The definitive statement regarding the Imam Al-Mahdi case.

It is not enough to follow the later trace and neglect the earlier one; rather, they are intertwined in meaning. We have revived the memory of the lineage of the state, the first state of the Umayyads, and the second state of the Umayyads. It is the third extension of the first Umayyad state. After Imam Abd al-Malik, his son Abd al-Aziz ruled, and then Abd al-Malik ibn Abd al-Aziz, the renewer, who strengthened his call. He was martyred by Abd al-Aziz ibn Abd al-Malik ibn Abd al-Aziz, who was praying the afternoon prayer in the mosque. He was martyred after his prayer, covered in blood.

His successor was Abd al-Malik. His sons were Ibn Namir and Ibn Said. Al-Mahdi, and these are not coincidences! It is arranged and managed in such a way that the accurate narrator precisely records it, then he records from his family, then from his companions, and then from his followers. The third state is an extension of the first, and it ended with Abd al-Malik, who was killed by Abd al-Malik. The end of the trace: "Then he went to him and killed him, and he was a man from Quraysh, who said to him, 'Abd al-Malik.'"

The phrase "he went to him" can be read as "he went to him." The fathah on the qaf makes it an alif. The Quran reads: "And do not kill your souls" (Al-Baqarah: 191). This is read with a qaf. Abu Dharr and his followers read: "And do not kill yourselves" without a qaf. The reading differed, even though the verses were the same. The alif can be written or omitted, so the scholars differed over it, whether it was a letter or a vowel.

The phrase remains in the following form: "Then he went to him and killed him." The phrase came as: "Then he went to him and killed him." If the hadith were literally true, but the precision of the early hadiths is known. How can it be so!