The rest of the household of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam too were not saved from the evils of the Shia. The Shia condemn, slander, and consider disbelievers all those who sought vengeance for Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu and those who sought leadership, with the exception of the eight sons of Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu. As for the rest of the Ahlul Bayt who sought leadership aside from the eight sons of Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu, be it from Hussain’s other sons or the sons of his brother Hassan, along with the sons of ‘Ali ibn Talib; they are all considered to be disbelievers.
Amongst those who had claimed leadership were Muhammad ibn al Hanafiyyah and his son Abu Hashim. Zaid ibn Zayn al ‘Abidin and his son Yahya, ‘Abdullah al Mahd ibn al Hassan al Muthanna and his son Muhammad titled as Nafs al Zakiyyah, as well as his brother Ibrahim al Ghumar, the two sons of Jafar ibn al Baqir: ‘Abdullah al Aftah and Muhammad, the two grandsons of Hassan al Muthanna: Hussain ibn ‘Ali and Yahya ibn ‘Abdullah, the two sons of Musa al Kazim: Zaid and Ibrahim, and the son of ‘Ali al Naqi, Jafar ibn ‘Ali and many others from the progeny of ‘Ali.
Not to mention the progeny of Abu Talib who Al Isfahani mentions in his book Maqatil al Talibiyin and others; as well as the children of Jafar ibn Abi Talib and ‘Aqil ibn Abi Talib, etc.
The Shia further consider as disbelievers all those from the Abbasids who claimed leadership, despite the Shia themselves acknowledging that the Abbasids were from the Ahlul Bayt.
Let us not forget the cousins of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and also the Fatimids of Egypt.
The Shia have fabricated reports in that particular regard. Abu Jafar al Baqir was asked with regards to the verse:
وَيَوْمَ الْقِيٰمَةِ تَرَى الَّذِيْنَ كَذَبُوْا عَلَى اللّٰهِ وُجُوْهُهُم مُّسْوَدَّةٌ أَلَيْسَ فِيْ جَهَنَّمَ مَثْوًى لِّلْمُتَكَبِّرِيْنَ
And on the Day of Resurrection you will see those who lied about Allah [with] their faces blackened. Is there not in Hell a residence for the arrogant?
The verse was revealed regarding he who says, “I am an Imam but in reality he is not.”
The narrator asked, “Even if he is an ‘Alawi?”
He replied, “Even if he be an ‘Alawi.”
Thereafter the narrator asked, “Even if he is from the progeny of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib?”
He replied in the affirmative.
In another narration which is transmitted from his son Jafar he states, “Even if he is a Fatimid ‘Alawi.”
In another report:
He who claims he is an Imam and he is not is a disbeliever.
As for the eight from the progeny of Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu, who they consider to be the Imams and the assumed twelfth Imam; they too were not spared from all of their insults.
The Shia have spoken ill, mocked, and reviled every one of them, ascribing to them that which they are free from. Just as they have done to their forefathers, Hassan, Hussain, and ‘Ali; along with the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and the rest of the Prophets.
‘Ali ibn Hussain, who according to the Shia is the Imam after the demise of his father Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu, is accused by the Shia of having more cowardice than a layman. They further state that he had also pledged to serve Yazid, the killer of Hussain (according to them). The narration is mentioned in al Kafi from the son of Zayn al ‘Abidin, Muhammad al Baqir:
Yazid ibn Muawiyah entered Madinah en route for Hajj and sent for a man from the Quraysh.
When he came Yazid asked him, “Do you attest that you are my slave, and if I so wish I may sell you or enslave you?”
He replied, “By Allah, O Yazid! You are not nobler than I in lineage amongst Quraysh nor was your father more virtuous than mine prior to Islam, nor are you more virtuous than me in matters pertaining to religion; so how can I attest to that which you have asked me?”
Yazid then said to him, “If you do not testify I will kill you!”
The man replied, “You killing me is no greater than your killing Hussain ibn ‘Ali.”
Yazid then commanded that he should be killed.
Thereafter, he sent for ‘Ali ibn al Hussain and told him the same that he said to the previous Qurashi.
‘Ali ibn Hussain replied, “If I were not to testify, will you also kill me as you have killed the other yesterday?”
Yazid (may Allah’s curse be on him) replied in the affirmative.
‘Ali ibn Hussain then said, “I agree to what you have asked. I am your forced slave, if you so wish you may enslave me or sell me.”
In a similar fashion the Shia have insulted and disgraced his son and mother.
One of the Imams was asked, “I have got two slaves, one is a Nasibi and the other a Zaidi, and it is necessary for me to be intimate with them; so who should I choose?”
He replied, “Both of them are equal, whomsoever rejects a verse of the Book of Allah it is as if he has cast behind him Islam as a whole… and rejected the entire Qur’an, and all the Messengers.”
Thereafter he said, “As for the Nasibi she is yours, the Zaidi is for us.”
They have also insulted his mother when they have stated:
Everyone became renegade after the killing of Hussain with the exception of five, Abu Khalid, Yahya ibn Umm al Tawil, Jubayr ibn Muti’, Jabir ibn ‘Abdullah, and al Shabkah—the wife of Hussain ibn ‘Ali.
We do not know what became of his mother Sharbanu, as they have omitted her name and mentioned Shabkah.
As for Muhammad al Baqir and his son, Jafar, there is not an insult except that they used it for them, accusing them of cowardice, hypocrisy, treachery, and deceit; despite them having contrived a school of thought in their names. They state regarding al Baqir that he used to permit that which Allah declared unlawful:
Al Baqir used to consider the prey of a hawk or falcon to be lawful (despite it being unlawful).
Thereafter the Shia transmit numerous reports proving the impermissibility of that which a hawk or falcon preyed on.
Zurarah ibn A’yan who is considered to be one of their senior scholars and the axis of their mazhab states regarding al Baqir:
He is an old man who has no knowledge of judicial and legal proceedings.
It has been transmitted from Zurarah:
I asked Muhammad al Baqir regarding a matter and he answered me. Shortly thereafter another person came and enquired about the same matter and he gave a different answer to the one he had given me. Not long after that, a third person came to inquire regarding the same matter, and al Baqir answered him contrary to the answer he had given to the two of us.
After the two had left I said to him, “O son of the Rasul! Two of your Shia from Iraq came and asked regarding a matter, and you answered all of them differently?”
He replied, “O Zurarah! This is better and more preserving for us. If you were to concur on a matter the people might consider you to be more credible than us which could lead to our destruction.”
Zurarah states that he then said to Abu ‘Abdullah, “If you were to command your supporters to cross over spears and fire they would, yet despite that they leave from you differing in opinion?”
He responded to me in the same manner that his father did.
The Shia also state that Abu Jafar praised Abu Hanifah in his presence but then went on to speak ill of him after he had left. Al Kulayni transmits from Muhammad ibn Muslim:
I entered upon Abu ‘Abdullah and Abu Hanifah was also present.
I then said to Abu ‘Abdullah, “May I be sacrificed in your stead! I had a strange dream.”
He replied, “O Ibn Muslim, relate the dream for in our midst we have a scholar who has knowledge of it (the interpretation of dreams),” and he pointed towards Abu Hanifah.
I then related the dream, “It was as if I had entered my house and suddenly my family were against me, they broke walnuts and scattered it over me. I was perplexed by this dream.”
Abu Hanifah then said, “You will dispute regarding the inheritance of your family and after great effort you will be successful if Allah so wishes.”
Abu ‘Abdullah exclaimed, “By Allah you are correct Abu Hanifah.”
When Abu Hanifah left, I said to him, “May I be sacrificed in your stead! I dislike the interpretation of that Nasibi.”
He then said, “O Ibn Muslim! Allah will not dishonour you! Our interpretations do not concur, and he has interpreted the dream incorrectly.”
I then said, “May I be sacrificed in your stead, but you have taken an oath and said that he was correct?”
He replied, “Yes! I took an oath that he was correctly wrong!”
They also attribute to him the statement:
I speak in seventy different ways and in each of them there is an escape for me.
We have previously mentioned the fabrications they have attributed to him, which one feels shy to even mention; nevertheless, we will transmit one report. Al Kashshi transmits from Zurarah:
By Allah! If I were to speak about all of that which I had heard from Abu ‘Abdullah, the male’s private parts would become stiff like wood.
The Shia have also insulted Musa ibn Jafar together with his mother:
Ibn Ukashah entered upon Abu Jafar and Abu ‘Abdullah was standing next to him. He presented him with some grapes.
Abu Jafar then said, “The elderly man and the child eat a grape at a time. As for he who thinks that he will not be satiated, he eats three to four at a time. So eat two grapes at a time as that is recommended.”
Ibn Ukashah then asked Abu Jafar, “Why do you not marry Abu Abd Allah as he has already reached puberty?”
Ibn Ukashah explains, “In front of him was a sealed package.”
Thereafter Abu Jafar said, “A slave trader from Berber will come, who will then reside in the house of Maymun. We will purchase from him a slave with this parcel.”
It so happened that the slave trader finally arrived, and we thus entered upon Abu Jafar.
He said to us, “Shall I not inform you that the slave trader who I had talked about has arrived. Thus go to him and purchase from him a slave.”
When we reached the slave trader, he said, “I have sold all of my slaves, all that remains now are two sick slaves; one being superior to the other.”
We said to him, “Bring them forth so that we can have a look at them.”
Thereafter, we asked, “How much are you selling the superior one for.”
He replied, “Seventy gold coins.”
We replied, “Excellent!”
The slave trader then reaffirmed, “I will not accept anything less than seventy gold coins.”
We said to him, “We will purchase her from you with what this bag contains, and we are not aware of how much money is in it.”
There was a white-haired and bearded man sitting by his side who instructed, “Open it and count.”
The slave trader than said, “Do not open it because if it is one coin less than seventy gold coins, I will not sell her to you.”
The elderly man then said, “Come closer.”
We advanced towards him and he opened it, counted it and there was exactly seventy gold coins in the bag. Thereupon we took the slave and presented her to Abu Jafar. Jafar was also present. We informed Abu Jafar of what had transpired and he praised Allah.
He then asked the slave, “What is your name?”
She replied, “Hamidah (one who praises).”
He remarked, “Hamidah in this world and Mahmudah (one who will be praised) in the hereafter. Inform me are you still virgin?”
She replied in the affirmative.
He then asked, “How is that possible whereas nothing falls to the lot of a slave trader except that he spoils it.”
She replied, “He attempted on more than one occasion and he would be positioned over me like how a man is positioned over a female. Allah would then put a white-haired and bearded man over him who would continue to slap him until he would leave.”
He then said, “O Jafar! Take her and she then conceived Musa ibn Jafar.”
They also questioned his knowledge and intellect:
He was asked with regards to a woman who had married despite having been married?
He replied, “She will be stoned and the male will be left.”
I then met Abu Basir and said to him, “I have asked Abu al Hassan with regards to a woman who had married despite her being married and he replied that she will be stoned and the male will be left.”
Abu Basir then rubbed his chest and said, “I do not think our companion’s wisdom has completely developed.”
In another narration:
I do not think his knowledge has fully developed.
Abu Basir al Muradi would accuse Musa ibn Jafar of being materialistic. Al Kashshi transmits from Hammad ibn ‘Uthman:
Ibn Abi Ya’fur, another person, and I went to Hirah or to some other place. We then spoke about worldly affairs.
Abu Basir al Muradi then remarked, “If our companion (Musa ibn Jafar) were to conquer it he would run a monopoly.”
The Shia attribute the permissibility of sodomy to ‘Ali ibn Musa ibn Jafar. Moreover, they transmit regarding him something similar to that of his father. Hisham ibn Ahmed narrates:
Abu al Hassan al Awwal asked, “Have you heard of anyone who had come from the west?”
I replied, “No.”
Thereafter he said, “Yes, a fair skinned person from the west has arrived, so let us go to him.”
We then mounted our conveyances and set out until we reached him, and with him was a slave.
Abu al Hassan then said to the man, “Present to us.”
He presented nine slaves and Abu al Hassan declined every one of them.
Thereafter he said to the man, “Present the others.”
The man replied, “None remain.”
Abu al Hassan then insisted.
The man refused and said, “By Allah, I only have one sickly slave.”
Abu al Hassan enquired, “Why is it that you do not want to present her?”
The man refused again and Abu al Hassan then left.
The following day he sent me and instructed me to ask him how much he will sell her for, and if he says such and such then I should purchase her.
I then went to him and asked, to which he said that he wants no less than such and such.
I replied, “I will purchase her from you,” and I gave the money to him.
Thereafter he said, “She is yours.”
He then asked, “Who was that with you yesterday?”
I replied, “A man from Banu Hashim.”
He then enquired, “From which family of Banu Hashim.”
I replied, “Its leaders.”
He then said, “I want more from him.”
I replied, “I do not have more than this.”
He then said, “I will relate to you the incident of this slave. I bought her from the west and a female from the people of the book asked me, ‘To whom does this slave belong?’ I replied, ‘I bought her for myself.’ She then said, ‘She is not befitting for you! She is for the best person on this earth. Furthermore she will not stay by him for long, only until she has conceived for him a son who the east and the west will be indebted to.’ Thus I brought her to him and she is only to remain by him, until she has given birth to ‘Ali.”
Does it even make logical sense that the likes of Musa ibn Jafar and Jafar ibn Baqir could not find suitable partners from the Banu Hashim and other nobles to get married to, and were thus forced to resort to slaves? How strange!
They also state that al Rida and the paternal cousin of Ma’mun were in love with each other. Ibn Babawayh al Qummi when explaining the relationship between Dhu al Riyasatayn and Abu al Hassan al Rida writes:
Dhu al Riyasatayn was jealous of ‘Ali al Rida and showed great enmity towards him on account of Ma’mun favouring him over the rest. It first became apparent on account of the paternal cousin of Ma’mun being fond of al Rida and vice versa. Her door would be open into the council of Ma’mun and she used to be inclined towards Abu al Hassan, and would speak ill of Dhu al Riyasatayn.
When what she would say reached Dhu al Riyasatayn, he said to Ma’mun, “It is not appropriate that the doors of the females should be open to your council.”
Ma’mun then ordered for it to be closed. Furthermore, Ma’mun would go to Hassan one day, and Hassan would go to Ma’mun the next, as the homes were next to each other. When Hassan entered, he looked towards the door and found that it had been closed off.
He thus enquired, “O leader of the believers why have you closed off the door?”
Ma’mun replied, “It was the opinion of Fadl, who has disapproved of it.”
Abu al Hassan then said, “To Allah do we belong and unto Him shall we return. What does Fadl have to do with the Amir al Mu’minin and females entering upon him?”
Ma’mun then asked Abu al Hassan, “What is your opinion?”
He replied, “Open it, enter upon your cousin, and pay no heed to the opinion of Fadl.”
Ma’mun then commanded that the door should be removed and he would then enter upon her.
The news of this reached Fadl and it grieved him.
They also accuse him of being a coward and wretched. Al Juludi (one of the ministers of Harun al Rashid) was sent to al Rida to seize his home and usurp his wealth. Instead of Abu al Hassan defending his wealth, household, and honour, he handed over everything to him.
Abu al Hassan al Rida entered his house and did not leave a thing behind. He even took the earrings, anklets, and pants of the females; and whatever he could lay his hands on in the house and gave it to him.
As for the son of al Rida, Muhammad, who was nicknamed Qani’ and given the agnomen of Abu Jafar al Thani, the Shia have questioned his parentage due to his dark pigmentation. The Shia further state that the first to have questioned his parentage were his own aunts and uncles. They transmit from ‘Ali ibn Jafar ibn al Baqir:
His brothers said to al Rida, “We never had an Imam of dark pigmentation.”
He replied, “He is my son.”
Thereafter they said, “The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had employed a Qa’if (those who are able to determine a child’s paternity) so let us too employ one.”
He then replied, “You can send for one, as for me I will not. Furthermore, do not inform them as to why you have sent for them.”
When the Qa’ifs arrived, they made us sit in the garden, and lined up his paternal aunts, his brothers, and sisters. Al Rida was made to wear a cloak and hood made out of cotton. A shovel was also placed on his neck.
Thereafter they told him, “Enter the garden as if you are a worker.”
Abu Jafar (Muhammad al Jawwad) was then brought and they instructed the Qa’ifs to identify his father.
They replied, “His father is not present here, however, this is his father’s paternal uncle, this is his paternal uncle, and that is his paternal aunt. If his father were present here amongst you it would have been none other than the person to whom this orchard belongs, as their feet resemble one another.
When Abu al Hassan returned they said, “This is his father.”
Look at this theatrical performance, how degrading is it towards the household of ‘Ali?
Furthermore, they state that he was a coward and fainthearted. When al Mu’tasim al ‘Abbasi summoned him for the second time:
He cried until his beard was soaking wet, thereafter turned and said, “It was this one who ‘Ali feared.”
Regarding his son, ‘Ali al Hadi, they state that his father had passed away when he was only eight. This led to serious differences concerning his Imamah, until they finally established it through the testimony of a man who was not from among them, having coerced him into doing so. Furthermore, they state:
Despite him being an Imam, his estate, wealth, expenses, and slaves will not be made over to him until he becomes matured. And ‘Abdullah ibn al Musawir was put in charge of his affairs by the decree of his father.
Despite the Shia transmitting the following regarding his father:
Some Shia from the outskirts sought permission to see him and he allowed them. After entering they asked him with regards to thirty thousand matters in one gathering. And he answered them whilst he was only ten years of age.
I cannot fathom as to why they have considered him a minor, and were forced to put someone in charge of his affairs until he reaches puberty. Thereafter they state that he did not know who would be the Imam after him. The Shia report that ‘Ali ibn Muhammad appointed his eldest son, Abu Jafar Muhammad, as the Imam after him. However, he was not aware that Abu Jafar Muhammad would pass away in his lifetime. Thus when he passed away he said, “I am not the one who had erred rather Allah was unaware of who was to become the Imam after me.” This is the exact wording:
Bada lillah (Allah was unaware) that Abu Muhammad Hassan al ‘Askari would become the Imam instead of his eldest brother, Abu Jafar, just as in the case with Musa and his brother, Ismail. It is just as you have said it, “Even if the liars detest it.”
As for the eleventh Imam, Hassan ibn ‘Ali—nicknamed al Askari, they state regarding him that he showed gratitude to Allah on the death of his brother when he heard that the Imamah will pass to him. This was after having ripped his clothes and slapped his cheeks; as transmitted by al Mufid in al Irshad and al Arbili in Kashf al Ghummah.
As for the assumed Twelfth Imam, the Shia explicitly write in their books that he was not born nor was he found despite them searching for him. They then later fabricated reports regarding his birth and features.
So either he was born or he was not, one cannot be existent and non-existent at the same time.
They transmit the following report from Ahmed ibn ‘Obaidullah ibn Khaqan, who explains in a very lengthy report regarding al ‘Askari:
When (al Hassan) was ill, he sent to my father that Ibn al Rida was ill. He (my father) rode to the Sultan’s palace. Then he returned quietly with five close trusted servants of the Commander of the faithful. Among them was Nahrir. He ordered them to stay at Hassan’s house and to investigate reports about him and his condition. He sent to a number of medical specialists and ordered them to go to him and to supervise him morning and night. Two or three days later, he was informed that he was weak. He ordered the medical specialists to stay at his house. He sent to the chief Qadi (judge) and made him attend his assembly. He told him to choose ten men who were trustworthy in religion, piety, and loyalty. He sent them to the house of Hassan, peace be on him, and ordered them to stay with him day and night. They remained there until he died, peace be on him. When the news of his death spread around, Samarra became one uproar…
The Sultan instructed that his house be cordoned off along with those in it. He then searched for any sign of a child. Mid-wives were then brought and instructed to examine all Hassan’s slaves to see if any of them was pregnant. Some of them mentioned that there is a slave girl who might be pregnant. She was then placed in a room, and Nahrir was in charge of her along with some associates of his and other women.
Banu Hashim, the military leaders, the secretaries, the judges, the attestators, and the rest of the people (all) rode to his funeral. On that day Samarra seemed like the (Day of) Resurrection. When they had finished the preparations for him, the authorities sent to Abu ‘Isa ibn al Mutawakkil and ordered him to say the (funeral) prayer over him. When the bier was put down for the prayer (to be said) over it, Abu ‘Isa came up to it. He uncovered (Hassan’s) face and showed it to the Banu Hashim, both the ‘Alawites and the ‘Abbasids, the military leaders, the secretaries, the judges and the attestators.
He said, “This is Hassan ibn ‘Ali ibn Muhammad ibn al Rida, peace be on them. He has passed away a natural death while on his bed. So-and-so and so-and-so attended him from among the servants of the commander of the faithful, so-and-so and so-and-so from among the judges, and so-and-so and so-and-so from among the medical specialists.”
Then he covered his face and said the prayer over him and ordered him to be taken (to be buried), and he was buried in the same house his father had been buried in.
After he was buried the Sultan and others started searching the house for a child. An extensive search was carried out and they suspended the distribution of his wealth. Furthermore, those who were put in charge of protecting the slave girl who they had suspected of being pregnant, they remained with her until it became evident that she was not pregnant. When it became clear that she was not pregnant, they distributed his wealth between his mother and brother. His mother submitted his bequest which was confirmed by the judge.
One Sunni scholar has expressed it most beautifully: The Mahdi of the Shia is a fabrication and a figment of their imagination. Their Qur’an too is non-existent and their school of thought was made up, and will also one day become non-existent, Allah willing!
This report which all the Shia historians, authors, and Muhaddithin transmit, invalidates the entire premise for which they have fabricated these fascinating stories about the birth of the Twelfth Imam. If not, then all that is intended with the above mentioned report can only be understood to be disrespectful towards him, by declaring him non-existent whereas he was alive.
Al Mufid and others writes:
He was not born in his father’s lifetime and few knew about him after his father’s demise. Jafar ibn ‘Ali, the brother of Abu Muhammad, then assumed leadership, took his estate, and strove towards imprisoning the slaves of Abu Muhammad and arrested his wives… Jafar took the estate of Abu Muhammad and strove in taking the position his brother once occupied amongst the Shia.
This is their twelfth Imam, if he exists. Some actually believed in the leadership of Jafar ibn ‘Ali, brother of Hassan al ‘Askari, and named themselves the Jafariyyah. However, the Shia curse him and insult him as is their norm. They state regarding Jafar ibn Muhammad:
He was an open sinner, obscene, insolent, and used to drink wine. The least important person I have seen, exposes his own sins, imbecile, and he has no confidence in himself.
They also refer to him as Jafar al Kadhab (the great liar) and use other such attributes for him.
I do not know how is it possible for the present day Shia to embrace the Fatimid’s and claim: “The Fatimid dynasty was a Shia state. The children of our forefather, and advocators to our way. The initiators of knowledge and civilization in Egypt, the ones who had erected Masajid and established publishing houses and universities.( Al Shia fi al Mizan lil Mughniyah pg. 149 and A’yan al Shia pg. 264 sec. 2.)
Despite the Shia themselves having concurred that the Fatimids were out of the fold of Islam.
A report was written in the Caliphate of al Qadir al ‘Abbasi in the month of Rabi al Akhir the year 402 A.H. which contained the signatures of their leading scholars the likes of Naqib al Ashraf, the compiler of Nahj al Balaghah, al Sayed Rida and his brother al Sayed Murtada; a report which history has preserved:
“Al Najim in Egypt, who is Mansur ibn Nizar nicknamed al Hakim ibn Ma’d ibn Ismail ibn ‘Abdur Rahman ibn Sa’id. When he left for Morocco he was named ‘Obaidullah and nicknamed al Mahdi. Him and his predecessors are all the (bastards of) adopted children of the Khawarij and not related to ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib in the least. All those claims are false. Furthermore, none of the progeny of Abu Talib had hesitated in referring to them as the (bastards of) adopted children of the Khawarij.” This repudiation and disclaimer was wide spread in the two holy cities when they had just started their movement in Morocco. Which in turn left no room for duplicity.
“The Najim in Egypt and his predecessors are all disbelievers, immoral and infidels with Magianism beliefs. They have transgressed the bounds, legalised prostitution and bloodshed, cursed the Prophets and the predecessors and claimed deism.”
The signatures of the following individuals were on the report.
Al Sharif al Rida, his brother al Murtada, ibn al Azraq al Musawi, Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Umar ibn Abi Ya’la al Alawiyun, Qadi Abu Muhammad Abdullah ibn Al Alfani, Qadi Abu al Qasim al Jaza’iri, Imam al Hamid al Isfarahini and many others. (al Nujum al Zahirah fi Muluk Misr wa al Qahirah pg. 229-230 by Jamal al Din (d. 874 A.H), Shadharat al Dhahab, Tarikh al Islam, Mirat al Uqul al Muntazim, and Aqd al Jumman.)
 Surah al Zumar: 56
 Al Usul min al Kafi, vol. 1 pg. 372.
Al Rawdah min al Kafi, vol. 8 pg. 234. 235,
Ibid, vol. 8 pg. 235,
 Majalis al Mu’minin by al Shustari, al Majlis al Khamis, pg. 144.
Al Furu min al Kafi, vol. 6 pg. 208, Bab Sayd al Bazat wa al-Saqur wa Ghayr Thalik.
Al Usul min al Kafi.
Al Usul min al Kafi, pg. 65, Kitab Fadl al ‘Ilm.
 Kitab al Rawdah min al Kafi, vol. 8 pg. 292.
 Basa’ir al Darajat, al Juz al Sadis.
 Rijal al Kashshi, pg. 123.
Al Usul min al Kafi, vol. 1 pg. 477, Kitab al Hujjah. Bab Mawlid Musa ibn Jafar.
A senior Shia scholar and their mentor, amongst those regarding whom Jafar had allegedly stated, “Were it not for them, the prophetic traditions would have been lost and extinguished.” (Rijal al Kashshi pg. 152)
Rijal al Kashshi, pg. 153-154.
 Ibid, pg. 154.
 Al Istibsar, Bab Ityan al Nisa’ Ma Duna al Farj, vol. 3 pg. 343.
 ‘Uyun Akhbar al Rida, vol. 1pg. 17-18; al Usul min al Kafi, vol. 1 pg. 486.
 Abu al ‘Abbas al Fadl ibn Sahl ibn Zadanfarukh al Sarakhsi, titled Dhu al Riyasatayn (the man of the two commands) was a famous Persian vizier of the ‘Abbasid era in Khurasa, who served under al Ma’mun.
 ‘Uyun Akhbar al Rida, pg. 153-154.
 ‘Uyun Akhbar al Rida, vol. 2 pg. 161.
 Al Usul min al Kafi, vol. 1 pg. 322, 323.
 For more details, check Kitab al Hujjah Ch. al Isharah wa al Nass ‘ala Abi al Hassan al Thalith vol. 1 pg. 324.
Al Usul min al Kafi, vol. 1 pg. 325.
Al Usul min al Kafi, vol. 1 pg. 496, Kitab al Hujjah, Bab Mawlid Muhammad ibn ‘Ali.
 What is intended hereby is that Allah was unmindful or that He subhanahu wa ta ‘ala forgot (May Allah forbid). For more details, refer to our book al Shia wa al Sunnah the first chapter which discusses Bada.
 Al Irshad, pg. 337.
 Ibid, pg. 326.
 Ibid, pg. 405.
 Kitab al Hujjah min al Kafi, pg. 505; al Irshad vol. 339, 340; Kashf al Ghummah, pg. 408, 409; al Fusul al Muhimmah, pg. 289; Jala al ‘Uyun, vol. 2 pg. 762; I’lam al Wara, pg. 377, 378.
 Al Irshad, pg. 345; I’lam al Wara, pg. 380.
 Al Usul min al Kafi, vol. 1 pg. 504.