View Full Version : Mohammed - a paedophile?
Its an embarrassing and rarely discussed aspect of the prophets lifestyle (particularly by apologists in the west), but by modern standards there is little doubt that the prohet was a paedophile and would be run out of town in any normal community (rather than revered as god holy messenger)
the facts briefly are that whilst in late-middle age he married his final wife aisha when she was six and consumated the marriage when she was 9.
these facts are widely accepted as true within islam, i.e there tends to be debate as to the interpretation rather than the dates.
i am surprised that this isnt brought up more often. to me once someone is established as a paedophile they lose all moral authority and respect. im intrigued as to how anyone (particularly muslims) would try to explain this away?
i dont buy the "different times, different standards" argument by the way - a child is a child and no normal man would in any circumstances want to have sex with a 9yr old.
edit: here is a link to a wikipedia page on the issue, i aknowledge wikipedia isnt the msot reliabel source and suggest reading around the issue
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisha%27s_age_at_marriage
Strike For The South
12-21-2006, 07:34
I cant say I fully agree and cant say I fully disagree ethier. I need more info. Ill watch the fireworks on this one
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 07:38
The problem is, is that people need to understand alot of things that are shunned in modern society was normal practice back then. I don't think it really matters if Mohammed was a pedophile, he created a religion that is still practiced today. Personal life doesn't (shouldn't) change what the person did. Like arguing that Hannibal was black. Would it really change what he did? No.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 07:42
i dont buy the "different times, different standards" argument by the way - a child is a child and no normal man would in any circumstances want to have sex with a 9yr old.
How do you know? I bet you would be doing it if you lived back then. Really, you can't say that a man wouldn't be attracted to a young girl. I'm not saying being a pedophile is right, I'm saying it was common practice, Abraham had another wife, who was his maid (Hagar wasn't it?). Today that would be considered a no-no, but back then it was common practice.
it doesnt change what he did = establish a successful religion
but surely it should destroy his crediblity? i dont understand how anyone can follow the teacings of a nonce
How do you know? I bet you would be doing it if you lived back then. Really, you can't say that a man wouldn't be attracted to a young girl. I'm not saying being a pedophile is right, I'm saying it was common practice, Abraham had another wife, who was his maid (Hagar wasn't it?). Today that would be considered a no-no, but back then it was common practice.
i cant believe you are arguing this issue. we are not talking about a "young woman" here, a 9yr old is a 9yr old. men arent biologically programmed to find 9yr olds sexually attrative, it is not something that should cross a normal persons mind.
hagar iirc was simply a second wife, that might not be standard practice now but there is nothing inherently abhorent or unnatural about it.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 07:53
it doesnt change what he did = establish a successful religion
but surely it should destroy his crediblity? i dont understand how anyone can follow the teacings of a nonce
I don't understand how people never come to realize today's world is different than the past's world. How can Jews follow the teachings of Abraham even though he had an affair with Hagar, and married her AND had Ishmael? Because he taught a religion of faith that is important to daily life. Really it doesn't matter if Mohammed was a pedophile, because it doesn't change what he did. Really, they follow the teachings of him. Wow he was a pedophile, he must not be a messenger of God! Really as I always state, alot was different back then.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 07:55
i cant believe you are arguing this issue. we are not talking about a "young woman" here, a 9yr old is a 9yr old. men arent biologically programmed to find 9yr olds sexually attrative, it is not something that should cross a normal persons mind.
hagar iirc was simply a second wife, that might not be standard practice now but there is nothing inherently abhorent or unnatural about it.
So Abraham can have an affair, a second wife and a child with that second wife, but Mohammed can't be attracted to a girl? Come on. A "biologically programmed" person. A person is different from another person. They aren't all programmed the same. Again, you didn't live then and can't say what's "normal".
im not sure why you continue to equate having an affair/second wife, with defiling a child surely they are not in the same league?
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 08:02
Because both are considered wrong today, I'm making a point you seem to not get. IT WAS DIFFERENT BACK THEN, TODAY IT IS CONSIDERED WRONG BUT BACK THEN IT WAS NORMAL.
So Abraham can have an affair, a second wife and a child with that second wife, but Mohammed can't be attracted to a girl? Come on. .
"but mohammed cant be attracted to a girl" this girl was 6!! when he fist married her! i cant believe you are suggesting that might be ok/normal
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 08:06
"but mohammed cant be attracted to a girl" this girl was 6!! when he fist married her! i cant believe you are suggesting that might be ok/normal
I'm not saying it's ok/normal!!!! I'm saying it was different back then, and things have changed! Maybe next time you should read E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G
IT WAS DIFFERENT BACK THEN, TODAY IT IS CONSIDERED WRONG BUT BACK THEN IT WAS NORMAL.[/B]
due you have any evidence that it was considered normal back then? even if it was normal it does not mean that it was objectively "ok" but rather suggests that a society were it was prevelant was dominated by perverse males.
in this specific situation, which occured towards the end of mohammeds life when he had become a very respected figure it seems to me that mohammed was abusing his postion of authority, ie it was at the point were if mo says its ok it must be
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 08:13
due you have any evidence that it was considered normal back then? even if it was normal it does not mean that it was objectively "ok" but rather suggests that a society were it was prevelant was dominated by perverse males.
in this specific situation, which occured towards the end of mohammeds life when he had become a very respected figure it seems to me that mohammed was abusing his postion of authority, ie it was at the point were if mo says its ok it must be
Do you have any evidence that he married a 6 year old? I do know it was normal back then because MOST EVERYONE DID IT. If it wasn't "OK" they wouldn't have done it. You seem to only reply to things I say that you can actually say something about. I haven't seen you agree with the fact that THINGS HAVE CHANGED. I don't even see why it matters. If Mohammed was a pedophile, then that's his decision. HE STARTED A WHOLE RELIGION THAT IS THE SECOND BIGGEST IN THE WORLD. Just because he liked girls doesn't mean his accomplishements changed. Like I said before, maybe Hannibal was black, does it matter? NO!
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 08:20
Excuse me, I have found some article on the matter. I also found articles that say she was older.
Comparison of hadith of Aisha's age with hadith of Laylat al-Qadr, in which 1 was used for 21, 3 for 23, 5 for 25 and so on, suggest that maybe Aisha's reports were transmitted literally and 16 became 6 and 19 became 9, as it is a way of talking in Arabic language when base is already known
Muhammad is attributed to say, "A woman must be consulted and get her permission to make the marriage valid". According to another report, Aisha at the age of nine was rather more interested to play with toy-horses than to take up the responsible task of a wife. The permission of an immature girl cannot be a valid authorization for marriage.
Aisha is reported to have said that at the time Surah Al-Qamar, the 54th chapter of the Qur'an , was revealed, "I was a young girl".[32] The 54th Surah of the Qur'an was revealed nine years before Hijrah.[33] According to this tradition, Aisha had not only been born before the revelation of the referred Surah, but was actually a young girl, not even only an infant at that time. So if this age is assumed to be 7 to 14 years then her age at the time of marriage would be 16 to 23
According to almost all the historians, Asma bint Abu Bakr, the elder sister of Aisha, was ten years older than Aisha Asma is reported to die in the 73 AH, when she was 100 years old. Now, obviously if Asma was 100 years old in the 73 AH, she should have been 27 or 28 years old at the time of Migration to Medina (1 AH). If Asma was 27 or 28 years old at that time, Aisha should have been 17 or 18 years old at the same time. Thus, Aisha - if she got married in 1 AH or 2 AH - was between 18 to 20 years old at the time of her marriage.
Do you have any evidence that he married a 6 year old? I do know it was normal back then because MOST EVERYONE DID IT. If it wasn't "OK" they wouldn't have done it. You seem to only reply to things I say that you can actually say something about. I haven't seen you agree with the fact that THINGS HAVE CHANGED. I don't even see why it matters. If Mohammed was a pedophile, then that's his decision. HE STARTED A WHOLE RELIGION THAT IS THE SECOND BIGGEST IN THE WORLD. Just because he liked girls doesn't mean his accomplishements changed. Like I said before, maybe Hannibal was black, does it matter? NO!
we are going around in circles here. yes - mohammed started a big religion.
does that mean he is automatically worthy of respect? not in my eyes, i judge a man by his deeds
he was a paedophile therefore i dont have any respect for his moral judgement. furthermore i find it hard to understand why people follow his teachings. why would anyone take advice on how to lead their life from someone who had sex with a 9yr old?
p.s i dont know why you are bringing hannibal into this. hannibal wasnt black but if he was it shouldnt make any difference to how people would judge him. being black is not a moral issue- it doesnt force you to question someones integrity, being a recorded paedophile IS a moral issue.
Excuse me, I have found some article on the matter. I also found articles that say she was older.
yes there is some dispute. but the common consensus within Islam is for the ages of 6 and 9.
a little bit of reading around should confirm this for you.
this being the common consensus I again have to wonder - why is this acceptable to muslims?
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 08:28
we are going around in circles here. yes - mohammed started a big religion.
does that mean he is automatically worthy of respect? not in my eyes, i judge a man by his deeds
he was a paedophile therefore i dont have any respect for his moral judgement. furthermore i find it hard to understand why people follow his teachings. why would anyone take advice on how to lead their life from someone who had sex with a 9yr old?
p.s i dont know why you are bringing hannibal into this. hannibal wasnt black but if he was it shouldnt make any difference to how people would judge him. being black is not a moral issue- it doesnt force you to question someones integrity, being a recorded paedophile IS a moral issue.
So you don't respect a man who taught people in his life, brung a new religion and helped unify his people, because of ONE, let me point that out again, ONE thing. Right. You seem to neglect the fact of others doing the same thing in that time.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 08:30
yes there is some dispute. but the common consensus within Islam is for the ages of 6 and 9.
a little bit of reading around should confirm this for you.
this being the common consensus I again have to wonder - why is this acceptable to muslims?
Well, why is it acceptable to Jews that Abraham had two wives and two sons? Even though a commandment says "Thou shall not commit adultery". Really, I believe Mohammed was not a pedophile. Yes I have read the articles, but am not swayed. Mostly because I can find evidence that counters this argument.
So you don't respect a man who taught people in his life, brung a new religion and helped unify his people, because of ONE, let me point that out again, ONE thing. Right. You seem to neglect the fact of others doing the same thing in that time.
yes i dont respect him. this ONE thing you talk about is not a minor issue that can be easily swept under the carpet or forgotten about. i am sorry but i do not have any respect for paedophiles, he was an evil man.
i dont lack respect for mohammed "just" because he was a paedophile. there are many other aspects of his life that i would take issue with but i think this is the most sinister point and i would prefer to concentrate on this in this thread.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 08:35
yes i dont respect him. this ONE thing you talk about is not a minor issue that can be easily swept under the carpet or forgotten about. i am sorry but i do not have any respect for paedophiles, he was an evil man.
i dont lack respect for mohammed "just" because he was a paedophile. there are many other aspects of his life that i would take issue with but i think this is the most sinister point and i would prefer to concentrate on this in this thread.
Evil man? He was a prophet! For God sake he was a holy man in Islam! Really I see alot of these critisms coming from people who aren't muslim, and neglect alot of arguments.
no, he claimed t o be a prophet. it wouuld take apretty deranged almighty to choose a paedophile as his spokesmen
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 08:45
no, he claimed t o be a prophet. it wouuld take apretty deranged almighty to choose a paedophile as his spokesmen
Really. That was one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. I think he had revelations. "A pretty deranged almighty" chose a man who had two wives, two sons to be the first one to start Monotheism. You can find alot, ALOT, of sources saying he was a prophet. He didn't just "claim" to be one.
Well, why is it acceptable to Jews that Abraham had two wives and two sons? Even though a commandment says "Thou shall not commit adultery". Really, I believe Mohammed was not a pedophile. Yes I have read the articles, but am not swayed. Mostly because I can find evidence that counters this argument.
you dont believe he was a paedophile? i can only asume this is because you find the idea uncomfortable.
yes there is some debate on the issue, but do you realise that the majority of muslims do accept the ages of 6 and 9 to be true?
i know wikipedia is far from infallible, but here is a link to a page on the issue
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisha%27s_age_at_marriage
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 08:49
you dont believe he was a paedophile? i can only asume this is because you find the idea uncomfortable
No, I explained why I don't, you must reply to things YOU WANT TO REPLY TO. I don't find it uncomfortable because most everyone did it back then.
Really. That was one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. I think he had revelations. "A pretty deranged almighty" chose a man who had two wives, two sons to be the first one to start Monotheism. You can find alot, ALOT, of sources saying he was a prophet. He didn't just "claim" to be one.
look i dont personally believe in god. just becuase someone is historicaly described as a prophet doesnt mean that they actually were in the true sense "conversing with god"
people call mohammed a prophet, but he is not a prophet to me (as an atheiest)
from a christian or jewish view point he is not considered a prophet either.
he is only a prophet to those who believe in his teaching = muslims.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 08:54
look i dont personally believe in god. just becuase someone is historicaly described as a prophet doesnt mean that they actually were in the true sense "conversing with god"
people call mohammed a prophet, but he is not a prophet to me (as an atheiest)
from a christian or jewish view point he is not considered a prophet either.
he is only a prophet to those who believe in his teaching = muslims.
And you fail to grasp the other sides argument. So you don't believe in God, and say his prophets were pedophiles? I haven't seen you made one great point in this whole thing.
Again I don't think Mohammed was a pedophile.
And you fail to grasp the other sides argument. So you don't believe in God, and say his prophets were pedophiles? I haven't seen you made one great point in this whole thing.
Again I don't think Mohammed was a pedophile.
what do you mean i havent made a point?
my point is - mohammed was a paedophile
i dont think many people are aware of this and i am interested to see what people think about this.
you on the other hand seem solely determined to defend the un-defendable.
It was common practice to, in those days, marry any random person just to produce a heir to take over the buisness or the land or the castle etc. You didn't have to love anybody to want to marry them.
Mohammed was not a paedophile. He was just an standard man that just happened to be a prophet.
I think this thread should be closed before we get race hate in here.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 09:10
what do you mean i havent made a point?
my point is - mohammed was a paedophile
i dont think many people are aware of this and i am interested to see what people think about this.
you on the other hand seem solely determined to defend the un-defendable.
Un-defendable? Excuse me, I have defended this. This isn't "undefendable". It's fully defendable and I'm going to defend Mohammed because I know he wasn't a pedophile.
If Mohammed was a paedophile then so were about 75% of the people of the time.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 09:16
If Mohammed was a paedophile then so were about 75% of the people of the time.
Exactly, and he fails to realize this.
do you have any evidence for that?
i believe that the general range at which people got married etc was a little younger than is standard now, but i dont think it was common for men to have sex with 9yr olds.
Exactly, and he fails to realize this.
no i dont. i do dispute that everyone was doing this.
however even if you are right and paedophilia was endemic in arabia i still dont think it provides a justification.
i would hope a spiritual/moral leader would challenge this practice rather than endorse it.
i think having sex with 9yr old is evil which ever way you look at it.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 09:24
Where did you hear he had sex with her? Please.
Some of Muhammad's companions were "shocked by the way he allowed his wives to stand up to him and answer him back. Muhammad regularly helped with household chores, mended his own clothes, prepared his food and took his wives’ advice seriously. On one occasion Umm Salamah helped him to prevent a mutiny."
Doesn't sound like a pedophile to me.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 09:26
no i dont. i do dispute that everyone was doing this.
however even if you are right and paedophilia was endemic in arabia i still dont think it provides a justification.
i would hope a spiritual/moral leader would challenge this practice rather than endorse it.
i think having sex with 9yr old is evil which ever way you look at it.
Dispute? You flat out said you didn't believe in the whole "times changed" thing. And maybe a person shouldn't target the bad things of someone's life than remember the good things he has done.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 09:30
however even if you are right and paedophilia was endemic in arabia i still dont think it provides a justification.
Justification? It was normal. No one needed justification. That's only today. They didn't think it was wrong.
Where did you hear he had sex with her? Please.
Doesn't sound like a pedophile to me.
why because paedophiles cant do housework?? i dont get your point.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 09:31
why because paedophiles cant do housework?? i dont get your point.
Point is, is that he was a hard working, just, respectable man. No where in that paragraph said he had sex with 9 year olds.
And maybe a person shouldn't target the bad things of someone's life than remember the good things he has done.
dont target the "bad things"! - oh the small matter of haveing sex with children, - why are you trying to trivialise child abuse?
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 09:38
dont target the "bad things"! - oh the small matter of haveing sex with children, - why are you trying to trivialise child abuse?
HE DIDN'T HAVE SEX WITH CHILDREN! YOU NEVER HAVE BROUGHT UP ONE PIECE OF EVIDENCE PROVING THAT!
ive taken this from the wikipedia page i posted:
this is from the hadith of bukhari - generally regarded as the most authorative by sunnis.
According to Urwah ibn al-Zubayr:
Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consummated that marriage when she was nine years old.[10]
According to Aisha:
the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).[11]
According to Ursa ibn al-Zubayr:
The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).[12]
you do realise what consumating a marriage is dont you?
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 09:48
You do realize wikipedia isn't a great source, seeing as people can edit it and put in things they want to hear. Look, no matter how hard you try, I always will believe Mohammed wasn't a pedophile. I think the argument against that claim is far stronger than the one for the claim.
You do realize wikipedia isn't a great source, seeing as people can edit it and put in things they want to hear. Look, no matter how hard you try, I always will believe Mohammed wasn't a pedophile. I think the argument against that claim is far stronger than the one for the claim.
if thats the case why do the majority of muslims accept the ages of 6 and 9 as being true??
the general position of islamic scholars is not to argue with the dates but they would dispute the interpretation that he was a paedophile.
they say that she was a mature girl for her age, and she was the only v young girl he slept with and thus there is not a consistent pattern of paedophile behaviour.
they also argue that the reason he waited 3 years was that he was waiting for her to start puberty - thus he did not have a thing for pre-pubescents
an alternative interpretation for the delay of three years comes from accounts that aisha was quite ill for a while and her hair fell out! - so mohammed had to wait for her to get better
i disagree with this interpretation. i think someone who defiles a 9yr old is a paedophile regardless of whether on not they started puberty.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 10:06
if thats the case why do the majority of muslims accept the ages of 6 and 9 as being true??
the general position of islamic scholars is not to argue with the dates but they would dispute the interpretation that he was a paedophile.
they say that she was a mature girl for her age, and she was the only v young girl he slept with and thus there is not a consistent pattern of paedophile behaviour.
they also argue that the reason he waited 3 years was that he was waiting for her to start puberty - thus he did not have a thing for pre-pubescents
an alternative interpretation for the delay of three years comes from accounts that aisha was quite ill for a while and her hair fell out! - so mohammed had to wait for her to get better
i disagree with this interpretation. i think someone who defiles a 9yr old is a paedophile regardless of whether on not they started puberty.
That nailed it. She was mature. She wasn't a minor (she was by today's standards). Why do so many believe he was? Well, because that's what they believe in. I'm not arguing what the believe, and you seem to always bring that up.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 10:07
i disagree with this interpretation. i think someone who defiles a 9yr old is a paedophile regardless of whether on not they started puberty
And a person who defiles a maid even though he is married is right, huh?
i give up on you mate, it seems you are determined to trivialise what mohammed did. i find your whole attitude very disturbing.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 10:12
i give up on you mate, it seems you are determined to trivialise what mohammed did. i find your whole attitude very disturbing.
Disturbing? Disturbing that I don't agree with you? Disturbing that I will defend a prophet of his religion?
This is an extremely controversial thread, and should be in the backroom. Patriarch of Constantinople is right in some ways. Those were very different times, what was acceptable then is not acceptable now. Technically it is still paedophilia, but it may have been social or cultural pressures that pushed him into the marriage and not paedophilic tendencies. Polygamy is a very different thing though, to child abuse, because polygamy harms none. And if those involved with such a lifestyle are happy with it, they should be allowed to continue. So any argument comparing these is totally redundant.
King Henry V
12-21-2006, 13:16
It was common practice in those times for men to marry girls who were significantly younger than them, even children. However, it was not common practice to consummate that marriage before the girl was about thirteen years of age, the time when she entered puberty and thus child bearing age. I may be wrong, but human beings are not supposed to be attracted to people who are at an age when reproduction is impossible, as it does not make biological sense.
Sadly it does - somebody wants the child as a wife when she gets older. So the man in question decides to marry her before some other person gets their hands on her.
taken from Wikipedia, but the Dutch version:
Omdat Aïsja nog te jong was werd het huwelijk uitgesteld tot na de migratie, in 622. Volgens moslimchronoloog Tabari bleef zij in het huis van haar ouders wonen en werd de verloving pas geconsumeerd toen Aïsja de puberteit bereikt had. Er zijn overleveringen in de hadithverzamelingen zoals die van Bukhari en Muslim, die zeggen dat Aïsja toen zes jaar oud was. Maar er zijn ook andere overleveringen zoals in Ibn Ishak en Tabari, die aangeven dat Aïsja tussen 12 en 14 jaar zou kunnen zijn geweest, of zelfs nog ouder. Moslims beschouwen de hadithverzameling van Bukhari als de meest gezaghebbende, wat inhoudt dat de minimale huwelijksleeftijd voor vrouwen onder de shari'ah negen jaar is.
Because Aïsja was too young the wedding was possponed till after the migration in 622. According to muslimchronologist Tabari she stayed with her parents till she reached puberty. Some, like Bukhari and Muslim, say that Aïsja was 6 years old then, others, like Ibn Ishak and Tabari, say that she was something like 12 and 14 years old. Or maybe even older. Muslims themselves consider Bukhari to be the one that is most right, which means for them that the minimal marriage-age for women under the shari'ah is 9 years old.
So who says she was 9?
And according to me Henry is right
Rodion Romanovich
12-21-2006, 15:40
To topic starter - here are 4 things to think about which you seem to forget:
- if a prophet would happen to be paedophile, that doesn't affect whether his ideology is good or not. Say if Jesus would be a paedophile, would you dislike Christian ideology (or if you already dislike it, would you dislikt it more)? Or if say Einstein would be a paedophile, would his theory of relativity be wrong? Or conversely, if Stalin liked icecream does liking icecream make you a massmurderer? Persons and their ideologies must be judged separately
- there isn't much "evidence" for the young marriage age, and it seems to be just as much if not more evidence that the girl was in her twenties or so when the marriage took place
- there's nothing suggesting that marriage means sex (in modern western society marriage seems to even mean the end of sex :laugh4:). In fact many marriages of that time would have been diplomatical and political, and the man and woman wouldn't have any sex at all during their entire marriage. This could very well have been the case here
- in many modern child marriages the marriage is made official early, and the man and woman might even complete the ceremonies at a very early age such as 9 years old or younger, but they still won't have sex before reaching a decent age. From what I can tell, having sex on the wedding night isn't part of the marriage ritual outside western society
Calling Mohammed a paedophile is undeniably very good fun, on a dutch forum I also frequent once in a while a muslim shows up who feels the need to say only whites rape kids we are all closet pedophiles ladida, and all that would never happen in a muslim country blablabla, then it's the time to discuss what position Mohammed would have preffered when he split poor little Aischa like a log.
Doesn't mean he actually was of course, different times.
Thank-you LegioXXXUlpiaVictrix.
And why has this thread got it'self dumped here?
taken from Wikipedia, but the Dutch version:
Because Aïsja was too young the wedding was possponed till after the migration in 622. According to muslimchronologist Tabari she stayed with her parents till she reached puberty. Some, like Bukhari and Muslim, say that Aïsja was 6 years old then, others, like Ibn Ishak and Tabari, say that she was something like 12 and 14 years old. Or maybe even older. Muslims themselves consider Bukhari to be the one that is most right, which means for them that the minimal marriage-age for women under the shari'ah is 9 years old.
So who says she was 9?
And according to me Henry is right
yes it is not a completely settled issue, i.e you cannot clai mwith 100% certainty that she was 6 +9, however this is age that is accepted by the majority of musims
that is in a way perhaps the most disturbing aspect, if this was a big secret then it would be understandable why there isnt much fuss made about it. instead it is something muslims generally accept as true - which means that they must explain away the relationship and portray it as "normal"
it has had a profoundly negative consequence for the protection of children in islamic countries. for example when the mullahs came in in iran they moved the age of consent down to 9 in accordance with mohammed own lifestyle.
here is ana article about wwidepsread child brides in western africa
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/africanlives/ivory/ivory.htm
And why has this thread got it'self dumped here?
Tarrak accidentely moved it to the wrong backroom, and since he only has mod powers in the Monastry he can't move it away from here ... happens from time to time, nothing to do about it.
To topic starter - here are 4 things to think about which you seem to forget:
- if a prophet would happen to be paedophile, that doesn't affect whether his ideology is good or not. Say if Jesus would be a paedophile, would you dislike Christian ideology (or if you already dislike it, would you dislikt it more)? Or if say Einstein would be a paedophile, would his theory of relativity be wrong? Or conversely, if Stalin liked icecream does liking icecream make you a massmurderer? Persons and their ideologies must be judged separately
- there isn't much "evidence" for the young marriage age, and it seems to be just as much if not more evidence that the girl was in her twenties or so when the marriage took place
- there's nothing suggesting that marriage means sex (in modern western society marriage seems to even mean the end of sex :laugh4:). In fact many marriages of that time would have been diplomatical and political, and the man and woman wouldn't have any sex at all during their entire marriage. This could very well have been the case here
- in many modern child marriages the marriage is made official early, and the man and woman might even complete the ceremonies at a very early age such as 9 years old or younger, but they still won't have sex before reaching a decent age. From what I can tell, having sex on the wedding night isn't part of the marriage ritual outside western society
i dont think your examples are great. einstein was a scientist not a moralist, if he turned out to be a paeodophile in would not mean that his work was erronous. his moral behaviour has no relation to his work.
mohammed on the other hand was a moral authority. if he behaved in an immoral fashion then it SHOULD draw inot question his reliability as a source of moral guidance.
as to your final paragraph - yes obvioulsy marrying a child does not mean you have to have sex with them. In fact in this instance that is not what i am reporting - mohammed married the child when she was six and then consumated the marriage (had sex with the child) when she was 9.
as to your suggestions that it was a political marriage and he didnt have sex with her, i believe in fact that she was mohammeds preffered sexual partner to the point that it caused jealousy amongst his other wives.
Tarrak accidentely moved it to the wrong backroom, and since he only has mod powers in the Monastry he can't move it away from here ... happens from time to time, nothing to do about it.
what are backrooms for anyway? if you can stil post in them and read the threads what purpose do they serve?
are they only accesible by full members or something?
Specialist290
12-21-2006, 16:54
I'm not going to say anything about the topic itself, but I do find it very ironic in a historical sense that a member titled "Patriarch of Constantinople" is defending Mohammed :beam:
That is all.
what are backrooms for anyway? if you can stil post in them and read the threads what purpose do they serve?
are they only accesible by full members or something?
It's for the more heated discussions, politics and such, I can see this one going there :laugh4:
Aye this one should have been there anyway, everything to do with religion isn't history, as it's all fiction anyway
doc_bean
12-21-2006, 17:55
According to one rather knowledgable muslim I had a rather heated debate with a long time ago, it's a mistake and she was actually 17 (so something). He mentioned a whole bunch of info that conflicted with her 'young' age, like Stig mentioned, there are a whole lot of different Hadiths, they aren't the Quo'ran (sp?) so they aren't infallible.
Besides, Mohammed was the vessel, Allah him(?)self dictated the Quo'ran, anything the Prophet besides that is of leseer importance and can't be used against it.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 19:34
Comparison of hadith of Aisha's age with hadith of Laylat al-Qadr, in which 1 was used for 21, 3 for 23, 5 for 25 and so on, suggest that maybe Aisha's reports were transmitted literally and 16 became 6 and 19 became 9, as it is a way of talking in Arabic language when base is already known
I think that disproves it.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 19:37
Besides, Mohammed was the vessel, Allah him(?)self dictated the Quo'ran, anything the Prophet besides that is of leseer importance and can't be used against it.
Yes. He was a messenger and nothing more. Since the Quran is the word of God, it shouldn't be used against Mohammed.
Patriarch of Constantinople
12-21-2006, 19:38
I'm not going to say anything about the topic itself, but I do find it very ironic in a historical sense that a member titled "Patriarch of Constantinople" is defending Mohammed :beam:
That is all.
I will defend prophets and holy men of their religion.
Adrian II
12-21-2006, 19:38
i am surprised that this isnt brought up more often.Because anachronistic debates about religious issues are a total bore. It's mythology, man. Neither Mohammed nor Christ really existed. Try to fathom the wisdom of the holy books, don't treat them like a guidebook for modern etiquette.
There are similar 'issues' with the Bible. Always good for a laugh among militant atheists. Eve necessarily had to be incestuous with her sons to 'beget' the next generation. Same applies to Noah, his wife and their kids. Oh, how scandalous, how irreconcilable, how debatable to the n-th degree.
:sleeping:
Because anachronistic debates about religious issues are a total bore. It's mythology, man. Neither Mohammed nor Christ really existed. Try to fathom the wisdom of the holy books, don't treat them like a guidebook for modern etiquette.
Yes they did, there have been many that claimed the title of Messias, how about Bar Kochba, fantasy as well? It's just all that stuff around them, if you ask me, no they weren't holy figures, just important people from that time.
Speaking of similar issues on the bible, it would explain the 'I have come with the sword' part. Probably wasn't jezus they were talking about as the messiah, but Bar Kochba.
are they only accesible by full members or something?
Yes.
Alexander the Pretty Good
12-21-2006, 22:10
Was this started here or was it moved from the Backroom?
Was this started here or was it moved from the Backroom?
As I said before, Tarrak wanted to move it from the Monastry to the Backroom (where it belongs), but he moved it too the wrong Backroom
Since I'm a mod on a forum using a similiar engine myself I can't blame him, sometimes it's pretty hard to say what's what
Ibn Munqidh
12-21-2006, 22:32
i dont lack respect for mohammed "just" because he was a paedophile. there are many other aspects of his life that i would take issue with but i think this is the most sinister point and i would prefer to concentrate on this in this thread.
May you be kind enough and share those other aspects with us?
Alexander the Pretty Good
12-21-2006, 22:59
As I said before
Oops - my apologies. I didn't read all the way through.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.