How the Rafidah whitewash the Jews and blame the wives of the Prophet (علیه الصلاة و السلام)

The deceitful Rafidah, just like the rest of the enemies of Islam, use one of the most pathetic (based on their ignorance of Arabic) lies to blame the death of the noble Prophet (peace be upon him) on the mother of the believers ‘Aaishah in particular. They argue by citing the following verses (you will find almost the exact same tactic on Anti-Islam websites!):

One of many Rafidi posters that can be found on the net, portraying two wives of the Prophet (‘Aaishah and Hafsa) as to ugly looking witches (whom the Prophet spent his time with!), who manhandled him (yet Rafidah Imams are some sort of Power Rangers, heck, they control the universe …) and poisoned him.

[shakir 69:44] And if he had fabricated against Us some of the sayings,

[shakir 69:45] We would certainly have seized him by the right hand,

[shakir 69:46] Then We would certainly have cut off his aorta.

Then in they usually connect that verse to a loosely translated English version of a hadith by Umm al-Mu`minin ‘Aaishah:

Volume 5, Book 59, Number 713:

Narrated Ibn Abbas:

Narrated ‘Aisha: The Prophet in his ailment in which he died, used to say, “O ‘Aisha! I still feel the pain caused by the food I ate at Khaibar, and at this time, I feel as if my aorta is being cut from that poison.”

The aorta is the vein that is towards the back and is connected to the heart; if it is cut then the person will die. The Rafidah accuse ‘Aaishah of having said that the Prophet (peace be upon him) died due to his aorta being cut just as the verse warns (if he’s a false Prophet), basically saying that she reported the view that he’s a false Prophet! This is how sick and deluded these enemies of Islam are. The truth however is that the two Arabic words used in the Qur’an (69:46) and hadith (in Al-Bukhari) are different. In the Qur’an it says al-Watin, but in al-Bukhari it says Abhar, both can be loosely translated as aorta, but there are two different types of aortas, one is ascending (Abhar) and the other is descending (al-Watin).

ثُمَّ لَقَطَعْنَا مِنْهُ الْوَتِينَ

al-Watin = descending aorta (See: http://en.wikipedia….escending_aorta)

4472 ـ وَقَالَ يُونُسُ عَنِ الزُّهْرِيِّ، قَالَ عُرْوَةُ قَالَتْ عَائِشَةُ ـ رضى الله عنها ـ كَانَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَقُولُ فِي مَرَضِهِ الَّذِي مَاتَ فِيهِ ‏”‏ يَا عَائِشَةُ مَا أَزَالُ أَجِدُ أَلَمَ الطَّعَامِ الَّذِي أَكَلْتُ بِخَيْبَرَ، فَهَذَا أَوَانُ وَجَدْتُ انْقِطَاعَ أَبْهَرِي مِنْ ذَلِكَ السَّمِّ ‏”‏‏.

Abhar = ascending aorta (See: http://en.wikipedia….Ascending_aorta)

‘Aaishah never used the specific aorta as mentioned in the Qur’an (al-Watin), she narrated the Prophet (peace be upon him) speaking of the ascending aorta (Abhar), an important difference that the Rafidah simply can’t fathom due to the notorious ignorance and weakness of their clergy with regards to the Arabic language (after all neither Najaf, let alone Qom are places known for their mastery of Arabic …).

Also, the other condition (of the verse with regards to the Prophet) is not fulfilled according to ‘Aaisha’s hadith:

[shakir 69:45] We would certainly have seized him by the right hand.

Furthurmore, these are the verses for the kuffar, not the wives or children or companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him).

The Muslims have a consensus that the Prophet (صل الله عليه و سلم) was poisened by the Jews, after the conquest of Khaybar, they have good reasons for that, solid and authentically reported narrations (by the same people who narrated the merits of the Ahl al-Bayt):

Al-Bukhari (2617) and Muslim (2190) narrated from Anas that a Jewish woman came to the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) with some poisoned mutton. The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) ate from it, then he asked her about that. She said, “I wanted to kill you.” He said, “Allaah would not let you do that.” They said, “Shall we kill her?” He said, “No.” He said, I can still see the effect of that on the palate of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

The name of this woman was Zaynab bint al-Harith, the wife of Salaam ibn Mashkam, one of the leaders of the Jews.

The conquest of Khaybar took place in Muharram or Rabee’ al-Awwal of the year 7 AH. So this event took place four years before the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) died.

The only sect (wrongfully) attributed to Islam that tries its utmost to whitewash the hands of the Jews (by attributing the crime to his wives) to this very day is the Rafidi Twelver sect:

The Prophet (after a stage of non-fighting) was eventually ordered to fight the hypocrites without exception, this is clearly stated in the Qur’an:

O Prophet, strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites and be harsh upon them. And their refuge is Hell, and wretched is the destination. 66:9

Yet the Prophet (according to Shiism) was busy taking the worst kind of hypocrites as his wives and advisors instead of fighting them as Allah said! Rawafid will come up with all sorts of strange excuses and Qiyas to justify their hateful takfiri beliefs, but there is not a shred of evidence that the Messenger considered his wives like ‘Aisha and Hafsah as being hypocrites.

Some Rafidah scholars, despite their hatred for the Sahabah and Ahlul-Sunnah couldn’t but admit that the Sunni narrative is indeed true, and a Jewish woman poisoned the Prophet (peace be upon him) not his wives:

From Itiqadat al-Imamiyah of Saduq:

“Our belief concerning the Prophet is that he was poisoned during the expedition of Khaybar. The poison continued to be noxious to him until it cut his aorta and then he died from its effects.”

Shia source

Now will the Rafidah accuse “Saduq” as they did with regards to the ‘Aaishah? Will they be consistent?

Now, that the Rafidi sect is a sect of Ghuluww, false emotions and sensationalism, so it is no wonder that even the likes of Ammar Nakhjavani who influences many Shias, sides with the narrative that the Prophet’s wives killed him! In any case, it is shame enough that there is a difference of opinion in their religion.

It is important to know that the common Rafidi narratives always whitewash the crimes of the Jews (like their complete denial of the existence of Ibn Saba’!) and attribute them to the closest companions and wives of the Prophet. In fact according to the Rafidi religion their sadistic monster of a 12th (Hebrew speaking and Arab killing) saviour (Dajjal) will have no issues with the Jew whatsoever, his main target will be the Arabs (and the Majoos will be his supporters!):

Is there any doubt left that the Twelver religion is a conspiracy against Islam,?