₦airaland Forum

Iran is world’s 14th leading electricity producer

On Line: 17 December 2012 17:59
In Print: Tuesday 18 December 2012

TEHRAN - Iran is the world’s 14th leading electricity producer, Iranian Deputy Energy Minister Mohammad Behzad said on Monday, citing the latest statistics released by the International Energy Agency.

Iran has risen two places since 2010, when it was 16th in the world in electricity generation, ISNA quoted Behzad as saying.

And Iran ranks first in the Middle East in electricity generation, he noted.

At present, Iran’s power generation capacity stands at 67 gigawatts, and it is projected to hit 70GW by the end of the current Iranian calendar year (March 20, 2013).

Sixteen new power stations, with a total capacity of 2.6GW, have come on stream in the current Iranian calendar year.

Currently, Iran provides electricity to Turkey, Armenia, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Iran also plans to connect its national power grid to the power grids of Oman, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Lebanon, and India in the future.

MG/HG


http://tehrantimes.com/economy-and-business/104168-iran-is-worlds-14th-leading-electricity-producer

Iran produces unmanned surface vehicle

Iranian researchers have produced an unmanned surface vehicle (USV) that can conduct a wide range of missions.

The USV - codenamed Ariana - was unveiled during a ceremony showcasing the recent research and technological achievements of the Science and Research Branch of the Islamic Azad University in Tehran on Sunday.

Project manager Behrouz Asadi told reporters that Ariana is highly maneuverable, has smart information processing systems, and can transmit images of its surrounding maritime environment.

He added that Ariana can be used to conduct military, surveillance, rescue and environmental protection missions.

Asadi concluded that the unmanned surface vehicle designed and made by Iran can travel as fast as 30 nautical knots (54 kilometers) per hour, and can carry a payload of four kilograms.

MP/HGH/SS

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/12/16/278419/iran-produces-unmanned-surface-vehicle/

Sweetnecta

Mod,please unhide my post here:

https://www.nairaland.com/1123572/need-advice-muslim-brothers-sister/1

Please mod,kindly unhide my above post.thanks.
And I'm done with this thread and I'd contain myself with the above advice.

vedaxcool: Al-Kafi is one of the four Shia
books of Hadith; of the four, it is
considered the most authoratative
and authentic. We read one such
Sahih Hadith, in which the Imam
says:

the Shia do not consider any book other than the Quran as "authentic" as a whole.

each hadith stands the test of examination and grading.

and who made the hadiths you're quoting "sahih",if these hadiths exist at all?

“One who engages in Mutah
once in his lifetime reaches the
status of Imam Al-Hussain. One
who engages in it twice becomes
equal in status to Imam Al-Hasan.
The one who performs it three
times reaches the position of Imam
Ali. And he who practices it four
times acquires the level and
position of the Prophet
Muhammad.”
(Furoo al-Kafi)

I am waiting on the shias to curse Al kafi for this huge blasphemy!

not a blasphemy! it is talking about reward.

but please,where is the reference of what you're quoting? you cannot just copy words and write under it "(al-Kafi)".what page,chapter or volume in al-Kafi is the hadith found? nothing!why?

The narrator asked Imam Baqir about
the women of Mutah. The Imam said,
“She is not among those four [women
classified as wives] because she
neither needs a divorce, nor is [a child
born of her] entitled to any
inheritance. She is like a hired
woman.” (Al-Kafi)
Spits three times!
A child derived from muta simply is equivalent to a bastard that is what the imam is indicating, it is very laughable that a sane mind will expect the dad of a woman involved in muta to bear the cost of taking care of the child from muta when clearly the father of such a child is known!

where is the reference of what you're quoting? you cannot just copy words and write under it "(al-Kafi)".what page,chapter or volume in al-Kafi is the hadith found? nothing!why?

who added parenthesis into the hadith to indicate that a child born out of mut'ah cannot inherit? can you see the dishonesty and lying Sunnis do? in mut'ah marriage,it is the woman that cannot inherit the man because the marriage would be dissolved.the child inherits.

i am not suprised why you are lying.it is because you're copying lies and forgeries from Sunni hate sites.in that way you will never see the truth nor reach any conclusion that is not false.

the hadith above even though tampered with in at least two places,refers to the woman not inheriting;and not the child.

please provide the reference for the hadith and let me examine it and expose the Sunni forgery.Sunnis are not only forging their own hadiths,tampering with their own hadiths,mis-translating and mis-quoting their hadiths and taking out of context,they now are extending their hand into the hadiths of others.

this is a shameful deed! they have learnt the christian skill of using parenthesis in the bible,to use parenthesis in their hadiths to add meanings and their own interpretation.why add parenthesis?

please,you do not have the knowledge to pass such rulings.
Jameel bin ad-Dari said that he asked
Imam Jafar as-Sadiq if Mutah was
permissible with a virgin girl. The
Imam said, “There is no harm in it if
the girl is not too young. However, all
of the collectors of hadith agree that
a nine-year-old girl is not considered
too young.” (Al-Kafi)



And a very strange twist is that muta "marriages" do not even require a witness!

Read more of muta hadiths here

theauthenticbase./2010/01/07/the-shia-fiqh-of-mutah/

again (for the third time):

where is the reference of what you're quoting? you cannot just copy words and write under it "(al-Kafi)".what page,chapter or volume in al-Kafi is the hadith found? nothing!why?


assuming the purported hadith is truly from al-kafi,yeah,like it is recorded in "sahih bukhari" that Aisha was 6 year old when the Prophet (saw) married her.and that is false.a girl that young cannot perform mut'ah marriage for the fact that she is most likely a virgin and under parental control since she is obviously too young.the problem is Sunnis consider the compilation of Bukhari as a whole to be "sahih",while the Shia do not consider any book as "sahih" or authentic except the Quran.the Quran is the only book that is acceptable 100%.and in the Quran mut'ah is permitted.

In iran they have what they call Brothels sorry House of chastity where they house muta women, people simply walk into such houses and within an hour a marriage is dissolved and any resultant pregnancy becomes her fathers headache and yet shia pretend that theirs is a religion founded on justice, yet such justice only involves cleaning mouth and leaving a girls father who might even been extremely poor to struggle with the consequence of the chopping! This one na real ayatollah sense!

you are poisoning your mind.i also find you very jobless and silly in going out there on the web to copy any Sunni trash and bring it here to fight others,regardless of how false what you copied is.

in Iran,mut'ah marriage is only valid when conducted by a qualified jusrist and a contract is made.there are jurists who conduct the marriage in order to fight pro$titution.

you're copying from anti-Shia sites and expressing the trash so confidently as if the words are yours and you're so knowledgeable about Shia Islam.your entire "knowledge" is fake built upon copy/paste without verification.i keep advicing you to read.channeling your effort into fighting and seeking any tool to attack others is not the healthy way to build correct understanding.

and regardless of what happens in Iran or anywhere,Mut'ah marriage is Islamic,permitted in the Quran,was practiced in the days of the Prophet (saw) and up to the time of abu bakr's caliphate,and can be proven beyond doubt that it was Umar out of his own personal desire who banned it.

whatever the case,read about mut'ah marriage and practice it correctly based on the rules and conditions of Islam.it is an islamic act and has its basis right from the days of Prophet Muhammed (saw).

www.mutah.com

vedaxcool: ^
You go mind am, the fact that the scholars and even Imams of shias reduce mutah to prostitution by saying women in mutah are like girls for hire or that when a pregnancy shows up it is non of the man's business clearly shows how undignifying such arrangement, what is more horrible is that the Prophet pbuh actually prohibited such marriage during his life time and like drinking alcohol it was more of an arab custom that the zorostrian regime has elevated to the hight of theology making it seem clearly that mutah is a sure route to success in religion! That in itself is a pity! People could read more on the vilness of this practices. www.nairaland.com/828259/mutah-pimps-quran.

www.nairaland.com/828391/mutah-pimps

www.nairaland.com/828367/plea-muslim-sister

stop lying on our Imams.mut'ah should be applied correctly.it is frown upon for a virgin girl who is under parental control to do it.in fact one of the rules of mut'ah is that a virgin girl cannot perform it without the consent of her father/guardian.in fact from that logic stems the purpose of mut'ah marriage.it mostly applies to widows,divorced women and girls who have known men.simply put,mut'ah is to do things in the halal way and get the girls off the streets or secret haram relations.Islam have given solution to every problem society and man faces and mut'ah is one of those solutions when applied correctly.do not turn solution into the problem!if you come to apply it part of the sunnah of the Prophet (saw) and the command of Allah in the Quran,then it is fine.there are conditions and rules in mut'ah marriage.in fact there are little differences between mut'ah marriage and permanent marriage.the only major difference is unlike permanent marriage,mut'ah marriage would later be dissolve or end in separation/divorce,if the marriage contract is not renewed or transformed into permanent marriage.

also,the father takes complete care and responsibility if there is any pregnancy.you lied on that too.

please you should go and read before commenting on issues.you're in the habit of commenting on contentious issues that you lack knowledge on.if you want to know about mut'ah marriage,then a website have been presented to know everything about it.

www.mutah.com

vedaxcool: ^^^

you can't have it both ways either your shias statments are true or not, or you simply live to deny another day,

Very very funny!

Anyways,I hope these encounters would be used as opportunity to increase your knowledge and to read more and find out more.I would really like you to read the five part research I earlier presented links to.you will really enjoy the reading.

I'm looking forward to having you soonest as one of our nairaland ayatollahs,along with LagosShia.

Salam,Peace! ( Note: not "shalom",we Shia are not jews )

vedaxcool: did you miss this?

Not at all!

But my mistake was thinking you understand what you read.

Now, lets see what al-kashee understood by these sahih hadiths, here is the opinion of shia alim al-kashee regarding ibn saba:

ذكر بعض أهل العلم أن عبد الله بن سبإ كان يهوديا فأسلم و والى عليا (ع) و كان يقول و هو على يهوديته في يوشع بن نون وصي موسى بالغلو فقال في إسلامه بعد وفاة رسول الله (ص) في علي (ع) مثل ذلك و كان أول من شهر بالقول بفرض إمامة علي و أظهر البراءة من أعدائه و كاشف مخالفيه و أكفرهم فمن هاهنا قال من خالف الشيعة أصل التشيع و الرفض مأخوذ من اليهودية.

Some people of knowledge mentioned that Abdullah bin Saba’ was a Jew, who embraced Islam and supported Ali. While he was still a Jew, he used to go to extremism in calling Yousha’ bin Noon as the appointee (successor) of Moses, thus after embracing Islam – after the demise of the Messenger of Allah [pbuh&hf] – he said the like about Ali. It was him who first publicly announced the mandatory Iamamah for Ali, rejected and disowned his enemies, debated his opponents and called them Kafirs. Hence, those who oppose the Shi’ites often say: The Shi’ites and Rejectors (Rafidah) have their roots in Judaism “.

Source: Al-Kashee, Rijaal, pg. 109

and the bad news keep getting worse

You're happy a Shia scholar is amusing us by reporting what a minority among Sunnis were spreading from the tales of saif ibn umar al tamimi.

Did you read these parts:

"Some people of knowledge mentioned"

"Hence, those who oppose the Shi’ites often say: The Shi’ites and Rejectors (Rafidah) have their roots in Judaism".

So if I,a Shia, report that : a Sunni "scholar" on nairaland mention that ibn saba was a jew who embraced islam and supported Imam Ali (as),and was the first to believe in the imamate of Imam Ali (as) as he believed in the imamate of Prophet Joshua (as) after Prophet Moses (as).so the opponents of the Shia are claiming that (we) the Shia have roots in judaism".

how does the above constitute "proof" that Ibn Saba is the "founder" of what I believe in or make the above that I am the stating ibn saba to be the "founder" when I'm only recording what others about us (Shia)? The above doesn't even prove the historical existence of ibn saba.

vedaxcool: These are the three Saheeh (with 7 different sahih isnaads) hadeeth regarding Ibn Saba:

حدثني محمد بن قولويه، قال حدثني سعد بن عبد الله، قال حدثنا يعقوب بن يزيد و محمد بن عيسى، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن هشام بن سالم، قال : سمعت أبا عبد الله (عليه السلام) يقول و هو يحدث أصحابه بحديث عبد الله بن سبإ و ما ادعى من الربوبية في أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب، فقال إنه لما ادعى ذلك فيه استتابه أمير المؤمنين (عليه السلام) فأبى أن يتوب فأحرقه بالنار.

Hishaam bin Salim, who said that he heard it from Imam Aboo `Abd Allaah (AS) when he told that `Abd Allaah bin Saba called (to people) the divinity of Imaam `Alee (AS). Upon that ‘Alee ordered him to repent, but he refused. Then Ali let him burn in fire.”

So how does the above validate your accusations,even assuming that ibn saba is an historical figure? He believed Imam Ali (a) is a "god",and he got punished.how does the above make him the "founder of shiism"?

With the event of Ghadir Khumm,the hadith of manzila,the event of saqifa banu saeda,the incident of fadak,the Quranic verse of wilayah,the Quranic verse of mawaddah,Quranic verse of ulil-amr,the hadith of twelve imams,hadith of imam of the time and many more found in the Quran and authentic/undisputed sunni hadiths,if any jewish convert or even a hindu,clinged to them,that convert is more Muslim than any Sunni.if I as a Shia can validate all our beliefs in the Quran and authentic hadiths,then you can call me (not only a jew but) even a zionist jew.even at that I'd be more muslim than any liar calling himself "Sunni"

Yet still assuming ibn saba existed at all,and was really punished by Imam Ali (a) for making him "god" as reported in hadiths without grade,then that is totally different from the tales invented by saif ibn umar al-tamimi,that makes him the "founder of shiism" by coining the stories of his involvement starting with the killing of umar,then usthman and up to the battle of jamal.there is no historical source proving these allegations to sort of promote ibn saba as a "cult leader" of troublemakers,and his sect is the Shia,who undisputed evidence record as the followers of Imam Ali (as) and the Ahlul-Bayt (as).it is even insulting to think that Imam Ali (as) was condoning the activities of a jew and a following just to "consolidate" his power as your article earlier alleged.there is no historical evidence to back up the accusations attached to ibn saba on major events.therefore he is a fictitious figure and not historical.assuming,the hadith claiming he was burnt alive for making Imam Ali (a) "god" was not coined as reaction to the invention of ibn saba and the accusations attached to him from umar's killing to the battle of jamal, by saif ibn umar,and thus inventing him as "the founder",there is nothing in history to back his mere presence.not even when he appeared and was "burnt" are recorded and established.nothing!and if this man ever existed,he was far too insignificant and worthless to have being "the founder" of any sect.if indeed he embraced Shia beliefs,then if those beliefs are what we Shia Muslims believe in,then he simply adopted what to this day we can validate and support in any debate, from the Quran and hadiths.

vedaxcool: ^^^

lol! the truth is too hard to stomach, isn't it! Then why ask for it only to start shouting yourself horse. Truly your post is hardly different from the term ignorance and wilful dishonesty, you should know that by now that i don't take you seriously! Next please! even your wikipedia excellent reproduction of the battle clearly says it is disputed Aisha started a rebel army to attack an Ali and disappointingly your wikipedia even tried pinning Uthman Murder on Ali, Auzobillah, and it seems you guys always ally yourself with kafirs! what a pity

Now you're lying!

You're even lying on wikipedia.where did wikipedia state Imam Ali (as) is responsible for Usthman's murder?

"The rebels of Egypt began the siege of Uthman Ibn Affan.[4] The rebels refused to provide Uthman with food or water, and kept him imprisoned, hoping to force his abdication.

Role of Ali and Aisha

Ali

Ali intervened only when informed that the rebels were preventing the delivery of water to the besieged caliph.[5] He tried to mitigate the severity of the siege by insisting that Uthman should be allowed water.[6] Ali went to the extent of even sending his own sons to protect Uthman's house when he was in danger of being attacked.[7][8] Rebels protested against it and committed excess therein.[9]

Uthman was murdered provoking the First Fitna.[10]


On Aisha in the Battle of Jamal:

PLEASE COMPARE:


"It has been disputed that Aisha formed a rebel army including Talha and Zubair and went to the city of Basra to seek vengeance for Uthman's blood, which was the beginning of the second civil war in Islam. The sunni mainstream view is that an independent army went to kill Ali and Aisha left with a small group of people to inform him herself.

AND-NOW PLEASE TAKE A LOOK AT THE BELOW AND SEE NOTHING BUT EITHER MENTAL RETARDATION OR SHAMEFUL DISHONESTY BASED ON SUNNI DENIAL AND DETAILS DRIBBLING:


"On learning of the advance of the rebels, Ali set out to meet them...

Led by Zubair and Talha (Aisha's cousin and commander), the rebels marched out to meet Ali's army.

In the war, Aisha accompanied the rebel army in her camel-litter.[21] Professor Leila Ahmed claims that it was during this engagement that Muslims fought Muslims for the first time.[22] Battle ensued and Aisha's forces were defeated. Aisha directed her forces from a howdah on the back of a camel; this 656 AD battle is therefore called the Battle of the Camel".




End of the battle

Marwan ibn al-Hakam shot his own general,[24]Talha (Aisha's cousin and commander), who became disabled in the leg by the shot, and carried into Basra, where he died later of his wound.[25][26][27] Marwan said,


'By God, now I will not have to search for the man who murdered Uthman'.[28]

Ali's forces overcame the rebels, and the defeated army was treated with generosity. Ali met Aisha, who was at that time aged 45, with the intent of reconciliation. He sent her back to Medina under military escort headed by her brother Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr, one of Ali's commanders. She subsequently retired to Medina with no more interference with the affairs of state.[29]

Please provide "factual" basis for the involement of ibn saba in the killing of umar,usthman and the battle of jamal.then show me where Shia scholars in those hadiths you quoted/stated that ibn saba is the "founder of shiism".according to the stories you provided,Imam Ali (as) burnt him for claiming Imam Ali (as) is "god".I am Shia and I don't believe Imam Ali (as) is "god".how do I become a follower of your ibn saba? I want evidence how your ibn saba was "the founder".validate your stories and accusations relating to him.even establishing his existence is not fictitious,is not enough to prove that the accusations you've attached to his name to attack the Shia are true.

The keyword to note is Saif Ibn Umar al-Tamimi!

^

You obviously don't know what you're copying!

You're still providing un-graded hadiths WITH NO CHAIN OF NARRATORS and based on the stories of Saif Ibn Umar al-Tamimi who invented the fictitious character of "abdullah ibn saba".

You have still not provided ANY reference regarding:

1. The presence and role of the fictitious character of Abdullah Ibn Saba in the killing of Umar

2. His role in killing Usthman

3. His role and PRESENCE in the battle of Jamal.

You will find NOTHING! give references to the three instances mentioned and validate the historicity of ibn saba.

^
"Bring forth your proof if you're truthful".

I'm not interested in a personal argument or exchange with you.I simply want you to back up your "Abdullah Ibn Saba" allegations and many accusations and copy/paste claims with references from hadith.very simple but yet impossible!

I'm not interested in accusations,malicious arguments or personal exchanges.I see myself as someone here to help based on what you don't know.I want to help you.if you accept,good.if not its fine.that's my mode of debate.I'm willing to convince you on what I believe,but what you're not trying to convince me.you're fighting to confuse yourself while you should not be convinced and become a Shia.and by Allah,I must admit from my observation on the forum,that you will make a good Shia!you just need to read more,instead of fighting and copying from here and there.

If you want to know the reality and history of the Shia,then ask and you will know from us who we are,starting from the time of the holy Prophet Muhammed (saw) and after his death.the term "Shia" is the only synonym for "Islam".

The Term "Shia" in the Quran and Hadith
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter1b/13.html

The Origin of the Shia
http://www.al-islam.org/the-origins-and-early-development-of-shia-islam-sayyid-jafari/

Extensive research into the fictitious character of Abdullah Ibn Saba,and all the imaginary and false claims against the Shia Muslims and Imam Ali (as) about the killing of usthman, the Battle of Jamal and others, invented by Saif Ibn Umar al-Tamimi, the heretic (according to Sunni scholars) and an Ummayyad mercenary and story teller without any reference or source to his stories.

The research is extensive and very detailed in 5 parts.happy reading as you discover many things in Islamic history!

Part 1
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter10/1.html

Part 2
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter10/2.html

Part 3
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter10/3.html

Part 4
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter10/4.html

Part 5
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter10/5.html

^
@ Vedaxcool,

We are not asking you for forged stories by Saif Ibn Umar al-Tamimi recorded in Tabari,in disrespect to what happened in the Battle of Jamal,Aisha launched,as an escape to cover up for Aisha's treason in fighting the battle against Imam Ali (as),the man regarded as the "fourth rightly guided caliph" by Sunnis.Aisha left Medina all the way to Iraq with an army capable of fighting a battle that cost thousands of lives to do what? For "reconciliation" with who? To "encourage" and "visit" Imam Ali (as) with an army? Please you're smarter than this.try and read more extensively into these issues in Islamic history.you're surely capable of handling details and reports than to be quoting formatted texts and half quotations.even wikipedia gives a better account about the Battle of Jamal than what you're copying.

Aside,we are asking you to provide reference on the stories on Abdullah Ibm Saba,the alleged jewish convert to Islam who started the "Shia sect".provide reference that his alleged father paid for the murder of Umar.Provide reference that Umar's son Ubaydullah killed 2 out of 3 of those who instigated the killing of his father;while "Saba Ibn Shamoon" escaped.then provide reference that Abdullah Ibn Saba,the alleged jewish convert had a role in the killing of Usthman and the Battle of Jamal.my dear Vedaxcool,you will find NOTHING! I will not accuse you of being a liar or a bad person.but you're evidently misled with false stories and your zeal to hold to your "Sunni identity".after we are done with this Abdullah Ibn Saba discussion,you will feel shame that you fell into this trap to copy such an account and throw it at the Shia.

Abdullah Ibn Wahab al-Sabai'ee,the head of the Khawarij, (who fought against Imam Ali (as) and his Shia), and his Sabaites/sabaiyyah clan from Saba',Yemen (who got their name from their clan) should not be mistaken for the fictitious Abdullah Ibn Saba,an alleged jewish convert to Islam who "founded" the "Shia sect" as the enemies of the Shia Muslims propagate to tarnish their history.the term "sabaiyyah" is an ethnic tag and was never a religious or sectarian tag.it is just as we have northerners in Nigeria carrying the name of the area they originate.the mischief to turn the word "sabaiyyah" into a religious tag associating it with a fictitious Abdullah Ibn Saba character only exists in the imagination of people with no historical or hadith sources.

Like we did in the Ashura thread,I don't want you to copy/paste.I want you to read and understand what you've read and then tackle me if you can.

So provide me references on the following,if not admit your ignorance (there is no shame in that) :

1. Provide reference that Umar's son Ubaydullah killed 2 out of 3 of those who instigated the killing of his father;while "Saba Ibn Shamoon" (abdullah ibn saba's father) escaped.

2. then provide reference that Abdullah Ibn Saba,the alleged jewish convert to islam,had a role in the killing of Usthman.

3. Provide reference of abdullah Ibn saba (the person himself as claimed),had a role in the battle of jamal.provide any report of his presence in the battle.

vedaxcool: Sorry, the post wasn't really at you, it was to the two nasibis that "liked" their kafir's pal post!

I am sure the shias are liking the nomination from saint paris - a shameless insulter of the prophet pbuh wrote! Wow getting support from a kafir ( as pronouced by your boss - lagosshia-) must mean the world to you guys. Truly do accept my heart felt condolence for the level you have sunken to!

Stop whining and don't be jealous over what an unbeliever is doing.no one asked for her support.she acted on her own.no one is using her against anyone.you're the one who have flirted with unbelievers against LagosShia.he has brought that thread once to shame you.you've also defended those that insult the Prophet (saw) against LagosShia.stop the pretense,please!

@ Vedaxcool
Please don't force us to get banned.you started this thread thinking you're a genius.when LagosShia brought out the facts with detailed references,he got banned for only revealing what you refuse to read in Sunni sources.

Do you want us to get banned? We can bring out the facts with references (and not just story-telling as you're doing) and then you will feel whipped and your moderator will feel bitter about the truth to flex his muscles and abuse power.all the unrelated issues you're linking up and lying on,I can bring wicked facts that will make you guys cry again and resort to oppression to silence us.just don't overstep your limit.

Aisha Was a Test

The Prophet (PBUH&HF) sensed the depth and danger of the schemes that revolved around him from all sides. He knew specifically that one of his wives, Aisha, was the instigator of the dangerous role because of the hatred and rancor that she felt towards his successor Ali in particular and his family in general. How could he not know, when he lived observing her role and her enmity towards them? He sometimes got angry; sometimes his face would change color and he would try to placate her at all times, informing her that one who loved Ali loved Allah, and the one who hated Ali was a hypocrite, whom Allah hated.

As a result, the Prophet of Allah (PBUH&HF) was patient when he realized that she was the test that Allah had sent to the Ummah, to examine it as He had tested the previous nations. "Do the people think that they will be left alone when they say: 'We believe' and they will not be tested?" (Quran 29:2)

The fact that she was a test for people is clear from the previously quoted tradition of al-Bukhari where Ammar Ibn Yasir said to people before the battle of Camel that: "Allah has put you to test whether you obey Allah or her (Aisha)." (See Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Tradition 9.220).

The Prophet of Allah (PBUH&HF) warned the Ummah against her on several occasions. In Sahih al-Bukhari, there is a chapter about what went on in the houses of the wives of the Prophet in which there is the following tradition:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 4.336
Narrated Abdullah:

The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointed to the house of Aisha, and said: "Fitna (trouble/sedition) is right here," saying three times, "from where the side of the Satan's head comes out."

In the above tradition the Prophet predicted the sedition which Aisha will bring for Muslims and that she will be seduced by Satan for instigating the first civil war in the history of Islam.

Muslim has also related in his Sahih from Ikrima Ibn Ammar from Salim from Ibn Umar who said:

"The Prophet of Allah (PBUH&HF) emerged from the house of Aisha and said. 'The pivot of disbelief is from here, where the horns of Satan will rise.'"

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, the Chapter of Seditions, v4, p2229

A Sunni brother mentioned that the following two traditions have the same reference to "one side of Satan's head", and they show that the Prophet (PBUH&HF) was pointing to Najd where the Wahhabis later emerged. Thus the above tradition (about Aisha) must be referring to the same thing (i.e., Najd). It might be that the house of Aisha was located in the east, and the Prophet was perhaps referring to Najd and not the house of Aisha. Here are the two traditions:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 2.147:
Narrated Ibn Umar:

(The Prophet) said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and our Yemen." People said, "Our Najd as well." The Prophet again said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and Yemen." They said again, "Our Najd as well." On that the Prophet said, "There will appear earthquakes and afflictions, and from there will come out the side of the head of Satan."

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5.672:
Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, "Belief is Yemenite while afflictions appear from there (the east) from where the side of the head of Satan will appear."

This argument does not seem to be correct for the following reasons:

1. al-Bukhari has put the tradition related to Aisha in a section named: "what went on in the houses of the wives of the Prophet". This shows that al-Bukhari did not understand the tradition as this brother proposed. If the author ever thought that the Prophet (PBUH&HF) meant Najd in that particular tradition, he wouldn't have put the tradition in the section of what was going on in the houses of the wives of the Prophet (PBUH&HF). He probably would have put it in the Chapter of al-Fitan or else. You agree that Najd has nothing to do with what was going on in the house of Aisha! Do you claim that you know better than the author of Sahih al-Bukhari?

2. The name of Aisha has been explicitly mentioned in that tradition while those of related to Najd do not have reference to Aisha.

3. Although the Prophet himself did not name Aisha, yet he mentioned in that particular tradition "right here" and the pointing was so clear that the companions understood that he was pointing to the house of Aisha as it is mentioned in the text of the tradition. Najd can not be "right here" in Medina in front of the Prophet. That is why the Messenger of Allah used "there" in the traditions related to Najd. I have highlighted the phrase "right here" in the tradition referring to Aisha, and the word "there" in the traditions referring to Najd for comparison. (See above).

4. The brother mentioned that the other traditions have the same reference to "one side of Satan's head", so this particular tradition must be referring to the same thing (i.e., Najd). Well, you agree that Satan's head does not have one side (or one horn) only. In fact, any Fitna is the manifestation of Satan. This includes all major Fitna which happened in the past (in the early history of Islam and civil wars, as well as the Wahhabi emergence in Najd) and also the great incoming Fitna by al-Dajjal and Sufyani as predicted in the traditions. Satan does not belong to Najd Metropolitan only! Like it or not, Muhammad Ibn Abdil Wahhab (the inventor of Wahhabism) and Aisha were both Fitna as the documented history proves. However they have been in different era. When the Messenger of Allah mentions anywhere the phrase "one of the horns of Satan", it is a symbolic way to say "one of the great Fitna induced by Satan." You agree with me that the inducing of Fitna by Satan has not been particular to one occasion. In fact, this has been Satan's business for long!

5. The problem is not Aisha alone. In a similar tradition in Sahih Muslim it is said that the Prophet was pointing the house of Hafsa (daughter of Umar). In the other tradition in Sahih Muslim (same page), the Prophet uses the phrase "The Chief of Unbelief/Blasphemy (Kufr)" instead of "Fitna" (see Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, the Chapter of Seditions, v4, p2229).

6. There is a great possibility that the additions which exist in other traditions parallel to the genuine Hadith and their explanation: "That means the east" is a mere fabrication to dilute the accusation against Aisha. The way of adding words to genuine traditions was a typical scheme of the Umayad to face the widespread traditions of the Prophet (PBUH&HF). Nonetheless, the two traditions mentioned above about Aisha from al-Bukhari and Muslim, do not include such additions.

http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter1a/10.html

^
I read the beating around the bush you posted to an extent.as usual,when its impossible to deny the fact or the existence of the hadiths in the most reliable sunni books (bukhari and muslim),sunni apologists resort to funny excuses and outright mighty lies and fabrication of history that are not in anyway relevant to the issue.if anti-islam orientalists are using the hadith to slander the Prophet (saw) wrongfully and maliciously,then that's their ignorance.the location or the house itself have nothing to do with Aisha.it just happens she lived there and reference is made to her location.to the Shia,the location is only mentioned because Aisha was present there;if not,then there is nothing with the location or its holiness.she could have been anywhere.the uncle of the Prophet (saw),abu lahab who is cursed in the Quran was living right there in Mecca,Islam's holiest place! Even the holy Ka'ba was once filled with idols.ofcourse as you know,the orientalist still use that to spread ignorance like they are using the hadiths on Aisha,who is referred to by the Prophet (saw) as "head of disbelief","source of sedition" and "horn of satan".another thing to note is that the Prophet (saw) was buried in the Masjidun Nabawi,but is Aisha "the horn of satan" buried there? Why? When she was about dying,she refused in her will to be buried there.regardless,the significance of the hadiths is about the person representing evil,regardless of the location.evil people can be anywhere,just like there were idol worshippers in Mecca.

Also,the claim by whoever that Najd is in Iraq is so annoying and false.to this day there is a province in saudi arabia called Najd.Najd is both historically and geographically since the Prophet's (saw) days found in arabian peninsula.the location of Najd needs no interpretation to say its found in iraq or somewhere else.that is where Ibn Abdul Wahab (founder of the wahhabi movement) came from- Najd.the hadiths also referring to Najd as "the place satan will rise" are different from the ones referring to Aisha and pointing towards her house.yet another hadith in sahih muslim makes the same reference on hafsa,aisha's associate who conspired against the Prophet (saw) in surat al tahreem.

In my next post I will provide a clear and complete refutation to the beating around the bush Vedaxcool posted to hide the painful revelation found in the most authentic Sunni hadith books on Aisha from the very lips of the holy Prophet (saw).

[size=14pt] SHOCKER! SHOCKER !! SHOCKER !!! [/size]

1. Ammar Ibn Yasir (RA) said to people before the battle of Camel that:

"Allah has put you to test whether you obey Allah or her (Aisha)." (See Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Tradition 9.220).

2. Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 4.336
Narrated Abdullah:

The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointed to the house of Aisha, and said: "Fitna (trouble/sedition) is right here," saying three times, "from where the side of the Satan's head comes out."

3. Muslim has related in his Sahih from Ikrima Ibn Ammar from Salim from Ibn Umar who said:

"The Prophet of Allah (PBUH&HF) emerged from the house of Aisha and said. 'The head of disbelief is from here, where the horns of Satan will rise.'"

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, the Chapter of Seditions, v4, p2229

maclatunji: ^Sorry guys, Lagosshia has received bans from the moderator in 2012. Therefore, your nominations are null and void.

Thank you.

It does not concern me.that is your rule but he is my choice.the ban he is still serving is for postin what you did not like and offend your sensitivity,inspite of it being truth.

This is OBJ versus Atiku

Too bad there is corrupt leadership even in an "islamic" setting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXCvnposB1k

further proof Aisha was not a child when the hold Prophet (s) married her:

Aisha's First Mrriage to Jubair Ibn Mot'em,before the Prophet (s) married her,contrary to what many Muslims think that the Prophet (s) was the first to marry her

al-Tabaqat al-Kabir of Ibn Sa'ad Volume 10,Page 59:

"the holy Prophet (s) made a proposal of marriage to Abu Bakr (Aisha's father), to marry Aisha.Abu Bakr said: I have given her (Aisha) to Jubair Ibn Mot'em;so let me talk to them.so he took her from them and he divorced her. after that,the Prophet (s) married Aisha".

Moderator,please unhide the post I last made in this thread-
https://www.nairaland.com/1107764/story-sunni-imam-shia-ayatollah/3

Thank you.

A'isha was not a child when the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) married her 

https://alqatrah.net/en/edara/pic/IMG-009.jpg


Section : Articles   ||   Date : 2010 / 06 / 17   ||   Reading : 10468

This article is the transcription of a lecture delivered by His Eminence Allama Sheikh Yasser Al-Habib

Enemies of Islam – be they Christians, Jews or other groups have often used the matter of the Prophet's marriage (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) to A'isha as a weapon against this Great Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family). They rely on that which was spread by A'isha about her having been married off to the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) when she was a girl of six and that he consummated his marriage to her when she was a girl of only nine. They say: "Look at how this old man married an innocent little girl young enough to be his granddaughter when he was over fifty years old! How could he live with himself taking away her childhood to satisfy his own needs? What sort of a Prophet is this who does something so inhumane?"

In spite of the fact that the account of the Prophet's marriage (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) to A'isha when she was a child is not told by anyone else but A'isha herself – we find no hadith nabawi or any other hadith from a reliable source about it – the enemies of Islam continue to spread these lies dreamt up by A'isha without any proper historical research. They just rely on the accounts to be found in the Bakri (i.e. Sunni) sect's sources.

In fact those with a grudge against the Master of Prophets (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) have exploited the fabricated hadith spread by A'isha through which she wanted to make people think that for the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family), she was the youngest, most radiant, most beautiful and the favourite among his wives. Her claim that she was just a delicate and innocent child who was ripped away from her swing on which she used to play with her little friends when her mother shouted out to her and led her away so roughly that she could hardly catch her breath – without her knowing what was going to happen or what she was wanted for – to take her to the house of the Prophet who frightened her when he walked in on her when the bitter truth became clear to her that she had suddenly become a wife.

Firstly, let us shed light on the hadith fabricated by A'isha. Bukhari narrates on the authority of Hisham on the authority of his father on the authority of A'isha who said: "The Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) married me when I was a girl of six. We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani al-Harith Ibn Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell out. Later on my hair grew back and my mother, Umm Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing settled down, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age." (Sahih al-Bukhari vol 4 p251 and Sahih Muslim vol 4 p141).

In another hadith A'isha paints a picture of what happened to her in another scenario no less full of tragedy than the last because she claims that her mother sat her down – when she was just a poor child – on the lap of her husband who treated her cheaply and consummated his marriage to her in the house of her father. No wedding banquet was laid on for her to celebrate her marriage to him. No one else even brought them anything to eat!"

Ibn Hanbal reports on the authority of A'isha that she said, "My mother came to me while I was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down. My nurse took over and wiped my face with some water and started leading me. When I was at the door she stopped so I could catch my breath. I was brought in while Muhammad was sitting on a bed in our house. Men and women from the Ansar were with him. She sat me down on his lap. Then, she said: "This is your family. May Allah bless you with them and may Allah bless them with you. The men and women jumped up and went out and the Messenger of Allah consummated his marriage to me in our house. No camel was slaughtered for me and no sheep was slaughtered for me until Sa'd Ibn Ibada sent us a bowl of grapes, something he would send to the Messenger of Allah whenever he would go round to his wives. At that time I was a girl of nine." (Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal vol 6, p211)

In order to back up her claim that she was an innocent child who did not understand what was going on around her, she came up with another account in which she claimed that when she got married to the Prophet, (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) she still had the dolls and figures she used to play with.

Muslim reports on the authority of Urwa on the authority of A'isha: "The Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) married her when she was a girl of seven and she was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old." (Sahih Muslim vol 4 p142)

Moreover she claimed that she carried on playing with her dolls even after her move to the marital home and that the Greatest Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) would find it soothing and would help her play with her little friends even though they would run away from him because they were scared of him.

Muslim reported on the authority of Hisham Ibn Urwa on the authority of A'isha, "That she used to play with girls in the presence of the Messenger of Allah (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family). She said, 'My friends would come to me and would hide from the Messenger of Allah!' She said: 'So the Messenger of Allah would call to them to play with me." (Sahih Muslim vol 7 p135 and similarly Sahih Ibn Hiban vol 13 p174 and Mu'jam al-Tabarani vol 23 p21).

Ibn Sa'd reports on the authority of Urwa on the authority of A'isha that she said, "The Messenger of Allah walked in on me one day while I was playing with some girls and he said, 'What is this, A'isha?' So she said Sulayman's horse and he laughed." (Al-Tabaqat al-Kubra by Ibn Sa'd vol 8 p62).

This is how A'isha tried to hold together this fictitious account of her being young when she married the Greatest Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) except that no matter how hard the creators of the false account tried to hold it together, it just falls apart as one can see. Now let us respond to these lies in line with scientific and historical facts, even those recorded in sources belonging to the Bakri sect.

Firstly, if A'isha's claims had been true, she would not have contradicted herself. We have already seen the discrepancy between her saying that when she got married she was "a girl of six" and her saying "a girl of seven". Both statements are reported on the authority of her nephew 'Urwa'.

Secondly, Bukhari narrates on the authority of Hisham on the authority of his father who said, "Khadija passed away three years before the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) left for Madina. He let two years pass, more or less and then he married A'isha, a girl of six. Then he consummated his marriage to her when she was a girl of nine." (Sahih al-Bukhari vol 4 p252)

The opponents [to Ahlulbayt i.e. al-mukhalifun] treat this hadith as if it is also narrated on the authority of A'isha herself for Ibn Hajar says, "This appears mursal but given that it is narrated by 'Urwa', what with his detailed knowledge of A'isha's life story it is also deemed to be narrated on her authority." (Fath al-Bari fi Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani vol 7 p175)

This hadith would mean that A'isha's wedding could only have taken place the year before the hijra in view of the fact that she was a girl of six, because after Khadija's passing (Allah's blessings upon Her) the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) let two years pass, more or less, without remarrying. Khadija (Peace be upon Her) passed away three years before the hijra. Then, His having consummated His marriage to A'isha when she was a girl of nine could only have taken place two years after the hijra because this is the time interval between when she was six and when she was nine. A'isha would only have been nine two years after the hijra. On this basis the length of time she lived with the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) could not have been more than eight years because as everyone knows He became a martyr in year ten (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family).

This contradicts what A'isha claimed according to Muslim's hadith mentioned above – which said that she was taken as a bride, along with her dolls to the Prophet's house (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) when she was a girl of nine and that he died when she was a girl of eighteen which means that she lived with him for nine years. This is confirmed in another hadith narrated by Bukhari on the authority of Hisham on the authority of his father, also on the authority of A'isha: "The Prophet married her when she was a girl of six and she was taken to his house when she was a girl of nine and she lived with him for nine years" (Sahih al-Bukhari vol 6 p134).

The hadiths cancel each other out. If the first is authentic, then the length of time A'isha lived with the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) was not nine years and if the second is authentic, then the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) did not marry her the year before the hijra or two years after the Mother of the Believers Khadija al-Kubra's passed away.

This is another contradiction A'isha has dropped herself into even though both sayings are narrated along the same chain [of narration] i.e. Hisham on the authority of her nephew Urwa. This contradiction obviously shows up the lie and fabrication. The Bakri sect cannot mitigate by saying something like these hadith are weak because they have decided that they are all authentic and to be without a doubt on the authority of A'isha.

Thirdly A'isha claimed that the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) said, "Oh Allah! In particular, strengthen Islam with Omar Ibn al-Khattab." (Mustadrak al-Hakim vol 3 p83).
We are not in the process of refuting this hadith, or proving that it was fabricated by A'isha; we only wanted to rely on it to prove a point. We say that this hadith is claimed to have been uttered before Omar had begun pretending to be a Muslim on the pretext that his Islam had come as an answer to the Messenger of Allah's du'a (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family). A'isha claims that she heard it from the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) and that she narrates it directly from him.

According to the Bakri sect Omar's conversion to Islam was in the sixth year after the Prophetic Mission had begun i.e. about seven years before the hijra. It was stated above that A'isha was a girl of six the year before the hijra which means that seven years before the hijra she was still either in her mother's womb or a suckling babe incapable of rational thought. How could she have heard or been aware of this hadith allegedly uttered by the Holiest Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family)?

If what she claimed about her being young and her being a girl of six when she got married, she had no business falsely attributing this fabricated hadith to the Messenger of Allah (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family). And if it was not authentic then the point is still proven i.e. that she was much older than that because according to the claim, she heard the hadith, understood it and narrated it.
This is a third contradiction to add to the aforementioned contradictions which prove that it is a fabrication and a lie but what is most damaging of all is that they are all narrated through an authentic chain of transmission on the authority of Hisham on the authority of his father 'Urwa'. How does one escape that?

Fourthly: Ibn Qutayba says by way of comment on A'isha's hadith about her marriage when she was a girl of nine: "…And she lived until the time when Mu'awiya was the Caliph and she passed away in the year fifty eight when she was nearly seventy. She was asked, "Shall we bury you next to the Messenger of Allah?" She replied, "But I did wrong. Bury me with my sisters." So she was buried in the Baqi' [cemetery] and she appointed Abdallah Ibn Zubayr as her executor. (Al-Ma'arif by Ibn Qutayba p29).

Al-Birri said, "She passed away in the fifty ninth year after the hijra towards the end of Mu'awiya's reign as Caliph. She was nearly seventy. It was on a Monday night, the night before the seventeenth of Ramadan." (Al-Jawhara fi Nisab al-Nabi wa Ashabihi al-'Ashara by Al-Birri vol 1 p216).

Ibn Abd Rabbih said, "After his death, she lived on right up to the days of Mu'awiya and she died in the fifty eighth year. She was nearly seventy. (Al-Iqd al-Farid by Ibn Abd Rabbih vol 2 p71).

Al-Maqdisi said, "He married A'isha in Makkah the year before the hijra (…) A'isha passed away during the time of Mu'awiya. She was nearly seventy. He said to her, "Should we not bury you in your house with the Messenger of Allah?" She replied, "No. I did wrong after His death." (Al-bid' wa al-Tarikh by Al-Maqdisi vol 1 p260).

On this basis, A'isha's age would have been roughly twelve the year before the hijra, the year in which the Greatest Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) married her (as mentioned above). What a far cry this is from her saying that she was a girl of six or seven!".

Even if we were to work on the presumption that what they meant by "nearly seventy" at her death was that she reached the age of sixty seven – as some of them have stated – then she would have been a girl of nine when she got married, not a girl of six or seven except for the fact that we also reject their account that she got married the year before the hijra. We refer back to the objection raised in the second point (above). There is shown to be a contradiction which disproves her claim.

Fifthly, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani says about Asma' daughter of Abu Bakr, "She was the mother of Abdallah son of Al-Zubayr. She became a Muslim a long time ago in Makkah and pledged allegiance to the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family). She was ten years older than A'isha and died less than a month after her son was killed. She was a hundred years old. That was in the year seventy three. (Subul al-Salam by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani vol 1 p39).

Al-Baihaqi and Al-Dhahabi narrate on the authority of Ibn Abi al-Zinad that he said, "Asma' daughter of Abu Bakr was ten years older than A'isha. (Sunan al-Baihaqi vol 6 p204 and Siyar  al-Nubala' by Al-Dhahabi vol 2 p289)

Similarly, Al-Nawawi narrates on the authority of Hafiz Abu Na'im that he said, "Asma' was born twenty seven years before the Messenger of Allah's hijra (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family). Her father Abu Bakr was twenty one years old when she was born." (Tahdhib al-Asma' by Al-Nawawi vol 3 p223).

The conclusion to be reached from these narrations is that Asma was twenty seven years old the year before the hijra and given that she was ten years older than her sister A'isha, A'isha's age was about seventeen at that time. That was the year in which she got married. What a far cry this is from her claim that she was a girl of six or seven. So the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) consummated his marriage to her when she was nearly twenty not a girl of nine.

This is how the lie told by A'isha is exposed. It was her intention to pretend to be younger and fool people into thinking that she was an innocent child who was married against her will to a really old man. In fact, A'isha was nearly twenty at the time meaning that she was a grown up woman and not a child as she claimed.

The age difference between her and between the Prophet (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) was about 33 years which is much less than the age difference between Joseph the Carpenter and Our Lady, the Virgin Mary (Peace be upon Her) when she got married or when they got engaged to each other. Mary's age was between just 12 and 14 while Joseph's was about 90.

The Catholic Encyclopedia says, "…a respectable man to espouse Mary, then twelve to fourteen years of age, Joseph, who was at the time ninety years old" (Website). That means that the age difference between Joseph and Mary was about 77 years. That is more than double the difference between the Prophet Muhammad (Allah's Peace and Blessings upon Him and His pure Family) and A'isha. So why is there no outcry over this matter too?

http://alqatrah.net/en/edara/index.php?id=91

Masha'Allah.great lectures.

‘O Allah, grant me the perfection of devotion to You, and illuminate the sight of our hearts with the radiance of being able to behold You until the sight of our hearts pierces through the veils of light, reaching the source of Exaltedness, and our souls become attached to the glory of Your Sacredness.’

-an excerpt from one of Imam Ali's (as) intimate supplication to Almighty Allah.

[Iqbal al-A`amal, v. 3, p. 299]

Jazakallahu khairan.