Comment
Our contention is that Ayeshas leaving her residence following the demise of the Holy Prophet (s) and
accompanying into battle a rebellious male movement that opposed the Khalifa of the time, was an open violation of
this verse.
Ansar.org states:
Ordering to stay at houses does not contradict leaving the house for an ordered benefit as when the woman
leaves the house to go to hajj or omrah, or leaves with her husband in a travel. This verse came down in the
life of the Prophet peace be upon him and the prophet peace be upon him traveled with his wives afterwards,
as the prophet peace be upon him traveled with Aysha and others to Hijjat Al-Widaa. Also, the Prophet
peace be upon him sent Aysha with Abdulrahman, her brother Hujjat Al-Wadaa happened before the
Prophets demise by less than three months after the revelation of this verse. Therefore, prophets wives
were going to hajj in the Caliphate of Omar and others as they used to with the Prophet and Omar gave
Uthman or Abdulrahman bin Owf the leadership of the prophets wives caravans. Accordingly, if it is allowed
for the prophets wives to travel for a benefit, then Aysha thought that by her departure a reformation for the
Muslims could happen. She interpreted in that matter.
Ibn al Hashimi states:
Allahs command to stay in the house was a general condition set upon not only the Prophets wives, but all
women in general. This does not mean that women can never leave the house; it is rather a general rule of
thumb so that they remain chaste and in Purdah. However, it is permissible to leave the house for ordered
duties, such as Hajj, Umrah, or travelling with ones husband. Verses 33:32-34 were revealed to the Prophet
() , and he himself travelled with his wives after this. For example, he travelled with Aisha
( ) to Hijjat Al-Widaa, and this occurred three months after the verse was revealed. Surely we are
not so crass as to accuse the Prophet ( ) of violating the meaning of this verse!
Even after the Prophets death, the Prophets widows performed Hajj; it is narrated that Umar ()
gave Uthman ( ) or Abdul-Rahman bin Owf ( ) the leadership of the caravan carrying the
Prophets widows. Accordingly, if it is allowed for the Prophets wives to travel for a benefit, then Aisha
thought that by her departure a reformation of the Muslims could happen [and Muslim lives would be saved].
She interpreted it in that matter. (Minhaj Al-Sunnah, vol.4, p.317-318)
After the Farewell Hajj, she (Zainab) and Sauda never performed Hajj again because the Prophet (s) had
said: This is your last Hajj, after this you must pray on floor mats, [whilst] the other wives would perform
Hajj, Zainab and Sawda would say Nothing shall move us.
Comment
The Nawasib of Ansar.Org and Ahlelbayt.com submit as many excuses as they like, the fact of the matter is that the
Imam of Truth, Ali (as) felt that Ayesha had no basis to support her stance; she was acting in opposition to Allah
(swt) and his Rasul (s). Whose opinion should we rely on, these Nasibi writers or the Gate of Knowledge, Imam Ali
ibn Abi Talib (as)?
When Ali was leaving for Basrah, he came before Ume Salamah. She said: May you go under the protection
of Allah. By Allah,you with Truth (Haq) and truth is with you. If I did not dislike disobedience of Allah and
His Apostle, as they have directed us to stay in the house, I would have come along with you. But by Allah, I
will dispatch with you someone who is themost preciousto me and is more dearest to me than myself, that
is my son Umar.
she recited this verse, she lamented over the tragedy that she had inflicted on the Ummah (alas, it was too late for
her). It is also relevant to point out that some Sunni scholars have recorded this very reaction of Ayesha in their
commentaries of this said verse, al-Ghernati for example records in al-Tasehil le Uloom al-Tanzil, Volume 2 page
365:
Whenever Ayesha recited this verse she would weep on account of her march at Jamal (battle).
Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti records in Tafsir Dur al-Manthur, Volume 6 page 600 records:
Masrooq [ra] narrated that when Ayesha [ra] would recite this verse, she would cry so profusely that her
cover would become soaked with tears.
Comment
The distraught reaction of Ayesha shall suffice to water down all Nawasib attempts to distort the divine injunction
placed upon the wives of the Holy Prophet (s). Ayeshas advocates would lead us to believe that their client
exercised ijtihad for which she would receive one reward if she was wrong, with any sin committed wiped out. One
wonders how correct such an approach is when textual evidence cites this distraught reaction of Ayesha. Her tears
do not suggest that she was confident of her conduct being pardoned let alone be rewarded for her approach.