Examining the Sixth Narration in the “Book of Forty Hadiths on the Mahdiyyin

Dar al-Hedayah | Nazim al-Uqaili, one of the official representatives of the claimant Yamani, authored a book titled “Forty Hadiths Regarding the Mahdiyyin and the Children of the Qa’im (as)” to prove his faction’s belief in the existence of 12 Imams from the descendants of Imam al-Mahdi (aj). In this book, he claims to cite forty hadiths proving the twelve Imams after Imam al-Mahdi (aj). He asserts:

Nazim’s Claims Regarding the “Mahdiyyin”:

1. Imamate is not confined to twelve Imams.

2. The “Mahdiyyin” after Imam al-Zaman (aj) hold the station of succession (wisayah) and Imamate.

3. The “Mahdiyyin” are the very progeny and children of Imam al-Zaman (aj).

 The Sixth Narration of the “Mahdiyyin” Book

Another narration that Nazim al-Uqaili cites in his book as the sixth hadith to prove his three claims is the following:

جَعْفَرٌ، عَنْ ذَرِيحٍ، قَالَ: سَأَلْتُهُ عَنِ الْأَئِمَّةِ بَعْدَ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَ عَلَيْهِمْ … فَقَالَ لِي: إِنَّمَا ذَكَرْتُ هَذَا لِتَكُونَ مِنْ شُهَدَاءِ اللَّهِ فِي الْأَرْضِ، إِنَّ مِنَّا بَعْدَ الرَّسُولِ سَبْعَةَ أَوْصِيَاءَ أَئِمَّةً مُفْتَرَضَةً طَاعَتُهُمْ، سَابِعُهُمُ الْقَائِمُ إِنْ شَاءَ اللَّهُ؛ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ يُقَدِّمُ مَا يَشَاءُ وَ يُؤَخِّرُ مَا يَشَاءُ وَ هُوَ الْعَزِيزُ الْحَكِيمُ، ثُمَّ بَعْدَ الْقَائِمِ أَحَدَ عَشَرَ مَهْدِيًّا مِنْ وُلْدِ الْحُسَيْنِ. فَقُلْتُ: مَنِ السَّابِعُ جَعَلَنِيَ اللَّهُ فِدَاكَ، أَمْرُكَ عَلَى الرَّأْسِ وَ الْعَيْنَيْنِ؟ قَالَ: «قُلْتُ ثَلَاثَ مَرَّاتٍ» قَالَ: ثُمَّ بَعْدِي إِمَامُكُمْ وَ قَائِمُكُمْ إِنْ شَاءَ اللَّهُ.

Translation: Ja’far (al-Sadiq) from Dharih, who said: I asked him about the Imams after the Prophet (pbuh)… So he (Imam al-Sadiq (as)) said to me: “I have only mentioned this so that you may be among the witnesses of Allah on earth. Verily, from us after the Messenger there are seven successors (awsiya’), Imams whose obedience is obligatory; their seventh is the Qa’im, if Allah wills. Verily, Allah is Mighty, Wise; He advances what He wills and delays what He wills, and He is the Mighty, the Wise. Then after the Qa’im there are eleven Mahdiyyin from the descendants of al-Husayn (as).” I said: “Who is the seventh, may Allah make me your ransom? Your command is upon my head and eyes.” I said this three times. He said: “Then after me is your Imam and your Qa’im, if Allah wills.”

*Al-Usul al-Sittata ‘Ashara: The Principle of Muhammad ibn al-Muthanna al-Hadrami, pp. 90-91*

 Critical Examination: Seven Major Flaws

1. First Point: Anomalous Source & Suspected Corruption

This narration is from the book “Al-Usul al-Sittata ‘Ashara” (The Sixteen Principles), specifically from the principle attributed to Muhammad ibn al-Muthanna al-Hadrami. Although this “Hadrami” principle was available to many great scholars (like al-Kulayni, al-Tusi, al-Saduq, al-Majlisi), this specific narration is found only in “Al-Usul al-Sittata ‘Ashara” and not in any other reliable hadith compilation. This strengthens the suspicion that the copy in “Al-Usul al-Sittata ‘Ashara” is corrupted, altered, or problematic.

2. Second Point: Its Content Supports the Deviant Waqifiyya Sect

The implication of this narration supports the beliefs of the Waqifiyya sect. The Waqifiyya are those who believed in only seven Imams and rejected the Imamate of Imam al-Rida (as) and those after him.

Al-Shaykh al-Hurr al-Amili, commenting on the narrations in “Al-Usul al-Sittata ‘Ashara,” said he found most of its narrations in reliable books like Al-Kafi, and the rest had supporting evidence, except for two objectionable (munkar) narrations. It is certain that one of these two objectionable narrations is this very one, due to its support for the Waqifiyya. Because of its objectionable and unacceptable content, no Shi’a traditionist ever included this narration in their authoritative works.

3. Third Point: A Corrupted Version of a Sound Narration

The narrator chain indicates that “al-Hadrami” took this from “Dharih al-Muharibi” from Imam al-Sadiq (as). However, the exact same narration—but without the problematic addition at the end—is found in Al-Kafi (Vol. 1, p. 181). In Al-Kafi, Imam al-Sadiq (as) names the Imams up to his father, Imam al-Baqir (as), and when Dharih presses him about who comes next, he says he told him this so he could be a witness. The Al-Kafi version ends there, with no mention of “eleven Mahdiyyin after the Qa’im.” This confirms that the version in “Al-Usul al-Sittata ‘Ashara” is corrupted with additions.

4. Fourth Point: No Proof for the Claim

Even if we consider the added phrase, it only mentions the existence of eleven Mahdiyyin from the descendants of Imam al-Husayn (as) after the Qa’im. It provides no evidence whatsoever that these Mahdiyyin are the children of Imam al-Zaman (aj) or that they possess the station of Imamate.

5. Fifth Point: Contradiction with the Claimants’ Own Doctrine

According to this narration, the eleven Mahdiyyin come after the Qa’im who is the seventh successor. The narration explicitly states that the Imams after the Prophet (pbuh) are seven, and the seventh is the Qa’im. When Dharih asks who the seventh is, Imam al-Sadiq (as) says: “Then after me is your Imam and your Qa’im”—clearly identifying the seventh Imam as Imam al-Kazim (as). Therefore, the “Qa’im” in this narration is Imam Musa al-Kazim (as), and the eleven Mahdiyyin would come after him. This directly contradicts the claim of Ahmad al-Basri’s faction that the Mahdiyyin come after Imam al-Mahdi al-Muntazar (aj), the twelfth Imam. It instead supports the Waqifiyya belief that Imam al-Kazim (as) was the final Qa’im.

6. Sixth Point: Nazim al-Uqaili’s Distortion of the Text’s Meaning

Nazim al-Uqaili claims that the “seven successors” refer to seven Imams starting from Imam al-Sadiq (as), making the seventh one Imam al-Mahdi (aj). This is a blatant distortion because the Arabic text says “from us after the Messenger” (minna ba’da al-Rasul)—meaning the count starts from Imam Ali (as), not from Imam al-Sadiq (as). Furthermore, the narration itself clarifies this when the Imam says the Imam after him is the seventh, confirming the count begins with Amir al-Mu’minin (as).

7. Seventh Point: Dishonest Manipulation of Scholarly Commentary

Nazim al-Uqaili commits an unforgivable act of dishonesty regarding a commentary by Shaykh al-Tusi. The Waqifiyya used a narration stating “Relief is with the seventh of us” to argue Imam al-Kazim (as) was the final Qa’im. Shaykh al-Tusi, in Al-Ghaybah (p. 53), refuted them by saying the phrase “seventh of us” could mean “the seventh from Imam al-Sadiq (as) himself,” which would then refer to Imam al-Mahdi (aj), the twelfth Imam, thus resolving any contradiction.

Nazim al-Uqaili twists this. He claims Shaykh al-Tusi meant the “seventh from the children of Imam al-Sadiq (as),” which would be a thirteenth figure, and then he inserts his “First Mahdi” (Ahmad al-Basri) into that role. This is a complete fabrication. Shaykh al-Tusi himself, in the same book (Al-Ghaybah, p. 126), explicitly and repeatedly affirms that the Imams after the Prophet (pbuh) are twelve, no more and no less, and that any claim of a thirteenth Imam is false and its proponents have vanished.

 Conclusion: A Fabricated Text Supporting a Defunct Sect

The sixth narration is utterly worthless as evidence for the “Mahdiyyin” doctrine for the following reasons:

1. Source Corruption: It is found only in a suspect collection, missing from all authoritative books, and is a corrupted version of a sound narration in Al-Kafi.

2. Doctrinal Alignment: Its content supports the deviant and extinct Waqifiyya sect, which believed in only seven Imams, with Imam al-Kazim (as) as the Qa’im.

3. Internal Contradiction: It places the “eleven Mahdiyyin” after the seventh Imam (al-Kazim (as)), not after the twelfth Imam (al-Mahdi (aj)), directly contradicting the claimants’ own belief.

4. Scholarly Rejection: It was recognized as objectionable (munkar) by major scholars and never accepted.

5. Intentional Distortion: Its proponent, Nazim al-Uqaili, further distorts its meaning and even falsifies the commentary of Shaykh al-Tusi to force it to fit his narrative.

This narration is not proof for a new chain of Imams; it is a relic of an old heresy (Waqifiyya) being resurrected and misapplied to support a new one. Its use demonstrates the intellectual desperation and methodological dishonesty of the claimant Yamani’s faction.