Does Islam, in fact, Encourage Paedophilia?

Was Ayesha A Six-Year-Old Bride?

The Ancient Myth Exposed

by T.O. Shanavas

I believed, without solid evidence other than my reverence to my Prophet, that the stories of the marriage of seven-year-old Ayesha to 50-year-old Prophet are only myths. However, my long pursuit in search of the truth on this matter proved my intuition correct. My Prophet was a gentleman. And he did not marry an innocent seven or nine year old girl. The age of Ayesha has been erroneously reported in the hadith literature. Furthermore, I think that the narratives reporting this event are highly unreliable. Some of the hadith (traditions of the Prophet) regarding Ayesha?s age at the time of her wedding with prophet are problematic. I present the following evidences against the acceptance of the fictitious story by Hisham ibn ?Urwah and to clear the name of my Prophet as an irresponsible old man preying on an innocent little girl.

EVIDENCE #1: Reliability of Source

Most of the narratives printed in the books of hadith are reported only by Hisham ibn `Urwah, who was reporting on the authority of his father. First of all, more people than just one, two or three should logically have reported. It is strange that no one from Medina, where Hisham ibn `Urwah lived the first 71 years of his life narrated the event, despite the fact that his Medinan pupils included the well-respected Malik ibn Anas. The origins of the report of the narratives of this event are people from Iraq, where Hisham is reported to have shifted after living in Medina for most of his life.

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).

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).

Mizanu?l-ai`tidal, 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-ai`tidal, Al-Zahbi, Al-Maktabatu?l-athriyyah, Sheikhupura, Pakistan, Vol. 4, p. 301).

CONCLUSION: 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.

CHRONOLOGY: It is vital also to keep in mind some of the pertinent dates in the history of Islam:

pre-610 CE: Jahiliya (pre-Islamic age) before revelation
610 CE: First revelation
610 CE: AbuBakr accepts Islam
613 CE: Prophet Muhammad begins preaching publicly.
615 CE: Emigration to Abyssinia
616 CE: Umar bin al Khattab accepts Islam
620 CE: Generally accepted betrothal of Ayesha to the Prophet
622 CE: Hijrah (emigation to Yathrib, later renamed Medina)
623/624 CE: Generally accepted year of Ayesha living with the Prophet
EVIDENCE #2: The Betrothal

According to Tabari (also according to Hisham ibn ?Urwah, Ibn Hunbal and Ibn Sad), Ayesha was betrothed at seven years of age and began to cohabit with the Prophet at the age of nine years.

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).

If Ayesha was betrothed in 620 CE (at the age of seven) and started to live with the Prophet in 624 CE (at the age of nine), that would indicate that she was born in 613 CE and was nine when she began living with the Prophet. Therefore, based on one account of Al-Tabari, the numbers show that Ayesha must have born in 613 CE, three years after the beginning of revelation (610 CE). Tabari also states that Ayesha was born in the pre-Islamic era (in Jahiliya). If she was born before 610 CE, she would have been at least 14 years old when she began living with the Prophet. Essentially, Tabari contradicts himself.

CONCLUSION: Al-Tabari is unreliable in the matter of determining Ayesha?s age.

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).

If Ibn Hajar?s statement is factual, Ayesha was born when the Prophet was 40 years old. If Ayesha was married to the Prophet when he was 52 years old, Ayesha?s age at marriage would be 12 years.

CONCLUSION: Ibn Hajar, Tabari an Ibn Hisham and Ibn Humbal contradict each other. So, the marriage of Ayesha at seven years of age is a myth.

EVIDENCE #4: Ayesha?s Age in relation to Asma?s Age

According to Abda?l-Rahman ibn abi zanna?d: ?Asma was 10 years older than Ayesha (Siyar A`la?ma?l-nubala?, Al-Zahabi, Vol. 2, p. 289, Arabic, Mu?assasatu?l-risalah, Beirut, 1992).

According to Ibn Kathir: ?She [Asma] was elder to her sister [Ayesha] by 10 years? (Al-Bidayah wa?l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol. 8, p. 371, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933).

According to Ibn Kathir: ?She [Asma] saw the killing of her son during that year [73 AH], as we have already mentioned, and five days later she herself died. According to other narratives, she died not after five days but 10 or 20, or a few days over 20, or 100 days later. The most well known narrative is that of 100 days later. At the time of her death, she was 100 years old.? (Al-Bidayah wa?l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol. 8, p. 372, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933)

According to Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani: ?She [Asma] lived a hundred years and died in 73 or 74 AH.? (Taqribu?l-tehzib, Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani, p. 654, Arabic, Bab fi?l-nisa?, al-harfu?l-alif, Lucknow).

According to almost all the historians, Asma, the elder sister of Ayesha was 10 years older than Ayesha. If Asma was 100 years old in 73 AH, she should have been 27 or 28 years old at the time of the hijrah.

If Asma was 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijrah, Ayesha should have been 17 or 18 years old. Thus, Ayesha, being 17 or 18 years of at the time of Hijra, she started to cohabit with the Prophet between at either 19 to 20 years of age.

Based on Hajar, Ibn Katir, and Abda?l-Rahman ibn abi zanna?d, Ayesha?s age at the time she began living with the Prophet would be 19 or 20. In Evidence # 3, Ibn Hajar suggests that Ayesha was 12 years old and in Evidence #4 he contradicts himself with a 17 or 18-year-old Ayesha. What is the correct age, twelve or eighteen?

CONCLUSION: Ibn Hajar is an unreliable source for Ayesha?s age.

EVIDENCE #5: The Battles of Badr and Uhud

A narrative regarding Ayesha?s participation in Badr is given in the hadith of Muslim, (Kitabu?l-jihad wa?l-siyar, Bab karahiyati?l-isti`anah fi?l-ghazwi bikafir). Ayesha, while narrating the journey to Badr and one of the important events that took place in that journey, says: ?when we reached Shajarah?. Obviously, Ayesha was with the group travelling towards Badr. A narrative regarding Ayesha?s participation in the Battle of Uhud is given in Bukhari (Kitabu?l-jihad wa?l-siyar, Bab Ghazwi?l-nisa? wa qitalihinna ma`a?lrijal): ?Anas reports that on the day of Uhud, people could not stand their ground around the Prophet. [On that day,] I saw Ayesha and Umm-i-Sulaim, they had pulled their dress up from their feet [to avoid any hindrance in their movement].? Again, this indicates that Ayesha was present in the Battles of Uhud and Badr.

It is narrated in Bukhari (Kitabu?l-maghazi, Bab Ghazwati?l-khandaq wa hiya?l-ahza?b): ?Ibn `Umar states that the Prophet did not permit me to participate in Uhud, as at that time, I was 14 years old. But on the day of Khandaq, when I was 15 years old, the Prophet permitted my participation.?

Based on the above narratives, (a) the children below 15 years were sent back and were not allowed to participate in the Battle of Uhud, and (b) Ayesha participated in the Battles of Badr and Uhud

CONCLUSION: Ayesha?s participation in the Battles of Badr and Uhud clearly indicates that she was not nine years old but at least 15 years old. After all, women used to accompany men to the battlefields to help them, not to be a burden on them. This account is another contradiction regarding Ayesha?s age.

EVIDENCE #6: Surat al-Qamar (The Moon)

According to the generally accepted tradition, Ayesha was born about eight years before hijrah. But according to another narrative in Bukhari, Ayesha is reported to have said: ?I was a young girl (jariyah in Arabic)? when Surah Al-Qamar was revealed (Sahih Bukhari, kitabu?l-tafsir, Bab Qaulihi Bal al-sa`atu Maw`iduhum wa?l-sa`atu adha? wa amarr).

Chapter 54 of the Quran was revealed eight years before hijrah (The Bounteous Koran, M.M. Khatib, 1985), indicating that it was revealed in 614 CE. If Ayesha started living with the Prophet at the age of nine in 623 CE or 624 CE, she was a newborn infant (sibyah in Arabic) at the time that Surah Al-Qamar (The Moon) was revealed. According to the above tradition, Ayesha was actually a young girl, not an infant in the year of revelation of Al-Qamar. Jariyah means young playful girl (Lane?s Arabic English Lexicon). So, Ayesha, being a jariyah not a sibyah (infant), must be somewhere between 6-13 years old at the time of revelation of Al-Qamar, and therefore must have been 14-21 years at the time she married the Prophet.

CONCLUSION: This tradition also contradicts the marriage of Ayesha at the age of nine.

EVIDENCE #7: Arabic Terminology

According to a narrative reported by Ahmad ibn Hanbal, after the death of the Prophet?s first wife Khadijah, when Khaulah came to the Prophet advising him to marry again, the Prophet asked her regarding the choices she had in mind. Khaulah said: ?You can marry a virgin (bikr) or a woman who has already been married (thayyib)?. When the Prophet asked the identity of the bikr (virgin), Khaulah mentioned Ayesha?s name.

All those who know the Arabic language are aware that the word bikr in the Arabic language is not used for an immature nine-year-old girl. The correct word for a young playful girl, as stated earlier, is jariyah. Bikr on the other hand, is used for an unmarried lady without conjugal experience prior to marriage, as we understand the word ?virgin? in English. Therefore, obviously a nine-year-old girl is not a ?lady? (bikr) (Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Vol. 6, p. .210, Arabic, Dar Ihya al-turath al-`arabi, Beirut).

CONCLUSION: The literal meaning of the word, bikr (virgin), in the above hadith is ?adult woman with no sexual experience prior to marriage.? Therefore, Ayesha was an adult woman at the time of her marriage.

EVIDENCE #8. The Qur?anic Text

All Muslims agree that the Quran is the book of guidance. So, we need to seek the guidance from the Quran to clear the smoke and confusion created by the eminent men of the classical period of Islam in the matter of Ayesha?s age at her marriage. Does the Quran allow or disallow marriage of an immature child of seven years of age?

There are no verses that explicitly allow such marriage. There is a verse, however, that guides Muslims in their duty to raise an orphaned child. The Quran?s guidance on the topic of raising orphans is also valid in the case of our own children. The verse states: ?And make not over your property (property of the orphan), which Allah had made a (means of) support for you, to the weak of understanding, and maintain them out of it, clothe them and give them good education. And test them until they reach the age of marriage. Then if you find them maturity of intellect, make over them their property...? (Quran, 4:5-6).

In the matter of children who have lost a parent, a Muslim is ordered to (a) feed them, (b) clothe them, (c) educate them, and (d) test them for maturity ?until the age of marriage? before entrusting them with management of finances.

Here the Quranic verse demands meticulous proof of their intellectual and physical maturity by objective test results before the age of marriage in order to entrust their property to them.

In light of the above verses, no responsible Muslim would hand over financial management to a seven- or nine-year-old immature girl. If we cannot trust a seven-year-old to manage financial matters, she cannot be intellectually or physically fit for marriage. Ibn Hambal (Musnad Ahmad ibn Hambal, vol.6, p. 33 and 99) claims that nine-year-old Ayesha was rather more interested in playing with toy-horses than taking up the responsible task of a wife. It is difficult to believe, therefore, that AbuBakr, a great believer among Muslims, would betroth his immature seven-year-old daughter to the 50-year-old Prophet. Equally difficult to imagine is that the Prophet would marry an immature seven-year-old girl.

Another important duty demanded from the guardian of a child is to educate them. Let us ask the question, ?How many of us believe that we can educate our children satisfactorily before they reach the age of seven or nine years?? The answer is none. Logically, it is an impossible task to educate a child satisfactorily before the child attains the age of seven. Then, how can we believe that Ayesha was educated satisfactorily at the claimed age of seven at the time of her marriage?

AbuBakr was a more judicious man than all of us. So, he definitely would have judged that Ayesha was a child at heart and was not satisfactorily educated as demanded by the Quran. He would not have married her to anyone. If a proposal of marrying the immature and yet to be educated seven-year-old Ayesha came to the Prophet, he would have rejected it outright because neither the Prophet nor AbuBakr would violate any clause in the Quran.

CONCLUSION: The marriage of Ayesha at the age of seven years would violate the maturity clause or requirement of the Quran. Therefore, the story of the marriage of the seven-year-old immature Ayesha is a myth.

EVIDENCE #9: Consent in Marriage

A women must be consulted and must agree in order to make a marriage valid (Mishakat al Masabiah, translation by James Robson, Vol. I, p. 665). Islamically, credible permission from women is a prerequisite for a marriage to be valid.

By any stretch of the imagination, the permission given by an immature seven-year-old girl cannot be valid authorization for marriage.

It is inconceivable that AbuBakr, an intelligent man, would take seriously the permission of a seven-year-old girl to marry a 50-year-old man.

Similarly, the Prophet would not have accepted the permission given by a girl who, according to the hadith of Muslim, took her toys with her when she went live with Prophet.

CONCLUSION: The Prophet did not marry a seven-year-old Ayesha because it would have violated the requirement of the valid permission clause of the Islamic Marriage Decree. Therefore, the Prophet married an intellectually and physically mature lady Ayesha.

SUMMARY:

It was neither an Arab tradition to give away girls in marriage at an age as young as seven or nine years, nor did the Prophet marry Ayesha at such a young age. The people of Arabia did not object to this marriage because it never happened in the manner it has been narrated.

Obviously, the narrative of the marriage of nine-year-old Ayesha by Hisham ibn `Urwah cannot be held true when it is contradicted by many other reported narratives. Moreover, there is absolutely no reason to accept the narrative of Hisham ibn `Urwah as true when other scholars, including Malik ibn Anas, view his narrative while in Iraq, as unreliable. The quotations from Tabari, Bukhari and Muslim show they contradict each other regarding Ayesha?s age. Furthermore, many of these scholars contradict themselves in their own records. Thus, the narrative of Ayesha?s age at the time of the marriage is not reliable due to the clear contradictions seen in the works of classical scholars of Islam.

Therefore, there is absolutely no reason to believe that the information on Ayesha?s age is accepted as true when there are adequate grounds to reject it as myth. Moreover, the Quran rejects the marriage of immature girls and boys as well as entrusting them with responsibilities

Asif:
Interesting piece. The distinction you point out between

pedophilia and ephebophilia is useful and perhaps important.

However, I don't understand how a 9-year-old (and I'm not

necessarily referring to Ayesha) could pass as pubescent in any

era. You write:
"The aim of that is to stop paedophiles from preying on

vulnerable youngsters. Incidentally, in Iran the age of consent

is 9."
But If you're thinking that the further back in history we go,

the lower is the onset of puberty, you're wrong. Onset of

puberty has been falling, at least in the past two hundred

years, for reliable data exists.

Secondly, the distinction between pre-, post- and pubescent

"children" may all really be arbritary limits for

age-of-consent. It is often claimed that and individual becomes

sexually 'mature' after undergoing puberty, but this really

isn't true. All that puberty does is make one REPRODUCTIVELY

mature. In almost all mammals, including humans, individuals

are sexually active well before the onset of puberty.

You write: "Sexual attraction to pubescent teens is another thing altogether tp paedophilia and has existed throughout history in most cultures and the term for that is ephebophilia. ..As others have written on Chowk in the past, the

sexual attraction to postpubescent teens was considered

the norm in Ancient Greece, Rome, Byzantium, India, China, the

whole of the Islamic World, medieval Europe, indeed in every

human culture "

This may not be an accurate statement. In very much of the

erotica relating to attraction to youngsters, there is either

no distinction made between post-pubescent and pre-, or even

pubescent. In fact, in most Arab homoerotic literature, the

object of atrraction is thought to be desireable only before

the first facial hairs start to sprout. At least for boys, The most common age of attraction for sheer beauty 'reasons' seems to be around 12, when, just before puberty, the various parts of the body are in a certain proportion that are naturally aestethically appealing.

okay, properly formatted this time...

Asif:
Interesting piece. The distinction you point out between pedophilia and ephebophilia is useful and perhaps important. However, I don't understand how a 9-year-old (and I'm not necessarily referring to Ayesha) could pass as pubescent in any era. You write:

"The aim of that is to stop paedophiles from preying on vulnerable youngsters. Incidentally, in Iran the age of consent is 9."

But If you're thinking that the further back in history we go, the lower is the onset of puberty, you're wrong. Onset of puberty has been falling, at least in the past two hundred years, for reliable data exists.

Secondly, the distinction between pre-, post- and pubescent "children" may all really be arbritary limits for age-of-consent. It is often claimed that and individual becomes sexually 'mature' after undergoing puberty, but this really isn't true. All that puberty does is make one REPRODUCTIVELY mature. In almost all mammals, including humans, individuals are sexually active well before the onset of puberty.

You write: "Sexual attraction to pubescent teens is another thing altogether tp paedophilia and has existed throughout history in most cultures and the term for that is ephebophilia. ..As others have written on Chowk in the past, the sexual attraction to postpubescent teens was considered the norm in Ancient Greece, Rome, Byzantium, India, China, the whole of the Islamic World, medieval Europe, indeed in every human culture "

This may not be an accurate statement. In very much of the erotica relating to attraction to youngsters, there is either no distinction made between post-pubescent and pre-, or even pubescent. In fact, in most Arab homoerotic literature, the object of atrraction is thought to be desireable only before the first facial hairs start to sprout. At least for boys, The most common age of attraction for sheer beauty 'reasons' seems to be around 12, when, just before puberty, the various parts of the body are in a certain proportion that are naturally aestethically appealing.

rgds,

#1 Posted by Islamic philosopher

Yes, yes. Every source is unreliable, except for your tortured arguments. Poor Abu Bakr did try to object, based on the grounds that he was like his (mo's) brother. But the randy old man countered that by saying that by Islamic (his own cooked up) law, it was perfectly okay.

So poor Abu had to consent (the alternative would have been a beheading).

#1 Posted by Islamic philosopher

Here you go....

Aisha the Child Wife of Muhammad


The thought of an old man becoming aroused by a child is one of the most disturbing thoughts that makes us cringe as it reminds us of pedophilia and the most despicable people. It is difficult to accept that the Holy Prophet married Aisha when she was 6-years-old and consummated his marriage with her when she was 9. He was then, 54 years old.


Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3310:
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64
Narrated 'Aisha:
that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 65
Narrated 'Aisha:
that the Prophet 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 for nine years (i.e. till his death)." what you know of the Quran (by heart)'

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88
Narrated 'Ursa:
The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).

Some Muslims claim that it was Abu Bakr who approached Muhammad asking him to marry his daughter. This is of course not true and here is the proof.

Sahih Bukhari 7.18
Narrated 'Ursa:
The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry."

Arabs were a primitive lot with little rules to abide. Yet they had some code of ethics that they honored scrupulously. For example, although they fought all the year round, they abstained from hostilities during certain holy months of the year. They also considered Mecca to be a holy city and did not make war against it. A adopted son’s wife was deemed to be a daughter in law and they would not marry her. Also it was customary that close friends made a pact of brotherhood and considered each other as true brothers. The Prophet disregarded all of these rules anytime they stood between him and his interests or whims.

Abu Bakr and Muhammad had pledged to each other to be brothers. So according to their costoms Ayesha was supposed to be like a niece to the Holy Prophet. Yet that did not stop him to ask her hand even when she was only six years old.

But this moral relativist Prophet would use the same excuse to reject a woman he did not like.
Sahih Bukhari V.7, B62, N. 37
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
It was said to the Prophet, "Won't you marry the daughter of Hamza?" He said, "She is my foster niece (brother's daughter). "

Hamza and Abu Bakr both were the foster brothers of Muhammad. But Ayesha must have been too pretty for the Prophet to abide by the codes of ethics and custom.

In the following Hadith he confided to Ahesha that he had dreamed of her before soliciting her from her father.

Sahih Bukhari 9.140
Narrated 'Aisha:
Allah's Apostle said to me, "You were shown to me twice (in my dream) before I married you. I saw an angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I said to him, 'Uncover (her),' and behold, it was you. I said (to myself), 'If this is from Allah, then it must happen.

Whether Muhammad had actually such dream or he just said it to please Ayesha is not the point. What matters here is that it indicates that Ayesaha was a baby being “carried” by an angel when the Prophet dreamed of her.

There are numerous hadithes that explicitly reveal the age of Ayesha at the time of her marriage. Here are some of them.

Sahih Bukhari 5.236.
Narrated Hisham's father:
Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old.

Sahih Bukhari 5.234
Narrated Aisha:
The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

And in another Hadith we read.

Sunan Abu-Dawud Book 41, Number 4915, also Number 4916 and Number 4917
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:
The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) married me when I was seven or six. When we came to Medina, some women came. according to Bishr's version: Umm Ruman came to me when I was swinging. They took me, made me prepared and decorated me. I was then brought to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him), and he took up cohabitation with me when I was nine. She halted me at the door, and I burst into laughter.

In the above hadith we read that Ayesha was swinging, This is a play of little girls not grown up people. The following Hadith is particularly interesting because it shows that Ayesha was so small that was not aware what was going on when the Holy Prophet “surprised” her by going to her.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 90
Narrated Aisha:
When the Prophet married me, my mother came to me and made me enter the house (of the Prophet) and nothing surprised me but the coming of Allah's Apostle to me in the forenoon.


Must have been quite a surprise! But the following is also interesting because it demonstrates that she was just a kid playing with her dolls. Pay attention to what the interpreter wrote in the parenthesis. (She was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty)


Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151
Narrated 'Aisha:
I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13)


Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3311
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.

The holy Prophet died when he was 63. So he must have married Ayesha when he as 51 and went to her when he was 54.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 73, Number 33
Narrated 'Aisha:
I never felt so jealous of any woman as I did of Khadija, though she had died three years before the Prophet married me, and that was because I heard him mentioning her too often, and because his Lord had ordered him to give her the glad tidings that she would have a palace in Paradise, made of Qasab and because he used to slaughter a sheep and distribute its meat among her friends.


Khadija died in December of 619 AD. That is two years before Hijra. At that time the Prophet was 51-years-old. So in the same year that Khadija died the prophet married Ayesha and took her to his home 3 years later, i.e. one year after Hijra. But until she grow up he married Umm Salama.

In another part Ayesha claims that as long as she remembers her parents were always Muslims.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 245

Narrated 'Aisha:
(the wife of the Prophet) I never remembered my parents believing in any religion other than the true religion (i.e. Islam),



If Ayesha was older i.e. 16 or 18 as some Muslims claim, she would have remembered the religion of her parents prior to becoming Muslims.

Now someone may still claim that all these hadithes are lies. People are free to say whatever they want. But truth is clear like the Sun for those who have eyes.

No sane person would be aroused by a 9-year-old child. Decent people wince at the thought of this shameful act. Yet some Muslims deny them. The question is why so many followers of Muhammad would fabricate so many false hadithes about the age of Ayisha, which incidentally confirm each other?

I can tell you why people would attribute false miracles to their prophet. Babis believe that Bab started to praise God as soon as he was born. There is a Hadith like that also about Muhammad. Christians believe the birth of the Christ was miraculous and the Jews believe Moses opened a dry passageway through the Red Sea. Believers love to hear these stories. It confirms their faith. There are many absurd miracles attributed to Muhammad in the hadiths, despite the fact that he denied being able to perform any miracles. But why should anyone fabricate a lie about the age of Ayisha that would portray his Prophet as a pedophile?

#1 Posted by Islamic philosopher

Here's some more:

Controversies about the age of Aisha

The majority of Muslims agree that Aisha was only 9 years old when the Prophet married her. The following site makes no apology for her young age and accuses the modernists for humbugging the Westerns morality and denying the truth.

http://admin.muslimsonline.com/~islamawe/Polemics/aishah.html

This site also defends Muhammad for marrying Aisha at 9 claiming that girls reach puberty at that age and therefore are considered adult and having sex with them at such tender age is acceptable.

http://bismikaallahuma.faithweb.com/aishah.html

However there are some “modernist” Muslims who dispute this fact. They argue:

(taken from http://www.understanding-islam.com/ri/mi-004.htm)

According to the generally accepted tradition, Aisha (ra) was born about eight years before Hijrah. But according to another narrative in Bukhari (kitabu'l-tafseer) Aisha (ra) is reported to have said that at the time Surah Al-Qamar, the 54th chapter of the Qur'an, was revealed, "I was a young girl". The 54th surah of the Qur'an was revealed nine years before Hijrah. According to this tradition, Aisha (ra) had not only been born before the revelation of the referred surah, but was actually a young girl (jariyah), not an infant (sibyah) at that time. Obviously, if this narrative is held to be true, it is in clear contradiction with the narratives reported by Hisham ibn `urwah. I see absolutely no reason that after the comments of the experts on the narratives of Hisham ibn `urwah, why we should not accept this narrative to be more accurate.
Answer:
Even if we assume this narrative to be accurate, we have no reason to give it more weight than those that are so detailed about Aisha ’s age, describing her playing with her dolls, talking about her girlfriends coming to play with her and hiding when Muhammad entered the room, her memories of playing on the swing when her mother called her and washed her face and took her to Muhammad, her ignorance of what was going on and her “surprise” when Muhammad got into action taking his role as the husband, etc. These events are more likely to be remembered by someone of her childhood than when a particular Surah was revealed. It is more probable that a person confuse one Surah with the other than confuse all those details of her own life.

According to a number of narratives, Aisha (ra) accompanied the Muslims in the battle of Badr and Uhud. Furthermore, it is also reported in books of hadith and history that no one under the age of 15 years was allowed to take part in the battle of Uhud. All the boys below 15 years of age were sent back. Aisha 's (ra) participation in the battle of Badr and Uhud clearly indicate that she was not nine or ten years old at that time. After all, women used to accompany men to the battle fields to help them, not to be a burden on them.
Answer:
This is a weak excuse. When the Battle of Badr and Ohud occurred Aisha was 10 to 11 years old. She did not go to be a warier, like the boys. She went to keep Muhammad warm during the nights. Boys who were less than 15 were sent back, but this did not apply to her.

According to almost all the historians Asma (ra), the elder sister of Aisha (ra) was ten years older than Aisha (ra). It is reported in Taqri'bu'l-tehzi'b as well as Al-bidayah wa'l-nihayah that Asma (ra) died in 73 hijrah when she was 100 years old. Now, obviously if Asma (ra) was 100 years old in 73 hijrah she should have been 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijrah. If Asma (ra) was 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijrah, Aisha (ra) should have been 17 or 18 years old at that time. Thus, Aisha (ra), if she got married in 1 AH (after hijrah) or 2 AH, was between 18 to 20 years old at the time of her marriage.
Answer:
When someone gets that old, people don’t care too much about her exact age. It is very easy to say she was 100 years old when in fact she was only 90. The difference is not noticeable to the younger folks and 100 is a round figure. Assuming the Hadith is authentic, it could be an honest mistake. Since in those days people did not carry birth certificates, it is very much likely that the person who reported her age to be 100 did not know that she was 10 years older than Aisha and did not sit to make the calculations and deductions. She was not an important person and it did not occur to anyone that 1300 years later it would become the subject of a controversy. This could be a genuine mistake by the narrator of the Hadith.

Tabari in his treatise on Islamic history, while mentioning Abu Bakr (ra) reports that Abu Bakr had four children and all four were born during the Jahiliyyah -- the pre Islamic period. Obviously, if Aisha (ra) was born in the period of jahiliyyah, she could not have been less than 14 years in 1 AH -- the time she most likely got married.
Answer:
Tabari’s narratives do not have the distinction to be known Sahih. Even if we assumed that this narratives is not forged, there is no reason to discard all those strong, detailed and explicit hadithes that concord with each other and confirm the age of Aisha was 9 when she married the Prophet, to accept this narrative that, could very well be also an innocent slip on the part of the narrator. People remember important events better than those that are relatively insignificant. The date of the birth of the children of Abu Bakr was not an important subject for Muslims to record. But the details of the Prophet's marriages were more important. As you can read in the story of Safiyah's wedding even the kind of food served is recorded.



According to Ibn Hisham, the historian, Aisha (ra) accepted Islam quite some time before Umar ibn Khattab (ra). This shows that Aisha (ra) accepted Islam during the first year of Islam. While, if the narrative of Aisha 's (ra) marriage at seven years of age is held to be true, Aisha (ra) should not have been born during the first year of Islam.
Answer:
The apologist fails to provide the references to the hadithes that he quotes. But obviously this is an error. To understand and accept a religion, one must he at least intelligent enough to make such decision. That is about 15 years old. But let us be generous and say that age is about 12. If Aisha accepted Islam during the first year of Islam, she must have been 26 years old when Muhammad married her. (12 + 14) First of all, in those days girls married at much younger age. No one stayed that long to get married. And it is very unlikely that a 26-year-old woman plays with her dolls. It shows that some of the Muslim apologists are embarrassed of what the Prophet did and are desperately looking for excuses to exonerate him of his improprieties.

Tabari has also reported that at the time Abu Bakr planned on migrating to Habshah (8 years before Hijrah), he went to Mut`am -- with whose son Aisha (ra) was engaged -- and asked him to take Aisha (ra) in his house as his son's wife. Mut`am refused, because Abu Bakr had embraced Islam, and subsequently his son divorced Aisha (ra). Now, if Aisha (ra) was only seven years old at the time of her marriage, she could not have been born at the time Abu Bakr decided on migrating to Habshah. On the basis of this report it seems only reasonable to assume that Aisha (ra) had not only been born 8 years before hijrah, but was also a young lady, quite prepared for marriage.
Answer:
It was an Arab tradition to betroth a girl to a boy even when the girl was a newborn. This tradition is still carried on in many Islamic countries. This is no proof that Aisha was a grown up.

According to a narrative reported by Ahmad ibn Hanbal, after the death of Khadijah (ra), when Khaulah (ra) came to the Prophet (pbuh) advising him to marry again, the Prophet (pbuh) asked her regarding the choices she had in her mind. Khaulah said: "You can marry a virgin (bikr) or a woman who has already been married (thayyib)". When the Prophet (pbuh) asked about who the virgin was, Khaulah proposed Aisha 's (ra) name. All those who know the Arabic language, are aware that the word "bikr" in the Arabic language is not used for an immature nine year old girl. The correct word for a young playful girl, as stated earlier is "Jariyah". "Bikr" on the other hand, is used for an unmarried lady, and obviously a nine year old is not a "lady".


Answer:
This explanation is absolutely incorrect. Bikr means virgin and, just as in English is not age specific. In fact Aisha was the second wife of Muhammad (after Khadijah) but Muhammad did not consummate his marriage with her for three years because she was too young. Instead he had to content himself with Umma Salamah, until Aisha matured a little bit more. It would not have made sense to marry a beautiful woman like Aisha and wait for three years to take her home.



According to Ibn Hajar, Fatimah (ra) was five years older than Aisha (ra). Fatimah (ra) is reported to have been born when the Prophet (pbuh) was 35 years old. Thus, even if this information is taken to be correct, Aisha (ra) could by no means be less than 14 years old at the time of hijrah, and 15 or 16 years old at the time of her marriage.
Answer:
Of course this information cannot be taken as correct. If Aisha was five years older than Fatimah, and Fatimah was born when the Prophet was 35 years old, then Aisha was only 30 years younger than the Prophet. So at the time of her marriage when the Prophet was 54, Aisha must have been 24 yeas old. This is not certainly correct, for the reasons explained above and also it contradicts the Hadith that the apologist quoted about the age of Asma, Aisha ’s sister, who according to that Hadith was 10 years older that Aisha and died in 73 Hijra. So at the time of Hijra Asma must have been 100 –73 = 27 years old, but according to this Hadith she was 34 years old.

The discrepancy between these two hadithes quoted by the same apologist, demonstrate their inaccuracy. It all goes to show that in those days numbers did not mean much. It is more likely that people forget the dates. But events are better remembered. The reports of the tender age of Aisha is consistent with the stories of her childhood, playing with her toys, her girlfriends hiding when Muhammad entered the room, the Prophet playing with her, her ignorance and “surprise” in the night of the nuptials, etc. All those hadithes confirm that she was a little girl. Those who deny the facts and try to prove otherwise, demonstrate their embarrassment of the acts of the Prophet. Perhaps they should be credited for having some scruples and realizing that what the Prophet did was wrong but we cannot praise them for their intellectual honesty or lack of it.

Finally the apologist concludes:

“In my opinion, neither was it an Arab tradition to give away girls in marriage at an age as young as nine or ten years, nor did the Prophet (pbuh) marry Aisha (ra) at such a young age. The people of Arabia did not object to this marriage, because it never happened in the manner it has been narrated.”
Answer:
I respect his opinion, but disagree with him completely. Not only this WAS the tradition of the Arabs, it is still their tradition and it has become the tradition of other counties that converted to Islam. Even up to this day it is very common to find girls as young as 9-years given for matrimony. Of course the reason that no one objected to the marriage of Muhammad and a 9-year-old girl, is because it was a costume. The reason when it was reported in so many hadithes that neither the author nor the scholars objected is because it was nothing out of the ordinary.

Just a few weeks ago I read in the news that in Iran a 9-year-old girl filed for divorce from her 15-year-old husband just after 20 days of marriage because he would constantly beat her. When the young man was questioned he said: “She neglects her housework and plays with her dolls all the time”.

Who cares what age the yound child was when Mohammad married her OR consumated the marriage? It's over, it's history.

If muslims really want to do something to improve their future, rescue those thousands of poor young girls whose future is being destroyed TODAY!.

Read and weep what Clifton posted on another board and do something about it. There was no response or any talk about ACTION after that post. It's real shame.

{#111 Posted by cliftonbridge on July 22, 2007 9:55:08 am

By Sher Baz Khan

... She is among more than 2,000 unfortunate girls of the area whose parents have decided to take them out of the schools after cleric Maulana Fazlullah issued an edict declaring girls’ education ‘un-Islamic’.
.. parents of about 5,000 children refused to get their sons and daughters vaccinated. The maulana congratulated all those parents on his radio station and appealed to more families to win heavenly rewards.}

#1 Posted by Islamic philosopher

And some more....

Moral Evaluations of the Marriage of the Prophet with Aisha


Aisha was 9 lunar years old or 8 years 9 months old according to solar years when Muhammad slept with her. This is a fact demonstrated by a great number of hadiths. There is no controversy in that. There has never been until now that some of the Muslims have come in contact with western values and are ashamed to admit that their Prophet could commit such an indecency. They deny the facts and have made it a controversy. The majority of Muslims still have no problem with the young age of the Aisha and they ridicule these Modern day “moral relativists” who are twisting the truth to please the morality of the westerners. (See this site)

An American lady, with whom I used to correspond about Islam, was interested in this religion because of her Muslim boyfriend. She admitted that the thought of Muhammad having sexual intercourse with a 9-year-old girl appalled her but she was relieved to know that there are some Muslims who deny it and this is the subject of a controversy not agreed by all the Muslims. This is what I wrote in response.

“There are people who deny the holocaust. This happened only 55 years ago and it is very well documented. Yet it has not stopped some people to deny it. So they start a controversy. Would you doubt the holocaust because it is a subject of a controversy? Intelligent people are not affected by controversies. They look at the facts and are not swayed by hearsays. Feeble-minded people become confused and do not know which way to turn. These people switch off and avoid the issue altogether, because for them, making a decision is not an easy task. That is why some people start the controversy.

Only a few years ago Sheikh Baaz in Saudi Arabia issued a fatwa that any one who said the Earth is round is Kafir. Obviously this did not go very far but he started a controversy. So what is your opinion about the shape of the Earth? Would you stay out of it because it is a controversial issue? How about the evolution? There are many Muslims as well as Christians who do not agree with evolution. They believe in the Biblical and Quranic fables of Adam and Eave and the creation. This is a big controversy. Are you going to stay away from it? Is it a none-issue for you? Almost everything under the Sun is a controversial issue. From death penalty to hunting, from spending money for space exploration to aiding the poor countries, everything is a controversy. Even the very subject of religion is a controversial issue. So you cannot walk away from responsibility when you are faced with controversies.

I agree that morality is relative and we should not judge the ancient people’s morality with our modern morality.

Obviously we all cringe when we think of pedophilia and acknowledge that it is a shameful act of immorality. But during the time of Muhammad, and even today in some Islamic countries, marrying a 9-year-old child was not immoral. In fact Aisha was given to Muhammad with the consent of her parents and no one raised an eyebrow. The question is, if sleeping with a nine year old child was not deemed bad and therefore was not considered immoral, was it ok? Not everything that a society accepts as moral is right. Having sex with a minor may not have been immoral for Arabs 1400 years ago, but it is now, as it was then, unethical. Moralities are defined by circumstances, but ethics transcend time and space. They are rooted in logics. Morality can vary from culture to culture, from time to time and from person to person. Who is to determine what is moral and what is not? “

Having sex with a minor may not have been immoral for Muhammad and his contemporaries in that uncivilized culture, but it was ethically wrong. If Muhammad was a messenger of God or an honorable man, as he made his Allah to proclaim him thus, he should have known that what he was doing was dishonorable and unethical.

Although it is true that in the past people married at very young age. And it is also true that occasionally wealthy old men married very young girls. We have to realize that these people acted on their culture. We do not condemn them for they did not know better. What they did was the norm. But we do condemn those cultures.

However, we cannot forgive with the same amnesty those who claimed to be the standard of rectitude amongst mankind. If average people could not distinguish the right from the wrong, the messengers of God, if they were from God, should have known better. If their claim was true, if their knowledge was divine, if they were inspired, they should not have followed the tradition of their people but should have set the example. Muhammad followed the morality of his people. But that morality was ethically wrong. He claimed to be the best human and the last messenger of God. According to him God has said to people all he wanted to say in the Quran and his religion is complete. There is no more guidance to come and his examples and teachings are all we need to know and follow for eternity. Yet what he did and said, under the light of modern values prove to be very wrong.

Now we realize that we cannot live by his examples any more, nor can we practice his teachings. Our morality has changed. We would certainly put a man in jail if he wanted to follow the Sunnah of the prophet in this day and age and "marry" a 9-year-old child. We would not allow someone to take people as slaves or trade in slavery as Muhammad did.

If we cannot follow the morality of Muhammad any more, if what he said and did do not fit in this modern day, why we need Muhammad? What part of his teachings should we accept and what part should we discard? Who will determine that? This is an important question. If we give ourselves the freedom to pick and choose the teachings that most suit us we should give the same freedom to others.

Suppose you believe that marriage to a minor should be outlawed, or you do not feel that polygyny is appropriate any more for this day and age. Suppose you disagree with slavery, male or female circumcision, beating of the wives and do not believe in Jihad any more. You prefer to concentrate on other parts of Islam that you like, e.g. Salat, Zikat, Haj, etc. This is your choice. But can you deny other Muslims whose choices are distinct from yours? How could you stop a Muslim who wants to follow those teachings of Islam that you consider outdated? By what authority can you dissuade one who wants to spread Islam by Jihad, like Muhammad did? How can you prohibit him not to assault sexually a 9-year-old child by marrying her? What would you say to a Muslim who wishes to marry up to four wives and decides to punish them by beating them if they are disobedient, as the Prophet instructed him to do? If you use logic in picking the teachings that are best, you are saying that logic is superior to revelation and therefore you are subscribing to the freethinker’s way of thinking not Muhammad’s.

Many Islamic countries have realized that true Islam is impractical. Very few of them can practice it faithfully; they all have modified it to certain extent and have incorporated secularism into their laws to make life bearable. Those that do follow Islam are hells on Earth. Interestingly the civility and the progress of these countries are proportionate to the level of their secularization. In the Middle Ages, when religion had plunged Europe into the dark ages, Islamic countries were progressive and prosperous. This was possible because of the tolerance of the rulers of those days, their independence from the Mosque and their disinterest to implement Islam.

Zakaria Ar-Razi, one of the greatest minds of Islamic world, attacked religion in general and Islam in particular with a force unthinkable in this day. He wrote:

“The prophets—these billy goats with long beards, cannot claim any intellectual or spiritual superiority. These billy goats pretend to come with a message from God, all the while exhausting themselves in spouting their lies, and imposing on the masses blind obedience to the "words of the master." The miracles of the prophets are impostures, based on trickery, or the stories regarding them are lies. The falseness of what all the prophets say is evident in the fact that they contradict one another: one affirms what the other denies, and yet each claims to be the sole depository of the truth; thus the New Testament contradicts the Torah, the Koran the New Testament. As for the Koran, it is but an assorted mixture of "absurd and inconsistent fables," which has ridiculously been judged inimitable, when, in fact, its language, style, and its much vaunted "eloquence" are far from being faultless. Custom, tradition, and intellectual laziness lead men to follow their religious leaders blindly. Religions have been the sole cause of the bloody wars that have ravaged mankind. Religions have also been resolutely hostile to philosophical speculation and to scientific research. The so-called holy scriptures are worthless and have done more harm than good, whereas the "writings of the ancients like Plato, Aristotle, Euclid, and Hippocrates have rendered much greater service to humanity."

This kind of criticism of Islam today, would carry the death sentence. Can any intellectual speak so freely against Islam calling the prophets “Billy Goats” as Ar-Razi called them disdainfully in these days and live? Does the fatwa against Salman Rushdie ring a bell? It is clear that in those days of the golden age of Islam, Islamic countries enjoyed a freedom and a level of secularization that has since been disappeared. And along with that, the glory of Islamic world also has ebbed. Islam can be used as an index of barbarity and backwardness. The more a country applies Islam, the more uncivilized and uncultured it becomes.

I have no doubt that if Islam was eliminated completely, we’ll regain the past glory of those secular days and even surpass it. There is no reason to believe that the black-eyed race of Middle East is inferior to the blue-eyed Europeans. The number of Middle Eastern scientists, academics and scholars in the West is an indication that given the opportunity we are no less intelligent than any other race. The reason that we are backward, uncivilized and barbaric in our native countries is because Islam has taken away our dignity, humanity and intelligence. Islam has brainwashed us, and like a drug has damaged the minds of our people.

#7 Posted by Pardesi

[Who cares what age the yound child was when Mohammad married her OR consumated the marriage? It's over, it's history.]

Read the last para of post #8.

This is the kind of bizarre thinking that convinces people that islam is some kind of drug which destroys grey cells and rational thinking.

Mohammad had an early marriage to a girl child. It was considered OK in his time and life. Fine, no problem, history is full of strange things that were considered OK - slavery, sale of children, foot-binding, sati whatever. In some cases, there are even good reasons for some of these things.

But here comes the nonsensical part: because mohammed did something, IT MUST BE OK FOR EVERYONE EVERYWHERE. This is the irrational, crazy and ultimately hateful part of this message.

Mohammed had to fight jews and unbelievers. So it is OK for everyone to fight jews and unbelievers!! AND so it goes - this is why one day, inshallah, people who think like this will get regular medication or be confined to a psychiatric clinic wit a diagnosis of islamitis.

Ancient hisotry is full of such bizarre evenets which ought not to be emulated in the times we live.

Aasif reasoned it (Muhammed's lovelock with Aisha) very well. Lets see how the debate develops!

Aasif:
It is a straighforward nice article. To the poin t , brief, and unapologetic.
I thank you.

However, it was marred by these two statements of yours which were uncalled for and should have been avoided. Please make sure, next time, just say MUSLIMS.

This is what I found uncalled for:

With that definition it is clear that Shariah does not permit any kind of sexual relation with a prepubescent (well at least the Sunnis don't and I am speaking as a Sunni) child.
...................

think none of us can honestly deny that in Islamic Shariah, as traditionally understood by all four Sunni schools and the Shia school as well, the traditional age of consent for marriage has been set at the onset of puberty since puberty is considered the onset of adulthood and can be at any age from upwards.

No SHARIAH today sanctions Prepubescent sex ( and evenif it was in the past it was AGAINST the Shariah of even the most "primitive" society..just as today it is common & gaining ground amongst the debauched & depraved west)

No Shariaha be it Abrahamic, Hindoo, Budhhist, animist or even Darwinian sanctions it.

It is a non-sequitur.

Kanjroon lose big-time in Turkey. In Pakistan also the Kanjaroon should be trounced & Muslims should regain control of the Islami nation"

The Western media -ThuGGs have been trying to give all kinds of spin, incl. BBC--the fraudest of all: sugar-pill poison..
and was yo-yoing with their nefarious, ugly, and evil desires.

The Bastards are not telling that the Muslim Party ( never call it Islamist ot or Islam-rooted: there are either Muslims, non-muslims or Kanjaroon ) has won over 62% of Seats...and the numbers might go up by tacit support by small winners.

The Janaazaa of the Ooons is for all to see & InshaAllah such good news would be a staple for muslims the world over.
_________________________________________________________
Massive victory for Turkey's ruling party in legislative polls
23 Jul 2007, 0349 hrs IST,AFP

ANKARA: Turkey's Islamist-rooted ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) won a decisive victory in legislative polls on Sunday, earning another five-year term in office, unofficial results showed.

The result was a strong vote of confidence for Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's government, which secularists including the powerful army suspect of seeking to undermine the separation of religion and state, analysts said.

Erdogan, 53, hailed the outcome as a victory for democracy and pledged commitment to Turkey's cherished secular system and continued economic and democratic reform to boost Ankara's bid to join the European Union.

"Our democracy has successfully passed a test ... Our unity, democracy and the republic have emerged stronger from the ballot box," he said outside AKP headquarters to fireworks and cheers of hundreds of supporters.

"We will never make concessions from the basic principles of the republic," he said.

"We will pursue economic and democracy reforms with determination." The ruling party, which has its roots in a now-banned Islamist movement, won 46.7 percent of the vote, according to unofficial results after 99.7 percent of the vote was counted.

This would translate to 341 seats in the 550-member parliament, enough for the AKP to once again form a government on its own.

The party had 352 members in the outgoing house and despite earning 12 percent more votes than in 2002, the number of its seats will decline because more parties will be represented in Parliament.

Final official results were expected next week. The secularist main opposition Republican People's Party (CHP) finished second with 20.9 percent of vote and an estimated 112 seats, according to unofficial results.

Re: # 14

Krishna,

I've limited my comment to the 'fact' of Muhammed's marriage with Aisha. I was not at all commenting on the propriety of His actions nor I was looking at it from the moral angle.

Mores change from time to time. We in India had a recorded history of polygomy and child marriages. Jinnah did it, Gandhi did it (though when they started bonking is a different matter).

Look at our own mythology. Krishna is a whoremaster since childhood. He effed 16,000 girls.

Instead we look at Him as an incarnation of Vishnu and the man who gave Gita. His personal life is outta discussion at anytime.

#11 Posted by Folio

[Ancient hisotry is full of such bizarre evenets which ought not to be emulated in the times we live. ]

Nope. You don't get away so easy.

Some perverted leches want to have sex with little children. Always have, always will. Good people back then did not want to have sex with little children. They still don't.

Just because it was possible back then without going to jail does not mean he was not a lech. Jesus did not want to bone little girls. Buddha didn't. Christ didn't. Mahavir Jain didn't.

If you are a good man, you don't do a million things that your "prophet" did. If you are a bad man, you do the things he did.

And if you are a bad man, I don't want to verify whether there REALLY was a winged creature in the cave giving you updates to the Old and New Testaments. (I actually wouldn't want to know anyway).

Sorry, ALL you Muslims have been the subject of a BIG hoax. Your prophet managed to fool everybody and bone everything he wanted to. Did what he wanted. When he wanted. As much as he could get away with.

You guys are idiots. Yes. ALL of you. Remember that the next time you are praying.

(Of course, the Jesus story of the virgin birth was another load of garbage. It SO happened that she got pregnant when Joseph was away. Virgin birth. Yeah right. Joseph probably did not want her to get stoned to death. But at least Jesus was a good man. No son of god, but a good man, who has my respect - if that story about him asking god to forgive those who hurt him on the cross is true.)

Re: # 15

A nine-year-old may be ready for sex with a 12 year old. Or a 15-year-old. The fact that it shocks one is not reason enough to denounce it wholeheartedly. It shocked me to the core to know that my parents were having sex, when I was around ten. I came 'round, though.

It used to shock my uncle and aunt that people of the same gender had sex. They've come around and accepted their son's gayness now.

BTW, the age of consent for sex between adults and minors in Holland is no longer 12. Even when it was, the adult could have been prosecuted on a complaint from either the minor's parents or a social worker IF they thought the child was being abused. (See, even some legislatives don't deem sex with 12-year-olds as necessarily abusive.)

However, not for any great incidence of abuse or complaints, but more for reasons owing to the increasing child-abuse hysteria of the nineties, did Holland revert to 16. However, for minors, 12 is still the legal age. It's about the same in most European countries)