48,466
edits
Aisha's Age: Difference between revisions
m
→History
| [checked revision] | [checked revision] |
m (→Introduction) |
m (→History) |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
The first ever pro-Muhammad and provably faulty objection raised to Aisha's age was by Maulana Muhammad Ali who lived from 1874 to 1951.<ref name="Zahid Aziz"></ref> He is neither a respected nor a notable figures as far as Islam is concerned, since he belonged to the [[Ahmadiyya]] whose beliefs drastically differ from mainstream Islam. The Ahmadiyya and their writings are also heavily focused on missionary work. | The first ever pro-Muhammad and provably faulty objection raised to Aisha's age was by Maulana Muhammad Ali who lived from 1874 to 1951.<ref name="Zahid Aziz"></ref> He is neither a respected nor a notable figures as far as Islam is concerned, since he belonged to the [[Ahmadiyya]] whose beliefs drastically differ from mainstream Islam. The Ahmadiyya and their writings are also heavily focused on missionary work. | ||
Adding to Ali's objections, there is Habib Ur Rahman Siddiqui Kandhalvi (1924-1991) who in his Urdu booklet, "Tehqiq e umar e Siddiqah e Ka'inat" (English trans. 1997), laments that he is "tired of defending this tradition" that is "laughed" at and "ridiculed" by English-educated individuals he meets in Karachi who claim it is against "sagacity and prudence" and "preferred English society to Islam over this", and he readily admits his "aim is to produce an answer to the enemies of Islam who spatter mud at the pious body of the Generous Prophet".<ref>All Habib Ur Rahman Siddiqui Kandhalvi quotations are taken from the Preface of the 2007 English translation of his Urdu booklet, "''Tehqiq e umar e Siddiqah e Ka'inat''", translated by Nigar Erfaney and published by Al-Rahman Publishing Trust under the title, "''Age of Aisha (The Truthful Women, May Allah Send His Blessings)''"</ref> A posthumous fatwa was issued against him in November 2004, labelling him a "Munkir-e-Hadith" (hadith rejector) and a "Kafir" (infidel) on the basis of being a rejector of hadith.<ref>The original fatwa and the English translation branding Habib Ur Rahman Siddiqui Kandhalvi's beliefs outside of Islam, thus making him a 'kafir', can be viewed here: [{{Reference archive|1=http://marifah.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=3036|2=2012-09-24}} Fatwa's on hadith rejectors?]</ref> | Adding to Ali's objections, there is Habib Ur Rahman Siddiqui Kandhalvi (1924-1991) who in his Urdu booklet, "Tehqiq e umar e Siddiqah e Ka'inat" (English trans. 1997), laments that he is "tired of defending this tradition" that is "laughed" at and "ridiculed" by English-educated individuals he meets in Karachi who claim it is against "sagacity and prudence" and "preferred English society to Islam over this", and he readily admits his "aim is to produce an answer to the enemies of Islam who spatter mud at the pious body of the Generous Prophet".<ref>All Habib Ur Rahman Siddiqui Kandhalvi quotations are taken from the Preface of the 2007 English translation of his Urdu booklet, "''Tehqiq e umar e Siddiqah e Ka'inat''", translated by Nigar Erfaney and published by Al-Rahman Publishing Trust under the title, "''Age of Aisha (The Truthful Women, May Allah Send His Blessings)''"</ref> A posthumous [[fatwa]] was issued against him in November 2004, labelling him a "Munkir-e-Hadith" (hadith rejector) and a "Kafir" (infidel) on the basis of being a rejector of hadith.<ref>The original fatwa and the English translation branding Habib Ur Rahman Siddiqui Kandhalvi's beliefs outside of Islam, thus making him a 'kafir', can be viewed here: [{{Reference archive|1=http://marifah.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=3036|2=2012-09-24}} Fatwa's on hadith rejectors?]</ref> | ||
More recently, we have Moiz Amjad (who refers to himself as "The Learner"). He readily admits to having lifted these faulty arguments from them, summarizing and presenting them in response to a Muslim asking him how he can respond to Christians who called Muhammad a pedophile (i.e. all of his arguments, like Ali's and Kandhalvi's before him, were apologetic in nature rather than scholarly).<ref>See: "[http://www.islamawareness.net/FAQ/what_was_ayesha.html What was Ayesha's (ra) Age at the Time of Her Marriage?]", by Moiz Amjad.</ref> It was at this very recent point in history that the arguments originating from the Ahmadiyya in the 1920s and 1930s finally achieved a little popularity among a few orthodox Muslims. However, this popularity seems to be strictly limited to articles or arguments on the Internet. Clearly a knee-jerk reaction to the avalanche in online criticism of Muhammad's life, as opposed to a shift in beliefs. | More recently, we have Moiz Amjad (who refers to himself as "The Learner"). He readily admits to having lifted these faulty arguments from them, summarizing and presenting them in response to a Muslim asking him how he can respond to Christians who called Muhammad a pedophile (i.e. all of his arguments, like Ali's and Kandhalvi's before him, were apologetic in nature rather than scholarly).<ref>See: "[http://www.islamawareness.net/FAQ/what_was_ayesha.html What was Ayesha's (ra) Age at the Time of Her Marriage?]", by Moiz Amjad.</ref> It was at this very recent point in history that the arguments originating from the Ahmadiyya in the 1920s and 1930s finally achieved a little popularity among a few orthodox Muslims. However, this popularity seems to be strictly limited to articles or arguments on the Internet. Clearly a knee-jerk reaction to the avalanche in online criticism of Muhammad's life, as opposed to a shift in beliefs. | ||