Hadith Sciences
4 items across 1 content type
Debate Excerpts (4)
Individual points from debates discussing this topic
“Is the age of Aisha recorded in the Quran?”
No. The age of Aisha is NOT in the Quran. This is the first critical point. In hadith sciences, we classify narrations by their chain of transmission. A Marfu' hadith is a direct statement from the Prophet ﷺ. A Mawquf hadith is a statement from a Companion (Sahabi). The narrations about Aisha's age are Mawquf — they come from Aisha herself reporting what she was told, not from the Prophet ﷺ. Furthermore, the narrations themselves are inconsistent: Sahih al-Bukhari records the age as 6, while Sahih Muslim records it as 7. This inconsistency exists because there was no formal calendar system in pre-Islamic Arabia. Ages were approximations based on what others told you.
“What does 'Marfu', 'Mawquf', and 'hadith Qudsi' mean?”
In the science of hadith, there are three classifications based on who the statement reaches back to: 1. Hadith Qudsi (Sacred hadith): Words of Allah conveyed through the Prophet ﷺ but not part of the Quran. 2. Marfu' hadith: A statement, action, or approval directly attributed to the Prophet ﷺ himself. 3. Mawquf hadith: A statement from a Companion (Sahabi) — it stops at the Companion and does not go back to the Prophet ﷺ. The narrations about Aisha's age are Mawquf — Aisha reporting what she was told about her own age by others. The Prophet ﷺ never stated how old Aisha was. So when someone says 'your Quran says she was 6' or 'your Prophet said she was 6,' both claims are factually wrong. It's not in the Quran and it's not a statement of the Prophet ﷺ.
“If you reject Rashi, then can we also reject the hadith about Aisha's age?”
You just established exactly my point. You said Rashi is a commentator, not the Bible itself — so you can reject his interpretation. I'm saying the exact same thing about the hadith on Aisha's age. The age of Aisha is NOT in the Quran — it's in hadith narrations attributed to a Companion, not even to the Prophet ﷺ. If you get to reject secondary sources about your scripture (Rashi on the Torah), then we can point out that the age of Aisha is itself from a secondary source (hadith, not Quran). You cannot use a double standard — accepting the right to reject your commentators while demanding we accept ours uncritically.
“If only scripture counts, then how can you use hadith against Islam?”
You just said you only accept the Bible — not commentators, not extra-biblical sources. You rejected Rashi and the Protoevangelium. But the hadith about Aisha's age is the Islamic equivalent of what you just rejected — it's not in our scripture (the Quran), and it's not even a direct statement of the Prophet ﷺ. By your own standard — 'only scripture counts' — you have no basis to attack Islam on Aisha's age, because it is not in our scripture. You've refuted your own argument. Furthermore, the Bible itself does not give Rebekah's age, so you have no idea how old she was — you just know Isaac was 40 (Genesis 25:20). And Numbers 31:17-18 IS in your Bible — that's not a commentary or an extra-biblical source. Moses commanding soldiers to keep virgin children for themselves is right there in your scripture.