|
Post by muslimanswers on Feb 8, 2017 5:04:41 GMT
|
|
|
Post by muslimanswers on Jan 17, 2017 10:26:59 GMT
Wa ‘alaykumussalām A person’s common sense (‘aql) on this issue would dictate that, given the overwhelming evidence provided, it is conclusively and incontestably true that ‘Ā’ishah (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhā) herself stated her age as being six or seven at marriage, and nine when moving in with the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam), and that she probably said this on several different occasions. I think one issue about the 'Aql is that well-meaning Muslims cannot conceive how the Prophet (Salla Allahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) could have ever married 'Ayesha (RAA) at that age; meaning for them the sure evidence from the Quran and many sources that the Prophet (Salla Allahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) is Rahmatun lil-'Alameen preponderates over textual evidence about the timing of this marriage (which could potentially be called into question as far as they see it by means of other evidence - this includes even the testimony of Ayesha (RAA) herself, meaning they would rather say she was mistaken rather than say the Prophet (SAW) did something that is to them unquestionably against Rahmah... I am not sure how one would define it in Usool terms but perhaps for them, a certain Unquestionable General conception of 'Rahmah' as connected to the Prophet (SAW) cannot be overturned even by Preponderant yet Probabilistic Textual evidence to the contrary). Perhaps it is necessary to look into what the 'Aql "instructs us" to consider as "Rahmah to the Worlds" in the general sense (after all, there are potentially thousands of events in the Prophet's (SAW) life that could 'shake one's faith' in this respect if they don't know what the 'Aql truly considers as a general rule in this regard).
|
|
|
Post by muslimanswers on Jan 15, 2017 22:28:56 GMT
Whatever one may have against Shaykh GF Haddad, I would say if we just look at the link at eshaykh and the reference he gives to his own 2 articles, there he is showing the falsity of the "older age" view, and he is very clear about that.
|
|
|
Post by muslimanswers on Jan 15, 2017 16:41:13 GMT
Salam Alaykum
I was asked by someone whether such marriages actually took place in the history of the early Arabs and early Muslims - the inference being that an exception cannot be made for Ayesha (RAA) if such was never the norm and she spoke of the marriage as something customary (i.e. her age would have been like that of other women of her time). I am aware of Shaykh GF Haddad's article mentioning some instances, but is there any additional evidence in this regard?
|
|
|
Post by muslimanswers on Jan 15, 2017 16:30:52 GMT
^
One comment I will make here, Wa Allahu A'lam:
I cannot see how the age of 14 would solve the issue; in modern ethical sentiments of the Euro-American worldview, marrying a girl at 14, even if she moves to her husband's house by 18, is still a whole lot of bad words and criminal in their systems (since whether the girl is 6, 8, 12, 14 or even 16-17 in most jurisdictions, she would not even know what a serious thing like marriage entails to begin with and cannot by definition make any choice in this regard).
Thus, it doesn't "solve" anything, even supposing everything else to be as per the revisionist's arguments...meaning if somehow this becomes accepted scholarship, there will need to be another round of "revisions" very soon.
|
|
|
Post by muslimanswers on May 21, 2016 18:31:47 GMT
Salam Alaykum, I know this might seem a little far from the topic, but I feel it is an 'application' of these supposedly 'Hanafi principles': A certain issue came up on my site, with respect to the miracle of the splitting of the moon, whether it is literally true or a metaphor subjectively described by the Companions. The link starts from: muslimanswers.net/2015/04/13/question-does-islams-emphasis-on-reality-not-show-our-disdain-for-how-different-people-perceive-things/comment-page-1/#comment-16437You can make out very easily that the last response of the questioner includes a comment from "Shaykh Atabek's Group" - no overt disrespect intended, but it is obvious how his students would respond and present matters. What would you say on top of what I have mentioned in my replies? Thank you Wa Salam.
|
|
|
Post by muslimanswers on Feb 26, 2016 17:17:45 GMT
^
Salam Alaykum,
The question of only judging based on the apparent is there, of course. But the beliefs alluded to (like corruption of the Quran) need some more elucidation: The Shia will not say that the words and phrases from the Quran have been deleted [at least not openly], but some of their scholars have said (and it can be found online and in their books of contemporary scholars) that the location of some of the Verses is misplaced - yet very smartly, they will not categorize it under "corruption of the Quran".
Same thing with 'Abusing the Sahabah' - they will say they do not abuse the Sahaba, never ever. But this means for them that they never say anything other than what they deem to have historically happened; thus a story like that of the Martyrdom of Fatimah's (RAA) by 'Umar (RAA) so prominent in their hagiography will be repeated time and again, along with the associated La'nas on 'Umar (RAA), but they can look at the Sunni with a straight face and say they do not abuse the Companions, again since in their minds they are only relating truths and reacting to truths... (it is somewhat analogous to the Wahaabi case, of saying that 'جسم' [Body] or 'عضو' [Organ/Limb] are something other than what normal people understand and it is in fact what Ibn Taymiyya or someone else defined them as, and thus Allah can be attributed with limbs, organs, and a body.)
So perhaps something about this can be elucidated as well, since this is common among the Shias, and is not an outlier.
|
|
|
Post by muslimanswers on Nov 28, 2015 9:33:14 GMT
Salam Alaykum,
This was an old thread I started, but yes the issue is there of living in a world where the concept of knowledge and reality itself is deprecated (way before we get into the discussion: 'Knowing the Existence of God'). Concerning scientists like Krauss and PZ Myers, should there not be a standing committee of Muslim scientist-apologists who understands exactly where the science under discussion stands [because at the end of the science can also very well be used for polemical reasons just like religious texts can be, someone who is unfamiliar should hand the matter over to someone who knows the issue well].
|
|
|
Post by muslimanswers on Oct 30, 2015 2:14:19 GMT
Salam Alaykum,
An important question is asked: What is the level of scientific certainty at which the Muslim scholars would be willing to say that the story of Creation is a metaphor and not Haqiqi? The analogy is drawn with the flatness of the Earth or the motionlessness of the Earth, positions that were once held by Muslim scholars, but which now due to the overwhelming physical evidence to the contrary has been abandoned and the relevant texts have been reinterpreted or interpreted to be about some other feature of the Earth or the Sun, etc. That is, there is always a need to correlate Islamic texts with indubitable reality, whether linguistic realities, physical realities, etc.
I understand from the article that scientific consensus has not been reached, but many might ask that would interpretations change from Haqiqi to Majazi in the future if scientific consensus is reached?
|
|
|
Post by muslimanswers on Oct 7, 2015 12:32:49 GMT
Salam alaykum,
Are there any persons who actively monitor the important sites of Shukurov and his students (the more well know sites like AsharisAssemble or SulaimanAhmad), from what I see they are always saying something against the 'fake Hanafis' (like the claim that Imam Maturidi (RA) believed that anyone who tried to find the truth would be saved, regardless of whether he hit or missed the mark. I know it may not be totally relevant to the Hadith issue directly, but in wider sense it is the same matter of quoting/misquoting earlier Hanafis, and of being true or fake Hanafis.)
|
|