# Why do some scholars still insist Aisha was nine?

*Why scholars hold back: precedent, medieval consensus, and reports that blemish the Prophet*

- URL: https://muftiabulayth.org/r/chyxri7trnk/s/4/
- Date: 2018-11-30 · Kind: lesson · Transcript tier: machine · Recording: Shaykh Omar Suleiman & the Yaqeen Institutes On Age of Aisha (r.a.) -Mufti Abu Layth (15:43–20:19)
- Status: general teaching
- Watch from the start of the segment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHyxRI7Trnk&t=943s
- Recording page: https://muftiabulayth.org/r/chyxri7trnk/

**Topics:** The age of Aisha; Mutawatir and certainty; Legal theory and method

**Summary (not a quotation; machine-made, unchecked):** Lacking an earlier authority is no reason to keep the young age, since medieval scholars also accepted slavery and other rulings no one would defend today. No hadith gives certain knowledge, so an inconclusive report that blemishes the Prophet's honour is rejected.

**Checked position (checked by two independent reviews, not by the channel):** Mufti Abu Layth says that the lack of an earlier authority is no reason to keep the young age, since medieval scholars also held slavery acceptable and gave rulings he calls haram, and that because no hadith gives certain knowledge, an inconclusive report that blemishes the Prophet's honour is rejected.

**Evidence, his words at 18:42:** “so the honour of the Prophet is conclusive if anything will bring a blemish to the honour of the Prophet and it is inconclusive it's based on huh bro a hard we reject it” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHyxRI7Trnk&t=1122s)

## Longer summary

Mufti Abu Layth says the sensible scholars who keep the young age do so not to provoke the West, which he says only others do, but because they lack the courage to stand without a precedent: if one Salafi authority such as al-Albani had said it, he says, they would all say it. He replies that it was not a debate in the medieval period, and that medieval scholars also held slavery to be acceptable and claimed consensus on it, which no one would say today. As a further example he cites a fatwa of Ibn Taymiyya, which he says is easily found, that a Muslim who enters non-Muslim territory without permission may keep what he steals, because the wealth of non-Muslims in Dar al-Harb has no protection; Mufti calls this utterly haram and says most scholars of that age may have accepted it because the world then dehumanised the other side, as non-Muslims did Muslims. He concludes that no hadith provides certain knowledge, being khabar ahad, while the honour of the Prophet is conclusive, so an inconclusive report that blemishes it is rejected. He ends by repeating his disappointment that the project reached the same conclusion while urging people not to reduce Aisha to a number, comparing that to a defence no court would accept.

## Sources and names cited

- Aisha
- al-Albani
- Ibn Taymiyya
- ijma'
- Dar al-Harb
- khabar al-ahad
- Omar Suleiman
- Yaqeen Institute

## Transcript (machine tier, 15:43–20:19)

[15:27] it just because they haven't got the courage to be the because they don't feel they have a precedent I guarantee you if one salaphi shell had said this just one if they had the precedent they just worried that we haven't got a precedent and our sect will kind of condemn us that's all because if let's say Albani had said this they would have all said it now because Albanian said it basically all they need is somebody like they don't have the courage to stand alone and they

[16:06] need somebody that said it so they say yeah but all the scholars in the past I don't want to go against them I don't want to go against all this number of scholars but the truth is this was not a debate back then and people in the medieval ages but let's just look at what all the scholars in the medieval ages said they all said slavery was okay they disagreed today they wouldn't dare say slavery is okay today all the scholars in the past said slavery was fine they said there's consensus on this they go against that they say well oh yeah but it's okay no and don't and will

[16:46] they dare say slavery is not a morality issue of course it's a morality issue so all the scholars do you know what even at a mere rights able it's a mere right that there is a Jamaa he says there is a consensus that if a Muslim unlicensed that means without permission of the Imam or the leader of his state sneaks into non-muslim territory whatever he steals this is what he writes whatever he steals when he comes back is halal for him he says because

[17:23] the kuffar have no indemnity when it comes to their wealth when it comes to the property and stuff like this because they are non Muslims living in that'll harm he says there is each man on this they you just have to Google he'll come right up Ignat Amyas fatwa that the wealth of all ku far in their territory so long as they don't have an agreement with us right in Muslim lands is halal so if anybody sneaks in he can steal it if he steals it and comes back it is that is utterly Haram but even the

[18:02] taymiyah says this it man most scholars in the past would have thought that's fine I will I wouldn't be surprised if almost all of them thought that because you see back then the world was a different place they had dehumanized non-muslims just as non-muslims had dehumanized Muslims so my point of saying this is just because the scholars in the medieval ages didn't say this doesn't give you the license and today this is such a big deal and hadith aha bro I had anyway no hadith can provide certain knowledge they are

[18:42] huh bro I had so the honour of the Prophet is conclusive if anything will bring a blemish to the honour of the Prophet and it is inconclusive it's based on huh bro a hard we reject it let alone the fact that this argument has so many holes in this in this argument anyway right so that's my point of making that so I was really disappointed honestly in listening to because I was kind of thinking of hamdulillah at least eight you know they're either rooster that even though they've said this after a while but al hamdulillah at least now they're gonna say as well openly that look we can't say stuff like these there

[19:21] isn't enough evidence there is problems in this chain and the honour of the Prophet and stuff like this and they just came and said the same thing that oh no she was nine but and the Prophet married her when she was six but but hey don't reduce her to a number she was a human being well your honor and that your honor is my defense I'd just like to say that how dare this court have reduced these victims to a number they were human beings goddamnit

[19:58] [Laughter] well that obviously won't work well with the jury so look that's I hope in Charlotte people can hear this message in please this is so disappointing but yeah let's [Music]

## Cite

Mufti Abu Layth Archive, segment cHyxRI7Trnk/s/4. https://muftiabulayth.org/r/chyxri7trnk/s/4/

Not a fatwa: these answers were given to specific people at specific times. Ask a qualified scholar about your own situation.