@@acogjefe4769 If you live in America you would understand what he said (i.e. he doesn't want the law to ban the Quran or Muslim speech and activity which means he wants free speech laws upheld- the consequence of that is a non-Muslim having the legal (not moral) right to insult any Muslim figure (be it from Adam to the final Prophet). If you live outside America, you'll remain clueless on this topic.
@@4681MM that goes against Islam and takes you outside the fold of Islam. Do you also agree with him about supporting “the right to marriage for 🏳️🌈”? If so this conversation is over.
@@4681MM btw I was born and raised in America but my nationality doesn’t trump me being a Muslim. I’m a Muslim before anything else and sharia trumps any man made law.
@@acogjefe4769 of course insulting the Prophet takes one outside of Islam- you're going in a circle as Dr. Brown says that too. He's just saying once free speech restrictions start, we won't be able to proclaim some verses of the Quran for example as they would be considered antisemitic (as happened in France a few years ago when the government wanted Muslims to release a revised Quran that removes verses about the Jews). The legal right is really restricted in essence to those who aren't Muslim from the get go. His point about marriage was in regards to nikah contracts (and by the way I think he's since revised this perspective a bit due to political developments over the years)- if the government is able to intervene on what is an acceptable marriage contract, the consequence is the government say in Mississippi can say they will not recognize or validate Muslim marriage contracts. His point was to keep the government out of that even at the expense of non-Muslims using the law to marry the same gender or else it's possible Muslim shariah compliant nikah contracts will be affected. And finally, if you are American, and believe shariah trumps any man made law, then 99% of our ulama said with very few exceptions, someone like you shouldn't even be here in the first place. You must make hijra to a Muslim majority land. So this whole discussion is inapplicable to someone of your temperament. Leave that discussion to those of us who say we can live in a land where according to the constitution, man made laws do trump the shariah, and we (people like myself and Dr. Brown who want to live here) are just trying to navigate that. You shouldn't be commenting on these topics by your own logic.
I would like to add my experience to help understand Aisha (RA) story. When I got married at the age of 20, one of my non-Muslim friend’s boyfriend told her like he wondered who would like to marry me, since I looked like a kid. I was short and kinda under developed for my age plus cute looking. I can recollect I always got advantages of being treated as a kid, even after getting into job. That said, marriage happened, started consummating… I had given an initial consent, but it turned out that I was hating the act and the frequency. My friends noticed I was gloomy at work. I even started praying to conceive inorder to get a break. Long story short, after 2 deliveries only I started enjoying sexual life.. and now I consider my past as a medical condition I had because of may be hormonal issues, malnutrition , over exposure to rape news etc. I sometimes miss those early days.. Rape fantasies are true for many women. So in total, my point is Aisha’s story is morally OK for people like me because of the below beliefs 1. Biological development is not always dependent on age. 2. Even if a woman is underdeveloped, marital rape happens and it is fine. Even if she may not feel it then, she may feel good about it after. Like, if 110 billion people ever lived in earth, there are that many possibilities of relationships. Sometimes I feel like non scholarly, non academic people have larger insight on such matters because they don’t try to generalise things for study.
let me comment on the hadith of Aisha's age رضي الله عنها 1.about the narrator Hisham ibn Urwah, he went to Kufa when he was old & there were several Islamic scholars علم رجال الحديث who said that he was struck by senility while in Kufa 2.Hisham spent much his time in Medina, & his most famous pupil was Imam Malik. but as far as I know I did not find this hadith in Al Muwatta. 3.for Az Zuhri ,, Ibn Hajr said that he was placed in the third group of 5 groups مدلس. Imam Shafii & Ad Duruqutni also said that Az Zuhri is مدلس. & Almost all the narrators under Hisham & Zuhri were Kufa people 4.we must remember the history about Shiites. & the majority of Kufa residents are Shia adherents. & how they not liking Aisha (who was Abu Bakr's daughter). is it not possible that this hadith was "invented", to make Aisha's credibility lower as the wife of the prophet? that Aisyah married the prophet at a young age..so what does she know about political matters. (Aisha is very vocal about political issues) what is missing from Mr. Brown's explanation,is history of sects in Islam & علم رجال الحديث. We must not forget that collecting Hadith in one book is very different from the AL Quran. when collecting the Al Quran in one book the Sahabahs still alive. but not with The Hadith, all The Sahabah is already died
why the hadith about Aisha's age very problematic, because in my opinion, it contradicts the Koran An-Nisaa 6. In this verse, it is stated about the appropriate age for marriage + along with a person's ability to maintain property. That's why it is stated in the verse, the guardian must wait until the orphan grows up, until can take care of his/her own property & the orphan is in marriageable age
and also contradicts An Nisa 19. regarding the prohibition of forced marriage of women. even though this verse uses the word ترثوا Inherit, but if we look further, this is a sarcastic sentence for criticizes any type of forced marriage. because in this verse also discusses about divorce manipulation carried out by husbands on his wive. he makes trouble for his wife,& if she want divorce with him, Like it or not, the wife has to return the dowry to her husband. The question is whether child marriage does not conflict with the prohibition on forced marriage or not? whereas it could be said that everything about children's life is "forced by parents". even a child is forced to go to school, right?
& about marital rape.. I think that contradicts verse An Nisaa 19 too. because there is an order in that verse عاشرواهن بالمعروف meaning they have to associated with their wives in a good manner
Dr. Jonathan Brown seems to have his own biases. Dr. Brown criticizes the Orientalists who use HCM, by pointing out their biases and making assumptions of what is probably going in their heads, yet he claims that the Orientalists cannot possibly do the same about how people back in the days used to think and act. So Dr. Brown actually uses HCM to attack the Orientalists and is confident that the method reveals Orientalists' true intentions! and yet is critical when HCM is used to weigh hadith narrators. He also sights how Qadi Iyad used HCM and pointed out defects in hadith, and seems to be proud of it, yet is very critical if a non-muslim scholar does the same using HCM. I believe that Dr. Brown, a revert from Christianity, would gladly welcome Orientalists' HCM and embrace their conclusions with no qualms when it comes to Biblical criticism or their doctrines. In this realm, it is possible for him to accept that the vast majority of scholars for 1500+ years across different cultures and traditions could all understand a doctrine as fundamental as trinity from the Gospel, yet they were all just wrong. But in the realm of hadith, it is impossible for the same to happen, not even for a fringe issue as Aisha's age. Regarding Aisha's age, Dr. Joshua Little makes arguments from silence (i.e. silence in medinan sources and early Hanafi fiqh sources) and he is being criticised for that. But Dr. Brown also makes the same argument from Silence (i.e no debates in islamic history about her age, not even by non-muslims). The silence in non-muslim sources (like John of Damascus) could probably be due to her age not being widely known at that time, which could be proof that the hadith came to be circulated much later. I think the argument that underaged marriage was common throughout history is inflated by Dr. Brown to include underaged girls of all ages. It is not the norm in any major society to marry off girls before puberty. It was only the exception. To unhesitantly inflate that to include a 6 year old girl reveals a BIAS that people like Dr. Brown have - which is - if u criticize hadiths in the "Sahih Canon", your whole traditional usul-ul-fiqh would fall apart. • They dont care about other reports that cite various ages from 6 to 16, • they dont care about the Quran making a connection of the Marriageable age to soundness of judgement in Surah Nisaa, • they dont consider why would the Prophet (sall.) marry a child of 6 in his year of grief, • they dont care if Hisham was a mudallis or became weak after her went go Iraq, • they dont care why Imam Malik (who also narrates from Hisham) doesn't narrate this hadith eventhough it's very useful for his fiqh, etc. etc. ••• All they care about is the "sanctity" of the "Saheehayn".
The vast majority of hadiths of Aisha's age is from Hisham Ibn Urwa. Regarding the other chains that do not include Hisham, Dr. Little points out that all of them are from Iraq. He also points out the tendency to naturalize certain hadiths to their own regional tradition by making up native isnaads. We'll, in this case, they aren't fabricating a lie in the name of the prophet, but just appropriating a "true" hadith for their own regional school. We'll, that's not a lie on the Prophet! As Dr. Little points out, if the narrations were truly spread in Iraq, it would have been quoted rampantly in early Hanafi fiqh. (But we seem to have only one early source in hanafi fiqh that talks about this issue, followed by centuries of silence about it. Since those manuscripts aren't available, Dr. Little suspects an interpolation in the early source).
بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمٰنِ الرَّحِيْمِ
dear dr. brown, i truly enjoyed yr work. May الله bless u & yr family with ❤. Thank u again for the education.
Dr. Brown is an ocean of ilm, mashallah
No he’s not. He said he believes people should be allowed to insult the prophet SAW…
@@acogjefe4769 If you live in America you would understand what he said (i.e. he doesn't want the law to ban the Quran or Muslim speech and activity which means he wants free speech laws upheld- the consequence of that is a non-Muslim having the legal (not moral) right to insult any Muslim figure (be it from Adam to the final Prophet). If you live outside America, you'll remain clueless on this topic.
@@4681MM that goes against Islam and takes you outside the fold of Islam. Do you also agree with him about supporting “the right to marriage for 🏳️🌈”? If so this conversation is over.
@@4681MM btw I was born and raised in America but my nationality doesn’t trump me being a Muslim. I’m a Muslim before anything else and sharia trumps any man made law.
@@acogjefe4769 of course insulting the Prophet takes one outside of Islam- you're going in a circle as Dr. Brown says that too. He's just saying once free speech restrictions start, we won't be able to proclaim some verses of the Quran for example as they would be considered antisemitic (as happened in France a few years ago when the government wanted Muslims to release a revised Quran that removes verses about the Jews). The legal right is really restricted in essence to those who aren't Muslim from the get go. His point about marriage was in regards to nikah contracts (and by the way I think he's since revised this perspective a bit due to political developments over the years)- if the government is able to intervene on what is an acceptable marriage contract, the consequence is the government say in Mississippi can say they will not recognize or validate Muslim marriage contracts. His point was to keep the government out of that even at the expense of non-Muslims using the law to marry the same gender or else it's possible Muslim shariah compliant nikah contracts will be affected. And finally, if you are American, and believe shariah trumps any man made law, then 99% of our ulama said with very few exceptions, someone like you shouldn't even be here in the first place. You must make hijra to a Muslim majority land. So this whole discussion is inapplicable to someone of your temperament. Leave that discussion to those of us who say we can live in a land where according to the constitution, man made laws do trump the shariah, and we (people like myself and Dr. Brown who want to live here) are just trying to navigate that. You shouldn't be commenting on these topics by your own logic.
I would like to add my experience to help understand Aisha (RA) story.
When I got married at the age of 20, one of my non-Muslim friend’s boyfriend told her like he wondered who would like to marry me, since I looked like a kid. I was short and kinda under developed for my age plus cute looking. I can recollect I always got advantages of being treated as a kid, even after getting into job.
That said, marriage happened, started consummating… I had given an initial consent, but it turned out that I was hating the act and the frequency. My friends noticed I was gloomy at work. I even started praying to conceive inorder to get a break.
Long story short, after 2 deliveries only I started enjoying sexual life.. and now I consider my past as a medical condition I had because of may be hormonal issues, malnutrition , over exposure to rape news etc. I sometimes miss those early days.. Rape fantasies are true for many women.
So in total, my point is Aisha’s story is morally OK for people like me because of the below beliefs
1. Biological development is not always dependent on age.
2. Even if a woman is underdeveloped, marital rape happens and it is fine. Even if she may not feel it then, she may feel good about it after.
Like, if 110 billion people ever lived in earth, there are that many possibilities of relationships. Sometimes I feel like non scholarly, non academic people have larger insight on such matters because they don’t try to generalise things for study.
let me comment on the hadith of Aisha's age رضي الله عنها
1.about the narrator Hisham ibn Urwah, he went to Kufa when he was old & there were several Islamic scholars علم رجال الحديث who said that he was struck by senility while in Kufa
2.Hisham spent much his time in Medina, & his most famous pupil was Imam Malik. but as far as I know I did not find this hadith in Al Muwatta.
3.for Az Zuhri ,, Ibn Hajr said that he was placed in the third group of 5 groups مدلس. Imam Shafii & Ad Duruqutni also said that Az Zuhri is مدلس.
& Almost all the narrators under Hisham & Zuhri were Kufa people
4.we must remember the history about Shiites. & the majority of Kufa residents are Shia adherents.
& how they not liking Aisha (who was Abu Bakr's daughter).
is it not possible that this hadith was "invented", to make Aisha's credibility lower as the wife of the prophet?
that Aisyah married the prophet at a young age..so what does she know about political matters.
(Aisha is very vocal about political issues)
what is missing from Mr. Brown's explanation,is history of sects in Islam & علم رجال الحديث.
We must not forget that collecting Hadith in one book is very different from the AL Quran.
when collecting the Al Quran in one book the Sahabahs still alive.
but not with The Hadith, all The Sahabah is already died
why the hadith about Aisha's age very problematic, because in my opinion, it contradicts the Koran An-Nisaa 6.
In this verse, it is stated about the appropriate age for marriage + along with a person's ability to maintain property. That's why it is stated in the verse, the guardian must wait until the orphan grows up, until can take care of his/her own property & the orphan is in marriageable age
and also contradicts An Nisa 19. regarding the prohibition of forced marriage of women.
even though this verse uses the word ترثوا Inherit, but if we look further, this is a sarcastic sentence for criticizes any type of forced marriage.
because in this verse also discusses about divorce manipulation carried out by husbands on his wive.
he makes trouble for his wife,& if she want divorce with him, Like it or not, the wife has to return the dowry to her husband.
The question is whether child marriage does not conflict with the prohibition on forced marriage or not?
whereas it could be said that everything about children's life is "forced by parents".
even a child is forced to go to school, right?
& about marital rape.. I think that contradicts verse An Nisaa 19 too.
because there is an order in that verse
عاشرواهن بالمعروف
meaning they have to associated with their wives in a good manner
I am the first to like this video
How does it feel
Well that was vapid. You didn't actually say anything of importance or new. Just went around in circular logic.
What are you talking about?
Dr. Jonathan Brown seems to have his own biases.
Dr. Brown criticizes the Orientalists who use HCM, by pointing out their biases and making assumptions of what is probably going in their heads, yet he claims that the Orientalists cannot possibly do the same about how people back in the days used to think and act. So Dr. Brown actually uses HCM to attack the Orientalists and is confident that the method reveals Orientalists' true intentions! and yet is critical when HCM is used to weigh hadith narrators.
He also sights how Qadi Iyad used HCM and pointed out defects in hadith, and seems to be proud of it, yet is very critical if a non-muslim scholar does the same using HCM.
I believe that Dr. Brown, a revert from Christianity, would gladly welcome Orientalists' HCM and embrace their conclusions with no qualms when it comes to Biblical criticism or their doctrines. In this realm, it is possible for him to accept that the vast majority of scholars for 1500+ years across different cultures and traditions could all understand a doctrine as fundamental as trinity from the Gospel, yet they were all just wrong. But in the realm of hadith, it is impossible for the same to happen, not even for a fringe issue as Aisha's age.
Regarding Aisha's age, Dr. Joshua Little makes arguments from silence (i.e. silence in medinan sources and early Hanafi fiqh sources) and he is being criticised for that. But Dr. Brown also makes the same argument from Silence (i.e no debates in islamic history about her age, not even by non-muslims). The silence in non-muslim sources (like John of Damascus) could probably be due to her age not being widely known at that time, which could be proof that the hadith came to be circulated much later.
I think the argument that underaged marriage was common throughout history is inflated by Dr. Brown to include underaged girls of all ages. It is not the norm in any major society to marry off girls before puberty. It was only the exception. To unhesitantly inflate that to include a 6 year old girl reveals a BIAS that people like Dr. Brown have - which is - if u criticize hadiths in the "Sahih Canon", your whole traditional usul-ul-fiqh would fall apart.
• They dont care about other reports that cite various ages from 6 to 16,
• they dont care about the Quran making a connection of the Marriageable age to soundness of judgement in Surah Nisaa,
• they dont consider why would the Prophet (sall.) marry a child of 6 in his year of grief,
• they dont care if Hisham was a mudallis or became weak after her went go Iraq,
• they dont care why Imam Malik (who also narrates from Hisham) doesn't narrate this hadith eventhough it's very useful for his fiqh, etc. etc.
••• All they care about is the "sanctity" of the "Saheehayn".
The vast majority of hadiths of Aisha's age is from Hisham Ibn Urwa.
Regarding the other chains that do not include Hisham, Dr. Little points out that all of them are from Iraq. He also points out the tendency to naturalize certain hadiths to their own regional tradition by making up native isnaads. We'll, in this case, they aren't fabricating a lie in the name of the prophet, but just appropriating a "true" hadith for their own regional school. We'll, that's not a lie on the Prophet!
As Dr. Little points out, if the narrations were truly spread in Iraq, it would have been quoted rampantly in early Hanafi fiqh. (But we seem to have only one early source in hanafi fiqh that talks about this issue, followed by centuries of silence about it. Since those manuscripts aren't available, Dr. Little suspects an interpolation in the early source).