Ayesha & Uthman

[poiuyt]

In Musnad Ahmed Hanbal and so on, it is mentioned that Ayesha had named Uthman as Nathal, who should be killed and Murtakib Kufr.

If you regard Ayesha as the truthful then you will have to accept what she called Uthman.

And if she did not tell the truth then why do you call her the truthful?

[SayedMohammed]

^.. You know I would really appreciate a vol page or book number please :huh:

[kin_han]

I saw this somewhere and saved it on my computer:

Did Ayesha call for Uthmans Killing (kill Nathal)?:

----- Reported in sources such as Lisan Al Arab, Sharh Nahajul Balagha, Tadkhirath al Khawwas, Asadul Ghaba, Manaqib, Iqd al Fareed, Tarihk Kamil.

Source 1: Lisan Al Arab by Ibn Mansur, a lexicon of Arabic language. It is not a history book. Therefore, there is no Sanad nor is their any other way to authenticate this Hadith. Therefore it is rejected.

Source 2: Sharh Nahajul Balagha by Ibn Al Hadid, the Mutazilite, it is neither considered a secondary or primary source, rather an obscure source and therefore once again rejected.

Source 3: Tadkirath Al Khawas, a secondary source. Reported Mursal with no chain of narration.

Source 4: Asadul Ghaba, an unknown source to me. Once again no Sanad and therfore rejected.

Source 5: Manaqib by Khawarzmi. A secondary source. He was considered weak and lenient when it came to hadith.

Source 6: Iqd al Fareed by Ibn abd Rabuh, who had massive Shia inclinations and this book is considered an Obscure source. Also it is not a book on history but rather is a literary book.

Source 7: Tarkih Kamil by Ibn Athir, who relied heavily on Tabari (whose book is not all authentic). Tabaris history is considered an "Annal" which means it is a compilation of history and events and narrations without actually examining the Sanad. Still, let us see the chains of narration.

Chain 1: Goes through Ali ibn Ahmad ibn Hasan who is unknown. Then comes Husayn bin Nasr who is also unknown. Then Nasr bin Muazhim who is considered unreliable and a forger of hadith.

Chain 2: Nasr is the first person again and as we know he is rejected. Then comes Sayf Bin Umar who is considered a Liar and a forgerer as you all know. Then comes Muhammad ibn Nuwayrah and Talhah ibn Alam who are both unknown.

Chain 3: Nasr once again. Then comes Umar bin Sad who is unknown. Umar narrates from Asad bin Abdullah once again Unknown. Asad narrates from "A learned person he met" and therefore unknown again

Quote: In al Tabaqat al Kubra Volume 3 page 82 we read that:

"Musruq said to Ayesha, 'Uthman died because of you, you wrote to people and incited them against him".

Ayesha categorically denied this claim very bluntly as mentioned in Tabaris Tarikh, Tarikh Ibn Kathir and Al bidayah. If people will go according what others think then Ali killed Uthman because they accuse dhim of writing to them to!

Quote: In Iqd al Fareed page Volume 2 page 210 we learn that:

"Marwan approached Ayesha and said 'Uthman died because of you, you wrote to people and incited them against him".

Also in Iqd al Fareed Volume 2 page 218 and al Imama wal Siyasa page 45 we are told that:

"Sad ibne Abi Waqqas was asked 'who killed Uthman? Sad replied, 'the sword was lifted by Ayesha and it was sharpened by Talha".

Also in Iqd al Fareed on Volume 2 page 219 we read that:

"Mugheera bin Shuba approached Ayesha and she said to him, 'In Jamal some of the arrows that were fired, nearly pierced my skin.' Mugheera replied 'If only an arrow had killed you that would have acted as repentance for the fact that you had incited the people to kill Uthman”

Iqd al Fareed, an obscure source and therefore is rejected according to our Ulema.

Quote: In al Imama wal Siyasa page 60 we read that:

"Someone asked Muhammad bin Talha who killed Uthman? He replied that "one third of his death was attributable to Ayesha and one third was due to my father Talha

There is no proof who wrote this book. It is only "Attributed" to Ibn Qutaybah and this is the Majority opinion. It is therefore rejected.

May Allah Instill the Love Jafar As-Sadiq (ra) had for the companions of the prophet (saw) in your heart O Brother Poiuyt!

[Akwa]

Aisha (ra) never said any such thing. She actually saved a spot for Uthman (ra) to be buried next to Abu Bakr (ra) The Prophet (pbuh) and Umar (ra),...however the unrest prevented this.

[poiuyt]

Aisha never said any such thing.

Musnad Ahmed Hanbal is lying then? Or is Ayesha?

There plenty abound in sunni texts showing her clear animosity towards Uthman, so far as even having his dead body left to rot for days until it was buried amongst the Jews.

[poiuyt]

They asked for permission,..and they got it. Don't be jealous because Abu Bakr (ra) and Umar (ra) had the honor of being buried next to RasulAllah (pbuh). :D :D :D

So why is it that they were buried there, yet, six months after the death of Rasool (pbuh), his own daughter could not be buried there? She has more *right* than any person to be buried next to her father.

Alas, the nasibies have put paid well and truly to this and as mankind, we mourn the loss of the resting place of the woman who leads females in Jannah (as) :cry:

With your attitude Akwa, is it any wonder Al-Zahra (as) hated the guts of these two usurpers, and the fact that Imame Ali (as) buried her without anyone's knowledge. :dry:

[Gypsy]

Aisha (ra) never said any such thing. She actually saved a spot for Uthman (ra) to be buried next to Abu Bakr (ra) The Prophet (pbuh) and Umar (ra),...however the unrest prevented this.

(salam)

Akwa, its a well know fact That Ayesha called Uthman Nathal(a jew) and fit to be killed. And the Muslim Ummah killed Utman and left his body for 3 days unburried. And when he was burried, it was in a non_muslim cemetry because no Muslim would pray on his body.

[Akwa]

(salam)

Akwa, its a well know fact That Ayesha called Uthman Nathal(a jew) and fit to be killed. And the Muslim Ummah killed Utman and left his body for 3 days unburried. And when he was burried, it was in a non_muslim cemetry because no Muslim would pray on his body.

Well known fact? In your dreams. Aisha (ra) only called Uthman (ra) nathal in Shia fantasies, every reliable book shows that Aisha (ra) loved and respected Uthman (ra), she was deeply distraught over his death.

As for the muslim ummah killing Uthman (ra),..this is the same muslim ummah that killed Al Hasan (ra) and beheaded him.

[kin_han]

There plenty abound in sunni texts showing her clear animosity towards Uthman, so far as even having his dead body left to rot for days until it was buried amongst the Jews.

Well known fact? In your dreams. Aisha only called Uthman nathal in Shia fantasies, every reliable book shows that Aisha loved and respected Uthman , she was deeply distraught over his death.

What is the matter with you two? I have already shown you that they are total lies, but you just ignore as if it were not there. Well, provide an argument atleast!

Salamu Alaykum

[Gypsy]

(salam)

Akwa, make a search. This is a famous hadith. It has been posted countless time. It is in all major work of Sunnism

If you dont even know what is in your own book, then you are wasting peoples time and spewing garbage on this board.

[Panzerwaffe]

As for the muslim ummah killing Uthman (ra),..this is the same muslim ummah that killed Al Hasan (ra) and beheaded him.

when did this happen?

[Akwa]

(salam)

This is a famous hadith. It is in all major work of Sunnism

bwahahaha, i got a good chuckle out of this :lol:

So do you lie to yourself until you believe your own lies??

Edited April 22, 2006 by Akwa

[Gypsy]

bwahahaha, i got a good chuckle out of this :lol:

So do you lie to yourself until you believe your own lies??

No, do you?

How about addressing the issues at hand and not running away, changing topic and insulting ppl.

It's pointless to be posting great thread at ShiaChat Suggestion, and feedback about how bad the moderators are or how bad the Shias are on this board.

When you are given ample oppurtunity to stand up for your belief.

Edited April 22, 2006 by Zareen

[Akwa]

No, do you?

How about addressing the issues at hand and not running away, changing topic and insulting ppl.

hmm, insulting people? I seem to remember you saying this........

If you dont even know what is in your own book, then you are wasting peoples time and spewing garbage on this board.

That sounds prettyyy insulting to me. Perhaps if you learnt how to speak in a more respectful tone, I might have reciprocated.

It's pointless to be posting great thread at ShiaChat Suggestion, and feedback about how bad the moderators are or how bad the Shias are on this board.

huh?? You might as well be speaking German because I didn't understand a single thing you were trying to say.

[Abdaal]

(salam)

Akwa, make a search. This is a famous hadith. It has been posted countless time. It is in all major work of Sunnism

If you dont even know what is in your own book, then you are wasting peoples time and spewing garbage on this board.

(salam)

Well you guys have the same opinion about this other so called Sunni book "Yanabi al Muwaddah". So a famous hadith used by 12rs on this forum doesn't make it authentic to us Sunnis.

[Gypsy]

hmm, insulting people? I seem to remember you saying this........

That sounds prettyyy insulting to me. Perhaps if you learnt how to speak in a more respectful tone, I might have reciprocated.

huh?? You might as well be speaking German because I didn't understand a single thing you were trying to say.

(salam)

I have been extremelly respectful to you. Even if you disagree, that is not the point of this thread/ topic.

Lets not engage in empty discussion. To stay on course, pls check these 2 links

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/lofiversion/...php/t60221.html

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=44844

[poiuyt]

Sis Zareen:

Akwa is similar to those nasibies who deny their own Sahih Sittah texts, yet embrace them as sacrosanct the minute they find nothing else to defend themselves with.

I wonder what pathetic refutation Aqua can provide to the following: since they are all bakri texts: :lol:

Ayesha'a specific fatwa that Uthman should be killed can be located in the following classical works of Ahl'ul Sunnah:

Manaqib by Khawarzmi, page 117

Tadkhirath al Khawwas page 38

Asadul Ghaba Volume 3 page 14, "Dhikr Jamal"

Al Istiab Volume 2 page 185

Al Nahaya Volume 5 page 80

Qamus page 500 "lughut Nathal" by Firozabadi

Iqd al Fareed Volume 2 page 117 "Dhikr Jamal"

Sharh Nahjul Balagha Ibn al Hadeed Volume 2 page 122

Shaykh Mudheera page 163

More bakri filth against Uthman, the bakri "rightly guided kalif", murdered by the "mother of so called believers":

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".

Seerath al Halabiyya Vol. 3 page 356

Ibn Atheer in Nahaya page 80 Volume 5 and Ibn Mansur in Lisan al Arab Volume 11 Chapter "Lughuth Nathal" page 670 both record that:

"Nathal is one who has a long beard and Ayesha said kill this Nathal, by Nathal she was referring to Uthman".

Lisan al Arab by Ibn Mansur Volume 11 Chapter "Lughuth Nathal" page 670

In Tareekh Kamil Volume 3 page 100 Ibn Atheer records that:

"Ubayd bin Abi Salma who was a maternal relative of Ayesha met her as she was making her way to Madina. Ubayd said "Uthman has been killed and the people were without an Imam for eight days" to which Ayesha asked "What did they do next?". Ubayd said "The people approached 'Ali and gave him bayya". Ayesha then said 'Take me back! Take me back to Makka". She then turned her face towards Makka and said, 'Verily Uthman was murdered innocently, and By Allah, I shall avenge his blood'. Ubayd then said 'You are now calling Uthman innocent, even though it was you who said 'Kill Nathal, this Jew".

Tareekh Kamil Volume 3 page 100

Aqua will no doubt bark and scream that these are all "fabricated" :!!!:

[kin_han]

poiuyt: I see your heart burns with Hatred to those loved by the prophet (saw) and his family.

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".

Seerath al Halabiyya Vol. 3 page 356

Ibn Atheer in Nahaya page 80 Volume 5 and Ibn Mansur in Lisan al Arab Volume 11 Chapter "Lughuth Nathal" page 670 both record that:

"Nathal is one who has a long beard and Ayesha said kill this Nathal, by Nathal she was referring to Uthman".

Lisan al Arab by Ibn Mansur Volume 11 Chapter "Lughuth Nathal" page 670

In Tareekh Kamil Volume 3 page 100 Ibn Atheer records that:

"Ubayd bin Abi Salma who was a maternal relative of Ayesha met her as she was making her way to Madina. Ubayd said "Uthman has been killed and the people were without an Imam for eight days" to which Ayesha asked "What did they do next?". Ubayd said "The people approached 'Ali and gave him bayya". Ayesha then said 'Take me back! Take me back to Makka". She then turned her face towards Makka and said, 'Verily Uthman was murdered innocently, and By Allah, I shall avenge his blood'. Ubayd then said 'You are now calling Uthman innocent, even though it was you who said 'Kill Nathal, this Jew".

Tareekh Kamil Volume 3 page 100

I have already provided an article regarding these Narrations. but you and those like you seem not to care and trun a blind eye towards the truth.

Salamu Alaykum

[poiuyt]

Im commanded to love Ahle Bait (as), not converted "companions" who loved Saqifa more than the Prophets (pbuh) funeral.

Anyway, as Sis Zareen kindly point out, and as I have brought forth ample bakri evidence- Uthman was declared "a jew" by Ayesha.

If, according to you, that this is not the case, then your hadith writers incur the wrath of Allah SWT for fabricating hadith.

So which is lying- Ayesha, or your sources? :!!!:

[al-syedia]

lol

wow someone is a liar either bibi ayeshaor masnad -e-hambal

lol

[kin_han]

Thank you for verifying that Musnad Hanbal is a liar then.

When did I say that? Please fulfill my request. You have spoken about Musnad Hanbal in your first post and yet still have not provided a reference to one. Read my post again:

What surprises me most is, no one has provided the account as given by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal... , Come on Poiuyt, post it so that I may analyse its context and authenticity.

My answer? Aisha (ra) is not a liar. Would you go up to the prophet (saw) and tell him, 'Ya Rassolallah, your wife is a big fat liar!'. No way, even Allah (swt) has defended her in the Quran, addressing her as a good pure believer, yet you dare to criticise someone Allah (swt) specifically defended?

Now, gimme the online reference to Ahmad Ibn Hanbal's version of the events.

Well?

[devilsadvocate]

Shia argument:

Testimony by Imam 'Ali (as) in a letter written to Ayesha as recorded in Seerath al Halabiyya Volume 3 page 356:

"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".

Seerath al Halabiyya Vol. 3 page 356

__________________________________________________

Sunni argument:

Ahmed narrates that Aysha said (regarding the murder of Uthman), “I wish I was forgotten. And about what happened to Uthman, by Allah, I never wanted anything bad to happen to him unless it happened to me too. So if I wanted him to be killed, then I shall be killed too.” [Virtues of the Companions, by Ahmed, vol. 1, p. 462, with authentic chain of narrators]. Talaq bin Hushan asked Aysha, “How was Uthman, the Commander of the Faithful, killed?” Aysha answered, “He was killed as an innocent man. May Allah curse his killers.” [Al-Tareekh Al-Kabeer by Al-Bukhari, vol. 4, p. 358]

[Abbas]

Salam Alaikum

My answer? Aisha is not a liar. Would you go up to the prophet (saw) and tell him, 'Ya Rassolallah, your wife is a big fat liar!'. No way, even Allah (swt) has defended her in the Quran, addressing her as a good pure believer, yet you dare to criticise someone Allah (swt) specifically defended?

Allah has defended her from a completely different accusation, and thus defended the Prophet's honour. No matter how bad the wife is, she will never have an affair with another man. Nuh's [a] wife, who is destined to hell, is also free from this sin, because the honour of nabi Nuh [a] is at stake.

Otherwise there is no verse that Aisha was addressed as a "good pure believer". She may have been defended for that other crime, but then the Quran clearly admonished her and another wife and threatened divorce.

[kin_han]

Read the words of the Almighty Lord (swt):

I have posted this elsewhere. Keep in mind that Verses 9 to about 27 (not sure) are all revealed concerning Aisha (ra).

(Noor:23) Verily, those who accuse chaste women, who never even think of anything touching their chastity and are good believers, are cursed in this life and in the Hereafter, and for them will be a great torment,

Who did Allah (swt) specifically defend before calling her a GOOD BELEIVER?

[shakir 24:11] Surely they who concocted the lie are a party from among you. Do not regard it an evil to you; nay, it is good for you. Every man of them shall have what he has earned of sin; and (as for) him who took upon himself the main part thereof, he shall have a grievous chastisement.

[Pooya/Ali Commentary 24:11]

The particular incident referred to here occurred on the return from the defensive expedition of the Bani Mustaliq in 5-6 Hijra. At one of the halts, A-isha, the Holy Prophet's wife, withdrew from the camp to cleanse herself in the nearby desert. There she lost her necklace. As it was dark there she took time to discover it. In the meantime the march was ordered. As her litter was veiled, it was not noticed that she was not in it. When she returned to the camp, she could do nothing but wait. She fell asleep. Next morning she was found by Safwan who had been left behind to pick up anything inadvertently left behind. He put her on his camel and brought her, leading the camel on foot. This episode furnished some malicious enemies of the Holy Prophet, particularly the hypocrites, with an opportunity to raise a scandalous storm in order to hurt the feelings of the Holy Prophet. The ringleader among them was the chief of the Madina hypocrites, Abdullah ibn Ubay. Mistah, her uncle, also helped him. Ibn Ubay is referred to as the man who "took on himself the lead among them" to spread the scandal.

Ali ibn abi Talib knew that it was an obvious lie (as said in verse 12), concocted to hurt the Holy Prophet, so he asked Burayrah, the maid of A-isha, to tell the mischief-makers the truth about her mistress. On Burayrah's report the scandal was diffused.

For verse 13 refer to the commentary of verse 4.

Mistah was a sahabi (companion) of the Holy Prophet but because of his role in the incident he was punished by the Holy Prophet. It shows that every sahabi was not righteous. According to Allah's law (indallah) four witnesses have to be produced even if the accusation is true.

People may think it is an insignificant matter to speak lightly of something which damages a person's character or reputation, but with Allah it is a most serious matter in all cases, particularly when it involves the honour and reputation of pious men and women.

Dissemination of scandalous news and gossip is a wide-spread social evil. In modern times it is carried out through books and magazines.

For thorough purification see commentary of Ahzab: 33 and for partial purification verse 26 of this surah.

Verse 22 refers to Abu Bakr, the father of A-isha, and Mistah, his cousin. Abu Bakr was given ample means by Allah. He used to support Mistah, but after this incident he withdrew his help. According to the highest standards of Islamic ethics, as said in this verse, a truly generous patron should not, in personal anger, withdraw his support even from a delinquent if he is in need. The general application holds good for all time. Those who desire that Allah should forgive their faults must be forgiving and merciful in their dealings with men who have wronged them.

Salamu Alaykum

[Firoz Ali]

Salaam Alaiqum,

Yaa Ali Madad

Sura E Taheem

[66:5] If he divorces you, his Lord will substitute other wives in your place who are better than you; submitters (Muslims), believers (Mu'mins), obedient, repentant, worshipers, pious, either previously married, or virgins.

Allah SWT talks abt dis obedient wifes of the holy Prophet SAWW aisha (abu baqr's dauther and hafsha (umer's daughter , isnt it- what qualities of the new wifes Allah promises , if Prophet SAWW choses to divorce them

Allah Hafiz

Yaa Ali Madad

Firoz Ali

[Abbas]

I have posted this elsewhere. Keep in mind that Verses 9 to about 27 (not sure) are all revealed concerning Aisha .

(Noor:23) Verily, those who accuse chaste women, who never even think of anything touching their chastity and are good believers, are cursed in this life and in the Hereafter, and for them will be a great torment,

Firstly, those verses may have been revealed with a particular reasoning and shaan-e-nuzool, but it does not mean all the verses revealed at the time are about her. The verse 24:23 could easily be a general hukm, and doesn't necessarily apply to Aishah.

Secondly, if the verse 23 is about Aishah, a serious contradiction arises.

The contradiction is that Mistah ibn Athathah, who accepted these accusations and spread them, is mal'oon (cursed), while he was also a Badri companion, who Sunnis hold in the highest respect. How can this inconsistency work?

[Aliya]

OT posts DELETED and members WARNED for continually taking topic OT after having had similar posts moved/deleted from this thread previously.

[poiuyt]

People:

Why cant we stick to the thread:

Is Ayesha lying, or is Hanbal lying?

And thanks Sis Aliya for correcting those who continually ruin this and numerous other threads with their bakri nonsense.

[devilsadvocate]

Yes lets stick to the thread. But first the Sunnis are asking for the full reference and full quote from Ibn Hanbal (Hanbal = father, Ibn Hanbal = the son) before we can establish who, if anyone, is lying.

There plenty abound in sunni texts showing her clear animosity towards Uthman

So then it should be very easy to find this full reference and quote from Ibn Hanbal.

And what the heck is "bakri"?

[poiuyt]

So then it should be very easy to find this full reference and quote from Hanbal.

Indeed, so get to it ^_^

[kin_han]

What surprises me most is, no one has provided the account as given by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal... , Come on Poiuyt, post it so that I may analyse its context and authenticity.

My answer? Aisha is not a liar. Would you go up to the prophet (saw) and tell him, 'Ya Rassolallah, your wife is a big fat liar!'. No way, even Allah (swt) has defended her in the Quran, addressing her as a good pure believer, yet you dare to criticise someone Allah (swt) specifically defended?

Now, gimme the online reference to Ahmad Ibn Hanbal's version of the events.

There plenty abound in sunni texts showing her clear animosity towards Uthman

Well, I am still waiting on your reference from Ibn Hanbal. Whats the matter with you!

Devilsadvocate provided something from Ibn Hanbal...

Ahmed narrates that Aysha said (regarding the murder of Uthman), “I wish I was forgotten. And about what happened to Uthman, by Allah, I never wanted anything bad to happen to him unless it happened to me too. So if I wanted him to be killed, then I shall be killed too.” [Virtues of the Companions, by Ahmed, vol. 1, p. 462, with authentic chain of narrators].

Poiuyt? Where the heck is your one that you have spoken about since the first post of this thread? Come on. Let us get over this useless issue.

Jazakallah.

[poiuyt]

I dont have time to visit bakri text books, Im sure you or someone else will manage to locate it.

Also, if you feel that this thread is futile, why do you insist on posting?

Bizarre.

[kin_han]

I dont have time to visit bakri text books, Im sure you or someone else will manage to locate it.

Oh, then why didnt you say that? I think its cause there is no such thing :P

Also, if you feel that this thread is futile, why do you insist on posting?

Bizarre.

Having fun letting you know you faults ^_^

[poiuyt]

Oh, then why didnt you say that? I think its cause there is no such thing :P

Having fun letting you know you faults ^_^

So you admit your texts are fabricated then? Not all Sahih's are "Sahih" then?

As for faults, you are not Allah SWT and you know none of mine. :lol:

[Huseyin_Cetin_Turkish_Shia]

Aisha (ra) never said any such thing. She actually saved a spot for Uthman (ra) to be buried next to Abu Bakr (ra) The Prophet (pbuh) and Umar (ra),...however the unrest prevented this.

really, What a witch. she saves a place for him, but dont hesitate to attack imam hasan (r.a)s coffin.

and u lot are pleased with her.

goshh goshh goshh.......................

ya hawla wa la kuvvet.