MARRIAGEABLE AGE IN RABBINIC JUDAISM

In this post I will cite leading rabbinic sources and authorities to show that a female was considered mature enough for marriage only after she had reached puberty, which the rabbis interpreted as taking place after the age of twelve. All emphasis shall be mine.

Note what one of the leading medieval rabbis Rashi wrote in regards to Exodus 21:7:

Now if a man sells his daughter as a maidservant: Scripture is referring [here] to a minor girl. I might think that even if she develops signs [of initial puberty, the father may sell her]. [But] you must agree that a kal vachomer [the inference of a major rule from a minor rule] applies here namely if she who is already sold goes free with signs [that is, when she has signs of initial puberty], as it is written: “she shall go out for nothing, without money” (Exod. 21:11), which we interpret as referring to the signs of initial puberty, does it not make sense that she who is not sold [and has initial signs of puberty] should not be sold [at all]? -[From Mechilta, Arachin 29a] [At the moment when a female has two pubic hairs, usually when she is twelve years old, she is no longer considered a minor. She is then called נַעִרָה (naarah). She is, however, still under her father’s jurisdiction until six months later, when her breasts have developed to a certain stage. Then she is called בּוֹגֶרֶת (bogeret) a mature girl. In the case of a Hebrew maidservant, the father may sell her only when she is a minor, not after she has become a נַעִרָה (Complete Jewish Bible with Rashi Commentary https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/9882/showrashi/true#v7)

The Talmud concurs by stating that the marriageable age for a girl takes place sometime after she has passed her twelfth birthday and is mature enough to desire marriage:

With regard to a girl, it was urged that the father’s duty was to secure a husband for her at an early age. The verse, ‘Profane not thy daughter to make her a harlot’ (Leviticus 19:29) was applied to a man ‘who delays in arranging a marriage while she is of suitable age’ (Sanhedrin 76a). She was considered to have arrived at this stage when she passed her twelfth birthday. According to Talmudic law, ‘A man is forbidden to give his daughter in marriage while she is a minor, until she is grown up and says, I wish to marry so-and-so’ (Kid. 41a). If he married her in her minority she could repudiate the marriage on reaching the age of twelve, and have it annulled without a divorce. (Abraham Cohen, Everyman’s Talmud – The Major Teachings of the Rabbinic Sages [Schoken Books, New York 1995], Chapter V. Domestic Life, II. Marriage and Divorce, pp. 162-163; bold emphasis mine)

הָאִישׁ מְקַדֵּשׁ אֶת בִּתּוֹ כְּשֶׁהִיא נַעֲרָה. כְּשֶׁהִיא נַעֲרָה – אִין, כְּשֶׁהִיא קְטַנָּה – לָא. מְסַיַּיע לֵיהּ לְרַב, דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב וְאִיתֵּימָא רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: אָסוּר לְאָדָם שֶׁיְּקַדֵּשׁ אֶת בִּתּוֹ כְּשֶׁהִיא קְטַנָּה, עַד שֶׁתִּגְדַּל וְתֹאמַר: ״בִּפְלוֹנִי אֲנִי רוֹצָה״.

The mishna teaches: A man can betroth his daughter to a man when she is a young woman. The Gemara infers: When she is a young woman, yes, he can betroth her; when she is a minor, NO, he cannot betroth her. This statement supports the opinion of Rav, as Rav Yehuda says that Rav says, and some say it was said by Rabbi Elazar: It is prohibited for a person to betroth his daughter to a man when she is a minor, until such time that she grows up and says: I want to marry so-and-so. If a father betroths his daughter when she is a minor and incapable of forming an opinion of the husband, she may later find herself married to someone she does not like. (Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 41a https://www.sefaria.org/Kiddushin.41a.8?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en)

Here is what Muhammad is reported to have said about these rabbinic injunctions:

Abu Sa‘id and Ibn ‘Abbas reported God’s messenger as saying, “He who has a son born to him should give him a good name and a good education and marry him when he reaches puberty. If he does not marry him when he reaches puberty and he commits sin, its guilt rests only upon his father.”

‘Umar b. al-Khattab and Anas b. Malik reported God’s messenger as saying that it is written in the Torah, “If anyone does not give his daughter in marriage when she reaches twelve and she commits sin, the guilt of that rests on him.” Baihaqi transmitted both traditions in Shu’ab al-Iman. (Mishkat Al-Masabih English Translation With Explanatory Notes by Dr. James Robson, [Sh. Muhammad Ahsraf Publishers, Booksellers & Exporters, Lahore-Pakistan, Reprint 1990], Volume I, Book XIII. – Marriage, Chapter III. The Guardian in Marriage, and asking the Woman’s consent, section III, pp. 666-667; bold emphasis mine)

Here’s the online version:

13 Marriage

(2c) Chapter: The Guardian in Marriage, and asking the Woman’s consent – Section 3

‘Umar b. al-Khattab and Anas b. Malik reported God’s Messenger as saying that it is written in the Torah, “If anyone does not give his daughter in marriage when she reaches twelve and she commits sin, the guilt of that rests on him.”

Baihaqi transmitted in Shu’ab al-iman.

Reference: Mishkat al-Masabih 3139

In-book reference: Book 13, Hadith 59 (https://sunnah.com/mishkat:3139)

Muhammad confuses the Talmud with the Torah!

The Talmud further condemns marrying off a mature, post-pubescent maiden to an old man:

אם כן לימא קרא אל תחל מאי אל תחלל שמע מינה תרתי ואביי ורבא האי אל תחלל את בתך להזנותה מאי עבדי ליה אמר רבי מני זה המשיא את בתו לזקן

The Gemara answers: If so, and that is the sole derivation from the verse, let the verse say: Do not profane [taḥel]. What is the reason that the verse uses the more complex form: Do not profane [teḥalel]? Conclude two derivations from it. The Gemara asks: And according to Abaye and Rava, who derive the prohibition against engaging in intercourse with one’s daughter from a different source, what do they do with this verse: “Do not profane your daughter by causing her to act licentiously”? Rabbi Mani says: This verse is referring to one who marries his daughter to an old man. Since she will not be satisfied with him, it will ultimately lead her to engage in adultery, and her father is responsible for causing that situation.

כדתניא אל תחלל את בתך להזנותה רבי אליעזר אומר זה המשיא את בתו לזקן ר”ע אומר זה המשהא בתו בוגרת

This derivation is as it is taught in a baraita: “Do not profane your daughter by causing her to act licentiously.” Rabbi Eliezer says: This is referring to one who marries his daughter to an old man. Rabbi Akiva says: This is referring to one who delays the marriage of his daughter who is A GROWN WOMAN. Since she finds no permissible outlet for her sexual desire, she is apt to engage in licentiousness.

אמר רב כהנא משום רבי עקיבא אין לך עני בישראל אלא רשע ערום והמשהא בתו בוגרת אטו המשהא בתו בוגרת לאו רשע ערום הוא

Rav Kahana says in the name of Rabbi Akiva: You do not have a pauper among the Jewish people other than one who is a conniving wicked person, who seeks to conceal his true nature, and one who delays the marriage of his daughter who is a grown woman. The Gemara asks: Is that to say that one who delays the marriage of his daughter who is A GROWN WOMAN is not a conniving, wicked person? He connives to delay her marriage to ensure that she will stay at home and do the housework, sparing him the cost of domestic help, and thereby causes her to sin. (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 76a https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.76a.24?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en)

Here’s another rendering:

Now, how do Abaye and Raba utilize the verse, Do not profane thy daughter to cause her to be a whore? — R. Mani said: [According to them] this refers to one who marries his [young] daughter to an old man.³² As it has been taught: Do not profane thy daughter to cause her to be a whore; R. Eliezer said: This refers to marrying one’s [young] daughter to an old man. R. Akiba said: This refers to the delay in marrying off a daughter who is already a bogereth.³³

R. Kahana said on R. Akiba’s authority: The only poor in Israel is the subtly wicked and he who delays in marrying off his daughter, a bogereth.³⁴ But is not one who thus delays himself subtly wicked?³⁵ Abaye answered: This is its meaning: Which poor man is subtly wicked? He who delays marrying off his daughter, a bogereth.

(32) Since she cannot willingly accept him, she may be led to adultery.

(33) Having attained puberty, she may become unchaste if not married. Marriage, of course, was then at a far earlier age than now.

(34) This is explained further on.

(35) Why ‘and he who delays etc.’: the two are identical. His wickedness consists in that he keeps her unmarried, that he may profit by her labour whilst endangering her chastity. (Rabbi Dr. H. Freedman and Jacob Shachter, Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, pp. 335-336 https://halakhah.com/pdf/nezikin/Sanhedrin.pdf)

This is where it gets interesting. The allegedly sound Islamic reports state that Muhammad married Aisha when she was around 6-7 years old, and had sex with her to consummate their marriage when she was nine.

The disgusting part about all this is that Muhammad was around 54 years old when he chose to deflower a premature, prepubescent girl who was still playing on swings and dolls. He even left her as a childless widow from the age of eighteen till she died!

Narrated Aisha:
The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, “Best wishes and Allah’s Blessing and a good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234 https://sunnah.com/bukhari:3894)

Narrated ‘Aisha:
Allah’s Apostle said to me, “You were shown to me twice (in my dream) before I married you. I saw an angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I said to him, ‘Uncover (her),’ and behold, it was you. I said (to myself), ‘If this is from Allah, then it must happen.’ Then you were shown to me, the angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I said (to him), ‘Uncover (her), and behold, it was you. I said (to myself), ‘If this is from Allah, then it must happen.'” (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 87, Number 140 https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7012; see also Number 139)

‘A’isha reported: Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house at the age of nine. She further said: We went to Medina and I had an attack of fever for a month, and my hair had come down to the earlobes. Umm Ruman (my mother) came to me and I was at that time on a swing along with my playmates. She called me loudly and I went to her and I did not know what she had wanted of me. She took hold of my hand and took me to the door, and I was saying: Ha, ha (as if I was gasping), until the agitation of my heart was over. She took me to a house, where had gathered the women of the Ansar. They all blessed me and wished me good luck and said: May you have share in good. She (my mother) entrusted me to them. They washed my head and embellished me and nothing frightened me. Allah’s Messenger came there in the morning, and I was entrusted to him. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3309 https://sunnah.com/muslim:1422a; see also 3310)

‘A’isha reported that Allah’s Apostle married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3311 https://sunnah.com/muslim:1422c)

Yunus b. Bukayr stated, from Hisham b. ‘Urwa, from his father who said, “The Messenger of God married ‘A’isha three years after (the death of) Khadija. At that time (of the contract) ‘A’isha had been a girl of six. When he married her she was nine. The Messenger of God died when ‘A’isha was a girl of eighteen.”

This tradition is considered gharib (unique in this line).

Al-Bukhari had related, from ‘Ubayd b. Isma‘il, from Abu Usama, from Hisham b. ‘Urwa, from his father, who said, “Khadija died three years before the emigration of the Prophet (SAAS). He allowed a couple of years or so to pass after that, and then he contracted marriage with ‘A’isha when she was six, thereafter consummating marriage with her when she was nine years old.”

What ‘Urwah stated here is mursal, incomplete, as we mentioned above, but in its content it must be judged as muttasil, uninterrupted.

His statement, “He contracted marriage with ‘A’isha when she was six, thereafter consummating marriage with her when she was nine” IS NOT DISPUTED BY ANYONE, and is well established in the sahih collections of traditions and elsewhere.

He consummated marriage with her during the second year following the emigration to Medina.

His contracting marriage with her took place some three years after Khadija’s death, though there is disagreement over this.

The hafiz Ya‘qub b. Sufyan stated, “Al-Hajjaj related to us, that Hammad related to him, from Hisham b. ‘Urwa, from his father, from ‘A’isha, who said, ‘The Messenger of God, contracted marriage with me (after) Khadija’s death and before his emigration from Mecca, when I was six years old. After we arrived in Medina some women came to me while I was playing on a swing; my hair was like that of a boy. They dressed me up and put make-up on me, then took me to the Messenger of God, and he consummated our marriage. I was a girl of nine.’”

The statement here “muttawaffa Khadija“, “Khadija’s death” has to mean that it was shortly thereafter. Unless, that is, the word, ba‘da, “after”, originally preceded this phrase and had been omitted from the account. The statement made by Yunus b. Bukayr and Abu Usama from Hisham b. ‘Urwa, from his father, is, therefore, not refuted. But God knows best. (Ibn Kathir, The Life of the Prophet Muhammad (Al-Sira al-Nabawiyya), Volume II, translated by professor Trevor Le Gassick, reviewed by Dr. Muneer Fareed [Garnet Publishing Limited, 8 Southern Court, south Street Reading RG1 4QS, UK; The Center for Muslim Contribution to Civilization, first paper edition, 2000], pp. 93-94)

Therefore, Muhammad stands condemned as a wicked old man for committing pedophile with a young minor. There’s simply no way around this fact.

FURTHER READING

WAS REBECCA REALLY 3?

The Holy Bible on the Age of Marriage

Revisiting the Issue of the Age for Marriage

Muhammad’s Marriage to a Prepubescent Minor

Muhammad’s Marriage to a Prepubescent Girl And Its Moral Implications

Analyzing the Claims of Muslim Polemicists

The Marriage of Umar ibn Khattab and Umm Kulthum

Aisha’s Condition at the Time of Her Marriage: Post-Pubescent Maiden or Premature Minor?

Was Aisha really only Nine? Pt. 1

Revisiting the Age of Aisha Pt. 1

Islam – The Religion of Pedophilia

MORE ON ISLAMIC PEDOPHILIA

ISLAMIC FEMALE CIRCUMCISION

MUHAMMAD: AN IMMORAL ADULTEROUS MISOGYNIST

ALLAH’S MISOGYNY AND ABUSE OF WOMEN

MUHAMMAD SAYS MUSLIM WOMEN ARE STUPID, CROOKED PRISONERS!

ISLAMIC INCEST

REVISITING ISLAM’S GROSS SEXUAL ETHICS

The prophet Isaiah proclaims that YHWH forgives sinners for his own sake:

“I, even I, am the one who wipes out your transgressions for My own sake, And I will not remember your sins.” Isaiah 43:25

Isaiah further teaches that YHWH could not find any one righteous and worthy enough to save and intercede, and so was left with no choice but to bring about judgment and salvation by himself, by his own Arm:

“So it is that truth is missing; And he who turns aside from evil makes himself plunder. Then Yahweh saw, And it was evil in His eyes that there was no justice. And He saw that there was NO MAN, And was astonished that there was NO ONE to intercede; Then His OWN ARM brought salvation to Him, And His righteousness upheld Him. He put on righteousness like a breastplate, And a helmet of salvation on His head; And He put on garments of vengeance for clothing And wrapped Himself with zeal as a mantle. According to what they deserve, so He will pay in full, Wrath to His adversaries, what is deserved to His enemies; To the coastlands He will pay what they deserve. So they will fear the name of Yahweh from the west And His glory from the rising of the sun, For He will come like a rushing stream Which the wind of Yahweh makes flee. And to those who turn from transgression in Jacob,’ declares Yahweh. ‘As for Me, this is My covenant with them,’ says Yahweh: ‘My Spirit which is upon you, and My words which I have put in your mouth, shall not depart from your mouth, nor from the mouth of your seed, nor from the mouth of your seed’s seed,’ says Yahweh, ‘from now and forever.’” Isaiah 59:15-21  

Arm is being used metaphorically to refer to God’s own infinite, uncreated power. The point being that YHWH brought salvation by his own power.

At the same time, the prophet preaches that the Servant of YHWH is sent to make atonement for the sins of the world by offering his soul as a sin offering, wherein he bears the transgressions of the peoples, and lives to justify and intercede for them. The reason why the Servant is able to do the very things which YHWH alone does, and which no mere creature can do, is because Isaiah identifies him as the very Arm of YHWH himself!

“Who has believed our report? And to whom has THE ARM of Yahweh been revealed? For HE grew up before Him like a tender shoot, And like a root out of parched ground; He has no stately form or majesty That we should look upon Him, Nor appearance that we should desire Him. He was despised and forsaken of men, A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; And like one from whom men hide their face He was despised, and we did not esteem Him. Surely our griefs He Himself bore, And our sorrows He carried; Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, Smitten of God, and afflicted. But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; The chastening for our peace fell upon Him, And by His wounds we are healed. All of us like sheep have gone astray, Each of us has turned to his own way; But Yahweh has caused the iniquity of us all To fall on Him.

“He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He did not open His mouth; Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, So He did not open His mouth. By oppression and judgment He was taken away; And as for His generation, who considered That He was cut off out of the land of the living, That for the transgression of my people, striking was due to Him? So His grave was assigned with wicked men, Yet He was with a rich man in His death, Because He had done no violence, Nor was there any deceit in His mouth.

“But Yahweh was pleased To crush Him, putting Him to grief; If You would place His soul as a guilt offering, He will see His seed, He will prolong His days, And the good pleasure of Yahweh will succeed in His hand. As a result of the anguish of His soul, He will see it and be satisfied; By His knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant, will justify the many, As He will bear their iniquities. Therefore, I will divide for Him a portion with the many, And He will divide the spoil with the strong; Because He poured out His soul to death, And was numbered with the transgressors; Yet He Himself bore the sin of many, And interceded for the transgressors.” Isaiah 53:1-12

Since the Servant is described as YHWH’s very own Arm this means that the Servant is no mere creature. Rather he himself must be truly divine since YHWH’s Arm refers to God’s uncreated, eternal Power. As such, the Servant is depicted as being both truly God and truly human, since he must be human for him to die for the sins of humanity.

Lo and behold this is precisely what the NT writings teach concerning Christ! I.e., Jesus is God’s uncreated Power and infinite Wisdom who became flesh in order to die for the salvation of the world:

“For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved, it is the power of God. For it is written, ‘I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, And the cleverness of the clever I will set aside.’ Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased, through the foolishness of the message preached, to save those who believe.For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ THE POWER of God and THE WISDOM of God.” 1 Corinthians 1:18-24

Elsewhere in the NT God’s Power is said to be both eternal and divine:

“For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, both His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.” Romans 1:20

“seeing that His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the full knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence.” 2 Peter 1:3

Since Jesus is God’s Power this means that he is both eternal and divine. Note the logic behind this argument:

1. God’s Power is eternal (uncreated) and divine.
2. Jesus is God’s Power who became flesh.
3. Jesus is, therefore, eternal (uncreated) and divine.

Th readers can now appreciate why Jesus, as the Servant prophesied in Isaiah 53 (Cf. Matt. 8:16-17; Luke 22:37; Acts 8:30-38; 1 Peter 2:21-25), can do what the prophet explicitly stated only YHWH does and is able to do. Jesus is not a mere creature but rather he is the very uncreated Arm/Power of YHWH who became Man for the redemption of God’s people.

This also explains why John could take the following depiction of YHWH Almighty,

“Who is this who comes from Edom, With garments of glowing colors from Bozrah, This One who is majestic in His clothing, Marching in the greatness of His power? ‘It is I who speak in righteousness, mighty to save.’ Why is Your clothing red, And Your garments like the one who treads in the wine press? ‘I have trodden the wine trough ALONE, And from the peoples there was NO MAN with Me. I also trod them in My anger And trampled them in My wrath; And their lifeblood is sprinkled on My garments, And I stained all My clothes. For the day of vengeance was in My heart, And My year of redemption has come. I looked, and there was NO ONE to help, And I was astonished, and there was NO ONE to uphold; So My OWN ARM brought salvation to Me, And My wrath upheld Me. I trod down the peoples in My anger And made them drunk in My wrath, And I brought down their lifeblood to the earth.’” Isaiah 63:1-6

And apply that to describe the Lord Jesus Christ in his coming back to the earth to judge the living and the dead:

“Then I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sits on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war.His eyes are a flame of fire, and on His head are many diadems; having a name written on Him which no one knows except Himself,and being clothed with a garment dipped in blood, His name is also called The Word of God.And the armies which are in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, were following Him on white horses.And from His mouth comes a sharp sword, so that with it He may strike down the nations, and He will rule them with a rod of iron; and He treads the wine press of the wrath of the rage of God, the Almighty.And He has on His garment and on His thigh a name written, ‘KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.’” Revelation 19:11-16 – Cf. 17:14; 1 Tim. 6:14-16

Like Isaiah, John knew that Jesus must be YHWH God Incarnate, the very Arm/Power of YHWH God the Father, in order to be able to do what he does, which is something that only God Almighty is capable of doing!

All scriptural references are taken from the Legacy Standard Bible (LSB).

FURTHER READING

HOW MANY DIVINE SAVIORS ARE THERE?

Jesus Christ and JWs: Who is the Jehovah That Saves?

WHO IS THE JEHOVAH THAT ONE CALLS UPON TO BE SAVED?

There are specific hadiths that are deemed to be sound (sahih) according to Sunni standards, which teach that Allah literally wears a robe/cloak and has a garment (izhar) covering his waist/loins.  

For instance, specific narrations claim that Allah’s cloak happens to be his pride and that his lower garment/waist wrapper (izhar) is his greatness/majesty/might:

34 Clothing (Kitab Al-Libas)

(1530) Chapter: What Has Been Reported About Pride

Narrated AbuHurayrah: The Prophet said: Allah Most High says: Pride is my cloak and majesty is my lower garment (izhari), and I shall throw him who view with me regarding one of them into Hell.

Grade: Sahih (Al-Albani)

Reference: Sunan Abi Dawud 4090

In-book reference: Book 34, Hadith 71

English translation: Book 33, Hadith 4079 (https://sunnah.com/abudawud:4090; emphasis mine)

And:

30 General Behavior

(251) Chapter: Pride

Abu Hurayra reported that the Prophet said that Allah Almighty said, “Might is My wrapper (izhari) and pride is My cloak. I will punish anyone who contends with Me over either of them.”

Grade: Sahih (Al-Albani)

Reference: Al-Adab Al-Mufrad 552

In-book reference: Book 30, Hadith 15

English translation: Book 30, Hadith 552 (https://sunnah.com/adab:552; emphasis mine)

Finally:

On the authority of Abu Hurayrah, who said that the Messenger of Allah said: Allah (mighty and sublime be He) said:

Pride is my cloak and greatness My robe (izhari), and he who competes with Me in respect of either of them I shall cast into Hell-fire. It was related by Abu Dawud (also by Ibn Majah and Ahmad) with sound chains of authority. This Hadith also appears in Muslim in another version.

Reference: Hadith 19, 40 Hadith Qudsi (https://sunnah.com/qudsi40:19; emphasis mine)

According to one of Salafi Islam’s greatest modern scholars, the late Muhammad ibn Saleh al-Uthaymin, the robe and lower garment of Allah cannot be explained away as simply metaphors but must be taken literally:

ما توجيه أهل السنة للحديث القدسي:”العزة ردائي”.?

الشيخ محمد بن صالح العثيمين

الشيخ : قول الله إيش ؟
الطالب : … ما توجيه أهل السنة لهذه ؟

الشيخ : يؤمنون به كما جاء في الحديث
الطالب : … الله عز وجل

الشيخ : نعم يثبتون ما أثبته الله لنفسه .
الطالب : ما يقال أن هذا أسلوب من أساليب العرب أن العزة متلبس بها ؟

الشيخ : يعني قصدك أن تكون إزارا معنويا ورداء معنويا .
لو أن أحدا بل لو أن الله عز وجل يوم القيامة سألك ما تقول ؟ ماذا تقول لله ؟ المسألة ما هي احتمال اللفظ للمعنى المسألة كيف تقابل الله عز وجل يوم القيامة إذا كان ظاهر كلامه أنه إزار حقيقي ورداء حقيقي ولكن كيف ارتدى به كيف اتزر به ؟ هذا علمه عند الله أفهمت ؟
لاحظوا هذه يا جماعة المسألة ما هي شطارة من الإنسان يستطيع أن يصرف النصوص كما شاء أو كما يعقل لا المسألة خبر محض أخبر الله بها عن نفسه لا يمكن يوم القيامة أن نقول يا ربنا ليس إزارا لك ولا رداء لك ما يمكن نعم .

The decrees (fatwas)

What is the interpretation of the people of the Sunnis about the Hadith Qudsi “Glory is my cloak.”?

Sheikh Muhammad bin Saleh Al-Uthaymeen

Sheikh: What does Allah say?

Student: … What is the interpretation of the people of the Sunnis to this?

Sheikh: They believe in it as it came in the Hadith.

Student: … Allah to him the glory and the majesty.

Sheikh: Yes, they affirm what Allah affirmed to Himself.

Student: what is said that this is a style of many of the Arab styles that the glory He wears it?

Sheikh: Do you mean that it is a spiritual garment (izhara) (to wear as underpants) and a spiritual cloak (something to wear over the underpants)?

If someone, or even if Allah, to him be the glory and the majesty, on the Day of Resurrection asks you what would you say? What would you say to Allah? The issue is what is the possibility of the meaning of the word? The issue is how will you meet Allah, to him be the glory and the majesty, on the Day of Resurrection, if the apparent meaning of His words is that it is a real garment (izhar haqiqi) and a real cloak? But how did He wear it? How did He wrap Himself with it? The knowledge of this is with Allah, do you understand?

Note this, Oh people. The issue is what is the cleverness of the human who can interpret the texts as he wishes or as he understands? The issue is not pure news that Allah has informed us about Himself. It is not possible on the Day of the Resurrection for us to say, “Our Lord, you have neither a garment nor a cloak.” It Is impossible. Yes. (LINK: https://al-fatawa.com/fatwa/39720/%D9%85%D8%A7-%D8%AA%D9%88%D8%AC%D9%8A%D9%87-%D8%A7%D9%87%D9%84-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%86%D8%A9-%D9%84%D9%84%D8%AD%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%AB-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%82%D8%AF%D8%B3%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B2%D8%A9-%D8%B1%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%A6%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D8%A8%D9%86-%D8%B9%D8%AB%D9%8A%D9%85%D9%8A%D9%86; emphasis mine)

Interestingly, there are “authentic” traditions attributed to Muhammad that confirm al-Uthaymin’s position.

For instance, Muhammad is reported to have seen Allah appearing to him in the shape of a beardless youth dressed in a red robe/garment:  

I saw my Lord in the form of a young man, beardless (amrad) with short curly hair (ja’d) and clothed in a red garment. (Narrated by Ahmad b. Hanbal in Tabarani; AUTHENTICATED BY AHMAD B. HANBAL in Creed 3 citing isnad, ‘Abd al-Samad b. Yahya in Tabaqat al-Hanabila, 1:218, al-Marrudhi (d. 888) in Tabaqat, 3:81, Ibn ‘Aqil in Makdisi, Ibn ‘Aqil, 130; Ibn ‘Adi al-Qattan, al-Kamil fi du’afa’ al-rijal, 3:49-50, al-Daraqutni, Kitab al-Ru’ya, 332-333, 356-357; al-Tabarani, al-Mu’jam al-Kabir, 25:143; SAHIH BY ABU L-HASAN B. BASHSHAR in Ibn Abi Ya’la, Tabaqat, 2:59; Abu Ya’la, al-Muta’mad, 85; ACCEPTED BY IBN TAYMIYYA in Bayan Tablis al-Jahmiyya, 7:192-198, 290)

One of Sunni Islam’s greatest hadith scholars named Ahmad b. Hanbal said about the above hadith: “Report it because the ‘ulama have reported it.” (‘Abd al-Samad b. Yahya reported in Tabaqat al-Hanabila, 1:218)

In case the readers are unaware of Ibn Hanbal, he not only was a compiler of hadiths whose massive collection of narrations is called Musnad Ahmad, but also has a school of Islamic jurisprudence named after him. I.e., the Hanbali madhab.

What this supposedly authentic hadith establishes is that Muhammad’s god does indeed wear clothing, even though the Salafis will say that he does so in a manner befitting his majesty which is unlike anything in creation!

FURTHER READING

MUHAMMAD’S GOD: A YOUNG CURLY HAIRED, BEARDLESS BOY!

Islam Portrays Allah as a Finite, Limited, Temporal Embodied Soul

FOR ALLAH SO LOVED THE UMMA THAT HE GAVE UP ONE OF HIS FEET!

ALLAH’S AMAZEMENT AND LAUGHTER

Allah – An Immaterial Entity or an Invisible Man?

The Annihilation of Allah

Allah: An Exalted Woman? Examining the Issue of Allah’s Veil

Revisiting the Face of Allah

Revisiting the Irrationality of Salafi Anthropomorphism

The Re-Formers of Islam: The Mas’ud Questions

Paul, in Colossians 1:15-17, describes Jesus as the eternal Creator and Sustainer of all creation:

“who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; for in him were ALL THINGS created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; ALL THINGS have been created through him, and unto him; and he IS before ALL THINGS, and in him ALL THINGS consist.” American Standard Version

“Who is image of the invisible God, firstborn of all creation, because in him EVERYTHING was created in the heavens and on earth, the visible and the invisible, be it thrones or lordships or governments or dominions—EVERYTHING has been created through him and to come to him, and before EVERYTHING he IS, and in him EVERYTHING holds together.” The Bible in Living English

The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Watchtower Bible and Tract Society couldn’t have this in their Bible and so decided to add the word “other” in their perversion of Scripture, since they admit that to not do so would identify Jesus as the Creator himself!

“He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation;because by means of him all other things were created in the heavens and on the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All other things have been created through him and for him. Also, he is before all other things, and by means of him all other things were made to exist,” 

all other things: A literal rendering of the Greek text would be “all things.” (Compare Kingdom Interlinear.) However, such a rendering could give the impression that Jesus was not created but was the Creator himself. And that idea would not agree with the rest of the Bible [sic], including the preceding verse, which calls Jesus “the firstborn of all creation.” (Col 1:15; compare Re 3:14, where Jesus is called “the beginning of the creation by God.”) Also, the Greek word for “all” can in some contexts have the meaning “all other,” as for example at Lu 13:2 (“all other”); Lu 21:29 (“all the other”); Php 2:21 (“all the others”). This agrees with Paul’s inspired teaching found at 1Co 15:27: “God ‘subjected all things under his [Christ’s] feet.’ But when he says that ‘all things have been subjected,’ it is evident that this does not include the One who subjected all things to him.” So both the Bible’s teachings as a whole and the probable meaning of the Greek word used here support the rendering “all other things.”​—Compare study note on Php 2:9. (New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (Study Edition): https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/colossians/1/; bold, italicized emphasis mine)

This candid admission shows just how pernicious and wicked the Watchtower Society happens to be, since they acknowledge that the plain and literal reading of the inspired Greek text of Colossians 1:16-17 portrays Christ as the uncreated Son of God whom the Father appointed to create and give life to all creation.

The Society, therefore, deliberately perverted the literal rendering of this God-breathed passage in order to hide this inspired truth of God that Jesus is not a part of creation, but is rather distinguished from all creation as its very Creator.

FURTHER READING

Revelation 3:14: Jesus the Arche of Creation

Revelation 3:14 Revisited: Jesus as the Arche of God’s Creation

Does Revelation 3:14 Teach That Jesus is God’s First Creation? Pt. 1, Pt. 2

THE NEW WORLD TRANSLATION PROVES JESUS IS UNCREATED!

THE NWT TESTIFIES THAT THE TRINITY IS THE ETERNAL CREATOR!