Muhammad's Troubling Marriages to Aisha and Safiyah

[Al-Fatihah]

You have no idea what consummation means. It actually refers to the act of sex when applied to marriage. Hence the translator of the Hadith used the word as part of tranliteration to convey the meaning of the act of sex not just marriage and living together. Udkhilath refers to sex when it comes to a man and woman in context. So further evidence that the English and Arabic versions are refering to sex rather than marriage. So you have twisted or ignored the meaning of the word in the ahadith and provided no secondary sources to confirm sex happened at a later date. More so by being married you are saying she was mature and considered a woman prior to the marriage itself. If Mo only had sex with her when she was mature after marriage you are saying she was not mature at the time of the marriage. Hence the marriage is invalid itself. So you are being inconsistent in relation to the marriage and sex. Give the above it is completely reasonable to conclude sex did happen and you have provide nothing of substance as a counter argument. More so you have demonstrated that you do not understand the ahadith in English nor Arabic. You also have refuted your prior statements with this response. So in reality I am arguing with someone that know less about their religion than the one they are arguing against. More so I am arguing with someone that has no line of thought regarding this topic. After all you wouldn't make such a mistake if you were actually forming your own response. Rather I think you are just copying apologetics without reading what you post nor looking at such rhetoric in conjunction with your previous statements.

She was mature when she was married vs Mo had sex with her after marriage when she was mature. Amusing to say the least.

Response: No dictionary on the planet says udkhilath refers to sex, nor does the word consummate. Your falsehood fails and only exposes the weakness in your logic and proves Muhammad's marriage was just.

 

[Shad]

Udkhilath is translated as consummated his marriage in English. It is using a euphemism. This phrase in English refers to the act of sex not a completion of a wedding or marriage contract. IE the context of the hadith. It is a more polite way of saying "He entered her". Hence why multiple translations of the Qu'ran in English have used this as a translation. No lies or falsehood. Just the ability to read, translate and understand the methods of transliteration. More so the root word, dakhala, in this context is translated to English as; to enter, to pierce, to penetrate, to consummate the marriage, cohabit, sleep with a woman.

 

[Al-Fatihah]

I know why you cannot answer this simple question.
I will ask one more time, and then I will explain why I asked this so that other members can see......
Did Muhammad want to make happy countries? Yes/No

Response: To the contrary, we see you still cannot find any harm in the marriage of Muhammad and Aisha, thereby using weak straw man to distract from this fact. Fortunately, your attempts are failing and your inability to show any harm in his marriage yet condemn it anyway shows that it is your ideology that condones rape and molestation, not Islam. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Al-Fatihah]

Yes....... he did. A very young infant.
And I still want you to confirm (or deny) that Muhammad wanted countries to be happy. I dare you to answer!

Response: No he did not, as supported by your continuous failure to quote any source saying otherwise.

 

[Al-Fatihah]

Udkhilath is translated as consummated his marriage in English. It is using a euphemism. This phrase in English refers to the act of sex not a completion of a wedding or marriage contract. IE the context of the hadith. It is a more polite way of saying "He entered her". Hence why multiple translations of the Qu'ran in English have used this as a translation. No lies or falsehood. Just the ability to read, translate and understand the methods of transliteration. More so the root word, dakhala, in this context is translated to English as; to enter, to pierce, to penetrate, to consummate the marriage, cohabit, sleep with a woman.

Response: No dictionary on the planet says consummate only refers to sex. Not one. Your logic fails. It means to complete, which can refer to sex, yet as proven by the context of the hadith,it does not. Furthermore, udkhilath does not mean or refer to "He entered her". That is grammatically incorrect. The word "udkhilah" means "to enter into", which is followed by the word "alaihi", which means "upon him". Thus the complete phrase "udkhilah alahi" literally means "entered into what's upon him". Referring to the marriage contract. Not entered her. So this lie that it means "he entered her" is grammatically incorrect. Another fail. It is grammatically incorrect, as proven by any dictionary. So your mutilation of language is only amusing at best, yet still proof of nothing.

As demonstrated, the hadith and context means he entered into the marriage contract by living together with her when she was 9. Not that they had sex.

 

[Shad]

Response: No dictionary on the planet says consummate only refers to sex. Not one. Your logic fails. It means to complete, which can refer to sex, yet as proven by the context of the hadith,it does not. Furthermore, udkhilath does not mean or refer to He entered her. The complete phrase "udkhilah alahi" literally means entered into what's upon him. Referring to the marriage contract. Not entered her. Another fail. It is grammatically incorrect, as proven by any dictionary. So your mutilation of language is only amusing at best, yet still proof of nothing.

Strawman and shows you never read what I posted. I provided the information that it is a euphemism to politely cover the direct word for word translation. A word can have multiple definition which is defined by context. Hence the euphemism of consummate the marriage is referring to the common understanding of what consummate a marriage meaning in English. "Enter what's upon him" is referring to Mo entering, sex, with Aisha not the contract. Hence the definition of the root word provided earlier. Verse 4:23 references this definition which furthers the argument I am putting forward. The word is not used for completion in English but is directly transliterated as a sexual act. Again you are ignoring the transliteration used by professional translators and putting forward your unsubstantiated claim stating otherwise. Sorry but there are English translation which you provided yourself. However since you clearly have comprehension issues you fail to grasp the meaning used and it's implication.The verse clearly shows that a sex is the definition used since it is not the marriage itself but the act of sex since there is no "blame" The verse is very distinct that the marriage and act of sex are different rather than the contract.

I have no need to prove anything since my point of view is back by published material while you have provided nothing of the sort. I am merely pointing out already statements already made by Muslim translators themselves...

Also a dictionary does have this meaning Arabic-English Dictionary The Hans Wehr Dictionary Of Modern Written Arabic.pdf

Lane's Lexicon also supports their transliteration.

 

[Al-Fatihah]

Strawman and shows you never read what I posted. I provided the information that it is a euphemism to politely cover the direct word for word translation. A word can have multiple definition which is defined by context. Hence the euphemism of consummate the marriage is referring to the common understanding of what consummate a marriage meaning in English. "Enter what's upon him" is referring to Mo entering, sex, with Aisha not the contract. Hence the definition of the root word provided earlier. Verse 4:23 references this definition which furthers the argument I am putting forward. The word is not used for completion in English but is directly transliterated as a sexual act. Again you are ignoring the transliteration used by professional translators and putting forward your unsubstantiated claim stating otherwise. Sorry but there are English translation which you provided yourself. However since you clearly have comprehension issues you fail to grasp the meaning used and it's implication.The verse clearly shows that a sex is the definition used since it is not the marriage itself but the act of sex since there is no "blame" The verse is very distinct that the marriage and act of sex are different rather than the contract.

I have no need to prove anything since my point of view is back by published material while you have provided nothing of the sort. I am merely pointing out already statements already made by Muslim translators themselves...

Also a dictionary does have this meaning Arabic-English Dictionary The Hans Wehr Dictionary Of Modern Written Arabic.pdf

Lane's Lexicon also supports their transliteration.

Response: You only make my point. As you say it is a euphemism. The text does not. Therefore, such a claim is made up and supported by nothing. Your logic continues to fail. You say "enter into what's upon him" refers to sex, yet no word in the statement is synonymous to sex. Another fail. Words cannot mean or refer to something if they are not synonymous. That's like saying Dog refers to cat. Debunked again.

So as we can see, your warped and amusing twist on language is amusing at best, and only exposes that Muhammad's marriage was just. Thanks for the assistance.

 

[Shad]

Response: You only make my point. As you say it is a euphemism. The text does not. Therefore, such a claim is made up and supported by nothing. Your logic continues to fail. You say "enter into what's upon him" refers to sex, yet no word in the statement is synonymous to sex. Another fail. Words cannot mean or refer to something if they are not synonymous. That's like saying Dog refers to cat. Debunked again.

So as we can see, your warped and amusing twist on language is amusing at best, and only exposes that Muhammad's marriage was just. Thanks for the assistance.

I provided the direct translation. The euphonium is used since the direct translation is distasteful. The Arabic text is talking about sex hence why the English translation is using the euphonium of consummation of marriage as in sex. Since translation of both the verse and hadith support my view you have failed to refute anything. Published work is on my side which I am merely putting forward with sources. While you have not provide anything but unsubstantiated claims with no sources. Rather your own source agree with my argument. You argument highlights you lack of reading comprehension, understand of linguistics in Arabic and English, the use of a euphemism and the intention behind it. I have proved you wrong with your claim about dictionary by citing two which support my argument. One being Lane's Lexicon which is a primary source of Arabic to English translation. Seems like scholarship is on my side.

 

[Al-Fatihah]

I provided the direct translation. The euphonium is used since the direct translation is distasteful. The Arabic text is talking about sex hence why the English translation is using the euphonium of consummation of marriage as in sex. Since translation of both the verse and hadith support my view you have failed to refute anything. Published work is on my side which I am merely putting forward with sources. While you have not provide anything but unsubstantiated claims with no sources. Rather your own source agree with my argument. You argument highlights you lack of reading comprehension, understand of linguistics in Arabic and English, the use of a euphemism and the intention behind it. I have proved you wrong with your claim about dictionary by citing two which support my argument. One being Lane's Lexicon which is a primary source of Arabic to English translation. Seems like scholarship is on my side.

Response: The text does not say it is a euphonium. You do. Therefore, your logic fails and absolutely nothing supports your view. The meaning of words are also based on a dictionary, not a published work. Then you claim a dictionary supports your view, yet the link I provided quotes the exact definition and clearly shows your claim to be false. Thus your redundant and failed interpolation continues to support the fact that the hadith means that they consummated the marriage by living together. Not sex, as proven by the literal meaning of the words and context. So it seems that scholars are laughing at you, as you continue to entertain us with severely weak attempts to twist the language as if you have knowledge on what you are talking about.

 

[oldbadger]

Response: To the contrary, we see you still cannot find any harm in the marriage of Muhammad and Aisha, thereby using weak straw man to distract from this fact. Fortunately, your attempts are failing and your inability to show any harm in his marriage yet condemn it anyway shows that it is your ideology that condones rape and molestation, not Islam. Thanks for the clarification.

Al-Fatihah....
That was your last chance.
My question was:-.
Did Muhammad want to make happy countries? Yes/No
Al-Fatihah, your failure to answer suggests that Muhammad did not want people to seek happiness or be happy, on this Earth, or in countries that follow him.

That's all I wanted.......
And as for your distorted view about what is a humane and decent age for people to marry...... Oh dear.
Perhaps you should leave the representation of your religion to other, more diplomatic, and possibly more forthright and open people?

 

[Al-Fatihah]

Al-Fatihah....
That was your last chance.
My question was:-.
Did Muhammad want to make happy countries? Yes/No
Al-Fatihah, your failure to answer suggests that Muhammad did not want people to seek happiness or be happy, on this Earth, or in countries that follow him.

That's all I wanted.......
And as for your distorted view about what is a humane and decent age for people to marry...... Oh dear.
Perhaps you should leave the representation of your religion to other, more diplomatic, and possibly more forthright and open people?

Response: In other words, you still cannot provide anything harmful in having consensual sex in marriage with one who reaches puberty and maturity, thereby supporting the fact that Muhammad's marriage with Aisha was just. Thanks for the assistance.

 

[oldbadger]

Response: In other words, you still cannot provide anything harmful in having consensual sex in marriage with one who reaches puberty and maturity, thereby supporting the fact that Muhammad's marriage with Aisha was just. Thanks for the assistance.

This post bent the truth. I'm done here.

 

[Sabour]

For the marriage of Aisha, there is no hadith that suggests that she was married at the age of 6-7. Marriages for the daughters were considered a way to make relations between families stronger, and that is for business reasons. They used to choose who will their daughters marry since she is first born. But that was not the case with the prophet. What happened when she was 6-7 years is that her parents and the prophet talked about it and when she became ready (age) she gave her acceptance.

There are many hadith talking about the age of Aisha, but it is not a concern for me to really know the age. This is because that issue only emerged lately meaning that it was completely accepted. Second, the only sources to know the age of Aisha is her narrations and hadith and she is the biggest Islamic scholar. If one looks into these hadiths, we notice how happy she was and how she describes the prophet, her life, and their relation. And there is nothing more authentic than her saying that " I witness there is no deity except Allah and that Muhammad is his messenger". So this disproves any thing claimed about the prophet peace be upon him regarding that issue.

I would advise to read the biography of the prophet peace be upon him before jumping to conclusions. We can't sit here and judge things that took place 1400 years ago without knowing some background information. If one thinks that he has it all covered, than think again and go verify.

 

[Servant_of_the_One1]

There is no problem with the marriage between Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him & his family(bloodrelatives & wives) and Aisha(radiyallah anha) when you understand the reason behind the marriage. The marriage was to strengthen the relationship/ties between the Prophet (peace be upon him & his family) & the father of Aisha(radiyallah anha), first rightly guided caliph Abu Bakr siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him).
So those from the disbelievers(disbelieving in Allah, the prophets and last day)/non-muslims that accuse the prophet PBUH of bad names, we believe their sayings are recorded and it will become for them a source of regret in the hereafter.

And thus We have made for every prophet an enemy - devils from mankind and jinn, inspiring to one another decorative speech in delusion. But if your Lord had willed, they would not have done it, so leave them and that which they invent. (6:112)

And Allah is most knowing of your enemies; and sufficient is Allah as an ally, and sufficient is Allah as a helper. (4:45)

 

[Shad]

For the marriage of Aisha, there is no hadith that suggests that she was married at the age of 6-7. Marriages for the daughters were considered a way to make relations between families stronger, and that is for business reasons. They used to choose who will their daughters marry since she is first born. But that was not the case with the prophet. What happened when she was 6-7 years is that her parents and the prophet talked about it and when she became ready (age) she gave her acceptance.

There are many hadith talking about the age of Aisha, but it is not a concern for me to really know the age. This is because that issue only emerged lately meaning that it was completely accepted. Second, the only sources to know the age of Aisha is her narrations and hadith and she is the biggest Islamic scholar. If one looks into these hadiths, we notice how happy she was and how she describes the prophet, her life, and their relation. And there is nothing more authentic than her saying that " I witness there is no deity except Allah and that Muhammad is his messenger". So this disproves any thing claimed about the prophet peace be upon him regarding that issue.

I would advise to read the biography of the prophet peace be upon him before jumping to conclusions. We can't sit here and judge things that took place 1400 years ago without knowing some background information. If one thinks that he has it all covered, than think again and go verify.

Many people are happy with their abusers. Many children which are abused are also happy. However this has no bearing on if the act is right or not. Stockholm syndrome is a documented. We can sit here and judge such an act since Islam requires one to evaluate it's merits and the acts of it's prophet. Cultural relativism is not a defense. Otherwise we can not judge acts of murder or genocide are acceptable or not.

 

[Shad]

Response: The text does not say it is a euphonium. You do. Therefore, your logic fails and absolutely nothing supports your view. The meaning of words are also based on a dictionary, not a published work. Then you claim a dictionary supports your view, yet the link I provided quotes the exact definition and clearly shows your claim to be false. Thus your redundant and failed interpolation continues to support the fact that the hadith means that they consummated the marriage by living together. Not sex, as proven by the literal meaning of the words and context. So it seems that scholars are laughing at you, as you continue to entertain us with severely weak attempts to twist the language as if you have knowledge on what you are talking about.

The transliteration uses a euphemism as a polite way of saying he entered her. I have already explained this. Since you are unable to understand the use of an euphemism this must be an issue you have with comprehension. You also have ignored your contradictory arguments. If Mo waits for Aisha to mature before having sex with her she was not mature at the time of the marriage. This makes the marriage one of a child and a grown adult. Which goes back to my earlier source regarding the dangers of child marriage. You have provided your interpretation not any academic sources thus you conflate you unsubstantiated opinion with a reliable source. Your opinion meanings nothing to me as it is your opinion backed by nothing.

There is also verse 4:6, 4:25, 24:59

Al-Azhar Al-Sharif, the highest religious body in the Sunni world, has recently released a new manual on the rights of Muslim children.

"Marriage in Islam is regulated by certain rules, namely, children must reach puberty and maturity so that they can get married

An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

It should be noted that ash-Shaafa‘i and his companions said: It is recommended for the father or grandfather not to arrange a marriage for a virgin until she reaches the age of puberty and he seeks her consent, lest she find herself trapped in a marriage that she resents. What they said is not contrary to the hadeeth of ‘Aa’ishah, because what they meant is that he should not give her in marriage before puberty if there is no clear and real interest to be served by that for which there is the fear that it will be missed by delaying marriage, such as the story of ‘Aa’ishah. In that case (i.e., if there is a clear and real interest to be served) it is recommended not to miss the opportunity to marry that husband, because the father is enjoined to take care of his children’s interests, not to neglect them.

Does Islam Allow Child Marriage? - Talk To Islam - Answers About Islam

Again this goes back to your contradictory statements. Amusing that so many Muslims contradict your statements. Marriage of an adult to a child speaks volumes to the character of Mo.

 

[Sabour]

Many people are happy with their abusers. Many children which are abused are also happy. However this has no bearing on if the act is right or not. Stockholm syndrome is a documented. We can sit here and judge such an act since Islam requires one to evaluate it's merits and the acts of it's prophet. Cultural relativism is not a defense. Otherwise we can not judge acts of murder or genocide are acceptable or not.

Cultural relativism are defense in such cases.

In the seventeenth century the legal age to marry at England for women was 12. Was that a crime. Go ahead and enlighten me.

If you want to evaluate the acts of the prophet go read a biography about him before you come to your conclusions. Read about his whole life and don't cherry pick out of context things that would fit your agenda.

 

[Shad]

No it is not otherwise no one can condemn any act be it good or bad from a culture not their own. No one can say what Hitler did was wrong. No one can say what Stalin did was wrong. No one can say the Armenian genocide was wrong. Islam itself can not condemn any acts of individuals outside of it's own practices and followers. So a same-sex couple from say Sweden is perfectly acceptable if it is acceptable in Swedish culture. Islam and Muslim must accept the act using your defense. The tenants of Islam can only be applied to those that follow Islam in the 7th century by the argument of cultural relativism. Cultural relativism is a fallacy, relativist fallacy What is true for me may not be for you. What is true for you is not true for me.

 

[joshua3886]

Most of the Koran is deeply disturbing. It's no coincidence that Islamic ruled countries are all third world countries.

 

[ginaleanne]

Did they even have consensual age laws in those days?