By the name of Allah, the Exalted from defaults, the one who guides whoever He wishes and misguide whoever He wishes, I begin while completely relying on Allah



It reached our ears recently a new filthy attempt to spread doubts about Aisha's (رضي الله عنها و أرضاها ) age at the time she was engaged and married to the best of man kind; our beloved prophet ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ). This issue was put before scholars and knowledge students who advised to neglect and not to be given attention because it is a waste of time. However, unfortunately, this new form of attack started to find its echo in hearts of some laypeople amongst Muslims due to their lack of knowledge. Yet, what is most sad is seeing some of those who are considered by laymen as people with knowledge taking the stand to advocate such false claimed doubts!! Thus, I allowed myself, after praying istikhara to write a rebuttal to this false accusation to clarify for laypeople Muslims this matter. Yet, why would not that happen while we are getting closer to the Hour establishment:

Abu Huraira narrated the prophet ( صلى الله عليه و سلم ) said: “ In the end of the time there will be liars and fabricators who will report tales and stories that neither you or your fathers have never heard . Be cautious of those so that they do not misguide you or tempt you” [Saheeh Ibn Habban: 6766]

I must admit that my real motive for writing this refutation is because this new attack was presented as an innocent way for seeking the truth while it is in reality aims to target one of the sources of Islam in which Muslims rely on to take their religion from; Sunnah. This is another attempt that aspires to plant doubts in Muslims’ hearts about the authenticity of Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, which the Ummah agreed on them as being the most authentic books after the Quran, as well as a way to put down from the status of our respectable scholars who dedicated all their lives for the sake of Allah.

It is necessary, for every Muslim, to know that Hadiths verification is done by known respectable scholars who went through hardship and spent all their lives studying and learning to purify the Sunnah from fabrications and weakness. Therefore, the authenticity of Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim were concluded after careful examination to the cont ext and chain of narrators, which was conducted by respectable known scholars of Hadiths from past and presence. Yet, it is sad and unfortunate to find some Muslims not only advocate this groundless notion but also brag about it as if they invented a rocket or as if they brought any benefit to this Ummah!!

I present before your hands in this article a detailed refutation to this false accusation in which I referred to authentic sources as well as the same used sources by the opponent who brought up this false accusation.

I seek only Allah’s reward and pleasure in this work, which I would not have done without Allah’s assistance and guidance. I ask Allah to let these words, which I wrote defending the Sunnah and our beloved mother, to be my shield from hell-fire in the judgment day and a reason to forgive all my past sins.

I hereby, declare if what I said is correct then it is from Allah and what is wrong then it is from me and the Shaytan


It is a matter of fact that enemies of Islam are working so hard to spread their beliefs amongst others by all means. Yet, their realization that their beliefs are weak and easily to be refuted, due to its reliance on superstition, myths and illogical sense therefore cannot be used to convince others with, led them to either use materialistic means ( money, women, fame, power and etc) or start attacking others’ beliefs to show what they believe is correct!!!

Yet, Allah says to them :{ Fain would they put out the light of Allah with their mouths, but Allah disdaineth (aught) save that He shall perfect His light, however much the disbelievers are averse} [Sura Al-Tawbah’: Verse 32] and to ensure the believers and frustrate the disbelievers and the hypocrites He promised in Noble Quran: “Lo! We, even We, reveal the Quran, and lo! We verily are its Guardian} [Al-Hijr: Verse 9],















Introduction:

Before I start I want the reader to keep in mind the following important points:

1. The false accusation is based on History books that contain some various stories that lack authenticity, as declared by authors themselves, which is normal to find in History books. Let review an example of what history books authors say:

Tabari said in the introduction of his treatise on Islamic History: "I hereby testify that news and stories that readers may find strange or false, unbelievable or awkward or inaccurate were in fact what I heard from others which upon I stated in my book as they were without direct or indirect interference. Thus, I declare no responsibility upon them" [Tareekh At-Tabari: 1/8]

2. Historians tend to mention all news whether it is weird, fabricated or strange in their books without verification of the authenticity of such news. This has always been the methodology of historians as their job is limited to narrate what they hear and in some cases they clarify or leave the examination to others who come after.

3. Most of the time such news that is mentioned in History books do not have chain of narrators

4. Acknowledged evidences have to be authentic and examined in two ways: chain of narrators and the cont ext of the narration. Otherwise, they will be disregarded

5. In case a narration is mentioned in History books that has no authenticity or cannot be examined due to the lack of chain of narrators while an authentic narration is mentioned appose to it then authentic narrations overpower because we do not give up certainty for the sake of doubts.

6. I case a narration is mentioned in History books that has no chain of narration or not being examined by anyone while there is no other narration appose to it then we cannot accept it because such narration will only provide a possibility and assumption.




Doubt 1

To begin with, I think it is the responsibility of all those who believe that marrying a girl as young as nine years old was an accepted norm of the Arab culture, to provide at least a few examples to substantiate their point of view.



Refutation:

I say this argument is too weak for two reasons:

First: the structure of the argument is misleading because the opponent suggests the age as the key word for his argument while they key word must be puberty. Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) at the age of nine reached puberty, as agreed on by the Ummah, which makes her no less than any other woman.

Second: The opponent asks us to provide evidences to support that this norm is accepted while, as a matter of fact, it is his responsibility to provide evidences to support his opinion since he is the one who apposes us. Nevertheless, for argument sake, I will accept to provide evidences that prove that such norm was accepted, known and recognized by Arabs:

 Imam Al-Shafi’e said: “During my stay in Yemen I have come across girls at the age of nine whom menstruated so often” [Siyar A’lam Al-Nubala’: 10/91]

 Imam Al-Bayhaqi narrated that Imam Al-Shafi’e said: “I have seen in the city of Sana’a a grandmother while she was twenty one. She menstruated at the age of nine and gave birth at the age of 10” [Sunan Al-Bayhaqi Al-Kubra: 1/319]

 Ibn Al-Jawzi narrated similar stories from Ibn U’qail and U’bad Al-Mahlby [ Tahqeeq Fi Ahadith Al-Khilaf: 2/267]







Doubt 2:

Most of these narratives are reported only by Hisham ibn `urwah reporting on the authority of his father. An event as well known as the one being reported should logically have been reported by more people than just one, two or three.


Refutation:

This is another fragile argument that shows the opponent has no knowledge in Hadith or its science. Furthermore, it indicates that he copied and paste without even knowing what is written in this argument

First: The Hadith that reports the age of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) to be nine at time she got married, has been narrated by other narrators as it follows:

i. Sunan Abi Dawd:

Obaid Allah Bin Moa'ath told us that His father told him that Muhammad (Ibn Umro) told him that Yahya (Ibn Abd Al-Rahman Bin hatib) narrated saying that Aisha said: [4937]


ii. Sunan Al-Bayhaqi Al-Kubra:

Abu Abdullah alhafith – Abu Abdullah Muhammad Bin ya’qoub – abu ja’far Muhammad bin Alhajjaj al waraq – Yahiya bin Yahiya – Abu Mu’awyya – Al-a’mash – al aswad – Aisha [13437]

iii. Al-Musatdrak A’la Al-Saheeh

Ahmad bin Obaid bin Ibrahim Al-Asdi – Ibrahim bin Al-Hussein bin Daizel – Abdula’la bin Mos-har – Abdullah bin Abdulrahman bin Yazeed bin Jabir –Yazeed bin Jabir – Jabir [6714]







iv. Al-Mo’jam Al-Kabeer of Al-Tabarani:

Mohammad bin Mousa bin Hamad ALbarbari – Abdulrahman bin saleh Al-Azdi – yahya bin Adam- shareek – Abi Ishaaq – Abi obiada – Abdullah [10279]

Muhammad Bin Abdullah Alhadrami – Sa’ed bin Amro Al-Sha’athi – A’bthar bin Alwasim – Mutraf – Abu Ishaaq – Abu Ubaida – Aisha [53]

Mohammad bin Ja’far bin ai’n Albaghdadi - Ahmad bin al-miqdam – Zuhair bin Ala’la Alqaisi - Saied bin Abi o’roba – Qutada [40]

Muhammad bin Abdullah Alhadrami – alhassan bin sahal Alhannat - Muahmmad bin Al-Hassan Al-asdi – sufyan – sa’d bin ibrahim – AlQasim bin Muhammad – Aisha [52]

Muhammad bin Abdullah Alhadrami - Abdullah bin Omar bin Abban - abu Osama – Al-Ajla’e – Abi Maleekah [62]


v. Musand Ahmad Bin Hanbal

Abdullah – His father – Abu Moa’awyya - Al-A’mash – Ibrahim – Alaswad – Aisha [24198]


vi. Sunan Al-Nisaie:

Ahmad Bin Sa’d Bin Al-hakam Bin Abi Maryam – his uncle – Yahya Bin Ayub – I’mara bin Ghazya – Muhammad bin Ibrahim – Abu Salamah Bin Abdulrahman – Aisha [3379]

Qutaibah – A'bthar – Mitrif – Abu Ishaaq – Abu U'baida – Aisha [3257]

Muhammad bin Al'A'laa and Ahmad bin Harb – Abu Mua'wiyya – Al-A'amash – Ibrahim – Al-aswad – Aisha [3258]


Thus, we can obviously conclude that this Hadith has been narrated by other companions and from other authentic ways other than Hisham Bin U'rwah. In addition, one of the narration in Musnad Ahmad from the way of Hisham is been narrated by narrators who are not from Iraq.

Second: The opponent seems to criticize the narrations made by Hisham Bin U’rwa in Iraq! It is clear and obvious the subjectivity of the opponent as he was picking up misleading statements to support his stand. Furthermore, this showed the tremendous lack of knowledge about the science of the Hadith.

Here is the opinion of scholars in regards Hisham Bin U’rwa:

Scholars said about Hisham Bin U’rwah the following:

 Al-I’jli: He is Thiqa ( trust worthy)

 Muhammad bin sa’d: He is thiqa who narrated a lot of Hadiths and he is Hujja

 Abu Hatem: He is thiqa and Imam in Hadith

 Ya’qub Bin Shayba: He is firm in what he memorizes and thiqa. No one denied any of his Hadiths until he went to Iraq where he started to narrate Hadiths from his father while in fact he heard these Hadiths from others who heard from his father.

 Abdulrahman bin Khirasj: Malik was not happy with him however Hisham is honest and his narration is considered amongst the authentic Hadiths. I was advised that Malik did not like him because of his Hadiths to the people of Iraq. He went to Kufa three times once he says my father told me that he heard Aisha then next time he narrates the same Hadith saying my father told me that Aisha and the third time he says my father narrated that Aisha.

 Ibn Habban: mentioned him in his Thiqaat book

Let's pay attention to the following points:

Scholars of Hadith accredited Hisham Bin U’rwa while, still, recognizing his “Tadlees” in some of the Hadiths he narrated in Iraq. Yet, this did not lead to reject all his Hadiths he narrated in Iraq.

Scholars' criticism was limited only to some Hadiths he narrated in Iraq, which scholars recognized due to the fact that he used to phrase how he heard the Hadith in different ways. This was obvious for scholars of Hadith because one time he mention a Hadith as if he heard it directly from his father then he says the same Hadith as if he heard it from one who heard his Father and so on. Thus, Scholars only excluded these types of Hadith and accepted the rest that have no defaults.

As a result, we can easily know that early scholars conducted careful anticipation, in depth. This anticipation was never opposed by any scholar of Hadith especially in this Hadith about the age of Aisha!! Furthermore, there is no one single scholar of Hadith who said to reject all Hisham Bin U’rwa’s Hadiths.



































Doubt 3:

According to the generally accepted tradition, Ayesha (ra) was born about eight years before Hijrah. But according to another narrative in Bukhari (kitabu'l-tafseer) Ayesha (ra) is reported to have said that at the time Surah Al-Qamar, the 54th chapter of the Qur'an, was revealed, "I was a young girl". The 54th surah of the Qur'an was revealed nine years before Hijrah. According to this tradition, Ayesha (ra) had not only been born before the revelation of the referred surah, but was actually a young girl (jariyah), not an infant (sibyah) at that time.



Refutation:

This argument is as the ones before; weak and misleading for the following reasons:

First: The Hadith – which I will quote for you- is been wrongly translated in a way to mislead the readers; so here is the Hadith and you can judge:

Volume 6, Book 60, Number 399: Click Here
Narrated Yusuf bin Mahik:
I was in the house of 'Aisha, the mother of the Believers. She said, "This revelation: "Nay, but the Hour is their appointed time (for their full recompense); and the Hour will be more previous and most bitter." (54.46) was revealed to Muhammad at Mecca while I was a playful little girl (Jariyyah)."
As it is obvious from the Hadith, Aisha only said that she witnessed one verse revelation from that Sura while she was young at Mecca!! I am not sure where did the opponent bring the notion that she witnessed the revelation of the whole Sura!!!! Yet, I will leave that to the reader to judge since the Hadith is clear but all I can say it is nothing but self desire and Shaytaan deception.

In addition, it is important to remind you with the fact that verses of each Sura are normally revealed on stages. That is why, in regards this Sura, Muqatil said that it is all revealed in Mecca except three verses [Fat-h Al-Qadeer] although the majority opinion recognize all verses of this Sura were revealed at Mecca.

Second: which authentic narration the opponent relies on that says this Sura, in general, was revealed nine years before Hijra? Keeping in mind the following:

a. Verses are revealed on long period of time, bit by bit.

b. An existing opinion declares that some verses of this Sura were revealed at Medina
c. There is no proof on the date of this Sura revelation anyway.

Thus, the opponent is demanded to bring forward an evidence to prove that particular verse which Aisha narrated she witnessed at Mecca was revealed 9 years before Hijra!!!

Third: This verse was revealed after the Islam of Omar based on the following Hadith:

Abu Huraira Narrated: the verse {the hosts will all be routed and will turn and flee} [54:45] was revealed to the prophet while he was in Mecca, which upon Umar said: O prophet of Allah which hosts? And that was before the battle of badr. [Al-Mu’jam Alwasat by Al-Tabarani : Hadith Number 9121; 9/58].

Now, knowing that Omar embraced Islam 4 years before Hijra makes the age of Aisha at time hearing that verse not less than four or five years old. This is supported by the fact that she was born after the 4 or 5 year of the beginning of revelation as agreed on by [Al-Isaba Fi Tamyeez Alsahabah: 11457: 8/16 ] and [ U’yoon Alathar by Ibn Sayyed Alnaas: 2/395]

Yet, let me put in your hand the biography of Aisha as proven from authentic books:

She was born on the 4th or the 5th year after the beginning of the revelation to the prophet Muhammad and was engaged two or three years pre Hijra time at the age of 6. She got married on the age of 9 after reaching age of puberty [tahtheeb alkamal by Almizzi: 35/227]. She passed away in 57th or 58th after Hijra at the age of 65 [ Tahtheeb Al-Tahtheeb: 12/436] and [U’oon Al-Athar: 2/395]

Al-Zarkali said in his book (Al-A’laam: 3/240) she was born 9 years before Hijra and died on 58 H.

Doubt 4:

According to a number of narratives, Ayesha (ra) accompanied the Muslims in the battle of Badr and Uhud. Furthermore, it is also reported in books of hadith and history that no one under the age of 15 years was allowed to take part in the battle of Uhud. All the boys below 15 years of age were sent back. Ayesha's (ra) participation in the battle of Badr and Uhud clearly indicate that she was not nine or ten years old at that time. After all, women used to accompany men to the battle fields to help them, not to be a burden on them.


Refutation:

The opponent conclusions and interpretations indicate two things surely; lack of Arabic language and lack of knowledge about fiqh and Hadith and its sciences, for the following reasons:

1. The authentic Hadith, which is referred to, by the opponent, states the following:

Narrated By Ibn 'Umar: Allah's Apostle called me to present myself in front of him or the eve of the battle of Uhud, while I was Fourteen years of age at that time, and he did not allow me to take part in that battle, but he called me in front of him on the eve of the battle of the Trench when I was fifteen years old, and he allowed me (to join the battle)." Nafi' said, "I went to 'Umar bin 'Abdul Aziz who was Caliph at that time and related the above narration to him, He said, "This age (fifteen) is the limit between childhood and manhood," and wrote to his governors to give salaries to those who reached the age of fifteen. [Sahih Bukhari: 2521]

a. Imam Al-Nawawi put this Hadith under the title “the age of puberty” then he said: “it is the age at which boys become fighters and take the same ruling as men” [ Sharh Saheeh Muslim: 12/13]

b. Imam Al-Nawawi then said : “ upon this Hadith Imam Al-Shafi’e, Al-Awza’ie, Ibn Wahb and Imam Ahmad and others said that 15 is the age of puberty ( for males) [ Sharh Saheeh Muslim: 12/13]

c. The age 15 in this Hadith, as it is obvious, is used for and applied on males only. This is more explained in the Hadith, itself, as it is underlined because the age here was used as the age of manhood to which boys who reach this age, will be held responsible as men at times of wars.

d. Al-Hafith Ibn Hajar stated in his commentary on this Hadith when he explained the interpretation of scholars regarding this Hadith “Furthermore, this is an individual case that does not apply generality of ruling as declared by some Maliki scholars” [Fat-h Al-Bari: Commentary on Hadith 2521].

e. It has been proven by authentic Hadiths that young boys participated in battles as proven by authentic Hadiths:

Narrated by Anas bin Malik: Al-Haritha was killed in the battle of Abdr while he was a boy who did not reach age of puberty (ghulam). So Um Ar-Rubai'bint Al-Bara', the mother of Hartha bin Suraqa came to the Prophet and said, "O Allah's Prophet! Will you tell me about Hartha?" Hartha has been killed (i.e. martyred) on the day of badr with an arrow thrown by an unidentified person. She added, "If he is in Paradise, I will be patient; otherwise, I will weep bitterly for him." He said, "O mother of Hartha! There are Gardens in Paradise and your son got the Firdausal-ala (i.e. the best place in Paradise)." [Sahih Bukhari: Hadith 3761] This has been narrated in [Musnad Ahmad: 13831] and [Musnad Abi Ya’la: 3500]


Narrated By 'Abdur-Rahman bin 'Auf: While I was fighting in the front file on the day (of the battle) of Badr, suddenly I looked behind and saw on my right and left two young boys and did not feel safe by standing between them. Then one of them asked me secretly so that his companion may not hear, "O Uncle! Show me Abu Jahl." I said, "O nephew! What will you do to him?" He said, "I have promised Allah that if I see him (i.e. Abu Jahl), I will either kill him or be killed before I kill him." Then the other said the same to me secretly so that his companion should not hear. I would not have been pleased to be in between two other men instead of them. Then I pointed him (i.e. Abu Jahl) out to them. Both of them attacked him like two hawks till they knocked him down. Those two boys were the sons of 'Afra' (i.e. an Ansari woman). [Sahih Bukhari: 3766]

It seems the opponent failed to differentiate between those who are participating in fights as fighters and those who stay in the back lines nursing soldiers. The criteria needed for each type is totally different therefore comparing both types to each other is invalid

Thus, I put forward some challenges for the opponent:

I challenge the opponent to bring one single Hadith that says clearly that 15 was the set age for females so they can be in the battles.

I challenge the opponent to bring evidence that says that the above Hadith he used applies on women as well by bringing statements from recognized scholars from past or presence!!




































Doubt 5:

According to almost all the historians Asma (ra), the elder sister of Ayesha (ra) was ten years older than Ayesha (ra). It is reported in Taqri'bu'l-tehzi'b as well as Al-bidayah wa'l-nihayah that Asma (ra) died in 73 hijrah when she was 100 years old. Now, obviously if Asma (ra) was 100 years old in 73 hijrah she should have been 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijrah. If Asma (ra) was 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijrah, Ayesha (ra) should have been 17 or 18 years old at that time. Thus, Ayesha (ra), if she got married in 1 AH (after hijrah) or 2 AH, was between 18 to 20 years old at the time of her marriage.



Refutation:

This argument is based on two points which I will mention and refute accordingly.

1) The age differences between Asmaa and Aisha.

The age difference between Asmaa and Aisha was narrated, by historians, only from the words of Ibn Al-Zinaad who did not live at the time of Asmaa since he is from Atbaa’ al-tabie’een. He was credited by some and discredited by many. Furthermore, most of Sheikhs whom he narrated from did not see Asmaa as well. Thus, the narration cannot be accepted as it is discontinued (Munqat’e).

On other note, if we to accept this very weak narration then we must acknowledge the statement which was made after narrating the words of Ibn abi al-zinaad by the historian who narrated it. Imam Al-Thahabi said: “.Ibn Abi Zinaad said: She – Asmaa Bin Abi bakr – is older than Aisha with 10 years. I, Thahabi, say: If this held to be rue, then the age of Asmaa when she passed away should be 91. On the other hand; Hisham bin U’rwa said: she lived 100 years without one tooth to fall” [Tareekh Al-Islam: 5/354]









2) The age of Asmaa which was narrated only by Hisham Bin U’rwa, whom the opponent rejected his Narrated Hadiths in Iraq. The chain of narrators in which the age of Asmaa was mentioned, have narrators from Iraq. Yet, we see the opponent here accepting his narration since it suits his self-desire. Anyway, I will accept the narration and agree that the age of Asmaa was 100 when she passed away, although Historians when they mention this age they put it as it was said this and that.

This will not prove anything about the age of Aisha because this argument was based on the narration of Ibn Abi Al-Zinaad which we refuted previously due to its obvious weakness.


As a result, I would like to put before the opponent some question that I ask him to answer since the opponent mentioned in his argument that most historians agrees on this info!!!!

a) Where in these books, which the opponent quoted from, historians ever said that they agree to that?

b) Does collecting a story in a history book means that the author agrees to it? Surely, not

c) Can the opponent name some of those who apposed this opinion since he mentioned that most of historians agree on that!!! ( Keep in mind: Historians never said they agree to that at all)

d) The books from which the opponent quoted his evidences contain many other narrations that refute and oppose his notion. So why did he considered what he quoted and rejected the rest!!! Although, what he rejected are agreed on and proven by authentic Hadiths!!










Doubt 6:

Tabari in his treatise on Islamic history, while mentioning Abu Bakr (ra) reports that Abu Bakr had four children and all four were born during the Jahiliyyah -- the pre Islamic period. Obviously, if Ayesha (ra) was born in the period of jahiliyyah, she could not have been less than 14 years in 1 AH -- the time she most likely got married.


Refutation

The opponent seems, once again, trying to mislead the readers by twisting the words and wrongly translate the words of Imam Tabari to suit his purpose. In addition it shows that the opponent has no simple understanding to the Arabic language!!

I put before your hand the full quotation from Tabary History book:

Tabari says in his treatise on Islamic History: “Ali Bin Muhammad narrated that someone told him as well as his Shaikhs that Abu Bakr got married during the pre Islamic period to Qatelah …who gave birth to Abdullah and Asma’a. He got married, during the pre Islamic period, to Um Roman as well…who gave birth to Aisha and Abdurrahman…So all four children were delivered by those two wives who we mentioned that he married during the pre Islamic period.” [Tarikh Al-tabari: 2/351] and [tareekh Al-Rusul wa almolook: 2/218]

1. Tabari never said that those four children were born during period of jahiliyyah at all. He said that the two wives, which he named, were married to Abu bakr at time of Jahilyya

2. Tabari never mentioned a year of birth of any of the children or a year in which Abu Bakr got married to these two wives.

3. There are no chains of narrators to this story at all.







Doubt 7
According to Ibn Hisham, the historian, Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam quite some time before `umar ibn al-Khattab (ra). This shows that Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam during the first year of Islam. While, if the narrative of Ayesha's (ra) marriage at seven years of age is held to be true, Ayesha (ra) should not have been born during the first year of Islam. According to Ibn Hisham, Ayesha (ra) was the 20th or the 21st person to enter into the folds of Islam (Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, Ibn Hisham, Vol 1, Pg 227 - 234, Arabic, Maktabah al-Riyadh al-hadithah, Al-Riyadh) While `umar ibn al-khattab was preceded by forty individuals (Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, Ibn Hisham, Vol 1, Pg 295, Arabic, Maktabah al-Riyadh al-hadithah, Al-Riyadh).

Refutation

This argument is based only on one point: The year in which Umar Bin Al-Khattab embraced Islam

This argument is not only fragile as the ones before but also misleading for the following facts:

Umar bin alkhattab embraced Islam on the 9th year after the beginning of revelation to the prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم ). Here is the proof from same source the opponent used as well other sources:

Ibn Sa'd said: " Muhammad Bin Umar told us that Osama bin zaid bin Aslam told him that his father told him that his grandfather told him:" I heard Umar Bin Alkhattab said: I was born 4 years before the great Fujjar incident . He entered Islam in the 6th year after the message while he was 26 years old. His grandfather said as well: Abdullah bin Umar used to say: my father (Umar) entered Islam while I was at the age of 6."[Al-Tabaqat Al-Kubra: 3/250]


Ibn Ishaaq said:” Umar bin AQl-khattab entered Islam after Muslims immigrated to Habasha” [Seerah Nabawya by Ibn Katheer: 2/32] [Seerah by Ibn Hisham 2/193]. This simple fact refutes opinion that says that Umar was the fortieth who entered Islam because Muslims who immigrated to Habasha were more than 80. [ Seera Ibn Hisham: 2/193]
Abdullah bin Umar, narrated the incident when Umar bin Alkhattab declared his Islam in public which upon he fought Quraish in front the Ka’ba by saying that he was (ghulam (boy) who can judge reasonably). [ Seera Ibn Hisham: 2/193] and [Seerah Nabawyya by Ibn Katheer: 239]

Let's pay attention to the dates in the above quotations:

First quotation:

Abdullah bin Umar age at time Umar embraced Islam was 6.

Date when Umar embraced Islam is year 6 after the revelation to the prophet.

Second quotation:

Umar embraced Islam after first Immigration to Habasha

Third quotation:

Abdullah bin Umar states that his father embraced Islam while he was a young boy who can make some reasoning (ghulam; under age of 9).

From this we can conclude the date of Umar's Islam according to Abdullah bin Umar; his son age. It is stated in authentic Hadith, which we referred to previously, that Abdullah bin Umar age at Uhud battle time was 14 years old. We know, as well, that Uhud battle was in the 3rd or 4th year after Hijra and we know that the prophet stayed 13 years in Mecca after the moment he became a messenger. Thus, based on these dates, Umar bin A-khattab embraced Islam in the 9th year after the revelation to the prophet. The following is a History Time line to demonstrate the events:

P R E H I J R A P E R I O D A F T E R H I J R A P E R I O D

5…………..……9……….…..….H (13)……….2………………..3………4
* * * * *
* * * Uhud battle
* * * * *
* Abdullah's age 6 * Abdullah's age 14
* * *
* Umar's Islam *
* *
Aish'a Born Aish'a Marriage

Doubt 8
According to a narrative reported by Ahmad ibn Hanbal, after the death of Khadijah (ra), when Khaulah (ra) came to the Prophet (pbuh) advising him to marry again, the Prophet (pbuh) asked her regarding the choices she had in her mind. Khaulah said: "You can marry a virgin (bikr) or a woman who has already been married (thayyib)". When the Prophet (pbuh) asked about who the virgin was, Khaulah proposed Ayesha's (ra) name.
All those who know the Arabic language, are aware that the word "bikr" in the Arabic language is not used for an immature nine year old girl. The correct word for a young playful girl, as stated earlier is "Jariyah". "Bikr" on the other hand, is used for an unmarried lady, and obviously a nine year old is not a "lady".

Refutation:

It is arrogant and foolish to bring such argument that anyone with basic Arabic language can easily refute and reply to. The way the opponent phrases represents an underestimating to people's mind as well as deceiving way to show that he has knowledge about what he is referring to while he has no clue at all about it. Yet, what to expect when people copy and paste others words!!!

This argument is based on the word (Bikr) and ( Jariyah), so here are some what this word mean:

Bikr of females are the ones who never had copulation. Bikr means as well the first born child whether it is male or female [Al-Muheet Fi Al-Lugha: 2/49]

Bikr is a Jaryyah who is virgin and Bikr of women is the one who never had copulation with a man [Lisan Al-A’rab: 4/76]

It is known to everyone that every young girl is called Jaryyah so the word Jarryya is related to age. However, the word Bikr is a des criptive word to females who are virgins whether they are old or young. In addition, Khawla question means whether the prophet wishes to marry someone who never married before or someone who has got married previously.
Doubt 9
According to Ibn Hajar, Fatimah (ra) was five years older than Ayesha (ra). Fatimah (ra) is reported to have been born when the Prophet (pbuh) was 35 years old. Thus, even if this information is taken to be correct, Ayesha (ra) could by no means be less than 14 years old at the time of hijrah, and 15 or 16 years old at the time of her marriage.
Ibn Hajar's original statement, its translation and reference follows: i.e. Fatimah (ra) was born at the time the Ka`bah was rebuilt, when the Prophet (pbuh) was 35 years old... she (Fatimah) was five years older that Ayesha (ra). (Al-isabah fi tamyizi'l-sahabah, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Vol 4, Pg 377, Arabic, Maktabatu'l-Riyadh al-haditha, al-Riyadh, 1978)


Refutation:

It is very important to have objectivity when history is discussed, which, the opponent seems not to have due to his prejudgment statements and his desperation to find whatever can be in support to his point of view. The used reference in the opponent's argument has been cut in a misleading way!!

Here are the bits, which the opponent completely neglected because it stands against his argument

Ibn hajar said just before the quotation: " it is been a matter of difference of opinion about the year fatima was born". Then he added just after the quotation: “Abu Umar narrated that Ubaid Allah bin Muhammad bin Suliman Bin Ja’far Alhashemi said : Fatima was born when the prophet's age was 41 and her birth was before the time when prophet to receive revelation in short time, a year or more and she is younger than Aisha with 5 years. Ali got married to her bingeing of Muharram 2 H after Aisha in 4 months and it has been narrated other opinions as well."









Final Advice:

It is enough evidence to know that the age of Aisha (May Allah be pleased with her) at the time she got married is a matter of consensus amongst scholars and common people, including Muslim Historians whose books were used as supposedly evidences that the opponent depends on.

It is very important to notice that, the opponent relies on history books which happen to be the same books that narrates that the age of Aisha was 9 at time of marriage. Yet, I will leave for the reader to figure out why the opponent, acknowledged only statements that support what wish to find and discard the rest which are proven authentic and agreed on!!!

I would like to advise myself and my Muslim brothers and sisters that we are living in a time of trials and hardships. Thus, we must protect ourselves by having the right knowledge from its authentic sources; Ibn Sereen (رحمه الله ) said simple words that became later a guideline for every scholar and Knowledge student. He said: " this knowledge is a religion, so be careful from whom you take your knowledge".

So let each one of us not to give ears to doubts that are spread by enemies of Islam especially the hypocrites who became horns for disbelievers that repeat what they wish them to say. Those who Allah said about them: “Those whose effort goeth astray in the life of the world, and yet they reckon that they do good work.” [ Sura Al-Kahf: 104]

Waallahu A'lam

Written by;

الفقير لربه الراجي لعفوه و رحمته

Ayman Bin Khalid

28 October 2007