T.O. Shanavas' selective quotes, re. Aisha's (r) age

Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullah.

I thought i’d open a new thread to address a few more of the evidences presented by T.O. Shanavas in his attempt to discredit the hadith that reports Aisha’s (r) young age at the time of her marriage to Prophet Muhammad (s). The original thread posted by PA, titled Hadith Inconsisties [sic] Exposed: Ayesha a Six-Year-Old-Bride?, can be found here. I’ll repost my initial reply to evidence #1 and will then briefly look at evidence #2 & #3 as i think these suffice to show the author’s bias and habit of selectively quoting only that which fits his agenda. I may look at the other evidences at some later point if time permits.

Here is the initial reply to evidence #1.

Interesting title. What’s an “Inconsisties”? In any case, i think the only thing “exposed” here is the pitiful lack of research on the part of T.O. Shanavas (he or she?) and the gullibility of those who swallow hook, line and sinker whatever he’s written in this particular article.

So Shanavas had a “thorn in the heart” of his faith. We’ll see below how he went about removing that thorn, by passing over evidence that contradicted his agenda whilst promoting one or two quotes that helped him discredit the hadith that report Aisha’s (r) young age.

It seems the problem Shanavas and his Christian questioner have is not Aisha’s (r) individual age at the time of her marriage to the Prophet (s) but rather the age gap between the two of them. Otherwise what is the point of mentioning the Prophet’s (s) age? Would Shanavas and his friend prefer it if the Prophet (s) had been younger? Some Christians, having failed to defame the exemplary character of the Prophet (s) based only on Aisha’s (r) age at the time of her marriage introduced a new factor into the equation, namely that the marriage is offensive because of the age difference between the two marriage partners.

Let’s first look at evidence #1, it seems as good a place as any to start.

This isn’t a very good start for Shanavas and those who’ve submitted to his arguments. “Most of the narratives”, we are told, "are reported only by Hisham ibn Urwah." Okay, let's accept for argument's sake that most of them have been reported only by Hisham ibn Urwah. Yet it is clear from Shanavas’ own words that there are in fact other reports that aren’t related through Hisham at all. So why doesn’t Shanavas mention any of them? Shanavas all too quickly passes over evidence that refutes his thesis, and his supporters are more than willing to let him do so. They are equally to blame; guilty by association i’d say.

The fact that other narrators agree with Hisham in reporting the young age of Aisha (r) at the time of her marriage suffices to show grave defects in Shanavas’ evidence #1 argument. His attempt therefore - as we shall see below - to discredit Hisham ibn `Urwah is both unnecessary and disingenuous. This is despite the fact that to suit his purpose Shanavas has grossly exaggerated Hisham’s weakness as we shall see. Shanavas wants us to believe that Hisham was mistaken in his reporting of Aisha’s (r) age. So what? Is he also going to condemn all the other narrators that agree with Hisham?

Hisham ibn `Urwah isn’t alone in reporting Aisha’s (r) young age at the time of her marriage to Prophet Muhammad (s). Here are some other narrators who report the same age that Hisham does:

Ibn Majah (d.273H) in his Sunan hadith collection, in the book of marriage, records it with his chain of transmission through Abu Ubaydah, on the authority of Abdullah ibn Mas’ud.

An-Nasa’i (d.303H) in his Sunan, the book of marriage, cites it with his chain of transmission through Muhammad ibn Abi Salmah, on the authority of Abdul Rahman, on the authority of Aisha (r).

An-Nasa’i also relates it through al-'Amash, on the authority of Ibrahim, on the authority of al-Aswad, from Aisha. (Cf. ibn al-Qayyim’s [d.751H], Tahdhib as-Sunan #2122). Likewise, Hafidh al-Haythami (d.807H), in his Majma az-Zawa’id (#15297), cites it from al-Aswad from Aisha (r) as does Imam Ahmed (d.241H) in his Musnad collection, in the section on Aisha’s (r) hadith.

At-Tabarani (d.360H) in his Mu’jam al-Kabir, in the chapter on the wives of the Prophet (s), has a number of chains of transmission for this report. Here are three of them:

  • from Sa’d ibn Ibrahim, on the authority of al-Qasim ibn Muhammad, from Aisha (r)

  • from Sai’d ibn Abu 'Aruba, on the authority of Qatadah, re. Aisha

  • from Abu Asamah, on the authority of al-'Ajlih, on the authority of ibn Abi Malayka, re. Aisha

None of the above routes of transmission go through Hisham ibn `Urwah yet they agree with him in narrating the young age of Aisha (r).

It is in fact reported by more than just one, two or three people.

Al-Qasim ibn Muhammad reports the age from Aisha (r) as per at-Tabarani’s chain above and he was one of the seven famous Imams of Madina.

The last chain cited from at-Tabarani’s work is through ibn Abi Malayka who is another Madinan scholar and an eminently reliable hadith narrator. He met at least thirty of the Prophet’s (s) Companions. (ibn Hajar, at-Taqrib #3454)

Yahya al-Lakhmi also reports it from Aisha (r), as per ibn Sa’d’s (d.230H) Tabaqat al-Kubra, and he is another Madinan authority.

In Sahih Muslim (1422) we have az-Zuhri citing this report from Hisham ibn 'Urwa. Az-Zuhri was a Madinan hadith master and it is safe to assume that he heard this report from Hisham in Madina prior to him moving to Iraq.

No! Madinan authorities have also cited this hadith as have other non-Iraqi narrators through chains that don’t mention Hisham at all.

Continued… Iqbal

... evidence #1 continued

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
**Tehzibu’l-Tehzib, one of the most well known books on the life and reliability of the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet, reports that according to Yaqub ibn Shaibah: “He [Hisham] is highly reliable, his narratives are acceptable, except what he narrated after moving over to Iraq” (Tehzi’bu’l-tehzi’b, Ibn Hajar Al-`asqala’ni, Dar Ihya al-turath al-Islami, 15th century. Vol 11, p. 50)
*
[/quote]

This is nothing more than selective quoting. Shanavas picks out the quote that fits his purpose and avoids mentioning the authorities who declared Hisham's hadith as perfectly reliable. It's funny how under evidence #4 Shanavas concludes that "Ibn Hajar is an unreliable source for Ayesha's age" yet here we find him unashamedly citing from ibn Hajar's work simply because it suits his argument.

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
**It further states that Malik ibn Anas objected on those narratives of Hisham which were reported through people in Iraq: “I have been told that Malik objected on those narratives of Hisham which were reported through people of Iraq” (Tehzi’b u’l-tehzi’b, Ibn Hajar Al-`asqala’ni, Dar Ihya al-turath al-Islami, Vol.11, p. 50).
*
[/quote]

Yes, but Hisham's report about Aisha's age wasn't just reported through Iraqis.

In any case, Yaqub ibn Shaibah's and Malik's criticism of Hisham is based on nothing more than the fact that Hisham towards the end of his life no longer use the phrase "narrated to me" but would say "My father, from Aisha" for the sake of brevity - the difference between these two phrases may not be immediately obvious but they do represent technical differences from the standpoint of hadith science. Consequently, ibn Hajar - who is Shanavas' reference for this criticism - himself rejected the objection as negligible, saying: "It was clear enough to the Iraqis that he did not narrate from his father other than what he'd directly heard from him."

Unfortunately, Shanavas completely fails to mention that this particular criticism had been dismissed centuries ago by the very authority that he pointed his readers to.

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
**Mizanu’l-aitidal, another book on the life sketches of the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet reports: “When he was old, Hisham’s memory suffered quite badly” (Mizanu’l-aitidal, Al-Zahbi, Al-Maktabatu’l-athriyyah, Sheikhupura, Pakistan, Vol. 4, p. 301).
*
[/quote]

Now Shanavas switches to selectively quoting from adh-Dhahabi's work al-Mizan al-I'tidal. Shanavas quotes the words "When he was old, Hisham’s memory suffered quite badly" whereas what adh-Dhababi actually says is that his "memory diminished". Memory normally diminishes in old age, doesn't it? But adh-Dhahabi rightly lambastes those who linger on the possibility that Hisham might have forgotten things towards the end of his life. He explicitly declares that Hisham:

"Never became senile at all! No attention is paid to the claim of Abu al-Hasan ibn al-Qattaan that he (Hisham)... became senile and (that his ability) changed... So stop fumbling and refrain from mixing the firm Imams with the weak and senile narrators... may Allah console us from you, Ibn al-Qattan, and also from the claim of Abdul Rahman ibn Khirash that Malik was not pleased with him (Hisham) and that he objected to his hadiths to the people of Iraq!" (adh-Dhahabi, al-Mizan #9233).

Again, Shanavas, for reasons best known to him, doesn't bother to tell his readers any of this. Hisham related the same hadith in Madina and in Iraq, other Madinan narrators report the same hadith independent of Hisham, and they all agree on Aisha's (r) young age. Adh-Dhahabi said: "His memory diminished in old age, so what?" (ibid). Exactly, so what? His reporting of this hadith was unaffected.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
**CONCLUSION #1:

Based on these references, Hisham’s memory was failing and his narratives while in Iraq were unreliable. So, his narrative of Ayesha’s marriage and age are unreliable. **
[/quote]

I hardly think so!

Wassalam
Iqbal

Evidence #2

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
**EVIDENCE #2:

However, in another work, Al-Tabari says: “All four of his [Abu Bakr’s] children were born of his two wives during the pre-Islamic period” (Tarikhu’l-umam wa’l-mamlu’k, Al-Tabari (died 922), Vol. 4, p. 50, Arabic, Dara’l-fikr, Beirut, 1979).**
[/quote]

Evidence #2 appears to be based on a misunderstanding of what at-Tabari (d.302H) actually said. At-Tabari explains that Abu Bakr (r) married four times, twice in the pre-Islamic period to two women through whom he had a total of four children (including Aisha [r]) and twice again during the Islamic period. The words cited above don't mean that all four children were born in the pre-Islamic period, only that Abu Bakr (r) married their mothers during that period. A better translation might be: "All those four children were born of his two wives - who we've previously named - [which he married] in the pre-Islamic period."

Iqbal

Evidence #3

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
**EVIDENCE # 3:

The Age of Ayesha in Relation to the Age of Fatima According to Ibn Hajar, “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).**
[/quote]

This one really shows Shanavas' sense of fairness. What Shanavas doesn't mention is that ibn Hajar (d.852H) in fact gives two dates for when the Prophet's (s) daughter Fatima (r) might have been born. And yes, you've guessed it, Shanavas picks the date that suits his agenda and completely omits mentioning the other one. In fact, he presents it in such way that the reader might easily be led to believe that this is the only date ibn Hajar gave.

Not only that, but Shanavas fails to appreciate that the date he has relied on is clearly shown by ibn Hajar to have come through the narrator Muhammad ibn Umar al-Waqidi who, despite his knowledge, is an abandoned reporter as ibn Hajar himself confirms in his work at-Taqrib at-Tahdhib (Dar ar-Rashid: 1996, #6175). A host of earlier hadith masters, including Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Zura ar-Razi, and an-Nasa'i, all agree that he is abandoned. (Cf. al-Jami' fi Jarh wa Ta'dil. Alim al-Kutub, Beirut: 1996, #4083)

The second date given by ibn Hajar is that Fatima (r) was born when the Prophet (s) was 41 years old. Given that Aisha (r) was some five years older than her, this date would then agree with the age given by Hisham ibn 'Urwa and the other narrators mentioned in my first reply above, this being the age confirmed in the reports found in Bukhari, Muslim, Mu'jam al-Kabir, Abu Dawud and elsewhere. This is the very age that Shanavas wants to discredit, but he's only able to do that by wilfully ignoring evidence that refutes his theory.

Iqbal

And what is the conclusion? I mean age of Ayesha (ra).

Conclusion: Nothing's changed. For my part, Shanavas' article has little or no impact on the narrations about Aisha's (r) age at the time of her marriage as found in Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, at-Tirmidhi, ibn Majah, an-Nasa'i, Musnad Ahmed, Mu'jam al-Kabir, Tabaqat ibn Sa'd and other hadith works. Of course, if, like Shanavas, people are hell bent on misquoting the sources, then one can practically make the texts say whatever one wants.

And Allah knows best.

Iqbal

Iqbal,

Thank you for your explanation, and I think most people will agree that the hadiths does report a young age for Hazrat Aisha (ra). Putting behind the discussion of what is authentic and what is not, or even on who is a credible reporter & who is not, lets move on to compiling an answer for those who question/object on the basis of "age difference" and "marrying at a young age" or even "lust".

How do you answer them? Or satisfy their queries?

I usually give the following answers and I hope you will comment on how I can make it better or where you disagree with me:

1) Its true that the Hadiths reports the age to be 6 or in some instances 9 & some are quoted Hazrat Aisha (r) as saying so herself. Though it is also true that people are mistaken on their own ages (like the example I gave of my own family) and there is no proof 'beyond doubt' that points to her age being 6, no more no less, as DOBs were not kept & most of the Arabs were illetrate.

2) It was customary for the culture world wide at the time for women to get married at an early age. The differences of the couple was normally much more than a few years which we see normal these days.

3) Most women (not all) didn't work and usually their duties were to take care of the house hold. From the very childhood were brought up in such a way that they were capable of taking care of the household by the time they were around 10. There are examples of such even in today's world in most of the poor nations of the world.

4) When a girl is physically ready for marriage differ from female to female and also depends on diet & climate. Modern science favors that argument.

5) Those who object and say that AnHazoor (saw) did it out of lust (Naozubillah), do not know the back ground or the history of Islam & life of Holy Prophet (saw). He married his first wife, Hazrat Khadija (r), when she was in her 40s & a widow. Till the day she was alive, he didn't marry anyone else, regardless of the fact that it was customary & permitted and obviously many prospective women available and he was young at that time. He took care of her in her old age like no one else and according to the traditions was thoroughly depressed when she passed away. I remember one tradition when he was walking down the street & saw a women who resembled Hazrat Khadija (r), with teary eyes he said "Is it you, Khadija (r)?" ... another tradition says that he used to do Qurbani on Eid-ul-Adhiya in her name even many years after she passed away and send the meat to her friends apart from distributing it to the family and poor, just like she used to do when she was alive. So, to say that a man with such dedicated love for his wife who in his youth never married anyone else, somehow turned to lust in his old age is outrageous & points to the prejudice in the questioner's heart.

ahmadjee, thank you for your comments. You’ve made some useful points. Abdur-Rahman Robert Squires has an important article on this topic which i read some years ago and found quite beneficial. I believe he concurs with some of things you’ve mentioned. Part of his analysis looks at the fact that “puberty has been the historical, cultural and religious norm for indicating readiness for marriage” and he has some valid things to say about this. You can read the article here:

The Young Marriage of 'Aishah

Do let me know what you think.

The Baker Encyclopaedia of the Bible (2/p.1407) says about Jewish marriage: “Subsequently, minimum ages (for marriage) of 13 for boys and 12 for girls were set.” This may allude to the possibility that younger ages were previously permitted. I believe that according to Jewish custom the onset of menarche was at one time (not sure if it is still the case today) an acceptable indication of a girl’s maturity. It would be interesting to explore this avenue further. In his super-commentary, Tuhfa al-Ahwadi, on at-Tirmidhi’s (d.279H) Sunan hadith collection (which records the young age of Aisha [r]), the scholar al-Mubarakfuri (d.1353H) relates that Aisha (r) said: “When a girl reaches the age of nine, she attains womanhood.”

At the time the marriage was arranged, Prophet Muhammad (s) was still in Makkah and the Muslims were living under a constant threat of persecution. If this marriage had been an outrage to the community, it would no doubt have been harmful to his cause, but there is no indication that the marriage was outside the norms of the society in which the Prophet (s) lived.

And Allah knows best.

Iqbal

Note: In his article, Robert Squires says:

“Of the four ahadith in Sahih al-Bukhari, two were narrated from 'Aishah (7:64 and 7:65), one from Abu Hisham (5:236) and one via 'Ursa (7:88).”

In fact, all these references from al-Bukhari have the same chain of transmission, namely, Hisham ibn 'Urwa from his father (Abu Hisham). The mention of 'Ursa is a mistake, it should be 'Urwa not 'Ursa.