For all the somalilanders eheyle al beyt

[makumba]

waxaan ka baqayaa hadii janadii la geeyana inay yidhaahdaan waa reer hebel

 

 

Loooool

[Fiqikhayre]

I have educated saylici already once on this matter, so this will be my last time inshallah!

 

Brother your abtirsiyo on Hassan Al-Caskari is embarrassing, flaud and just plain wrong because as I told you before Hassan Al-Caskari didn't have any children! So why would you base your abtirsiyo on someone, who never had any children? Are you that desperate?

 

Atleast when you make up lies, they should be believable but unless you're not shiite ofcourse and you believe in manhaj Ahlu-Sunnah wal' Jamaacah and you're a Sunni, then it is quite clear for all that Hassan Al-Caskari never did have children and that it was made up by the Shiites because the imaamate would come to an end, so they invented children out of the blue for Hassan Al-Caskari, so please make your abtirsiyo on someone else but not on a sincere religious and god-fearing man, who died at the tender age of 27/28 and who never had any children!

 

Amazing how someone could come up with this, to say you're a offspring of some man who never had any children but suddenly you invent and attribute to him a whole bunch of child generations on to his name, althoug it is quite evidant in the history books that he never had children, subhanallaah that's mad!

[Catalyst]

Originally posted by MKA Yoonis:

I have educated saylici already once on this matter, so this will be my last time inshallah!

 

Brother your abtirsiyo on Hassan Al-Caskari is embarrassing, flaud and just plain wrong because as I told you before Hassan Al-Caskari didn't have any children! So why would you base your abtirsiyo on someone, who never had any children? Are you that desperate?

 

Atleast when you make up lies, they should be believable but unless you're not shiite ofcourse and you believe in manhaj Ahlu-Sunnah wal' Jamaacah and you're a

Sunni, then it is quite clear for

all

that Hassan Al-Caskari never did have children and that it was made up by the Shiites because the imaamate would come to an end, so they invented children out of the blue for Hassan Al-Caskari, so please make your abtirsiyo on someone else but not on a sincere religious and god-fearing man, who died at the tender age of 27/28 and who never had any children!

 

Amazing how someone could come up with this, to say you're a offspring of some man who never had any children but suddenly you invent and attribute to him a whole bunch of child generations on to his name, althoug it is quite evidant in the history books that he never had children, subhanallaah that's mad!

السادة الاشراف الرضويون الكرام المنسوبون في مشجراتهم خطأ الى الحسن العسكري , شهرتهم بالشرف ثابتة عند علماء الانساب , و الصحيح انهم مرفوعون الى اخيه السيد جعفر الزكي بن علي الهادي.

 

 

و قد ذكر نسبهم مرفوعا الى السيد محمد بن الحسن بن جعفر الزكي بن علي الهادي , في عدة كتب قديمة :

 

1- "صحاح الأخبار في نسب السادة الفاطمية الأخيار" للسيدالنسابة سراج الدين الرفاعي المخزومي طبعة الهند 1306 هجري صفحة56 و هو معاصر للمقريزي (845 هه) وهو نسابة معروف وكتابه عن الأنساب حجة.

 

 

2- "الدر السني للنسب الحسيني والحسني" للفاسي القادري للنسابة العلامة المغربي السيد عبدالسلام القادري الحسني الفاسي في مخطوطه الذي حققه حفيده السيدعبدالقادر عام 1305 هجري , و هو مخطوط و الصفحة عليها رقمان الأعلى 73 وفي اسفلها 27

 

3- نور الأبصار للشبلنجي صفحة261

 

4- الطبقات الكبرى للشعراني , في ترجمة احمد البدوي

 

5- تذييل بحر الانساب للسيد مرتضى الزبيدي رحمه لله , و هو حجة النسابين في عصره.

 

و غيرها.

 

(و اضاف بعض الاخوان الرضويين ان هذا العمود مذكور في "تاريخ الاسلام و تراجم الاعلام الكبير" للذهبي (742 هه) , و تاريخ المقريزي (840هه) , و لم ارهما بعيني حتى الان و جاري البحث عنهما لندرة التاريخ الكبير و توفر الصغير فقط , لاحظ ان الذهبي كان تلميذا لابن دقيق العيد تلميذ البدوي مباشرة , فهو معاين لا معنعن )

 

 

و قد اختارت لجنة النسب بنقابة السادة الاشراف بمصر الرفع الى جعفر الزكي , و انزلته في اخر مجلاتها في مشجر لال المغازي الرضويين , و هم ابناء عم السيد عزاز الاكبر .

 

و نرى ان هذا التحقيق صائبا , و هو الرفع الى جعفر الزكي , و يشترك في ذلك علماء مكتبة النجف الاشرف حيث لدي مشجرة للسادة المغازية بتاريخ 1988 ترفعهم ايضا الى جعفر الزكي , مع ملاحظة ان هذا اختيار نقابة الاشراف بمصر ايام الزبيدي رحمه الله من قبل.

 

و اضيف ان هذا تحقيق السيد الجوعاني و اختياره بالمجمع العالمي لانساب ال البيت

 

و السادة ال اللقاني المعرفين للسادة الموسويين بالحجاز

 

و السادة ممثلي الاشراف العراقيين بالمغرب

 

و غيرهم من الجهابذة من علماء اهل البيت الاكارم لم اذكرهم لضيق الوقت فقط .

[Fiqikhayre]

Stop your corruption I say unless you believe in the Shia doctrine, We as the Sunnis and the followers of Ahlu-Sunnah wal-Jamaacah which 99.99% of Somalis adhere to do no believe that Hassan Al-Askari had any offspring! He died childless and everyone knows it. It was the start of Shia confusion and when they adopted some parts of other religions like the missing mahdi etc! Stop lying to yourself if you're a sunni muslim that is!

 

In fact it's the origins of the shia and their lies, the death of Hassan and leaving no offspring that is, educate yourself:

 

THE MYTH OF THE SHI'IA MAHDI

 

The 15th of Sha‘baan is a very significant date, both to the Ahl as-Sunnah and the Shi‘ah. The Shi‘ah, however, have their own reason for ascribing significance to this night. To them it is the night of the birth of their twelfth Imam, the Hidden Mahdi.

 

Who is this Mahdi whose return to this world is so eagerly awaited by the Shi‘ah, and belief in whose existence in occultation forms such a integral aspect of the Shi'ite psyche? Before an adequate answer to this question may be given, there is a need to understand certain aspects concerning the Shi'ite doctrine of Imamah.

 

THE SHI'IA MAHDI Background

 

The cornerstone of the Shi'ite faith is the belief that the spiritual and temporal leadership of this Ummah after the demise of Rasoolullaah sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam is vested in the Imam, who is appointed, like the Nabi sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam himself, by Allah, and who enjoys all the distinctions and privileges of the Nabi sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam.

 

However, they believe that Imamah, unlike Nubuwwah, can never come to an end. In this regard there is a well-known Shi'ite ahaadeeth which says that “the world cannot exist without an Imam”, and another which goes that “if the earth were to be without an Imam for a single day it would sink.”

 

Thus, when it came to pass that the first of those whom they regard as their Imams— Sayyiduna Ali radiyallahu ‘anhu— left this world, a problem arose. Some of those who regarded themselves as his followers claimed that he did not in fact die, but that he will return to establish justice. Others said that he was succeeded as Imam by his son Hasan, who was in turn succeeded by his brother Husayn.

 

When Husayn died there were some who claimed to follow their other brother Muhammad (known as Ibn al-Hanafiyyah) as their Imam. When he died his followers claimed that he was in reality alive, and that he will return in due time. Others amongst the Shi‘ah took Sayyiduna Husayn’s son, Ali, surnamed Zayn al-‘Abidin, as their Imam, and upon his death transferred their loyalties to his son, Muhammad al-Baqir.

 

When al-Baqir died there were once again elements from amongst the Shi‘ah who denied his death and claimed that he would return one day, while others took his son Ja‘far as-Sadiq as their Imam.

 

When he died there was mass confusion amongst the Shi‘ah: each of his sons Isma‘il, Abdullah, Muhammad, Zakariyya, Ishaq and Moosa was claimed by various groups amongst the Shi‘ah to be their Imam. In addition to them there was a group who believed that Jaa‘far did not really die, and that he would return one day.

 

More or less the same thing happened at the death of his son Moosa. Some of the Shi‘ah denied his death, believing that he will return, and others decided to take as their new Imam one of his sons. Some of these chose his son Ahmad, while others chose his other son Ali ar-Rida.

 

After him they took as their Imam his son Muhammad al-Jawwad (or at-Taqi), and after him his son Ali al-Hadi (or an-Naqi). At the death of Ali al-Hadi they looked upon his son Hasan al-Askari as their new— and 11th— Imam.

 

The death of Hasan al-Askari

 

The above is a very brief synopsis of a tumultuous and confusing history— a history from which a dedicated researcher might extract some very revealing facts about the development of Shiaism.

 

However, that is not our concern at this moment. We have now arrived at the year 254 AH, the time when a major section of the Shi‘ah accepted as their Imam the 22-year old Hasan, son of Ali al-Hadi, and 10th lineal descendant of Sayyiduna Ali and Sayyidah Fatimah radiyallahu‘anhuma. Six years later, in 260 AH, Hasan al-Askari, at the very young age of 28, is lying on his deathbed, but unlike any of his forefathers he leaves no offspring, no one to whom the Shi‘ah might appropriate as their new Imam.

 

The Shi‘ah who had been regarding Hasan al-Askari as their Imam were thrown into mass disarray. Does this mean the end of the Imamah? The end of the Imamah would mean the end of Shiaism. Were they prepared for that?

 

The confusion that reigned amongst the Shi‘ah after the death of Hasan al-Askari is reflected by the Shi'ite writer Hasan ibn Moosa an-Nawbakhti, who counts the emergence of altogether 14 sects amongst the followers of Hasan al-Askari, each one with a different view on the future of the Imamah and the identity of the next Imam. It must be noted that an-Nawbakhti was alive at the time all of this was taking place. Another Shi'ite writer, Sa‘d ibn Abdullah al-Qummi, who also lived during the same time, counts 15 sects, and a century later the historian al-Mas‘udi enumerates altogether 20 separate sects.

 

Trends

 

There were four major trends amongst these various sects:

 

(1) There were those who accepted the death of Hasan al-Askari as a fact, and accepted also the fact that he left no offspring. To them Imamah had thus come to an end, just like Nubuwwah came to an end with the death of Rasoolullaah (s.a.w.s) . However, there were some amongst them who kept hoping for the advent of a new Imam.

 

(2) The second trend was one to which the student of the history of “succession to the Imamah” would be much more used to. This was the tendency to deny the death of Hasan al-Askari, and to claim that he would return in the future to establish justice upon earth. We have seen this tendency emerge amongst the Shi‘ah at more than one critical juncture in the history of the Imamah of the Shi‘ah; it is therefore only logical to expect it to resurface at a moment as critical as the death of Hasan al-Askari.

 

(3) The third trend was to extend the chain of Imamah to Hasan’s brother Jaa‘far.

 

(4) The fourth trend was the claim that Hasan al-Askari did in fact have a son. It is the fourth trend which ultimately became the view of the dominant group in Shiaism.

 

The missing son

 

This trend was spearheaded by persons who had set themselves up as the representatives of the Imam, and who were in control of a network covering various parts of the Islamic empire— a network for the purpose of collecting money in the name of the Imams of the Ahl al-Bayt.

 

All followers of the Imams were obliged to pay one fifth of their income to the representatives of the Imams. (This is a practice which continues up to today.) At the head of this network was a man called Uthmaan ibn Sa‘id al-‘Amri. His manner of resolving the predicament was unique: Hasan al-Askari was dead, he admitted, but he was not childless. He had a 4-year old son, Muhammad, with whom no one but he— Uthmaan ibn Sa‘id— could have contact. And from that point onwards he would act as the representative (wakeel) of the Hidden Imam and collect money in his name.

 

To the fact that Hasan al-Askari’s own family were completely ignorant of the existence of any child of his, and that his estate had been divided between his brother Jaa‘far and his mother, Uthman ibn Sa‘id and his ilk responded by denouncing Jaa‘far as al-Kadhdhab (the Liar).

 

In due time a fantastic story was brought into circulation about the union between Hasan al-Askari and a Roman slave-girl, who is variously named as Narjis, Sawsan or Mulaykah. She is mentioned as having been the daughter of Yusha‘ (Joshua), the Roman emperor, who is a direct descendant of the apostle Simon Peter. But history shows that there never was a Roman emperor of that name. The Roman emperor of the time was Basil I, and neither he nor any other emperor is known to have descended from Peter. The story goes on to tell of her capture by the Muslim army, how she eventually came to be sold to Hasan al-Askari, and of her supernatural pregnancy and the secret birth of the son of whom no one— aside from Uthman ibn Sa‘id and his clique— knew anything. Everything about the child is enveloped in a thick and impenetrable cloud of mystery.

 

The four representatives

 

Uthman ibn Sa‘id remained the “representative of the Hidden Imam” for a number of years. In all that time he was the only link the Shi‘ah had with their Imam. During that time he supplied the Shi'ite community with tawqi‘at, or written communications, which he claimed was written to them by the Hidden Imam. Many of these communications, which are still preserved in books like at-Tusi’s Kitab al-Ghaybah, had to do with denouncing other claimants to the position of representatives, who had come to realise exactly how lucrative a position Uthmaan ibn Sa‘id had created for himself. The Shi'ite literature dealing with Uthmaan ibn Sa‘id’s tenure as representative is replete with references to money collected from the Shi'ite public.

 

When Uthmaan ibn Sa‘id died, his son Abu Jaa‘far Muhammad produced a written communication from the Hidden Imam in which he himself is appointed the second representative, a position which he held for about 50 years. He too, like his father, had to deal with several rival claimants to his position, but the tawqi‘at which he regularly produced to denounce them and reinforce his own position ensured the removal of such obstacles and the continuation of support from a credulous Shi'ite public.

 

He was followed in this position by Abul Qasim ibn Rawh an-Nawbakhti, a scion of the powerful and influential Nawbakhti family of Baghdad. Before succeeding Muhammad ibn Uthmaan, Abul Qasim an-Nawbakhti was his chief aide in the collection of the one-fifth taxes from the Shi‘ah. Like his two predecessors, he too had to deal with rival claimants, one of whom, Muhammad ibn Ali ash-Shalmaghani used to be an accomplice of his. He is reported in Abu Jaa‘far at-Tusi’s book Kitab al-Ghaybah as having stated: “We knew exactly what we were into with Abul Qasim ibn Rawh. We used to fight like dogs over this matter (of being representative).”

 

When Abul Qasim an-Nawbakhti died in 326 AH he bequethed the position of representative to Abul Hasan as-Samarri. Where the first three representatives were shrewd manipulators, Abul Hasan as-Samarri proved to be a more conscientious person. During his three years as representative there was a sudden drop in tawqi‘at. Upon his deathbed he was asked who his successor would be, and answered that Allah would Himself fulfill the matter. Could this perhaps be seen as a refusal on his part to perpetuate a hoax that has gone on for too long? He also produced a tawqi‘ in which the Imam declares that from that day till the day of his reappearance he will never again be seen, and that anyone who claims to see him in that time is a liar.

 

Thus, after more or less 70 years, the last “door of contact” with the Hidden Imam closed. The Shi‘ah term this period, in which there was contact with their Hidden Imam through his representatives-cum-tax-collectors, the Lesser Occultation (al-Ghaybah as-Sughra), and the period from the death of the last representative onwards the Greater Occultation (al-Ghaybah al-Kubar). The Greater Occultation has already continued for over a thousand years.

 

Activities of the representatives

 

When one reads the classical literature of the Shi‘ah in which the activities of the four representatives are outlined, one is struck by the constantly recurring theme of money. They are almost always mentioned in connection with receiving and collecting “the Imam’s money” his loyal Shi'ite followers. There is a shocking lack of any activities of an academic or spiritual nature. Not a single one of the four is credited with having compiled any book, despite the fact that they were in exclusive communion with the last of the Imams, the sole repository of the legacy of Rasoolullaah sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam.

 

When we look at the major sources upon which the Shi'ite faith is based, we find that most of them were written after the onset of the Greater Occultation. Those works, like al-, which was written during the latter decades of the Lesser Occultation, contain scarcely a reference to any of the four representatives as narrators from the Hidden Imam. Instead it is filled with thousands of reports which go back, via other channels, to the fifth and the sixth Imams. That is indeed strange, considering the fact that a man like Uthmaan ibn Sa‘id al-‘Amri is claimed to have been closely associated with the 10th, the 11th as well as the hidden 12th Imam, and also the fact that his son remained the Shi'ite community’s solitary link to that Imam for half a century. Would it not have been better and more authoritative for an author like al-Kulayni to report the hadith of his Imams from the Hidden Imam via his representatives who lived in Baghdad at the same time as he rather than to trace it all back to the fifth and sixth Imams through a myriad of doubtful channels?

 

But of course, he could not have done that, because the activities of those representatives did not have as much to do with authentically preserving the legacy of the Ahl al-Bayt as with the collection of wealth in their names.

 

In light of the fact that the Shi‘ah explain the necessity of Imamah in terms of the need for an infallible guide who serves as the repository of the legacy of Ahl al-Bayt, it appears extremely incongruous that this particular guide has left no sort of legacy of his own whereby the legacy of the Ahl al-Bayt can be known. Despite the fact that an infallible guide supposedly exists, it is upon fallible persons such as Muhammad ibn Ya‘qub al-Kulayni that the Shi‘ah must depend for that legacy.

 

The only bit of information that has come down to us regarding the Hidden Imam’s authentication of the hadith legacy of the Shi‘ah is what is recorded by Aqa Muhammad Baqir Khwansari in his book Rawdat al-Jannat. He writes that al-Kulayni’s book was presented to the Hidden Imam who looked at it and declared, “Hadha Kaafin li-Shi‘atina” (This is enough for our Shi‘ah). This is incidentally how the book received its name.

 

A report such as this creates a huge problem. It appears to be a ratification of the contents of the book al-KAAFI by the infallible Imam. Yet, 9 centuries later the Shi'ite muhaddith, Mulla Muhammad Baqir Majlisi, would declare in his commentary on al-, named Mir’at al-‘Uqul, that 9,485 out of the 16,121 narrations in al- are unreliable. What did Majlisi know that the infallible Imam was so unaware of that he would authenticate a book, 60% of whose contents would later be discovered to be unreliable?

 

Evaluation

 

The Iraqi Shi'ah scholar, Muhammad Baqir as-Sadr, finds proof for the existence of the Hidden Mahdi in what he calls “the experience of a community”. The existence of the Hidden Imam, he postulates, was experienced by the Shi'ite community as a whole in the written communications that the representatives used supplied them with.

 

The crux of this argument lies in the fact that an individual experience might be doubted, but never that of experience of an entire community. However, the glaring flaw in this line of reasoning is that it very conveniently overlooks the part of the representatives as the individual go-betweens.

 

The community never had the privilege of seeing or meeting the person they believed to be the author of the tawqi‘at. Their experience was limited to receiving what the representatives produced. Even the argument of a consistent handwriting in all the various tawqi‘at is at best melancholy. There is no way one can get away from the fact that the existence of the Hidden Imam rests upon nothing other than acceptance of the words of the representatives.

 

The activities of those representatives furthermore go a long way to show that they were much, much more inspired by the desire to possess than by pious sentiments of any kind.

 

So when the Shi‘ah commemorate the birth of their twelfth Imam on the 15th night of Sha‘ban, or when they seek to apply ahaadeeth in Sunni sources which speak of twelve khalifahs to their twelve Imams, then let us ask them on what basis do they accept the existence of the twelfth one?

 

History bears witness to the existence of eleven persons in that specific line of descent, but when we come to the twelfth one, all we have is claims made by persons whose activities in the name of their Hidden Imam give us all the reason in the world to suspect their honesty and integrity.

 

In Islam, issues of faith can never be based upon evidence of this kind.

 

By Abu Muhammad Al-Afriqi

[RedSea]

This is more believable then to think that the puppet so called government of the TFG will bring good to Somalia.

 

I rather believe that I am ehlul Bayt.

[General Duke]

^^ You are becoming rather emotional SNM-Mujahid.

[Fiqikhayre]

Sunnis believe that Hassan Al-Caskari was childless so thus making your claim not only flaud but wrong aswell, so how can you believe in the wrong, even if you have been shown the truth? Unless you're shiite ofcourse, there is no room for manouvere!

 

That periods when Hassan died is an important period as it was the division of the shia sect into different sects!

 

The biggest dilemma for them was that Hassan not only died very young but at the same time did't leave any offspring aswell, that was a great trial for the shiasm and they didn't know how to come over it! Some choose the missing mahdi whilst others invented a child for the childless Hassan Al-Askari, so we can see the desperation and dilemma in here!

 

On the other hand your ancestors should have done a bit of research before they chose that abtirsiyo, because they put you now in a dead end and no room for manouvere, but I guess just like you, they weren't educated enough to realise the truth about Hassan Al-Askari!

 

So this means you delibarately ignore the truth, is it? Then ofcourse nothing will register with you because you're someone who choses to blind himself and delibarately believe in falsehood although he has been shown the light and absolute truth!

 

So you will never ever see the truth because you're in simple denial!

[RedSea]

Duke, you dont' make sense.

 

It's true,Melez Zenawi said the other day,that it was huge mistake to let the port city of Asmar go.He went on to say that he as about six sea ports under their supervision,Somali's sea ports offcourse.

 

These people won't hide their agenda,but you seem to fail to see that,thinking your uncle will the "president' of a nation,he will be remembered like Ziyad Barre.But my friend a puppet so called president can't do a thing.He will always remain weak and as I see this TFG thing was born dead to begin with.

 

So since you believe,dead and nonfunctioning so called government will bring Somalia back then you are being dellusional,for that reason I rather believe being Ehlul bayt then to believe in the TFG....you getting my drift.

[Catalyst]

Dont bring any emotional nonsense to this discussion Mr. MKA Yoonis. I have provided an Arabic text which clearly state the situation seen in many houses of Ashrafs in which they were, wrongfully, attributed to Al-Hassan Al-Askari who had no offspring. Its a well known situation and if you are really interested in the answer to that by scholars of the science of Nasab, then you should know that it was agreed upon that so many Qurashis from Mekka, Egypt, Madina, Sudan, Somaliland were mistakingly added to the geneological line of Hassan and were therfore corrected to Ja'far Al-Zaki bin Ali Al-Hadi.

 

Just read the text in my replay above and you shall find all the answers along with all the sources, books, biblography..etc.

[Fabregas]

My descendants where nomads from Turkey, they rode all the way with their Camels to Somalia.....You see names like "Shiekh Hassan Turki"? He is a descendant of the Turkman too...ha.haaaaaaa

[Taako Man]

Originally posted by Mujaahid: Red Sea: Duke, you dont' make sense.

 

It's true,Melez Zenawi said the other day,that it was huge mistake to let the

port city

of

Asmar

go.

When did Asmara become a port city? You are speaking so irrationally your geography is off. That is how we know you are lying and being deceptive.

[Fiqikhayre]

Catalyst it's you who is emotional about it, all I'm saying is stop the shiite fairy-tale and stop basing your geneology on a man, who didn't have any children!

 

Mistake here and mistake there will not excuse it sxb, just stop using geneology based on Hassan Al-Askari who was a good religious man and who did not have any children, is that too much to ask?

[Catalyst]

You clearly seem unable read the arabic text I provided while, at the same time, trying to maintain your position on a matter of which you have no knowledge of, apart from a couple of english articles here and there.

 

If you are that interest in the subject of the matter here why dont you spare us all the emotional outbursts and go read the resources noted up?

[RedSea]

Taako Man, duh.

 

Asmar is the largest city of Eritrea,take as an example.when Melez refered to it,he was refering to the whole country of Eritrea.

 

Besides that is not even the point.

 

FYI Casab and Massaw are the ports that serve Eritrea.

[Fiqikhayre]

Sxb spare us your cries and hysterical emotional outbursts and let's talk about the real issues, what is here on contention, if I may ask? We're contesting if Hassan Al-Askari had any offspring and the reality that a false geneology was claimed on Hassan Al-Askar!

 

So how could we finish this off, without shedding more light and embarrassment to you and the people you represent! You know that I'm not wrong and you've said that in your previous post, so I will highlight it for you one more time because it seems that you don't know what is here on contention!

 

Originally posted by

catlyst:

I have provided an Arabic text which clearly state the situation seen in many houses of Ashrafs in which they were,

wrongfully

,

attributed to Al-Hassan Al-Askari who had no offspring.

Its a well known situation and if you are really interested in the answer to that by scholars of the science of Nasab, then you should know that it was agreed upon that so many Qurashis from Mekka, Egypt, Madina, Sudan, Somaliland

were mistakingly added to the geneological line of Hassan

and

were therfore

corrected

to Ja'far Al-Zaki bin Ali Al-Hadi.

Thank you very much for reaffirming what I have been saying all along, so much for the english text provided being questioned and discredited!

 

So, if you know that Claus wasn't your father and in fact it's Jim, then why would you still place your geneolgy on Claus knowing that he's not your father and proven without doubt, so because that said Claus never had any children?

 

That's why I re-educated Shaafici that the man he's claiming as one of his father's i.e. Hassan Al-Askari never had any children which you amusingly seem to agree with! But something is stopping you, somehow!

 

So, thanks! All I was interested was only to correct you and Saylici on that matter, which I have done!

 

Now if you claim something else then it's not my business! You could claim to be descended from Genghis Khan, I would't care less but on the other matte$r you simply had to be corrected because you were lying and making up children for a man, that didn't have any!

 

So stop the wailing and emotional outbursts and re-educate your friend that the old story has been changed and that a new father was found and that he should change or edit the geneology, understand? So don't come here on me with all guns blazing, when you have been corrected on something you lied on and proven to be a charlatan! Don't claim a man, who didn't have any progeny was all I was saying, so if you change the geneology again then good because that's your custom and tradition and I don't want to take that away from you!