This will lead us to the final part of the responses between Dr Ismail and YahwehSaves
*You said*
You heard me right. Yes, _”you missed the whole point”_ of my initial response which was directed at *Murileak* to prove that the text in the parenthesis of the Hadith he brought was an *ADDITION* from a commentary in *Fathul* *Bari* . And such commentary falls short of the truth because they are opposed by stronger evidences that show that Aisha already reached puberty before consummation (let alone when she was 14 years), an age that is even older than when Mary had Jesus and married to Jesus according to Christian sources.
*Response*
It seems that you now resorting to circular reasoning, repeating already refuted points without addressing the substantive evidence I’ve provided. This is a common tactic when someone lacks solid arguments but wants to maintain their position. You’ve always alleged me of cyclic arguments when you are the one doing so. My rebuttals are not cyclic, as it continually presented new evidence and addressed your points logically.
To address the first line thoroughly and point by point, we need to tackle the fallacies, incorrect assertions, and misleading comparisons directly.
1. You misrepresented the Parenthetical text as “Addition”.
Your claim that the parenthesis in the hadith is an “addition” from a commentary, specifically in Fathul Bari by Ibn Hajar, is incorrect. Ibn Hajar did not add anything foreign to the hadith. His commentary clarifies why Aisha was still playing with dolls, which is a historical context, not an interpolation of the hadith text.
Here is evidence:
Ibn Hajar mentions in Fathul Bari that Aisha’s playing with dolls was allowed because she had not reached puberty, which was a common legal practice for those under the age of maturity. This interpretation is based on his rigorous scholarly analysis of Sahih al-Bukhari and other hadith sources, as well as an understanding of Islamic law (fiqh).
Direct Quote:
Ibn Hajar explicitly states,
> “The strongest view is that she had not yet reached puberty.”
This is a scholarly conclusion derived from the hadith and historical context, not an “addition” but an interpretation made clear through extensive study.
2. Your claim that Ibn Hajar’s Commentary “Falls Short” has no basis. You couldn’t even provide a single evidence for this claim.
You argues that Ibn Hajar’s commentary “falls short of the truth” because of supposed stronger evidence proving Aisha had reached puberty before consummation.
Ibn Hajar’s conclusion aligns with the hadith tradition that indicates Aisha was not considered to have reached maturity during her early years of marriage.
Scholars like Al-Nawawi and Al-Bayhaqi have not contradicted Ibn Hajar’s view but have discussed similar themes regarding the permissibility of playing with dolls before reaching puberty, which indicates a broad scholarly consensus on this interpretation.
Islamic scholars have long maintained that the relevant issue concerning Aisha’s age is tied to Islamic legal principles, cultural practices, and her narrations of events
This first line misrepresents the parenthetical text as an “addition” and dismisses Ibn Hajar’s scholarship unfairly. The assertion that stronger evidence proves Aisha reached puberty before consummation is unsubstantiated, and the comparison to Mary is a diversionary tactic irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
*You said*
You erred by inclining towards the side of the *refuted* and *weakened* position of Ibn Hajar and Al-Khattabee who “opined” that, at 14 years old, Aisha has not yet reached puberty (just to find a *reconciliation* and avoid a contradiction in the legal ruling of who is allowed to have and play with dolls).
*My response*
1. Your claim that Ibn Hajar and Al-Khattabi’s positions have been “refuted” is inaccurate. Neither of these scholars’ interpretations has been definitively refuted by Islamic scholarship. On the contrary, their views represent a widely respected and accepted position in traditional Islamic scholarship, especially on the issue of when Aisha reached puberty and her allowance to play with dolls.
Ibn Hajar and Al-Khattabi’s positions on Aisha’s age at the time of the Prophet’s marriage to her, and her not reaching puberty by age 14, are supported by the legal and historical contexts of the hadith. Their interpretations are rooted in hadith authenticity, and legal reasoning (fiqh), and represent a coherent understanding of Islamic rulings on maturity and childhood.
Supporting Evidence
As recorded in Fathul Bari, Ibn Hajar states, “The strongest view is that she had not yet reached puberty,” indicating that this was not merely an isolated opinion but one backed by legal reasoning, hadith commentary, and Islamic tradition. Likewise, Al-Khattabi, another highly regarded scholar, made similar observations about Aisha’s age and her playing with dolls.
2. You framed Ibn Hajar’s and Al-Khattabi’s positions as mere “opinions” that were put forth to reconcile an alleged contradiction about the permissibility of playing with dolls. This is a mischaracterization of their scholarly work, which was not based on arbitrary opinion but on rigorous scholarship.
The positions of Ibn Hajar and Al-Khattabi were based on sound hadith, historical evidence, and Islamic jurisprudence—not on a need to “reconcile” contradictions. Ibn Hajar’s argument about Aisha not having reached puberty by age 14 is backed by the fact that the Prophet Muhammad did not prohibit her from playing with dolls until after she had reached puberty, which was later confirmed during the Tabuk expedition.
In Fathul Bari, Ibn Hajar notes that “Aisha’s playing with dolls was permitted because she had not yet reached puberty,” and this was consistent with the legal rulings of the time. There is no contradiction that needed to be “reconciled,” as the Islamic legal system clearly distinguishes between the rules for prepubescent and pubescent individuals.
3. You suggested that there was some inherent contradiction in Islamic legal rulings about who can play with dolls, implying that Ibn Hajar and Al-Khattabi had to “reconcile” this issue. This is a red herring, as there is no contradiction in Islamic law regarding this matter.
Islamic jurisprudence is clear that dolls were permissible for children who had not yet reached puberty, as they were seen as playthings and not idols. When a person reaches puberty, different legal responsibilities apply, and the prohibition of dolls falls under broader prohibitions related to images and idols. This does not indicate any legal contradiction or need for reconciliation.
Supporting Evidence
As stated by scholars, including Ibn Hajar and Al-Khattabi, the permissibility of dolls for Aisha before she reached puberty was entirely consistent with Islamic law. The prohibition of dolls for her after reaching puberty aligns with broader Islamic teachings that prohibit the making of images and objects that could lead to idolatry.
4. Ibn Hajar’s position on Aisha’s age and her maturity is not a mere “opinion” but is grounded in hadith analysis and Islamic legal principles. The use of the word “opined” by you is misleading, as it suggests that Ibn Hajar’s conclusions were speculative rather than based on a careful reading of hadith and historical data.
Ibn Hajar’s position was not a weak opinion, but a scholarly conclusion supported by evidence from authentic hadith and historical context. Scholars of his caliber were not inclined to base their conclusions on speculative reasoning but on a thorough examination of all available evidence.
Ibn Hajar states,
“This view is the strongest,” referencing the legal and historical evidence that supports Aisha’s prepubescent status during the period in question. He did not make this claim lightly, and it reflects his mastery of the hadith sciences.
Your attempt to undermine Ibn Hajar and Al-Khattabi’s positions by claiming they were “refuted” or that they were merely trying to “reconcile” a legal contradiction is unfounded. No evidence to back it up. You are making yourself authority for what you don’t agree with by discarding your reputable sources. Had it be that what Ibn Hajar said was in your support, I know, this conversation won’t be long as this. You don’t have ground to say what you claimed about Ibn Hajar and others I’ve mentioned. The positions of these scholars are grounded in sound hadith analysis, historical context, and Islamic legal reasoning, with no contradiction to be reconciled. The claim of Aisha’s immaturity by age 14 is well-supported by evidence and not a weakened or baseless “opinion.”
*You said*
It is laughable how you neglected all these evidences for Aisha’s puberty (including the one in Aisha’s own words !!!) that she had already reached puberty before the consummation of her marriage and you choose to dabble in uncertainty than certainty.
*Mr response*
1. You accused me of relying on “uncertainty” rather than “certainty” by referencing scholars like Ibn Hajar, but this claim is baseless. In fact, the argument that Aisha had not reached puberty during the consummation of her marriage is based on credible hadith and sound scholarship, not uncertainty.
Ibn Hajar’s position is based on verified historical timelines and hadiths, not “uncertainty.” The evidence showing that Aisha had not yet reached puberty during Khaibar, and only later at Tabuk was she prohibited from playing with dolls, is based on reliable scholarly analysis. Your accusation that this is “uncertainty” is false, as it is supported by well-documented sources in hadith and Islamic history.
Supporting Evidence
Ibn Hajar, a leading hadith scholar, referenced Sahih hadith to support his conclusion that Aisha had not reached puberty at the time of Khaibar. This is not an opinion of speculation but a scholarly conclusion based on factual analysis of historical records. Therefore, your attempt to dismiss this position as uncertain is inaccurate.
2. You claimed that Aisha’s own words prove she reached puberty before the consummation of the marriage. However, this statement is vague and lacks direct evidence to support his claim.
*My Response*
The hadiths in which Aisha speaks about her marriage do not directly state that she had reached puberty before consummation. In fact, scholars like Ibn Hajar and others, using historical context and the timeline of events, have concluded that Aisha had not yet reached puberty at the time of Khaibar. If you wish to claim otherwise, you must provide specific hadiths that definitively state Aisha had reached puberty before consummation — something you have failed to do.
Supporting Evidence
According to the hadith in Sahih Bukhari (Volume 5, Book 58, Hadith 234), Aisha mentioned playing with dolls during her time with the Prophet, and scholars have concluded that this is a sign she had not reached puberty. Ibn Hajar and other scholars used this and other hadiths to establish the timeline for when Aisha reached puberty, which they determined was after the Battle of Tabuk, not before the consummation of the marriage. It is not my sources but yours.
3. You failed to address or refute the substantial scholarly analysis that shows Aisha had not reached puberty at Khaibar. Instead, you selectively uses vague claims and misinterprets Aisha’s words without providing direct hadith evidence to support his argument.
If you truly have evidence that Aisha reached puberty before consummation, you would have presented clear, specific hadiths that state this (You are the Muslim and I’m not). Instead, your argument relies on head knowledge claims without direct references to support them. This selective use of evidence is misleading and weakens his argument.
Supporting Evidence
The absence of clear evidence from you that directly contradicts Ibn Hajar’s scholarly position shows that your argument lacks foundation. Scholars like Ibn Hajar have extensively analyzed the available hadiths and concluded that Aisha had not reached puberty during Khaibar, and this analysis remains unchallenged by you.
Therefore, as I’ve heavily presented, your claim that Aisha had reached puberty before consummation lacks credible evidence and scholarly backing. Your reliance on vague assertions and misinterpretation of Aisha’s words does not hold up against the well-documented conclusions of scholars like Ibn Hajar. Without presenting direct hadith evidence or scholarly support, your argument has already been dismissed as speculative and baseless.
*You said*
Anyways, let me go over your beating about the bush and succinctly refute your errors once again. Hopefully, this time you will learn.
I fully understand the erroneous argument you are attempting to make.
Your argument is that Aisha, at 14 years (older than virgin Mary), had not reached puberty according to Fathul Bari.
Unfortunately for you, even the Fathul Bari (Ibn Hajar) you are clutching at expressed *DOUBT* and *UNCERTAINTY* about the position of he was inclined to.
The question you need to ask yourself is, WHY would you inclined to a doubtful position just like Ibn Hajar did and *ignore* the position of Aisha herself and other Hadith I provided which prove beyond doubt that Aisha had already reached puberty around the age of 9 years let alone the age of 14 years !!! ???
*My response*
1. You claimed that Ibn Hajar expressed doubt and uncertainty about his position regarding Aisha’s age of puberty. This is a misreading of the scholar’s work and an attempt to misrepresent a careful scholarly analysis as weak or speculative.
Ibn Hajar, in Fath al-Bari, does discuss the age of Aisha at Khaibar and Tabuk, and he thoroughly analyzes various hadith and historical contexts. His statement that the “strongest view” is that Aisha had not reached puberty by Khaibar is not an expression of doubt but rather a conclusion reached after weighing all available evidence, including the fact that she was playing with dolls, something allowed only for those who had not yet reached puberty. This scholarly process of analyzing evidence does not mean that Ibn Hajar was uncertain; rather, it shows his careful method of weighing various sources and reaching a reasoned conclusion.
Supporting Evidence
In Sahih Bukhari (Volume 8, Book 73, Hadith 151), Aisha narrates that she was playing with dolls while the Prophet was present. Dolls were allowed only for prepubescent children according to Islamic rulings, further supporting Ibn Hajar’s conclusion that Aisha had not reached puberty during this time. This is why Ibn Hajar considered this the “strongest view,” not because of doubt, but because of corroborating evidence from hadith and Islamic law.
Added is historical evidence that prove Ibn Hajar right on the claim of the strongest view.
2. You accused me of ignoring evidence that Aisha had already reached puberty by age 9. However, this claim is unsupported by the actual hadith literature and appears to be a distortion of the facts.
You conveniently ignores that hadiths indicate Aisha was playing with dolls during her marriage, which is strong evidence that she had not yet reached puberty. Had she reached puberty by the age of 9 or even by 14, she would no longer have been allowed to play with dolls according to Islamic tradition. This fact alone undermines your claim that she had reached puberty by the time of her marriage or during the Battle of Khaibar.
Supporting Evidence
In Sahih Muslim (Hadith 2127), Aisha states she was playing with dolls when the Prophet entered the house, which scholars such as Ibn Hajar have interpreted as evidence that she had not reached puberty at the time. Additionally, the consensus among scholars, including Al-Khattabi and others, is that dolls were only allowed for prepubescent children, strengthening the argument that Aisha had not yet reached puberty by age 14 during Khaibar.
3. You claimed that Aisha herself, along with “other Hadith,” proves that she reached puberty around the age of 9. However, you provide no specific hadith to back this claim and instead relies on vague references without providing the necessary sources.
If your claim were valid, you should be able to produce a clear, unambiguous hadith stating that Aisha reached puberty at 9 years old or that she was mature at the time of Khaibar. Yet, you has failed to do so. Instead, the hadith that are available and have been analyzed by scholars indicate the opposite, that she had not yet reached puberty by age 14.
You fails to provide any reliable hadith that directly state Aisha reached puberty before or at the age of 9. Had such evidence existed, it would have been cited by scholars like Ibn Hajar, Al-Khattabi, or other notable scholars. The absence of this evidence in your argument is telling. Furthermore, Aisha’s own words, as recorded in hadith, show that she was playing with dolls at a time when only prepubescent girls were allowed to do so, further contradicting your claims.
4. You tried to equate the discussion of Aisha’s age at Khaibar with the Virgin Mary’s age during her betrothal to Joseph. This comparison is irrelevant to the topic at hand and serves as a distraction from the actual discussion of Aisha’s age of puberty.
The mention of the Virgin Mary is a clear example of a red herring fallacy. You introduced this comparison to distract from the discussion about Aisha’s puberty and to shift the focus onto an unrelated topic. The age of the Virgin Mary has no bearing on Aisha’s situation, and bringing it up only shows your inability to engage with the actual evidence presented.
5. Your entire argument is built on speculation, misrepresentation of hadith, and a lack of clear evidence. You failed to provide any reliable hadith or scholarly support to back your claim that Aisha had reached puberty by the time of her marriage or during Khaibar.
You have no authority or credible scholarship to discredit Ibn Hajar, Al-Khattabi, or other hadith scholars. Your rejection of their conclusions is based on his own misunderstanding or unwillingness to engage with the actual evidence. Without presenting specific hadith or scholarly sources to counter Ibn Hajar’s position, your argument lacks credibility.
Your argument is full of logical fallacies (strawman, red herring, and misrepresentation) and lacks any substantial evidence. Your failure to provide direct hadith or scholarly sources to support your claims, while dismissing the conclusions of renowned scholars, weakens your position beyond repair. Without solid proof, your objections remain baseless and speculative, making my argument far stronger in comparison.
*You said*
From your own admission, we can conclude the following
(I) You agree that Ibn Hajar did NOT categorically deny that Aisha had NOT reached puberty during Khaibar (14 years) but rather he admitted that it is possible she had NOT reached puberty based on the STRONGEST VIEW of the Hadith and historical evidence
*correction:*
— First, thanks for admitting the uncertainty of the ibn Hajar (which means we can NOT take his view or the one whom he is really upon as definite).
*My Response*
You are attempting to manipulate the discussion by misinterpreting what was admitted and twisting Ibn Hajar’s careful analysis to serve your argument. Let us see why you are wrong.
1. You claimed that my admission means Ibn Hajar was “uncertain,” implying that we cannot take his view as definitive. This is a misunderstanding of how scholarly analysis works. Ibn Hajar, as with many scholars, weighs evidence and reaches a conclusion based on the strongest available view, which is not the same as uncertainty or speculation.
Ibn Hajar never expressed doubt about the facts; instead, he thoroughly evaluated the hadith and historical evidence. He stated that the strongest view is that Aisha had not reached puberty by Khaibar, based on corroborating hadith (such as her playing with dolls, which was only permitted for prepubescent girls). The phrase “strongest view” is a scholarly method of determining the most reliable position after weighing competing evidence—not an expression of uncertainty or doubt.
In Fath al-Bari, Ibn Hajar clearly favored the interpretation that Aisha was prepubescent at Khaibar, based on the evidence of her playing with dolls (as noted in Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 8, Book 73, Hadith 151). There is no mention of doubt in his analysis, only careful consideration and reasoned conclusion, typical of sound Islamic scholarship.
Your attempt to present this as “uncertain” reflects either a lack of understanding of how Islamic scholarship works or an intentional distortion to undermine the credibility of Ibn Hajar’s analysis.
2. Scholarly caution in phrasing conclusions is often misrepresented as uncertainty by those unfamiliar with how rigorous Islamic scholarship operates. Ibn Hajar stating the “strongest view” is a way of emphasizing that, after reviewing all the available evidence, this conclusion is the most reliable—it’s not a disclaimer of doubt.
You seems to believe that unless something is stated in absolute terms, it is uncertain. This is not how scholarship works. Scholars, especially those of the caliber of Ibn Hajar, often present evidence-based conclusions that weigh various hadith and historical accounts. The “strongest view” doesn’t indicate doubt but highlights that this is the most reliable conclusion based on the available evidence.
Islamic scholars throughout history have used this approach to weigh hadith, legal rulings, and historical events. Ibn Hajar’s conclusion that the strongest view is that Aisha had not reached puberty at Khaibar is based on several hadith, including the one about her playing with dolls. This was a well-established legal marker in Islamic jurisprudence, showing that the playing with dolls is significant evidence of her prepubescent status.
3. Your assertion that Ibn Hajar’s view cannot be taken as definitive because of supposed “uncertainty” is an attempt to discredit his scholarly authority without providing any actual evidence to refute it.
You have provided no counter-evidence or reliable hadith to challenge Ibn Hajar’s conclusion. Rejecting the analysis of a highly respected scholar like Ibn Hajar without offering any credible alternative shows a lack of scholarly integrity. Unless you can produce a more reliable hadith or evidence, their argument remains baseless.
Ibn Hajar’s conclusions are grounded in strong evidence, such as the Sahih hadith regarding Aisha’s behavior and Islamic law’s treatment of puberty and playing with dolls. Without bringing any solid evidence to counter this, your claim to uncertainty is weak.
We have more claims to refute >>> Next?
*You said*
— Secondly, *THE STRONGEST VIEW* that Ibn Hajar was talking about here is the strongest view about which war it was BETWEEN Khaibar and Tabuk in the Hadith.
And the strongest view is that this is the Khaibar war !!!!!
Hence, it is NOT the strongest view about whether or not she was 14 years old or prepubescent during Khaibar or Tabuk.
Get the DIFFERENCE !!!!
*My response*
It is not funny ooo
Your response again misrepresents the context of Ibn Hajar’s analysis and introduces a new twist that we need to refute.
1. You tried to redefine what Ibn Hajar meant by “the strongest view” to suggest that Ibn Hajar was only referring to which war it was—between Khaibar and Tabuk. However, this is a diversion and misrepresentation of the actual scholarly context.
Ibn Hajar, in his analysis, was not only clarifying which war (Khaibar vs. Tabuk) the hadith referred to but also addressing the status of Aisha during that time—specifically, whether or not she had reached puberty. You are trying to limit the discussion to the timeline of the battles, ignoring the broader context of the hadith and Ibn Hajar’s actual point.
Ibn Hajar’s commentary in Fath al-Bari carefully assesses both the timing of events (the wars) and Aisha’s age and maturity. He discusses the implications of Aisha playing with dolls as indicative of her prepubescent status, which is the core of the issue. The timing of Khaibar or Tabuk is relevant because it helps establish a timeline for when Aisha might have reached puberty, but the primary issue Ibn Hajar is addressing is her status—whether or not she was prepubescent—during these events.
2. You attempted to create a distinction between the wars and Aisha’s maturity, but this is a false dichotomy. The analysis of her prepubescent status hinges on the historical timeline established by these battles, and Ibn Hajar’s conclusion that she had not reached puberty at Khaibar is tied to both the historical and legal context.
You are deliberately splitting hairs to confuse the issue. Ibn Hajar’s reference to “the strongest view” encompasses both the timing of the events and Aisha’s maturity. These elements are interconnected in the scholarly analysis. The conclusion that Aisha had not reached puberty by Khaibar is based on the historical timeline and the legal implications of her playing with dolls.
Ibn Hajar and other scholars use historical events like battles to establish a timeline but then use legal indicators—like the playing with dolls—to determine maturity. In Sahih al-Bukhari, it is reported that the Prophet saw Aisha playing with dolls after Khaibar (Vol. 8, Book 73, Hadith 151), which is why scholars concluded that she had not yet reached puberty at that time. This view holds until she reached puberty later, which led to the prohibition of dolls.
3. You are intentionally shifting the focus away from the question of Aisha’s puberty and onto the issue of which war is being referred to in the hadith. However, the real debate is about Aisha’s age and maturity at the time of Khaibar and whether she had reached puberty by then.
Your argument about which war is merely a distraction. The critical point here is the determination of Aisha’s maturity, and the strongest evidence (supported by the hadith about dolls) indicates that she had not reached puberty at the time of Khaibar. Ibn Hajar’s analysis in Fath al-Bari focuses on this issue, not just the identification of the war.
Scholars agree that the playing with dolls is a clear indication that Aisha was prepubescent, as dolls were allowed for girls who had not yet reached puberty. This fact is more important in this discussion than merely identifying the exact battle, because it directly speaks to Aisha’s physical maturity at the time.
So what can I say now? well!!!your argument is an intentional misdirection. Ibn Hajar’s strongest view does not merely refer to identifying the battle but also to determining Aisha’s prepubescent status at that time. The timeline of the battles helps clarify when Aisha reached puberty, and Ibn Hajar, based on the evidence of her playing with dolls, concluded that she had not yet reached puberty by the time of Khaibar. Your attempt to sidestep this core issue by focusing solely on the war timeline fails to address the actual evidence of Aisha’s maturity.
*You Said*
Without getting this difference, you will continue to assume that the strongest view among scholars is that Aisha was still prepubescent at 14 years (which is understandable in the face of other overwhelming proof of Hadith I already posted)
*My response*
Your claim hinges on the assertion that I have misunderstood the difference between the strongest view regarding the specific battle and the strongest view concerning Aisha’s prepubescent status at 14 years old. You further attempted to argue that there is overwhelming proof from other hadith that she had already reached puberty before that time. Well, let’s dissect and refute your point systematically.
1. You tried to create a false distinction between the discussion of Aisha’s prepubescent status and the identification of the battle. You claimed I confuse the strongest view about the battle with the strongest view about her maturity.
There is no confusion here. The context of Ibn Hajar’s commentary clearly connects both the battle timeline and Aisha’s prepubescent status. These are not mutually exclusive issues but interconnected factors in the scholarly analysis. Ibn Hajar references the battle timeline because it helps establish when Aisha was still playing with dolls, which is crucial to determining her maturity. Therefore, your insistence on separating these two discussions is a strawman fallacy designed to deflect from the core issue—Aisha’s prepubescent status at Khaibar.
Ibn Hajar explicitly addresses Aisha’s prepubescent status, noting that her playing with dolls during Khaibar is an indication that she had not yet reached puberty. This conclusion is drawn from both historical and legal perspectives, where the timeline of events is essential for determining her age and maturity.
2. You repeatedly claim that other hadith provide overwhelming evidence that Aisha had reached puberty before or by the age of 9, thus making it impossible for her to be prepubescent at 14.
You have failed to provide any substantive hadith or evidence that definitively states Aisha reached puberty before the age of 14. While there are hadith about Aisha’s young age at the time of consummation (around 9 years old), these do not provide conclusive evidence about her reaching puberty at that specific time. In fact, the hadith about her playing with dolls, which Ibn Hajar and other scholars reference, is a clear indication that she had not yet reached puberty by Khaibar, as dolls were permitted only for prepubescent girls.
In Sahih al-Bukhari, the hadith about Aisha playing with dolls after the Battle of Khaibar (Vol. 8, Book 73, Hadith 151) is a clear indication that she had not yet reached puberty by that time. If she had already reached puberty before Khaibar, the dolls would have been prohibited. Your claim of “overwhelming proof” from other hadith is baseless because no such hadith explicitly states that Aisha had reached puberty by 9 or even by 14 years old.
3. Your claim that I have misunderstood the scholarly consensus and that there is no definitive statement from Ibn Hajar or others about Aisha being prepubescent at 14 years old. You attempted to dismiss the scholarly view on Aisha’s maturity as uncertain.
Ibn Hajar’s analysis is cautious, but he clearly leans towards the strongest view that Aisha had not reached puberty at the time of Khaibar. His reference to the dolls is not merely a tangential observation but a key piece of evidence in the discussion of Aisha’s maturity. Your dismissal of this as “uncertain” ignores the broader scholarly consensus that uses this evidence as part of the determination of her prepubescent status.
Ibn Hajar, in Fath al-Bari, carefully analyzes the timeline of events and the hadith about dolls to conclude that Aisha had not yet reached puberty by Khaibar. Other scholars who analyze the same hadith, such as Al-Nawawi, support this view. Your claim that there is no scholarly consensus on this matter is unfounded, as these scholars base their conclusions on hadith and historical context. What if I now add that your sources said that you can consummate marriage with a prepubescent girl what will this debate would have looked like?
4. You repeatedly creates a strawman by claiming I (and scholars like Ibn Hajar) argue that the strongest view is that Aisha was 14 years old and prepubescent. You then attacks this strawman by suggesting that the real issue is simply identifying the battle (Khaibar vs. Tabuk).
This is a clear strawman argument. The discussion is not about merely identifying the battle but about what Aisha’s status was at the time of these events. The scholars, including Ibn Hajar, use the battle timeline to establish when Aisha was still playing with dolls and had not yet reached puberty. Your attempt to reduce the issue to a matter of battle identification is a diversion and a misrepresentation of the scholarly discussion.
*You said*
(ii) To even prove that the position of Ibn Hajar which he inclined to (from Al-Khattabee) can not be true, the same ibn Hajar *elsewhere* says that Aisha (at 7 A.H when she was supposedly 14) was matured when the Abyssinian came to Medina to perform
He (Ibn Hajar wrote):
_”…*Evidently, this happened after ‘Aisha had attained puberty (waq‘a ba‘d bulughiha)* and it has already been mentioned that according to a report with Ibn Hibban it happened when the delegation from Abyssinia came. It is known that *they came in the year 7 AH,* therefore, ‘Aisha was then fifteen years in age”_
Fath al-Bari, Vol.2, 445
*My Response*
Your claims require a thorough response as you are attempting to selectively quote Ibn Hajar to suggest a contradiction and mislead on the timeline. Let’s address these claims point by point, while also refuting the inconsistencies in your argument and the selective use of sources.
Claim Breakdown
1. You attempted to argue that Ibn Hajar contradicts himself by stating that Aisha had already attained puberty in 7 AH when the Abyssinian delegation came, thus implying that Aisha was mature at the age of 14. You selectively quotes from Fath al-Bari to suggest that Ibn Hajar contradicts the position that Aisha was prepubescent at 14 years old.
Chai!!!
Your use of the quote from Fath al-Bari is highly selective and misleading. First, Ibn Hajar’s reference to “waq‘a ba‘d bulughiha” (that this event took place after her attaining puberty) is not a definitive statement of fact, but part of a broader scholarly discussion. Scholars like Ibn Hajar often present multiple views when discussing complex issues, analyzing varying reports to reconcile them. In this instance, Ibn Hajar discusses a different event that occurred during 7 AH, unrelated to Aisha’s playing with dolls or her maturity during Khaibar.
Here is contextual Evidence.
Ibn Hajar’s analysis in Fath al-Bari is consistent when discussing Aisha’s prepubescent state during the events of Khaibar. The dolls hadith and the events of Khaibar are part of a distinct context that should not be conflated with the unrelated event of the Abyssinian delegation’s arrival. You failed to acknowledge that Ibn Hajar discusses both these events independently in different contexts. By attempting to merge these separate discussions, you create a false contradiction where none exists.
2. You assumed that Aisha was 15 years old in 7 AH and tries to frame this as definitive proof of her reaching puberty by that age. However, this is a misrepresentation of the timeline.
Aisha was born around 613–614 CE, and the migration to Medina (Hijra) occurred in 622 CE. The Battle of Khaibar took place in 7 AH, which corresponds to around 628 CE. Therefore, Aisha would have been approximately 14 years old at the time of Khaibar, not 15 as you suggested.
Even if the Abyssinian delegation arrived in 7 AH, that event does not negate the evidence that Aisha was still prepubescent during the Battle of Khaibar, as shown by her playing with dolls, which Ibn Hajar mentions in his discussion.
Just because an event (like the Abyssinian performance) is mentioned after the Battle of Khaibar does not automatically imply that Aisha had reached maturity at that point. The evidence of her playing with dolls remains a stronger indicator of her prepubescent state during Khaibar.
3. You tried to argue that Ibn Hajar’s quote about the Abyssinian delegation proves that Aisha had already reached maturity by 7 AH, thus negating the earlier hadith about her playing with dolls.
The two events—the Abyssinian performance and the dolls hadith—are unrelated and do not contradict each other. Ibn Hajar, as a scholar, was discussing multiple reports, some of which mention later stages of Aisha’s life. You are attempting to force a contradiction by conflating these distinct events. The fact that Aisha may have reached maturity at some point after Khaibar does not negate the evidence that she was prepubescent during Khaibar.
Ibn Hajar and other scholars analyze events in their historical context. The hadith about Aisha playing with dolls is specifically tied to the Battle of Khaibar, where it is used as an indicator of her prepubescent status. The mention of later events, such as the Abyssinian performance, should not be used to retroactively alter the conclusions drawn about her earlier years.
So your attempt to discredit Ibn Hajar’s analysis by selectively quoting and conflating unrelated events is misleading and erroneous.
The key point remains:
– Aisha’s playing with dolls during Khaibar is strong evidence that she had not yet reached puberty at that time.
– Your argument, based on a quote from an unrelated event (the Abyssinian performance), does not disprove this fact.
– Your selective quoting of Fath al-Bari misrepresents the overall scholarly consensus and the approach that scholars like Ibn Hajar take when analyzing multiple reports.
– Your lack of context and your attempt to force contradictions where none exist demonstrate the weakness of his argument.
*You said*
From the above, you can clearly see that Ibn Hajar is NOT consistent and hence his inclination to the position of Al-Khattabee is simply to favor a reconciliation as I already stated in my previous post.
*My response*
Your conclusion that Ibn Hajar is “not consistent” is a falsehood based on a misunderstanding of how scholars like Ibn Hajar approach hadith analysis and historical evidence. Scholars frequently deal with complex, multi-faceted traditions, and they present a range of interpretations based on the available evidence. This complex approach is not a sign of inconsistency but of intellectual honesty and depth in scholarship. Let’s refute this false conclusion point by point.
1. You claimed that Ibn Hajar was inconsistent simply because he presented multiple views or “inclined” toward a particular position. However, this reflects a misunderstanding of how Islamic scholarship works. Scholars like Ibn Hajar evaluate all available reports, sometimes arriving at a preferred or “stronger” opinion, while acknowledging other possibilities. This is not inconsistency but rigorous scholarship.
Ibn Hajar’s job as a commentator was to weigh the evidence and consider all the perspectives, which is why he addresses both the hadith and its varying reports. Presenting multiple views or reconciling seemingly conflicting reports does not imply that the scholar is inconsistent; it indicates a thorough, evidence-based approach to ensure no aspect is overlooked. Ibn Hajar is recognized as one of the greatest hadith scholars because of this rigorous, methodical process.
2. You claimed that Ibn Hajar’s inclination toward Al-Khattabee’s position was merely an attempt to “reconcile” different views. However, reconciliation is a normal and essential part of Islamic legal and historical analysis, especially in hadith studies. When apparent contradictions arise, scholars aim to reconcile these by looking at the broader context, different chains of narration, and the reliability of sources.
Far from being a weakness, reconciliation is a vital scholarly tool. Ibn Hajar, like all reputable scholars, uses reconciliation to harmonize seemingly conflicting reports. This is a standard method in Islamic scholarship, and it is rooted in the desire for a balanced and comprehensive understanding of the evidence. Ibn Hajar’s preference for a certain view is based on the strength of the evidence, not on inconsistency or personal bias.
Example, Ibn Hajar’s discussion of Aisha’s playing with dolls and her maturity is based on rigorous analysis of hadiths and historical reports. He acknowledges the evidence suggesting she was prepubescent during Khaibar, while also noting other reports. Your failure to grasp this methodology lead you to falsely accuse Ibn Hajar of inconsistency.
3. You misinterpreted Ibn Hajar’s approach as inconsistent, but Ibn Hajar consistently maintains that Aisha had not reached puberty during the events of Khaibar, which is supported by the hadith of her playing with dolls. His discussion of the Abyssinian delegation arriving in Medina in 7 AH does not negate his earlier analysis; it simply provides additional context for a different event. Ibn Hajar does not contradict himself.
His analysis remains consistent: Aisha was likely prepubescent during Khaibar, as indicated by her playing with dolls. You attempt to discredit this by citing unrelated events (like the Abyssinian delegation) is a red herring. Just because Aisha may have reached puberty later does not mean she had reached it by the time of Khaibar. This is a deliberate conflation of two separate time periods.
4. Finally, you failed to provide any substantial evidence to support your claim that Ibn Hajar was inconsistent. Instead, you relies on selective quotes and conjecture, rather than engaging with the full scope of Ibn Hajar’s analysis. You also disregards the scholarly methodology of reconciliation and fails to address the key hadith about Aisha playing with dolls. What would you have done if I were the one making claims you are making and you have Ibn Hajar to prove she hasn’t reach puberty at Kaybar?
So, without strong evidence to back your claim, your argument remains baseless. You have not provided any credible counter-evidence to refute Ibn Hajar’s analysis or the broader scholarly consensus. Instead, you resorted to dismissing Ibn Hajar’s work without fully understanding or addressing it.
At this point I will love to conclude the session since I still have one more round to respond to, your conclusion that Ibn Hajar was inconsistent is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how Islamic scholarship works, especially in the context of reconciling different reports. Ibn Hajar’s methodology is consistent, thorough, and well-established. As said repeatedly, you have provided no credible evidence to discredit Ibn Hajar’s conclusions and instead relies on misinterpretation and selective quoting.
Ire o!!!
We shall end this in the next page in Part VIII
