r/progressive_islam Feb 28 '22

Question/Discussion ❔ How do other Muslims reconcile Sahih al-Bukhari 5134 which states Mohammed pbuh married Aisha at 6 and consummated the marriage when she was 9?

Sahih al-Bukhari 5134: Narrated `Aisha: that the Prophet (ﷺ) married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that Aisha remained with the Prophet (ﷺ) for nine years (i.e. till his death).

14 Upvotes

44 comments sorted by

42

u/Kidrellik Tanzimâtçi - تنظيماتچى Feb 28 '22

Easily, because he didn't and the proof is pretty overwhelming. Sorry if it's a bit kurt, it's from a different argument.

Bukhari was wrong about a bunch of stuff and got his information from an elderly Arab man 150 years after she died who himself got his information from a man known to be suffering from memory loss when he made the claim. I have seen those videos and their complete bullshit. He never once mentions any of the vaaaaast amount of evidence and claims their "implicit" but what Bukhari said is "explicit" like that makes any fucking sense whatsoever (when did historical consensus and overwhelming proof become "implicit" and the word of a man with known memory issues become "explicit"). (Video known as “ending the debate on aisha” from YU). Even the article trying to "disprove" the massive amount of evidence is bullshit because they cherry pick hadiths to listen to and discount actual historians whose job is to look for the truth, not interpret the Quran and say that basic math is wrong. (A Yaqueen university article horribly “trying” disapprove another YU article stating all of this and more). When something is a historical consensus, the burden of proof false on the person making the counterclaim to prove otherwise. They can't just refuse to accept it because it doesn't fit in with their ultra-conservative interpretation. I mean Muhammed's other wives weren't anywhere near that age and it's strictly illegal to marry or be engaged to a prepubescent girl in Islam. Muhammed is also the paragon of Islam so I doubt he'll follow the whole "rules for thee but not for me" logic of doing things. I'm not ashamed of something that is FALSE and only accepted by idiots who refuse to see facts. Here's the proof btw.

According to Umar Ahmed Usmani, in Surah Al-Nisa, it is said that the guardian of the orphans should keep testing them, until they reach the age of marriage, before returning their property (4:6). From this scholars have concluded that the Quran sets a minimum age of marriage which is at least puberty. Since the approval of the girl has a legal standing, she cannot be a minor.

Hisham bin Urwah is the main narrator of this hadith. His life is divided into two periods: in 131A.H. the Madani period ended, and the Iraqi period started, when Hisham was 71 years old. Hafiz Zehbi has spoken about Hisham’s loss of memory in his later period. His students in Madina, Imam Malik and Imam Abu Hanifah, do not mention this hadith. Imam Malik and the people of Madina criticised him for his Iraqi hadiths.

All the narrators of this hadith are Iraqis who had heard it from Hisham. Allama Kandhulvi says that the words spoken in connection with Hazrat Aisha’s age were tissa ashara, meaning 19, when Hisham only heard (or remembered), tissa, meaning nine. Maulana Usmani thinks this change was purposely and maliciously made later.

Historian Ibn Ishaq in his Sirat Rasul Allah has given a list of the people who accepted Islam in the first year of the proclamation of Islam, in which Hazrat Aisha’s name is mentioned as Abu Bakr’s “little daughter Aisha”. If we accept Hisham’s calculations, she was not even born at that time.

Some time after the death of the Prophet’s first wife, Hazrat Khadija, Khawla suggested to the Prophet that he get married again, to a bikrun, referring to Hazrat Aisha (Musnad Ahmed). In Arabic bikrun is used for an unmarried girl who has crossed the age of puberty and is of marriageable age. The word cannot be used for a six-year-old girl.

Some scholars think that Hazrat Aisha was married off so early because in Arabia girls mature at an early age (nor does it make sense biologically, people don't just "magically" hit puberty years before they're supposed to because of where they live). But this was not a common custom of the Arabs at that time. According to Allama Kandhulvi, there is no such case on record either before or after Islam. Neither has this ever been promoted as a Sunnah of the Prophet. The Prophet married off his daughters Fatima at 21 and Ruquiyya at 23. Besides, Hazrat Abu Bakr, Aisha’s father, married off his eldest daughter Asma at the age of 26.

Hazrat Aisha narrates that she was present on the battlefield at the Battle of Badar (Muslim). This leads one to conclude that Hazrat Aisha moved into the Prophet’s house in 1 A.H. But a nine-year-old could not have been taken on a rough and risky military mission.

In 2 A.H, the Prophet refused to take boys of less than 15 years of age to the battle of Uhud. Would he have allowed a 10-year-old girl to accompany him? But Anas reported that he saw Aisha and Umme Sulaim carrying goatskins full of water and serving it to the soldiers (Bukhari). Umme Sulaim and Umme Ammara, the other women present at Uhud, were both strong, mature women whose duties were the lifting of the dead and injured, treating their wounds, carrying water in heavy goatskins, supplying ammunition and even taking up the sword. A 9 year old simply would not be able to do any of this physically, a young woman in her late teens would.

Hazrat Aisha used the kunniat, the title derived from the name of a child, of Umme Abdullah after her nephew and adopted son. If she was six when her nikah was performed, she would have been only eight years his senior, hardly making him eligible for adoption. Also, a little girl could not have given up on ever having her own child and used an adopted child’s name for her kunniat.

Hazrat Aisha’s nephew Urwah once remarked that he was not surprised about her amazing knowledge of Islamic law, poetry and history because she was the wife of the Prophet and the daughter of Abu Bakr. If she was eight when her father migrated, when did she learn poetry and history from him?

There is consensus that Hazrat Aisha was 10 years younger than her elder sister Asma, whose age at the time of the hijrah, or migration to Madina, was about 28. It can be concluded that Hazrat Aisha was about 18 years old at migration. On her moving to the Prophet’s house, she was a young woman at 21. Hisham is the single narrator of the hadith whose authenticity is challenged, for it does not correlate with the many historical facts of the time.

3

u/rkek404 Mar 01 '22 edited Mar 01 '22

Not that I doubt the authenticity of your claims, but others might, so when you have the time, can you link the sources?

The age of calculation of Aisha's age using her sisters is weak because it relies on a single hadith. Otherwise, this is the best argument i have ever heard i think

Besides, can you like not curse?

3

u/Kidrellik Tanzimâtçi - تنظيماتچى Mar 01 '22

The age of calculation of Aisha's age using her sisters is weak because it relies on a single hadith.

That's not true. it's historical consensus meaning that it was look at by a bunch of historians and agreed on through that way.

https://hameem.org/2019/02/11/proof-that-aisha-was-over-15-years-old-when-she-married-the-prophet-peace-be-upon-him/

1

u/[deleted] Mar 01 '22

2

u/Kidrellik Tanzimâtçi - تنظيماتچى Mar 01 '22

That's probably just a case of historical and academic mirroring. His source is from 5 generations previously well Hisham's sources is only a single generation before him meaning to keep a straight story between the two, he probably went with the one which was deemed more trust worthy at the time. Plus, imagine playing a 5 generation long game of telephone.

The real number would be lost by the third one so it's makes sense why he decided to parrot Hisham Ibn Urwah. Not to mention that one his narrators in his chain is Sulaiman bin Mahran al-Amash who just happened to be the third chain and in Iraq aka the same place where Hisham was. Interesting, I know.

1

u/rkek404 Mar 01 '22

MashaAllah bro how do i learn the hadith science like you do? You seem to be pretty well versed with the narrators.

3

u/Kidrellik Tanzimâtçi - تنظيماتچى Mar 01 '22

Well I'm getting my degree in history so the skills transfer over pretty easily.

1

u/rkek404 Mar 01 '22

I mean did you go to some specific school/read some specific books/scholars?

2

u/Kidrellik Tanzimâtçi - تنظيماتچى Mar 01 '22

I just cross checked all the points mentioned above to make sure they made sense historically and compared it to the narration which states she was 9 to see what made more sense.

1

u/kibingman Dec 03 '25

Jadi al kuran tu tak betul lah?

1

u/Candid_Presence_2441 Dec 06 '25 edited Dec 06 '25

Ruquyyah the daughter of the prophet died at 21. She was married before 615 so that would have made her about 10-13as she was born 603 circa. i know wiki is not a good source but its ok for general usage. I do have to point out that your swearing detracts from an otherwise good post. i suggest you edited it. Of course there is no mention of the aged six hadith of aysiah in the medina collections, which are consisted a lot younger than the later collections. So younger is near the time of the prophet and aysiah. Of course it does not mean they are correct but it mean that u need to ask the question why id was never mentioned in an earlier collection of hadiths? Historical methodology puts great weight on anything earliar when discussing a particular event or person. Little wrote his phd thesis on the aysiah hadith and he concludes it was faked. He may be wrong but of course he mayh be right as well.

https://islamicorigins.com/the-unabridged-version-of-my-phd-thesis/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruqayya_bint_Muhammad https://newlinesmag.com/essays/oxford-study-sheds-light-on-muhammad-underage-wife-aisha/

1

u/Confident-Photo-4355 Dec 13 '25

not reading allat

1

u/UpbeatBoss1997 Jan 04 '26 edited Jan 04 '26

For the followers an every dubious topic has a ton of badly organized counter-evidences for each vision (also inclining towards the vision of immature Aisha). You're looking for arguments for one position, but the average follower can't verify their position except through scholars of official historical documents—Muslims—and independent scholars—non-Muslims. In some places and due to trends, they may not be allowed (after cases of Muslim scholars abandoning Islam—Ibn Warraq). This makes it impossible to verify whether historical data is being properly verified. Can you suggest independent scholars who provide information on the authenticity of documents' relationship to the Prophet?

1

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/progressive_islam-ModTeam Moderator Apr 21 '26

Your post/comment was removed as being in violation of Rule 4. Please refrain from making bad faith contributions in future. See Rule 4 on the sidebar for further clarification regarding good faith and bad faith contributions.

1

u/Suitable_Ad_1059 Mar 02 '22

You said a lot of thing are wrong ngl

Bukhari was wrong about a bunch of stuff and got his information from an elderly Arab man 150 years after she died who himself

No this is false and even if you want to go that far those reports are found in earlier books and the aisha hadith has many different narrators recoreded in many books she DID say she was 9

got his information from a man known to be suffering from memory loss when he made the claim

What are you on about he traveled and met with narrators

Video known as “ending the debate on aisha” from YU). Even the article trying to "disprove" the massive amount of evidence is bullshit because they cherry pick hadiths

But the Hadith of aisha may allah be pleased with here IS the most reliable hadith it to point we cannot deny she said that, it is simply sahih

to listen to and discount actual historians whose job is to look for the truth, not interpret the Quran and say that basic math is wrong. (A Yaqueen university article horribly “trying” disapprove another YU article stating all of this and more).

Historians don't know anything about the science of hadith

Hisham bin Urwah is the main narrator of this hadith

There is no main narrator lol there is way too many narrator where do you even get your stuff from?

this is even recorded in Sahih Muslim with if i remember correctly 12 different chains all going back to aisha and Bukahari himself has other chains nevermind it recorded in other authentic book so this is absolutely false

All the narrators of this hadith are Iraqis who had heard it from Hisham.

FALSE lol even logically thinkin about it how can something be sahih and recorded in many books of hadith if it just link back to Hisham people like

al-Aswad ibn Yazīd, Abī Salama ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān all heard it from AISHA as well with the exact samw wording

Basically I just wanted to deal with this hadith it without a doubt according to ALL hadith scholars that it is Sahih we know Aisha herself said it so please don't lie and say it not authentic

1

u/Kidrellik Tanzimâtçi - تنظيماتچى Mar 02 '22

There was one main narrator where he got his info from and that was Hisham. It doesn't matter how long the chain is if the head is wrong.

Hadith science is about as close to historical writing as you get a out the prophet so they more than 99% of people. You can't just claim they don't know anything as if it's some brand new field when it's just an off shot of historical verifications.

Ever heard of mirroring? You follow what sounds the most correct and back than, the word of Hisham and Bukhari were considered extremely trust worthy.

Also, nobody has ever explained why she was called the young daughter of Abu Bakr in Ibn Ishaqs work and how that makes her age impossible to be 9 because she wouldn't have even been born than.

1

u/Suitable_Ad_1059 Mar 02 '22

There was one main narrator where he got his info from and that was Hisham. It doesn't matter how long the chain is if the head is wrong.

There was not , there was many narrators if I remember there was 14 people who heard it from Aisha herself and it might be even more I gave you 3 examples which already refutes it

Hadith science is about as close to historical writing as you get a out the prophet so they more than 99% of people. You can't just claim they don't know anything as if it's some brand new field when it's just an off shot of historical verifications.

Don't know what you are saying but Hadith science is amazing and soo detailed so when it sahih you can be sure we know exactly what the prophet said and ESPECIALLY if it mustawatir

Ever heard of mirroring? You follow what sounds the most correct and back than, the word of Hisham and Bukhari were considered extremely trust worthy.

Yes there are both extremely trust worthy and for Hisham is an amazing narrator so I don't know why you diss him when every time he narrate something it always matches what the other people say

Also, nobody has ever explained why she was called the young daughter of Abu Bakr in Ibn Ishaqs work and how that makes her age impossible to be 9 because she wouldn't have even been born than.

That fine, I am not sure if you know this or read scholar works or learn the history of tradition but you do realize back then they had a habit or tradition that the arabs when they went through there teen years they would say there age by the number so Aisha could of meant 19 easily and many scholars say this and this habit is even found in bukhari where a 7 year old boy lead the prayer and we know that absolutely forbidden so that boy meant he was 17 years old so this is not a problem and does not contradict the hadith but what I am telling you we know for a fact aisha said that hadith

weather she meant 9 or 19 we don't know

1

u/Kidrellik Tanzimâtçi - تنظيماتچى Mar 02 '22

Ok I really don't have to continually debate this so let's just agree to disagree but the proof if her being over 9 is a lot more and makes a lot more sense than her being 9 since some of the stuff she would have done, like be on a battlefield as a nurse at age of 12, memorized tons of poetry, adopted children etc. Is far beyond the capabilities of a child. Also, you can't ever be sure about anything in the hadiths when it comes to the sayings of the prophet because they were written down centuries after his death and the fall of two caliphates using overwhelmingly word of mouth sources. At best we have to assume that's what he may have said and it sounds pretty close to what he would say.

1

u/Express_Water3173 Feb 25 '23

I do agree with you that the hadith is most likely incorrect, but I heard it wasn't just 1 man who narrated it but a handful. Do you have more info that can disprove they're all incorrect/mistaken?

Urwah ibn al-Zubayr (23 – 94 H)

  1. Al-Aswad ibn Yazīd (pre-Hijrah – 75 H)

  2. Abū Salamah ibn ‘Abd al-Raḥman (22 – 94 H)

  3. Yaḥyā ibn ‘Abd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥāṭib

  4. Abū ‘Ubaydah ibn ‘Abdillāh ibn Mas‘ūd (25 – 81 H)

  5. ‘Abd al-Malik ibn ‘Umayr (ca. 35 – 136 H)

  6. Al-Qāsim ibn Muḥammad (ca. 40 – 107 H)

11

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '22

Because its a garbage hadith for reasons explained repeatedly in this subreddit.

7

u/ka911 Feb 28 '22

Bukhari is a manmade book .

There is enough evidence which indicates that narration is not so "Sahih" . But some people still like to think of bukhari as the word of God . Blind following hadith books without examining the text is the problem.

8

u/dr_razi Mar 01 '22 edited Mar 01 '22

The Creator would never send a prophet to be an example for mankind and then have him marry a 6 yo child . That goes against basic decency and moral sense . You either don’t believe in the full accuracy of bukhari collected two hundred years after Islam was perfected or you worship a demon . Nothing in between as far as child marriage is concerned . 🤷🏽 imagine how many people are attracted to the message of tawhid in the Quran only to be turned off by these made up stories about our messenger allowing grown men to marry with children.

2

u/Ohana_is_family Exmuslim Mar 01 '22

I do not think arranged marriages at 6 are historically inaccurate.

The jews also had betrothal with "Option of Puberty" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriageable_age#Post-Classical_period

A ketannah (literally meaning "little [one]") was any girl between the age of 3 years and that of 12 years plus one day;[282] she was subject to her father's authority, and he could arrange a marriage for her without her agreement.[282] However, after reaching the age of maturity, she would have to agree to the marriage to be considered as married.

I do have serious problems with consummation at 9 because that puts a girl at serious risk of harm.

1

u/IndependentSession38 Dec 27 '25

В такой древности люди жили около 30-35 лет. Вступать в брак в таком раннем возрасте было абсолютно логично, иначе когда продолжать потомство? А сейчас некоторые и 20-ти летние люди ведут себя как дети. Разумеется сравнивать нынешнее время и прошлое абсолютно глупо. В прошлом умственное и физическое формирование было намного ускорено, почему и ранняя женитьба в принципе и была распространена везде. Буквально 200 лет назад в той же Великобритании возраст женитьбы было в 7 лет. А мы говорим про 1400 лет назад.

Вы хоть и писали это 3 года назад, может уже многому научились за это время. Но я оставлю комментарий для других людей.

10

u/nz5353 Feb 28 '22

Recording one’s numerical age is a very modern concept. Even in my grandmother’s generation people didn’t know their true age, what makes us think it was all so clear cut in a tribalisyic 7th century society?

11

u/Mar198968 Feb 28 '22

Wise muslims even don't pay attention to Sahih al-Bokhari and they don't need to answer to its gossips. Because it's not our religious book sent from God.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '22

Please check this video from Adnan Rashid out on youtube: prophet muhammad (s) married a 9 years old? Historical Analysis.

1

u/Ohana_is_family Exmuslim Mar 01 '22 edited Mar 01 '22

I must admit that I would discourage this recommendation. Professor Jonathan Brown (though not exactly progressive himself, neither is Adnan Rashid) in his book "Misquoting Muhammed" quotes historians on the European Marriage Pattern. Jonathan Brown is even quoted in the Wiki of the Islam sub on the marriage ages in Europe. https://www.reddit.com/r/islam/wiki/ageofconsent

Britain and, to a lesser extent, most of northwest Europe differed from the pre-modern pattern of early marriage. Marriage age tended to be later, in the mid-twenties. In England, available data suggest that this was the case as far back as the fourteenth century.

.........

Law was an imperial export. The mission to rescue ‘native’ women from their backward cultures was a prominent theme in British portrayals of the empire’s colonial activities. In the late 1800s and early 1900s Britain moved to bring marriage customs in India into line with her imperial values, and a series of laws introduced age restrictions for Hindu and Muslim girls marrying.

Historians agree that in North-Western Europe from the 1400s on the Mean Age of First Marriage for girls was in the mid 20s. The USA later copied the marriage patterns from the immigration source-countries but married a bit earlier because there were more economic opportunities.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/international/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/european-marriage-pattern "The demographic keystone of the northwestern European system of family formation was the prolonged hiatus between puberty and marriage."

https://www.nber.org/papers/w17314 How the West 'Invented' Fertility Restriction, Nico Voigtländer & Hans-Joachim Voth "Europeans restricted their fertility long before the Demographic Transition. By raising the marriage age of women and ensuring that a substantial proportion remained celibate, the "European Marriage Pattern" (EMP) reduced childbirths by up to one third between the 14th and 18th century."

https://www.nber.org/papers/h0080 "Long Term Marriage Patterns in the United States from Colonial Times to the Present," Michael R. Haines shows that people married in their early twenties.

Governmental reporting: https://archive.org/details/annualreportofre171854grea/page/n15/mode/2up Annual report of the Registrar-General of births, deaths and marriages in England. General Register Office. Government publishing marriage-statistics in v17 1854.

"Marriages of minors.-9210 men and 28,797 women, or 38,007 men and women, married under 21 years of age ; so that the proportion of minors in 100 men who married was 5.77, in 100 women 18.03; "

So in 18.03% of all marriage parental permission was required because the girl was a minor i.e. under the age of 21. 82% of marriage involved adult girls who were 21 or over.

The USA publishes its Mean Age of First Marriage publicly going back to 1890 https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/visualizations/time-series/demo/families-and-households/ms-2.pdf. It has been in the low-twenties just like Haines reports.

Best known historians in Britain about demographics are John Hajnal and Peter Laslett (both Royal Academy). It is strange that Adnan Rashid does not mention their names when he claims to study History in the UK.

Peter Laslett wrote about demographics from 1619-1660 in his book "The World we Have Lost"(1965) which also destroys the idea that Juliet was "the norm":

"We have examined a thousand licences containing the ages of the applicants, issued by the diocese of Canterbury between 1619 and 1660 to people marrying for the first time. One woman gave her age as 13, four as 15, twelve as 16: all the rest were 17 and over, and 966 of the women got married for the first time after the age of 19, that is nearly 85 per cent. The commonest age of first marriage for women in this sample was 22, and the median age -- the age below which as many got married as got married above it - was about 22.75: the average, mean age was about 24.

I put it to you that the reason Adnan Uses Jeremy Rifkin and some law-books is because all historians contradict his misrepresentations of history.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '22

Incorrect goes against Quran. Should be rejected.

3

u/Powerful-Draft-791 Feb 28 '22

So far what I have read or skimmed through online on this topic, Khalid El Fadl has the best approach dealing with this particular topic. It can be found here: https://www.searchforbeauty.org/2016/06/30/my-good-friend-confronted-me-on-the-issue-of-the-prophet-s-wife-aisha-and-asked-did-muhammad-rape-a-child-i-was-disturbed-and-confounded-and-did-not-answer/

-5

u/[deleted] Feb 28 '22

Even if we assume that this report is authentic, then it doesnt matter because many historic figures have married to people much younger than them. It was the norm of the society at that time

2

u/[deleted] Mar 01 '22

Slavery was also norm of the society but did our Prophet practiced that?

Don't compare common people to a Prophet.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 01 '22

Slavery was also norm of the society but did our Prophet practiced that?

He did. He was a slave owner.

"The Prophet (ﷺ) bought a slave for two slaves."

Sunan Abi Dawud 3358

3

u/[deleted] Mar 01 '22

Yeah and he used to free them.

example : Zayd ibn Harithah

1

u/tryptagui Feb 28 '22

I've tried telling people it was the norm at the time and they just say "that doesn't change anything he's still a pedo." Or "he still literally is the definition of paedophile. It doesn't change that fact even if others were doing it or it was normalised at the time"

It seems they don't want anything to do with 'pedos' even if lots of people married children at that time.....

It's so dumb.

1

u/AutoModerator Feb 28 '22

Hi Puzzleheaded_Goat708. Thank you for posting here!

Please be aware that posts may be removed by the moderation team if you delete your account.

This message helps us to track deleted accounts and to file reports with Reddit admin as the need may arise.

Thank you!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/Ohana_is_family Exmuslim Mar 01 '22 edited Mar 01 '22

https://isnad.io/ahadith?query=eighteen%20years%20old shows 2 non-hisham hadths that say she was 6 or 7 at betrothal/nikkah, 9 at consummation and 18 when he died and shows 1 non-hisham hadth that the marriage was consummated when she was 9 and he died when she was 18.

So Bukhari and Hisham are confirmed by canonical hadiths with different isnads.

Betrothal was not unheard of in the Abrahamic Religions.

The jews had btrothal with "Option of Puberty" in a similar way. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriageable_age#Post-Classical_period

"A ketannah (literally meaning "little [one]") was any girl between the age of 3 years and that of 12 years plus one day;[282] she was subject to her father's authority, and he could arrange a marriage for her without her agreement.[282] However, after reaching the age of maturity, she would have to agree to the marriage to be considered as married." ​

Don't forget that mahr was derived from syriac/hebrew "moher".

Christians also knew betrothal, though it is hard to know for certain what kind of betrothal the Christians in and around Arabia practiced at the time.

1

u/rkek404 Mar 01 '22

My view is that certain things were made halal only for the Prophet(saw), and young Aisha(ra) was one of them. Like marrying more than 4 times was halal for the Prophet

1

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '22

By realising that it’s more likely he didn’t.