Saudis rethinking on Tribal traditions of child marriage

Well finally Saudi government may be getting ready to take on the extremist clerics, at least in one area aka child marriage. Here is a good analysis of the issue in light of Quran and hadees.

It also tries to disprove the myth that Mohammad pbuh married child-Ayesha rah and not a grown up Ayesha rah.

Still it will be difficult to convince the clerics as they will continue believing in tribal traditions hidden in the guise of “Islamic traditions”.

**

No sanction for child marriage
**
By Asghar Ali Engineer

Friday, 15 May, 2009 | 08:36 AM PST |

RECENTLY I read a news item datelined Riyadh that said that Saudi Arabia was contemplating banning the marriage of girls under 18. This became necessary because a case of a girl aged eight years came to light.

She was married off to a man over 40 years her senior. Many Saudi jurists and ulema, however, uphold such marriages. Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul Aziz al-Sheikh endorses the practice of marrying underage girls, arguing that in doing so they avoid spinsterhood or the temptation engaging in relationships outside wedlock. According to other reports many young girls in Arab countries that observe tribal traditions are married to older husbands but not before puberty. Such marriages are also driven by poverty in countries like Yemen, one of the poorest countries outside Africa.

But in countries like Saudi Arabia it is more of a tribal tradition which is practised in the name of Islam. Here the main question is: does Islam permit child marriage? If you ask any traditional jurist he would say ‘yes.’ But it was more of a pre-Islamic tradition which became part of Islam and our jurists and theologians generally justify it on the basis of the Prophet (PBUH) having married Hazrat Aisha when she was seven. It is doubtful if the Prophet of Islam would marry such a young child.

Modern researchers have established that the hadith regarding Hazrat Aisha’s marriage appeared some 300 years after the death of the Holy Prophet. It cannot be relied upon. Moreover, the Quran describes marriage as mithaqan ghaliza (strong covenant) and if marriage is a contract, how can one enter into one with a child who is hardly conscious of the implications of the contract?

It was for this reason that Hanafi jurisprudence has made provisions for what is called khiyar al-bulugh (i.e. option of puberty). According to this provision, if a child is married at a young age (below puberty) she has the option of accepting or repudiating the marriage on achieving puberty. The contractual nature of marriage cannot be altered.

In our traditional culture various pressures work on a girl’s mind and once she is married off it is very difficult for her to repudiate that marriage. Thus the Quranic principle is very sound and must not be sidelined in order to uphold traditional practices. Most Muslim communities give priority to their own respective traditions than Islamic principles and jurists, also coming from the same traditional cultures, and find ways to justify such practices. And then these acquire the halo of Sharia law.

Since many jurists insist on following such traditions, the faith becomes a laughing stock for the world media. The minor girl who was married to a man of 50 years of age in Saudi Arabia was finally divorced by her husband only after coming under pressure from the media. And only because of such pressure Saudi authorities are now considering banning the marriage of girls below 18 years of age. If put into effect, the measure will be quite in keeping with Islamic principles.

The need is to understand that what we call Sharia today includes a number of pre-Islamic Arab traditions and customary practices known as aadat (literally practices). Since the Quran was revealed among the Arabs and they were the first to embrace Islam their practices were accepted as part of Sharia law and Islamic principles had to be applied to the body of these aadat. But when Islam spread to other areas local customary laws also continued to be practised. Islamic principles as contained in the Quran are universal and surprisingly modern. It is unfortunate that our jurists and ulema are not ready to rethink our present laws which are a mixture of Islamic principles and aadat. For them Sharia law once formulated becomes eternal, though no student of classical Islamic jurisprudence will agree with such an approach. Whatever was formulated in the past must be reviewed in the light of Quranic pronouncements and child marriage must be banned. If the Saudi authorities have realised the need for banning child marriage, it should be welcomed. If they take this initiative, others can follow. But legislation, though quite necessary, is not enough. Many laws continue to be violated in practice.

Thus, there is an urgent need to spread awareness in Muslim societies. Awareness has to be created among women as, more often than not, they are the victims of many traditions and customs which have nothing to do with Islam. Also, a greater problem lies in areas where women are less literate or illiterate. They need to be made more aware of their Islamic rights to prevent more instances of child marriage and other abuses.

The writer is an Islamic scholar who also heads the Centre for Study of Society and Secularism, Mumbai.
DAWN.COM | Pakistan | No sanction for child marriage

Re: Saudis rethinking on Tribal traditions of child marriage

^lol, rolling eyes...modernists are at their blunders again. Where did he mention the evidence from the Qur'an and hadith which says such marriages are against Islam? Shri'ah has pre-Islamic practices because it is hukm (order) of Allah Ta'ala, not because scholars incorporated them out of blue to serve their "desires". Islam incorporated already existent good practices because every thing originally comes from Allah 'Azz wa Jal. Whatever Allah Ta'ala revealed is beneficial for mankind and there is wisdom behind it, regardless of how we perceive.

Shri'ah is not man made that it needs to go through evolution as modernists try to portrait. Tell me, why Arab people should abandon this parctice? Why was this practice acceptable back then and should not be acceptable now days? Have humans somehow evolved into new species that we need evolution in our ethics and moral codes?

Re: Saudis rethinking on Tribal traditions of child marriage

^^ so you're saying child marriage is completely islamic?

damn, this has to be the biggest time jump in the history of time.

going from the 7th century to the 20th in one go? WOW.

Hey. Can I have sexual intercourse with a 9 year old? Is this Islamic? even when im 45?

as-salamu 'alaykum

Bismillah Ar-Rahmaan Ar-Raheem

one thing I forgot to mention is that the Islamic ruling is not just for females. It is also for males. How come the modernists and liberal humanists always defend the female? What about the males?


yes, it is Islamic. This marriage has to do with nikkah (drawing the marriage contract): nothing more nothing less. The marriage is not consummated until the person has reached puberty and physically and psychological able for it, whether male or female.


yes, if she has reached puberty and it causes her no harm: physically and psychological. Meaning if she physically and psychological ready for it. This rule is general, it applies all aged men and women.

let me just remind everyone that I'm still waiting for an answer to my earlier questions:Why was this practice acceptable back then and should not be acceptable now days? Have humans somehow evolved into new species that we need evolution in our ethics and moral codes?
and Allah knows best

Re: Saudis rethinking on Tribal traditions of child marriage

look, I agree with Islamic ruling where the best age of marriage is at puberty. I will no way by any means refute this ruling. I also believe its the best system. However, 99.9999999999999888888% of the time, a 9 year old girl WILL NOT CONSENSUALLY AGREE TO MARRIAGE WITH A 30 YEAR OLD LET ALONE HAVING SEXUAL INTERCOURSE.

At the end of the day, the final decision should always be with the girl. If she is incapable of making such a decision then she is therefore physiologically unable to commit to the marriage. If the marriage has gone forward one has to assume that someone has taken advantage of the girl.

You could make that claim about Islamic ruling which came into effect with the prophet. Why was a practice acceptable back in 800BC should not be acceptable in the prophets time? Have humans somehow evolved into new species that we need evolution in our ethics and moral codes?

But that's beside the whole point. Just because its a practice doesn't mean its right. Why is one culture above criticism?

Yeah, that's a good question. I think there are more female related issues coming from these countries. If, the female was the dominant player in this society the same people would be going nuts.


there are number of problems with your argument

1 - According to general definition of Islam, Islam started from day one. Hence, it has been around from dawn and Allah Ta'ala revealed His rulings to people, but people deviated from straight path and invented their own laws. Hence, over time Prophets came to remind people of Allah's laws. Islam's legislation was completed with Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). We can use our example to understand this: many people have rejected Islam and rule by other than Allah's legislation.

2 - You're mixing up three views here:
Islamic View

Whatever Allah has legislated is haqq (truth) and there is no benefit in following other than Allah's legislations. Hence, no man-made laws were ever accepted or treated as beneficial or truth for mankind. Islam has rejected all man-made laws from day one. Therefore, your argument has no legs to stand.
Modernists View

Certain laws or practices were acceptable in the past and they were moral, but they are not acceptable now and have become immoral.
*
My comment:* What is their argument based upon? Nothing but conjuncture and whole commotion about "progression" in morality. If we follow their argument, then it means certain acceptable laws/pratcices in our time will not be acceptable in future due to this idea of "progression" in morality.

Third View (I don't know what to call it)

The laws of Islam or old acceptable practices (moral values) are not acceptable in our time as they are barbaric to begin with. Even if they were practices back then, doesn't mean they were moral.

My comment: What is evidence for such claims? Again, nothing but conjuncture, and current standards/principles to determine ethics based upon limited knowledge and intellect. Even though, unlike modernists, this view is little bit different, but the methodology is same. They both are two fruits of same tree. In nutshell, their principle is simple: "I'm capable of determining truth and falsehood in matters of morality" and there should be "evolution/progression" in morality.


regardless of what is happening in these countries, the Islamic ruling is for both genders. The whole argument shouldn't be based upon issues related a specific gender and then use it attack a view point when the view point is for both genders. It doesn't follow logically to make such absurd arguments. Isn't this sexism?

There is no doubt in this general statement.

The problem is when you want to impose Mullah's will as Allah's will.

There is no place in Quran where Allah has legally allowed (legislated) that child marriages are OK.

So make sure you have done your home work when you attribute something to Allah.

Thank you.

Re: Saudis rethinking on Tribal traditions of child marriage

^Will you believe in it? The answer is NO. For 14 centuries Muslim ummah have agreed upon this ruling. However, suddenly in last century or so you modernists appear and started opposing the traditionalist views. So according to you for 14 centuries Muslims have been committing sin for opposing supposedly prohibition of child marriages in Islam. Actually denying rulings of Allah is kufr; so, for 14 centuries Muslims have been committing kufr. You got nothing from the Qur'an or Sunnah to back it up; well you modernists reject Sunnah. You claimed it in the first post, but you've failed to prove it. In addition, you've ignored all of my questions.

You're accusing me off imposing mullah's will, but tell me how are you any different, o modernist! Why are you appealing to this secular modernist "Islamic scholar"? Why don't you quote me an ayah which says that child marriages are prohibited in Islam?

No accusation! We need a civilized discussion that's all.

Read the original article. It poses a question.

**

Modern researchers have established that the hadith regarding Hazrat Aisha’s marriage appeared some 300 years after the death of the Holy Prophet. It cannot be relied upon. Moreover, the Quran describes marriage as mithaqan ghaliza (strong covenant) and if marriage is a contract, how can one enter into one with a child who is hardly conscious of the implications of the contract?
**

And you haven't answered it. And yet you continue throwing around the false notions.

This is what Abu Jahil (The father of arrogant people aka the supremely arrogant) used to tell Muhammad pbuh.

AJ would say "O Muhammad pbuh, how could I leave my forefathers' faith, you think they were all wrong? We (the Kuffar) have practiced our religion for 1000's of years. Now you (Muhammad pbuh) suddenly show up and tell that our religion is all wrong"

Can you please give reference for the bold part. Or is it just your opinion?

^that is not my personal opinion, because traditionalist Muslims don’t relay on their whims and desires to derive rulings and I’ve no intention to make Islam appeasing to Kufaar. I can care less about what you think about Islam.

As far your question, this is well known in Islam as a basic right of spouse. First evidence for this is practice of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him): he married (drew marriage contract) to Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her), but delayed the consummation till she was able for it. Second evidence for this is hadith of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him): “There should be neither harming nor reciprocating harm” [Related by Ibn Majjah, Al-Daraqutni, Malik in his Muwatta and others]. This is what scholars have concluded:
The fact that it is permissible to marry a minor girl does not imply that it is permissible to have intercourse with her, rather the husband should not have intercourse with her until she becomes able for that. Hence the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) delayed consummating the marriage to ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her).
Islam Question and Answer - Is it acceptable to marry a girl who has not yet started her menses?
and Allah knows best

Re: Saudis rethinking on Tribal traditions of child marriage

^By your logic, muslims are also allowed to marry more than four.

"There should be neither harming nor reciprocating harm"

^What does it mean? And how can someone conclude from this statement that you can do nikah with a 9 years old?

Also, can a woman do nikah with an eight or seven or six years old boy?

Re: Saudis rethinking on Tribal traditions of child marriage

i have read somewhere that nikah can take place before puberty but not consumated and as soon the person hits puberty they have the right to proceed with the nikah or opt for divorce?


this is what you said:

[quote]
The problem is when you want to impose Mullah's will as Allah's will.
[/quote]
Now can you prove that you are not imposing the modernist mulla's will and heretical belief on us? Your modernists scholar have contradicted what the Qur'an and Sunnah have stated; on top, it is against the understanding of consensus of Muslim ummah. Not to mention that deliberately opposing or distorting the rulings of Allah is kufr. So you and your modernist scholar issued a fatawa of kufr on all the Muslims current and past (14 centuries), which includes the Salaf (Sahaba, Tabi'een, Taba Tabi'een - may Allah be pleased with them).

I brought forward your modernists methodology and how your framework works, but you have failed to address any of my points, and yet you want a peaceful discussion.


I've read the article and also read what you stated but failed to prove it; you said:

[quote]
Here is a good analysis of the issue in light of Quran and hadees.
[/quote]
Did your modernist mulla provide a single ayah or hadith prohibiting such marriages? The answer is big fat NO! So, please backup what you claim. Let me further expose your modernist mulla's ignorance.

1 - who are these modern researchers? Where were these modern researchers for 14 centuries? Only a jahil (ignorant) modern researcher will come up with such a blunder. This only shows your jahiliyyat and deception Mr. modernist. Why do you trust other ahadith which apeared after "300" years? Why not reject them as well? This shows your hypocrite nature.

2 - Where did you learn your science of research? We do not reject historical accounts merely based on time when they were compiled. Why do you accept the Qur'an and narrations related to it? Was Qur'an not compiled after the death of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)? Can you please explain me how does a historical account being compiled later prove that it is not authentic?

3 - The narrations regarding Prophet's (peace be upon him) marriage with 'Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her) are mutwatir, as there are two many with different isnaad: a science which maybe alien to you. No, Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslims were not compiled after 300 years and there were not the first books of ahadith. The Sahifah of Hammam bin Munabbih (rahimahullah) was written in first century of hijrah and about 1500 ahadith found in Musnad Ahmad, Bukhari and Muslim (with slight variant readings) are exact copies of ahadith found in Hammam's (rahimahullah) Sahifah. Hence, it is very much likely that these ahadith are also found in Hammam's (rahimahullah) Sahifah as they are narrted by many. The hadith of Prophet's (peace be upon him) marriage to 'Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her) appears in all three books, Musnad Ahmad being the earliest (second century of hijrah), in addition to Sunnah Abu Dawud, Sunna An-Nasai, Sunan ibn Majjah, Sunan al-Bayhaqi al-Kubra, Mustdark al-Hakeem, and al-Mujeem al-Kabeer of at-Tabarani (rahimahullah). Ahadith on this subject in all of these books have different isnaad in addition to having same isnaad. The masters of hadith have graded them authentic and who are you or your modern researchers to grade them unreliable with 0 evidence in your favour.


g2g, will reply to this later, insha'Allah


actually if you care and open your eyes this ayah applies to you modernists because you started listening to these handful liberalists appear in last century and blindly follow them when they got no sharee proof for their claims. Any traditionalist Muslim would be only guilty of this if we got no sharee evidence to proof our case. Hence, you got no leg to stand and this argument has no value against us. We are following the Sunnah of our Prophet (peace be upon him), but what are you following?

and Allah knows best

Re: Saudis rethinking on Tribal traditions of child marriage

^because you appear to be knowledgeable can i ask something? If a trend is setting where elders are using the premission of child marriages to abuse the rights of children would it be alright to put a ban on it for a while? like i read soemwhere during famine Hazrat Umer r.a banned the penalty for theft (losing a hand).


it is sad that you put forward such flawed reasoning. Doesn't Qur'an say that believers can only have 4 wives at once and more than 4 wives is only for the Prophet? Where is evidence that this action (marriage to Aishah - may Allah be pleased with her) of Prophet (peace be upon him) was only for him and not general?


it means that you cannot cause harm to others and this is what scholars have understood for centuries. If you don't believe me, go check with your sufi scholars. When did I say that this hadith state that your can have nikaah with young male/female? I said this hadith is the evidence for not having sexual intercourse with your spouse if he/she is not able for it (causes him/her physical or pyscological harm).


yes, as the ruling is general and applicable to both genders.

Before everyone else go crazy: this ruling is limited to being permissible and scholars have put conditions on it. Everyone can't go around and start doing it to fulfill their desires.
and Allah knows best

oops yeah i misread your post.