# Was the ifk in Surat al-Nur really about Aisha?

*The ifk verses refer to Mariya, not Aisha: a research preview*

- URL: https://muftiabulayth.org/r/kwmtt2tqao0/s/34/
- Date: 2020-08-24 · Kind: lesson · Transcript tier: machine · Recording: Monday Nights with Mufti #179 | Q&A Unscripted & Unrestricted! 😉 | Mufti Abu Layth (2:26:25–2:32:34)
- Status: general teaching
- Watch from the start of the segment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWmtt2TQAO0&t=8785s
- Recording page: https://muftiabulayth.org/r/kwmtt2tqao0/

**Topics:** The wives of the Prophet; Tafsir and verse study

**Summary (not a quotation; machine-made, unchecked):** Mufti Abu Layth holds that the Quran's ifk verses were revealed about rumours concerning Mariya, though he believes an earlier incident with Aisha also happened.

**Checked position (checked by two independent reviews, not by the channel):** Mufti Abu Layth says he definitely feels that the ifk mentioned in the Quran refers to an incident with Mariya, not the incident to do with Aisha.

**Evidence, his words at 2:26:52:** “so what i definitely do feel is that the if mentioned in the quran is referring to an incident with maria radiola not the incident to do with aisha” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWmtt2TQAO0&t=8812s)

## Longer summary

Mufti Abu Layth previews his reading on the incident of the ifk, saying he is definitely inclined to the view that the ifk in the Quran refers to an incident involving Mariya. He dates Aisha's incident to the campaign against Banu al-Mustaliq, around year five or six, while Surat al-Nur's verses come in year eight, after Mariya arrived in year seven and bore a child; he notes some Shia say this too. He thinks both incidents happened: rumours about Aisha resolved at the time, and later rumours that the Prophet, out of love for a child, claimed another man's child, citing a report in al-Hakim in which Aisha herself uses the word ifk of Mariya. He suggests Aisha in later life could have identified with the verses, that the narrative he calls Zubayrid [?] made Mariya insignificant, and that a report in Sahih Muslim mentions the accusation against a slave woman of the Prophet without naming her; he says the Muslim legacy has betrayed Mariya.

## Sources and names cited

- the incident of the ifk (the slander of Aisha)
- Mariya al-Qibtiyya
- Aisha
- Quran 24:11-20 (the ifk verses of Surat al-Nur): https://quran.com/24/11-20
- the campaign against Banu al-Mustaliq
- report: aisha said of mariya people spoke of the ifk that out of his love for a child he claimed another man child
- al-Mustadrak (al-Hakim)
- Sahih Muslim
- Shia

## Transcript (machine tier, 2:26:25–2:32:34)

[2:25:45] uh what is called i do i do feel that that's not haram and i will at some point go into much depth once i finalize ibn azraq's book but it isn't in my from what i've understood it's not haram i think it's highly politicized yeah you know speaking about politicized i've been reading up a bit more but i won't do a full analysis here but i'll just give you a little preview i've been reading up more on this whole hadith al-ikh this hadith of the great lie

[2:26:24] sorry not the hadith the incident of the if and the more i'm reading into it i what i feel that you see because what i found is these different narratives i definitely am inclined to the understanding that the if in the quran that is being mentioned damn that's my throat going again

[2:26:52] wow so what i definitely do feel is that the if mentioned in the quran is referring to an incident with maria radiola not the incident to do with aisha or the allah um because when you look at it just makes so much sense like um the hadith the the incident of aisha is is attributed to this battle of banil musta which is around the sixth hijri or some say before that maybe fifth injury

[2:27:30] i've even heard some say fourth history but suratu nur to do with the verses of if is in eight hijri maria comes to medina in seven hijri and then falls pregnant and has a baby in eighth history so it's yeah and it's really interesting and i feel that that one it ties up with the tallies with the ramifications as well some of the and i've noticed some of the shia have actually said this as well as i've been researching it i've realized some of the shia have said this although they feel that

[2:28:08] maybe aisha radhilan i think that's a stretch i feel this is in my understanding okay i think both incidents happened so when in early you're still okay relatively early whether it's mid uh the prophet's life in medina whatever whether it's four five or six whatever when the prophet comes back from

[2:28:42] i feel that there were rumors to do with aisha that did happen but they were resolved then and later on a couple of years later this incident happens with maria that people start saying and there's a hadith in in hakim by the way where aisha is actually transmitting about that people started to say that the prophet's child they said that he uh le siddhatti that for his the prophet's excessive love to have a child

[2:29:21] that he claimed somebody else's child for himself and this is actually in the riwayat and the sunni books you find this so in hakim it's interesting that aisha is the one speaking she says and she uses the word if to do with maria so radiola so yeah that's my so i feel that they both happened but that one was of much more importance like as in not impo like they were both important but that one was of much more grave consequence and the verses of the quran were to do with that

[2:29:59] but because the verses go on to not only uh exonerate the person but they also go on to claim that modesty and mentions believing that she's from the faithful later on in life when the whole incident began the splits between the shia and the sunnah when the camps became slightly anti-aisha i feel that people like you see it's possible it's very possible because you have to remember you see for i shared the allahu anha

[2:30:38] herself in later life when she read the verses of if she could have identified with them as well so it's not that because remember an incident like that if we go with that it did happen so when you're reading it you're identifying with it even if it was primarily meant for someone else so i feel in later life she may have said that yes that does refer to me as well or people may have definitely kind of pushed it on her that doesn't this also refer to you and she um

[2:31:17] would have owned it because she could identify with it and so it's kind of true by its meaning it refers to her but although i don't feel it was revealed for her reveal for maria and then with the zubair narrative of history maria becomes inconsequential and she becomes insignificant so they just completely move her out the picture which is another disservice that muslim scholars have really done and the muslim legacy i feel has betrayed maria radhiallahu anha

[2:31:54] because it kind of really just uh buried this whole if story because it is in our sunni books by the way it's in sahih muslim that oh she was accused of having an affair but they don't even mention her name they try and put it off as she was a slave of the prophet they say a slave woman of the prophet um but it was you know that's not true and she was a wife and but yeah so that's an interesting thing i thought i'd just share that with you right guys we're going to start to wrap up uh you're not muslim

## Cite

Mufti Abu Layth Archive, segment KWmtt2TQAO0/s/34. https://muftiabulayth.org/r/kwmtt2tqao0/s/34/

Not a fatwa: these answers were given to specific people at specific times. Ask a qualified scholar about your own situation.