Salam / greetings and ramadan mubarak, just a note, the author of this
article also has a blog at http://www.mereislam.info/  And he also has
a site at www.muslim-answers.org/ I think.

Just in case anyone is interested.

Ginny

On 10/7/05, amy jallow <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Thought this would make an interesting read, during this month of Ramadan.
>
> Amy
>
>
>
> Author:  AbdurRahman R. Squires
>
>
> The marriage of the Prophet Muhammad  to  'Aishah bint Abu Bakr when she was
> at quite a young age has been the focus of quite a bit of criticism in the
> West.  Unfortunately, in this Neo-Colonialist Age of  smart bombs, MTV, CNN
> and the Big Mac, some of those who profess to be Muslims have themselves
> become critics.  Many Muslims, faced with the juggernaut of allegedly
> "universal"  Western liberal values that have permeated almost everyone
> around them, sheepishly avoid discussion of such "embarrassing" Islamic
> issues.  It is a keenly true observation that even though the European
> powers have pulled their colonial armies out of Muslim lands and granted
> them "independence", an even worse plague continues.  This curse is
> "Colonialism of the Mind" and it is more dangerous since it is much more
> subtle.  Insha'llah, this article will be a contribution to making both
> Muslims and non-Muslims aware of not only the objective facts regarding the
> Prophet's  marriage to 'Aishah, but how to
>  understand it in light of Islam and life in the "modern" world.
> Regrettably, for those of us trying to spread the truth of Islam in the
> West, we often have to agree with the Orientalist W. Montgomery Watt when he
> wrote:  "Of all the world's great men none has been so much maligned as
> Muhammad."1  But here, for a change, were are dealing with something that is
> an authentic part of Islamic history, not an apocryphal or fabricated event
> that Westerners have been duped into believing is authentic, such as the
> so-called "Satanic Verses" incident.  That a man in his fifties would marry
> such a young girl—especially a man who is supposed to be a living example of
> piety—is not only difficult for many "modern" Westerners to come to terms
> with, but it has even gone so far as to stir up disgusting "sexual
> misconduct" charges amongst them.  In the face of such criticism, Muslims
> have not always reacted well.  In the past century, when so many Muslims
> were so "Westoxicated" and ready to monkey Europeans in almost anything, the
> usual reaction was to deny the
>  sources that reported the alleged "embarrassing problem".  To Muslim
> "modernists", who argued that ONLY a legal ruling found in the Qur'an was
> Islamically valid, brushing aside this aspect of the Prophet's life was
> rather easy.  They simply denied that it had occurred and attacked the
> sources which reported it.  Fortunately for Muslims, the apologetics of
> these "Uncle Toms of Islam" has faded into the periphery to a large extent.
> However, there are still many Muslims out there who try to get around what
> they see as a problem by ignoring authentic Islamic sources while claiming
> to be followers of the Ahl as-Sunnah. (which basically means "orthodox
> Sunni" Muslims, for those unfamiliar Islamic terminology).  Many other
> Muslims possibly wonder whether the story is authentic and how to understand
> it if it is.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> THE ISLAMIC EVIDENCE OF 'AISHAH'S AGE
> ---------------------------------
>
> Due to the apparent ignorance of many Muslims, possibly due to reading
> "modernist" apologetic literature like that mentioned above, a look at what
> the authentic sources of Islam say about the age at which 'Aishah  married
> the Prophet  is in order. This way, before we move on to an analysis of the
> facts, we will first establish what the authentic Islamic facts are.  At
> this point, it should be mentioned that it is absolutely pointless from an
> Islamic standpoint to say that the age of 'Aishah is "not found in the
> Qur'an", since the textual sources of Islam are made up of BOTH the Qur'an
> and the Sunnah - and the Qur'an tells us that.  For those wanting (or
> needing) to learn more about the status of the Sunnah in Islam, please read
> An Introduction to the Sunnah and/or The Sunnah and Its Position in Islamic
> Law.   Now in regards to what the authentic Islamic sources actually say, it
> may come as a disappointment to some "modern" and "cultured" Muslims that
> there are four ahadith in Saheeh
>  al-Bukhari and three ahadith in Saheeh Muslim which clearly state that
> 'Aishah was "nine years old"  at the time that her marriage was consummated
> with the Prophet .  These ahadith, with only slight variation, read as
> follows: 'Aishah, may God be pleased with her, narrated that the Prophet
> was betrothed (zawaj) to her when she was six years old and he consummated
> (nikah) his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with
> him for nine years.  (Saheeh al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64)Of the
> four ahadith in Saheeh al-Bukhari, two were narrated from 'Aishah (7:64 and
> 7:65), one from Abu Hishaam (5:236) and one via  'Ursa (7:88).   All three
> of the ahadith in Saheeh Muslim have 'Aishah as a narrator.  Additionally,
> all of the ahadith in both books agree that the marriage betrothal contract
> took place when 'Aishah was "six years old", but was not consummated until
> she was "nine years old".  Additionally, a hadeeth with basically the same
> text (matn) is reported
>  in Sunan Abu Dawood.  Needless to say, this evidence is—Islamically
> speaking—overwhelmingly strong and Muslims who deny it do so only by
> sacrificing their intellectual honesty, pure faith or both.
> This evidence having been established, there doesn't seem much room for
> debate about 'Aishah's age amongst believing Muslims. Until someone proves
> that in the Arabic language "nine years old" means something other than
> "nine years old", then we should all be firm in our belief that she was
> "nine years old"  (as if there's a reason or need to believe otherwise!?!).
> In spite of these facts, there are still some Muslim authors that have
> somehow (?) managed to push 'Aishah's age out to as far as "fourteen or
> fifteen years old" at the time of her marriage to the Prophet .  It should
> come as no surprise, however, that none of them ever offer any proof,
> evidence or references for their opinions.  This can be said with the utmost
> confidence, since certainly none of them can produce sources more authentic
> than the hadeeth collections of Imams al-Bukhari and Muslim!  Based on the
> research that I've done, I feel that there is a common source for those who
> claim that 'Aishah's age was "fourteen
>  or fifteen years old" at the time of the marriage.  This source is "The
> Biographies of Prominent Muslims" which is published in book form, on CD-ROM
> and is posted in several places on the Internet.  Just another example of
> why going to the sources is important . . .
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> THE PROPHET'S  MARRIAGES IN PERSPECTIVE
> ---------------------------------
>
> To put all of this in perspective—hopefully without undue apologetics—the
> first thing that one should be aware of is that 'Aishah was the third wife
> of the Prophet , not the first.  Prior to this, the Prophet's  first and
> only wife for twenty-four years was Khadijah bint al-Khuwaylid, who was
> about nineteen years older than him.  He married Khadijah when she was forty
> and he was twenty-one—which might be called the years of a male's "sexual
> prime"—and stayed married ONLY to her until her death.   Just after
> Khadijah's death, when he was round forty-six years old, the Prophet
> married his second wife Sawdah bint Zam'ah.  It was after this second
> marriage that the Prophet  became betrothed to 'Aishah, may God be pleased
> with her.  She was the daughter of Abu Bakr, one of the Prophet's closest
> friends and devoted followers.  Abu Bakr, may God be pleased with him, was
> one of the earliest converts to Islam and hoped to solidify the deep love
> that existed between himself and the Prophet
>  by uniting their families in marriage.  The betrothal of Abu Bakr's
> daughter 'Aishah to Muhammad , took place in the eleventh year of Muhammad's
> prophethood, which was about a year after he had married Sawdah bint Zam'ah
> and before he made his hijra (migration) to al-Madinah (Yathrib).    As
> mentioned above, the marriage with 'Aishah bint Abu Bakr was consummated in
> Shawwal, which came seven months after the Prophet's hijra from Makkah to
> al-Medinah.  At the time of his marriage to ''Aishah, the Prophet  was over
> fifty years old.
> It should be noted that the Prophet's  marriage to 'Aishah was an
> exceedingly happy one for both parties, as the hadeeth literature attests.
> 'Aishah, may God be please with her, was his favourite wife and the only
> virgin that he ever married.  After emigrating to al-Madinah, Muhammad
> married numerous other wives, eventually totalling fifteen in his lifetime.
>  Even though we do not have time to go into the details of each one of them
> here, each of these marriages was done either for political reasons, to
> strengthen the ties of kinship or to help a woman in need.  Quite a few of
> the wives were widows, older women or had been abandoned and thus were in
> need of a home.  Additionally, it should be mentioned that the same
> collection of Muslim hadeeth literature that tells us that 'Aishah was only
> nine years old at the time of the marriage tells us that the marriage was
> Divinely ordained: Narrated 'Aishah, may God be pleased with her:  The
> Messenger of God  said (to me):  "You have been
>  shown to me twice in (my) dreams. A man was carrying you in a silken cloth
> and said to me, 'This is your wife.' I uncovered it; and behold, it was you.
> I said to myself, 'If this dream is from God, He will cause it to come
> true.'" (Saheeh Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 15)Thus like everything
> that the Prophet  did, there was wisdom behind it and lessons to be learned
> from it.  The wisdom behind such incidents provides us guidance on the basis
> of human morality, exposes the double standards of misguided hypocrites from
> other religions that criticize Islam and much more.  But more on that
> subject below. . .
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>  CRITICISM ADDRESSED AND ENTERTAINED
> ---------------------------------
>
> Myself and many other Muslims should no longer be surprised by the double
> standards that Christians display when they criticize the conduct of Prophet
> Muhammad  , since we've heard it for so long.  To have an atheist,
> agnostic—or anyone else who does not believe in a Divinely revealed basis
> for morality—criticize something that is "politically incorrect" by today's
> moral standards comes as no surprise.  Such people will always find
> something to criticize, since they simply have a bone to pick with
> "religion" in general.  All of this "absolute morality" talk gets in the way
> of them having a good time, so they want to mock it, discredit it and do
> away with it. The criticism of Christians, however, is another matter.
> While it is true that Christians speak out against the "moral relativity"
> which is spreading amongst the increasingly secular society today, they too
> are unconscious victims of it.    The values of most Christians today come
> from the humanist values of Western Europe (or,
>  at a minimum, are heavily influenced by them).  Their values DO NOT come
> straight out of the Bible—in theory or in practice—regardless of what they
> may claim.  That Christians today try to take credit for the so-called
> "Freedom", "Human Rights", "Democracy" and "Women's Rights" in Europe and
> America is nothing short of a joke.  It may impress uneducated people in
> so-called Third World countries, but anyone who has studied history knows
> that these things came about in spite of the Church, not because of it.  The
> way in which many Christians uncritically mix non-Christian values with
> (allegedly) Biblical values has always fascinated me.  One interesting
> example of this is how nationalism and patriotism are supported amongst the
> majority of Evangelical Protestant (and even other) Christians in the United
> States.   In America, good Christians are flag wavers.  Few, if any, of
> these fiercely patriotic minds ever seem to realize that narrow-minded
> patriotism is, at its core, both selfish
>  and non-universal.  That patriotism and Christianity go hand-in-hand in the
> minds of many people is just an example of how we can be blindly sucked into
> "moral relativism" without even realizing it.
> According to Judaism, Christianity and Islam, right and wrong are ordained
> by Almighty God. As such, morality does not change over time based on our
> whims, desires or cultural sensitivities. In cultures where there is no
> Divinely revealed ruling on an issue, what is right and what is wrong is
> determined by cultural norms. In such cases, a person would only be
> considered "immoral" if they violated the accepted norms of their society.
> As we will demonstrate, the Prophet Muhammad's  marriage to 'Aishah, viewed
> both in the light of Absolute Morality and the cultural norms of his time,
> was not an immoral act, but was an act containing valuable lessons for
> generations to come. Additionally, this marriage followed the norms for all
> Semitic peoples, including those of Biblical times. Based on this, and other
> information that we will provide below, it is grossly hypocritical for
> Christians to criticise the Prophet's   marriage to 'Aishah at such a young
> age. In case Christian readers are
>  under the false impression that their values today are timeless and somehow
> reflect those of Biblical times, please consider the following points which
> are directly related to the question of at what age a person is properly
> ready to be married:
>    Keeping in mind the ideas of "political correctness" and "absolute
> morality", in Biblical times the age at which a girl could marry was
> puberty.  However, during the Middle Ages it was usually twelve years old.
> Now in most "Christian" countries it is between fourteen and sixteen years
> old.  I live in country where some states allow partners of the same sex to
> legally marry, but consider an eighteen year old boy who sleeps with a
> sixteen year old girl a "statutory rapist".   So even though Christians
> might disagree with much of what is becoming all too prevalent in Western
> society today—whether it be drug abuse, gay marriages or abortion—they too
> have been swallowed up (possibly unknowingly) by the ugly monster of "moral
> relativism". Certainly, they might be giving in less quickly than people who
> do not believe in a Divine basis for morality, but they're giving in
> nonetheless.
>    Historically, the age at which a girl was considered ready to be married
> has been puberty.  This was the case in Biblical times, as we will discuss
> below, and is still used to determine the age of marriage in what the
> culturally arrogant West calls "primitive societies" throughout the world.
> As the ahadith about 'Aishah's age show, her betrothal took place at least
> three years before the consummation of the marriage.  The reason for this
> was that they were waiting for her to come of age (i.e. to have her first
> menstrual period).  Puberty is a biological sign which shows that a women is
> capable of bearing children.  Can anyone logically deny this?  Part of the
> wisdom behind the Prophet's Muhammad's  marriage to 'Aishah just after she
> reached puberty is to firmly establish this as a point of Islamic Law, even
> though it was already cultural norm in all Semitic societies (including the
> one Jesus  grew up in).  The large majority of Islamic jurists say that the
> earliest time which a
>  marriage can be consummated is at the onset of sexual maturity (bulugh),
> meaning puberty.  Since this was the norm of all Semitic cultures and it
> still is the norm of many cultures today—it is certainly not something that
> Islam invented. However, widespread opposition to such a Divinely revealed
> and accepted historical norm is certainly something that is relatively new!
>    The criticism of Muhammad's  marriage to 'Aishah is something relatively
> new in that it grew up out of the values of "Post Enlightenment" Europe.
> This was a Europe that had abandoned (or at least modified) its religious
> morality for a new set of humanist values where people used their own
> opinions to determine what was right and wrong.  It is interesting to note
> that Christians from a very early time criticized (again hypocritically) the
> Prophet's practice  of polygamy, but not the marriage to 'Aishah.
> Certainly, those from a Middle Eastern Semitic background would not have
> found anything to criticize, since nothing abnormal or immoral took place.
> It was European Christians who began to criticize Muhammad on this point,
> not ones who were in touch with their Semitic roots.
>    It is upon reaching the age of puberty that a person, man or woman,
> becomes legally responsible under Islamic Law.  At this point, they are
> allowed to make their own decisions and are held accountable for their
> actions.  It should also be mentioned that in Islam, it is unlawful to force
> someone to marry someone that they do not want to marry.  The evidence shows
> that 'Aishah's marriage to the Prophet Muhammad  was one which both parties
> and their families agreed upon.  Based on the culture at that time, no one
> saw anything wrong with it.  On the contrary, they were all happy about it.
>    None of the Muslim sources report that anyone from the society at that
> time criticized this marriage due to 'Aishah's young age.  On the contrary,
> the marriage of 'Aishah to the Prophet  was encouraged by 'Aishah's father,
> Abu Bakr, and was welcomed by the community at large.  It is reported that
> women who wanted to help the Prophet , such as Khawlah bint al-Hakeem,
> encouraged him to marry the young  'Aishah.  Due to the Semitic culture in
> which they lived, they certainly saw nothing wrong with such a marriage.
>    Society's ideas of love, family and marriage are much different in the
> so-called "modern" and "civilized" West of today than they were in Biblical
> or Qur'anic times.  Unfortunately, many of us carry the baggage of "romantic
> love" and ideas about sex that have managed to poison our minds since the
> Europeans (and their ideas) came to dominate the globe. These ideas have not
> only penetrated into the minds of Muslims, but actually permeate many of
> them.  The European colonial powers have pulled out of almost all Muslim
> lands, but the colonization of the minds continues!  As we mentioned above,
> the sad part is that most people do not even realize that they are under
> such un-Godly influences.  Just to reference the way things have changed, a
> statement in The New Encyclopaedia Britannica makes it clear that values
> regarding the proper age of marriage have been changing over the years:  ".
> . . in the United States and parts of Europe the association of adult status
> with sexual maturity as
>  expressed in the term puberty rites has been unwelcome".2
>     The significance that sex and sexuality are thought to play in human
> psychology has its roots in Freudian thought.  Even though many of Freud's
> ideas are being heavily challenged today, many of his ideas still play a
> role in the thinking of many people.  Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) taught that
> humans are basically "sexual beings" whose childhood sexual urges are the
> key to understanding their behaviour.  He developed the methodology of
> psychoanalysis and his ideas on sex, repressed guilt and sexuality, the
> subconscious sex drive, the Oedipus complex and other ideas have come to
> almost haunt the Western view of sexuality (almost as much as the repressive
> views of the Roman Catholic Church).  Needless to say, Freud's ideas have
> been criticized by believing Jews, Christians and Muslims since they
> basically deny human moral responsibility.  In Freud's view of things, human
> beings are prisoners to the effects of unconscious forces and their sex
> drive.   Such ideas are always welcomed by
>  "liberals", "humanists" and others like them.  The point of all this in
> regards to young marriage, however, might be less clear.  What needs to be
> pointed out is the contradictory "modern" Western view of sexuality.  They
> are taken aback by the thought of marriage at the age of puberty, even
> though it's an age old custom.  However, they have junior high schools where
> sex education is taught and a society where sexually permiscuous "dating" is
> considered the norm.  Sometime sex is simply a natural pleasure to be
> enjoyed, but at other times it is a psychological demon of far reaching
> consequences. In short, everything from their private lives to their court
> systems, have fallen victim to the moral relativity of the psychiatrists and
> psychologists.  The attitude that any experience in life can be seen as some
> sort of "trauma" is very widespread. Many people go through life constantly
> obsessed about what sort of "complex" they may be suffering from due to
> experiences they've had in
>  their relatively normal life. The morality which is produced by such
> attitudes all but does away with human responsibility. People who are guilty
> of serious crimes, instead of being held responsible for their actions, are
> themselves considered "victims", since they are only doing what their
> psychological makeup causes them to do.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> PUBERTY = MATURITY = MARRIAGE
> ---------------------------------
>
> The above points having been presented, some additional details on a few of
> them is worthwhile.  An interesting article on the age at which people
> married in Biblical times is Ancient Israelite Marriage Customs, by Jim
> West, ThD—a Baptist minister.  This article states that: "The wife was to be
> taken from within the larger family circle (usually at the outset of puberty
> or around the age of 13) in order to maintain the purity of the family
> line;"This is just one reference to the fact that the onset of puberty was
> considered the age at which young people could marry.   That people in
> Biblical times married at an early age is widely endorsed.  While discussing
> the meaning of the word 'almah, which is the Hebrew word for "young woman"
> or "adolescent female", Gerald Segal says:
> "It should be noted, however, that in biblical times females married at an
> early age".3
> In spite of its somewhat arrogant Western talk of "primitive cultures",  An
> Overview of the World's Religions makes it clear that puberty is an age old
> symbol of adulthood: "Almost all primitive cultures pay attention to puberty
> and marriage rituals, although there is a general tendency to pay more
> attention to the puberty rites of males than of females.  Because puberty
> and marriage symbolize the fact that children are acquiring adult roles,
> most primitive cultures consider the rituals surrounding these events very
> important.  Puberty rituals are often accompanied with ceremonial
> circumcision or some other operation on the male genitals.  Female
> circumcision is less common, although it occurs in several cultures.  Female
> puberty rites are more often related to the commencement of the menstrual
> cycle in young girls."Some female authors agree: "Puberty is defined as the
> age or period at which a person is first capable of sexual reproduction, in
> other eras of history, a rite or
>  celebration of this landmark event was a part of the culture." (Rites of
> Passage:  Puberty, by Sue Curewitz Arthen)
> "Getting your period" marks a rite of passage for young girls entering
> womanhood  (From the Women's Resource Center)
> Another contemporary reference relating marriage age to  puberty is an
> article on Central Africa, which says:   ". . . women marry soon after
> puberty"4.  The previous quotations, and plenty of others which were not
> used, should prove to any intelligent person what anthropologists and
> historians already know:  in centuries past, people were considered ready
> for marriage when they reached puberty.
> It should be mentioned that from an Islamic point of view, many problems in
> society today can be traced back to the abandonment of early marriage.  Due
> to the way that Almighty God has created man and woman, i.e. with strong
> sexual desires, people should marry young. In the past, this was even more
> true since life expectancy was very low (i.e. you were considered "old" if
> you made it to 40!).   Not only does marriage provide a legal outlet for
> people with strong sexual desires, but it usually produces more children.
> One of the main purposes of marriage is to produce children—"be fruitful and
> multiply" as the Bible says (Genesis 8:17).  This was especially important
> in the past, when people did not live for as long as they do now and the
> infant morality rate was much higher.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> THE AGE OF PUBERTY
> ---------------------------------
>
> Even though we have established that puberty has been the historical,
> cultural and religious norm for indicating readiness for marriage, some may
> wonder at which age puberty normally takes place.  This is somewhat
> meaningless in regards to our specific discussion of Muhammad  and 'Aishah,
> since the hadith literature makes it clear that she had reached puberty.
> However, in regards to puberty and at what age most girls have their first
> menstrual cycle,  'Abdul-Hamid Siddiqi says: Islam has laid down no age
> limit for puberty for it varies with countries and races due to the climate,
> hereditary, physical and social conditions.  Those who live in cold regions
> attain puberty at a much later age as compared with those living in hot
> regions where both male and female attain it at a quite early age.  "The
> average temperature of the country or province," say the well-known authors
> of the book Woman, "is considered the chief factor here, not only with
> regard to menstruation but as regards the
>  whole of sexual development at puberty."5  Raciborski, Jaubert, Routh and
> many others have collected and collated statistics on the subject to which
> readers are referred.  Marie Espino has summarised some of these data as
> follows:  (a)  The limit of age for the first appearance of menstruation is
> between nine and twenty-four in the temperate-zone; (b) The average age
> varies widely and it ay be accepted as established that the nearer the
> Equator, the earlier the average age for menstruation.6 Additionally, an
> article entitled Puberty in Girls by an Australian government Public Health
> organization, says: "The first sign of puberty is usually a surge of growth:
> you become taller; your breasts develop; hair begins to grow in the pubic
> area and under the arms. This may start from 10 years to 14 years - even
> earlier for some and later for others." An article Physical Changes in Girls
> During Puberty has this to say: "During puberty, a girl's body changes,
> inside and out, into the body of a
>  woman. The changes don't come all at once, and they don't happen at the
> same time for everybody. Most girls start showing physical changes around
> age 11, but everyone has her own internal schedule for development. It's
> normal for changes to start as early as 8 or 9 years of age, or not until 13
> or 14. Even if nothing looks or feels different yet, the changes may have
> already begun inside your body."Many will readily agree with the information
> above, but still may harbour reservations about whether a marriage to an
> older man could be happy for such a young girl.  Putting aside the modern
> Western notions of "happiness" for a moment,  the marriage of  'Aishah and
> the Prophet  was a mutually happy and loving one as in expressed in numerous
> hadeeth and seerah books.  That happy marriages occur between people with a
> fairly large difference in ages is known among psychologists: "When the
> differences (in ages) is great, e.g. exceeds fifteen to twenty years, the
> results may be happier.  The
>  marriage of an elderly (senescent) not, of course, an old (senile) man to a
> quite young girl, is often very successful and harmonious.  The bride is
> immediately introduced and accustomed to moderate sexual intercourse" 7
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> MORE WISDOM BEHIND IT
> ---------------------------------
>
> In his comments on the ahadith in Sahih Muslim which mention 'Aishah's young
> marriage to the Prophet , 'Abdul-Hamid Siddiqi shows points three other
> reasons for this marriage:
> 'Aishah's marriage to the Prophet Muhammad  at an early age allowed her to
> be an eye witness to the personal details of his life and carry them on the
> succeeding generations.  By being both spiritually and physically near to
> the Prophet  , the marriage prepared 'Aishah to be an example to all
> Muslims, especially women, for all times.  She developed into a  spiritual,
> teacher and scholar, since she was remarkably intelligent and wise.  Her
> qualities helped support the Prophet's work and further the cause of Islam.
> 'Aishah, the Mother of the Believers, was not only a model for wives and
> mothers, but she was also a commentator on the Qur'an, an authority on
> hadeeth and knowledgeable in Islamic Law.  She narrated at least 2,210
> ahadith that give Muslims valuable insights into the Final Prophet's daily
> life and behaviour, thus preserving the Sunnah of Muhammad .
> At that time, this marriage refuted the notion that a man could not marry
> the daughter of a man who he had declared to be his "brother" (even in the
> religious sense).  Since the Prophet  and Abu Bakr had declared each other
> to be "brothers", this notion was done away with.  This is demonstrated in
> the following hadeeth: Narrated 'Ursa:  The Prophet  asked Abu Bakr for
> 'Aishah's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said,  "But I am your brother." The
> Prophet  said, "You are my brother in God's religion and His Book, but she
> ('Aishah) is lawful for me to marry." (Saheeh al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62,
> Number 18)
> The marriage did away with the pagan Arab superstition that it was a bad
> omen to be married in the month of Shawwal.  They thought that the month
> carried this omen since the word Shawwal was derived from Shaala, which
> itself was believed to carry a bad omen.  The authentic ahadith indicate
> that the Prophet  and 'Aishah were married in this lunar month.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> NOT MUCH ADO BACK THEN
> ---------------------------------
>
> Above, we established that fact that getting married at puberty was an
> accepted practice amongst not only today's "primitive cultures", but
> specifically amongst the Semitic (i.e. Hebrew, Arab, Syriac, etc.) peoples
> of the Middle East.  In order to provide additional proof that Muhammad's
> marriage to 'Aishah did not raise any eyebrows at that time, I here submit
> quotations from two Western female scholars who have studied Islam in
> detail: "It is not clear just when the marriage actually took place.
> According to some versions, it was in the month of Shawwal of the Year 1,
> that is, some seven or eight months after the arrival at Medina; but,
> according to others, it was not until after the Battle of Badr, that is, in
> Shawwal of the second year of the Hijrah.  In no version is there any
> comment made on the disparity of the ages between Mohammed and Aishah or on
> the tender age of the bride who, at the most, could not have been over ten
> years old and who was still much enamoured with her
>  play."8In the above quotation, the sources which are given for the latter
> date are "Nawawi" and "Tabari".  Both Imams al-Nawawi and al-Tabari were
> great Muslim scholars, but their works contain material that is less than
> authentic by Islamic standards, which is probably the reason over her
> questioning which date is authentic.  This is all beside the point, since
> we've already shown that authentic Islamic sources state that 'Aishah, may
> God be pleased with her, was "nine years old".  The main point to note is
> that in "no version" was any comment made on their age difference or on
> 'Aishah's young age.  Why?  Such an early marriage was normal in all Semitic
> societies - such as the ones that Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad grew up
> in!
> Another author, Karen Armstrong, has this to add:  "Tabari says that she was
> so young that she stayed in her parents' home and the marriage was
> consummated there later when she had reached puberty".9  This further
> establishes that the marriage took place at puberty and that, as such, no
> eyebrows were raised.  "Tabari", it should be mentioned, refers to Abu Jafar
> Muhammad ibn Jareer al-Tabari (225-310 AH / 839-923 CE), who was a great
> Muslim scholar who is well known in the West for his Qur'anic commentary and
> history of the world.
> It is no surprise that both of the above authors agree on the fact that the
> marriage of 'Aishah and Muhammad   took place when the former had reached
> puberty and that this was normal at the time.  This is no surprise, since
> anyone who studies the Muslim sources and Semitic culture would be forced to
> come to the same conclusion, since it is simply a historical fact.  It
> should be pointed out that both of the above quoted female authors do not
> hesitate to misrepresent Islam (intentionally or unintentionally) in their
> other writings.  Suffice it to say that if there was some other "damaging"
> information available, they would not hesistate to bring it to light.  Nabia
> Abbott, who has done some useful research on Islam in some areas, was
> basically an "Orientalist" in the classic sense.  Her book which was quoted
> above, Aishah-The Beloved of Mohammed, is actually nothing but a disgusting
> second-guessing of  'Aishah's life.  If a book with a similar mix of
> speculation and inauthentic
>  sources were written about someone of significance in the West, it
> certainly would not be sitting on scholarly bookshelves.  It's has long been
> established that Orientalists with a bone to pick with Islam liked to decide
> on the authenticity of a story based on their pre-conceived notions.  If an
> inauthentic story seemed to belittle the Prophet of Islam, it became oft
> quoted.  However, any authentic material that contradicted their theories
> was simply ignored.  It's analogous to writing a historical biography of
> Jesus and using quotations from apocryphal gospels to override the Canonical
> ones whenever whimsically deemed appropriate.  This is how Orientalists and
> Christian missionaries have been treating Muhammad  for centuries.  For
> those who want to know more about this, please read our article Orientalism,
> Misinformation and Islam.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> SO WHAT'S THE VERDICT?
> ---------------------------------
>
> Overcoming cultural bias or admitting your own double standards is not
> always easy.  For some people, it takes years for them to admit that they've
> been hypocritical.  Hopefully, the thoughts presented here will plant the
> seed of reflection in some people so that they may reflect on the truth.
> Admitting that there's a problem is often half the battle, so before the
> reader heads off to make a final personal judgement on where they stand on
> this issue, I want to provide some more food for thought.  Montgomery Watt,
> a long time scholar of Islam, had some choice words on how the West should
> judge Muhammad .  I have never agreed with many of Watt's conclusions about
> Islam, but I have always viewed him as one of the more open-minded and
> open-hearted Orientalist scholars.  Possibly, this is because he was more of
> a promoter of understanding than a narrow-minded Christian missionary.
> Years of studying Islam brought Watt to this conclusion: "The other main
> allegations of moral defect in
>  Muhammad are that he was treacherous and lustful . . . Sufficient has been
> said above about the interpretation of these events to show that the case
> against Muhammad is much weaker than is sometimes thought. The discussions
> of these allegations, however, raises a fundamental question. How are we to
> judge Muhammad ?  By the standards of his own time and country ?  Or by
> those of the most enlightened opinion in the West today?  When the sources
> are closely scrutinized, it is clear that those of Muhammad's actions which
> are disapproved by the modern West were not the object of the moral
> criticism of his contemporaries. They criticized some of his acts, but their
> motives were superstitious prejudice or fear of the consequences.  If they
> criticized the events at Nakhlah, it was because they feared some punishment
> from the offended pagan gods or the worldly vengeance of the Meccans.  If
> they were amazed at the mass execution of the Jews of the clan of Qurayzah,
> it was at the number and
>  danger of the blood-feuds incurred.  The marriage with Zaynab seemed
> incestuous, but this conception of incest was bound up with old practices
> belonging to a lower, communalistic level of familial institutions where a
> child's paternity was not definitely known; and this lower level was in
> process being eliminated by Islam . . . From the standpoint of Muhammad's
> time, then, the allegations of treachery and sensuality cannot be
> maintained.  His contemporaries did not find him morally defective in any
> way. On the contrary, some of the acts criticized by the modern Westerner
> show that Muhammad's standards were higher than those of his time.  In his
> day and generation he was a social reformer, even a reformer in the sphere
> of morals. He created a new system of social security and a new family
> structure, both of which were a vast improvement on what went before. By
> taking what was best in the morality of the nomad and adapting it for
> settled communities, he established a religious and
>  social framework for the life of many races of men. That is not the work of
> a traitor or 'an old lecher'."10
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> FROM ABRAHAM  TO "PICK-AND-CHOOSE / FEEL GOOD RELIGION"
> ---------------------------------
>
> Everything that we have discussed above logically frees Muhammad  from the
> unjust criticism that he has received (at least amongst those who can be
> intellectually honest and fair-minided).  One point, however, still needs to
> be made a bit more clear.  Even though we've mentioned it in passing, the
> hypocrisy and double standards of Christians who criticize Muhammad  for his
> morality needs to be more thoroughly analysed and exposed.
> Before moving on to an analysis of Biblical morality, I would like to offer
> some advice and encouraging words to my fellow Muslims. My main piece of
> advice is to not be discouraged by slanderous attacks on Islam or how it is
> distorted in the media.  Certainly, we all hate to see such things occur,
> but in the "Information Age" which was brought about by a culture that
> (allegedly) places a supreme value on freedom of speech, there is not much
> that we can do to stop it. The flip side to this coin is the fact that the
> Truth of Islam is still out there and people are finding it. Yes, Islam is
> spreading in spite of these hypocritical methods that Christians and others
> are using to stop it. From the "moon god" lies of Robert Morey to the almost
> daily distortions in the media, Islam is still spreading in the West.
> Actually, the fact that those who make a career out of attacking Islam, such
> as Christian missionaries, have to resort to lies and distortions when they
> discuss Islam is a good
>  sign.  Certainly, if they discussed Islam as it was meant to be understood,
> they would only be hurting their own cause.  When Islam is presented by
> non-Muslims in the West, usually matters of peripheral importance are
> addressed and criticised. The core beliefs of Islam, if discussed at all,
> are presented in a distorted manner. If Islam was just some ridiculous
> "Third World" religion with no appeal, they would not have to treat it this
> way. As a matter of fact, a great deal of the anti-Islamic literature that
> fills Christian bookstores (and the Internet) is not designed to convert
> Muslims, but to turn Westerners off to Islam. The people who write these
> lies are just trying to poison the minds of people so that they won't be
> receptive to the message of Islam when they hear it.
>
> Their methods, however, are failing.  In Europe especially, the Christian
> religion is in a  severe state of stagnation and people are looking for
> truth elsewhere. Christians have always been embarrassed by their almost
> complete inability to convert a notable Muslim to Christianity. Certainly,
> they have their converts that they hold up as examples, however all of them
> seem to have been only nominal Muslims (at best) when they converted.
> However, many notable Westerners have embraced Islam, recently as well as in
> the past. One of the most interesting things about this is many (if not all)
> of these people could be called "Searchers for the Truth". By this I mean
> that they were the type of people who were spiritual, open-mined and read
> books on many subjects. They were not brainwashed simpletons who simply
> wanted to join an easy religion and the dominating culture of the time. They
> were people who knew a lot not only about religion, but about history,
> philosophy and other disciplines.
>  Suffice it to say that the truth of Islam is out there, in spite of all the
> negative press that it gets today. The following is just one testimony that
> Islam is spreading in the West: "Unprecedented numbers of British people,
> nearly all of them women, are converting to Islam at a time of deep
> divisions within the Anglican and Catholic churches.  The rate of
> conversions has prompted predictions that Islam will rapidly become an
> important religious force in this country . . . Within the next 20 years the
> number of British converts will equal or overtake the immigrant Muslim
> community that brought the faith here", says Rose Kendrick, a religious
> education teacher at a Hull comprehensive and the author of a textbook guide
> to the Koran. She says: "Islam is as much a world faith as is Roman
> Catholicism. No one nationality claims it as its own". Islam is also
> spreading fast on the continent and in America.  (The Times , London,
> Tuesday, November 9th, 1993,  Home-News page) Thanks be to God
>  that many of us who are former "pew warmers" finally decided to go out and
> investigate what they try to spoon feed us from the pulpit and TV.  Why does
> Islam succeed in attracting Christians and others?  Because it's the Clear
> Way of Abraham.  No other religion today can honestly claim this!  Islam
> isn't just a "feel good" religion where they just tell you what you want to
> hear and read selected verses from the Bible. Most Christians today approach
> religion like they do Sunday brunch: they take what they like and leave what
> they don't like.  They have this attitude in spite of the fact that Abraham
> is held up in their Bible as a towering example of faith.  Abraham  , who
> was going to sacrifice his own son because Almighty God commanded it,
> certainly knew the basis of morality.  It is clear in both the Bible and the
> Qur'an that Abraham knew that whatever God commands is the right thing to
> do.  However, how many Christians today can say that they honestly believe
> that on all issues?
>  How many of them have reflected on the moral ramifications of what is
> contained in their Bible? Seemingly, not even their learned apologists who
> attack Islam have reflected on it too deeply!
>
> The question "What is our basis for morality?" is an easy one for those who
> follow the faith of Abraham —and that's what Islam is.  Islam is submission
> to the Will of Almighty God - "We hear and we obey"- the faith of our father
> Abraham.  If it was good enough for Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad, then
> it's good enough for me! It is this truth and this attitude that attracts
> people to Islam. The entire basis of Islam, which produces this attitude, is
> Unity—the Unity of Almighty God and the unity of mankind.  To be sure, the
> message of Islam appeals to the very nature of man. No wonder it is
> spreading! A Christian theologion, relatively recently, observed:
>
> "It is probable that early in the twenty-first century Islam
> will have become numerically the largest of the world religions" 11
>
> Quite possibly, if you count only Sunni Muslims (which are at least 85% of
> Muslims), we are already the largest religion in the world when compared not
> to "Christians" as a whole, but to either the Orthodox, Roman Catholics or
> Protestants each separately.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> A CASE STUDY IN BIBLICAL MORALITY
> ---------------------------------
>
> Now that we've taken an detailed look at an alleged moral difficulty in the
> life of Muhammad , for the sake of balance, let's take a look at a moral
> difficulty in the Bible.  We've already made statements above concerning the
> nature of Biblical morality, but many readers may be unaware of some of its
> "difficulties". For better or for worse, in Sunday school they generally
> skip the verses which we are going to deal with below. However, these verses
> certainly are useful tools in putting intellectually honest Christians in
> the same "moral dilemna" that they think Muslims should be in due to
> Muhammad's  young marriage to 'Aishah, may God be pleased with her. It
> should be kept in mind that the purpose of this discussion is the basis for
> morality, not the inspiration of the Bible (or lack thereof). For the
> purposes of this discussion, we accept the Bible "as is". However, this
> should not be interpretted to mean that we are endorsing it as the "Word of
> God" in toto. On the other hand, it
>  should not be interpreted to mean that we are attacking the "Word of God",
> since we are discussing it simply because Christians consider it to be the
> "Word of God" (whatever their particular definition might be). For those
> wanting more detailed information on the Muslim view of the Bible, please
> click here.
>
> The portion of the Bible that we want to look at begins with the Book of
> Numbers, Chapter 31, verses 17 and 18. Here, Moses, following the Lord's
> command, orders the Israelites to kill all the Midianite male children. The
> order continues with the following:
>
> ". . . kill every woman who has known man by lying with him,
> but all the female children, that have not known a man by lying with him,
> keep alive for yourselves."
>
> One can only guess how the Israelites determined who the virgins were.  Most
> probably, they did it based on age and maturity, assuming that all of the
> female "children" who had not reached puberty were virgins.  Keep in mind
> that this was done, according to the Bible, on God's command to "Avenge the
> Israelites on the Midianites". Later, God gives Moses instructions on how to
> divide up the booty, "whether persons, oxen, donkeys, sheeps or goats".
> Based on this command, "thirty-two thousand persons in all, women who had
> not known a man by lying with him" were divided up. This was done so that
> the Israelite soldiers could have these young girls "for themselves". I do
> not suspect that anyone reading this is either so naive or ignorant of King
> James English to not know what this means!
>
> Moving along to another great example of Biblical morality, . . . in
> Deuteronomy 21:10-14 the Biblical "God of Love" gives the following
> command:
> "When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the Lord thy God
> hath delivered them into thine hands and thoust has taken them captive, and
> seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and have a desire unto her, that
> though would have her to be thy wife, then though shalt bring her home to
> thine house . . . and after that you may go into her and be her husband, and
> she shall be your wife. But if though have no delight in her, then thou
> shalt let her go". This should serve as sufficient proof that the morality
> that is taught in the Bible often is not what Christians make it out to be.
> In spite of what they teach in Sunday school, the above mentioned verses
> demonstrate the following:
> Almighty God, at least according to the Bible:
> * Ordered innocent babies to be killed; and
> * He allowed young women to be forced into sex against their will.
> Before moving on, it should be noted that killing women and children in war
> is never permitted under Islamic Law (the actions of some ignorant Muslims
> around the world notwithstanding).  Some Christians may take issue with the
> words "innocent babies" above, since they believe that even babies are
> tainted with "Original Sin".  However, this is not the topic of the
> discussion at hand. Suffice it to say that Biblical support for the Doctrine
> of Original Sin is contradictory at best. There are some verses that seem to
> support it, but there are others that seem to clearly deny it. One strike
> against "Original Sin", besides the fact that it's simply unjust, is the
> fact that the Jews—who read the Old Testament—never belived in it the way
> Chrisitnas do. But anyway . . . when faced with the problematic parts of the
> Old Testatment, Christians react in various ways. Many offer up the ill
> thoughtout "Well-That's-in-the-Old-Testament" defense.  In spite of the fact
> that they usually don't brush
>  the Old Testament aside so quickly when they are being shown alleged
> prophecies which match Jesus, a few other thoughts can be presented. Some of
> the things that make brushing aside the Old Tesament a bit more difficult
> (at least for Christians who want to remain intellectually honest) are: 1)
> the same God that "inspired" the Old Testament "inspired" the New Testament;
> 2) this same God is "unchanging" according to the Bible; 3) Jesus in the New
> Testament endorses the "Law and the prophets" (i.e. the Old Testament) in
> several places; and 4) without the Old Testament there is no basis for
> Christianity.
>
> When put in this predicament, Christians, have one of two choices: 1) stop
> thinking about it and fall back on a liberal "pick-and-choose" religion that
> just makes them "feel good" but does not answer any of life's more difficult
> questions; or 2) accept the (allegedly) Divinely Revealed morality of the
> Bible "as is" and en toto.
>
> There are Christians out there who claim to accept the Divinely Revealed
> morality of the Bible. They understand what's at stake and the issues at
> hand. If people are allowed to whimsically decide what is right and what is
> wrong, there would be chaos. Just as importantly, if people decide what is
> "God's Word" and what is not His word based on their preconceived notions
> and "modern" sensibilities, nothing would be left of the Bible. As such,
> there are Christians who, in principle, say that killing babies is "moral"
> as long as God clearly commands it.  For someone who understands the nature
> of Divinely Revealed morality, we would have to agree in principle but with
> certain reservations. As mentioned above, Almighty God—according to
> Islam—never commands the killing of innocent children. That is one
> "difficulty" that I am glad that Muslims don't have to explain their way out
> of! Killing babies is okay as long as God commands it!?! So much for having
> Christians as baby-sitters!
>
> The bottom line is that morality comes from Almighty God and from Him alone.
> However, if ones studies the Bible, it is plain to see that it is not a
> foundation for morality.  The examples above are just a few that can be
> provided from both the Old and the New Testament. The people who promote
> "Biblical morality" pick and choose from the text as they please.  Only in
> Islam can one with good conscience accept "the whole package" without
> ignorantly or hypocritically denying things that they don't like.  This is
> how true internal peace and balance are achieved.  If one belongs to a
> religions without accepting everything in its scripture (real or alleged)
> one is not only bearing false witness againt themself but against God
> Himself. With all the false ideas in the modern age, it's easy to be lead
> astray.  The liberal Westeran morality that has now touched all corners of
> the globe is, culturally speaking, something like an eight-hundred pound
> gorilla. It's very hard to stand in its way or
>  speak out against it. However, being encouraged by others to follow "vain
> desires" has been an eternal problem for mankind, as Almighty God makes
> clear in the Qur'an:
> "Say: 'I will not follow your vain desires:if I did I would stray from the
> pathand be not of the company of those who receive guidance.'" Qur'an -
> Surah al-An'aam - 6:56
> ---------------------------------
> GUIDEPOSTS TO BE THANKFUL FOR
> ---------------------------------
>
> The Prophet Muhammad  was a great example for all of humanity and peoples of
> different cultures (from "modern" Europeans to the aborigines of Australia).
> Not only was he a great Prophet and Messenger, but he was also a statesman,
> military leader, ruler, teacher, neighbor and friend.   Family life was one
> of the most important areas where he was a great example, since he was both
> a husband and a father.  Due to God's wisdom, His last and final prophet
> experienced a wide array of marriages and family situations.  Due to this,
> he is an example for people who are monogamous, for those who are
> polygamous, for those wishing to marry those older than themselves and for
> those wondering how early someone can rightfully marry. Muhammad
> reestablished the Religion of Abraham so that it would continue to the Last
> Day.
>
> As Muslims, we should be thankful for these guideposts in our moral journey
> through life.  Reflecting on them aids us in avoiding being led astray into
> "moral relativism". This is a very dangerous thing, since it can lead to the
> worst of all sins—associating others with Almighty God in worship, belief
> and/or Lordship.  By knowing the Prophet's  life we can see how to stay
> within the boundaries laid by Almighty God and stay on the Natural Religion
> of Islam which was made to suit the natural disposition (fitrah) of mankind.
>  I pray that we, as Muslims, make Almighty God's limits our limits,  and
> that we are not influenced by other societies and cultures. If it was good
> enough for Abraham and Moses, then it's good enough for me . . .
>
> That's the way I see it, but God knows best . . .
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> FOOTNOTES
> ---------------------------------
> 1  W. Montgomery Watt, Muhammad at Medina,  Oxford University Press, 1956.
> 2  "Rites and Ceremonies",  The New Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th Edition
> (1987), Volume 26, page 850.
> 3  Gerald Sigal, The Jew and the Christian Missionary, Ktav Publishing
> House,1981, page 28.
> 4  "Central Africa", The New Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th Edition (1987),
> Volume 15, page 646.  See also "Aboriginal Australia", The New Encyclopaedia
> Britannica, 15th Edition (1987), Volume 14, page 425.   For additional
> references to the marriage customs in Biblical times, see Israel: Its Life
> and Culture, by  Johannes Pedersen, Volume 1, page 60ff.
> 5  Herman H. Ploss, Max Bartels and Paul Bartels, Woman, Volume I, Lord &
> Bransby, 1988, page 563.
> 6  English-translation of Sahih Muslim, Volume 2, International Islamic
> Publishing House, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, page 715.
> 7  Theodor H. Vandevelde, Ideal Marriage : Its Physiology and Technique,
> Greenwood Publishing Group, 1980, p. 243.
>
> 8  Nabia Abbott, Aishah-The Beloved of Mohammed, Al-Saqi Books, London,
> 1985, page 7.
> 9  Karen Armstrong, Muhammad:  A Biography of the Prophet, Harper San
> Francisco, 1992, page 157.
>
> 10  W. Montgomery Watt, Muhammad: Prophet and Statesman, Oxford University
> Press, 1961, page 229.
> 11  John Hick, The Metaphor of God Incarnate, Westminster
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo!
> Security Centre.
>
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
> To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
> Web interface
> at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
>
> To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to:
> http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/CGI/wa.exe?S1=gambia-l
> To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
> [log in to unmask]
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>


--
Visit my blog at: http://GinnysThoughts.blogspot.com/