Child marriage, Sharia and moral responsibility of our time

Islam’s moral logic supports raising marriage age to prevent harm, ensure maturity

Pakistan's recent decision to set 18 as the minimum age of marriage has reignited a familiar controversy. Religious objections have framed the law as an assault on Islamic Sharia, suggesting that any restriction beyond puberty amounts to importing alien values into a Muslim society. Yet this framing misunderstands both Islam and the nature of the challenge Pakistan faces today.

The question before us is not whether early marriage existed in early Muslim societies. It undeniably did. The real question is whether Islam requires us to preserve a historical practice even when its original social conditions have disappeared, and its harms have become systematic. On this question, Islam's own moral logic points clearly in one direction.

Islam did not come to freeze seventh-century social arrangements. It came to guide humanity toward justice, responsibility and moral maturity. Many practices present in pre-Islamic Arabia — slavery, tribal warfare, unrestricted patriarchy — were regulated rather than immediately abolished.

Regulation, however, was never the same as moral idealisation. To confuse tolerance in a specific context with timeless endorsement is to reduce Islam to history rather than uphold it as a living ethical framework.

A crucial distinction in the Quran is between biological maturity and moral maturity. Puberty is never treated as a sufficient qualification for responsibility. In fact, the Quran explicitly separates the two. Guardians are instructed to test orphans for sound judgment before handing over their wealth, even after they reach marriageable age.

This concept of rushd — mental and practical maturity — is central to Islamic ethics. If Islam demands demonstrated judgment before entrusting someone with property, how can it require less before entrusting them with marriage, motherhood and lifelong responsibility?

Marriage in Islam is not a biological event triggered by puberty. It is described as a solemn covenant rooted in tranquillity, affection, mercy and mutual responsibility. These are not physical conditions; they are psychological and moral capacities. A girl who lacks emotional maturity, informed consent and the ability to understand the consequences of marriage cannot meaningfully enter such a covenant. To insist otherwise empties nikah of its moral substance.

Islamic law is also anchored in a foundational principle: there should be neither harm nor reciprocating harm. Today, the harms associated with early child marriage are neither hypothetical nor exaggerated. They are visible across Pakistan — higher maternal mortality, interrupted education, entrenched poverty, psychological trauma and unsustainable population growth.

When harm becomes predictable and widespread, Islamic jurisprudence does not defend permissibility; it moves to restriction. Preventing harm is not a modern invention; it is a religious duty.

Some argue that regulating marriage age challenges prophetic practice. This argument collapses once history is approached honestly. The Prophet (PBUH) operated within his social context, but his moral trajectory consistently raised ethical standards rather than sanctifying vulnerability.

His example cannot be reduced to isolated historical details detached from context and purpose. To use his life to justify structural harm to girls in today's Pakistan is not reverence; it is moral misreading.

Context has always mattered in Islamic law. Early marriages occurred in societies with lower life expectancy, informal education and economic structures that demanded early family formation. Modern Pakistan is a radically different reality. Parenthood today requires education, healthcare access, psychological readiness and economic stability.

Islamic jurisprudence recognises the authority of the state to regulate social matters in pursuit of public welfare. Fixing a minimum marriage age is not a declaration that earlier practices were sinful in their historical setting. It is an acknowledgement that circumstances have changed, harms are clear and moral responsibility demands adjustment.

The deeper question, then, is not whether Islam permits early marriage in abstraction, but whether Islam compels us to ignore the damage it now causes.