Did Imam Hasan al-Askari (as) Martyr without Fathering any Children?

The Prophet (s) prophesized that Imam al-Mahdi (as) would be born, and that his father would be Imam Hasan al-Askari (as). As such, anybody who reads these hadiths and then doubts whether or not Imam al-Askari (as) died without leaving any children is, in fact, doubting about the veracity of the Prophet (s)’s prophecies about future events, and this is obvious disbelief in Islam.

We have already established, based on the Qur’an and Sunnah, that there must be an Imam in every time. We have established, based upon the Sunni hadith literature, that there will be twelve such Imams (as) after the death of the Holy Prophet (s), and that the final Imam will be Imam al-Mahdi (as). As such, the question about whether or not Imam al-Askari (as) died without leaving any children becomes pointless: the Sunni hadith literature (including books written well before the birth of Imam al-Mahdi (as)) establish that there will be twelve Imams, and even lists their names. If Sunnis deem such narrations as weak, then that is there headache not ours. Alhamdolillah we have clear traditions that confirm the twelve Imams that followed the Prophet (s).

The Prophet (s) prophesized that Imam al-Mahdi (as) would be born, and that his father would be Imam Hasan al-Askari (as). As such, anybody who reads these hadiths and then doubts whether or not Imam al-Askari (as) died without leaving any children is, in fact, doubting about the veracity of the Prophet (s)’s prophecies about future events, and this is obvious disbelief in Islam.

As such, there is no need to answer the question as to whether or not Imam al-Askari (as) died without fathering any children: there must be an Imam, and the Imam must be his son. However, we may still turn towards a specific refutation of the Wahabi argument that Imam al-Askari (as) died without any children. The Wahabi author writes:

This trend was spearheaded by persons who had set themselves up as the representatives of the Imam, and who were in control of a network covering various parts of the Islamic empire— a network for the purpose of collecting money in the name of the Imams of the Ahl al-Bayt. All followers of the Imams were obliged to pay one fifth of their income to the representatives of the Imams. (This is a practice which continues up to today.) At the head of this network was a man called Uthman ibn Sa‘id al-‘Amri. His manner of resolving the predicament was unique: Hasan al-Askari was dead, he admitted, but he was not childless. He had a 4-year old son, Muhammad, with whom no one but he— Uthman ibn Sa‘id— could have contact. And from that point onwards he would act as the representative (wakeel) of the Hidden Imam and collect money in his name. To the fact that Hasan al-Askari’s own family were completely ignorant of the existence of any child of his, and that his estate had been divided between his brother Ja‘far and his mother, Uthman ibn Sa‘id and his ilk responded by denouncing Ja‘far as al-Kadhdhab (the Liar).

This Nasibi is so lazy in his research that he fails to highlight the tradition from ‘where’ his claim is made. He relied on Usul al-Kafi, and used it to “prove” that Imam al-Mahdi (as) is not yet born. However, anybody with reason will recognize that if some people, who happen to be from the lineage of the Prophet (s) (but not from the Ahl al-Bayt (as), whom Allah has purified from all impurity in Surat 33:33) said something due to his lack of knowledge, then that cannot be used as a proof. Jafar and his ilk are not infallible imams, and as such their statements do not have any automatic weight. The author is confused on this point: the Shi’a of the Ahl al-Bayt (as) do not believe that every sayyid, every person with physical lineage to the Prophet (s), is infallible. Rather, we believe that the Ahl al-Bayt (as) is infallible, for they have been purified from all impurity:

Indeed, Allah desires to remove from you all impurity O Ahl al-Bayt, and purify you with a thorough purification. (Quran: 33:33)

The Holy Imams (as), as well as Fatima Zahra (as), are of the Ahl al-Bayt (as), while other members of the Prophet (s)’s family are not. This is established by the Holy Qur’an, where Allah (swt) says that the son of Noah, in spite of being the direct son of a Prophet, was not considered to be from his Ahl al-Bayt:

So the ark floated with them on the waves, towering like mountains. And noah called out to his son, who had separated himself from the rest: “O my son! Embark with us, and be not with the Unbelievers!” The son replied: “I will betake myself to some mountain. It will save me from the water.” Noah said: “This day nothing can save from the Command of Allah, any but those on whom He hath mercy!” And the waves came between them, and the son was overwhelmed in the flood. Then the word came forth: “O earth! Swallow up thy water, and withhold thy rain!’ And the water abated, and the matter was ended. The Ark rested on Mount Judi, and the word went forth: “Away with those who do wrong!” And Noah called upon his Lord, and said: “O my Lord! Surely my son is from my family! (ahli), and Thy promise is true. And thou art the Justest of Judges.” He [Allah] said: “O Noah: He is not of thine family; for his conduct is unrighteous.” (11:42-46)

These verses establish that the mere fact of possessing a physical lineage to a Prophet does not establish infallibility, or that one has been purified in the same way as that Prophet. As such, Ja’far al-Kadhab’s lineage to the Prophet (s) means nothing here. A person may have such lineage and be thoroughly evil, and Ja’far al-Kadhab was one such person. The fact that he did not know about the birth of Imam az-Zaman (as) does not indicate that Imam az-Zaman (as) was not born; rather, it is a sign that, because of Jafar’s impiety, Allah (swt) kept this birth a secret from Ja’far, as He (swt) kept it a secret from the ruling Abbasid dynasty. Factors such as the lack of knowledge, the character of pathetic people, and the ill intentions of the ruling class, lead to Allah (swt) keeping the birth of his representative a secret. Usul-e-Kafi carries a tradition on this:

To the ruler, Imam Abu Muhammad (as) died without bearing a son. He distributed the Imam’s (as)’s property, and the people who did not deserve it, took it. The ruler is looking for him, every where people are running around asking for him. No one should be associated with them, or tell them anything. The name you are asking, if told, the search would become easier. Therefore, be afraid of Allah (swt) and don’t ask about the name of the Imam (as).
Usul alKafi, Volume 1 page 330
Shaykh Majlesi decalred it Sahih in Mirat al-Uqool, Volume 4 page 5

Though with a weak chain, there is another tradition which states:

Ali-bin-Qais narrates from a military policeman that even I have seen Seema (slave of Jafar) in Serman Rai; he broke the door of Imam Hasan AlAskari’s (as)’s house. A man appeared from inside with an axe in his hand. The man asked Seema, what are you doing at my house? Seema replied Jafar thinks that your father (as) died without giving birth to any children, but if this house was yours, then I should return. Saying that, Seema left the house. Ali-bin-Qais says that immediately after this, one of the servants came to us, and I asked him about this. He asked me, ‘who told you about this?’ to which I replied that a military police man told me, the servant replied, pretty soon, nothing shall remain secret from anyone.
Usul alKafi, Volume 1 pages 331-332

These two narrations contradict the narration that is used by this Nasibi, and proves that individuals such as Ja’far al-Kadhab are liars and deceivers. This narration’s serve as evidence that Jafar’s narration was wrong, since he was a puppet in the hands of the Abbasid rulers and wanted to divide the Shi’a. Moreover, the rulers of the time wanted to kill Imam al-Mahdi (as), just like Pharoah and Nimrod wanted to kill Prophet Musa (as) and Prophet Ibrahim (as), as discussed above. Since it was a known fact for a long time that this twelfth Imam would destroy the dynasties of these rulers, they were anxiously awaiting his birth in order to apprehend and kill him. But Allah (swt) would implement his plans, even if the disbelievers were averse. Therefore according to the command of Allah (swt), the birth of Imam al-Mahdi (as) was shrouded in secrecy.

It is only the fact that a young child becomes an Imam and then disappears from view that boggles the mind of this Nasibi bigot. Taking the office of khalifah when young is not something new, nor is it alien to the Qur’an. Allah (swt) granted Prophethood to Prophet Isa (as) when he (as) was young. Likewise with Yahya (as) Allah (swt) states:

O Yahya! Take hold of the Book with strength, and we granted him wisdom while yet a child. (19:12)

It is not a necessity that all the representatives of Allah (swt) be old and mature. Sometime, when the old and young run away from the battlefield, it is the young who perform the duty of the representatives of Allah (swt).

Indeed, the story of Ja’far, brother of Imam Al-Askari (as), is similar to the story of Prophet Yusuf (as)’s brothers who according to Deobandi Imam Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi, had committed a major sin (Imdad ul Mushtaq, page 57) but when they realized their mistake they pleaded for forgiveness, Prophet Yusuf (as) forgave them. We read in Surah Yusuf verse 91:

They said: “By Allâh! Indeed Allâh has preferred you above us, and we certainly have been sinners.”

Prophet Yusuf (as) while replying to his brothers stated:

“No reproach on you this day, may Allâh forgive you, and He is the Most Merciful of those who show mercy! Surah Yusuf verse 92

In his commentary of this verse Allamah Shabeer Ahmad Uthmani stated as follows:

[10]. “Yusuf (as) did not even want to hear that much from his brothers, he said: ‘Don’t talk about it, today I am not issuing any allegation against you, I have forgiven all of your wrongs. The words that I have used is to show the result of Allah (swt)’s favour and the level of patience and piety. From today onwards, the crime you have committed will not even be mentioned, I supplicate to God that whatever wrongs that you have committed before Allah (swt) be forgiven as well’.”
Tafseer Uthmani, part 11 page 326

Similarly, Ja’far realized his mistake and Imam al-Mahdi (as) himself, through his representative, Mohammed-bin-Uthman AlAhamri, said in written form:

“But my uncle Jafar and his children followed the same path as the brothers of Yusuf (as).”
Bihar-ul-Anwar, v53 p180 and Kitab Al-Ghaybah by Sheikh Tusi, Page 188, Published Najaf

The mother of Imam al-Mahdi (as)

Abu Muhammad al Afriqi stated:

In due time a fantastic story was brought into circulation about the union between Hasan al-Askari and a Roman slave-girl, who is variously named as Narjis, Sawsan or Mulaykah. She is mentioned as having been the daughter of Yusha‘ (Joshua), the Roman emperor, who is a direct descendant of the apostle Simon Peter. But history shows that there never was a Roman emperor of that name. The Roman emperor of the time was Basil I, and neither he nor any other emperor is known to have descended from Peter.

Reply One – The Nasibi has failed to cite in any sources to substantiate his claim

Comments such as this have no value whatsoever, since they are devoid of corroborative evidence. Which sources has this Nasibi consult to prove the Shi’a wrong? Is he a historian of that era? Which texts did this historian consult to arrive at this conclusion? It is NOT incumbent on the Shia’s to accept evidence in the absence of concrete textual support, and there is certainly no need to take the word of a third class enemy of the Ahl al-Bayt (as). Our Shi’a sources inform us (via Sahih chains) that Narjis was indeed the wife of Imam Hasan al-Askari (as) and that she was a Byzantine. The Byzantines were the descendants of Simon Peter. Our sources confirm this fact, and that is good enough for us. If “your” historical works have no such evidence then that does not mean that our claim is false.

Reply Two – The inability of the Ahle Sunnah to correctly identify the parentage of their esteemed Sahaba does not mean that they never existed

Furthermore, this hadeeth is entirely irrelevant. If we do not know who the mother of Imam al-Mahdi (as) was, this does not prove that he (as) did not exist. For we have already established, based on the Qur’an and sunnah, that Imam al-Mahdi (as) must exist. Therefore, all of these other questions are superfluous. Even if it is proven that we cannot be certain as to who Imam al-Mahdi (as)’s mother was, than this does not mean that he doesn’t exist. After all, we read in the Sunni hadeeth literature no certainty as to who the father of the companion Amr ibn al-Aas was. Shaykh Sibt Ibn Jauzi al-Hanafi records in Tadhkira al Khawwas:

When Amr bin al-Aas was born, five people claimed be his father: (1) As bin Wa’al, (2) Abu Lahab (3) Umayya bin khulafa (4) Hashim bin Mugheera (5) Abu Sufyan. These five fornicated with the mother of Amr bin al-‘Aas, Nabgha, and when she fell pregnant the five began to fight over who the father was.
Tadhkhira al-Khuwwas, page 117

Allamah Zamakhshari records the following in his book Rabee al-Abrar, Volume 1 page 363:

كانت النابغة أم عمرو بن العاص أمة رجل من عنزة فسبيت، فاشتراها عبد الله بن جدعان، فكانت بغيا ثم عتقت. ووقع عليها أبو لهب، وأمية ابن خلف، وهشام بن المغيرة، وأبو سفيان ابن حرب، والعاص بن وائل، في طهر واحد، فولدت عمرا.

‘The whore, the mother of Amro bin al-Aas was slave of a man from Eniza, then she became a capive of war, then Abdullah bin Jad’an bought her, hence she was slut then (her owner) made her free, then Abu Lahab, Umaya bin Khalaf, Hisham bin al-Mughira, Abu Sufyan bin Harb and al-Aas bin Wael had sexual intercourse with her in the same period, then she gave birth to Amro’
Rabi ul Abraar, Volume 1 page 363

Ahmad Zaki Safwat records the following words of Imam Hasan (as) in his book Jamharat Khutab al-Arab, Volume 2 page 25:

وأما أنت يا بن العاص فإن أمرك مشترك وضعتك أمك مجهولا من عهر وسفاح فتحا كم فيك أربعة من قريش فغلب عليك جزارها ألأمهم حسبا وأخبثهم منصبا

‘…Oh you son of al-Aas, your lineage is unknown, your mother gave birth to you through lust and adultery, you were from four (men) of Quraish, then you were attributed to the meanest lineage and most injurious status.’
Jamharat Khutab al-Arab, Volume 2 page 25

A similar story goes with the Imam of Nawasib, Muawiyah bin Hinda, as we read in Tadkhirat al Khawwas, page 114 Chapter 7:

“Sham bin Muhammad Kalbi in his book Kitab Mushab notes that Imam Hasan said to Mu’awiya ‘Are you aware of the bed from which you was conceived?’ This means he was born from four fathers”.

Similarly in ‘Rabi ul Abraar’ by Allamah Zamakhshari Volume 3 page 551:

“There were four people who were thought to be Mu’awiya’s father, Abi bin Umar bin Musaafir, Abi Umar bin Waleed, Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib and Sabah”
Rabi ul Abraar by Allamah Zamakhshari Volume 3 page 551

Amr ibn al-Aas and Muawiyah are beloved by the Nawasib, yet in spite of the fact that nobody knows who their father were, no Nasibi or Sunni has ever attempted to deny that they didn’t exist. And at least in the case of Imam al-Mahdi (as) we have absolute certainty about who his father was, unlike many of the most beloved companions of the Nawasib.

If this enemy of the Ahl al-Bayt (as) is seeking to mock this mysterious marriage, then he is demonstrating clear disbelief in the historical records of the Prophets (as), Imams (as), and Saints (as). Was the birth of Isa (as) not more mysterious than the birth of Imam al-Mahdi (as)? The Jews, had no knowledge of this immaculate conception, and accused lady Maryam (as) of adultery, and suggested that she had invented the miraculous story of Isa (as)’s conception in order to cover up her act. This is the mentality of people who have no light of spirituality within them, and who are unable to look beyond mere physical appearances. This is indeed the approach of people who deny the existence of Allah (swt). We have seen that many enemies of the Ahl al-Bayt (as) have argued about the “preposterous” belief that Imam al-Mahdi (as) could be over a thousand years old, demonstrating their complete disbelief in the Qur’an where many individuals are listed as having extraordinary lifetimes.

The Wahabi is arguing that the story of Imam al-Askari (as)’s marriage to lady Narjis is too strange to be believed. But it is certainly not more strange the following story of the Prophet (s)’s marriage to Aisha which is found in Bukhari:

Narrated by Aisha: Allah’s Apostle said (to me), “You were shown to me in a dream. An angel brought you to me, wrapped in a piece of silken cloth, and said to me, ‘This is your wife,’ I removed the piece of cloth from your face, and there you were. I said to myself. ‘If it is from Allah, then it will surely be.’”
Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 57

According to Sunni sources, this supposed merit always made Ayesha arrogant over other wives of Holy Prophet (s):

It has been narrated that Aeysha (ra) used to covet for the things that other than her no woman was given and that includes that Jebril brought her image to the Prophet in a silken cloth and he said to the Prophet (s) ‘This is your wife’.
Tafseer Baghwi, Volume 3 page 335, Surah 24 verse 27

Tafseer Siraj al-Munir, Volume 1 page 2737 Surah 24 verse 26

And the story of Imam al-‘Askari (as’s) marriage is certainly far less strange than many of the bizarre narrations that occur in the Sunni hadeeth literature, such as what we read in Sahih al-Muslim:

Anas b. Malik reported that Gabriel came to the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) while he was playing with his playmates. He took hold of him and lay him prostrate on the ground and tore open his breast and took out the heart from it and then extracted a blood-clot out of it and said: That was the part of Satan in thee. And then he washed it with the water of Zamzam in a golden basin and then it was joined together and restored to it place. The boys came running to his mother, i. e. his nurse, and said: Verily Muhammad has been murdered. They all rushed toward him (and found him all right) His colour was changed, Anas said. I myself saw the marks of needle on his breast.
Sahih Muslim Book 001, Number 0311

The enemies of the Ahl al-Bayt (as) expect us to believe that Jibrael (as) descended from heaven, and that he surgically removed part of Satan from the heart of the Holy Prophet (s) of Allah (swt) when he was a child, even though Allah (swt) declares to have the highest status and the most perfect example of humanity, and even though all children are supposed to be free from evil. This is to be accepted and believed without question, and the Wahabi author believes this, but the somewhat mysterious nature of Imam al-‘Askari (as)’s marriage is too much for him to believe? Is there any logic in this?

Reply Three – The inability of the Ahle Sunnah to identify the man crucified instead of Isa (as) does not mean his crucifixion and the ascent of Isa never happened

A source of much pleasure for the Nawasib is their citation of Shia texts depicting differing details of the mother of Imam Mahdi (as). They argue that the lack of uniform details of her name and lineage, constitutes grounds to reject the existence of Imam Mahdi (as) once she is removed from the equation her ‘son’ can then be proven as a mere figment of the Shi’a imagination.

Such an approach cannot be applied by the Nawasib when we look at their commentaries of this Quranic verse 004.157:

That they said (in boast), “We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah”;- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not.

When it comes to identifying the individual crucified, Sunni scholars of Tafsir cannot agree on who that individual was. Ibn Kathir in his commentary of the above verse, depicts the sacrifice of isa’s companion as follows:

Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that Ibn Abbas said, “Just before Allah raised Isa to the heavens, `Isa went to his companions, who were twelve inside the house. When he arrived, his hair was dripping water and he said, `There are those among you who will disbelieve in me twelve times after he had believed in me.’ He then asked, `Who volunteers that his image appear as mine, and be killed in my place. He will be with me (in Paradise)’ One of the youngest ones among them volunteered and Isa asked him to sit down. Isa again asked for a volunteer, and the young man kept volunteering and Isa asking him to sit down. Then the young man volunteered again and Isa said, `You will be that man,’ and the resemblance of Isa was cast over that man while Isa ascended to heaven from a hole in the house. When the Jews came looking for Isa, they found that young man and crucified him. Some of Isa’s followers disbelieved in him twelve times after they had believed in him. They then divided into three groups. One group, Al-Yaqubiyyah (Jacobites), said, Allah remained with us as long as He willed and then ascended to heaven.’ Another group, An-Nasturiyyah (Nestorians), said, `The son of Allah was with us as long as he willed and Allah took him to heaven.’ Another group, Muslims, said, `The servant and Messenger of Allah remained with us as long as Allah willed, and Allah then took him to Him.’ The two disbelieving groups cooperated against the Muslim group and they killed them. Ever since that happened, Islam was then veiled until Allah sent Muhammad .” This statement has an authentic chain of narration leading to Ibn Abbas, and An-Nasa’i narrated it through Abu Kurayb who reported it from Abu Muawiyah.

Now compare this report to those cited by other Sunni Ulema . As Imam of Ahle Sunnah Badruddin Al-Aini records in Umadatul Qari, Volume 12 page 35:

ألقى الله تعالى شبه عيسى على الذي دلهم واسمه

“Allah (swt) made the like of Isa upon the person who denounced him”

We read in Tanwir al-Maqyas by Fayrozabadi, page 85:

ألقى شبه عيسى على تطيانوس فقتلوه بدل عيسى

“Made the likeness of Isa appear on Titanws, therefore they killed him instead of Isa”

We read in Tafsir Thalabi, Volume 3 page 410:

وقد قيل إن الذي شبه لعيسى وصلب مكانه رجل إسرائيلي وكان يقال له إيشوع بن مدين

“It has been said that the one who appeared in the likeness of Isa was substituted for crucifixion was an Israelite man called Josha bin Midian”

We read in Tafsir al-Sam’ani, Volume 1 page 499:

وقيل إنهم كانوا حبسوا عيسى في بيت وجعلوا عليه رقيبا فالقى الله تعالى شبه عيسى على الرقيب فقتلوه

“It has been said that they incarcerated Isa in a house and placed a guard over him, then Allah made the likeness of Isa appear on the guard, hence they killed him (the guard)”

If we bring these narrations together we can see that Sunni narrations suggest that the individual that took the shape of Isa (as) was:

• A pious self sacrificing companion of Isa (as)
• Titanws
• Josha bin Midian
• a guard

Collectively the Sunni Scholars are unable to agree upon which of these traditions is correct. That is why post modern Sunni Scholars have started to denying all of these traditions outright (for example Muhammad Asad in his commentary of Quran deemed all these traditions to be false).

Could the Nawasib explain why such blatant traditions exist in their books? When it came to the Imam Mahdi (as), it was necessary to spread different stories about his mother and his birth so as to prevent the State subjecting the mother and son to harm. If the Nawasib find our submission unacceptable, then could explain to us why they are unable to agree on the identity of the individual crucified in place Prophet Isa (as) in their books? If the Shias inability to provide agreed details of the mother of Imam Mahdi (as) proves her non existence, that automatically makes the birth and occultation of Imam Mahdi (as) non existent will they likewise reject the crucifixion and ascension of Isa as they cannot agree on the identity of the man crucified in place of Isa (as)? We leave it to the upholders of justice to ponder over the point that we have just raised.

Is it shameful to believe that Imam Mahdi (as) was the son of a slave-woman?

Another notion that we have observed particularly coming from the filthy Nawasib of Sipah-e-Sahabah is that the Shia believe that Imam Mahdi (as) was born from a slave-woman that is shameful. One wonders how this can be shameful since for a woman, it is her piety and decent character that matters not her financial status. One wonders how can they forget that Prophet Ibrahim’s (as) wife Haajar (as) was also a slave-girl, who gave birth to Prophet Ismaeel (as) and our Propet Muhammad (s), who is the leader of all humanity including all prophets came from the very lineage of Prophet Ismaeel (as) making lady Haajar (as) as grand mother of Holy Prophet (s). Do the narrow-minded Nawasib have the audacity to attribute an act of embarrassment to the greatest of creations? Though, the fact that lady Haajar (as) was a slave-woman is known to every Muslim child, we shall substantiate by using some Sunni sources: Ibn Athir records in Tarihk Kamil, Volume 1 page 102:

كانت هاجر جارية ذات هيئة فوهبتها سارة لإبراهيم

“Haajar was a beatiful slave, therefore Sarah granted her to Ibrahim”

Imam ibn Qudamah records in his authoritry work ‘Al-Mughni’ Volume 12 page 488:

وكانت هاجر أم إسماعيل عليه السلام سرية إبراهيم

“Haajar the mother of Ismaeel was Ibrahim’s slave”

Imam Abdulrahman ibn Qudamah records in ‘Al-Sharh al-Kabir’ Volume 12 page 488:

وكانت هاجر سرية إبراهيم

“Haajar was Ibrahim’s slave”

The secret birth of Imam Mahdi (as)

Abu Muhammad al Afriqi stated:

The story goes on to tell of her capture by the Muslim army, how she eventually came to be sold to Hasan al-Askari, and of her supernatural pregnancy and the secret birth of the son of whom no one— aside from Uthman ibn Sa‘id and his clique— knew anything. Everything about the child is enveloped in a thick and impenetrable cloud of mystery.

The author should know that this is not the first time that the khalifah of Allah (swt) has been in ghaybah. Indeed, had this enemy of the Ahl al-Bayt (as) bothered to study history, he would know that whenever the khalifah of Allah (swt) was sent to overthrow a dictatorial king, this revolution was proceeded by an Occultation. The advisors of Nimrod (la) had interpreted a dream that he had, and told him that that a child would be born called Ibrahim, that he would be born in a specific month, and that he would destroy his rule and end his religion of emperor worship. As a safety mechanism Nimrod issued an edict that all children born that year be killed and men be separated from women. Despite this intense campaign, the mother of Ibrahim (as) still fell pregnant, and the State officials had no knowledge of this. Allamah Ibn Atheer al Jazari whilst writing on the life of Prophet Ibrahim (as):

دخلت السنة التي ذكروا حبس نمرود الحبالى عنده إلا أم ابراهيم فإنه لم يعلم بحبلها لأنه لم يظهر عليها أثره، فذبح كل غلام ولد في ذلك الوقت، فلما وجدت أم ابراهيم الطلق خرجت ليلا الى مغارة وكانت قريبة منها فولدت

“In the year that the Courtiers had referred to, Nimrod ordered that intelligence be kept upon all pregnant women, but no information was ascertained on the mother of Prophet Ibrahim (as), as they had no knowledge that she was pregnant, she portrayed no [outward] signs of pregnancy. At that time whichever boy was born was executed by Nimrod, when the mother of Ibrahim (as) began to feel labour pains, she went into a cave at night, that was nearby and Ibrahim was born…” Tareekh Kamil, Volume 1 page 31

 We read similar a thing in various other Sunni books:

1. Tarikh Tabari, Volume 1 page 143
2. Tarikh Rasul al-Maluk by Tabari, Volume 1 page 88
3. Al-Tabsera by Ibn al-Jawzi, Volume 1 page 84
4. Tafseer Tabari, Volume page, Surah 6, verse 76
5. Tafseer Baghwi, Volume 3 page 159 Surah 6, verse 76
6. Tafsir aaf al-Bayan by Thalabi, Vol 5 page 249 Surah 6 verse 76
7. Tafseer Khazan, Volume 2 pages 410-411 Surah 6 verse 76
8. Tafseer Siraj al-Munir by Shibrini, Vol page 937 Surah 6, verse 76
9. Samt al-Nujum by al-Esami, Volume 1 page 63
10. Tafseer Abi Hatim, Volume 8 page 278 Tradition 14646 Surah 26 verse 69

When it was quiet she left the cave, and miraculously no one recognized her. This is an explicit example of the way Allah (swt) protects and safeguards the birth of his Guide when he is faced by the tyranny of a jealous Leader. We feel that this example would suffice for those with rational minds. The Wahabi author is thoroughly ignorant, but this is inevitable: since he has refused to know the Imam of his time, he has chosen to live and one day die the death of jahiliyyah.

We also know that, during the time that Prophet Musa (as) was born, Pharoah saw a dream, and his courtiers also advised him that a child would be born from the Banu Israil, a child that would end his reign. Applying the policy of Nimrod, Pharoah issued an edict that all new born babies were to be killed. Furthermore, spies would enter homes and touch the stomachs of women to determine whether on not they were pregnant. If a woman was pregnant, the order was to murder the unborn child. Yet Allah (swt) made the pregnancy of the mother of Musa (as) a secret, so much so that her midwife had no knowledge of this pregnancy. On this issue the comments of Ibn Kathir are of interest:

فلما حملت أم موسى به، عليه السلام، لم يظهر عليها مخايل الحمل كغيرها، ولم تفطن لها الدايات

“When the mother of Musa (as) fell pregnant, she did not portray the signs of pregnancy that are present in other women, and the midwives were unable to ascertain that she was pregnant”. 1. Tafseer Ibn Katheer Volume 3 page 380, Surah Qasas, Verse 7
2. Ruh al Bayan, Volume 6 page 382

From the examples of these two Prophets it is clear that for any child that has been born for the purposes of bringing an end to the reign of a tyrannical leader, steps are adopted to make this birth a secret, to the point that even relatives have no knowledge of the pregnancy. This is to ensure that not even the slightest information is leaked out to those at helm of State. That is why when Allah (swt) wants to bring an end to tyrannical family rule, and worldly reign, He (swt) counters the threat by ensuring that the birth of his representative remains a secret. Even after the birth, his upbringing is also very unusual. When it comes to the ultimate destruction on man made rule, Allah (swt) selected two individuals both of whom share distinct similarities. The birth of Isa (as) was unusual, as was his upbringing, and his subsequent occultation (into the Heavens) was to ensure his protection from man made dictatorial rule. The purpose of Imam Mahdi (as)’s birth was to bring an end to the man made rule of Dajjal – the ultimate and final battle. That is why Allah (swt) has taken such extraordinary steps to protect him, to the extent that even the believer is usually unaware of his immediate whereabouts. The birth of Imam Mahdi (as) and his life is part of the Sunnah of Allah (swt) to protect His servants, in order to ensure the completion of the mission for which they had been created.