It is not bad to give a summary about the event of Mahdi’s birth. The birth of Mahdi the son of Imam Hasan Askari is recorded by historians as being a simple event.
However the birth is surrounded by some strange signs. The writer is not willing to see or accept the strange signs because he says that no such events were recorded. Which records he uses for his research, we do not know. An event of birth is not to be elaborated - generally speaking. Sources that are close to the house of Imam Hasan Askari (as) should also be contacted to see what they know and have to say. Historical science has gone too flaccid as its scholars have shown prejudice in recording the events or the facts. However, facts do remain unchanged although the attitude of a historian is however changeable.
The birth of messengers is gestant with unusual events, extra ordinary. Adam’s birth for example was a strange thing. The birth of Abraham, Is’haq, Moses, and Jesus were all strange, Jesus (as) still in a cradle spoke. All these events were super natural and extra ordinary. If these events are not historical, then the birth of Mahdi too is not one. If those events are regarded as being historical, the birth of ‘Mahdi’ too is one. The negligence of some historians do not spoil the event.
As a figure of speech, no matter how many veils are hung to hide or conceal something, if a candle is placed beyond the veils even the slightest light will still pass through those veils. Often is the case that an unauthentic source says something ignorant and it becomes history; but an occurrence of importance and magnitude which took place and is told by persons of repute and renown, still is not considered history! What a portentous display of prejudice and partiality it is! The writer says that the biographies of the Imams of the Shia have been so written that they are like the stories of the Sufis.
The stories of the Sufis are far from sense and reason. The writer could have said that the biographies of the Imams are like the stories of the births of prophets like Abraham, Is’haq, Ismael, Moses, Jesus and Yahya. But, taste is needed to install a similitude. Delicacy is the demand, wit is the want and vigilance is the vitality, needed to bring a similarity of the same sanctity. The stories of the Sufis are fabricated in order to attain the level of godly figures so as to make them credible.
They are fake, false, and feigned. But the facts of the prophets or the Imams do not break apart by false statements as a shadow cannot eradicate a light. It is the evil that proves a virtue. A dark night is the indication of a bright day, which dawns from within its folds.
The very sense the word history imparts should be defined here. Some events are perhaps narrated in the books of philosophy or medicine and not in the book of history. Although irrelevant of its place it is still history or a historical event. Whether it be the prophet of God or kings what they do go down as history.
Therefore, history cannot be confined to a man or a particular group or a particular performance. As a result there is no classification or category to which certain events are regarded as historical or non-historical. The writer is wrong. The birth of the twelfth Imam was history in itself as well as a historical event.