BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents

 

What is Attributed to al Hassan al ‘Askari

 

1. The Narration of Farhat al Zahra’

 

رَوى ابن أَبي العلاء الهَمداني الوَاسطي ويَحيى بن مُحمد بن حُويج البَغدادي قَالا تَنازعنا في ابن الخَطاب واشتبه علينا أَمره فَقصدنا جَميعًا أَحمد بن إسحاق القمي صَاحب أَبي الحَسن العَسكري عليه السلام بمدينة قُم فَقَرعنا عليه البَاب فخرجت علينا صَبية عِراقية فَسألنَاها عنه فَقالت هُو مشغول بِعِيده فإنه يَوم عِيد فَقُلت سُبحان الله إِنما الأَعياد أَربعة للشيعة الفطر الأضحى الغدير والجُمعة قَالت فإن أحمد بن إسحاق يَروي عن سَيده أبي الحَسن علي بن مُحمد العَسكري عليه السَلام أَن هَذا اليوم يَوم عِيد وهُو أَفضل الأَعياد عند أهل البيت عليهم السلام وعند مَواليهم قلنا فاستأذني عليه وأخبره بمكاننا قالا فدخلت عليه فأخبرته فخرج علينا وهو مستور بمئزر يفوح مسكًا وهو يمسح وجهه فأنكرنا ذلك عليه فقال لا عليكما فإني اغتسلت للعيد قلنا أوَّلًا هذا يوم عيد قال نعم وكان يوم التاسع من شهر ربيع الأول قالا فأدخلنا داره وأجلسنا ثم قال إني قصدت مولاي أبا الحسن عليه السلام كما قصدتماني بسر من رأى فاستأذنت عليه فأذن لي فدخلت عليه عليه السلام في مثل هذا اليوم وهو يوم التاسع من شهر ربيع الأول فرأيت سيدنا عليه وعلى آبائه السلام قد أوعز إلى كل واحد من خدمه أن يلبس ما يمكنهم من الثياب الجدد وكان بين يديه مجمرة يحرق العود فيها بنفسه فقلت له بآبائنا وأمهاتنا يا ابن رسول الله هل تجدد لأهل البيت في هذا اليوم فرح فقال عليه السلام وأي يوم أعظم حرمة عند أهل البيت من هذا اليوم التاسع من شهر ربيع الأول ثم ذكر أن هذا اليوم هو يوم مقتل عمر وبدأ يسرد عدة من مثالبه بزعمه والتي منها أنه أحرق بيت الوحي وكذب فاطمة بنت رسول الله واغتصب فدك منها وأسخط قرة عين المصطفى ولم يرضها ولطم وجه الزكية عليها السلام

Ibn Abi al ‘Ala’ al Hamdani al Wasiti and Yahya ibn Muhammad ibn Huwayj[1] al Baghdadi said, “We had a dispute regarding ‘Umar ibn al Khattab and were unsure about his matter, so we both decided to visit Ahmed ibn Ishaq al Qummi, the companion of Abu al Hassan[2] al ‘Askari, in the city of Qum. We knocked on his door and an Iraqi girl came out to greet us. We asked her about him and she said, ‘He is occupied with his festival, as today is a day of celebration.’

I responded, ‘Glory be to Allah. There are only four festivals for the Shia: ‘Id al Fitr, ‘Id al Adha, ‘Id al Ghadir, and Friday.’

She replied, ‘Ahmed ibn Ishaq narrates from his master, Abu al Hassan ‘Ali ibn Muhammad al ‘Askari, that today is a celebration and it is the greatest celebration for the Ahlul Bayt and their followers.’

We said, ‘Seek permission to enter on our behalf and inform him of our presence.’

She entered upon him and informed him. Then he came out to us, covered with a waistcloth, from which musk was emanating. He was wiping his face. We were surprised by this, and he said, ‘There is no problem, for I have washed for the ‘Id.’

We enquired, ‘Is today a day of ‘Id?’

He said, ‘Yes, it is the ninth day of the month of Rabi’ al Awwal.’

He brought us into his home and made us sit. Then he said, ‘I intended to visit my master Abu al Hassan, just as you intended, in Surr Man Ra’a[3]. I sought permission from him, and he granted it. I entered upon him on this day, the ninth of Rabi’ al Awwal. I saw our master instruct each of his servants to wear the finest new clothes they could. In front of him was a censer in which he was burning incense with his own hands. I said to him, ‘May our fathers and mothers be sacrificed for you, O son of the Messenger of Allah! Is there joy renewed for the Ahlul Bayt on this day?’

He said, ‘And what day is more sacred for the Ahlul Bayt than this ninth day of Rabi’ al Awwal?’ He then mentioned that this day is the day of the killing of ‘Umar and began to recount several of his alleged misdeeds, including that he burned the House of Revelation, denied Fatimah the daughter of the Messenger of Allah, usurped Fadak from her, displeased the joy of the Prophet’s eye and did not satisfy her, and struck the face of the pure one.’”[4]

 

Study of the Isnad

This narration is not found in any of the early Shia narrative sources such as the four canonical books, the works of Ibn Babawayh al Qummi, al Mufid, al Tusi, or other early Shia scholars. It has no origin in the core narrative sources. Instead, it was transmitted by a number of later Shia scholars from various sources:

 

• Al Majlisi cites it from the book Zawa’id al Fawa’id by ‘Ali ibn Tawus,[5] the son, who narrates it without a chain.[6]
• This narration has also been incorrectly attributed to Dala’il al Imamah by Muhammad ibn Jarir al Tabari. The reason for this mistake is that Ni’mat Allah al Jaza’iri mentions in al Anwar al No’maniyyah:

 

ورويناه من كتاب الشيخ الإمام العالي أبي جعفر محمد بن جرير الطبري قال المقتل الثاني يوم التاسع من شهر ربيع الأول أخبرنا الأمين السيد أبو المبارك أحمد بن محمد بن أردشير الدستاني قال أخبرنا أبو البركات بن محمد الجرجاني قال أخبرنا هبة الله القمي واسمه يحيى قال حدثنا أحمد بن إسحاق بن محمد البغدادي قال حدثنا الفقيه الحسن بن الحسن السامري أنه قال كنت أنا ويحيى بن أحمد بن جريح البغدادي فقصدنا أحمد بن إسحاق القمي وهو صاحب الإمام الحسن العسكري عليه السلام

And we narrated it from the book of Sheikh al Imam al ‘Ali Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn Jarir al Tabari, who said — the second killing on the ninth day of the month of Rabi’ al Awwal was reported to us by al Amin al Sayed Abu al Mubarak Ahmed ibn Muhammad ibn Ardashir al Dastani who said — we were informed by Abu al Barakat ibn Muhammad al Jurjani who said — we were informed by Hibat Allah al Qummi, whose name was Yahya, who said — Ahmed ibn Ishaq ibn Muhammad al Baghdadi reported to us, saying — al Faqih al Hassan ibn al Hassan al Samiri told us that he said: “I and Yahya ibn Ahmed ibn Jurayh al Baghdadi intended to visit Ahmed ibn Ishaq al Qummi, who was a companion of Imam al Hassan al ‘Askari.”[7]

 

Then he mentioned the report. ‘Abdul Zahra’ al ‘Alawi mistakenly thought that the Muhammad ibn Jarir referred to here is the same al Tabari to whom the book Dala’il al Imamah is attributed. Thus, he attributed the narration to him, saying:

 

وقد رواه مسندًا الطبري القرن الرابع في كتابه دلائل الإمامة

It was narrated with a chain by al Tabari (fourth century) in his book Dala’il al Imamah.[8]

 

Some others followed him in this.[9] This attribution is incorrect, as al Jaza’iri did not explicitly attribute the report to either the book Dala’il al Imamah or its author. He did not clarify which Muhammad ibn Jarir al Tabari is being referred to, so it could refer to the author of al Mustarshid, or it could refer to the author of Dala’il al Imamah. Since this narration does not exist in the book Dala’il al Imamah, its attribution to its author is incorrect. Moreover, the absence of this narration in the book al Mustarshid prevents it from being attributed to Muhammad ibn Jarir ibn Rustam al Tabari.

• This narration has been attributed to the book Misbah al Anwar fi Fada’il Imam al Abrar by Hashim ibn Muhammad Ma’an, a Shia scholar from the 6th century. The book is still in manuscript form. The chain of narration in Misbah al Anwar reads:

أخبرنا أبو محمد الحسن بن محمد القمي بالكوفة قال حدثنا أبو بكر محمد بعن جدويه القزويني وكان شيخًا صالحا زاهدًا سنة إحدى وأربعين وثلاثمائة صاعدًا إلى الحج قال حدثني محمد بن علي القزويني قال حدثنا الحسن بن الحسن الخالدي بمشهد أبي الحسن الرضا عليه السلام قال حدثنا محمد بن العلاء الهمداني الواسطي ويحيى بن محمد بن جريح البغدادي قالا تنازعنا في أمر أبي الخطاب محمد بن أبي زينب الكوفي واشتبه علينا أمره فقصدنا جميعًا أبا علي أحمد عن إسحاق بن سعد الأشعري القمي صاحب أبي الحسن العسكري عليه السلام بمدينة قم

Abu Muhammad al Hassan ibn Muhammad al Qummi in Kufah informed us, saying — Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Jadawayh al Qazwini, a pious and ascetic scholar, who was traveling for Hajj in the year 341 AH, told me that — Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al Qazwini said — al Hassan ibn al Hassan al Khalidi said in the presence of Abu al Hassan al Rida ‘alayh al Salam — Muhammad ibn al ‘Ala’ al Hamdani al Wasiti and Yahya ibn Muhammad ibn Jurayh al Baghdadi reported, “We disputed over the matter of Abu al Khattab[10] Muhammad ibn Abi Zainab al Kufi and became confused about it, so we all decided to visit Abu ‘Ali Ahmed ibn Ishaq al Qummi, the companion of Imam al ‘Askari in the city of Qum.”

and reported the story.[11]

 

• This narration was also found in the book al ‘Aqd al Nadid wa al Durr al Farid, attributed to Muhammad ibn al Hassan al Qummi,[12] which states:

 

عن الحسن بن الحسين السامري قال كنت أنا ويحيى بن أحمد بن جريح البغدادي فتنازعنا في ابن الخطاب فاشتبه علينا أمره فقصدنا أحمد بن إسحاق القمي صاحب الإمام أبي محمد الحسن بن علي العسكري عليهما السلام بمدينة قم

From al Hassan ibn al Hussain al Samiri, who said, “I and Yahya ibn Ahmed ibn Jurayh al Baghdadi disputed over the matter of Abu al Khattab and became confused about it, so we decided to visit Ahmed ibn Ishaq al Qummi, the companion of Imam al ‘Askari in the city of Qum.”

Then he mentioned the narration.[13]

 

• Al Hassan ibn Sulaiman al Hilli also mentioned this narration in his book al Muhtadar, quoting:

 

ما نقله الشيخ الفاضل علي بن مظاهر الواسطي عن محمد بن العلاء الهمداني الواسطي ويحيى بن جريح البغدادي قالا تنازعنا في أمر ابن الخطاب فاشتبه علينا أمره فقصدنا جميعًا أحمد بن إسحاق القمي صاحب العسكري عليه السلام بمدينة قم

What was transmitted by the Sheikh al Fadil ‘Ali ibn Mazahir al Wasiti — from Muhammad ibn al ‘Ala’ al Hamdani al Wasiti and Yahya ibn Muhammad ibn Jurayh al Baghdadi, who said, “We disputed over the matter of Abu al Khattab, and it became confused for us, so we decided to visit Ahmed ibn Ishaq al Qummi, the companion of Imam al ‘Askari in the city of Qum.”

and mentioned the report.[14]

 

After examining the sources of this narration, it becomes clear that the report contains several defects and that its chain of transmission is disconnected:

• ‘Ali ibn Tawus’s narration in Zawa’id al Fawa’id lacks a connected chain of transmission. ‘Ali ibn Tawus did not mention his chain to the one who narrated the report and there is a gap of three centuries between him and the narrators, as ‘Ali ibn Tawus was alive until 704 AH.
• The narration reported by al Jaza’iri from al Tabari also lacks a connected chain, as al Jaza’iri did not clarify where he took the narration from and there are several centuries between him and al Tabari.
• As for the author of Misbah al Anwar, Hashim ibn Muhammad, he is unknown and has no known biography. Al Shahrudi said about him, “He was not mentioned.”[15]
• Moreover, the chain of transmission in the book is definitely not connected. Hashim ibn Muhammad narrates in this report from al Hassan al Qummi, who heard this report from Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Jadawayh al Qazwini in the year 341 AH. If we know that Hashim ibn Muhammad was alive in the year 552 AH,[16] it becomes clear that there is a clear gap in the chain, as there are more than 200 years between Hashim ibn Muhammad and Abu Bakr al Qazwini, making it impossible for him to narrate from him with only one intermediary.
• As for the author of al ‘Aqd al Nadid, al Hassan ibn Muhammad al Qummi, he is also unknown, and nothing is known about his life. The editor of his book states:

 

لم يعرف شيء عن حياة المؤلف

Nothing is known about the life of the author.[17]

 

He has no biography in the books of Rijal and the earliest person to mention him is Muhsin al Amin in his al A’yan, where he mentions that he was one of the prominent figures of the 7th century or later.[18] The source of Muhsin al Amin is the manuscript of al ‘Aqd al Nadid, and thus his reliance on the book itself for the biography is evident, as it is the only source he has for identifying the author. Furthermore, this narration is also transmitted by al Qummi without a chain of narration.

It could be suggested that al Hassan ibn Muhammad al Qummi is the same person who is quoted by Hashim ibn Muhammad in Misbah al Anwar. However, this is strange because al Hassan ibn Muhammad al Qummi, in this narration, heard from Abu Bakr al Qazwini in 341 AH, which would imply that he lived in the 4th century and, at most, may have lived into the early 5th century. On the other hand, the author of al ‘Aqd al Nadid quotes narrators who lived into the mid-6th century, such as Abu al Mu’ayyad al Khawarizmi (d. 568 AH), Abu Muhammad al Khuza’i al Razi (d. around 510 AH), and al Fattal al Naysaburi (who lived in the 6th century).[19] Therefore, it is impossible that they are the same person unless the book is misattributed to him and was actually authored by someone from the 6th century, though further research into this issue is difficult and unlikely to contribute much to this investigation, especially since there is only one known manuscript of al ‘Aqd al Nadid.[20]

• The narration in al Muhtadar also has an incomplete chain. Sheikh Muhammad ‘Abbas Duhayni, a prominent Shia scholar, stated:

السند الساقط بين علي بن مظاهر الواسطي ومحمد بن العلاء الهمداني الواسطي إذ يفصل بينهما ما لا يقل عن خمسة قرون فالسند الساقط يتكوَّن في أقل تقدير من خمسة رجال وهذا إعضال كبير

The missing link in the chain between ‘Ali ibn Mazahir al Wasiti and Muhammad ibn al ‘Ala’ al Hamdani is at least five centuries apart. This missing link would consist of at least five individuals. This is a significant issue in terms of authenticity.[21]

 

Even if we overlook these issues, the core of the narration relies on the figures of Muhammad ibn al ‘Ala’ al Hamdani al Wasiti and Yahya ibn Muhammad ibn Jurayh or Huwayj, as mentioned in Zawa’id al Fawa’id and Misbah al Anwar. In the versions of the narration transmitted by al Jaza’iri from al Tabari and by al Qummi in al ‘Aqd al Nadid, Yahya ibn Muhammad ibn Jurayh is replaced by al Hassan ibn al Hussain al Samiri!

However, even assuming that these three individuals did narrate the story, it does not benefit the chain of transmission because all three are unknown figures in the Shia biographical books. Muhammad ibn al ‘Ala’ al Hamdani, Yahya ibn Muhammad ibn Jurayh, and al Hassan ibn al Hussain al Samiri are not mentioned in the Shia Rijal literature, as noted by al Shahrudi, who commented on each of them, “They were not mentioned.”[22]

Dr. Hassan Ansari, an Iranian Shia scholar, believes that the origin of this narration lies in the Nusayri tradition. He points out that this narration, with the same chain, can be found in the book Majmu’ al A’yad by Abu Sa’id al Maymun ibn al Qasim al Tabarani al Nusayri (d. 426 AH). Abu Sa’id al Tabarani states:

 

حدثنا محمد بن العباس الخراساني قال أخبرنا أبو علي أحمد بن إسماعيل السليماني قال حدثنا الحسين بن أحمد بن شيبان القزويني قال حدثنا أبو أحمد بن علي الكمنجشي قال حدثنا محمد بن العلاء الهمداني الواسطي ويحيى بن محمد بن جذع البغدادي قال تنازعنا في باب أبي الخطاب فاشتبه علينا أمره فقصدنا جميعًا أحمد بن إسحاق القمي صاحب العسكري عليه السلام بمدينة قم فقرعنا عليه الباب

Muhammad ibn al ‘Abbas al Khurasani narrated to us, saying — Abu ‘Ali Ahmed ibn Ismail al Sulaimani informed us, who said — al Hussain ibn Ahmed ibn Shayban al Qazwini narrated to us, saying — Abu Ahmed ibn ‘Ali al Kamanjashi narrated to us, saying — Muhammad ibn al ‘Ala’ al Hamdani al Wasiti and Yahya ibn Muhammad ibn Jadh’ al Baghdadi narrated to us, saying, “We disputed regarding the matter of Abu al Khattab, and it became unclear to us, so we all went to Ahmed ibn Ishaq al Qummi, the companion of al ‘Askari (peace be upon him), in the city of Qum, and we knocked on his door.”[23]

 

This supports the theory that the original source of this narration comes from the Nusayri tradition, narrated by one of their scholars in the 5th century in a book filled with exaggerations. It then infiltrated the Shia tradition in later centuries.[24]

 

The Opinion of Imamiyyah Scholars on the Isnad

Muhammad Asif Muhsini ruled this narration as weak.[25] The Iranian scholar Dr. Hassan Ansari wrote an article in which he thoroughly researched the origins of this narration in the books of the Imamiyyah and concluded by stating that the origin of the narration is from the Nusayri heritage and he considered this narration to be a fictional story.[26]

Haydar Hubb Allah said:

 

رواية أحمد بن إسحاق فبصرف النظر عن المناقشة في سندها ومدى صراحتها صدورًا ومضمونًا ومتنًا وفيها كلام ليس بالقليل وهي من أهم مستندات ما يعرف بـعيد فرحة الزهراء وهي رواية غير معتبرة على المستوى الصدوري لا على مستوى حجية خبر الثقة ولا الخبر الموثوق

The narration of Ahmed ibn Ishaq, regardless of the discussion about its chain of transmission, its clarity in issuance, content, and text, contains significant issues. It is one of the main sources for what is known as ‘Id Farhat al Zahra’, but it is an unreliable narration in terms of issuance, neither as a trustworthy report nor as a reliable narration.[27]

 

Muhammad ‘Abbas Duhayni said:

 

هذه الرواية ضعيفة السند

This narration has a weak chain of transmission.[28]

 

The Imami Marja’ Muhammad al Yaqubi explicitly stated that there is no basis for this matter, saying:

 

الذي أعتقده أن هذا العيد وهذه الفرحة لا أصل لها والاحتفال به بدعة وقال أيضًا هذه الفرحة وهذا العيد لا أصل له وليس له وجود في عصر الأئمة المعصومين

What I believe is that this celebration and joy have no basis and celebrating it is an innovation.

 

He also said:

 

هذه الفرحة وهذا العيد لا أصل له وليس له وجود في عصر الأئمة المعصومين

This joy and this celebration have no basis and it did not exist during the time of the infallible Imams.[29]

 

Discussion on the Narration’s Text

This narration contains conclusive evidence that it is fabricated and false. Among these are the following:

The claim that ‘Umar ibn al Khattab passed away on the ninth of Rabi’ al Awwal is entirely incorrect. Ibn Idris al Hilli, the Imami scholar, said:

 

وهذا خطأ من قائله بإجماع أهل التاريخ والسير

This is a mistake made by its narrator, according to the consensus of the historians and biographers.[30]

 

It is mentioned in this narration:

 

وأمرت الكرام الكاتبين أن يرفعوا القلم عن الخلق كلهم ثلاثة أيام

And I commanded the noble scribes to cease writing for all of creation for three days.

 

There is no doubt that this is false and fabricated.

 

2. The Narration of al Tarazi

Ibn Tawus said:

 

ذكر الزيارة المشار إليه لمولاتنا فاطمة الزهراء صلوات الله عليها تقول وصلِّ على البتول الطاهرة الصديقة المعصومة التقية النقية الرضية المرضية الزكية الرشيدة المظلومة المقهورة المغصوبة حقها الممنوعة إرثها المكسور ضلعها المظلوم بعلها المقتول ولدها

He mentioned the visitation to our Lady Fatimah al Zahra’, in which it is said: … And send blessings upon the virgin, the pure, the truthful, the infallible, the devout, the pious, the contented, the pleased, the pure, the guided, the oppressed, the overpowered, whose right was usurped, whose inheritance was denied, whose rib was broken, whose husband was wronged, and whose child was killed.[31]

 

Study of the Isnad

This narration lacks a chain of transmission. Ibn Tawus transmitted it from Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al Tarazi, who lived in the fifth century. However, al Tarazi did not provide a chain of transmission for this narration. Furthermore, al Tarazi himself does not have a biography in the books of Rijal, and he is only known through Ibn Tawus’s transmission of his reports. Agha Buzurk al Tihrani said:

 

المؤلف ممن ليست له ترجمة في الأصول الرجالية للأصحاب ولم نطلع على شخصيته إلا من تأليفه الذي ذكره لنا السيد رضي الدين ابن طاووس بالنقل عنه ولم توجد نسخة هذا الكتاب بعد عصر السيد ابن طاووس حتى اليوم بل لم نر النقل عنه في أي موضع آخر عن غير السيد

The author is someone who does not have a biography in the foundational works of Rijal by the Shia scholars, and we do not know his identity except through the work mentioned to us by Sayed Radi al Din ibn Tawus in his transmission. A copy of this book has not been found since the era of Sayed Ibn Tawus until today and we have not seen any other mention of it except from him.[32]

 

Similarly, al Sa’id about him, “He was not mentioned.”[33]

Al Jawahiri summarised an opinion on him, saying, “Majhul (unknown).”[34]

 

The Opinion of Imamiyyah Scholars on the Isnad

Hashim al Hashimi ruled it to be weak and mursal.[35] Asif Muhsini did not include it among the reliable narrations in his work Mashra’at Bihar al Anwar.[36]

 

 

NEXT⇒ Study of the Origins of the Rib-Breaking Narrations and a Study of Their Limited Sources and Chains of Transmission

---

[1] This is how it was mentioned in al Bihar, while other sources mentioned the name as Ibn Jurayh al Baghdadi.

[2] This is how it was mentioned in al Bihar, but there is a clear omission since al Hassan al ‘Askari’s agnomen is Abu Muhammad, and the correct term should be: the companion of Abu Muhammad al Hassan al ‘Askari, as mentioned in other sources.

[3] Surr Man Ra’a is the old name of the city of Samarra in Iraq.

[4] Bihar al Anwar, vol. 31, pg. 120-126.

[5] He is different from the well-known Ibn Tawus, the author of Mahaj al Da’awat, Falah al Sa’il, and other books.

[6] Bihar al Anwar, vol 31, pg. 120-126.

[7] Al Anwar al Nu’maniyyah, vol. 1, pg. 108.

[8] Bihar al Anwar, ed. ‘Abdul Zahra’ Mahdi, vol. 31, pg. 120 (footnote 3).

[9] Sayed ‘Ali Ashraf in his edition of al Muhtadar, pg. 89 (footnote 1); Jafar Murtada al ‘Amili in Ma’sat al Zahra’, vol. 2, pg. 72 (footnote 1).

[10] This is how it was mentioned in Misbah al Anwar and this is also what is found in Majmu’ al A’yad by Abu Sa’id al Tabarani al Nusayri, as will be mentioned later. In other sources: Ibn al Khattab. The closer correct version seems to be Abu al Khattab.

[11] Sayed ‘Ali Ashraf cited this narration in his edition of al Muhtadar, pg. 89 (footnote 1) and ‘Abdul Zahra’ al ‘Alawi referred to it in his commentary on Bihar al Anwar, vol. 31, pg. 129 (footnote 7), quoting the words of the editor of al Muhtadar.

[12] The editor of the book said: Nothing is known about the life of the author. (Introduction to the edited version of al ‘Aqd al Nadid, pg. 7.)

[13] Al ‘Aqd al Nadid wa al Durr al Farid, pg. 60.

[14] Al Muhtadar, pg. 89.

[15] Mustadrakat ‘Ilm Rijal al Hadith, vol. 8, pg. 135.

[16] Al Tihrani mentioned in al Dhari’ah, vol. 21, pg. 103 that the author of al Misbah said, “We were informed by Wajih al Din Abu al Hassan ‘Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Ahmed al ‘Alawi al Harawi in Isfahan on the 17th of Dhu al Hijjah 552.”

[17] Introduction to al ‘Aqd al Nadid, pg. 7.

[18] Quoting the introduction of al ‘Aqd al Nadid, pg. 7.

[19] Introduction to al ‘Aqd al Nadid, pg. 8-9.

[20] Introduction to al ‘Aqd al Nadid, pg. 10.

[21] Yawm Farhat al Zahra’: A Critical Reading, an article published on the official website of Sheikh Muhammad ‘Abbas Duhayni, on Friday, dated 09/12/2016. [http://dohaini.com/?p=2162]

[22] See consecutively: Mustadrakat ‘Ilm Rijal al Hadith, vol. 7, pg. 210, vol. 8, pg. 193, vol. 2, pg. 371. Sheikh al Shaharudi tried to correct the situation of Yahya ibn Muhammad ibn Jurayh in another place, relying on his narration of this report. He said vol. 8, pg. 229, “It contains indications of his goodness and perfection and that cannot be overlooked.” However, authenticating a narrator based on his own narration is laughable, as mentioned by al Khu’i in Mu’jam Rijal al Hadith, vol. 1, pg. 280.

[23] Majmu’ al A’yad al Manshur Dimna Silsilat al Turath al ‘Alawi, vol. 3, pg. 336.

[24] Article: A Fictional Narrative about the Ninth of Rabi’ al Awwal, published in Persian on Dr. Hassan Ansari’s website, dated 27/11/1390 Hijri Shamsi according to the Iranian calendar, corresponding to 24 Rabi’ al Awwal 1433 AH. The Persian title: Sar-Nawesht Yak Riwayat Sakhtagi Darbarah-ye Nuh Rabi’, on Hassan Ansari’s blog at the following link: [https://ansari.kateban.com/post/1867] Viewed on 30/10/2022.]

[25] Mashra’at Bihar al Anwar, vol, 2, pg. 41.

[26] Article: A Fictional Narrative about the Ninth of Rabi’ al Awwal, in Persian, on Hassan Ansari’s blog at the following link: [https://ansari.kateban.com/post/1867] Viewed on 30/10/2022.]

[27] Ida’at fi al Din wa al Fikr wa al Ijtima’, vol. 5, pg. 427.

[28] Yawm Farhat al Zahra’: A Critical Reading, an article published on the official website of Sheikh Muhammad ‘Abbas Duhayni, on Friday, dated 09/12/2016. [http://dohaini.com/?p=2162] Viewed on 30/10/2022.]

[29] Article Farhat al Zahra’, published in the al Sadiqin newsletter, issue 81, pg. 3. Digital copy available on the website of Marja’ Muhammad al Yaqubi at the following link: [https://yaqoobi.com/arabic/index.php/permalink/1870.html]

Viewed on 30/10/2022.

[30] Al Sara’ir, vol. 1, pg. 419.

[31] Ibn Tawus: Iqbal al A’mal, vol. 3, pg. 166.

[32] Al Dhari’ah, vol. 8, pg. 195.

[33] Mustadrakat ‘Ilm Rijal al Hadith, vol. 7, pg. 234.

[34] Al Mufid min Mu’jam Rijal al Hadith, pg. 558.

[35] Hiwar ma’ Fadl Allah, pg. 285.

[36] Mashra’at Bihar al Anwar, vol. 2, pg. 477.