The historical accuracy of Mohammed's child bride

[Undesired Walrus]

So, we've all heard it, but how much truth is there in it?

[Safe-Keeper]

What I would like to know, as I said in the other thread, was whether or not under-age sex was actually involved. In our times, spouses typically have intercourse with each others. Was this also the case back then, when marriages were just as much for status, alliances, money and other practical purposes?

ETA: Heck, even today we have proforma marriages, in which couples marry for citizenship (for example, I could go to Taiwan, marry a Taiwanese girl and take her home with me, and then divorce her when she has been awarded Norwegian citizenship). Since such marriages are not for love, I imagine many of them do not involve sexual relations.

[~enigma~]

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

What I would like to know, as I said in the other thread, was whether or not under-age sex was actually involved. In our times, spouses typically have intercourse with each others. Was this also the case back then, when marriages were just as much for status, alliances, money and other practical purposes?

ETA: Heck, even today we have proforma marriages, in which couples marry for citizenship (for example, I could go to Taiwan, marry a Taiwanese girl and take her home with me, and then divorce her when she has been awarded Norwegian citizenship). Since such marriages are not for love, I imagine many of them do not involve sexual relations.

Hey any broad marries me she better put out

[Third Eye Open]

Wiki says

Quote:

From an Islamic (Shari'Ah) law perspective, the minimum requirements and responsibilities in a Muslim marriage are that the groom provide living expenses (housing, clothing, food, maintenance) to the bride, and in return, the bride must be a partner (sexually) to the husband.

Also, don't most cultures not consider a marriage to be official unless it has been consummated?

[Tebtenri]

Consider the times 700AD?
Most cultures of that time, went that way, some even with their own relations (now we know why some folk really are inbred, and not just the monarchy)

[TimCallahan]

Concerning divorce, Surah 65 ("Diverce") lays down periods of time that they must wait to remarry and how long the husband must support them after he has divorced them. Verse 4 of that surah says:

And (as for) those of your women who have despaired of menstruation, if you have a doubt, their prescribed time shall be three months, and of those too who have not had their courses; and (as for) the pregnant women, their prescribed time is that they lay down their burden; and whoever is careful of (his duty to) Allah He will make easy for him his affair.

The phrase, "and of those too who have not had their courses," refers to girls who have not yet menstruated. There's a separate verse referring to divorcing women with whom the husband hasn't consumated marriage. Thus, we must assume that the society of that time and place condoned men having sex with girls who hadn't yet menstruated. I believe the material about Aisha having sex with Muhammad when she was nine or ten came from material attributed to her.

[Jontg]

You're forgetting that the traditions haven't changed much since then, and modern child marriages, at least, typically entail waiting a certain amount of time. I view the whole Aisha affair as a lot like Cain having sex with his siblings--it probably didn't happen, but rather was added to the canon to cover up what people must have seen as an inconsistency. In this case, somebody probably wanted to make it one hundred percent certain that she was virginal, and their desire for holy writ to be internally consistent overrode the inherent squickiness of what they were suggesting.
ETA: I would also point out that, at the time, nobody seems to have seen anything unusual about what was going on between Aisha and Muhammad, which sort of implies that whatever happened was perfectly kosher. Er, if you'll excuse the term.

[TimCallahan]

Google "Aisha in the Hadith" and you will find several verses from various hadiths saying that Muhammad consummated the marriage with her when she ws nine.

[Hux]

Child brides were not that common in Medieval times. They were only used really when there was inheritance or land or both involved, ergo the rich did it. Peasants didn't want a millstone around their necks so early.

Quote:

"Then I saw the (Hell) Fire, and I have never before, seen such a horrible sight as that, and I saw that the majority of its dwellers were women." The people asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is the reason for that?" He replied, "Because of their ungratefulness." It was said. "Do they disbelieve in Allah (are they ungrateful to Allah)?" He replied, "They are not thankful to their husbands and are ungrateful for the favors done to them. Even if you do good to one of them all your life, when she seems some harshness from you, she will say, "I have never seen any good from you.' " Bukhari 7.62.125...

You might want to have a look at this: it seems to encompass all you ask. Read the section "From the Haddith"
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Qu...s-sex-life.htm

[Jontg]

Originally Posted by TimCallahan

Google "Aisha in the Hadith" and you will find several verses from various hadiths saying that Muhammad consummated the marriage with her when she ws nine.

And one look at that part of the Hadith will tell you--in fact, it will tell you at least once per paragraph--that Aisha was menstruating at the time. That made her fair game by the standards of not only ancient Arabs, but of almost every other society of that era. Adolescence is a luxury only modern man can afford--you had to grow up pretty darn fast back then. Once you had your first period, you were officially marriageable. Barbarous, yes, but in no way evil or abnormal.
ETA: And don't think that I'm not wondering why I'm so resistant to the idea of accusing Muhammad of pedophilia--it would make my job so much easier if I could dismiss him as a creepy old man.

[Hux]

From what I have managed to see (admittedly in a cursory way) it seems to be that wherever there is true Sharia law, Muslims still want child brides and the 'right' to sex with them before the menses start. And all because of the example of the scumbag that is Mohammed.

Even if it was common practice (which still didn't make it right) in big Mo's days, there is really no excuse for this vile and repulsive practice nowadays. And these people have the perfect excuse - it is a religious desire. Islam is truly repulsive.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

What I would like to know, as I said in the other thread, was whether or not under-age sex was actually involved. In our times, spouses typically have intercourse with each others. Was this also the case back then, when marriages were just as much for status, alliances, money and other practical purposes?

...snip...

In the "European" countries we know that princes and princess were often married at a very young age (without even meeting) or betrothed at a very young age right the way until the 19th century (it may have happened later than the 19th century I just don't know of many examples). Marriage as we understand it and use the term is a modern invention.

[Hux]

Marriage as we recognise it may well be a modern thing. Medieval peasants rarely underwent marriage ceremonies despite protestations by the church ( because they were being done out of a fee).

Betrothals, once again, only really occurred when hereditary legacy was at stake. Money , lands and power. The poor were rarely 'betrothed'. Betrothal really only survived into the late 18 century amongst the Royal houses, who were, unbeknown to themselves, encouraging inbreeding.

[Cainkane1]

Originally Posted by Jontg

And one look at that part of the Hadith will tell you--in fact, it will tell you at least once per paragraph--that Aisha was menstruating at the time. That made her fair game by the standards of not only ancient Arabs, but of almost every other society of that era. Adolescence is a luxury only modern man can afford--you had to grow up pretty darn fast back then. Once you had your first period, you were officially marriageable. Barbarous, yes, but in no way evil or abnormal.
ETA: And don't think that I'm not wondering why I'm so resistant to the idea of accusing Muhammad of pedophilia--it would make my job so much easier if I could dismiss him as a creepy old man.

Was she menustrating or just bleeding?

[Jontg]

They actually use the word "period" in that translation, at least--and why else would she be...

Oh, ew. Dude. Lay off the Japanese porn, okay? Mai-chan's Daily Life is not an accurate study of human anatomy. Ew.
...
...
Oh, god! Now I can't get that out of my brain! *loofah*
ETA: And now I'm wanting to switch sides just so I can incorporate the phrase "It's AWWWWright!" into a discussion of religious morality.

[HansMustermann]

Actually, you know, this is one of the things where the double standards of the fundies really shine. Basically:

- Bible is sexist against women and even condones sexual slavery and rape? "Well, that was only then, those were the standards of the time, everyone was sexist, God was only giving a nod to the status-quo, bla, bla, bla."

- Bible condones slavery _and_ beating slaves savagely as long as they don't die on the spot? (But if he dies a couple of days later, that's ok.) "Well, that was only then, those were the standards of the time, everyone had slaves and beat them up, God was only giving a nod to the status-quo, bla, bla, bla."

- God commanded genocides, like that against Midian? "Well, that was only then, those were the standards of the time, everyone did genocides, God was only giving a nod to the status-quo, bla, bla, bla."

- ETA: God commands the rape of the virgin female captives from Midian, and I see no mention of a minimum age? "Well, that was only then, those were the standards of the time, everyone screwed the female captives, God was only giving a nod to the status-quo, bla, bla, bla."

- Mohamed had an underage wife? "OMG, creepy old pervert, just shows that their religion is evil, kill, kill, kill"

[Jontg]

Exactly--everyone used the is-she-bleeding-yet criteria to determine adulthood. Including ancient Europeans--and more importantly, ancient Jews.
In order to be an unmarried virgin in that era, Mary, Mother of Jesus, could not have been a day over fourteen.

[HansMustermann]

Something like that. Though I was thinking of the larger scale incident at Midian. All the non-virgin women were killed at Moses's order, and the virgin ones were good to use as a reward for the winners. I'm sure there weren't many past menstruation age among them.

[Jontg]

I just used that very passage to try and prove the same point to a Jew about a week ago. He didn't seem to enjoy that.

[Hux]

[Jontg]

...
Okay. Let's go with that.

[headscratcher4]

Didn't Shakespear write of Juliet something like girls of her age (13?) are already mothers...

[GreNME]

Originally Posted by TimCallahan

Concerning divorce, Surah 65 ("Diverce") lays down periods of time that they must wait to remarry and how long the husband must support them after he has divorced them. Verse 4 of that surah says:

And (as for) those of your women who have despaired of menstruation, if you have a doubt, their prescribed time shall be three months, and of those too who have not had their courses; and (as for) the pregnant women, their prescribed time is that they lay down their burden; and whoever is careful of (his duty to) Allah He will make easy for him his affair.

The phrase, "and of those too who have not had their courses," refers to girls who have not yet menstruated. There's a separate verse referring to divorcing women with whom the husband hasn't consumated marriage. Thus, we must assume that the society of that time and place condoned men having sex with girls who hadn't yet menstruated. I believe the material about Aisha having sex with Muhammad when she was nine or ten came from material attributed to her.

Originally Posted by TimCallahan

Google "Aisha in the Hadith" and you will find several verses from various hadiths saying that Muhammad consummated the marriage with her when she ws nine.

While I don't dispute your factual accuracy in your description, I do think that a lot of this point of Muhammad's history gets lost in the extreme focus on Aisha's age and ignoring the context of how she came to be his wife, the fact that Muhammad actually married Aisha years before they consummated, and Aisha was actually sent back to live with her parents during the intervening years between the initial marriage and when she was deemed to have matured sufficiently for physical consummation.

First, the marriage was initially meant to be a strengthening of alliance between Abu Bakr and Muhammad, and at least as told it was suggest to Abu Bakr by the man to whom Aisha was initially to be betrothed that Aisha should instead be wed to Muhammad. This wasn't just a common practice in the area where Muhammad lived, but stretching from sub-Saharan Africa up to the post-Roman European lands. If anything, marrying a young girl to a more respected or higher-status person ensured better treatment for the girl overall.

Also, what seems to be forgotten about Aisha's story is that the girl was apparently a prodigy from a very early age. Not only was she eventually to grow into a favored wife by Muhammad, she was one of the more highly-educated (recorded) women of the time, and eventually became a symbol of the political and intellectual status women are supposed to be afforded under most Islamic society, quite the opposite of the repressive treatment women get in the more fundamentalist regimes. After all, this woman led her own army against Ali (and lost, but it was still a feat) at a time when women had traditionally been treated as second-class citizens culturally. The more "modern" and "liberal" sects of Islam tend to focus far more heavily on the role Aisha played in the history of Islam and the impact she had than do the more repressive sects, and it's due in large part to the accomplishments Aisha actually had in her lifetime. More than Mary in the Christian-dominated Europe, Aisha was a religious-historical woman who exemplified knowledge and power along with religious piety, and wasn't relegated to being only a mother and caretaker for the male leading figure in the religious history.

The Christian or right-wing fundies who attempt to bring up Aisha as a condemnation of Islam only do so out of ignorance about her life and accomplishments (or possibly, in worst cases, out of resentment for them).

[Jontg]

I just had a sudden epiphany... George R. R. Martin based the character of Daenerys on Aisha, didn't he?

[TimCallahan]

Originally Posted by GreNME

While I don't dispute your factual accuracy in your description, I do think that a lot of this point of Muhammad's history gets lost in the extreme focus on Aisha's age and ignoring the context of how she came to be his wife, the fact that Muhammad actually married Aisha years before they consummated, and Aisha was actually sent back to live with her parents during the intervening years between the initial marriage and when she was deemed to have matured sufficiently for physical consummation. . . .

In the Los Angeles County Arboretum, one of the major boatnical gardens in Southern California, there is a Victorian house that "Lucky" Baldwin (1828 -1909)founder of the town of Arcadia, built for his bride. She was 14 at the time. There was nothing illegal or even socially reprehensible about a grown man marrying a 14year-old girl at tht time, less than two centuries ago. If he tried that today he'd be guilty of statutory rape and deemed a sex offender.

You have a point it's hard to determine whether or not Aisha was physically mature at the time she and Muhammad consumated their marriage. However the case of Muhammad and Aisha, like that of the much more recent example of "Lucky" Baldwin and his 14 year-old bride, illustrates the problem of changing mores. However, while we can consign our feelings about Baldwin's act to the differences in sexual mores between the late nineteenth and early twenty-first ceturies, Muhammad was the founder of a religion, and his acts can be interpreted by members of that religion to be a proper example for the ages. hence the concern over when he consumated his marriage to Aisha.

[Jontg]

He did it when she hit puberty--that's a reasonable standard for less advanced societies that require you to grow up more quickly, and while it's unfortunate that Aisha was an early bloomer it doesn't seem to have had any adverse effect on her. It's wholly inappropriate for a developed, modern civilization, but so is just about everything else Abrahamic religions require us to do--that's why we're trying to get rid of them all. Saying that this particular custom is any more alarming than anything else in those books is sort of missing the point. Happy birthday, by the way. ^^

[Sabrina]

I think you're all also forgetting that people lived much shorter lives back then (old age would have been mid forties at best, and you'd probably be dead by fifty), so naturally women matured earlier. That's not to say I condone sex with a nine-year-old, mind you, but there WERE different standards back then due to the shortness of a person's life, so I think that should be taken into account. It's only lately, since the advent of better healthcare, that people began living longer than fifty, so the age of maturation for a girl became later as well. But most girls will still menstruate by 13 or 14 at the latest. In many of today's societies that is still far too young to be a fully grown woman, but I would imagine there are still some societies (perhaps Amazon tribes and the like who do not live in industrialized societies) where girls mature as early as 7 or 8 and begin menstruating then; if the society then considers her to be a fully-grown woman, regardless of her physical age, then she can perform womanly tasks at that point.

I don't condone it, but I recognize that it was an extremely different world back then and we can't judge it by the standards of today's industrialized societies.

[Darth Rotor]

Originally Posted by Jontg

I just had a sudden epiphany... George R. R. Martin based the character of Daenerys on Aisha, didn't he?

That was my guess.

[HansMustermann]

Originally Posted by Sabrina

I think you're all also forgetting that people lived much shorter lives back then (old age would have been mid forties at best, and you'd probably be dead by fifty), so naturally women matured earlier. That's not to say I condone sex with a nine-year-old, mind you, but there WERE different standards back then due to the shortness of a person's life, so I think that should be taken into account. It's only lately, since the advent of better healthcare, that people began living longer than fifty, so the age of maturation for a girl became later as well. But most girls will still menstruate by 13 or 14 at the latest. In many of today's societies that is still far too young to be a fully grown woman, but I would imagine there are still some societies (perhaps Amazon tribes and the like who do not live in industrialized societies) where girls mature as early as 7 or 8 and begin menstruating then; if the society then considers her to be a fully-grown woman, regardless of her physical age, then she can perform womanly tasks at that point.

I don't condone it, but I recognize that it was an extremely different world back then and we can't judge it by the standards of today's industrialized societies.

I don't think that the premature aging also makes puberty come sooner. I know for example that in Old Kingdom ancient Egypt they married their girls at 12 and the boys at 14, which would be roughly the same age they get puberty in our modern society.

Some rare children can get their puberty much sooner. And, who knows, maybe Mo's bride was such an exception. But I don't think it was the rule.

[GreNME]

Originally Posted by TimCallahan

In the Los Angeles County Arboretum, one of the major boatnical gardens in Southern California, there is a Victorian house that "Lucky" Baldwin (1828 -1909)founder of the town of Arcadia, built for his bride. She was 14 at the time. There was nothing illegal or even socially reprehensible about a grown man marrying a 14year-old girl at tht time, less than two centuries ago. If he tried that today he'd be guilty of statutory rape and deemed a sex offender.

You have a point it's hard to determine whether or not Aisha was physically mature at the time she and Muhammad consumated their marriage. However the case of Muhammad and Aisha, like that of the much more recent example of "Lucky" Baldwin and his 14 year-old bride, illustrates the problem of changing mores. However, while we can consign our feelings about Baldwin's act to the differences in sexual mores between the late nineteenth and early twenty-first ceturies, Muhammad was the founder of a religion, and his acts can be interpreted by members of that religion to be a proper example for the ages. hence the concern over when he consumated his marriage to Aisha.

Well, concern I would understand. However, certain groups have turned it into hysteria and hyperbole instead of concern. What's more, the vast majority of Islamic study and educational material on the significance of Aisha have little or nothing to do with her age at the time of marriage or the consummation, but with the personal effect she had on 'The Prophet' and the life she led in adulthood, particularly her contributions to the hadiths.

In other words, I'm questioning whether the hype that the more "vocal" groups have given Aisha's story with regard to her age has anything at all with the significance given to her by the group who considers Muhammad a prophet in the first place. It seems a bit like religious/political baiting rather than a concern with an ethical basis in reality.

[zooterkin]

Originally Posted by TimCallahan

In the Los Angeles County Arboretum, one of the major boatnical gardens in Southern California, there is a Victorian house that "Lucky" Baldwin (1828 -1909)founder of the town of Arcadia, built for his bride. She was 14 at the time. There was nothing illegal or even socially reprehensible about a grown man marrying a 14year-old girl at tht time, less than two centuries ago. If he tried that today he'd be guilty of statutory rape and deemed a sex offender.

As I've pointed out recently in a couple of other threads, you don't even have to go back that far. Jerry Lee Lewis married his cousin who was 13 at the time in 1958; it did cause a scandal when it came to light on his tour of the UK, but the marriage was legal in the state in which it was performed.


Oh, and Tim

[geni]

It's probably true.

Age of consent laws were pretty limited for centuries (UK was 12) with the issue not being regarded as a massive problem. The poor didn't really want to marry before their 20s and the rich could do whatever they liked.

It was only when the Victorians started to get worried about child prostitution that the age of consent started to climb.

[Hux]

Ok can I ask this:

Is it correct to say that today's Muslims wish to emulate the Prophet just as much as those in older days? If that is so, are childhood marriages quite common in Islamic countries (by that I mean, grown men with very young girls)?

If so, what is their excuse?

[AWPrime]

Most cultures at that time consummated at around age 13. This can be seen and excused as ephebophilia. At age 9 there is a extreme risk of damage. Those few years make a huge difference. And even royal families known for marrying preteens, often don't go lower with sex and then most of the time it was between individuals with a far lower age difference.

These types of extreme cases seem to happen mostly in very primitive and patriarchal cultures, it could very well be institutionalized pedophilia.

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

Actually, you know, this is one of the things where the double standards of the fundies really shine. Basically:

- Bible is sexist against women and even condones sexual slavery and rape? "Well, that was only then, those were the standards of the time, everyone was sexist, God was only giving a nod to the status-quo, bla, bla, bla."

- Bible condones slavery _and_ beating slaves savagely as long as they don't die on the spot? (But if he dies a couple of days later, that's ok.) "Well, that was only then, those were the standards of the time, everyone had slaves and beat them up, God was only giving a nod to the status-quo, bla, bla, bla."

- God commanded genocides, like that against Midian? "Well, that was only then, those were the standards of the time, everyone did genocides, God was only giving a nod to the status-quo, bla, bla, bla."
- ETA: God commands the rape of the virgin female captives from Midian, and I see no mention of a minimum age? "Well, that was only then, those were the standards of the time, everyone screwed the female captives, God was only giving a nod to the status-quo, bla, bla, bla."

- Mohamed had an underage wife? "OMG, creepy old pervert, just shows that their religion is evil, kill, kill, kill"

Well, sure, if godidit it's always ok!!!!!



That's why I keep saying if there really was one it would need to be hunted down and killed. But there isn't - it's just bad people - who need to be etc.

[geni]

Originally Posted by Hux

Ok can I ask this:

Is it correct to say that today's Muslims wish to emulate the Prophet just as much as those in older days? If that is so, are childhood marriages quite common in Islamic countries (by that I mean, grown men with very young girls)?

If so, what is their excuse?

Most go for between 14 and 16.

A few (saudi arabia, yemen, Qatar) go for no sex outside marriage and leave the marriage issue up to the parents.

[Jontg]

Remember, though, pedophilia is a psychological term, a diagnosis of a disease, and what that constitutes varies from culture to culture. Remember, in order for something to be pathological, it has to be deviant, distressing, dysfunctional, and dangerous--and a traditional act is by definition non-deviant and non-dysfunctional. It may be dangerous for obvious and squicky reasons, but if you're raised to expect and accept it, it's unlikely to be distressing for anyone involved or their peers. That's my big problem with accusing Muhammad et al of pedophilia--you can say that it was barbaric, or even flat-out wrong if you're a moral absolutist, but an ancient Arab having sex with a girl who was a woman by the standards of her time, had been raised to know this was going to happen, and grew up without any apparent baggage or injury due to the incident, simply cannot be said to meet any clinical definition of pedophilia. That's not a subjective word that you can stretch to meet a definition you like; it's a specific, diagnostic term that does not apply here.

[Aepervius]

As discussed in another thread until 19th century age of consent was 12 and in some countries even lower (http://law.marquette.edu/lawreview/S.../Olszewski.pdf) for example in UK it was 10 year old in the 16th century until the 19th.

So in such a context, does it sound weird to marry and have sex with such a young girl ? Not too much.

[Arcade22]

Originally Posted by Aepervius

So in such a context, does it sound weird to marry and have sex with such a young girl ? Not too much.

Yeah, and i remembered that we used to burn heretics here and go on crusades, and i that context the islamists killing the infidels and waging war against the unbelievers doesn't feel weird to me...

[AWPrime]

Originally Posted by Jontg

Remember, though, pedophilia is a psychological term, a diagnosis of a disease, and what that constitutes varies from culture to culture. Remember, in order for something to be pathological, it has to be deviant, distressing, dysfunctional, and dangerous--and a traditional act is by definition non-deviant and non-dysfunctional.

Nope. We can assume that she didn't show any outward signs of puberty. To feel any desire to have sex with such a girl is pedophilia. Sexual preference for prepubescent children isn't a normal type of sexual attention, as it seems to be more connected with a desire for power imbalance combined with a sense of sexual entitlement.

If a very powerful person obtains a leadership role he could institutionalize pedophilia. And just because a culture or a person made pedophilia 'normal', doesn't change the fact that it is pedophilia.

Personally I think that Mohammed had an extra reason to marry that young girl. Because of her extreme low age he would be able to mold her completely.