₦airaland Forum

Yes, Aisha was born before Islam began (around 610 CE), with most sources placing her birth a few years prior, around 607-614 CE, making her a child or young girl when the Prophet Muhammad received his first revelation, a fact supported by her own accounts of playing with dolls during early Quranic revelations, though specific timelines and ages at marriage remain debated among scholars.

Evidence Aisha was born before Islam:
Her Own Testimony: Aisha stated she was a "young girl playing with toys" when the Quranic chapter of Al-Qamar (The Moon) was revealed, which occurred several years before the Hijra (migration to Medina).
Abu Bakr's Children: Historian Tabari reports all four of Abu Bakr's children, including Aisha, were born during the Jahiliyyah (pre-Islamic period).

Early Islam: Aisha's parents converted very early, and she was a child when they embraced Islam, indicating her birth preceded the start of the Prophet's mission.

Traditional vs. Modern Views:
Traditional View: Some hadith (sayings of the Prophet) suggest she was 6 at betrothal and 9 at consummation, but these conflict with other reports.

Modern/Alternative View: Using accounts of her sister Asma's age and historical events like the Battle of Badr (where participants had to be 15+), many scholars calculate Aisha was older, perhaps 17-19 at marriage, suggesting a birth around 607-614 CE.

In summary, Aisha was indeed born before Islam was established, growing up as a Muslim within her family, though the exact timing of her birth relative to the initial revelations is a point of scholarly discussion.

Biodun556:
Yes, Aisha was born before Islam began (around 610 CE), with most sources placing her birth a few years prior, around 607-614 CE, making her a child or young girl when the Prophet Muhammad received his first revelation, a fact supported by her own accounts of playing with dolls during early Quranic revelations, though specific timelines and ages at marriage remain debated among scholars.

Evidence Aisha was born before Islam:
Her Own Testimony: Aisha stated she was a "young girl playing with toys" when the Quranic chapter of Al-Qamar (The Moon) was revealed, which occurred several years before the Hijra (migration to Medina).
Abu Bakr's Children: Historian Tabari reports all four of Abu Bakr's children, including Aisha, were born during the Jahiliyyah (pre-Islamic period).

Early Islam: Aisha's parents converted very early, and she was a child when they embraced Islam, indicating her birth preceded the start of the Prophet's mission.

Traditional vs. Modern Views:
Traditional View: Some hadith (sayings of the Prophet) suggest she was 6 at betrothal and 9 at consummation, but these conflict with other reports.

Modern/Alternative View: Using accounts of her sister Asma's age and historical events like the Battle of Badr (where participants had to be 15+), many scholars calculate Aisha was older, perhaps 17-19 at marriage, suggesting a birth around 607-614 CE.

In summary, Aisha was indeed born before Islam was established, growing up as a Muslim within her family, though the exact timing of her birth relative to the initial revelations is a point of scholarly discussion.

How then was Moses and the other Israeli prophets Muslims? 😏

Kayberg:
How then was Moses and the other Israeli prophets Muslims? 😏

Perhaps the op omitted saying Islam as completed under prophet Muhammad pbuh.
However specific to your question is understanding the meaning of being Muslim.

Explore2xmore:
Perhaps the op omitted saying Islam as completed under prophet Muhammad pbuh.
However specific to your question is understanding the meaning of being Muslim.

The OP was clear enough to make it known that Aisha was born before Islam began around 610 CE, also providing evidence.

Kayberg:
The OP was clear enough to make it known that Aisha was born before Islam began around 610 CE, also providing evidence.

I see your restrictions however in the absolute sense Islam did not begin in 610 CE. What began then was the final revelation to Prophet Muhammad pbuh.

Explore2xmore:
I see your restrictions however in the absolute sense Islam did not begin in 610 CE. What began then was the final revelation to Prophet Muhammad pbuh.

You don't need to open a defense on this with me.

The Israelites never knew anything called Islam during their days; if they do, they won't have found it strange when it was introduced to them back then.

Kayberg:
You don't need to open a defense on this with me.

The Israelites never knew anything called Islam during their days; if they do, they won't have found it strange when it was introduced to them back then.

No defense or debate as it only takes knowing what Islam means.

Explore2xmore:
No defense or debate as it only takes knowing what Islam means.

That a child is named Mercy does not mean the child is merciful… so that doesn't work.

Explore2xmore:
Perhaps the op omitted saying Islam as completed under prophet Muhammad pbuh.
However specific to your question is understanding the meaning of being Muslim.

Ahhh, then we can say that atheism predates all religion once we rejig the meaning of what an atheist is. Playing word definition games can bite both ways.

LordReed:
Ahhh, then we can say that atheism predates all religion once we rejig the meaning of what an atheist is. Playing word definition games can bite both ways.

We will need to come to an agreement about the ambiguity of evidence supporting evolution, and the belief that life cannot arise from non-life before agreeing that early mankind had no concept of the existence of God.

Kayberg:
That a child is named Mercy does not mean the child is merciful… so that doesn't work.

Do break down your analogy

Explore2xmore:
We will need to come to an agreement about the ambiguity of evidence supporting evolution, and the belief that life cannot arise from non-life before agreeing that early mankind had no concept of the existence of God.

My statement has nothing to do with evolution.

LordReed:
My statement has nothing to do with evolution.

I am starting with the root of atheism with regards to the origin of man. Maybe you could clarify how atheism predates all religion which is a practice of mankind.

LordReed:
My statement has nothing to do with evolution.

The term Muslim refers to anyone who submits to God, even those who lived before Muhammad pbuh. While being an atheist is rooted in denial and doesn't allow for a retroactive application of beliefs. So, these two concepts aren't really equivalent.

Explore2xmore:
I am starting with the root of atheism with regards to the origin of man. Maybe you could clarify how atheism predates all religion which is a practice of mankind.

Homo sapiens have been around for more than 250,000 years while the earliest evidence of ritualistic or proto-religion is about 80,000 years. This suggests humans didn't have religious beliefs for more time they've been around than the time they did have it.

Explore2xmore:
The term Muslim refers to anyone who submits to God, even those who lived before Muhammad pbuh. While being an atheist is rooted in denial and doesn't allow for a retroactive application of beliefs. So, these two concepts aren't really equivalent.

Nope. Atheism is lack of beliefs and as I have shown lack of belief was around for far longer than any belief in any gods.

LordReed:
Homo sapiens have been around for more than 250,000 years while the earliest evidence of ritualistic or proto-religion is about 80,000 years. This suggests humans didn't have religious beliefs for more time they've been around than the time they did have it.

While that might hold true from an archaeological standpoint, it really only reflects evidence, not actual belief. Just because we don’t have any surviving rituals doesn’t mean that early humans didn’t have a sense of God or some form of spiritual awareness.

LordReed:
Nope. Atheism is lack of beliefs and as I have shown lack of belief was around for far longer than any belief in any gods.

Atheism, by its very nature, needs the idea of God to be able to reject it. So, just because early humans didn’t leave behind evidence of belief doesn’t automatically make them atheists, they simply might not have had a documented concept of God at that time.

Explore2xmore:
While that might hold true from an archaeological standpoint, it really only reflects evidence, not actual belief. Just because we don’t have any surviving rituals doesn’t mean that early humans didn’t have a sense of God or some form of spiritual awareness.

Well then, till when you able to produce definitive evidence that that was the case then the point stands.

Atheism, by its very nature, needs the idea of God to be able to reject it. So, just because early humans didn’t leave behind evidence of belief doesn’t automatically make them atheists, they simply might not have had a documented concept of God at that time.

Wrong again. I have given you the definition of atheism, LACK OF BELIEF, it doesn't require any concept of god to reject since it is not a rejection. Also remember we are playing word games so you can't seriously challenge this or else we also fault your definition of Muslim.

LordReed:
Well then, till when you able to produce definitive evidence that that was the case then the point stands.



Wrong again. I have given you the definition of atheism, LACK OF BELIEF, it doesn't require any concept of god to reject since it is not a rejection. Also remember we are playing word games so you can't seriously challenge this or else we also fault your definition of Muslim.

Can you provide any definitive evidence for your own claims? Then you say lack of belief is your definition but cannot say what isn't believed in. So you are not making a clear statement.

Explore2xmore:
Can you provide any definitive evidence for your own claims? Then you say lack of belief is your definition but cannot say what isn't believed in. So you are not making a clear statement.

I already did, are you paying attention?

Lack of belief in any gods.

LordReed:
I already did, are you paying attention?

Lack of belief in any gods.

The 170,000-year archaeological gap merely indicates a lack of material religion, not a lack of faith in God, which need not leave physical remnants. It is by no means conclusive proof of ungodliness.

Explore2xmore:
The 170,000-year archaeological gap merely indicates a lack of material religion, not a lack of faith in God, which need not leave physical remnants. It is by no means conclusive proof of ungodliness.

It is a resounding evidence of lack of belief in any gods as religion tends to leave behind evidence of practice which is why we have the burial sites. If they were believing in gods before that then we should have had evidence. You dismissal is inadequate especially as you provide nothing substantial to refute it except nah-uh.

Meanwhile I am yet to see you provide evidence that any believers in your god were Muslims before the advent of your prophet Mohammad. Can you show any text that calls them Muslims written before 571 CE?

LordReed:
It is a resounding evidence of lack of belief in any gods as religion tends to leave behind evidence of practice which is why we have the burial sites. If they were believing in gods before that then we should have had evidence. You dismissal is inadequate especially as you provide nothing substantial to refute it except nah-uh.

Meanwhile I am yet to see you provide evidence that any believers in your god were Muslims before the advent of your prophet Mohammad. Can you show any text that calls them Muslims written before 571 CE?

Despite the lack of pre-571 texts, early monotheists, such as Idris/Enoch, are counted as Muslims because submission to God is what defines a Muslim, and the 170,000-year archaeological gap does not prove ungodliness.

Consider too that perishable materials (wood, paint, dance, song) were used in rituals. Few traces were left by tiny populations. Most sites and organic materials are lost after more than 100,000 years; only stone and bone in extraordinary circumstances survive.

Explore2xmore:
Despite the lack of pre-571 texts, early monotheists, such as Idris/Enoch, are counted as Muslims because submission to God is what defines a Muslim, and the 170,000-year archaeological gap does not prove ungodliness.

Consider too that perishable materials (wood, paint, dance, song) were used in rituals. Few traces were left by tiny populations. Most sites and organic materials are lost after more than 100,000 years; only stone and bone in extraordinary circumstances survive.

Then I reject your categorising of any pre Mohammedean believers as Muslim. It's that simple.

LordReed:
Then I reject your categorising of any pre Mohammedean believers as Muslim. It's that simple.

Logically?

Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian, but he was a hanif, a Muslim (submitting to Allah), and he was not of the polytheists.(Qur’an 3:67)

Explore2xmore:
Logically?

Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian, but he was a hanif, a Muslim (submitting to Allah), and he was not of the polytheists.(Qur’an 3:67)

Yes based on your own standard. You produced no evidence of any kind so I reject your assertion.

LordReed:
Yes based on your own standard. You produced no evidence of any kind so I reject your assertion.

Despite clearly showing why the sort of archaeological evidence you request doesn't exist? Maybe we should switch for a moment and you show the same for your view.

Explore2xmore:
Despite clearly showing why the sort of archaeological evidence you request doesn't exist? Maybe we should switch for a moment and you show the same for your view.

LoLz. Yes let's just hand wave away the evidence but produce none for our position then ask for evidence again. Dude I gave the evidence for my position, you gave NONE, by your own standard you forfeit the argument.

LordReed:
LoLz. Yes let's just hand wave away the evidence but produce none for our position then ask for evidence again. Dude I gave the evidence for my position, you gave NONE, by your own standard you forfeit the argument.

With your starting inclination to humor I wonder. However, the lack of artifacts doesn’t mean someone is ungodly; rather, it’s the act of submitting to God that truly defines a Muslim. Take prophets like Abraham, for instance, they were Muslim, even if history hasn’t left us much to go on.

If you will quote a pointer to your evidence please.

LordReed:
LoLz. Yes let's just hand wave away the evidence but produce none for our position then ask for evidence again. Dude I gave the evidence for my position, you gave NONE, by your own standard you forfeit the argument.

Wait, we should accept some remote governance from Paris but he can't do remote consultations and physical treatment with French doctors? 😅 Make it make sense! If bandwidth is good enough to run Nigeria via video call, it's good enough for medical appointments. The math ain't mathing.