Did the killing of Ayesha’s envoy on his way to Medina trigger the Battle of Jamal?

Did the killing of Ayesha’s envoy on his way to Medina trigger the Battle of Jamal?

The Nasibi author was so desperate to impress this on his Sunni readership that he repeated the same assertion on three occasions. Ibn al Hashimi states:

“And so the Battle of the Camel was initiated, not by Ali (رضّى الله عنه) nor by Aisha (رضّى الله عنها); rather it was Uthman’s killers who attacked Aisha’s envoy (رضّى الله عنها) for fear that her negotiation mission would succeed and result in the subsequent capture of those responsible for the death of Uthman (رضّى الله عنه). Ali (رضّى الله عنه), Aisha (رضّى الله عنها), Talha (رضّى الله عنه), and Zubair (رضّى الله عنه) found their contingents fighting each other, not even knowing who fired the first shot; little did they know that it was Uthman’s killers who had initiated this entire operation, hoping that it would cause Aisha’s mission (رضّى الله عنها) of negotiation to fail. The Saba’ites would blame the entire matter on Aisha (رضّى الله عنها), and we see clearly today that their descendants–the Ithna Ashari Shia–have continued this tradition of blaming Aisha (رضّى الله عنها). This is yet another solid link between Abdullah ibn Saba and the modern day Shia, both of which slander the Prophet’s wives and his companions.

Ibn al Hashimi states:

The reality is that Aisha (رضّى الله عنها), Talha (رضّى الله عنه), Zubair (رضّى الله عنه), Muawiyyah (رضّى الله عنه), and hundreds of other people wanted Ali (رضّى الله عنه) to apprehend Uthman’s killers who were in his camp. Ali (رضّى الله عنه) always planned on doing this, and it is likely that he would have agreed to Aisha’s request (رضّى الله عنها) to speed up the process. Uthman’s killers did not want this, and they attacked Aisha’s envoy (رضّى الله عنها) on its way to Medinah, thereby initiating the Battle of the Camel and saving their own skin.

Reply One – Ibn al Hashimi has failed to provide any source to back up his claim

This is a crucial reference for Ibn al Hashimi as he has sought to stress how deceptive the Sabaites were, they didn’t give peace a chance as they killed Ayesha’s envoy when negotiations were nearing a positive end. If this event was true, why has Ibn al Hashimi failed to cite its primary source? The biggest deception Nawasib do is when they provide the summary of a text to their readers without citing the page number or reference. That way readers are left assuming that the text has been quoted verbatim, and those seeking to verify such texts are in effect forced to find a needle in haystack. Shameless hypocrites like Ibn al Hashimi do this intentionally, after all most people don’t have the time to delve into books and verify such citations, they are just led to rely on the integrity of the ‘trustworthy’ author. In this instance, Ibn al Hashimi has severely abused his position of trust.

Reply Two – Why would the Sabaites want to kill an envoy heading away from Jamal?

Ibn al Hashimi by suggesting this incident at the negotiation stage, prior to the commencement of battle was seeking to create public revulsion towards those he deemed the ancestors of the Shia, after all they were so evil they did everything to prevent the likelihood of a peaceful settlement, stooping as low as slaughtering the peace envoy of Ayesha! Firstly the narration that Ibn al Hashimi relied on regarding the pre Jamal negotiation is weak on account of Sayf bin Umar in the chain. Secondly, what would be the logic in the envoy of Ayesha being killed on his way to Madina? Why was he heading in the direction of Medina when the hostile parties were already camped in Jamal? All the main players were in Jamal, so what was the logic in this envoy heading elsewhere? If he was on his way to Madina, what were his precise co-ordinates at the time of death? The distance between Jamal and Medina is thousands of miles, how did those camped at Jamal receive news of the Sabaites killing this envoy, via email?