Refutation of the Shi‘ah’s distortion of a saheeh hadith that they use to cast aspersions upon the Mother of the Believers ‘Aa’ishah

Praise be to Allah.

Perhaps one of the main confusions that control the minds of some Muslims is that of focusing on some historical events and using them as justification for altering beliefs and ideas; they become completely obsessed with these events, as if they have just happened or are happening right now, even though they are over and done with, and now we are going through major events that are no less important or significant than those historical events. So such feebleminded individuals remain prisoners of the past, and they forget the present and all that it contains of pain and hope, thus living a life that is lacking in vision and believing in a faith that is distorted, to the extent that history is subject to distortion or fabrication.

Based on the above, it is very important for us to point out to you that you should understand that it is not right to make history – even if it is real history – something that distracts you from the main aims of Islam that were brought by the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). Islam is a system of aims and goals that are based on great pillars and centred on affirming the Oneness of the Creator, may He be glorified and exalted, and worshipping Him alone, within the framework of the six pillars of faith and the five pillars of practice on which Islam is based, and also on the moral and ethical values which the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was sent to complete and perfect for all of humanity. All of that is the focus of the verses of the Holy Qur’an and the hadiths of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), and is the purpose for which he was sent. All of that was summed up by Ja‘far ibn Abi Taalib (may Allah be pleased with him) in his famous words before the Negus when he said to him:

“O king, we were an ignorant people, worshipping idols, eating the meat of animals found dead, committing shameful deeds, severing ties of kinship, mistreating neighbours, and the strong among us devoured the weak. We were like that until Allah sent to us a Messenger from among ourselves, whose lineage, honesty, trustworthiness and chastity we knew well. He called us to affirm Allah’s Oneness and worship Him alone, and to renounce that which we and our fathers used to worship instead of Him of stones and idols. He instructed us to speak the truth, be faithful to trusts, uphold ties of kinship, treat neighbours kindly, and to refrain from that which is prohibited and from bloodshed. And He forbade us to commit shameful deeds, speak falsehood, consume orphans’ wealth and slander chaste women. He instructed us to worship Allah alone and not ascribe anything as a partner to Him, and He instructed us to pray, give zakaah (obligatory charity) and fast – and he enumerated the commands of Islam. – So we accepted him and believed in him, and we followed him in what he had brought. So we worshipped Allah alone, not ascribing any partner to Him. We regarded as forbidden that which he forbade, and we regarded as permissible that which he permitted to us..

Narrated by Ahmad in al-Musnad (3/266) with a hasan isnaad.

Is it not a sign of failure to regard these events as a cause of division and dispute among us today, when Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, has sufficed us and saved us from being present at that time of turmoil, and has spared us the great turmoil that occurred among the noble Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them all)?

Even though Ahl as-Sunnah believe that ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allah be pleased with him) was in the right, yet they do not choose to join the side of those who impugned the honour of others or cast aspersions upon their religion and faith. Rather they defend the right of the one who is in the right by using gentle words, and they ask Allah to pardon and forgive those among the noble Sahaabah who made mistakes; they think positively of all of them. When the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) died, he was pleased with all of them. In fact Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And the first to embrace Islam of the Muhajiroon (those who migrated from Makkah to Al-Madinah) and the Ansar (the citizens of Al-Madinah who helped and gave aid to the Muhajiroon) and also those who followed them exactly (in Faith). Allah is well-pleased with them as they are well-pleased with Him. He has prepared for them Gardens under which rivers flow (Paradise), to dwell therein forever. That is the supreme success”

[at-Tawbah 9:100].

Today you see many significant events occurring and we cannot reach any certain conclusion about what is really happening and the details of some stories we hear, despite all these very modern means of communication and advanced ways of verifying events, and despite the fact that there are so many researchers and specialists who study these events in depth. Yet despite that we cannot come to know the true nature of some events and what really happened. So how about when we study events in the distant past having to do with the fitnah (turmoil) and the details of what exactly happened among the noble Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them)? We may note that documentation of events and writing down of details was very rare at that time, and there has been a great deal of distortion and fabrication on the part of narrators and writers later on, not to mention conflation and confusion of events. Is it rational to make the events of those days our obsession, thinking of them morning and evening, and taking them as the criterion for judging people or regarding it is permissible to speak against others, and even to regard the honour and lives of one side or another as permissible?

Secondly:

Nevertheless, we say clearly in response to the events mentioned in the question: it was never narrated from the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) that he said: “Apostasy or disbelief will emerge from my house” and he pointed to the house of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her). In fact none of the scholars of hadith narrated that, and there is no known isnaad for it. This is sufficient evidence that it is false and deserves to be rejected.

But what happened is that some of those who bore resentment and hatred towards the Mother of the Believers ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) distorted the meanings of some hadith reports, and misinterpreted them in a manner that is completely baseless. The ones who were the main promoters of this fabrication were a number of Shi‘i authors, such as al-Majlisi in Bihaar al-Anwaar (31/639), Daamin al-Madani in Waq‘at al-Jamal (p. 46), ‘Abd al-Husayn in al-Muraaja‘aat (p. 424), and at-Tijaani as-Samaawi in Fas’alu Ahl adh-Dhikr (p. 105-106) and Thumma Ahtadaytu, and others.

The explanation for that is that the books of the Sunnah are filled with narrations of the hadith of Ibn ‘Umar, according to which the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “O Allah, bless us in our Shaam (Greater Syria) and in our Yemen.” They said: And in our Najd? He said: “O Allah, bless us in our Shaam and in our Yemen.” They said: And in our Najd? He said: “There there are earthquakes and tribulations, and there the side of the head of the Shaytaan will emerge.”

Narrated by al-Bukhaari (1037) and Muslim (2905).

Other saheeh reports clearly state that what he meant was the eastern direction, which is Najd or Iraq, both of which are to the east of al-Madinah al-Munawwarah.

It was narrated that ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) said: I saw the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) point towards the east and say: “Oh, tribulation is there; oh, tribulation is there; oh, tribulation is there, from where the side of the head of the Shaytaan will appear.”

Narrated by al-Bukhaari (3279) and Muslim (2905).

The scholars and commentators on hadith have discussed in detail the meaning of this hadith, and how the Najd of Arabia or the Najd of Iraq [Najd refers to highlands] were places of evil and turmoil. Some of them interpreted it as referring to the appearance of Musaylimah al-Kadhdhaab in Bahrain, and others interpreted it as referring to the turmoil that occurred in Iraq and the major events in which al-Husayn ibn ‘Ali and others among the noble Sahaabah were killed.

As the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was standing on the minbar, facing the noble Sahaabah, and pointing towards the east, the apartment of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) would be to his right, so it would also be towards the east. Some haters exploited this fact and distorted all the clear reports mentioned above, saying that what was meant was ‘Aa’ishah herself (may Allah be pleased with her), and that she was the cause of the turmoil and evil that would befall the people. The Shaytaan made this misguidance fair-seeming to them, by means of a report of which they failed to understand the meaning. The hadith is well-known from the narration of Naafi‘ from ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him); it was taken from Naafi‘ by many of his companions, namely: ‘Abd ar-Rahmaan ibn ‘Ata’, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Awn, ‘Ubaydullah ibn ‘Umar and al-Layth ibn Sa‘d. All of them narrated it in a context which clearly indicated that what was meant was the eastern direction, from which the side of the head of the Shaytaan would appear. For information on all these isnaads, please see al-Musnad al-Jaami‘ (10/789).

There is another report which was narrated only by Juwayriyah from Naafi‘, which says: The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) stood up to address the people. He pointed in the direction of the dwelling of ‘Aa’ishah and said: “There is fitnah (turmoil) – three times – from where the side of the head of the Shaytaan will appear.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (3104).

If a fair-minded, smart researcher examines this hadith, he will realise that the gesture referred to was simply pointing towards the east, but because the apartment of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) was to the east, the narrator expressed it by saying that he pointed in the direction of ‘Aa’ishah’s dwelling; i.e., he meant the direction of the east, not of the Mother of the Believers ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) herself. This is supported by the fact that the report says nahwa (in the direction of, towards) and not ila (to or at) ‘Aa’ishah.

It says in the report of ‘Ubaydullah ibn ‘Umar from Naafi‘ that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) stood at Hafsah’s door and pointed towards the east – according to another version, he stood at ‘Aa’ishah’s door and pointed towards the east – as it says in Saheeh Muslim (2905). Thus it is clear that what is meant is the direction. As for the apartments (of the Prophet’s wives), it does not mean the apartments themselves.

Does it make sense to say that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) would pray for blessing for Shaam (Greater Syria) and Yemen, then when the noble Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them) asked him to pray for Najd, he would respond by telling them that the dwelling of ‘Aa’ishah would be a source of fitnah and the place from which the side of the head of the Shaytaan would emerge? What rational mind could accept this nonsensical idea? What connection could there be between the beginning and the end of the hadith according to this weird distortion of the meaning

Apart from Naafi‘, the hadith was also narrated by a number of the students of ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him), including ‘Abdullah ibn Dinar, Saalim ibn ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, Bishr ibn Harb and others, all of whom narrated it with the wording “he pointed to the east.” This was narrated by al-Bukhaari (3274, 3511), Muslim (7400), Ahmad and others. See: al-Musnad al-Jaami‘ (10/833-834); as-Silsilah as-Saheehah (no. 2494).

Shouldn’t he – the one who understands the report in this weird manner – wonder how come none of the noble Sahaabah understood it in this distorted way, even though the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said this to them as he addressed them from the minbar.

If it was the Mother of the Believers ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) to whom the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was referring in this hadith, how could he have continued to live with her and died with his head in her lap (may Allah be pleased with her), when she was supposedly the source of turmoil and the place from which the side of the head of the Shaytaan would appear – Allah forbid?

Wasn’t the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) the most caring of people towards his ummah and the most eager to protect them from evil and turmoil? So how could he have kept quiet about what he knew of what his wife, the Mother of the Believers, ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) was supposedly going to do?

Indeed, how could the noble Sahaabah – including ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allah be pleased with him) and others of the family of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) – have kept quiet about that, and not questioned him (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) concerning her, or ask him for permission to rid the Muslims of the fitnah (turmoil) that would emerge from her house!

Did any historian or scholar of hadith narrate that anyone who was present at that speech understood that what was meant was ‘Aa’ishah herself (may Allah be pleased with her)?

Moreover, would any rational Muslim agree to the notion that the best of creation and leader of mankind, Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) would suggest that the house of his wife, who was the dearest of his wives to him, a place which was his own home, would be a place where the side of the head of the Shaytaan would appear, instead of it being a beacon of light for all humanity until the Day of Resurrection, as indeed it truly is. Is there anything that could undermine the status of our noble Prophet Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) more than this distortion which cast aspersions on his family and his honour (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)?

The revelation used to come down in her apartment (may Allah be pleased with her), when the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was with her under the same cover. Can it make sense to suggest that this apartment would become a place where the Shaytaan would emerge, on the basis of a distorted interpretation of some historical events?

Wasn’t the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) buried in that apartment, where his blessed body will remain until the Day of Resurrection, and the Prophets are alive in their graves, yet despite that he (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) allegedly described his resting place during his life and after his death as being a place from which fitnah and the side of the head of the Shaytaan would emerge?

‘Ammaar ibn Yaasir (may Allah be pleased with him) – who was one of the most prominent among those who fought on the side of ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allah be pleased with him) – said that the Mother of the believers ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her)  would be the wife of our Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in Paradise, as is narrated by al-Bukhaari (3772) from al-Hakam who said: I heard Abu Waa’il say: When ‘Ali sent ‘Ammaar and al-Hasan to Kufah to seek their support, ‘Ammaar addressed them, saying: I know that she is his wife in this world and in the hereafter, but Allah is testing you to see whether you will follow Him or her. If the apartment of the Mother of the believers is the cause of turmoil, then how could ‘Ammaar ibn Yaasir have said that she would be the wife of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in Paradise?

Indeed those who narrated the hadith from ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) understood the hadith correctly and interpreted it as referring to the Najd of Iraq, as in the report narrated by Imam Muslim in his Saheeh (2905) from Saalim ibn ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, who said: O people of Iraq, how often you ask about minor issues when you are committing major sins! I heard my father, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, say: I heard the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) say: “Tribulation will come from there,” and he pointed with his hand towards the east, “where the side of the head of the Shaytaan will appear.” And here you are now, striking one another’s necks…

Where did these distorters come up with this weird manner in which they interpret this hadith, that was not narrated from any of the family of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), or from any of those who fought alongside ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allah be pleased with him) when he fought ‘Aa’ishah, Talhah and az-Zubayr?

Shaykh al-Albaani (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The versions of the hadith all indicate that the direction to which the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) pointed was the east, specifically Iraq, as I have seen in some reports that state that clearly. This hadith is one of the signs of his Prophethood (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), because the first turmoil came from the east, and that was the cause of division among the Muslims. Similarly, innovations started from the same direction, such as the innovations of the Shi‘ah, Khaarijis and others.

Al-Bukhaari (7/77) and Ahmad (2/85, 153) narrated that Ibn Abi Na‘eem said: I was with Ibn ‘Umar when a man from Iraq asked him about a muhrim (pilgrim in ihram) who kills a fly. He said: O people of Iraq, you ask me about a muhrim who kills a fly, when you killed the son of the daughter of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), and the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “They [al-Hasan and al-Husayn] are my two fragrant plants in this world”! Some of this turmoil is the Shi‘ah’s impugning the senior Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them), such as Sayyidah ‘Aa’ishah as-Siddeeqah bint as-Siddeeq, whose innocence was revealed from heaven. The fanatical Shi‘i ‘Abd al-Husayn, in his book al-Muraaja‘aat ( p. 237), wrote several chapters impugning her and rejecting her hadiths, and accusing her of all kinds of things with all audacity and shamelessness, basing his arguments on weak and fabricated hadiths, some of which I [Shaykh al-Albaani] have highlighted in ad-Da‘eefah (4963-4970), in addition to distorting the meaning of saheeh hadiths and interpreting them in a far-fetched manner. Similarly he – may he be silenced and may his hand be paralysed – interpreted the saheeh hadith as referring to Sayyidah ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) and claimed that she is the fitnah mentioned in the hadith. “Monstrous is the word that comes out of their mouths (i.e., that He begot (took) sons and daughters). They utter nothing but a lie” [al-Kahf 18:5]. They based that on the two reports mentioned above:

The first report is the report of al-Bukhaari which says: … and he pointed in the direction of the dwelling of ‘Aa’ishah. The other report was narrated by Muslim: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) came out from the house of ‘Aa’ishah and said: “The head of kufr (disbelief) is there.” This evildoer tried to give the wrong impression to his readers that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was pointing to the house of ‘Aa’ishah herself, and that what was meant by fitnah was ‘Aa’ishah herself! Our response to that that his approach is akin to what the Jews did when they distorted and twisted words. The Shi‘ah understood the words in the first report – “and he pointed in the direction of the dwelling of ‘Aa’ishah” – as it the text said “and he pointed at the dwelling of ‘Aa’ishah”! The fact that it says nahwa (in the direction of/towards) and not ila (at/to) definitively indicates that this understanding is incorrect, especially since most reports clearly state that he pointed towards the east, and in some reports it says that he pointed towards Iraq. And historical reality testifies to that.

With regard to the report of ‘Ikrimah, it is munkar (odd), as stated above. Even if it was suggested that it is sound, it has been summarised to the point of undermining its meaning, so this Shi‘i exploited it greatly, as is indicated by other versions of the hadith. What is meant is: the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) came out of the house of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) and prayed Fajr, then he stood beside the minbar (or – according to one report – at ‘Aa’ishah’s door, turned to face towards the sunrise and pointed towards the east. According to a report narrated by al-Bukhaari, he pointed in the direction of the dwelling of ‘Aa’ishah. According to another report narrated by Ahmad, he pointed towards Iraq. So the fair-minded person who is free of any whims and desires with regard to all these versions of this hadith will definitely realise the falseness of the aspersions that this Shi‘i cast upon ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her). May Allah deal with him as he deserves.

End quote from as-Silsilah as-Saheehah (no. 2494, 5/655)

Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qaadir Sufi said, concerning this distortion of the hadith, that it is an incorrect understanding:

It may be refuted by the fact that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was standing on his minbar, which was to the west of the houses of his wives (may Allah be pleased with them) and to the west of the house of his daughter Faatimah (may Allah be pleased with her), as these houses were all to the right of the minbar, towards the east. This is something that cannot be disputed or argued about. Just as the Raafidis themselves decided to interpret the easterly direction as referring to the house of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her), the Naasibis [those who oppose Ahl al-Bayt] could decide to interpret the easterly direction as referring to the house of Faatimah (may Allah be pleased with her)! That is foolishness on the part of both sides.

End quote from as-Saa‘iqah (p. 151)

Dr Ibraaheem ar-Ruhayli (may Allah preserve him) said:

Some reports mention some of the tribes who lived in the land, and described the situation of its people:

It was narrated that Ibn Mas‘ood said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) pointed with his hand towards Yemen and said: “Faith is there, and harshness and hardheartedness are among the uncouth owners of camels, where the side of the head of the Shaytaan rises, Rabee‘ah and Mudar.” These reports definitively indicate that what the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) meant when he said “Fitnah is there” was the eastern lands, as the reports clearly state that, and in some reports there is a description of the people of that land and some of its tribes are identified by name. This clearly proves the falseness of what the Raafidi claimed about him pointing to the house of ‘Aa’ishah. This is a false and invalid view; no one ever understood it in this way and no one ever said that except this hateful Raafidi.

End quote from al-Intisaar li-s’Sahb wa al-Aal min Iftiraa’aat as-Samaawi ad-Daall (p. 323)

Shaykh Shahaatah Muhammad Saqar said:

The words of the Shi‘ah can only mean one of two things:

Either they are saying that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) meant ‘Aa’ishah herself when he pointed, or they are saying that he (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) meant her dwelling itself.

If they are saying the former, then this is obviously false, on the basis of the linguistic usage in the hadith, because it can only refer to a specific place, not a person, such as when he said “from where” and “fitnah is there”, referring to the place where fitnah will reside.

If they are saying the latter, which is that he (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) meant her dwelling itself, then that could not have been the case during the lifetime of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family), because he lived there himself, and he would come to it every time it was ‘Aa’ishah’s day (may Allah be pleased with her); in fact he would come there twice as often as the houses of his other wives, because ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) had two days, her own day and that of Sawdah bint Zam‘ah (may Allah be pleased with her), as she gave her day to ‘Aa’ishah because she knew that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) loved her.

What’s more, when the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) was dying, he wanted to be tended in the house of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her), not in the houses of his other wives, and he stayed there until he passed away (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) in the house of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her), and he was buried there even though this may annoy the Raafidis.

There is no other possible interpretation left except for them to say that what was meant was the dwelling of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) after the death of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family). If they say this, then they are calling for their own doom, because the dwelling of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) became the grave of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) after his death, and it was no longer her house that could be described as hers. How can any rational person think it possible that Allah, may He be exalted, would be pleased for His beloved slave Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) to be buried in a place from which fitnah would emerge, according to the claim of the Raafidis?!

It is indeed one of the miracles of Allah, may He be exalted, that He caused the house of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) to become the place where His slave and beloved Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) would be tended during his illness, then He caused it to become His grave, then He completed it by causing his two companions and advisers, Abu Bakr and ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both) to be buried beside him.

If this fabricated view propagated by the Shi‘ah was valid or possible in any way, we would have learned about someone who said it or quoted it or used it as evidence among those who differed with the Mother of the Believers ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) and were of the level of the Taabi‘een or those who came after them. As for the Sahaabah, it is definitely not possible to think that any of them held such a view. As we have not found anyone who suggested that interpretation, we may conclude that it is pure lies and fabrications against the Mother of the believers (may Allah be pleased with her) on the part of the Shi‘ah, along the same lines as what their earlier predecessors (i.e., the hypocrites) did in the case of the slander against her (al-ifk).

End quote from Ummuna ‘Aa’ishah (91-94).

And Allah knows best.