Puberty = Maturity = Marriage : IMC-SA

Puberty = Maturity = Marriage

These points having been presented, some additional details on a few
of them is worthwhile. An interesting article on the age at which
people married in Biblical times is Ancient Israelite Marriage
Customs, by Jim West, ThD - a Baptist minister. This article states
that:

The wife was to be taken from within the larger family circle
(usually at the outset of puberty or around the age of 13) in order
to maintain the purity of the family line;

This is just one reference to the fact that the onset of puberty was
considered the age at which young people could marry. That people in
Biblical times married at an early age is widely endorsed. While
discussing the meaning of the word 'almah, which is the Hebrew word
for "young woman" or "adolescent female", Gerald Segal says:

It should be noted, however, that in biblical times females married
at an early age.3

In spite of its somewhat arrogant Western talk of "primitive
cultures", An Overview of the World's Religions makes it clear that
puberty is an age old symbol of adulthood:

Almost all primitive cultures pay attention to puberty and marriage
rituals, although there is a general tendency to pay more attention
to the puberty rites of males than of females. Because puberty and
marriage symbolize the fact that children are acquiring adult roles,
most primitive cultures consider the rituals surrounding these
events very important. Puberty rituals are often accompanied with
ceremonial circumcision or some other operation on the male
genitals. Female circumcision is less common, although it occurs in
several cultures. Female puberty rites are more often related to the
commencement of the menstrual cycle in young girls.

Some female authors agree:

Puberty is defined as the age or period at which a person is first
capable of sexual reproduction, in other eras of history, a rite or
celebration of this landmark event was a part of the culture. (Rites
of Passage: Puberty, by Sue Curewitz Arthen)

"Getting your period" marks a rite of passage for young girls
entering womanhood. (From the Women's Resource Center)

Another contemporary reference relating marriage age to puberty is
an article on Central Africa, which says:

. . . women marry soon after puberty4.

There are many other references which should prove to any
intelligent person what anthropologists and historians already know:
in centuries past, people were considered ready for marriage when
they reached puberty.

It should be mentioned that from an Islamic point of view, many
problems in society today can be traced back to the abandonment of
early marriage. Due to the way that Almighty God has created man and
woman, i.e., with strong sexual desires, people should marry young.
In the past, this was even more true since life expectancy was very
low (i.e. you were considered "old" if you made it to 40!) Not only
does marriage provide a legal outlet for people with strong sexual
desires, but it usually produces more children. One of the main
purposes of marriage is to produce children -"be fruitful and
multiply" as the Bible says (Genesis 8:17). This was especially
important in the past, when people did not live as long as they do
now and the infant morality rate was much higher.

The Age Of Puberty

Even though we have established that puberty has been the
historical, cultural and religious norm for indicating readiness for
marriage, some may wonder at which age puberty normally takes place.
This is somewhat meaningless in regards to our specific discussion
of Muhammad(P) and 'Aishah, since the hadith literature makes it
clear that she had reached puberty. However, in regards to puberty
and at what age most girls have their first menstrual cycle, 'Abdul-
Hamid Siddiqi says:

Islam has laid down no age limit for puberty for it varies with
countries and races due to the climate, hereditary, physical and
social conditions. Those who live in cold regions attain puberty at
a much later age as compared with those living in hot regions where
both male and female attain it at a quite early age. "The average
temperature of the country or province," say the well-known authors
of the book Woman, "is considered the chief factor here, not only
with regard to menstruation but as regards the whole of sexual
development at puberty."5

Raciborski, Jaubert, Routh and many others have collected and
collated statistics on the subject to which readers are referred.
Marie Espino has summarised some of these data as follows: (a) The
limit of age for the first appearance of menstruation is between
nine and twenty-four in the temperate-zone; (b) The average age
varies widely and it ay be accepted as established that the nearer
the Equator, the earlier the average age for menstruation.6

Additionally, an article entitled Puberty in Girls by an Australian
government Public Health organization, says:

The first sign of puberty is usually a surge of growth: you become
taller; your breasts develop; hair begins to grow in the pubic area
and under the arms. This may start from 10 years to 14 years - even
earlier for some and later for others.

An article Physical Changes in Girls During Puberty has this to say:

During puberty, a girl's body changes, inside and out, into the body
of a woman. The changes don't come all at once, and they don't
happen at the same time for everybody. Most girls start showing
physical changes around age 11, but everyone has her own internal
schedule for development. It's normal for changes to start as early
as 8 or 9 years of age, or not until 13 or 14. Even if nothing looks
or feels different yet, the changes may have already begun inside
your body.

Many will readily agree with the information above, but still might
harbour reservations about whether a marriage to an older man could
be happy for such a young girl. Putting aside the modern Western
notions of "happiness" for a moment, the marriage of 'Aishah and the
Prophet(P) was a mutually happy and loving one as in expressed in
numerous hadeeth and seerah books. That happy marriages occur
between people with a fairly large difference in ages is known among
psychologists:

When the differences (in ages) is great, e.g. exceeds fifteen to
twenty years, the results may be happier. The marriage of an elderly
(senescent) not, of course, an old (senile) man to a quite young
girl, is often very successful and harmonious. The bride is
immediately introduced and accustomed to moderate sexual
intercourse. 7

More Wisdom Behind It

In his comments on the ahadith in Sahih Muslim which
mention 'Aishah's young marriage to the Prophet(P), 'Abdul-Hamid
Siddiqi shows points three other reasons for this marriage:

'Aishah's marriage to the Prophet Muhammad(P) at an early age
allowed her to be an eye witness to the personal details of his life
and carry them on the succeeding generations. By being both
spiritually and physically near to the Prophet(P), the marriage
prepared 'Aishah to be an example all Muslims, especially women, for
all times. She developed into a spiritual, teacher and scholar,
since she was remarkably intelligent and wise. Her qualities help
support the Prophet's work and further the cause of Islam. 'Aishah,
the Mother of the Believers, was not only a model for wives and
mothers, but she was also a commentator on the Qur'an, an authority
on hadeeth and knowledgeable in Islamic Law. She narrated at least
2,210 ahadith that give Muslims valuable insights into the Final
Prophet's daily life and behaviour, thus preserving the Sunnah of
Muhammad(P).

At that time, this marriage refuted the notion that a man could not
marry the daughter of a man who he had declared to be his "brother"
(even in the religious sense). Since the Prophet(P) and Abu Bakr had
declared each other to be "brothers", this notion was done away
with. This is demonstrated in the following hadeeth:

Narrated 'Ursa: The Prophet(P) asked Abu Bakr for 'Aishah's hand in
marriage. Abu Bakr said, "But I am your brother." The Prophet(P)
said, "You are my brother in God's religion and His Book, but she
('Aishah) is lawful for me to marry." (Saheeh al-Bukhari, Volume 7,
Book 62, Number 18)

The marriage did away with the pagan Arab superstition that it was a
bad omen to be married in the month of Shawwal. They thought that
the month carried this omen since the word Shawwal was derived from
Shaala, which carried a bad omen. The authentic ahadith indicate
that the Prophet(P) and 'Aishah were married in this lunar month.

Not Much Ado Back Then

Above, we established that fact that getting married at puberty was
an accepted practice amongst not only today's "primitive cultures",
but specifically amongst the Semitic (i.e. Hebrew, Arab, Syriac,
etc.) peoples of the Middle East. In order to provide additional
proof that Muhammad's(P) marriage to 'Aishah did not raise any
eyebrows at that time, I here submit quotations from two Western
female scholars who have studied Islam in detail:

It is not clear just when the marriage actually took place.
According to some versions, it was in the month of Shawwal of the
Year 1, that is, some seven or eight months after the arrival at
Medina; but, according to others, it was not until after the Battle
of Badr, that is, in Shawwal of the second year of the Hijrah. In no
version is there any comment made on the disparity of the ages
between Mohammed and Aishah or on the tender age of the bride who,
at the most, could not have been over ten years old and who was
still much enamoured with her play."8

In the above quotation, the sources which are given for the latter
are "Nawawi" and "Tabari". Both Imams al-Nawawi and al-Tabari were
great Muslim scholars, but their works contain material that is less
than authentic by Islamic standards, which is the probably reason
over her questioning which date is authentic. This is all beside the
point, since we've already shown that authentic Islamic sources
state that 'Aishah, may God be pleased with her, was "nine years
old". The main point to note is that "no version" was any comment
made on their age difference or on 'Aishah's young age. Why? Such an
early marriage was normal in all Semitic societies - such as the
ones that Abraham(P), Moses(P), Jesus(P) and Muhammad(P) grew up in!

Another author, Karen Armstrong, has this to add:

Tabari says that she was so young that she stayed in her parents'
home and the marriage was consummated there later when she had
reached puberty.9

This further establishes that the marriage took place at puberty and
that, as such, no eyebrows were raised. "Tabari", it should be
mentioned, refers to Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn Jareer al-Tabari (225-
310 AH / 839-923 CE), who was a great Muslim scholar who is well
known in the West for his Qur'anic commentary and history of the
world.

It is no surprise that both of the above authors agree on the fact
that the marriage of 'Aishah and Muhammad(P) took place when the
former had reached puberty and that this was normal at the time.
This is no surprise, since anyone who studies the Muslim sources and
Semitic culture would be forced to come to the same conclusion,
since it is simply a historical fact. It should be pointed out that
both of the above quoted female authors do not hesitate to
misrepresent Islam (intentionally or unintentionally) in their other
writings. Suffice it to say that if there was some other "damaging"
information available, they would not hesistate to bring it to
light. Nabia Abbott, who has done some useful research on Islam in
some areas, was basically an "Orientalist" in the classic sense. Her
book which was quoted above, Aishah-The Beloved of Mohammed, is
actually nothing but a disgusting second-guessing of 'Aishah's life.
If a book with a similar mix of speculation and inauthentic sources
were written about someone of significance in the West, it certainly
would not be sitting on scholarly bookshelves. It's has long been
established that Orientalists with a bone to pick with Islam liked
to decide on the authenticity of a story based on their pre-
conceived notions. If an inauthentic story seemed to belittle the
Prophet of Islam, it became oft quoted. However, any authentic
material that contradicted their theories was simply ignored. It's
analogous to writing a historical biography of Jesus(P) and using
quotations from apocryphal gospels to override the Canonical ones
whenever whimsically deemed appropriate. This is how Orientalists
and Christian missionaries have been treating Muhammad(P) for
centuries. For those who want to know more about this, please read
our article Orientalism, Misinformation and Islam.

So What's The Verdict?

Overcoming cultural bias or admitting your own double standards is
not always easy. For some people, it takes years for them to admit
that they've been hypocritical. Hopefully, the thoughts presented
here will plant the seed of reflection in some people so that they
may reflect on the truth. Admitting that there's a problem is often
half the battle, so before the reader heads off to make a final
personal judgement on where they stand on this issue, I want to
provide some more food for thought. Montgomery Watt, a long time
scholar of Islam, had some choice words on how the West should judge
Muhammad(P). I have never agreed with many of Watt's conclusions
about Islam, but I have always viewed him as one of the more open-
minded and open-hearted Orientalist scholars. Possibly, this is
because he was more of a promoter of understanding than a narrow-
minded Christian missionary. Years of studying Islam brought Watt to
this conclusion:

The other main allegations of moral defect in Muhammad are that he
was treacherous and lustful. . Sufficient has been said above about
the interpretation of these events to show that the case against
Muhammad is much weaker than is sometimes thought. The discussions
of these allegations, however, raises a fundamental question. How
are we to judge Muhammad? By the standards of his own time and
country? Or by those of the most enlightened opinion in the West
today? When the sources are closely scrutinized, it is clear that
those of Muhammad's actions which are disapproved by the modern West
were not the object of the moral criticism of his contemporaries.
They criticized some of his acts, but their motives were
superstitious prejudice or fear of the consequences. If they
criticized the events at Nakhlah, it was because they feared some
punishment from the offended pagan gods or the worldly vengeance of
the Meccans. If they were amazed at the mass execution of the Jews
of the clan of Qurayzah, it was at the number and danger of the
blood-feuds incurred. The marriage with Zaynab seemed incestuous,
but this conception of incest was bound up with old practices
belonging to a lower, communalistic level of familial institutions
where a child's paternity was not definitely known; and this lower
level was in process being eliminated by Islam . . . From the
standpoint of Muhammad's time, then, the allegations of treachery
and sensuality cannot be maintained. His contemporaries did not find
him morally defective in any way. On the contrary, some of the acts
criticized by the modern Westerner show that Muhammad's standards
were higher than those of his time. In his day and generation he was
a social reformer, even a reformer in the sphere of morals. He
created a new system of social security and a new family structure,
both of which were a vast improvement on what went before. By taking
what was best in the morality of the nomad and adapting it for
settled communities, he established a religious and social framework
for the life of many races of men. That is not the work of a traitor
or 'an old lecher'.10

From Abraham(P) To "Pick-And-Choose / Feel Good Religion"

Everything that we have discussed above logically frees Muhammad(P)
from the unjust criticism that he has received (at least amongst
those who can be intellectually honest and fair-minided). One point,
however, still needs to be made a bit more clear. Even though we've
mentioned it in passing, the hypocrisy and double standards of
Christians who criticize Muhammad(P) for his morality needs to be
more thoroughly analysed and exposed.

Before moving on to an analysis of Biblical morality, I would like
to offer some advice and encouraging words to my fellow Muslims. My
main piece of advice is to not be discouraged by slanderous attacks
on Islam or how it is distorted in the media. Certainly, we all hate
to see such things occur, but in the "Information Age" which was
brought about by a culture that (allegedly) places a supreme value
on freedom of speech, there is not much that we can do to stop it.
The flip side to this coin is the fact that the Truth of Islam is
still out there and people are finding it. Yes, Islam is spreading
in spite of these hypocritical methods that Christians and others
are using to stop it. From the "moon god" lies of Robert Morey to
the almost daily distortions in the media, Islam is still spreading
in the West. Actually, the fact that those who make a career out of
attacking Islam, such as Christian missionaries, have to resort to
lies and distortions when they discuss Islam is a good sign.
Certainly, if they discussed Islam as it was meant to be understood,
they would only be hurting their own cause. When Islam is presented
by non-Muslims in the West, usually matters of peripheral importance
are addressed and criticised. The core beliefs of Islam, if
discussed at all, are presented in a distorted manner. If Islam was
just some ridiculous "Third World" religion with no appeal, they
would not have to treat it this way. As a matter of fact, a great
deal of the anti-Islamic literature that fills Christian bokstores
(and the Internet) is not designed to convert Muslims, but to turn
Westerners off to Islam. The people who write these lies are just
trying to poison the minds of people so that they won't be receptive
to the message of Islam when they hear it.

Their methods, however, are failing. In Europe especially, the
Christian religion is in a severe state of stagnation and people are
looking for truth elsewhere. Christians have always been embarrassed
by their almost complete inability to convert a notable Muslim to
Christianity. Certainly, they have their converts that they hold up
as examples, however all of them seem to have been only nominal
Muslims (at best) when they converted. However, many notable
Westerners have embraced Islam, recently as well as in the past. One
of the most interesting things about this is many (if not all) of
these people could be called "Searchers for the Truth". By this I
mean that they were the type of people who were spiritual, open-
mined and read books on many subjects. They were not brainwashed
simpletons who simply wanted to join an easy religion and the
dominating culture of the time. They were people who knew a lot not
only about religion, but about history, philosophy and other
disciplines. Suffice it to say that the truth of Islam is out there,
in spite of all the negative press that it gets today. The following
is just one testimony that Islam is spreading in the West:

Unprecedented numbers of British people, nearly all of them women,
are converting to Islam at a time of deep divisions within the
Anglican and Catholic churches. The rate of conversions has prompted
predictions that Islam will rapidly become an important religious
force in this country . . . Within the next 20 years the number of
British converts will equal or overtake the immigrant Muslim
community that brought the faith here", says Rose Kendrick, a
religious education teacher at a Hull comprehensive and the author
of a textbook guide to the Koran. She says: "Islam is as much a
world faith as is Roman Catholicism. No one nationality claims it as
its own". Islam is also spreading fast on the continent and in
America. (The Times , London, Tuesday, November 9th, 1993, Home-News
page)

Thanks be to God that many of us who are former "pew warmers"
finally decided to go out and investigate what they try to spoon
feed us from the pulpit and TV. Why does Islam succeed in attracting
Christians and others? Because it's the Clear Way of Abraham. No
other religion today can honestly claim this! Islam isn't just
a "feel good" religion where they just tell you what you want to
hear and read selected verses from the Bible. Most Christians today
approach religion like they do Sunday brunch: they take what they
like and leave what they don't like. They have this attitude in
spite of the fact that Abraham is held up in their Bible as a
towering example of faith. Abraham(P), who was going to sacrifice
his own son because Almighty God commanded it, certainly knew the
basis of morality. It is clear in both the Bible and the Qur'an that
Abraham knew that whatever God commands is the right thing to do.
However, how many Christians today can say that they honestly
believe that on all issues? How many of them have reflected on the
moral ramifications of what is contained in their Bible? Seemingly,
not even their learned apologists who attack Islam have reflected on
it too deeply!

The question "What is our basis for morality?" is an easy one for
those who follow the faith of Abraham(P) - and that's what Islam is.
Islam is submission to the Will of Almighty God - "We hear and we
obey"- the faith of our father Abraham. If it was good enough for
Abraham(P), Moses(P), Jesus(P) and Muhammad(P), then it's good
enough for me! It is this truth and this attitude that attracts
people to Islam. The entire basis of Islam, which produces this
attitude, is Unity - the Unity of Almighty God and the unity of
mankind. To be sure, the message of Islam appeals to the very nature
of man. No wonder it is spreading! A Christian theologion,
relatively recently, observed:

It is probable that early in the twenty-first century Islam will
have become numerically the largest of the world religions. 11

Quite possibly, if you count only Sunni Muslims (which are at least
85% of Muslims), we are already the largest religion in the world
when compared not to "Christians" as a whole, but to either the
Orthodox, Roman Catholics or Protestants each separately.

A Case Study In Biblical Morality

Now that we've taken an detailed look at an alleged moral difficulty
in the life of Muhammad(P), for the sake of balance, let's take a
look at a moral difficulty in the Bible. We've already made
statements above concerning the nature of Biblical morality, but
many readers may be unaware of some of its "difficulties". For
better or for worse, in Sunday school they generally skip the verses
which we are going to deal with below. However, these verses
certainly are useful tools in putting intellectually honest
Christians in the same "moral dilemna" that they think Muslims
should be in due to Muhammad's(P) young marriage to 'Aishah, may God
be pleased with her. It should be kept in mind that the purpose of
this discussion is the basis for morality, not the inspiration of
the Bible (or lack thereof). For the purposes of this discussion, we
accept the Bible "as is". However, this should not be interpretted
to mean that we are endorsing it as the "Word of God" in toto. On
the other hand, it should not be interpreted to mean that we are
attacking the "Word of God", since we are discussing it simply
because Christians consider it to be the "Word of God" (whatever
their particular definition might be). For those wanting more
detailed information on the Muslim view of the Bible, please click
here.

The portion of the Bible that we want to look at begins with the
Book of Numbers, Chapter 31, verses 17 and 18. Here, Moses(P),
following the Lord's command, orders the Israelites to kill all the
Midianite male children. The order continues with the following:

". . . kill every woman who has known man by lying with him, but all
the female children, that have not known a man by lying with him,
keep alive for yourselves."

One can only guess how the Israelites determined who the virgins
were. Most probably, they did it based on age and maturity, assuming
that all of the female "children" who had not reached puberty were
virgins. Keep in mind that this was done, according to the Bible, on
God's command to "Avenge the Israelites on the Midianites". Later,
God gives Moses(P) instructions on how to divide up the
booty, "whether persons, oxen, donkeys, sheeps or goats". Based on
this command, "thirty-two thousand persons in all, women who had not
known a man by lying with him" were divided up. This was done so
that the Israelite soldiers could have these young girls "for
themselves". I do not suspect that anyone reading this is either so
naive or ignorant of King James English to not know what
this means!

Moving along to another great example of Biblical morality, . . . in
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 the Biblical "God of Love" gives the following
command:

"When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the Lord
thy God hath delivered them into thine hands and thoust has taken
them captive, and seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and
had a desire unto her, that though would have her to thy wife, then
though shalt bring her home to thine house . . . and after that you
may go into her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife. But
if though have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go".

This should serve as sufficient proof that the morality that is
taught in the Bible often is not what Christians make it out to be.
In spite of what they teach in Sunday school, the above mentioned
verses demonstrate the following:

Almighty God, at least according to the Bible, ordered innocent
babies to be killed; and
He allowed young women to be forced into sex against their will.

Before moving on, it should be noted that killing women and children
in war is never permitted under Islamic Law (the actions of some
ignorant Muslims around the world notwithstanding). Some Christians
may take issue with the words "innocent babies" above, since they
believe that even babies are tainted with "Original Sin". However,
this is not the topic of the discussion at hand. Suffice it to say
that Biblical support for the Doctrine of Original Sin is
contradictory at best. There are some verses that seem to support
it, but there are others that seem to clearly deny it. One strike
against "Original Sin", besides the fact that it's simply unjust, is
the fact that the Jews - who read the Old Testament - never belived
in it the way Chrisitnas do. But anyway . . . when faced with the
problematic parts of the Old Testatment, Christians react in various
ways. Many offer up the ill thought out "Well-That's-in-the-Old-
Testament" defense. In spite of the fact that they usually don't
brush the Old Testament aside so quickly when they are being shown
alleged prophecies which match Jesus(P), a few other thoughts can be
presented. Some of the things that make brushing aside the Old
Tesament a bit more difficult (at least for Christians who want to
remain intellectually honest) are:

1) the same God that "inspired" the Old Testament "inspired" the New
Testament;
2) this same God is "unchanging" according to the Bible;
3) Jesus(P) in the New Testament endorses the "Law and the prophets"
(i.e. the Old Testament) in several places; and
4) without the Old Testament their is no basis for Christianity.

When put in this predicament, Christians, have one of two choices:

1) Stop thinking about it and fall back on a liberal "pick-and-
choose" religion that just makes them "feel good" but does not
answer any of life's more difficult questions; or
2) Accept the Divinely Revealed morality of the Bible "as is".

There are Christians out there who claim to accept the Divinely
Revealed morality of the Bible. They understand what's at stake and
the issues at hand. If people are allowed to whimsically decide what
is right and what is wrong, there would be chaos. Just as
importantly, if people decide what is "God's Word" and what is not
His word based on their preconceived notions and "modern"
sensibilities, nothing would be left of the Bible. As such, there
are Christians who, in principle, say that killing babies is "moral"
as long as God clearly commands it. For someone who understands the
nature of Divinely Revealed morality, we would have to agree in
principle but with certain reservations. As mentioned above,
Almighty God - according to Islam - never commands the killing of
innocent children. That is one "difficulty" that I am glad that
Muslims don't have to explain their way out of! Killing babies is
okay as long as God commands it!?! So much for having Christians as
baby-sitters!

The bottom line is that morality comes from Almighty God and from
Him alone. However, if ones studies the Bible, it is plain to see
that it is not a foundation for morality. The examples above are
just a few that can be provided from both the Old and the New
Testament. The people who promote "Biblical morality" pick and
choose from the text as they please. Only in Islam can one with good
conscience accept "the whole package" without ignorantly or
hypocritically denying things that they don't like. This is how true
internal peace and balance are achieved. If one belongs to a
religions without accepting everything in its scripture (real or
alleged) one is not only bearing false witness againt themself but
against God Himself. With all the false ideas in the modern age,
it's easy to be lead astray. The liberal Westeran morality that has
now touched all corners of the globe is, culturally speaking,
something like an eight-hundred pound gorilla. It's very hard to
stand in its way or speak out against it. However, being encouraged
by others to follow "vain desires" has been an eternal problem for
mankind, as Almighty God makes clear in the Qur'an:

Say: 'I will not follow your vain desires: if I did I would stray
from the path and be not of the company of those who receive
guidance.' [Qur'an - Surah al-An'aam - 6:56]

Guideposts To Be Thankful For

The Prophet Muhammad(P) was a great example for all of humanity and
peoples of different cultures (from "modern" Europeans to the
aborigines of Australia). Not only was he a great Prophet and
Messenger, but he was also a statesman, military leader, ruler,
teacher, neighbour and friend. Family life was one of the most
important areas where he was a great example, since he was both a
husband and a father. Due to God's wisdom, His last and final
prophet experienced a wide array of marriages and family situations.
Due to this, he is an example for people who are monogamous, for
those who are polygamous, for those wishing to marry those older
than themselves and for those wondering how early someone can
rightfully marry. Muhammad(P) reestablished the Religion of Abraham
(P) so that it would continue to the Last Day.

As Muslims, we should be thankful for these guideposts in our moral
journey through life. Reflecting on them aids us in avoiding being
led astray into "moral relativism". This is a very dangerous thing,
since it can lead to the worst of all sins - associating others with
Almighty God in worship, belief and/or Lordship. By knowing the
Prophet's(P) life we can see how to stay within the boundaries laid
by Almighty God and stay on the Natural Religion of Islam which was
made to suit the natural disposition (fitrah) of mankind. I pray
that we, as Muslims, make Almighty God's limits our limits, and that
we are not influenced by other societies and cultures. If it was
good enough for Abraham(P) and Moses(P), then it's good enough for
me . . .

That's the way I see it, but God knows best . . .

References

1 W. Montgomery Watt, Muhammad at Medina, Oxford University Press,
1956.
2 "Rites and Ceremonies", The New Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th
Edition (1987), Volume 26, page 850.
3 Gerald Sigal, The Jew and the Christian Missionary, Ktav
Publishing House,1981, page 28.
4 "Central Africa", The New Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th Edition
(1987), Volume 15, page 646. See also "Aboriginal Australia", The
New Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th Edition (1987), Volume 14, page
425. For additional references to the marriage customs in Biblical
times, see Israel: Its Life and Culture, by Johannes Pedersen,
Volume 1, page 60ff.
5 Herman H. Ploss, Max Bartels and Paul Bartels, Woman, Volume I,
Lord & Bransby, 1988, page 563.
6 English-translation of Sahih Muslim, Volume 2, International
Islamic Publishing House, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, page 715.
7 Theodor H. Vandevelde, Ideal Marriage : Its Physiology and
Technique, Greenwood Publishing Group, 1980, p. 243.
8 Nabia Abbott, Aishah-The Beloved of Mohammed, Al-Saqi Books,
London, 1985, page 7.
9 Karen Armstrong, Muhammad: A Biography of the Prophet, Harper San
Francisco, 1992, page 157.
10 W. Montgomery Watt, Muhammad: Prophet and Statesman, Oxford
University Press, 1961, page 229.
11 John Hick, The Metaphor of God Incarnate, Westminster/John Knox
Press, 1993, page 87.

Source: Free America Now!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/freeamericanow/message/14195