Al-Mahdi (a.s.)

yet another group says: refers to those personalities who follow his religion and adhere to his manners.

thereafter he says: «these are the three views which are more famous than all other views in this regard.

however the reason that the first view is correct is a tradition which qazi hussein-ibn-mas'oud baghwi has brought in his book «commentary of sunnat ar-rasul» (which is a collection of all those traditions which are in agreement) and he quotes its reference from abdur-rahman-ibn-laili who said:- 'ka'ab-ibn - ajza met me and said - «should i present you-with something which i heard from the messenger of Allah?» i replied: 'yes give it to me.'

he said: i asked the holy prophet as to how one should send salutations upon them - the ahlul-bait.

the holy prophet (s.a.w.a.) replied:

('o Allah, send salutations upon muhammad and his descendants just as thou sends salutations upon ibrahim and his descendants and send blessings upon muhammad and his descendants just as thou sends blessings upon ibrahim and his descendants. surely thou art all-praiseworthy and all-glorious).

thereafter he says:- the holy prophet interpreted his ahlul-bait as his - aâl». thus both are similar as far as their meaning is concerned and hazrat interchanged one word for the other in a manner that his are his ahlul-bait and his ahlul-bait are his ». therefore, on this basis, - aâl» and - ahl» are similar in meaning. the reality of this affair can be discovered from here that the root of had been » and - h» was changed to «- ?» for this reason that the letter of «- h » becomes «tasgheer dimunitive form and «--»(27) tasgheer of «--» becomes «--» as per this rule which states that "tasgheer" returns back every noun to its original form.

the reason that the second view is correct is a tradition which the traditionists have brought in their books. moreover, imam muslim-ibn-hajjaj, abu dawoud and nesa'ee are unanimous in the authenticity of this tradition and each one of them have, in their respective «sahihs» narrated from abdul-muttalib - ibn rabiya - ibn - haaris as such:

'i heard the holy prophet (s.a.w.a.) saying:- it is not that alms is filth and is not permissible for muhammad and his «--» to eat from it.

moreover, they have supported their view by a tradition which malik-ibn-anas has narrated in his «mutha» referring to the holy prophet (s.a.w.a.) as saying: «alms is not permissible for » (descendants) of muhammad because they are the dirt and filth of people.» thus, he mnade alms specifically un-permissible for his » and those upon whom alms is forbidden are bani-hashim and abdul-muttalib. it was asked from zaid-ibn-arqam as to who are the (descendants) of the messenger of Allah upon whom alms are forbidden and he replied:- «--» of ali, «--» of jafar, «--» of abbass and «--» of aqeel and this second view is nearer to the first view.