In this chapter, we will discuss the following claims by the Nawasib:
First claim – Was Aisha the most superior wife of Rasulullah (s)?
Second Claim – Were Abu Bakr and Aisha the most beloved of Rasulullah (s)?
Third Claim – Does the title of ‘Umahat ul Momineen’ given to the wives of the Holy Prophet (s) evidence Aisha’s personal merit or guarantees her immunity from criticism?
Abu Sulaiman stated:
There is no doubt that Aysha is the best among the wives of the prophet peace be upon him because all true narrations indicate such a thing. Examples are found in Saheeh Bukhari and Muslim.
Imam Ahmed records in Musnad Ahmed bin Hanbal, Vol. 19 pg. 383 Hadith 12414:
Anas narrated that the prophet (s) said: “The most excellent of the women of all worlds are: Mary the daughter of Imran, Khadija the daughter of Khuwaylid, Fatimah the daughter of Muhammad, and Asiya the wife of Pharaoh”
Shaykh Shu’ayb al-Arnaut stated:
‘Sahih on the conditions of two Shaykhs’
We also read in Musnad Ahmed bin Hanbal, Vol. 1 pg. 293 Hadith 2668:
Ibn Abbas narrates that Rasulullah (s) made four lines on the earth, then He (s) said to his companions, ‘Do you know what this is?’ They replied: ‘Allah and his messenger know best’. He (s) replied: ‘The most excellent of the women of Paradise are Khadija the daughter of Khuwaylid, Fatimah the daughter of Muhammad, Asiya the wife of Pharaoh, and Mary the daughter of Imran’
Shaykh Shu’ayb al-Arnaut stated:
‘The Chain is Sahih, the narrators are reliable (Thuqat), narrators of Sahih (books)’
In Sahih al-Bukhari 3818, Aisha herself narrates:
“I did not feel jealous of any of the wives of the Prophet as much as I did of Khadija though I did not see her, but the Prophet used to mention her very often, and whenever he slaughtered a sheep, he would cut its parts and send them to the women friends of Khadija. When I sometimes said to him, “(You treat Khadija in such a way) as if there is no woman on earth except Khadija,” he would say, “Khadija was such-and-such, and from her I had children.”
According to wikipedia “Jealousy typically refers to the negative or angry thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of insecurity, fear, and anxiety that occur when a person believes a valued relationship is being threatened by a rival, or when another person is perceived to have some type of advantage” . Jealousy is a trait inherent in a person who is envious of the superior position of another, and Aisha’s admission “I did not feel jealous of any of the wives of the Prophet as much as I did of Khadija”, is clear proof that Aisha was fully aware of the superior rank of Khadija. Had Aisha indeed been the most superior wife there would have been no need for her to be jealous.
These four women are the most superior in rank amongst women. Only one wife of Rasulullah (s) is selected in this group and that wife is Khadija (as) NOT Aisha. This tradition PROVES that Khadija is the MOST superior amongst Rasulullah’s wives. If Aisha was, then why did Rasulullah (s) not elevate her to the station of Leaders of women in Paradise?
“The Prophet said…”Among your women, a lovely woman producing many children is better than a childless woman. He said: An ugly woman with children is better than a beautiful woman having no children”
If (according to these Sunni narrations) a fertile woman is better than a barren on, and the ability to bear children is a mark of superiority, then Aisha’s inability to conceive children automatically means that Khadija (sa) was superior on account of her ability to bear children.
Having good manners is one of the themes found continually throughout the Quran and Sunnah and this is the first aspect that proves the importance of good manners. If adults impress on children the importance of good manners at a young age, they shall seek to adhere to such principles in later life. It is indeed tragic that Aisha who (according to Sunnis) benefited from the company of the Prophet from the age of six, failed to grasp the importance of manners. Here are just a few snapshots of her mannerisms when rowing with her husband.
Narrated Aisha:
That Allah’s Apostle said to her, “I know when you are pleased with me or angry with me.” I said, “Whence do you know that?” He said, “When you are pleased with me, you say, ‘No, by the Lord of Muhammad,’ but when you are angry with me, then you say, ‘No, by the Lord of Abraham.’ ” Thereupon I said, “Yes (you are right), but by Allah, O Allah’s Apostle, I leave nothing but your name.”
Whilst the tradition speaks for itself, we would like to pose some questions:
Imam of Ahl’ul Sunnah Abdul Hamid Ghazzali records the following in his classic Ihya Ulum-id-din by Imam Ghazzali, Volume 2 page 36, Chapter “The secrets of marriage” – English translation by Maulana Fazlul Karim:
Once there was an altercation between the Prophet and Aisha when they found Abu Bakr as judge. Hazrat Aisha said to the Prophet: ‘You speak but don’t speak except truth. At once Abu Bakr gave her such a slap that blood began to ooze out from her mouth’.
The title ‘Sadiq’ was one that dated back to the time of jahilyya, and was a testament to the fact that the pagan Arabs recognized that Muhammad (s) son of Mustafa was a man that always spoke the truth. Now compare this recognition to the conduct of Aisha who was appealing to the conscience of her husband, demanding that he speak truthfully before her father that was there as a an arbiter between the feuding couple. Are such manner becoming of the wife of the Prophet (s)? Her anger is such that she even questions whether the Prophet (s) may seek to influence a decision by fabricating events obtain a decision in his favour. This behavior so angered Abu Bakr that he subjected her to a physical; assault, as a result of which she received a bloody mouth.
Sadly as Abu Ya’la Al Mawsili records in Musnad Abi Ya’la Al Mawsili, Vol. 8, pg. 129-130 Ghazali notes in Ihya Ulum-id-din [Arabic], Vol. 2 pg. 43, this was not a one off blasphemous outburst, we note how on another occasion she said as follows:
وقالت له مرة في كلام غضبت عنده أنت الذي تزعم أنك نبي الله
“It is you who pretend to be a prophet from Allah.”
We appeal to justice, is such an outburst conduct becoming of the best wife of the Prophet (s)? If it is not bad enough that she refuses to refer to her husband as the Prophet of Allah (swt) when angry, on this occasion she commits open kufr against him. We would urge our readers to dispassionately look at this reference. Whilst we are not in any way suggesting that spousal disharmony can never occur in the marital home, both partners will always ensure that whatever they say remains within boundaries to ensure that matters do not get to a more serious level, as such they will always have the feelings of their spouse in mind, knowing that there is a limit to what they can say, no matter how angry they get. Boundaries governing such disputes are very much linked to general rules of decorum, the entire landscape changes when the spouse is Rasulullah (s). The wives of the Prophet (s) cannot simply view him (s) as an ordinary husband, that can thus entitle them to vent anger and frustration towards him from time to time, he is at all times their Prophet (s) and as such the right he has over them and the respect that they must afford him is due to his being the select Prophet of Allah (swt). Whilst rowing with one’s husband might breach rules of decorum, such conduct is not regulated by the Shariah per se, the same cannot be said of a spouse rowing with Rasulullah (s), her actions will always be adjudged against her duties (as a believer) towards the Prophet (s) as stipulated in the Quran. Any conduct that falls below the duties placed on the believer will be a gross sin in the eyes of Allah (swt), and would breach the plethora of verses that regulate the manner in which the believers interact with the Prophet (s). Allah (swt) says in Surah Hujurat ‘O you who believe do not raise your voices in front of the Prophet” – this is a duty imposed on the believer, does it not apply to the Mother of the Believers? Speaking loudly risks all deeds of the believer being quashed. How can one judge a wife whose anger plunges her to such depths that she refuses to refer to him as the Prophet (s) and worse, on one occasion labels him a charlatan Prophet (s)? Is such blatant kufr conduct becoming of a woman that Ansar.Org insist was the most superior wife of the Prophet (s)? We see no evidence of any other wife conducting herself in such an atrocious manner, so how can she be deemed as the most superior wife of the Prophet (s)?
Clearly Aisha’s manners as demonstrated from the above examples fell far below the standards that Allah (swt) and his Prophet (s) would expect, after all he (s) stated as recorded in Sahih al-Bukhari 3559:
Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr: “The Prophet never used bad language neither a ‘Fahish nor a Mutafahish. He used to say ‘The best amongst you are those who have the best manners and character.’
Sadly despite so many years sitting in the company of the Prophet (s), Aisha was unable to control her tongue. One such example can be found in Sahih al-Bukhari 6030:
Narrated ‘Abdullah bin Mulaika:
‘Aisha said that the Jews came to the Prophet and said, “As-Samu ‘Alaikum” (death be on you). ‘Aisha said (to them), “(Death) be on you, and may Allah curse you and shower His wrath upon you!” The Prophet said, “Be calm, O ‘Aisha ! You should be kind and lenient, and beware of harshness and Fuhsh (i.e. bad words).” She said (to the Prophet), “Haven’t you heard what they (Jews) have said?” He said, “Haven’t you heard what I have said (to them)? I said the same to them, and my invocation against them will be accepted while theirs against me will be rejected (by Allah). ”
Rasulullah (s) disliked the use of bad words towards his enemies, which is why he rebuked Aisha, but as we shall evidence in a later chapter, she could not even control her tongue when remonstrating with another mother of the believers!
Islam deems backbiting to be a trait so abominable that Allah (swt) and his Messenger (s) singled out as conduct that a believer should steer clear of. Allah (swt) says in Surah Hujuraat verse 12:
يَـٰٓأَيُّہَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ ٱجۡتَنِبُواْ كَثِيرً۬ا مِّنَ ٱلظَّنِّ إِنَّ بَعۡضَ ٱلظَّنِّ إِثۡمٌ۬ۖ وَلَا تَجَسَّسُواْ وَلَا يَغۡتَب بَّعۡضُكُم بَعۡضًاۚ أَيُحِبُّ أَحَدُڪُمۡ أَن يَأۡڪُلَ لَحۡمَ أَخِيهِ مَيۡتً۬ا فَكَرِهۡتُمُوهُۚ وَٱتَّقُواْ ٱللَّهَۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ تَوَّابٌ۬ رَّحِيمٌ۬
O ye who believe! Shun much suspicion; for lo! some suspicion is a crime. And spy not, neither backbite one another. Would one of you love to eat the flesh of his dead brother? Ye abhor that (so abhor the other)! And keep your duty (to Allah). Lo! Allah is Relenting, Merciful.
The loquacious hero of the English speaking Salafi world, Bilal Philips in his commentary of the above verse in Tafseer Soorah al-Hujraat, page 105 states:
“Backbiting has also been opposed by painting it in repulsive terms. In this Allaah compares it to eating the flesh of one’s dead brother. Just as we find the though of eating one’s dead brother’s flesh repulsive, we should also find the though of backbiting repulsive for they are equivalent. Allaah also had his Prophet (s) bring this simile to life through a heart wrenching miracle. ‘Ubayd, the freed slave of the Prophet (s) reported that someone came and showed the Prophet 9s) two women who were fasting and said that they were dying of thirst. The Prophet (s) turned away silently refusing to give permission for them to break their fast. So the man begged him again mentioning that the women were on the verge of death. The Prophet (s) then said, “Bring them to me and bring along a vomit in the bowl.” When they came to him, he turned to one and told her to vomit in the bowl. She complied spitting up a mixture vomit, blood, pus and pieces of flesh which half filled the bowl. He then turned to the other and had her do the same. After the bowl was filled, he said, “Verily, these two have fasted from what Allaah has made Halaal for them and broke fast from what Allaah has made Haraam. They spent their fast eating the flesh of others” [Collected by Ahmad].
We read in Sahih Muslim 2589:
Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Do you know what is backbiting? They (the Companions) said: Allah and His Messenger know best. Thereupon he (the Holy Prophet) said: Backbiting implies your talking about your brother in a manner which he does not like. It was said to him: What is your opinion about this if I actually find (that failing) in my brother which I made a mention of? He said: If (that failing) is actually found (in him) what you assert, you in fact backbited him, and if that is not in him it is a slander.
We read in Sunan Abi Dawud 4878:
Anas ibn Malik reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said: When I was taken up (on the night journey), I passed by some people who had nails of copper scraping their faces and chests. I said, “Who are these, O Gabriel?” He said, “These are the ones who consumed people’s flesh and maligned their honor.”
Backbiting can have a detrimental effect on those being spoken about and society in general, which is why the penalties for it are so severe. Bilal Philips in Tafseer Soorah al-Hujraat, page 105 comments:
“The law of Islaam has placed stiff penalties on backbiting which involve serius lies. In the Qur’aan, Allaah has stated that “Those who accuse chaste women (of illicit sex) and fail to produce four witnesses should be given eighty lashes”. When this verse was revealee, the Prophet ordered that two Sahaabahs, Hassaan ibn Thaabit and Mistah ibn Uthaathah, and a Sahaabeeyah, Hamnah biny Jahsh, be lashed for slandering the Prophet’s wife Aaeshah”.
Having herself been a victim of backbiting one would have assumed that Aisha would have sought her utmost to steer clear from this trait, unfortunately her personal experience did not hinder her in any way. Sadly when we look at the life of Aisha this was a trait that she possessed and exhibited on several documented occasions. On one occasion it attracted the rebuke of Allah (swt) , we read as follows in Tafsir Qurtubi, Vol. 19 pg. 388:
قال المفسرون: نزلت في ٱمرأتين من أزواج النبيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم سَخِرتا من أمّ سلمة، وذلك أنها ربطت خَصْرَيْها بسَبِيبة ـ وهو ثوب أبيض، ومثلها السِّبّ ـ وسدلت طرفيها خلفها فكانت تجرها؛ فقالت عائشة لحفصة رضي الله عنهما: ٱنظري! ما تجرُّ خلفها كأنه لسان كلب؛ فهذه كانت سخريتهما.
“The commentators on Quran said this verse was revealed about two of the Prophet’s wives that mocked Um Salama, when she tied a veil around her waist and she let the tip of the veil hang down behind her; Aisha therefore said to Hafsa: Look! what is behind her, it looks like a dog’s tongue. and that was her mockery”
Whilst in this example Aisha chose to backbite about a fellow wife of the Prophet (s) that passed by her, even the late wife of the Prophet (s) was not protected from her backbiting, as can be evidenced by Sahih al-Bukhari 3821:
Narrated ‘Aisha: Once Hala bint Khuwailid, Khadija’s sister, asked the permission of the Prophet to enter. On that, the Prophet remembered the way Khadija used to ask permission, and that upset him. He said, “O Allah! Hala!” So I became jealous and said, “What makes you remember an old woman amongst the old women of Quraish an old woman (with a teethless mouth) of red gums who died long ago, and in whose place Allah has given you somebody better than her?”
On another occasion her backbiting attracted the ire of the Prophet (s) as recorded in Tafsir al-Tabari, volume 26 page 177 that has been declared authentic by al-Iraqi in Takhrij al-Ehya, pg. 1753:
حدثنا ابن ابي الشوارب قال ثنا عبدالواحد بن زياد قال ثنا سليمان الشيباني قال ثنا حسان المخارق أن امرأة دخلت على عائشة فلما قامت لتخرج أشارت عائشة بيدها إلى النبي أي أنها قصيرة فقال النبي اغتبتيها
Hasan Ibin Al Makhaariq reported that “Once a woman visited Aisha and when the woman got up to leave, Aisha made a sign with her hand indicating to the Prophet that the woman was short. The Prophet immediately chastised her, saying, “You have backbitten”.
Despite this, we see how she continued to backbite, and in fact to an even more extreme level as recorded in Sunan Abi Dawud 4875:
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin:
I said to the Prophet (s): It is enough for you in Safiyyah that she is such and such (the other version than Musaddad’s has:) meaning that she was short-statured. He replied; You have said a word which would change the sea if it were mixed in it. She said: I imitated a man before him (out of disgrace). He said: I do not like that I imitate anyone even if I should get such and such.
Whilst the word such and such is clearly an attempt to cover the word used it is clear that this was a very offensive word as Rasulullah (s) said it was so filthy that if thrown into the sea it would contaminate the sea. A terminology so obscene that it would pollute the sea, epitomizes the extreme level of backbiting Aisha exhibited in this instance.
It should also be pointed out that not only does Islam prevent individuals from backbiting, it also places a duty on believers to prevent others from doing so. Bilal Philips expounds on this point as follows:
“Only when the fear of Allah becomes real and more powerful than the day-to-day fears will man rebel at the slightest thought of backbiting or gossip. One possessing this unique level of God consciousness would not even be able to listen to the backbiting of others without speaking out against it for the Prophet (s) said, “Whoever perceives an evil should prevent it with his hand, but if he is unable let him do so with his tongue and if he remains unable let him hate in his heart for that is the lowest form of Eeman”. Hence it is not sufficient for a Muslim to merely stop backbiting, he must also prevent others from doing so whenever possible or else he becomes an accomplice to the Haraam” [Tafseer Soorah al-Hujraath pg. 106-107]
Whilst Philips opined that those that reach the high levels of taqwa are those that neither backbite themselves not tolerate others from doing so, Aisha was clearly not at such an elevated point as she was an individual who not only partook in backbiting, but listened to it and even acted on it. We read in Sahih al-Bukhari 6073-6075:
Narrated ‘Aisha:
(the wife of the Prophet) that she was told that ‘Abdullah bin Az-Zubair (on hearing that she was selling or giving something as a gift) said, “By Allah, if ‘Aisha does not give up this, I will declare her incompetent to dispose of her wealth.” I said, “Did he (‘Abdullah bin Az-Zubair) say so?” They (people) said, “Yes.” ‘Aisha said, “I vow to Allah that I will never speak to Ibn Az-Zubair.” When this desertion lasted long, ‘Abdullah bin Az-Zubair sought intercession with her, but she said, “By Allah, I will not accept the intercession of anyone for him, and will not commit a sin by breaking my vow.” When this state of affairs was prolonged on Ibn Az-Zubair (he felt it hard on him), he said to Al-Miswar bin Makhrama and ‘Abdur-Rahman bin Al-Aswad bin ‘Abu Yaghuth, who were from the tribe of Bani Zahra, “I beseech you, by Allah, to let me enter upon ‘Aisha, for it is unlawful for her to vow to cut the relation with me.” So Al-Miswar and ‘Abdur-Rahman, wrapping their sheets around themselves, asked ‘Aisha’s permission saying, “Peace and Allah’s Mercy and Blessings be upon you! Shall we come in?” ‘Aisha said, “Come in.” They said, “All of us?” She said, “Yes, come in all of you,” not knowing that Ibn Az-Zubair was also with them. So when they entered, Ibn Az-Zubair entered the screened place and got hold of ‘Aisha and started requesting her to excuse him, and wept. Al-Miswar and ‘Abdur Rahman also started requesting her to speak to him and to accept his repentance. They said (to her), “The Prophet forbade what you know of deserting (not speaking to your Muslim Brethren), for it is unlawful for any Muslim not to talk to his brother for more than three nights (days).” So when they increased their reminding her (of the superiority of having good relation with Kith and kin, and of excusing others’ sins), and brought her down to a critical situation, she started reminding them, and wept, saying, “I have made a vow, and (the question of) vow is a difficult one.” They (Al-Miswar and ‘Abdur-Rahman) persisted in their appeal till she spoke with ‘Abdullah bin Az-Zubair and she manumitted forty slaves as an expiation for her vow. Later on, whenever she remembered her vow, she used to weep so much that her veil used to become wet with her tears.
We can see from this tradition that a group of individuals approached her and began backbiting about Ibn Zubair. Rather than fulfilling her religious duty to order the said individuals to refrain from such gossip, she acted on this backbiting and took the impromptu decision to vow to never speak to Ibn Zubair again, and in doing so went against a Hadith of the Prophet (s)! Rather than curtailing this backbiting Aisha acted on it and in doing so she had in to quote Bilal Philips become an “accomplice to the Haraam”.
We appeal to justice; Aisha the wife of the Prophet (s) was a recidivist backbiter and thus committed a major sin that has consequences in the next world. She also failed to take direct action to curtail backbiting that is also a sin. There is therefore no way that Aisha can be compared to those wives of the Prophet (s) that did not.
Some Ahl’ul Sunnah assert that since Aisha was the most superior wife then that means that she was the most superior of all women. Not only is the claim that she was the most superior wife baseless, the fact of the matter is in Surah Tahreem (that we have discussed earlier) exposes her deceitful conduct against the Prophet (s). Had Aisha been the most superior wife there would be no grounds for her to lie and slander the Prophet (s) by questioning his hygiene during the honey plot. Moreover there would have been no need for Allah (swt) to vent his wrath by exposing her. No other wives have been exposed for their conduct, so how can Aisha be presented as being superior to them? How can one exposed for a crooked heart, be greater than those that were not exposed. Moreover the verse states (66:5):
It may be, if he divorced you (all), that Allah will give him in exchange consorts better than you,- who submit (their wills), who believe, who are devout, who turn to Allah in repentance, who worship (in humility), who travel (for Faith) and fast,- previously married or virgins.
This clearly indicates that there were believing women among the Muslims who were much better than Aisha. This also negates Aisha’s own claim that her virgin status evidenced her superiority, in this verse Allah (swt) makes it clear that there existed in the Ummah, virgins who would be better wives for the Prophet (s) than Aisha.
Abu Sulaiman sought to conclude his passionate exoneration of Aisha by citing the following tradition:
Ansar.org states:
Omro bin Al-A’as said, ‘Once the prophet peace be upon him used me as a leader for an army. I went to him and said, “O’ Messenger of Allah, who is the most beloved to you?” He answered, “Aysha.” I said, “What about men?” He replied, “Her father.”‘
This alleged hadith does not tally up to stronger explicit traditions that prove that there existed individuals who Rasulullah (s) had clearly indicated as superior on account of his love for them. If the Ansar.org will continue to insist on their position that Aisha and Abu Bakr were the most beloved in the eyes of Rasulullah (s), then why do they not accept the testimony of Aisha herself recorded and declared Sahih by Imam Hakim in Mustadrak, Vol. 3 pg. 171 Tradition 4744:
Jami bin Umair narrates: ‘I accompanied my aunt and approached Aisha [ra] and asked her: ‘Who was the dearest among the people to Rasulullah?’ She replied ‘Fatima’. I then asked ‘And amongst men? She replied ‘Her husband’
Imam Nisai records in Khasais Imam Ali, pg. 128:
Amro bin Ali narrated from Abdulaziz bin al-Khatab from Muhammad bin Ismail bin Raja al-Zubaidi from Abi Ishaq al-Shaybani from Jami bin Umair who narrated: ‘I along with my father went to Aisha and asked her (behind the veil) about Ali. She replied: ‘You are asking me about a man whom I know NONE among the men that the Holy Prophet loved most except him and NONE among the women except his wife’.
Jami bin Umair: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Seduq’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p156). Abu Ishaq al-Shaybani: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p386). Muhammad bin Ismail bin Raja: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Seduq’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2 p55). Abdulaziz bin al-Khatab: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Seduq’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p603). Amro bin Ali: Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p741). Moreover the margin writer of the book namely Abu Ishaq al-Huwayni who has been one of the beloved students of Imam Nasiruddin Albaani al-Salafi has also declared the chain of this tradition to be ‘Sahih’.
In another tradition recorded by Imam Haythami in Majma al Zawaid, Vol. 9 pg. 119 Tradition 14730, Aisha has herself testified that Ali (as) was more dearest to Holy Prophet (s) than Abu Bakr:
Al-Numan bin Bashir said: ‘Abu Bakr asked for permission to enter on the prophet (s), then he heard Aisha saying (to the prophet): ‘I knew that Ali is dearest to you than my father’. She said that twice or thrice’
Imam Abi Bakr al-Haythami said:
‘al-Bazar recorded it and the narrators the narrator of Sahih’
Same episode has also been narrated in this manner in Majma al Zawaid, Vol. 9 pg. 237 Tradition 15194:
Al-Numan bin Bashir said: ‘Abu Bakr asked for permission to enter on the prophet (s), whereupon he heard Aisha’s loudly raised voice, saying (to the prophet): ‘I knew that Ali and Fatima are more dearer to you than me and my father’. She said that twice or thrice – Abu Bakr then asked for permission and entered he approached her and said: ‘O daughter, you should not raise your voice before Allah’s messenger (s)’.
Imam Abi Bakr al-Haythami said:
‘Ahmad recorded it and the narrators are the narrators of the Sahih’.
We would urge Aisha’s advocates to take a good look at this tradition. Nawasib can huff and puff as much as they like and seek to impress upon their readers that the Prophet (s) deemed Aisha and Abu Bakr to be the dearest to the Prophet (s), but when we have Aisha’s own testimony telling us otherwise then such claims become baseless. Not only did Aisha testify to the Prophet (s) loving Maula Ali (as) and Fatima (sa) more than her and her father, her raised voice evidences how jealous and resentful she was at this fact, so much so that it caused her behavior to fall foul of the standards of conduct imposed by Allah (swt) on those speaking to the Prophet (s). It took Abu Bakr to intervene and remind his daughter of her religious obligation: ‘O daughter, you should not raise your voice before Allah’s messenger (s)’. Abu Bakr may well have been alluding to Surah Hujurat verse 2:
O ye who believe! Raise not your voices above the voice of the Prophet, nor speak aloud to him in talk, as ye may speak aloud to one another, lest your deeds become vain and ye perceive not.
The verse sets out the serious consequences for those that raise their voice in the presence of the Prophet (s), Abu Bakr had practical experience of this, since this verse descended to reprimand his conduct (Sahih al-Bukhari 4845).
Mulla Mutaqi Hindi records in Kanz ul Ummal, Vol. 11 pg. 334 Tradition 31670:
Arwa said: ‘I asked Aisha: ‘Who was the dearest man to the Holy Prophet (s)?’ She replied: ‘Ali bin Abi Talib’. I said: ‘Then what was the reason for rebelling against him?’ She replied: ‘What was the reason for your father marrying your mother?’ I said: ‘It was fate’. She replied: ‘And also this was fate’.
The unequivocal testimony of Aisha about Ali bin Abi Talib (as) being dearest to the Holy Prophet (s) should suffice to silence her advocates. If we examine the excuse she advanced for fighting the dearest person to the Holy Prophet (s) we see it is both feeble and unIslamic since in Islam, one cannot commit heinous crimes and blame fate she will after all have to pay the price for those offences in the hereafter!
Imam Hakim records a Sahih tradition in Mustadrak Ala Al Sahihain, Vol. 3 pg. 168 Tradition 4735:
Buraida said: ‘The dearest woman to Allah’s messenger was Fatima and the dearest man was Ali’.
To locate the most beloved in the eyes of Rasulullah (s) it would need to be that individual who is also loved by Allah (swt). Such an individual attains a rank that cannot be attained by any other person. Following the successive failures of the Shaykhain in leading the Muslim army to conquer the fort of Khaiber, Rasulullah (s) made this declaration that we have cited from Sahih Muslim 2406:
Sahl b. Sa’d reported that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) said on the Day of Khaibar: I would certainly give this standard to a person at whose hand Allah would grant victory and who loves Allah and His Messenger and Allah and His Messenger love him also. The people spent the night thinking as to whom it would be given. When it was morning the people hastened to Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) all of them hoping that that would be given to him. He (the Holy Prophet) said: Where is ‘Ali b. Abu Talib? They said: Allah’s Messenger, his eyes are sore. He then sent for him and he was brought and Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) applied saliva to his eyes and invoked blessings and he was all right, as if he had no ailment at all, and conferred upon him the standard. ‘Ali said: Allah’s Messenger, I will fight them until they are like us. Thereupon he (the Holy Prophet) said: Advance cautiously until you reach their open places, thereafter invite them to Islam and inform them what is obligatory for them from the rights of Allah, for, by Allah, if Allah guides aright even one person through you that is better for you than to possess the most valuable of the camels.
So here Rasulullah (s) gave a clear guarantee that the individual who would be given the standard was a man loved by Allah (swt) and him. The fact that all the Sahaba were hoping for the Standard being given to them, vouches for the fact that they were fully aware of the esteemed rank the next person grasping the standard would have in the eyes of Allah (swt) and his Apostle (s). The fact that it was ‘Ali (as) and no one else evidences that he was the most beloved to Rasulullah (s), one loved by Rasul (s) and his Creator.
With regards to Imams Hasan (as) and Husayn (as), we read in Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3769 that Rasulullah stated:
“Hasan and Husayn are both my sons, O Allah I love them so love them and those that love them”.
In this supplication Rasulullah (s) has declared that his love for his beloved grandsons, was such that he has declared his love for those that loved them.
Along the same line, consider this tradition from Sunan Ibn Majah 149:
Rasulullah (s) said:
“God commanded me to love four, and He informed me that he loves them. People asked him: Messenger of God, who are they? He said: Ali is from them (repeating that three times ). And Abu Dharr and Salman and al-Miqdad
[No doubt the Nawasib will be quick to point out that Darussalam graded the hadith as weak; to this we reply by saying Tirmidhi graded it as hassan, and Suyuti accepted it as well, while Al Hakim recorded it in al Mustadrak and accepted it while Dhahabi took issue with one narrator named Abu Rabi’a Al Ayadi, who was accepted by Yahya Ibn Ma’in and Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani]
Such is the rank of the four individuals in this hadith that Allah (swt) has declared his love for them, so they have a rank of superiority that far outstrips that of the other Sahaba.
It is clear that the individuals in these traditions rank as the most beloved from amongst the faithful so much so that not only the Prophet (s) but Allah (swt) declared his love for them. We challenge Ansar.org to present any traditions in which Rasulullah (s) had declared that Allah (swt) loved Aisha and ‘Abu Bakr. No such hadith exists.
When seeking to identify the most beloved in the eyes of Rasulullah (s) one needs to look no further than the Qur’an. Allah (swt) states the duty that has been placed on the Muslims:
Say: “No reward do I ask of you for this except the love of those near of kin.” (42:23).
Jalaladin Suyuti in Tafsir Durr Al Manthur Vol 4, pg. 348 under the commentary of this verse records the following:
Abdullah ibn Abbas narrated ‘When this verse descended the people asked who are these close relatives whose love had been made compulsory?’ Rasulullah said they are ‘Ali, Fatima, and their sons.
Other leading lights of Ahlul Sunnah have also confirmed that this verse came down in respect of these four individuals:
1. Hilyat al Awliya Vol. 3, pg. 201
2. Mustadrak al Hakim Vol. 3 pg. 188 - 189
5. Kanz al-Ummal Vol. 2 pg. 290
Clearly these four individuals are the most beloved to Rasulullah (s) to the extent that Allah (swt) has declared love towards them as the only wage required by Rasulullah (s), for providing the ummah with Allah’s message – Islam. Therefore, their love is a part of the Deen. If Aisha and Abu Bakr were indeed the ‘most’ beloved then why has Allah (swt) not stipulated love towards them as a duty upon the Muslims in the same way He (swt) has for Imams Ali (as), Hasan (as), Husayn (as) and Sayyida Fatima (as)?
We read in the Sira of Ibn Hisham, Vol. 2 pg. 146 that:
“The Prophet after the Hijrah said to the Muslims: Be brothers in God. Every two should be brothers. Then he took the hand of Ali Ibn Abi Talib and said this is my brother. Thus, the Messenger of God, the Leader of the Messengers, the Imam of the righteous, the one who has no equal among the servants of God and Ali Ibn Abi Talib became brothers. Al Hamzah, Lion of Allah and of his Messenger and Zaid Ibn Harith became brothers, and Abu Bakr and Kharijah Ibn Zuhair became brothers. Omar Ibn Khattab and Atban Ibn Malik became brothers''
Our question to Abu Sulaiman and his fellow advocates is ‘If Abu Bakr was indeed the most beloved then why did the Holy Prophet (s) not select him to be his brother when he (s) divided the Sahaba into pairs on the Day of Brotherhood?’ This occasion was a clear declaration of the closeness between Imam ‘Ali (as) and Rasulullah (s). If Abu Bakr was the most beloved then why did he prefer Imam Ali (as) over him?
Unable to identify a legitimate defence for the crimes committed by their Nasibi ancestors against Imam Ali bin Abi Talib (as) from the Quran and Sunnah, they turn to the fact that Allah (swt) declared the wives of the Prophet (s) to be the ‘mothers of the believers’ the exempts them from criticism. Ansar.org submit this defence in this manner:
Ansar.org states:
And we value her because she is our mother in faith. Allah says, “The Prophet is closer to the Believers than their own selves, and his wives are their mothers.” (Al-Ahzab, 5)
We shall puncture this Nawasib ‘defense ball’ by pointing out that the sole reason for declaring the wives of the Prophet (s) as ‘the mothers of the believers’ was to prevent the Muslims from marrying them in the eventuality of their being divorced or widowed, it is not a merit on their part. That is why we read in the Holy Quran:
Nor is it right for you that ye should annoy Allah’s Messenger, or that ye should marry his widows after him at any time. (33:53)
The first verse was revealed when Allah [swt] exposed the evil wish of Talha to marry Aisha in the eventuality of the Prophet’s death. Allah [swt] sought to remove such an option by revealing this verse:
‘and his wives are their mothers’ (33:6)
The first verse was revealed to establish a new rule that Muslims could not marry the Prophet (s)’s and the second commandment was revealed to emphasize the very rule. It is similar to the case of the verses of Zakat. Zakat was mentioned in the Quran several times, initially to establish a new rule with the remainder occasions emphasizing the requirement of Zakat. Let us now substantiate our argument with the help of Sunni sources. We read in Tafsir al-Qurtubi, Vol. 19 pg. 388 wherein Qurtubi mentioned both the nexus between both the verses in the following manner:
رَوَى إِسْمَاعِيل بْن إِسْحَاق قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّد بْن عُبَيْد قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّد بْن ثَوْر عَنْ مَعْمَر عَنْ قَتَادَة أَنَّ رَجُلًا قَالَ : لَوْ قُبِضَ رَسُول اللَّه صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ تَزَوَّجْت عَائِشَة , فَأَنْزَلَ اللَّه تَعَالَى : ” وَمَا كَانَ لَكُمْ أَنْ تُؤْذُوا رَسُول اللَّه ” الْآيَة . وَنَزَلَتْ : ” وَأَزْوَاجه أُمَّهَاتهمْ “
Qatada said: ‘A man said: ‘If Allah’s messenger (s) died, I would marry Aisha’. Hence Allah revealed ‘{ Nor is it right for you that ye should annoy Allah’s Messenger}’ then revealed ‘{ and his wives are their mothers}’.
Modern day Salafi scholar Abu Bakr al-Jazairi records in Aysar al-Tafasir, Vol. 4 pg. 288:
روي أن رجلاً من المنافقين لما تزوج رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أم سلمة وحفصة بعد خنيس بن حذافة قال : فما بال محمد يتزوج نساءنا والله لو قد مات لأجلنا السهام على نسائه ، فأنزل الله تعالى هذه الآية ، فحرم الله نكاح أزواجه من بعده وجعل لهن حكم الأمهات
It has been narrated that when Allah’s messenger (s) married Umm Salama and Hafsa, after (she got separated) from Khunais bin Hudafa, a male hypocrite said: ‘Why is Muhammad marrying our women? By Allah when he dies, we should fire our arrows at his wives’. Allah (swt) therefore revealed this verse. Thus Allah made the marriage to His wives unlawful and made their status as the status of mothers.
In Vol. 4 pg. 243 we read:
{وأزواجه أمهاتهم } في الحرمة وسواء من طلقت أو مات عنها منهن رضي الله عنهن
“{and his wives are their mothers.} The unlawfulness (for marriage) whether they are divorced or widows may Allah be pleased with them.”
Allamah Salehi al-Shami records in Subul al-Huda wa al-Rashad, Vol. 12 pg. 21 - 22:
أن معنى الآية أن الامومة في الامة المراد بها تحريم نكاحهن على التأبيد كالأمهات .
“The meaning of motherhood to the nation means that it is unlawful to marry them forever just like the case of their biological mothers.”
One of the beloved scholars of Salafis namely Shawkani records in Fath al-Qadir, pg. 1157 wrote:
فلا يحل لأحد أن يتزوج بواحدة منهن كما لا يحل له أن يتزوج بأمه فهذه الأمومة مختصة بتحريم النكاح لهن
“It is impermissible for anyone to marry any one of them as it is impermissible to marry his biological mother, thus this motherhood is about forbidding marriage with them”
Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti records in Tafsir Durr al-Manthur, Vol. 6 pg. 566:
وأخرج ابن أبي حاتم عن قتادة رضي الله عنه في قوله وأزواجه أمهاتهم يقول : أمهاتهم في الحرمة لا يحل لمؤمن ان ينكح امرأة من نساء النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم في حياته ان طلق ولا بعد موته هي حرام على كل مؤمن مثل حرمة أمه
“Qutada (ra) said about his (Allah) statement ‘{and his wives are their mothers.}’ they are their mothers in unlawfulness (for marriage), it is impermissible for a believer to marry any woman from the prophet (s)’s women, whether they were divorced during His life time or after his death, they are unlawful for every believer as the unlawfulness of their biological mothers.”
Imam Fakhruddin al-Razi records in Tafsir al-Kabir, Vol. 10 pg. 30:
كما أنه تعالى سمى أزواج النبي عليه السلام أمهات المؤمنين في قوله : { وأزواجه أمهاتهم } لأجل الحرمة
“He (Allah) Almighty called the wives of the prophet (s) as the mother of believers according to the verse {and his wives are their mothers} due to unlawfulness (of marriage).”
It is important to note that if one canters through the Sunni tafsirs that deal with verse 33:6 they have also claimed that the verse sets out an absolute duty upon the believers to venerate the wives of the Prophet (s). The reality is there exists no evidence from the blessed tongue of the Prophet (s), nor do we have any authentic traditions that would suggest the verse relates to venerating the wives of the Prophet (s) on account of their being the Mother of the Believers. Crucially if this was indeed the case then there would be a religious duty for all believers both men and women to venerate the Mothers of the Believers due to this esteemed moniker, but this is not the case this mother relationship only relates to the nexus between the male believer and the wives of the Prophet (s). Our position can be corroborated by the testimony of Aisha herself who unequivocally stated that she was the mother of the Muslim men not of Muslim women, that perfectly concurs with the notion that those women were made mothers of the ‘male’ believers so as to prohibit marriage, as stated earlier. Imam Ibn Saad records in Tabaqat al-Kabir, Vol. 8 pg. 51:
حدثنا هشام أبو الوليد الطيالسي حدثنا أبو عوانة عن فراس عن عامر عن مسروق أن امرأة قالت لعائشة يا أمة فقالت لست بأمك أنا أم رجالكم
Masruq said: ‘A woman said to Aisha: ‘Oh mother’. She replied: ‘I’m not your mother, I’m the mother of your men’.
According to Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani, Abu al-Walid al-Tealisi and Abu Uwana are ‘Thiqa Thabt’ while Feras bin Yaya is ‘Seduq’ and Amer al-Sh’abi and Masrooq are ‘Thiqah’. Moreover, many Sunni scholars have declared this tradition to be Sahih. This tradition is recorded in Masanid Feras, Vol. 1 pg. 85 by Feras al-Maktab while the reviser of the book Sheikh Muhammad bin Hassan al-Masri has declared its chain as ‘Sahih’ as has also been done by Esaami in Semt al-Nujum al-Awali, pg. 184. The Salafi scholar Abu Ishaq al-Huwaini was the favorite student of Imam Nasiruddin Albaani al-Salafi, which is why Salafis call him ‘the small Albaani’. Abu Ishaq in his book Tanbeeh al-Hajeb, Vol. 2 pg. 29 answered al-Qurtubi in this manner:
قلت : رضي الله عنك !
فقد صح هذا عن عائشة –رضي الله عنها – من طريق مسروق
I say: may Allah be pleased with you!
This is a Sahih (tradition) from Aisha may Allah be pleased with, narrated by Masrooq.
We read in Ibn Jawzi's Zaad al-Masir, pg. 1114:
Masrooq narrated that a woman said to Aisha’ O mother’ . She (Aisha) said: “I am not your mother, rather I am the mother of your men”. This is in reference to motherhood with regards to the prohibition of marriage.
For the Nawasib belonging to Sipah Sahaba, we should point out that one of the favorite scholars of Deoband school namely Qazi Thanaullah Pani Patti Uthmani records in Tafseer Mazhari, Vol. 9 pg. 202:
“Shu’bi has narrated from Masrooq that a woman said to Aisha: ‘Oh mother’. She replied: ‘I’m not your mother, I’m the mother of your men’. Bahaqi has also narrated it in Sunan. This has proved that Allah (swt) calling the wives of Holy Prophet (s) as the mothers of the believers means that in the same way that one’s biological mother is Haram for the Ummah so is the case with marrying the wives of the Holy Prophet (s)”
Beside Sunni texts, Shia sources also confirm that their being mothers of the believers was to prevent their marriage with Muslim men, see
1. Rasael al-Murtaza, by Sharif al-Murtaza, Vol 4, pg. 65
2. Jame al-Jawame, by Tabarsi, Vol. 3, pg. 49
3. Tafsir al-Quran, by Abdullah Shubar, pg. 491
If there was a duty venerate the Mother of the Believers due to their having their title then that would apply to both sexes, but Aisha ruled that out, that proves that the title Mother of the Believers is nothing other than a title that ensures that male believers do not seek to marry the wives of the Prophet (s) after his (s) death, a fact that has been perfectly summarized by Ibn Arabi in his Tafsir known as Tafsir Ibn Arabi, Vol. 3 pg. 542:
“People disagreed, as to the wives been the mother of both men and the women. They are the mothers of men based on two accounts. Some said : It is general for both the men and women, some said: It’s only for the men only because the meaning is to point out that it’s prohibited for men whereas for women it’s expected to be prohibited (due to sodomy been explicitly haram). And it’s recorded a woman said to Aisha: ‘O mother’ she said: ‘I am not your mother rather I am the mother of your men’ and that is right opinion”
The above reality removes the proverbial wind from the Nasibi sails of Ibn al Hashimi who argued:
Why would Allah bestow this honor upon Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) and Hafsa (رضّى الله عنها) if they were the enemies of the Muslims? Surely then Allah would have addressed them with the title of Umm Al Nasibioon (Mother of the Nasibis). Why would Allah try to confuse the believers by complimenting a supposed enemy of Islam? Was Allah trying to fool us?
We have evidenced clearly that honor was linked purely to curtailing the ambitions of certain individuals who declared a wish to put a deposit down for Aisha in the eventuality of Rasulullah (s) passing away. Confusion does not even come into it; this verse was linked purely to preventing such machinations coming into fruition. Moreover the early portion of the verse places a condition upon Aisha, that she remains within the confines of her residence, her breach of that condition means that she fell foul of this verse. Rather than honoring her, her conduct evidenced that she failed to adhere to the condition to remain at home that had been imposed upon her.
A Nasibi advanced an absurd objection that Shias consider themselves ‘Momineen’ (believers), does that mean that Allah [swt] prevented the Shia men from marrying the wives of Holy Prophet (s) whilst the Sunni men were not?
The word ‘Mumineen’ has been used in the Holy Quran at various places and at times it carries different meanings. For example, Allah (swt) has also used this word for the hypocrites too (61:2), for Muslims in general (5:6) and also for the true believers (31:8). It is therefore not strange if Allah (swt) used this word to refer to the Muslims in general so as to prevent them marrying the wives of the Holy Prophet (s).
We shall cite a few more sources to highlight this point. We read in Tafsir al-Baghawi, Vol. 7 pg. 119:
وَعَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيِّ فِي هَذِهِ الْآيَةِ قَالَ: كُنَّا نَقُولُ رَبُّنَا وَاحِدٌ وَدِينُنَا وَاحِدٌ وَنَبِيُّنَا وَاحِدٌ فَمَا هَذِهِ الْخُصُومَةُ؟ فَلَمَّا كَانَ يَوْمُ صِفِّينَ وَشَدَّ بَعْضُنَا عَلَى بَعْضٍ بِالسُّيُوفِ قُلْنَا: نَعَمْ هُوَ هَذَا
Abu Saeed al-Khudri stated that regarding the cited verse: ‘We used to ask that when our God is the same, our religion is the same and our Prophet is the same then what sort of dispute has been referred to in the verse? When the battle of Siffin took place and we used our words against each other it was then that we realized and said that whatever was mentioned in the verse was true’.
Thus, mere fact that Imam Ali (as)’s opponents apparently shared the same belief in the same God, religion and Prophet as Imam Ali (as), does not constitute any virtue on the part of his opponents, rather, there is a genuine possibility that the party opposing the rightful Imam might be oppressors despite sharing beliefs in the the same God, religion and Prophet. One should not lose sight of the fact that the word used by Imam Ali (as) was “Zaahir” (apparent/outward) and it is unanimous that hypocrite is the one who professes Islam whilst being inclined to all those acts that are prohibited under Islam. Allamah Safarini Hanbali stated in Lawami‘ al-Anwar al-Bahiyyah, Vol. 1 pg. 427:
فَالْخِطَابُ بِالْإِيمَانِ يَدْخُلُ فِيهِ ثَلَاثُ طَوَائِفَ، الْمُؤْمِنُ حَقًّا، وَالْمُنَافِقُ فِي أَحْكَامِهِ الظَّاهِرَةِ، وَإِنْ كَانَ الْمُنَافِقُ فِي الْآخِرَةِ فِي الدَّرْكِ الْأَسْفَلِ مِنَ النَّارِ، وَهُوَ فِي الْبَاطِنِ يُنْفَى عَنْهُ الْإِسْلَامُ وَالْإِيمَانُ وَفِي الظَّاهِرِ يُثْبَتَانِ لَهُ ظَاهِرًا. وَيَدْخُلُ فِيهِ الَّذِينَ أَسْلَمُوا وَلَمْ تَدْخُلْ حَقِيقَةُ الْإِيمَانِ فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ
“Whenever the people of faith (Iman) are addressed, it includes three groups, the first group consists of those that are rightful believers (Momin Haqqa), the second group are those hypocrites that are treated as believers due to their apparent (Zaahir) traits yet the very group of hypocrites will be in the lowest level of Hell and hypocrites (Munafiq) are those that have nothing to do with Islam and Iman (faith) yet he pretends to possess both of these things and hypocrites are also those who whilst they embraced Islam didn’t find a place for it in their hearts”.
We have also noticed that some Nawasib have tried to respond to our above mentioned reliance on the Sunni sources and accused us of ‘deception’ in our aforementioned stance by failing to cite the rest of the very Sunni sources wherein it is claimed that the said verse was revealed as a commandment to venerate and respect the wives of the Prophet (s).
We would like to ask these sly Nawasib, why they have so conveniently failed to make a single specific comment on what we had specifically cited from Sunni sources? Despite this evident silence these milquetoast sons of Muawiya are highlighting the texts wherein their clergy have deduced that one is required to respect and venerate the mothers of the believers. Even if we accede to this interpretation, it in no way means that we must venerate a segment of people (the Prophet’s wives in this case) irrespective of their personal conduct and character, whether they partake in murder, treachery, dishonesty or disloyalty. Of course not! If we are required to venerate mothers of the believers then that only refers to those free from any blemish, those that adhered to the path of Allah (swt), his Apostle (s) who never had the audacity to indulge in confrontation with the pure progeny of Prophet (s). We will elaborate on this point in Reply Three i.e. “The wives of the Prophet (s) will be judged by Allah (swt) according to their deeds”.
Let us cite an example:
There is a doctor who has invented a treatment to care cancer or an engineer who has developed a new formula or a warrior who laid down his life whilst defending his nation’s territory in an unprecedented manner. The nation awards him with the highest medal of valour following his death. Now if you happen to know the mothers of all these individuals and you are to introduce her to a third person, your introduction will certainly be based on their (mothers’) relation to their respective sons. You might say ‘meet her, she is the mother of Dr. ABC’ . The use of such terminology acts as the recognition of the mother-son relationship and is dependent on the merits of the son, not of mother. There isn’t any contribution of the mother in the efforts the doctor made in the laboratories on the contrary it was the efforts of the son who has brought a reputation or name to his mother.
Being a wife of the Prophet (s) is indeed a blessing, an honorable station but to believe this guarantees immunity from punishment, no matter what she does is against the justice of Allah (swt), if she commits any form of sin she will be held accountable for it. In this connection, let us consider this tradition recorded in Musnad Abi Yala, Vol. 7 pg. 9 that has been graded as Sahih by the margin writer of the book Hussain Salim Asad:
أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال : يا معاذ قال : لبيك يا رسول الله قال : بشر الناس أنه من قال : لا إله إلا الله دخل الجنة
Anas narrated that the prophet (s) said: “Oh Mu’adh”. Mu’adh said: “Yes Allah’s messenger”. He (s) said: “Tell the people, who ever said ‘there is no God except Allah’ will enter paradise”.
If we interpret the aforesaid words of the Prophet (s) literally, that would mean that all those who after reciting ‘there is no God except Allah’ commit adultery, take bribes, consume alcohol, commit theft, murder the innocent and commit all other sorts of sin will not be held accountable for them, which is illogical and unIslamic. Reciting the Kalima certainly makes one eligible to enter paradise as long as one also obeys Islamic injunctions. When it comes to observing Islamic laws and keeping aloof from any form of activity that will incur the wrath of Allah (swt), a wife of the Prophet (s) is expected to adhere to this path just like any other believer, neigh it is even more stringent a greater degree of observance is expected, with a punishment for one that transgresses being greater than any other believer:
O Consorts of the Prophet! If any of you were guilty of evident unseemly conduct, the Punishment would be doubled to her, and that is easy for Allah. (33:30)
Ibn Kathir in Tafsir Ibn Kathir Vol 6, pg. 181 -182 of the verse recorded as follows:
This Ayah is addressed to the wives of the Prophet who chose Allah and His Messenger and the Home of the Hereafter, and remained married to the Messenger of Allah . Thus it was befitting that there should be rulings which applied only to them, and not to other women, in the event that any of them should commit open Fahishah. Ibn `Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, said: “This means Nushuz (rebellion) and a bad attitude.” Whatever the case, this is a conditional phrase and it does not imply that what is referred to would actually happen. This is like the Ayat:
﴿وَلَقَدْ أُوْحِىَ إِلَيْكَ وَإِلَى الَّذِينَ مِن قَبْلِكَ لَئِنْ أَشْرَكْتَ لَيَحْبَطَنَّ عَمَلُكَ﴾
(And indeed it has been revealed to you, as it was to those before you: “If you join others in worship with Allah, surely your deeds will be in vain.”) (39:65)
﴿وَلَوْ أَشْرَكُواْ لَحَبِطَ عَنْهُمْ مَّا كَانُواْ يَعْمَلُونَ﴾
(But if they had joined in worship others with Allah, all that they used to do would have been of no benefit to them.) (6:88)
﴿قُلْ إِن كَانَ لِلرَّحْمَـنِ وَلَدٌ فَأَنَاْ أَوَّلُ الْعَـبِدِينَ ﴾
(Say: “If the Most Gracious had a son, then I am the first of (Allah’s) worshippers.”) (43:81)
﴿لَّوْ أَرَادَ اللَّهُ أَن يَتَّخِذَ وَلَداً لاَّصْطَفَى مِمَّا يَخْلُقُ مَا يَشَآءُ سُبْحَـنَهُ هُوَ اللَّهُ الْوَحِدُ الْقَهَّارُ ﴾
(Had Allah willed to take a son, He could have chosen whom He willed out of those whom He created. But glory be to Him! He is Allah, the One, the Irresistible.) (39:4). Because their status is so high, it is appropriate to state that the sin, if they were to commit it, would be so much worse, so as to protect them and their Hijab. (33:30) Allah says:
﴿مَن يَأْتِ مِنكُنَّ بِفَـحِشَةٍ مُّبَيِّنَةٍ يُضَاعَفْ لَهَا الْعَذَابُ ضِعْفَيْنِ﴾
(Whoever of you commits an open Fahishah, the torment for her will be doubled,) Malik narrated from Zayd bin Aslam:
﴿يُضَاعَفْ لَهَا الْعَذَابُ ضِعْفَيْنِ﴾
(the torment for her will be doubled,) “In this world and the next.” Something similar was narrated from Ibn Abi Najih, from Mujahid.
﴿وَكَانَ ذلِكَ عَلَى اللَّهِ يَسِيراً﴾
This verse is specific to the wives of the Prophet (s) and here Allah (swt) specifies the type of conduct expected of them that in addition to adultery according to ibn Abbas this also incorporated bad conduct and exhibiting a rebellious conduct, wide terms that could encapsulate a plethora of different type of behaviors. Whilst Ibn Kathir seeks to lessen the significance of the verse by suggesting it is merely theoretical and it “…does not imply that what is referred to would actually happen” it does not rule it out either, it basically acts as a warning to the wives of the Prophet (s), making it clear that there is a nexus with him (s) will serve no benefit in the next world if they partake in transgression. The crucial thing here is contrary to what Ibn al Hashimi would like us to believe, merely being the wife of the Prophet (s) in no way provides that wife with the cart blanche authority to behave in any way she chooses, the Shariah remains applicable to her, and breaches of it are more severe on account of her relationship to the Prophet (s). It is worth noting that Maudoodi in his Tafhim al Quran whilst commenting on the said verse opines why the wives of the Prophet (s) would face a stiffer penalty than the normal believer:
“The reason for giving a double punishment for a sin and a double reward for a good work is that those whom Allah honors with a high rank in society generally become the leaders of men and the majority of the people follow them for good or for evil. Thus, their evil does not remain their own evil but becomes the cause of a people’s degeneration, and their goodness does not remain their own goodness but becomes the cause of the true success of many other people also. Therefore, when they commit evil they are punished for their own as well as for others degeneration, and when they do good they are not only rewarded for their own good works but also for this that they guided others also to do good”.
Maudoodi is suggesting the double punishment is on account of the fact that a wife of the Prophet (s) has a position of influence, if she goes astray there is a risk of many people following her blindly into deviancy, so her punishment is on account of her leading others astray. Now we appeal to justice, consider the words of Ammar Yasir (ra) from Sahih al-Bukhari 7100:
Narrated Abu Maryam Abdullah bin Ziyad al-Asadi:
When Talha, al-Zubair and Aisha moved to Basra, Ali sent Ammar bin Yasir and al-Hasan bin Ali who came to us at Kufa and ascended the pulpit. al-Hasan bin Ali was at the top of the pulpit and Ammar was below al-Hasan. We all gathered before him. I heard Ammar saying, “Aisha has moved to al-Basra. By Allah! She is the wife of your Prophet in this world and in the Hereafter. But Allah has put you to test whether you obey Him (Allah) or her (Aisha).”
Ammar (ra), was making it explicitly clear during his sermon that preceded the battle of Jamal, that the believers were left with a choice, namely that they either obey Allah (swt) or Aisha. There were two paths that were set by Allah (swt) and that being adhered to by Aisha was at variance with Allah (swt) meaning her path was that of deviation. Taken to its logical conclusion it means that those that chose to side with Aisha and take up arms against the rightful Caliph Ali (as) were on a path that constituted disobedience to Allah (swt). There is no doubt that many of those that sided with Aisha were those that stood with her on account of the position she held, namely that of a wife of the Prophet (s) that led to them assuming that her decision would be a correct one, moreover her vocal opposition would have roused them even more, she successfully incited the people to rebel against the legitimate Head of State, and her personal order to imprison the Basran Governor Uthman bin Hunayf that led to his imprisonment and torture. The harsh reality is not only did Aisha personally deviate from the Shariah of Allah (swt) as alluded to by Ammar (ra) due to her open rebellion against Ali (as) her ability to successfully recruit others to follow her on this erroneous path was one so serious that (applying Maudoodi’s understanding of the above verse) she risked attaining a double punishment due to her leading her supporters astray, on a path that constituted disobedience to Allah (swt). Lest not forget the Hadith of the Prophet (s) as recorded in Sahih Muslim 1851a “Whoever dies without having on his neck bayah (to an Imam) dies the death of Jahiliyyah.” – Can we begin to estimate the number of spiritual sons from amongst the Sahaba and Tabi'een that by siding with their spiritual mother died the death of jahiliyya on the plains Jamal, as they failed to recognize the Imam of their time? Whilst ultimately we are all responsible for our actions, will Aisha not be held to account for her campaign of rebellion and incitement that not only cause her to deviate from the Shariah but also thousands of others who erred having faith in the fact that she was the wife of the Prophet (s)?
There isn’t any rocket science in this. A mother cannot be barred from crticism and punishment for the crimes and sins she commits just because she is a mother. The Nawasib always seek to ‘embarrass’ the Shia by asking:
‘Will you disrespect and criticize your own biological mother? If not then how can you treat the mothers of the believers in this manner?
Firstly, no Shia ‘disrespects’ Aish acriticizing her crimes does not constitute showing her disrespect. Aisha herself opened the door of criticism by committing such sins.
As for the second point, Nawasib are working on the assumption that mothers are always good to their children on account of the status as mothers. Tragically this is not a hard a fast rule and there exist many examples of mothers subjecting their biological children to neglect and abuse, for example:
Mother participates in the rape of her daughter
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/6230072.stm]
Mother jailed over child neglect
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,20511524-1702,00.html
Mother abandons children and goes on holiday
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article534741.ece
Mother murders her baby son
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1532206/Mother-who-killed-her-baby-son-in-fire-is-spared-jail.htm
Applying these cases to the facts under and the question whether a Shia would criticize his own biological mother, then the answer is that if one’s biological mother (godforbid) committed sins like those of the above women and Aisha, she is worthy of criticism. Alhamdulilah, we don’t see any Shia mother going out of her house joining men after her husband’s death, causing fitnah and murder in the Ummah and fighting the Ulil Amr who she hates, and that too when she was forewarned that such conduct would evidence her being on the wrong path!
