Hassan al ‘Askari was asked if he had any children and he replied in the affirmative

This narration is generally reported by those who claim that they are from the Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah but in reality they possess Shia ideologies and doctrines.

Al Kulayni has narrated it as follows:

أن الحسن العسكري سئل هل لك ولد قال نعم قال فأين أجده قال في المدينة

Hassan al ‘Askari was asked, “Do you have any children.”

“Yes,” he replied.

He asked, “Where will I find him?”

He replied, “In Madinah.”[1]

This is the greatest fallacy of this narration. According to you, al Mahdi performed Salat al Janazah upon his father in Samara at the age of five. So the narration clarifies for the questioner, in fact it is emphasises for everyone who is perplexed about his matter that he will soon find him in Madinah. So do not be too elated with the narration for it contains contradiction within and has caused another headache and has also increased the Shia’s amazement. Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala has certainly spoken the truth:

وَلَوْ كَانَ مِنْ عِندِ غَيْرِ اللَّهِ لَوَجَدُوْا فِيهِ اخْتِلَافًا كَثِيْرًا

If it had been from [any] other than Allah, they would have found within it much contradiction.[2]

The lies of the Rawafid concerning al Mahdi

The Rawafid believe that the Ahlus Sunnah confirm the birth of the Hidden Mahdi. Their belief stems from the following:

Either they present Rawafid who are believed to be from the Ahlus Sunnah the likes of Sibt ibn al Jawzi, and al Kanji whom they claim to be a Shafi’i.
Or either they present ‘Ulama’ of the Ahlus Sunnah who have mentioned the birth of al Mahdi while clarifying that this is the belief of the Rawafid. The Rawafid practice deception and turn a blind eye to this clarification.

Let us begin with their proofs regarding this.

Sibt ibn al Jawzi

Al Dhahabi states, “He narrates repulsive incidents. I do not accept him to be reliable. Moreover, he observes rafd. Sheikh Muhyi al Din al Susi prayed after the obituary of Sibt ibn al Jawzi reached him, ‘May Allah not have mercy on him. He was a Rafidi.’”[3]

Al Kanji Muhammad ibn Yusuf al Shafi’i (d. 658 A.H.)

It appears that he is a Rafidi or a Mutaraffid (fanatical Rafidi) with evidence of a Rafidi’s acknowledgement (i.e. Muhammad ibn Ahmed al Qummi) that he found him slain with his stomach ripped open on account of his inclinations to Shi’ism.[4]

I say: Instead, because he adopted the quality of betrayal from the Rawafid. The scholars have reported that he was an agent of the Tatars aping his predecessor Nasir al Din al Tusi.

Ibn Kathir has mentioned while relating the incidents of the war with the Tatars:

و قتلت العامة وسط الجامع شيخا رافضيا كان مصانعا للتتار على أموال الناس يقال له الفخر محمد بن يوسف بن محمد الكنجي كان خبيث الطوية مشرقيا ممالئا لهم على أموال المسلمين قبحه الله و قتلوا جماعة مثله من المنافقين

The masses killed a Rafidi old man in the middle of the Jami’ Masjid who cooperated with the Tatars upon people’s wealth who was called al Fakhr Muhammad ibn Yusuf ibn Muhammad al Kanji. He was malevolent, an infiltrator, and a secret agent of theirs upon Muslims’ wealth. May Allah disfigure him. The masses killed a group of hypocrites of his ilk as well.[5]

Thereafter, I found in Kitab al Yaqin of Ibn Ta’us something that further supports his rafd and lies. He quotes before us some snippets of the sections of his book Kifayat al Talib fi Manaqib ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib.

For example:

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam called him Sayyid al Muslimin (leader of the Muslims) and Wasi Rasul Rabb al ‘Alamin (the wasi of the Messenger of the Lord of the worlds).
Jibril named him Amir al Mu’

Ibn Ta’us has related that he believed that Muhammad ibn al Hassan al ‘Askari was the awaited Imam al Mahdi.[6]

I have found the Shia admitting that he had a book titled al Bayan fi Akhbar Sahib al Zaman implying al Mahdi.[7] This proves that he had Shia and Rafidi ideologies.

We do not know any Shafi’i who believes in the hidden Imam in the cave. However, the Rawafid misuse the word Shafi’i to deceive the adherents of the Ahlus Sunnah.

The statement of Ibn Kathir is sufficient to silence those who think that he was Shafi’i whereas al Shafi’i is exonerated and innocent from the treacherous Rawafid. Just see how Ibn Kathir describes him:

كان خبيث الطوية مشرقيا ممالئا لهم على أموال المسلمين قبحه الله و قتلوا جماعة مثله من المنافقين

He was malevolent, an infiltrator, and a secret agent of theirs upon Muslims’ wealth. May Allah disfigure him. The masses killed a group of hypocrites of his ilk as well.^{^[8]}

Ibn Hajar al Haytami

Ibn Hajar related in his book al Sawa’iq al Muhriqah that it is said:

أن الحسن العسكري سم و لم يخلف غير ولده أبي القاسم محمد الحجة

Hassan al ‘Askari was poisoned and he was not survived except by his child Abu al Qasim Muhammad al Hujjah (the Proof).

Consider grammatically that the word abi (father) is connected to waladihi (his son) which is the mudaf ilayh (possessor). Had the sentence been a mubtada’ (subject) it should have begun with a raf’ like this: Abu al Qasim (i.e. Abu al Qasim Muhammad is his son, which is not the case.)

Ibn Hajar al Haytami says thereafter that he had mentioned great detail about al Mahdi in the foregoing pages and directs those who want further detail to refer to those pages. He says:

فارجع إليه فإنه مهم

Go back to that for it is important.

I went back and found him criticising the Shia for believing that he was born and was an Imam at the age of five. A declaration is reported from al Subki that majority of the Rawafid believe that Hassan al ‘Askari was issueless and there is no establishment of any child for him. He also states that the Rawafid split into 20 groups with regards to the alleged al Mahdi.

He then says: “It is established in the pure Shari’ah that it is not correct for a minor to be a guardian. So how could these fools believe a minor at the age of five to be an Imam? He made it clear that they have turned themselves into a laughing stock in front of people of intelligence. It is aptly said:

ما آن للسرداب أن يلد الذي كلمتموه بجهلكم ما آنا

فعلى عقولكم العفاء فإنكم ثلثتم العنقاء والغيلانا

The time has not come for the cave to give birth to the one you spoke about due to your ignorance, and the time will never come.

Your brains have fallen down the abyss of obliteration for you have added a third to the griffon and ghaylan.

He thereafter clarified that they believe of his existence and his hiding away while others from their own ilk reject this belief and state that he has no existence at all.

‘Ali ibn Muhammad ibn al Sabbagh al Maliki

He has been ascribed to rafd as explained by the author of Kashf al Zunun[9] due to his authoring the book Kitab al Fusul al Muhimmah fi Ma’rifat al A’immah.

Ibn Khalikan

He said:

و فيها توفي أبو محمد العلوي العسكري و هو أحد الأئمة الإثني عشر على مذهب الإمامية و هو والد محمد الذي يعتقدونه المنتظر بسرداب سامرا

In that year did Abu Muhammad al ‘Alawi al ‘Askari pass away who is one of the twelve A’immah according to the Imamah creed. He is the father of the Muhammad they believe is awaited and hiding in a cave in Samara.[10]

Shams al Din al Dhahabi

و فيها الحسن بن علي الجواد أحد الأئمة الإثني عشر الذين تعتقد الرافضة فيهم العصمة و هو والد المتنظر محمد صاحب السرداب

Therein is Hassan ibn ‘Ali al Jawwad one of the twelve A’immah whom the Rawafid believe to be infallible. He is the father of the awaited Muhammad in the cave.[11]

He also said:

و فيها محمد بن الحسن العسكري .. أبو القاسم الذي تلقبه الرافضة الخلف الحجة و تلقبه بالمهدي و بالمنتظر و تلقبه بصاحب الزمان و هو خاتمة الإثني عشر و ضلال الرافضة ما عليه مزيد فإنهم يزعمون أنه دخل السرداب الذي بسامرا فاختفى و إلى الآن و كان عمره لما عدم تسع سنين أو دونها

Muhammad ibn al Hassan al ‘Askari, Abu al Qasim whom the Rawafid title al Khalaf (the Successor), al Hujjah (the Proof), al Mahdi, al Muntazar (the Awaited), and Sahib al Zaman (Lord of the Time). He is the seal of the twelve. The deviation of the Rawafid is never ending for they believe that he entered a cave in Samara and went into hiding right up until now. His age when he went missing was 9 or less.[12]

He mentioned in Siyar A’lam al Nubala’:

المنتظر الشريف أبو القاسم محمد بن الحسن العسكري بن علي الهادي ابن محمد الجواد بن علي الرضى بن موسى الكاظم بن جعفر الصادق بن محمد الباقر بن زيد العابدين علي بن الحسين الشهيد بن الإمام علي بن أبي طالب العلوي الحسيني خاتمة الإثني عشر سيدا الذين تدعي الإمامية عصمتهم و لا عصمة إلا لنبي و محمد هذا هو الذي يزعمون أنه الخلف الحجة و أنه صاحب الزمان و أنه صاحب السرداب بسامراء و أنه حي لا يموت حتى يخرج فيملأ الأرض عدلا و قسطا كما ملئت ظلما و جورا فوددنا ذلك والله و هم في انتظاره من أربع مئة و سبعين سنة و من أحالك على غائب لم ينصفك فكيف بمن أحال على مستحيل و الإنصاف عزيز فنعوذ بالله من الجهل و الهوى

The Awaited Honourable Abu al Qasim Muhammad ibn al Hassan al ‘Askari ibn ‘Ali al Hadi ibn Muhammad al Jawwad ibn ‘Ali al Rida ibn Musa al Kazim ibn Jafar al Sadiq ibn Muhammad al Baqir ibn Zaid al ‘Abidin ‘Ali ibn al Hussain the martyr ibn al Imam ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib al ‘Alawi al Hussaini, seal of the twelve sayyids whom the Imamiyyah believe to be infallible whereas only a Nabi is infallible. This Muhammad is the one they believe to be al Khalaf al Hujjah, Sahib al Zaman, man of the cave in Samara and that he is living and has not died. He will emerge and fill the world with justice and fairness just as it was filled with injustice and oppression. We aspire this by Allah. They are waiting for him for 470 years. Whoever assigns you to an absent person, he will not deal fairly with you. So what about the one who assigns to an impossibility? And justice is rare. We seek Allah’s protection from ignorance and passion.[13]

They believe that Muhammad entered a cave in the house of his father while his mother was looking at him and he never emerged from there until this moment. He was 9 years old at the time or younger according to different views. Ibn Khalikan said, “It is said that he entered when he was 17 years old in the year 275 and it is said rather in 265 and that he is alive.”

Among those who assert that Hassan al ‘Askari had no issue is Muhammad ibn Jarir al Tabari, Yahya ibn Sa’id. They are sufficient for you in cognisance and reliability.

He mentioned in Tarikh al Islam while discussing Hassan al ‘Askari:

و هو والد منتظر الرافضة توفي إلى رضوان الله بسامراء و أما ابنه محمد بن الحسن الذي يدعوه الرافضة القائم الخلف الحجة فولد سنة ثمان و خمسين و قيل سنة ست و خمسين عاش بعد أبيه سنتين ثم عدم و لم يعلم كيف مات و أمه أم ولد و هم يدعون بقاءه في السرداب من أربعمائة و خمسين سنة و أنه صاحب الزمان و أنه حي يعلم علم الأولين و الآخرين و يعترفون أن أحدا لم يره أبدا فنسأل الله أن يثبت علينا عقولنا و إيماننا

He is the father of the Rawafid’s Awaited. He passed away into the pleasure of Allah in Samara’. With regards to his son Muhammad ibn al Hassan whom the Rawafid claim to be al Qa’im al Khalaf al Hujjah; he was born in the year 85 and it is said 65. He lived for two years after his father and then went missing. It is not known how he died. His mother was an umm walad (slave girl who bears a child for her master). They claim his existence in the cave for 450 years and that he is Sahib al Zaman and that he is living and he possesses knowledge of all who preceded and succeeded him. At the same time, they admit that no one has ever seen him. We beseech Allah to keep our minds and iman intact.[14]

Al Kurani thinks that this text of al Dhahabi points to his belief in al Mahdi’s birth because he said, “He was born …” Moreover, the book Tarikh al Islam was written after those books wherein al Dhahabi denies al Mahdi’s birth.

This is nothing but confusion, deception, and falsehood. There is no need for us to discuss which was first and last because the text does not clearly state al Dhahabi’s belief in al Mahdi’s birth.

We continue seeing how al Dhahabi ridicules this belief by saying, “We beseech Allah to keep our minds and iman intact.” He also quotes the acknowledgement of the Rawafid that “no one has ever seen him.” So how could al Dhahabi acknowledge his birth?

The greatest evidence the deceit holds onto is the fact that al Dhahabi did not say, “He was born according to the Rawafid…” If this indicates anything, it indicates hopelessness and clutching onto straws.

Yes, had he clearly stated that he believes in his birth, it was appropriate for him to object to us. However, when al Dhahabi discusses the Rawafid’s al Mahdi, he supplicates for the protection of our minds and iman which implies that belief in this type of al Mahdi is not part of al Dhahabi’s iman.

Moreover, al Dhahabi did not allocate a separate section for the biography of Muhammad ibn al Hassan al ‘Askari from his birth. He only spoke about him while discussing the biography of Hassan al ‘Askari.

Next⇒ Indeed Allah commanded me to marry Fatimah to ‘Ali

[1] Al Kafi vol. 1 pg. 328, Kitab al Hujjah, bab al isharah wa al nass ila sahib al dar.

[2] Surah al Nisa’: 82.

[3] Mizan al I’tidal vol. 7 pg. 304; Siyar A’lam al Nubala’ vol. 23 pg. 297.

[4] Mi’ah Manqabah min Manaqib Amir al Mu’minin pg. 8.

[5] Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah vol. 13 pg. 221.

[6] Al Sirat al Mustaqim vol. 2 pg. 219.

[7] Muhammad ibn Ibrahim al Nu’mani: Kitab al Ghaybah pg. 10.

[8] Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah vol. 13 pg. 221.

[9] Kashf al Zunun vol. 2 pg. 1721.

[10] Al Kamil fi al Tarikh vol. 7 pg. 274.

[11] Al ‘Ibar fi Khabar man Ghabar vol. 1 pg. 373.

[12] Al ‘Ibar fi Khabar man Ghabar vol. 1 pg. 381.

[13] Siyar A’lam al Nubala’ vol. 13 pg. 119.

[14] Tarikh al Islam vol. 5 pg. 112.

BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents