The Shia Accuse Ayesha of Hating Ali (as)

Objections to the Shia Criticisms Leveled at Ayesha

Objection One– The Shia Accuse Ayesha of Hating Ali (as)

Ibn al Hashimi emotively argues:

Yet today we see that Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) is still insulted and slandered. She is accused of hating Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and of being an enemy of Ahlel Bayt.

Reply One – Ayesha’s enmity to Imam Ali (as) would open like a pot

In Kanz ul Ummal, Volume 16 page 186 Tradition 44216, we read:

وأما عائشة فأدركها رأي النساء وشئ كان في نفسها علي يغلي في جوفها كالمرجل

“Ayesha was informed about the opinion of women, but there was some thing inside her boiling like a cooking pot against Ali”

Reply Two – Ayesha’s refusal to mention Imam Ali (as) by name is proof that she hated him

Ansar.org stated:

Al-Tijani claims that the historians mentioned Aysha as not wanting to mention the name of Ali. And I ask him, which historians? Can you tell me exactly so that we know the liar from the truth teller? And on which references did you depend?

There is no need for Abu Sulaiman to get agitated, for this fact can be located in a number of sources of Ahl’ul Sunnah. On this occasion will fare one better than Tijani, we shall cite the traditions from their books of hadith.

A mild version can also be located in Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3 hadith 761:

Ubaidullah bin ‘Abdullah told me that ‘Aisha had said, “When the Prophet became sick and his condition became serious, he requested his wives to allow him to be treated in my house, and they allowed him. He came out leaning on two men while his feet were dragging on the ground. He was walking between Al-’Abbas and another man.” ‘Ubaidullah said, “When I informed Ibn ‘Abbas of what ‘Aisha had said, he asked me whether I knew who was the second man whom ‘Aisha had not named. I replied in the negative. He said, ‘He was ‘Ali bin Abi Talib.”

This reference is sufficient to prove that Ayesha hated Imam Ali (as). In light of the above reference we would like to ask the following questions to the advocates of Ayesha:

• When he (s) requested to his wives that he go to the home of Ayesha whose residence was he residing in at the time?
• Which of the other wives expressed a desire that the Prophet (s) reside in their homes?
• If any other did, who was it?
• Why did she not make a request to the other wives and personally bring the Prophet (s) to her home?
• What was troubling the Prophet (s) at that wife’s home that led to him wishing to leave?
• She mentioned Ibn Abbas accompanying the Prophet (s) but not Ali (as), why not?
• Was Ayesha angry with him?
• If so why?
• Was there any historical reason that pointed to this animosity?
• If there was, can any historical evidence be submitted to satisfy our inquisitive minds?
• If there was no reason for this anger, why did she choose to omit his name?
• Does the Deen entitle a Muslim to be angry to such an extreme towards another Muslims without a reason, whereby they cannot even tolerate saying the name of that person?
• Is there any link between the refusal to mention the name of Ali (as) and the jealousy she possessed towards Khadija (as)?
• Is it not the fact that this jealously lay in the fact Khadija (as) bore the Prophet (s) a lineage and Sayyida Fatima (as) was the walking example of her mother?

Try as they might, even al-Bukhari alludes to the fact that Ayesha was unable to mention Imam ‘Ali (as) by name. Abu Sulaiman would of course differ and seek to deny that ANY animosity was borne by Ayesha towards Imam ‘Ali (as). The difficulty for him is that the Ulema of Ahl ul Sunnah have confirmed this fact. In his commentary of this hadith, Allamah Bardruddin al-Aini records in Umadatul Qari, Volume 5 page 192 Tradition 665:

عن معمر ولكن عائشة لا تطيب نفسا له بخير

Mua’amar narrated: ‘Ayesha avoided mentioning him (Ali) in a good manner’.

We also read:

عن الزهري ولكنها لا تقدر على أن تذكره بخير

Al-Zuhari said: She ‘(Ayesha) didn’t posses the ability to mention anything good of him (Ali).’

We shall now present a ‘complete’ version of this tradition which proves clearly that Ayesha’s failure to mention Imam ‘Ali (as)’s name whilst recollecting this incident, was not on account of temporary amnesia but was in fact due to her hatred of him:

When Ubaidullah Ibn Utbah mentioned to Ibn Abbas that Aisha said “In his death-illness the Prophet was brought to (Aisha’s) house while his shoulders were being supported by Fadhl Ibn Abbas and another person”, then Abdullah Ibn Abbas said: “Do you know who this ‘other man’ was?” Ibn Utbah replied: “No.” Then Ibn Abbas said: “He was Ali Ibn Abi Talib, but she is averse to name him in a good context.”

The references for the above narration can be located in the following texts:

1. Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal, Volume 6 page 228 Tradition 25956
2. al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, by Ibn Sa’d, v2, part 2, p29
3. History of al-Tabari (Arabic), v1, pp 1800-1801 this is also loacted in the English translation. History of al-Tabari (English) Volume 9 page 169-170
4. al-Ansab al-Ashraf, by al-Baladhuri, v1, pp 544-545

The margin writer of Musnad Ahmed bin Hanbal namely Shaykh Shoib al-Arnaut stated:

“The chain is Sahih according to the standards of the two Sheiks (Bukhari & Muslim)”

Reply Three – Ayesha hated Banu Hashim and Imam Ali (as)

Allamah Abu Umar Ahmed bin Abd Rabbah records:

He (Ali) said: ‘Go to that woman and tell her to return to her house wherein Allah ordered her to remain’. He (Ibn Abbas) said: ‘Hence I went to her and asked permission to enter but she refused to grant it, hence I entered the house without permission and sat on a cushion. She (Ayesha) said: ‘Oh ibn Abbas, by Allah I never saw some one like you! You entered our house without permission and sat on our cushion without our permission’. I said: ‘By Allah this is not your house, your only house is the one which Allah ordered you to stay at, but you didn’t obey. The commander of the believers orders you to return to your home land which you left’. She said: ‘May Allah’s mercy be upon the commander of believers who is Umar bin al-Khatab’. I said: ‘Yes, and this is Ali bin Abi Talib the commander of believers’. She said: ‘I refuse, I refuse……’. Then she said: ‘Alright, I will return, because I hate the city in which you (Bani Hashim) reside in’.

Iqd al-Fareed, Volume 2 page 108

In Al Imama wal Siyasa, Volume 1 page 45 we learn that:

“Following Uthman’s murder Zubayr approached Ayesha in Makka and said ‘Look they have made ‘Ali Khalifa. She said, What right does ‘Ali have to rule over our necks? I will not stay in Madina as long as ‘Ali is in power”.

In Rauzatul Ahbaab, Volume 3 page 65, we read that:

“After the Battle of Jamal, Ali approached Ayesha and said: ‘You have treated me like an enemy’”.

We also read in Rauzat ul Ahbaab, Volume 3 page 10 that:

“Ayesha was clouded by her hatred of Ali”.

Reply Four – Ayesha’s failure to correct a man speaking ill of Ali (as) is proof that she hated him

We read in Musnad Ibn Hanbal, Volume 6 page 113 Hadith 24864:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبي ثنا أبو أحمد قال ثنا عبد الله بن حبيب عن حبيب بن أبي ثابت عن عطاء بن يسار قال : جاء رجل فوقع في علي وفي عمار رضي الله تعالى عنهما عند عائشة فقالت أما علي فلست قائلة لك فيه شيئا واما عمار فإني سمعت رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم يقول لا يخير بين أمرين الا اختار أرشدهما

‘A man came and spoke negatively of Ali and Ammar in the presence of Ayesha to which Ayesha said: ‘I shall not tell you anything about Ali but as for Ammar, I heard the Holy prophet say that if he is provided with two options, he opts for the better one’.

The margin writer of Musnad Ahmed bin Hanbal namely Shaykh Shoib al-Arnaut stated:

“The chain is Sahih as per the condition of Muslim”

We appeal to justice, when it comes to the rank of superiority who is at a more superior level, Imam Ali (as) or Amar bin Yasir (ra)? If Ayesha was prepared to correct this individual’s incorrect and negative opinion of Amar (ra) by citing a Hadith of his excellence, could she not have done the same about Ali (as)? Are we to believe that she had never heard anything about the excellence of Ali (as) from the tongue of Rasulullah (s)? If she had, was this not the apt time to silence the tongue of this individual? Had Ayesha offered no response to the views of both Ali (as) and Amar (ra) her advocates may have opined that her response was made under taqiyya, but the fact that she was prepared to defend the character of Amar (ra), but offered no words to protect the character of Ali (as). By remaining silent Ayesha went against the warning of Rasulullah (s) who said:

من أذل عنده مؤمن فلم ينصره وهو يقدر على أن ينصره أذله الله على رؤوس الأشهاد يوم القيامة

“Whoever is present while a Muslim is humiliated before him, and is able to assist him [and yet does not], Allah will humiliate him before [all of] creation.”

[Ahmad in al-Musnad, 3/487; Suyuti in Al-Jami` As-Saghir, 2/510, Hadith Number 8375]

the character of Ali (as). Ayesha’s willingness to allow a person to hold an unsavoury opinion of Ali (as) and offering no rebuttal to such a viewpoint evidences her hatred of him. Lest not forget that Ayesha was no ordinary person, she was the widow of Rasulullah (s) and as such she commanded considerable trust and respect amongst the people, she will after hold an opinion that will have influence over the people. If Ayesha was prepared to offer no view a

bout a man that spoke ill of Ali (as), one can only imagine what sort of precedent she was setting amongst her subjects that she accompanied onto the plains of Jamal.

Reply Five – Ayesha’s reaction at the death of Imam Ali (as) evidences her hatred of him

Ansar.org states:

Al-Tijani says, “and when she learnt of his death she knelt and thanked Allah.” Then he gave us in the footnotes the name of historians he took as references. These are his references, “AL-Tabari, Ibn Al-Atheer, Al-Fitnah Al-Kubra, and all historians who documented the incidents of the year 40 after the immigration of the prophet peace be upon him.” [20] So, I went back to Al-Tabari and Ibn Al-Atheer for the stories of the year 40. And guess what! I did not find any trace for this claim! What a liar he is!

Again Abu Sulaiman is seeking to mislead people with false information, for these references can be located in these very books and we are attaching the link of the text from History of al Tabari Volume 17 page 224 (English translation) for our reader’s perusal:

Ayesha’s pleasure at Maula Ali(as)’s death

“When news of ‘Ali’s death reached Aishah, she said: And she threw down her staff and settled upon her place of abode, like the traveller happy to return home”.

Perhaps Abu Sulaiman will seek to offer his own insight into the meaning of this verse, he need not bother for the English translator, Professor G. R. Hawting states in the footnote on page 224:

“…the verse is proverbial and is cited to indicate pleasure at something”.

Shaykh Kamaluddin Damiri also records in his famed work Hayat al-Haywan, Volume 1 page 43:

ولما انتهى إلى عائشة رضي الله تعالى عنها قتل علي رضي الله تعالى عنه قالت : فألقت عصاها واستقر بها النوى كما قر عينأ بالإياب المسافر

When Ayesha (ra) was informed about the murder of Ali (ra), she said: ‘And she threw down her staff and settled upon her place of abode, like the traveller happy to return home’

This reference can also be located in Tadkhirath al Khawwas, page 181 and Shaykh ul Mudhira page 156. For Abu Sulaiman to use his authority and make this claim, knowing that his adherents blindly believe his every word since he is an advocate of Mu’awiya, is indeed a cause for concern. We would ask his readers to ask themselves honestly ‘If Abu Sulaiman can not even be honest about such a basic fact, then how much credence should be given to anything that he says?’

We should also point out that Allamah Asbahani recorded in Maqatil al-Talebeen, page 24:

حدثني محمد بن الحسين الاشناني ، قال : حدثنا أحمد بن حازم قال : حدثنا عاصم بن عامر وعثمان بن أبي شيبة ، قالا : حدثنا جرير عن الاعمش عن عمرو إبن مرة عن أبي البختري قال : لما أن جاء عائشة قتل علي ع سجدت .

Abu al-Bakhtari said: ‘When Ayesha was informed about Ali’s murder, she prostrated’

Ibn al Hashimi why do you suggest that the Shia believe that being a Nasibi is worse than Zina, is it not correct that the Prophet (s) said being a Nasabi makes one a Kaafir? Why do you knowingly choose to ignore the implications of clear traditions that make it clear that hated of Ali (as) is a sign of hypocrisy, and fighting Ali (as) is tantamount to fighting the Prophet (s)? We have addressed all such tradition in previous chapters, so there is no need to run through them once more suffice is to say, Ibn al Hashimi when Rasulullah (s) identified the status of one that hates Ali (as) and fights him, why are you reluctant to rule on such a status? Do you not believe those that rebelled against Abu Bakr are kaafirs?