Aisha’s Dolls: Round Two!
An Islamaphobic website furthers another argument, which goes as follows:
1) Islamic Law (Shari’ah) forbids post-pubertal girls from playing with dolls. Only
pre-pubertal girls are allowed to play with dolls.
2) There are hadeeth (narrations) in which we see Aisha playing with dolls after she
moved into the Prophet’s house.
3) This proves that she was pre-pubertal even after she moved into the Prophet’s
house and consummated the marriage with Aisha.
To properly understand why this argument is a weak one, we need to clarify a few things.
First of all, the Islamic Law (Shari’ah) comes from the Quran and the authentic hadeeths
(Prophetic sayings); these two texts—the Word of God (Quran) and His Messenger
(hadeeths)—are considered the Islamic canon. However, it should be known that there is
absolutely no directive in the Quran or the hadeeths that says dolls are permissible to prepubertal
girls and forbidden to post-pubertal girls. No statement like such can be
attributed to either God or His Messenger.
So what did Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) say? Actually, we have a hadeeth
(Prophetic saying) in which he categorically forbade people from making graven images
of living things. In this narration, Prophet Muhammad says that the angels do not enter
houses in which there are such sculptures. [As an interesting aside, the Bible also carries
such a prohibition: “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of
anything that is in the heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water
under the earth.” (Deut. 5:8)]
The consequences of this command from Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is
that Muslims are forbidden to make or keep sculptors of living things. It was feared that
people would start worshipping them as idols, and hence the prohibition. Additionally,
the only Creator is God, and it does not befit the creation to create any living thing, or
even an image of a living thing. This is to “compete” with God’s Power, and God will
challenge such a person to bring the living thing to life. In any case, this hadeeth
(Prophetic saying) clearly prohibits the creation of three dimensional figures that
resemble human beings or animals.
However, we have another hadeeth in which Aisha (peace be upon her) is playing with
dolls and the Prophet (peace be upon him) does not rebuke her for that. So the question
arises: how do we reconcile these two narrations? After all, is not a doll a sculptor and
hence forbidden? The Islamic scholars debated on how to reconcile between these two
narrations. One of these views was that perhaps Aisha was pre-pubertal and pre-pubertal
girls were exempted from this prohibition since they were younger than the age of
accountability. This was one of the views stated by Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari. Now what
the Islamaphobes do is pretend that this is the one and only view amongst Islamic
scholars. It is important to recognize that Islamic scholars differ on many things, and it
would be incorrect to present a monolithic view on the matter.
In fact, Ibn Hajar himself mentioned numerous views of this issue in Fath al-Bari.
Actually the problem is that Islamaphobes are unfamiliar with Ibn Hajar’s writing style or
with his book. Whenever he used to discuss a controversial issue, Ibn Hajar would list all
the various views on the matter; many of the views would in fact be contradictory. His
intention was not to be dogmatic, but rather to share with the reader the various views.
Therefore, it would be incorrect to claim that just because one view is in Ibn Hajar’s book
that this is his view. In fact, in the very same book, Ibn Hajar wrote:
If the doll of Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) had clear features, then this was
before the prohibition of picture-making.
(Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari)
In other words, there are two ways to reconcile the two narrations: (1) pre-pubertal girls
are exempted from the prohibition, or (2) Aisha (peace be upon her) was playing with the
dolls before God informed Prophet Muhammad to forbid people from it. This was stated
by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Adam al-Kawthari who said:
Some commentators of Hadith explain that Aisha (R.A.) used to play with dolls
before the prohibition of Tasweer (picture-making), and the Hadith was abrogated
by the Narrations which prohibit picture-making.
In other words, the idea—that perhaps Aisha (peace be upon her) was pre-pubertal—is
not the only possible explanation of the two seemingly “contradictory” narrations.
Rather, it could have been that Aisha (peace be upon her) was playing with dolls before
the prohibition came down to forbid it. And there are many examples of this: for
example, there is a hadeeth (narration) in which one of the Prophet’s disciples is drinking
alcohol. This hadeeth is easily reconciled with another hadeeth—in which alcohol is
forbidden—by saying that the first hadeeth occurred before the second one. In other
words, the Prophet’s disciple drank alcohol before it was forbidden. Another example is
that of temporary marriage which many of the Prophet’s disciples engaged in until it was
forbidden by God and His Messenger.
There is a third view—which is also mentioned by the same Ibn Hajar (!!!) as well as by
many other scholars. The two narrations—one forbidding statues resembling living
creatures and the other mentioning Aisha playing with dolls—can be reconciled by
mentioning a third narration in which the Arch-Angel Gabriel refuses to enter the
Prophet’s house because there is a statue by its door. So Gabriel commands Prophet
Muhammad:
Order that the head of the sculpture be broken off so that it resembles the trunk of
a tree.
(Abu Dawood, al-Nisai, al-Tirmidhi, and Ibn Hibban)
After the head of the sculpture is disfigured so that it does not have clear facial features,
Arch-Angel Gabriel enters the Prophet’s house. Applying this hadeeth (narration), it is
possible to reconcile the conflict between the prohibition of sculptures and Aisha’s dolls.
The prohibition on sculptures did not apply to those whose heads were disfigured.
Therefore, it is likely that Aisha’s dolls did not have clear facial features, and as such the
creator of these dolls is not “competing” with God by copying His creation. It is known
that the dolls back then were just made of wool, so they were more like sock puppets than
intricately designed Barbie dolls. This is confirmed by the following hadeeth:
We used to make toys of wool for the boys, and if anyone of them cried, he was
given those toys until it was time of the breaking of the fast.
(Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 31, Number 181)
Bassam Zawadi comments:
The above Hadeeth proves that dolls of children were nothing like what we know
as dolls nowadays, since they are nothing but stick wrapped with wool that take
no shape and if someone looked at it he won't be able to recognize what they
symbolize. Knowing that, we can explain why the Prophet (peace be upon him)
did not recognize the toy of Aisha (he didn't know that it was a horse), therefore
inquired about it to the extent that he could not tell the wings as it was just extra
piece of wool or sheet added to the toy.
Shaykh Salih al-Munajjid was asked about Aisha’s dolls to which he said:
Those toys which are made of wool are not considered to be [graven] images,
because they do not have a head apart from a piece of wool, and it does not have
the features of the faces such as eyes, nose, mouth, or ears. If an image does not
have a head or any [distinct] facial features, it is exempt from the ruling
prohibiting images.
Ibn Abbas also narrated that an image without a head does not come into the category of
forbidden images. Shaykh Muhammad ibn Adam al-Kawthari said:
If the dolls do not have a head, meaning they do not have eyes, ears, nose, and
mouth which make them incomplete, then it will be permissible to make them…It
has been narrated from Ibn Abbas, Abu Huraira (may Allah be pleased with them)
and others, that a picture without a head is not a picture, thus permissible…The
dolls which Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) played with was not of the type we
have today. Her dolls were made out of rags without any prominent features.
Many commentators of Hadith have explained that the doll of Aisha (Radhi
Allahu Anha) was not of the type that its features and organs of the body could be
clearly seen; rather it was made from cloth and cotton as how it is generally made
in the villages.
This explanation was also given as one possibility by Ibn Hajar who said:
The doll did not have prominent [facial] features.
(Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari)
So there are a few possibilities to explain why Aisha (peace be upon her) had dolls:
1. Image making was forbidden only after the hadeeth in which Aisha (peace be
upon her) played with dolls.
2. Aisha’s dolls were not forbidden because their faces did not resemble human or
animal creation.
3. She was pre-pubertal, and pre-pubertal girls may not have been included in the
prohibition of image making.
This third view is merely a possibility. The Islamaphobe’s quote Ibn Hajar to validate
their view, but in fact, Ibn Hajar said that this third opinion is seriously “questionable”,
and we’ll see why shortly. But even if we accept the third view, this is only referring to
the age of accountability, and not sexual maturity. Let us recall the words of Mufti
Maulana Husain Kadodia who explained:
In reality, puberty has two usages. The first usage is with regards to physical
development, whereas the second usage is with regards to menses. For (sexual)
intercourse, developmental puberty is a precondition. Whereas for other
rulings—such as being ordered to pray—the menses usage applies.
(Maulana Mufti Husain Kadodia, www.Ask-Imam.com)
There is no doubt that Aisha (peace be upon him) had reached puberty if we use the first
usage of the word; all Islamic scholars are agreed upon this. The first usage is a
precondition for marriage. As for the second usage of the word “puberty”, then once this
stage is reached, then the age of accountability begins. As we have discussed earlier,
when Islamic scholars use the word “puberty” (buloogh), then they are referring to this
second usage (i.e. the age of accountability). So when Al-Khattabi in Fath al-Bari said
that Aisha was pre-pubertal, then by this he meant to say that Aisha had not reached the
age of accountability and therefore the prohibition did not apply to her.
However, the Islamic scholars are agreed, by consensus (Ijma), that a girl reaches the age
of accountability either when her menses occur, or when she reaches the age of fifteen—
whichever of the two occurs first. The reason for this is that some girls do not have their
first menstrual period until well into their twenties, whereas still others do not have any
menses at all (a medical condition called amenorrhea). This ruling—that a girl reaches
puberty either through having menses or by attaining the age of fifteen years—is based
on an authentic hadeeth. Shaykh Salih al-Munajjid said: