First: Fromthe abovediscussionwehave come toknowof the viewsandtheiranswers,so itisnot needed to repeat themhere. Second:Without any doubt, it isappropriate andprecautionary to mentionHisEminence, byhis titlesevenwhenweare not ingatheringsandassembliesand not tomentionhispromised name so that we may be free fromthe doubtof opposinganobligatoryorder;andalsoit isasort of respect andhonorofImam(a). Rather thismanner isseenin the statementsof Imams(a)and their followers. Third: Fromthe traditional reportsmentionedabove itisknown that one ofthe blessed namesof HisEminence, isAhmad.Nowthe questionariseswhetheritisalso unlawful tomentionthisname ingatherings? Orthe prohibitionisabout the wellknownname of HisEminence, thatis Muhammad?The authorof KifayatulMuwahhideenhasexplained thatthereisno difference between the twoandbotharesame in prohibition;andhe hasreferred thisviewto be popular. But there isscope of considerationin thisstatementsince the well-knownname isMuhammadand the statementof those who acceptthatitisprohibitedisneither Nassnor the apparentimportof namingHisEminence with other namesthanMuhammad. RatherI don’tknowof evenone scholar who is certain of the prohibition of mentioning this name. But precaution is the best way and the Almighty Allah is the best guide.
Fourth:Doesthisprohibitionalso apply to theKunniyat of HisEminence, which issame asthatof hisforefather, the HolyProphet (s)? Onthe basisofprecautionwecansay: Yes. But otherwise we cansay:No. Because ‘Ism’meansother thanKunniyat andtitlesasisfoundinlocal parlance. Thisis the apparentmatterandwhat ismentionedin the traditionof Khizrthat he said:Do notcallhimby hisKunniyat and name. Itisnot possible to proveitby thisonlybecause thereisapossibilityinit. Asisfoundin the viewofthe scholarsof principlesof jurisprudence.The same wasthe viewof MuhaqqiqNoori (r.a.), mayAllah keep hisplace of repose pure. Hehasconsidered the prohibition to be only regarding the name.Though the bestwayisthe wayof precaution.