She brought shame on her progeny and children from other than the Imam.

She brought shame on her progeny and children from other than the Imam. When an argument occurred between them and the [^1] Al-Mas‘udi, Murujj al-Dhahab, vol. 2, p. 353. It was said that Mo’awiya sent her ten thousand dinars and gave her country estates of the land of Kufa. This has been mentioned in the book Tuhaf al-‘Uqool, p. 391. [^2] A‘yan al-Shia, vol. 4, p. 78. [^3] Tuhaf al-‘Uqool, p. 391.

clans of Quraysh, they would revile them, saying: “Sons of a women who poisons her husbands.”[^1] Mu’awiya broke his promise toward her. He did not marry her to Yazid. He mocked at her when she asked him for that, saying: “Surely we like the life of Yazid.

Were it not for that, we would fulfill our promise toward you through marrying you to him.”[^2] Most historians have unanimously agreed on that Imam al-Hasan died of poison, and that it was Mu’awiya who had (ordered to) put poison into his food and killed him.[^3] Other historians have maintained that it was Yazid who poisoned Imam al-Hasan.[^4] If we acknowledged that, then he did that according to his father’s command, for none believes that he committed such a dangerous incident without consulting his father and getting his approval.

It is very strange that Ibn Khaldun has tried to justify this action of Mu’awiya and to declare that he was innocent of this crime. He has said: “What is narrated that Mu’awiya had poisoned Imam al-Hasan through the hand of his wife, Ja’dah, daughter of al-Ash‘ath, is from the traditions of the Shia. Far it be from Mu’awiya.”[^5] Ibn Khaldun has said that out of fanaticism. This historian had been inflicted with this disease.

He has written these researches for nothing, but to satisfy [^1] A‘yan al-Shia, vol. 4, p. 76. [^2] Al-Mas‘udi, Murujj al-Dhahab, vol. 2, p. 303. [^3] Ibn Abi al-Hadeed, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 17, p. 4. Tarikh al-Duwal al-Islamiya, vol. 1, p. 53. Tadhkirat al-Khawas, p. 222. Al-Isti‘ab, vol. 1, p. 374. Al-Nasaa’ih al-Kafiya, p. 62. Abu al-Fida’, Tarikh, vol. 1, p. 194. All these books belong to the Sunni Muslims. They have ascribed the murder of the Imam to Mo’awiya.

They indicate the corruption of the opinions of some historians who have maintained that it is only the Shi‘ites who have narrated that Mo’awiya poisoned Imam al-Hasan. They also show the corruption of the viewpoint of Dr. Philip Hatti, who has mentioned in his book al-‘Arab, p. 79, saying: “And as for the Shia, they ascribe his (al-Hasan’s) murder to Mo’awiya.