Our Second Duty towards our Imam (a.t.f.s)

2: To be respectful while mentioning Him

---

A believer should always mention Imam (a.s.) with the best of the titles. For example, Hujjat, Qaim, Mahdi, Sahibul Amr and Sahibuz-Zaman etc. He should refrain from uttering his actual name, which is the name of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.): (M-H-M-D). There are varying opinions among the scholars, as regards the pronouncing of the name of Imam (a.s.). Some have prohibited it, except in Taqayyah. For example Muhaddith Amili in Wasail; [1] and some have absolutely prohibited it, like Shaykh Mufeed and Shaykh Tabarsi (q.s.). Some think that it is definitely Haraam, but in supplications received from the Holy Imams (a.s.) Ismail bin Ahmad Alawi Aqeeli Tabarsi (q.s.) is of this view mentioned in Kifayatul Muwahhideen. There are others who think that it is permitted but despicable; like Shaykh Muhaqqiq Ansari (q.s.). Some scholars are of the view that to pronounce the name of the Imam is prohibited in gatherings and not in other instances; like Sayyid Muhaqqiq Mir Damad and Muhaddith Noori (q.s.). Certain scholars think that the prohibition is only during the time of Minor Occultation, although I don’t know of any particular scholar who is of this view. From the statement of Allamah Majlisi in Biharul Anwar [2] it is seen that some are of this view, and Allah is all-knowing. It is possible that this statement be referred back to the first view, from the aspect of special emphasis on Taqayyah during the period of the Minor Occultation as is very much clear. In any case we can conclude that the issue of mentioning the Imam’s name is from the following types:

Type 1: It is allowed to mention the name of Imam (a.s.) in books, in discussion connected with him. There is no doubt about it. The legality of this is proved from the practice of all past scholars and also the fact that none of them have ever objected to this practice.

Type 2: No one have even prohibited the mention of Imam (a.s.) by indication or cue. Like saying that the name of Imam (a.s.) is the same as the name of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.). The tradition of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) narrated by the Shia as well as Sunni scholars through various chains of narrators says, “Mahdi is from my progeny. His name is my name and his Kunniyat is my Kunniyat (agnomen).”

Type 3: In the same way the mention of his name in supplications and salutations (Ziarat) is apparently permitted because it does not resemble the conditions mentioned in the traditions. Thus, precaution demands that we avoid mentioning the real name of Imam (a.s.) in assemblies and gatherings and refer to him only by his well-known titles. However, we should only use the titles that are mentioned in authentic traditions so that we do not contravene this rule.

Type 4: It is remembering His Eminence in gatherings etc, secretly and in ones heart; and the fact is that, in this case also it is allowed from the aspect that there is no prohibition for it. In addition, there is a tradition in Mustadrak narrated through Huzaifah bin Yaman that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) in a narration describing the qualities of His Eminence, Imam Mahdi (a.s.) said: And he is the one whose name will not be uttered by anyone openly before his advent, except by one who is a disbeliever.[3] This is also supported by the statement quoted by Mir Damad that: “He mentioned his name clearly and openly,” and then he narrated his statement.

Type 5: Mention of this name at the time of fear, like: in the gatherings of the enemies of religion as Taqayyah is obligatory in that situation and no ancient and modern scholar has opposed this at any time. Also all the evidences of Taqayyah prove this. In the same way all traditions prohibiting the mention of name are also included in this.

Some reminders:

First: From the above discussion we have come to know of the views and their answers, so it is not needed to repeat them here.

Second: Without any doubt, it is appropriate and precautionary to mention His Eminence, by his titles even when we are not in gatherings and assemblies and not to mention his promised name so that we may be free from the doubt of opposing an obligatory order; and also it is a sort of respect and honor of Imam (a.s.). Rather this manner is seen in the statements of Imams (a.s.) and their followers.

Third: From the traditional reports mentioned above it is known that one of the blessed names of His Eminence, is Ahmad. Now the question arises whether it is also unlawful to mention this name in gatherings? Or the prohibition is about the well known name of His Eminence, that is Muhammad? The author of Kifayatul Muwahhideen has explained that there is no difference between the two and both are same in prohibition; and he has referred this view to be popular. But there is scope of consideration in this statement since the well-known name is Muhammad and the statement of those who accept that it is prohibited is neither Nass nor the apparent import of naming His Eminence with other names than Muhammad. Rather I don’t know of even one scholar who is certain of the prohibition of mentioning this name. But precaution is the best way and the Almighty Allah is the best guide.

Fourth: Does this prohibition also apply to the Kunniyat of His Eminence, which is same as that of his forefather, the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.)? On the basis of precaution we can say: Yes. But otherwise we can say: No. Because ‘Ism’ means other than Kunniyat and titles as is found in local parlance. This is the apparent matter and what is mentioned in the tradition of Khizr that he said: Do not call him by his Kunniyat and name. It is not possible to prove it by this only because there is a possibility in it. As is found in the view of the scholars of principles of jurisprudence. The same was the view of Muhaqqiq Noori (r.a.), may Allah keep his place of repose pure. He has considered the prohibition to be only regarding the name. Though the best way is the way of precaution.

[1] Wasailush Shia, Vol. 11, Pg. 487, Chapter 33 under 7 & 8

[2] Biharul Anwar; Vol. 51, Pg. 32

[3] Mustadrakul Wasail, Vol. 2, Pg. 380, Tr. No. 14