|
|
Topics:
01 | 02 |
03 |
04 |
05 |
06
This is not Zakir Naik's research |
|
Madam Aishah, a
Study of her age at the time of her marriage with Prophet
Muhammad
Historical
Fact 9.
The status of the narratives in the Sahih collections:
How is it, then, that the hadith
collections of al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, an-Nisa’I and
Ibn Majah all narrate Aishah’s age at the time of her nikah
as being merely six, and that she went to live in her
husband’s home at the age of nine?
It seems that they used Hisham’s tradition for confirmation
of this. However, it must be repeated again that Hisham’s
record is not altogether reliable, even though Hisham got
his information from his own father, Asma’s son Urwah. Many
scholars, such as Ajurri, Uqayli, Abu al-Aswad and Imam
Malik all remarked that none of the narratives Hisham
recorded on his father’s reference concerning Aishah were
trustworthy – and the given reason is because they all
originated in Iraq.
Even the narratives in the Sihah (the Authentic Books of
Hadith) about Aishah’s nikah which claim Aishah herself as
the source are suspect, because the chain of authorities on
which this narrative is based consists entirely of either
Basri or Kufi elements.
Yaqub ibn Abi Shaybah, Ibn Kharash and Imam Malik, as also
Ajurri, Uqayli and Abu al-Aswad, all maintain that Hisham’s
Iraqi references are invalidated, and untrustworthy. The
reason is the very serious objection that these narratives
were completely unknown to the people of Madinah.
Both Imam Malik and Imam al-Shafi’i declared: ‘Any tradition
with no roots in Hijaz has no substance, that means, it is
not trustworthy.’15
Therefore, since all the narratives and references related
to Aishah’s nikah and wedding, even those alleged to be on
the authority of Aishah herself, originated in Iraq and were
unknown to the scholars of Madinah, they cannot be trusted
even though they fulfill the conditions laid down by some of
the compilers of the Six Authentic Books.
The only piece of non-Iraqi evidence to back up the Iraqi
material is the reference of Muhammad ibn Shihab al-Zuhri
recording a similar statement – also on the authority of
Urwah, Hisham’s father. However, it has not been established
whether al-Zuhri heard this directly from Urwah. Ibn Hajar,
the great interpreter of al-Bukhari, stated:
“There is no proof that Muhammad ibn Shihab attended to
Urwah directly, though it has been proved that he gathered
references from other authorities, even greater than Urwah.’16
So, if the references all go back to Hisham, what can be
deduced from this?
Unfortunately, we can prove quite simply that his records
are not consistent, and all hadith scholars agree that when
a particular narrator contradicts his own narrative, then it
should not be considered trustworthy.17
It was certainly Hisham’s personal opinion (not a matter
gleaned from any other source or scholar) that Aishah did
pass away in 50 AH/672 CE. He also stated that his
grandmother Asma was older than Aishah by ten years.
Unfortunately for Hisham, as we have already seen, if Aishah
died in 50 AH aged 67, she must have been born 17 years
before the Hijrah, in 605. This means that his dates simply
don’t add up, for once again it makes Aishah 19 and not 9 at
her full marriage.
----------------------------
15. ‘Tadrib al-Rawi’ (Egypt)
p.23.
16. ‘Tahdhib al-Tahdhib’ (Beirut) Vol IX/450).
17. ‘Irshad al-Fuhul’ (Egypt).
Topics:
01 | 02 |
03 |
04 |
05 |
06
This is not Zakir Naik's research |
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|