Refuting the Claim that Prophet Muhammad was a Pedophile

[فداء الرسول]

Marriage of Immature Girls in Other Religions



It should be noted that many Western Islamaphobes try to criticize Islam for allowing
fathers to marry their immature daughters off in such a way. Yet, this is another case of
the Jews and Christians throwing stones from their glass house. The Jewish Talmud, for
example, allows fathers to marry off their immature daughters. Just like Islamic Law, the
Talmud does not recommend fathers to do this, but the provision is there. We read:


Although the Talmud recommended that a daughter be given in marriage when
na'rah, between the ages of twelve and twelve and a half, a father could marry
her off well before that time…16th century Jewish history reveals a prevalence
of girl "child" marriage.


(G.U.S.: A World Reference Atlas, http://www2.rz.huberlin.
de/sexology/GESUND/ARCHIV/GUS/MIDDLEEASTOLD.HTM)


Unlike Islamic Law, however, Jewish Law allows husbands to have sexual relations with
immature girls. The authoritative Jewish website, AskMoses.com, says:


What is the minimum age of marriage according to Jewish law?


by Rabbi Naftali Silberberg


…In ancient (and not so ancient) times however, marriage was often-times
celebrated at a rather young age. Although we do not follow this dictum,
technically speaking, a girl may be betrothed the moment she is born, and married


at the age of three. [Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 37:1.]

(AskMoses.com, http://www.askmoses.com/article.html?h=573&o=2488)


Mark E. Pietrzyk writes:


According to the Talmud, the recommended age for marriage is sometime after
twelve for females, and thirteen for males. Marriage below these ages was
generally frowned upon. However, a father was allowed to betroth his
daughter to another man at an earlier age, and sexual intercourse was regarded
as a valid means of sealing a betrothal. The age limit for betrothal through sexual
intercourse was shockingly low. According to the Talmud, “A girl of the age of
three years and one day may be betrothed by intercourse.”


(Mark E. Pietrzyk, http://www.internationalorder.org/scandal_response.html)
Similarly, Christian Law allows fathers to marry off their immature daughters. Saint
Thomas Aquinas, considered by Catholics to be the greatest theologian of all time, wrote
in The Summa Theologica:


If the parties are betrothed by another person [i.e. the father] before they reach the
age of puberty, either of them or both can demur; wherefore in that case the
betrothal does not take effect, so that neither does any affinity result therefrom.
Hence a betrothal made between certain persons by some other takes effect, in so
far as those between whom the betrothal is arranged do not demur when they
reach the proper age, whence they are understood to consent to what others have
done.
(The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas,


http://www.newadvent.org/summa/5043.htm)
Yet, according to Christian Law, a husband can invalidate his wife’s right to annul the
marriage if he has sex with her. Mark E. Pietrzyk writes:


Once intercourse had taken place, the marriage could not be annulled.


(Mark E. Pietrzyk, http://www.internationalorder.org/scandal_response.html)

Pope Alexander III ruled:
If a girl of tender age is betrothed and delivered to her husband, and afterwards
desires to marry a different man, her petition is not to be granted if her husband
swears that he has had carnal knowledge of her even at the early age of eleven or
twelve. [12]


Other than Jews and Christians, we find that many Hindus join the bandwagon to attack
Prophet Muhammad for his marriage to Aisha. Yet, it seems that Jewish, Christian, and
Hindu Islamaphobes all hire the same architect to build their giant glass house. Judaism,
Christianity, and Islam discourage fathers to marry their immature daughters off, even if
the provision exists. On the other hand, Hindu Law goes one step further and actively
encourages fathers to marry their immature daughters off. In the Hindu religious
scripture known as the Manu-smriti, we read:
Vashistha (17.70).— Out of fear of the appearance of the menses, let the father
marry his daughter while she still runs about naked. For if she stays in the home
after the age of puberty, sin falls on the father.


Bodhayana (4.1.11).— Let him give his daughter, while she still goes about
naked, to a man who has not broken the vow of chastity and who possesses good
qualities, or even to one destitute of good qualities ; let him not keep the maiden
in his house after she has reached the age of puberty.


(Manu IX, 88; http://www.payer.de/dharmashastra/dharmash083.htm)


In conclusion, Islam protects the rights of a female more so than Judaism, Christianity,
and Hinduism. Judaism allows a man to have sex with a three year old girl. In
Christianity, a man can have sex with a seven year old immature girl, which subsequently
invalidates her right to annul the marriage. Hinduism actively encourages a father to
marry off his immature daughter, even when she is running around in diapers. Islam, on
the other hand, allows a father to contract a marriage on his daughter’s behalf, and this



provision is given only if it serves the child’s benefit. The husband cannot have sex with
her until she becomes mature. Meanwhile, the wife has the right of annulment and
divorce, as applicable (see relevant sections above).
As for Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), he did indeed marry Aisha (peace be
upon her) when she was immature, but the marriage remained suspended until she came
of age, and it was only then that the marriage was consummated. As such, no blame can
be put on Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

---

[12] Quoted in John Fulton, The Laws of Marriage (New York: E. and J.B. Young, 1883), 112.

[فداء الرسول]

Consummation of Marriage


Under Islamic Law (Shari’ah)—like Jewish and Christian Law—marriages are sealed
after they are consummated (i.e. when the couple has sexual relations). Some Muslims
think that the minimum age for marriage under Islamic Law is either nine years of age or
menarche (onset of menses). But this is not correct; in fact, Islam sets no minimum age
limit. Rather, Islamic Law follows this simple dictum:


A man may have sex with his wife when she becomes sexually mature enough such
that she is not harmed from having sex in any way whatsoever.


This is actually the most beautiful and all-encompassing rule of all. The Islamic scholars
agree—by consensus (Ijma)—with the above stated dictum. In other words, the only
hard-and-fast rule with marriage is that a man may have sex with his wife so long as she
is sexually mature enough that it does not harm her in any way whatsoever.
The consequences of this simple dictum are profound. Let us take the example of a
fourteen year old girl who has passed the age of menarche (i.e. she has had her menses);


it might be, however, that she has matured slowly, and therefore, she is still not ready to
have sex. If having sex would bring harm upon her (in any way whatsoever), then it is
considered forbidden (haram) for any man to consummate with her, despite her postmenarchal
age. A man can only have sex with a girl if she is ready for that. Under
Jewish and Christian Law, the focus is on if the man can have sex with her. Under
Islamic Law, however, the focus is on the female: can she have sex without any harm
being brought upon her?
Shaykh Abdul Aziz ibn Ahmad ad-Durayhim, a well-renowned Islamic scholar, was
asked about marriage to such a young girl. In response, he said:


With respect to what we have said about the legal validity of such a marriage, that
refers [only] to the validity of the contract itself. As for the effects [i.e. execution]
of the marriage—such as privacy, intimacy, and sexual relations—that is another
matter entirely. Such things are permitted only if the girl is able to handle such a
relationship without any harm whatsoever coming to her. Otherwise, it is
prohibited. This is because the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “There shall be
no harm nor the causing of the harm.” It can also be seen in the very conduct of
the Prophet (peace be upon him). He did not consummate his marriage with
Aisha for a number of years on account of her young age.
Shaykh Abdul Wahhab at-Turayri wrote:


The lawfulness of consummating a marriage at such an age is contingent on the
maturity of the girl and that no harm would come to her.


Imam an-Nawawi said:


With regard to the wedding-party of a young married girl at the time of
consummating the marriage, if the husband and the guardian of the girl agree
upon something that will not cause harm to the young girl, then that may be done.
The marriage contract between Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon her) and Aisha
(peace be upon her) was drawn up when she was only six or seven years old. But it was
not executed until three years later at which point in time she had become sexually
mature such that she was capable of having sexual relations without any harm coming to
her whatsoever. Yes, Aisha (peace be upon her) was only nine or ten years old when she
consummated the marriage, but the reader should keep in mind that Prophet Muhammad
married Aisha 1,400 years ago, which was a very, very, very long time ago. It may be
difficult for people today to associate nine or ten year olds with sex, but this is because
the average human lifespan is now well into the eighties. Yet, as we know:


Human life expectancy was in the 20s a thousand years ago.

were not married at an early age, then they would not have enough years of child-bearing
left, and slowly the human species would have died out.
Today, the average age of marriage in the West is around twenty-five. Yet, in the ancient
world, people would die around this age. This is the problem with applying today’s
situation and super-imposing it on olden times. It simply does not work. People today
cannot fathom ten year old girls having sex, but people 1,000 years ago could not
imagine a society in which everyone waits in their twenties to get married. It is hubris to
judge all of humanity with our subjective—and ever changing—cultural norms.


(Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...214930,00.html)


It should be no surprise then that a woman who would die in her twenties would marry at
a very young age. If people didn’t marry early, then they certainly would die early, and
this would create a problem for the propagation and survival of the human species. Early
marriage was necessary in order to counter incredibly high mortality rates. If women

[فداء الرسول]

Puberty


Many well-meaning Muslim laypersons have furthered the idea that a man may not have
sex with a pre-pubertal girl. This statement can be true or false, depending on what is
meant by it. We must first define what is meant by the term “puberty”. Shaykh al-Islam
Ibn Taymiyyah warned the Muslims that when they debate about topics, they should first
define the terms they use clearly; he further explained how sometimes two people will
seem to be saying opposite things, even though the same thing is being said in different
ways.


The confusion occurs because “puberty” is defined differently in the English language
and in Islamic legal terminology. According to the English language, the definition of
puberty is:


The time when a child’s body becomes sexually mature
(Kernerman English Multilingual Dictionary)


If we use this English definition of puberty, then we agree that this is the precondition for
consummating a marriage: according to Islamic Law (Shari’ah), a girl’s body must be
sexually mature enough such that no harm will come to her from having sexual
intercourse. However, Islamic legal terminology defines “puberty” (buloogh) in a
different way: a girl is said to have attained the age of puberty when she has her first
period (menarche), regardless of if she is sexually mature or not. Menarche is not a
condition for marriage; sexually maturity is. Therefore, when Islamic scholars insist that
it is not necessary for a girl to have reached the age of puberty, they merely mean to say
that she does not have to be post-menarchal. However, all Islamic scholars agree that a
girl’s body must be sexually mature. In other words, a girl must have reached puberty
according to the English language, but not necessarily post-pubertal (baligh) according to
the Islamic legal terminology.

belief would create huge problems. After all, there are some girls who menstruate way
before they go through the other stages of puberty. In other words, just because a girl has
had her first period, this does not mean that her body is sexually mature. Wikipedia, for
example, says:


Menarche [onset of first period] may occur at an unusually early age, preceding
thelarche [breast development] and other signs of puberty. This is termed isolated
premature menarche.


(Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menarche)


To give an example, there may be an eight year old girl who menstruates but who has not
developed any of the other signs of puberty; her body may remain sexually immature.
According to Islamic legal parlance, such a girl—who menstruated at an early age before
her body becomes sexually mature—would technically be considered post-pubertal
(baligh). Yet, from an Islamic perspective, it would be strictly forbidden (haram) to have
sex with her, since her body has not matured enough to handle sexual intercourse.


On the other hand, take the example of a fourteen year old girl who has gone through
other stages of puberty, except for menstruation: she has developed large breasts, her sex
organs are developed, etc. According to Islamic legal parlance, such a girl would not be
considered post-pubertal (baligh), since she has not menstruated yet. Who then would be
fitter for sexual intercourse: the eight year old girl with immature sex organs or the
fourteen year old girl sexually mature sex organs? In fact, there are some girls who don’t
get their first period until they enter their twenties! A medical journal on Cambridge.org
says:


The variable age at menarche was normally distributed with an age range of 7–24
years.


(Cambridge.org,


journals.cambridge.org/production/action/cjoGetFulltext?fulltextid=10260)



Muslim laypersons should stop claiming that menarche (onset of periods) is the minimum
age for the consummation of marriage; Islamic scholars do not agree to this, and such a

So if we demanded stubbornly that a girl must pass through menarche before
consummation can take place, then this would create the unusual situation where we were
allowing some post-menarchal seven year olds to be married, whereas forbidding some
pre-menarchal twenty year olds from this! Therefore, the Islamic Law (Shari’ah) does
not want this absurdity to occur, and that is the reason that menarche is not used as an
indicator of a girl’s readiness for sex.


In fact, doctors would agree that a girl who menstruates is not necessarily ready for sex,
whereas a girl whose body is sexually mature is ready for that. Once again, because
Islamic scholars use menstruation as an indicator of the onset of puberty (buloogh), it is
therefore not very productive to use the Islamic definition of puberty (buloogh) to
delineate a girl’s readiness for sex. A girl may technically be post-pubertal (buloogh)
from an Islamic perspective, yet not be ready for sex. On the other hand, another girl
may technically be pre-pubertal from an Islamic perspective, and yet be ready for sex;
after all, some girls become sexually mature but have delayed menarche.
Mufti Maulana Husain Kadodia explained:


In reality, puberty has two usages. The first usage is with regards to physical
development, whereas the second usage is with regards to menses. For (sexual)
intercourse, developmental puberty is a precondition. Whereas for other
rulings—such as being ordered to pray—the menses usage applies.


(Maulana Mufti Husain Kadodia, www.Ask-Imam.com)


This is a very meaningful quote to understand, so let us elaborate on it. Basically, there
are two usages of the word “puberty”. The first usage of the word “puberty” [i.e. sexual
maturity] is a precondition for the consummation of marriage. On the other hand, the
second usage of “puberty” [i.e. menstruation] has to do with the age of accountability, not
marriage. Once a girl reaches the age of puberty/accountability, then prayer (salah),
fasting (sawm), almsgiving (zakah), and other religious duties become mandatory on her.
A person under the age of accountability, on the other hand, would not be punished for


failing to uphold these religious duties. When Islamic scholars use the term “puberty”
(buloogh), they are only referring to this second usage of the term.


It would be dangerous to use menarche (onset of periods) as a precondition for sex; as we
have discussed, some girls who have their menses are not sexually mature, and some
sexually mature girls do not have their menses until after many years. Therefore, the
idea that puberty is a precondition for sexual intercourse can be true or false, depending
on how we define “puberty”. If we use the English definition of the word, then it would
be correct to say that puberty is a precondition for sexual intercourse. If we use the
Islamic legal definition, however, then we should know that this is in reference to the age
of accountability and has nothing to do with marriage.


The Islamaphobes paint the picture that Islam allows a grown man to pierce his penis like
a lance into the underdeveloped vaginal opening of a sexually immature girl. Yet, this is
a horribly inaccurate depiction. A girl’s body must be sexually mature such that she can
withstand sexual intercourse without any harm coming to her whatsoever. For example,
the vagina cannot be small and improperly developed; otherwise, a man’s penis would
damage it, creating lacerations and other vaginal injuries. According to Islamic Law, if a
girl is sexually immature such that it would cause harm to her if she engaged in sexual
intercourse, then it is forbidden (haram) to have sex with her. I noticed that an
Islamaphobic site posted a fatwa (religious edict) from Shaykh Salih al-Munajjid in


which at the beginning of his ruling he said:

In this verse we see that Allaah has made the 'iddah in the case of divorce of a girl
who does not have periods - because she is young and has not yet reached puberty
- three months. This clearly indicates that Allaah has made this a valid marriage.
Yet, in the very same ruling, the Shaykh finished by saying:


Al-Dawoodi said: `Ai’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) had reached physical
maturity (at the time when her marriage was consummated).
From this, we can see the two usages of the word “puberty”. Shaykh Salih al-Munajjid is
basically saying that it does not matter if a girl has had menarche [first usage of the word
“puberty”], but it does matter if she has gone through the pubertal changes that cause
sexual maturation [second usage of the word “puberty”]. We cannot know for sure
whether not Aisha (peace be upon her) had her menses, but what we do know for a fact is
that Aisha (peace be upon her) “had reached physical maturity (at the time when her
marriage was consummated).” In other words, the legality of the marriage hinged not on
the menses, but rather on the sexual development that came about as a result of puberty.
In effect, Islam does not prescribe any age limit for consummation of marriage. There
may exist some girls who become sexually mature at the age of nine, whereas other girls
are still sexually immature at the age of sixteen. (Yes, it would be completely forbidden
under Islamic Law to have sex with a sixteen year old if she was sexually immature!)
When Islamic scholars clarify that menarche is not associated with the minimum age of
consummation, this is not their way of encouraging pre-menarchal girls to be married off!
Rather, it is to make it clear that menarche is just not the parameter we look for. To give
an analogy, if some person were to claim that a girl must be four feet tall before she could
be married off, then Islamic scholars would protest this, since height is not a determining
factor. Yes, because Islamic scholars say that sexual maturity is a requirement for
consummation of marriage, a consequence of this is that most girls who get married will
be taller than four feet. After all, most girls shorter than four feet are sexually immature.
But nonetheless it would be wrong to say that height is the factor we look for to
determine who is and who is not ready for sexual intercourse.


Marrying a young girl before she reaches the age of adolescence [puberty] is
permitted in Sharee’ah; indeed it was narrated that there was scholarly consensus
on this point. (a) Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):


“And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them
the 'Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubt (about their periods), is three
months; and for those who have no courses [(i.e. they are still immature) their
'Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise” [al-Talaaq 65:4]

The emphasis then is on sexual maturity, not any specific age, since girls develop at
different rates. Shaykh Salih al-Munajjid wrote:
There is nothing…that forbid(s) that [consummation] in the case of a girl who is
able for it before the age of nine, or to allow it in the case of a girl who is not able
for it and has reached the age of nine.


In other words, age does not matter; all that matters is that the girl has undergone the
pubertal changes that would allow her to endure sexual intercourse without bringing any
harm to herself. Islamic Law (Shari’ah) is beautiful: all the emphasis is on the safety and
well-being of the girl. If sex would be harmful to the girl in any way whatsoever, then it
would be forbidden (haram) to have sex with her. In the words of Mufti Maulana Husain
Kadodia:


This shows the paramount importance that the Shari’ah gives to the rights of the
girl, by making her safety, health, and well-being the precondition for marriage.
This is in the spirit of Shari’ah to remove any harm that may come to the girl.


(Maulana Mufti Husain Kadodia, www.Ask-Imam.com)


By harm, we mean any harm whatsoever, physical as well as psychological. Islam
recognizes psychiatry as a legitimate branch of medicine. The evidence for this is that it
is permissible (halal) to use medicines containing forbidden (haram) ingredients in them
for the purpose of treating clinical depression, a psychiatric disease. Of course, the
psychological harm must be real, documented, and have proof in the medical sciences.
Most Westerners claim that marriage at such a young age is always harmful, and they
look down on past civilizations who engaged in that. In their collective hubris, these
Westerners judge all of humanity past and present based on their own society’s norms.
Yet, they should have some humility and be more self-critical. In the words of Abdullah
Squirres, the West has “been swallowed up (possibly unknowingly) by the ugly monster
of ‘moral relativism.’” In the West, for example, homosexual relationships are now
being considered normal, whereas large age gaps between man and wife are considered

abnormal. Christians would gawk at a ninety year old man married to a twelve year old
girl, but barely raise an eyebrow at Adam and Steve.


Yet, their own Bible categorically condemns homosexuality; God was so outraged by this
“abomination” that He sent “fire and brimstone” to destroy the society that engaged in it.
On the other hand, large age gaps are the norm in Biblical narratives. The Biblical
Prophet Abraham was eighty-six years old when he married someone some sixty or
seventy years younger than him. The Biblical King David, the man who slew Goliath,
was an old man on his deathbed when he married a young virgin. The Biblical Prophet
Isaac was forty years old when he married a three year old Rebecca! According to the
Christian narrative, the ninety year old Joseph married the twelve year old Mary. Saint
Augustine at the age of thirty-one betrothed a ten year old girl whom he married two
years later. And other examples abound.


Yet, suddenly when it comes to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon), the disingenuous
Christians are up in arms! Is their criticism honest or is it merely the result of their
ignorance, arrogance, and Islamaphobia? Should we really judge all of humanity based
on the West’s ideals? Somehow the Westerners cannot understand how a sixty year old
man would find a fifteen year old girl to be attractive, yet they somehow understand how
one man would be attracted to another man. This is merely a case of moral relativism,
and based on Western society’s cultural mores. Yet, not every society feels the same
way, and the Westerners should realize this! For example, Prophet Muhammad (peace be
upon him) told his disciples about the story of Prophet Lot (peace be upon him) and how
the people of Sodom engaged in the sin of homosexuality. Being attracted to another
man was so unacceptable amongst the Arabs that many of the Prophet’s disciples were
shocked and told him that they had previously thought it impossible for a man to be
attracted to another man.


Another example of the West’s selective bias is their scorning of cousin marriages;
somehow it is considered biologically normal to be attracted to the same sex, yet it is
backwards to be attracted to a cousin! Is it not possible, we ask these people, that not all
cultures are alike? What is considered acceptable by you may not be acceptable to others

and vice/versa. In the West, for example, fornication is considered acceptable, or at least
normal. In the United States and parts of Europe, the average age at which girls engage
in sexual foreplay (kissing, fondling, oral sex, etc.) is shockingly low; by the age of
twelve, about half of American girls have become unchaste, and some have even lost
their virginity. In fact, most Western readers will probably think that a girl having her
first kiss on her junior prom is “cute”; few Westerners realize that this is fornication as
condemned in their Bible. In fact, the Westerners are more accustomed to and okay with
fornication than they are of marriage; so an American girl who has oral sex at fourteen
gets only nominal criticism and is considered “more normal” than a Muslim girl who gets
married at the same age!
The idea that absolutely no girl is ready to be married at the age of nine, ten, or twelve is
completely false. The proof against this claim is that many American girls are
voluntarily becoming sexually active at those ages. But hey, reason the Westerners, that
is okay so long as it is illegal fornication and not the lawful sexual intercourse of
marriage! If a high school girl engages in lesbian activity with another girl, that’s okay
they say, so long as her partner is around the same age! On the other hand, normal
heterosexual sex between an older man and a young wife is considered atrocious. It
becomes understandable for a girl to be attracted to another girl, but completely
unacceptable for an elderly man to find a young girl attractive.
Ancient (and not so ancient) cultures used to prize virginity. That is why men used to
marry girls as soon as they turned sexually capable, in order that they marry girls who
have not been “defiled” by other men. On the other hand, girls favored socially wellestablished
males; this meant that girls tended to favor elderly men, instead of financially
struggling younger ones. This is why there was a huge age gap back in those days.
Today, on the other hand, Western guys could care less about the virginity or chastity of
their brides; in fact, most of them express interest in finding a (sexually) “experienced”
girl. Furthermore, whereas once society had valued age in males, now the older you are,
the more chance you have of being accused of senility! And thus the age gap disappears.
But this should be understood as a cultural trend, and not a moral fact of life. Yes, girls
today are disgusted by the thought of marrying old men, but was the Biblical Hagar

insulted at marrying the eighty-six year old Abraham? Was the Biblical Mary, the
mother of Jesus, disgusted by the thought of marrying a widower in his nineties? Was
the ten year old girl fiancé of Saint Augustine disgusted by the thought of marrying a
thirty plus male? Was the seven year old French princess disgusted by the thought of
marrying a Christian King, Richard II? Far from it. All of these girls were very pleased
with their marriages to such noble men, just as Aisha (peace be upon him) was pleased
with her marriage to the Mercy of all the Worlds, the Seal of the Prophets, and the best
human in the world.


Yes, today it seems difficult to believe that a nine or ten year old would be ready for
consummation of marriage, but Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) married her
over a thousand years ago. Is it not conceivable that we judge him by the standard of his
time and not the cultural norms of today? In any case, such a marriage is valid according
to Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Law. As such, there is no issue.

[فداء الرسول]

Was Aisha Pre- or Post-Pubertal?


This is a huge debate between some well-meaning Muslim laypersons on the one hand,
and Islamaphobes on the other. Some Muslim laypersons insist that Aisha (peace be
upon her) was post-pubertal (baligh) when she married the Prophet (peace be upon him).
Like I said earlier, this statement can either be true or false. If we take the meaning of
“post-pubertal” (baligh) to be post-menarchal (after the onset of menses), then there is no
way to prove this either way. And as such, Muslims should not insist upon this as if it is
incontrovertible fact. But Islamaphobes should not get too happy at me saying this,
because neither can anyone claim to know for sure that she was not post-menarchal.
More on this later.


Yet, if we take the second usage of post-pubertal—which involves the physical changes
and maturity that comes about due to puberty—then we know with certainty that Aisha
(peace be upon her) had reached this stage. It is a requirement of Islamic Law (Shari’ah)
that a girl reach physical maturity before marriage is consummated; what then is the level
of sexual maturity that must be reached? The answer is simple: the girl must be sexually
mature enough that sexual activity will not be harmful to her in any way whatsoever.
This means that when Aisha (peace be upon her) consummated the marriage with the
Prophet (peace be upon her), she had reached a stage at which it was not harmful for her.
We know this for certain because that is the very reason that Prophet Muhammad (peace
be upon him) delayed consummating the marriage with her for three or four years. If he
had not cared about her safety, then nothing prevented him from consummating the
marriage in those three years. Instead, the Prophet (peace be upon him) waited until she
was ready for it.



Western audiences should only be indignant if the girl was harmed, yet Aisha (peace be
upon him) was not harmed in any whatsoever; so it is a non-issue. Sure, it sounds strange
that a nine or ten year old girl would be ready for sexual intercourse, but this was over
one thousand years ago, when people used to have an average lifespan in their twenties.
I’ve already cited numerous examples of venerated Christian figures who married girls of

a similar age, as well as provided extensive quotes and references which show that far
from being unheard of, it was the norm all over the world to have such young marriages.
It is problematic to judge ancient civilizations based on our current cultural mores. To
give just one example, in ancient civilizations it was not at all uncommon for people to
go months without taking a shower. In fact, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)
commanded his followers to shower at least once a week. Only once a week, you say!
Back then, this was considered a lot and the Prophet’s command to shower once a week
made the Muslims the cleanest of people in Arabia. The matter was no different in
Europe; in fact, the Muslims are the ones who introduced soap to the Europeans, who had
hitherto never used it. By today’s standards, someone who does not shower for an entire
week is considered “gross”. Yet, back in those days, once a week with soap would put
the person in the finicky clean category. Just as showering once a week or even once a
month was business as usual, so too was marrying young girls.


In any case, Aisha (peace be upon her) was most definitely post-pubertal if we use the
word “puberty” in its second usage, i.e. sexual maturity. In other words, her body went
through the physical changes and maturation that puberty brings, such that her body had
become ready for sexual intercourse. There is a very strong proof we can use to show
that Aisha (peace be upon her) had reached physical maturity before she moved into the
Prophet’s house, and this is Aisha’s own statement in which she said:


When the girl reaches nine years of age, she is a woman.


(Sunan al-Tirmidhi, Kitab al-Nikah)


From this, we can see that Aisha (peace be upon her) had the body of a woman when she
consummated her marriage with the Prophet (peace be upon him). She was mature, and
not immature, as the Islamaphobes claim. But if by post-pubertal (baligh) we mean postmenarchal,
which is the way that Islamic scholars use the term, then we can never know
for certain if Aisha (peace be upon her) was this or not. The reason is because there is no
single hadeeth (narration) which informs us when Aisha (peace be upon her) experienced
her first period. It is, however, largely irrelevant, because some girls menstruate long

after their bodies have physically matured; some girls don’t menstruate until in their
twenties.
In any case, the evidence seems to indicate that Aisha (peace be upon him) was in fact
post-menarchal. However, we can’t know for sure, so I think it is fruitless to argue this
point, especially since it doesn’t matter. What matters is whether or not Aisha (peace be
upon her) was physically mature or not, and she definitely was, and all Islamic scholars
have consensus (Ijma) on that.

[فداء الرسول]

Aisha’s Dolls


Aisha (peace be upon her) brought her dolls along when she moved into the Prophet’s
house. The Islamaphobes use this as a proof, as if Aisha (peace be upon her) bringing her
dolls proves that she was an immature girl. However, this is not true. Aisha (peace be
upon her) was a mature woman, as she stated in her own words. The fact that she brought
along her dolls does not at all disprove this.


Many mature girls have dolls; we just call them “stuffed animals” nowadays. It is wellknown
that sexually active young women in America love to receive stuffed animals—
such as teddy bears—from their lovers. In fact, a recent survey carried out by Travelodge
and published in Sky News showed that 15% of adult women sleep with their teddy bears.


[13] I don’t think I really need to prove this, since everyone knows that young adult
women love teddy bears and other stuffed animals.



But just for the sake of being thorough, I cite the example of the surgeon at the University
of California Irvine who would hand out teddy bears to women fighting breast cancer.
This same idea was adopted at many other hospitals; Wendy Mitchell, the former
program manager for the Center for Women’s Health, commented about the patients:


“Their eyes well up with tears of joy. They take the teddy bear and hold it to their chests
hoping this teddy bear from their doctor, this power of touch, will get them through this.”


[14]


The point is that Aisha (peace be upon her) bringing her dolls along—or even playing
with them—does not prove anything at all, especially when we factor in that she lived
over a thousand years ago. According to About.com, it was just a couple decades ago that
girls used to play with Barbie dolls up until their teenage years. Denise Van Patten
writes:

It was with great reluctance that I packed up my Barbie dolls in their doll trunk
for the last time at 14. Back in Barbie's early heyday, in the 1960s and 1970s, my
story wasn't unusual—girls often played with Barbie until their early teens.


(About.com, http://collectdolls.about.com/cs/bar...bieoutgrow.htm)


So we see that in the 1970s, girls as old as 14 were playing with Barbie dolls. And a
hundred years ago, the average age at which girls stopped playing with dolls was
substantially older. And a thousand years ago, girls—and even young women—had few
other ways to spend their free time, and thus, playing with dolls was routine. They had
no other source of entertainment—no MTV, no shopping malls, no internet. Today, girls
outgrow dolls very fast, because of all the other more catchy gizmos people have to
entertain themselves with. One reference website states:


The toy dolls that existed before the 1700's served chiefly as playthings for adults
as well as for children…The first dolls specifically for children probably were
made in the 1700's.


(How Stuff Works, http://reference.howstuffworks.com/d...cyclopedia.htm)


So in ancient (and not so ancient times), it was not at all unusual to see young adult
women playing with dolls. As we can see, the fact that Aisha (peace be upon her) played
with dolls does not in and of itself prove that she was an immature girl

---

13 http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_2240697.html
14 http://www.ohsuwomenshealth.com/news/bears.html

[فداء الرسول]

Aisha’s Dolls: Round Two!



An Islamaphobic website furthers another argument, which goes as follows:


1) Islamic Law (Shari’ah) forbids post-pubertal girls from playing with dolls. Only
pre-pubertal girls are allowed to play with dolls.


2) There are hadeeth (narrations) in which we see Aisha playing with dolls after she
moved into the Prophet’s house.


3) This proves that she was pre-pubertal even after she moved into the Prophet’s
house and consummated the marriage with Aisha.


To properly understand why this argument is a weak one, we need to clarify a few things.
First of all, the Islamic Law (Shari’ah) comes from the Quran and the authentic hadeeths
(Prophetic sayings); these two texts—the Word of God (Quran) and His Messenger
(hadeeths)—are considered the Islamic canon. However, it should be known that there is
absolutely no directive in the Quran or the hadeeths that says dolls are permissible to prepubertal
girls and forbidden to post-pubertal girls. No statement like such can be
attributed to either God or His Messenger.


So what did Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) say? Actually, we have a hadeeth
(Prophetic saying) in which he categorically forbade people from making graven images
of living things. In this narration, Prophet Muhammad says that the angels do not enter
houses in which there are such sculptures. [As an interesting aside, the Bible also carries
such a prohibition: “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of
anything that is in the heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water
under the earth.” (Deut. 5:8)]


The consequences of this command from Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is
that Muslims are forbidden to make or keep sculptors of living things. It was feared that
people would start worshipping them as idols, and hence the prohibition. Additionally,
the only Creator is God, and it does not befit the creation to create any living thing, or
even an image of a living thing. This is to “compete” with God’s Power, and God will

challenge such a person to bring the living thing to life. In any case, this hadeeth
(Prophetic saying) clearly prohibits the creation of three dimensional figures that
resemble human beings or animals.


However, we have another hadeeth in which Aisha (peace be upon her) is playing with
dolls and the Prophet (peace be upon him) does not rebuke her for that. So the question
arises: how do we reconcile these two narrations? After all, is not a doll a sculptor and
hence forbidden? The Islamic scholars debated on how to reconcile between these two
narrations. One of these views was that perhaps Aisha was pre-pubertal and pre-pubertal
girls were exempted from this prohibition since they were younger than the age of
accountability. This was one of the views stated by Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari. Now what
the Islamaphobes do is pretend that this is the one and only view amongst Islamic
scholars. It is important to recognize that Islamic scholars differ on many things, and it
would be incorrect to present a monolithic view on the matter.


In fact, Ibn Hajar himself mentioned numerous views of this issue in Fath al-Bari.
Actually the problem is that Islamaphobes are unfamiliar with Ibn Hajar’s writing style or
with his book. Whenever he used to discuss a controversial issue, Ibn Hajar would list all
the various views on the matter; many of the views would in fact be contradictory. His
intention was not to be dogmatic, but rather to share with the reader the various views.
Therefore, it would be incorrect to claim that just because one view is in Ibn Hajar’s book
that this is his view. In fact, in the very same book, Ibn Hajar wrote:
If the doll of Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) had clear features, then this was
before the prohibition of picture-making.
(Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari)


In other words, there are two ways to reconcile the two narrations: (1) pre-pubertal girls
are exempted from the prohibition, or (2) Aisha (peace be upon her) was playing with the
dolls before God informed Prophet Muhammad to forbid people from it. This was stated


by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Adam al-Kawthari who said:



Some commentators of Hadith explain that Aisha (R.A.) used to play with dolls
before the prohibition of Tasweer (picture-making), and the Hadith was abrogated
by the Narrations which prohibit picture-making.
In other words, the idea—that perhaps Aisha (peace be upon her) was pre-pubertal—is
not the only possible explanation of the two seemingly “contradictory” narrations.
Rather, it could have been that Aisha (peace be upon her) was playing with dolls before
the prohibition came down to forbid it. And there are many examples of this: for
example, there is a hadeeth (narration) in which one of the Prophet’s disciples is drinking
alcohol. This hadeeth is easily reconciled with another hadeeth—in which alcohol is
forbidden—by saying that the first hadeeth occurred before the second one. In other
words, the Prophet’s disciple drank alcohol before it was forbidden. Another example is
that of temporary marriage which many of the Prophet’s disciples engaged in until it was
forbidden by God and His Messenger.
There is a third view—which is also mentioned by the same Ibn Hajar (!!!) as well as by
many other scholars. The two narrations—one forbidding statues resembling living
creatures and the other mentioning Aisha playing with dolls—can be reconciled by
mentioning a third narration in which the Arch-Angel Gabriel refuses to enter the
Prophet’s house because there is a statue by its door. So Gabriel commands Prophet
Muhammad:


Order that the head of the sculpture be broken off so that it resembles the trunk of
a tree.
(Abu Dawood, al-Nisai, al-Tirmidhi, and Ibn Hibban)
After the head of the sculpture is disfigured so that it does not have clear facial features,
Arch-Angel Gabriel enters the Prophet’s house. Applying this hadeeth (narration), it is
possible to reconcile the conflict between the prohibition of sculptures and Aisha’s dolls.
The prohibition on sculptures did not apply to those whose heads were disfigured.
Therefore, it is likely that Aisha’s dolls did not have clear facial features, and as such the
creator of these dolls is not “competing” with God by copying His creation. It is known

that the dolls back then were just made of wool, so they were more like sock puppets than
intricately designed Barbie dolls. This is confirmed by the following hadeeth:
We used to make toys of wool for the boys, and if anyone of them cried, he was
given those toys until it was time of the breaking of the fast.


(Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 31, Number 181)
Bassam Zawadi comments:


The above Hadeeth proves that dolls of children were nothing like what we know
as dolls nowadays, since they are nothing but stick wrapped with wool that take
no shape and if someone looked at it he won't be able to recognize what they
symbolize. Knowing that, we can explain why the Prophet (peace be upon him)
did not recognize the toy of Aisha (he didn't know that it was a horse), therefore
inquired about it to the extent that he could not tell the wings as it was just extra
piece of wool or sheet added to the toy.


Shaykh Salih al-Munajjid was asked about Aisha’s dolls to which he said:
Those toys which are made of wool are not considered to be [graven] images,
because they do not have a head apart from a piece of wool, and it does not have
the features of the faces such as eyes, nose, mouth, or ears. If an image does not
have a head or any [distinct] facial features, it is exempt from the ruling
prohibiting images.


Ibn Abbas also narrated that an image without a head does not come into the category of
forbidden images. Shaykh Muhammad ibn Adam al-Kawthari said:
If the dolls do not have a head, meaning they do not have eyes, ears, nose, and
mouth which make them incomplete, then it will be permissible to make them…It
has been narrated from Ibn Abbas, Abu Huraira (may Allah be pleased with them)
and others, that a picture without a head is not a picture, thus permissible…The
dolls which Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) played with was not of the type we
have today. Her dolls were made out of rags without any prominent features.


Many commentators of Hadith have explained that the doll of Aisha (Radhi
Allahu Anha) was not of the type that its features and organs of the body could be
clearly seen; rather it was made from cloth and cotton as how it is generally made
in the villages.
This explanation was also given as one possibility by Ibn Hajar who said:
The doll did not have prominent [facial] features.
(Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari)


So there are a few possibilities to explain why Aisha (peace be upon her) had dolls:
1. Image making was forbidden only after the hadeeth in which Aisha (peace be
upon her) played with dolls.


2. Aisha’s dolls were not forbidden because their faces did not resemble human or
animal creation.
3. She was pre-pubertal, and pre-pubertal girls may not have been included in the
prohibition of image making.


This third view is merely a possibility. The Islamaphobe’s quote Ibn Hajar to validate
their view, but in fact, Ibn Hajar said that this third opinion is seriously “questionable”,
and we’ll see why shortly. But even if we accept the third view, this is only referring to
the age of accountability, and not sexual maturity. Let us recall the words of Mufti
Maulana Husain Kadodia who explained:


In reality, puberty has two usages. The first usage is with regards to physical
development, whereas the second usage is with regards to menses. For (sexual)
intercourse, developmental puberty is a precondition. Whereas for other
rulings—such as being ordered to pray—the menses usage applies.
(Maulana Mufti Husain Kadodia, www.Ask-Imam.com)


There is no doubt that Aisha (peace be upon him) had reached puberty if we use the first
usage of the word; all Islamic scholars are agreed upon this. The first usage is a

precondition for marriage. As for the second usage of the word “puberty”, then once this
stage is reached, then the age of accountability begins. As we have discussed earlier,
when Islamic scholars use the word “puberty” (buloogh), then they are referring to this
second usage (i.e. the age of accountability). So when Al-Khattabi in Fath al-Bari said
that Aisha was pre-pubertal, then by this he meant to say that Aisha had not reached the
age of accountability and therefore the prohibition did not apply to her.
However, the Islamic scholars are agreed, by consensus (Ijma), that a girl reaches the age
of accountability either when her menses occur, or when she reaches the age of fifteen—
whichever of the two occurs first. The reason for this is that some girls do not have their
first menstrual period until well into their twenties, whereas still others do not have any
menses at all (a medical condition called amenorrhea). This ruling—that a girl reaches
puberty either through having menses or by attaining the age of fifteen years—is based


on an authentic hadeeth. Shaykh Salih al-Munajjid said:

[فداء الرسول]

A woman is deemed to have reached puberty when one of four things happens:


1 – When she reaches the age of fifteen.
2 – When her pubic hair grows, which is hair around the private parts. [pubarche]
3 – When she emits maniy
4 – When she starts to menstruate. [menarche]


If one of these four things happens, then she has reached the age of puberty and
she is now regarded as accountable, and she is obliged to do acts of worship just
like adults.


The first usage of the word “puberty” involves physical maturity, and is the precondition
for marriage. The second usage of the word “puberty” is when the age of accountability
begins. This age of accountability takes effect if any one of those four events occurs:
menarche (the onset of menses), pubarche (growth of pubic hair), emission of maniy, or
the age of fifteen is reached. Only one of the four conditions needs to be met in order for
a person to be considered “post-pubertal” (baligh) according to Islamic Law (Shari’ah).
We shall prove that when Aisha (peace be upon her) played with her dolls, she had
attained pubarche (growth of pubic hair) and/or she reached the age of fifteen. Either

way, she would not at all be considered pre-pubertal according to Islamic Law. Hence, it
cannot be said that Aisha was exempted from the prohibition on sculptures.
Let us again examine the hadeeth (narration) in which Aisha (peace be upon her) was
playing with her dolls. (It should be noted that it is this same hadeeth which is used on
Islamaphobic websites to “prove” that Aisha was pre-pubertal.) Aisha narrated:
When the Messenger of God (peace be upon him) arrived after the expedition to
Tabuk or Khaybar (the narrator is doubtful), the draught raised an end of a curtain
which was hung in front of her (Aisha’s) store-room, revealing some dolls which
belonged to her. He (the Messenger of God) asked: “What is this?” She replied:
“My dolls.” …


(Sunan Abu Dawood, Book 41, Number 4914)
This event—Aisha with her dolls—occurred either after the expedition to Tabuk or the
expedition to Khaybar. (The narrator did not remember which one it was.) If the event
took place after Tabuk, then Aisha (peace be upon her) was older than fifteen years old at
the time. If the event took place after Khaybar, then she had most certainly attained
pubarche (growth of pubic hair). Therefore, from an Islamic perspective, she would have
been considered post-pubertal (baligh), since fifteen years of age and pubarche are two of
the four conditions. (see Shaykh Salih al-Munajjid’s fatwa above.)
To prove that Aisha (peace be upon her) was older than fifteen years old after Tabuk is a
simple matter. We merely need to open up The History of at-Tabari. Muslims date their
calendar after the Hijrah (migration to Madeenah). Aisha (peace be upon her)
consummated her marriage with Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) in the year 1
A.H. (after Hijrah). At that time, she was nine or ten years old. We read from The
History of at-Tabari:


The Events of the Year 1: …In this year also the Messenger of God consummated
his marriage with Aisha. This was in Dhu al-Qa’dah eight months after his
arrival in Madeenah according to some accounts, or in Shawwal seven months
after his arrival according to others. He had married her in Mecca three years


before the Hijrah, after the death of Khadijah. At that time, she was six, or
according to other accounts, seven years old.


(The History of at-Tabari, Vol.7, pp.6-7)
If he had married Aisha three years before the Hijrah, then in the year 1 A.H., Aisha was
at least nine years of age. The expedition to Tabuk meanwhile took place in the year 9
A.D. We read from The History of at-Tabari:


The Events of the Year 9: An Account of the Military Expedition to Tabuk
...The Messenger of God ordered his companions to prepare for the military
expedition against the Byzantines.
(The History of at-Tabari, Vol.9, p.47)


If Aisha was nine years old in the year 1 A.H., then she was some seventeen years old by
the time of Tabuk which took place in 9 A.H. Therefore, if Aisha was playing with her
dolls during the expedition of Tabuk, she was way over the age limit of fifteen and
thereby considered post-pubertal by Islamic Law (Shari’ah). Ibn Hajar says:
As for her age at the time of the Battle of Tabuk, she had by then definitely
reached the age of puberty.
(Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari)


In regards to Khaybar, we read from The History of at-Tabari:
The Events of the Year 7: The Expedition to Khaybar
Then the year 7 began. The Messenger of God set out for Khaybar in the
remainder of al-Muharram.
(The History of at-Tabari, Vol.8, p.116)


This would mean that Aisha (peace be upon her) was at least fourteen years old at the
Battle of Khaybar. The average age of pubarche (onset of pubic hair) is eleven years old.

More importantly, an overwhelming 97% of girls reach pubarche by thirteen years of age.
We read:
Delayed Puberty
…What’s normal? Approximate mean ages for onset of various pubertal changes
are as follows. Ages in parentheses are the approximate 3rd and 97th percentiles
for attainment. For example, less than 3% of girls have not yet achieved thelarche
by 13 years of age…
Pubarche 11y (8.5-13.5y)


(http://www.economicexpert.com/a/Delayed:puberty.html)
So there is an overwhelming 97% chance that Aisha had reached pubarche. In other
words, there is an overwhelming 97% chance that the theory—that Aisha was exempted
from the prohibition on sculptures—is false. Ibn Hajar was a great Islamic scholar, but
he was not a physician or a medical expert; neither was the technological knowhow
present back then to carry out such medical studies to determine the normal range of
pubarche. But if Ibn Hajar were told that there is an overwhelming 97% chance that
Aisha had attained pubarche, then it is more than likely that he would not have accepted
it as a reasonable possibility.


It is much more likely then that Aisha was playing with dolls without distinct facial
features, and as such, she was not in violation of any prohibition. Even if we say that
certain dolls are forbidden to post-pubertal girls, Aisha’s dolls were not of that type,
evidenced by the fact that she played with them when she was most definitely postpubertal.
We leave it to the Islamaphobes to deny an overwhelming 97% probability.
There is only a 50% chance that the event took place at Khaybar instead of Tabuk,
meaning that the Islamaphobes are holding onto a 1.5% possibility that Aisha was prepubertal
at the time. (Simple arithmetic: 50% chance it was Khaybar, and 3% chance she
had not reached pubarche, so 0.5x0.03=0.015)


Al-Khattabi therefore was most certainly wrong, and Ibn Hajar didn’t spot this because
he did not have the medical data regarding pubarche. We respect the Islamic scholars,
but no Islamic scholar is infallible. However, even if Al-Khattabi was right and Aisha
was pre-pubertal, then this refers to the second usage of the word “puberty”. And once
again, we go back to the words of Mufti Maulana Husain Kadodia who said:
In reality, puberty has two usages. The first usage is with regards to physical
development, whereas the second usage is with regards to menses. For (sexual)
intercourse, developmental puberty is a precondition. Whereas for other
rulings—such as being ordered to pray—the menses usage applies.
(Maulana Mufti Husain Kadodia, www.Ask-Imam.com)
So when Al-Khattabi was talking about Aisha being pre-pubertal, he was merely saying
that she was pre-menarchal (i.e. she had not had her period yet), not that she was sexually
immature.
In any case, the strongest view is that the dolls Aisha (peace be upon her) played with
were not forbidden because they had no distinct facial features. Even if we assume that
there are certain dolls that are forbidden to adults (and permissible to children), Aisha’s
dolls were not of this type! Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen wrote:


With regard to those (dolls) in which the shape is incomplete, in which there is
only a part of the limbs or head, but the shape is not clear, there is no doubt that
these are permissible, and these are like the dolls with which Aisha used to play.
(Narrated in al-Bukhari, 6130; Muslim, 2440)
But if the shape is complete, and it is as if you are looking at a person—especially
if it can move or speak—then I am not entirely at ease with the idea of them being
permissible, because this is a complete imitation of the creation of Allah. It seems
that the dolls with which Aisha used to play were not like this, so it is preferable
to avoid them. But I cannot say that they are definitely haram, because there are
concessions granted to young children to play and have fun; they are not obliged
to do any of the acts of worship so we cannot say that they are wasting their time

in idle play. But if a person wants to be on the safe side in such matters, he
should cut off the head or hold it near the fire until it softens, then he should press
it until the features disappear.
Notice that Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen did believe that concessions were granted to children
for certain dolls, but Aisha’s dolls were not of this category. In other words, even if we
accept the view that some dolls are permitted only to children, Aisha’s dolls were a type
that were permissible to children and adults, and this is because they did not have distinct
facial features. (It should be noted that the safer view is that there is no distinction
between children and adults, and that dolls with distinct facial features are to be avoided
by all.)
It is highly probable that Aisha (peace be upon her) was post-pubertal (baligh) from an
Islamic perspective. But even if Aisha had not yet had her first period, then this does not
mean that she was pre-pubertal. She was only pre-pubertal according to the Islamic
definition of the word, but not the English definition of the word! Doctors agree that
many pubertal changes occur before menarche; in fact, a girl’s sex organs may become
sexually mature years before menarche, with some girls not having a period until their
early twenties!


Although there might be a 1.5% chance that Aisha was pre-menarchal at the time of the
doll incident, there is no chance at all that her body had not undergone the physical
changes necessary to have sexual relations without harming herself. In fact, the marriage
could not have occurred if this precondition had not been met. Aisha’s body was
physically mature and the issue of having a period or not is inconsequential. This leads
me to another point. The Islamaphobes make a big deal about how Prophet Muhammad
slept with a girl who was still playing with dolls. Yet, Aisha was at least fourteen years
old when she was playing with dolls. Many fourteen year old girls have developed
bodies. A recent survey conducted by a study group “found that 42 percent of the youth
had engaged in vaginal intercourse by the age of 14.” [15] Even today, the laws in many
American states—such as Alabama, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, and


South Carolina—allow for a girl to be married at the age of fourteen with parental
approval. The Christian propagandists are trying to condemn the Prophet (peace be upon
him) for having sexual relations with a fourteen year old whereas the mother of Jesus
(peace be upon her) was betrothed at ten years of age and married at twelve.
To conclude the matter, Aisha (peace be upon her) was most likely post-menarchal. But
even if she was not, that is not a big deal because her body had undergone the pubertal
changes that cause physical maturity. Her sexual organs had been developed to the point
at which no harm would come to her from having intercourse. Some girls don’t have
menarche until their twenties. Should we demand that they never have sex until that
time? Surely that would be absurd, and this is why menarche is not a good indicator for
the readiness for sex. There are some girls who have their first period at the age of seven
whereas others have their period in their twenties, and as such, menarche is not a good
indicator to use. A better gauge for readiness for sex is overall physical maturity, which
Aisha (peace be upon her) most definitely possessed.

---

15 http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/apr/06040605.html

[فداء الرسول]

Did the Prophet’s Disciple View Aisha as Immature?



An Islamaphobic website claims that one of the Prophet’s disciples, Buraira, thought of
Aisha (peace be upon her) as immature. To back this claim, the site mentions the
following narrations:


Buraira said: “I cannot accuse her of any defect except that she is still a young girl
who sleeps (on the job), neglecting her family’s dough which the domestic goats
come to eat.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 48, Number 805)
Buraira said, “No, by God Who has sent you with the Truth, I have never seen in
her anything faulty except that she is a girl of immature age, who sometimes


sleeps and leaves the dough for the goats to eat.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3,
Book 48, Number 829)


Buraira said: “By Him Who sent you with the truth, I have seen nothing
objectionable in her duty only this much that she is a young girl and she goes to
sleep while kneading the flour and the lamb eats that.” (Sahih al-Muslim, Book
37, Number 6673)


In fact, this is an incorrect translation; nowhere does the text say that Aisha (peace be
upon her) was immature. Rather, the Arabic text merely says that Aisha (peace be upon
her) was young.
Bassam Zawadi explains:


Looking at the Arabic text, I don’t see (the) word ‘immature’ anywhere! It only
states that she is a young girl, which we already know. But if someone is young,
that does not necessarily imply that he or she is immature.


Secondly, the Companion [Buraira] was not criticizing Aisha for her age. Rather,
he was saying that her fault was that she “goes to sleep while kneading the
flour…” The Companion might have attributed her carelessness due to the fact

that she was young and did not take seriously her responsibility over her tasks.
However, this does not imply she was immature or psychologically incapable of
being married.
Even in my workplace, when we bring in new marketing research trainees who
are fresh graduates and are in their early twenties, our managers would criticize
them for being careless in their jobs, since they haven’t matured and are too
young for these kind of responsibilities and tasks. Now, in no way would that
imply that these individuals are (sexually) immature or incapable of being
married. However, their age and inexperience does play a role in them not being
efficient and serious at the work place like someone who has been working for
several years…
It is very likely that Aisha in her young age would not take her house chores
seriously (just as I and many other bachelors do[n’t]; if you see my room, it is a
mess!), but I really do not see how this in any way shows that she was too
immature to get married. Someone not taking a certain thing seriously might be
said to be immature in regards to that thing, but that does not necessarily imply
that he/she is immature in everything.
Therefore, the Prophet’s disciple was not talking about Aisha’s physical body! He was
merely saying that she was acting irresponsibly. For example, we often hear how
eighteen year olds are “immature kids”, even though by law they are considered adults.
Her “immaturity” was not that she was physically or psychologically incapable of sexual
intercourse, but rather that she was irresponsible in regards to her chores. The truth is
that I, like Bassam Zawadi and other bachelors, am well past the age of adulthood but I
continue to be irresponsible with my household chores!
We admit that Aisha (peace be upon her) was young, but she was sexually mature and
capable of having sexual intercourse without this harming her. The Islamaphobes claim
that the Prophet’s marriage to Aisha (peace be upon her) was a proof of his child abuse.
What abuse, if they cannot cite a shred of evidence that indicates that Aisha was harmed
from her marriage? Far from it! Aisha (peace be upon her) would boast about how she
of all his wives was the youngest of his wives to be married to him; this was a source of
great pride for her. So the image that the Islamaphobes wish to portray—about a young
girl being forced off into marriage—is highly inaccurate; in fact, Aisha was so pleased
about her early marriage that she used to boast about it. The marriage may seem odd by
today’s standards, but it was nothing unusual 1,000 years ago.

[فداء الرسول]

Who Decides When a Girl is Mature?


We have agreed that the Islamic dictum states that marriage cannot be consummated with
a girl until and unless she has reached sexual maturity, such that no harm may come to
her from it. This of course leads to the obvious question: who decides when the girl is
ready for this? If this decision were to be made by the husband, then we all know how
this would result in chaos: so many husbands would rush into sexual intercourse, even
before the girl is ready for that. Therefore, the Islamic Law (Shari’ah) does not give this
right to the husband. This is a means of protecting the wellbeing of the child.


Instead, the decision is given to the father, who can decide when the girl is ready to move
into her husband’s house. In Islam, the decision rests with him. A father is the protector
and maintainer of his daughter, and he would have the best interest of the child in mind.
Who knows the daughter better than the father? A father will know how mature or
immature his daughter is, and whether or not she would be ready for marriage.


Oftentimes what happens in Muslim families is that the girl thinks she is ready for
marriage, but the father prevents her from this, based on her young age; this is out of the
father’s care and concern for the child.


A critic might contend that many fathers are perverts who would have no problem in
giving their immature daughters to sexual predators. However, a simple refutation of this
is that the vast majority of fathers are not perverts. If I were a father, I certainly would
care about my daughter more than anyone else on this earth, and I think that I would be
the best person to protect her from harm. There might certainly be abuse by some
perverted fathers, but my contention is that allowing such fathers to marry their daughters
off would not do any additional harm that is already present.


If a father is a pervert, he is most likely already sexually abusing his daughter even
before she is married off. Therefore, it is not like a law that prohibits fathers from
marrying off their daughters would be preventing any harm, because those fathers would
already be abusing their daughters! My point is that most fathers are the best guardians
of their daughters, excepting the perverts, but they would already be abusing their

daughters so it is a non-issue. Instead of taking away the rights of the father, the
authorities should take action against those errant fathers who are perverts. In other
words, don’t punish all fathers for the sins of a few isolated people!
Islamic Law (Shari’ah) is very clear on the fact that a father who is a sexual pervert—and
who exposes his daughter to this perversion—is stripped of his parental rights. Shaykh
Salih al-Munajjid was asked about the father who is sexually perverted with his daughter,
to which he responded:


This, by Allah, is something that would make one weep. Have things become so
bad that the fitrah (human nature) has been turned upside down and a father feels
such things towards his daughter? There is no doubt that this father is mentally ill
and sexually deviant, and he needs urgent and intense treatment for his heart and
mind, both psychological and physical treatment…
Wise relatives should be informed of such actions so that matters may be dealt
with. If that does not work, then you have to make a complaint to the Shari’ah
court or to the security services [i.e. police] in order to stop his evil actions
towards you…
It is haram (forbidden) for you to take your father’s actions lightly. You have to
ward him off with all the strength you have, and raise your voice in shouting for
help, even if that leads you to his being shamed or imprisoned.


If none of these solutions work, then we do not advise you to stay in the house.
We advise you go and live with some righteous sisters or with your relatives
where can live with them in accordance with Islamic rulings.
We ask Allah to relieve your distress and to guide your father and withhold his
evil from you.


To conclude the matter, the right—of deciding when a girl is ready for marriage—rests in
the hands of her father. But in the case of a sexual pervert, his parental rights are stripped
of him, so this would no longer apply.


In the United States today, it is the government that decides when a girl is mature enough
to be married off. And as such, the state governments set arbitrary age limits, which
apply to every girl in the state. But because of this, one finds great discrepancy between
states, such that one state allows marriage at the age of fourteen whereas another allows it
only at the age of eighteen. And in various countries, one can find even younger age
limits, such as in some Asian and African countries. Therefore, it is merely a matter of
moving state or country lines to marry a younger girl! For some odd reason it is
acceptable to marry a fourteen year old in Alabama, but not so in another state.
The Islamic Law (Shari’ah), on the other hand, is more versatile than this secular law.
The Islamic Law recognizes that in certain matters it is impossible to pass a blanket
judgment. How can any manmade law declare when a girl is ready to get married, when
in fact different girls mature at different rates? There can be no one-size-fits-all
judgment! It may be that a thirteen year old girl in Africa is fitter for marriage than a
seventeen year old girl in America. So blanket generalizations cannot be made, because
this would be restricting in a way that is not fair to everyone. It is for this reason that we
say that there is no set age limit for every single human on earth, but rather it differs
based on individual cases.


To take one example, some states dictate that fifteen years old is the minimum age for
marriage. This law was enacted in order that immature girls are not harmed by being
placed into marriage. However, it is not true that all girls under the age of fifteen would
be harmed from marriage. Rather, some girls might be harmed, i.e. those who are
immature. On the other hand, there might be a fourteen year old who is mature enough to
get married; the evidence of this is the fact that states like Alabama allow for a fourteen
year old to get married! Therefore, it would not be just or proper to ban all fourteen year
olds from getting married, just because some girls would be harmed at that age. Rather, it
is more appropriate that we allow those fourteen year olds to be married who are ready
for it, and we prohibit those girls from getting married who might be harmed from it.


Bassam Zawadi said:

This should be looked at on an individual level and not a general level. For
example, eating a Big Mac for someone who has diabetes, high cholesterol, etc. is
forbidden only for that person, if it will harm him. Same thing with Pepsi or
Coke. However, this is not the case with everyone else, since they won’t harm
them. [sic] Thus, we can’t make a general fatwa based on everyone, but it must be
looked at individually.


Ustadh Ayman bin Khaled declared:


The ruling of marrying at (a) young age is allowed (mubah) but the ruling shift(s)
from mubah to either dislikeable (makrouh) or haram (forbidden) or preferable or
wajib (obligatory); (it) depends on the (individual) case. If health science (is
used) to prove that nowadays women are more exposed to danger because of early
marriages, then this need(s) to be considered only on those who are exposed to
this danger…It is important to put in(to) consideration that bodies mature
differ(ently) from one area to another due to life-style, environment, health,
immunity, and so forth…The possible danger of early marriages…can be taken
in[to] consideration [i.e. on a case by case basis]…Each case has to be handled
separately, so if harm (is) to result by any marriage, then it (the marriage) has to
be prevented.


It should be remembered that the Islamic Law (Shari’ah) was revealed for all time, not
just our present day. It would be outlandish then for God’s Divine Law to state that girls
under the age of fifteen may not be married. What about all the cultures and civilizations
in the pre-modern era that used to engage in such early marriages? In this book, we have
thoroughly documented how it was a worldwide phenomenon in the ancient (and not so
ancient) world to get married at such a young age. If the Islamic Law created an age
limit like fourteen or fifteen, then this would make God’s Holy Law obsolete for so many
thousands of years, when all of humanity used to marry their young daughters off.
Therefore, the Islamic Law (Shari’ah) is more dynamic than this, and sets forth a
principle, namely that a girl may be married off when she is sexually mature enough that
no harm is done to her. As such, the Islamic Law is all-encompassing. There might be


some fifteen year old girls who are not ready for marriage due to their sexual immaturity,
and as such, they would be forbidden from it. On the other hand, a fourteen year old girl
might be ready for marriage, and thus the Islamic Law allows for that. This is a more just
law, and takes into account that girls mature at different rates. As such, the best decider
would be the father, who loves his daughter a great deal and would not want any harm to
come to her from it.

[فداء الرسول]

Father Cannot Oppress Daughter


A father may only marry his daughter to a man with the intention of safeguarding her
good. If he intends to abuse this privilege, in order to gain some worldly benefit—at the
expense of his daughter’s well-being—then this is definitely forbidden (haram) in Islam.
Shaykh Salih al-Munajjid declared:
It is forbidden to make deals in marriage, such as saying “Let me marry your
daughter and I will give you my daughter or sister in marriage.” Such reciprocal
deals are a form of oppression and injustice, and haram (forbidden).
In such cases of abuse, then the Islamic court could step in to prevent and stop the father
from this. Under Islamic Law, the court system and judges should be the protectors of
the daughter over and above the father, if he oversteps his bounds.