Before addressing the objections, we would like to present some points regarding the main topic to our readers. Following that, the commentary made on the aforementioned discrepancies will be answered.
First, we want to clarify whether the different names mentioned for the mother of Imam al-Zaman (may Allah hasten his reappearance) are authentic or not. It is crucial to determine the historical accuracy and validity of these names before responding to the aforementioned objections. In reality, some of the names mentioned above do not exist at all!
One Of Her Name is Khamt
For instance, claiming that one of your names is Khamt. This claim is only made by Ibn Khalkan in his book “Wafayat al-A’yan.” He writes:
كانت ولادته يوم الجمعة منتصف شعبان سنة خمس و خمسين و مائتين، ولما توفى ابوه، وقد سبق ذكره كان عمره خمس سنين، و اسم امه خمط ، و قيل نرجس، والشيعة يقولون انه دخل السرداب في دار ابيه و امه تنظر اليه فلم يعد يخرج اليها ، و ذلك في سنة خمس وستين ومائتين، و عمره يومئذ تسع سنين .
The birth of Imam Mahdi (may Allah hasten his reappearance) was on Friday, the 15th of Sha’ban, 255 Hijri. When his father passed away, as previously mentioned, his age was five years. His mother’s name was Khamt, and it is also said Nargis. The Shia believe that he entered the cellar in his father’s house while his mother was watching him, and he did not return to her. This was in the year 265 Hijri, and his age at that time was nine years. You did not come out from there. This incident occurred in the year 260 Hijri. At that time, your blessed age was nine years.
This person, regarding the Pure Progeny (Ahl al-Bayt) and Shia history, narrates things in which he does not believe. This is because his animosity and enmity towards the Ahl al-Bayt are proven by such evidence that there is no way to deny it. This matter can be established by the following two points:”
“1: The first indication of his being a Nasibi (one who harbors animosity towards Ali and his family) is his self-designation as Ibn Khalkan.”
“Meaning, he used to boast about his ancestors and mostly uttered these words: ‘My father was such and such, my grandfather was so great, my ancestors possessed such and such perfections.’ In response, he would be told.
“خل كان وتكلم عن نفسك”
Leave them who they were, tell us about yourself, what are you?
Eventually, this (Ibn Khalkan) became his title.
Ibn Imad Hanbali, in Shadharat al-Dhahab: 8/422, narrates this incident from one of his Sheikhs (teachers). Among his statements is that the word Ibn Khalkan is structured in the form of two verbs. The first verb is khall (leave), which is an imperative verb from takhlīq (creation). The second is kāna (was), which is an incomplete verb. The reason for this is that he often used to say: ‘My father was such and such, my grandfather was such and such, my ancestors were like this…’ So he was told: khall kāna (leave them, what were they?). So he was overcome (and the name stuck).
When we search for this person in the pages of history, we find him to be of Baramaki lineage.”
References: Wafayat al-A’yan: 4/176
The explanation of the name “Ibn Khalkan” is interesting, focusing on the Arabic verb forms and their implications. is visible. And anyone with even a slight acquaintance with history knows for sure that the people of the Barmaki family harbored the greatest animosity and hatred towards the descendants of Ali. They were the right hand and arm of the Abbasid government in its early days. The reason the Bani Abbas relied on the Barmakis was that they could not trust anyone from Arabia or non-Arab lands. This was because those people were inclined towards the Alids due to the treachery of the Bani Abbas. It was agreed between them (Barmakis and Alids) that they would hand over the caliphate to Imam Reza (peace be upon him), and he would be their ruler. In this context, the Barmakis were like unsheathed swords against the enemies of the Abbasids, especially the family of Ali. Thus, they have an independent history of animosity with the Alids. Undoubtedly, Ibn Khalkan has also expressed the same animosity and hatred with his pen here.”
“Ibn Khalkan was a staunch lover of Yazid ibn Muawiyah and an aficionado of his poetry. He writes in the biography of Marzubani:”
وهو أول من جمع ديوان يزيد بن معاوية بن أبي سفيان الأموي، واعتنى به. وهو صغير الحجم، يدخل في مقدار ثلاث كراريس، وقد جمعه من بعده جماعة وزادوا فيه أشياء كثيرة ليست له. وكنت حفظت جميع ديوان يزيد، لشدة إعجابي به، وذلك في سنة ثلاث وثلاثين وستمائة بمدينة دمشق، وعرفت صحيحه من المنسوب إليه الذي ليس له، وتتبعته حتى ظفرت بصاحب كل بيت. ولولا خوف الإطالة لبينت ذلك، وشعر يزيد مع قلته في نهاية الحسن
He was the first to compile the Diwan of Yazid ibn Mu’awiya ibn Abi Sufyan al-Umawi and took great care of it. It is small in size, fitting within the space of three notebooks. After him, a group of people also compiled it, adding many things that do not belong to him.
I had memorised the entire Diwan of Yazid due to my great admiration for it, and that was in the year 633 AH in the city of Damascus. I was able to distinguish its authentic verses from those falsely attributed to him and traced each verse until I identified its true author. Were it not for the fear of prolonging the discussion, I would have explained this in detail. Despite its limited quantity, the poetry of Yazid is of exceptional beauty.(Reference-Wafayat al-A’yan: 4/354)
This paragraph raises several questions. For example, why is Ibn Khalkan so enamored with Yazid?! If he is fascinated by him merely because of Yazid’s poetic content, this too is no less than a calamity in itself. And this proves Ibn Khalkan’s evil nature. Because there is no mention of ALLAH and the Messenger in Yazid’s poems, but rather they are entirely based on immorality and debauchery. Moreover, he is not greater than Dhahabi in this field. He mentions Yazid ibn Muawiyah in his Talkhis in this way:
“و كان ناصبيا ، فظا ، غليظا ، جلفا ، يتناول المسكر ، و يفعل المنكر ، افتتح دولته بمقتل الشهيد الحسين ، و اختتمها بواقعة الحرة، فمقته الناس، ولم يبارك في عمره”
“He was a Nasibi, harsh, rude, and coarse. He consumed intoxicants and committed immoral acts. He began his rule with the killing of the martyr Husayn and ended it with the incident of Harra. As a result, people despised him, and there was no blessing in his lifespan.”
Ibn Khalkan himself considers Yazid’s poetry to be good due to his love for him, then this flaw is enough for his condemnation. Because for love of Yazid to be in someone’s heart is clear proof that he is himself a Nasibi and harbors animosity and hatred towards the Prophet’s Ahl al-Bayt (family).
To prove this matter, this sentence of Ibn Kathir al-Dimashqi is sufficient for us. He writes:
“People have different opinions regarding Yazid ibn Muawiyah. Some love him and consider him their leader, and they are a group from the people of Syria, from the Nasibis.”
(Reference-Al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah: 6/465)
In light of these facts, it is not far-fetched that some historians who were nurtured by the rulers of the time might have mentioned different names for Lady Syeda (Fatima al-Zahra) in order to cast doubt on the actual matter concerning the Imam of the Age (Imam Mahdi). This mention of Ibn Khalkan is just an example.
Another Name is Maryam
After this, it is claimed that the name of the mother of the Imam of the Age, may Allah hasten his reappearance, “Maryam. This is a name mentioned only by the First Martyr in al-Duroos. And even he narrated it with the formula of uncertainty (i.e., ‘it is said’). I have not found any mention of it in the early sources, except for the book al-Hidayah al-Kubra by Hussein ibn Hamdan Khasibi, where he writes:
“و امه صقیل ، وقيل : نرجس، ويقال : سوسن ، ويقال : مريم
ابنة زيد، اخت حسن و محمد بن زید الحسینی الداعي بطبرستان
و ان التشبيه وقع على الجوارى امهات الاولاد ، و المشهور
والصحيح : نرجس، فهذا من دلائلها -“
“His mother’s name was Saqeel, and it is said: Nargis, and it is said: Sawsan, and it is said: Maryam, the daughter of Zayd, the sister of Hasan and Muhammad ibn Zayd al-Husseini, the Da’i (preacher) of Tabaristan. And the resemblance is based on the slave girls who became mothers of children. And the well-known and correct (name) is: Nargis. So this is one of her signs (evidences of her nobility).”
“Al-Duroos: 2/16”
“The name of the mother of the Imam of the Time (may Allah hasten his reappearance) is Saqeel, according to one account, Nargis, according to another, Sawsan. It is also said that her name was Maryam bint Zayd, who is the sister of Hasan and Muhammad ibn Zayd al-Husseini, who were preachers in Tabaristan. And her resemblance is with those slave girls who became mothers of sons. But the famous and correct (name) is that her name is Nargis. Therefore, this is one of the proofs of his (Imam’s) Imamate.”
“Rather, we have not found any mention anywhere near or far that the preachers of Tabaristan, Hasan and Muhammad, even had a sister, regarding whose marriage any discussion would be possible. The books of genealogy are before you. Search and examine them as you wish so that the truth becomes clear to you. When the existence of a person is not proven, then the matter of her marriage to Imam Hasan Askari (peace be upon him) is even more distant from the intellect.”
“As far as we know, this view is contrary to many authentic and explicit hadiths.”
“Al-Hidayah al-Kubra: 348”
Now we will present in the coming pages, that Imam Mahdi (may Allah hasten his reappearance) is the son of a slave woman, who is the leader and mistress of all slave women. The reason for this contradiction is that Maryam bint Zayd Alawiyyah is a free woman, not a slave woman. Thus, the conflict and contradiction between the two groups is clear.”
“Even if there were no contradiction, we still cannot accept this narration. This is because it is one of the unique narrations of Hussein ibn Hamdan, who is the leader and authority of the Nusayri sect. Al-Najashi writes about his circumstances:”
“الحسين بن حمدان الخصيبي الحنبلانى ابو عبد الله كان فاسد المذهب ، له كتب ، منها : كتاب الاخوان ، کتاب المسائل ، كتاب تاريخ الائمة، كتاب الرسالة تخليط”
“Hussein ibn Hamdan Khusaibi Hanbali, Abu Abdullah, was corrupt in his beliefs. He has books, including: Kitab al-Ikhwan, Kitab al-Masail, Kitab Tarikh al-A’immah, Kitab al-Risalah“
Another Name Is Maleeka
Similarly, one of the names attributed to her is ‘Malika’. This is mentioned only in the narration of Kamal al-Din page 420 where the lady introduces herself. According to that narration, she said:
‘I am Malika, daughter of Yashua, son of Caesar, the King of Rome”
“The authenticity of this name depends on the correctness of the narration. Based on this, the fall of the narration necessitates that the attribution of this name is not correct.”
From this discussion, our readers will realize that most of these names are not establishedand because of this, the scope of disagreement becomes limited, provided that the existence of the remaining names is fundamentally assumed.
Regarding Names or Titles
Regarding the claim of the multiplicity of names, doubt is possible from another perspective as well. And that is that the aforementioned names might be among the titles of Bibi (referring to a respected female figure). Whereas it is obvious that narrators and historians have mixed names and titles together. Therefore, a name is that which is spoken first about someone, and a title is a secondary name with which a person is addressed to indicate their highness or lowness, as this is an established matter in the dictionary.
If we consider this claim that these are names, then the possibility of them being titles becomes very clearly prominent. For example, Susan, Raihana, and Narjis are the names of some flowers and plants, which are known for their beauty or fragrance. Therefore, their possibility of being among the titles of Bibi as opposed to names is greater. Rather, it is explicitly stated in accounts as well, from which it is known that some of these are among the titles of Bibi. As Sheikh Saduq has narrated this tradition regarding the reason for her title of Saqeel:
و يقال : صقيل و يقال : سوسن الا انه قيل : لسبب الحمل
Saqeel (The Arabic portion is left as is)
The argument that the absence of historical data on Narjis, the mother of Imam Mahdi (as), means he did not exist is not only flawed but also riddled with hypocrisy. If the standard for proving existence requires a fully traceable genealogy, then this logic would undermine the existence of figures whose recorded lineages contain contradictions or gaps. A prime example is Jesus Christ, whose genealogy in the Bible presents two conflicting accounts—one in the Gospel of Matthew (1:1-17) and another in the Gospel of Luke (3:23-38). Despite this contradiction, no serious historian dismisses the existence of Jesus based on inconsistencies in his lineage.
The discrepancies between the two genealogies are stark. Matthew traces Jesus’ descent from David through Solomon, listing 27 generations, while Luke traces it through Nathan, listing 42 generations. The names after David diverge almost entirely, making it impossible for both to be literally true. Christian scholars have offered explanations, such as one being the genealogy of Mary rather than Joseph, or one representing a legal lineage, but these remain speculative. Yet, despite this clear contradiction, Jesus’ historical existence is widely accepted based on the impact he left and the continuity of belief in him. If such inconsistencies do not cast doubt on Jesus’ existence, then the absence of records on Narjis does not invalidate Imam Mahdi (as).
The Quran itself refers to several individuals whose lineage remains unknown, yet their existence is accepted without dispute. Luqman the Wise is mentioned in the Quran, yet there is no definitive record of his parentage or origins, with some reports identifying him as Nubian and others as Yemeni. Khidr, who encountered Prophet Musa (as) as detailed in Surah Al-Kahf, has no known lineage or historical background, yet his presence is universally acknowledged. Similarly, the Companions of the Cave (Ashab al-Kahf) are honoured in the Quran, but their names, ancestry, and even their precise number are left ambiguous. Even Iblis, a central figure in the Quranic narrative, has no recorded lineage—only that he was created from fire—yet no one questions his existence on this basis. If a lack of genealogical detail were a valid reason to dismiss someone’s existence, these Quranic figures would be subject to the same scepticism.
This brings us to the blatant double standards at play. Sunni polemicists, who demand historical proof of Narjis’ existence, have no issue accepting the existence of Abdullah ibn Saba, a figure they claim was responsible for the first divisions in Islam and the so-called founding of Shiism. Unlike Narjis, whose existence is attested to in Shia historical sources, the very existence of Abdullah ibn Saba is highly questionable. His supposed role in early Islamic history is built upon dubious reports from biased sources, primarily Sayf ibn Umar, a fabricator whose reliability was dismissed by Sunni hadith scholars. Not only is his mother untraceable, but there is no concrete evidence that he himself ever lived. Yet, despite this, they insist he was a real historical character and that everything attributed to him must be accepted.
The hypocrisy does not end there. Figures beloved by the Nawasib, such as Amr ibn al-Aas and Muawiyah, are widely accepted as historical figures despite serious doubts regarding their paternity. Sunni hadith literature presents no certainty as to who the father of Amr ibn al-Aas was. Shaykh Sibt Ibn Jauzi al-Hanafi records in Tadhkira al-Khawwas page 117:
“When Amr bin al-Aas was born, five people claimed to be his father: (1) As bin Wa’al, (2) Abu Lahab, (3) Umayya bin Khulafa, (4) Hashim bin Mugheera, (5) Abu Sufyan. These five fornicated with the mother of Amr bin al-‘Aas, Nabgha, and when she fell pregnant, they began to fight over who the father was.”
Allamah Zamakhshari records the following in Rabee al-Abrar page 363
**كانت النابغة أم عمرو بن العاص أمة رجل من عنزة فسبيت، فاشتراها عبد الله بن جدعان، فكانت بغيا ثم عتقت. ووقع عليها أبو لهب، وأمية ابن خلف، وهشام بن المغيرة، وأبو سفيان ابن حرب، والعاص بن وائل، في طهر واحد، فولدت عمرا.**
“The whore, the mother of Amr bin al-Aas, was a slave of a man from Eniza. She was then taken as a captive of war and later bought by Abdullah bin Jad‘an, after which she was freed. Then Abu Lahab, Umayya bin Khalaf, Hisham bin al-Mughira, Abu Sufyan bin Harb, and al-Aas bin Wael had sexual intercourse with her in the same period, after which she gave birth to Amr.”
Ahmad Zaki Safwat records the following words of Imam Hasan (as) in Jamharat Khutab al-Arab:
**وأما أنت يا بن العاص فإن أمرك مشترك وضعتك أمك مجهولا من عهر وسفاح فتحا كم فيك أربعة من قريش فغلب عليك جزارها ألأمهم حسبا وأخبثهم منصبا**
“…Oh you son of al-Aas, your lineage is unknown, your mother gave birth to you through lust and adultery. You were from four (men) of Quraysh, then you were attributed to the meanest lineage and most injurious status.”
(Jamharat Khutab al-Arab, Volume 2, page 25)
A similar sordid birth history exists with Muawiyah bin Hind, as we read in Tadhkira al-Khawwas, Chapter 7 page 114:
“Sham bin Muhammad Kalbi, in his book *Kitab Mushab*, notes that Imam Hasan said to Mu’awiya: ‘Are you aware of the bed from which you were conceived?’ This means he was born from four fathers.”
Similarly, in Rabee al-Abrar Volume 3 page 551:
“There were four people who were thought to be Mu’awiya’s father: Abi bin Umar bin Musafir, Abi Umar bin Waleed, Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib, and Sabah.”
Amr ibn al-Aas and Muawiyah are beloved by the Nawasib, yet in spite of the fact that nobody knows who their fathers were, no Nasibi or Sunni has ever attempted to deny their existence. In contrast, we have absolute certainty about Imam al-Mahdi (as) and his father, Imam Hasan al-Askari (as).
If the absence of biographical details about Narjis is grounds to deny the existence of her son, then how do they justify accepting individuals whose very paternity remains in question? This contradiction exposes the inconsistency in their argument. When it suits their narrative, they demand genealogical proof, yet when it comes to figures central to their own history, they readily overlook glaring uncertainties.
If lack of biographical detail invalidates a person’s existence, then by their own standard, they must reject many of their revered figures. The reality, however, is that history is not determined by whether every personal detail is preserved, but by the impact, testimonies, and continuity of belief surrounding a figure. The birth and existence of Imam Mahdi (as) are firmly rooted in history, attested to by eyewitness accounts and generations of scholars. If the Sunni standard were applied consistently, much of their own historical narrative would collapse under scrutiny.
The overall passage discusses the possibility that certain names associated with a revered female figure might actually be titles, considering the common practice of mixing names and titles in historical accounts. It uses the example of flower names and provides a supporting narration from a respected scholar.