Sam Shamoun "Ramadan: One of the Names of Allah???!!!" (1)

Sam Shamoun "Ramadan: One of the Names of Allah???!!!" (1)

In the Bible, both Christians and Jews are told to fear their God so much that the uttering of His name became taboo.

When the Israelites feared they might die if they continued to experience revelation and so asked of Moses to step in and be their intermediary with God, they were told that it is precisely the awe of God that humbles a person and prevents him from sin, keeps evil away, makes him walk aright and perform justice 

Malachi2:5-6,Prov19:23,Ex20:16-17"in order that His awe shall be upon your faces, so that you shall not sin". 

The same is stated in the Quran 79:40. As the psalmist states, the one wo performs justice and rigtheousness can only be one whose 

Ps119:120"flesh bristles from fear of You, and I dread Your judgments". 

Ezra to whom part of the book of Chronicles is traditionally attributed to, states, while recalling the prophet David's prayer 

1Chr16:30"Quake before Him, all the earth.."

To fear God reverently is actually among the 613 commandements revealed at Sinai Deut6:13,10:20 and reiterated time and again by the prophets 1Sam12:24-5, including Solomon, the wisest of all prophets who stated when concluding the last book attributed to him that fear from, and servitude to God is the whole purpose of man's existence Ecc12:13-14. In fact the whole of creation has been arranged in such a way so as to result in fear of God for the spiritually aware, who cannot but perceive God's all-encompassing grasp in the functioning of all existence Ecc3:14.
His father David before him echoed that universal purpose, it is every human's duty, to be inculcated from the youngest age 

Ps34:12,Ps33:8"Let all the earth fear the Lord; let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of Him". 

He also stated, in the context of a time where all nations will be brought low before the Jewish people and either convert to Judaism or die 

Ps2:11"Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with quaking". 

God fearing is a precondition for divine acceptance and guidance Ps25:12, one of the prime qualities of the righteous believer Ex18:21, up to the most respected, upright leaders of a community 2Sam23:3 and prophets 

Isa8:13,Ps5:8,Ps34:10"Fear the Lord, His holy ones". 

The love of YHWH certainly has degrees, it is directly proportional to the servant's fear, not love, of Him. Fear of God is the pre-condition to wisdom itself, as well as discipline, uprightness and true knowledge, and to gaining God's praise and acceptance Ps111:10,112:1,Prov1:7,8:13. David also stated that 

Ps19:10"the fear of the Lord is pure" 

and hence the absence of that fear is often equated with disbelief Jer2:19. This is why a time will come where those that do not fear God will be considered worthless and deserving a severe chastisement. Those that feared Him, more particularily His chastisment, will be saved and rewarded Mal3:5,20,Ps85:10,Prov28:14. As the Quran equally states, fear of God, when kept in view in one's daily life and actions, inevitably leads to reward in the Hereafter 55:46,76:5-10,79:40-1.

It will be the fear of God that will animate the mythical messianic figure that will come at the end of times to restore justice and righteousness Isa11:2-5 and it is the fear of God, carved into the hearts of the Jews at the end of times that will make them walk the straight path forever Jer32:38-40. 

The fear, awe and reverence to God is so deeply rooted in the teachings of Judaism that they may not pronounce what they have construed as His actual proper name

Deut28:58"fear this glorious and awesome name, the Lord, your God". 

Because those consonants cannot be pronounced, the Jews apply the biblical instruction of making God Himself, throughout the HB, does not identify any word as His unique, proper name. It is the Jews that have identified these 4 consonantal letters YHWH (the Tetragammaton) as such. The instruction to fear the name YHWH creates difficulties within the text and its interpretation. For example HaShem, Elohim or Adonai replace these 4 consonants whenever they appear in the text. When describing the sacred Ark of the Jews, and speaking of the inscription on it representing these 4 letters, the author of 2Sam6:2 refers to "the name" so as to avoid pronouncing the word.

The biblical instruction of making God's name known to the world is reinterpreted in the sense of making His fame, reputation known. Knowing "about" God is achieved by showing the manner in which His attributes manifested in the world and throughout history. The text however shows that the name was known in ancient times, without any restrictions Gen4:1, just as was the case in the times of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob Gen15:7,17:1,22:14,28:3,13,35:11. 

Later however, due to the high awe, and reverence towards the name, the priests forbade the laymen from uttering it, and preserved it among their own descendants. This of course is an unfounded traditional claim, since nobody today can claim to known the correct spelling of the 4 letters, even among those who trace their lineage to the priestly clan. Legend says that the mystery shrouding the correct spelling of the name will continue until the Messianic era where the 4 consonants will be made known to all, and without any restriction.

In Lev24:10-16 there is the story of someone who attempted to pronounce it 

"..the son of the Israelite woman pronounced the [Divine] Name and cursed it.. Any man who curses his God shall bear his sin.  And one who NOKEV the Name of the Lord, shall be put to death; the entire community shall stone him; convert and resident alike if he NOKVO the [Divine] Name, he shall be put to death."

The verb NAKAV apears in many instances, including Gen30:28,Num1:17,Isa62:2 and never means to blaspheme or curse but is equivalent to "saying" or "calling". It is purposefuly mistranslated as "blaspheme" in Christian Bibles that seek to bypass the total restriction concerning the utering of God's name. In fact the very plain reading of the verse reveals the important fact that the person commited not 1, but 2 sins, and that he was not actually executed for cursing God's name, but for pronouncing it. The person pronounced, then cursed the name. For the cursing, the sentence was that he shall "bear his sin" meaning that no atonement would be possible for him and he will carry the burden all throughout his life until it is dealt with by God after his death. For the sin of pronouncing the name, the sentence was that he should be put to death.

In addition to due reverence, there are other pragmatic reasons to avoid pronouncing the 4 letters. It only consists of consonants, which can only result in an incorrect pronunciation to anyone who tries. There is nothing more insulting than mispronouncing someone's name, let alone one used for God. The pronunciation "Yahweh" or "Jehovah" is based on that used by some of the Church Fathers but even among biblical scholars there is no certainty at all in this matter which is why most prefer to render it simply as YHWH without the vowels. In fact the pronounciation "Yahweh" is a Christians blunder, who took the vowelization which Jews use for ADNY (The aleph has the vowel "ah", the daled has "o", the nun has "ah" and it ends with a yud = AhDoNahY) and applied it to YHWH (They gave the first "ah" to the Y, then the "o" to the H, and finally the last "ah" to the letter vav = YaHoVah, regularily pronounced Yahweh or Jehovah).

Sam Shamoun "Was Aisha really only Nine?" (7)

Sam Shamoun "Was Aisha really only Nine?" (7)

It is important to keep in mind, that books of hadith, especially Bukhari and Muslim, are stronger in reliability than the books of history such as those of Tabari, ibn Ishaq and others. This isnt the point of contention, although it is also important to add, some of the narrations in these 2 books, were already regarded with suspicion starting with the generation of Bukhari and Muslim’s teachers, then their peers, then those who came after them through Ibn Abd al-Barr, al-Nawawi, Ibn Hajar and others.

In Islam, the one and only text pledged to be safeguarded from corruption and which Muslims are required to believe as divinely protected, free from error is the Quran. All the rest, the Quran has repeatedly urged mankind to look at with reason and sound judgement. Disregarding Hisham ibn Urwa's bias and weakness for argument's sake, the matter here is comparing authentic reports going back to a single person, Aisha, with many independant contradicting clues from the authentic hadith themselves as well as the books of history. Of course none of the clues by themselves are sufficient to prove that Aisha's estimation of her age of engagement and marriage was wrong. But the concurrence of all those clues together is a strong piece of evidence towards Aisha being mistaken in the report of her own age.

Again, we only have Aisha's word for it.

Today, even among the most educated people living in rural areas, personal information like precise age is a matter of approximation. This in itself does not compromise a person's intellectual capabilities. In the absence of documentation, if one is not born in a landmark year then they can loose track, so establishing a precise age is something impossible to do. If one looks at works of biography, including al Dhahabi's Siyar i3lam al-nubul, we see that birth dates, which were important in the authentication of hadith transmission, are almost always disagreed upon, even for the most famous personalities. The prophet humbly stated, following a memory lapse "I am only human like you; I forget as you forget". He was here referring to nothing less than the pillar of religion, which is prayer, something he was wholeheartedly dedicated to in his daily life. If it happened to him in such a precisely memorized matter, then what would prevent even the staunchest dogmatist to objectively evaluate Aisha's statement in light of so many conflicting evidences, made towards the end of her life about her age, which is a matter known for its uncertainty among the ancient people?

That is why one might still accept the hadith's authenticity, that Aisha did truly believe her marriage age was as stated in the sahih, but it still does not prove that she actually knew the reality of the matter, and neither does such confusion compromise her reliability in terms of hadith transmission. That is why the early hadith scholars did not deem it important to cross examine this specific information transmitted by Aisha. 

It is only when someone makes the ridiculous claim that the age of 9 is a 100% certainty, and uses it to fuel hatred, lies and ignorance that Muslims must present an accurate, honest, overall picture of the matter. Besides, to argue that the issue regarding the age of Aisha is in response to Western cultural values is to ignore what was already stated centuries before concerning criticism in the shia literature of Umar wanting to marry Ali's daughter, with the criticism being that she was young and he was too old. Whether the narration is fabricated to make Umar look bad by shia is irrelevant, the reality is, it still attests to a stigma that would have to exist to make Umar look bad.

Further "western" values are perpetually changing. Western critics of Islam saw no problem with Aisha's age of marriage since it was something they practiced themselves. From the advent of Islam and its numerous opponents that hated Muslims and the prophet, these enemies whose lies and calumnies are well documented in Islamic literature, to the 7th century Byzantine Anti-Muslim polemics, followed by the Christian smearing campaigns against the prophet during the crusades and medieval times, then the renaissance and enlightenment period and its unabating hatred of Islam, to the orientalists of the 18th-19th centuries, not a single critic targeted this particular issue. The reason is simple; marriages to prepubescent girls were perfectly acceptable and legal up to the 1900s but usually not consummated prior to puberty. Contrary to modern times where such a thing would and should be seen as revolting, childhood was understood as ending with puberty. Mental maturity and social responsibility were attained much earlier. The concept of adolescence itself, seen as a transitional phase between childhood and adulthood (approx. 10 to 19years old) is a modern creation of the late 19th century.

REFERENCES

(1)Tabari's Tarikh "Abu Bakr married during the pre-Islamic period Qutayla bint Abd al-Uzzaand from this marriage Abdullah and Asmaa' were born to him. He also married Umm Ruman bint Amir during the pre-Islamic period and from this marriage Abd al-Rahman and Aisha were born to him. All of these four children were born to his two wives that we mentioned in the pre-Islamic period."
(2)"According to 'Abd al-Hamid b. Bayan al-Sukkari-Mu-hammad b. Yazid-Ismail (that is, Ibn AN Khalid)-'Abdal-Rahman b. Abi al-Dahhak-a man from Quraysh-'Abd al-(Rahman b. Muhammad: 'Abd Allah b. Safwan together with an-other person came to 'A'ishah, and 'A'ishah said (to the latter), "0so-and-so, have you heard what Hafsah has been saying?"" He said, "Yes, 0 Mother of the Faithful." 'Abd Allah b. Safwan askedher, "What is that?" She replied, "There are nine special features in me that have not been in any woman, except for what God be-stowed on Maryam bt. Imran." By God, I do not say this to exalt myself over any of my companions." "What are these?" he asked. She replied, "The angel brought down my likeness; the Messen-ger of God married me when I was seven; my marriage was con-summated when I was nine; he married me when I was a virgin, no other man having shared me with him; inspiration came to him when he and I were in a single blanket ; I was one of the dearest people to him; a verse of the Qur'an was revealed con-cerning me when the community was almost destroyed;'s I saw Gabriel when none of his other wives saw him; and he was taken (that is, died) in his house when there was nobody with him but the angel and myself."
(3)Nawawi, Kitab Tahdhib al-asmaa wal-lughaat
(4)al qurtubi and ibn abbas
(5)Bukhari's Kitab-ul-Kafalat "Once the Muslims started to face trials, Abu Bakr left toward Abyssinia, until he reached Barak al-Ghimad and met Ibn al-Dughna"
(6)Ibn Abi Asim in his al-Aahaad, al-Tabari in his Tarikh, al-Bayhaqi and many others;"Khawla said to Abu Bakr: “The messenger of God sent meto ask for Aisha’s hand in marriage.” He said to her to her: “Wait,” then he went out. UmmRuman mother of Aisha said to her: “Mut`im bin Adi had asked for her hand for his son. By God, Abu Bakr has never made a promise that he broke later.” Abu Bakr went to Mut`im bin Adi while his wife was there, mother of the young man. She said: “O Ibn Abi Quhafa (i.e. O Abu Bakr), perhaps you will require our companion [[referring to her son?]] to apostatize toyour religion if he marries your daughter.” Abu Bakr said to Mut`m bin Adi: “Yes, what do yousay?” He said: “She says such and such.” So he left them, his heart content that the promise hethought he had made was no longer in force"
(7)see Al Khattabi in his book A`laam al-Hadith "Regarding his saying tanquzaan, naqz means to skip or jump, but I consider itto have been tazifraan, and zafr means to carry heavy containers, and thecontainer itself is called zifr".
(8)he married Fatima bint al Mundhir when she was 9 (al-Muntazam and Tarikh Baghdad)
(9)See Mishkat al-Masabih, Imam Wali-ud-Din Muhammad ibn Abdullah Al-Khatib. Also,Ibn Abd al-Barr in his al-Isti`aab and Ibn Asaakir in Tarikh Dimashq narrate from two chainsfrom al-Asma`i from Ibn Abi al-Zinad that he had said: “Asma bint Abu Bakr is about ten year older than Aisha.” And this is a good (jayyid) isnad
(10)Ibn al-Athir corroborates in Usud al-Ghaaba: "Abu Nuaym says: "She was born before the calendar by 27 years." Ibn Abdal-Barr says in al-Isti`ab: "Asmaa' died in Mecca in the month of Jamadi al-Ulain the year 73 AH. She died when she had reached 100."
(11)Taqri'bu'l-tehzi'b AND Ibn Kathir's Al-bidayah wa'l-nihayah AND And Abu Nu`aym says in his Ma`rifat al-Sahaba in his article on Asmaa’: She was born before the start of the Islamic calendar by 27 years, and she died in 73 AH in Mecca days after her son Abdullah bin al-Zubayr was killed when she was 100 years old. Ibn kathir adds that despite her advanced age, Asma had still maintained her mental capacities.
(12)hadith found in Muslim and Bukhari 

(13)Sunan abu Dawud

Sam Shamoun "Was Aisha really only Nine?" (6)

Sam Shamoun "Was Aisha really only Nine?" (6)

In Christian tradition, it is reported Joseph at 90 married Mary who was 12 which is the double age difference than that of Muhammad when he allegedly married Aisha. That is besides the disturbing notion of an eternal deity impregnating a young virgin with whom the age difference is infinitely greater than Muhammad and Aisha, and out of whose private parts was born an entity combining human and divine attributes.

1. Church leaders that argued what was inerrant and what was not, never challenged the age. In the story itself we read that the society accepts and even expects a 12 years old to be sexually active "When she turned twelve, a group of priests took counsel together, saying, "Look, Mary has been in the temple of the Lord twelve years. What should we do about her now, so that she does not defile the sanctuary of the Lord our God?" Her turning 12 is what prompted the priests to gather to find her a husband. God himself, finding nothing wrong with her age, chooses the old Joseph for her, from among other men of advanced age "And the high priest said, "Joseph! Joseph! You have been chosen by lot to take the virgin into your own keeping". As already said, neither God nor the society saw a problem with a 12 year old given to marriage. Joseph then expresses his fear that he might be ridiculed among the people, and this is due to 3 precise factors; he is old, meaning barren. The angel instructed Zachariah to seek potential husbands from among men of advanced age for a reason, protecting the virgin birth from any accusation. Joseph further said he already has sons, meaning beyond the need for a progeny, and Mary is young, meaning the marriage would appear to be simply motivated by lust, not even companionship. Had he feared mockeries because of the age difference, the mention of him having sons would be unnecessary and he would have stressed her being "too young" not simply "young". Why would a young woman be married to an old, barren man who already has children, in addition impotent? Her pregnancy only occurred 4 years later while Joseph had not defiled her. Little in the NT indicates Mary's age when she was married to Joseph. She is described as reciting a short 10 verses prayer, which isnt a hard task for a 12 years old, and undertaking a trip from Nazareth to Judah, which of course did not have to be undertaken by foot.

2. Not a single 'apocrypha' scripture was rejected based upon the age of Joseph marrying Mary.

3. Just because an apocrypha was rejected, does not mean it was rejected for all of it's contents. For example, the same Apocrypha can say that Jesus was born in a stable and 3 wise-men came and visited him. Is this story 'false' because it's in Apocrypha? Besides the fact that it is known that we find reference throughout the Bible to information extracted from lost and non canonical texts. But let us assume this particular detail of Mary’s age was made up. It would then make the point even stronger that it is acceptable, one could even say recommended for such a marriage to happen in Christian tradition. It is the venerated, idolised Mary who is supposed to have been given by the respected temple priest to Joseph at that age. No Christian of that time would have invented that detail in her story if such union was seen as morally wrong.

4. One man's apocrypha is another man's scripture, thus the example of the book of Revelation, among other books, being rejected as apocrypha until later on.

5. What is the minimum age of virgins allowed to be taken as war captives in Num31?

6. The Bible forbids, even under the death penalty by stoning, certain morally and physically harmful sexual practices like adultery and homosexuality. Why would it be silent on minor marriage, a very common practice in all ancient and pre-modern societies around the Judeo-Christian world and among Jews and Christians themselves, had the God of the Bible and His prophets disapproved of it?

7. More importantly, does the Bible even set an age of consent, or gives any ethical instructions to consider when determining marriage age, contrary to the Quran which clearly lays out psycho-physical requirements?

Assuming the Quran allows pre-pubescent marriages, and that the prophet did, how does this claim discredit Islam or its prophet, especially coming from Christians? They in general level this claim to attack the prophet's personality and imply that he couldnt be a prophet based on his evil deeds. What is the biblical criteria for a true prophet and does it include "not marrying pre-pubescent kids"? There is a reason why nothing at all is said about uprightness of character. In fact one needs turning to the Quran, not the Bible, to see among the criteria of a prophetic envoy, impeccable morality as one of the primary requirements. Looking at these Christians' own bible, the characters and deeds of its most prominent prophets, then, simply based on behavior, even if one would accept every single calumny the Christ-loving evangelists have been throwing, then adding many more on top, it would still do nothing to erode Muhammad's credibility even an iota. None of the individuals the bible calls "prophets" ceased being prophets while premeditating their murders, committing adultery and debauchery, hoarding wealth and enslaving nations, idolatry, capturing countless virgins in their holy genocidal wars. Some repented and others never did, and it is besides the point. These Judeo-christian critics lack consistency and intellectual honesty; Condemning a man as a false prophet while the book they stand for approves of prophets whose deeds should give them a heart attack if they finds the supposed charges against Muhammad offensive. That is why no Muslim is bothered by such dishonest criticism. They can only hope to trouble Muslims if they argue from the angle of the Quran's standards of the prophets as sublime examples of morality, then showing that the prophet Muhammad's supposed deeds are in conflict with those standards. So long as the accusers keep the bible as a standard of morality of the true prophets, these attacks self-destruct. By the Quranic standard, one that is extremely high in comparison to the Bible, as well as the accepted standards of morality, Muhammad did not commit a single inappropriate deed for a prophet. Finally, it is interesting to note that the prophet, whom those critics claim invented the Quran, as well as committed every possible misdeed under the sun (misdeeds that still make him look like a saint in comparison to the true prophets of the Bible) went out of his way to establish a pattern of morality among the prophets that contradicts his own. He had every reason to not change a single thing of what is shamelessly attributed to the Biblical prophets, so that he might justify his supposed misdeeds all the while claiming to be a prophet of God, in line with those very prophets of the Bible.

As a final observation, among the most outspoken Christian polemicists on that particular issue, many admit, knowing the lowly moral standards of those described as true prophets in their Bible, that should one prove Muhammad's prophethood then they would not object to him marrying Aisha as described in the hadith. Here lies their dishonesty, they will defend the authenticity and veracity of the information in those particular ahadith, but will reject other reports from the same books with no slightest bit of controversy as are found as regards Aisha's age, describing Muhammad as a prophet of God, receiving revelation, experiencing miracles, either as the direct agent or indirectly, making prophecies, giving information of the unseen.

Sam Shamoun "Was Aisha really only Nine?" (5)

Sam Shamoun "Was Aisha really only Nine?" (5)

None of the narrations saying she was 6 when engaged and 9 when moved with the prophet come from Mecca or Medina and whether from Muslim or Bukhari's sahih books combined, it is the same hadith narrated in multiple ways, which refutes the position that Aisha's age is established by multiple reliable sources.

Even the two hadith in Bukhari claiming that Aisha says her age are attributed to Hisham bin Urwa, so they arent even her own words. It is only in Muslim, in the context of permissibility of marrying young women, that we find two hadith claiming to be Aisha's words. But they all report additional material from Hisham that arent reported in Bukhari.

All such narrations come from Iraq, even those outside sahih Bukhari, and the majority of those are traced to Hisham bin Urwa, Asma's grandson, meaning there is no possibility to verify whether Hisham was involved in those other reports where his name isnt mentioned in the chain, directly or indirectly. So it all goes back to one source ultimately who himself was married to a 9 year old (8). In addition to this obvious bias, he is reported by imam Malik, his student, to have become unreliable in his Iraq period, due to changing, willingly or not, the transmission chain of certain reports going back to his father. But even if we dismiss these reservations and his bias, we would still be confronted to difficulties showing how any attempt at specifically determining Aisha's marriage age is not based upon contradiction-free information.

Asma was 10 years older than Aisha (9). Yet Hisham bin Urwa himself claims Asma lived until 100(10). Asma died in 73H (11). If she was 100 in 73H according to bin Urwa himself then it means she was 27 at the time of Hijra. Consequently Aisha was 17 at the time and 18-19 when she married 1 or 2 years later. Knowing this difficulty to harmonize the records available with bin Urwa's, the historian Imam Adh-Dhahabi tries reducing Asma's age at death in order to make it fit with the reports on Aisha's marriage age

"If this is true (Asma being 10 years older than Aisha), then the age of Asmaa when she passed away should be ninety-one".

For a 17-18 years old to be playing on a swing the day of her wedding with her friends or playing with toys during her marriage isnt an extreme oddity (12). This may be referring to the early period of her marriage. Today married men regularly spend hours playing video games. The contention that she played with dolls even after the campaign of Khaybar or Tabuk (13) which would mean around the age of 26 is flawed. The same narration is found in Bukhari and Muslim without the part about the prophet coming from Khaybar or Tabuk, as well as other differences. They have both rejected these parts because they are attributed to Yahya bin Ayyub who was deemed confused in the chain and content of this hadith. Even if one were to accept the passage as true for argument's sake, as well as Aisha's age of marriage at 6years old, then this means she was still playing with dolls after the battle of Khaybar when she was 15-16. Playing with dolls is not an indication of age or stage of physical development.

Public criticism, according to the tradition, was laid at Umar for his trying to marry Ali's daughter, because she was young and Umar was old, almost the same age difference between the Prophet and Aisha. In fact, the traditions record that this was one of the objections of Ali for the union and public criticism had gotten to the point Umar had to defend himself for the move in public. Umar made the point that he only wanted to marry her to affirm his ties with the House of the Prophet. Umar didnt use the precedent of the Prophet marrying Aisha at an alleged young age. This incident, involving the closest companions of the prophet, reveals the same inconsistencies as those noted earlier with the prophet's refusal to marry his daughter to AbuBakr. Also, if it was a norm of Arab culture, then why would he draw the criticism of the city of Medina for such an act?

Further, in the Muwatta which is the representative work on the school of Medina, in the chapter on marrying younger women without asking them, this narration isnt even reported. And you would think, in Medina of all places, the marriage of the Prophet to a young Aisha would serve an evidence for the people of Medina.

Where are the examples to substantiate the point of view that such practice was a norm in Arab culture? An interesting point to re-stress is that not only are there no examples to show how such practice was a norm, but also Urwa, the ultimate source of these traditions regarding Aisha's age, just so happened to have married a 9year old. Besides his poor memory at the time he reported Aisha's age, there is now another reason to seriously doubt his credibility, namely the blatant need to falsify a hadith to serve his interest in justifying an act that far from being the "norm" of the prophet's time, was unacceptable to many including the prophet's own entourage. 

Sam Shamoun "Was Aisha really only Nine?" (4)

Sam Shamoun "Was Aisha really only Nine?" (4)

It is well documented in the works of historians, like Tabari, that Aisha, along with all of Abu Bakr's children were born in Jahilliya (1) and this despite the fact that Tabari is aware of the 6-9 hadith as he quotes it in the same book (2). This refers in Islamic terminology to the period prior to the beginning of Muhammad's prophethood. The hijra, or migration towards Medina occured 13 years later, the same year which it is alleged that Aisha was married to the prophet, or the year after according to al-Nawawi (3).

This means there is no way possible she could have been less than 13 years old at the time of Hijra as some ahadith suggest. The proponents of Aisha's early age at the time of hijra ignore that statement of Tabari. This is significant because Tabari says that following their engagement, the prophet waited before consuming the marriage. But not because he wanted her to first reach puberty as implied in Bukhari or Muslim. It was rather due to his poor financial situation, inability to arrange a proper home for her and establish himself.

This is just one of the blatant examples of tension that exists within the hadith corpus as regards Aisha's age at the time of marriage, let alone the established marital pattern of the prophet. There perhaps exists no other topic within the sahih compilations which is at such a high level of contradictory tension with the rest of the remaining traditions. 

Another noteworthy observation in that regard is that the prophet himself denied his daughter Fatima's marriage to AbuBakr, then Umar, because she was comparatively too young to either of them (Sunan an-Nasa’i 3221). He instead married her to Ali who was 21 while it is reported that Fatima was 9. What better occasion was there for AbuBakr to mention the precedent of his own daughter marrying the prophet at 6 and expecting the prophet to reciprocate? The prophet would not have used the age argument to deny his daughter's hand to AbuBakr seeing that he married the latter's daughter at even a younger age and with an age gap exceeding that between Fatima and AbuBakr. This refusal can be understood in different ways; the age of 9 is not a benchmark for girls marriage, rather a combination of factors must be taken into account, including physical and mental readiness, which can occur at 9 or later but also compatibility in regards to personality. The other way to understand it is that the reports about Aisha's age of marriage are inaccurate.

According to a narrative in sahih Bukhari the revelation of al qamar:46 occured when Aisha was a young girl/jariya. Jariya never refers to a 4 years old. But if she was 12 then her reference as jariya by bukhari makes sense. The chapter ends a mere 9 verses later at v55 and it is obvious from the topic that v46 to v55 were revealed together and could not have been cut off. So the argument that some suras were revealed in portions with long intervals of time in between verses is moot. Besides all scholars agree this is a Meccan sura, whose finalization the opinion varies between the 4th and 8th year (4) of the call to prophethood.

But even if we consider Aisha's traditionally accepted date of birth in the 5th year of revelation as true, and in addition accept the latest estimation for the date when sura al-qamar was finalized on the 8th year of revelation as true, then this would mean Aisha was able to memorize with precision a verse and its reference when she was merely 3, which is highly unlikely. 

Other historians such as Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Hisham say she accepted Islam before Umar, who himself converted in the 9th year of revelation. These historians both say she was among the earliest converts. Ibn Ishaq places her at the 18th and ibn Hisham places her approximately at the 20th place chronologically. This takes us back during the 1st or at most the 2nd year of revelation. Aisha isnt supposed to have even been breathing at the time if she was truly born in the 5th year of revelation.

Even if we assume that this date of birth is true, how can anybody reasonably argue that someone willingly accepts a religion 3 years later at 3 years old (ie before Umar's conversion in the 9th year)?  
Aisha describes her vivid memory of events that supposedly happened when she was but an infant, such as Abu bakr's migration to Ethiopia in the 5th year of revelation, the year she was supposedly born in (5). This shows again, her birth could not have been later than the pre-islamic era, as confirmed in Tabari's reports.

As said in introduction, before her union with the prophet she was engaged to Jubayr ibn Mut'im ibn Adi. This is found, among others in Ibn saad's tabaqaat with authentic asanid. His father was a vehement enemy of the prophet, before Abu Bakr accepted Islam. The engagement was broken off by Jubayr's father when Abu Bakr converted and planned to go to Abyssinia in the 5th year of revelation, the year of Aisha's alleged birth (6). Even if we were to argue that this arrangement happened while both Aisha and Jubayr were toddlers, even infants, as would sometimes happen in ancient times among families seeking to strengthen their bonds, then this still doesnt allow for Aisha being born anytime than prior to the revelation. Mut`im bin Adi and his wife were polytheists when the engagement was made and resented the idea that their son would become Muslim if he married Aisha. Abu Bakr on the other hand was among the most zealous companions calling people towards Islam. This makes it highly unlikely that the staunch pagan Mut`m bin Adi mentioned his interest to Abu Bakr after the revelation.

She relates herself as having played an active role during the migration; getting the travelling goods together in a highly tense situation per the narrations. An 8 year old could not have acted in such a way. Again she describes herself how she reached Shajra along with the soldiers in the battle of Badr that took place in 2H. Nobody under 15 years old was allowed to join the soldiers in the battlefield. This was to avoid being captured and raised as idol-worshippers or killed and become a problem for the army. Yet she is alleged to have been 9 or 10, meaning she had absolutely no business whatsoever in being at the battlefield. But if she was born prior to the revelation, then by that time she would be around 18 years old, which makes sense. In fact there are reports of the prophet sending back some Muslim youths who tried, out of eagerness, to go along with the Muslim army.

The very notion that the Prophet would set an age limit to 15 for people to participate in battle, but allow 9-10 year olds or 11 year old females to accompany the battlefield, especially in such situations, is against all common sense. Why would young men below 15 be forbidden to be at the battle-field, but 9-10 year old girls be allowed to take care of people wounded and on the verge of death. Does one think the Prophet would have exposed these girls to the chance of being captured and eventually mistreated and abused by masters who used to force their female slaves into prostitution?
Anas further describes Aisha along with Umm Sulaim lifting their dresses up to avoid any hindrance in their movement, at the battle of Uhud. The idea of lifting the dress in Arab tradition, as is evident in abundant pre-Islamic poetry is a reference to women fleeing the battlefield, having to raise their skirts exposing their shins. This is what happened in Uhud when Muslim men were panicking, because the unbelievers had sent them into disarray. It had reached such an extent that they abandoned the Prophet.

Yet, here is a 'nine or ten year' old girl running back and forth, to various Muslim men assisting them with their needs in the midst of battle:

“On the day (of the battle) of Uhud when (some) people retreated and left the Prophet, I saw Aisha daughter of Abu Bakr and Umm Sulaim, with their robes tucked up so that the bangles around their ankles were visible hurrying with their water skins (in another narration it is said, ‘carrying the water skins on their backs’ (7). Then they would pour the water in the mouths of the people, and return to fill the water skins again and came back again to pour water in the mouths of the people”.

How can people think that at the height of the battle, when Muslims were panicking and even leaving the Prophet, Aisha was 9-11 years old, not even slightly panicking while attending bravely wounded soldiers, and was allowed to go into battle? Dont the narrations specifically tell us the Prophet constantly warned his men not to abandon their posts on the hill? If he was so keen about that matter and so keen on males being a specific age, what makes people think he was going to take females that would burden the army?

The fact is Aisha actively participated in battles during the prophet's life, assisting the men at the battlefield along with other women, which is why by the time of Ali's reign as Caliph, she gathered enough experience and credibility that she could rally a huge fighting force.