The Merits of Ayesha from the Pen of her ِِِAdvocates - 3
Third Claim – Does the title of ‘Umahat ul Momineen’ given to the wives of the Holy Prophet (s) evidence Ayesha’s personal merit or guarantees her immunity from criticism?
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)
Reply One: The actual reason for declaring them ‘mothers of the believers’ was to prevent Muslims from marrying them
We shall puncture this Nawasib ‘defence 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 Ayesha 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, Volume 14 page 228 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 Ayesha’. 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, Volume 4 page 1422:
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 Um 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 Volume 4 page 1395 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, Volume 11 page 146:
أن معنى الآية أن الامومة في الامة المراد بها تحريم نكاحهن على التأبيد كالامهات .
“The meaning of motherhood to the nation means that it is unlawful to marry them for ever just like the case of their biological mothers.”
One of the beloved scholars of Salafies namely Shawkani records in Fatah al-Qadir, Volume 4 page 372 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 Dur al-Manthur, Volume 6 page 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) satatement ‘{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, Volume 5 page 136:
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 an 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 Ayesha 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, Volume 8 page 65:
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
Masrooq said: ‘A woman said to Ayesha: ‘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 Amer al-Sh’abi and Masrooq are ‘Thiqah’ while Feras bin Yaya is ‘Seduq’. Moreover, many Sunni scholars have declared this tradition to be Sahih. This tradition is recorded in Masanid Feras, Volume 1 page 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, page 184. The Salafi scholar Abu Ishaq al-Huwaini was the favorite student of Imam Nasiruddin Albaani al-Salafi which why is Salafies call him ‘the small Albaani’. Abu Ishaq in his book Tanbeeh al-Hajeb, Volume 2 page 425 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 Ayesha may Allah be pleased with, narrated by Masrooq.
We read in Tafsir Ibn Jauzi , Volume 6 page 353:
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 the 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, Volume 9 page 202:
“Shu’bi has narrated from Masrooq that a woman said to Ayesha: ‘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 belevers was to prevent their marriage with Muslim men, see
1. Rasael al-Murtaza, by Sharif al-Murtaza, v4, p65
2. Jame al-Jawame, by Tabarsi, v3, p49
3. Tafsir al-Quran, by Abdullah Shubar, p418
4. Min Wahi al-Quran, by Fadhlullah, v18, p263
5. Tafsir al-Quran, by Abdullah Shubar, p418
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 Ayesha 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 Ahkam al-Quran:
“People disagreed, as to the wives been the mother of both men and the women. They are the mother 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 honour was linked purely to curtailing the ambitions of certain individuals who declared a wish to put a deposit down for Ayesha in the eventuality of Rasulullah (s) passing away. Confusion does not even come in to it; this verse was linked purely to preventing such machinations coming into fruition. Moreover the early portion of the verse places a condition upon Ayesha, that she remains within the confines of her residence, her breach of that condition means that she fell foul of this verse. Rather than honouring her, her conduct evidences that she failed to adhere to the condition to remain at home, that had been imposed upon her.
nasibi objections
Objection One
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?
Reply
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).
Objection Two
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).
Reply
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”.
Reply Two: Being a ‘mother of the believers’ is a merit dependent on the believers
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.
Reply Three: The wives of the Prophet (s) will be judged by Allah (swt) according to their deeds
Being a wife of the Prophet (s) is indeed a blessing, an honourable 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, Volume 7 page 32 that has been graded as Sahih by the margin writer of the book Hussain Salim Asad:
أن النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم 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 Ma’az”. Mu’az 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. ( 033.030 )
Ibn Kathir in his commentary of the said 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. 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 behaviours. 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 them 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 Bukhari Volume 9 Hadith 220:
Narrated Abu Maryam Abdullah bin Ziyad al-Aasadi:
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 Ayesha. There were two paths that set by Allah (swt) and that being adhered to by Ayesha 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 Ayesha and take up arms against the rightful Khalifa Ali (as) were on a path that constituted disobedience to Allah (swt). There is no doubt that many of those that sided with Ayesha 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 Ayesha 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 under the chapter Kitab al-Imarah “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 Tabieen that by siding with their spiritual mother died the death of jahilyya at on the plains Jamal, as they failed recognize the Imam of their time? Whilst ultimately we are all responsible for our actions, will Ayesha 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)?
Reply Four: A mother can be good or bad
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’ Ayesha criticizing her crimes does not constitute showing her disrespect. Ayesha 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
Mother jailed over child neglect
Mother abandons children and goes on holiday
Mother murders her baby son
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 Ayesha, 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!
No comments:
Post a Comment