User talk:Androvie

You reverted an major point regarding aisha's age during her marriage to muhammad. Its a common belief in both sunni and shia muslims that her age is uncertain as well that she might me 18 or 19. The sources, I have gives demonstrate just that. Its a calculation that interested readers can do themselves when they access it. In Wikipedia, we have to provide views of all sides. Solve this issue so I can put that content back in to give more information to the readers!

All those opinions are summarized at the bottom of the section. The sources you brought cannot be included in Wikipedia on their own, because they do not meet the WP:RS

Btw, have you read this one source that you provided?

https://islamqa.info/en/answers/124483/how-old-was-aishah-when-she-married-the-prophet

It actually refutes all the arguments that claims Aisha was not 6 or 7 years old when the Prophet married her. Androvie (talk) 23:10, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How is it @

StarkReport

? Have you read the content of the above source you presented that actually refutes all your points?

Here I quote some of the text from it:

The definition of the age of ‘Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her) when the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) did the marriage contract with her as being six years, and of the age when he consummated the marriage with her as being nine years, is not a matter of ijtihad (individual opinion) on the part of the scholars, such that we could argue whether it is right or wrong; rather this is a historical narration which is proven by evidence that confirms its soundness and the necessity of accepting it.

Androvie (talk) 05:21, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Have you even read my sources I have given in recent edits. None of them is from islamqa, the source your are trying to quote from. The sources I have given satisfies WP:RS as well as WP:OR. Carefully study them rather than reverting on impulse. Now you might be asking, what is the reason for putting it here, its a part of expanding and updating Wiki's articles. Out there among the Muslim scholars and people, this info is is accepted as fact by many, so the reason for this is to provide their viewpoint as well rather than concealing it. And no, its not a fringe theory in any way. StarkReport (talk) 10:25, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's funny that you left it out after knowing that it invalidates all the arguments you brought, including the one using the (weak) narration about Asma's age. Anyway, what you brought up was a fringe theory, which shouldn’t be given undue weight, but nevertheless the matter is included in the article (which I myself had to compromise on) in this part:

some Muslims chose to align themselves with the projects of modernization and re-calculated her age—using deft stratagems of omission and commission—to fix it at early adolescence, but conservatives rejected such revisionist readings since they flew in the face of ʻilm al-ḥadīth.

which is in accordance with this other source that you brought:^[1]

‘Aqqad cleverly skirts the authenticated Hadith found in Sahih Bukhari in which Aisha herself reports that she was nine at the time, addressing it only obliquely by suggesting that Aisha was fond of emphasizing her child- hood spent in the nascent days of Islam and how young she was during the faith's formative days…

More conservative Muslim scholars objected to this rereading of the Prophet's life. They sensed the epistemological turnover behind "Aqqad's defense of Islam. Not only did it upturn the hierarchy of authority within the Sunni scriptural canon by ignoring a clear text contained in Bukhari's august Sahih, it also broke with the Shariah consensus on marriage age. No member of Egypt's religious establishment showed more displeasure with Aqqad than Ahmad Shakir…

At the heart of Shakir's criticism was the question of the proper locus of truth in Muslim life. He states and restates that Aisha's recollection of her own marriage age is the lynchpin of historical and scriptural truth on this issue. Her report was categorically authenticated by the great Hadith critics of the classical era and sealed by the consensus of the medieval jurists. Aqqad's insinuation that she exaggerated her youth was thus tantamount to calling the Prophet's wife a liar. Against Aisha's own authenticated testimony, moreover, Aqqad brought nothing more than a flimsily cobbled-together argument, which Shakir contends rested on flawed premises.

—Androvie (talk) 13:11, 21 February 2023 (UTC) Androvie (talk) 13:11, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The source disputes the assertions in the same way as supporters of Sahih al-Bukhari would. I included it since it refers to the opposing side's allegations; I only omitted it in response to your complaint that it did not adhere to WP:RS. And it's funny that you did the same thing by using islamiqate which is in no way a neutral or reliable source.

Once more, we are simply giving the arguments for both viewpoints without making a judgement about which is superior or correct. The sources I have gives reflects the views of dozen of scholars as well as writers on the sunbject's age. StarkReport (talk) 11:00, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Funny how you dispute Sahih Bukhari because it is Sunni, yet your Shia scholar source, Ayatollah Qazvini, recalculates Aisha's age using Sunni narrations that are far weaker (such as those from Ibn Abi Zinad).^[2]

According to what has been narrated by the prominent scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah…

Abu ʿAbd Allah b. Mundah narrates from Ibn Abi Zannad that Asma’ b. Abi Bakr was older than ʿA’yshah by ten years.

It was already refuted by your other source though.

Traditionalists dismiss this calculation by arguing that the age difference of Asma' and Aisha of 10 years is not a consensus among Islamic historians. It was noted that al-Zahabi (1963) stated that the age difference between the two was between 13 and 19 years, and not 10 years as the critics assume. Thus, Aisha's age in the year of Hijrah was eight or nine years old and not 18 years old (IslamQA n.d.). Asma's age at the time of the migration was 27 years minus the 19 years age gap between the two, which means Aisha's age was seven years old when she married the Prophet, a year before the Hijrah. This aligns with al-'Asqalani’s (1994) report, which asserted Aisha was born four or five years after the advent of Islam. In echoing the hadith giants such as Yahya Ibn Mu’in, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, al-Nasaie, Abu Ahmad al-Hakim dan Abu Hatim, the traditionalists also attacked the credibility of Ibn Abi Zinad as a weak narrator to dismiss his narration (Malik 2018; al-Ghufayli 2011).

If they wish to use Sunni narrations, why disregard the stronger ones, such as Sahih Bukhari, in favor of the very weaker ones? You allege that the Wiki page on Aisha contains cherry-picked information, yet it turns out that your source is the one who did it. Androvie (talk) 12:23, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you are missing the point. We are acknowledging the contradictions between hadiths and the lack of consensus among many scholars and simply mentioning it on the page. The current info is cherry picked and it fails to present the complete picture. For example read the source ^[3] its just to demonstate to you that there is indeed incompatible claims and while it's true that Sunni traditionalists disagree with some of the claims. We have already touched upon that matter in the article. StarkReport (talk) 10:25, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So it is true that your shia scholar sources use sunni hadiths, but cherrypicked them, right? There are some scholars who say that the earth is flat, but that doesn't mean that there is no consensus that the earth is an ellipsoid. There is no contradiction in the saheeh hadith about Aisha's age, the report about the age of Asma in the theory you put forward is simply from a

weak narrator that contradicts with other reliable narrators. Please read hadith authenticity evaluation. Androvie (talk) 12:30, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

]