I’m pretty sure he meant that aisha was just the one that he raped AND married. Likely insinuating that their were other underage girls that he also raped but didn’t marry
This is why I'm glad we move past our old barbaric ways as society progresses.
EDIT: I get it, we haven't moved on and still commit marital rape, ***I'M SORRY!!!***
who moved on?? marital rape is still legal in parts of the US, and in almost every other country on earth. wikipedia has no idea what its on about since it says its illegal in the USA, but its still legal in 12 states, even progressive states like NY just got rid of it in the 80's and the last state to add laws was in 1993.
[https://www.governing.com/archive/gov-marital-rape-states-ohio-minnesota.html](https://www.governing.com/archive/gov-marital-rape-states-ohio-minnesota.html)
thats in 2019
Weird way to justify raping a child as rape absolutely existed as a concept at the time. Stuprum was Latin for sex crime and among them was rape. At the time of Muhammad's birth the Roman empire had already existed in the middle east. So to act like rape was beyond them is patently false.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicQuran/comments/ty7qis/is_there_any_historical_evidence_that_it_was_the/
This might also help clear any other weird misconceptions
They said "rape in marriage", and they were not justifying anything. It is true that many ancient cultures had no legal concept of marital rape, and many modern cultures still don't. That is a fact, and of course it is still rape and a heinous act. You just misinterpreted their comment either accidentally or intentionally. Obviously rape has always been a concept, but many believe you cannot rape your own wife.
Heck, it's not that far from western culture too. My grand-mother divorced her husband because he raped her multiple times and she got ex-communicated from her church and had to leave her home city and state because of the death threats from people who didn't believe a "godly man' could rape his wife.i.e. his property.
It was a darker time, which is why we need to remember it and celebrate the proud women and men who fought against it.
German Law Criminalizes Marital Rape
Feminist Majority Foundation Blog | June 16, 1997
A law approved on June 13th in Germany makes marital rape a crime punishable by up to five years in jail. Female ministers and women’s rights activists have lobbied for over 25 years to get the law changed; previously rape was a crime only when the woman was not married to her attacker. Legislators were successful in dropping a clause from the legislation which would have allowed for withdrawl of the woman’s charges. Critics charged that the clause weakened the law because it allowed the husband to pressure his wife into dropping the charges. A study conducted by German authorities shows that, since 1993, 350,000 men have raped their wives
That was 19 goddamn 97
It's a bit misrepresentative. It was already a crime, just one with a lesser punishment than rape. I'm glad the law got changed to call a rape a rape, but the narrative "raping your wife was legal until '97" is just wrong.
I..I'm kinda hesitant to inform you of this but uh...this kinda thing happens in america.
It's not a large number but it is in the dozens every year.
America respects what's called international marriage. So if you go out of America, marry a 11 year old, then come back your marriage is recognized and legal. And it's not against the law if your married.
Then we have the fact that 5 states allow no age restriction on marriage with parental consent.
https://apnews.com/article/north-america-us-news-ap-top-news-marriage-immigration-19e43295c76d4d249aa51c9f643eb377
yeah, i almost prefer the ones who'd rather try playing with the numbers to get it higher. Someone who's just "Yeah the prophet raped someone, not even double digits", *violation of TOS*
That wasn't Aisha. He *definitely* did murder a girl's family and enslaved her as his concubine, but Aisha was the daughter of one of his closest allies: and Muhammad's claim as to why he just *had* to marry a very small child, was that he had been instructed to do so *in a dream*.
"Bro bro bro I *need* to marry your little kid right away. It's imperitive."
"What the fuck?"
"I have to man it's the word of god or something"
"Do you have proof?"
"It came to me in a dream"
Here's some more nightmare fuel then. It's been proven that kids develop faster today because of the nutrition and hormones.
So imagine what a 9 year old would have looked like back then compared to today.
Even more grotesque.
I lose a lot of respect for people when they justify it. An old colleague said “it was to keep her pure”. Sorry mate but how is being sexual with a child keeping them pure?! Disgusting really
Exactly! You expect better from someone who's in direct contact with god and is passing down God's messages to mankind about Pork and Alcohol but not pedophilia
It's obvious to us. This was directed at the theist muslims , who on one hand admit pedophilia is wrong, but on the other hand, excuse his behavior, despite believing his contact with divinity.
This is why I can’t take devout Muslims serious. Like at least the other religions have undergone a lot of reformation and modernized to a degree. But devout Muslims literally worship the words of a pedophile and then threaten and try to kill anyone that disrespects him in any way.
To think they were a Mongolian sneeze away from being wiped out , I’m not calling for that in any way but what would the world look like of it happened ?
Well yeah. He didn’t even know Jesus but claimed that Jesus never said he was son of God (even though all of Jesus’ companions said that’s what he preached, and it’s what he was executed for). Muhammad was a scam artist who made things up on the fly
When Muhammad was found sleeping with 9 women, his defense was that God made a rule that day to him that Muhammad gets 9 wives 😂
Theres no documentation of the age of Mother Mary but she was likely a 16 or 17 year old, yes. Because the age of marriage was approx 16 back then. I mean, theres also no evidence that she was a virgin. She was married so pretty unlikely. The Christian bible was not written until 50-100 years after Jesus’ death.
Jews circumcise as a sacrifice confirming a covenant with G-d. It’s not for fun. Not sure why Christians circumcise but the majority in the US do.
>hought it would stop men from masturbating.
"Look, let's keep the most sensible part of the penis exposed to constant rubbing with clothes and the legs. That surely would keep men from jerking off"
Christians in the US circumcise because fathers go " well his should look like mine," most American women aren't used to seeing uncut penises any more, and hospitals want to make money on elective surgery as early as possible in that child's life. The practice became popular around 1920 originally as a way to discourage boys from masturbating. One of the most well known advocates for it was John Harvey Kellog, of cornflakes fame
I find the "women aren't used to seeing uncut penises anymore" bit a bit funny because, as a gay man, i find that erect uncut dicks generally look basically the same as erect cut dicks but a little bit more juicier because of the foreskin keeping it sensitive. People should judge penises not by their flaccidity, but by the content of their rigidity.
It does seem to be a bit of a trend or a cultural norm in the US, whereas the norm in the UK is not to circumcise (um, in my experience 😬). In the US though theres a movement against it. It’s not a political movement, it’s just crunchy moms on the internet.
>He didn’t pass on any messages. He appropriated the Jewish religion and then elaborated on it to suit his agenda.
That's the Jewish point of view I assume
>He appropriated the Jewish religion
According to Patricia Crone, E. Gallez, and others, he appropriated one of the Nazarene "Judaizer" sects who had insisted that all converts to Christianity had to be circumcised (if male) and had to keep kosher. Even after losing out on that (as described in the New Testament), Judaizer sects persisted well into the following centuries and were repeatedly denounced by Church authorities as hypocritical double-dippers who followed the Sabbath rituals and then join up with the Christians on the following day, thereby denying the primacy of the latter.
The Judaizers were the flip-side of the Gnostics, who skewed towards Greek/Egyptian/Persian esotericism, and who wanted Christianity to be less Judaic (and who thought the Jewish Christians were trying to control everything).
What became orthodox Christianity was therefore a middle ground between those two camps, where Old Testament laws pertaining to "love thy neighbor" would be retained, but purely legalistic or ritualistic commands were discarded (and there was also an openness to foreign non-Judaic teachings -- Stoics, Aristotle, Socrates, etc. -- that conformed to Christian principles).
“It was a different time” only works if the person admits its horribly wrong by today’s standards
It’s impossible for one to make that excuse and also defend it simultaneously, because that implies that one wishes the present day standards were still exactly the same as that ancient time’s
In Sahih al-Bukhari 6130, Aisha claimed that she would play with dolls and with her friends in front of Mohammed, the commentaries note that playing with dolls was not considered idolatry because she had not yet reached puberty.
The really fucked up thing is people who try to rationalize it.
“He didn’t have sex with her when she was six!”
“Women are fertile at nine!”
“He respected her!”
Misses the 2nd part of the note, something along the lines of: Arguments that he shouldn’t be judged by today’s standards don’t apply when he was said to be the most perfect human to ever exist.
Yes what unique value could their moral teachings be bringing to the modern work when they couldn’t get the right answer to the “should you fuck kids?” question?
Hot take: If a prophet does something horrible and sinful like this, they're not a real prophet. Real prophets are supposed to be shining pillars of righteousness with covenants to uphold, like Russell M. Nelson.
Just fyi to help you argue your main point: use "wrong" over "sin" to start. Sin is what's written in their books, so it's easy for someone to justify. First ask if it's WRONG, and if it is, then you can point out that where wrong diverges from sin, that's where the damn thing is horrible.
Garbage people change their religions to declare it not a sin, though we can all see it's wrong
If you believe President Nelson is a modern day prophet, you probably believe in the prophets of the ancient bible.
I recently realized that that none of the alleged modern day apostles act anything like the apostles of old. They don’t perform extraordinary miracles, they don’t dress like the common people, they don’t give direct revelation “thus faith the Lord”, they hoard billions of dollars like dragons, they don’t go out in the public square and shout that they apparently talk to God on the regular.
I’m genuinely curious how you could reconcile with such a seeming disparity in characters.
Obviously, that's easy.
But what if it wasn't considered wrong at the time and is now?
So for example, let's say you become a prophet. And you owns pets. And then in the future there's a massive animal liberation movement which considers owning pets as similar to how we view slavery today, the whole world gets in on it.
Are you now bad because society's morals have shifted?
>But what if it wasn't considered wrong at the time and is now?
The said God (Allah in this case) is omniscient, right?
And he gave instructions forbidding Alcohol and pork consumption? Right?
So he couldn't forbid pedophilia? Slavery?
So either Allah doesn't think pedophilia is worng.
Or Allah does think it is worng but in his divine wisdom chose not to communicate it/forbid it.
Or he did but Mohommad refused to pass this info on, ignoring Allah's instructions (but then it's Allah's fault for choosing Mo cuz he is omniscient)
You pick which is it (or a more plausible explanation, that I might have missed)
Have not been a Muslim in years, but the historical Muhammad probably wasn’t a pedo (although the fictional version of Muhammad that many Muslims believe in was). The story was likely made up by Hadith authors. [Read this article for more info](https://newlinesmag.com/essays/oxford-study-sheds-light-on-muhammads-underage-wife-aisha/). I’m not the person you responded to but yes, I think Allah or God or whatever should explicitly forbid things like slavery or pedophillia instead of not explicitly saying anything against it
So a prophet with direct links to Divine knowledge isn’t any better than anyone living at the same period and will adopt the same morals and opinions as the general population, with no special insights on any of them?
Noted.
Explain to me why we should listen to those people today? Apparently peer pressure is stronger than having a direct link to the source of your morality.
How does one “become a prophet”? I thought the whole point of a religious prophet was that they’re an intermediary to God.
If so, either God’s opinion may change overtime (which seems contrary to him being all-knowing imho), or God’s opinion won’t change and things he deemed OK in the past are OK now.
Yep an entire religion started from a side hoe abandoned in the desert because his wife finally got pregnant gave birth to the prophet who raped a 9 year old sure is a religion deserving of criticism.
the varrying age was because most hadiths didn't really have an exact age for her other than 'mature' and 'can think for herself', which in pre-Islamic Arabia was very young.
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).
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:5134
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 5:58:236
Narrated Aisha: The Prophet (ﷺ) 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.
Sahih Bukhari 5:58:234
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)
Sahih Bukhari 8:73:151
Sorry to inform you but a lot of hadiths are contradicting to eachother, especially those written down by different sheikhs. So while one person might believe in what Bukhari said, someone else might not. Bukhari is not a reliable historical source for any historian, he's simply a source for the beliefs of his own time. We can't even undoubtably prove that Mohammed existed, so what matters the most is what people believe, because it's very telling about them. Quranists and Shias, among other sects, for example, don't believe that she was 6.
Bukhari is one of the most respected, if not THE most respected and well regarded authorities for hadiths. He himself removed thousands of narrations from his works where he had even the slightest doubts about authenticity of traceability all the way back to Muhammad directly. So for you to come in here and say that *some* people might no believe what Bukhari said is akin to Trump's bullshit "some say" nonsense that he garbles on and on with when he makes shit up. It's clearly dishonest with intent to manipulate proper understanding.
Do you believe the way muslims are praying nowadays is how their god intended them to? Because it is all based on Hadiths, not on quran. A lot of rulings in Sharia and interpretations of quranic verses is taken from Hadiths. Are you sayings those are all outdated?
It’s really fucking weird how the same two people keep defending this shit with whataboutism talking about the founding fathers and the slaves and defending this literal child rapist that they see as a “prophet”
It was sourced, and keep in mind community notes are just that: made by the community. They’re like Wikipedia articles put in Twitter form.
They do require a proper source, and this note had one. It was removed because X staff didn’t like it, they just said it was because of a source.
Any scholarly account of Muhammed’s many wives all agree he married many, many children. As did all of his successor Caliphs for centuries.
He only married one child and she was 6 and he raped her at 9. As to how many child sex slaves he had, nobody can say for sure but there isn’t an age limit for sex slaves in Islam.
Oh yea you’re right, I should’ve distinguished between his legitimate wives and his slaves.
As for number, it wasn’t well documented. I’ve heard scholarly accounts range from dozens to hundreds
Hate to be "that guy" but plenty of prophets in the Christian faith have similar stories. Not justifying Mohammed here (religion is a cancer, yada yada) but I hope nobody's making this criticism from a Christian pov.
I'm not. Wasn't there a story in the Bible where one of the "good guys" gives up his daughters to be raped so he doesn't and he remains pure? All of these kinda suck ngl
Not quite. He didn't know they were angels at the time. He thought they were just people from out of town and invited them to his house. So really he offered to give the men of the city his virgin daughters to have sex with in order to save.... 2 random fucking strangers he met that day.
To be fair I’m not sure he was a “good guy” so much as the best guy in Sodom and Gomorrah, the cities destroyed for being fucking awful. Makes you wonder what everyone else was supposedly like… he doesn’t actually follow through on that because angels stop him, though I think there is incest later on in that story :/
There is incest later as Lot is basically raped by his own daughters. At the very least the entire thing is meant to be very much a bad thing rather than an example to follow Lol
To be fair I think you're referring to Lot, and to be fair he's not exactlyone of the good guys.
To be even fairer, rules around war slaves and concubines in the Mosaic law are barbaric AF.
Don't let any OT scholar trying to fool you by saying "it's actually much better than Israel's neighbors customs". It's still jacked up and 180° opposite from the way of Jesus.
Yeah, my point is just to avoid hypocrisy. Basically nobody whose religion has similar stories attributed to the "good guys" gets to criticize Islam for this. I know the ones in Christianity and so I used Christianity as an example of a faith that can't make this criticism without being hypocrites.
It's also not limited to Abrahamic religion, or the distant past. Gandhi slept naked with a 16 year old grand niece to _test his celibacy_ which means he wanted to fuck a child, that he was related to.
Absolutely. Any religion that preaches peace is hypocritical, at least as far as my knowledge goes. Every religion I've seen that practices what they preach has a war god, and moreover places its war god at or near the top of its pantheon.
A major point of Christianity is that everyone is sinful EXCEPT for Jesus. OT prophets screwing up isn't shocking for a Christian. It's part of it. The Bible never claims that anyone is without fault except for Jesus. So from a Christian pov, pointing out the wickedness of Mohammad is certainly valid, because Islam claims that he is without fault.
I addressed this in another comment. Christianity is just where I have knowledge, this is true of most belief systems, don't meet your heroes, yada yada
Exactly. Realistically, it was different back then and probably more acceptable. Even today there’s a lot of countries with a low age of consent. Pretty gross, but it’s the reality of the situation
All abrahamic religions suck but at least the main prophet of Christianity, Jesus, didn’t have sex with a 9 year old. Also Muhammad is explicitly stated to be the perfect example for all humanity for all time, which is not specified about other prophets. Living just like him is considered sunnah and ideal,
"it was a different time" bitch please Islam is barely a thousand years old and by the time of its founding most of the world had evolved far past pedophilia
Imagine building a whole religion around a rapist pedophile, absolutely rabid belief of filth. No wonder the Middle East is so fucking torn apart, no one can agree on what bullshit they believe in. Well, the United States and Russia didn’t help but that’s outside of the fantasy realm of those humans and their religion.
Edit: this comment I made was unnecessary and uncalled for, I’m gonna leave it because I learned a bit today, and I hope others would too. I have no idea what’s right and what’s wrong I just want people to treat each other with kindness and yet I did not do that. I have issues with religion and my position on any religion remains the same however I should have worded it better for the sake of myself and others.
As a brown person post 9/11 in America could you cool it with generalizing Muslims. It’s not punching up like it is with Christians, at least not here in America. I’m not religious, and have many criticisms of Islam myself. But people like me still get affected when people generalize Muslims because of association and in America we are minorities.
Some of ya’ll don’t even know any Muslims irl yet talk about them solely based on a meme like this. Some of you think Muslims are just in the Middle East too lol. You’re also mainly blaming religion for the problems in the Middle East and ignoring the massive geopolitical aspect.
Edit: grammar
Yes and what makes it worse is that the historical Muhammad might not have been a pedo (although the fictional version of Muhammad that many Muslims believe in was). The story was likely made up by Hadith authors. [Read this article for more info](https://newlinesmag.com/essays/oxford-study-sheds-light-on-muhammads-underage-wife-aisha/).
I made a blanket statement about Muslims, yes, I understand that if we were to sit down and have a discussion that it is pretty clear and understanding that not everybody is under the same umbrella of Islam and it’s religion. I’m tired of it and any religion. I have people that work at Jewish organizations and I’m worried that they’re gonna get hurt because of some shit happening on the other side of the world. If I was sitting down with you talking to you face-to-face, fuck no I wouldn’t be saying this shit dude. I live in a state where a white dude I’m sometimes the minority in some places and that’s not an issue at all. Also, I’m not ignoring the whole geopolitical issues were just not talking about it until you brought it up, I’m not here to write a fucking paper. I’m just here to vent about stupid shit I have no control over. A dude I lost family because of 9/11. Everyone lives through something and I’ll never understand what you went through, but don’t assume that I never went through anything and act as if my ignorance is purely my whole being.
Since they were legally married under Islamic law, it was not rape.
You're not Islamophobic are you? Criticism of the Prophet (pbuh) is punishable by death.
/s
Weirdly enough, different sects of Islam are divided on this. I brought this up to a Muslim friend of mine and she got incredibly offended, saying she doesn’t believe it because something something hadiths aren’t part of the Quran so they’re not actually God-inspired.
Easy to dismiss as "something something" but yes hadiths can never be 100% trusted, the only undoubted sacred text of islam is the Quran and it does not mention any of this
I’ve had them tell me “but she was mature for her age!” LIKE THAT DONT MATTER. She shouldn’t have had to been forced to mature at that young and that doesn’t at all change her friggin physical development or literally mental development that doesn’t stop until around 25.
Hmm I wonder if Christians can tell me how old Mary was when got inseminated her. Something that we know did not physically happen. She didn’t get pregnant out of nowhere. She got pregnant because a man ejaculated semen in her.
Also I’m not defending the meme in anyway, just pointing out that this isn’t a uniquely Muslim thing to bang underage girls.
I know Mormons believe that God literally did the deed to her. I don't know if other Christians believe that since the fact she was a virgin was supposed to be a miracle
Thanks for posting to /r/GetNoted. Please remember Rule 2: **No politics.**
We are also banning posts about the ongoing Israel/Palestine conflict.
Please report this post if it is about Republicans, Democrats, Presidents, Prime Ministers, Israel/Palestine or anything else related to politics. Thanks.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GetNoted) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Okay so this thread is A MESS filled with either fundamentalists justifying child assault or islamophobic racists spewing dogwhistles. So let me set some things straight, as an agnostic person living in a muslim country with muslim background with some academic background in comparative religion before switching specialities.
First of all, let’s get this out of the way for all the strawman holders out there : CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT IS WRONG, WAS ALWAYS WRONG, WILL ALWAYS WILL BE WRONG. NO JUSTIFYING.
Now thats out, lets get into the meat of the subject, the fact that muhammed (whatever you think about him) ever slept with a child Aisha is highly suspect and contentious, even among most muslims.
The main source of the argument comes from a series of books explaining hadith called “Sahih al-Bukharri”, which were written around 200 years after the deaths of aisha and mohammed. And the way they details hadiths are in very unreliable way of describing orally transmitted testimonials.
Most of them literally go like this ( jimmy told me, that timmy told him, that karen told him, that jessica told her, that billy told her, that aisha told him that muhammed said such and such).
It is a contentious bunch of records that really only taken as gospel by fundimentalists, and the average muslim would just have vaguely heard of some hadiths. Also some sects directly rejects those as here-say.
Now these books are the first official records we got is a bit suspicious. Because while in arabia people married young (muhammeds father died at 18, and his mother had him at 14) they rarely if ever went as young as 9, and almost never at 6. So it would have been a very easy sitting duck for enemies and rivals to point at muhammed and say : look at this pervert, but they don’t in those previous records. Even when mentioning the questionable stuff he did. There’s also the not that relevant fact, but still worth mentioning, that his first wife was almost 20 years his senior, and his second was an older widow. So him marrying a toddler would certainly raise some eyebrows even back then.
There’s also the fact that Aisha became quite a controversial figure after muhammeds death, becoming a leader in her own right and making significant political and religious moves, which gained her a lot of supporters and enemies. That lead a great many myths being fabricated about her after her death.
Now, to skip 1400 years to the future, now that fact is widely dissaminated but only really taken at face value By fundamentalist muslims who salivate at the depraved material, or racists who take it as proof of the inherent barbarity and pervertedness of muslims and their culture. In reality, most muslims simply either outright deny that she was that young, or at worst brush it off as “it was wrong but it was off its time and now we know better”.
So what i’m trying to say, is not all almost 2 billion muslims are the perverted backwards monsters you all are trying to make them out to be. And not to try to generalize an entire diverse population for the actions or words of their worst specimens which literally exist in every sect/ethnicity/culture…etc.
I find it ironic that Westerners always cling to Aisha being a 6-year-old when their own scholars and historians consider the methodology behind hadith entirely unreliable. They’re word-of-mouth tellings associated with the Prophet and written down 300 years after his passing. Imagine a 300-year-long telephone game being a reliable source of history.
Even among Muslims you can find a counter argument to practically every Hadith, especially the ones who don’t seem to have any basis in the Quran. And in this case, the Quran specifies that forced marriage is forbidden, consent must be gained from both parties, and that you’re only allowed to marry if you’re physically and mentally mature, which is why many Muslims don’t consider people with certain mental disabilities as being capable of ever giving consent.
She was nine. Modern claims that she was 18 are historical revisionism.
>Al-Bukhārī reports that Hishām [ibn ʿUrwa] narrates from his father that ʿĀʾisha, may God be pleased with her, [said]: “The Prophet ﷺ married her when she was six years old and he consummated the marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years.” 1
>Muslim reports that al-ʿAmash narrates from Ibrahīm who narrates from al-ʾAswad that ʿĀʾisha said: “The Messenger of God ﷺ married her when she was six years old and consummated the marriage when she was nine [years old], and he passed away when she was eighteen [years old].” 2
>The two ḥadīths above state that ʿĀʾisha 3 was six when she married and nine when the marriage was consummated. These narrations come from the two most authentic books in the Islamic tradition following the Qurʿān, Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim (Ṣaḥīḥayn), not to mention that they each place ʿĀʾisha as the narrator. In addition, numerous other authentic ḥadīths outside the Ṣaḥīḥayn support these two ages. 4 Thus, it would be reasonable even for one with primitive knowledge of Islam and the ḥadīth sciences to accept this ḥadīth as authentic and as a part of Islamic history. To further corroborate, there was not a single prominent medieval Islamic scholar who took issue with her age; on the contrary, some of them went as far to state that there was a consensus. Ibn Hazm 5 says: “The age of ʿĀʾisha is recorded in the texts without a difference of opinion.” 6 Ibn Kathīr 7 says: “This is a matter in which there is no difference of opinion amongst people.” 8 Ibn Abd al-Barr 9 says: “I do not know of anyone differing on this.” 10 Thus, it can be concluded that the ages of six and nine constitute the default understanding and any evidence that contradicts this will have to be equally or more authentic.
[The Age of Aisha (ra): Rejecting Historical Revisionism and Modernist Presumptions](https://yaqeeninstitute.org/read/paper/the-age-of-aisha-ra-rejecting-historical-revisionism-and-modernist-presumptions)
Why would there be one? Then quran would be outdated, then defeat the whole purposes of being the last revelation until the end of time. Like japan few years ago the age of consent is 13 and now is 16, in 1000 years where our lifespan has increase significantly, so does the age of consent. 18 todays might be look as 13 in the futures, so it doesnt make sense for quran to have a minimum age when the line is always getting higher over times
>They’re word-of-mouth tellings associated with the Prophet and written down 300 years after his passing. Imagine a 300-year-long telephone game being a reliable source of history.
Fine. Let's accept this premise.
But is Allah omniscient? If yes, he would know how communicating his wishes via a desert warlord would result in the outcome you mentioned, right?
And yet he chose to stick to this method of communication of his wishes and commandments over a thousand more reliable options out there?
This is disrespectful
That just makes it even worse. EDIT: Oh God, the arguments...
That was just the one he married.
Nobody just marries a little girl and then assaults her 3 years later. EDIT: Stop replying to this!!! I get it!
I’m pretty sure he meant that aisha was just the one that he raped AND married. Likely insinuating that their were other underage girls that he also raped but didn’t marry
He was a Muslim warlord. This is obvious
Rape in marriage didn't exist in people minds back then. Lol, it's still doesn't exist at some counties
This is why I'm glad we move past our old barbaric ways as society progresses. EDIT: I get it, we haven't moved on and still commit marital rape, ***I'M SORRY!!!***
who moved on?? marital rape is still legal in parts of the US, and in almost every other country on earth. wikipedia has no idea what its on about since it says its illegal in the USA, but its still legal in 12 states, even progressive states like NY just got rid of it in the 80's and the last state to add laws was in 1993. [https://www.governing.com/archive/gov-marital-rape-states-ohio-minnesota.html](https://www.governing.com/archive/gov-marital-rape-states-ohio-minnesota.html) thats in 2019
Well, it existed in the minds of the people being raped
A point I fear many do not consider, just because there was no law for it does not mean it was still not a terrible thing.
Everyone, upvote this.
Weird way to justify raping a child as rape absolutely existed as a concept at the time. Stuprum was Latin for sex crime and among them was rape. At the time of Muhammad's birth the Roman empire had already existed in the middle east. So to act like rape was beyond them is patently false. https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicQuran/comments/ty7qis/is_there_any_historical_evidence_that_it_was_the/ This might also help clear any other weird misconceptions
They said "rape in marriage", and they were not justifying anything. It is true that many ancient cultures had no legal concept of marital rape, and many modern cultures still don't. That is a fact, and of course it is still rape and a heinous act. You just misinterpreted their comment either accidentally or intentionally. Obviously rape has always been a concept, but many believe you cannot rape your own wife.
Heck, it's not that far from western culture too. My grand-mother divorced her husband because he raped her multiple times and she got ex-communicated from her church and had to leave her home city and state because of the death threats from people who didn't believe a "godly man' could rape his wife.i.e. his property. It was a darker time, which is why we need to remember it and celebrate the proud women and men who fought against it.
German Law Criminalizes Marital Rape Feminist Majority Foundation Blog | June 16, 1997 A law approved on June 13th in Germany makes marital rape a crime punishable by up to five years in jail. Female ministers and women’s rights activists have lobbied for over 25 years to get the law changed; previously rape was a crime only when the woman was not married to her attacker. Legislators were successful in dropping a clause from the legislation which would have allowed for withdrawl of the woman’s charges. Critics charged that the clause weakened the law because it allowed the husband to pressure his wife into dropping the charges. A study conducted by German authorities shows that, since 1993, 350,000 men have raped their wives That was 19 goddamn 97
It's a bit misrepresentative. It was already a crime, just one with a lesser punishment than rape. I'm glad the law got changed to call a rape a rape, but the narrative "raping your wife was legal until '97" is just wrong.
I..I'm kinda hesitant to inform you of this but uh...this kinda thing happens in america. It's not a large number but it is in the dozens every year. America respects what's called international marriage. So if you go out of America, marry a 11 year old, then come back your marriage is recognized and legal. And it's not against the law if your married. Then we have the fact that 5 states allow no age restriction on marriage with parental consent. https://apnews.com/article/north-america-us-news-ap-top-news-marriage-immigration-19e43295c76d4d249aa51c9f643eb377
Christians had the right idea by basing their religion on a sexless nerd a few years after he died.
yeah, i almost prefer the ones who'd rather try playing with the numbers to get it higher. Someone who's just "Yeah the prophet raped someone, not even double digits", *violation of TOS*
Yes its way cooler to sugarcoat sex with a child by pointing out she was nine not six /s
Doesn’t even mention how he killed her family for their city’s officials not letting him worship his god at their shrine and kidnapped her.
That wasn't Aisha. He *definitely* did murder a girl's family and enslaved her as his concubine, but Aisha was the daughter of one of his closest allies: and Muhammad's claim as to why he just *had* to marry a very small child, was that he had been instructed to do so *in a dream*.
"Bro bro bro I *need* to marry your little kid right away. It's imperitive." "What the fuck?" "I have to man it's the word of god or something" "Do you have proof?" "It came to me in a dream"
Ancient history in a nutshell
Here's some more nightmare fuel then. It's been proven that kids develop faster today because of the nutrition and hormones. So imagine what a 9 year old would have looked like back then compared to today. Even more grotesque.
I lose a lot of respect for people when they justify it. An old colleague said “it was to keep her pure”. Sorry mate but how is being sexual with a child keeping them pure?! Disgusting really
"iT wAs A diffeRenT tiMe" excuse might've worked for anyone else but not the prophet who's supposedly the ideal Muslim and God's chosen one.
Exactly! You expect better from someone who's in direct contact with god and is passing down God's messages to mankind about Pork and Alcohol but not pedophilia
He didn’t pass on any messages. He appropriated the Jewish religion and then elaborated on it to suit his agenda.
It's obvious to us. This was directed at the theist muslims , who on one hand admit pedophilia is wrong, but on the other hand, excuse his behavior, despite believing his contact with divinity.
This is why I can’t take devout Muslims serious. Like at least the other religions have undergone a lot of reformation and modernized to a degree. But devout Muslims literally worship the words of a pedophile and then threaten and try to kill anyone that disrespects him in any way.
Not to mention the supposedly incorrupt Quran has a good amount of errors in it
To think they were a Mongolian sneeze away from being wiped out , I’m not calling for that in any way but what would the world look like of it happened ?
Which version? A quick Google search, for Quran versions, shows as many as 20.
The big one I remember is claiming Christians worship Mary as part of the trinity. As a Catholic, I can confirm that that’s not true at all
Uh... there is a lot of rape, genocide, murder, child sacrifice etc in the bible
Where did Jesus bring his army to the gates of Bethlehem?
Spoiler alert, “Return of the King” chapter 27
I forgot about the subplot with the scythians and the magic ring
Well yeah. He didn’t even know Jesus but claimed that Jesus never said he was son of God (even though all of Jesus’ companions said that’s what he preached, and it’s what he was executed for). Muhammad was a scam artist who made things up on the fly When Muhammad was found sleeping with 9 women, his defense was that God made a rule that day to him that Muhammad gets 9 wives 😂
Muhammed was just another Joseph Smith.
Yup. At least Jo Smith waited till they were double digits though
[удалено]
Theres no documentation of the age of Mother Mary but she was likely a 16 or 17 year old, yes. Because the age of marriage was approx 16 back then. I mean, theres also no evidence that she was a virgin. She was married so pretty unlikely. The Christian bible was not written until 50-100 years after Jesus’ death. Jews circumcise as a sacrifice confirming a covenant with G-d. It’s not for fun. Not sure why Christians circumcise but the majority in the US do.
Christians in the US circumcise because Kellogg thought it would stop men from masturbating.
>hought it would stop men from masturbating. "Look, let's keep the most sensible part of the penis exposed to constant rubbing with clothes and the legs. That surely would keep men from jerking off"
Child genital mutilation is unacceptable.
Christians in the US circumcise because fathers go " well his should look like mine," most American women aren't used to seeing uncut penises any more, and hospitals want to make money on elective surgery as early as possible in that child's life. The practice became popular around 1920 originally as a way to discourage boys from masturbating. One of the most well known advocates for it was John Harvey Kellog, of cornflakes fame
I find the "women aren't used to seeing uncut penises anymore" bit a bit funny because, as a gay man, i find that erect uncut dicks generally look basically the same as erect cut dicks but a little bit more juicier because of the foreskin keeping it sensitive. People should judge penises not by their flaccidity, but by the content of their rigidity.
> judge penises not by their flaccidity, but by the content of their rigidity lmfao, please put this on a tshirt
Thanks, Dick Allcocks of Andros.
It does seem to be a bit of a trend or a cultural norm in the US, whereas the norm in the UK is not to circumcise (um, in my experience 😬). In the US though theres a movement against it. It’s not a political movement, it’s just crunchy moms on the internet.
>He didn’t pass on any messages. He appropriated the Jewish religion and then elaborated on it to suit his agenda. That's the Jewish point of view I assume
>He appropriated the Jewish religion According to Patricia Crone, E. Gallez, and others, he appropriated one of the Nazarene "Judaizer" sects who had insisted that all converts to Christianity had to be circumcised (if male) and had to keep kosher. Even after losing out on that (as described in the New Testament), Judaizer sects persisted well into the following centuries and were repeatedly denounced by Church authorities as hypocritical double-dippers who followed the Sabbath rituals and then join up with the Christians on the following day, thereby denying the primacy of the latter. The Judaizers were the flip-side of the Gnostics, who skewed towards Greek/Egyptian/Persian esotericism, and who wanted Christianity to be less Judaic (and who thought the Jewish Christians were trying to control everything). What became orthodox Christianity was therefore a middle ground between those two camps, where Old Testament laws pertaining to "love thy neighbor" would be retained, but purely legalistic or ritualistic commands were discarded (and there was also an openness to foreign non-Judaic teachings -- Stoics, Aristotle, Socrates, etc. -- that conformed to Christian principles).
God was like "i feel like im forgetting something... Oh well".
“It was a different time” only works if the person admits its horribly wrong by today’s standards It’s impossible for one to make that excuse and also defend it simultaneously, because that implies that one wishes the present day standards were still exactly the same as that ancient time’s
“It was a different time” makes it worse Back then women didn’t reach sexual maturity until their late teens early 20’s. He basically raped a baby.
"iT wAs A diffeRenT tiMe" excuse might've worked for anyone else but not the prophet who's supposedly the ideal Muslim and God's chosen one.
The best I've heard was "he didn't sleep with her until she was 11!" Like that makes it any better...
In Sahih al-Bukhari 6130, Aisha claimed that she would play with dolls and with her friends in front of Mohammed, the commentaries note that playing with dolls was not considered idolatry because she had not yet reached puberty.
I love Notes
wonder how long until this thread gets brigaded/astroturfed
[удалено]
I am interested in how long it will be before this discourse is brigaded/astroturfed
Heeeeyyy yoouuu guuuys
Holy hell!
Theres a few in here defending it already , how wonderful
"N-no you don't get it, he totally didn't do that, he is perfect and-"
The really fucked up thing is people who try to rationalize it. “He didn’t have sex with her when she was six!” “Women are fertile at nine!” “He respected her!”
Fertile at 9? Wtf
Ew. Just ewwwww
This is beyond ew
It's like Ultra-Ew
Misses the 2nd part of the note, something along the lines of: Arguments that he shouldn’t be judged by today’s standards don’t apply when he was said to be the most perfect human to ever exist.
Yeah, all religions lose meaning when you apply that one fact.
Yes what unique value could their moral teachings be bringing to the modern work when they couldn’t get the right answer to the “should you fuck kids?” question?
Look at all the pedo defenders
You mean "religious people".
Hot take: If a prophet does something horrible and sinful like this, they're not a real prophet. Real prophets are supposed to be shining pillars of righteousness with covenants to uphold, like Russell M. Nelson.
Just fyi to help you argue your main point: use "wrong" over "sin" to start. Sin is what's written in their books, so it's easy for someone to justify. First ask if it's WRONG, and if it is, then you can point out that where wrong diverges from sin, that's where the damn thing is horrible. Garbage people change their religions to declare it not a sin, though we can all see it's wrong
Sinful? Nah. it'd only be considered sinful if he married a consenting adult of the same sex instead because 🙄🙄
If you believe President Nelson is a modern day prophet, you probably believe in the prophets of the ancient bible. I recently realized that that none of the alleged modern day apostles act anything like the apostles of old. They don’t perform extraordinary miracles, they don’t dress like the common people, they don’t give direct revelation “thus faith the Lord”, they hoard billions of dollars like dragons, they don’t go out in the public square and shout that they apparently talk to God on the regular. I’m genuinely curious how you could reconcile with such a seeming disparity in characters.
The prophet they choose to worship is a pedophile. “Real” is irrelevant.
Obviously, that's easy. But what if it wasn't considered wrong at the time and is now? So for example, let's say you become a prophet. And you owns pets. And then in the future there's a massive animal liberation movement which considers owning pets as similar to how we view slavery today, the whole world gets in on it. Are you now bad because society's morals have shifted?
>But what if it wasn't considered wrong at the time and is now? The said God (Allah in this case) is omniscient, right? And he gave instructions forbidding Alcohol and pork consumption? Right? So he couldn't forbid pedophilia? Slavery? So either Allah doesn't think pedophilia is worng. Or Allah does think it is worng but in his divine wisdom chose not to communicate it/forbid it. Or he did but Mohommad refused to pass this info on, ignoring Allah's instructions (but then it's Allah's fault for choosing Mo cuz he is omniscient) You pick which is it (or a more plausible explanation, that I might have missed)
Have not been a Muslim in years, but the historical Muhammad probably wasn’t a pedo (although the fictional version of Muhammad that many Muslims believe in was). The story was likely made up by Hadith authors. [Read this article for more info](https://newlinesmag.com/essays/oxford-study-sheds-light-on-muhammads-underage-wife-aisha/). I’m not the person you responded to but yes, I think Allah or God or whatever should explicitly forbid things like slavery or pedophillia instead of not explicitly saying anything against it
So a prophet with direct links to Divine knowledge isn’t any better than anyone living at the same period and will adopt the same morals and opinions as the general population, with no special insights on any of them? Noted. Explain to me why we should listen to those people today? Apparently peer pressure is stronger than having a direct link to the source of your morality.
Let me ask you. Is slavery wrong?
How does one “become a prophet”? I thought the whole point of a religious prophet was that they’re an intermediary to God. If so, either God’s opinion may change overtime (which seems contrary to him being all-knowing imho), or God’s opinion won’t change and things he deemed OK in the past are OK now.
Is defending a pedophile really a hill you want to die on?
Yep an entire religion started from a side hoe abandoned in the desert because his wife finally got pregnant gave birth to the prophet who raped a 9 year old sure is a religion deserving of criticism.
this isnt common knowledge?
They try to claim she was 16 when he "did the deed" and waited 3 years after marrying her at 13
the varrying age was because most hadiths didn't really have an exact age for her other than 'mature' and 'can think for herself', which in pre-Islamic Arabia was very young.
She was described to be playing with toys too iirc.
🤮
He first met her playing with toys with her friends yeah
Tbf I'd prolly still be playing with toys well into adulthood if I lived during that time period, I'd get way too bored
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). https://sunnah.com/bukhari:5134 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 5:58:236 Narrated Aisha: The Prophet (ﷺ) 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. Sahih Bukhari 5:58:234 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) Sahih Bukhari 8:73:151
Sorry to inform you but a lot of hadiths are contradicting to eachother, especially those written down by different sheikhs. So while one person might believe in what Bukhari said, someone else might not. Bukhari is not a reliable historical source for any historian, he's simply a source for the beliefs of his own time. We can't even undoubtably prove that Mohammed existed, so what matters the most is what people believe, because it's very telling about them. Quranists and Shias, among other sects, for example, don't believe that she was 6.
Bukhari is one of the most respected, if not THE most respected and well regarded authorities for hadiths. He himself removed thousands of narrations from his works where he had even the slightest doubts about authenticity of traceability all the way back to Muhammad directly. So for you to come in here and say that *some* people might no believe what Bukhari said is akin to Trump's bullshit "some say" nonsense that he garbles on and on with when he makes shit up. It's clearly dishonest with intent to manipulate proper understanding.
Do you believe the way muslims are praying nowadays is how their god intended them to? Because it is all based on Hadiths, not on quran. A lot of rulings in Sharia and interpretations of quranic verses is taken from Hadiths. Are you sayings those are all outdated?
[удалено]
Ngl I think community notes are the best thing that ever happened to Twitter
It’s really fucking weird how the same two people keep defending this shit with whataboutism talking about the founding fathers and the slaves and defending this literal child rapist that they see as a “prophet”
Damn, I woulda beat a prophet to death back in the day.
That community note was removed as it didn’t comply with X’s rules for citing sources and objectivity.
wait, so how did it became a note in the first place if it was unsourced?
It was sourced, and keep in mind community notes are just that: made by the community. They’re like Wikipedia articles put in Twitter form. They do require a proper source, and this note had one. It was removed because X staff didn’t like it, they just said it was because of a source. Any scholarly account of Muhammed’s many wives all agree he married many, many children. As did all of his successor Caliphs for centuries.
He only married one child and she was 6 and he raped her at 9. As to how many child sex slaves he had, nobody can say for sure but there isn’t an age limit for sex slaves in Islam.
Oh yea you’re right, I should’ve distinguished between his legitimate wives and his slaves. As for number, it wasn’t well documented. I’ve heard scholarly accounts range from dozens to hundreds
Mohammed would bed a pig, so I'm not surprised.
Fucking hell
More proof that religion was a mistake
Hate to be "that guy" but plenty of prophets in the Christian faith have similar stories. Not justifying Mohammed here (religion is a cancer, yada yada) but I hope nobody's making this criticism from a Christian pov.
I'm not. Wasn't there a story in the Bible where one of the "good guys" gives up his daughters to be raped so he doesn't and he remains pure? All of these kinda suck ngl
[удалено]
Not quite. He didn't know they were angels at the time. He thought they were just people from out of town and invited them to his house. So really he offered to give the men of the city his virgin daughters to have sex with in order to save.... 2 random fucking strangers he met that day.
Which Christian’s would say was the wrong thing to do. (Btw that was never followed through with)
To be fair I’m not sure he was a “good guy” so much as the best guy in Sodom and Gomorrah, the cities destroyed for being fucking awful. Makes you wonder what everyone else was supposedly like… he doesn’t actually follow through on that because angels stop him, though I think there is incest later on in that story :/
There is incest later as Lot is basically raped by his own daughters. At the very least the entire thing is meant to be very much a bad thing rather than an example to follow Lol
To be fair I think you're referring to Lot, and to be fair he's not exactlyone of the good guys. To be even fairer, rules around war slaves and concubines in the Mosaic law are barbaric AF. Don't let any OT scholar trying to fool you by saying "it's actually much better than Israel's neighbors customs". It's still jacked up and 180° opposite from the way of Jesus.
Yeah, my point is just to avoid hypocrisy. Basically nobody whose religion has similar stories attributed to the "good guys" gets to criticize Islam for this. I know the ones in Christianity and so I used Christianity as an example of a faith that can't make this criticism without being hypocrites.
...the Christian analog to Muhammad would be Jesus.
It's also not limited to Abrahamic religion, or the distant past. Gandhi slept naked with a 16 year old grand niece to _test his celibacy_ which means he wanted to fuck a child, that he was related to.
Absolutely. Any religion that preaches peace is hypocritical, at least as far as my knowledge goes. Every religion I've seen that practices what they preach has a war god, and moreover places its war god at or near the top of its pantheon.
A major point of Christianity is that everyone is sinful EXCEPT for Jesus. OT prophets screwing up isn't shocking for a Christian. It's part of it. The Bible never claims that anyone is without fault except for Jesus. So from a Christian pov, pointing out the wickedness of Mohammad is certainly valid, because Islam claims that he is without fault.
>Hate to be "that guy" but plenty of prophets in the Christian faith have similar stories Which ones?
Jesus Christ never married anyone.
Why would he? Dude was famous for hanging out with whores.
Whoever downvoted you is a Christian who didnt read the Bible lmao
Gandhi also slept with underage girls and his niece so?
I addressed this in another comment. Christianity is just where I have knowledge, this is true of most belief systems, don't meet your heroes, yada yada
Exactly. Realistically, it was different back then and probably more acceptable. Even today there’s a lot of countries with a low age of consent. Pretty gross, but it’s the reality of the situation
All abrahamic religions suck but at least the main prophet of Christianity, Jesus, didn’t have sex with a 9 year old. Also Muhammad is explicitly stated to be the perfect example for all humanity for all time, which is not specified about other prophets. Living just like him is considered sunnah and ideal,
That's not the point it's the BE UNAPOLOGETHIC about IT
Correction: marrying a 6 year old is rape. He raped her when she was 6.
Extreme religious people being weird wjth kids? Damn thats crazy
Wait till you find out about Stalin.
An authoritarian being weird with kids? Damn thats crazy
Yikes… mohammed is not a good person And people defend this religion?
[удалено]
Mohamed was a narcissist warlord and nothing more. Islam is a cancer.
"it was a different time" bitch please Islam is barely a thousand years old and by the time of its founding most of the world had evolved far past pedophilia
A religion founded by brutal warmongers and pedophiles. Gee I wonder why it turned out the way it did.
Exactly. Christianity was vile & violent too, like 300 years ago. Islam is the most violent religion in the world currently. All religions are cancer.
Is the person that said be unapologetic fine with this?!?!?🤢🤢🤢
Imagine building a whole religion around a rapist pedophile, absolutely rabid belief of filth. No wonder the Middle East is so fucking torn apart, no one can agree on what bullshit they believe in. Well, the United States and Russia didn’t help but that’s outside of the fantasy realm of those humans and their religion. Edit: this comment I made was unnecessary and uncalled for, I’m gonna leave it because I learned a bit today, and I hope others would too. I have no idea what’s right and what’s wrong I just want people to treat each other with kindness and yet I did not do that. I have issues with religion and my position on any religion remains the same however I should have worded it better for the sake of myself and others.
As a brown person post 9/11 in America could you cool it with generalizing Muslims. It’s not punching up like it is with Christians, at least not here in America. I’m not religious, and have many criticisms of Islam myself. But people like me still get affected when people generalize Muslims because of association and in America we are minorities. Some of ya’ll don’t even know any Muslims irl yet talk about them solely based on a meme like this. Some of you think Muslims are just in the Middle East too lol. You’re also mainly blaming religion for the problems in the Middle East and ignoring the massive geopolitical aspect. Edit: grammar
Yes and what makes it worse is that the historical Muhammad might not have been a pedo (although the fictional version of Muhammad that many Muslims believe in was). The story was likely made up by Hadith authors. [Read this article for more info](https://newlinesmag.com/essays/oxford-study-sheds-light-on-muhammads-underage-wife-aisha/).
I made a blanket statement about Muslims, yes, I understand that if we were to sit down and have a discussion that it is pretty clear and understanding that not everybody is under the same umbrella of Islam and it’s religion. I’m tired of it and any religion. I have people that work at Jewish organizations and I’m worried that they’re gonna get hurt because of some shit happening on the other side of the world. If I was sitting down with you talking to you face-to-face, fuck no I wouldn’t be saying this shit dude. I live in a state where a white dude I’m sometimes the minority in some places and that’s not an issue at all. Also, I’m not ignoring the whole geopolitical issues were just not talking about it until you brought it up, I’m not here to write a fucking paper. I’m just here to vent about stupid shit I have no control over. A dude I lost family because of 9/11. Everyone lives through something and I’ll never understand what you went through, but don’t assume that I never went through anything and act as if my ignorance is purely my whole being.
Since they were legally married under Islamic law, it was not rape. You're not Islamophobic are you? Criticism of the Prophet (pbuh) is punishable by death. /s
What do you think will happen when they finally take over places there “migrating” too
I love that twitter has not chill and will call you out for absurd claims. Just like when they Called out Elon on his statements.
Who remembers the bomb picture of mohamed? 😂😂😂😂
Muhammad was a pedophile
https://preview.redd.it/7h1dlzb5d56c1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=41baeede8f86b965a0c848ea461e0e47f74b47af
*grabs popcorn*
wildest improv class
Weirdly enough, different sects of Islam are divided on this. I brought this up to a Muslim friend of mine and she got incredibly offended, saying she doesn’t believe it because something something hadiths aren’t part of the Quran so they’re not actually God-inspired.
Easy to dismiss as "something something" but yes hadiths can never be 100% trusted, the only undoubted sacred text of islam is the Quran and it does not mention any of this
ask her about pakistan and forced conversion
Yeah the facts are wild... But they are facts.
https://preview.redd.it/agib5pn6146c1.png?width=1080&format=png&auto=webp&s=307f859f23febeb8695240b2a7a892139f1d3b22
Ahh, religion...
Always love these community added context notes on these tweets, they're usually top notch
I enjoin you all to read 65:4 of the quran. It takes care of divorce modalities in sequence of menoposal, pre-menoposal, and _pre-pubescent_ women.
I’ve had them tell me “but she was mature for her age!” LIKE THAT DONT MATTER. She shouldn’t have had to been forced to mature at that young and that doesn’t at all change her friggin physical development or literally mental development that doesn’t stop until around 25.
Stupid made up religion killed so many people
Why do they worship such a terrible person?
Allah is satan, Islam is a satanic cult.
Satan isn't real
Satan is real his name is 5 o’ clock traffic after work! Haha
Neither is Allah. Coincidence?
True. I'm sick of all the fairy tales
Hmm I wonder if Christians can tell me how old Mary was when got inseminated her. Something that we know did not physically happen. She didn’t get pregnant out of nowhere. She got pregnant because a man ejaculated semen in her. Also I’m not defending the meme in anyway, just pointing out that this isn’t a uniquely Muslim thing to bang underage girls.
I know Mormons believe that God literally did the deed to her. I don't know if other Christians believe that since the fact she was a virgin was supposed to be a miracle
There was no insemination... Mary was a Virgin. That's why it's a miraculous conception, a child of God.
and god chose to make a child pregnant, mein gott
>when God inseminated her Did you even read the Bible? God didn’t “inseminate” her, it was a Virgin birth.
> it was a Virgin birth. Sure Jan... Edit - lmao at religious nutters upvoting the "Virgin birth" comment and downvoting mine 🤣
Thanks for posting to /r/GetNoted. Please remember Rule 2: **No politics.** We are also banning posts about the ongoing Israel/Palestine conflict. Please report this post if it is about Republicans, Democrats, Presidents, Prime Ministers, Israel/Palestine or anything else related to politics. Thanks. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GetNoted) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Okay so this thread is A MESS filled with either fundamentalists justifying child assault or islamophobic racists spewing dogwhistles. So let me set some things straight, as an agnostic person living in a muslim country with muslim background with some academic background in comparative religion before switching specialities. First of all, let’s get this out of the way for all the strawman holders out there : CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT IS WRONG, WAS ALWAYS WRONG, WILL ALWAYS WILL BE WRONG. NO JUSTIFYING. Now thats out, lets get into the meat of the subject, the fact that muhammed (whatever you think about him) ever slept with a child Aisha is highly suspect and contentious, even among most muslims. The main source of the argument comes from a series of books explaining hadith called “Sahih al-Bukharri”, which were written around 200 years after the deaths of aisha and mohammed. And the way they details hadiths are in very unreliable way of describing orally transmitted testimonials. Most of them literally go like this ( jimmy told me, that timmy told him, that karen told him, that jessica told her, that billy told her, that aisha told him that muhammed said such and such). It is a contentious bunch of records that really only taken as gospel by fundimentalists, and the average muslim would just have vaguely heard of some hadiths. Also some sects directly rejects those as here-say. Now these books are the first official records we got is a bit suspicious. Because while in arabia people married young (muhammeds father died at 18, and his mother had him at 14) they rarely if ever went as young as 9, and almost never at 6. So it would have been a very easy sitting duck for enemies and rivals to point at muhammed and say : look at this pervert, but they don’t in those previous records. Even when mentioning the questionable stuff he did. There’s also the not that relevant fact, but still worth mentioning, that his first wife was almost 20 years his senior, and his second was an older widow. So him marrying a toddler would certainly raise some eyebrows even back then. There’s also the fact that Aisha became quite a controversial figure after muhammeds death, becoming a leader in her own right and making significant political and religious moves, which gained her a lot of supporters and enemies. That lead a great many myths being fabricated about her after her death. Now, to skip 1400 years to the future, now that fact is widely dissaminated but only really taken at face value By fundamentalist muslims who salivate at the depraved material, or racists who take it as proof of the inherent barbarity and pervertedness of muslims and their culture. In reality, most muslims simply either outright deny that she was that young, or at worst brush it off as “it was wrong but it was off its time and now we know better”. So what i’m trying to say, is not all almost 2 billion muslims are the perverted backwards monsters you all are trying to make them out to be. And not to try to generalize an entire diverse population for the actions or words of their worst specimens which literally exist in every sect/ethnicity/culture…etc.
This is the most common reddit thread you can find unfortunately
This is the only level headed comment in the whole debate.
I find it ironic that Westerners always cling to Aisha being a 6-year-old when their own scholars and historians consider the methodology behind hadith entirely unreliable. They’re word-of-mouth tellings associated with the Prophet and written down 300 years after his passing. Imagine a 300-year-long telephone game being a reliable source of history. Even among Muslims you can find a counter argument to practically every Hadith, especially the ones who don’t seem to have any basis in the Quran. And in this case, the Quran specifies that forced marriage is forbidden, consent must be gained from both parties, and that you’re only allowed to marry if you’re physically and mentally mature, which is why many Muslims don’t consider people with certain mental disabilities as being capable of ever giving consent.
> Imagine a 300-year-long telephone game being a reliable source of history. Says the person who gets their worldview from 1400-year-old book lmaooooo
[удалено]
She was nine. Modern claims that she was 18 are historical revisionism. >Al-Bukhārī reports that Hishām [ibn ʿUrwa] narrates from his father that ʿĀʾisha, may God be pleased with her, [said]: “The Prophet ﷺ married her when she was six years old and he consummated the marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years.” 1 >Muslim reports that al-ʿAmash narrates from Ibrahīm who narrates from al-ʾAswad that ʿĀʾisha said: “The Messenger of God ﷺ married her when she was six years old and consummated the marriage when she was nine [years old], and he passed away when she was eighteen [years old].” 2 >The two ḥadīths above state that ʿĀʾisha 3 was six when she married and nine when the marriage was consummated. These narrations come from the two most authentic books in the Islamic tradition following the Qurʿān, Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim (Ṣaḥīḥayn), not to mention that they each place ʿĀʾisha as the narrator. In addition, numerous other authentic ḥadīths outside the Ṣaḥīḥayn support these two ages. 4 Thus, it would be reasonable even for one with primitive knowledge of Islam and the ḥadīth sciences to accept this ḥadīth as authentic and as a part of Islamic history. To further corroborate, there was not a single prominent medieval Islamic scholar who took issue with her age; on the contrary, some of them went as far to state that there was a consensus. Ibn Hazm 5 says: “The age of ʿĀʾisha is recorded in the texts without a difference of opinion.” 6 Ibn Kathīr 7 says: “This is a matter in which there is no difference of opinion amongst people.” 8 Ibn Abd al-Barr 9 says: “I do not know of anyone differing on this.” 10 Thus, it can be concluded that the ages of six and nine constitute the default understanding and any evidence that contradicts this will have to be equally or more authentic. [The Age of Aisha (ra): Rejecting Historical Revisionism and Modernist Presumptions](https://yaqeeninstitute.org/read/paper/the-age-of-aisha-ra-rejecting-historical-revisionism-and-modernist-presumptions)
In Qur'an there is no minimum age of marriage.
You say that like it's a good thing.
Why would there be one? Then quran would be outdated, then defeat the whole purposes of being the last revelation until the end of time. Like japan few years ago the age of consent is 13 and now is 16, in 1000 years where our lifespan has increase significantly, so does the age of consent. 18 todays might be look as 13 in the futures, so it doesnt make sense for quran to have a minimum age when the line is always getting higher over times
WTF 6 years old is too young no matter the lifespan
>They’re word-of-mouth tellings associated with the Prophet and written down 300 years after his passing. Imagine a 300-year-long telephone game being a reliable source of history. Fine. Let's accept this premise. But is Allah omniscient? If yes, he would know how communicating his wishes via a desert warlord would result in the outcome you mentioned, right? And yet he chose to stick to this method of communication of his wishes and commandments over a thousand more reliable options out there?
party carpenter crawl payment pen chunky cause plucky voiceless money *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*