Home > Analyzing Shia Encyclopedia, History and Biographies, Refutations, Uncategorized > Was Sayyidah ‘Aisha bint Abi Bakr (ra) involved in the murder of Uthman (ra)?

Was Sayyidah ‘Aisha bint Abi Bakr (ra) involved in the murder of Uthman (ra)?


Bismillah

All praises due to Allah and may His mercy and blessings be upon His Last and Final Messenger Muhammad, his family and companions.

Shia Imamis have always been very critical of many of the close companions of the Prophet (may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him). They hate them to the worse extant and consider this to be a virtue. They consider this viewpoint of them to be a criterion to differentiate between a believer and a hypocrite. So to prove their point they come with different historical “evidences”. But in all this they fail to establish authenticity. When someone objects to this they say how could you deny this while your own scholars have written this in their books?

This is one of their biggest problems which caused them to remain ignorant about the methodology of scholars of Ahl as-Sunnah. They fail to understand that our scholars quote a tradition for different reasons and not always they care about its authenticity. So there are scholars who when quote a tradition, they quote it for its authenticity like Al-Bukhari, Muslim, Ibn Khuzaimah, Ibn Hibban etc in their Sahih collections. There are those who quote a tradition because of its weakness like Ibn al-Jawzi, Al-Shawkani, Mulla ‘Ali Qari in their collections on fabricated narrations. There are those who quote a narration to explain the usage of Arabic word contained in it, like Ibn Manzoor in Lisan al-‘Arab, Majduddin Ibn al-Atheer in An-Nihayah etc. There are those who quote a hadith as an example of a narration by specific narrator, for example Tareekh Baghdad of Khateeb in which the author mentions a narrator and after mentioning the sayings of scholars regarding him he narrates traditions narrated by him. There are those who compile books just to collect narrations on specific topic. For example, As-Suyuti compiled Al-Jami’ al-Kabeer or Jam’ al-Jawami’ which was later rearranged by ‘Ali Muttaqi in Kanz al-‘Ummal. This book is a collection of everything which is narrated from the Prophet (pbuh). So we see scholars quote a narration in their book for different reasons and its authenticity is considered while doing it. Hence, the claim of some shia that it is Hujjah on sunnis because some sunni scholars have mentioned it is flawed.

One of their accusation against Sayyida ‘Aisha is that she was involved in the murder of ‘Uthman or that she incited people against him. We see even their well known ‘Ulama propagate this false accusation. By Allah, this is not the first time she is being accused. The last time she was accused was during the incident of Ifk and Allah then revealed her innocence from above the seven heavens.

This article was compiled during my analysis of shia encyclopedia in which the Shi’i author has repeated the same accusation and to support it he has quoted some books by Sunni (or simply non-Shia) authors. Therefore, here I will be quoting the Shia author of the Shi’ite Encyclopedia first and then I will be responding to it, Insha Allah.

The author of “A Shi’ite encyclopedia” quotes:

Once she went to Uthman and asked for her share of inheritance from the Prophet (after so many years passed from the demise of the Prophet). Uthman refrained to give Aisha any money, and reminded her that she was one of those who counseled Abu Bakr not to pay the share of inheritance of Fatimah al-Zahra (AS). So if Fatimah does not have any share, then why should she? Hearing this, Aisha became very angry at Uthman, and came out and said to the people:

“Kill this old fool (Na’thal), for he is unbeliever.”

Sunni references:

  • History of Ibn al-Athir, v3, p206
  • Lisan al-Arab, v14, p141
  • al-Iqd al-Farid, v4, p290
  • Sharh Ibn Abil Hadid, v16, pp 220-223.

 

Reply

As for the context of the statement quoted by the compiler of the Encyclopedia, that is Aisha (ra) asking of her share of inheritance from Uthman (ra), then I do not know the source of it. None of the referenced sources mention the background provided by the author, as far as I can see. Wallahu A’alam.

First let me introduce the refrences provided by the shia author so that the matter would be clear for the readers.

  1. History of ‘Izud-Deen Ibn al-Atheer Al-Jazari. It is “Al-Kaamil fi at-Tarikh”. This book is a collection of incidents without providing the source of it. It mostly relies on the book of Tabari for early history but doesn’t mention the Isnad, unlike Tabari who narrates incidents with Isnad.
  2. Lisan al-‘Arab: A detailed dictionary of Arabic language compiled by Muhammad bin Mukrim bin ‘Ali Al-Ansari Al-Afreeqi, well famous as Ibn Manzur Al-Afreeqi. Hence, no isnad is given. The author quotes traditions and early Arabic proverbs and poetry regardless of their authenticity. This he does to explain a specific word in his book. Besides, the author was not a specialist in hadith.
  3. Al-‘Iqd al-Farid: It was compiled by Abu ‘Umar Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Abdi Rabbihi, famous as Ibn ‘Abd Rabbihi al-Andalusi (d.328AH). He only collected the speeches, sayings, poems and incidents he was aware of. The muhaqqiq of the book mentioned several books as his sources which includes the Torah, the Gospel, books of al-Jaahiz, books of Ibn Qutaiba, al-Kaamil of al-Mubarrad, books of Ibn al-Muqaffi’ etc. So how could he be relied when he does not mention his Isnad and quotes from such unreliable sources? Ibn Katheer (15/121) notified that he had Shi’i leaning even though he was from the Umavi lineage.
  4. Sharh Ibn Abil Hadeed: The detailed commentary on Nahj al-Balagha of Shareef Ridha compiled by Abdul Hameed bin Hibatullah bin Husain, Abu Haamid Ibn Abil Hadeed (d.656AH). He was a Mu’atazali on the madhhab of Baghdadi Mu’tazalites, that is those who preferred Ali over Abu Bakr and had more shi’i tendencies than their Basari predecessors who were more like Ahl as-Sunnah in these matters. Like any other Mu’tazali he was ignorant of the science of hadith criticism and hence collected good and bad he found, accepting all that which supports his creed and rejecting all that which goes against his creed. He does not narrate with his chain but many a times gives reference to a specific book which may not be a reliable book.

After all these, those Shia who think that the mere existence of a report in a Sunni book accounts for its authenticity should study more regarding the methodology of Ahl as-Sunnah. The narration “Take half of your religion from Humayra (Aisha),” was also quoted by Ibn Manzoor in the same book, but shia due to their hatred of Sayyidah Aisha declare that to be fabricated and consider this one to be acceptable. But we consider both of them to be fabricated and unreliable. We do not consider any narration in any of our books to be reliable even if it supports our claim until its authenticity is proven through reliable sources through reliable Isnad. Those who doubt this may refer to the books written on the topics of fabricated narrations, he will see a section dedicated to those traditions which were fabricated in praise of different companions.

Coming back to the narration under discussion, the particular statement, i.e. “Kill this Na’thal…,” was attributed to Sayyidah ‘Aaisha (ra) by some sunni historians and linguists who were not expert in hadith criticism like Ibn Atheer, Ibn Manzoor etc. This was attributed to Aisha (ra), in a narration, by Ubaid bin Abi Salamah, who was one of her relatives, in her presence and she did not deny. But this was reported by Saif bin Umar who was abandoned and there was sufficient gap between the incident and the narrator. [Tabari (4/458-9)]

This has also been mentioned by Abu Mikhnaf. Some say the first one to call Uthman a Na’thal was Aisha (ra) as mentioned by Ibn Abil Hadeed in Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah (6/215) without specifying who actually claimed. These are only claims which some authors inherited from others.  While there could be some indication that she was critical of Uthman’s (ra) policies and actions but there is no proof in that to suggest that she wanted to kill him or was in support of his murder. These kinds of reports are unreliable because of three main reasons;

  1. They were reported by unreliable authors like Abu Mikhnaf, al-Waqidi, Saif bin Umar, Ibn al-Kalbi etc.
  2. Even they did not connect their chains to the eyewitnesses of the incident, hence the reports in most cases remain disconnected.
  3. The established facts indicate otherwise. Among those is the fact that Aisha always denied this accusation just as Ali bin Abi Talib denied it.

It has been narrated by Ahmad in “Fadhail as-Sahaba”, Bukhari in “Khalq Af’aal al-‘Ibaad” and Al-Baladhuri in Ansab al-Ashraf through Ibn Shihaab az-Zuhri from ‘Urwah from Aisha that she said, ‘If I wanted to kill Uthman I would have been killed too.’ This tradition is authentic. In other traditions she said, ‘By Allah, Uthaman was killed unjustly.’ And there are other traditions suggesting the same.

It could be that some people might have falsely attributed these kinds of things to ‘Aisha. This is understood from the tradition related by Ibn Sa’d (3/60), Ibn Shabbah in “Tarikh al-Madinah” (4/1225) and Al-Baladhuri in “Ansab Al-Ashraf” (5/597) through the route of A’amash from Khaithama from Masrooq that after hearing the criticism of Aisha against those who killed Uthman he said to her, ‘This has been done by you. You wrote to the people to revolt against him.’ She replied, ‘No, by the One in whom believed the believers and disbelieved the disbelievers, I did not write to them with the black (i.e. ink) on the white (i.e. paper) until this sitting of mine. A’mash said, ‘So they used to believe that it was fabricated in her name.’

Ibn Katheer said in al-Bidayah (10/340): This is authentic from her. In this and other traditions similar to it is the proof that these Khawarij had fabricated letters in the name of Sahaba, to incite people against Uthman.

This also clarifies another tradition present in Ansab al-Ashraf (5/596) through the route of Wakee’ from Qais bin Muslim from Umm al-Hajjaj al-‘Awfiyyah that on the enquiry of Ashtar an-Nakha’i regarding Uthman she replied, ‘Ma’adhAllah if I command to shed the blood of muslims and to murder their leader (Imam) and to legitimate (to downgrade) their sanctity.’ So Al-Ashtar said, ‘You wrote to us and now when the fight has initiated you have started to forbid us.’  In the version of Ibn Shabbah, in his “Tarikh al-Madeenah” (4/1224), it also adds the comment of al-A’amash that on that day A’isha (ra) took oath which no one else took before or after her. Then he mentioned her oath as in the previous tradition.

Another tradition quoted by the compiler of Shia encyclopedia is as follows:

While Ibn Abbas was setting out for Mecca, he found Aisha in al-Sulsul (seven miles south of Medina). Aisha said: “O’ Ibn Abbas, I appeal to you by God, to abandon this man (Uthman) and sow doubt about him among the people, for you have been given a sharp tongue. (By the current siege over Uthman) people have shown their understanding, and light is raised to guide them. I have seen Talha has taken the possession of the keys to the public treasuries and storehouses. If he becomes Caliph (after Uthman), he will follow in the path of his parental cousin Abu-Bakr.” Ibn Abbas said: “O’ Mother (of believers), if something happens to that man (i.e., Uthman), people would seek asylum only with our companion (namely, Ali).” Aisha replied: “Be quiet! I have no desire to defy or quarrel with you.”

Reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 238-239

Reply

This contains al-Waqidi and Abu Bakr bin Abi Sabrah both of whom were abandoned. [See Tarikh at-Tabari (4/407), Meezan al-E’itedal (4/503-4)]

Another report given by Rawafidh is the consultation between Marwan and ‘Aisha (ra):

“We pray that you stay in Medina, and that Allah may save this man (Uthman) through you.” Aisha said: “I have prepared my means of transportation and vowed to perform the pilgrimage. By God, I shall not honor your request… I wish he (Uthman) could fit to one of my sacks so that I could carry him. I would then through him into the sea.”

Reference: “al-Ansab al-Ashraf”, by al-Baladhuri, v4, part 1, p75

Reply

This was mentioned by Ibn Sa’d in Tabaqat (2/27) and al-Baladhuri in Ansab al-Ashraaf (5/565) without relating any Isnad to it rather Ibn Sa’d, who was later on quoted by al-Baladhuri and Ibn ‘Asakir, attributed it to some unknown people with the phrase “They say”. From Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah (3/7) it appears that the actual source of this report is al-Waqidi, the abandoned narrator, who narrated this in Kitab ad-Daar. WAllahu A’alam

 

  1. Al Mahdi Brigade
    October 19, 2013 at 1:31 pm

    Wt abt this narration kid;

    Ibn Jarir Tabari – Ziyaad bin Ayub –
    Muassab bin Sulaiman al-Tamimi –
    Muhammad – Asim bin Kulayb – his father:

    ”……. Uthman was killed the news
    reached us as we were returning from a
    raid, and my companions said: ‘You dream
    Kulayb!’. When we got to Basrah, and we
    had not been there long when someone
    said: ‘Talha and al-Zubayr are coming and
    the Mother of the Faithful is with them’.
    This alarmed the people and they were
    surprised, but they were claiming to the
    people that they had only come out of
    anger over Uthman and in penance over
    the way they had not supported him. The
    Mother of the Faithful spoke up: “We
    _________________________________
    became angry at Uthman on your behalf
    because of three things he did: giving
    command to youths, expropriating common
    property and beating (people) with whips
    and sticks“.

    History of Tabari, English Edition, volume 16,
    pages 99-100

    All the narrators are authentic!!

    Ziyad bin Ayub: Dahabi said: ‘Hujja’ (Tazkirat
    al-Hufaz, v2 p508), Ibn Hajar said:
    ‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p318). Mussab
    bin Salam al-Tamimi: Al-Albaani considered
    him Thiqah (Silsila Sahiha, v5 p280). Ibn Hajar
    said: ‘Seduq’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2 p186).
    Muhammad bin Suqah: Dahabi said:
    ’Hujja’ (Siar alam alnubala, v6, p1340, Ibn
    Hajar said: ‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2 p84).
    Asim bin Kulayb: Dahabi said:
    ‘Authenticated’ (Tarikh al-Islam, v8 p457), Al-
    Albaani said:‘Thiqah’ (Silsila Sahiha, v3 p334),
    Ibn Hajar said: ‘Seduq’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1
    p459). Kulayb bin Shehab: Ibn Hajar said:
    ‘Seduq’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2 p44), Dahabi
    said: ‘Authenticated’ (Al-Kashif, v2 p149)

  2. Al Mahdi Brigade
    October 19, 2013 at 1:34 pm

    Imam ‘Ali (as) wrote a letter to Aisha in which
    He (as) had openly questioned Aisha’s motives,
    as recorded in Seerat al Halabiyah (Urdu),
    Volume 2 part 2 page 437:

    “You have acted in opposition to Allah (swt)
    and his Rasul (s) by leaving your home, you
    have made demands for those things that
    you have no right. You claim to wish to
    reform the Ummah, tell me, what role do
    women have in reforming the Ummah and
    participating in battles? You claim that you
    wish to avenge Uthman ‘s murder despite
    the fact that he is a man from Banu
    Ummayya and you are a woman from Banu
    Taym. If we look in to the matter it was
    only yesterday that you had said ‘Kill
    Nathal May Allah (swt) kill him because he
    has become a kaafir”.

  3. Al Mahdi Brigade
    October 19, 2013 at 1:37 pm

    Ahmad
    bin Yaqoob Maskuweh (d. 421 A.H) wrote in
    his book Tajareb al-Ummam, volume 1 page
    419:
    ﻭ ﺖﻧﺎﻛ ﻦﻣ ﻊّﻨﺸﺗ ﻞﺒﻗ ﻰﻠﻋ ،ﻥﺎﻤﺜﻋ ﻭ ّﺾﺤﺗ ،ﻪﻴﻠﻋ ﻭ
    ﺝﺮﺨﺗ ﺔﺒﻛﺍﺭ ﻝﻮﺳﺭ ﺔﻠﻐﺑ -ﻪﻠﻟﺍ ﻰﻠﺻ -ﻪﻴﻠﻋ ﻪﻠﻟﺍ ﻭ
    ﺎﻬﻌﻣ ﻪﺼﻴﻤﻗ ﻭ :ﻝﻮﻘﺗ – ﺺﻴﻤﻗ ﺍﺬﻫ» ﻝﻮﺳﺭ ،ﻪﻠﻟﺍ
    ﻰﻠﺻ ﺎﻣ ،ﻪﻴﻠﻋ ﻪﻠﻟﺍ ﻰﻠﺑ ﻭ ﻰﻠﺑ ﺪﻗ ،ﻪﻨﻳﺩ ﺍﻮﻠﺘﻗﺍ ،ﻼﺜﻌﻧ
    ﻞﺘﻗ ﻪﻠﻟﺍ «.ﻼﺜﻌﻧ
    She used to defame Uthman and instigate
    against him, she used to roam on Allah’s
    Apostle’s mule holding a cloth and saying:
    ‘This is Allah’s Apostle’s cloth, it’s not
    ragged yet while his religion has become
    ragged, Kill Na’thal, may Allah kill Na’thal

  4. Al Mahdi Brigade
    October 19, 2013 at 1:48 pm

    Muhammad bin Umar al-Waqidi ~

    1. One of the revered Sunni Imams in the field of
    Rijal namely Ibn Hajar Asqalani records:

    ﻲﻓ ﻝﻮﺒﻘﻣ ﻱﺯﺎﻐﻤﻟﺍ ﺪﻨﻋ ﺎﻨﺑﺎﺤﺻﺃ ﻢﻠﻋﺃ ﻪﻠﻟﺍﻭ

    ‘He is acceptable in the narrations of the
    battles according to our companions and
    Allah knows the best.

    Talkhis al-Habir, Volume 7 page 57

    2. Another great Sunni Imam in the field of Rijal
    namely Dhahabi has the following views on al-
    Waqidi:

    ﻕﺩﺎﺻ ﻮﻬﻓ ﻥﺎﺴﻠﻟﺍ ﺮﻴﺒﻛ ﺭﺪﻘﻟﺍ
    “He is truthful and high valued”

    Siyar alam al-Nubla, Volume 7 page 142

    Imam Dhahabi also recorded the views of other
    Sunni scholars about Muhammad bin Umar al-
    Waqidi:

    ﻝﺎﻗ ﻦﺑ ﺪﻤﺤﻣ :ﻲﺤﻤﺠﻟﺍ ﻡﻼﺳ ﻢﻟﺎﻋ ﻱﺪﻗﺍﻮﻟﺍ ﻩﺮﻫﺩ
    Muhammad bin Salam Al-Jumahi said: ‘al-
    Waqidi is the scholar of his time’.

    Siyar alam al-Nubla, Volume 9 page 457

    3. Imam Ibn Emaad Hanbali records the follwing:

    ﻱﺪﻗﺍﻮﻟﺍﻭ ﻲﺿﺎﻗ ﺩﺍﺪﻐﺑ ﻮﺑﺃ ﺪﺒﻋ ﻪﻠﻟﺍ ﻦﺑ ﺪﻤﺤﻣ ﺮﻤﻋ
    ﻦﺑ ﺪﻗﺍﻭ ﻲﻤﻠﺳﻷﺍ ﻲﻧﺪﻤﻟﺍ ﺔﻣﻼﻌﻟﺍ ﺪﺣﺃ ﺔﻴﻋﻭﺃ ﻢﻠﻌﻟﺍ
    “Al-Waqidi the judge of Baghdad, Abu
    Abdullah Muhammad bin Umar bin Waqid
    al-Aslami al-Madani, a scholar and
    container of knowledge”

    Shadharat Al-Dahab, volume 2 page 18

    4. Modern day Salafi/Wahabi scholar namely
    Hassan bin Farhan al-Maliki records in his
    book Naho Enqad al-Tarikh, page 258:

    ﻱﺪﻗﺍﻮﻟﺍ ﻪﻘﺛﻭ ﻮﺤﻧ ﺔﻌﺒﺳ ﺔﻤﺋﻷﺍ ﻦﻣ ﻦﻴﺛﺪﺤﻤﻟﺍ ﻞﺑ
    ﻩﺎﻤﺳﺃ ﻢﻬﻀﻌﺑ ﺮﻴﻣﺃ ﻲﻓ ﻦﻴﻨﻣﺆﻤﻟﺍ ﺚﻳﺪﺤﻟﺍ
    “al-Waqidi has been authenticated by seven
    scholars, nay some of them called him Amir
    al-Mominin in hadith”
    .
    .

    Imam Dahabi also said:

    “It was decided that al-Waqidi is weak, but
    he is required in wars [Ghazawat] and in
    ‘history’

    Siyar Alam al-Nubla, Volume 9 page 469

    • October 20, 2013 at 10:44 am

      I had the intention to compile a short refutation to the contentions of AA and other people regarding Al-Waqidi, but i left it as the matter is clear enough for those who simply look into the books of Jarh and Ta’deel. I wanted to compile it on some other occasion as i had to travel then. So in hurry i left few important topics. But hopefully i’ll start answering each of your arguments once i get back to my home.
      For now, regarding the narration you quoted from Ibn Jareer, the answer is that it only says that Aisha (ra) was critical of Uthman (ra) on some issues. I did not write this article to show that Aisha was not critical of him. This is only to prove that she was not involve in his murder as some people claim. If you have something authentically proven related to this then bring it. Wassalam

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: