Rant - The Americans Afford Respect to Their First Lady

–:Sixth Emotional Rant:–

The Americans Afford Respect to Their First Lady

Ibn al Hashimi stated:

The Americans bestow respect upon their president, and one way they do this is by extending this respect to his wife, whom they refer to as the First Lady of America. Historically, the British have bestowed respect on the wife of their king. Surely, the respect bestowed upon the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) by the Muslims should far surpass the respect the Americans give to the President, or the British have given to the King.

If the Americans have the decency to respect the First Lady of America, and if the British have the decency to respect the Queen of England, then surely the Muslims should have the decency to respect Aisha (رضّى الله عنها), the First Lady of Islam. All government officials address the First Lady of America with respect; but do we see the Ayatollahs (the officials of the Shia religion) addressing the First Lady of Islam with respect? Instead, they call her a Kaffir [the Imam of Kufr], Fasiq, Munafiqh, Nasibi, and an enemy of Islam.

Insulting or harming the Prophet’s wife (رضّى الله عنها) is insulting and harming the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) himself. Even the man with the least amount of chivalry and self-respect would not allow people to insult his wife, and this includes the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)

Reply – Respect is Earned, it is NOT an Automatic Right

Respect is not granted as an automatic right, it has to be earned. The first lady has a formal role / responsibility, and should act as a role model citizen. If the wife of a Head of State conducts herself in a dignified, respectful manner, and does not attract attention by partaking in any form of activity that might open the door for criticism then she has earned the respect from her husband’s subjects. If the First Lady does the exact opposite, and chooses to undertake unlawful activities that ask questions of her, such as corruption, bribery or worse indulges in activities that are harmful to the national interest then the respect that she once had will erode, and will be replaced by open criticism. That is why we have examples of First Lady’s whose respect was replaced by criticism on account of their conduct, examples include:

• Americas First Lady Hilary Clinton was continually accused in the US Press for her involvement in the Whitewater bribery scandal.
• First Lady of South Africa Winnie Mandela was involved in serious corruption during the Presidency of Nelson Mandela
• First Lady Imelda Marcos was famed for her corruption, whilst her husband was the President of the Philippines
• A string of African First Ladies have been dogged by serious corruption allegations and have been openly riled for it: http://www.ethiopianreview.com/content/8589

All of the above were First Ladies who were both criticised and (in some cases) fell from grace, and were severely criticised, the fact that they were the spouses of Heads of State in no way guaranteed them immunity from criticism. Their conduct courted controversy, criticism and in some cases prosecution! The above facts relate to the wives of normal fallible Heads of State, the duty to behave in a certain manner is ten fold greater when it comes to the wife of Rasulullah (s), for she should act as a perfect role model to the people. If a wife of Rasulullah (s) fails to act in an appropriate manner, and in fact abuses her position, and worse still, uses her influence to partake in a seditious rebellion, that makes her a sinner and those that followed her, then we are fully within our rights to highlight this reality, and point out that our loss of respect for her is due to this reality.

There exist scenarios wherein a First Lady’s conduct is of such a serious nature that it is harmful to the Head of State on account of her being his spouse. In such circumstances any Leader worth his salt will seek to distance himself from such activities and will warn his people not to steer clear of her. We have Mandela who not only distanced his wife when she partook in serious offences he eventually divorced her. When it came to Rasulullah (s), he was openly critical about the future conduct of his First Lady, and warned the nation of her reality when he relayed two facts:

Tawoos narrates that Allah’s Messenger (s) said to his wives: ‘Who among you shall have the dogs of so and so bark at them? Oh Humayra, will it be you?’ 

Kanz ul Ummal, Volume 11 page 334 Tradition 31671

And as we read in Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4 Hadith 336:

“Narrated Abdullah: The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointed to the house of Aisha, and said: “Fitna (trouble/sedition) is right here,” saying three times, “from where the side of the Satan’s head comes out.”

Now when Rasulullah (s) was publicly criticizing Ayesha in one tradition and alluding to the deviation of this same First Lady in the other, then what is wrong if we accordingly criticize her, by relying on both traditions? The conduct of this First Lady violated the Quran, Sunnah and her deviation from the truth was foretold by Rasulullah (s) that hence entitles us to criticize her accordingly, for we are exposing her for that very conduct that Rasulullah (s) had expressed his concerns about.