A friend of mine was flipping through my new issue of Muslim Girl a few nights ago. She came upon a photo shoot entitled, "Winterize Your Hijab", which showcases a model wearing different winter knit fabrics as headscarves.

She scoffed at the model: "She doesn't even look Muslim!"

"Why not?" I asked. "Because she's white?"

Akh, here we go again.

Now, the conflation of Islam with Middle Eastern people isn't new. To begin with, all Middle Easterners are not Muslim and all Muslims are not Middle Eastern. In fact, Arabs make up only 18% of the world's Muslim population, according to Reza Aslan, author of No God but God. But due to terrorism perpetrated by a few Middle Eastern people, and those oh-so-lovely film clips of angry, bearded brown men burning the US flag, the Middle East and Islam are often mixed up.

Looking within our own community, many Muslims themselves (those of both Middle Eastern origin and non-Middle Easterners) see Arab culture as a proxy for Islamic authenticity. This may stem from the fact that the Holy Qur'an was revealed to the Prophet (peace be upon him)—who was an Arab—in Arabic. Naturally, there is value of learning classical Arabic and reading the Holy Qur'an in its original form. Knowing classical Arabic can also aid in reading the ahadith (a collection of the Prophet's sayings, teachings, and traditions), and reading about Islamic law and history.

Baladas Ghosal of openDemocracy.com defines this phenomenon as "[a] process of homogenization and regimentation - the "Arabization" of Islam - puts greater emphasis on rituals and codes of conduct than on substance…" But although getting caught up in rules and regulations often can make one miss the bigger picture, it's important to note that this Arabization is more of a cultural issue than a religious one.

Since the original Muslims were mostly Arab, everything associated with them - their culture, names, and family structures - has been associated with Islam. But this presents a problem since the vast majority of Muslims in our current world are not Arab. Passing off Arab culture as Islam in this regard is inaccurate, exclusionary, and disrespectful of other Muslims' cultures.

Converts to Islam illustrate the issue even further. If a Latina converts to Islam, for example, she may decide (or those at the local mosque may urge her) to take a "Muslim" name, like Fatima or Khadija (which are also Arab names). But why can't Lucinda be a Muslim name? What makes a name "Muslim"?

I know of many non-Arab converts who have taken Arab names upon their conversion. But why? What's wrong with the names their parents gave them? There isn't anything in the Holy Qur'an that mandates Muslims to have Arab names. Changing your name from Carmelita to Khadija isn't going to get you into Paradise any quicker. Changing one's name doesn't change one's ethnicity or personality. But having an Arab name makes one seem more "Muslim," because of the way Arab culture is seen as synonymous with Islam.

Another excellent example is clothing, which mostly affects Muslim women. The niqab (the face-veil) was rarely seen outside of the Arabian Gulf until recently. Most Muslims see the niqab as a byproduct of Arab culture. It is only recently that the niqab has been interpreted as religiously authentic instead of a cultural expression. A minority of women in Canada, the U.S., and Europe now wear niqab because they believe it is religiously mandated.

But sometimes brothers get in on the cultural dress-up, too. For example, Morgan Spurlock's TV show, 30 Days, featured a white West Virginian man living as a Muslim for 30 days. They showed him often in a kufi and "salwar kameez" which is like a long tunic over pants. As with the niqab, this isn't "Muslim" clothing, it's a South Asian cultural dress. But since Pakistan is sometimes erroneously considered part of the Middle East, it's considered authentically Muslim. This seems especially silly considering the fact that the majority of the Muslim men in the TV special were wearing "Western-style" clothes: jeans and T-shirts or button-up shirts.

What is troublesome about all this is that most Muslims who are non-Arabs complain that they're not seen as Muslims because they're not Arab (or ethnically Middle Eastern, in some cases). But when non-Arab Muslims take Arab names or wear Arab clothes under the guise of "Islamic authenticity," we're all reinforcing the idea that we're not really Muslims unless we have some link to Arab culture.

The internal projection of Arab culture upon Islam has spread outside the Muslim community as well. If you've ever watched a TV special on Islam, there's always 'oud (an instrument similar to the guitar or lute) or ney (similar to a flute) music playing, to make it sound "mystical" and Arab, and thus authentic. And there's always a gratuitous shot of the desert in there, just to make sure we think that Islam derives from the tribal culture of the Arabian peninsula's deserts instead of from Allah (swt).

The real danger is that Islam is getting buried under all this cultural expression. It is possible to be Muslim without being Middle Eastern, without having a name like Mohammed, and without wearing dishdashas (the long robe worn by most men in the Arabian Gulf states) or niqabs. We should reconsider why Arab-ness is, all of a sudden, next to godliness.

yes hajibaba-
it is a well established fact that people who come form the same geopgraphical area think in sheeple lockstep.

salaams OmarG
yup- that is indeed cool!

I agree with (Dakota), the dilemma stems from the first, maybe second generations mostly. The trend to adopt Arab names or Asian names is vanishing quickly. You see more and more newer converts to Islam being properly educated these days about the reasons to change a person's name. We see that Arab or Asian clothes are no longer the only acceptable clothing for Muslims in the West in our Masjids.

Cities such as New York, Philadelphia and New Jersey, the young people have a more urban, inner city look to there dress. Those who choose to wear Arab or Pakistani style clothes do so on there own, but not because of social pressure, which was the case 15 or 20 years ago. A lot of the Muslims in the Southern part of the United States no longer resort to Arab or Pakistani clothes also. They have return to wearing American/Western clothing, but sometimes making some modifications to insure that the Sunnah traditions are not violated.

The understanding of what is required from the Sunnah and what is not required is much clearer to the masses of American converts these days. The dissemination of Islamic literature via the Internet Telelinks with the Ulema via the phone has made information readily available. Proper education of Islam is slowly taken place to correct some these false understandings.

My, My! I am impressed at your German! Dumbkopf? Scheisskopf? All because I said something true? Like the fact that Arabs are the most powerful group of Muslims? Who cares if there are poor Arabs also; HajiBubba, the point is it takes only one extremely wealthy Arab to make all the rest of you donkey-cart riders to follow him and that's pretty much what's happening! All the blonde-blue-eyed Muslims in Germany and America don't matter a whit when it comes to making the rules for what makes a 'good Muslim'. It is all done by a handful of muttawwas in Saudi Arabia and the rest of you proud ditch-diggers just better follow; otherwise you will get whipped and flogged! As for thinking the Chinese are too clever by half, obviously there is some crazy notion among the Muslims that thier salvation from the Great Shaitan will come from the Godless communists of China! Good bet, fools! Good bet!

Weisskopf, everything you've said thusfar is based on some observation without looking at other factors.

"the point is it takes only one extremely wealthy Arab to make all the rest of you donkey-cart riders to follow him and that's pretty much what's happening!"

Wealthy people don't make rules; so-called scholars do. I'd say half of the Muslim world is illiterate, so yes, a lot of them will unfortunately blindly follow scholars, and somehow over the years, the Arabness of scholars have made them more credible.

"All the blonde-blue-eyed Muslims in Germany and America don't matter a whit when it comes to making the rules for what makes a 'good Muslim'."

Barely any blonde, blue-eyed Muslims anywhere. And for the Muslims that rarely are, they will practice so long as they believe. Saudi Arabia unfortunately does have a lot of influence because they can go to poor Muslim countries, drop cash, and say 'Muslims do this, they don't do that.' But that doesn't mean they make the rules for all Muslims. Go to Morocco. Turkey. Syria. Next-door Oman. Practicing Muslims there are hardly influenced by the Saudi Selefi ideology.

"It is all done by a handful of muttawwas in Saudi Arabia and the rest of you proud ditch-diggers just better follow; otherwise you will get whipped and flogged!"

Last point.

"As for thinking the Chinese are too clever by half, obviously there is some crazy notion among the Muslims that thier salvation from the Great Shaitan will come from the Godless communists of China!"

Have no idea how you jumped to that conclusion. And China was not always communist, dumbass.

i have blue eyes (but red hair)javizzle and you're right!

"Have no idea how you jumped to that conclusion. And China was not always communist, dumbass." - javizzle

BUT THEY ARE NOW! DUMBASS! LEARN TO LIVE IN THE PRESENT AND HALF YOUR TROUBLES WILL BE OVER! DUMBASS!

Now quietly, for the rest of your 'brilliant' arguments, dumbass!

Saudi influence has been on the upswing since the 1960s. It is not because they throw cash at poor people. Muslims all over the world implicitly believe Saudis are superior because Mohamed lived there and also believe god gave them petrol because it is a holy place; ergo they are better muslims than others ;especially, the dark-skinned converts in far-away Indonesia or Pakistan or India! Just go to Saudi arabia and see for yourself how they treat the muslims from these countries!

You can fool yourself all you want that it is scholarship or whatever but until the Saudis got hold of the world by its balls because of Oil, they were just a bunch of camel-herders who took alms from Indian muslims even! It's true! As recently as the early 20th century money used to go from India to Arabia as Zakat or whatever you guys call it.

Whether it is muslim or jew, he who has the cash, wields the whip! And the saudis are wielding it right now and boy, are they giving you guys a flogging, or what?!

Weisskopf,

The Saudis are the puppets of the United States. Saudi Arabia invests trillions of dollars in the Untied States. Even though the US buys more oil from Canada and Mexico each, neither of these countries invest the huge amount that the Saudis do. In addition, the United States makes billions of dollars selling weapons to Saudi Arabia, even though the Saudis do not have the qualified personnel to operate the weapons. This is why they are dependent on the United States to defend them. Saudi Arabia is just a storage place for weapons that the United States would use in any future interventions in the Middle East

The Saudis are only as powerful as their master the United States.

This discussion of western muslims has been very interesting, especially of women converts.

I'm studying the Koran and am very attracted to Islam, but have to balk at learning Arabic and dressing like a member of any other culture than my own. Is there any way to be both Muslim and myself?

yes grace- i invite you to read my post at the beginning on page 1
peace

Read the 3 statements, the first made by Fatemeh Fakhraie, the second made by Haji Baba, the third made now by amita sampat

.......... This may stem from the fact that the Holy Qur'an was revealed to the Prophet (peace be upon him)—who was an Arab—in Arabic.

...........despite the fact that Arab guys are usually the worst when it comes to controlling whats in their pants.


............The Propphet at the age of 56 married a 9 year old girl called Ayesha and ( horrors ) consumated that marriage

Now the facts speak for themselves.

AMITA SAMPAT-

i hope this is edifying



Title:
What was Ayesha's (ra) Age at the Time of Her Marriage to the Prophet (pbuh)?

Question:

What was Ayesha's (ra) age at the time of her marriage?

It is normally believed that she was nine years old at the time of her marriage with Mohammad (sws) was consummated. I do think it was according to the traditions of the Arab culture, as otherwise people would have objected to this marriage. But unfortunately, the modern day man is not satisfied with an answer as simple as that.



Answer:

To begin with[1], 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. I have not yet been able to find a single reliable instance in the books of Arab history where a girl as young as nine years old was given away in marriage. Unless such examples are given, we do not have any reasonable grounds to believe that it really was an accepted norm.

In my opinion, the age of Ayesha (ra) has been grossly misreported in the narratives of the incident. Not only that, I think that the narratives reporting this event are not only highly unreliable but also that on the basis of other historical data, the event reported, is quite an unlikely happening. Let us look at the issue from an objective stand point. My reservations in accepting the narratives, on the basis of which, Ayesha's (ra) age at the time of her marriage with the Prophet (pbuh) is held to be nine years are:

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.

It is quite strange that no one from Medinah, where Hisham ibn `urwah lived the first seventy-one years of his life has narrated the event, even though in Medinah his pupils included people as well known as Malik ibn Anas. All the narratives of this event have been reported by narrators from Iraq, where Hisham is reported to have shifted after living in Medinah for seventy-one years.

Tehzeeb al-Tehzeeb, one of the most well known books on the life and reliability of the narrators of the traditions ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh) reports that according to Yaqub ibn Shaibah: "narratives reported by Hisham are reliable except those that are reported through the people of Iraq". It further states that Malik ibn Anas objected on those narratives of Hisham, which were reported through people of Iraq (Vol. 11, pg. 48 - 51).

Meezaan al-Ai`tidaal, another book on the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet (pbuh) reports that when he was old, Hisham's memory suffered quite badly (Vol. 4, pg. 301 - 302).

According to the generally accepted tradition, Ayesha (ra) was born about eight years before Hijrah. However, according to another narrative in Bukhari (Kitaab al-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 even only an infant (sibyah) at that time. Obviously, if this narrative is held to be true, it is in clear contradiction with the narratives reported by Hisham ibn `urwah. I see absolutely no reason that after the comments of the experts on the narratives of Hisham ibn `urwah, why should we not accept this narrative to be more accurate.

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 indicates that she was not nine or ten years old at that time. After all, women used to accompany men to the battlefields to help them, not to be a burden upon them.

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 Taqreeb al-Tehzeeb as well as Al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah that Asma (ra) died in the 73rd year after hijrah[2] when she was 100 years old. Now, obviously if Asma (ra) was 100 years old in the 73rd year after 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.

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.

According to Ibn Hisham, the historian, Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam quite some time before Umar ibn 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 even have been born during the first year of Islam.

Tabari has also reported that at the time Abu Bakr (ra) planned on migrating to Habshah (8 years before Hijrah), he went to Mut`am - with whose son Ayesha (ra) was engaged at that time - and asked him to take Ayesha (ra) in his house as his son's wife. Mut`am refused, because Abu Bakr had embraced Islam. Subsequently, his son divorced Ayesha (ra). Now, if Ayesha (ra) was only seven years old at the time of her marriage, she could not have been born at the time Abu Bakr decided on migrating to Habshah. On the basis of this report it seems only reasonable to assume that Ayesha (ra) had not only been born 8 years before hijrah, but was also a young lady, quite prepared for marriage.
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".

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.

These are some of the major points that go against accepting the commonly known narrative regarding Ayesha's (ra) age at the time of her marriage.

In my opinion, neither was it an Arab tradition to give away girls in marriage at an age as young as nine or ten years, nor did the Prophet (pbuh) marry Ayesha (ra) at such a young age. The people of Arabia did not object to this marriage, because it never happened in the manner it has been narrated.

1st May 1998


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] The answer to this question is primarily based on the research by Habib ur Rahman Kandhalwi (urdu) as presented in his booklet, "Tehqiq e umar e Siddiqah e Ka'inat", Anjuman Uswa e hasanah, Karachi, Pakistan

[2] That is, the migration of the Prophet (pbuh)

Muslims of all races are very apparent and present in society. Media representation will never make a fair analysis of the actual. It is a compromised institution despite all the free speech hype. The only way that Muslims will find better representation in the media is if we are better representing ourselves. The only way we can better represent ourselves is if we better in relation to the revealed religion.

The day we can express openly Muslim ideas rooted in our Islamic theology, ideas that can stand technically, academically and in literature is the day we will be represented for what are. If we stand for nothing, they will fall for anything.

Excellent Research Mrs.A. Whoa. You actually read books. Nutto. You are now classified along with Ghulam as a "Nutto". Congrats.

This whole Ayesha (ra) marriage thing is usually raised by people who think the Prophet (pbuh) was some sort of an EVIL man, possibly a PERVERT, and most likely a PSYCHOPATH. This explains why he created this Devil Religion Islam. Once they have made this conclusion already, now the idea that the Prophet married a nine year old girl is perfectly clear in their mind that OK, makes perfect sense, see.

Which is quite sad, because in their prejudice, they forget that the Prophet (pbuh) MARRIED Hazrat Ayesha (ra). As in he asked for her hand from her father or guardian, properly announced the marriage in public and everything. Sort of like a good Christian! Somthing which most Christians themselves do not do nowadays, they just bling bling first and move on. Nobody knows who sleeps with whom, how many illegitimate children and abortions there are, but someone marrying someone young in their community in a proper way is for some odd reason perversion, and blinging around with the same is just fine and dandy.

Infact, the opposite is more likely. Is it not common sense that people and cultures who do not have a proper social marital relationships are more likely to be found sleeping with nine year olds, then cultures where everything is done with consent of parents and in full public glare???? Odd.

When Mrs A debates Ayeshas age that means ( please note this very important point ) that she is ACCEPTING that had the Prophet married a 9 year old girl there was something wrong with him. Long back Omar G ( another sensible chap on this site – ) made the same defence

But look at Hajibaba’s attitude. It is obvious from his post on the same day that he has raised various pathetic unrelated points………. but none to disown Ayeshas age. Im sorry Mrs A , but most Muslims are very very clear about these 2 facts ( want to risk asking me for very clear documented references, by Muslims themselves ? ) The 2 points being……..
1- The prophet married a 9 year old girl
2- There is nothing wrong with that

So Mrs A , well begun is half done.……… the rest of the argument is between you, Hajibaba, and other Muslims. If much of the Muslim world agrees with the above 2 points then you ( and Omar G ) HAVE to admit that ( by your own white standards ) you both have reservations about your Prophet.

>>So Mrs A , well begun is half done.……… the rest of the argument is between you, Hajibaba, and other Muslims. If much of the Muslim world agrees with the above 2 points then you ( and Omar G ) HAVE to admit that ( by your own white standards ) you both have reservations about your Prophet.<<

Well Amita. You are proving precisely my point! That YOU have reservations about the Prophet (pbuh)!!!!! That is EXACTLY what I was trying to say. That people are looking to hate the Prophet for whatever reason, and so they take his biography and start picking and choosing things that they find offensive.

Its how you want to see things. If you think someone is noble, so you cherry-pick what you find noble in him, and if you thinks someone is a sicko, so you focus on things that re-affirm your prejudices.

I have absolutely no clue what age Ayesha was, never paid much attention to that statistic, although I came across someone distributing literature some years back similar to what Mrs.A. has pasted above analyzing this issue.

One would have to look up some biographies of him and see what they say. The most commonly read in English are by Martin Lings, Mubarakpuri, Haykal, and more recently major ones include Emerick, Adil Salahi and a couple others. I will go to our local mosque library this week and see what they say. Should be an interesting experiment. These are the books that the vast majority of Muslims learn about the Prophet (pbuh) from in English-speaking countries.

amita- the reservation is being projected upon me-
i made no value judgement one way or the other-

this writing simply presents the SOURCES from which this idea is taken from.

the souce (singular) that indicates aisa was 9 yars old-
is for several reasons (transmitted by one person- not 2 or 3- the age of the transmitter{over 71} the questioned memory of the transmitter, and the invalidity of this and other hadeeth relayed through the people of iraq at that time as their motives may have been mixed) doubted.

by taking whatever available information into account- (the age of aisha's sister, that all 4 siblings were born pre-islamic time- etc etc) it is clear her age can be easily and objectively determined.

please note THIS is very important-

math is math.

im not going to list every point- i cannot read it for you-
read the post yourself and come to your conclusion based upon the infromation provided-

to reject informaton because you are making an assumption about what MAY be my motives-
means that you are simply looking for a weak reason to shut out what disagrees with your preconceptions.
whether or not i have "reservations" about our Prophet(pbuh) bears no relevance to the post.

the complete and fully made points directly refute your assertion.

to attempt to shoot the messenger doesnt disprove the message-

it simply proves you have no objective refutation to the message itself.

Ok Mrs A , I am sorry, if I made an assumption about what MAY be your motives- Ill take another line. Please read these ‘objective’ sources below, there is also a reference to ‘Modern’ Muslims like you who have alternate research to give some other age to Ayesha.

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina/ayesha.htm
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina/ayesha_age.htm
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina/ayesha_moraleval.htm

Now, don’t tell me which source you may agree to, I was never trying to play a game of one-up(wo)manship. My intention is not to insult you. My intention is to educate you ( sorry if I sound arrogant, because I realize you are fairly well read ) But there is always something new to learn.

Mrs A, just read these links and sit in the peace and quiet of your room, and argue with yourself. Question yourself. There is no ego if you are alone. You may want to change your perception about Islam. Good Luck.

Hajibaba, you are beyond redemption, so I will not try. But just to be fair, I’ll say that there is a lot of sickening shit in Hinduism as well, and the sooner we drop this baggage of 1000 year old rules and fools, the better our world will be

Well, since you dragged my name into this: no, I have no reservations about my prophet per se. I have reservations about what people *report about him*. Big, huge, tremendous difference.

So, what makes faithfreedom.org an "objective" source?? What makes Ali Sina automatically correct?

Final comment: Our prophet married women; yours burned them in suttee. 'Nuf said, you loose.