Islam-Sikhism - Feedback (THE YOUNG AGE OF 'A'ISHAH)

This question-answer and counter response was forwarded by Pravin Singh, although originally posted on a site that is known for its hatred towards Islaam and propagation of lies and misconceptions.

Ayatollah Montazeri's answers - red
Response to Montazeri - green
Our reply - blue

The young age of Ayesha
---------------------------------
Question no. 1
Muhammad married Ayesha when she was 6-years old and consumed his marriage with her when she was 9-years-old. How could a 54 year-old man calling himself the messenger God have sexual feelings for a 9-year-old girl?

It is only in the modern era, with the advancement of technology resulting in the longevity of life, that perceptions of marital and pre-martial relationships have dramatically changed. If one seeks to raise doubts of one man's sexual proclivity then one must also extend doubts over the same practice carried out by humankind from time immemorial. In our article The Charge of Paedophilia, we show that prior to the modern era, alongside its accompanying sexual depravity, women were considered eligible for marriage upon the onset of their menstrual cycle with the decision for marriage dependent upon the socio-political environment.

1- Ayatollah Montazeri In those days the tradition of Marriage was based on tribal customs and rituals. The objective of marriage was mainly to foster friendship with the father of the bride and therefore the marriage of the Prophet with Ayesha was a political move.
Sina. This is not a good excuse to marry an underage child. I am not bothered of the marriage of the prophet with a daughter of Abu Bakr, but the fact that Ayesha was a child.

Who is it that has come to an absolute definitive conclusion that marriage to an underage child is wrong? Is it the prerogative of man or his Creator?
As mentioned in the above article The Charge of Paedophilia, according to the circumstances that the Muslims found themselves in, it was considered in their best interest to solidify the bonds of friendship into family bonds. 'A'ishah's marriage was not to a low-life commoner known for mistreatment and disloyalty of his women, similar to the men of today's modern secular society where the very notion of commitment and trust has been discarded for its opposite. On the contrary, she was betrothed to a man known for his absolute kind treatment of women and children, an example unparalleled in history.

It is not proper for a messenger of God to have sexual feelings for a little girl and it is unconscionable to act on them. In this day and age if a 54-year-old man has an intercourse with a 9-year-old girl he will be jailed and despised as a pedophile. Why should the Prophet be forgiven?

This person does not realise that the Prophet's marriage to 'A'ishah when she was six was not for sexual pleasure or the need to sire children, since he was already married to Sawdah bint Zam'ah, but "in order to consolidate the ties of mutual brotherhood within the new Islamic community, and especially between himself and his two viziers" Abu Bakr and 'Umar due to the "continued psychological and physical persecution" from the Pagan Arabs, who sought to religiously cleanse the Muslims from the face of the earth. They "had their property usurped by the powers that be of Makkah" and it was for this reason, in order to raise the hopes of his followers and build further solidarity within the ranks of the Muslims, that he married 'A'ishah. Furthermore, this person also fails to mention the fact that the Prophet consummated the marriage when 'A'ishah had matured and begun ovulating, a natural indication of her maturity of womanhood and the ability to sire children.

2. Ayatollah Montazeri. The Prophet at the age of 25 married Khadijah, a woman who was 40-years-old and did not marry with another woman as long as she was alive. If the Prophet was a lustful man, he would not have married with an older woman and stay faithful to her all her life.

One must also mention that after the Prophet's marriage to 'A'ishah under the above mentioned exceptional circumstances, the Prophet thereafter only married mature women who were either widowed or divorced. If the Prophet was, as this person is attempting to malign, a paedophile who had "sexual feelings" for "little girls", why did he not during the remainder of his life choose to marry "little girls" instead of old widows and old divorcees, some of whom had reached menopause? He had the opportunity to and could have easily chosen whoever he wanted, and yet he did not. Why?

Sina: Khadijah was a wealthy woman and the Prophet was a poor employee of her. Marrying a wealthy woman for him was climbing the ladder of social status. At that age, he was an orphan boy with little ambitions. Being a poor young man, no one paid attention to him.

This is a clear indication of this person's ignorance. A closer examination of the seerah (biography) and hadeeth of the Prophet's life will prove that even by the age of 25 the Prophet's impeccable characteristics of truthfulness and trustworthiness were already acknowledged by his people and the whole of Makkah. Indeed, he was known by the nickname: As-Saadiq-ul Aameen - The Truthful and Trustworthy.
It was precisely for this reason due to his reputation proceeding him that Khadeejah hired him as a merchant, and after seeing for herself this man's sublime character proposed marriage.

Ibn Ishaq reported that Khadijah, daughter of Khwailid was a business-woman of great honour and fortune. She used to employ men to do her business for a certain percentage of the profits. Quraish people were mostly tradespeople, so when Khadijah was informed of Muhammad , his truthful words, great honesty and kind manners, she sent for him. She offered him money to go to Syria and do her business, and she would give him a higher rate than the others. She would also send her hireling, Maisarah, with him.
...When he returned to Makkah, Khadijah noticed, in her money, more profits and blessings than she used to. Her hireling also told her of Muhammad's good manners, honesty, deep thought, sincerity and faith. She realized that she homed at her target. Many prominent men had asked for her hand in marriage but she always spurned their advances. She disclosed her wish to her friend Nafisa, daughter of Maniya, who immediately went to Muhammad and broke the good news to him. He agreed and requested his uncles to go to Khadijah's uncle and talk on this issue. Subsequently, they were married. [1]

Kadijah was to him a boon. She gave him the comfort and the ease of mind from financial worries. Now he could afford to retreat to his cave and let his imagination fly; meet Jinns, battle with Satan, converse with Gabriel, and other creatures that haunted his feeble mind.

This is an Ad Hominem fallacy with no evidence to support these disparaging remarks.

The fact that he remained faithful to Khadijah was not due to his chastity or loyalty but because she was a powerful woman and would not have tolerated infidelity from him.

This is a strawman argument. Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was from a noble lineage himself. Indeed, his close relationship to his uncle Abu Taalib would later be the reason for the hesitation of the leaders of Makkah from killing him - precisely because of Abu Taalib's strong handed and uncompromising protection of his nephew.

At that time Muhammad had no followers and he would have lost everything if he had offended his wealthy wife. That would have destroyed him completely.
However, he showed his true colors when he came to power and virtually nothing could stop him from doing what he pleased. It was then that he broke all the norms of the decency by the leave of his Allah.

This only adds weight to our argument, that is: why did the Prophet, therefore, not marry more "little girls" and more wealthy beautiful virgins? Why did he instead choose to marry those women who in today's terminology would be described as a "financial liability"?

3- Ayatollah Montazeri. The Prophets intention in marrying numerous old and widowed women, apart from sociopolitical considerations, was to foster their social status. Those were the days when women, especially slave girls, had little or no value and ignorance was such that they used to burry their daughters alive.

Sina. The Prophet married Khadijah, as I explained above, for her wealth.

Wrong! Khadeejah proposed marriage to Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Hence, the counter-question we pose is: why would a wealthy prosperous business woman marry her "poor employee"?

After her death he married Ayesha who was only 6 years old and due to Abu Bakr's request did not consummate his marriage with her for three years.

We strongly contest this and ask: where is the proof that the Prophet did not consummate the marriage upon Abu Bakr's request? This person is alluding to the idea that had it not been for Abu Bakr's request, the Prophet would have gone through with the consummation, far above is Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) from such allusions.

During this time he needed a woman and the non-believers would not marry him as they thought he was a lunatic. Among his handful of followers there were few eligible women to whom he could marry. Sauda was a Muslim woman and a widow. She was ideal under the circumstances. She could warm his bed and take care of his home and needs. He married her two months after the death of Kahdijah. Khadijah and Sauda were the only wives of the Prophet, with whom he married not for lust but out of necessity. Hafza, the daughter of Omar also may have not been very beautiful according to her own father and the Prophet may have married her to please him and for political reasons. Every one of his other wives was a beautiful virgin or a beautiful divorcee or widow. Majority, if
not all of them were in their teens. Prophet married them or simply slept with them without marrying them only because of their looks. Some times he had to bend few rules and even bring Allah to reveal some verses for him in order to allow him get what he wanted. As was in the case of Zeinab Bent Jahsh, Maryah and Ayesha. None of his wives were suffering from malnutrition or were lonely poor widows prior to marrying him. The stories of Safiyah, Maryah and Zeinab are love stories, flavored with lust, betrayal and crime.

These are unsubstantiated fanciful assertions completely separated from the factual truth as it stands. This is correctly refuted as follows:

'A'ishah and Hafsah were daughters of his two viziers, Abu Bakr and 'Umar, respectively. It was this relation of their fathers to Muhammad which caused the latter to cement his relationship with them by blood. That is why he married their two daughters; that is why he gave in marriage his two daughters to 'Uthman and 'Ali.
...Another conclusive proof of this sense of social concern is the case of Muhammad's marriages to Zaynab, daughter of Khuzaymah, and Umm Salamah. The former was the wife of `Ubaydah ibn al Harith ibn al Muttalib who fell at the Battle of Badr. Surely she was not beautiful, but she was so kind and gentle that she acquired the nickname of "mother of the destitute." She was past her prime in age and lived only one or two years after her marriage to Muhammad. Besides Khadijah she was the only wife of the Prophet who died before him. As for Umm Salamah, she was the wife of Abu Salamah for whom she bore many children. It has already been mentioned that Abu Salamah was wounded at Uhud, that he seemed to be recovering from his wound when the Prophet assigned to him the duty of fighting Banu Asad whom he defeated and whose wealth he seized. It was during the second campaign of Abu Salamah that his wound reopened, and it caused his death a few days later. The Prophet visited him in his last days and remained constantly by his bedside praying for him until he died. Four months after his death, when the Prophet asked the hand of Umm Salamah, she apologized by using the large number of her children and her old age as an excuse. But the Prophet insisted until she accepted and he assumed the duty of caring for and bringing up her offspring. Would then the missionaries and the Western Orientalists claim that Umm Salamah was a woman of rare beauty and that this is why Muhammad had married her? If Muhammad was indeed looking for beauty, there were scores of virgin daughters of both Muhajirun and Ansar far surpassing his women in beauty, in youth, in position and wealth, in vitality, for him to choose from and to take in marriage. He did not have to choose those women who would bring to him large liabilities of mouths to feed and old people to take care of. The fact is that Muhammad married Umm Salamah because of this noble motivation of his, the same reason for which he married Zaynab, daughter of Khuzaymah. It was this same reason which caused the Muslims to love their Prophet all the more and honor him as the Prophet of God and to see in him a father to the destitute and the deprived and the weak and the poor as well as to everyone who had lost his father as a martyr in the cause of God. [2]

You also correctly described the deplorable condition of the slave girls in those days, but you forgot to mention that many of these slave girls were free people before the Prophet took away their freedom and reduced them into slaves. Are you saying that the slave girls should have been grateful to the Prophet for killing their loved ones and sell them in the markets to a Muslim who would use them as a maid and a sex slave?

Of course s/he fails to mention that those who attacked the Muslims, forcing them to defend themselves, were entering into a state of war from which slavery stems. Although this requires greater elaboration, the question we ask is: how were these slaves treated by the Muslims, as maid and sex slaves as this person suggests or with dignity and respect?
For further information on this subject we recommend the following book that deals with this subject emphatically: "Slavery in Islam" by Maulana Saeed Ahmad - Darul Ishaat publishers.

4- Ayatollah Montazeri The marriage of the Prophet with Ayesha took place in the first or second year of the Hijra at the insistence of her father Abu Bakr and some of his friends. The Prophet, for sometimes after the death of Khadijah, remained single. His main objective in accepting this marriage was for political reasons. The reason for this marriage was that the Prophet was under the intense pressure by his enemies like Abu Lahab and Abu Jahl and was completely dependant of the protection of other tribes. Abu Bakr had a lot of tribal influence. And rejecting his offer, in those conditions, for the Prophet was not prudent. In reality this marriage was symbolic and not to satisfy his sexual instinct, because, as a rule a 53-year-old man cannot have sexual feelings for a 9-year-old girl.

This is incorrect. The marriage did not take place in the "first or second year of Hijra". Rather it occurred in the tenth year of Prophethood, approximately 3 years before Hijrah:

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) married her in Shawwaal of the tenth year of the Prophethood. [3]

In Shawwal of the same year, the Prophet concluded a marriage contract with 'Aishah - may Allah be pleased with her - , 'the truth verifier', when she was six of age and consummated his marriage with her in Shawwal, the year 1 After Hijrah in Madinah when she was nine. [4]

"The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and consummated the marriage with me when I was nine." [5]

Sina The Prophet did not marry Ayesha at the insistence of her father. There are many Hadithes that show it was the Prophet who desired Ayesha and asked Abu Bakr to give him his then 6-year-old daughter for marriage. In fact Abu Barkr was shocked by such a request. He objected that he was a foster brother to the Prophet, which would have made such a marriage illicit. But the Prophet dismissed his concern saying that they were not real blood brothers and their oath of brotherhood was of no relevance in this case.
Sahih Bukhari 7.18
Narrated 'Ursa:
The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry."

How easily a slight of hand can derive a false conclusion from two unrelated premises. The above is nothing more than a non-sequitur. There is no proof that Abu Bakr was "shocked" by the Prophet's proposal. On the contrary, Abu Bakr failed to realise the distinction of brotherhood in religion and brotherhood of blood, which the Prophet rightly corrected.

Arabs were a primitive lot with little rules to abide. Yet they had some code of ethics that they honored scrupulously. For example, although they fought all the year round, they abstained from hostilities during certain holy months of the year. They also considered Mecca to be a holy city and did not make war against it. A foster son's wife was deemed to be a daughter-in-law and they would not marry her. Also it was costmary that close friends made a pact of brotherhood and considered each other as true brothers. The Prophet disregarded all of these rules anytime they stood between him and his interests or wishes.
Abu Bakr and Muhammad had pledged to each other to be brothers. So according to their costumes Ayesha was supposed to be like a niece to the Holy Prophet. Yet that did not stop him to ask her hand even when she was only six years old.
But this moral relativist Prophet would use the same excuse to reject the daughter of Hamza who was also a foster brother to the Prophet because she was not very pretty.

These "primitive rules" mentioned are no more correct than the secularist laws of today. By extension of the above argument, would this person be willing to concede that the Prophet outlawing a sons marriage to his mother following the father's death, or the social practice of infanticide of young baby daughters by burying them alive, was a wrong verdict by the "moral relativist" Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)? Of course not. The Prophet came to, as he said: "...perfect the nobility of character", part of which was to change the incorrect customary actions with correct ones. Hence, the socially accepted practice that a verbal agreement of brotherhood necessitated a marital barrier between the two parties concerned was declared incorrect and expunged.

Sahih Bukhari V.7, B62, N. 37
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
It was said to the Prophet, "Won't you marry the daughter of Hamza?" He said, "She is my foster niece (brother's daughter). "
In the following Hadith the Prophet confided to Ahesha that he had dreamed of her before asking her hand from her father.
Sahih Bukhari 9.140
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.' "

This is further proof that the Prophet believed this to be a divinely arranged marriage, which refutes the charge that he had "sexual feelings" for "little girls".

The excuse that this marriage was "political" can be also dismissed easily. Abu Bakr was a good friend of the Prophet; he was one of his followers and his foster brother, he belonged to the same tribe of the Prophet; there was no need for the Apostle of Allah to sleep with his little daughter in order to foster his friendship. The evidence shows that the holy Prophet took advantage of this man's devotion and abused the trust that he had in him and coerced him into giving his little girl in marriage to him. How could you deny the request of a man whom you believe to be a messenger of God?

Alas, not a single piece of clear evidence has been presented either from the hadeeth literature or from the annals of history. The proof that the Prophet did not abuse the trust of Abu Bakr was 'A'ishah herself who narrated over 2000 ahadeeth and not once did she speak ill of the Prophet in terms of his treatment of her and her father. Moreover, since there were no marital barriers between Muhammad and Abu Bakr from a Islamic perspective, no trust was broken. Hence, the above is once again a strawman argument.

Abu Jahl (the father of ignorance) was a derogatory nicknames given to Abul Hakam (the father of erudiciton). It's difficult to see in what ways sleeping with a 9-year-old girl would have protected the Prophet from him? As you said this marriage took place one or two years after Hijra. His enemies were in Mecca. Even if such a marriage could have protected the Prophet, which is absurd, he was already safe in Medina, so that alibi is unacceptable.
Anyway, the point is not that the Prophet married a daughter of Abu Bakr. The point is that he had sex with a 9-year-old child. If you say it was done to protect himself, then the Prophet was an opportunist who raped a little girl to save his own life. Please don't say it was not rape because a 9-year-old child is not mature enough to consent and if she cannot consent it is rape. Your defense incriminates the messenger of Allah even more than my accusations.

We counter this absurd conclusion by asking why the world remained silent up until the modern era to accuse the Prophet of Mercy of rape?
Why did not the enemies of Islaam accuse him of this crime?
Why did not 'A'ishah object to this marriage during the course of her life?
Why did the pagan Arabs not accuse him of rape?

You said that the marriage was symbolic. How symbolic it could be if the Prophet approached Ayesha when she, according to her own testimony, was still playing with her toys and gave her a completely different kind of toy to play with that "SURPRISED" that little girl?
Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 90
Narrated Aisha:
When the Prophet married me, my mother came to me and made me enter the house (of the Prophet) and NOTHING SURPRISED ME BUT THE COMING OF ALLAH'S APOSTLE TO ME IN THE FORENOON.
You wrote, "As a rule a 53-year-old man cannot have sexual feelings for a 9-year-old girl." That is absolutely true. This is precisely my point. Unfortunately we are not living in a perfect world and there are people who are psychologically disturbed and violate the rules. Even today there are old men who fantasize having sex with small children, keep their photos and exchange them on the Internet. They are known as pedophiles and to protect our children we put them in jail. If the Prophet hadn't "surprised" that little girl in the same forenoon that her mother took her to his house, I could have accepted that the marriage was "symbolic", even though its merits are not clear. But when we see that the Apostle of Allah consummated his marriage with that little girl in the same day that she was taken to him, it is hard to see it as "symbolic"; symbol of what?

The above argument brings us full circle to the absolute absurdity of this whole argument. This person, by extension of argument, must therefore charge all men who married women upon reaching maturity after the on-set of menstruation as paedophiles. We wonder how large the jail must have been in order to lock away all those who were "guilty" of committing this crime not only throughout the major societies of that time, but also throughout human history!

5- Ayatollah Montazeri. There is no doubt that the climatic conditions influence the physical and psychological growth of girls and their growth are more accelerated in hot climates.
Sina: In the previous point you explained that the marriage was symbolic and "as a rule a 53-year-old man cannot have sexual feelings for a 9-year-old girl". But now you are approaching from a totally different angle.
I am afraid 9-year-old girls in Arabia are still 9-year-old children. Unless you advance a scientific evolutionary theory that human race has undergone a huge mutation during these 1400 years and in those days women reached adulthood at the age of 9, the fact remains that the Prophet had sexual feelings for an underage girl and this was wrong. To be convinced that 9-year-old children were always children, even during the time of the Prophet, we do not have to look farther than another Hadith narrated by Ayesha herself. In the following hadith Ayesha is revealing that she was playing on a swing when her mother took her to the Prophet.
Sunan Abu-Dawud Book 41, Number 4915, also Number 4915 and Number 4915
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:
The Apostle of Allah (pbuh) married me when I was seven or six. When we came to Medina, some women came, according to Bishr's version: Umm Ruman came to me when I was swinging. They took me, made me prepared and decorated me. I was then brought to the Apostle of Allah (pbuh), and he took up cohabitation with me when I was nine. She halted me at the door, and I burst into laughter.
And used to play with her dolls.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151
Narrated 'Aisha:
I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13)
Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3327:
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) 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.
As a rule one would say that if she was still playing with her dolls, she was not mature enough to learn about sex, first hand, from a man who could be her grandfather.

The problem this person has is recognising the difference between a child and an adult. We have proven from the rebuttal The Charge of Paedophilia that prior to the modern era, and right throughout history, the demarcation between adolescence and adulthood was the females menstrual cycle. It is also an accepted fact that in those times, with the average age much shorter than it is today, both men and women were married early on in life regardless of whether they were playing with dolls, sewing clothes, washing dishes or cooking. In Hindustan, for example, it was a common practice for daughters to be betrothed to a prospective suitor before they reached adulthood. This practice was carried out during and after the time of the 10 Gurus.
In the case of the Prophet, we know that due to the exceptional circumstances of that time, he deemed it necessary for the benefit of the Muslims to marry 'A'ishah when she was six - a child - followed by consummation when she was nine - a woman. However, when circumstances were equal, did the Prophet choose to repeat this practice? The answer is no; though as we said earlier, if he wanted to he could have. It is for this reason that Imaam an-Nawawi (d.676AH/1277CE) wrote in his famous explanation of Saheeh Muslim:

It is preferable for a guardian not to marry off his daughter when she is still young unless there is a valid reason for that. It should be noted that [Imaam] ash-Shaffa'ee (d.205AH) and his companions said: It is preferable for fathers and grandfathers not to marry off a virgin until she reaches the age of puberty and they ask her permission, lest she end up in a marriage that she dislikes. What they said does not go against the hadeeth of 'A'ishah, because what they meant is that they should not marry her off before she reaches puberty if there is no obvious interest to be served that they fear will be missed out on if they delay it, as in the hadeeth of 'A'ishah. In that case it is preferable to go ahead with the marriage because the father is enjoined to take care of his child's interests and not to forego a good opportunity. [6]

6- Ayatollah Montazeri. The difference of age between men, and the women they married, in the primitive societies, was acceptable and customary. Also it was not indecent or lewd for older men to marry very young girls and people of those days did not deem that to be something immoral. Even up to this day, one can find marriages with very young girls among the Arabs. As a rule one should not compare the customs of the primitive and tribal societies with the customs of the modern and advanced societies of today.

Sina I agree that primitive societies had some customs that are shocking to our modern sensitivity. Primitive people did a lot of things that appall us today. They had, human and animal sacrifices; practiced gender discrimination, slavery and many forms of abuses of human rights. I am not condemning primitive societies for they did not know better. I am condemning modern people who follow those primitive societies by following the examples of a man who was just a product of his primitive society. I am condemning a man who called himself the Prophet of Allah, the "Mercy of God in the worlds - Rahmatu'llah lil Alamin" and the example for all mankind, who instead of setting the example of morality and rectitude followed the customs of his primitive society and thus reaffirmed them and perpetuated them as something to emulate. I am condemning a society that has forgotten its own past splendor and glory and is now trying to copy the customs of a primitive society and wants to establish
their primeval precepts by following their prophet who had nothing new to add to that primitive society bur was a product of it.

As we mentioned in our rebuttal article, The Charge of Paedophilia: "this was 'urfi - a custom of the people of that time, not only in Arabia, but all over the world". Thus, it is necessary to point out that this custom is not obligatory (waajib) upon the Muslims to carry out. This is the mistake committed in the above assertion, which stems from the incorrect assumption that the practice of this custom by a lesser technologically advanced "primitive" culture was in following the example of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Nothing could be further from the truth and before making this connection, the onus is upon the claimant to show this beyond reasonable doubt.
Before jumping to these premature conclusions one must know what actions of the Prophet are obligatory (waajib) for Muslims to actualise and what actions are merely permissible (mubah) without being obligatory. This is an oft-repeated mistake made by non-Muslims when attempting to understand the dictates of the Prophet of Islaam and its application by the followers. Of course, this is due to ignorance.

Yes, we should not compare the customs of the primitive and tribal societies with the customs of the modern and advanced societies of today. But why should we emulate them? Why should we follow them? Why should we accept their prophet who was incapable to break away from that primitiveness, barbarity and savagery?

The answer is simple: There is great wisdom and learning to be derived from these so-called "primitive" cultures, something which today's secularised society could learn from in order to derive the solutions to the many illnesses plaguing its social sinews.
The Prophet of Mercy taught us not to have pre-marital relationships; thus, keeping at bay the social problems of sexually transmitted diseases, teenage pregnancies, fatherless children, sexual immorality and moral depravity; the illnesses caused by the unnatural practice of homosexuality; warning against adultery, again a major reason for the break down of the family structure and the spread of STDs. And much more than this person unfortunately will ever realise, may Allaah guide him/her towards the Truth.

If the Prophet was truly a prophet, he would have acted differently. He would have not followed the customs of his primitive society but would have set a new standard. If he followed the example of his primitive society why are we following him? On one hand the Muslims of the world study Muhammad's life meticulously, try to imitate him in everything he did. They dress like him, shave like him, walk like him and talk like him, do as he did and live as he lived. They believe everything he did, was ordained by God and he was sent to be the example to all humanity. Yet you say that he did just what his ignorant and primitive society used to do and we should forgive his sins because he was just a victim of that society. How pitiful are we who have not seen this yet. Look what has befallen to our mighty nation that has forsaken its own past glory and is now blindly following a man who followed the customs of his primitive society. Could we sink deeper than this? Is there any humiliation more denigrating than this?

7- Ayatollah Montazeri The issues of each time and place must be viewed according to the standards of their own time and place and not according to standards of other times and places. On the other hand we find that the Prophet (pbuh) practically did not confront with many customs of his own time that were not in contrast with the educational and spiritual goals of Islam, but dealt with them gradually and with realism in order to slowly eradicate them.
Sina I agree that issues should be apprised in the context of to their own time and place. Something that was acceptable 1400 years ago in Arabia may not look that good today. Perhaps we should not judge those people so harshly. But the question is why should we follow them? The solutions that were appropriate then are no more suitable for our time. Why follow a doctrine that has lost its utility and is stuck in history?
Muslims are advised to follow the Sunnah of the Prophet. You say that the Prophet was an Arab, following the traditions of his own people, so what he did was right in that context. But by following him now aren't we perpetuating those unfit and outdated customs of those Arabs of 1400 years ago?

We would say that such questions only stem from one who does not have any idea of how the example of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is to be emulated by the Muslims.
Furthermore, the broad brushed statement that "the solutions that were appropriate then are no more suitable for our time" is indicative of the narrow-mindedness and bigotry this person has displayed through this diatribe.

You affirm that the Prophet did not confront those bad customs that were not in contrast with spiritual and educational goals of Islam. My question is then, what are the spiritual and educational goals of Islam? What is the main goal of Islam anyway? The Muslim's answer is of course, to recognize that God is one and he does not have any partner and that Muhammad is His messenger. This is the main concern of Islam. Moral and ethical issues are secondary. All the sins can be forgiven. Theft, homicide, murder and pedophilia are forgivable but assigning a partner to God is not.

Why? The Prophet explained why all sins will be forgiven except the one who dies upon violating the very right of God:

Mu'aadth Ibn Jabal who said: I was riding behind the Messenger of Allaah on a donkey, so he said, "Do you know what is the right of Allaah in His slaves, and what is the right of the slaves on Allaah?" I said: Allaah and His Messenger know best. He said: The right of Allaah on His slaves is that they worship Him and do not associate with Him anything, and the right of the slaves on Allaah is that He does not punish them if they do not associate with Him anything..." [7]

We also wish to repeat the questions that Pravin Singh either overlooked or failed to answer from the conclusion of the article The Charge of Paedophilia:

Those Sikhs who are still adamant and pigheaded enough to accuse the Prophet of paedophilia must by extension accuse the majority of humankind of paedophilia since prior to the post-modern era and its western influences, people of the world accepted and understood that womanhood was reached upon the onset of menstruation and, as a result, was ready for marriage. Indeed, the categorisation of "children-teenagers-adults" is in fact a modern invention.

During the time of Guru Nanak, at what age were women in Hindustan and the Arabian Peninsula getting married? Was it upon the onset of menstruation or similar to today - at the ages of 20-30?

And we conclude with the following challenge as Allah informs us to: "Produce your evidences if you speak the truth" (Qur'an 2:111):

Provide us with a clear proof from Sri Guru Granth Sahib that establishes when the right time for marriage is.

If the said Sikhs are unable to meet this challenge, but still have the audacity to claim that such and such an age of marriage is wrong, we say that you are not only claiming to be more knowledgeable than your ten Gurus and God, but you are no different to the atheists.
Why?

[1] S-R. al-Mubarakpuri - (Jamia Salafia, India), Ar-Raheeq al-Makhtum (The Sealed Nectar).
[2] M. H. Haykal, The Life of Muhammad, p.291-2.
[3] Ibn Sa'ad 8/58-59.
[4] A-R al-Mubarakpuri, op. cit.
[5] Al-Bukhaari, 3894; Muslim, 1422.
[6] Sharh Muslim, 9/206.
[7] Al-Bukhaari & Muslim