Was Mohammed a paedophile/marital rapist?

[aneeshm]

I was unsure whether or not to make this thread, because this may look like blatant trolling, but I'm going out on a limb here and trusting the maturity of CFC's OT Forum enough to expect a civil discussion. And I request people not to resort to childish name-calling and baseless ad-homimen attacks.

First - the background.

There is controversy over how many wives Mohammed had, but the usually accepted number is twenty. Of these, Mohammed's youngest and most favourite wife is, by all accounts (and I mean this literally, that is, going by all the accounts we have today), the girl Aisha, whom Mohammed married when she was six and consummated the marriage when she was nine.

He also took on wives from among the people he captured and whose menfolk he had massacred. The tales of some of these wives is given below.

Now to cite the sources. I am taking these from the Hadith accounts of Mohammed's life.

An excerpt from a book about Islam through the prism of the Hadith, on Mohammed's marriages:

MUHAMMAD’S MARRIAGES

Some incidents relating to the Prophet’s marriages with SafIyya (3325-3329) and Zainab hint Jahsh are mentioned (3330-3336).


SAFIYYA

Muhammad’s wars and raids not only fed his coffers, they also swelled his harem. SafIyya, a beautiful girl of seventeen years, was the wife of the chief of a Jewish clan inhabiting Khaibar. Muhammad’s custom was to make surprise attacks. Khaibar was invaded in the same fashion. Anas narrates: “We encountered the people at sunrise when they had come out with their axes, spades and strings driving their cattle along. They shouted in surprise: Muhammad has come along with his force! The Messenger of Allah said: Khaibar shall face destruction” (4438). There is even a QurAnic verse relating to Muhammad’s sudden sweep on the valley and the fate of its people: “But when it descends [nazala] into the open space, before them evil will be the morning for those who were warned” (QurAn 37:177).

In any case, many people were butchered, and many others were taken prisoners. “We took Khaibar by force, and there were gathered the prisoners of war,” according to Anas. SafIyya, the daughter of Huyayy b. Akhtab, the chief of the Quraiza and al-NazIr, was one of them. Her husband, KinAna, was put to a cruel death (3325).4

Anas continues: “She first fell to the lot of Dihya in the spoils of war.” (Incidentally, Dihya was strikingly handsome. Muhammad used to see Gabriel in his form.) But Anas adds that people “praised her in the presence of Allah’s Messenger and said: ‘We have not seen the like of her among the captives of war’ ” (3329). Muhammad took her away from Dihya, Gabriel or no Gabriel, and even took her to his bed the same night her husband was killed, in violation of his own command, which enjoined the believers to wait until the beginning of the next menstrual cycle in their captive women.5


RIHANA AND JUWAIRIYA

SafIyya was no exception. Many other women, among them RIhAna and JuwairIya, were taken in and treated as part of the war booty. RIhAna was a Jewish girl of the BanU Quraizah. After her husband was beheaded in cold blood along with eight hundred other male members of her tribe in the genocide at Medina, Muhammad kept her as his concubine. We shall touch upon this massacre again in our discussion of jihAd.

JuwairIya, another of these unfortunate girls, was the daughter of the chief of the Banu’l Mustaliq. She was captured in the fifth or sixth year of the Hijra along with two hundred other women. “The Messenger of Allah made a raid upon BanU Mustaliq while they were unaware and their cattle were having a drink at the water. He killed those who fought and imprisoned others. On that very day, he captured JuwairIya bint al-HAris” (4292).

In the division of the booty, she fell to the lot of SAbit ibn Qays. He set her ransom price at nine ounces of gold, beyond the power of her relatives to pay. ’Aisha’s reaction when she saw this beautiful girl being led into the presence of Muhammad is recounted in these words: “As soon as I saw her at the door of my room, I detested her, for I knew that he [Muhammad] would see her as I saw her.” And indeed, when Muhammad saw JuwairIya he paid her ransom and took her for his wife. JuwairIya was at that time about twenty, and she became the seventh wife of the Prophet. The whole story is given by Ibn IshAq, the Prophet’s biographer.6

There was another girl, named Zainab, again Jewish, who had seen her father, husband, and uncle killed. She poisoned the roasted lamb she was ordered to prepare for Muhammad. Suspecting something wrong, Muhammad spat out the very first morsel. He was saved, and she was immediately put to death, according to some authorities (TabaqAt, vol. II, pp. 252-255).


ZAINAB BINT JAHSH

Here we shall mention another Zainab, whose affair was not cruel but scandalous. She was the wife of Muhammad’s adopted son, Zaid, and therefore, in the eyes of the Arabs, as good as his own daughter-in-law. Muhammad went to her house when her husband was away, saw her in a state of seminudeness, and was aroused. When Zaid heard about it, he offered to divorce her, but Muhammad, fearing a public scandal, told him to keep his wife for himself. At this point Allah spoke and decided the matter (QurAn 33:36-40). He chided Muhammad for telling Zaid, “Retain thou in wedlock thy wife,” and for hiding in his heart “that which God was about to make manifest.” Allah told Muhammad: “Thou feared the people, but it is more fitting that thou should fear God”; and He revealed His plan, present and future, to Muhammad thus: “We joined her in marriage to thee, in order that in future there may be no difficulty to the believers in the matter of marriage with the wives of their adopted sons.” He now also addressed Himself to the Muslims of all generations: “It is not fitting for a believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by God and His Apostle to have any option about their decision. If anyone disobeys God and His Apostle, he is indeed clearly on a wrong path.”

Thus reassured, Muhammad made Zaid himself go to his wife with his marriage proposal. “Allah’s Messenger said to Zaid to make a mention to her about him” (3330). The marriage ordered from above was celebrated with unusual festivity. “Allah’s Messenger gave no better wedding feast than the one he did on the occasion of his marriage with Zainab” (3332).

In the above cases, was it marital rape to "go to" a woman whose husband he had killed himself on the same day as the killing? Was it right to take on wives the way he did? Could such actions be classified as marital rape by modern standards?




Now for the paedophilia controversy:

The chapter on ’Aisha is the longest. A daughter of AbU Bakr, she was betrothed to Muhammad when she was six years old and he was fifty. The marriage was consummated when she was nine. Muhammad had a very soft spot for her. “The excellence of ’Aisha as compared to women is that of TharId [a dish of very thin bread soaked in a broth of meat and sometimes vegetables which Muhammad very much relished] over all other food,” Muhammad said (5966).

The explicit references:

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).

The most heart-rending and touching ones I have reserved for the end:

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. Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234

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) Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151

Playing with dolls!

There is also some controversy over whether or not the marriage was incestuous by Arabian standards (Aisha being the daughter of Abu Bakr, who was a brother-by-oath to Mohammed, which was considered as good as a blood-relation in Arabic society at that time).

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."

What is the opinion of the forumers here?

Three questions, for the poll and for the discussion:

a) Was Mohammed's marriage to Aisha paedophilic by modern standards?
b) Were his marriages to prisoners of war, consummated on the very day of the war, a form of marital rape?
c) Was the marriage to Aisha incestuous by Arabian standards of the time?

 

[Swedishguy]

Yes. Yes. Yes.

 

[aneeshm]

I myself voted:

Yes.
Yes.
No.

The reason for that "No" (for the incest one) vote was because I believe that Arabian society was, at that time, flexible enough to recognise that social conventions, specially those rooted only in convention and not in blood, can be bent by exceptional people - a flexibility Islam had the ironic pleasure of destroying.

 

[Tee Kay]

What was the title of the book? (ie your sources)

 

[Truronian]

Well, Aisha's age is not as clear cut as you make out. There are conflicting accounts

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisha%27s_age_at_marriage

I can't help but sense a motive here aneeshm.

 

[aneeshm]

I've posted multiple sources. The "controversy" over her age is manufactured by modern apologists. I don't give it any credence.

 

[Truronian]

I've posted multiple sources. The "controversy" over her age is manufactured by modern apologists. I don't give it any credence.

Seems to me you believe what you want to believe.

 

[QuoVadisNation]

aneeshm, I think it's great you're trying to poke every hole in another religion's as a form of propaganda. I really do.

Any who, let's see what wiki has to say.

Muhammad's marriage to Aisha is particularly controversial, mainly because of her age during the marriage. The hadith collections of Bukhari (d. 870) and Muslim b. al-Hajjaj (d. 875) are in general regarded as the most authentic by Sunni Muslims. Both quote Aisha herself claiming she was six or seven at the time of her marriage and nine when the marriage was consummated. D A Spellberg states that in Ibn Sa'd, the age of Aisha at marriage varies between six and seven.[28] She stayed in her parents' home till she had reached puberty at nine (or maybe ten according to Ibn Hisham) and then her marriage with Muhammad was consummated[29][28] Spellberg states that "all these references to the Aisha's age reinforce Aisha's pre-menarcheal status, and, implicitly her virginity."[28]

The age of Aisha is particularly concerning to non-Muslims, who denounce Muhammad for having sexual relations with a girl so young. Ayaan Hirsi Ali has called Muhammad a "pervert" for allegedly marrying a girl as young as six and Jerry Vines has called Muhammad a "pedophile"[30][9]

There is considerable debate among Muslim scholars over Aisha's age at marriage. Maulana Muhammad Ali makes a detailed historical argument that Aisha could not have been more than nine or ten at the time of betrothal, and fifteen at marriage.[31] Others fix her age at consummation as late as nineteen.[32] Muqtedar Khan also concurs with Shanavas, who argues that there are different reports within the Islamic sources about the age of Aisha at the time of marriage.[33][34] The majority of scholars accept the tradition that Aisha was married at the age of nine. Some respond to criticism of the young marriage by claiming that she had reached puberty by then.[35] In an effort to show that Aisha's marriage was not unusual, defenders point out that early marriages were common in most cultures until fairly recent times.[36] In medieval Britain, "Girlhood was brief. Women were marriageable at twelve and usually married by fourteen. Heiresses might be married in form as young as five and betrothed even younger..."[37] There is even an account in Christian apocryphal writings that claims that Mary, mother of Jesus, was between the ages of twelve and fourteen at the time of her marriage to a ninety-year old Joseph, though many churches see these works as suspicious or unreliable for various reasons. [38]

In short, I think we need to put it in eight century Arabic train of thought. By modern times, fine, to us it is objectionable. But our standards changed. Thus, your first question (by "modern standards") is totally unfair.

 

[aneeshm]

Seems to me you believe what you want to believe.

The very same to you, dear chap! You believe the controversialists, I believe the scholarship accepted by Muslims for known Muslim history.

 

[Tee Kay]

Let's see what the wiki has to say on Zaynab bint Jahsh

Muhammad has been criticized for marrying Zaynab bint-Jahsh, the divorced wife of his adopted son.[39] Watt, however, holds that Muhammad didn't marry Zaynab for sexual desire, but that this marriage was mainly a "political act in which an undesirable practice of 'adoption' belonging to a lower moral level was ended".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Muhammad

And more on Aisha

The marriage to Aisha may have been politically motivated initially, in that Abu Bakr was one of Muhammad's strongest supporters, and the marriage strengthened the ties between them.

He was also involved in defending her during the controversy wherein she was accused of adultery.

Aisha became separated from the rest of the party while on a trip, and was brought back by one of Muhammad's companions, Shafwan ibn Muatthal. Since she had been alone with another man, people gossiped and said that she must be having an affair. Muhammad refused to repudiate her, then received a revelation that four eyewitnesses were necessary to prove adultery.

Even though the marriage may have been politically motivated, to mark the ties between Muhammad and his companion Abu Bakr, most early accounts say that Muhammad and Aisha became sincerely fond of each other. Ibn Ishaq, in his Sirat Rasulallah, states that during Muhammad's last illness, he sought Aisha's apartments and died with his head in her lap. The Sunni take this as evidence of Muhammad's fondness for Aisha. Many traditions relate that during his last illness, he sought her company and died with his head in her lap.

Shi'a Muslims would disagree with the Sunni assertion of her being his favorite wife, regarding it as politically motivated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad%27s_marriages

I'll bring more credible sources when I have time, but it seemed to me that the fact that Mohammad was allowed to have more than four wives was politically linked: marriage was one way to unite the warring tribes of Arabia into a strong entity, and Mohammad was just as much a stateman as a prophet.

 

[aneeshm]

aneeshm, I think it's great you're trying to poke every hole in another religion's as a form of propaganda. I really do.

Any who, let's see what wiki has to say.




In short, I think we need to put it in eight century Arabic train of thought. By modern times, fine, to us it is objectionable. But our standards changed. Thus, your first question (by "modern standards") is totally unfair.

It may be unfair, but it has to be done, because of Muslim theology, which states that Mohammed is an eternal role model, to be followed in all respects, and that all he ever did was good and must be right.

And I will use Arabian standards when no corresponding modern standard is available, as in the case of the last question.

And that is also why I did not confine myself to the Aisha controversy, I also included the marital rape bit, ref. the womenfolk of the massacred Jewish tribes.








But let us, for a moment, accept your argument, and judge Mohammed by norms prevalent in other societies of the time.

Let us take India as the counterexample.

In India, in the BC years itself, a remarkable code of laws was enunciated by the shrewd Chanakya and his followers. It is called the ArthaShastra. It is not remarkable when it confirms to Hindu dogma, but it is quite notable when it reforms it, as in the case of marriage.

Under those laws, a girl may be married either after the age of thirteen, or after she has completed puberty, whichever is later. A girl has the right to find a husband for herself if her parents do not find one for her by the time she is sixteen. She also has the right to reject a husband chosen for her - no marriage without mutual consent. Also, a marriage to a woman captured in war is one of the "deplorable" and "lower" forms of marriage.

These laws are infinitely more humane than the ones Mohammed preached. How do you respond to that criticism?

 

[silver 2039]

I don't see the point in aplying modern moral standards to such distant historical events. It happened a thousand years ago, the societal and cultural norms didn't exist then nor did modern moral values with regard to human rights. Muhmmad was indeed a conqueror, killer, rapist, pedophile if you look at him by modern standards.

But I don't look at him by modern standards for it is foolish to do so and serves no purpose when intrepreting and analyzing historical events.

 

[Truronian]

The very same to you, dear chap! You believe the controversialists, I believe the scholarship accepted by Muslims for known Muslim history.

*Ignore bias*
On the contrary, I accept that either could be true. If you're unwilling to accept the possibility that Muhammed was not a pedophile then this thread is flaming. Why ask a question for which you already know the answer? To provoke.

 

[aneeshm]

Let's see what the wiki has to say on Zaynab bint Jahsh



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Muhammad

And more on Aisha



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad's_marriages

I'll bring more credible sources when I have time, but it seemed to me that the fact that Mohammad was allowed to have more than four wives was politically linked: marriage was one way to unite the warring tribes of Arabia into a strong entity, and Mohammad was just as much a stateman as a prophet.

So, in this (rather perverse) view of things, paedophilia is perfectly pardonable if for political purposes? And so is forcible marriage and marital rape?

 

[aneeshm]

*Ignore bias*
On the contrary, I accept that either could be true. If you're unwilling to accept the possibility that Muhammed was not a pedophile then this thread is flaming. Why ask a question for which you already know the answer? To provoke.

Not really. To debate. I hold certain views, and I want to find out how many people agree with me, and I want to be exposed to opposing views, because if they are true, then I will have to concede defeat and change myself to confirm with truth.

 

[Tee Kay]

So, in this (rather perverse) view of things, paedophilia is perfectly pardonable if for political purposes? And so is forcible marriage and marital rape?

No it's not, but in the historical context of the time it is to be expected. And as Silver pointed out:

I don't see the point in aplying modern moral standards to such distant historical events. It happened a thousand years ago, the societal and cultural norms didn't exist then nor did modern moral values with regard to human rights. Muhmmad was indeed a conqueror, killer, rapist, pedophile if you look at him by modern standards.

But I don't look at him by modern standards for it is foolish to do so and serves no purpose when intrepreting and analyzing historical events.

 

[aneeshm]

I don't see the point in aplying modern moral standards to such distant historical events. It happened a thousand years ago, the societal and cultural norms didn't exist then nor did modern moral values with regard to human rights. Muhmmad was indeed a conqueror, killer, rapist, pedophile if you look at him by modern standards.

But I don't look at him by modern standards for it is foolish to do so and serves no purpose when intrepreting and analyzing historical events.

Agreed.

But the problem is, Islam claims that Mohammed is a perfect role model for all Muslims to follow even now. Which is why judging him by modern standards becomes necessary.

And are you willing to extend this "historic understanding" to Hinduism or Christianity? Are you willing to judge Rama and Arjuna and Krishna and Moses and Jesus by the standards of their time?

 

[Truronian]

Not really. To debate. I hold certain views, and I want to find out how many people agree with me, and I want to be exposed to opposing views, because if they are true, then I will have to concede defeat and change myself to confirm with truth.

Well, I exposed certain opposing views and you wrote them off as 'apologist'; thats hardly debating.

 

[aneeshm]

Well, I exposed certain opposing views and you wrote them off as 'apologist'; thats hardly debating.

That's because the controversialists are just that. They have not yet put up a coherent opposition to the argument of the Hadith, nor have they reached internal consensus among themselves.

 

[tossi]

That story is about 1500 years old.. common.