A Moment of Reflection.
It is astonishing that some object to the Shia school of thought based on minor variations in names, using them as a means to cast doubt on the belief in the Mahdi (as), when they themselves have far greater discrepancies in their own historical records.
Take, for example, Abu Hurayra—the most prolific narrator of Hadith in Sunni Islam. According to Ibn Hazm al-Zahiri, he transmitted 5,374 Hadith. Yet, the very name of this key figure is a subject of considerable dispute. Al-Nawawi, the commentator of Sahih Muslim, states:
“Abu Hurayra was the first to be given this nickname. It is said that he had a cat as a child and played with it, which is why he was called Abu Hurayra. However, there is much disagreement regarding his actual name and parentage—so much so that around thirty different opinions exist on the matter. The most widely accepted view among scholars is that his name was ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Sakhr.
This confusion is not limited to Al-Nawawi. Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr also comments on the extent of disagreement:
“Scholars have greatly differed regarding the name of Abu Hurayra and his father’s name, to an extent that is impossible to encompass. His name was not consistently recorded in the pre-Islamic era or after he embraced Islam. Some say his name was Abdullah ibn Amr; others say it was Burayr ibn Ash’araqah. Some claim it was Sakeen ibn Dumah. Ahmad ibn Hanbal held that his name was Abdullah ibn Abd Shams, while others reported it as Abd Nuhum ibn Aamir, Abd Ghanm, or even Kurdus. The reality is known only to Allah, as there is much disagreement on this matter.
(Rererence-Al-Majmu’, 1/466).
If such significant inconsistencies regarding the name of one of Sunni Islam’s most prominent narrators do not invalidate his existence or credibility, how can a minor variation in the name of Imam Mahdi’s (as) mother be used as grounds for skepticism?
The claim that Shia sources differ regarding her name is a weak objection, especially when considering the historical circumstances that necessitated secrecy surrounding her identity. Given the Abbasid persecution and their active search for the awaited Imam, such concealment was a deliberate strategy to ensure his safety. This is why various names including Malikah, Sawsan, Rayhanah, Saqil, and Narjis—are attributed to her in different contexts.
That said, we find the name Narjis to be the most frequently cited in the narrations of the Imams (as). The most compelling evidence for this comes from Uyoon al-Mu’jizat, where a chain of narrators including Aslan al-Kalabi, Musa bin Ahmad Fazari, and Ahmad bin Ja’far transmit a narration from Lady Hakima, the aunt of Imam Hasan al-Askari (as). She recounts that on the night of the fifteenth of Sha’ban, 255 AH, Imam Hasan al-Askari (as) informed her:
“Aunt, the son we have been waiting for will be born tonight. He will be born to Narjis.”
This narration not only confirms her name but also underscores the authenticity of the sources reporting it. Furthermore, the reference to the book Al-Wasaya, written by Shalmaghani—who, before deviating, was among the closest companions of the special representatives of Imam al-Mahdi (as)reinforces the credibility of this report.
Thus, rather than being a point of contention, the historical variations in the name of Imam Mahdi’s (as) mother only serve to highlight the careful measures taken to protect him from those who sought to extinguish his light. If minor inconsistencies in names were a valid reason to reject historical figures, then figures like Abu Hurayra—whose very identity remains uncertain should face similar scrutiny. But history does not operate on such double standards.
By these standards, the belief in the Mahdi (as) stands firm, unshaken by superficial objections.