Talk:Aisha

it seems to me when comparing qarawadi and brown (who are also in agreement with earlier scholars such as ibn hajar) commentary and hers there are disagreements, to me it appears they is more correct as the hadith is in relation with the  33: 51 verse of the quran and regarding her jealousy, ahmed, in my humble opinion, has made a small err because the hadith and remark of aisha is not about permitting of marriage, but of postponing of turns, let me know what you guys think Darklightsd (talk) 10:36, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

also unrelated but don't you guys think on the paragraph of revisionists we should add citations of their books? Darklightsd (talk) 10:37, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

You added the following:

Modern scholars such as al-Qaradawi describe the jealousy of Aisha toward his other wives, so much so that she once broke a plate sent by one of them and even once retorted to a revelation which permitted him to postpone turns of his wives, to which she said "It seems to me that your Lord hastens to satisfy your desire", scholars like Jonathan Brown also said the same regarding her jealousy.^[1][2]

I checked the first of these citations and I do not see how it supports the content it is cited for. It does not mention the quotation of Aisha's words "It seems to me that your Lord hastens to satisfy your desire". It does not seem to mention Aisha at all. It is fake and should be deleted.-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:38, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

i think i accidently posted generally, but the page is Hadith, pp. 85–88 Darklightsd (talk) 13:45, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

The modern source you cited fails verification and thus the content has been deleted. If you are gonna cite sources, at least make sure that they support the content. Hadiths are primary sources. For any interpretations, secondary sources are required. StephenMacky1 (talk) 13:47, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

ok Darklightsd (talk) 13:48, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

also i did not cite brown regarding the quote, i cited al qaradawi, but jonathan brown for her jealousy which he was in agreement with earlier ibn hajar Darklightsd (talk) 13:48, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Brown says nothing about that in the source you cited. StephenMacky1 (talk) 13:50, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

i did not cite brown regarding the quote, i cited al qaradawi, but jonathan brown for her jealousy which he was in agreement with earlier ibn hajar

pp. 63–65

pp 72-74 and 83-90 Darklightsd (talk) 13:51, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

also what about qaradawi? Darklightsd (talk) 13:52, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

You did not include much information about the source, thus making it unverifiable. You should include as much information as you can when citing sources such as date of publication, publisher, page numbers, etc. StephenMacky1 (talk) 13:57, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

ok Darklightsd (talk) 14:00, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Darklightsd if you want to cite sources, and citation (1) supports statement (A) and citation (2) supports statement (B), then write it like this:

• Statement A;^[1] statement B^[2]

If your citation is to a book review, that means that you are citing the book review, not the book being reviewed.

If you are citing books, you need to cite the page number, and we need to know the edition and publication details. The reason we need to know the edition and publication details is that page numbers are sometimes very different between editions. A citation like al-Qaradawi, Yusuf. Fiqh al-Sīrah. Cairo: Dār al-Shurūq is unverifiable because it lacks this information.-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:58, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

i will fix it thank you for your feedback Darklightsd (talk) 14:01, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

At this point, I am gonna advise you against making further reverts as you already violated the three-revert rule. Propose all the information you want to include on this talk page. StephenMacky1 (talk) 14:04, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

ok then can you fix it because i think you're better at this, the last edit i did i posted the pages Darklightsd (talk) 14:07, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

actually a small mistake still exist, i did not provide page number of brown but stated them here, can you fix it in the sources? Darklightsd (talk) 14:08, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

fixed it myself Darklightsd (talk) 14:11, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

This citation is to a book review, which was on pages 64-73 of The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 36:2.

• Zayd, Abu (2019-04-15). "Hadith: Muhammad's Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World, 2nd ed". American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences. 36 (2): 85–88, pp. 72–74, 63–65. doi:10.35632/ajiss.v36i2.575. ISSN 2642-701X.

Darklightsd are you trying to cite Brown's book, or the review of his book by Abu Zayd? If you are citing the book, then stop providing a citation to book review and provide a citation to the book instead!-- Toddy1 (talk) 14:51, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

i used automatic citing and then added pages, i meant brown's book, will fix, the link however goes to browns book Darklightsd (talk) 14:57, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

I am gonna advise you to stop removing the content cited to a secondary source too. StephenMacky1 (talk) 14:59, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

if you checked mine and it was not problematic, please revert back my page (it should be noted the main one here is qarawadi and brown is supplementary ) Darklightsd (talk) 15:02, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

• my revision Darklightsd (talk) 15:02, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

you mean ahmad? in the talk page i stated in my opinion these two scholars are better cited because of a small err in her writing (which i explained) Darklightsd (talk) 15:01, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Nope, we are not making any further reversions until you provide proper citations. StephenMacky1 (talk) 15:07, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

"Hadith: Muhammad's Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World, 2nd ed". American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences. 36 (2): 85–88, pp. 72–74, 63–65.

for qarawadi its publication is in arabic and is approximate therefore: al-Qaradawi, Yusuf. Fiqh al-Sīrah. Cairo: Dār al-Shurūq pp 146-150 (approximate arabic version)

now can you revert mine? Darklightsd (talk) 15:11, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Could you provide quotes from Al-Qaradawi's source? You need to forget about Brown's source since it does not support your proposed content. Neither does his book. I checked his book too and could find nothing of the sort. StephenMacky1 (talk) 15:25, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

"The jealousy among the Mothers of the Believers was a natural jealousy for which a woman is not blameworthy."

كانت الغيرة بين أمهات المؤمنين غيرة فطرية لا تؤاخذ عليها المرأة brown accepted methodology of ibn hajar who also quoted on that hadith as supplement

Darklightsd (talk) 15:38, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

ibn hajar talked about jealousy of aisha in that hadith, but he is not a modern source so hence my wording "brown accept method of ibn hajar regarding ahadith of emotionality" of which this hadith was specifically mentioned Darklightsd (talk) 15:40, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

another modern scholar which discuss this hadith is albani and others:

Abul A'la Maududi in tafsir of 33 51: granted the Prophet discretion regarding his wives in order to remove domestic strain and maintain harmony in the household.

actual quotation: “These incidents reflect the natural feelings that existed among the wives and do not imply any objection to God’s command.” Darklightsd (talk) 15:51, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

this is from albani himself:

The narration is authentic, and what occurred from ʿĀʾisha was from jealousy, which is known among co-wives. Muhammad al-Amin al-Shanqiti:

Her statement was said due to jealousy, and such speech occurring from jealousy is excused and does not carry doctrinal implication.

Darklightsd (talk) 15:52, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

these shows it is jealousy and is regarding verse 33 51(postponing of turns) which the hadith itself states, which ahmed had err Darklightsd (talk) 15:53, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

I do not see the relevance of any of this to Darklightsd's deleting the quotation from Leila Ahmed's book. Ahmed's main point was that "Aisha must have felt reasonably equal to and unawed by" The Prophet. Whether Aisha's motive for saying what she said was (a) that the The Prophet wanted one rule for himself and another for the rest of us, or (b) jealousy, is a detail. Content needs to be backed by citations to reliable sources - the sources cited need to actually mention the stuff they are cited for.-- Toddy1 (talk) 16:04, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

i deleted it because the hadith refered to verse 33 51 and is stated in them but she err, so i wanted to provide a better info from other sources which also mentions her jealousy, i do not vare about her motive just the correct info, the hadith in tafsir also refers to 33 51 as stated before Darklightsd (talk) 16:38, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

• care, Darklightsd (talk) 16:39, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

however it should be noted that motive would also provide info regarding what the sources actually say, ibn hajar (and other scholars i quoted) said regarding it and also the wording used:

قالته على سبيل الغيرة

“She said this by way of jealousy.” and used wording the scholars called الإدلال

meaning: affectionate familiarity allowing informal expression

he further explained regarding wording: هَوَى (hawā) here does not mean sinful desire.It means what you prefer or choose (المحبة / الاختيار).

• So the meaning becomes:

  “Revelation often comes in accordance with what brings you ease.”

Darklightsd (talk) 17:12, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

i clarify i do not want to sound like a apologist, correct info and true info is my top priority, had i been an apologist i would have tried to erase the section completely and not leave the remark of her, i did once deleted it but it was because of error to attribute it to something while in fact it was 33 51 in the hadith. i have no problem with that hadith Darklightsd (talk) 17:15, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

I think the most productive use of your time here would be to propose specific changes on this talk page: to do this you just collect all the sources you want to cite, quote verbatim which sections of the source you find relevant and give precise descriptions of where you found the material and then propose what additional thing you would like the article to say based on those sources. As long as the sources aren't just an endless collection of primary religious sources from a few hundred years ago and something more akin to a book or article by Jonathan Brown etc. and as long as they have some obvious relevance to the article I am sure there is a way to ultimately integrate the content into the article. Because as it—looking at this from a very good faith perspective and knowing that you can follow sources closely (as you did laudably with John Bagot Glubb)—it is very difficult to linguistically and logically follow your argument as it was presented here thus far. It would be very helpful if you focus your efforts making sure it's easy to understand two core things: which academic secondary material you want to cite and which material point of it seems relevant to the article to you. Bari' bin Farangi (talk) 17:33, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

ok then, i will not use medieval sources (which i have already said i no longer use) BUT some of the modern scholars accept their view and use them, is it ok that i use them as source (like brown accepting methodology of ibn hajar who commented on emotional ahadith) or albani or qarawadi or Abul A'la Maududi or al shanqiti or brown etc? these are all modern scholars,

so should i start drafting the wordings? Darklightsd (talk) 18:00, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

If a modern scholar of Islamic studies references older material like a text by Ibn Hajar that reference comes with their entire academic education as a filter something which is helpful to avoid the pitfalls of working with primary sources. Make sure that the text you are referencing has some obvious connection to the subject of the article: reasonings like "brown in this case takes ibn hajar's statements at face value, therefore ibn hajar is to be taken at face value all the time" and "a modern scholar translates this arabic word in a different context like ibn hajar understands it in this hadith related to aisha, therefore we can assume this word always means this" will not be logically sufficient. The relationship between what the author states in the secondary work and the Aisha article should be direct and uncomplicated and not in need of grand interpretations by the reader. If you want to reference modern Islamic theologians that is theoretically fine but remember that when it comes to NPOV we're not going frame a disagreement between the academic consensus in Islamic studies and the religious beliefs of one sect of Islam as a neutral disagreement between two parties on equal footing, as the former fundamentally shares the epistemological base assumptions of Wikipedia with regards to evidentiary methodology and the scientific method—while the latter operates according to its own epistemological framework, evidentiary methodology, and according to very different base assumptions compared to modern social sciences and thus what Wikipedians would commonly understand as a neutral point of view. Bari' bin Farangi (talk) 18:22, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

of course you're right, then i purpose that we mention albani or qarawadi or Abul A'la Maududi or al shanqiti Darklightsd (talk) 18:27, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

and other scholars which mention jealousy in the household like Muhammad al-Ghazali or qaradawi or husayn haykal Darklightsd (talk) 18:29, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

here's what im going to wrote:

"it is reported (because multiple reports not one" that there was a sense of jealousy between her and her co-wives, she specially was jealous of his late wife khadija saying "I never felt so jealous of any woman as I did of Khadija", it was also reported that she once broke a plate of food sent by one of the wives to which her husband said to the companions "your mother became jealous" Darklightsd (talk) 19:15, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

if we gonna keep the quote (we already stated jealousy) we should quote albani analysis of jealousy:

another time she was angered by the revelation of 33:51 verse of the quran which allowed postponing of turns of wives, she retorted by saying "your lord hastens to satisfy your desires" or “Revelation often comes in accordance with what brings you ease.”, according to albani (he uses methodology of ibn hajar for explanation), the wording however is affectionate rather than lashing. according to aisha herself and ibn abbas he did not used his privilege (this one is not from a modern source but no modern source state this expect a site)

what do you think? any feed back? also () are here for explanation in this talk and not for the final revision Darklightsd (talk) 19:24, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

heres what i purpose, we adhere to the actual info of the hadith (33 51 as in the hadith itself stated), we mention jealousy as being presented with her like how she was jealous of khadija and his other wives and as the hadith itself stated, in the case if we are gonna keep the quote of her and the remark (because it would not probably belong in relation selection and replaced by jealousy and of khadija) and say her retort and quote as the basis of her jealous (again as in the hadith itself stated and the scholars provided, modern ones), for that we can quote albani and other scholars which said that jealousy was a everyday matter and she herself stated in the hadith, and that it was regarding postponing (33 51 and the hadith) what do you think? Darklightsd (talk) 18:21, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

should we use the hadith of khadija that which she said she was jealous of her and of the plate breaking incident directly from the books of hadith Darklightsd (talk) 18:51, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

but albani said regarding it :The hadith proves strong jealousy occurred even among the best women. he states that his saying “Your mother became jealous” shows it is normal nature,

Darklightsd (talk) 18:59, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

here what i purpose we write, note () is not gonna be in the edit:

"it is reported (because multiple reports not one, we can put one of the purposed scholars tho)" that there was a sense of jealousy between her and her co-wives , she specially was jealous of his late wife khadija saying "I never felt so jealous of any woman as I did of Khadija", it was also reported that she once broke a plate of food sent by one of the wives to which her husband said to the companions "your mother became jealous".

how about this? this is composed after the feedbacks, any more?

Darklightsd (talk) 08:16, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Darklightsd, this link goes to a book review. You need to check that what you are doing is what you think you are doing. Maybe you should use source editor instead of the edit process you are using. The absence of automatic features in source editor can be an advantage.-- Toddy1 (talk) 15:51, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

yes thank you very much, i also provided sources of what i stated regarding jealousy from modern scholars and that the verse as the hadith stated is regarding 33 51 (postponing of turns) not what ahmed erred Darklightsd (talk) 15:55, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Verifiability says: "If reliable sources disagree with each other, then maintain a neutral point of view and present what the various sources say, giving each side its due weight." Editors should not be cherry picking sources to back up what they think.-- Toddy1 (talk) 16:08, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

i did done that before but was deleted Darklightsd (talk) 16:36, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

also another thing, i did not want to cut the content selection (relationship) and bombard it with many word words of disagreement, so i just used names Darklightsd (talk) 16:45, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

let me clarify, i do not doubt her reliability but as far as the other sources and the hadith she herself quoted state otherwise, i think in this specific case she made a error Darklightsd (talk) 16:56, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

think about it , we can provide new info (jealousy in their relationship) while also correct a problem with reliable source Darklightsd (talk) 16:57, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

here what i purpose we write, note () is not gonna be in the edit:

"it is reported (because multiple reports not one, we can put one of the purposed scholars tho)" that there was a sense of jealousy between her and her co-wives , she specially was jealous of his late wife khadija saying "I never felt so jealous of any woman as I did of Khadija", it was also reported that she once broke a plate of food sent by one of the wives to which her husband said to the companions "your mother became jealous".

how about this? Darklightsd (talk) 08:12, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

What would be the citations for this? Please provide full details. And specify which citations support which statements. i.e. if citation 3 supports "I never felt so jealous of any woman as I did of Khadija", and citations 4 and 5 support the plate story, this needs to be made clear. -- Toddy1 (talk) 08:21, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

ok for the first ones first the ahadith:

https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi:2017 (jealousy against khadija)

https://sunnah.com/nasai:3955 (jealousy among the co wives and the plate breaking)

albani wrote:

“In this is proof that jealousy is part of women’s natural disposition, and it does not contradict righteousness or virtue, for it occurred from ʿĀʾisha — may Allah be pleased with her — while she is among the best women of this nation.” al-Albani, Silsilat al-Aḥādīth al-Ṣaḥīḥah, vol. 1, hadith no. 190 he also said in his audio lecture (Silsilat al-Huda wa an-Nur) he cited the plate breaking that jealousy is natrual and highlighted that he did not become angry or rebuke Aisha harshly, recognizing her action as a natural fit of Ghayrah (jealousy)

i used all the modern scholars, however, if we can extend to classical they would also support these

Disclaimer: i verified these many times (the albani) but i cannot find a english text itself, in this case i used ai to try find the quote regarding aisha specifially and verified it many times (but ibn hajar an older scholar did mention things regarding jealousy of her) but i wanted to quote a modern one, other scholars have talked regarding jealousy in general and said that the household was a normal life dimension, however, i hope the ahadith i sent can be used as citation.

any feedbacks? Darklightsd (talk) 11:37, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

for albani after rigorously pushing ai to make sure it does not hallucinate:

• Book: Silsilat al-Aḥādīth al-Ṣaḥīḥah (The Series of Authentic Narrations).
• Volume: 1.
• Hadith Number: 190.
• Page Number: 333.
• Publisher: Maktabat al-Ma'arif (Riyadh).
• In the commentary for Hadith #190 ("Kindness is not found in anything except that it beautifies it..."), Al-Albani discusses the incident where Aisha (RA) responded sharply to the Jews who insulted the Prophet "...and this is evidence that jealousy is inherent in women, and this does not detract from their righteousness and virtue, as this happened with Aisha, may God be pleased with her, and she is one of the best women of this nation."

Darklightsd (talk) 11:44, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

another hadith of jealousy: "Narrated 'Aisha: Once Hala bint Khuwailid, Khadija's sister, asked the permission of the Prophet to enter. On that, the Prophet remembered the way Khadija used to ask permission, and that upset him. He said, "O Allah! Hala!" So I became jealous and said, "What makes you remember an old woman amongst the old women of Quraish an old woman (with a teethless mouth) of red gums who died long ago, and in whose place Allah has given you somebody better than her?" [Sahih Bukhari (5/39) No. 3821]" Darklightsd (talk) 11:51, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

i found another person talking about her jealousy toward khadija Sayed Ammar Nakshawani (shia) in his lecture Darklightsd (talk) 11:52, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

You are kidding?

Wikipedia cannot publish an editor's interpretation of religious primary sources such as Sahih al-Bukhari and other hadith collections. It is against the rules. See Wikipedia:No original research, though other policies also apply.

If Aisha were a living person, then newspaper and magazine articles would be acceptable sources. But she died 1348 years ago - so we only accept published sources written by scholars. Religious scholars are frowned upon - basically you can use them as a source for what the religious scholar said. Secular scholars are preferred.-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:09, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

i provided those ahadith to show the sources that scholars based these commentaries on (like how ahmed did)

also i saw some people post ahadith tho, but i understand, regarding her jealousy we can use albani's and ammar lecture.

for plate breaking incident the only scholars i had (reliable) who commented are classical, is it a problem? Darklightsd (talk) 12:21, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

also havent we put her jealousy of khadija in the proposed edit? shouldnt we use that hadith and Nakshawani and other scholars or just that? what i mean is that it specifically stated in the hadith she was jealous. but yeah we can use scholars if you're not satisfied Darklightsd (talk) 12:23, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

for plate breaking incident the only scholars i had (reliable) who commented are classical, is it a problem? Yes it is. Works by classical scholars are primary sources - see the rules for these WP:PRIMARY.-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:53, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

do you consider Dr. Mohannad Hakeem as a scholar? he is a writer educator and activist, i found a video of him commenting on this hadith and he uses what previous scholars used in regard to this hadith, is this valid? Darklightsd (talk) 13:06, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

also it should be noted that many other people and sites talk about this specific hadith, but is it ok to use them as source and citations? also what about the albani one? Darklightsd (talk) 13:08, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Do you mean Dr. Mohannad Hakeem who worked as a research engineer at the Ford Motor Company? On the subject of cars, yes. On the subject of Aisha, no.-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:22, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

or this one written by ismail kamdar who specialize in tafsir fiqh and history

https://muslimmatters.org/2013/02/08/ismail-kamdar-life-of-aishah-bint-abi-bakr/, actually, this is perfect, looks like he talked much about jealousy and of both jealousy toward khadija (like sayed ammar and others did) AND the plate breaking incident ( Darklightsd (talk) 13:30, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

now that there are multiple people (excluding scholars of classical era) talked about this, can we put the plate incident in the edit? also i got another scholar from 16th century i remembered, is this one also not able to use? Darklightsd (talk) 13:35, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

i meant this one that i searched for comment on the hadith: https://aboutislam.net/shariah/prophet-muhammad/a-mercy-for-all/companions-confessions-aishah-gets-jealous-smashes-plate/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

you can also check his bio, i think he might be the same but he is also a writer and wrote about ahadith too Darklightsd (talk) 13:25, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

At this point you're trying to ChatGPT brute-force this. Take a break. Longewal (talk) 21:27, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

im using chatgpt to find modern sources, i kinda didn't knew classical scholars couldn't be used, however, this link that i sent does have a scholar talk about the jealousy, i also heard it is ok to use chat gpt for finding sources and as assistant and you used it yourself Darklightsd (talk) 21:48, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

the scholar is also modern one, also can we use sites instead of people? Darklightsd (talk) 21:49, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

sorry replied to wrong reply, i posted another scholar in another comment named ismail kamdar Darklightsd (talk) 21:52, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

You're right, using ChatGPT for sourcing is fine. I apologize for the snide tone. To help the process, please try to group your thoughts into one post. The current volume is making it difficult for other editors to keep up. We all want the same thing: an article grounded in reliable secondary sources. — Longewal (talk) 22:19, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

Its ok sorry for being kinda disorganized, right now (other than websites) i found ismail kamdar to be best secondary source i found, he talks about both incidents and also said she was jealous many times throughout her life with her co-wives, i have sent a link to the article, see if it fits the criteria, i searched his bio and he is indeed a scholar and is reliable and wrote many books, the article i sent talks about her jealousy the following i quote:

Now Aishah [ra], she was the most beloved wife of the prophet [saws], but despite that, she would still get jealous of his other wives. And she was most jealous of Khadija even though Khadija had passed away before her; the reason being that the Prophet [saws] loved Khadija a lot. So much so, that the scholars differ on whether he loved Aishah more or Khadija more. So Aishah narrates that no woman made her more jealous than Khadija even though she had never seen her, because every day the Prophet [saws] would talk about her until one day Aishah got angry and told the Prophet [saws], “Didn’t Allah give you something better than her?” (talking about herself). And the Prophet [saws], he got angry and he replied, “Khadija believed in me when nobody else did, and Khadija was the one who assisted me with her wealth, and she is the one to whom Allah had blessed me with children.”  From then Aishah realized that she should not speak about Khadija again. I’m bringing up this story to show that the sahabah, who were the greatest of humanity after the prophets, were also human and they were also subject to the mistakes of human beings and to the emotions that the rest of us feel. Sometimes we paint too beautiful a picture of the sahabah until it seems unrealistic and it seems like something we can’t follow. But when you look at Aishah [ra] and the other sahabah, they were humans like ourselves but they strived to be amongst the best and, as a result, because of this, Allah elevated their status.

There are many other stories of her jealousy, which shows some of her human mistakes. For example, once, when the Prophet [saws] had some of his guests in her house, and one of the other wives had sent some food for these guests, she got very angry as to why she was sending food to her house, and she threw the plate and it broke. The Prophet [saws] did not scream at her, he did not shout at her, he did not get abusive or vulgar, as was his nature. He was the mercy to this universe. He was a mercy to his wives as well. He simply laughed and told his companions that your mother is jealous. And he told Aishah to replace the plate and that was it. End of the story. He didn’t blow it out of proportion, understanding human nature and understanding the nature of co-wives, that they would be jealous of each other

Darklightsd (talk) 07:40, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

sorry replied to wrong reply, i posted another scholar in another comment named ismail kamdar Darklightsd (talk) 21:52, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

the wording of kamdar transcribed from his lecture (you can check out the site i sent that also have transcribed text):

Now Aishah [ra], she was the most beloved wife of the prophet [saws], but despite that, she would still get jealous of his other wives. And she was most jealous of Khadija even though Khadija had passed away before her; the reason being that the Prophet [saws] loved Khadija a lot. So much so, that the scholars differ on whether he loved Aishah more or Khadija more. So Aishah narrates that no woman made her more jealous than Khadija even though she had never seen her, because every day the Prophet [saws] would talk about her until one day Aishah got angry and told the Prophet [saws], “Didn’t Allah give you something better than her?” (talking about herself). And the Prophet [saws], he got angry and he replied, “Khadija believed in me when nobody else did, and Khadija was the one who assisted me with her wealth, and she is the one to whom Allah had blessed me with children.”  From then Aishah realized that she should not speak about Khadija again. I’m bringing up this story to show that the sahabah, who were the greatest of humanity after the prophets, were also human and they were also subject to the mistakes of human beings and to the emotions that the rest of us feel. Sometimes we paint too beautiful a picture of the sahabah until it seems unrealistic and it seems like something we can’t follow. But when you look at Aishah [ra] and the other sahabah, they were humans like ourselves but they strived to be amongst the best and, as a result, because of this, Allah elevated their status.

There are many other stories of her jealousy, which shows some of her human mistakes. For example, once, when the Prophet [saws] had some of his guests in her house, and one of the other wives had sent some food for these guests, she got very angry as to why she was sending food to her house, and she threw the plate and it broke. The Prophet [saws] did not scream at her, he did not shout at her, he did not get abusive or vulgar, as was his nature. He was the mercy to this universe. He was a mercy to his wives as well. He simply laughed and told his companions that your mother is jealous. And he told Aishah to replace the plate and that was it. End of the story. He didn’t blow it out of proportion, understanding human nature and understanding the nature of co-wives, that they would be jealous of each other. Darklightsd (talk) 21:55, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

the final draft of edit:

aisha is noted to have rather jealous of her husband's affection for his late wife khadija, and also of his other wives, one time when he was talking with his companions one of his other wives sent some food, aisha broke the plate, her husband responded to companions "don't worry your mother has become jealous" and cleaned up the broken plate. Darklightsd (talk) 11:57, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

we should put link of ismail kamdar at the end, be it himself or the site Darklightsd (talk) 11:58, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

also maybe the word 'co-wife' would be better here linguistically Darklightsd (talk) 11:58, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

@Darklightsd, in this revision, changed the text in the article from:

but conservatives rejected such revisionist readings since they flew in the face of ʻilm al-ḥadīth

to:

but conservatives rejected such revisionist readings and have adhered to the report of Ibn Hisham.

And that edit is still present in the article as of now. I strongly suspect this constitutes a misrepresentation of the cited source, as the name Ibn Hisham is not mentioned anywhere in the cited pages. It appears that Darklightsd may have assumed that Hisham ibn Urwa (the grandson of Aisha’s sister) is the same person as Ibn Hisham, although they are in fact two different individuals who lived in different periods. This seems plausible, given that Hisham ibn Urwa is frequently singled out by those who deny Aisha’s reported age at marriage and is often accused of having an unreliable memory in transmitting that report. However, the report that Aisha was married at the age of 6–7 is not based solely on hadith transmitted by Hisham, it is also supported by narrations from other transmitters regarded as trustworthy (thiqa) and classified as sahih.

Muhaqqiq1 (talk) 12:56, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

Done.-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:25, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

please check my other reply to muhaqqiq Darklightsd (talk) 11:52, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

true i made a small mistake, thank you for pointing it our, it should be noted the other transmitter (like al aswad) narration gone through his student ibrahim, who scholars note that even tho being his student did not transmitted from him or aisha, and they consider narrations from him as mursal Darklightsd (talk) 11:51, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

the other transmittors also have born long after aswad and ibrahim and hisham Darklightsd (talk) 11:52, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

and any other narration is considered mutābiʿāt (supporting) than independent ones Darklightsd (talk) 12:03, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

all of them also go through urwah (who told hisham his son) so they are singular in a sense of being from a same hub of information, hence considered supporting than independent reports Darklightsd (talk) 12:05, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

That's... just a lie. The only sahih hadith not traced back to Hisham about Aisha is narrated by Al-Aswad ibn Yazid.

The problem with following that logic is that it has to pretend that other hadiths flat out don't exist.

For example: Aisha described herself as a jariyah (young girl playing) during the time of the revelation of Surah al-Qamar (615 CE), which... would be impossible at one year old.

Aisha states she remembers the Expedition to Ethiopia (Abu Bakr's attempt, 615 CE), so that's also impossible.

Aisha at "11" was participating in battle in Uhud despite Muhammad's policy that those under 15 could not participate in battle.

Either you're using Hisham, Al-Aswad ibn Yazid, or the Hasan one (Sunan an-Nasa'i 3381) or the one not even connected to Aisha herself (Sunan Ibn Majah 1877) EgyptianNationalist (talk) 01:39, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

you're all true expect one thing that even support your words further more: that even the report of al aswad is considered mursal for it goes through his student ibrahim who is literally known to have NOT reported from him or aisha. the scholars consider reports from his as mursal and weak.

nevertheless beautifully said. Darklightsd (talk) 03:26, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

An editor suggested an article on muslimmatters.org as a source during the discussion at #Putting commentary of qarawadi and jonathan brown in place of ahmed. The muslimmatters.org website was discussed twice at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard:

• Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 247#Sources for Islam in 2018
• Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 266#MuslimMatters in 2019

The conclusion in both cases was that it was reliable as a source for what the contributor thought. The article was by Ismail Kamdar, who is a school teacher and administrator, and at one time was a presenter on Radio Al-Ansaar. He writes self-help books that are available on Kindle.-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:00, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

So can he be used as citation ? Darklightsd (talk) 00:10, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Also what about counter to ahmed's statement which other tafsirs and the hadith itself said refers to 33 51 and to postponing not what she said. Darklightsd (talk) 00:18, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

It is disputed whether Aisha was born in 605 or in 613/614. I would recommend writing both years. ~2026-15957-83 (talk) 14:02, 13 March 2026 (UTC)