Coming to the Canadian experience, which has no doubt been hovering in the backs of our minds, with a nation requiring so much intellectual mediation, we may well worry that as the memory of the parties who fought on the Plains of Abraham fades into the background of the national consciousness, only homo economicus may survive, who looks to the nation only to optimize consumerism in the quest for status, rationalized as the summa of self actualization.

And we may justifiably worry that the universals of human nature which have obstructed utopian visions will continue to haunt the national dream, among them nepotism, inequality of intellectual and social potential, and the quest for dominance through violence, which is also embedded in our genes. And by the way, on the score of economic man, you’ll be amused to know that the most sophisticated instrument for the study of national identity, called the National Identity Scale, is not the work of academics or Statistics Canada, but of marketing agents. You can google it. Their goal is to profile all of our nationalist sentiments, loyalties, and proclivities in order to target our purchasing inclinations. How ironic is it that interested parties are seeking to brand us as consumers by profiling our diversities of national feeling?

There are other obstacles to national experience and identity worthy of mention. The word itself is derived from “natio” which essentially means birthplace, taken from “nasci,” to be born. We may well wonder whether our place of birth is our life’s destiny. He or she who swears an oath to the Queen in a citizenship court is making a vow that is tantamount to a religious conversion. Yet where people are born remains a huge part of their identity. A group of Canadian nationalist academics back in the 1970s, in a narrow spirit of mind, confirmed that very belief by stating that anyone not born in Canada lacked a true national experience and should therefore be barred from all positions of influence within our university systems. What a doctrine to impose upon an essentially immigrant nation, eager to recruit talent from abroad to maintain its national dream!

Yet that issue will never ultimately die, because we will never ultimately agree about how we construct identity and fashion allegiances, who is really in and who is not. How malleable are we, and how much baggage from our pasts is too much when it comes to forming a new national community? And how much superiority can the native born claim for themselves?

Something once said by George Bernard Shaw cuts both ways: “There is nothing that can be changed more completely than human nature when the job is taken in hand early enough.” The gist of it is that we are indeed malleable, but only when we are young. Each of us here is as apt to speak Japanese as any child born in Japan, had we been born there. Yet nothing makes learning Japanese more difficult than first speaking English, because we were born here. So is birth tantamount to the only nation we can experience? How much plasticity do we have? Can a second language ever equal a first? That debate is likewise yours to discover.

The topic of memory in this context is also significant. It is not possible to dwell on all its complexities here, for memory is both key to the construction of t he self and key to those common experiences that define national identity. But self and nation entail different kinds of memory. A self is a point of view concerning its own lived history. National memories are preserved through books, paintings and pictures, letters, and journals housed in national archives and libraries. A nation emerges only when historical memory becomes personal memory, when the story of a people is internalized, inviting us to feel for and with those who created our national past.

Can a nation shed this component and still be a nation? I ask in innocence. Perhaps we can thrive together on current events. But if we require a deeper historical memory, how is it to be framed and disseminated? It is a real challenge for educators, who must referee among the embarrassing facts, the touchy opinions, and political correctness. Can we even afford an embattled Canadian history? Or do we beat our breasts and construct it as one long trail of colonializing abuse and ethnic misunderstanding? After all, two of our three founding peoples are conquered nations, and much of the history of Canada has been devoted to assuaging the loss of those former identities.

The Quebecois have a dearly-held sense of themselves as a first experience quality of nation centered on birth, language, a common history and culture, and at one time a common religion, yet they too must seek to embrace the contractual, legal, and secular components of a modern pluralistic society. The most intense intellectual debates within Quebec today are concerned with this very question. There is a lot of nostalgia in la belle province, and who can blame them? At some level, we all crave the kind of oneness they hope to find in a society still tenuously held together by a common language and traditions, made urgent by a history of perceived subjugation and collective hope.

Meanwhile, it is easy to imagine how irrelevant those confrontations must seem to newer Canadians who have no stakes in that conversation and can only hope for a second order gesellschaft nation or retreat into former national feelings; our historical solitudes go in many directions. Yet this part of our national experience cannot and should not be pretended away. And thus, how do we shape the collective memory of Canada? An attempt will be made in the transformation of our National Museum of Civilization into a Museum of National History, which I think we all recognize as an effort in nation building, in selectively representing the Canadian past in ways which will instill national pride in all its citizens. But whether this new institution will represent a faithful and comprehensive history or a cheerleading version of it remains to be seen. Behind it all is an admirable goal, to give our national memory a monument or shrine to make visible who we are, and to make it accessible to all the people.

I have thrown up a lot of obstacles to the realization of national identity in modern diversified societies. Unfortunately, I cannot resolve all the stressors and dilemmas which I have raised. I would be bigger than God if I had a band-aid for all our national divisions, and I would be a menacing tyrant if I had the power to imprint nationalist universals by fiat in the mind of every citizen.

What I would venture is that we all desire to be members of a national community—to participate personally in that cluster of ideas which not only holds us together but distinguishes us from all other nations, and to experience it as part of our extended personal identity. It is a level of the self that is big, but not too big, and still within imagining. National sentiments are strong when Canada does well in international ratings concerning our financial fundamentals. We are justifiably proud of our social welfare net, our peacekeeping objectives, or when planes fly overhead in formation, or when we take Olympic medals or win the World Series.

But we sense there is even more pro patria to be felt through education, historical consciousness, generous feelings toward our fellow citizens, and openness to dialogue and exchange. Emotions cannot be coerced, but when we feel them, they can help form the bonds that hold us together. In Canada, a dialogue among cultures has replaced the monolithic orientations of older and more traditional societies, which is now as it must be, but it is an ongoing experiment all the same, with an uncertain outcome. That brings us back to the intercultural and interfaith dialogues sponsored by such organizations as the IDI (Intercultural Dialogue Institute), which are vital to the shaping of our national ethos; we become one in sharing our differences and in understanding just how those differences still pertain both to our common humanity and to our national aspirations. In that regard, we can champion Fethullah Gulen’s great commission when he urges that “Each person who loves his or her country has to be a proper representative of that nation. Every member should invest in its values and put energy and aid into its development, and follow this pathway throughout life.” It is a great reciprocity conducted by granting identity to others and assuming an informed identity for ourselves.

A nation is dialogic. It is made by thinking it together. My purpose has been to think about the self and its experience in the context of nation, and how buying in cognitively adds to our experiencing of the self as a thinking participant. I can’t imagine a working nation without conditions like respect for law and the rights of others, respect for democratic institutions, and fiscal integrity. And here we get into the hard points for discussion. We need working languages to avoid our own Tower of Babel; thus it seems reasonable that we foster the two official languages of Canada as efficient vehicles of communication. We need citizens with religious sensibilities, even if they are confirmed atheists, but we must be wary of guiding ourselves in matters of the collective secular nation by religious principles more specific than generic ethics and civic morality; the French Revolution got that right. We need residents who imagine the common good and respect the dignity of life by instinct. And I would add my support for extending the historical consciousness of the nation, because Canada has had a rich history in its scant 400 hundred years of urban settlement. Canada has been pluralistic from its inception, yet we have forged a sense of a single dominion historically grounded and tied to a precious social and political formula based on reason and the spirit of order and cooperation. Yet I think we can remain true to our inspiring cultural diversity through discussion and sharing. Upon such a heritage, minds can build a nation.

I seem to recall that it was a beer company that branded us with a bit of national self-affirmation through its “I am Canadian” campaign. It was a “good feeling” ad. But Gulen said it more eloquently: “It is vital for citizens of a nation to say, ‘this is my country.’ The altruism of today will lead to the happiness of tomorrow’s generations.” And all this we do with our brains and minds in the most remarkable and mysterious of ways are, as a cognitive philosopher, are matters of eternal fascination to me. Nation-building we accomplish only by synchronizing our minds. We build an invisible yet compellingly real national community just by thinking in a collective way. Nation, in that sense, is a cognitive and emotional opportunity for the construction of the self, and clearly as a collective idea, nation has its adaptive value as a point of view from which we exercise our interests in the world. That alone gives grounds for the instauration of national bonds.

Donald A. Beecher is Chancellor’s Professor at Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada.
Editor’s note: The first part was published in the previous issue #99.

It is perhaps not fair to expect a world with two faces to respond to this new atrocity with honor and honesty. This is why we should seek support and mercy from the One who is the ultimate source of all power and love. We are only as powerful as the length of our essays in this periodical. Thus, we call on the tyrants to stop their cruelties, for they should know that whatever the reasons they have committed them, it will not bring happiness. Happiness comes with virtuousness! We ask these leaders: who is your guide? Do not be mistaken by the fact that these tyrants happen to be in Muslim countries – this does not qualify them to be the rightful followers of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, for the Prophet, as described in the lead article “was utterly virtuous and contentedly happy. He … never, not even once, consented to anything that was not approved by the Exalted Creator. He was … never unfair and never acted unjustly to anyone. … he never preferred any worldly flavor to virtuousness. He … did not, not even once, fall into hesitation when distinguishing good from bad.” We hope these tyrants are brought to their senses as soon as possible, so that we are saved from our failure to fulfill our basic human responsibilities to stand up for life and dignity. In the meantime, we seek guidance and hope in the Almighty, because ultimately, He is the one with the power to bring these events under control. As we are so often reminded, our human capabilities are quite limited.

The so-called split between science and religion has led us to view life through a binocular with a rather short range. It’s a low definition, black & white range. We thought we were what our genes imposed on us; we believed that natural way would be to let that design unleash itself as genetically ordained. Is it truly so? Are we really nothing more than genetically engineered? Or are there other factors that are involved in making us who we are?

In this issue, “Are Genes the Source of Behavioral Disorders?” explores these questions in a cross-reading between what our biological structure prescribes, vis-à-vis other factors like our culture, parents, education, etc. According to this article “… each child is born with different inclinations and threshold values that are determined genetically and hormonally for each of his or her possible characters and behaviors. These potential inclinations and threshold values can surface depending on internal and external stimuli and educational styles.” So, we are not only what we eat or what we know; we become what we are as a result of a combination of things, some of which we can control, and others which we are born with.

“Why Do We Turn Over During Sleep?” is another article about a daily blessing that is out of our control but is for the good of our health. If we always stay in the same position, sleeping for a regular six to eight hours can cause a disruption in blood circulation, resulting in a pressure ulcer. Therefore, our body is blessed with a defense mechanism in which our position changes, consciously or subconsciously, so that skin integrity is not disrupted.

“Who Owns This Body?” is another contribution on the same theme. The author challenges the belief that we control our bodies, and that no one, not even the One who created us, can impose on our bodies what to do and what not to do. The author gives plenty of examples to show that there is so much happening in our body without our noticing it, that it is nonsensical to claim full ownership over it.

Reports that Aisha bint Abi Bakr was 6 or 7 years old when she became engaged and 10 when she married [1] have been the most basic factor in the formation of the view regarding her age of marriage. Also, it should not be forgotten that factors such as similar practices being quite widespread at the time and the physical development of children becoming complete at an earlier age at that time also contributed to the dispersion of this view. For this reason, this subject was not made a current issue for discussion until very recently.

Orientalists who do not consider the conditions of the time period in which an action occurred and who examine Islam from “outside” have made this a current issue. The Muslim world’s reaction to this different stance has been mixed. While some have insisted that Aisha’s above-mentioned age at marriage is correct [2], others are of the opinion that Aisha was older [3]. In this situation, where it is not always possible to maintain a balanced view, various approaches have developed as an answer to Orientalists’ claims, including those that choose to deny the reports or ignore the existence of other alternatives as a response to this view.

First of all, we should know that everyone is a child of the time they live in and therefore must be evaluated according to the cultural context of the relevant time. There are certain values that form a society’s customs and when a society is evaluated, these values have to be taken into consideration. Otherwise, were we to attempt to evaluate historical events within today’s conditions, we should remember that we are fated to make mistakes.

It is known that during the time of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, young girls were married at an early age [4] and that age difference was not important in marriage [5]. Especially in regard to young girls, it should not be forgotten that there was social pressure for this, that they matured earlier due to climatic and geographical conditions and that they were seen as goods that needed to grow in their husband’s house. Moreover, this is not a matter just related to girls; boys were also married at ages 8, 9 and 10 and they became the head of a family at an age that is perceived as very young today [6]. Perhaps it is this culture that lies at the basis of this issue’s not having been questioned until recent times. Otherwise, it was impossible for a mentality that wanted to brew a storm in regards to the Prophet’s marriage with Zaynab bint Jahsh and that slandered Aisha after her return from the Muraysi expedition to not criticize such an issue at that time.

In the verses of the Qur’an that came at the same time, the age for marriage was mentioned and it was emphasized that children should be married when they come of age [7]. So, opposing a divine suggestion cannot be considered. Using the mentality of Umar, if intervention had been a matter of consideration here, the Prophet would surely have been warned in a coming revelation and a step would have been taken to resolve the issue. At any rate, the Prophet’s wedding to Aisha took place in accordance with direction from divine will [8].

Now, if you like, putting the extremes behind us and using moderate criteria, let’s examine sources related to Aisha’s age at marriage once again.

1. While listing names of Muslims during the first days of Islam, Aisha’s name, together with her older sister Asma, are listed immediately after the names of the Sabiqun al-Awwalun (the first ones) like Uthman ibn Affan, Zubayr ibn Awwam, Abdurrahman ibn Awf, Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas, Talha ibn Ubaydullah, Abu Ubayda ibn Jarrah, Arqam ibn Abi al-Arqam and Uthman ibn Maz’un. Being the 18th person to accept Islam, Aisha’s name precedes the names of Umayr ibn Abi Waqqas, Abdullah ibn Mas’ud, Salit ibn Amr, Ja’far ibn Abi Talib, Abdullah ibn Jahsh, Abu Hudayfa, Suhayb ibn Sinan, Ammar ibn Yasir, Umar ibn Khattab, Hamza ibn Abdilmuttalib, Habbab ibn Aratt, Said ibn Zayd and Fatima bint Khattab [9]. This means she was living then and was mature enough to make such a choice and exercise her will. In addition, the information in reports that “she was a small girl then” shows that her name was mentioned in a conscious way [10].

This date refers to the early days of Islam. For it is known that Aisha’s sister Asma, who was born in 595, was 15 when she became a Muslim [11]. This indicates the year 610, when the Prophet started to receive the revelation and this then shows that Aisha was at least 5, 6 or 7 that day and that she was at least 17 or 18 when she married the Prophet in Medina.

2. In regard to days in Mecca, Aisha said, “I was a girl playing games when the verse, ‘Indeed, the Last Hour is their appointed time [for their complete recompense], and the Last Hour will be more grievous and more bitter’ [12] was revealed to God’s Messenger [13].” This information opens other doors for us regarding her age.

The verse under consideration is the 46th verse of Surah Qamar, the 54th chapter of the Qur’an, which explains the miracle of the split moon [the splitting of the moon is one of the miracles performed by the Prophet Muhammad]. Revealed as a whole, this surah came while the Prophet was in Ibn Arqam’s home in the fourth (614) [14] or eighth (618) or ninth (619) [15] year of his mission, according to differing reports. Looking especially at necessity, some scholars focused on the date being 614; when this date is taken, Aisha either had not been born or had just been born. While when this date is taken it appears that she must have been born at least eight or nine years earlier, the situation does not change much when 618 or 619 are taken. In that situation she would have only been 4 or 5 years old, neither an age at which she would be in a position to understand this event and relate it years later. According to the second possibility, she was probably born when Muhammad’s prophethood had just begun [16].

Another matter worth mentioning here is that while describing that day, Aisha stated, “I was a girl playing games.” The word she used to describe herself, jariya, is used to describe the passage into puberty. Ibn Yara, an Arab poet, describes this passage as follows: “When a girl becomes 8 years old, she is not a ‘jariya.’ She is a bridal candidate that I can marry to Utba or Muawiya.” Some scholars say that it is used for girls who are older than 11.

If we look at the issue taking 614 as the year that Surah Qamar was revealed, Aisha would have been born at least eight years before the prophetic mission, or in 606. If we accept 618, then the year of birth would have been 610; this event alone makes it impossible for her to have been 9 when she married.

When this information is combined with her name being on the list of the first Muslims, we get the result that Aisha’s date of birth was probably 606. Consequently, she would have been at least 17 when she married.

3. Of course, Aisha’s memories of Mecca are not limited to this. In addition to this, the following memories confirm this matter:

a) Her saying that she had seen two people begging who had remained from the Year of the Elephant (the year in which Yemeni King Abraha sent an army of elephants to Mecca in order to destroy the Ka‘ba; the elephants were pelted with pebbles dropped on them by birds), which occurred 40 years before the prophetic mission and is accepted as a milestone for determining history, and her handing down this information with her sister Asma only [17].

b) Her describing in detail that during difficult times in Mecca, God’s Messenger had come to their house morning and evening and that her father, Abu Bakr, who could not endure this hardship, attempted to migrate to Abyssinia [18].

c) Her stating that first it was mandatory to offer two cycles of obligatory prayer and that later it was changed to four cycles for residents, but that during military campaigns two cycles were performed [19].

d) In reports about the early days, there being statements like, “We heard that Isaf and Naila had committed a crime at the Ka‘ba and for this reason God turned them into stone as a man and woman from the Jurhum tribe [20].”

4. Being betrothed before the engagement: Another factor that supports the above view is that at the time when the Prophet’s marriage was a topic of discussion, Aisha was engaged to Mut’im ibn Adiyy’s son Jubayr. The suggestion for the Prophet to marry Aisha came from Hawla bint Hakim, the wife of Uthman ibn Maz’un, someone not from the family. Both situations show that she had come to the age of marriage and was known as a young marriageable girl.

As is known, this betrothal was broken by the Ibn Adiyy family due to the possible religious conversion of their son to Islam, and it was only after this that Aisha’s engagement to Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, took place [21]. Consequently, the marriage agreement was either made before the prophetic mission or when the call to Islam was being made openly (three years after the Prophet began receiving revelation). If it was made before the mission, together with the idea that Aisha was 9 years old when she married being shaken from its foundation, it implies that Aisha was born even earlier than has been thought. For this reason, some say that she was a 13- or 14-year-old girl then [22].

It should not be overlooked that this decision was made during the period when the call to Islam had begun to be made openly. In regard to time, this means 613-614. If it is assumed that Aisha was born four years after the mission, it has to be accepted that she had not yet been born, so it is not possible to talk about a marriage agreement under these circumstances. In this case, it has to be accepted that she was at least 7 or 8 when her engagement was broken, so the year was probably 605 [23].

Here, another possibility can be mentioned; namely, an agreement of arranged future marriage similar to “cradle tallying,” an agreement between parents in the early years after the birth of a baby. However, there are no details in the texts under consideration to confirm this.

5. The age difference of Aisha’s siblings should be taken into account. As is known, Abu Bakr had six children. Asma and Abdullah were born from Qutayla bint Umays, Aisha and Abdurrahman from Umm Ruman, Muhammad from Asma bint Umays and Umm Kulthum from Habiba bint Harija. Asma and Abdullah have the same mother as do Aisha and Abdurrahman. The age difference between children from the same mother can enlighten our subject matter.

a) Abu Bakr’s first daughter, Asma, was born in 595, 27 years before the Hijra, Prophet Muhammad’s emigration to Medina [24]. At the time of the Hijra, she was married to Zubayr ibn Awwam and was six-months pregnant [25]. Her son Abdullah was born three months later in Quba while she was migrating to Medina. She died in the 73rd year of the Hijra at the age of 100; her teeth had not even fallen out.

Here there is another critical piece of information. The age difference between Aisha and her sister Asma was 10 years [26]. According to this, Aisha’s year of birth was 605 (595+10=605) and her age at the time of the Hijra was 17 (27–10=17). Since her marriage took place six, seven or eight months after the Hijra, or just after Badr [27], this means Aisha was 17-18 years old at that time.

b) The age difference between Aisha and her brother Abdurrahman is also striking. Abdurrahman became Muslim after the Treaty of Hudaibiya was signed, six years after the Hijra. He was careful not to encounter his father at the Battle of Badr, in the second year after the Hijra, and that day Abdurrahman was 20 years old [28]. In other words, he must have been born in 604. Taking into consideration the conditions of that time, the probability is low that the sister of a child born in 604 would be born 10 years later in 614. Put another way, at a time when the age difference between brothers and sisters is one or two years, a large difference such as 10 years between Aisha and her brother is highly unlikely.

6. Reports regarding Aisha’s death are also of a nature to illuminate this issue. The year in which she died is listed as the 55th, 56th, 57th, 58th or 59th year after the Hijra [29] and her age at that time as 65, 66, 67 or 74 [30]. Just as there is no agreement regarding her date of birth, there is no agreement regarding her date of death.

Reports to the effect that she died in the 58th year after the Hijra and that she was 74 when she died give the impression that they are sounder than others because they give detailed information such as the day she died as being Wednesday, that it corresponded to the 17th day of Ramadan, that upon her request she was buried at night after the Witr prayer in the Jannah al-Baqi graveyard, that again upon her last request the funeral prayer was lead by Abu Hurayrah and that she was lowered into the grave by persons like her sister Asma’s two sons, Abdullah and Urwa, her brother Muhammad’s two sons, Qasim and Abdullah, and her brother Abdurrahman’s son Abdullah [31]. Therefore, when calculations are made according to this date, we see she lived 48 years after the Prophet’s death (48+10=58+13=71+3=74). This means she was born three years before his prophethood and, in view of this information, she was 17 when she married (74–48=26–9=17).

In support of the above, her being on the battle front at Uhud, in the third year after the Hijra, when even boys were turned away; her depth in scholarly matters and the mature attitude and statements she put forth in regard to the matter of slander; the age difference between her and the Prophet’s daughter Fatima; her knowledge and awareness of the Hijra and later developments; after arriving in Medina, her marriage being consummated at her father’s suggestion and after the mahr had been paid [32]; the position of the Prophet as a guide in the society; the sensitivity of the Prophet and fatherly compassion; the differences in reports regarding the date of marriage and their having no finality [33]; Aisha’s using the doubtful expression “six or seven” when referring to her age; dates of birth and death not being as clearly determined in that society as they are today-all this strengthens the probability that she was born before the commencement of Islam, was engaged at 14 or 15 years of age and was married to the Prophet at the age of 17 or 18.

In this situation, it is up to us to attribute the meaning “I appeared to be” to the report “I was 6 or 7 when I was engaged and 9 when I married” and reconcile the two [34]. The fact that Aisha was physically thin strengthens this interpretation. She was affected by physical events faster and had a smaller body than her peers. Events like her becoming ill during the migration to Medina [35], her mother’s showing her special attention and trying to make her well [36], her losing her necklace after the Muraysi expedition and the enclosed litter being put on the camel thinking that she was in it [37] all show this.

In short, regardless of whether Aisha’s age at marriage was 9 or 17 or 18, there is nothing strange about it. It is necessary to evaluate every society according to its own rules. When we look at examples, it was quite a widespread custom to marry both boys and girls at a young age. However, when we look at information passed down to us, it should not be forgotten that this information to the effect that Aisha, may God be pleased with her, was born in 605, engaged at the age of 14 or 15 and married at the age of 17 or 18 is too strong to be ignored.

Dr. Resit Haylamaz is the editor-in-chief of Kaynak Publishing Group.

Notes

1. Bukhari, Manaqib al-Ansar, 20, 44; Muslim, Niqah, 71; Fadail al-Sahaba, 74; Abu Dawud, Adab, 55; Ibn Maja, Niqah, 13; Nasai, Niqah, 78; Darimi, Niqah, 56.
2. Azimli, Mehmet, “Hz. Âise’nin Evlilik Yas? Tartismalarinda Savunmaci Tarihciligin Ç?kmaz?,” Islâmî Arastirmalar, Vol. 16, Issue 1, 2003.
3. See Doðrul, Ömer Riza. Asr-? Saâdet, Istanbul: Eser Kitabevi, 1974, 2/141; Nadwi, Sayyid Sulayman. Hazreti Aise, (trns. by Ahmet Karatas), Istanbul: Timas Yay?nlar?, 2004, p. 21; Savas, R?za. “Hz. Âise’nin Evlenme Yasi ile ilgili Farkl? Bir Yaklasim,” D. E. Ü. ilâhiyât Fak. Derg. Issue 4, Izmir, 1995, pp. 139-144; Yüce, Abdülhakim, Efendimiz’in Bir Günü, Istanbul: Is?k Yayinlari, pp. 82-83, 2007.
4. Abdul Muttalib, the grandfather of the Prophet, married Hala bint Uhayb, who was young then. Since he married off his son Abdullah to Amina at an early age at around the same time of his own marriage with Hala, the Prophet was almost of the same age with his uncle Hamza.
5. In order to have family relationship with the Prophet and thus further his close relation with God’s Messenger, Umar ibn Khattab married Ali’s daughter Umm Qulthum, and this marriage was not found strange at that time at all.
6. Amr ibn As, for instance, was 12 years older than his son Abdullah. This means that he was around 10 when he got married. For further information see Ibn al-Athir, Usud al-Gaba, 3/240.
7. Nisa 4:6.
8. Bukhari, Ta’bir, 21, Manakib al-Ansar, 44, Niqah, 9; Muslim, Fadail al-Sahaba, 79; Ibn Hanbal, Musnad, 6/41, 128.
9. Ibn Hisham, Sira, 1/271; Ibn Ishaq, Sira, Konya, 1981, 124.
10. Ibn Hisham, Sira, 1/271; Ibn Hisham, Sira, 124.
11. Nawawi, Tahzib al-Asma, 2/597; Hakim, Mustadrak, 3/635.
12. Qamar 54:46.
13. Bukhari, Fadail al-Qur’an, 6; Tafsir al-Sura, (54) 6; Ayni, Badruddin Abu Muhammad Mahmud ibn Ahmad, Umdat al-Qari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, Dar alIhya al-Turas al-Arabi, 20/21; Asqalani, Fath al-Bari, 11/291.
14. Suyuti, Itqan, Beirut, 1987, 1/29, 50; Doðrul, Asr-i Saadet, 2/148.
15. The month difference stems from the lunar calendar.
16. Taking this information into account, some people calculate Aisha’s age at marriage as least 14 or 22, up to 28. We have not focused on these as they are not supported by the sources.
17. Ibn Hisham, Sira, 1/176; Haysami, Majma al-Zawaid, 3/285; Ibn Kathir, Tafsir, 4/553; Bidaya, 2/214; Qurtubi, Tafsir, 20/195.
18. Bukhari, Salat, 70, Kafala, 5, Manaqib al-Ansar, 45, Adab, 64; Ibn Hanbal, Musnad, 6/198.
19. Muslim, 3/463; Mu’jam al-Kabir, 2/285, 286; Mu’jam al-Awsat, 12/145; Ibn Hisham, Sira, 1/243.
20. Ibn Hisham, Sira, 1/83.
21. Bukhari, Niqah, 11; Ibn Hanbal, Musnad, 6/210; Haysami, Majma al-Zawaid, 9/225; Bayhaqi, Sunan, 7/129; Tabari, Tarih, 3/161-163.
22. Savas, Riza, D. E. Ü. ilahiyat Fak. Dergisi, Issue 4, izmir, pp. 139-144, 1995.
23. Berki, Ali Hikmet, Osman Eskioðlu, Hatemü’l-Enbiya Hz. Muhammed ve Hayati, 210.
24. Nawawi, Tahzib al-Asma, 2/597.
25. Nawawi, Tahzib al-Asma, 2/597.
26. Bayhaqi, Sunan, 6/204; Ibn Manda, Ma’rifat al-Sahaba, Köprülü Kütüphanesi, No: 242, p. 195; Ibn Asakir, Tarih al-Damascus, Tarajim al-Nisa, Damascus, pp. 9, 10, 28, 1982; Mas’udi, Muruj al-Zahab, 2, 39; Ibn Sa’d, Tabaqat al-Kubra, Beirut, 8/59, 1968.
27. Ibn Sa’d, Tabaqat, 8/58; Ibn Abdilbarr, Istiab, 4/1881; Nadwi, Sirat al-Sayyidati Aisha Umm al-Mu’minin, Edition critique by Muhammad Rahmatullah Hafiz al-Nadwi, Dar al-Kalam, Damascus, 40, 49, 2003.
28. Ibn Athir, Usud al-Gaba, 3/467.
29. Ibn Abdilbarr, Istiab, 2/108; Tahzib al-Kamal, 16/560.
30. Ibn Sa’d, Tabaqat, 8/75; Nadwi, Sirat al-Sayyidat Aisha, 202.
31. Ibn Abdilbarr, Istiab, 2/108; Doðrul, Asr-i Saadet, 2/142.
32. Tabarani, Kabir, 23/25; Ibn Abdilbarr, Istiab, 4/1937; Ibn Sa’d, Tabaqat, 8/63.
33. For such differences in narrations as “one and a half or two years before the Hijra,” “when she was 6 or 7 years old,” “when Khadija passed away or three years after Khadija passed away,” “seven or eight months after the Emigration or the first year of the Hijra,” “Right after the Battle of Badr,” see Bukhari, Manakib al-Ansar, 20, 44; 36.
34. There are even those who react to this information as the mistake of the narrator, claiming that it should be, “I was 6 or 7 when the first revelation came.”
35. Bukhari, Manakib al-Ansar, 43, 44; Muslim, Niqah, 69; Ibn Maja, Niqah, 13.
36. Bukhari, Manakib al-Ansar, 44; Muslim, Niqah, 69; Abu Dawud, Adab, 55; Ibn Maja, Niqah, 13; Darimi, Niqah, 56; Tabarani, Kabir, 23/25; Ibn Abdilbarr, Istiab, 4/1938; Ibn Sa’d, Tabaqat, 8/63; Ibn Ishaq, Sira, Konya, 239, 1981.
37. Bukhari, Shahada, 15; Magazi, 34; Tafsîr, (24) 6; Muslim, Tawba, 56; Tirmidhi, Tafsir, (63) 4; Ibn Sa’d, Tabaqat, 2/65; Ibn Hisham, Sira, 3/310.

An interesting scientific medical study, published in the British Medical Journal (No 6993, 10 June 1995), proved beyond any doubt the benefit of giving a new-born child sugar, in order to reduce the feeling of any painful procedure like heel pricking for a blood sample or before circumcision.

The study, entitled ‘The analgesic (pain killing) effect of sucrose in full term infants: a randomised controlled trial’, was done by Nora Haouari, Christopher Wood, Gillian Griffiths and Malcolm Levene in the post-natal ward in the Leeds General Infirmary in England.

60 healthy infants of gestational age 37-42 weeks and postnatal age of 1-6 days, were randomized to receive 2ml of one of the four solutions: 12.5% sucrose, 25% sucrose, 50% sucrose, and sterile water (control).

The first group of 30 babies received sugar syrup before a routine blood test (heel pricking, which is usually painful) done to detect jaundice. The other 30 babies were given only sterile water as a control group.

Placing 2ml of a 25% or 50% sucrose solution on the tongue before pricking the heel significantly reduced crying time, compared to babies who got water. Also, their heart rate returned to normal more quickly. The stronger sugar solution had the greater effect, crying being reduced further with increasing concentration of sucrose. From which we may conclude that sucrose (sugar) placed on the tongue may be a useful and safe form of analgesia for use with new born infants.

Blass and Hoffmeyer also showed that 12% solution of inter-oral sucrose significantly reduced the duration of crying in new-born babies subjected to heel pricking or circumcision. This study was reported in The Independent newspaper (Friday 9 June 1995) as well as in the British Medical Journal article.

The practice of the Prophet, upon him be peace, is recorded in the collections of his sayings and reports about him, of which the most revered are the two Sahih collections of Bukhari and Muslim:

Abu Burdah reported from Abu Musa, who said: ‘I had a new-born baby; I took him to the Prophet Muhammad, upon him be peace and blessings, who called him Ibrahim. The Prophet chewed a date then he took it and rubbed the inside of the baby’s mouth with it.’

There are many other reported incidents like this one.

The date contains a very high percentage of sugar (70-80%); it has both fructose and glucose which have high calorific values, it is easily and quickly digestible, and very helpful to the brain. The date contains 2.2% protein, vitamin A, vitamins Bl, B2 and nicotruic acid (against Pellagra); it has traces of minerals needed for the body such as potassium, sodium, calcium, iron, manganese, copper. Potassium, of which percentage is very high, has been found to be very effective for cases of haemorrhage, such as the occasions of birth or circumcision.

We may note that the Sunnah also commends dates for the breaking of the fast in Ramadan. Dates should be eaten, if available, before the sunset prayer-this is medically and nutritionally the best way and the Sunnah.

The great worth of dates is also indicated in a famous and beautiful passage of the Qur’an, surah Maryam, verses 25-6:

And shake towards you the trunk of the palm-tree and it will drop on you fresh ripe dates. So eat and drink and be comforted.

This was the prescription of God, the Creator, for the blessed Virgin Mary at the time of the birth of Jesus, the blessed Prophet of God. It was a prescription to make the delivery easy and comfortable.

As in the example we have briefly recorded in this article, we believe further research will confirm for those who still doubt the full worth and truth, the wisdom, of the teachings of Qur’an and Sunnah.

We shall show them our signs on the furthest horizons and within themselves until it becomes clear to them that it is the truth. Is it not sufficient that your Lord is witness over all things? (Fussilat, 41.53)

As the authors of the medical study referred to intend trying new sugary or sweet substances, we shall recommend that they try dates for the newborn for the relief of pain.

Finally, we hope Muslim medical scientists and researchers lake this new discovery on board, and that many more ideas and practices in the teachings of Islam needing investigative research and objective, scientific study will get the attention they deserve.