Accusation: Sayyidah ‘A’ishah accused Sayyidah Mariyah al Qibtiyyah of fornication and consequently the verse of ifk was revealed

Accusation: Sayyidah Aisha accused Sayyidah Mariyah al Qibtiyyah of fornication and consequently the verse of ifk was revealed

The approaches to substantiating this accusation amongst the Rawafid have varied. One approach has been of absolute denial that the verses of Surah al Nur were revealed in exoneration of Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha despite the extensive evidences to the effect.

The majority of Shia deny this simply on the premise that this is the view of the Ahlus Sunnah and according to them the narrations of the Ahlus Sunnah are rejected. In fact, they are of the opinion that if two contradictory reports are conveyed from any of their Imams, and one conforms to the Ahlus Sunnah’s viewpoint then that report will be discarded for the possibility of it being said out of Taqiyyah.[1]

Instead they allege that these verses were revealed to exonerate Sayyidah Mariyah al Qibtiyyah radiya Llahu ‘anha from the accusations of Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha against her.

A few contemporary Shia have authored works in this light. One of them is Ja’far Murtada al Hussaini[2], author of the book Hadith al Ifk. Employing various arguments throughout his book, he has endeavoured to refute the established version on the hadith of Ifk. At times he criticises the narrators of the Ahlus Sunnah, asserting that there is contradiction in the narration, or alleging that there is weakness in the chain without specifying what the weakness is, along with a number of other deceptions.

Hashim al Ma’ruf al Hassani[3] has also rejected this incident in his book Sirat al A’immah al Ithna ‘Ashar[4] and there are many more of their kind.

Refutation of this misinterpretation

Rejecting these verses being revealed to exonerate Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha and establish her innocence contradicts the position of a large group of Shia scholars. They too believe that Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala exonerated her from the accusations against her and Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam lashed those who had spread it. They also use this incident as proof for the enmity between Sayyidina ‘Ali and Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anhuma saying, “Enmity surfaced from that time.”[5][6]

In fact, some of their scholars emphasise that the innocence of Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha is mutawatir[7] and is known by darurah (to be essential aspect of din) and its rejection is rejection of darurah.

Ibn Abi al Hadid says:

و قوم من الشيعة زعموا أن الآيات التي في سورة النور لم تنزل فيها و إنما أنزلت في مارية القبطية و ما قذفت به مع الأسود القبطي و جحدهم لإنزال ذلك في عائشة ححد لما يعلم ضرورة من الأخبار المتواترة

A group of Shia believe that the verses in Surah al Nur were not revealed regarding her but rather regarding Mariyah al Qibtiyyah and the accusation against her with al Aswad al Qibti. Their rejection of this being revealed regarding Aisha is rejection of something known essentially from mutawatir traditions.[8]

We find that Ibn Abi al Hadid has at another juncture confirmed Sayyidah Aisha’s radiya Llahu ‘anha innocence. He says:

و قذفت عائشة في أيام رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم بصفوان ابن المعطل السلمي و القصة مشهورة فأنزل الله تعالى براءتها في قرآن يتلى و ينقل و جلد قاذفوها الحد

Aisha was accused in the days of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam with Safwan ibn al Mu’attal al Sulami. The incident is well-known. Consequently, Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala revealed her innocence in the Qur’an which will be recited and transmitted, and the punishment of lashing was implemented on her slanderers.[9]

Al Safi of the Shia affirms in al Jawami’:

و كان سبب الإفك أن عائشة ضاع عقدها

The reason for the slander was that Aisha lost her necklace.

Al Qummi says:

و قال القمي روت العامة أنها نزلت في عائشة و ما رميت به في غزوة بني المصطلق من خزاعة انتهى

The general scholars record that it was revealed regarding Aisha and the slander levelled against her in the Battle of Banu al Mustaliq of Khuza’ah.”

If one were to say: Al Razi[10] and others asserted that the Muslims have unanimously agreed that the purport is the slander against Aisha and then you say that there is consensus; but thereafter add the disclaimer, “except a group who says that it refers to Sayyidah Mariyah al Qibtiyyah,” then this is a contradiction.

(The answer to this would be) The opposition of this [minority] group will not be considered either because of their unawareness of their stance or because it is contrary to consensus, and contradicting consensus is impermissible. Or their odd view will not be considered since it contradicts the general Shia view which is in harmony with the view of all the Muslims.

Al Safi has given an indication in his tafsir that this view is extremely weak:

أقول إن صح هذا الخبر إلى آخره

I say: If this narration is correct …”

This is clear testimony to its falsehood and its unreliability by the Shia themselves.[11]

One of the aspects that falsifies the Rawafid’s claim that Allah’s declaration in the 10 verses of Surah al Nur were revealed to exonerate Mariyah from Aisha’s slander against her in the words:

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ جَاءُوا بِالْإِفْكِ عُصْبَةٌ مِّنكُمْ

Indeed, those who came with falsehood are a group among you.[12]

Is that the hadith concerning the slander and these verses materialised in the Battle of Banu al Mustaliq in the year 4, 5 or 6 A.H. according to various traditions; the most preferred of which is 5 A.H. And al Muqawqas sending Mariyah al Qibtiyyah radiya Llahu ‘anha to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam happened the year Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam wrote letters to the kings of the world, either 7 or 8 A.H; the most preferred being 8 A.H. This is long after the Battle of Banu al Mustaliq after which the slander took place, the account of which just passed. Thus, the verses’ revelation in Sayyidah Aisha’s radiya Llahu ‘anha innocence took place approximately 3 years before Mariyah’s arrival. So how is it possible to be revealed in her regard while she was in Egypt following the religion of her people? How did this alleged slander take place while she was in her country across the lands[13] and seas? The conclusion is that the Qur’an, Sunnah, history, and consensus of the ummah all humiliate the Shia and debunk their plot and slander against the most superior Messenger and the most noble and pure home known to history and the world.[14]

Further detail will soon come when discussing the Rawafid’s disgusting attitude towards our mother Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha when objecting to the incident of ifk.[15]

The second method the Shia use is to exploit da’if and munkar narrations which appear in the books of the Ahlus Sunnah.

It is common knowledge that one of the practices of the Rawafid to affirm their accusations and fabrications is to look for a fabricated or da’if narration which appears in the books of the Ahlus Sunnah and then narrate it to emphasise their point of view and silence the Ahlus Sunnah.

Regarding the accusation under discussion, some of them have located a very da’if narration, in fact baseless, which appears in our books. The one to head this tendency is ‘Abdul Hussain[16] in his book al Muraja’at.

The following is the narration they rely upon. Allegedly, Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha reports:

أهديت مارية إلى رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم و معها ابن عم لها قالت فوقع عليها وقعة فاستمرت حاملا قالت فعزلها عند ابن عمها قالت فقال أهل الإفك و الزور من حاجته إلى الولد ادعى ولد غيره و كانت أمه قليلة اللبن فابتاعت له ضائنة لبون فكان يغذى بلبنها فحسن عليه لحمه قالت عائشة رضي الله عنها فدخل به على النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم ذات يوم فقال كيف ترين فقلت من غذي بلحم الضأن يحسن لحمه قال و لا الشبه قالت فحملني ما يحمل النساء من الغيرة أن قلت ما أرى شبها قالت و بلغ رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم ما يقول الناس فقال لعلي خذ هذا السيف فانطلق فاضرب عنق ابن عم مارية حيث وجدته قالت فانطلق فإذا هو في حائط على نخلة يخترف رطبا قال فلما نظر إلى علي و معه السيف استقبلته رعدة قال فسقطت الخرقة فإذا هو لم يخلق الله عز و جل له ما للرجال شيء ممسوح

Mariyah was gifted to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and she was accompanied by her cousin. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had relations with her and subsequently she fell pregnant. So he left her by her cousin. The people of slander and falsehood said, “Due to his need for a child, he claimed the child of another.” His mother had very little milk so she purchased an ewe with milk and the child would be fed the ewe’s milk. Due to this, he became nice and plump.

Aisha continues: Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam brought him to me one day. He asked, “What do you think?” I said, “Whoever is nourished with a sheep’s milk, becomes nice and plump.” Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “And no resemblance?” I was overwhelmed with the possessiveness that overwhelms women so I said, “I do not see any resemblance.”

News reached Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam of what people were saying so he instructed ‘Ali, “Take this sword and cut the neck of Mariyah’s cousin wherever you find him.” Accordingly, he proceeded and found him in an orchard on a date-palm plucking fresh dates. When the latter saw ‘Ali, a shudder went down his spine so his loin cloth fell down and ‘Ali saw that Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala did not create for him what he created for men. It was just smooth.[17]

We find that ‘Abdul Hussain has manipulated this narration in al Muraja’at in the most despicable way. He relies on it to slander Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha in her character and faith. He says:

و حسبك مثالا لهذا ما أيدته نزولا على حكم العاطفة من إفك أهل الزور إذ قالوا بهتانا و عدوانا في السيدة مارية و ولدها عليه السلام ما قالوا حتى برأهما الله عز و جل من ظلمهم براءة على يد أمير المؤمنين محسوسة ملموسة وَرَدَّ اللَّهُ الَّذِيْنَ كَفَرُوْا بِغَيْظِهِمْ لَمْ يَنَالُوْا خَيْرًا

Sufficient for you as an example for this is her support – after succumbing to sentimental demands – of the liars’ slander when they said regarding Sayyidah Mariyah and her child what they said, out of enmity and to slander her. Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala thereafter exonerated them from their oppression, a tangible and perceptible exoneration on the hands of Amir al Mu’minin.

وَرَدَّ اللَّهُ الَّذِيْنَ كَفَرُوْا بِغَيْظِهِمْ لَمْ يَنَالُوْا خَيْرًا

And Allah repelled those who disbelieved, in their rage, not having obtained any good.[18][19]

He then adds a footnote on this saying:

من أراد تفصيل هذه المصيبة فليراجع أحوال السيدة مارية رضي الله عنها في ص 39 من الجزء الرابع من المستدرك للحاكم أو من تلخيصه للذهبي

Whoever wishes further detail regarding this calamity should study the biography of Sayyidah Mariyah radiya Llahu ‘anha on pg. 39 of volume 4 of Hakim’s al Mustadrak or its abridgement by al Dhahabi.

He refers by this to this munkar hadith (weak hadith which contradicts sahih ahadith. He not only relies on it – notwithstanding its severe du’f – but goes one step further and does not narrate the wording to confuse and lead people astray. Had he quoted the wording, it would have been apparent to any man of intellect and din that Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha is innocent from the slander the hypocrites ascribe to her in this munkar hadith. Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala has exonerated her by revealing Qur’an which will be recited whether the Shia believe in this or not. May Allah deal with the liars and their helpers in the manner they deserve! And we undoubtedly belong to Allah and to Him will we return.

Ibn Shahin[20] has also recorded this hadith from the chain of Sulaiman ibn Arqam from al Zuhri as appears in al Isabah[21] of Hafiz al ’Asqalani who comments “Sulaiman is da’if.”[22]

This allegation and all things that sprout from it can be answered in few ways:

Firstly, this narration is baseless and extremely da’if (weak). It is not at all permissible to use it as proof.

It is narrated by Sulaiman ibn Arqam and the A’immah are unanimous on labelling him da’if (weak), in fact extremely da’if.[23]

Due to the apparent du’f of this hadith, al Hakim remained silent over it in al Mustadrak – coupled with his laxity in authentication – and similarly al Dhahabi did not comment on it in its abridged version. Sheikh al Albani has recorded this hadith is his al Silsilah al Da’ifah[24] and commented, “Extremely da’if.”

Secondly, the original hadith is authentic and thabit (established) without the munkar (contradictory) additions.

Ibn al Arqam has made these additions to the hadith. If this points to anything, it only proves his extremely weak memory or that he intentionally lied or made additions due to his base desires. Thereafter, the followers of passions use it as proof.

The authentic sahih narration in this regard is recorded by Muslim from the report of Sayyidina Anas radiya Llahu ‘anhu:

أن رجلا كان يتهم بأم إبراهيم ولد رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم لعلي اذهب فاضرب عنقه فأتاه علي فإذا هو في ركي يتبرد فيها فقال له علي اخرج فناوله يده فأخرجه فإذا هو مجبوب ليس له ذكر فكف علي عنه ثم أتى النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم فقال يا رسول الله إنه لمجبوب ما له ذكر

A man was accused with Umm Ibrahim – Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam son. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam commanded ‘Ali, “Go and execute him.” Accordingly, ‘Ali went to him and found him cooling off in a well[25]. ‘Ali told him, “Come out,” and gave him his hand and pulled him out. He found him to be without a private part. ‘Ali thus desisted from killing him. He thereafter came to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and said, “O Messenger of Allah! He does not have a penis.”[26]

The third method the Shia use is adding concocted additions to sahih narrations to achieve their sinister goal.

It has been one of the skills of the Rawafid to take a sahih narration and then make additions to it, which concocts the narration in order to justify their lies, fabrications, and fibs. Sometimes they assert that a certain fabricated narration is the reason behind the revelation of a certain verse of the Qur’an so that they might reach the peak of deception and misguidance.

‘Ali ibn Ibrahim al Qummi has mentioned in his Tafsir[27] while commentating on the verse:

إِنَّ الَّذِيْنَ جَاءُوْا بِالْإِفْكِ عُصْبَةٌ مِّنكُمْ ۚ لَا تَحْسَبُوْهُ شَرًّا لَّكُمْ ۖ بَلْ هُوَ خَيْرٌ لَّكُمْ ۚ

Indeed, those who came with falsehood are a group among you. Do not think it bad for you; rather it is good for you.[28]

He says:

إن العامة يعني أهل السنة رووا أنها نزلت في عائشة و ما رميت به في غزوة بني المصطلق من خزاعة و أما الخاصة فإنهم رووا أنها نزلت في مارية القبطية و ما رمتها به عائشة

The ‘ammah, i.e. Ahlus Sunnah, report that it was revealed regarding Aisha and the slander levelled against her in the Battle of Bani al Mustaliq of Khuza’ah. The khassah, i.e. Shia report that it was revealed regarding Mariyah Qibtiyyah and Aisha’s slander against her.

‘Ali ibn Ibrahim al Qummi relates with his sanad:

لما مات إبراهيم ابن رسول الله صلى الله عليه و آله حزن عليه حزنا شديدا فقالت عائشة ما الذي يحزنك عليه فما هو إلا ابن جريح

When Ibrahim, the son of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam passed away, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was extremely sorrowful. Aisha said, “What makes you grieve over him? He is only the son of Jurayh.”[29]

This narration is sahih and thabit (established) according to the Rawafid and Saba’iyyah. That is why they have full reliance on it. Their senior scholars have categorically stated the authenticity of this narration.

Al Mufid[30] one of the senior scholars emphasises that these narrations are authentic and accepted by the Shia. He affirms:

خبر افتراء عائشة على مارية القبطية خبر صحيح مسلم عند الشيعة

The narration of Aisha’s accusation against Mariyah al Qibtiyyah is authentic and accepted by the Shia.”[31]

The narration is therefore Sahih in their sight.[32] The Rawafid have also reported the same incident in the tafsir of the verse:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِيْنَ آمَنُوْا إِنْ جَاءَكُمْ فَاسِقٌ بِنَبَإٍ فَتَبَيَّنُوْا أَنْ تُصِيْبُوْا قَوْمًا بِجَهَالَةٍ فَتُصْبِحُوْا عَلىٰ مَا فَعَلْتُمْ نَادِمِيْنَ

O you who have believed, if there comes to you a disobedient one with information, investigate, lest you harm a people out of ignorance and become, over what you have done, regretful.[33]

‘Ali ibn Ibrahim al Qummi has mentioned in his Tafsir:

إنها نزلت في مارية القبطية أم إبراهيم و كان سبب ذلك أن عائشة قالت لرسول الله صلى الله عليه و آله إن إبراهيم ليس هو منك و إنما هو من جريح القبطي فإنه يدخل إليها في كل يوم فغضب رسول الله صلى الله عليه و آله و قال لأمير المؤمنين عليه السلام خذ هذا السيف و ائتني برأس جريح إلى أن قال فأنزل الله عز و جل يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِيْنَ آمَنُوْا إِنْ جَاءَكُمْ فَاسِقٌ بِنَبَإٍ فَتَبَيَّنُوْا الآية

It was revealed regarding Mariyah al Qibtiyyah, mother of Ibrahim. The reason behind this was that Aisha said to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, “Ibrahim is not yours. He is Jurayh al Qibti’s son. He enters upon her every day.” Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam became angry and instructed Amir al Mu’minin radiya Llahu ‘anhu, “Take this sword and bring me Jurayh’s head.” … until Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, revealed, ‘ you who have believed, if there comes to you a disobedient one with information, investigate…’”[34][35]

Just to highlight what we have mentioned now that the Rawafid’s methodology is to insert corrupt additions to sahih narrations, we will present a sahih narration from the books of the Ahlus Sunnah and see how the Rawafid distort and twist it.

Al Tahtawi reports from the chain of ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Salih al Azdi al Kufi while al Bazzar, Abu Nu’aym, Ibn ‘Asakir and al Diya’ al Maqdisi[36] report from the chain of Abu Kurayb Muhammad ibn al ’Ala’ al Hamdani; all from Yunus ibn Bukayr from Muhammad ibn Ishaq from Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib from his father from his grandfather ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu who said:

كان قد تجرؤوا و في رواية كثر أو أكثر على مارية في قبطي ابن عم لها كان يزورها و يختلف إليها فقال لي رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم خذ هذا السيف فانطلق فإن وجدته عندها فاقتله … الحديث

They mustered the pluck – in a narration: they overstepped – to accuse Mariyah with a Qibti, her cousin. He would visit her and be in and out of her house. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam told me, “Take this sword and proceed. If you find him by her, kill him…”[37]

There is no mention in this hadith of Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha. So the neutral fair-minded seeker of knowledge may see how the Rawafid have distorted this narration and added spice to it. This hadith exists in reference to the hypocrites, not Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha.

The munafiqin were the ones who were spreading slanders against Sayyidah Mariyah radiya Llahu ‘anha but Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala exonerated her. They did this to cast accusations against Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam just as the leader of nifaq ‘Abdullah ibn Ubayy[38] had done before with Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha, and Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala exonerated her. Those who believe in Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and respect him will not regard the wives of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam as slanderers especially after Sayyidah Aisha’s radiya Llahu ‘anha innocence was revealed in the Qur’an which will be recited in the four corners of the world till the Day of Qiyamah. Every believer believes in her innocence, virtue, lofty status, and the verses of the Qur’an which were revealed in her regard. No one will slander her except a zindiq (heretic) who harbours rancour in his heart for Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, his family, and Companions.[39]

A few implications of the Rawafid emphasising this incident:

Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha remained accused of adultery according to the Rawafid since the ten verses were not revealed in her innocence, but rather were revealed to exonerate Sayyidah Mariyah radiya Llahu ‘anha from the slander of the former, as claimed by them.
Disparagement of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to a greater extent since Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha remained in his wedlock for 6 years thereafter and he passed away in her home. This is a filthy slander from the wicked against Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam honour, nobility, prophethood, and manhood since a person with an iota of manhood and decency will not keep a woman, who has been accused of adultery and whose innocence is not proven, in his wedlock. This is the outcome of the Rawafid’s slander and this is her condition according to them. Can there be a more horrible defamation of Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam honour?
The wicked do not stop here but go on to accuse Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha of slandering Sayyidah Mariyah radiya Llahu ‘anha of adultery to demonstrate to the world that the house of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam – which is the purest house on the face of the earth – is actually the worst house which houses the most immoral women. Evil indeed is what they slander with. Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala announced regarding Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam wives:

يَا نِسَاءَ النَّبِيِّ لَسْتُنَّ كَأَحَدٍ مِّنَ النِّسَاءِ

O wives of the Prophet, you are not like anyone among women.[40]

Therefore, they are the most superior women in character and piety. Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala also titled them as Ummahat al Mu’minin to honour them. Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala declares:

النَّبِيُّ أَوْلىٰ بِالْمُؤْمِنِيْنَ مِنْ أَنفُسِهِمْ وَأَزْوَاجُهُ أُمَّهَاتُهُمْ

The Prophet is more worthy of the believers than themselves, and his wives are [in the position of] their mothers.[41]

Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala says in their regard:

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُلْ لِّأَزْوَاجِكَ إِنْ كُنْتُنَّ تُرِدْنَ الْحَيَاةَ الدُّنْيَا وَزِيْنَتَهَا فَتَعَالَيْنَ أُمَتِّعْكُنَّ وَأُسَرِّحْكُنَّ سَرَاحًا جَمِيْلًا وَإِنْ كُنْتُنَّ تُرِدْنَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُوْلَهُ وَالدَّارَ الْآخِرَةَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ أَعَدَّ لِلْمُحْسِنَاتِ مِنْكُنَّ أَجْرًا عَظِيْمًا

O Prophet, say to your wives, “If you should desire the worldly life and its adornment, then come, I will provide for you and give you a gracious release. But if you should desire Allah and His Messenger and the home of the Hereafter – then indeed, Allah has prepared for the doers of good among you a great reward.”[42]

When Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam presented this choice to them, each one of them chose Allah, His Messenger, and the Life of the Hereafter and the first of them was none other than Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha. This lofty honour of being the pure and noble wives of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam has angered the Rawafid and they do not acknowledge this. Additionally, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam has mentioned many virtues of Sayyidah Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha. He affirmed that her superiority over other women is like the superiority of tharid over all other foods. Her merits are numerous. She was the most knowledgeable women of the universe. The Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anha would venerate her and acknowledge her scholastic rank. They would come to her when faced with any difficulty in understanding the hadith or when they had disputes. They would have the utmost reliance and trust on her traditions from Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.[43]

NEXT⇒ Accusation: Sayyidah Aisha commanded Sayyidina Bilal to put Abu Bakr forward for salah

[1] Al Sirat al Mustaqim vol. 3 pg. 182

[2] Ja’far ibn Murtada al Hussaini al ’Amili a contemporary. He was born in 1364 A.H. He studied in al Najf, then travelled to Qumm and finally returned to his birthplace Jabal ‘Amil in Lebanon in 1413 A.H. He has authored Ma’sat al Zahra’ and Bayan al A’immah fi al Mizan.

[3] Hashim al Ma’ruf al Hassani. A Shia religious scholar from Jabal ‘Amil in Lebanon. He was born in 1337 A.H. He assumed the post of religious judge and became a part of al Mahkamah al Shar’iyyah al Ja’fariyyah al ’Ulya (Ja’fariyyah Religious High Court). Some of his books are: Sirat al A’immah al Ithna ‘Ashar and al Wasaya wa al Awqaf. He died in 1403 A.H. (Dalil Junub Lubnan pg. 130)

[4] Sirat al A’immah al Ithna ‘Ashar vol. 1 pg. 438.

[5] Al Jamal of al Mufid pg. 219; Talkhis al Shafi of al Tusi pg. 468; Manaqib Al Abi Talib of Ibn Shahar Ashub vol. 1 pg. 201; al Sawarim al Muhriqah of al Tusturi pg. 105; Ihqaq al Haqq pg. 284; al Darajat al Rafi’ah of al Shirazi pg. 25; al Fusul al Muhimmah of al Musawi pg. 156.

[6] Al Sa’iqah fi Nasf Abatil wa Iftira’at al Shi’ah pg. 112 – 114.

[7] Established by such a multitude of narrations that it is impossible to deny.

[8] Sharh Nahj al Balaghah vol. 14 pg. 23

[9] Ibid vol. 9 pg. 191

[10] Muhammad ibn ‘Umar ibn al Hassan, Abu al Ma’ali al Razi, Fakhr al Din. Imam of the Mutakallimin. He was esteemed in the eyes of the Kings of Khawarizm and others. Many madrasahs were built for him in different cities. He retracted from the science of al kalam to the stance of the Salaf prior to his demise. He authored Mafatih al Ghayb and al Mahsul. He passed away in 606 A.H. (Tabaqat al Shafi’iyyah of al Subki vol. 8 pg. 80; al Bidayah wa al Nihayah vol. 13 pg. 55)

[11] Al Husun al Muni’ah fi Bara’at Aisha al Siddiqah bi Ittifaq Ahlus Sunnah wa al Shia of Muhammad ‘Arif al Hussaini pg. 21

[12] Surah al Nur: 11

[13] Al Suhub: plural of suhb: steppe region, level land (Taj al ’Urus vol. 3 pg. 78)

[14] Article: Ummuna Aisha Malakat al ’Afaf of Fadwa al Sadiq Bankiran (unpublished article)

[15] Pg. 610

[16] ‘Abdul Hussain ibn Yusuf Sharaf al Din al ’Amili al Musawi. He was a Shia Faqih. He was born in Shuhur in Jabal ‘Amil in 1290 A.H. and studied in al Najf. The most famous book of his is al Muraja’at. The permissibility of the masses beating themselves with swords and chains in lamentation of Sayed al Shuhada’ Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhuma is taken from this book. He died in Sur in 1377 A.H. and is buried in al Najf. (al A’lam vol. 3 pg. 279)

[17] Al Mustadrak vol. 4 pg. 41. Ibn Hajar declared the hadith as da’if in al Isabah vol. 3 pg. 335. Al Albani said in Silsilat al Ahadith al Da’ifah vol. 10 pg. 700 “Extremely da’if.”

[18] Surah al Ahzab: 25

[19] Al Muraja’at pg. 260, 261

[20] ‘Umar ibn Ahmed ibn ‘Uthman, Abu Hafs al Baghdadi, Ibn Shahin. The Hafiz, ‘Alim, and Sheikh of Iraq. He was born in 297 A.H. He was reliable. Some of his books are: Tarikh Asma’ al Thiqat and Nasikh al Hadith wa Mansukhuh. He passed away in 385 A.H. (Siyar A’lam al Nubala’ vol. 16 pg. 431; Shadharat al Dhahab vol. 3 pg. 117)

[21] Al Isabah fi Tamyiz al Sahabah vol. 5 pg. 519

[22] Al Silsilah al Da’ifah vol. 10 pg. 701 – 703

[23] Al Tarikh al Kabir of al Bukhari vol. 4 pg. 2; al Du’afa’ wa al Matrukun of al Nasa’i pg. 48; al Jarh wa al Ta’dil vol. 4 pg. 100; al Kamil fi Du’afa’ al Rijal of Ibn ‘Adi vol. 4 pg. 228; Tarikh Baghdad vol. 10 pg. 18; al Du’afa’ wa al Matrukun of Ibn al Jawzi vol. 2 pg. 16; al Mughni fi al Du’afa’ vol. 1 pg. 277

[24] Vol. 10 pg. 700 Hadith: 4964

[25] Al Raki: well (al Nihayah fi Gharib al Hadith wa al Athar vol. 2 pg. 261; Fath al Bari vol. 1 pg. 125)

[26] Sahih Muslim Hadith: 2771

[27] Tafsir al Qummi vol. 2 pg. 99

[28] Surah al Nur: 11

[29] A number of Rafidi authors have mentioned this citing from al Qummi, viz. Hashim al Bahrani in his Tafsir al Burhan fi Tafsir al Qur’an vol. 4 pg. 52, 53 and al Majlisi in Bihar al Anwar vol. 22 pg. 155

[30] Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn al Nu’man, Abu ‘Abdullah ibn al Mu’allim. A Shia scholar. He is titled Sheikh al Mufid. He was the head of the Rawafid. He authored for them many books of misguidance and criticism of the predecessors. He has about 200 books to his name. He died in 414 A.H. (Lisan al ’Arab vol. 5 pg. 368; al A’lam vol. 7 pg. 21)

[31] Risalah fima Ashkala min Khabar Mariyah of al Mufid pg. 29

[32] Al Sa’iqah fi Nasf Abatil wa Iftra’at al Shi’ah pg. 103; al Husun al Muni’ah fi Bara’at Aisha al Siddiqah pg. 54; al Fath al An’am fi Bara’at Aisha wa Maryam of ‘Ali Ahmed al ’Al al Tahtawi pg. 130

[33] Surah al Hujurat: 6

[34] Vol. 2 pg. 318, 319

[35] Al Burhan fi Tafsir al Qur’an of al Bahrani vol. 13 pg. 138; Tafsir Nur al Thaqalayn of al Huwayzi, vol. 5 pg. 81; Bihar al Anwar vol. 22 pg. 153, 154

[36] Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul Wahid ibn Ahmed, Abu ‘Abdullah al Maqdisi al Hambali. The Sheikh, Imam, Hafiz and Hujjah. He was born in 569 A.H. He mastered many sciences. He disapproved (declared majruh) and approved (declared ‘adil), validated (declared sahih) and invalidated (declared weak) with honesty and truthfulness. Some of his works are: Fada’il al A’mal and al Ahadith al Mukhtarah. He passed away in 643 A.H. (Siyar A’lam al Nubala’ vol. 23 pg. 126; Shadharat al Dhahab vol. 5 pg. 223)

[37] Sharh Mushkil al Athar Hadith: 4953; Musnad al Bazzar vol. 2 pg. 237 Hadith: 634; al Ahadith al Mukhtarah Hadith: 735; Hilyat al Awliya’ vol. 3 pg. 177, 178. Al Maqdisi says, “It has a shahid in Sahih Muslim from the tradition of Anas very similar to it.” Al Albani declared it sahih in Silsilat al Ahadith al Sahihah Hadith: 1904

[38] ‘Abdullah ibn Ubayy ibn Malik, Abu al Hubab, well known as Ibn al Salul. He was the head of the munafiqin in the golden era of Islam. He was the leader of the Khazraj at the end of their ignorance. He outwardly accepted Islam after the Battle of Badr to hide his true colours. In the Battle of Uhud, he withdrew with 300 men. He died in 9 A.H. (al A’lam vol. 4 pg. 65)

[39] Al Intisar li Kitab al ’Aziz al Jabbar wa li al Sahabah al Akhyar ‘ala A’da’ihim al Ashrar of Rabi’ al Madkhali pg. 396, 397

[40] Surah al Ahzab: 32

[41] Surah al Ahzab: 6

[42] Surah al Ahzab: 28, 29

[43] Excerpt from an article of Sheikh Rabi’ ibn Hadi al Madkhali titled al Mahdi bayn Ahlus Sunnah wa al Rawafid

BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents