What is your take on these claims?

[BasinEMT]

Hi all. Non-Muslim here. I have taken a keen interest in Islam and have considered converting, however, I'd like to lay down some common western objections to Islam and see if you could offer any insights as to their validity.


First, I hear a lot that Islam is a "supremacist" ideology. This means that because Islam is God's will, and because it is superior to all other religion or ideology, it is then justified to subject non-Muslims to Islamic rule. I even heard of a sort of tax that non-Muslims must pay to Muslims.


Second, I have heard that the Quran and the Prophet endorse slavery, and specifically, sex slavery.


Third, there seems to be a significant amount of gender inequality and subjugation of women in Islam, particularly in countries such as Saudi Arabia. How close is this to true Islam?


Fourth, critics often talk about a child bride married to Muhammad, and thus collude that adult men marrying female children is okay in Islam.


Finally, critics accuse the Quran and Muslims of promoting a significant amount of hatred toward non-Muslims, as if non-Muslims are "less than"


If I could have the actual words of real Muslims dispelling these claims, that would be awesome :)


Have a nice day everyone.

[Scimitar]

Peace be upon you brother BasinEMT

Hi all. Non-Muslim here. I have taken a keen interest in Islam and have considered converting, however, I'd like to lay down some common western objections to Islam and see if you could offer any insights as to their validity.

God willing I can help you to put your qualms to rest,

First, I hear a lot that Islam is a "supremacist" ideology. This means that because Islam is God's will, and because it is superior to all other religion or ideology, it is then justified to subject non-Muslims to Islamic rule. I even heard of a sort of tax that non-Muslims must pay to Muslims.

Islam is not supremacist, as the very word suggests a racial superiority, whilst Islam is for all people regardless of colour. In the final address of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh, his closing words were as follows:

All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over black nor a black has any superiority over white except by piety (taqwa) and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood. Nothing shall be legitimate to a Muslim which belongs to a fellow Muslim unless it was given freely and willingly. Do not, therefore, do injustice to yourselves.

Source

Second, I have heard that the Quran and the Prophet endorse slavery, and specifically, sex slavery.

A popular claim by the west. The reality is that Islam gave salves their rights and the Prophet Muhammad pbuh encouraged the freeing of slaves. IN fact, during this period of world history, slavery was a part of accepted society all over the world, and no slaves had rights - yet, in Islam - you will find that in the Qur'an and in the Sunnah (example of the prophet) that slavery was a thing which was slowly removed from Islamic society in general.

It is with much happiness that I am able to declare that Islam abolished slavery and gave slaves equal rights to their masters, a slave was considered as ones household member, not to be abused or worked into the ground... in fact, many Arabs adopted their slaves as their inheritors. So when the owner died, his slave was one of the inheritors of his estate.

Where else in world history has this actually happened en masse? Nowhere. The subject is a delicate one, as our preconceived notions of slavery hold a deep bias.

take for example, how some slaves willingly gave themselves to their owners for life because to be attached to such men of high social status was an honour itself - even so, Islam discouraged it, and encouraged equal rights for all.

In the words of Umar RA: how can I accept to make a man a slave when he was born a free soul?

Third, there seems to be a significant amount of gender inequality and subjugation of women in Islam, particularly in countries such as Saudi Arabia. How close is this to true Islam?

It may surprise you to know that Islam gives the women more rights over their men than the other way round. The proof of this statement is in the fact that with the number of converts worldwide to the Islamic faith, the women out number the men at a ratio of 4/1 in Islamic conversions... if Islam didn't give women their rights in this, the modern age - how do we explain the phenomenal statistic I just threw here?

The truth is this brother, there is a heck of a smear campain on Islam and it started way before we were born, yet truth prevails and so, we find you here with your genuine concerns which we will answer in good time, God willing.

Fourth, critics often talk about a child bride married to Muhammad, and thus collude that adult men marrying female children is okay in Islam.

I made a video about this years ago but closed my channel down. Aisha's age was garbled by Hisham ibn Urwa, who was a narrator of hadeeth, however in tehzibul tehzib - a book which comment on the reliability of narrators, it mentions that any hadeeth narrated by Hisham ibn Urwa while he was in Iraq is doubtful because he had reached old age and was known to suffer from amnesia, and senile. Thus it was also reported that any of his five students who reported from him in Iraq were also to be excluded from the hasan grading.

Further, we find that in the actual ahadeeth regarding her age, we find a numerical error in the fact that the 1 was very much faded and the 9 visible, leading us to think that she was nine at the age of consummation. She was 19 and God knows best.

The video I made perfectly explained things. Shame I closed the channel down.

Finally, critics accuse the Quran and Muslims of promoting a significant amount of hatred toward non-Muslims, as if non-Muslims are "less than"

This is false, a hadeeth to prove it:

If I could have the actual words of real Muslims dispelling these claims, that would be awesome :)


Have a nice day everyone.

I am a Muslim, :)

Have a nice day too, and God bless

Scimi

[AbdurRahman.]

Hi all. Non-Muslim here. I have taken a keen interest in Islam and have considered converting, however, I'd like to lay down some common western objections to Islam and see if you could offer any insights as to their validity.

Hi and welcome! :)

First, I hear a lot that Islam is a "supremacist" ideology. This means that because Islam is God's will, and because it is superior to all other religion or ideology, it is then justified to subject non-Muslims to Islamic rule. I even heard of a sort of tax that non-Muslims must pay to Muslims.

Muslims themselves are commanded to be humble hence they always have a lowly opinion of themselves and hold other people, even non-muslims to be better than them [as non-muslims sin in ignorance while a muslim has no excuse to sin], however since Quran is from God this is why we hold it to be superior than all other way of life. back in the days of Prophet [saw] the world was polarised such that if you did not invade, you yourself will be invaded, hence expanding the Islamic empire was the only way, but nowadays, in the days of diplomacy and interdependency, diplomatic relations are the way forward and shariah law is only established over belligerent non-muslims who are bent on war

Second, I have heard that the Quran and the Prophet endorse slavery, and specifically, sex slavery.

I second brother Timi Scar on this

Third, there seems to be a significant amount of gender inequality and subjugation of women in Islam, particularly in countries such as Saudi Arabia. How close is this to true Islam?

it is true unfortunately but this is out of ignorance and culture in some muslim societies but Islam itself holds women in the utmost respect and enjoins love mercy and a high level of tolerance towards them

Fourth, critics often talk about a child bride married to Muhammad, and thus collude that adult men marrying female children is okay in Islam.

I have to disagree with brother Timi Scar on this and say that here is a consensus of sunni Scholars that Ayesha [ra] got married at age of 6-7 and marriage consummated at 9; there are multiply transmitted hadiths from Ayesha [ra] herself confirming this thus they are infallible [i.e, so many recorded statements from Ayesha exist putting her age at 9 at consummation that it virtually would have been impossible for all of them narrators to collude to tell a lie]. as for now, marriage with a girl as young as 9 will only be ok if it is not harmful in a society and culture and the government itself allows it; the government has the right to set the marriage age for girls at 18 [in one of the mainstream schools [hanafi]; this goes to show the most suitable 'age of consent/marriage' is to be picked according to culture and society

Finally, critics accuse the Quran and Muslims of promoting a significant amount of hatred toward non-Muslims, as if non-Muslims are "less than"

Islam is similar to Christianity in this in that we hate the sin of any people but not the sinner themselves; we love all people and want the best for them

hatred is only for the belligerent war mongers out of the non-muslims

If I could have the actual words of real Muslims dispelling these claims, that would be awesome :)


Have a nice day everyone.

hope this helps

slaam! :)

[Scimitar]

Hi and welcome! :)
I have to disagree with brother Timi Scar on this and say that here is a consensus of sunni Scholars that Ayesha [ra] got married at age of 6-7 and marriage consummated at 9; there are multiply transmitted hadiths from Ayesha [ra] herself confirming this thus they are infallible [i.e, so many recorded statements from Ayesha exist putting her age at 9 at consummation that it virtually would have been impossible for all of them narrators to collude to tell a lie]. as for now, marriage with a girl as young as 9 will only be ok if it is not harmful in a society and culture and the government itself allows it; the government has the right to set the marriage age for girls at 18 [in one of the mainstream schools [hanafi]; this goes to show the most suitable 'age of consent/marriage' is to be picked according to culture and society

Please present your proof, not the repeat of what scholars have said - I have already sent emails to scholars regarding this issue and none want to debate it.

So please - I will be waiting.

I have information which makes scholars uncomfortable - they are not infallible. Remember that.

Scimi

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[AbdurRahman.]

Please present your proof, not the repeat of what scholars have said - I have already sent emails to scholars regarding this issue and none want to debate it.

So please - I will be waiting.

I have information which makes scholars uncomfortable - they are not infallible. Remember that.

Scimi

salaam brother

what I mean is the information in those hadiths is infallible due to the near impossibilty of them being a lie; this is what the scholars say of multiply transmitted hadiths [mutawatir] brother; it makes sense too, for example we have not seen world war 2, but due to the so many eye witness reports of D day landings for example, we can be certain it indeed happened exactly in that way

the proof is right here brother:

. 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, al- Aswad, Ibn Abi Mulayka, Abu Salama ibn `Abd al-Rahman ibn `Awf, Yahya ibn `Abd al- Rahman 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!

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=is...as+9+mutawatir


As for the mutawâtir, nobody can question its authenticity. The fact narrated by a mutawâtir chain is always accepted as an absolute truth even if pertaining to our daily life. Any statement based on a mutawâtir narration must be accepted by everyone without any hesitation. I have never seen the city of Moscow, but the fact that Moscow is a large city and is the capital of U.S.S.R. is an absolute truth which cannot be denied. This fact is proved, to me, by a large number of narrators who have seen the city. This is a continuously narrated, or a mutawâtir, fact which cannot be denied or questioned.
I have not seen the events of the First and the Second World War. But the fact that these two wars occurred stands proved without a shadow of doubt on the basis of the mutawâtir reports about them. Nobody with a sound sense can claim that all those who reported the occurrence of these two wars have colluded to coin a fallacious report and that no war took place at all. This strong belief in the factum of war is based on the mutawâtir reports of the event.

In the same way the mutawâtir reports about the sunnah of the Holy Prophet (

) are to be held as absolutely true without any iota of doubt in their authenticity. The authenticity of the Holy Qur’ân being the same Book as that revealed to the Holy Prophet (

) is of the same nature. Thus, the mutawâtir ahâdîth, whether they be mutawâtir in words or in meaning, are as authentic as the Holy Qur’ân, and there is no difference between the two in as far as the reliability of their source of narration is concerned.

Although the ahâdîth falling under the first category of the mutawâtir, ie. the mutawâtir in words, are very few in number, yet the ahâdîth relating to the second kind, namely the mutawâtir in meaning, are available in large numbers. Thus, a very sizeable portion of the sunnah of the Holy Prophet (

) falls in this kind of mutawâtir, the authenticity of which cannot be doubted in any manner.

http://ccm-inc.org/oldsite/iqra/arti...sun/chap3.html

The proof for Hadhrat Aishah Radhiyallāhu Anhā’s age during marriage is in Sahīh al-Bukhārī and Sahīh Muslim. Consider the following Ahādīth:

حدثنا محمد بن يوسف، حدثنا سفيان، عن هشام، عن أبيه، عن عائشة رضي الله عنها:أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم تزوجها وهي بنت ست سنين، وأدخلت عليه وهي بنت تسع، ومكثت عنده تسعا (صحيح البخاري, ج 10، ص 466-467، دار البشائر الاسلامية)

Aishah Radhiyallāhu Anhā reports that Nabī Sallallāhu Alaihi Wa Sallam married her while she was six years old. She was sent to stay with Nabī Sallallāhu Alaihi Wa Sallam when she was nine and she lived with Nabī Sallalllāhu Alaihi Wa Sallam for nine years.

(Sahīh al-Bukhārī) وحدثنا يحيى بن يحيى، أخبرنا أبو معاوية، عن هشام بن عروة، ح وحدثنا ابن نمير، واللفظ له، حدثنا عبدة هو ابن سليمان، عن هشام، عن أبيه، عن عائشة، قالت: «تزوجني النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وأنا بنت ست سنين، وبنى بي وأنا بنت تسع سنين (صحيح مسلم، ج 2، ص 1039، دار إحياء التراث العربي – بيروت)

Aishah Radhiyallāhu Anhā says, “Rasūlullāh Sallallāhu Alaihi Wa Sallam married me when I was six years old, and he started living with me when I was nine years old.

(Sahīh Muslim)

The Ummah has accepted the narrations that appear in Sahīh al-Bukhāri and Sahīh Muslim as authentic. Allāmah Hāfidh bin Hajar al-Asqalāni Rahimahullāh states in “Sharh al-Nukhbah” that the Ulamā are unanimous in accepting Sahīh al-Bukhārī and Sahīh Muslim. <!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[1]<!--[endif]--> Allāmah Sakhāwī states in “Fath al-Mughīth” that Sahīh al-Bukhārī and Sahīh Muslim are the most authentic books of Hadīth. <!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[2]<!--[endif]-->


http://islamqa.org/hanafi/askimam/6245

[Scimitar]

You're just repeating scholarly babble - the very same I have debunked may times over now.

And you've failed to take on the premise here:

Aisha's age was garbled by Hisham ibn Urwa, who was a narrator of hadeeth, however in tehzibul tehzib - a book which comment on the reliability of narrators, it mentions that any hadeeth narrated by Hisham ibn Urwa while he was in Iraq is doubtful because he had reached old age and was known to suffer from amnesia, and senile. Thus it was also reported that any of his five students who reported from him in Iraq were also to be excluded from the hasan grading.

Further, we find that in the actual ahadeeth regarding her age, we find a numerical error in the fact that the 1 was very much faded and the 9 visible, leading us to think that she was nine at the age of consummation. She was 19 and God knows best.

The video I made perfectly explained things. Shame I closed the channel down.

I ask you, would you let me marry your six year old daughter and sleep with her at nine? I'm forty one this august.

Got you cornered.

Bring me your methodology, not your parroting of scholars, boring.

Scimi

EDIT:

Would the Prophet pbuh contradict that which is in the Qur'an?

"Test the orphans till they reach the marriageable age; then, if ye find them of sound judgment, deliver over unto them their fortune. And devour it not by squandering and in haste lest they should grow up Whoso (of the guardians) is rich, let him abstain generously (from taking of the property of orphans); and whoso is poor let him take thereof in reason (for his guardianship). And when ye deliver up their fortune unto orphans, have (the transaction) witnessed in their presence…" (4:6)

I'm guessing this ayah of the Qur'an goes over your head.

The Qur'an explicitly makes it clear that the age of reason comes after the age of puberty, and only if one has reached the age of reason are they able to marry.

Aisha was no child when she consummated her marriage to Muhammad pbuh, and she even participated in the battle of Uhud, where no minor under the age was allowed to participate (except one, the younger brother of a sahabi)

On this basis it is clear that Aisha was over the age of 15 when she attended the battle of Uhud.

Further, we find that in no historical record did the enemies of Islam ever claim that Muhammad pbuh married a minor - these claims of marrying a minor have a history in corruption which you remain unaware of.

Please do not show me your ignorance - i'm tired of reading ignorant muslims.

Scimi

[M.I.A.]

What is God's will?

When two stupid people collide.. God decides between them?

Not in the face.. not in the face!

What's a face?

It's the thing your knows lives on.

[Scimitar]

What is God's will?

When two stupid people collide.. God decides between them?

Not in the face.. not in the face!

What's a face?

It's the thing your knows lives on.

Lay off the drugs bro :D

Scimi

[greenhill]

The truth is that the message from Allah, The One, The Eternal, came from Adam (pbuh) and all the successive prophets (25 mentioned in the Quran). 4 Books came to rasools or nessengers. The Psalms, the Torah, the Bible and the Quran.

Abraham pbuh prayed to Allah to have his descendants being the ones to guide men to salvation, to the road of Allah, and for muslims it would be the 5th line of the opening verse. "Lead us to the right path". But in between, he sent many prophets to remind the descendants of Ibrahim pbuh, the messages. Likewise for Moses, David, Jesus and Muhammad pbta. all had incremental nessage to deliver. But the Jews rejected Jesus, hence the split. A singular religion became 2 separate faiths. Apart from correcting their errs, Jesus also granted some reprieve. But mostly what did it was the forbidding of interest that tipped the balance for the clerics. Jesus had to be silenced. Likewise the final messenger, Muhammad pbuh, he had to flee Makkah.

But if we were to look at the Books and look for the essence you will find that Psalms are about praises, prayers, etc and Torah taught mechanics of human interaction etc, Bible forgiveness (turn the other cheek) and with the Quran laid the law for living in a comnunity.

Instead of developing the system for the world based on charity 'amanah' fair and honest, benefitting society, the system brought to us by those who have caused Jesus to be ostracised and Islam to be misunderstood, is a system based on riba' and polarized education system, genetical engineering for foods, medicine etc to make us all totally dependent on the system.

You see, the anti Christ is actually Dajjal. The wotld is fast becoming Dajjal world. It is not Christ that he is anti. It is believers.

And when it all finally falls in place for him, the wotld will be a pretty hostile place for a believer.

(A bit off the topic but I reckon mostly covered already by others so I thought I'd expand a bit) ;D

:peace:

[AbdurRahman.]

You're just repeating scholarly babble - the very same I have debunked may times over now.

And you've failed to take on the premise here:



I ask you, would you let me marry your six year old daughter and sleep with her at nine?

Got you cornered.

Bring me your methodology, not your parroting of scholars, boring.

Scimi

well I did say such marriages will only be allowed if the culture is right ... and no it is not now so that would be a no! :D

but those 'parroting scholars' give all the evidences brother; if I give you them i'll just have to parrot them so why not just go in there and read it ...

that first one particularly refutes the idea that she was 19 at time of marriage

[Scimitar]

Bro, listen to me.

just because you remain ignorant of my debunking these claims, doesn't mean I have to now engage in convincing you - especially when i have posed you questions which you are ignoring out of your inability to reason these out given Qur'an and Sunnah.

All you can do is repeat the same tired dribble the scholars have, and they've not entertained my emails as yet.

While I find you here, repeating the same as they did. And not to my satisfaction, you havent appealed to my intellect, nor any methodology, let alone tackle the questions poised to you in my last post.

So please - think before your ego embarrasses you further.

God bless.

Scimi

EDIT: culture of modern day? the Qur'an is timeless... let me marry your 6 year old daughter or niece, come on - i'm unmarried.

You have nothing but prejudice inflaming your ego my friend.

Scimi

[M.I.A.]

Lay off the drugs bro :D

Scimi

No but seriously.. it's been at least a decade since I did anything wrong..

I still got dealers in my system lol.

Anyway, ops post is all hearsay.. he won't find anything in the book that is not still around in some forms or other.

Supremacist Islam.. those are some wise life choices.

[Scimitar]

LOL that was funny, you never cease to make me laugh :D

[Regrets1]

As far as I know Aisha (RA) was 6 when she got married but marriage was consummated at the age of 9 (she wasn't considered a minor) the culture and society allowed it..it's not acceptable now in our time but it was ok back then..

Hope the link below helps (Prophet Muhammad's (pbuh) marriage to Aisha (ra)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEL_fAKFZQk

[AbdurRahman.]

You're just repeating scholarly babble - the very same I have debunked may times over now.

And you've failed to take on the premise here:



I ask you, would you let me marry your six year old daughter and sleep with her at nine? I'm forty one this august.

Got you cornered.

Bring me your methodology, not your parroting of scholars, boring.

Scimi

EDIT:

Would the Prophet pbuh contradict that which is in the Qur'an?

"Test the orphans till they reach the marriageable age; then, if ye find them of sound judgment, deliver over unto them their fortune. And devour it not by squandering and in haste lest they should grow up Whoso (of the guardians) is rich, let him abstain generously (from taking of the property of orphans); and whoso is poor let him take thereof in reason (for his guardianship). And when ye deliver up their fortune unto orphans, have (the transaction) witnessed in their presence…" (4:6)

I'm guessing this ayah of the Qur'an goes over your head.

The Qur'an explicitly makes it clear that the age of reason comes after the age of puberty, and only if one has reached the age of reason are they able to marry.

Aisha was no child when she consummated her marriage to Muhammad pbuh, and she even participated in the battle of Uhud, where no minor under the age was allowed to participate (except one, the younger brother of a sahabi)

On this basis it is clear that Aisha was over the age of 15 when she attended the battle of Uhud.

Further, we find that in no historical record did the enemies of Islam ever claim that Muhammad pbuh married a minor - these claims of marrying a minor have a history in corruption which you remain unaware of.

Please do not show me your ignorance - i'm tired of reading ignorant muslims.

Scimi

you could disagree all you want brother but i'm just giving the definitive sunni view on this

as we saw there are no less than 3 concrete proofs that she was 9 at time of consummation

1, Ayesha [ra] herself saying so in no less than 11 transmitted hadiths making the narrated concept infallible.
2. there is a consensus of sunni Scholars that she was 9 at time of consummation.
3. it says she was 6 at time of marriage and 9 at consummation in bukhari and muslim collections of hadiths too and there is a consensus of the Scholars that every single hadiths in them two are all authentic [except a few that have been put in there as part of a discourse]

there are hadiths that say consensus' can never be wrong, i.e, there is a divine protection over them:

Imam Hakim (1/116) has related a Sahih Hadith from the Prophet (Peace be upon him) in the following words: "My Ummah shall not agree upon error."
(17) Imam al-Tirmidhi (4/2167) reported on the authority of Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) from the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), who said: "Verily my Ummah would not agree (or he said the Ummah of Muhammad) would not agree upon error and Allah's hand is over the group and whoever dissents from them departs to Hell." (see also Mishkat, 1/173)


so from a sunni point of view ,the matter is very clear and decisive

[AbdurRahman.]

Bro, listen to me.

just because you remain ignorant of my debunking these claims, doesn't mean I have to now engage in convincing you - especially when i have posed you questions which you are ignoring out of your inability to reason these out given Qur'an and Sunnah.

All you can do is repeat the same tired dribble the scholars have, and they've not entertained my emails as yet.

While I find you here, repeating the same as they did. And not to my satisfaction, you havent appealed to my intellect, nor any methodology, let alone tackle the questions poised to you in my last post.

So please - think before your ego embarrasses you further.

God bless.

Scimi

EDIT: culture of modern day? the Qur'an is timeless... let me marry your 6 year old daughter or niece, come on - i'm unmarried.

You have nothing but prejudice inflaming your ego my friend.

Scimi

brother I don't have to engage in convincing you either :D; just giving you the sunni view that's all

no offense if you're not brother but I think you maybe a shia, for you say [saw] after Ali's [ra] name?

[Scimitar]

Haaaaa. exhales deeply.

I'm not Shia, I do not identify with sects. Was hadrat Ali a shia? NO. So please bro, don't talk from ignorance. His khwarij followers identified themselves as shia... not Hadrat Ali RA.

You should learn Islamic history.

I am of those who follow the example of the Prophet pbuh and who gather in masajid.

Your previous post to this one does little to satisfy my interest. Sorry bro but I've already made those walls fall a long time ago.

Scimi

[AbdurRahman.]

Haaaaa. exhales deeply.

I'm not Shia, I do not identify with sects. Was hadrat Ali a shia? NO. So please bro, don't talk from ignorance. His khwarij followers identified themselves as shia... not Hadrat Ali RA.

You should learn Islamic history.

I am of those who follow the example of the Prophet pbuh and who gather in masajid.

Your previous post to this one does little to satisfy my interest. Sorry bro but I've already made those walls fall a long time ago.

Scimi

you follow example of prophet [saw]??? ^o) but you do not accept consensus although he said consensus' are infallible! :Emoji46: :Emoji46:

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

1) When Rasoolullaah Sallallaahu `Alayhi wa Sallam married Hadhrat `Aa'ishah Radhiyallaahu `Anhaa, she still used to play with dolls (as is narrated in Sunan Abi Daawud and others from the books of Hadeeth.) An 18-19 year old woman doesn't play with dolls.

2) To answer the objection posed: If I had a nine year old daughter, and a proposal came from a Muttaqi (Pious man) who is like the Sahaabah, I would accept. No one is obliged to give their daughter to simply any old man who proposes. Rasoolullaah Sallallaahu `Alayhi wa Sallam was the greatest of Allaah Ta`aalaa's Makhlooqaat (Creation), and so was Hadhrat `Umar Radhiyallaahu `Anhu, who also married a woman who was very much younger than him. A person may refuse a proposal which comes from a random old man who mushrooms up from nowhere, but they would accept the proposal which comes from a Wali of Allaah Ta`aalaa. Hence, the objection that "would you allow an old man to marry your daughter?" is fallacious. The actions of people and what they would or would not accept does not affect the Deen.

The Deen of Allaah Ta`aalaa is unchangeable; neither governments nor people can alter it. Likes and dislikes with regards to it is inconsequential. Our duty is to submit to the Sharee`ah. That is the meaning of Islaam. "Islaam" comes from "Aslama, Yuslimu", which means "to submit". A Muslim is one who submits wholeheartedly to the Deen of Islaam and to every facet of the Sharee`ah, whether he understands it or not.

والله تعالى أعلم

The following two articles may be read on the subject:

https://islamqa.info/en/124483

https://islamqa.info/en/122534

3) The Khawaarij and Shee`ah are two separate groups. The Shee`ah claimed to love Hadhrat `Ali Radhiyallaahu `Anhu and went overboard in that regard, raising him to the pedestal of divinity, and thus they became Kuffaar. The Khawaarij on the other hand, despised him and made Takfeer of him (excommunicated him from Islaam), and one of their members, "`Abdur Rahmaan ibn Muljim", eventually killed him, regarding it to be a good deed, wal `Iyaadhu Billaah.

والسلام

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

The sixth Aayah of Soorah an-Nisaa has been cited, wherein it is mentioned "until they reach marriageable age." The `Ulamaa of Tafseer (Imaam ibn Katheer, narrating from Imaam Mujaahid Rahmatullaahi `Alayhi and others) define "marriageable age" as "puberty". Hence, once the person has reached puberty, he/she has reached marriageable age.

In Arabia and many other places in the world, girls reach Buloogh (puberty) at a relatively younger age than other places.

[Scimitar]

I'm not going to repeat my debunk as it is a waste of time here. I'd previously made a fifteen minute video packed with evidence to debunk such heinous claims against our prophet pbuh,

...but...

...You are free to marry six year olds :)

Or offer me your six year old daughter in marriage.

:shade:

Good night,

Scimi

[Bhabha]

Guys, regarding the marriage age of Aisha it is DEBATED amongst scholars.

Also, at that time people were marrying REALLY young, because they were also dying at a very early age. If the consumable age in Europe was around 11-13 years old during the mid 1700s, why would it be strange to find a consumable age of a woman at 9 years old in Arabia when women menstruate quicker. The colder the climate, the later the age for the girl to get her period. Women reach menstrual ages in warmer climates. During those times the marriage age was that young age. As medicine gets better and people have a longer lifespan the marriage age CHANGES and it is also contingent on the LAWS of the LAND, hence it is contingent on context. It is not 9 years old now, because the conditions change and children are now children. There is literally no point in marrying a woman so young now, because life spans have completely changed and because the conditions have completely changed.

Islam is supposed to make things easy remember and you are also supposed to obey the law of the land. So if the law of the land stipulates that marriage at a certain age is FORBIDDEN, then the person below that age is therefore not of a marriageable age. PERIOD.

[kritikvernunft]

I am personally, currently going through the motions of upgrading to Islam. And yes, I have indeed bought the DVD already!

First, I hear a lot that Islam is a "supremacist" ideology. This means that because Islam is God's will, and because it is superior to all other religion or ideology, it is then justified to subject non-Muslims to Islamic rule.

All of this depends on your own outlook on life. I am quite a supremacist person myself. Therefore, it is normal that I would rather join a religion deemed superior, rather than joining the ranks of a second-rank creed. Seriously, what would be the point in congregating with a bunch of losers in such second-rank religion? The fact that Islam is considered even by non-Muslims to be the top number one creed, i.e. the superior way of seeing things, is obviously fantastically attractive to me.

I even heard of a sort of tax that non-Muslims must pay to Muslims.

Since it would be unthinkable that I would pay tax to someone else, the only way to implement a functioning taxation system, if one is needed, would obviously consists in letting others pay tax to me. So, I pretty much agree with this view, because it nicely correlates with my own personal take on things.

Second, I have heard that the Quran and the Prophet endorse slavery, and specifically, sex slavery.

Well, there are always serious difficulties in giving women back their freedom. If you tell her, "You are free to go now. I am giving you back your freedom." you will find that lots of women may disagree. Freeing a woman, is not that simple. If you run away, she may even run after you. Islam therefore suggests that you could keep such women around, but then the men may start complaining that all of this amounts to slavery. It is a non-trivial problem. There are too many situations in which people actually desire to be what other people could understand as being enslaved. I have tried to argue not even that long ago with my own wife that there would be so many benefits for her if only I manumitted her and gave her back her freedom, but unfortunately, she did not agree. So, she is still enslaving herself at the moment.

Third, there seems to be a significant amount of gender inequality

I also noticed that there is quite a bit of unfairness in the distribution of height and weight between men and women. I think that you must also have noticed that men are usually unfairly taller, and usually even weigh more. We have been working on this problem for a long time now, with unfortunately no ready-made solution in sight.

subjugation of women in Islam, particularly in countries such as Saudi Arabia.

The Saudi men are indeed known for their preference to lie on top. This obviously prevents the woman from getting away, if she so desires. In that sense, she may indeed feel subjugated. The Saudis are apparently, already working on this problem.

Fourth, critics often talk about a child bride married to Muhammad, and thus collude that adult men marrying female children is okay in Islam.

A 1576 law making it a felony to "unlawfully and carnally know and abuse any woman child under the age of 10 years" was generally interpreted as creating more severe punishments when girls were under 10 years old while retaining the lesser punishment for acts with 10- and 11-year-old girls. Jurist Sir Matthew Hale argued that the age of consent applied to 10- and 11-year-old girls, but most of England's North American colonies adopted the younger age. The French Napoleonic code provided the legal context in 1791 when it established an age of consent of 11 years.

Let's say that the historical age of marriage was around 10 years in Europe before the end of the 19th century. Of course, in and of itself, it is no problem that people changed their opinion about marriageable age in the West. In the end, families decide about that kind of things for their own children. In other cultures, people did not change their minds about the age of marriage or the age of consent. This is obviously also their God-given right.

The problem only occurs when particular utterly detestable western people suddenly decide that they want to stick their noses in the age of marriage of children in other people's families, and force their own views onto other people, not about their own children, but about these other people's children.

But then again, in this field, the only opinions that matter are the ones for which you are willing to risk your life and die. Furthermore, I tend to believe that the subject will soon be moot, because now that it has become pretty much inevitable that the war in Syria will end up getting exported elsewhere too, approximately nobody will spend time or energy on that kind of subjects when the severed arms and legs are flying around in the air. Who will still care about a thing like that?

Finally, critics accuse the Quran and Muslims of promoting a significant amount of hatred toward non-Muslims, as if non-Muslims are "less than"
If I could have the actual words of real Muslims dispelling these claims, that would be awesome

Since I am pretty much no longer such "non-Muslim", "less than" views and opinions absolutely suit me fine. Sometimes I understand the concerns of the pagans, when they get suicide-bombed or find themselves on the receiving end of a shoot-out, like recently in Orlando, but then again, since the shooters were obviously not targeting me -- I am not even gay, let alone a gay in Orlando -- I tend to move on to other items on the agenda quite fast. The pagans and their problems are never high up on my agenda, actually. In Allah we trust and in nothing else. Therefore, I enjoy quite good metaphysical protection against that kind of things. The pagans, however, apparently do not. I even saw it on television. They regularly seem to get butchered like sheep. They are really not doing well. They seem to have nonexistent metaphysical protection. But then again, that is also their own choice. I am quite confident that Allah would not mind too much to take them in too, but ok, if the pagans refuse, who cares? In that case, let them go it alone. You see, sometimes you can see already suicidal people getting angry at the pagans and turning the whole thing into a blood bath before dying themselves. Nobody besides Allah can do anything about that. No amount of whining can change that. Whining is just a waste of time. I do not even listen. Seriously, I don't care. The metaphysical characteristics of the situation are simply beyond me. That is why I am not sticking my nose into any of that. All I can do is to engage in signalling ("praying") to our Master, to make sure that I will make it alive out of it. I am obviously not going to waste my time praying for the pagans, if these pagans are clearly to lazy to pray for themselves. That is why you should never waste your time praying for the pagans. They are not going to make it anyway.

[KIP]

'Women reach menstrual ages in warmer climates.'
Do you have evidence/source for this claim?

[Karl]

'Women reach menstrual ages in warmer climates.'
Do you have evidence/source for this claim?

No this is bunk. Individuals reach menses depending on their hormone levels which control their growth and maturation. A Norse female may reach womanhood by the age of eight where an Egyptian female may take into her teens and some sub Saharan Negro females can be fully grown by the age of seven. It is all to do with genetics not environment, but famine can definitely slow things down. Generally, the bigger races (in size) mature faster.

[KIP]

Marrying children regardless of religion is purely wrong. What kind of god would allow this and why?

[kritikvernunft]

Marrying children regardless of religion is purely wrong.

That is entirely predicated on the definition of "children". If we seek a modicum of universality in what we assert, we are supposed to look at the laws of nature, as we can see around us. The laws of nature indicate that it would be pointless to have sexual intercourse with a girl who does not yet menstruate and is therefore not capable of conceiving. Hence, the concept of "uselessness" of this behaviour. As soon as the girl starts having her periods, sexual intercourse could be fruitful and productive. From that point on, it is the prerogative of her family to decide how much longer they are going to wait with authorizing marriage.

Picking random numbers, representing a minimum age of marriage, as the pagans do, is a silly and arbitrary method to address the issue. I recommend against it. The practice of using magic constants is generally rejected in any field worth mentioning:

The term magic number or magic constant also refers to the programming practice of using numbers directly in source code. This has been referred to as breaking one of the oldest rules of programming, dating back to the COBOL, FORTRAN and PL/1 manuals of the 1960s. The use of unnamed magic numbers in code obscures the developers' intent in choosing that number, increases opportunities for subtle errors. A programmer reading the first example might wonder, What does the number 52 mean here? Why 52?

Only the pagans agree to liberally use unexplained magic constants.
That is a direct consequence of the well-known fact that the pagans are imbeciles.

What kind of god would allow this and why?

The pagans very much like the use of magic constants, if only because black magic is full of them too.
All pagan views on this matter must be rejected as utterly dumb and possibly Satanic.
Never believe the pagans. Never trust them. Never adopt any views of them.
The pagans must be repudiated and rejected, because such is the will of the One God.

[KIP]

Where did you get your information from for this claim? It doesn't seem scientifically valid.

[KIP]

No this is bunk. Individuals reach menses depending on their hormone levels which control their growth and maturation. A Norse female may reach womanhood by the age of eight where an Egyptian female may take into her teens and some sub Saharan Negro females can be fully grown by the age of seven. It is all to do with genetics not environment, but famine can definitely slow things down. Generally, the bigger races (in size) mature faster.

Where did you get this information from? It doesn't seem scientifically valid.

[KIP]

That is entirely predicated on the definition of "children". If we seek a modicum of universality in what we assert, we are supposed to look at the laws of nature, as we can see around us. The laws of nature indicate that it would be pointless to have sexual intercourse with a girl who does not yet menstruate and is therefore not capable of conceiving. Hence, the concept of "uselessness" of this behaviour. As soon as the girl starts having her periods, sexual intercourse could be fruitful and productive. From that point on, it is the prerogative of her family to decide how much longer they are going to wait with authorizing marriage.

The legal age of marriage in many countries is based on physical maturity. In most cases girls are not mature for pregnancy until 15+ years. Menstruation does not mean a girl is ready for delivering a baby. She can get pregnant, but the chance of complications and death in child birth are very high. Before modern medicine, a girl had a 50% chance of dying while giving birth if under age of 15.

[kritikvernunft]

Where did you get your information from for this claim? It doesn't seem scientifically valid.

Your remark is silly.

My claim rejects the use of random numbers as a minimum marriage age, solely on the grounds that these numbers are arbitrary, and hence that they are backed by nothing at all.

"Scientific" means that a statement was experimentally tested in order to look for counterexamples. How would it be possible to design experiments for this statement? There is no need for experiments to back a claim that rejects another claim. It is the other claim that would need experiments to back it.

Furthermore, enforcing any such arbitrary minimum age, means that there are people who desire to use force, and hence willing to risk their lives and die for what they believe in. I am always happy when that kind of bluff gets called, and when that kind of people are effectively made to die for trying to impose their views onto others. In the end, it does not matter what you believe. What matters is what you are willing to risk your life and die for.

Some people say that there are already too many bullets flying around. My point of view is that there absolutely not enough bullets flying around, because there are still too many people who need to learn the hard way that there is a hefty price tag attached to trying to impose your own arbitrary views onto others. Therefore, at this point, we absolutely need more killings and not fewer.

[kritikvernunft]

The legal age of marriage in many countries is based on physical maturity. In most cases girls are not mature for pregnancy until 15+ years. Menstruation does not mean a girl is ready for delivering a baby. She can get pregnant, but the chance of complications and death in child birth are very high. Before modern medicine, a girl had a 50% chance of dying while giving birth if under age of 15.

None of this has been tested experimentally.

In order to do that, you would need to impregnate a few thousands of young girls and a few thousands of older girls, and then check if the difference in death rate is significant. The null hypothesis is that it is not. Technically there would be no problem to conduct this kind of experiments. The problem obviously lies elsewhere. Hence, nobody can claim that he would be able to back his views on this matter by testing experimentally, aka, "science".

In other words, everything that you are claiming is sheer conjecture.

You can try to convince governments to impose your views onto others, but then you are counting on another conjecture: There are people willing to risk their lives and die, not for what they necessarily believe in, but for what you believe in. Therefore, my point of view is that everybody should receive what they have asked for, and hence, to get the opportunity to die for what they believe that they should die for. The funny part of the story, is that these people usually get killed by people who are suicidal, and therefore also want to die. Isn't the One God great?

[KIP]

Your remark is silly.

It wasnt directed at you, I forgot to quote. You'll see I've written it again with the correct quote.

[KIP]

You can try to convince governments to impose your views onto others, but then you are counting on another conjecture: There are people willing to risk their lives and die, not for what they necessarily believe in, but for what you believe in. Therefore, my point of view is that everybody should receive what they have asked for, and hence, to get the opportunity to die for what they believe that they should die for. The funny part of the story, is that these people usually get killed by people who are suicidal, and therefore also want to die. Isn't the One God great?

What are you on about? Your post makes no sense.

[sister herb]

The legal age of marriage in many countries is based on physical maturity. In most cases girls are not mature for pregnancy until 15+ years. Menstruation does not mean a girl is ready for delivering a baby. She can get pregnant, but the chance of complications and death in child birth are very high. Before modern medicine, a girl had a 50% chance of dying while giving birth if under age of 15.

What was legal age of marriage in many "the western countries" at the time of the Prophet - about 1400 years ago? Why we should compare conditions and cultures like they would to be same yet there is over 1000 year distance between them.

The age of Aisha is one of the most typical matter which every of those people whose hate Islam and try to prove it´s only a negative thing, are using. You belong to those Islam-haters, don´t ya?

[KIP]

None of this has been tested experimentally.

Medical research and collected historical data. Plenty of it on the net. Have a look. Here's some info for you.
Search - ICRW 'Child marriage facts and figures'

(I can't post a link yet, forum rules.)

[KIP]

What was legal age of marriage in many "the western countries" at the time of the Prophet - about 1400 years ago? Why we should compare conditions and cultures like they would to be same yet there is over 1000 year distance between them.

The marriage age was too young in most countries back then. What I have an issue with is this age being supposedly condoned by a god, regardless of what century, when clearly it's dangerous for the child and the baby.

[sister herb]

The marriage age was too young in most countries back then. What I have an issue with is this age being supposedly condoned by a god, regardless of what century, when clearly it's dangerous for the child and the baby.

Do you now claim that the God had made some mistake when He allowed the Prophet to marry Aisha or do you possible mean that the Prophet had made something which we could call as a sin?

And what baby you are talking with this matter? They hadn´t children together as far I know.

[kritikvernunft]

Medical research and collected historical data. Plenty of it on the net. Have a look. Here's some info for you.
Search - ICRW 'Child marriage facts and figures'
(I can't post a link yet, forum rules.)

None of that constitutes science. Where are the test reports? I don't see any ...

If you want to claim scientifically that A causes B, then you will have to create lots of cases for A, and then record that B really occurred, in such a way that other people can repeat your experiments in order to verify that they did not run into counterexamples.

The report that you have mentioned, does not refer to one single source of experimental testing.
Hence their claims must be considered non-scientific.
All of it is just ideological conjecture.

Everybody and their little sister can do that. How hard can it be?

[kritikvernunft]

The marriage age was too young in most countries back then.

On what grounds do you claim that?
What experiments can we repeat in order to find counterexamples for your claim?

You are just conjecturing nonsense out of your own butt.

Your personal or ideological opinions do not constitute science or otherwise any valid academic claim.

Hence, your opinions only apply to yourself and to your own offspring.
Other people have other opinions and are not interested in yours.
Get over it.

[KIP]

On what grounds do you claim that?
What experiments can we repeat in order to find counterexamples for your claim?

Historical medical research IS valid and it is plain and obvious to everyone due to children having underdeveloped hips/breasts, pubic hair and height. You don't think a girl is fully grown when she gets her period? That is only the start of puberty. It is also possible for a child to be damaged if they have sex to early. It can render them unable to have children.
How many children did Aisha have?

[kritikvernunft]

Historical medical research

No, that is history.
History only ascertains that past events have truly taken place.
History does not make any prediction about the future.

it is plain and obvious to everyone due to ...

No, no, no. There is nothing plain nor obvious to anybody.
Otherwise, we would not need something like the scientific method, if things were just plain and obvious.
If things are so plain and so obvious, why don't you just conduct a few plain and obvious experiments, that other people would be able to repeat, in order to find counterexamples for your claim?

Seriously, now I want to see your plain and obvious scientific report!

[czgibson]

Greetings,

What was legal age of marriage in many "the western countries" at the time of the Prophet - about 1400 years ago? Why we should compare conditions and cultures like they would to be same yet there is over 1000 year distance between them.

This is irrelevant, given that you're talking about a God who supposedly has perfect knowledge of all things, and a Prophet (pbuh) whose life and actions are considered an ideal for all Muslims for all time. Either this moral guidance is eternal or it isn't.

Given all this, what reason is there from the Islamic perspective to prevent adult males marrying and having sex with 9 year-old girls?

Peace

[kritikvernunft]

... prevent adult males having sex with 9 year-old girls? ...

If the parents gave the girl in marriage to me, and she would already have her periods, and her looks would attract my fancy, then what would be the problem? Why would you try to prevent that? You see, I am an adult male, and there would most likely be no better way to enrage me than to try to prevent me from having sex with a girl that would be lawfully mine.

As you can probably imagine, for every nuclear warhead around, there exists a chain of keys, passwords, and misleading messages that will lead to its detonation, exactly there where it is stored, or even elsewhere. It is not hard to prove that. It would just take a lot of effort and probably also serious amounts of social engineering to figure that out. I have actually already seen worse than that. Therefore, I am quite surprised that nobody has done this yet, because then, the ones who survive a thing like that, would have the opportunity to think it over, whether all of that was really worth it to them. I seriously doubt it! ;-)

Therefore, my recommendation is to leave the prophet and his wife alone; may both of them rest in peace.
This is just to tell you that you are digging in the wrong hole, because seriously, nothing good can ever come out of that.

[Neha Qadri]

In any Religion including there is no way to ask about evidence.
because if we will open the door to ask question so people will ask about Mohammed P.B.U.H Waqae Meraaj and we will not have answer and so many thinks like this so please don't ask about Evidence

[czgibson]

Greetings,

If the parents gave the girl in marriage to me, and she would already have her periods, and her looks would attract my fancy, then what would be the problem? Why would you try to prevent that? You see, I am an adult male, and there would most likely be no better way to enrage me than to try to prevent me from having sex with a girl that would be lawfully mine.

I would wish to prevent it because a 9 year-old girl is not capable of giving consent to having sex with you, regardless of what her parents say. If the law was silent on this issue and allowed people like you to fulfil their carnal urges in this way, the potential for abuse would be massive.

It is an indication of how seriously you take your religion (if you have converted yet) that you are trying to use it to justify sex with children. I find your position utterly repulsive and I am amazed that this kind of perversion is allowed on the forum.

Peace

Edit: I also take it from what you say here that it might be OK to rape your wife, given that she is lawfully yours?

[Aaqib]

Greetings,



I would wish to prevent it because a 9 year-old girl is not capable of giving consent to having sex with you, regardless of what her parents say. If the law was silent on this issue and allowed people like you to fulfil their carnal urges in this way, the potential for abuse would be massive.

It is an indication of how seriously you take your religion (if you have converted yet) that you are trying to use it to justify sex with children. I find your position utterly repulsive and I am amazed that this kind of perversion is allowed on the forum.

Peace

Edit: I also take it from what you say here that it might be OK to rape your wife, given that she is lawfully yours?

Ok, from what I've learned from my dad, Aisha (May Allah be pleased with her) was DESTINED to marry the Prophet (SAW), so when he dies, Aisha (May Allah be pleased with her) can tell what the Prophet did/what he didn't do.

At least, that's what I learned from my dad.

There's nothing wrong with this, in my sight, as she passed puberty. Seriously.. the enemies of the prophet wouldn't make fun of this/do anything/comment on it, because it was normal back in those days for this to happen. And now, you see people centuries later complaining about it.

Makes no sense to me, tbh.

:Wasalam: and apologies if I have said anything wrong. May Allah forgive me for that.

[Aaqib]

removed

[Search]

:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

Prophet Muhammad :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) received a dream three times indicating that he should marry Aisha (may God be pleased with her) and so he did just as Prophet Abrahm alayhis salaam (peace be upon him) received a dream three times to sacrifice his son. God never demands what is objectively and morally reprehensible. During the time of Prophet Muhammad :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him), his enemies called him a sorcerer, insane, illiterate, divider, but never did they accuse of him doing a wrong in marrying Aisha (may God be pleased with her) and that is because such marriages in the Arab culture during the 7th century then did happen between consenting persons due to alliance between families. In fact, Aisha (may God be pleased with her) had been betrothed to someone else prior to marrying Prophet Muhammad :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him).

Mary (peace be upon her), the mother of Jesus alayhis salaam (peace be upon him), gave birth at the age of 13.

My own grandmother married at the age of 15 to my grandfather who was in 20s. She gave birth to ten healthy children with only one dying early due to disease.

Even when I was an atheist, I did not find young marriages due to culture or historical times odd, and one of the primary reasons apart for my love of anthropology and history included my reading taste which included historical romance novels. I've read themes in romance novels that included childhood marriage, and there was no yuck factor. In fact, in one Regency novel that I still remember, Julie Garwood had the heroine, aged 4, marry the hero, aged 14, in the novel The Gift in the year 1802.

I am sure if we traced our ancestry far back enough, we'd both find our ancestors married at early ages.

Due to our modern thinking and culture, we believe such ages to be young.

My own mother married at the age of 19. At 19, I could not even contemplate marriage because I was too immature and truly believe I would have been divorced had I married then. However, for her, it worked, and it was the right age to marry for her. However, unlike me, she didn't go to graduate school and only completed college. So, for her, this made sense.

Prophet Muhammad :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) is the barometer by which we measure our character and actions and mercy and concern for humanity, yes. However, not everything Prophet Muhammad :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) is required of us, for some things are understood as simply having been a special grant for him such as seeing Aisha (may God be pleased with her) in a dream thrice and understanding it as God telling him that they would marry.

That being said, Islamic scholars have left the issue of marriage to each individual, family, and culture to decide on their own, which I think is fair because in some indigent Muslim-majority countries education exists very little to none and the next step for a girl is either marriage or being a dependent on her parents for life. And that's because women globally seem to have a "shelf life" after which a woman's chances of being married start becoming low to nonexistent. To tell these families and girls what they should do oriented in Western culture would be deprive these families and girls of a normal family life in their own culture, and I don't think that's right.

Moreover, it is not only in Islam but many other tribal cultures in which young marriages still do take place. For example, anthropologist Kenneth Good was studying the Yanomama tribe in 1978. In keeping with local customs, Kenneth Good was offered to marry a girl named Yarima as a wife and finally after seeing no way to prevent offense if he didn't, he accepted to marry her. Good's autobiographical accounts recount that in keeping with community wishes, he was betrothed to his future wife when she was age 9. They consummated the marriage when she was about 14, as is typical in Yanomami culture. While the Yanomami people do not record individuals' ages, Kenneth Good himself recalled these ages being closer to 13 and 16 respectively.

I think the main objection in our Western culture rises to child marriages due to the fact that we conflate it mistakenly with rape, abuse, and sexual trafficking. Healthy marriage in any culture and society do not equal to any of the aforesaid three offenses. Our main problem is that we come from a place of ethnocentrism and believe that what is right for us is also right for others when it really isn't.

Also, I should mention that in law school we had ADA come to our class and explain to us that he would not despite having the right to do so prosecute, for example, if a 15-year old boy had sex with a a 13-year old girl under statutory rape though it legally qualifies but he would prosecute a 23-year old man for having sex with a 16-year old girl.

However, my question if children below the age of consent which is 18 in the United States will have sex and are allowed to do so under the color of the law in many Western countries, then why isn't it acceptable for parents to marry their consenting daughters to consenting adults in non-Western cultures? Is it hubris that makes us think we have a right to judge what is right for others?

I'm not saying that there aren't abuses that happen in even those cultures in regards to child brides because some parents decide to override the lack of consent of the child bride and I've read those news articles as well, but honestly, I don't know that this is any worse than what I see working in the legal field in the U.S. and it depends entirely on the values and parenting style of parents. Some individuals should not be parents. Period (pun intended). However, these abuse cases are not the norm for any society as most parents do always act in the highest and best interests of their children.

Greetings,

This is irrelevant, given that you're talking about a God who supposedly has perfect knowledge of all things, and a Prophet (pbuh) whose life and actions are considered an ideal for all Muslims for all time. Either this moral guidance is eternal or it isn't.

Given all this, what reason is there from the Islamic perspective to prevent adult males marrying and having sex with 9 year-old girls?

Peace

[Search]

:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

@kritikvernunft

Hi. I hope you're doing well.

I am glad to have you on IB, and and certainly I would be very happy to congratulate you on your conversion if you indeed have taken that step in your journey to learning about Islam on IB. However, some of your views make me concerned, and I would like to therefore issue some clarifications on specific matters that I believe might be helpful in increased understanding. I apologize in advance as I haven't read the entire thread, but it is important for all of us to be able to differentiate between what we interpret as Islam to be and what is Islam as understood by scholars and also Muslim laypersons throughout history.

While marital rape has not been delineated as a specific offense under shariah (Islamic scholar), Islamic scholars has been generally understood marital rape to fall under the category of oppression, and oppression of any type is haram (forbidden) in Islam. Oppression entails violating the dignity or sanctity of any right given to human beings and is therefore a very serious offense under the eyes of God and unsurprisingly God has said generally of oppression in a larger hadith (prophetic tradition): “O my servants, I have forbidden oppression for myself and I have made it forbidden among you, so do not oppress one another.” Marriage is a legal contract, and that contract entitles human beings to lawfully have intercourse, but that does not entitle any human being to oppress the other (regardless of whether that is female or male in the marriage doing so).

Also, it is true what you've said that Prophet Muhammad :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) is a true example for humanity to follow but that's because of his (peace and blessings be upon him) highest moral example. However, there were some things for Prophet Muhammad :saws: alone, such as marrying more than four wives and that was to break the extant societal and cultural taboo of marrying the widow, the divorcee, and other non-virgins of other categories.

In that same way, marriage to Aisha (may God be pleased with her) came as a result of divinely inspired dreams that Prophet Muhammad :saws: received and it was entirely the will of the One God that this marriage should take place and as a prophet and best man Prophet Muhammad :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) accepted all divine will. Please understand that both Islamic scholars and lay Muslims do not understand the marriage of Aisha (may God be pleased with her) to be a blanket encouragement to marry underage females as marriage to any female is still understood as a matter of choice between individuals, families, and dictated typically cultural norms. Also, I would like to mention that Islamic scholars have consistently emphasized following the law of the land under which one lives - and therefore Muslims are not allowed to break legal or social taboos - by marrying underage females if legal proscriptions exist in that country, and I'm assuming most of us here live in Western country and therefore will abide by the laws of the land.

Many female scholars have existed throughout history, and I'm now linking you to the PDF book available called Al-Muhaddithat: The Women Scholars in Islam that hopefully shows you and any others doubtful about how high and honored a woman's place in Islam is and how valued her opinion is. A woman is not a man's ornament; she is a person, and her personhood is essential to her value as a Muslim woman. A Muslim female may excel in piety her Muslim male counterpart, and it is her piety that determines her superiority or inferiority as a human being and not her gender.

Thank you for your consideration, understanding, and patience.

[Search]

:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

Brother, I humbly ask you to consider what you're saying. Muslims are a people of mercy first and foremost, and we do not ever bear arms like vigilantes; those who do among us are oppressors, and they shame us and shame Islam.

And if we do ever bear arms, we do so under a legitimate authority for a legitimate cause and only when that is the only option available to us and we so for God with the idea of meting out both justice to oppressors and mercy and relief for the oppressed. Again, in the process, we do not seek to become oppressors or aggressors ourselves.

If someone wrongs us, we do not wrong them, because that then is not justice: When Ali (may God be pleased with him) was in battle with a man, Ali (may God be pleased with him) was about to strike with the sword that man as a killing blow when that man spit on him. So, Ali refrained from giving that killing blow and the man laying on the ground was perplexed at Ali (may God be pleased with him) withdrawing his sword and not killing him. So, he asked him why Ali (may God be pleased with him) why he did not kill him. Ali (may God be pleased with him) answered that when first he was about to strike him with that sword, it was to be for God, but when the man spit on him, he became angry and so he knew it would be wrong Islamically to kill the man as Muslims do not kill for their egos and they kill when justice so requires in the battlefield. That man was astonished and knew that this was the highest of standard to carry in the heat of battlefield and thereby this religion that establishes this standard could only come from God and so asked to say the shahada (testifimony of faith) so he too could become Muslim and be part of that religion that honors and dignifies human beings above ego.

The Quran (4:135) says, "O you who believe, be persistently standing firm in justice as witnesses for Allah, even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives. Whether one is rich or poor, Allah is more worthy of both. Follow not your desires, lest you not be just. If you distort your testimony or refuse to give it, then Allah is aware of what you do."

comment deleted

[Search]

:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

Insisting on sex with your lawful wife does not violate her dignity because that is what she is here for. I am not yet familiar enough with Islamic Fiqh, but this is an example of what religion may reasonably say on the matter:

Martin Luther, Works:
- The word and works of God is quite clear, that women were made either to be wives or prostitutes.
- Even though they grow weary and wear themselves out with child-bearing, it does not matter; let them go on bearing children till they die, that is what they are there for.

Quran (2:187) says, "They (your wives) are your garment and you are a garment for them."

Prophet :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) said, "Among the Muslims the most perfect, as regards his faith, is the one whose character is excellent, and the best among you are those who treat their wives well."

Prophet :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) said, "He is the best amongst you who is the kindest towards his wives and I am the kindest amongst you towards my wives."

Prophet :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) said, "Three things fall under unkindness and one of them is when the man engages in sexual act with his wife without sending a messenger: humor and kisses. No one should directly fall on his wife like one buffalo does to another."

For fiqh (Islamic legal) aspect of why marital rape is forbidden and how it is regarded in Islam, please see the following two fatwas: Question Regarding Marital Rape and Does marital rape exist in Islam?

A man verbally insisting on sex itself may not violate a wife's right, but the manner in which a man goes about this issue, might become a problem, especially if that verbal insistence is followed with physical insistence on exercising that marital right against the wife's will; this physical insistence which overrides her consent is a violation of her personhood and dignity and falls under the category of oppression which is forbidden in Islam.

I was not familiar nor particularly interested in the matter, until I ran into this kind of discussions in the context of Islam. So, I was forced to make up my mind and develop a point of view on the subject, because everybody else seems to be so interested in it. Just to make my point, I would be perfectly willing and happy to accept from a Muslim family one of their daughters in the same circumstances as the daughter of Abu Bakr, to accept her in marriage, and to consummate the marriage after she has her first periods. I do not care about what other people think about it. However, I will certainly calculate who exactly would try to interfere and preemptively ambush the situation, so that they can ask themselves the question if the resulting mayhem was worth it to them. I do not let the enemy choose the time and the place. I choose the time and the place.

I have to tell you that in most Western countries in which Muslims are living or wealthy Muslim-majority countries that enjoys a high standard of living, you will most likely not find any persons willing to offer underage daughters in marriage because college and graduate education has raised the age bar for when both men and women tie the marital knot around the globe. So, at this point, we must understand this discussion is largely hypothetical.

That being said, if hypothetically-speaking a family offered you their daughter in marriage and this offer was in keeping with that family's tradition and the wider cultural norms and legally permissible in that country and they'd obtained the consent of their daughter, then there is probably no problem and no one has a right to interfere in that marriage. However, the likelihood of that happening is rare, as I do believe such marriages usually exist only in indigent Muslim-majority countries like Yemen and Afghanistan OR either in backwaters rural, indigent, and village-like communities of better/wealthier Muslim-majority countries (that are otherwise known for their high standard of living and/or education) wherein the best protection in terms of security and finances for a female in such specific areas is regarded to lay inside marriage marriage due to lack of emphasis on generally (more) education for either male or female or both.

No, "the law of the land" is a Jewish doctrine:

“Dina d’malchuta dina,” the law of the land is the law [and must be obeyed], is a phrase repeated numerous times in the Talmud and always attributed to the sage Samuel.

This is one of the Jewish doctrines that explains why I would never become a Jew. I personally believe that the Talmud is a Satanic work of deception.

Furthermore, this doctrine is impossibly inconsistent. It amounts to giving a blank cheque to the rulers of the land. If the ruler's name is Adolf Hitler and he wants to kill all the Jews, the "law of the land"-doctrine says that all Germans must collaborate with Hitler and duly denounce all the Jews for deportation to the extermination camps. This is indeed what the Germans did, and they did so completely in accordance with Jewish Rabbinic Law. So, I wonder what the Jews are still complaining about even today? The Germans fully obeyed Jewish Law!

Seriously, this doctrine is absurd.

The Germans tried to use it in their defense. Their version of this doctrine was called Befehl ist Befehl. An order is an order. Hitler asked us to unceremoniously chop the Jews to pieces, and so we did. Unfortunately for them, even though their views are entirely consistent with this doctrine, the Allies rejected them. Look at what the doctrine became next:

AGREEMENT by the Government of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, the Provisional Government of the FRENCH REPUBLIC, the Government of the UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND and the Government of the UNI0N Of SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUPLICS for the Prosecution and Punishment of the MAJOR WAR CRIMINALS of the EUROPEAN Axis WHEREAS the United Nations have from time to time made declarations of their intention that War Criminals shall be brought to justice;

Article 8. The fact that the Defendant acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior shall not free him from responsibility, but may be considered in mitigation of punishment if the Tribunal determines that justice so requires.

Ha ah aha ha ha! There goes the "law of the land"-doctrine, unceremoniously out of the window. Look, your doctrine is a Mickey Mouse rule. It is suitable for people from Imbecilistan only. Giving a blank cheque to the rulers to decide what is lawful and what is not, is a pagan depravity. I am subject to the laws of Allah, simply because I voluntarily choose to. Furthermore, I personally believe that the "law of the land" is haram to me. I will always seek to make lots of money by unceremoniously breaking it. There is nothing more fun than to take the pagans to the cleaners. So, my doctrinal belief is the opposite of yours:

If you can reasonably break the law of the land, without breaking the laws of Allah, you should.

I understand what you're saying here, but you have to realize that the Revelation that came onto Prophet Muhammad :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) was meant to verify what was the truth from previous Abrahamic religions and correct whatever distortions or fabrications that had made into the Christian and Jewish religions so that the submission to the One God could be prioritized and understood as paramount.

Of course, you're correct in surmising that following the law of the land does not mean a blanket cheque to the rulers of the land. Why? Because there's a caveat to the premise of following the law of the land. Prophet :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “It is necessary upon a Muslim to listen to and obey the ruler, as long as one is not ordered to carry out a sin. If he is commanded to commit a sin, then there is no adherence and obedience.”

So, for example, if we as Muslims had been ordered by the state to be part of the extermination of Jews by Adolf Hitler in Germany, we'd have been bound by Islam to refuse because we're not allowed to obey a ruler or nation-state in carrying out a sin: Killing is one of the major sins in Islam.

The Quran says, "O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and obey those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result."

This ayat (verse) in the Quran has been understood by Islamic scholars to underline the importance of obeying authority and rule generally so as to prevent any chaos in the land and prevent any bad or wrong result harmful to Muslims in either the short-term or the long-term.

For more detailed understanding of the subject matter, I refer you to the article Obeying the Law of the Land in the West.

[kritikvernunft]

...I do believe such marriages usually exist only in indigent Muslim-majority countries like Yemen and Afghanistan OR either in backwaters rural, indigent, and village-like communities of better/wealthier Muslim-majority countries ...

Yes, I like it in places like Yemen and Afghanistan. I get along with the local people much better. So, yes, I would be more interested in Yemeni or Afghan brides than the so-called wealthier what-have-you. I don't need their money anyway. I never make money from the local market, with the global market being much more interesting. Therefore, I now also live in a backwater. Cheap. Good internet connection. No-questions-asked visa. What more would you want? Well, actually, no, there are things to ask because they are very pagan here. So, I should probably move to Yemen or Afghanistan, when they are done fighting there! ;-)

So, for example, if we as Muslims had been ordered by the state to be part of the extermination of Jews by Adolf Hitler in Germany, we'd have been bound by Islam to refuse because we're not allowed to obey a ruler or nation-state in carrying out a sin: Killing is one of the major sins in Islam.

In Bosnia, the Muslims happily joined in on Hitler's Jew-killing fest. You see, I am not a Jew, and I do not desire to join that religion, but I am so contrarian that I cannot imagine myself doing what Hitler would tell me to do. It is so contrary to my nature.

This ayat (verse) in the Quran has been understood by Islamic scholars to underline the importance of obeying authority and rule generally so as to prevent any chaos in the land and prevent any bad or wrong result harmful to Muslims in either the short-term or the long-term.

If the Quran contained a blank cheque that asks the believers to obey to the rulers, there would be no point for the Quran to specify any law, because then the ruler can just use his blank cheque to create his own ones instead. Therefore, I strongly suspect that nothing in the Quran should be understood as handing out a blank cheque to any rulers.

The King of Morocco clarified his position on that matter: I cannot, as Commander of the Faithful, permit what God has forbidden and forbid what God has permitted. I really like it that he has said this, because it nicely clarifies that he nor his parliament have the right to invent new forbidden behaviours or to authorize anyway, existing forbidden behaviours. Therefore, I totally agree with the King. It prevents absolutely anybody from inventing new laws or modifying the existing ones. What else would we want? Consequently, the believer has every right to ignore, and if need be, retaliate against the enforcement of laws that forbid that what God has permitted or permit that what God has forbidden.

Hence, I subscribe to the Royal doctrine, which is pretty much the opposite of the Jewish doctrine to which you subscribe! ;-)

[Search]

:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

Yes, I like it in places like Yemen and Afghanistan. I get along with the local people much better. So, yes, I would be more interested in Yemeni or Afghan brides than the so-called wealthier what-have-you. I don't need their money anyway. I never make money from the local market, with the global market being much more interesting. Therefore, I now also live in a backwater. Cheap. Good internet connection. No-questions-asked visa. What more would you want? Well, actually, no, there are things to ask because they are very pagan here. So, I should probably move to Yemen or Afghanistan, when they are done fighting there! ;-)

I don't wish to comment on any of your preferences in regards to marriage, as that is not my concern and it can only be a concern for you and the individual in question you'd like to marry, the family, and the cultural and societal norms and laws of that country.

In Bosnia, the Muslims happily joined in on Hitler's Jew-killing fest. You see, I am not a Jew, and I do not desire to join that religion, but I am so contrarian that I cannot imagine myself doing what Hitler would tell me to do. It is so contrary to my nature.

Muslims who participated in Nazi Germany's killing of Jewish peoples were wrong; and no amount of justification can justify the unjustifiable. Muslims have played both the roles of heroes and villains throughout history just like any other adherents of other religions. And Muslims who played a villainous role in participating in Hitler's evil will pay the price of their sins and participation in evil in either this life or the hereafter or both for God does no iniquity to any persons and does not tolerate any injustice without justice being meted out in this world itself or on Judgement Day or both.

If the Quran contained a blank cheque that asks the believers to obey to the rulers, there would be no point for the Quran to specify any law, because then the ruler can just use his blank cheque to create his own ones instead. Therefore, I strongly suspect that nothing in the Quran should be understood as handing out a blank cheque to any rulers.

The King of Morocco clarified his position on that matter: I cannot, as Commander of the Faithful, permit what God has forbidden and forbid what God has permitted. I really like it that he has said this, because it nicely clarifies that he nor his parliament have the right to invent new forbidden behaviours or to authorize anyway, existing forbidden behaviours. Therefore, I totally agree with the King. It prevents absolutely anybody from inventing new laws or modifying the existing ones. What else would we want? Consequently, the believer has every right to ignore, and if need be, retaliate against the enforcement of laws that forbid that what God has permitted or permit that what God has forbidden.

Hence, I subscribe to the Royal doctrine, which is pretty much the opposite of the Jewish doctrine to which you subscribe! ;-)

Again, I have linked you to the article which describes how obeying the law of the land is also an Islamic tradition with the caveat that we're not allowed to obey the ruler or nation-state in disobedience to God in any sinful action. Generally, otherwise, however, Muslims are to obey laws of the country in which they're residing.

[kritikvernunft]

Generally, otherwise, however, Muslims are to obey laws of the country in which they're residing.

Well, you subscribe to the Jewish Talmudic doctrine, while I subscribe to the Royal doctrine:

It is a despicable pagan depravity to obey to any authority when it forbids that what Allah has permitted or when it permits that what Allah has forbidden.

Therefore, in accordance with the Royal doctrine, I seek to generally break most, if not all of the secular-only laws in the country where I reside, especially, when doing so, happens to make me money. You will have a hard time to convince me otherwise, because the Royal doctrine keeps stuffing money in my pockets, while I really do not see how I could make any money at all out of your Jewish Talmudic doctrine.

[aaj]

The links Najimuddin posted is all you need to know about this topic.

Just a few things to highlight in this.

The marriage of Aisha r.a. was a divine order with it's own wisdom behind it. She became one of the greatest scholars, narrating over 2000 ahadith and revealing personal and intimate details of their personal lives. We accept it as a divine decision and have no issues with it. It does not mean we go around looking for 9 year old to marry ourselves.

With time, values and norms change in society. Today girls that young normally would not get married because of many reasons, among them being not ready mentally, emotionally, physically.

But back then girls matured and reached puberty at younger age, especially in hotter climates. Marrying young girls was the norm of the world and not just a deed of one man. Girls young as 9-10 were being married to for ages around the world, including the western world.

To cry about them being children and all this whining is just others lack of comprehending things in their historical context.

The reason this topic is so popular among the non-Muslims is because they find it as a topic they can use to attack Islam when in fact all men married girls that age in those times, including the Christians, the atheist and pagans, and having more than one wife of that age at that. They can cry all about it, we give as much credit to their whining as does a cow about it's dung. If someone doesn't like it, too bad. No one is begging them to accept it or win them over with excuses.

There are also apologetic Muslims who like to raise that age up to 15 to validate it in some way. They also need to open their eyes and accept the facts for what they are. IF it bothers them that much or they lack the conviction to deal with it among the non-Muslims then that is a deficiency in them. They need to come to terms with historical facts and their own discomforts.

This topic nor thread needs to drag on any further or resurface very few months.

[kritikvernunft]

Today girls that young normally would not get married ...The reason this topic is so popular among the non-Muslims is because they find it as a topic they can use to attack Islam ...

The only way to solve the problem is to acknowledge that there is nothing wrong with marrying such young girl. So, if a Muslim family has a spare daughter somewhere, I will marry her, just to prove this point. Then, the enemies of Islam can try to attack me, instead of just endlessly whine about these things. I will be waiting for them. Let's settle this matter once and for all.

[czgibson]

Greetings,

We accept it as a divine decision and have no issues with it. It does not mean we go around looking for 9 year old to marry ourselves.

All fine. Most of what you say is true but irrelevant to the point that concerns me.

My question is what is there to prevent an Islamic adult male from marrying and having sex with a 9 year-old, should he wish to do so? You can either take the view of our anarchist friend here and say that you see no reason to prevent it, or give a different answer. But do not just ignore the question.

To cry about them being children and all this whining is just others lack of comprehending things in their historical context.

This is the biggest red herring of all, and is a very simple way of avoiding the issue completely. The point that so many of you seem to be forgetting is that we are talking about a Prophet (pbuh) whose every deed has been scrutinised by Muslims with a goal towards emulation of him. This is a person who has offered guidance for all time (as we are so often reminded). I'm asking Muslims why they should choose to disregard this part of his exemplary life.

Peace

[kritikvernunft]

... the view of our anarchist friend here ...

Anarchists believe that there should be no rules at all.
That is not what I advocate.
There will always be rules, if only the ones of nature (and therefore its Creator).
It is true that I thoroughly despise National States, but so do the tribes, and they are not anarchist either.

The National State is is an artifact of outdated 18th -and 19th century technology. It cannot weather contemporary globalization. The National State and its desire to collect taxes on a national scale can only collapse in the context of a globalized economy. Taxation elasticy is going through the roof now. Just move the activity across the border and be done with it. National States can also not control information as it flows over a borderless internet.

All I am saying is that I very much enjoy making money from ransacking these ridiculously dumb things, called National States. Shorting the National State is simply a one-way bet. The more these things sink, the more money I make, and not just me. My greatest hero in this field is George Soros, as he duly took pretty much all National States in Southeast Asia to the cleaners, pocketing 50+ billion dollars. Yeah, bring it on! ;-)

I'm asking Muslims why they should choose to disregard this part of his exemplary life.

Yep. I agree to emulate the Prophet, may he rest in peace, in everything he did, including marrying a young girl, just to prove my point.

[Zafran]

This is the biggest red herring of all, and is a very simple way of avoiding the issue completely. The point that so many of you seem to be forgetting is that we are talking about a Prophet (pbuh) whose every deed has been scrutinised by Muslims with a goal towards emulation of him. This is a person who has offered guidance for all time (as we are so often reminded). I'm asking Muslims why they should choose to disregard this part of his exemplary life.

The prophet slept on the floor - do Muslims have to do that?

he prophet was a merchant do we all emulate to become merchants? He rode a camel - dump cars and ride camels? He wore 7th century Arab and Yemeni clothes do we we emulate that?

The prophets message is for all times the message of tawhid just like the previous prophets.

There is something called fiqh in Islam you should learn it before telling Muslims what there religion is and what they should emulate. Specifically Urf of the people.

[kritikvernunft]

The prophet slept on the floor - do Muslims have to do that? The prophet was a merchant do we all emulate to become merchants? He rode a camel - dump cars and ride camels? He wore 7th century Arab and Yemeni clothes do we we emulate that? The prophets message is for all times the message of tawhid just like the previous prophets.

Good that you are telling me about that!
Yes, I am already a merchant in ways, but I also agree to ride a camel (but not every day!), and wear 7th-century Arab and Yemeni clothes.
Seriously, I agree to emulate the Prophet in everything he did. ;-)

[Search]

:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

Greetings,

My question is what is there to prevent an Islamic adult male from marrying and having sex with a 9 year-old, should he wish to do so?

Peace

My question is why is this adult male implied to be more significant in this equation? Surely, his wishes are easily thwarted if there was no one ever offering his or her daughter in marriage at a young age in any culture.

So, the prevailing question in my opinion should concern what is not preventing this 9 year-old from marrying at that age? The answers usually have to do with extreme poverty, familial values, lack of opportunity for educational advancement, societal pressure, and cultural norms. Surprising as it may be to you, religion has very little to do in terms of the role it plays in the the specific family's choices usually in this matter. Please remember Islam never said that such marriages must take place or even that such marriages are meritorious; Islam has left the choice largely up to the culture and family and individuals involved.

Prophet Muhammad :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) had received a divine dream in which Aisha (may God be pleased with her) was seen, and this divine dream is categorized as wahi (Revelation) and no other human being can claim the same since wahi (Revelation) has been understood to have ended with his :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) death.

However, since others cannot make the same claim of a divine dream or endorsed divine order, my question to you is what do you think should exist to prevent this male adult from marrying this hypothetical 9-year old? National legal bans? They already exist in many Muslim-majority countries. This hasn't worked in indigent Muslim-majority countries, however, and I should mention that this cultural practice is not unique to Muslim-majority countries as indigent non-Muslim majority countries have the same cultural practice.

I do not endorse child marriages, but I refuse also to condemn it, because as you know I'm a cultural relativist.

@Zafran is right that there are things unique to Prophet Muhammad :saws: and his time that we're not required to emulate such as traveling on horseback or camels, as we now have faster modes of transportation with technological advancement that include cars, vans, airplanes, etc. I would not say this is about disregarding or accepting this part of his :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) blessed life; rather, it is about how individuals within each culture understand to be acceptable for their sons or daughters.

If you do want to change this cultural practice, I'd say your best bet is to hinge your arguments based in Islam about why child marriage in that culture despite being the prevailing norm is not ideal as it is not in the best interests of children by using medical or psychological evidence of some harm that results to children and then say what Prophet Muhammad :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) had said about taking care of children:

Prophet Muhammad :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) has said, "Fear Allah and treat your children fairly."

Prophet Muhammad :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) said, "The parents are responsible with regard to their children in the same manner in which the children are responsible with regard to their parents" which refers to the concept of meeting the needs of any and all persons under your care.

Prophet Muhammad :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) said, "O Muslims, O fathers and mothers, O my followers, be kind and compassionate towards children, for someone who is not kind to children has no place amongst the Muslims."

Prophet Muhammad :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) said, "I give my Salaam to children and respect them, and Muslims should follow my behavior and always be warm and loving with children."

In focusing on the male in question, you are barking up the wrong end of the tree, as there is nothing really to prevent from any man from to live and act on his desire to live as he sees fit within his own society and practice what his culture and freedom of choice allows him.

[kritikvernunft]

... child marriage in that culture despite being the prevailing norm is not ideal as it is not in the best interests of children by using medical or psychological evidence of some harm that results to children ...

Yes but what experiments did they conduct, that other people could repeat in order to find counterexamples for this so-called "evidence"?
If there are no experiments that we can repeat, in that case, we are not talking about science but about ideological conjecture.

Why would we exempt this particular claim from the existing anti-alchemy -and anti-astrology policies in science?
There are very good reasons why these anti-alchemy -and anti-astrology policies were originally instituted in the first place.

Therefore, sorry, there will be no exemption whatsoever.

[czgibson]

Greetings,

So, the prevailing question in my opinion should concern what is not preventing this 9 year-old from marrying at that age? The answers usually have to do with extreme poverty, familial values, lack of opportunity for educational advancement, societal pressure, and cultural norms. Surprising as it may be to you, religion has very little to do in terms of the role it plays in the the specific family's choices usually in this matter.

I'm aware of all of this. You're still missing the point.

Please remember Islam never said that such marriages must take place or even that such marriages are meritorious; Islam has left the choice largely up to the culture and family and individuals involved.

I never even implied that it did. The problem is that a supposedly omniscient God for some reason had no objection to a child marriage. Incidentally, I'm aware that the marriage to Aisha was a happy one and that she was an important figure in Islam and generally rather a remarkable woman. I'm not disputing any of that.

However, since others cannot make the same claim of a divine dream or endorsed divine order, my question to you is what do you think should exist to prevent this male adult from marrying this hypothetical 9-year old? National legal bans? They already exist in many Muslim-majority countries.

Yes, and I support such bans. The question is why do they exist in Muslim countries? Why do humans think that they know better than God in this case?

This hasn't worked in indigent Muslim-majority countries, however, and I should mention that this cultural practice is not unique to Muslim-majority countries as indigent non-Muslim majority countries have the same cultural practice.

None of which makes it right.

I do not endorse child marriages, but I refuse also to condemn it, because as you know I'm a cultural relativist.

Well, perhaps that's the difference between us. I take the view that a culture which bans child marriage is better than a culture that does not. Even though poor or primitive societies may practise child marriage for eminently understandable reasons, that does not make it a good thing.

@Zafran is right that there are things unique to Prophet Muhammad :saws: and his time that we're not required to emulate such as traveling on horseback or camels, as we now have faster modes of transportation with technological advancement that include cars, vans, airplanes, etc.

I'm not saying you're required to emulate it.

If you do want to change this cultural practice, I'd say your best bet is to hinge your arguments based in Islam about why child marriage in that culture despite being the prevailing norm is not ideal as it is not in the best interests of children by using medical or psychological evidence of some harm that results to children

This is absolutely correct. I wonder why God apparently couldn't see this.

In focusing on the male in question, you are barking up the wrong end of the tree, as there is nothing really to prevent from any man from to live and act on his desire to live as he sees fit within his own society and practice what his culture and freedom of choice allows him.

I'm sorry, I can't make sense of this sentence. "to prevent from any man from to live"? Do you mean people are free to do what they like within the law? If so, this is obvious, and doesn't address the question of why God would allow a practice that is known to be frequently harmful to children.

Peace

[aaj]

Greetings,


My question is what is there to prevent an Islamic adult male from marrying and having sex with a 9 year-old, should he wish to do so? You can either take the view of our anarchist friend here and say that you see no reason to prevent it, or give a different answer. But do not just ignore the question.

Well, the law for one. Most nations have laws against marrying underage girls and in today's society a 9 year old would qualify as an underage girl. I think you are just trying to make a mountain out of a mole. This is a moot issue. Almost all Muslims would not consider this an option nor something they are interested in.

This is the biggest red herring of all, and is a very simple way of avoiding the issue completely. The point that so many of you seem to be forgetting is that we are talking about a Prophet (pbuh) whose every deed has been scrutinised by Muslims with a goal towards emulation of him. This is a person who has offered guidance for all time (as we are so often reminded). I'm asking Muslims why they should choose to disregard this part of his exemplary life.

Peace

I understand what you are trying to say but you are trying to discuss a topic without full knowledge of it. Yes, the Prophet (pbuh) is an example for us to follow. Yes, the sunnah (way of the prophet) is following what he did in his life. But that sunnah is of two kinds. One sunnah is what he did in accordance with Islam, such as not eating some food (pork). And one sunnah (his way of doing) is what he did personally, such as eating some food and not other out of personal taste and preference. We are obligated to follow the religious sunnah, not personal lifestyle and choices sunnah. Even in religious sunnah, there were certain things that were only allowed for the Prophet (pbuh) and not to his people. For example, he had more than 4 wives while the limit for us is only up to 4. This marriage was also a divine intervention, otherwise at age six she was already engaged to a non Muslim, Jubayr ibn Mut’im.

[czgibson]

Greetings, aaj,

I'm already aware of everything you've said. You are, like most people here, missing the point. Either answer my questions directly or don't bother replying. The only person who has answered directly is kritikvernunft, who has said that he sees nothing wrong with marrying underage girls, he intends to do just that, and he also intends to kill anyone who tries to stop him. He's clearly either joking or insane, but at least he's answered the question.

Well, the law for one. Most nations have laws against marrying underage girls and in today's society a 9 year old would qualify as an underage girl.

How come modern humans realise marrying and having sex with 9 year-old girls is wrong, but God didn't?

Peace

[kritikvernunft]

...who has said that he sees nothing wrong with marrying underage girls, he intends to do just that...

The family would still need to make sure to bring their prettiest girl, because otherwise I may snub their offer. I am taking a risk here. So, they will have to entice me with a really cute one. If I can clearly see that they have prettier daughters than the one they are offering to me, I will not take their intentions seriously.

...and he also intends to kill anyone who tries to stop him...

Yes, of course.

He's clearly either joking or insane, but at least he's answered the question.

The goal is to cause lots of mayhem, and the instrument is to marry an "underage" girl.
(In Islamic doctrine, she would not be "underage", because she would already have here periods).
So, yes, my intention would be to stir up a lot of ****.
The purpose would be to cause spectacular amounts of damage to anybody trying to prevent such marriage, with a view on discouraging them to try to do that ever again.
So, indeed, the idea is that the severed arms and legs should start flying around! ;-)

[noraina]

We didn't say it is wrong, at least for Muslims, just that in accordance with the part of Shariah known as Urf (social customs) it wouldn't be possible today in most countries in the world.

As has been said, the sunnah means literally the traditions of the Prophet (pbuh), and there is a distinction between his own personal perferences or local customs of the time and those traditions which were significant religiously. For example, actually getting married is a highly emphasised religious sunnah, getting married to a 9-year-old girl or woman many years older than you is not religiously binding on anyone, not that it is wrong, but it depends on local customs and laws of the country you are in.

In Islamic law, as long as they do not contradict with Islam, Muslims are expected to obey the law of the land they are in. So if the age limit for marriage is set at 16 or 18 years, it isn't wrong for Muslims to obey that and they are in fact encouraged to.

This type of argument comes from a eurocentric point of view, we need to remember different times and culturals meant different social customs. Just because something is different doesn't make it wrong.

[kritikvernunft]

Muslims are expected to obey the law of the land they are in.

As you know, Karl Marx so nicely argued that religion is an opium-like instrument to enslave the masses to the interest/riba-infested financial elites.

This is most certainly true for Judaism and Christianity. "Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar" and "Obey the law of the land" are clearly examples as to why Karl Marx was utterly right. It all amounts to exploitation of the poor, the uneducated, and all the other gullible individuals. Therefore, an important condition for the revolution to succeed, and to get rid of the self-serving interest/riba-infested financial elites, was to duly terminate these false religions. That is why the revolution became an exercise in organizing a killing fest amongst their clergy.

Islam has never been mentioned by anybody as a pillar for the National State and its self-serving interest/riba-infested financial elites. By adopting the notorious Jewish Talmudic doctrine "Obey the law of the land (and its self-serving riba/interest-infested elite)", why do you want to turn Islam into an opium-like instrument to enslave the masses to interest/riba, and other depravities of the obnoxious elite?

As you can imagine, if the clergy tries to protect the corrupt elites of the National State by arguing in favour of their false, pagan and man-made laws, and their other riba/interest-infested practices, they will have repurposed the religion as a tool to make people obey to obnoxious man-made law. From there on, they will also run into serious trouble with the revolutionaries. How will they avoid getting decimated? They should not expect the revolution to spare them, as they have made friends with the riba/interest elites and have sided against the believers.

[noraina]

as long as they do not contradict with Islam, Muslims are expected to obey the law of the land they are in

This is the full quote. Riba/interest is haraam, hence Muslims should of course not obey . I specifically stated as long as it isn't anything forbidden, Muslims should obey the law of the land. Islam encourages balance and moderation, so full on rebellion for the sake of rebellion or 'going against the state' wouldn't be beneficial for us Muslims or for society. We follow our deen without compromise and also go according to social customs where we live as long as it doesn't compromise our deen.

[kritikvernunft]

so full on rebellion for the sake of rebellion or 'going against the state' wouldn't be beneficial for us Muslims or for society.

It is necessary to put a halt to the practice of inventing man-made law. How many more new man-made laws do we need, before all our needs for new man-made laws will completely have been satisfied?

Furthermore, the National State protects the banking system, which is completely riba-infested. The National State is full of debt and sucks the population dry with taxes, to make interest/riba payments to the banks, and their powerful owners, the financial elites.

Therefore, this is certainly not "rebellion for the sake of rebellion". Everybody is looking for ways to get rid of "Wall Street", while you seem to have repurposed Islam as an opium-like tool to keep these riba/interest-infested financial elites in place, by adopting the vocabulary, ideas, and even the exact language of the Jewish-Babylonian Talmud.

Dina d’malchuta dina, the law of the land is the law [and must be obeyed]. If the "authorities" tell you to step on the train to Auschwitz, you must obey! The Jews are still complaining today about the fact that they did not know that it was better not to obey to man-made law, but wasn't this just the blank cheque in their own Jewish Law, to the rulers of the land, backfiring at them?

[aaj]

Greetings, aaj,

I'm already aware of everything you've said. You are, like most people here, missing the point. Either answer my questions directly or don't bother replying. The only person who has answered directly is kritikvernunft, who has said that he sees nothing wrong with marrying underage girls, he intends to do just that, and he also intends to kill anyone who tries to stop him. He's clearly either joking or insane, but at least he's answered the question.

How come modern humans realise marrying and having sex with 9 year-old girls is wrong, but God didn't?

Peace

Greetings Gibson,

I believe Noraina has answered your question.

And like i said in my first post, you need to learn to comprehend things in their historical context. This is not something the prophet(pbuh) did against the norm of his society, this is not something his society did against the norm of the world. This is not something constraint to that time period alone.

Today western world has set an arbitrary number as the "legal adult" age. A century from now, you may be called pedos for that very number. So quit trying to blame God for everything, Islam did not set an arbitrary number. All it said was that when a girl hits puberty (sign of womenhoood) and is ready (mentally, emotionally, physically, etc), which varies from time to time, society to society and person to person.

[Muhammad]

Greetings,

I am closing this thread as rather strange comments are being made and some are using the discussion to push their anti-Islamic agenda. The issue of marrying at a young age is being conflated with the issue of child abuse. How odd that individuals are latching onto one or two details of Islamic teachings yet conveniently ignoring all the rest. And how perplexing that a simple issue is being twisted to insinuate errors on the part of God or His Prophet :saws:. We seek refuge in Allaah :swt: from such ignorance.

A lot of terms are being thrown around such as 'missing the point', 'red herrings' or failing to answer the question. It seems any attempt to view an Islamic issue within its context and entirety will be dismissed by such misplaced accusations.

Perhaps it's sufficient to quote a snippet of an article from 'The Guardian':

The Islamophobic depiction of Muhammad's (pbuh) marriage to Aisha as motivated by misplaced desire fits within a broader Orientalist depiction of Muhammad (pbuh) as a philanderer. This idea dates back to the crusades. According to the academic Kecia Ali: "Accusations of lust and sensuality were a regular feature of medieval attacks on the prophet's character and, by extension, on the authenticity of Islam."

[...]

Aisha's union would also have cemented Muhammad's (pbuh) longstanding friendship with her father, Abu Bakr. As was the tradition in Arabia (and still is in some parts of the world today), marriage typically served a social and political function – a way of uniting tribes, resolving feuds, caring for widows and orphans, and generally strengthening bonds in a highly unstable and changing political environment. Of the women Muhammad (pbuh) married, the majority were widows. To consider the marriages of the prophet outside of these calculations is profoundly ahistorical.

What the records are clear on is that Muhammad (pbuh) and Aisha had a loving and egalitarian relationship, which set the standard for reciprocity, tenderness and respect enjoined by the Qur'an. Insights into their relationship, such as the fact they liked to drink out of the same cup or race one another, are indicative of a deep connection which belies any misrepresentation of their relationship.

To paint Aisha as a victim is completely at odds with her persona... she went on to become one of the most prolific and distinguished scholars of her time.

A stateswoman, scholar, mufti, and judge, Aisha combined spirituality, activism and knowledge and remains a role model for many Muslim women today. The gulf between her true legacy and her depiction in Islamophobic materials is not merely historically inaccurate, it is an insult to the memory of a pioneering woman.

Those who manipulate her story to justify the abuse of young girls, and those who manipulate it in order to depict Islam as a religion that legitimises such abuse have more in common than they think. Both demonstrate a disregard for what we know about the times in which Muhammad (pbuh) lived, and for the affirmation of female autonomy which her story illustrates.

So, as members have already noticed, cherry-picking and misconstruing points to push misleading conclusions is unacceptable and a disservice to yourselves. There's plenty of previous threads (as you very well know) which detail the contextual information to help understanding this issue. May I also remind some of our Muslim members to avoid speaking about Islam without knowledge.

Thread closed.