A Hadith: “Whoever dies without knowing the Imam of his time” — its meaning, and who is the Imam of the Zaydīs today?

6 months ago

19 minutes

The Question:

It is narrated from the Messenger of God ﷺ that he said:

“Whoever dies without knowing his Imam dies a death of ignorance (Jāhiliyyah).”

Who is the Imam of the Zaydīs in this era? How long is the period between one Messenger and another—that is, how long did people remain without a Messenger until God sent the next Messenger or Prophet after the death of any Prophet?

The Answer:

This question, derived from that authentic Muhammadan hadith, has become one by which intellects are tested and understandings are confounded, due to the severe warning it contains regarding dying a death of ignorance, and because many researchers find it difficult to fully grasp its dimensions.

The most reliable narration I relied upon in my research into the chains of this hadith is what was reported by Imam al-Aʿẓam Zayd ibn ʿAlī, from his father, from his grandfather, from ʿAlī (peace be upon them), who said:

“Whoever dies without having an Imam dies a death of ignorance, if the Imam is just, righteous, and God-fearing.”
(Musnad of Imam Zayd ibn ʿAlī)

The proper juristic understanding of this hadith is established through several foundational points

First Foundation: On the Meanings of Imamate as Guidance and Good

The Imamate that represents guidance and truth is of two types:

The first Imamate: the Imamate of the Qur’an and the Sunnah.
The second Imamate: the Imamate of the living Imam who assumes the succession of the Messenger of God ﷺ within the community.

Both Imams remain necessary for the Ummah due to its need for them. However, one remains without condition, while the other remains with conditions.

The Imamate That Remains Without Condition

This is the Imamate of the Book and the Sunnah. God has guaranteed their continuation until the Day of Judgment.

If it is said: We understand the preservation of the Book from the verse:

“Indeed, We sent down the Reminder, and indeed We are its Preserver.”

We reply: What is meant here by preservation is not merely the physical preservation of the text—chapters and verses—but the preservation of correct guidance derived from the Book and the correct guidance derived from the Sunnah.

God has guaranteed this guidance as long as the Hasanid and Husaynid progeny remain, until the end of religious obligation. The proof for this is found in the well-known, mass-transmitted Hadith of the Two Weighty Things (al-Thaqalayn), in which the Messenger of God ﷺ said:

“Indeed, I am leaving among you that which, if you hold fast to it, you will never go astray after me: the Book of God and my progeny, my Ahl al-Bayt. The Subtle, the All-Aware has informed me that they will never separate until they return to me at the Pond.”

Thus, although the Book is preserved from distortion, this Imamate of the Book and the Sunnah remains without condition. God has guaranteed its survival and appointed interpreters and guides to it—namely, the People of the House of our master Muhammad ﷺ.

Whoever does not take the Book and the Sunnah as Imams through guiding Imams, and dies upon that state, has died a death of ignorance.

The Imamate That Remains With Conditions

This is the Imamate of the one who rises to assume the succession of the Messenger of God ﷺ within the Ummah.

Its validity is tied to public emergence and the open proclamation of a Hasanid or Husaynid call, and this emergence itself has two conditions:

The first condition: the availability of supporters and helpers from the Ummah, so that the Ahl al-Bayt are not overwhelmed by oppression and suppression.
The second condition: that assuming leadership and the Imamate does not lead the Ummah to an evil—or to something worse than the situation they are already in.

When these two conditions are fulfilled, the Imamate of the rising, virtuous descendant of Fāṭimah becomes binding upon the Ummah, requiring obedience to that specific Imam. Whoever does not recognize such an Imam—listening to him and obeying him—and dies upon that state, has died a death of ignorance.

Clarifying an Apparent Contradiction

If it is said: You speak of the emergence of a Hasanid or Husaynid call and restrict it with conditions, while also stating that this Imamate is one that remains—how can you claim its continuity while acknowledging its absence until the conditions are fulfilled?

The answer is: there is no contradiction. The concept of the Ahl al-Bayt implies that the continuity of the Imamate, as a matter of divine command and selection for this lineage, means that there is never a time when a person capable of undertaking the leadership of the Ummah is absent from among them.

Time is never devoid of a righteous individual among them who is qualified to lead and guide the Ummah. Thus, the second Imamate remains through the continued existence of those qualified for it, whenever the Ummah fulfills its obligation—namely, uniting around the Ahl al-Bayt to undertake the affairs of the community in a manner that reasonably promises the removal of oppression and the stabilization of people’s affairs, in whole or in part.

Summary

The essence of this first foundational point is that:

The Imamate without which a legally responsible person dies a death of ignorance is of two kinds, and time is never devoid of either.
The Imamate of guidance through the Book and the Sunnah continues through the scholars of the Family of Muhammad, who guide people to it.
The Imamate of assuming supreme leadership continues through the scholars of the Family of Muhammad, who observe the response of the Ummah to the guidance of the Book and the Sunnah, and who rise—when support and acceptance are present—to govern and establish justice according to the way of their forefathers, the rightly guided Imams.

The Second Foundation

Among the foundational principles of the Ahl al-Bayt—and indeed principles shared by the rest of the Muslims except those who deviate—is that God does not burden any soul beyond its capacity, as God the Exalted says:

“God does not burden a soul beyond its capacity.” (Qur’an 2:286)

Likewise, there is no obedience owed to imams of misguidance, injustice, or tyranny.

If the Muhammadan hadith—“Whoever dies without having an Imam dies a death of ignorance”—is understood to require the necessary existence of an Imam in the technical legal sense, namely a manifest, just, ruling Imam governing the Ummah, such as the Commander of the Faithful ʿAlī, and the Imams from his descendants like Zayd, al-Hādī ilā al-Ḥaqq Yaḥyā ibn al-Ḥusayn, al-Nāṣir al-Uṭrūsh al-Ḥasan ibn ʿAlī, and others—

then it is known by historical necessity that there were periods when such an Imam was absent:
briefly according to Zaydī conditions, and extensively according to the conditions of others.

According to the Salafīs, this absence is obvious after the Rightly Guided Caliphate (as they define it), with the exception of ʿUmar ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz. As for those who followed from the Umayyads and the Abbasids, the injustice and tyranny of their rulers is known to every fair-minded person.
According to the Imāmī (Twelver) Shīʿa, after al-Ḥusayn ibn ʿAlī there was no manifest, publicly recognized Imam leading the Ummah. Even if one concedes to them that eight Imams were manifest, from the mid-third century (255 AH) until today they have had no visible Imam managing the affairs of the Ummah, commanding good, forbidding evil, defending the oppressed, or restraining oppressors.
The same applies to the Ismāʿīlīs.
According to the Zaydīs, there were also intervals (fatrahs) between active Imams:
- between the uprising of al-Ḥusayn ibn ʿAlī and that of his nephew al-Ḥasan ibn al-Ḥasan,
- between al-Ḥasan ibn al-Ḥasan and Zayd ibn ʿAlī,
- and between the uprising of Imam Majd al-Dīn al-Muʾayyadī—whose leadership was established but later abandoned by the people (d. 1428 AH)—and the emergence of an Imam in our present time.

Thus, even according to Zaydī standards, there are short periods in which no manifest, calling, ruling Imam exists who leads the Ummah, commands good, forbids evil, establishes legal punishments, and defends the oppressed.

Therefore, if the hadith of the “death of ignorance” were understood to require the existence of manifest Imams openly calling to their Imamate and whose obedience is individually obligatory, historical necessity proves this interpretation false, since time itself has been devoid of such figures.

To adopt such an interpretation would impose upon people what they cannot bear, and would judge them to have died deaths of ignorance during eras that were actually devoid of manifest, ruling Imams—whereas God has expanded ease for people during those periods when such leaders were absent in reality.

For this reason, we exclude this interpretation—namely, the absolute requirement of a just, manifest, calling Imam in every single era—from the correct understanding of the Muhammadan hadith.

The Correct Meaning of the Hadith

Rather, if what is meant by the saying of the Messenger of God ﷺ—

“Whoever dies without having an Imam dies a death of ignorance”

—is what we have previously explained, in accordance with circumstances and the fulfillment of conditions as outlined in the First Foundation, then the meaning is coherent, consistent, applicable to every age, and binding upon every legally responsible person.

This is because:

The Imamate of the Qur’an and the Sunnah remains,
and the Ahl al-Bayt are inseparably attached to them, guiding to them and never separating from them until they return to the Pond with our Prophet Muhammad ﷺ.

Thus, whoever, during a time when no ruling Imam from the Family of Muhammad has arisen—due to the absence of conditions for uprising, the dispersal of people from them, and their being overwhelmed by injustice, fear, and incapacity—does not take these sources (the Qur’an, the Sunnah, and the Ahl al-Bayt) as Imams of guidance, illuminating his belief, speech, and action, and dies upon that state, dies a death of ignorance.

However, if the conditions for uprising are fulfilled, the Ummah unites around the Ahl al-Bayt, and one of them rises—calling to God with the approval of the Family of Muhammad—then it becomes obligatory upon the Ummah to respond to him, for under those conditions, and with the qualifications of merit and righteousness, he cannot but be upon the guidance of the Qur’an, the Sunnah, and the consensus of his predecessors from the Ahl al-Bayt.

He is then the Imam of the time, and obedience to him becomes obligatory. Whoever fails to respond to him incurs the threat mentioned in the hadith and the death of ignorance.

Statements of the Imams of the Ahl al-Bayt

Having laid down these two foundations, we now cite statements from the Imams of the Ahl al-Bayt that testify to this reasoning.

Imam al-Hādī ilā al-Ḥaqq Yaḥyā ibn al-Ḥusayn (d. 298 AH) said, explaining the hadith of his grandfather ﷺ:

“If in a person’s time there is a standing Imam—pure, upright, and manifest—and he does not recognize him, does not support him, abandons him, betrays him, and dies upon that, he dies a death of ignorance.
But if there is no manifest Imam known by name and recognized by his leadership, then the Imam is the Messenger, the Qur’an, the Commander of the Faithful (ʿAlī), and whoever among his descendants follows his path and shares his attributes.
Knowledge of what we have mentioned is obligatory upon all people when no Imam is known in that era. They must know that this authority belongs exclusively to the descendants of the Messenger ﷺ, and that the age is never devoid of a proof of God among them—an Imam who commands good and forbids evil.
If a person knows all of this, holds it as we have explained, and then dies, he has escaped the death of ignorance and died upon the death of the religious community. Whoever is ignorant of this, does not say it, and does not believe it, has exited the communal death and died a death of ignorance. This is the interpretation and meaning of the hadith.”
(al-Aḥkām fī al-Ḥalāl wa-l-Ḥarām)

Imam Abū Ṭālib Yaḥyā ibn al-Ḥusayn al-Hārūnī al-Ḥasanī commented on this explanation, saying:

“This is the correct view, not what some people imagine—that the hadith indicates the necessity of knowing a specific Imam in every single age. That interpretation is extremely far-fetched.
If someone asks: Do you permit the earth to be devoid of Imams for long periods?
We reply: If you mean that the earth is devoid of those who are fit for the Imamate and governance of the Ummah from the most virtuous of the Prophet’s family, this is impossible according to the Zaydīs and is not permitted.
But if you mean that it may be devoid of one who actually undertakes leadership due to circumstantial causes and preventing events, then this is not impossible.”
(al-Daʿāmah)

Imam Mankadīm al-Mustazhir billāh Aḥmad ibn al-Ḥusayn said:

“Know that according to our doctrine, time is never devoid of an Imam. We do not mean by this that there must necessarily be an actively governing Imam—this is clearly not always the case—but rather that time cannot be devoid of one who is fit for the Imamate.”
(Sharḥ al-Uṣūl al-Khamsah)

Conclusion of the Second Foundation

With this, we conclude the discussion of the second foundation. We also point out that, according to Zaydī doctrine, periods of absence do not remain long without the rise of a calling Imam, because the Ummah is in need of such leadership to revive the landmarks of the Qur’an and the Sunnah, to disturb the comfort of tyrants, to defend the oppressed against oppressors, the weak against the strong, to eradicate evil, establish good, and implement legal punishments.

Thus, the first Imamate—that of the Qur’an, the Sunnah, and the learned, upright descendants of the Ahl al-Bayt—prepares the ground for the second Imamate—the active leadership of the Ummah and support of God’s caller.

The first is the foundation of the second. Yet adherence to the first does not replace adherence to the second when it arises, calls, and fulfills its conditions—lest one fall into the death of ignorance as indicated by the Muhammadan hadith and others that establish the obligation of supporting and following the standing Imam of guidance.

There are further considerations regarding ignorance and interpretive error for those who fail to respond to such an Imam, but this is not the place to elaborate on them.

The Third Foundation

Our brothers from the Imāmī (Twelver) Shīʿa whom we have encountered in our time—whose arguments we have examined and tested—claim that this hadith has no valid application except according to their own doctrine, because, in their view, it implies uninterrupted continuity and total temporal inclusion, encompassing every age.

They are the ones who assert the existence of an Imam in every era, who designate the Imam, and who claim that the Imam of their time is al-Mahdī Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan al-ʿAskarī, for twelve centuries—meaning that the son of al-Ḥasan al-ʿAskarī is the Imam of our time, the Imam of nine or more generations of our forefathers, indeed the Imam of our fathers and ancestors all the way back to Imam al-Hādī ilā al-Ḥaqq Yaḥyā ibn al-Ḥusayn (d. 298 AH).

It is well known to every principled jurist and fair-minded researcher that this is a cold and weak excuse.

The Zaydīs acted justly toward reason when they were not overcome by emotion into asserting the continuity of the Imamate of active rule in every age without intervals, since historical necessity contradicts such a claim. As for the Imāmīs, they contented themselves with obligating the legally responsible to know the Imam merely by name, without encountering his person, being guided by his conduct, or benefiting from his commanding right and forbidding wrong, deriving legal rulings, or directing the Ummah.

If mere knowledge of the name, despite absence, were sufficient for the salvation of the Ummah, then we already know that our Imam is the Messenger of God ﷺ despite his absence—and that should suffice as name-recognition without the physical presence of the person. Or we know that our Imam is the Commander of the Faithful, ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib (peace be upon him), despite his absence—and that should suffice as well.

Furthermore, the Imāmī foundational claim—that the Imam of the time whose knowledge saves one from the death of ignorance is the Mahdī, son of al-Ḥasan al-ʿAskarī—is based upon the alleged establishment of explicit textual designation (naṣṣ). Yet this naṣṣ is invalid both in the Qur’an and the Sunnah; it consists of solitary reports unique to the Imāmīs and was not transmitted by the Ummah in a manner yielding certainty or definitive knowledge.

Moreover, this Imāmī foundation is contradicted by the statements of their own Imams.

Shaykh al-Mufīd narrates with his chain from Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī al-Ḥalabī, who said that Abū ʿAbd Allāh (peace be upon him) said:

“Whoever dies while having no living, manifest Imam over him dies a death of ignorance.”
(al-Ikhtiṣāṣ, p. 269)

This report from Imam al-Ṣādiq (peace be upon him) is exactly what we established in the first two foundations, and it accords precisely with the explanation of Imam al-Hādī ilā al-Ḥaqq Yaḥyā ibn al-Ḥusayn. It indicates that the Imāmīs, for twelve centuries without a manifest Imam, are subject to the very “death of ignorance” with which they test others today.

Even clearer—and more decisive against the Imāmī interpretation—is what al-Kulaynī narrates with his chain from Muḥammad ibn Muslim, who said:

“I heard Abū Jaʿfar (peace be upon him) say:
‘Everyone who worships God—Exalted and Mighty—exerting himself in devotion, yet has no Imam from God, his effort is not accepted, and he is misguided and bewildered…
By God, O Muḥammad, whoever among this Ummah wakes up without a manifest, just Imam from God wakes up misguided and lost. And if he dies in that state, he dies a death of disbelief and hypocrisy.
Know, O Muḥammad, that the imams of injustice and their followers are removed from the religion of God; they have gone astray and led others astray.’”
(Uṣūl al-Kāfī, 1/184)

It is known that the Imāmīs have had no manifest Imam for twelve centuries. Reflect on the attribute of justice, which Imam al-Ṣādiq (peace be upon him) explicitly joins to the attribute of manifestness, and it becomes clear that what is meant by Imamate here is the Imamate of active leadership and public الدعوة (calling to God) through commanding right and forbidding wrong.

This has not been realized for twelve centuries according to Imāmī conditions in their Imam, whom they know only by name.

Yes—there are further statements from Imāmī Imams affirming the second meaning of Imamate: the Imamate of rising, calling, struggling against tyrants, and supporting the oppressed. This affirmation itself confirms the Zaydī position that Imamate in the Fāṭimid Hasanid and Husaynid line is by public call and uprising.

We have already spoken about the existence of short intervals, and this directly contradicts the Imāmī conception of Imamate as uninterrupted and encompassing every age. Indeed, it nullifies the Imamate of their twelfth Imam, who—after his birth (if it occurred)—disappeared until today, leaving nations, centuries, generations, and communities without a manifest Imam who establishes proof and a just, public call.

The statements of the Imāmī Imams contradict that position. Through these reports—and others previously cited—from Imāmī authorities themselves, which undermine their own foundational understanding of the hadith of the Messenger of God ﷺ:

“Whoever dies without having an Imam dies a death of ignorance,”

the threat contained in that Muhammadan report applies to them, due to their distance from sound scholarly methodology and correct foundational reasoning.

We mention this only as a warning to researchers, not out of love for applying the threat or destroying the Ummah and increasing its division. The Imāmīs have tested the Ummah with this hadith, rejoicing in the mere knowledge of a name without any substantive foundation beneath it.

Conclusion

With this third foundation, the answer to the question concerning the hadith of the death of ignorance is complete.

As for the remaining question—how long the interval is between one Messenger and another—that is known to God alone. These periods may be long or short, and Muslims do not deny their existence. The closest well-known interval is that between our Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ and the Prophet of God ʿĪsā (peace be upon him), which approaches six centuries.

At times, there may be no interval at all between Prophets and Messengers, such as between Solomon and David, or between Jesus, Zechariah, and John—peace be upon them all.

With this, the answer is complete.
And praise belongs to God.

Answered by:
al-Ustādh al-Kāẓim al-Zaydī — may God grant him success.

O God, send blessings upon Muḥammad and upon the family of Muḥammad.

Translation of Ustadh Kadhim Al Zaydi (May Allah reward him)

#hadith #imamah #imamis #polemics #rafida