The Imam’s scholars have classified political and social grades. From Kulaini to Tusi Nomani who are regarded as some of the first ones to write about the absence of the Imam. Prior to them there was a group of scholars who dealt with this subjects and wrote books. Fazl Bin Shozan (died in 260) and still further back there were Ibrahim Bin Husham Abul Fadl Al-Nasheri and others constitute a class of writers.
Imam Hasan (as) and Imam Husayn (as) were two brothers and at the same time Imams. In that period and age both were Imams one obeyed the other; the younger brother obeyed his elder, as he became Imam. Imam Hasan (as) actually held the political authority as well as the religious one. He administered social affairs and held the government over them. Imam Husayn (as) had no say as long as his brother Hasan was alive.
The writer now tries to establish a link on this precedent and suggests that the Imamate was of Abdulla Ajta instead of Musa al-Kadhim or to the both of them and similarly to Ja’far brother of Imam Hasan Askari. The office of Imamate is Divine. As such, the Imamate is not dependent on our pleasure.
It is not our right to suggest one for the Imamate or not to approve the others. When Musa al-Kadhim became Imam, Abdullah goes out of question. Likewise Ja’far is not Imam because Hasan Askari is the Imam. The Imamate of Hasan and Husayn cannot be a base for any who happens to be a brother of the Imam to become Imam. To avoid such a kind of mischief or this type of interpretation the Prophet (S) in his life time had repeatedly disclosed the names of the Imams individually. He had even specified the characteristics of them. So, that no doubt nor suspicion would remain.