Did Imam Ali (as) Suggest that the Prophet (s) Divorce Ayesha?

Did Imam Ali (as) Suggest that the Prophet (s) Divorce Ayesha?

Ibn al Hashimi states:

Ali (رضّى الله عنه) Defends Aisha (رضّى الله عنها)The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) was a person with a lot of Gheerah (protective jealousy) which, according to the Sunnah, is considered a good quality in Muslim men. So the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) was naturally incensed by the accusations that his wife had slept with another man. These accusations caused him a great deal of agitation. The Companions of the Prophet (رضّى الله عنهم) saw how miserable the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) had become over this issue, and so it was that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) said to him: “O Allah’s Apostle! Allah does not impose restrictions on you, and there are plenty of women other than her. If however, you ask her slave girl, she will tell you the truth!” (Bukhari)

First and foremost Ibn al Hashimi is yet again narrating this consultation exercise backwards. He seems to suggest that after the aborted sermon in the mosque, the Prophet (s) then entered into discussions with the Sahaba over how to resolve the matter. This is false, gauging their opinion occurred first and the aborted Khutbah followed that, which is clear from the evidence of Ayesha in Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 92, Number 462. Moreover the counsel of the Sahaba as a body had not been sought rather only Ali (as) and Usamah had been consulted.

Now we would like to ask:

• The Prophet (s) sought the counsel of Ali (as) and Usamah, why was Umar not summoned when he is commonly deemed the key adviser of the Prophet (s) who was fond of interfering in the personal matters of the Prophet (s), and whose counsel was preferred to the opinion of Rasul (s) on a number of occasions to the extent that (as per Sunni traditions) Allah (swt) preferred his decision making over that of the Prophet (s)?
• Unusually Umar is nowhere to be found during the entire episode, why is that?
• Was this military campaign one wherein the Prophet (s) did without his alleged most brave fearless warrior?
• If he was present why is he notably absent throughout the event?
• We see no evidence of Umar approaching Abu Bakr, nor is he present in the mosque of the Prophet (s) when the Khazraj and Aus have a row amidst the sermon of the Prophet (s), why is he absent?

Ibn al Hashimi states:

The popular Shia author and scholar Al-Tijani cited this as evidence that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) told the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) to divorce Aisha (رضّى الله عنها). He declares that this is recorded in Sunni accounts as well and he off-handedly cites the above Hadith from Bukhari as his “evidence.” This is what we like to call “Half-Hadith-ing” [i.e. using half of a Hadith to “prove” one’s point]. If we look at the other half of the Hadith, we see that it negates Al-Tijani’s claim that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) told the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) to divorce Aisha (رضّى الله عنها).

Imam Ali (as) was indeed making it clear that Rasulullah (s) had the option to divorce Ayesha if he so wished. Maula Ali (as) merely set out the options available, and he was stating that there were other proverbial fish in the sea, if Rasulullah (s) wanted he could replace her with another wife. He was merely stating that in light of the slander he could divorce simply to silence the tongues of others. It doesn’t mean Ayesha had done anything wrong rather he was setting out the options that were available to him. Maudoodi who Ibn al Hashimi has referred to as an Imam (as we have previously cited) has also stated that Imam Ali (as) set out the option:

The greatest falsehood, rather a calumny, in this connection is the assertion by the Umayyads that it was Hadrat `Ali who had been referred to in this verse. A saying of Hisham bin `Abdul Malik has been cited in Bukhari, Tabarani and Baihaqi to the effect: “The one who had the greatest share of responsibility in it” refers to `Ali bin Abi Talib. The fact, however, is that Hadrat `Ali had no hand whatever in this mischief. The truth is that when Hadrat `Ali saw the Holy Prophet in a perturbed state of mind and the Holy Prophet asked for his counsel, he said: “Allah in this matter has not laid any restriction on you: suitable women are plenty: you may if you like divorce `A’ishah and marry another woman.” But this did not at all mean that Hadrat `Ali had supported the accusation against Hadrat `A’ishah. His object was only to allay the Holy Prophet’s mental anguish.

If the response of Ali (as) referring to alternative spouses went against Ayesha, how different was this to that said by Allah (swt) in Surah Tahrim? The Bukhari narration records “Ali bin Abi Talib said, ‘O Allah’s Apostle! Allah does not put you in difficulty and there are plenty of women other than she” and Allah (swt) says:

It may be, if he divorced you (all), that Allah will give him inexchange 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.

What is the difference between the two statements?

Tijani suggests that this option given to Rasulullah (s) by Ali caused her resentment towards him, let us for arguments sake say that his conclusion is false, could Ibn al Hashimi kindly provide us with an explanation as to why she hated Ali (as) to such an extreme that she loathed mentioning his name, as the man aiding the Prophet (s) as he entered his mosque, and prostrated in happiness upon receipt of his death? At least Tijani offers a reason could you kindly expand on the grounds for such hatred?