said (in a reply to arriving at a best judgement-fatwa):
If you get it right you will get no reward for it, but if you get it wrong
you will have ascribed a lie to Allah(azwj)...(Al-Kafi, Vol. 1, Wasail ul Shia H. 33185)
Amir-ul-Momineen Ali(asws)
Ibn Abi Talib(as)
says in the Hadith-e-Tariq
How could Allah(azwj)
Make obligatory upon His servants the obedience
of the one who is veiled from the mysteries of the Heavens and the
Earth.(Mashariq ul Anwar, pg. 138, Bahrul Muarif, pg. 360, Najul Israr, vol. 1, pg. 109 )
The term Ijtihad, according to the Arabic dictionary, is derived from `juhd’, which means
employment of an effort or endeavor in performing a certain activity. The principles of
ijtihad in accordance with Sunni as well as Shia school of thoughts, put together, are:
the Book, the Sunnah, Ijma` (consensus), `Aql (reason), Qiyas (analogy), …and so on.
Ijtihad (to strive) in religion has been used by Sunni Muslims for a very long time, from
the era of Holy Prophet Mohammed(saww)
until today. During this period, this technique
which facilitates one to form an opinion and issue a decree (fatawa), was completely
rejected and disliked by the twelve successors of the Holy Prophet(saww), specially, when
it was practiced, out of necessity, by the Sunni Muslims.
The companions of the Holy Prophet(saww)
started making use of it soon after taking into
their hands the reign of Government in order to justify some of their unislamic actions,
but later on it was extensively used by the imams of Ahly e Sunnah (Sunni) not only to
issue Fatwas to public but also to support and cover up the mistakes of the rulers who
started distorting the true picture of Islam. At the same time, Ahl al-Bayt(asws)
(The Divine
Imams(asws) declared Ijtihad, as an evil concept, which was used by evil spirits to gather
support to refute Divine Commands, the first one who used Ijtihad was Iblis,..{He said: "What prevented you (O Iblis) that you did not prostrate, when I commanded you?" Iblis said: "I am better than him (Adam), You created me from fire, and him You created from clay."}..(Quran 7:12)
‘Once, abu Hanifa came to see Imam Abu ‘Abd Allah(asws)
who said to abu Hanifa, ‘O abu
Hanifa, do you practice analogy
as I hear you do’? Abu Hanifa replied, ‘Yes, I do
practice analogy.’ The Imam(asws)
then said to him, ‘Do not practice it; the first person
who used analogy was Iblis when he said, “Lord, you have created me from fire and
created him from clay.’ He analogized fire with clay. If he had compared ‘نورية’ the light
in Adam(as)
and light of ‘النار’ the fire, he would have learned about the difference between
the two lights and the excellence of one over the other.(Al-Kafi, Vol. 1, - H 176, Ch. 19, h20 )
The first Ijtihad
was based on analogy and its foundation was laid down by the Iblis(la)
since then it was used by the enemies of Allah(azwj). The Sunnis’ version of Ijtihad is
based on a fabricated Hadith of ‘Amr ibn al-’As (a well known enemy of Ahl Al-Bayt(asws),
He fabricated a hadith that Prophet(saww)
said: ‘When a judge gives a decision by
Ijtihad and gets it right, there are two rewards for him; and if he gave a
Judgement by Ijtihad but erred, there is one reward for him’.(Sahih Muslim – B18 – H 4261)
Basically, a wrong
result of an Ijtihad (hardwork/effort) will earn one a single reward whereas a correct
result will get him two rewards,
The above fabricated hadith has been criticised by the Ahl al-Bayt(asws), as shown clearly
by, Amir-ul-Momineen(asws)’s comments:
ما لقيت من هذه االمة من كذابيها ومنافقيها. لكأني بالقراء الضعفة المجتهدين قدرووا حديثه وصدقوه فيه واحتجوا علينا
أهل البيت بكذبه.
‘From this Ummah, what I have seen from its liars and hypocrites – Of course I can
see those reciters who are weak and are Mujtahids have narrated his (Amr Bin Al
Aas’s) Hadith and confirm him and present his lies as arguments in opposition to us
the Ahl Al-Bayt(asws)...( Kitab Sulaym Bin Qays Al Hilali – H 22)
BEGINNING OF IJTIHAD IN THE SHIA WORLD
Ijtihad entered among the Sunnis during the era of the 1st caliphate and then the second and carried on to the extent that those who were considered to be the companions used to think that it was their birth right to use their own opinion in matters of religion. This is why the Sunnis regard all companions to be Mujtahids and cover up their mistakes by regarding it as an ‘error of Ijtihad’. It was later on, at the time of Abu Hanifa that Ijtihad was done in an organized manner. He began commenting on the Holy Quran using his own opinion and declared some Hadeeth to be of a doubtful nature. This gave him an open field to play in. Later on many others followed his example and created their own sects. They also created the principles of jurisprudence which formed the basis of Sharia law. (Al Risalat Ul Ilmiya Fi Akhbar Ul Ma’sumeen – Al Risala for short) It has been quoted from Rawdat Ul Jannat by Muhammad Baqir Khonsari: ‘It is the unanimous view of all the scholars that the first one to set the principles of jurisprudence was Shafi of the Sunnis’.
I am only delving into this for the sake of understanding it and not to narrate the history of Ijtihad among the Sunnis. This has nothing to do with us. It’s their affair. We are only interesting in finding out where this plague came from and how it was established amongst the Shias. Allama Bakhshashi has quoted his book, ‘Imam Ja’fer Al Sadiq (asws) Peshwa O Raees E Mazhab’ that the first Shia scholar who used the term Ijtihad in the other meaning was Allama Hilli (died 726 AH) who in his book, in the chapter of Ijtihad used the term Ijtihad in the same meaning that it is being used today in. This was the time period when the term Ijtihad was accepted by the Shia. Well, that was the 8th Century AH. Let us now go back a little. Allamah Muhammad Baqir Kamrohi’s book, in his preface of Sheykh Saduq’s book Al Khisal he says: “until the end of the 4th CenturyAH, the Shia used the Holy Quran and the sayings of Masoomeen (asws) as the source of law. When they started following the scholars of other sects, they then started writing books on Principles and Jurisprudence; then Ijma (Consensus) and Aqal (Evidence of reason) was introduced as sources of law. When it was pointed out to them that this was against the teachings of Ahlul Bayt (asws), they tried to explain it away by saying that the consensus includes Masoomeen (asws), whilst the evidence of reason on its own is not a source but is part of the evidence which forms the law. This then led to the introduction of analogy (Qiyas) in the Shia sect. This was the time when referring to the Holy Quran and the sayings of Masoomeen (asws) as sources of law came to an end. Those that hung on to these two weighty things as the only sources of law lost the attraction of the scholars and the attention of the people.” Let me clarify the claim that ‘by consensus we mean that Masoom (asws) is included therein’. Now it is up to you if you wish to accept this claim without any evidence, however, it does not make sense. If you were to look at the discussions of these scholars you will see that they differ vigorously among themselves on many small and big issues. This proves that Masoom (asws) is not present amongst them and is not a part of their differences. The purpose of Imam (asws) is to remove differences and not to create them. Furthermore, since they started to create a parallel system in contrast to the unconditional obedience to Masoom (asws), how is it possible for Imam (asws) to be part of this discussion and be agreeable to their qiyas (analogies)? It has been clarified that the Shia Sect was clean from the impurities of Ijtihad up until the end of the 4th Century AH. Now, it is said that ‘Excuse for the sin is worse than the commission of it’. In this way they have sacrificed the sayings of Masoomeen (asws) at the altar of the rules which they took from the Sunnis. Their assertion that the evidence of reason and consensus are the tools with which they uncover the sayings of Masoomeen (asws) is also invalid because these two tools were created by Shafi of the Sunnis. Therefore, they cannot have anything to do with Masoomeen (asws). Neither did Masoomeen (asws) mentioned them nor commanded the use of them. We are discussing the period of the 4th Century AH, but this matter goes further. As I have said before, Marjaiat is an intoxicant like none other. Even at the time of the minor occultation, despite having respect for the last of the Imams (asws) they had started thinking about establishing their Marjaiat. The first thing they did was to introduce the term ‘Naaib e Imam’ (Representative of Imam) and adopt it for themselves. They were soon reprimanded for this from the letters that came from Imam (atfs.), and so the Shias were kept safe from the deceptive traps of Shaitan (la). As soon as the major occultation started, the desires of these deceitful people came to fruition. What they then did was to refer the four messengers of the Imam (atfs) as ‘the four representatives’ and made them well known as such, despite the fact that these four noble people never used this term for themselves. There is no mention anywhere in history of the usage of this terminology for these four noble people. Al Kafi was compiled during the minor occultation and does not refer to this term anywhere. Man La Yahzur Ul Faqih was written immediately after the start of the major occultation and there is no mention of this terminology anywhere in it either. Is it not strange that the Shias of that time had neither heard of these ‘representatives of the Imam’ nor had any knowledge of the ‘four representatives’. It was centuries later that some people had ‘revelations’ that these terms should be pasted onto these four messengers of the Imam (atfs) so that they should begin to be known as such amongst the people. This was done so strongly that if today someone were to try and uncover the veil in order to explain reality, then the people would oppose him vehemently. The whole purpose of this was that sometimes in the future they themselves would be able to adopt these terms for themselves and there would be no objection from the people. Those that referred to the four noble messengers of the Imam (atfs) as the four ‘special representatives’ (Naaib e Khaas), and who then adopted for themselves the term ‘general representatives’ (Naaib e Aam) . The messengers of Imam (atfs) were neither Mujtahids themselves, nor were they issuing any verdicts (Fatwas), nor did they believe in the principles of jurisprudence, nor did they ever invite people to follow them (do their Taqleed). These ‘special representatives’ only used to convey the commands of the Imams (asws) and that’s it. There are too many veils that have covered the events during the minor occultation and it is no easy task to lift these and come to know the reality. If you were to listen to the statements of these people or peruse their books you will feel that (maazAllah) the period of the minor occultation was devoid of guidance. Only a few of His (Imam atfs) letters and miracles will be seen, as if the whole of His (Imam atfs) network was engaged in the sole activity of the collection of Khums. Someone will be seen to be bringing Khums in a canister of oil or someone will be bringing it concealed in a piece of cloth. When scholars realized the profitability of the situation, they then had the audacity to declare themselves as being representatives of the Imam (atfs), and during these days Ijtihad and the principles of Jurisprudence were systematically introduced among the Shias from the Sunnis.
You may be shocked by this. These are not my words, but those of Allamah Syed Baqir Musavi Khownsari from his book ‘Rowzat Ul Jannat Fi Ahwal E Ulama O Sadaat’. Muhammad Bin Junaid who was a resident of Baghdad, and was known by the title of KATIB (Writer), was the first person who laid the foundation of Ijtihad in the Shia world by adopting the principles of Jurisprudence from the adversaries. He followed Hasan Bin Aqeel Nu’mani in this concept and lived at the time of Muhammd Bin Yaqoub Kulayni. These two scholars are known as the Two Old Ones. Sheykh Toosi was the first one to follow the footsteps of Ibn Junaid who issued a number of religious commands against Yaqoub Kulayni, prompting the other scholars to try and affect a compromise between the two in order to prove both of them to be correct. In this regard those that went against the companions of Masoomeen (asws) by using the evidence of reason, the art of theology and qiyas (analogy), were Muhammad Bin Junaid and Hasan Bin Aqeel Nu’mani. Then came Sheykh Mufeed, who made conjecture a beloved thing from what he wrote, and his companions Syed Murtadha and Sheykh Toosi who forwarded the method of Ibn Junaid and Ibn Abi Aqeel to the next generation. After this, Allama Hilli made the principles of the adversaries an obligation and got the aggressive support of both the Shaheed E Awwal and Shaheed E Thaani. The first one to make the claim that the majority of hadiths upon which the Shias used to act and will continue to do so during the major occultation are to be taken from the books of the companions of the above mentioned people, was Sheykh Ali. The Mujtahid Muhammad Idris Hilli was the first one to declare that any tradition which has only one narrator cannot be relied upon and no knowledge can be gained from it. Sheykh Ta’ifa, Syed Murtadha, and Sheykh Toosi all acted upon this regulation. You have just seen what an old Mujtahid Allamah Muhammad Baqir Khonsari has explained above.
Now let us see what conclusions can be drawn from all this. 1.The Mujtahid Ibn Junaid is the founder of Ijtihad in the Shia Sect, but he was himself in the Taqleed of Hasan Bin Abi Aqeel Nu’mani and they both were at the time of the Minor Occultation. 2.These two elders are referred to as the ‘Two Old Sheykhs’ (Qadeemain’) 3.Ibn Junaid is the first Shia Mujtahid to not only adopt the principles of Jurisprudence of the Sunnis but also made these a part of the Shia Sect. 4.The great Mujtahid who completed the adoption of these principles as part of religion was Sheykh Toosi. 5.Ibn Junaid lived at the time of Sheykh Yaqoub Kulayni the narrator of hadiths, and openly opposed him. 6.The words, ‘Some Mujtahideen tried to make a compromise between the two and try and prove both of them to be correct’ testifies that there were some scholars who had the same Ijtihad mentality. 7.The vehement opposition to Sheykh Yaqoub Kulayni shows that the process of Ijtihad had already started and the road to the guidance of Masoom Imam (atfs) was being blocked. These people were backed by the government of that time because Ibn Junaid was a minister of Mo’iz Ud Dowla in the Buyid period. 8.The Mujtahids of that time stopped following hadiths and started opposing the great collector of hadiths Sheykh Yaqoub Kulayni, who presented to us his monumental book ‘Al Kafi’, which is based on the original principles of religion and is regarded as a reliable book. They vehemently opposed him and started following their own opinions based on conjecture and analogies and gave preference to Ijtihad.
If this religion of the Mujtahids were to be analyzed, what would be the criteria for it? Personal opinions, personal choice, personal circumstances or the words of Masoom (asws)? Certainly those that are aware and love their religion would say that the criteria should be the words of Masoomeen (asws). So, without any hesitation I would like to quote one tradition from Al Kafi and let you decide. Imam Jafar Sadiq (asws.) said, “People have been ordered to get Our understanding, and to turn to Us (rujoo) and obey what We say. If these people fast , offer prayers , and give testimony of Allah but do not turn towards Us for guidance and in obedience , they would become polytheists” – AL KAFI.
Now look at some more from Rowzat Ul Jannat : 1.The first person to say that truth can only be reached by four sources – The Holy Quran, Coincidental traditions (Hadees), The Evidence of Reason (Aqal) and Consensus (Ijma), was Abu Huzaifa Wasil Bin Ata who was the first one to be referred to as a Mu’tazilite. He is the leader of the misguided and the father of the Mu’tazilites. He used to live in Medina and has the title Abu Huzaifa Ghazali. 2.It is the unanimously accepted view of all the scholars that it was Shafi who first made up the principles of jurisprudence. The more you look into these Mujtahideen the more shocking revelations you will come across and you realize that the reins of this matter are in the hands of the adversaries. The main problem is that the Shia have been impressed by the general appearance of these Mujtahids who have adopted the apparent religion of Masoomeen (asws) but in reality are followers of Their (Masoomeen asws) enemies. The Shias, when they look at their turbans and cloaks that they wear, get easily influenced by them and consider their words as being the words of Masoomeen (asws)....
SOME IMPLUCATIONS OF THE OCCULTATION:
The imam is omnipresent in Imamite religious life. Given the capital role that this
presence plays, it is obvious why there were such substantial modifications in
Imamite religious life after the final Occultation. One question inevitably comes
to mind when we examine the evolution of Imamite doctrine: after the
Occultation, is Imamite religious life deprived of all collective characteristics, of
all community practice, of all social application? This question is at first glance
provocative; it nevertheless appears to find a partial answer in certain "distinctive
characteristics" of the doctrine. Although our work here has been a study of early
Imamism, we might do well at this point to outline the historical evolution of the
doctrine, in order to be able to look at the influence that this evolution has had on
Imamism's basic teachings. Such an outline will help us to understand better the
historical fate of Imamism, on the one hand, and to evaluate the relationship that
the faithful believer is supposed to maintain with the imam during the
Occultation, on the other. Let us look first at the case of Imamite
jurisprudence (fiqh), since it is the discipline that touches daily religious life most
closely. It is jurisprudence that codifies and regulates the most concrete aspects of
dogma, and it appears to have been the discipline that was most immediately
touched by the problems posed by the Occultation. Imamite fiqh came into
existence as a discipline of its own, so to speak, during the Imamates of
Muhammad al-Baqir(as) and especially Jafar al-Sadiq(as), even though its systematic
methodology was not worked out until later. For a long time the principles of
jurisprudence (Usul al-fiqh) included only the Quran and the hadith, the latter
comprising the traditions of the Prophet and those of the imams, those of the
imams being able to abrogate those of the Prophet. As we have seen, the imams
are extremely critical of both reasoning by analogy (qiyas) and the use of personal
opinion (raay) in religious matters. We have also seen that in the early
"esoteric non-rational" tradition, ‘aql’ not only had the meaning of a dialectic
faculty of discernment, but it also referred to a cosmic force, like the Imam of
Creation, actualized in individuals in the form of a faculty of metaphysical apperception and considered as the individual imam of each faithful believer.
Even among the first great "rationalist" theologians like al-Mufid (d. 413/1022)
and his disciple al-Murtada (d. 436/1044), the Qur’an and the hadith are
recognized as being the only bases of law. Ijtihad (the "personal interpretation" of
the doctor/theologian), of great importance in later Imamism, was rejected as
being a disguised form of the "reasoning by analogy" that was criticized by the
imams. The "consensus" (ijma) of the Doctors of the Law, as it is described
by these two authors, comes in a typically Shiite form: the "consensus" is of no
value unless it includes the will of the imams, a will that must be shown through
their words. The value of the "consensus" is thus "effaced" by the validity of the
hadith. The same opinions of ijtihad and ijma are found in Abu Jafar al-Tusi
(d. 460/1067), but in his case we can already see the first influences of Mu’tazilism: ‘aql’ begins to lose its early definition and approaches the reasoning
faculty of the dialecticians. It appears as though the somewhat later al-Allama
al-Hilli (d. 726/1325) was the first of the great Imamite scholars to have classified
ijtihad, and consequently ‘aql’ (in its acceptation as dialectical reasoning) as
methodological principles of jurisprudence to be used along with the Qur’an and
the hadith. In its early stage, then, the bases of Imamite law were practically
limited to the Qur’an and the hadith. As we will see, it will not be until about
the tenth/sixteenth century, that the two ideas of ijtihad and ‘aql’ are effectively
considered to be two bases for jurisprudence, that the doctor/theologians will
acquire significant political and social power.As far as "applicable branches" (furu) are concerned, transactions (mu’amalat) in
Imamite law are with very few exceptions identical to those in Sunni schools of law. Problems become more thorny when we get into the field of duties regarding
worship ('ibadat) and precepts (ahkam); here, even in Imamism, scholars have long
debated certain points. Let us begin with duties regarding worship, divided into prayer
(both individual and collective), fasting, the religious "taxes," pilgrimage, jihad (in the
sense of "holy war"), and ordering what is good and forbidding what is evil. From
what can be gleaned from the notes of Aqa Bozorg al-Tihraru in his al-Dharia, a
colossal collection of Shiaite works, fierce debates were waged on the practice of two
of these, collective prayer and holy war. In essence, what characterizes these two is
their need for a "leader" or a "guide" to be practiced appropriately. We know that in
Imamism this "leader" can only be the imam himself, or someone designated by him.
According to the early corpus of the imams, the collective prayer of the two feasts of
the Sacrifice at the end of the month of Ramazan are specifically declared as
impossible to perform in the absence of the imam or his delegate. On the other
hand, since the leaders of the Imamite collective prayer on Fridays were named by the
imams, once the imam is absent, it appeared as though the Friday prayer could no
longer be practiced, or that it was at least suspended" (mutawaqqif al-ijra) until the
Return of the Mahdi(as) and his designating new leaders for prayer. This situation
prevailed throughout the pre-Safavid period, since at the beginning of the Safavid
dynasty (circa 927/1520 to 1009/1600) nearly a hundred books or treatises were
written to justify the legal status of Friday prayer. The composition of these books
was linked to the religious politics of the Safavids, specifically to attempts at setting
up another Islamic "pole" in the face of the Ottoman Empire, on the one hand, and the
"ideologization" of Imamism, on the other. We shall return to this.We find ourselves facing the same phenomenon when it comes to the holy war. With
the arrival of the Safavids, a number of polemical works were composed to prove the
legal or illegal status of jihad in the absence of the imam. A solution was finally
reached through compromise, and the doctor-theologians distinguished between two
different holy wars: the offensive jihad, declared to be "suspended" during the period
of Occultation, and the defensive, legal jihad, which may be obligatory in the case of
an attack from outside. The polemics and the juridical-theological debates in the
Safavid and post-Safavid periods show that the question was still moot until relatively
recently.
Among the ahkam, religious jurisdiction (hukuma/qada") and legal punishments
(hudud) were subject to this debate. The need for justice based on the Law and
religious science of the judge being beyond question, the question remains as to
whether the judge should be a religious person, in the sense of a religious "professional," or not. The problem is raised by later sources, once again starting in
the time of the Safavids and the constitution of a class of Imamite religious
professionals. Actually, among the early Imamites, the theologian-judges
(hukkam/qudat al-share) were named directly by the imams; some of the imams'
remarks regarding the difficulty of just jurisdiction appear to have led Imamite
doctors to wonder whether, in the absence of the imam, a religious judge, ,all the
more likely to make judgment errors since he is not designated by the infallible person
of the imam, could exercise such a responsibility without compromising both the Law
and religion. The number of works written from the Safavid period on against this
argumentation encourages us to think that it was effectively used by Imamites in
earlier times. Imamite law divides legal punishments into two categories: there
are first of all those punishments instituted by the Qur’an and whose application is
designated by the expression "Allah's right" (haqq Allah); next, there are the
punishments applied to errors not foreseen by the Sacred Text and whose commission
is called "man's right" (haqq al-nas). Since the imam is the only person with the
ability to apply Qur’anic precepts to individual cases appropriately, the practice of
"Allah's right" can be carried out only by Him, or by the person specifically designated
by Him. "Man's right," on the other hand, can be carried out by an individual whose
virtue and religious knowledge are recognized by everyone. The final part of al-
Murtada's treatise, Risalat al-ghayba, summarizes and illustrates quite well this
somewhat discomforting and ambiguous situation that we are examining. The
somewhat stilted language of the text is from A. Sachedina' s translation: The doctrine of the hudad [legal punishment] during the ghayba is clear. It is like this
that if [the hadd] was to be implemented on a person, if the Imam appears and if that
person is still alive and if it is proved on him by imputation and confession of having
been committed by him, the Imam will impose the legal punishment on him. But if
the punishment was not implemented because of his having died, the sin is on those
who have frightened the Imam and forced him to go into ghayba. The Shari'ah does
not get abrogated in the execution of the hudad, because abrogation is at that time
when there is a possibility of implementing the punishment and when obstacles
preventing its enforcement have been removed. But under the condition we have
mentioned, it does not get abrogated. "
This short excerpt seems to sum up the early Imamite concept as concerns the social
application of jurisprudence: as long as the imam remains in hiding, it is impossible
for the Law to function correctly on the collective level. There is no one but the
hidden imam who, once he comes back, can carry out all the precepts applicable to
the collective religious life. The Imamites could not have been ignorant of the
inevitable implications of a complete Occultation: without the designation of the
imam, no chosen delegate could be named; without the delegate, there could be no
"leader" or "guide" for collective prayer, which, therefore, becomes "suspended."
Nothing in the early corpus of the imams suggests a remedy for such a situation. The
last letter of the twelfth imam will cut to the quick: not only will there not be a
"representative," but no one but an impostor will claim to be one. In the face of this
information, we might wonder-and here we return to our original question-if the
complete Occultation did not bring about the end of the collective dimension of the
Imamite doctrine, and if this doctrine did not become, from that point on, a
completely interiorized, individualized, initiatory kind of "religion. "In addition to the information examined previously, there are also comments by the
imams about the Occultation that appear to corroborate our idea here. The fourth
imam, 'Ali Zayn al-'Abidi'n(as), after saying that the Imamate belongs to al-Husayn's
descendents and that the Mahdi(as)' will have two Occultations, states: " As far as the
[second] Occultation is concerned, its duration will be prolonged until the majority of
those who profess this doctrine go back on their belief; at that time the only one who
will remain steadfast will be he whose certainty [yaqin] is strong [or "strengthened"]
and whose knowledge [ma'rifa] is healthy [or "restored"], he who finds in himself no
difficulty accepting what we [the imams] proclaim, he who salutes us "people of the
house" [of the Prophet]." The conditions required to be a true faithful believer
during the period of the major Occultation are thus (walaya) for the imams,
absolute "certainty" about the truth of their teachings, and knowledge, which, in the
technical terminology of the imams means knowledge of the initiatory secrets of the
doctrine. These conditions point only to an interior and individual religious
spirituality. Two of Ja’far(as)'s traditions appear to suggest that such a believer remains
in contact with the hidden imam, even during the period of the major Occultation:
"The Qa’im will have two Occultations, a short one and another of long duration.
During the first of these, only certain chosen Shiites will know where he is hidden,
and during the second [Occultation], only the chosen ones among the intimate Friends
in his Religion will know this place." Again, Ja’far(as) says: "The Lord of this Cause
[that is, the Mahdi] will have two Occultations; one will be so long that some of [the
Imamites] will say that he is dead, others that he has been killed, and still others that
he has disappeared [definitively]. Only a few of his faithful will remain attached to his
Cause, and none of his friends or anyone else will know where he is, except for the
intimate Friend who rules over his Cause." Let us not forget this other saying,
constantly repeated by the imams: "Our Cause is difficult; the only ones able to bear it
are a prophet sent by God, an angel of Proximity, and a faithful believer whose heart
has been tested by God for faith." We discern in the expression "test of the heart" an
allusion to initiation into the spiritual "technique" of vision with the heart, through
which the initiated discover the Light of the Imam in their hearts and thus attain esoteric Knowledge and miraculous powers. Is this tantamount to saying that "vision
with the heart," with the "certainty" and "knowledge" that accompany such vision, is
what makes the faithful believer become an intimate Friend of the imam? Is it what
allows the faithful believer to know the "location" of his Master? This is at any rate
what Imamite mystics have always claimed. Only a small minority will know "the
location of the hidden imam," or, in other words, only a small minority will be in
contact with him. But this same handful of believers will be able to hide their
privilege from the eyes of the world, so that the conditions set up by the hidden imam
in his last letter may be respected. These believers are those that later sources called
"men of the Invisible" (rijal al-ghayb), and about whom it is said that their existence is
indispensible to humanity, since they are the ones that will continue to transmit the
Divine Science secretly until the Return of the hidden imam.But things evolved quickly from the beginning of the major Occultation. The Imamite
Community's situation was becoming untenable. Living in a socially and ideologically
hostile environment, deprived of the physical presence of its charismatic leader, in
possession of a body of beliefs that appeared "heretical" and "irrational" at a time
when "orthodoxy" and "rationalism" had firm footing, Imamism felt forced to adopt a
solution of compromise in order to survive as a religious community. Everything
seems to have begun with the slide of the meaning of the word 'aql that, from the time of shaykh al-Mufid, was beginning to refer to the faculty of logical reasoning. From
that time on, the traditions judged to be too "irrational?' were quietly left
unmentioned, or were even considered suspect. The door was thus open for the
principle of ijtihad ("the personal interpretation of the doctor-theologian regarding
religious matters"), giving the doctor-theologian tremendous social and political
power. The process nevertheless took a number of centuries to crystallize. As we
have seen, respect for the rules instituted by the imams began to get in the way of the
application of the doctrine in collective matters. The great turning point was the rise
of the Safavids in Iran. The evolution of Imamite law and the chronological placement
of sources coincide directly with this political and cultural change that transformed
Imamite doctrine into a state religion beginning in the tenth/sixteenth century. Before
the Safavids, the problem of a government drawing its legitimacy from its adherence
to a doctrine does not even seem to have been an issue among the Imamites. Imamite
or proImamite powers like the Buyids (334/945 to 447/1055) and the Ilkhanids (from
the sixth/twelfth to the eighth/fourteenth centuries) appear never to have been forced
to justify their legitimacy by their profession of faith. It is undeniable that this attitude
had its political reasons, but we might also think that it was founded on the
fundamental Imamite belief according to which any power before the Return of the
hidden imam is by its very nature a usurper, or on some of the imamass' traditions
where they vehemently impugn the very idea of government. Things changed
radically when the Safavids took power in 907/1501. Shah Ismail, the founder of the
dynasty, publicly called himself the precursor and the "representative" of the hidden
imam(as), and his followers looked upon him as a reincarnation of the imams.In order to create another political and religious pole in the face of the Ottoman
sultan-caliphs, he ferociously imposed his ideas and ultimately declared Imamism to
be the state religion of Iran. Drawing its legitimacy from its doctrinal adherence, the
Safavid power needed a religious "system." Besides local doctor-theologians,
religious authorities were invited from Syria, Bahrain, and Arabian Iraq to put into
place a veritable "ideological" armature, in order to support the Safavid idea of
Imamism. A whole religious structure, to avoid the term "official Church," controlled
by the state was put into place. Simultaneously, the religious system gave birth to a
body of independent Doctors of the Law vis-a-vis the powers that be. The
disappearance of the charisma of the sovereigns, the failure of the religious politics of
the state, and serious economic crises created a condition of wavering and uncertainty,
the beneficiaries of which were the independent Doctors. With the exception of a
few cases of desperate resistance on the part of sovereigns, it can be said that from the
time of Shah Tahmasb I's reign (931/1524 to 984/1576), power effectively fell into
the hands of the Doctors of the Law. The School of usuli ("rationalist")
theologians, who carried on the thought of al-Mufid or al-Allama al-Hilli, was
restructured at this time, and it displaced (although not without violence) the old
akhbari ("traditionalist") School; thus the idea of ijtihad, supported by the theologian's
personal dialectical reasoning, officially and effectively became one of the
methodological bases of Imamite law. Ijtihad brought significant political and
religious power to the jurist-theologian who used it (the mujtahid). The mass of
faithful, incapable of reaching the level of ijtihad, was relegated to relying on
"imitation" (taqlid), that is, to following the mujtahid and his instructions
scrupulously (pain-stakingly). The mujtahid was promoted to the rank of "general
representative of the hidden imam" (naib-e amm-e imam), and the four "representatives" of the period of the minor Occultation were henceforth named "the
particular representatives of the imam" (naib-e khass).
The fiqh, which tends to be usuli, easily became the dominant discipline of Islamic
studies, and eclipsed the other sciences almost totally. The search for an interiorized
individual religion, spiritual effort through the strength of walaya,
"Knowledge," and "Certitude" in the hope of establishing "contact" with the
hidden imam were practiced by very few, often persecuted groups.
Political ambition and power, defined by the imams(as) as being destroyers of the "true
Religion," were from then on presented as guarantees of its just application. The
religious "system" worked out by the Safavids succeeded in putting into place a
"process of substitution": the jurist-theologian took the place of the imam;
principles of jurisprudence replaced the teachings of the imams; walaya,
love/submission/fidelity-that all initiates owe to their initiating Master-was
transformed into taqlid, servile imitation of the all-powerful jurist; love for the
imams was transformed into a morbid, dolorous cult whose violent group
demonstrations were approved and perhaps even encouraged by clerical authority; an
official, institutionalized clergy replaced the "invisible companions" of the
Awaited imam(as). This process took place in a specific direction: its aim was to
drag Imamism into the political arena, apply it on the collective level and
crystallize it as an ideology. (‘THE DIVINE GUIDE IN EARLY SHIISM, The Sources of Esotericism in Islam’by Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi, translated by David Streight, STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK PRESS)
Agha Seestani says: InShaAllah you will not be blamed (in the Hereafter) if you act as
per this book (Touse-ul-Masail).
and traditions of Masomeen(asws),..Whoever is guided is only guided for [the benefit of] his soul. And whoever errs only errs against it. And no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another. And never would We punish until We sent a messenger.(Quran 17:15)
TAQLEED
In every age there have been people who have called others to themselves and there has never been a shortage of people who heeded their calls and followed them. Moula Ali (asws) condemned people of this type who act like a flock of sheep and placed them at the bottom rung of the ladder of humanity.Moula Ali (asws) declared those who run behind others and answer the call of any and every one as a kafir (unbeliever). A believer is one who is surrounded by the light of his intelligence by which he achieves guidance, safeguards his faith and stops him from going astray. In actual fact people did not understand intelligence and so got entangled and ended up with differences. The logician defines intellect in one way while the man of ethics defines it differently. The businessman understands it differently to the politician. This is the reason why every person considers himself to be clever and takes others to be as idiots. Only the creator of the intellect has the right to define its meaning. Therefore, the Tongue of Allah, Moula Ali (asws) defines it in this way: ‘Intellect is that which makes a person gain the marifat of his Guide. That much intellect is sufficient for a man that enables him to recognize his Guide’. Now that intellect has been defined thus, there is no need to give any evidence to prove that the purpose of intellect is not to interfere in religious ordinances but to recognize them. Now, every part wishes to associate itself with the whole and be with it. Likewise, our partial intellect also desires to be with the complete intellect(Masoomeen (asws)). It then only has to follow the orders of the total intellect(Masoomeen (asws)) without any questions or doubts. This is because the partial intellect has already been through that stage and so if the total intellect orders the partial intellect to jump in a well then it should do so as the matter of knowledge, wisdom and infallibility is proven for the total intellect. All mistakes, faltering and delusions are its opposites and necessarily do not exist in the total intellect. It therefore follows that blind following of total intellect is the correct use of intellect and this is Taqleed. This is the Taqleed which is an individual obligation without which none of a person’s deeds are accepted. A deed performed without use of intellect is not acceptable anyhow. Muhammad ibn ‘Ubayda narrates, “Once I was with Imam Musa Kazim (asws)when Imam (asws) asked me, ‘O Muhammad, do you observe Taqlid more strictly than the group of Marja’ does? I replied, ‘They observe Taqlid and we observe Taqlid.’ The Imam (asws)then said, ‘I did not ask you about this.’ I replied, “I did not have any answer other than the first one.” The Imam (asws) then said, ‘The group of Marja chose a man to whom obedience was not obligatory according to the commands of Allah but they obeyed and followed him strictly. You chose a man and considered obedience to him necessary according to the commands of Allah and then you did not follow him strictly. Therefore, they are stricter in Taqlid (following) than you are.’” (Usool e Kafi Kitab e Aql chapter 19)
As I have said before that Taqleed can only be done of one who possesses knowledge regarding every matter in the universe. There is no room for error or uncertainty. Every action they perform must be done with yaqeen (certainty). Therefore, based upon this understanding, performing taqleed of a non masoom is proof one’s lack of intelligence because a non masoom is always prone to error and uncertainty. All of their actions are based upon qiyas and doubt. Therefore, intellect demands the one to whom taqleed is done must be a masoom.
Certain points come out of the above hadeeth: 1. Taqleed is done only to those Masooms that Allah has made Their obedience wajib upon all. 2. Performing taqleed of one whose obedience is not made wajib by Allah is haram (forbidden). 3. The one who performs taqleed of one whose obedience is not wajib cannot be considered a shia. 4. Those who perform taqleed of non masoom are very strict in their belief. Once proving taqleed can only be for a Masoom, then automatically taqleed of a non masoom is proven haram. Look at what horrific results that are gained from such acts: 1.Narrator says, “Once I asked Imam Jafar Sadiq (asws) about the verse of the Holy Quran that says, ‘People (unconditionally) obeyed the rabbis and the monks and worshiped the Messiah, son of Mary, as they (people) should have obeyed Allah . . .’ (Quran9:31). The Imam (Asws) replied, ‘By Allah they (rabbis) did not call people to worship them. If they had done so people would not have accepted it. The rabbis and monks made haram (unlawful) things halal ( lawful) for them and the halal (lawful) things as haram (unlawful). In this way they (people) worshiped (obeyed) them unintentionally.’” (Usool e Kafi Kitab e Aql chapter 19 hadith 1) 2.In this same chapter Imam (Asws) further says regarding this ayah “People (unconditionally) obeyed the rabbis and the monks and worshiped the Messiah, son of Mary, as they should have obeyed Allah . . .” (Quran9:31) The Imam (asws) said, ‘By Allah, they (the people) did not pray or fast for them (rabbis and monks) but they (rabbis and monks) made halal (lawful) for the people what was haram (unlawful) and haram ( unlawful) what was halal ( lawful) and people followed them accordingly.’” This can also be proven from the following two ayahs: “ And they have taken gods besides Allah, that they should be to them a source of strength;By no means! They shall soon deny their worshiping them, and they shall be adversaries to them” [Quran19:81-82] In the explanation of these Verses, it has been narrated in Tafseer al Muttaqeen ref Tafseer Saafi and Tafseer Qummi that Imam Jafar Sadiq (asws) said, “Any person who disobeyed Allah and was obedient to a person then he has indeed made that person to be his god. On the day of judgement these ‘gods’ would then disassociate themselves from their worshipers (followers)’.”You have just read two verses and one hadeeth where Taqleed of a non masoom has been categorised as ‘Shak fil Ibaadat’ (Doubt in worship) and those who perfom such acts have been declared as mushriks (polytheists). Shirk has a brother called kufr and they are with each other at all times. It is only better that I should now discuss this brother of shirk. I am now quoting from Kitab Sulaim bin Qays Hillali pg no 65 a hadeeth of Ameerul Momineen (asws). Someone asked Ameerul Momineen (asws) what is the least act that makes a person become a kafir? Ameerul Momineen (asws) replied, ‘The smallest thing which makes a person to be a kafir is that when a person adopts a religious act believing it to be the command of Allah even though it may or may not be. Then he makes a habit out of practicing it regularly. Instead of staying away from others like this he moves close to them. In his mind he thinks that he is acting according to the commands of Allah’. Certain points come out of this hadeeth; 1.These people do not have correct belief regarding the real commands of Allah. Instead they depend upon their own presumptions and qiyas (analogies) to extract the law. They then act upon their own presumptions as if they were the orders of Allah. They do not even consider that Allah may have forbidden them to depend on their own qiyas. 2.They then collect these presumptuous orders and make a religion out of it. 3.They love people who do this. They consider those who do not do this as their enemies. 4.They worship their priests thinking that they are worshipping Allah. This has now been clarified by this hadeeth. Keep this Hadeeth in your mind. When I discuss to you the definitions of taqleed given by the mujtahids, this hadith will be useful to you.I have already defined Taqleed above. Its obligation and its necessity for the acceptability of the deeds has been clarified. I have also explained the people whose Taqleed is obligatory upon us and whose is forbidden, the disastrous consequences of this has also been explained so that no doubt should remain now. It is up to you now to think as to where this Taqleed of non masoom came from. Moula Ali (asws) says, ‘When you are in doubt about a matter, you can understand its ending by looking at its beginning’. We will now have to look at the history of the previous people to understand our position. We see that whenever a Prophet came, propagated a Religion, presented a Law, gave a Book and then after his death, his religion was changed, his Law was derided and his Book was altered. Then Allah sent another Prophet, and the whole cycle repeated itself. This is what happened from Adam (a.s.) up to Isa (a.s.). Now my question is this. Who made these amendments to the religions, the people or the priests? Obviously,the priests. The people simply did not have the knowledge to do all these amendments. If this is what has happened since Adam (a.s.) then how can we say that this did not happen after the demise of RasoolAllah (saw)? At least in the time of the previous Prophets there was hope that another Prophet will come and sort things out again. Immediately after RasoolAllah (saw) left this world, the other people started acting upon the ‘Sunnah’ of the previous people. The Shia were saved from this by the presence of Masoomeen (asws) who put a stop to all the innovations. However, despite their presence the Ismailis started their own sect and after the seventh Holy Imam (asws) the Waqifiyya made their own sect. Allamah Majlisi writes that as soon as the eleventh Imam Hasan Al Askari (asws) left this world, and His body was still in the veranda of His house, the Shia divided themselves into sixteen sects. Can you imagine that if the Shia can do this during the physical presence of Masoomeen (asws), then what they are capable of during the ghaybat (occultation)? The Shia scholars then had the golden opportunity to establish themselves as the leaders of religion. You have read on Ijtihad that they had started taking parts out of religion during ghaybat (occultation). The work had already begun to classifying hadiths as doubtful whilst at the same time taking the principles of jurisprudence from the enemies of Masoomeen (asws). Thus causing confusion amongst the Shia. Confusion questions were being presented to the Shia and slowly they were being brainwashed into believing that religion is too complicated for them. In the seventh and the eight century Hijra, they received the reward of their efforts when they declared themselves worthy of Taqleed and invited the Shia to follow them. Some Shia who were firm in their beliefs opposed this new religion they were making. However, they were in a minority, and the more medicine the religion got, the more critical its condition became.
If you were to go thorough the Holy Quran with concentration you will see that whenever Allah has ordered us to follow someone it has always been a Masoom. When you look at Allamah Hilli’s book ‘Alfeyn’ and Allamah Majlisi’s book ‘Haq Ul Yaqeen’ in the first volume you will see that these two great Sheykhs have dicussed the concept of Imamate in great lengths and have concluded that Infallibility is a necessity. They have made a Verse of the Holy Quran as their basis that since an ordinary person is prone to error, therefore he may give a correct decision and sometimes he may not. Therfore, obedience to a non masoom is a horrendous thing and Allah cannot give such an order. As far as obedience to a non masoom is concerned, this has been condemned time an again in the Holy Quran. Every prophet has declared the people who do this as kafir and mushriks. “Nay! they say: We found our fathers on a course, and surely we are guided by their footsteps.” [Quran43:22] If now someone were to tell you that this is to do with beliefs whereas the Mujtahids are telling you to follow them in actions, then this is just an attempt to lead you astray. It was not so that the unbelievers were following their fathers in their beliefs but used to follow RasoolAllah (saw) in actions. Therefore the condemnation is for both the following in beliefs as well as actions. Taqleed has gone very far in this day and age. At first they used to say that there is no Taqleed in beliefs, but only in actions. Nowadays this is slowly changing. Whatever beliefs they teach you is what they expect you to have and no more. If any Shia were to speak on matters of beliefs any more that what they have taught him, then they straight away issue a fatwa on him of being a ghali (exaggerator). If they have no right to interfere in beliefs then why these fatwas on matters of belief? They have now included Taqleed in matters of Principles of Religions (Usool E Deen) and they make the claim that without this none of our deeds are acceptable. It is obvious that the acceptability of deeds is based on beliefs.
I am now coming to the issue of Taqleed as explained by Allamah Haeiri in his book Al Risalat Tanqeed fi Isbatul Ijtihad wa Taqleed . Afterwards I will give you its refutation accordingly. He has defined Taqleed as: “‘In its literal form the root word of Taqleed is ‘Qaladah’. This is the collar worn on the neck, just like when a rope is tied around the neck of an animal. In this way the ignorant people put the Mujtahid’s collar around its neck and follow him accordingly, and cannot go against his will. “In its general usage Taqleed is the adoption of a Mujtahid’s statements and acting upon it without asking for any proofs’.” Is this because the general populace is ignorant and they do not need any proofs? They should now consider the statements of the Mujtahids as the Commands of Allah and act on them. In the previous pages there was a discussion about the hadeeth of Moula Ali (asws) where He was asked as to what is the minimum that turns one to kafir. I hereby request you to read that again and in its background survey the above definitions. Allamah Haeri then goes on to say: ‘In the absence of the RasoolAllah (Saw) and Masoomeen (asws), there are two types of people upon whom the ordinances of religion are obligatory –knowledgeable and ignorant’. It is obvious that since the muqqalid (follower) has given his leash in the hands of the Mujtahid then he does not have the right to any proof, but if he does pluck up the courage to ask for proofs then he should be ready to hear the answer: ‘You should go and give your leash in the hands of some other Mujtahids if you do not accept what I say’.
Proofs of Taqleed
I am now going to present to you the proofs of Taqleed as given by Allamah Haeri in his book Al Risalat Tanqeed fi Isbatul Ijtihad wa Taqleed and from various other Mujtahids.
First Proof
They present this Verse: “ And We did not send before you any but men to whom We sent revelation-- so ask the followers of the Reminder if you do not know” [Quran16:43]
1.“‘The order ‘so ask’ applies to those upon whom the religion has been made obligatory.” (I say that this is applicable to the Mujtahids as well because the religion is also obligatory on them.) 2.”This order to ask is valid till the day of judgement as people will always have the need to ask’. (What this means is that the existence of the Mujtahids will also be there until the day of judgement, even after the reappearance of Imam e Zamana (atfs).) 3.‘”The Taqleed can only be done to the Ahlul Zikr (people of rememberance) who are alive because a dead person does not have the capability to answer questions’. (MashaAllah! These days taqleed to the dead mujtahids is being done. Therefore they will either have to refute this proof of theirs or make the claim that a dead Mujtahid does have the capability of answering questions.) 4.“‘It is established from ijma (consensus) and hadiths of the Muslims that the Holy Quran is the ‘Zikr’ and that the people of the ‘Zikr’ are the people of the Holy Quran.” “ Allah has prepared for them severe chastisement, therefore be careful of (your duty to) Allah, O men of understanding who believe! Allah has indeed revealed to you a reminder,” [65:10] This claim can only be made by those who are immersed in the knowledge of the Holy Quran. They are experts regarding it. They possess oceans of knowledge regarding its ayahs. They know which ayahs are abrogated, allegorical, general or special, and they know its revelation and exposition. The first category is of the Ahl Ul Bayt (asws). After that is there are two types of scholars. The first is of those companions like Ibn Abbas and Ibn Mas’ud. The next category is of the scholars from the type of the repentants ‘Tawwabeen’ until the scholars of today’.
Critique of the First Proof
Firstly, there is no doubt that this verse is a command and it is obligatory to ask if you do not know. However, this is a divine command from Allah, and for someone to interfere in this with his opinion is to argue against Allah Himself. Now that it has been agreed that it is obligatory to ask, we have to see who the questioner is and who is to be asked. The Verse is clear that the ones to be questioned are the ‘Ahl Ul Zikr’ and that everyone apart from them are the questioners. It is also obligatory for the Ahl Ul Zikr to exist until the day of judgement for people to question them. This is the same as in the Verse: “ O you who believe! be careful of (your duty to) Allah and be with the true ones.” [Quran 9:119] This means that in every day and age there must be at least one ‘true one’ in existence. These both Verses actually prove Imamate. How is it possible that Allah tells us to ask the Ahl Ul Zikr but does not tell us who they are and for us to be with the truthful without letting us know who the true ones are? Even a normal person would realize it cannot be that Allah gave the order to question the Ahl Ul Zikr but leaves it to the people to chose whosoever they want to question. In this way every sect would simply question those which they consider to be knowledgeable. If this were to be accepted then there would be no distinction between right and wrong resulting in the Holy Quran and religious ordinances being toys in the hands of the people. This is because the word ‘scholar’ has a very wide meaning. The one who has read ten books is a scholar, but so is the one who has read one hundred books. If we were to say that it is those who have studied in a religious Madressa who are being referred to here then the scholars of Al Azhar University of Cairo would be the most eligible to make this claim of being the Ahl Ul Zikr as this is an internationally recognized university. This is making a mockery of the Holy Quran and religion. So every person of intellect will realise that Allah must have informed us as to whom the Ahl Ul Zikr are so that the Ummah does not get involved in differences.The Ahlul Zikr are none other than Masoomeen (asws). The ghaybat of Imam (atfs) does not mean that all of His rights have now been transferred to non masoom. Questioning someone does not necessarily mean that it must be done in front of him. When we say ‘let us ask the Holy Quran what it has to say about this’, it does not mean that we speak to it and it speaks back at us. In the same way during the ghaybat of our Imam (atfs), we cannot ask Him directly and so we have to refer to those statements which have already been made. Because the ‘one to be questioned’ is the Holy Imam (atfs) and no one else. However, there is one important thing to note. While it is obligatory on us to ask, it is not obligatory on Them to answer.Therefore, if we cannot find the answer in Their sayings, then it is obligatory on us to refrain from performing the act until such time as we can find out what it is They have to say because this is what They have ordered us to do. Imam (asws) said, “ Restraint in confusing cases is better than indulging in destruction.’” (Kafi, Kitab e Aql chapter 23 hadith 10)
There are nine Hadeeth in Al Kafi – Kitab e Hujjat chapter 19 which clearly state that the Ahl Ul Zikr are the Imams (a.s.) of the Ahl Ul Bayt (a.s.), I will only be quoting three of them here for brevity.
1.Hadith 3: Narrator says, “Once I said to Imam Reza (asws), ‘May Allah keep my soul in service for your cause, what is the meaning of the words of Allah, “Ask the people of Dhikr if you do not know”? (16:43, 21: 7) The Imam (asws) said, ‘Dhikr is Prophet Muhammad (saw) and We are His Family (Ahlul) who must be asked for guidance.’ I further asked, ‘Are you the ones who must be asked for guidance and we will be the ones to ask questions?’ The Imam (asws)said, ‘Yes, that is true.’ I then asked, ‘Will it be obligatory upon us to ask You?’ The Imam (asws) , said, ‘Yes, it is so.’ I then asked, ‘Will it be obligatory on You to answer us?’ The Imam (asws) said, ‘No, We will decide. We may or may not answer. Have you not heard the words of Allah, the Most Holy, and the Most High that say, “This is a gift from Us. You may give to others and oblige or keep without being held accountable.’”(Quran 38:39)
2.Hadith 2: Someone asked Imam Muhammad Baqir (asws) regarding this ayah, “‘Ask the people of Dhikr if you do not know.’(Q16:43, 21: 7) The Imam (asws) said, ‘Prophet Muhammad (saw) is Dhikr and We are Ahlul Dhikr who must be asked for guidance.’ I also asked about, ‘It is a reminder for you and for your people and you all must be asked (for guidance).’ (Q43:44) The Imam (asws) said, ‘It is a reference to Us. We are Ahlul Dhikr and We must be asked for guidance.’”
3.Hadith 8: Imam Reza (asws) says, “Imam Ali (asws) bin Hussain (asws)has said, “ ‘Certain obligations for ‘A’immah are not obligatory for Their followers and certain obligations of Our followers are not obligatory for Us. Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High, has commanded them to ask Us their questions saying, “Ask Ahlul Dhikr if you do not know,” thus, Allah has commanded them to ask Us their questions for Guidance but it is not obligatory for Us to answer them. We may answer them or may not answer them.’”
After all this there should not remain any doubt that Ahl Ul Zikr are Masoomeen (Asws) and no one else. Whosoever claims someone else is Ahlul Zikr, they are forging lies against Masoomeen (asws) and thereby Allah as well. I leave it to you to decide what the verdict should be of one such a claimant. Allamah Haeri has gone even further. Not only does he make this claim for himself but he has included Ibn Abbas and Ibn Masu’d and the Tabeiin as well. These people were alive during the times of Masoomeen (asws). In reality what he is saying is not only during the period of ghaybat but during the presence of Masoomeen (asws) as well there were some people who were known as “Ahlul Zikr”. Can it be imagined that these people are the ones that the people have been commanded to question? Another weak point in their argument is that they have included the ijma (consensus) of muslims alongside the Hadeeth of Masoomeen (Asws). It may be that according to them Masoomeen (asws) may not be giving the complete explanation of the Holy Quran and that the consensus of the Muslims therefore became necessary for them. This just goes to show exactly how much they regard Masoomeen (asws) and Their sayings. Then he goes on to claim that according to the Verse it is established that the Holy Quran is Zikr and that the people of Zikr are the people of the Holy Quran. This is an invalid point to make. Take a look at the Verses: “ Allah has prepared for them severe chastisement, therefore be careful of (your duty to) Allah, O men of understanding who believe! Allah has indeed revealed to you a reminder, A Messenger who recites to you the clear signs of Allah so that he may bring forth those who believe and do good deeds from darkness into light; and whoever believes in Allah and does good deeds, He will cause him to enter gardens beneath which rivers now, to abide therein forever, Allah has indeed given him a goodly sustenance.” [Quran65:10-11] These clearly state that the ’Zikr’(a reminder) is RasoolAllah (saw) and therefore, the Ahl Ul Zikr would be Masoomeen (asws) and not Allama Haeri or Ibn Abbas or Ibn Mas’ud etc. It is another altogether if they consider themselves and these persons to be part of Ahlul Bayt (asws). Finally, the questioners have been obligated to do Taqleed, which has not been proven anywhere. There is no mention of either Taqleed, or Mujtahid or Ijtihad anywhere in the Verse. Whatever has been said by Allama Haeri has been based on his own qiyas. Now the first proof of Allamah Haeri has hereby been refuted.
Second Proof
Allamah Haeri then presents his second proof of Taqleed based on a Hadeeth: When RasoolAllah (saw) designated Sa’ad Bin Muadh Bin Jabal as a judge in Yemen RasoolAllah (saw) asked him: ‘O Sa’ad! How will you pass judgement amongst these people?’ He replied:‘From the Book of Allah’. RasoolAllah (saw) then asked:’ And if you cannot find it in the Book of Allah?’ Sa’ad said: ‘From Your statements’. RasoolAllah (Saw) then asked: ‘And if you cannot find it there either then how will you pass judgment?’ Sa’ad then replied: ‘I shall do Ijtihad with my own opinion’. RasoolAllah (saw) then performed a sajda e shukr (prostration of thanksgiving) to Allah that He has endowed His (RasoolAllah saw) companion with that which is beloved to Allah and also liked by His Prophet (saw).” By presenting this proof Allamah Haeri has broken all limits. He also forgot the well known Hadeeth that even children are aware of where RasoolAllah (saw) has said: ‘”If a hadith is attributed to Us and it contradicts Quran, then fling it against the wall”. The Hadeeth that he has presented not only contradicts one but many a verse in the Holy Quran. 1.Sura Ma’aida ayah 44: “and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the kafirs.” 2.Sura Ma’aida ayah 45: “and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the oppressors”3.Sura Ma’aida ayah 47: “whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the sinners.” 4.Sura Anaam ayah 144: “Who, then, is more unjust than he who forges a lie against Allah that he should lead astray men without knowledge? Surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.” According to the above verses one who does not judge according to what Allah has revealed is a sinner, oppressor, unjust, and kafir. If I were to rely on the hadeeth that has been presented by Allamah Haeri then it would mean that (maazAllah) Allah and RasoolAllah (saw) regard the sinners, oppressors, unjust and kafirs to be beloved. Now what do you say? Shall we accept this hadeeth? Now that this hadith which is the basis for taqleed has been proven false not only is their proof invalidated but their entire claim as well. For the refutation of this Hadeeth, whatever has been said so far is sufficient. To the Mujtahid worshippers I say that this Hadeeth does not even meet the standards of their own criteria. The famous traditionist Al Tirmidhi has commented on this Hadeeth that not only is it extremely weak but it has a broken chain of its narrators. It also contradicts the Hadeeth in which RasoolAllah (saw) told Sa’ad Bin Muadh to write to Him (RasoolAllah saw) for an explanation of things he (Sa’ad) does not know about and he shall receive a written reply.
Third Proof
Allamah Haeri then presents his third proof of Taqleed which is based upon the Hadeeth from Masoomeen (asws) which says: ‘It is upon Us to give you the principles of the Commandments of Allah and its analysis is upon you’. Well, first of all there has never been any muhaddith (narrator of hadith) who lived amongst Masoomeen (asws) that has narrated this saying. This is sufficient as a proof of its invalidity. Secondly, this Hadeeth neither contains the words ‘Ijtihad’, ‘istambaat’ or ‘Taqleed’, so how can this be a proof of all these? Thirdly, there is nothing in this Hadeeth to suggest that Masoomeen (asws) are addressing mujathids only. This Hadeeth is addressed to one and all. Fourthly, if they are saying that it was the responsibility of Masoomeen (asws) to give the principles to the Mujtahids only, then did Masoomen (asws) do so or not? If so, when and to which Mujtahid? What were those principles given? What is the most ridiculous is that they have taken the principles of jurisprudence from the enemies of Masoomeen (asws) and based the whole of Ijtihad on this. On the other hand they are claiming to have taken these from Masoomeen (asws). They are therefore forging lies against Masoomeen (asws). Fifthly, there is no time limit indicated in this hadeeth that for how long will the Holy Imam (asws.) give us the principles and from when will they stop. There is also no indication to suggest what will happen to this during the period of ghaybat as it is not necessary for the Holy Imam (atfs) be present in front of us to give us these principles. This can also be given to us in our hearts if we were to incline our hearts to the Holy Imam (atfs.). How is it possible for these to be inspired in the hearts which contain the principles of the enemies of Masoomeen (asws)? Therefore, if on the basis of this Hadeeth, these principles are being given, then on whom are they being given? What method is being used and at which place are they being given? In refutation of their claim, their own differences of opinion are sufficient. It is not possible that a Masoom (asws) would inspire one thing to one Mujtahid and an opposite thing to another Mujtahid. Neither is a Masoom part of their differences nor is His purpose to create conflicts. Sixthly, if the Holy Imams (asws) can inspire principles, They can also explain them. Was it lack of time that stopped Them from doing so? They were present among us for over three hundred years. Is this not sufficient time for the explanations of these principles? Are they telling me that the explanations of these principles was left to these people of deficient intellects? It has been proven from the above discussion that this hadith is false and has been falsely attributed to Masoomeen (asws).
Fourth Proof
For his fourth proof Allamah Haeri presents this Hadeeth narrated from Imam Muhammad Baqir (asws). Imam (asws) says, ‘O Aban Bin Taghlub! You should sit in the Mosque of RasoolAllah (saw)and issue fatwas as it would please Me if the world can see a shia mufti like you”. The time of Imam Muhammad Baqir (asws) was a period of taqayyah as the rule was of the Banu Umayyah. This is why I cannot understand how a Shia Mufti can sit in the mosque of RasoolAllah (saw) (Which was in governmental control and was the centre of their affairs) and openly issue fatwas in such a repressive time. However, this hadith still is not a proof for Taqleed nor is it a proof for Ijtihad. The concept that someone can issue fatwas based on his own opinion in the presence of a Masoom Imam (asws) is simply a dream. At the utmost you can see is that Aban Bin Taghlub would be using the verses of the Holy Quran and the available hadeeth for his fatwas and no more. Neither was he allowed to use his own qiyas nor was he told to invite people to do his Taqleed. If a Mujtahid issues a fatwa based on a hadeeth then it is acceptable. Otherwise anything based on qiyas is to be refuted. This Hadeeth, instead of proving Taqleed, actually proves my point.
Fifth Proof
Allamah Haeri presented his fifth proof based on an incomplete Hadeeth. Imam (asws) said: ‘I forbid you to give fatwas to the people on matters which you know not’. However, this hadeeth is completely against the mujtahid as he really does not know the matter on which he issues fatwas. This was testified by Mufti Jafar Hussain when he said that a mujtahid’s fatwa is based on qiyas and conjecture and that ijma (consensus) and qiyas (analogy) are two important pillars of Ijtihad. Moula Ali (asws)said, ‘Even when he issues a fatwa he has doubt whether the fatwa he has gives is correct or not. And when he gives an incorrect fatwa he doubts that maybe it was correct’. Therefore this hadeeth has no bearing whatsoever on Taqleed and the whole foundation of Ijtihad crumbles based upon this. I have no idea why he has used this hadeeth for his proof, or was it divine inspiration that made him do it so that his own pen would bear witness against himself. It’s like he has cut his own foot with his own axe.
Sixth Proof
For his sixth proof he presents this hadith; Imam (asws) said, “‘I hereby forbid you to issue fatwas based on your opinion and qiyas (analogy)’.” This hadeeth is actually cutting off the branch on which all the mujtahids have built their houses and their whole businesses are being invalidated with this. This is completely contradicting the hadeeth he presented before for his second proof whereby RasoolAllah (saw) congratulated Sa’ad Bin Muadh for using his opinions and fell into sajda e shukr to Allah. You can see for yourself the state of their proofs.
Seventh Proof
For his seventh proof he present the Hadeeth: ‘Whosoever issues Fatwas without knowledge gets cursed by the angels of Mercy’. This is an incomplete hadeeth. I have given this complete Hadeeth before. The hadeeth has actually broken the back of Ijtihad and made it the target of the curses from the angels of mercy and punishment. All this misappropriation is happening because they have taken the principles of ijtihad, like analogy and consensus, from the enemies and are going around wearing the Hadeeth of Thaqalayn like an amulet around their necks.
Eighth Proof
For his eighth proof he presents the Hadeeth: Imam (asws) said, ‘Whosoever issues Fatwa without knowing the abrogated and the unabrogated Verses is in destruction and will remain in punishment eternally’. First of all tell me, has anyone else apart from Masoomeen (Asws) ever made a claim to know all these various verse of the Holy Quran? Now let us look at the status of the claims of the mujtahids and their knowledge.
Remember that in order to become a mujtahid, one only studies up to 500 ayahs of the Holy Quran from the abrogated and unabrogated and the clear and the allegorical. The other ayahs he does not learn about. Before someone objects to what I have said, I will quote from Allamah Hilli’s book ‘Mabadi Al Wusool Ala Ilm Ul Usool’: ‘A Mujtahid should have the capability to enable him to implement Sharia law based on evidence. This is only possible when he understands the meanings of the words and the Divine Pleasure and the infallibility of RasoolAllah (saw). He should achieve a standard whereby he can understand the Divine Intention and the apparent meaning of the words in their solitary form as well as the context in which they have been used. He should be able to maintain the sequence of the words as well as preserve their apparent and inner meanings. Along with this he should be aware of the abrogated and the unabrogated Verses. He should also be in the know which Hadeeth are solitary and which are multiple. He should also know the basis of giving preference to a Hadeeth or a verse and how to apply the proofs on these. This can only be gained from the understanding of the Holy Quran. The whole of the Holy Quran is not necessary for this. The 500 ayahs that are related to commands is sufficient for knowing all of this. There is also no need to memorise all the hadeeth. The knowledge of only those hadeeth related to those five hundred verses is sufficient. Arrangements should be made so that the necessary Verse or hadeeth should be brought to the fore. Then he should also understand the concept of consensus (Ijma) so that he does not end up issuing Fatwa against the consensus. He should also know the limits of proofs (Burhan). He should also know the Arabic grammar and syntax and also have an eye on the narrators of Hadeeth. When he comes to know all this then he is, without doubt, a Mujtahid.
Did you see the claims regarding the issues the mujtahid should have knowledge of: 1.Be aware of Divine Pleasure. 2.Know the Intentions of Allah 3.Know all the abrogated and the unabrogated verses. 4.Know all the apparent and the hidden meanings of the verses. 5.Know the clear and the allegorical Verses. And how is this going to be achieved? By referring to only five hundred verses of the Holy Quran which pertain to the ordinances, and only those Hadeeth. The funny part is that despite having the knowledge of the whole Quran, his knowledge would still remain deficient unless he has the knowledge of consensus. Was there any deficiency in the Holy Quran which this consensus will complete it?
Ninth Proof
Allamah Haeri then gives five questions as his ninth proof of Taqleed.
1.Do you not make use of your intellect?
2.Do you not utilize analysis?
3.Do you not ponder?
4.O people of vision, take lesson from this.
5.O people of heart and wisdom, take lesson from this.
All these five points are actually translations of the verses of the Holy Quran. Look at these points again and then tell me whether there is any mention here of a Mujtahid, or Taqleed or Ijtihad anywhere? The more you ponder over these the more you will realise that these points in actual fact are contradicting the concept of Taqleed. Do not sell your vision and intellect to others. Use your own mind. This will lead you to conclude that since your intellects are deficient, it becomes necessary to seek refuge in an Masoom Imam (asws) to remove any possibility of stumbling. This will give us yaqeen (certainty) that our actions are correct. If we refer to people of deficient intellect then we will end up spending all our lives in doubt and confusion. Allamah Haeri is using these very ayahs of Quran which in reality are against taqleed as his proof for taqleed. What can I say now? Everything is permissible for him now since he is aware of divine pleasure. He says: ‘The Verses which have been quoted above have a very wide and general meaning. They not only prove the following of a live Mujtahid but also prove Marja’iat. He then goes on to present four Hadeeth to prove the system of representatives of the Imam (Atfs).
Tenth Proof
He uses the Hadeeth of RasoolAllah (saw), ‘My scholars are like the Prophets of Bani Israeel’, as his tenth proof of Taqleed. The reason for using this hadeeth is to safeguard the people from ignorance and stop them from straying from the Holy Quran and religious ordinances. These scholars are therefore to be given the same status as Prophets and that it be made obligatory upon the people to take religious ordinances from them. Just as a reminder, please note that this hadeeth is not to be found in Shia books, but it has been taken from the books of the Sunnis. However, even by their own standards, this hadith has been classified as doubtful. This is in clear contradiction to the Holy Quran and so should be left aside. Forget about making claims to be equal to the Prophet Suleyman (a.s.) and Prophet Musa (a.s.), we cannot even imagine any such thing.
Eleventh Proof
And for his eleventh proof of Taqleed he uses the tradition of Umar Ibn Hunzala from Imam Jafar Sadiq (asws) which is accepted by all as being correct. Only part of the tradition is quoted here: ‘They must look for one amongst you who has narrated Our Hadith and has studied what is halal (lawful) and haram ( unlawful) according to Our teachings and has learned Our laws. They must agree to settle their dispute by his judgement; I have given him authority to settle your disputes. If he issues a judgement according to Our commands but then it is not accepted, the dissenting party has ignored the commands of Allah and it is a rejection of Us. Rejecting us is rejecting Allah and that is up to the level of paganism and shirk.’ I don’t understand whether Allamah Haeri is presenting proofs of his argument or making a charge sheet against himself. How does this hadeeth prove Ijtihad and Taqleed? This Hadeeth proves him to be a pagan and mushrik (polytheist). Let us now see what conclusions can be drawn from this hadeeth;
1.There is no mention of Ijtihad, or Taqleed of a Mujtahid.
2.The judge is one to narrates hadeeth and judges according to the commands of Masoomeen(asws) and not base them on his own zan (conjectures) and qiyas (analogies).
3.He knows what is lawful and unlawful and passes judgements based on them. Ijtihad is only done when one does not know what is halal (lawful) and haram (unlawful).
4.The judge knows the teachings of Masoomeen (asws). If the Mujtahids knew these then they would not have taken principles of jurisprudence from the enemies and started Ijtihad.
5.The only judge acceptable is one who judges according to the teachings of the Masoomeen (asws) and not one who does so based upon his own opinion.
6.Not accepting the orders of Masoomeen (asws) is to reject the commands of Allah
7.Whosoever rejects the commands of Masoomeen (asws) is actually rejecting the commands of Allah
8.The crime of rejecting the statements of Masoomeen (asws) is so great that it amounts to shirk. Allah has already stated shirk can never be forgiven.
And so Allamah Haeri, instead of planting the flag of Taqleed should try and save his skin.
Twelfth Proof
For his twelfth proof Allamah Haeri uses this Hadeeth: ‘Imam Jafar Sadiq (asws) sent me to His companions to tell them that when you have any dispute in your dealings and if you need to consult these judges, then instead you should chose amongst you one person who understands what we have made halal and haram. Then I appoint such a person to be a judge over you’. Once again we are talking about people who narrate hadeeth. There is no mention here about Ijtihad or Mujtahid or Taqleed.
Thirteenth Proof
For this he has quoted a hadeeth of Imam Hasan Al Askari (asws) from Al Ihtijaj Tabarsi. Imam (asws) says, “‘Whoever among the jurists who is free from personal bias, safeguards his religion, contradicts his own self desires and is obedient to his master, the people are allowed to do his Taqleed’. The explanation of this hadeeth is extremely necessary as they have used it as a weapon to establish their businesses and deceived the people into falling into their trap of Taqleed. The first thing is that in this Hadeeth the Holy Imam (asws) has not used the word Ijtihad or Mujtahid but Faqih (jurist) has been used. Therefore it becomes necessary first of all to understand who a Faqih actually is. This word has never been used in the Holy Quran or by Masoomeen (asws) for the purposes of ‘Furoo’, but that this version is the invention of the offices of the Mujtahids. Imam Hussain (asws)’s reference to Habib Ibn Mazahir as a ‘Faqih’ proves the point. I will now quote again one Hadeeth and then another one so that you can understand who a Faqih actually is, because it has been implanted in your brains that Faqih means a Mujtahid. Imam Jafar Sadiq (Asws) said: ‘A person who is a Faqih has two characteristics – He has no greed and is not even concerned with what he is wearing or eaten’ – (Al Khisal chapter Khisalat Hadeeth No. 22.) Imam Jafar Sadiq (asws) said: “Know the position of Our Shia through their good reports from Us because We do not consider the faqih from among them to be faqih unless he becomes a Muhaddith (Narrator of traditions).” (Wilayat e Faqih) It is clear that at the time of Imam Jafar Sadiq (Asws) the word Faqih was being used in the same meaning that it is being used today i.e. Mujtahid. The process of making hadeeth to be doubtful and the process of opinions and qiyas were in full swing. In this context, the hadeeth above assumes even more importance because a faqih is not someone who issues fatwas based on his opinion but one who narrates hadiths. They do not say anything from themselves but just deliver the message to the people in its pure form. Therefore it follows that in the hadeeth quoted as proof by Allamah Haeri we will have to take the faqih to mean the narrator of hadiths not those for whom the hadeeth takes second place. Their whole business is being run on opinions and qiyas. There is no way we can use the term faqih to mean a mujtahid in this hadeeth. Even the narrators of hadeeth are not all to be taken as faqihs as Imam (asws) has placed certain conditions on them. Thefore we can draw the following points from this discussion:
1.The term faqih denotes a Muhaddith (narrator of hadith) and not a Mujtahid.
2.The faqih is one who keeps himself clean from the impurity of personal bias. (Does not issue Fatwas based on opinions or enriches himself from religion).
3.The faqih is one who safeguards his religion. (How can a person, who adopts other people’s views and depends on only part of the Holy Quran, be one of these? In fact he is a double criminal – one to spoil his own religion and destroying the faith of his followers as well).
4.The faqih goes against his own desires. (A person who struggles for government and considers this as his religion, and sacrifices millions of people for it will not be one of these)
5.A faqih who is obedient to his master (Imam (asws) This condition is so clear that there is no need for further explanation. The opponent as well as his follower, both are criminals here.
Therefore only one who meets all these conditions will be found to be deserving to be followed. No one else. He will only give out narrations and nothing personal from himself. His adherance will in reality be the Taqleed of Masoomeen (asws) because it will only be Their orders that are being followed and no one else’s. This Taqleed is the obligatory one without which no deeds are acceptable. Based on the above discussion, to consider the Mujtahids as the ones to be followed is to deceive one’s self. There is nothing of Ijtihad in this hadeeth here, nor is there anything to accept the Taqleed of one who, instead of narrating the hadeeth of Masoomeen (asws) makes people follow his own fatwas.
Fourteenth Proof
Sheykh Muhammad Bin Hassan Amili in Wasaail Us Shia has a Hadeeth that Imam Jafar Sadiq (Asws) said to Muadh: ‘O Muadh! I have heard that you sit in the Mosque and issue Fatwas?’ He replied: ‘Yes master. This is how it is. Whatever I have got from you I relate it to your Shia and your friends’. Imam (asws) replied: ‘Keep doing that’.
Fifteenth Proof
In Wasail Us Shia there is a narration that one day a man called Abdul Aziz came to Imam Reza (asws) and told Imam (Asws) that he lives far away and cannot come to Him (the Imam asws) to solve any problems, and so will he allow him to ask Yunus Ibn Abdul Rahman? The Imam (asws) replied: ‘Yes’.
Five conclusions can be derived from the two proofs presented above.
1. Both the persons i.e. Muadh as well as Abdul Aziz were companions Masoomeen (Asws)
2. Both of them are deriving the ordinances from Masoomeen (asws)
3. Both of them are muhaddiths (narrators of hadeeth) and not mujtahids.
4. Both of them consider personal opinions and qiyas to be prohibited.
5. Both of them are under the Wilayah of Masoomen (asws) Neither have they been thrown out of the Wilayah nor did they make claim to be Walis...And so both these proofs have been refuted.
Sixteenth Proof
Tradition from Imam Al-Mahdi (atfs) in a reply to Ishaq ibn Ya'qub: "As far as newly occurring circumstances are concerned, you should turn (for guidance) to the narrators of Our ahadith, for they are my proof over you just as I am Allah's proof." – (Kamal ul Deen al Sudooq and Ahtijaj al Tabrisi)
The institution that presented this proof translated it correctly,however, the scholars of them fooled the people by explaining it as thus: ‘It is clear from this hadeeth that during the major occultation the Shia should refer to the Mujtahids for the answers to their problems’. Now, the hadeeth above neither mentions Ijtihad nor Mujtahid. Everyone is not ignorant that they would all fall into this trap. The reference is clearly to the narrators of hadeeth (muhaddithin) and not to Mujtahids. This is because the basis of the Fatwa of the Mujtahid is on opinion and qiyas, whereas the Muhaddith simply relates the words of Masoomeen (asws) exactly as they are. Fatwa has been defined as the ‘Personal opinion of the Mujtahid after using his logic and reason to deduce the knowledge regarding the matter at hand”.
Seventeenth Proof
“We hereby present to you the statement of the great scholar, narrator and special representative of our Imam (asws.), Uthman Bin Sa’eed Umari. When he gave the reply prohibiting something, to one of the questioners, he made an addition to it. He said: ‘I am not giving you this decision from myself. I am not allowed under any circumstances to make lawful anything. I am just giving you the statement of Masoomeen (asws)’’It is completely useless to comment upon this proof as this has completely uprooted the foundations of ijtihad and made fatwas to be prohibited. I have already given you the proof against Ijtihad and Taqleed from which these points were established:
The sect of the Mujtahids is completely opposite to the sect of Ahl Ul Bayt (asws)
1.The Mujtahids have taken all the tools of Ijtihad from the Sunnis, which have nothing to do with Masoomeen (asws)
2.The Mujtahids have established a worldly and religious order against Masoomeen (asws). They have made obedience to themselves obligatory upon the Shia and do not permit them to ask whether their Fatwas are according to the Masoomeen (asws) or not.
3.The Mujtahids have made claims of Imamate and Wilayah and their slogan is ‘Death to the deniers of Wilayat e Faqih’ (marg bar munkire wilayate Faqih).
4.The Mujtahids have usurped the titles and positions of Masoomeen (asws) and allocated it for themselves.
5.The beliefs of the Mujtahids are in contradiction to the beliefs of the Shia and the Masoomeen (asws). They even reject those virtues of Masoomeen (asws) which Masoomeen (Asws) themselves have related to us, and those that believe in these attributes are termed as ghalis (exaggerators).
6.They consider themselves to be replacements of the Prophets (a.s.) and Masoomeen (asws).
7.The Mujtahids in their oppositions to Masoomeen (asws) do not refrain from even insulting Masoomeen (asws)
8.The Mujtahids in their hatred of Masoomeen (asws) leave no stone unturned as has been explained by Imam Hasan Al Askari (asws)
9.The Mujtahids peform certain acts that ensures they will be cursed by Masoomeen (asws). They make others to perform these acts as well.
10.The Mujtahids, instead of getting people to follow Masoomeen (asws), make them follow a non masoom (Mujtahid). According to the statement of Masoomeen (asws) they are then outside of their Wilayah.
11.The leadership of the Mujtahids which is based on qiyas and errors has been condemned by the Holy Quran.
12.The Mujtahids have insulted the people by considering them to be ignorant and stupid, to the extent that they have been likened to animals with a collar round their necks, the leash of which is in the hands of the Mujtahid.
13.The verses and the hadeeth that the Mujtahids have used to prove their Ijtihad and Taqleed in actual fact in condemnation of them.
These conclusions have been derived from the previous discussions that I have made. I have deliberately kept this topic of Taqleed at the end so that you can first understand the definition, history and the principles of Ijtihad. You can also come to know the beliefs of the Mujtahids and their claims. This would then make it easier to understand the reality of Taqleed and you can also come to the same conclusions that have been listed above. Even now if someone were to dilly dally and argue then there is no treatment for his illness. Allah has said about these types of people:..It is the same to them whether you warn them or you warn them not, they will not believe (Quran 36:10).
{With the help of Allah and the blessings of Imam Zamana (ajfs)...Wassalaam!}
No comments:
Post a Comment