Jojo again is entirely incorrect in these assertions.

On Jan 3, 2013, at 1:12 AM, Jojo Jaro wrote:

> Lomax and Bivort,  why is it that you consider the work of scholars who lived 
> 1600 years later better than the testimony of the person herself as recorded 
> by your own muslim scholars.  I find this attempt at deception instructive 
> but puzzling.
> 
> A'isha herself said, in 2 respected hadiths, that she was 9 years old when 
> muhammed had his first intercourse with her.  Now, here comes all these 
> westernized scholars and "experts", that claim otherwise and you take their 
> work as more authoritative than Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari.  I really 
> don't understand this.  Islam is indeed a malady.
> 
> 
> 
> Jojo
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" 
> <a...@lomaxdesign.com>
> To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>; <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
> Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013 12:01 PM
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:OT:JoJo's "Truth" about islam and little girls.
> 
> 
>> At 07:29 PM 1/2/2013, de Bivort Lawrence wrote:
>>> Thanks, Abd ar-Rahman.
>>> 
>>> Some time ago I wrote a long post on Muslims, marriage, and pre-and post 
>>> Quranic practices. Jojo said he would respond later, but never did. FYI, I 
>>> subsequently read that post to a well-regarded Muslim scholar and he 
>>> confirmed the accuracy of the post, so I'll let my post stand.
>> 
>> Do you have a link to it? Or the date and time?
>> I do notice that you "mispell" my name correctly as a common variation.
>> 
>>> I think memetics is the way to understand the 
>>> birther/Muhammed/aliens/illuminati alternative "reality".  For reasons I 
>>> think you and others here will appreciate, I'd prefer not to discuss this 
>>> field further, here or in any other public venue.
>> 
>> You can write me privately. Anyone who subscribes to this list can, if you 
>> read the list as a subscriber.
>> 
>>> I admire your patience, and wish I had as much of it!
>> 
>> Patience or foolishness, I can't tell. Thanks.
>> 
>>> On Jan 2, 2013, at 6:48 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg75072.html
>> 
>> On the subject of Ayesha's age at "marriage" i.e. when she began to live 
>> with the Prophet, I found some sources I'll share. I am *not* claiming to 
>> know the age of Ayesha, and my own opinion is that it's impossible to know 
>> for sure. But I'd still pay attention to authoritative analysis. Too much of 
>> what I've seen may have been contaminated by bias.
>> 
>> http://dawn.com/2012/02/17/of-aishas-age-at-marriage/
>> This is a newspaper source and might be a cut above the average. The author 
>> is called "a scholar of the Qur'an," which could make him outside his 
>> expertise. Some of the arguments I've seen elsewhere. The argument about the 
>> kunnat, the name Ayesha adopted, "Umm Abdullah," is interesting. He 
>> concludes that she was 21 when she moved into the Prophet's House (I'll call 
>> that "marriage"). And God knows best.
>> 
>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-david-liepert/islamic-pedophelia_b_814332.html
>> This is a reputable media site. The author has clearly done a lot of 
>> research. He's also not necessarily a "muslim scholar," but has probaby 
>> collected materials and analysis from some. The above site and this one, I 
>> just found today, and I find, here, many of the facts and arguments I came 
>> up with myself. He comes up with a possible age of 20 at marriage.
>> 
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2012/sep/17/muhammad-aisha-truth
>> Article in the Guardian by a Muslim woman, "studying for a DPhil at Oxford 
>> University, focusing on Islamic movements in Morocco." She comes up with my 
>> opinion, roughly, saying "it is impossible to know with any certainty how 
>> old Aisha was," but estimates of her age range from nine to 19.
>> 
>> http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=4604&CATE=1
>> This is a reputable web site apparently affiliated with Nuh Keller, whom I 
>> know. The page is written by G.F. Haddad, whom I also know. Keller is 
>> definitely a Muslim scholar, and recognized as such. Haddad, as I recall, 
>> was studying, and that was more than ten years ago. The page is poorly 
>> formatted and the questions that he is answering are not set off from his 
>> answers, but he concludes that Ayesha "could not have been less than 14."
>> 
>> I looked for some time for some page that appeared to me to be 
>> authoritative. I did not select pages for skepticism on the age. But I 
>> didn't find one that actually argued for nine years old.
>> 
>> Trying to find some other opinion, I cast a bit wider net. I found a page 
>> titled "Authentic Tauheed," and mentioning the "Salaff" The could be a 
>> highly conservative site, but I didn't read widely enough to be sure.
>> http://authentictauheed.blogspot.com/2011/07/age-of-hazrat-aisha-ra-when-she-married.html
>> He comes up with age 9-18, and says that regardless, she had reached puberty 
>> and was very happy.
>> (The site seems amateurish in ways, so I'm not confident in the authority of 
>> this site as to scholarship.)
>> 
>> Okay, I found something.
>> http://www.islamic-life.com/forums/local_links.php?action=jump&catid=3&id=879
>> has a PDF download, of a paper prepared that argues for an age of 9. The 
>> controversy is portrayed as between "history" and "hadith." Basically, a 
>> fundamentalist position is being taken. The hadith are correct, and history 
>> is false, and that actually seems to be the major point. If you want to know 
>> how a fundamentalist Muslim thinks, the paper is detailed. The paper has the 
>> Abu Dawud hadith, previously mentioned, in Arabic, should I be crazy enough 
>> to pursue this further.
>> 
>> My own stand is that we cannot know the age with certainty, and that the age 
>> is actually irrelevant.
>> 
>> Legally, the conditions of marriage and consent are crucial, and age is only 
>> a proxy for those conditions. A community may use such a proxy to protect 
>> children, and I commend the practice of requiring judicial consent for a 
>> marriage under some specified age. That process could review testimony, etc. 
>> From a religious perspective, if a woman is actually ready for marriage, 
>> delaying it can be harmful, so, ultimately, the welfare of the child must be 
>> paramount. That determination may also vary with the social conditions 
>> present. And God knows best.
>> 
> 

Reply via email to