Content of the doubt:

The enemies of Islam cite a narration in the book (Al-Mustadrak) on the authority of Lady Aisha, in which she said: Maria was presented to the Messenger of God, along with her cousin. He had intercourse with her and she remained pregnant. The Messenger of God separated her from her cousin. Based on the previous narration, the enemies of Islam claim that Lady Aisha accused Maria, the Prophet’s wife, of committing adultery with her cousin and becoming pregnant by him. How true is this statement?!

Response to the doubt:

Firstly:

The previous narration is false and cannot be attributed to Lady Aisha. The narrator who narrated this narration is: Abu Muadh/Sulayman bin Al-Arqam Al-Ansari, and his hadith is (abandoned)...

Let's see what the scholars of hadith criticism and authentication said about the narrator, Sulayman ibn al-Arqam:

Abu Ahmad Al-Hakim said about him: His hadith is abandoned. Abu Ahmad bin Adi Al-Jurjani said about him: Most of what he narrates is not followed up. Abu Bakr Al-Bayhaqi said about him: He is abandoned and cannot be relied upon. Abu Hatim Al-Razi said about him: His hadith is abandoned. Ibn Hibban Al-Busti said about him: He distorts the narrations and narrates fabricated narrations. Abu Dawud Al-Sijistani said about him: His hadith is abandoned. Abu Zur’ah Al-Razi said about him: He is weak and his hadith is invalid. Abu ‘Isa Al-Tirmidhi said about him: His hadith is abandoned and weak according to the people of hadith. Ahmad bin Hanbal said about him: He is nothing, his hadith is not worth anything, and hadiths are not narrated from him. Ahmad bin Shu’aib Al-Nasa’i said about him: His hadith is abandoned and his hadith is not written down. Ibrahim bin Ya’qub Al-Juwzjani said about him: He is invalid. Ibn Hajar Al-‘Asqalani said about him: He is weak. Ad-Daraqutni said about him: His hadith is abandoned.

Al-Dhahabi said about him: He is abandoned. Abd al-Rahman ibn Yusuf ibn Kharash said about him: His hadith is abandoned. Amr ibn Ali al-Fallas said about him: He is not trustworthy, and he narrated strange hadiths. Muhammad ibn Ismail al-Bukhari said about him: He is abandoned and lost in hadith . Muhammad ibn Abdullah al-Ansari said about him: They used to forbid us from him when we were young. Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj al-Naysaburi said about him: He is rejected in hadith. Yahya ibn Ma’in said about him: He is nothing and is not worth a penny.

As we have seen, the narrator Sulayman ibn al-Arqam is a lying narrator whose hadith is rejected and whose hadith cannot be relied upon at all.

Secondly:

As for those who claim that Lady Maria committed adultery with her cousin, this is a lie. The narration originally did not say that she committed adultery with him. Rather, the narration said that [her cousin had intercourse with her]. This phrase might mean that he raped her against her will and not of her own free will. The phrase did not stipulate that she committed adultery with him of her own free will.

Third : If we continue with the rest of the story, we will find that the Prophet ordered Ali bin Abi Talib to draw his sword and kill her cousin. Ali bin Abi Talib went to look for her cousin and found him on a date palm picking dates. When the cousin saw the sword in Ali bin Abi Talib’s hand, he trembled and shook with fear to the point that the rag that was around his waist fell off, revealing her cousin’s private parts.

When Ali ibn Abi Talib looked at him, he did not find any reproductive organs. Her cousin had congenital defects and deformities, such that he did not have a reproductive system at all... Therefore, the story says:

[If God did not create for him what men have, it is something erased]

Fourth : The story contains a legal violation that proves that the story is actually a lie. The story says that the Prophet ordered Ali bin Abi Talib to strike off the neck of her cousin with the sword!! This is contrary to the Holy Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet. The adulterer is punished by flogging if he is a virgin, and by stoning if he is married, not by being struck with a sword!

Through all of the above, we clearly see the falsehood of this story and the innocence of Lady Aisha in it.

Additional note:

As for those who claim that the book (Al-Mustadrak) is authentic from beginning to end, this is a mistake. This is because the book Al-Mustadrak contains many objectionable hadiths, weak and fabricated hadiths. Many scholars have drawn attention to this and criticized him for it. Al-Hakim Al-Naysaburi (the author of Al-Mustadrak) commented on many hadiths in his book, considering them to meet the conditions of Al-Bukhari and Muslim, and this is a mistake on his part. In fact, only a quarter of the hadiths in his book are considered authentic, while the rest of the book is objectionable.

As for those who cite Imam al-Dhahabi as evidence, Imam al-Dhahabi did not authenticate many of these hadiths himself, but rather merely transmitted al-Hakim al-Nishaburi's commentary on the narrations. Al-Dhahabi noted this and said:

[For in many of these are hadiths which appear to meet the criteria of al-Bukhari or Muslim, or both, but which in reality have hidden and influential flaws. A portion of the book has a sound, good, and excellent chain of transmission, and that is about a quarter of it. As for the rest of the book, it is full of strange and unusual hadiths. In the meantime, there are about a hundred hadiths whose falsehood is attested to by the heart.]

The reason why the book (Al-Mustadrak) contains many fabricated hadiths is that its author died before he revised his book.