel’s kings should not multiply wives, lest their hearts turn away from Jehovah their God:

“When you come to the land which the LORD your God is giving you, and possess it and dwell in it, and say, ‘I will set a king over me like all the nations that are around me,’ you shall surely set a king over you whom the LORD your God chooses; one from among your brethren you shall set as king over you; you may not set a foreigner over you, who is not your brother. But he shall not multiply horses for himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt to multiply horses, for the LORD has said to you, ‘You shall not return that way again.’ Neither shall he multiply wives for himself, lest his heart turn away; nor shall he greatly multiply silver and gold for himself. Also it shall be, when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write for himself a copy of this law in a book, from the one before the priests, the Levites. And it shall be with him, and he shall read it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the LORD his God and be careful to observe all the words of this law and these statutes, that his heart may not be lifted above his brethren, that he may not turn aside from the commandment to the right hand or to the left, and that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he and his children in the midst of Israel.” Deuteronomy 17:14-20 NKJV

To, therefore, appeal to the example of the Old Testament prophets, merely highlights how desperate Muslims are in justifying Muhammad’s lustful, perverted sexual escapades, and further demonstrates the imperfection and backwardness of their prophet’s so-called revelations.

Finally, even the Islamic sources testify that Muhammad’s contemporaries accused him of being a womanizer, whose god seemed to rush to fulfill his prophet’s sexual passions and fantasies:

“… Layla bt. al-Khatim b. ‘Adi b. ‘Amr b. Sawad b. Zafar b. al-Harith b. al-Khazraj approached the Prophet while his back was to the sun, and clapped him on his shoulder. He asked who it was, and she replied, ‘I am the daughter of one who competes with the wind. I am Layla bt. al-Khatim. I have come to offer myself [in marriage] to you, so marry me.’ He replied, ‘I accept.’ She went back to her people and said that the Messenger of God had married her. They said, ‘What a bad thing you have done! You are a self-respecting woman, but the Prophet is a womanizer. Seek an annulment from him.’ She went back to the Prophet and asked him to revoke the marriage and he complied with [her request]…” (The History of Al-Tabari: The Last Years of the Prophet, translated and annotated by Ismail K. Poonawala [State University of New York Press, Albany, 1990], Volume IX (9), p. 139; bold emphasis ours)

Even Muhammad’s childbride Aisha noticed this to be the case:

Narrated Muadha:

’Aisha said, “Allah’s Apostle used to take the permission of that wife with whom he was supposed to stay overnight if he wanted to go to one other than her, after this Verse was revealed:–

‘You (O Muhammad) can postpone (the turn of) whom you will of them (your wives) and you may receive any (of them) whom you will; and there is no blame on you if you invite one whose turn you have set aside (temporarily).’” (33.51) I asked Aisha, “What did you use to say (in this case)?” She said, “I used to say to him, ‘If I could deny you the permission (to go to your other wives) I would not allow your favor to be bestowed on any other person.’” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 312 https://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=60&translator=1&start=0&number=312)

The foregoing makes it very hard to avoid coming to the conclusion that the main purpose of Allah’s existence was to satisfy Muhammad’s perverted desires and sexual lusts.

FURTHER READING

Muhammad’s Sexual Privileges (https://answeringislamblog.wordpress.com/2019/07/03/muhammads-sexual-privileges/)

Revisiting the Age of Aisha Pt. 4 (https://www.answering-islam.org/authors/shamoun/rebuttals/jonathan_brown/aisha_age_4.html)

Muhammad’s multiple marriages

Never Shall He Be Satisfied

Muhammad’s Marriage to Safiyyah: A Case Study in Allah’s Mercy

Muhammad’s Marriage to Safiyyah Revisited

Muhammad and Safiyyah Revisited 3a3b

Source: https://answeringislamblog.wordpress.com/2019/10/25/muhammad-the-womanizing-sensualist/

IHS


A Muslim Defense of Muhammad’s Marrying A Prepubescent Minor Pt. 2

This is a follow up to my previous post (https://answeringislamblog.wordpress.com/2019/10/25/a-muslim-defense-of-muhammads-marrying-a-prebuscent-minor-pt-1/) where I again republish a leading Muslim scholar’s refutation (https://www.abc.se/home/m9783/ir/d/aam1_e.pdf) to the attempts by some Muslims to deny that Muhammad had sexual relations with a 9-year-old minor.

‘Ā’isha’s Age at the Time of Her Marriage

by GF Haddad – Shawwāl 1426 / November 2005

Our Mother ‘Ā’isha was between four and five years old the year both Abū Tālib and Khadīja died – three years before the Hijra – and the Prophet remarried both with her and with Sawda between one and two years later, when she was six, cohabiting with her when she was nine as explicitly reported from her in the books of SahīhSunan, and Musnads.

Al-Bukhārī narrates from ‘Ā’isha in two places of his Sahīh – the book of Tafsīr and the one directly after it titled Fadā’il al-Qur’ān – that verse 46 of Sūrat al-QamarNay, but the Hour (of doom) is their appointed tryst, and the Hour will be more wretched and more bitter (than their earthly failure) (54:46), “descended upon Muhammad in Makka when I was still a mere little girl playing” (wa’innī lajāriyatun al‘abu). Since the hadīth Masters, Sīra historians, and Qur’anic commentators agree that the splitting of the moon took place about five years before the Holy Prophet’s  Hijra to Madīna, it is confirmed that she was born between seven and eight years before the Hijra and the words that she was a jāriya five years before the Hijra match the fact that her age at the time Sūrat al-Qamar was revealed was around 2.1

The Prophet recounted to ‘Ā’isha how he was first inspired to ask her in marriage:

You were shown to me in dream for three nights. The angel brought you wrapped in a silk cloth, saying, ‘This is your wife.’ I would lift the veil from your face and there you were! I would say, ‘If this [sign] is from Allāh then He shall make it take place.”2

More Wisdoms to the Prophet’s Marriage with ‘Ā’isha

The marriage of our Mother ‘Ā’isha with the Holy Prophet at an early age, together with her exceptional intelligence, allowed her to be an eyewitness to the personal details of his life and carry them on to the succeeding generations with precision, clarity, detail, abundance, and acumen generally unsurpassed by anyone who ever related from a Prophet in the history of mankind. Imām Ibn Shihāb al-Zuhrī said: “If the knowledge of ‘Ā’isha were added to the knowledge of all women, the knowledge of ‘Ā’isha would still be better.”3 No doubt, this everlasting benefit is the greatest wisdom to be deduced from this marriage.

A second, timely wisdom, is that just as the Prophet, with his later marriage with Zaynab following her divorce from Zayd, abolished the pre-Islamic Arabian notion that a man could not marry the former wife of an adoptive son, similarly, he abolished once and for all the notion that a man could not marry the daughter of a man one had formally declared to be his brother. The Prophet asked Abū Bakr for ‘Ā’isha’s hand in marriage. Abū Bakr said, “But I am your brother.” The Prophet said: “You are my brother in the Religion of Allāh. and His Book, but she is lawful for me to marry.”4

A third, timely wisdom is that the marriage did away with the pagan superstition that it was a bad omen to marry in the month of Shawwāl, but the Prophet and ‘Ā’isha were married in Shawwāl and they began to cohabit in Shawwāl of the second year after the Hijra.5

Various Misconceptions over Her Youthful Marriage

There is no dispute that ‘Ā’isha had reached puberty at the time of the consummation of her marriage. However, a claim was made by Maulana Muhammad ‘Alī that she was a teenager at the time:

A great misconception prevails as to the age at which ‘Ā’isha was taken in marriage by the Prophet. Ibn Sa‘d has stated in the T.abaqāt that when Abū Bakr was approached on behalf of the Holy Prophet, he replied that the girl had already been betrothed to Jubayr [ibn Mut.‘im ibn ‘Adī ibn Nawfal ibn ‘Abd Manāf], and that he would have to settle the matter first with him [actually with his father Mut‘im]. This shows that ‘Ā’isha must have been approaching majority at the time [sic]. Again, the Isāba, speaking on the Prophet’s daughter Fātima, says that she was born five years before the Call and was about five years older than ‘Ā’isha. This shows that ‘Ā’isha must have been about ten years at the time of her betrothal to the prophet, and not six years as she is generally supposed to be. This is further borne out by the fact that ‘Ā’isha herself is reported to have stated that when the chapter entitled “The Moon” (54th chapter) was revealed, she was a girl playing about and remembered certain verses then revealed. Now the 54th chapter was undoubtedly revealed before the sixth year of the Call. All these considerations point to but one conclusion, viz., that ‘Ā’isha could not have been less than ten years of age at the time of her nikāh, which was virtually only a betrothal. And there is one report in the Tabaqāt that ‘Ā’isha was nine years of age at the time of nikāh. Again it is a fact admitted on all hands that the nikāh of ‘Ā’isha took place in the tenth year of the Call in the month of Shawwāl, while there is also preponderance of evidence as to the consummation of her marriage taking place in the second year of Hijra in the same month, which shows that full five years had elapsed between the nikāh. and the consummation. Hence there is not the least doubt that ‘Ā’isha was at least nine or ten years of age at the time of betrothal, and 14 or 15 years at the time of marriage.6

The above conclusion is flawed due to the following facts:

• Ibn Sa‘d’s report about the betrothal to Jubayr ibn Mut‘im has an extremely weak chain through Abū al-Mundhir Hishām ibn Muhammad ibn al-Sā’ib, from his father Abū al-Nadr al-Kūfī, from Abū Sālih, from Ibn ‘Abbās. Hishām and his father are both “discarded” (matrūk) and considered liars while the latter actually admitted to Sufyān al-Thawrī, “All I have narrated to you from Abū Sālih. is a lie.”7

• The reasoning that a betrothal to Jubayr would suggest anything about age is also faulty and shows ignorance of the fact that betrothal could take place from the cradle or even before birth. Further, the word “majority” is probably being used in an unislamic sense by Maulana Muh.ammad ‘Alī.

• The Isāba does not cite only one, but two possible dates for the birth of Fātima al-Zahrā’ (i) The year the Ka‘ba was rebuilt, five years before Prophethood, when the Prophet was 35. This is reported by al-Wāqidī alone who is, moreover, very weak or discarded as a hadīth narrator. (ii) The forty-first year of the Prophet. This is reported by al-Hākim in al-Mustadrak through two chains (1990 ed. 3:176 and 3:178), Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr in al-Istī‘āb (4:1893), and alMizzī in Tahdhīb al-Kamāl (53:248). Both dates are cited in the Isāba (1992 ed. 8:54) which adds that Fātima was five years older than ‘Ā’isha. By the first date, therefore, the age of ‘Ā’isha the year the marriage was consummated (2H) would be 15; by the second date, 9 – the age confirmed by the totality of the reports in the Sahīhs and Sunan.

• The Tabaqāt of Ibn Sa‘d explicitly state (8:217) that ‘Ā’isha was six years of age at the time of nikāh. and nine at the time of consummation.

• As for Sūra 54 being “undoubtedly revealed before the sixth year of the Call” and the claimed “fact admitted on all hands that the nikāh. of ‘Ā’isha took place in the tenth year of the Call,” these are statements without basis.

Another, yet weaker claim was made that ‘Ā’isha “was not 9 but 19 at the time of her marriage” and that “the wrong age” was the “result of an error perpetuated by copying a mistake committed by Ibn Sa‘d”! However, the precise age of nine at the time of consummation is reported with at least seventeen different chains in the Six Books, nine of them in the Sahīhayn, plus three more chains in the Musnad of Imām Ahmad and one more in al-Dārimī’s Musnad, all excluding Ibn Sa‘d. The onset of menarche often took place at eight or nine in the Arabian peninsula at the time. Al-Shāfi‘ī said: “I saw in Yemen many nine-year old girls who had menses” (ra’aytu bil-yaman banāti tis‘in yahidna kathīran). 8 Al-Tirmidhī said in the “Book of the Nikāh of the Prophet” in his Sunan:

Ahmad and Ishāq [ibn Rāhūyah] said: “When the orphan reaches nine years of age and is then married upon her approval, the marriage is permissible.” ‘Ā’isha said: “When the girl reaches nine years of age she is a woman.”

The weakest claim of all is probably the attempt to suggest weakness in the narration of Hishām ibn ‘Urwa in the following terms: “Most of the hadīths about a young age for ‘Ā’isha at her marriage were transmitted by Hishām ibn ‘Urwa on the authority of his father. All of those who narrated these hadiths from Hishām are Iraqis. This is important because there are reports in Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb to the effect that Hishām’s reports are reliable except when narrated by Iraqis [!]. There is a report from Ya‘qūb ibn Shayba to that effect, and one from Mālik ibn Anas.” The reply is that none among the hadīth Masters endorsed these reservations, since they were based solely on the fact that Hishām in his last period (he was 71 at the time of his last trip to Iraq), for the sake of brevity, would say “My father, from ‘Ā’isha” (abī ‘an ‘Ā’isha) and no longer pronounced, “narrated to me” (haddathanī). Hence Ibn Hajar rejects the objections as negligible in Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb (11:45), saying: “It was clear enough to the Iraqis that he did not narrate from his father other than what he had heard directly from him.” In Taqrīb al-Tahdhīb (#7302), he states of Hishām, “thiqa rubbamā dallasa – trustworthy, may have occasionally left his narrator unnamed” but Shu‘ayb alArna’ūt and ‘Awwād Ma‘rūfsaid in their Tahrīr Taqrīb al-Tahdhīb (4:41), a thorough review of Ibn Hajar’s findings in al-Taqrīb:

It seems the words rubbamā dallasa are based on the sayings of Ya‘qūb ibn Shayba and Mālik, although his [Hishām’s] narration from his father is retained in the fundamental manuals of Islam, among them the two Sahīhs, so this [criticism] is negligible.

Another ignorant claim states that this report comes from Hishām ibn ‘Urwa only through the Iraqis and not through the Madinans. In reality, al-Zuhrī also reports it from ‘Urwa, from ‘Ā’isha; so does ‘Abd Allāh ibn Dhakwān – both major Madanīs. So is the Tābi‘ī Yah.yā al-Lakhmī who reports it from her in the Musnad and in Ibn Sa‘d’s Tabaqāt. So is Abū Ishāq Sa‘d ibn Ibrāhīm who reports it from Imām al-Qāsim ibn Muhammad – one of the Seven Imāms of Madina! – from ‘Ā’isha. Also, Sufyān ibn ‘Uyayna – from Khurāsān – and ‘Abd Allāh ibn Muhammad ibn Yahyā – from Tabarayya in Palestine – both report it from Hishām, from ‘Urwa. Nor was this hadīth reported only by ‘Urwa but also by ‘Abd al-Malik ibn ‘Umayr, al-Aswad, Ibn Abī Mulayka, Abū Salama ibn ‘Abd al-Rahmān ibn ‘Awf, Yahyā ibn ‘Abd al-Rahmān ibn Hātib, Abū ‘Ubayda (‘Āmir ibn ‘Abd Allāh ibn Mas‘ūd) and others of the Tābi‘ī Imāms directly from ‘Ā’isha. This makes the report mass-transmitted (mutawātir) from ‘Ā’isha by over eleven authorities among the Tābi‘īn, not counting the other major Companions that reported the same, such as Ibn Mas‘ūd nor other major Successors that reported it from other than ‘Ā’isha, such as Qatāda!

‘Abd al-Rahmān Squires wrote:

Part of the wisdom behind the Prophet’s marriage to ‘Ā’isha just after she reached puberty is to firmly establish this as a point of Islamic Law, even though it was already cultural norm in all Semitic societies (including the one Jesus grew up in). The large majority of Islamic jurists say that the earliest time a marriage can be consummated is on the onset of sexual maturity (bulūgh), meaning puberty.9 Since this was the norm of all Semitic cultures and it still is the norm of many cultures today: it is certainly not something that Islam invented. However, widespread opposition to such a Divinely revealed and accepted historical norm is certainly something that is relatively new.

The criticism of [the Prophet] Muhammad’s marriage to ‘Ā’isha is something relatively new in that it grew up out of the values of “Post-Enlightenment” Europe. This was a Europe that had abandoned (or at least modified) its religious morality for a new set of humanist values where people used their own opinions to determine what was right and wrong. It is interesting to note that Christians from a very early time criticized (again hypocritically) the Prophet’s practice of polygamy, but not the marriage to ‘Ā’isha. Certainly, those from a Middle Eastern Semitic background would not have found anything to criticize, since nothing abnormal or immoral took place. It is “modern” Westernized Christians who began to criticize [the Prophet] Muh.ammad on this point, not earlier pre-Enlightenment ones.

It is upon reaching the age of puberty that a person, man or woman, becomes legally responsible under Islamic Law. At this point, they are allowed to make their own decisions and are held accountable for their actions. It should also be mentioned that in Islam, it is unlawful to force someone to marry someone that they do not want to marry. The evidence shows that ‘Ā’isha’s marriage to the Prophet Muhammad was one which both parties and their families agreed upon. Based on the culture at that time, no one saw anything wrong with it. On the contrary, they were all happy about it.

None of the Muslim sources report that anyone from the society at that time criticized this marriage due to ‘Ā’isha’s young age. On the contrary, the marriage of ‘Ā’isha to the Prophet was encouraged by ‘Ā’isha’s father, Abū Bakr, and was welcomed by the community at large. It is reported that women who wanted to help the Prophet, such as Khawla bint [Hakīm], encouraged him to marry the young ‘Ā’isha. Due to the Semitic culture in which they lived, they certainly saw nothing wrong with such a marriage.10

An American “women’s 19th-century history” website states the following under the heading The Campaign to Raise the Age of Consent, 1885-1914:

In the late nineteenth century, “Age of consent” referred to the legal age at which a girl could consent to sexual relations. Men who engaged in sexual relations with girls who had not reached the age of consent could be criminally prosecuted. American reformers were shocked to discover that the laws of most states set the age of consent at the age of ten or twelve, and in one state, Delaware, the age of consent was only seven. Women reformers and advocates of social purity initiated a campaign in 1885 to petition legislators to raise the legal age of consent to at least sixteen, although their ultimate goal was to raise the age to eighteen. The campaign was eventually quite successful; by 1920, almost all states had raised the age of consent to sixteen or eighteen.11

1 The definition of jāriya in the Qāmūs is fatiyyatu al-nisā’ i.e. “the little female girl.” This appellation applies to girls from birth to pre-pubescence.

2 Narrated from ‘Ā’isha by al-Bukhārī, Muslim, and Ahmad, and by al-Tirmidhī and Ahmad through a different chain.

3 Narrated by al-Hākim (4:11).

4 Narrated from ‘Urwa by al-Bukhārī.

5 Narrated from ‘Ā’isha by Muslim, al-Tirmidhī, al-Nasā’ī, Ibn Mājah, Ahmad, and al-Dārimī.

6 Maulana Muhammad ‘Alī, The Living Thoughts of the Prophet Muhammad (p. 30, note 40, “A Brief Sketch of the Prophet’s Life”) cf. another Subcontinent rehash: http://www.pakistanlink.com/religion/97/re11-21-97.html.

7 Cf. al-Dhahabī’s Mīzān and Ibn al-Jawzī’s al-Du‘afā’ wal-Matrūkīn.

8 Cited by al-Dhahabī in his chapter on al-Shāfi‘ī in Syar A‘lām al-Nubalā’ (Fikr ed. 8:418). “Those who live in cold regions attain puberty at a much later age as compared with those living in hot regions where both male and female attain it at a quite early age. ‘The average temperature of the country or province,’ say the well-known authors of the book Woman [Herman H. Ploss, Max Bartels and Paul Bartels], ‘is considered the chief factor here, not only with regard to menstruation but as regards the whole of sexual development at puberty.’ (Woman, Volume I, Lord & Bransby, 1988, page 563.) Raciborski, Jaubert, Routh and many others have collected and collated statistics on the subject to which readers are referred. Marie Espino has summarised some of these data as follows: (a) The limit of age for the first appearance of menstruation is between nine and twenty-four in the temperate-zone; (b) The average age varies widely and it may be accepted as established that the nearer the Equator, the earlier the average age for menstruation.” http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Polemics/aishah.html.

9 Actually, there is the additional pre-condition, before initiating cohabitation, that both spouses must be physically fit for coitus.

10 See the URL cited in the next-to-previous note and also http://www.muslim-answers.org/aishah.htm.

11 http://womhist.binghamton.edu/teacher/aoc.htm.

Source: https://answeringislamblog.wordpress.com/2019/10/25/a-muslim-defense-of-muhammads-marrying-a-prepubescent-minor-pt-2/

IHS


A Muslim Defense of Muhammad’s Marrying A Prebuscent Minor Pt. 1

 

The following is a post (https://www.abc.se/home/m9783/ir/d/aam2_e.pdf) written by a Muslim scholar who refutes the attempt by his fellow Muslims to undermine the overwhelming testimony of the Islamic tradition that Aisha was a 9-year-old minor when a 54 year old Muhammad slept with her.

More on ‘Ā’isha’s Age at the Time of Her Marriage

A Dialogue Between “The Learner” and Shaykh Gibril F. Haddad

Shawwāl 1425 / December 2004

“They continue to call this ‘often a disputed subject’ because their hearts refuse to accept the evidence.” — Shaykh Gibril F. Haddad

“The Learner”:

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 dependable 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.

G. F. Haddad:

Bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim:

• Abu Tughlub ibn Hamdan married the daughter of `Izz al-Dawla Bakhtyar when she was three and paid a dowry of 100,000 dinars. This took place in Safar 360 H. (Ibn al-Athir, al-Kamil).

• Al-Shafi`i in al-Umm reported that he saw countless examples of nine-year old pubescent girls in Yemen. Al-Bayhaqi also narrates it from him in the Sunan al-Kubra as does alDhahabi in the Siyar.

• Al-Bayhaqi narrated with his chains in his Sunan al-Kubra no less than three examples of Muslim wives that gave birth at age nine or ten.

• Hisham ibn `Urwa himself (whom the objector claims to know enough to forward the most barefaced judgments on his reliability) married Fatima bint al-Mundhir when she was nine years old (al-Muntazam and Tarikh Baghdad).

• Our liege-lord `Umar married Umm Kulthum the daughter of `Ali and Fatima at a similar age per `Abd al-Razzaq, Ibn `Abd al-Barr and others.

• And our Mother `Aisha herself was first almost betrothed to Jubayr ibn Mut`im before her father dropped that option when he received word from the Messenger of Allah, Allah bless and greet him and be well-pleased with them. [Although the authenticity of this report is questionable.]

“The Learner”:

In my opinion, the age of Ayesha (ra) has been grossly mis-reported in the ahadith. 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. Let us look at the issue from an objective stand point. My reservations in accepting the narratives, on the basis of which, Ayeshas (ra) age at the time of her marriage with the Prophet (pbuh) is held to be nine years are:

• Most of these narratives 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. Try more than eleven authorities among the Tabi`in that reported it directly from A’isha, not counting the other major Companions that reported the same, nor other major Successors that reported it from other than `A’isha.

• 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 Medinah his pupils included people as well known as Malik ibn Anas.

G. F. Haddad: Not so. Al-Zuhri also reports it from `Urwa, from `A’isha; so does `Abd Allah ibn Dhakwan – both major Madanis. So is the Tabi`i Yahya al-Lakhmi who reports it from her in the Musnad and in Ibn Sa`d’s Tabaqat. So is Abu Ishaq Sa`d ibn Ibrahim who reports it from Imam al-Qasim ibn Muhammad – one of the Seven Imams of Madina – from `A’isha.

“The Learner”:

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.

G. F. Haddad:

Not so. In addition to the above four Madinese Tabi`in narrators, Sufyan ibn `Uyayna – from Khurasan – and `Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn Yahya – from Tabarayya in Palestine – both report it. Nor was this hadith reported only by `Urwa but also by `Abd al-Malik ibn `Umayr, alAswad, Ibn Abi Mulayka, Abu Salama ibn `Abd al-Rahman ibn `Awf, Yahya ibn `Abd alRahman ibn Hatib, Abu `Ubayda (`Amir ibn `Abd Allah ibn Mas`ud) and others of the Tabi`i Imams directly from `A’isha.

This makes the report mass-transmitted (mutawatir) from `A’isha by over eleven authorities among the Tabi`in, not counting the other major Companions that reported the same, such as Ibn Mas`ud nor other major Successors that reported it from other than `A’isha, such as Qatada!

“The Learner”:

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 to Yaqub ibn Shaibah: “narratives reported by Hisham are reliable except those that are reported through the people of Iraq”. It further states that Malik ibn Anas objected on those narratives of Hisham which were reported through people of Iraq. (vol 11, pg 48 – 51)

G. F. Haddad:

Rather, Ya`qub said: “Trustworthy, thoroughly reliable (thiqa thabt), above reproach except after he went to Iraq, at which time he narrated overly from his father and was criticized for it.” Notice that Ya`qub does not exactly endorse that criticism.

As for Malik, he reports over one hundred hadiths from Hisham (as is evident in the two Sahihs and Sunan!) to the point that al-Dhahabi questions the authenticity of his alleged criticism of Hisham.

Indeed, none among the hadith Masters endorsed these reservations since they were based solely on the fact that Hisham in his last period (he was 71 at the time of his last trip to Iraq), for the sake of brevity, would say “My father, from `A’isha” (abi `an `A’isha) and no longer pronounced, “narrated to me” (haddathani).

Al-Mizzi in Tahdhib al-Kamal (30:238) explained that it became a foregone conclusion for the Iraqis that Hisham did not narrate anything from his father except what he had heard directly from him.

Ibn Hajar also dismisses the objections against Hisham ibn `Urwa as negligible in Tahdhib alTahdhib (11:45), saying: “It was clear enough to the Iraqis that he did not narrate from his father other than what he had heard directly from him.”

In fact, to say that “narratives reported by Hisham ibn `Urwa are reliable except those that are reported through the people of Iraq” is *major nonsense* as that would eliminate all narrations of Ayyub al-Sakhtyani from him since Ayyub was a Basran Iraqi, and those of Abu `Umar alNakha`i who was from Kufa, and those of Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman from Kufa (the Shaykh of Abu Hanifa), and those of Hammad ibn Salama and Hammad ibn Zayd both from Basra, and those of Sufyan al-Thawri from Basra, and those of Shu`ba in Basra, all of whom narrated from Hisham!

“The Learner”:

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)

G. F. Haddad:

An outright lie, on the contrary, al-Dhahabi in Mizan al-I`tidal (4:301 #9233) states: “Hisham ibn `Urwa, one of the eminent personalities. A Proof in himself, and an Imam. However, in his old age his memory diminished, but he certainly never became confused. Nor should any attention be paid to what Abu al-Hasan ibn al-Qattan said about him and Suhayl ibn Abi Salih becoming confused or changing! Yes, the man changed a little bit and his memory was not the same as it had been in his younger days, so that he forgot come of what he had memorized or lapsed, so what? Is he immune to forgetfulness? [p. 302] And when he came to Iraq in the last part of his life he narrated a great amount of knowledge, in the course of which are a few narrations in which he did not excel, and such occurs also to Malik, and Shu`ba, and Waki`, and the major trustworthy masters. So spare yourself confusion and floundering, do not mix the firmly-established Imams with the weak and muddled narrators. Hisham is a Shaykh al-Islam. But may Allah console us well of you, O Ibn al-Qattan, and the same with regard to `Abd alRahman ibn Khirash’s statement from Malik!”

“The Learner”:

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.

G. F. Haddad:

Not true. The hadith Masters, Sira historians, and Qur’anic commentators agree that the splitting of the moon took place about five years before the Holy Prophet’s (upon him blessings and peace) Hijra to Madina. Thus it is confirmed that our Mother `Aisha was born between seven and eight years before the Hijra and the words that she was a jariya or little girl five years before the Hijra match the fact that her age at the time Surat al-Qamar was revealed was around two or three A.H.

“The Learner”:

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.

G. F. Haddad:

A two year old is not an infant. A two year old is able to run around, which is what jariya means. As for “the comments of the experts” they concur on 6 or 7 as the age of marriage and 9 as the age of cohabitation.

“The Learner”:

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 hadith and 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.

G. F. Haddad:

First, the prohibition applied to combatants. It applied neither to non-combatant boys nor to noncombatant girls and women. Second, `Aisha did not partricipate in Badr at all but bade farewell to the combatants as they were leaving Madina, as narrated by Muslim in his Sahih. On the day of Uhud (year 3), Anas – at the time only twelve or thirteen years old – reports seeing an elevenyear old `A’isha and his mother Umm Sulaym having tied up their dresses and carrying water skins back and forth to the combatants, as narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim.

“The Learner”:

According to almost all the historians Asma, the elder sister of Ayesha was ten years older than Ayesha.

G. F. Haddad:

Well, Ibn Kathir based himself on Ibn Abi al-Zinad’s assertion that she was ten years older than `A’isha, however, al-Dhahabi in Siyar A`lam al-Nubala’ said there was a greater difference than 10 years between the two, up to 19, and he is more reliable here.

“The Learner”:

4 It is reported in Taqri’bu’l-tehzi’b as well as Al-bidayah wa’l-nihayah that Asma died in 73 hijrah when she was 100 years old. Now, obviously if Asma was 100 years old in 73 hijrah she should have been 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijrah. If Asma was 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijrah, Ayesha should have been 17 or 18 years old at that time. Thus, Ayesha, 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.

G. F. Haddad:

Ibn Hajar reports in al-Isaba from Hisham ibn `Urwa, from his father, that Asma’ did live 100 years, and from Abu Nu`aym al-Asbahani that “Asma’ bint Abi Bakr was born 27 years before the Hijra, and she lived until the beginning of the year 74.” None of this amounts to any proof for `A’isha’s age whatsoever.

“The Learner”:

Tabari in his treatise on Islamic history, while mentioning Abu Bakr reports that Abu Bakr had four children and all four were born during the Jahiliyyah — the pre Islamic period. Obviously, if Ayesha was born in the period of jahiliyyah, she could not have been less than 14 years in 1 AH — the time she most likely got married.

G. F. Haddad:

Al-Tabari nowhere reports that “Abu Bakr’s four children were all born in Jahiliyya” but only that Abu Bakr married both their mothers in Jahiliyya, Qutayla bint Sa`d and Umm Ruman, who bore him four children in all, two each, `A’isha being the daughter of Umm Ruman.

“The Learner”:

According to Ibn Hisham, the historian, Ayesha accepted Islam quite some time before Umar ibn Khattab.

G. F. Haddad:

Nowhere does Ibn Hisham say this.

“The Learner”:

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.

G. F. Haddad:

Rather, Ibn Hisham lists `A’isha among “those that accepted Islam because of Abu Bakr.” This does not mean that she embraced Islam during the first year of Islam. Nor does it mean that she necessarily embraced Islam before `Umar (year 6) although she was born the previous year (year 7 before the Hijra) although it is understood she will automatically follow her father’s choice even before the age of reason.

“The Learner”:

Tabari has also reported that at the time Abu Bakr planned on migrating to Habshah (8 years before Hijrah), he went to Mut`am — with whose son Ayesha was engaged — and asked him to take Ayesha in his house as his son’s wife. Mut`am refused, because Abu Bakr had embraced Islam, and subsequently his son divorced Ayesha (ra).

G. F. Haddad:

Not at all, there is no mention of emigration in Tabari’s account of Abu Bakr’s discussion with Mut`im. Nor did he ever ask him to take `A’isha because there had been only some preliminary talk, not a formal arrangement. Umm Ruman, Abu Bakr’s wife, reportedly said: “By Allah, no promise had been given on our part at all!” Rather, al-Tabari said that when news of the Prophet’s interest in `A’isha came, he went to see Mut`im. Then Mut`im’s wife manifested her fear that her son would become Muslim if he married into Abu Bakr’s family. Abu Bakr then left them and gave his assent to the Prophet, upon him blessings and peace.

“The Learner”:

Now, if Ayesha was only seven years old at the time of her marriage, she could not have been born at the time Abu Bakr decided on migrating to Habshah. On the basis of this report it seems only reasonable to assume that Ayesha had not only been born 8 years before hijrah, but was also a young lady, quite prepared for marriage.

G. F. Haddad:

Your assumption fizzles at the root when you read al-Tabari’s positive assertion: “On the day he consummated the marriage with her she was nine years old.”

“The Learner”:

According to a narrative reported by Ahmad ibn Hanbal, after the death of Khadijah, when Khaulah came to the Prophet advising him to marry again, the Prophet asked her regarding the choices she had in her mind. Khaulah said: “You can marry a virgin (bikr) or a woman who has already been married (thayyib)”. When the Prophet asked about who the virgin was, Khaulah proposed 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, and obviously a nine year old is not a “lady”.

G. F. Haddad:

This is ignorant nonsense, bikr means a virgin girl, a girl who has never been married even if her age is 0 and there is no unclarity here whatsoever.

“The Learner”:

According to Ibn Hajar, Fatimah was five years older than Ayesha. Fatimah is reported to have been born when the Prophet was 35 years old. Thus, even if this information is taken to be correct, Ayesha could by no means be less than 14 years old at the time of hijrah, and 15 or 16 years old at the time of her marriage.

G. F. Haddad:

Rather, Ibn Hajar mentions two versions: (1) al-Waqidi’s narration that Fatima was born when the Prophet was 35; and (2) Ibn `Abd al-Barr’s narration that she was born when he was 41, approximately one year more or less before Prophethood, and about five years before `A’isha was born. The latter version matches the established dates. So our Mother `A’isha was nineteen to twenty years younger than her sister Asma’ (b. 27 before Hijra-d. 74) and about five years to eight years Fatima’s junior.

“The Learner”:

These are some of the major points that go against accepting the commonly known narrative regarding Ayesha’s (ra) age at the time of her marriage.

In my opinion, neither was it an Arab tradition to give away girls in marriage at an age as young as nine or ten 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.

G. F. Haddad:

Those that itch to follow misguidance always resort to solipsisms because they are invariably thin on sources. In this particular case “The Learner” proves to be ignorant and dishonest. It is no surprise he moves on every single point, without exception, from incorrect premises to false conclusions.

“The Learner”:

In the ISLAMIC REVIEW we find the following points:

1. The well-known historian Ibn Jareer al-Tabari writes at page 50 of volume 4 of his ‘Book of History’: “Abu Bakr married two ladies in the days of ignorance (pre-Call era). Fateelah daughter of Abd al-Aza was the first, from whom Abdullah and Asma were born. Umm-i-Rooman was the second, from whom Abd al-Rahman and ‘Aishah were born. All the four children of Abu Bakr were born in the days of ignorance (Jahiliyyah, i.e., pre-Islamic days) from the above-named two ladies.

G. F. Haddad:

This is false as already shown.

“The Learner”:

2. It is a well-known fact of history, that Abu Bakr’s son Abd al-Rahman fought against the Muslims in the battle of Badr. His age at that time was 21-22 years, and although he was older than ‘Aishah, there is no evidence to show that the difference between their ages was more than three or four years. This fact lends support to the view that Hazrat ‘Aishah was born four or five years before the Call.

G. F. Haddad:

What nonsense! Abu Bakr’s children `Abd Allah, `Abd al-Rahman, Muhammad and Asma’ were all born before `A’isha and her birth could have followed that of the last of them by any number of years.

“The Learner”:

3. The well-known historian and scholar Ibn Katheer writes in his ‘Al-Badayah’ about Sayedah Asma’ daughter of Abu Bakr, Asma’ died in 73 A.H. at the age of 100 years. She was ten years older than her sister ‘Aishah.

G. F. Haddad:

See above. 7

“The Learner”:

Now according to this report ‘Asma’ would have been 27-28 years old at the time of Hijrah and since she was ten years older than Sayedah ‘Aishah, therefore the age of Sayedah ‘Aishah would have been 17 or 18 years at the time of Hijrah. Accordingly, her birth falls about four or five yearsbefore the Call, and her age at the time of the consummation of marriage in 2 A.H. will work out to 19-20 years.

G. F. Haddad:

This is all too flimsy as already shown.

“The Learner”:

4. The author of the well-known collection of Hadith ‘Mishkat al-Masabeeh’, Sheikh Waheed-udDeen, writes in his well-known book ‘Ahmal fi Asma’ al-Rijjal’:

“At the time of the consummation of her marriage Sayedah ‘Aishah’s age was not less than 18-19 years.”

G. F. Haddad:

There is no “Sheikh Waheed-ud-Deen.” The person you mean is al-Khatib al-Tibrizi himself, whose nickname is Wali al-Din, and whose book al-Ikmal fi Asma’ al-Rijal received an Urdu translation in the fifties titled: Ikmal fi asma’ al-rijal, mu’allafa-e sahib-i Mishkat, shekh Valiyal-Din Abi `Abd-Allah Muhammad ibn `Abd-Allah al-Khatib, tarjuma-e Urdu. [Karachi, NurMuhammad: Karkhana-e Tijarat-i-Kutub, 195?].

It is highly unlikely that al-Tibrizi would have said what you attribute to him. He himself adduced in Mishkat al-Masabih the hadith of Sahih Muslim whereby `Aisha married at seven and cohabited at nine.

“The Learner”:

All the above quotations give ample refutation to the common misconception that Aishah’s age at the time of her Nikah was 6 years and at the time of consummation of marriage it was only 9 years. If Muslim scholars of the present era deem fit to make an objective research instead of beating the old track, they will find ample material in the pages of history to arrive at a correct age for Aishah. And Allah the Almighty is the source of truth.

G. F. Haddad:

Objective research shows that the beaten track is right on…and Allah knows best.

Continue to the next part of the sheikh’s response (https://answeringislamblog.wordpress.com/2019/10/25/a-muslim-defense-of-muhammads-marrying-a-prepubescent-minor-pt-2/).

Source: https://answeringislamblog.wordpress.com/2019/10/25/a-muslim-defense-of-muhammads-marrying-a-prebuscent-minor-pt-1/

IHS