Shia scholars on Aisha

Zindiq Zaynutdin Nabati  in his book “Sitarul mustaqim” p 161 entitled chapter about Aisha (r.a) with words:

فصل في أم الشرور

“Chapter in mother of evils”.

Ali ibn Ibraheem al-Qummi said in his commentary (vol 2, p 377):

قال علي بن ابراهيم في قوله (ضرب الله مثلا) ثم ضرب الله فيهما مثلا فقال: (ضرب الله مثلا للذين كفروا امرأة نوح وامرأة لوط كانتا تحت عبدين من عبادنا صالحين فخانتاهما) فقال والله ما عنى بقوله فخانتاهما إلا الفاحشة

“Then Allah gave as an example of two of them (Aisha and Hafsa) and said: “Allah sets forth an example to those who disbelieve the wife of Nuh and the wife of Lut: they were both under two of Our righteous servants, but they acted treacherously towards them”, and said: by Allah! It’s clear from His words that   treachery means nothing but licentiousness..”

Kashani narrated in his tafsir as-Safi (1/390), as if imam Sadiq said about death of prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam):

انهما سقتاه قبل الموت يعني الامرأتين.

They poisoned him before his death, it’s mean (those) two woman”.

We all aware about shia attitude towards Aisha and Hafsa, so there no need to be genius to understand whom does they mean.

Aisha did consider herself from amongthe Ahl Al-Bayt

35 – (1995) وحدثنا زهير بن حرب وإسحاق بن إبراهيم. كلاهما عن جرير. قال زهير: حدثنا جرير عن منصور، عن إبراهيم. قال:
قلت للأسود: هل سألت أم المؤمنين عما يكره أن ينتبذ فيه؟ قال: نعم. قلت: يا أم المؤمنين! أخبريني عما نهى عنه رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أن ينتبذ فيه. قالت: نهانا، أهل البيت، أن ننتبذ في الدباء والمزفت…Doc=1&Rec=4760

Ibrahim reported: I said to Aswad if he had asked the Mother of the Believers (in which utensils) he (the Holy Prophet) disapproved the preparation of Nabidh. He (Aswad) said: Yes. I said: Mother of the Believers, inform me about the utensils in which) Allah’s Apostle forbade to prepare Nabidh. She (Hadrat ‘A’isha) said: He forbade us, the members of his family [Ahlal Bayt], to prepare Nabidh in gourd, or varnished jar. I said to him: Do you remember green pitcher, and pitcher? He said: I narrated to you what I have heard; should I narrate to you which I did not hear? [Sahih Muslim… ber=4918#4918]

Note- Ahlal Bayt in bracket is by me as a transliteration of what is present in arabic source.  (by brother al-sunnah)

Prophet (pbuh) called Aisha (ra) “Ahli Baytee” (my family)

فقام رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فاستعذر يومئذ من عبد الله بن أبي ابن سلول، فقالت: فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وهو على المنبر: (يامعشر المسلمين، من يعذرني من رجل قد بلغني أذاه في أهل بيتي، فوالله ما علمت على أهلي إلا خيرا، ولقد ذكروا رجلا ما علمت عليه إلا خيرا، وما كان يدخل على أهلي إلا معي…Doc=0&Rec=6951

“…So Allah’s Apostle got up (and addressed) the people an asked for somebody who would take revenge on ‘Abdullah bin Ubai bin Salul then. Allah’s Apostle, while on the pulpit, said, “O Muslims! Who will help me against a man who has hurt me by slandering my family? By Allah, I know nothing except good about my family, and people have blamed a man of whom I know nothing except good, and he never used to visit my family except with me,”
Sahih Bukhari-…mb er=274#274

Imam Jafar as-Sadiq and Musa al-Kazim and their daughters (Aishas)

Salam alaikum.

We have already seen video where brother from Iraq says that rafida use to kill and torture people, only due to they named children Umar or Aisha (see HERE).

Let us see now how two imams from 12 shia imams, named their daughter.

Shia scholar Baqir Sharif al-Qurashi in his book on life of imam Musa al-Kazim, at page 598, talked about children of imam, and said:

The Females:

Um ‘Abd Allah, Qusayma, Lubaba, Um Ja‘far, Umama, Kelthem, Burayha, Um al-Qasim, Mahmuda, Amina the elder, ‘Aliya, Zaynab, Ruqaya, Hasna, A’isha, Um Salama, Asma’, Um Farwa, Aamina, Um Abeeha, Halima, Remla, Maymuna, Amina the younger, Asma’ the elder, Zayneb, Zayneb the elder, Fatima the elder, Fatima, Um Kulthum the elder, Um Kulthum the younger, Um Kulthum the youngest. Al-Ashnani (an author) has added to them: ‘Attfa, ‘Abbasa, Khadija the elder, Khadija, and Sarha. Accordingly, the number of the ladies from among his children is thirty-seven.

As for daughter of imam Jafar as-Sadiq.

Aisha Bewley in her “Muslim women. A biographical dictionary” (p 7) wrote:

“Aisha bintu Jafar (d 145/762) the daughter of Imam Jafar as-Sadiq, known for her devoutness”.

Hadith About Aisha’s House and Satan’s Horns [A Sunni Perspective]

Praise be to Allah for giving us this opportunity to defend the Prophet’s wife. Truly what an amazing honor this is. May Allah raise us up with those who defend the Ahlel Bayt, as opposed to those who slander the blessed Ahlel Bayt. As for those who slander and insult the Prophet’s own wives, we can only imagine the Prophet’s anger towards these erring people; indeed, not even the vilest and most debased Shia would tolerate someone insulting his own wife! It will be the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah that will forever guard the honor of our Beloved’s beloved.

Shia Slander Against the Mother of the Believers

Despite the fact that Umm al Mu’mineen Aisha is part of the blessed Ahlel Bayt, the Shia propagandists revile her; of the many slanders they utter against her, one of their favorites is to claim that the “horns of Satan” or the “head of Satan” would emerge from Aisha’s house. This is based on their horrible misinterpretation of Sunni Hadith which they then propagate amongst the ignorant ones amongst the Sunnis. In fact, the Hadiths in question have nothing at all to do with Aisha, but rather the Prophet was simply pointing in the direction of the East towards Iraq (i.e. the Persian Empire at that time). An analogy of this is if a man asks which direction is Qiblah, and his friend points towards a certain house on the street. This simply means that Qiblah is in that direction. The Prophet did not at all mean that Aisha’s house would be the source of Satan’s horns, but rather he meant the East. In relation to where the Prophet was standing, Aisha’s house simply happened to be in the direction of the East.

Now let us reproduce the Hadiths from both Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari. We read:

Sahih Muslim, Book 041, Number 6938:

Ibn Umar reported that he heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying while he had turned his face towards the East: “Behold, turmoil would appear from this side, from where the horns of Satan would appear.”

Sahih Muslim, Book 041, Number 6939:

Ibn Umar reported that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) stood by the door (of the apartment of) gafsa and, pointing towards the East, he said: “The turmoil would appear from this side, viz. where the horns of Satan would appear,” and he uttered these words twice or thrice; and Ubaidullah in his narration said: the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) had been standing by the door of Aisha.

Sahih Muslim, Book 041, Number 6940:

Salim b. Abdullah reported on the authority of his father that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), while turning his face towards the East, said: “The turmoil would appear from this side; verily, the turmoil would appear from this side; verily, the turmoil would appear from this side–the side where appear the horns of Satan.”

Sahih Muslim, Book 041, Number 6941:

Ibn Umar reported that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) came out from the house of Aisha and said: “It would be from this side (pointing to the East) that there would appear the height of unbelief, viz. where appear the horns of Satan.”

Sahih Muslim, Book 041, Number 6942:

Ibn Umar reported: I heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying while pointing his hands towards the East: “The turmoil would appear from this side; verily, the turmoil would appear from this side (he repeated it thrice) where appear the horns of Satan.”

Sahih Muslim, Book 041, Number 6943:

Ibn Fudail reported on the authority of his father that he heard Salim b. Abdullah b. Umar as saying: O people of Iraq, how strange it is that you ask about the minor sins but commit major sins? I heard from my father Abdullah b. Umar, narrating that he heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying while pointing his hand towards the East: “Verily, the turmoil would come from this side, from where appear the horns of Satan and you would strike the necks of one another…”

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Number 336:

Narrated Abdullah:

The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointing towards Aisha’s house (i.e. Eastwards), he said thrice, “Affliction (will appear from) here,” and, “from where the side of the Satan’s head comes out (i.e. from the East).”

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 88, Number 212:

Narrated Salim’s father:

The Prophet stood up beside the pulpit (and pointed with his finger towards the East) and said, “Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from where the side of the head of Satan comes out,” or said, “..the side of the sun..” (i.e. the sun emerges from the East)

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 88, Number 213:

Narrated Ibn Umar:

I heard Allah’s Apostle while he was facing the East, saying, “Verily! Afflictions are there, from where the side of the head of Satan comes out.”

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 88, Number 214:

Narrated Ibn Umar:

The Prophet said, “O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Sham! O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Yemen.” The People said, “And also on our Najd (i.e. Iraq).” He said, “O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Sham (North)! O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Yemen (South).” The people said, “O Allah’s Apostle! And also on our Najd (i.e. Iraq).” I think the third time the Prophet said, “There (in the Najd, i.e. Iraq) is the place of earthquakes and afflictions and from there comes out the side of the head of Satan.”

Iraq was at that time referred to by the Arabs as the Najd, as stated in “Najd Qarnu ash-Shaytan”. This has been stated by al-Khattabi, al-Kirmani, al-Ayni, an-Nawawi, Ibn Hajr and others. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Hajr said:

“Al-Khattabi said: ‘For the one who is in Medinah, then his Najd would be the desert of Iraq and its regions (baadiya al-Iraaq wa Nawaaheehaa) for this is to the East of the People of Medinah.”

This is made abundantly clear by the same narration recorded in alternate wording:

Al-Mu’jam al-Kabeer, Compiled by Imam Al-Tabarani:

Narrated by Ibn Abbas:

The Prophet supplicated and said, “O Allah bestow your blessings on our Shaam and Yemen.” A person from amongst the people said, “O Prophet of Allah, and Iraq?” He said, “Indeed there (in Iraq) is the Horn of Satan, and the trials and tribulations will come like mounting waves, and indeed harshness is in the East.”

“Pointed Towards”, Not “Pointed To”

It is Hadith Number 336 of Vol.4, Book 53 of Sahih Bukhari that the Shia propagandists rely on most, namely because the translator used by the USC website (Muhsin Khan) made a mistake in his translation. He translates it as “pointed to Aisha’s house” instead of “pointed towards Aisha’s house.” However, the proper translation is “pointed towards” and not “pointed to.” In the Arabic text of said Hadith, the words are “fa-ashaara nahwa (towards) maskani `a’ishah” and not “fa-ashaara ila (to) maskani `a’ishah”. Therefore, we see that the Prophet was simply pointing towards the direction of Aisha’s house, and not at Aisha’s house specifically.

The Persian Empire: Wherefrom Satan’s Horns Emerged

At that time in history, Iraq was part of the Persian Empire; the Prophet had dispatched an ambassador to the Persian Chosroes inviting him to Islam. The haughty Persian leader scoffed at the Prophet’s call, rejecting to accept the “lowly” Arab “barbarians” as spiritual leaders over and above the “mighty” Persians. Soon thereafter, the Muslim Ummah would be propelled into an all-out war with the the Persian Empire; Caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab blitzed across Iraq and this is when the Fitnah began for the Muslims. The perceptive reader should keep in mind that before the fall of Persia, the Muslim Ummah was united under its Caliph and Dar al-Islam was expanding its borders. Right after the liberation of Iraq from Persian domination, the assassinations of Caliphs began.

The Muslims had indeed defeated the haughty and proud Persian Empire, but the Persians carefully planned their revenge. The Persian governor Harmuzan was pardoned by the Caliph, but he conspired against the Muslims to avenge his humiliating defeat. The conquered Persians plotted against the Muslims, and it was their conspiracy plans which no doubt the Prophet was referring to as “Satan’s horns”. It was from the ashes of the Persian Empire that the Shia sect was formed, a mix between Islam and Zoroastrianism as well as Persian nationalism.

The Persian governor Harmuzan became partners with Jafeena Al-Khalil and Saba bin Shamoon (whose son was Abdullah ibn Saba, founder of the Shia sect); these three men hired Feroz Abu Lulu, a Persian POW from Iraq, to assassinate Caliph Umar. Today, the modern day Persian Shia venerate Abu Lulu, and they call him “Baba Shuja-e-din” which can be translated as “Honored Defender of Religion.” These Shia have a shrine erected for this murderer, located in the Iranian city of Kashan called the Abu Lulu Mausoleum wherein he is buried. The Shia travel from far distances to pray inside this shrine, and many of the Shia fast on the day that Umar was killed, and even pass out sweets. Feroz Abu Lulu is one of the venerated founding figures of Shia ideology; the same people who conspired to kill Umar were the ones who planted the seeds of the Shia movement.

Abu Lulu was hired by three men, and the third of these three was the father of Abdullah ibn Saba, founder of the Shia faith. His intention in creating the Shia faith was to create a sect within Islam that would split its ranks, create disunity, and–quite frankly–to forever be a rebel movement against mainstream Islamic governments. And if we look throughout history, we find that the Shia have always been rebels and turncoats, one of the reasons they are referred to as “Rafidhis” (or turncoats). Not only they were turncoats, but these Shia were Ahl al-Bidah (People of Innovation) for they adultered Islam with their Magian beliefs. This was the Satan’s horn that emerged from the East, and no doubt this is what the Prophet was referring to.

Aisha Did Not Start the Fitnah

The Shia argue that it was Aisha who started the Fitnah in the ranks of the Muslims by organizing an army against Ali. But in fact, this is incorrect. First of all, Aisha did not leave her house with the intention of instigating an armed revolt against Ali. Instead, she left her house only with the intention of Islah (reformation). In Tareekh Al-Tabari, the events precipitating the Battle of the Camel are recorded. Al-Tabari narrates that a man asked Aisha why she had come to visit Ali, saying: “O mother, what moved you and pushed you to this country?” She answered: “O son, to reconcile between people.”

The word “Fitnah” refers to turmoil which causes disunity in the ranks of the Muslim Ummah. Even before the time of the Battle of Camel, the Muslim ranks had become split, so why should the Shia blame this on Aisha? The Fitnah began right after the Persians assassinated the Caliph of the Muslims, which pre-dated the Battle of the Camel. In fact, it was the murder of Umar ibn al-Khattab by the Persians that started the chain reaction which resulted in the Battle of the Camel. Ubaidallah, Umar’s son, avenged the murder of his father by plotting to kill the three men who hired the assassin Abu Lulu. Ubaidallah was successful in killing two of the three men, but the third–Saba bin Shamoon–survived, and he demanded that Ubaidallah be executed for his double murder. Caliph Uthman, however, showed Ubaidallah mercy, despite Ali who advised the Caliph to execute him for his crime of vigilante murder.

The fact that Uthman showed mercy upon Ubaidallah angered Saba bin Shamoon and his son, Abdullah ibn Saba. These two men looked sympathetically towards Ali, due to the fact that Ali had taken a harsh stance towards Ubaidallah’s actions. It was thus that Abdullah ibn Saba “converted” to Islam and founded the Shia sect, calling the masses to adore Ali and agitating them against Uthman. It was Abdullah ibn Saba’s propaganda against Uthman that helped fan the flames of civil discontent and caused the people to rise against the Caliph. And so it was that the Saba’ites (followers of Abdullah ibn Saba) assassinated Uthman.

This murder of Uthman led to the rise of Ali as Caliph; the people demanded of Ali that he apprehend the killers of Uthman and this was the cause of the Battle of Camel. The people were upset with Ali for failing to apprehend the killers of Uthman–who happened to be in his own party, but Ali chose to delay apprehending them due to the fact that he did not want to alienate his own supporters in this time of civil discontent when he needed them the most. So Ali decided to delay on apprehending the killers until after he consolidated his power as Caliph, but the people were threatening to revolt against and even kill Ali, who was even wrongfully implicated in the murder of Uthman. And so it was that some of the people appealed to the Prophet’s wife to go talk to the Caliph on their behalf. Aisha agreed to do this, only to prevent bloodshed and furnish Islah (reformation) between the ranks of the Muslims. Aisha was hopeful that she could convince Ali to find the killers and apprehend them posthaste.

When the Saba’ite killers of Uthman found out that Aisha was on her way to meet the Caliph in order to urge him to apprehend the assassins, this naturally made them antsy and fear for their lives. So it was they who attacked Aisha’s contingent and thus began the Battle of the Camel, a result of the chain reaction that began with the Persian murder of Caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab. It was thus that the Persians were the cause of the Fitnah, and Aisha was innocent of that. Today, we find that the modern day Shia are soft towards the Persian conspirators but harsh towards the Mother of the Believers! The truth is that the Shia propagandists will be raised with those they love, and they will be raised up with the likes of the Persian Abu Lulu, whereas the Muslims will be raised with the blessed Ahlel Bayt including the Prophet’s wives. The Shia of today are the remnants of the Magian Persian Empire, and they are from where Satan’s horns emerged.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Hajar said:

“The People of the East were disbelievers at that time and the Messenger of Allah informed us that the trials and tribulations would arise from that direction and it was as he said. And the first of the trials that arose, arose from the direction of the East and they were the reason for the splitting of the Muslim ranks, and this is what Satan loves and delights in. Likewise the innovations appeared from that direction.” (Fath al-Bari 13/58)


The Prophet was not at all referring to his own wife. If that were the case, then nothing prevented him from simply pointing to his wife, instead of pointing towards Aisha’s house in the direction of the East. In fact, although this Hadith is abused by the Shia propagandists, in reality this same Hadith is a damnation of the Shia themselves for it was they who the Prophet was warning against us. May Allah save us from Shi’ism, the horn of Satan.

It is inconceivable that the Prophet of Islam would be buried at the spot wherefrom Satan’s horns emerged. May Allah bless the Prophet’s Ahlel Bayt including his wives, the Mother of the Believers.

Article Written By: Ibn al-Hashimi  (abriged)

Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) didn’t do Ghusl in Front of strangers

A common tactic of the Shia is to say that the Ahlus Sunnah says such-and-such and then they will say “it’s in Sahih Bukhari”, without actually showing us the entire Hadith in question. One such instance is the Hadith about Bibi Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) teaching two men how to do Ghusl. The Shia will claim that the Sunnis believe that Bibi Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) did Ghusl naked in front of two non-mehrem men.

Let us read the Hadith:

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 5, Number 251:
Narrated Abu Salmah:

Aisha’s brother and I went to Aisha and he asked her about the bath of the Prophet. She brought a pot containing about a Sa’ of water and took a bath and poured it over her head and at that time there was a screen between her and us.

The Hadith was narrated by Sayyiduna Abu Salmah (رضّى الله عنه) who regarded Bibi Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) as his aunt by suckling because Aisha’s sister (Bibi Umm Kulthoom [رضّى الله عنها]) suckled Sayyiduna Abu Salmah (رضّى الله عنه). And the other person was Aisha’s brother (رضّى الله عنه).

The Shia propagandists will say things like “why would two men come to a woman to teach them Ghusl?” This is not strange at all, because they did not just come to any woman, but they come to their sister and aunt, respectively. And Bibi Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) was considered a scholar and she taught many Sahabah (Companions), so there is nothing strange in this.

Therefore, we see that the Hadith in Bukhari talks innocently about Bibi Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) showing her brother and nephew (رضّى الله عنهم) how to do Ghusl. There is nothing strange in this. We would like to ask the Shia if they would find it strange if they read somewhere that Bibi Fatima (رضّى الله عنها) taught her son, Sayyiduna Hasan (رضّى الله عنه), how to do Ghusl? The answer is certainly “no,” and we would thus like to ask our Shia brothers to not harbor a different standard for the wife of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم), Bibia Aisha (رضّى الله عنها).

Allah (عز و جل) has already warned the Muslims of spreading such slander against Bibi Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) in the Quran and this is the famous incident of Al-Ifq in which–according to both Sunni and Shia sources–Allah (عز و جل) says about those who slander Bibi Aisha (رضّى الله عنها): “Allah admonishes you that you should not return to the like of it (slandering Aisha) ever again if you are believers.” (Quran, 24:17).

The Hadith itself clearly states that there was a screen between her and the two men! This refers to Purdah which is very definitive, and in Islam, the Purdah refers to a strict barrier between male and female. Because the Hadith is so crystal clear on the matter that the two were separated by a screen, I do not see how the Shia can actually try to use this Hadith against us!

As any student of the Hadith sciences knows, most incidents have multiple narrations. Some of these narrations are abridged and would not make sense without the entire narration. In fact, this incident mentioned in Sahih Bukhari is also narrated in Sunan Abu Dawood (which narrates the same incident but goes more in depth). Sunan Abu Dawood states that Bibi Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) left the room, performed Ghusl behind a screen, came out, and then verbally told them how to do Ghusl. Therefore, it seems to be a complete distortion of facts to claim that Bibi Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) was indeed naked in front of two men.

How many people learned how to do Wudu and Ghusl from Islamic audio cassettes, videos, and books? It is not imperative that a physical demonstration be done in order to learn how to do Ghusl. After Bibi (رضّى الله عنها) had completed her own Ghusl, then she taught her brother and nephew verbally on the matter of Ghusl.

The Hadith in Al-Bukhari is a summary of the incident, and the detailed explanation is Sunan Abu Dawood. It is the same event, and there is 100% concordance between the two Hadith. Both Hadith say she was behind a screen. Not Bukhari, nor Muslim, nor Abu Dawood, nor any other scholar has ever said that she wasn’t behind a screen and this is only the imagination of Shia who watch pornography and do Mutah left and right.

It may be said, however, that the Hadith doesn’t make sense then if the screen was between the two. Well, there is no room for interpretation since the Hadith itself says there was a screen between them! And all of this in the same sentence, so how can the Shia accept part of the sentence and then ignore the rest of it which says that there was a screen between her and the two men?

The Shia will ask: if Bibi Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) was doing a demonstration of Ghusl, what benefit would that have if the audience it was directed at did not see her?

When Bibi Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) went to perform Ghusl, she never said that this was a demonstration to the men. Otherwise, as has been stated, there would be no need for a screen. The truth of the matter is very simple and straightforward. Bibi Aisha’s brother and nephew (رضّى الله عنهم) wanted to know how to do Ghusl. When they approached Bibi Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) about this, she said that she was doing Ghusl herself and then after she did it, then she would teach them how to do it verbally. This view is strengthened and bolstered by the Hadith itself which categorically states that there was a screen between them, and the Hadith in Sunan Abu Dawood which tells us that she left the room to perform Ghusl and only after she came out did she teach them how to do Ghusl. The fact that it is narrated with such detail in Sunan Abu Dawood will, Insha-Allah, clear all doubts regarding this matter.

As can be seen, these accusations (both about the character of Bibi Aisha [رضّى الله عنها] and about the nature of Sahih Bukhari) are baseless. This current slander of Bibi Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) is similar to the way the Munafiqoon (the Hypocrites) saw Bibi Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) and another man together in the incident of Al-Ifk, so they automatically tried interpreting this in the dirtiest way possible. A similar approach is used by the Shia when they view the Hadith about Bibi Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) teaching her brother and nephew (رضّى الله عنهم) how to do Ghusl.

Article Written By: Ibn al-Hashimi (abriged)

Death of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her)

Salam alaikum.

Shia as a proffesional liars spreading materials as if sayidina Aisha (r.a) was killed by Moawiyah (r.a) by getting into the ditch.May Allah disfigure all rafidha in this world as they are going to be in hereafter!

Here is the narration which answer to that iftira (in Arabic). I got an English translation, but slightly edited it:

Narrated Ibn Abu Mulaika:

Ibn ‘Abbas asked permission to visit Aisha before her death, and at that time she was in a state of agony (the Arabic word used is Maghlouba). She then said: “I am afraid that he [came here to] praise me“.

It was said to her: “He is the cousin of Allah’s Apostle and one of the prominent Muslims” Then she said: “Allow him to enter.”

[When he entered] he said: “How are you?

She replied: “I am Alright if I fear (Allah) (the Arabic is Bekhayr in Itaqayt)

Ibn Abbas said, “Then you are Alright by the Will of Allah, you are the wife of Allah’s Apostle and he did not marry any virgin except you and proof of your innocence was revealed from the Heaven” Later on Ibn Az-Zubair entered after him and ‘Aisha said to him, “Ibn ‘Abbas came to me and praised me greatly, but I wish that I was a thing forgotten and out of sight.

In the narration in Musnad Al-Imam Ahmad, authenticated by Shaykh Ahmad Shakir, it states:

He said: Ibn Abbas asked permission to visit her as she was dying. [She did not wish to allow him at first, so] she was told: O Mother, Verily, Ibn Abbas is one of your righteous sons, and came to greet you and (give you farewell?). So she said: Then allow him if you wish.

Ibn Abbas [May Allah be pleased with him] was allowed to enter. He said: Glad-tidings my mother, the only thing between you and meeting Muhammad Prayers and Peace of Allah upon him, and the loved ones [in another narration it adds ‘and for that tiredness and aching to go away’] is for your soul to leave your body. You were his most beloved wife, and verily he did not love except that which is pleasant and righteous … he mentions many other of her virtues, and adds that her innocence had been proclaimed in the Quran, so you would not find a Masjid were Allah is being mentioned except that these verses would be recited day and night.
She said: Leave me alone O Ibn Abbas, By [Allah] who my soul is in His Hands, I wish I was something forgotten.

فرضي الله عنها وأرضاها ولعن من أبغضها وعاداها

[2] So knowing these authentic tradition that describes the time right before her death, I do not know how a Muslim would ask or even affiirm such a thing as she dying and being buried in a ditch dug for her by Mu’awiya [May Allah be pleased with him].

[3] The narration of that ditch in itself is so retarded that even without knowing this specific authentic tradition, one can affirm that it is a fabricated lie…. I wanted to add something else, but noticed I have been rambling on for too long, so I will just leave it at that … and in what our respected brothers and sisters wrote for you is what should be sufficient for you
PS. Thanks to brother al-Misri.