“Examination of the Sixth Hadith within the Section Titled ‘The Fortieth Hadith of the Mahdiyin'”

Dar al-Hidayah | Continuing the examination of the fortieth heading from Nidham Al-Aqili’s book “Forty Hadiths on the Mahdiyeen and the Children of the Qa’im (AS)”, this article analyzes the sixth narration cited under that heading – which is effectively the “forty-fifth” hadith used by the followers to prove the Imamate of Ahmed Isma’il al-Basri (Ahmed Al-Hasan) and their imaginary Mahdiyeen.

Nidham Al-Aqili’s core claims are:

• Imamate is not limited to twelve Imams.
• The Mahdiyeen, after Imam Mahdi (AS), hold the station of Wasayah (successorship) and Imamate.
• The Mahdiyeen are the Itrat (progeny) and children of Imam Mahdi (AS).

The Sixth Hadith Under the Fortieth Heading

The sixth narration that Nidham Al-Aqili cites under the fortieth heading is as follows:

Junadah ibn Abi Umayyah said: “I entered upon al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali (AS) during the illness in which he passed away. Before him was a basin (tasht) into which blood was being discharged, and his liver was coming out in pieces – due to the poison that Mu’awiyah (may Allah curse him) had given him.

I said: ‘O my master, why do you not treat yourself?’ He said: ‘O servant of Allah, with what shall I treat death?’ I said: ‘Indeed we belong to Allah and to Him we shall return.’

Then he turned to me and said: ‘By Allah, this is a covenant that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) made with us – that this affair (of Imamate) will be held by twelve Imams from the children of ‘Ali (AS) and Fatimah (AS). There is none among us except that he is poisoned or killed.'”

Source: Kifayat al-Athar fi al-Nass ‘ala al-A’immah al-Ithna ‘Ashar, Vol. 1, p. 226

Critical Analysis – Four Major Refutations

Refutation One: No Explicit Statement That There Are More Than Twelve Imams

This hadith contains no explicit statement whatsoever that there are Imams beyond the twelve. The hadith clearly and unambiguously states: “twelve Imams from the children of ‘Ali (AS) and Fatimah (AS).” It does not say “thirteen” or “twenty-four” or “twelve plus others.” The number is explicitly fixed at twelve.

Refutation Two: The Phrase “From the Children of Ali and Fatimah” Is Explained Through the Principle of Predominance (Taghlīb)

The fact that the hadith describes the twelve Imams as being “from the children of ‘Ali (AS) and Fatimah (AS)” is due to the principle of predominance (taghlīb) – because eleven of the twelve Imams are literally from the children of ‘Ali (AS) and Fatimah (AS). Imam ‘Ali (AS) himself – although he is the father of those eleven – is not literally a “child” of Fatimah (AS) (he is her husband). However, because the majority (eleven) are from them, the term is applied to all twelve through predominance.

This is a well-established principle in Arabic rhetoric and is used by Ahmed Al-Hasan himself in his own words. Consider his statement:

“For indeed, he (the Prophet) bequeathed (وصى) you with my fathers, the twelve Imams (baba’i al-ithna ‘ashar), and with me (wa bi), and with my twelve sons (wa bi-abna’i al-ithna ‘ashar)…”

Here, Ahmed Al-Hasan uses the principle of taghlīb – he mentions “my fathers, the twelve Imams” even though not all twelve are literally his fathers. In the same way, the hadith mentions “from the children of ‘Ali and Fatimah” even though not all twelve are literally their children. If Ahmed Al-Hasan allows taghlīb in his own statement, he cannot deny it in the hadith.

Refutation Three: Nidham Al-Aqili’s Interpretation Is Inconsistent with His Own Sect’s Belief

Nidham Al-Aqili claims that this hadith proves the Imamate of thirteen Imams (the twelve Imams plus the “first Mahdi”). However, the sect of Ahmed Isma’il al-Basri (Ahmed Al-Hasan) believes in twenty-four Imams in total (the twelve Imams + Ahmed Al-Hasan himself + his twelve sons).

If Nidham Al-Aqili’s interpretation of this hadith were correct, it would only prove thirteen Imams – which would still contradict his own sect’s belief in twenty-four Imams. By interpreting this hadith as supporting thirteen Imams, Nidham Al-Aqili has unintentionally negated the Imamate of his own imaginary Mahdiyeen (the twelve sons of Ahmed Al-Hasan).

Refutation Four: The Book Itself Is Titled “Kifayat al-Athar fi al-Nass ‘ala al-A’immah al-Ithna ‘Ashar” – The Twelve Imams

This hadith appears in the book Kifayat al-Athar fi al-Nass ‘ala al-A’immah al-Ithna ‘Ashar – which, as its title indicates, is a collection of texts and narrations concerning the twelve Imams – not thirteen, not twenty-four, not more. The very name of the book confirms that the hadiths within it are about the twelve Imams specifically.

Furthermore, in another narration from Imam al-Hasan al-Mujtaba (AS) in the same book, the phrase “from the children of ‘Ali (AS) and Fatimah (AS)” is replaced with “from his Ahl al-Bayt and his chosen ones (min ahli baytihi wa safwatihi)” – leaving no doubt whatsoever that this narration is only stating the Imamate of the twelve Imams:

Hisham ibn Muhammad, from his father, who said: “When Amir al-Mu’minin (AS) was killed, al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali (AS) ascended (the pulpit) and wanted to speak, but weeping choked him… then he stood and said: ‘…And indeed, my grandfather, the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), informed me that this affair (of Imamate) will be held by twelve Imams from his Ahl al-Bayt and his chosen ones. There is none among us except that he is killed or poisoned…'”

Source: Kifayat al-Athar fi al-Nass ‘ala al-A’immah al-Ithna ‘Ashar, Vol. 1, p. 160

This alternative wording – “from his Ahl al-Bayt and his chosen ones” – is broader and does not require the principle of taghlīb. It simply states that the twelve Imams are from the Prophet’s Ahl al-Bayt. It does not mention “children of ‘Ali and Fatimah” – and it certainly does not mention any “Mahdiyeen” or “children of Imam Mahdi (AS).”

Summary of the Argument

The followers of Ahmed Al-Hasan claim that this hadith – with its phrase “from the children of ‘Ali and Fatimah” – proves that there are additional Imams (Mahdiyeen) from the children of Imam Mahdi (AS). However, this claim is based on a literalist misreading of the text and a failure to understand the principle of taghlīb.

The correct understanding is:

1. The hadith explicitly states twelve Imams – no more, no less.
2. The phrase “from the children of ‘Ali and Fatimah” is explained through taghlīb: Because eleven of the twelve are literally from them, the term is applied to all twelve through predominance.
3. Ahmed Al-Hasan himself uses taghlīb: He says “my fathers, the twelve Imams” even though not all twelve are literally his fathers.
4. Nidham Al-Aqili’s interpretation is inconsistent: If the hadith proved thirteen Imams, it would still contradict his own sect’s belief in twenty-four Imams.
5. The book’s title confirms the number: It is a collection of texts on the twelve Imams.
6. Alternative wording in the same book confirms it: Another version says “from his Ahl al-Bayt and his chosen ones” – with no mention of children of ‘Ali and Fatimah.
7. No mention of Mahdiyeen: Nowhere in the hadith is there any mention of “Mahdiyeen,” “children of Imam Mahdi (AS),” or any Imams after the twelfth Imam.

Conclusion on the Sixth Hadith Under the Fortieth Heading

The Twelve Imams from children of Ali and Fatimah refutation has been thoroughly examined. This analysis conclusively demonstrates:

1. The hadith explicitly limits the Imams to twelve – no more, no less.
2. The phrase “from the children of ‘Ali and Fatimah” is explained through the principle of predominance (taghlīb) – as proven by Ahmed Al-Hasan’s own usage of the same principle.
3. Nidham Al-Aqili’s interpretation is inconsistent with his own sect’s belief in twenty-four Imams.
4. An alternative version of the same hadith says “from his Ahl al-Bayt and his chosen ones” – confirming that the hadith is about the twelve Imams only.
5. Nowhere does the hadith mention “Mahdiyeen,” “children of Imam Mahdi (AS),” or any Imams after the twelfth Imam.

Thus, the sixth hadith under the fortieth heading provides absolutely no support for the alleged Yamani sect’s core doctrine and, when correctly understood, actually refutes the claim of any additional Imams after Imam Mahdi (AS).