![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
I am trying to figure this out, because I heard somewhere she was young. How young? Why is this not mentioned in the Wikipedia article. I am so mad I see that Wikipedia is just protecting Islam all the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.11.56.20 ( talk) 19:55, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Isn't it about time to resolve the dispute? How long can an article be editprotected... Debresser ( talk)
This question of mine seems to have prompted Gnosisquest to ask for my opinion on the reliability of the source he mentioned. Here is my opinion (copied from my talk page).
I would say that this is an assertion of the book's reliability as a source about its subject, yes. I am familiar with the custom of religious institutions of repute issuing endorsements to books in order to make their reading acceptable to the adherents of their faith, so yes.
As to the matter of the discussion about the age of Aisha (nice name) at the time of her marriage, now that is a delicate matter.
Wikipedia guidelines say that "In general, articles should not give minority views as much or as detailed a description as more popular views, and will generally not include tiny-minority views at all." In view of this it is my opinion that more sources are needed before inclusion of the disputed opinion becomes advisable. These sources might be academic, or non-academic sources that testify to a relatively wide acceptance of this opinion amongst scholars or laymen. Sincerely, Debresser (talk) 20:13, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from User talk:Debresser"
I've got some sources:
Asma Barlas: "A minority of Muslims calculate the age of Aisha to have been over 13 and 14, perhaps between 17 and 19. These Muslims base their calculation on the more details we have of Aisha's sister (Asma); on the details of Muhammad's migration from Mecca to Medina; Aisha's reported knowledge of Ancient Arabic poetry, genealogy, and the the fundamental rules of Arabic-Islamic ethics at her marriage. by Khalid Zaheer] as per Islamic voice a magazine
Moreover the Ahmadiyyas agree with this and claim that Maulana Ali was one of the fist to challenge the traditional age of Aisha
Basically all these sources agree that Aisha was not less than 10 at the time of her marriage and atleast 15 at the time of the consummation of her marriage. Since the book Muhammad the Prophet has been approved by Al Azhar it becomes a reliable source and can be used in the section Marriage to Muhammad itself.-- Gnosisquest ( talk) 19:16, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
According to Abdal-Rahman ibn abi zannad:
“Asma was 10 years older than Ayesha (Siyar A‘lam Al-Nubala’, Al-Zahabi, Vol. 2, p. 289, Arabic, Mu’assasatu’l-risalah, Beirut, 1992). Dha, Al-Dhahabi, Siyar a`lam al-nubala(The Lives of Noble Figures), vol. 2, p. 289{{ citation}}
: Check|authorlink=
value ( help); External link in( help):
|authorlink=
قال عبد الرحمن بن أبي الزناد كانت أسماء أكبر من عائشة بعشر
According to Ibn Kathir:
“She [Asma] was elder to her sister [Ayesha] by 10 years” (Al-Bidayah wa’l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol. 8, p. 371, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933) Kathir, Ibn, The Beginning and the End (Arabic: Al Bidayah wa-Nihayah or Tarikh ibn Kathir), vol. 8, p. 371{{ citation}}
: Check|authorlink=
value ( help); External link in( help):
|authorlink=
وهي أكبر من أختها عائشة بعشر سنين.
According to Ibn Kathir: “She [Asma] saw the killing of her son during that year [73 AH], as we have already mentioned, and five days later she herself died. According to other narratives, she died not after five days but 10 or 20, or a few days over 20, or 100 days later. The most well known narrative is that of 100 days later. At the time of her death, she was 100 years old.” (Al-Bidayah wa’l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol. 8, p. 372, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933) Kathir, Ibn, The Beginning and the End (Arabic: Al Bidayah wa-Nihayah or Tarikh ibn Kathir), vol. 8, p. 372{{ citation}}
: Check|authorlink=
value ( help); External link in( help):
|authorlink=
وأدركت قتل ولدها في هذه السنة كما ذكرنا، ثم ماتت بعده بخمسة أيام. وقيل: بعشرة. وقيل: بعشرين. وقيل: بضع وعشرين يوما. وقيل: عاشت بعده مائة يوم، وهو الأشهر، وبلغت من العمر مائة سنة ولم يسقط لها سن، ولم ينكر لها عقل رحمها الله. وقد روت عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم عدة أحاديث طيبة مباركة رضي الله عنها ورحمها
According to Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani:
“She [Asma] lived a hundred years and died in 73 or 74 AH.” (Taqribul-tehzib, Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani, p. 654, Arabic, Bab fi’l-nisa’, al-harfu’l-alif, Lucknow). Ibn Hajar, Al-Asqalani, "Bab fi'l-nisa', al-harfu'l-alif", Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, p. 654{{ citation}}
: Check|authorlink=
value ( help); External link in( help); Unknown parameter
|authorlink=
and|chapterurl=
|chapterurl=
ignored (|chapter-url=
suggested) ( help):
8525- أسماء بنت أبي بكر الصديق [ذات النطاقين] زوج الزبير ابن العوام من كبار الصحابة عاشت مائة سنة وماتت سنة ثلاث أو أربع وسبعين ع
Bibi Asma died in 692 CE, she was 100 years old.. 692 - 100 = 592, she was 10 years elder than Bibi Aisha. so 592+10 = Bibi Aisha was born on 602 CE
Al-Tabari writes in History of the Prophets and Kings:
“All four of his [Abu Bakr’s] children were born of his two wives during the pre-Islamic period” (Tarikhul-umam wa’l-mamlu’k, Al-Tabari (died 922), Vol. 4, p. 50, Arabic, Dara’l-fikr, Beirut, 1979) (also known as Tarikh-ul-Tabari OR History of the Prophets and Kings). History Of the Prophets and Kings, vol. 4, p. 50{{ citation}}
:|first=
missing|last=
( help); External link in( help)
|authorlink=
The reference above means that Abu Bakr's all four kids including Bibi Aisha were born before 610 CE that's when the first revelation occurred.
“Fatima was born at the time the Ka`bah was rebuilt, when the Prophet was 35 years old… she was five years older that Ayesha” (Al-isabah fi tamyizi’l-sahabah, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Vol. 4, p. 377, Maktabatu’l-Riyadh al-haditha, al-Riyadh, 1978). Ibn Hajar, Al-Asqalani, Al-isabah fi tamyizi’l-sahabah, vol. 4, p. 377{{ citation}}
: Check|authorlink=
value ( help); External link in( help)
|authorlink=
It means when Bibi Aisha was born Prophet was 40 years old, we already know that their marriage took place after Hijrah, and that at the time of Hijrah Prophet was 52 years old (or above), which means that Bibi Aisha was at least 12 years of age at the time of marriage. Marriage took place after Hijrah to Madina in 622 CE that means Ibn Hajar has indirectly contradicted himself.
This confirms two / three things from at least three different sources "Abdal Rahman Ibn Azi Zannad in 'The Loves of Noble Figures'", Ibn Kathir in 'The Beginning and the End'" and "Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib"
This means that references to Bibi Aisha's age are flawed, contradictory and/or conflicting with each other. Can this be accepted as reliable sources? at least it verifies that age is not recorded correctly. Asma_bint_Abi_Bakr#cite_note-2, and wiki-pages of these people I have cited above state that they are scholars, historians, renowned commentator etc.
Al-Haafidh Shihabuddin Abu'l-Fadl Ahmad ibn Ali ibn Muhammad, better known as Ibn Hajar due to a fame of his forefathers, al-Asqalani due to his origin (Arabic: ابن حجر العسقلاني) (February 18, 1372 – d. February 2, 1448 852 A.H. [1]), was a medieval Shafiite Sunni scholar of Islam who represents the entire realm of the Sunni world in the field of Hadith.
Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn `Uthman ibn Qaymaz ibn `Abd Allah, Shams al-Din Abu `Abd Allah al-Turkmani al-Diyarbakri al-Fariqi al-Dimashqi al-Dhahabi al-Shafi`i (Arabic: محمد بن احمد بن عثمان بن قيوم ، أبو عبد الله شمس الدين الذهبي), known as Al-Dhahabi (1274-1348[1]), a Shafi'i Muhaddith and historian of Islam, was born in Damascus in 1274 CE/673 AH.
Ismail ibn Kathir (Arabic: ابن كثير) (1301–1373) was an Islamic scholar and renowned commentator on the Qur'an.
and "Abu Ja'far Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari (838-923 أبو جعفر محمد ابن جرير الطبري) was one of the earliest, most prominent and famous Persian[1] [2][3][4][5] historian and exegete of the Qur'an,who wrote exclusively in Arabic ,[6][7] most famous for his Tarikh al-Tabari (History of the Prophets and Kings) and Tafsir al-Tabari."
Since these references are taken from books (Tarikh al-Tabari [aka: History of the Prophets and Kings], Siyar A‘lam Al-Nubala’, Al-Bidayah wa’l-nihayah, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib) which are written by prominent, famous and known historians and scholars, I think this should be enough to verify and accept our orequest. Thanks SKDev-Salman ( talk) 10:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
SKDev-Salman ( talk) 21:06, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
You seem to be hell bent on making this article one sided.I have already replied to your arguments. Anyway if you do not like what the book mentions we can use your historian Spellbergs statement "Aisha's youth was deliberately emphasized by scholars who supported the Abbasid caliphate and rejected Shi'a claims for the descendants of Ali ibn Abi Talib (This would have been the period when Islamic history, and the hadith, were first written down.) Aisha was the only virgin wife of Muhammad, divinely destined for him, and thus divinely inspired in her opposition to Ali. Claims for her youth at marriage are claims for her virginity and special status." This might do just as well-- Gnosisquest ( talk) 23:12, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Politics, Gender, and the Islamic Past: The Legacy of 'A'isha bint Abi Bakr D.A. Spellberg pg 40 Columbia University Press, 1994.The second neutral mod agrees that the book written by maulana ali is a reliable source-- Gnosisquest ( talk) 14:38, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks.You forgot to add the bracket part.Can you add the exact statement I provided ? We can create a new section including scholarly opinon of Adil Salahi (newspaper represents an opinion and acording to wikiproject islam Scholarly opinions shoulb be presented) and that of Muhammad the Prophet a book approved by Al Azhar(Makes it reliable) the latest edition of Muhammad the Prophet contains a foreword written by Sheikh Tantawi.Since these are the best possible secondary sources I think that they should be used.-- Gnosisquest ( talk) 00:40, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
I am adding a new section on the opinion of scholars regarding the age of Aisha.Your view please.-- Gnosisquest ( talk) 23:29, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
You guys are only showing the wahabi/salafi view of the age of Aisha (R) when she got married to the Prophet (S)! This is incorrect in the view of other Muslims. Here is an article that should be addressed! It states that hazrat Aisha (R) was 18-23 years old when she got married and asserts that the hadiths that say she was younger are not accurate! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.147.248.2 ( talk) 04:37, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Could you please add a slash to the second instance of <ref name="Spellberg">
, making it <ref name="Spellberg"/>
, thereby fixing the "incorrect references" error.
Debresser (
talk)
21:10, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
The section referring to Maria al-Qibtiyya used to explain who she was for those unfamiliar with her: " Martin Lings writes that this verse refers to Maria al-Qibtiyya, a Coptic Christian slave-girl Muhammad kept as his concubine." This was removed twice by User:Gnosisquest, first without comment and second with a comment that was very unclear, saying it "Should be used in Criticism of Muhammad". I replaced it twice, indicating that this information is necessary for establishing Maria's identity and her role in the so-called "story of the honey". It was later removed again by Debrusser. The problem is, there is nothing contentious about the description. Maria was certainly an Egyptian Coptic Christian who was sent as a slave to Muhammad, who kept her as his concubine. Some later scholars indicate that he may have later freed her and married her. There might be a better way to phrase it than what was originally in the article, but surely that information is needed to clarify to readers just who Maria was. Thoughts?-- Cúchullain t/ c 01:45, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Regarding Maria al Qibtah There is a difference in opinion whether she married the Prophet or not.The correct reference if at all needed would be Mother of the believers.Concubine should be moved to criticism page.-- Gnosisquest ( talk) 14:16, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks again :-).-- Gnosisquest ( talk) 21:44, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
According to Wikipedia newspaper articles can not be used to edit history, but they can be used to source opinions. Newspapers can be used to source scholarly opinions if it represents a significant view.As long as the material provided is verifiable,reliable and scholarly there will always be a way to add it one way or the other.Adil Salahis views as a scholar can be used in the setion age at marriage even if this issue is considered by some to be controversial.-- Gnosisquest ( talk) 21:27, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Third opinion: An opinion from a 'neutral administrator' was requested, but we don't really do that on
WP:3O. Anyway, I'm with Cúchullain on this one, actually. I'm looking at
this last set of edits. Why would you remove the line about child marriage? Seems to me that all that does is skew the POV of the page. And if you want that line about Salahi in, prove that his opinion is actually valid by finding a truly
reliable source. As a side note, it seems that this issue has gone on for weeks and weeks. It might be time to open an RfC, or to get some input from the people at the
Islam WikiProject. —
HelloAnnyong
(say whaaat?!)
14:40, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) Gnosisquest, this is becoming a little
tendentious, don't you think? —
HelloAnnyong
(say whaaat?!)
15:38, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) I tend to agree with Cúchullain on this. This edit seems to have just enough information; adding "consummated usually after maturity" is sort of redundant. But I'm curious - does he literally say that in the book? — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 19:47, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
As far as the statement "marriage was consummated at maturity" is concerned there are some sources which may suggest that was the case like Aisha was initially betrothed to Jubayr ibn Mut'im, Lack of or less number of reports of child abuse among Arabs during that time and no hadith from Aisha that she had been abused.There can be a third option, Add the statement "marriage was consummated at maturity"
I would like to know how would you like the statement [5] to be framed so that it is acceptable by wikipedia ? -- Gnosisquest ( talk) 20:18, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
I think you should include Gnosisquest's source for what it is: Modern Islamic apologetics. according to the blurb, Muhammad Imdad Hussain Pirzada is "examining key issues pervading the modern world relating to Islam and the Muslims." Apparently to the fact that "Aisha was 19". This doesn't qualify as a scholarly hypothesis, but at least it shows that Muslims in Britain begin to feel uncomfortable with early medieval Arabian marriage customs, which is probably a good sign. Apparently the book was hailed as "addressing the most urgent issues facing Muslims in modern Britain" (Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad Shaykh Zayed Lecturer of Islamic Studies Faculty of Divinity, Cambridge University). This source can be used, if only to document that Muslims in Britain are actively debating the Aisha question. [6] Accepting editors' submissions for what they are really worth is, whenever at all possible, preferable to just scrapping them. Very nearly any printed book can be duly mentioned somewhere on Wikipedia. Often not in the context and gist envisaged by the original submitter, but Wikipedia grows by absorbing misconceptions and setting them right. -- dab (𒁳) 15:09, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
According to Wikipedia's own article on Asma bint Abi Bakr, Asma (Aisha's older sister) was 10 years older than Aisha and died at the age of 100 in 693 A.D. (or 73 A.H.) This is agreed upon by the majority of Islamic scholars. So just do the math, if you can: Aisha couldn't have been any younger than 17 when she was married to Muhammad -- if Khadija (as is also agreed upon) died three years before Muhammad departed for Medina. 4.157.11.153 ( talk) 18:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC) Dhimmicrat
In the section on The Battle of the Camel, it is claimed that Aisha(RA) had contempt for the Ahl'Ul'Bayt. This is a sectarian(Shia) bias, clearly shown by the fact that according to Sunnis, she was part of the Ahl'Ul"Bayt. The guidelines for wikipedia articles state that they should not be sectarian in nature, so while its fine to state the Shia point of veiw, it should be acknowledged as such, not stated as a majority muslim belief. The same applies to the part about Aisha(RA) conspiring to murder Uthman. If Nahj'Ul'Balagha is used as a citation, it should be made clear that to Sunnis, this is not a valid or accepted text. Also Al-Tabari- He is well known to have included many Shia narrations in his writing. There are no sahih reports in their citation, at least from the majority Sunni view.To Mainstream Sunni Muslims, the claim that Aisha(RA) helped to murder Uthman(RA) is offensive. It is well known that she innitiated the Battle of the Camel because she felt that Ali(RA) had not moved quikly or decisively enough against the Egyptians who killed Uthman(RA) This needs to be addresed. 24.22.94.118 ( talk) 03:54, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, does Islam have any rules about marriageable age?
The marriageable age in Judaism is 3 for a girl, if the father gives consent; I was wondering if there were any corresponding rules set down by Islam about this subject, or whether it has no opinion, and just takes the local cultural norm of the marriageable age.
I'm posting this question here because lots of people make a big fuss about Aisha's age at marriage, so it seemed like the place people might know.
If there is a fixed marriageable age, in Islam, would someone be able to mention it at marriageable age#By religion. If Islamic rules about this are more nuanced, or complex, would someone be able to give a brief explanation at Talk:Child marriage in Judaism?
(we are trying to ascertain whether Judaism is the only religion that sets rules about the age for marriage, rather than just going with whatever the local cultural norms/laws are)
Thanks. Newman Luke ( talk) 23:04, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
More importantly, Aisha was under contract to be married to another prior to her marriage to the last prophet. This is often overlooked and really makes the whole conversation a moot one to begin with. Lilac 3/14/10```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilac Cotton ( talk • contribs) 18:01, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
On the Veiws section there is not one citation. If it is a universaly known fact that Aisha had contempt for Ahl'ul'Bayt, some solid, NON SECTARIAN citations should be given. Can't find any....Hmm. Maybe thets because 90% of muslims dont believe that and it's not reflected in the works of their scholars either. 24.22.94.118 ( talk) 22:19, 2 December 2009 (UTC) Gibbon mentioned in his "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" that Aisha had a contempt for Hazrat Ali.--hassan 07:02, 23 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hassan572 ( talk • contribs)
This article has been written from a Shite point of view & their hatred of Aisha is well known. She never hated Uthman - in fact she helped raise the army to catch his murderers. This article needs to be corrected. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
94.169.62.38 (
talk)
19:46, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
I take issue with that. The whole point of Sunni Islam aims at covering up details rather than relating verifiable information. When you say "most" muslims obviously you are referring to "most" Sunnis whom you regard to have the upper hand in this. The point of Wiki is to provide accurate information and if that information violates a Sunni, that constitutes for you and those 90% you suggest, a corruption of Islam. All it is really is an expose of the lies and coverups supported by mostly Sunni regimes who inflicted oppression on people who didn't uphold their political offices. Lilac 3/14/10```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilac Cotton ( talk • contribs) 18:04, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
I am trying to figure this out, because I heard somewhere she was young. How young? Why is this not mentioned in the Wikipedia article. I am so mad I see that Wikipedia is just protecting Islam all the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.11.56.20 ( talk) 19:55, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Isn't it about time to resolve the dispute? How long can an article be editprotected... Debresser ( talk)
This question of mine seems to have prompted Gnosisquest to ask for my opinion on the reliability of the source he mentioned. Here is my opinion (copied from my talk page).
I would say that this is an assertion of the book's reliability as a source about its subject, yes. I am familiar with the custom of religious institutions of repute issuing endorsements to books in order to make their reading acceptable to the adherents of their faith, so yes.
As to the matter of the discussion about the age of Aisha (nice name) at the time of her marriage, now that is a delicate matter.
Wikipedia guidelines say that "In general, articles should not give minority views as much or as detailed a description as more popular views, and will generally not include tiny-minority views at all." In view of this it is my opinion that more sources are needed before inclusion of the disputed opinion becomes advisable. These sources might be academic, or non-academic sources that testify to a relatively wide acceptance of this opinion amongst scholars or laymen. Sincerely, Debresser (talk) 20:13, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from User talk:Debresser"
I've got some sources:
Asma Barlas: "A minority of Muslims calculate the age of Aisha to have been over 13 and 14, perhaps between 17 and 19. These Muslims base their calculation on the more details we have of Aisha's sister (Asma); on the details of Muhammad's migration from Mecca to Medina; Aisha's reported knowledge of Ancient Arabic poetry, genealogy, and the the fundamental rules of Arabic-Islamic ethics at her marriage. by Khalid Zaheer] as per Islamic voice a magazine
Moreover the Ahmadiyyas agree with this and claim that Maulana Ali was one of the fist to challenge the traditional age of Aisha
Basically all these sources agree that Aisha was not less than 10 at the time of her marriage and atleast 15 at the time of the consummation of her marriage. Since the book Muhammad the Prophet has been approved by Al Azhar it becomes a reliable source and can be used in the section Marriage to Muhammad itself.-- Gnosisquest ( talk) 19:16, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
According to Abdal-Rahman ibn abi zannad:
“Asma was 10 years older than Ayesha (Siyar A‘lam Al-Nubala’, Al-Zahabi, Vol. 2, p. 289, Arabic, Mu’assasatu’l-risalah, Beirut, 1992). Dha, Al-Dhahabi, Siyar a`lam al-nubala(The Lives of Noble Figures), vol. 2, p. 289{{ citation}}
: Check|authorlink=
value ( help); External link in( help):
|authorlink=
قال عبد الرحمن بن أبي الزناد كانت أسماء أكبر من عائشة بعشر
According to Ibn Kathir:
“She [Asma] was elder to her sister [Ayesha] by 10 years” (Al-Bidayah wa’l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol. 8, p. 371, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933) Kathir, Ibn, The Beginning and the End (Arabic: Al Bidayah wa-Nihayah or Tarikh ibn Kathir), vol. 8, p. 371{{ citation}}
: Check|authorlink=
value ( help); External link in( help):
|authorlink=
وهي أكبر من أختها عائشة بعشر سنين.
According to Ibn Kathir: “She [Asma] saw the killing of her son during that year [73 AH], as we have already mentioned, and five days later she herself died. According to other narratives, she died not after five days but 10 or 20, or a few days over 20, or 100 days later. The most well known narrative is that of 100 days later. At the time of her death, she was 100 years old.” (Al-Bidayah wa’l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol. 8, p. 372, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933) Kathir, Ibn, The Beginning and the End (Arabic: Al Bidayah wa-Nihayah or Tarikh ibn Kathir), vol. 8, p. 372{{ citation}}
: Check|authorlink=
value ( help); External link in( help):
|authorlink=
وأدركت قتل ولدها في هذه السنة كما ذكرنا، ثم ماتت بعده بخمسة أيام. وقيل: بعشرة. وقيل: بعشرين. وقيل: بضع وعشرين يوما. وقيل: عاشت بعده مائة يوم، وهو الأشهر، وبلغت من العمر مائة سنة ولم يسقط لها سن، ولم ينكر لها عقل رحمها الله. وقد روت عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم عدة أحاديث طيبة مباركة رضي الله عنها ورحمها
According to Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani:
“She [Asma] lived a hundred years and died in 73 or 74 AH.” (Taqribul-tehzib, Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani, p. 654, Arabic, Bab fi’l-nisa’, al-harfu’l-alif, Lucknow). Ibn Hajar, Al-Asqalani, "Bab fi'l-nisa', al-harfu'l-alif", Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, p. 654{{ citation}}
: Check|authorlink=
value ( help); External link in( help); Unknown parameter
|authorlink=
and|chapterurl=
|chapterurl=
ignored (|chapter-url=
suggested) ( help):
8525- أسماء بنت أبي بكر الصديق [ذات النطاقين] زوج الزبير ابن العوام من كبار الصحابة عاشت مائة سنة وماتت سنة ثلاث أو أربع وسبعين ع
Bibi Asma died in 692 CE, she was 100 years old.. 692 - 100 = 592, she was 10 years elder than Bibi Aisha. so 592+10 = Bibi Aisha was born on 602 CE
Al-Tabari writes in History of the Prophets and Kings:
“All four of his [Abu Bakr’s] children were born of his two wives during the pre-Islamic period” (Tarikhul-umam wa’l-mamlu’k, Al-Tabari (died 922), Vol. 4, p. 50, Arabic, Dara’l-fikr, Beirut, 1979) (also known as Tarikh-ul-Tabari OR History of the Prophets and Kings). History Of the Prophets and Kings, vol. 4, p. 50{{ citation}}
:|first=
missing|last=
( help); External link in( help)
|authorlink=
The reference above means that Abu Bakr's all four kids including Bibi Aisha were born before 610 CE that's when the first revelation occurred.
“Fatima was born at the time the Ka`bah was rebuilt, when the Prophet was 35 years old… she was five years older that Ayesha” (Al-isabah fi tamyizi’l-sahabah, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Vol. 4, p. 377, Maktabatu’l-Riyadh al-haditha, al-Riyadh, 1978). Ibn Hajar, Al-Asqalani, Al-isabah fi tamyizi’l-sahabah, vol. 4, p. 377{{ citation}}
: Check|authorlink=
value ( help); External link in( help)
|authorlink=
It means when Bibi Aisha was born Prophet was 40 years old, we already know that their marriage took place after Hijrah, and that at the time of Hijrah Prophet was 52 years old (or above), which means that Bibi Aisha was at least 12 years of age at the time of marriage. Marriage took place after Hijrah to Madina in 622 CE that means Ibn Hajar has indirectly contradicted himself.
This confirms two / three things from at least three different sources "Abdal Rahman Ibn Azi Zannad in 'The Loves of Noble Figures'", Ibn Kathir in 'The Beginning and the End'" and "Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib"
This means that references to Bibi Aisha's age are flawed, contradictory and/or conflicting with each other. Can this be accepted as reliable sources? at least it verifies that age is not recorded correctly. Asma_bint_Abi_Bakr#cite_note-2, and wiki-pages of these people I have cited above state that they are scholars, historians, renowned commentator etc.
Al-Haafidh Shihabuddin Abu'l-Fadl Ahmad ibn Ali ibn Muhammad, better known as Ibn Hajar due to a fame of his forefathers, al-Asqalani due to his origin (Arabic: ابن حجر العسقلاني) (February 18, 1372 – d. February 2, 1448 852 A.H. [1]), was a medieval Shafiite Sunni scholar of Islam who represents the entire realm of the Sunni world in the field of Hadith.
Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn `Uthman ibn Qaymaz ibn `Abd Allah, Shams al-Din Abu `Abd Allah al-Turkmani al-Diyarbakri al-Fariqi al-Dimashqi al-Dhahabi al-Shafi`i (Arabic: محمد بن احمد بن عثمان بن قيوم ، أبو عبد الله شمس الدين الذهبي), known as Al-Dhahabi (1274-1348[1]), a Shafi'i Muhaddith and historian of Islam, was born in Damascus in 1274 CE/673 AH.
Ismail ibn Kathir (Arabic: ابن كثير) (1301–1373) was an Islamic scholar and renowned commentator on the Qur'an.
and "Abu Ja'far Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari (838-923 أبو جعفر محمد ابن جرير الطبري) was one of the earliest, most prominent and famous Persian[1] [2][3][4][5] historian and exegete of the Qur'an,who wrote exclusively in Arabic ,[6][7] most famous for his Tarikh al-Tabari (History of the Prophets and Kings) and Tafsir al-Tabari."
Since these references are taken from books (Tarikh al-Tabari [aka: History of the Prophets and Kings], Siyar A‘lam Al-Nubala’, Al-Bidayah wa’l-nihayah, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib) which are written by prominent, famous and known historians and scholars, I think this should be enough to verify and accept our orequest. Thanks SKDev-Salman ( talk) 10:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
SKDev-Salman ( talk) 21:06, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
You seem to be hell bent on making this article one sided.I have already replied to your arguments. Anyway if you do not like what the book mentions we can use your historian Spellbergs statement "Aisha's youth was deliberately emphasized by scholars who supported the Abbasid caliphate and rejected Shi'a claims for the descendants of Ali ibn Abi Talib (This would have been the period when Islamic history, and the hadith, were first written down.) Aisha was the only virgin wife of Muhammad, divinely destined for him, and thus divinely inspired in her opposition to Ali. Claims for her youth at marriage are claims for her virginity and special status." This might do just as well-- Gnosisquest ( talk) 23:12, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Politics, Gender, and the Islamic Past: The Legacy of 'A'isha bint Abi Bakr D.A. Spellberg pg 40 Columbia University Press, 1994.The second neutral mod agrees that the book written by maulana ali is a reliable source-- Gnosisquest ( talk) 14:38, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks.You forgot to add the bracket part.Can you add the exact statement I provided ? We can create a new section including scholarly opinon of Adil Salahi (newspaper represents an opinion and acording to wikiproject islam Scholarly opinions shoulb be presented) and that of Muhammad the Prophet a book approved by Al Azhar(Makes it reliable) the latest edition of Muhammad the Prophet contains a foreword written by Sheikh Tantawi.Since these are the best possible secondary sources I think that they should be used.-- Gnosisquest ( talk) 00:40, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
I am adding a new section on the opinion of scholars regarding the age of Aisha.Your view please.-- Gnosisquest ( talk) 23:29, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
You guys are only showing the wahabi/salafi view of the age of Aisha (R) when she got married to the Prophet (S)! This is incorrect in the view of other Muslims. Here is an article that should be addressed! It states that hazrat Aisha (R) was 18-23 years old when she got married and asserts that the hadiths that say she was younger are not accurate! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.147.248.2 ( talk) 04:37, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Could you please add a slash to the second instance of <ref name="Spellberg">
, making it <ref name="Spellberg"/>
, thereby fixing the "incorrect references" error.
Debresser (
talk)
21:10, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
The section referring to Maria al-Qibtiyya used to explain who she was for those unfamiliar with her: " Martin Lings writes that this verse refers to Maria al-Qibtiyya, a Coptic Christian slave-girl Muhammad kept as his concubine." This was removed twice by User:Gnosisquest, first without comment and second with a comment that was very unclear, saying it "Should be used in Criticism of Muhammad". I replaced it twice, indicating that this information is necessary for establishing Maria's identity and her role in the so-called "story of the honey". It was later removed again by Debrusser. The problem is, there is nothing contentious about the description. Maria was certainly an Egyptian Coptic Christian who was sent as a slave to Muhammad, who kept her as his concubine. Some later scholars indicate that he may have later freed her and married her. There might be a better way to phrase it than what was originally in the article, but surely that information is needed to clarify to readers just who Maria was. Thoughts?-- Cúchullain t/ c 01:45, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Regarding Maria al Qibtah There is a difference in opinion whether she married the Prophet or not.The correct reference if at all needed would be Mother of the believers.Concubine should be moved to criticism page.-- Gnosisquest ( talk) 14:16, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks again :-).-- Gnosisquest ( talk) 21:44, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
According to Wikipedia newspaper articles can not be used to edit history, but they can be used to source opinions. Newspapers can be used to source scholarly opinions if it represents a significant view.As long as the material provided is verifiable,reliable and scholarly there will always be a way to add it one way or the other.Adil Salahis views as a scholar can be used in the setion age at marriage even if this issue is considered by some to be controversial.-- Gnosisquest ( talk) 21:27, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Third opinion: An opinion from a 'neutral administrator' was requested, but we don't really do that on
WP:3O. Anyway, I'm with Cúchullain on this one, actually. I'm looking at
this last set of edits. Why would you remove the line about child marriage? Seems to me that all that does is skew the POV of the page. And if you want that line about Salahi in, prove that his opinion is actually valid by finding a truly
reliable source. As a side note, it seems that this issue has gone on for weeks and weeks. It might be time to open an RfC, or to get some input from the people at the
Islam WikiProject. —
HelloAnnyong
(say whaaat?!)
14:40, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) Gnosisquest, this is becoming a little
tendentious, don't you think? —
HelloAnnyong
(say whaaat?!)
15:38, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) I tend to agree with Cúchullain on this. This edit seems to have just enough information; adding "consummated usually after maturity" is sort of redundant. But I'm curious - does he literally say that in the book? — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 19:47, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
As far as the statement "marriage was consummated at maturity" is concerned there are some sources which may suggest that was the case like Aisha was initially betrothed to Jubayr ibn Mut'im, Lack of or less number of reports of child abuse among Arabs during that time and no hadith from Aisha that she had been abused.There can be a third option, Add the statement "marriage was consummated at maturity"
I would like to know how would you like the statement [5] to be framed so that it is acceptable by wikipedia ? -- Gnosisquest ( talk) 20:18, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
I think you should include Gnosisquest's source for what it is: Modern Islamic apologetics. according to the blurb, Muhammad Imdad Hussain Pirzada is "examining key issues pervading the modern world relating to Islam and the Muslims." Apparently to the fact that "Aisha was 19". This doesn't qualify as a scholarly hypothesis, but at least it shows that Muslims in Britain begin to feel uncomfortable with early medieval Arabian marriage customs, which is probably a good sign. Apparently the book was hailed as "addressing the most urgent issues facing Muslims in modern Britain" (Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad Shaykh Zayed Lecturer of Islamic Studies Faculty of Divinity, Cambridge University). This source can be used, if only to document that Muslims in Britain are actively debating the Aisha question. [6] Accepting editors' submissions for what they are really worth is, whenever at all possible, preferable to just scrapping them. Very nearly any printed book can be duly mentioned somewhere on Wikipedia. Often not in the context and gist envisaged by the original submitter, but Wikipedia grows by absorbing misconceptions and setting them right. -- dab (𒁳) 15:09, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
According to Wikipedia's own article on Asma bint Abi Bakr, Asma (Aisha's older sister) was 10 years older than Aisha and died at the age of 100 in 693 A.D. (or 73 A.H.) This is agreed upon by the majority of Islamic scholars. So just do the math, if you can: Aisha couldn't have been any younger than 17 when she was married to Muhammad -- if Khadija (as is also agreed upon) died three years before Muhammad departed for Medina. 4.157.11.153 ( talk) 18:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC) Dhimmicrat
In the section on The Battle of the Camel, it is claimed that Aisha(RA) had contempt for the Ahl'Ul'Bayt. This is a sectarian(Shia) bias, clearly shown by the fact that according to Sunnis, she was part of the Ahl'Ul"Bayt. The guidelines for wikipedia articles state that they should not be sectarian in nature, so while its fine to state the Shia point of veiw, it should be acknowledged as such, not stated as a majority muslim belief. The same applies to the part about Aisha(RA) conspiring to murder Uthman. If Nahj'Ul'Balagha is used as a citation, it should be made clear that to Sunnis, this is not a valid or accepted text. Also Al-Tabari- He is well known to have included many Shia narrations in his writing. There are no sahih reports in their citation, at least from the majority Sunni view.To Mainstream Sunni Muslims, the claim that Aisha(RA) helped to murder Uthman(RA) is offensive. It is well known that she innitiated the Battle of the Camel because she felt that Ali(RA) had not moved quikly or decisively enough against the Egyptians who killed Uthman(RA) This needs to be addresed. 24.22.94.118 ( talk) 03:54, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, does Islam have any rules about marriageable age?
The marriageable age in Judaism is 3 for a girl, if the father gives consent; I was wondering if there were any corresponding rules set down by Islam about this subject, or whether it has no opinion, and just takes the local cultural norm of the marriageable age.
I'm posting this question here because lots of people make a big fuss about Aisha's age at marriage, so it seemed like the place people might know.
If there is a fixed marriageable age, in Islam, would someone be able to mention it at marriageable age#By religion. If Islamic rules about this are more nuanced, or complex, would someone be able to give a brief explanation at Talk:Child marriage in Judaism?
(we are trying to ascertain whether Judaism is the only religion that sets rules about the age for marriage, rather than just going with whatever the local cultural norms/laws are)
Thanks. Newman Luke ( talk) 23:04, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
More importantly, Aisha was under contract to be married to another prior to her marriage to the last prophet. This is often overlooked and really makes the whole conversation a moot one to begin with. Lilac 3/14/10```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilac Cotton ( talk • contribs) 18:01, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
On the Veiws section there is not one citation. If it is a universaly known fact that Aisha had contempt for Ahl'ul'Bayt, some solid, NON SECTARIAN citations should be given. Can't find any....Hmm. Maybe thets because 90% of muslims dont believe that and it's not reflected in the works of their scholars either. 24.22.94.118 ( talk) 22:19, 2 December 2009 (UTC) Gibbon mentioned in his "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" that Aisha had a contempt for Hazrat Ali.--hassan 07:02, 23 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hassan572 ( talk • contribs)
This article has been written from a Shite point of view & their hatred of Aisha is well known. She never hated Uthman - in fact she helped raise the army to catch his murderers. This article needs to be corrected. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
94.169.62.38 (
talk)
19:46, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
I take issue with that. The whole point of Sunni Islam aims at covering up details rather than relating verifiable information. When you say "most" muslims obviously you are referring to "most" Sunnis whom you regard to have the upper hand in this. The point of Wiki is to provide accurate information and if that information violates a Sunni, that constitutes for you and those 90% you suggest, a corruption of Islam. All it is really is an expose of the lies and coverups supported by mostly Sunni regimes who inflicted oppression on people who didn't uphold their political offices. Lilac 3/14/10```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilac Cotton ( talk • contribs) 18:04, 14 March 2010 (UTC)