CHAPTER 10: TAQLEED
I have now come to the topic which is the main reason for the production of this book. As I have explained before, 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. Imam Ali (a.s.) have condemned people of this type who act like a flock of sheep and placed them at the bottom rung of the ladder of humanity. I have already quoted a hadeeth about this before and there is no need to do it again. What he (a.s.) said that the one who heeds every call is not a believer. 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. But Allah (s.w.t.), the One Who created intellect in the first place also has the right to define intellect and so the ‘Speech of Allah (s.w.t.)’, Imam Ali (a.s.) has defined it as: ‘Intellect is that which makes a person recognise his Guide. That much intellect is sufficient for a man that enables him to recognise 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 recognise them.
Now, every part wishes to associate itself with the whole and be with it, in the same way our partial intellect also desires to be with the total intellect and when it does so, then its work is done. It then only has to follow the orders of the total intellect 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 his deeds are acceptable. A deed performed without use of intellect is not acceptable anyhow.
AL KAFI - H 155, Ch. 18, h2
Ali ibn Muhammad has narrated from Sahl ibn Ziyad from Ibrahim ibn Muhammad al-Hamdani from Muhammad ibn ‘Ubayda who has said the following: “Abu al-Hassan, recipient of divine supreme covenant, once said, ‘O Muhammad, do you observe Taqlid more strictly than the group of Murji’a’ does? I replied, ‘They observe Taqlid and we observe Taqlid.’ The Imam then said, ‘I did not ask you about this.’ I did not have any answer other than the first one. The Imam then said, ‘The group of Murji’a 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.’”
As I have said before that Taqleed can only be done of total intellect so that there is no room for error and delusions and that all actions can be performed with certainty. And this conclusion on the basis of intellect means that the Taqleed of non infallible will be proof of lack of intellect because they will always be prone to error and delusions. All actions would therefore be subject to doubt and conjecture. Intellect demands infallibility.
Certain points come out of the hadeeth above.
1.Taqleed is only of that infallible on whom Allah (s.w.t.) has made it obligatory.
2.The one whose obedience is not made obligatory by Allah (s.w.t.), his Taqleed is prohibited.
3.The one who does the Taqleed of such an Imam cannot be a Shia.
4.The follower of such an Imam is very staunch in his Taqleed.
When the Taqleed of an Infallible (a.s.) is proven then automatically the Taqleed of a non infallible becomes prohibited. Look at what horrific results are gained from this.
AL KAFI - H 154, Ch. 18, h1
A number of our people have narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Khalid from 'Abd Allah ibn Yahya from ibn Muskan from abu Basir who has said the following: “Once I asked Imam abu ‘Abd Allah, recipient of divine supreme covenant, about the verse of the Holy Quran that says, ‘People (unconditionally) obeyed the rabbis and the monks and worshipped the Messiah, son of Mary, as they (people) should have obeyed Allah . .’ (9:31) The Imam 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 unlawful things lawful for them and the lawful things as unlawful. In this way they (people) worshipped (obeyed) them unintentionally.’”
H 156 Ch. 18, h3
Muhammad ibn ‘Isma’il has narrated from al-Fadl ibn Shadhan from Hammed ibn ‘Isa from Rib’i ibn ‘Abd Allah from abu Basir from abu ‘Abd Allah, recipient of divine supreme covenant, who has said the following about the words of Allah, the Most Majestic, the Most Glorious: “People (unconditionally) obeyed the rabbis and the monks and worshipped the Messiah, son of Mary, as they should have obeyed Allah . .” (9:31) The Imam said, ‘By Allah, they (the people) did not pray or fast for them (rabbis and monks) but they (rabbis and monks) made lawful for the people what was unlawful and unlawful what was lawful and people followed them accordingly.’”
This can also be proven from the two Verses:
وَاتَّخَذُوا مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ آلِهَةً لِّيَكُونُوا لَهُمْ عِزًّا
[Shakir 19:81] And they have taken gods besides Allah, that they should be to them a source of strength;
كَلَّا سَيَكْفُرُونَ بِعِبَادَتِهِمْ وَيَكُونُونَ عَلَيْهِمْ ضِدًّا
[Shakir 19:82] By no means! They shall soon deny their worshipping them, and they shall be adversaries to them
In the explanation of these Verses, it has been narrated in Tafseer Saafi and Tafseer Qummi that Imam Ja’far Al Sadiq (a.s.) explained: ‘Any person who disobeyed Allah (s.w.t.) and was obedient to a person then he has indeed made him to be his god. On the day of judgement these ‘gods’ would then disassociate themselves from their worshippers (followers)’. I have already explained the differences in Fatwas of the Mujtahids in the chapter on differences before. You have just read two verses and one hadeeth where Taqleed of a non infallible has been categorised as ‘Shak fil Ibaad’ (Doubt in worship) and these have been described as polytheists. Polytheism has a brother called Disbelief who remains with him all the time. It is only better that I should now discuss this brother of Polytheism.
I am now quoting from the Book of Suleym Bin Qays Hilali a hadeeth of Imam Ali (a.s.): ‘The smallest thing which makes a person to be an unbeliever is that when a person adopts a religious act thinking it to be the command of Allah (s.w.t.) and He (s.w.t.) has not forbidden it. Then he makes a religious practise out of it. Instead of staying away from such people he actually loves them. In his mind he thinks that he is acting according to the commands of Allah (s.w.t.)’.
Certain points come out of this hadeeth;
1.These people do not have conviction about the religious ordinances. They depend upon their presumptions and analogies to extract the law and presume them to be the orders of Allah (s.w.t.). They do not even consider that Allah (s.w.t.) may have forbidden them to depend on conjectures.
2.They then collect these presumptuous orders and make a religion out of it.
3.They love people who do this. Obvious they would be considering the others as their enemies.
4.They worship their priests thinking that they are worshipping Allah (s.w.t.).
This has now been clarified by this hadeeth. Keep this Hadeeth in mind, so that when I discuss the issue of Taqleed later on and describe to you the definitions given to it by the Mujtahids, then it will come in handy. 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 infallibles has started from. Imam Ali (a.s.) said: ‘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 when he died, his religion was changed, his Law was derided and his Book was altered. Then Allah (s.w.t.) 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 Holy Prophet (s.a.w.)? At least in the time of the previous Prophets there was hope that another Prophet will come and sort things out again. But this hope was not there after the last one. And so immediately after the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) the other people started acting upon the ‘Sunnah’ of the previous people. The Shiites were saved from this by the presence of the Holy Imams (a.s.) who put a stop to all the innovations, which was part of their purpose. But despite their presence the Ismailis started their own sect and after the seventh Holy Imam (a.s.) the Waqifiyya made their own sect. Allamah Majlisi writes that as soon as the eleventh Imam Hasan Al Askari (a.s.) passed away, and his body was still in the veranda of his house, the Shiites had divided themselves into sixteen sects. Can you imagine that if the Shiites can do this during the physical presence of the Holy Imams (a.s.), what they are capable of during the occultation?
The Shiite priests then had the golden opportunity to establish themselves as the leaders of religion. You have read in the chapter on Ijtihad that they had started taking parts out of religion during the occultation. The work had already begun to classify as doubtful the Hadeeth whilst taking the principles of jurisprudence from the adversaries and cause confusion among the Shiites. Complicated problems were being presented to the Shiites and slowly they were being brainwashed into believing that religion is too complicated for them. In the seventh and the eight century Hijra, their efforts bore fruit when they declared themselves worthy of Taqleed and invited the Shiites for it. Some Shiites of strong beliefs always opposed them, but they were in a minority, and the more medicine the religion got, the more critical its condition became.
When this matter was started among the Sunnis their four sects became well known, a lot of them became marja’s and built their own mosques. The government of the time was alarmed that if they keep going at this rate the Muslims would be split into thousands of sects. They then passed a law that whichever sect has been formed should pay a sum of one hundred thousand dirhams as a registration fee to the government treasury. This effectively closed the door of Ijtihad among them for good. The four sects paid over this sum and got their sects registered. But the Shiite sect could not get registered - why? You will realise this in a moment. At that time both the jurists, Sheykh Mufid as well as Syed Murtaza were present, and both used to receive government stipends, and both were financially well off, and it was not beyond their means to get hold of the money in order to register the Shiite sect. Against them was Syed Razi, who was not a jurist and was a ‘malang’ type fellow, ran around collecting the money by donations from the people but could not meet the government deadline. The question that should be in every one’s mind is that how come these two jurists kept quiet whilst a non jurist ran around making great efforts. As a matter of principle these two jurists should be making the efforts. The harder you think the more you will realise that had the Shiite sect got registered then the doors would have been shut on Ijtihad for these two people rendering them incapable of calling the people to their Taqleed. This is why they kept this door open, and considering the Shiites to be like sheep, kept them ignorant of their religion and established their Taqleed on them. Now, if the Shiites do not accept their Taqleed and do not pay them their Khums, neither can their deeds be accepted nor can they achieve forgiveness. Now the people are at the mercy of the Mujtahids. If they want they can send them to Paradise or if they want they can get them flung into Hell. If you can understand this beginning, then you shall come to know its ending. The only conditions are, of being just and have a pure intention.
If you were to go thorough the Holy Quran with concentration you will see that whenever Allah (s.w.t.) has ordered us to follow someone it has been an Infallible (a.s.). 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 has 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. And so obedience to a non infallible is an ugly thing and Allah (s.w.t.) cannot give an ugly order. As far as obedience to a non infallible is concerned, this has been condemned time an again in the Holy Quran. In the time all the prophets, the people who have done this have been referred to as following the way of the unbelievers and the polytheists.
بَلْ قَالُوا إِنَّا وَجَدْنَا آبَاءنَا عَلَى أُمَّةٍ وَإِنَّا عَلَى آثَارِهِم مُّهْتَدُونَ
[Shakir 43:22] Nay! they say: We found our fathers on a course, and surely we are guided by their footsteps.
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 the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) in actions. Therefore the condemnation is for both the following in beliefs as well as actions. Anyhow, Taqleed has gone vey 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 Shiite 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 an extremist (Ghali). 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 Risala’ and give you its refutation accordingly. He has defined Taqleed as: ‘In its linguistic 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 act 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 (s.w.t.) and act on them.
In the previous pages there was a discussion about the hadeeth of Imam Ali (a.s.) where he (a.s.) was asked as to what is the minimum that turns one to disbelief. 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 Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) and the Imams (a.s.) there are two types of people on whom the ordinances of religion are obligatory -knowledgeable and ignorant’. It is obvious that since the emulator 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’.
I am now going to present to you the proofs of Taqleed as given by Allamah Haeri and other Mujtahids which they have presented.
1st PROOF
They present this Verse:
وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِكَ إِلاَّ رِجَالاً نُّوحِي إِلَيْهِمْ فَاسْأَلُواْ أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِن كُنتُمْ لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ
[Shakir 16:43] 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
‘The order ‘so ask’ is applicable to on whom religion has been made obligatory’. I say that this is applicable to the Mujtahids as well as religion has also been made obligatory for them.
‘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 appearance of the Holy Imam (a.s.)?
‘The Taqleed can only be done of the Ahl Ul Zikr who are alive as a dead person does not have the capability to answer questions’. Glory is to Allah (s.w.t.)! These days even the Taqleed of the dead Mujtahid 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.
‘It is established from consensus and traditions of the Muslims that the Holy Quran is the ‘Zikr’ and that the people of the ‘Zikr’ are the people of the Holy Quran.
أَعَدَّ اللَّهُ لَهُمْ عَذَابًا شَدِيدًا فَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ يَا أُوْلِي الْأَلْبَابِ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا قَدْ أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ إِلَيْكُمْ ذِكْرًا
[Shakir 65:10] 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,
This claim can only be made by those who are immersed in the knowledge of the Holy Quran, are experts of it, experienced, have oceans of knowledge, they know its Verse e.g. abrogated, allegorical, general or special, and they know its revelation and exposition. The first category is of the Ahl Ul Bayt (a.s.). After that is that of the scholars who are of two types. 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’. I now present to you my critique of the above.
Firstly, there is no doubt that this verse is a command and that is has been made obligatory to ask. But this is divine speech, and for someone to interfere in this with his opinion is to argue against it. Now that it has been agreed that it is obligatory to ask, then we have to see who the questioner is and who is to be questioned. 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:
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ اتَّقُواْ اللّهَ وَكُونُواْ مَعَ الصَّادِقِينَ
[Shakir 9:119] O you who believe! be careful of (your duty to) Allah and be with the true ones.
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 (s.w.t.) 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 realise it cannot be so that Allah (s.w.t.) 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 be on the right that they question whoever that 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’ is a word with a very wide meaning. The one who has read ten books is also a scholar and one who has read one hundred books is also a scholar. If we were to say that only one who has studied in a religious Madressa is denoted 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 recognised university. This is making a mockery of the Holy Quran and religion. So every person of intellect will realise that Allah (s.w.t.) must have informed us as to whom the Ahl Ul Zikr are so that the Ummah does not get involved in differences. I have already discussed this verse before and presented to you the Hadeeth which have clearly established that these are none other that the Holy Imams (a.s.).
The occultation of the Holy Imam (a.s.) does not mean that all of his (a.s.) rights have now been transferred to non infallibles. Questioning someone does not necessarily mean that it must be done in front of him. When we say that ‘let us ask what the Holy Quran has to say about this’, does not mean that we speak to it and it speaks back at us. In the same way during the occultation of our Imam (a.s.), we cannot ask him directly and so we have to refer to his statements already made, because the ‘one to be questioned’ is only the Holy Imam (a.s.) and no one else. If we cannot find the answer in their (a.s.) statements, then remember, it is obligatory upon us to ask but their no obligation upon them to answer, and at this juncture it becomes obligatory to refrain as that is the order of the Holy Imam (a.s.).
AL KAFI - H 198, Ch. 21, h10 - (PART)
Muhammad ibn Yahya has narrated from Muhammad ibn al-Husayn from Muhammad ibn ‘Isa from Safwan ibn Yahya from Dawud ibn al-Husayn from ‘Umar ibn Hanzala who has said the following: Restraint in confusing cases is better than indulging in destruction.’”
There are nine Hadeeth in Al Kafi - Book of Divine Proof 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.
AL KAFI - H 540, Ch. 20, h3
Al-Husayn ibn Muhammad has narrated from Mu‘alla ibn Muhammad from al-Washsha' who has said the following: “Once I said to Imam al-Rida, recipient of divine supreme covenant, ‘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, recipient of divine supreme covenant, said, ‘Dhikr is Prophet Muhammad, recipient of divine supreme covenant, and we are his family (people) who must be asked (for guidance).’ I further asked, ‘Are you the ones who must be asked (for guidance) and we will be the one to ask questions?’ The Imam, recipient of divine supreme covenant, said, ‘Yes, that is true.’ I then asked, ‘Will it be a right (obligation) on us to ask you?’ The Imam, recipient of divine supreme covenant, said, ‘Yes, it is so.’ I then asked, ‘Will it be a right on you to answer us?’ The Imam, recipient of divine supreme covenant, 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.’” (38:39)
AL KAFI - H 539, Ch. 20, h2
Al-Husayn ibn Muhammad has narrated from Mu‘alla ibn Muhammad from Muhammad ibn ’Uwarma from Ali ibn Hassa’n from his uncle ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Kathir who has said the following:“I asked Imam abu ‘Abd Allah, recipient of divine supreme covenant, about the meaning of the words of Allah, ‘Ask the people of Dhikr if you do not know.’ (16:43, 21: 7) The Imam, recipient of divine supreme covenant, said, ‘Prophet Muhammad, recipient of divine supreme covenant, is Dhikr and we are the people of Dhikr who must be asked (for guidance).’ I also asked about, ‘It is a Dhikr for you and for your people and you all must be asked (for guidance).’ (43:44) The Imam, recipient of divine supreme covenant, said, ‘It is a reference to us. We are the people of Dhikr and we must be asked (for guidance).’”
AL KAFI - H 545, Ch. 20, h8
A number of our people have narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from al-Washsha' who has said that he heard Imam al-Rida say the following: “Imam Ali ibn al-Husayn, recipient of divine supreme covenant, 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 the people of 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 if we may so decide.’”
After all this there should not remain any doubt that what is meant by Ahl Ul Zikr are the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) and no one else. Whosoever were to make a claim for anyone else to be so is falsifying the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) and thus falsifying Allah (s.w.t.). I leave it to you to decide what the verdict should be of one such a claimant.
Allamah Haeri has gone even further but not only making this claim for himself but has included Ibn Abbas and Ibn Masu’d and the Tabeiin as well. The time period of these people was that of the Holy Imam (a.s.). What I am saying is that forget about the period ofoccultation, he is saying that even during the presence of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) there were some people who were the Ahl Ul Zikr as well. 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 alongside the Hadeeth of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) they have also included the consensus of the Muslims. It may be that according to them the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) 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 what value they have placed on the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) and their statements.
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:
أَعَدَّ اللَّهُ لَهُمْ عَذَابًا شَدِيدًا فَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ يَا أُوْلِي الْأَلْبَابِ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا قَدْ أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ إِلَيْكُمْ ذِكْرًا
[Shakir 65:10] 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,
رَّسُولًا يَتْلُو عَلَيْكُمْ آيَاتِ اللَّهِ مُبَيِّنَاتٍ لِّيُخْرِجَ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ مِنَ الظُّلُمَاتِ إِلَى النُّورِ وَمَن يُؤْمِن بِاللَّهِ وَيَعْمَلْ صَالِحًا يُدْخِلْهُ جَنَّاتٍ تَجْرِي مِن تَحْتِهَا الْأَنْهَارُ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا أَبَدًا قَدْ أَحْسَنَ اللَّهُ لَهُ رِزْقًا
[Shakir 65:11] A Messenger who recites to you the clear communications 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.
These clearly state that the ’Zikr’ is the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) and it follows that the Ahl Ul Zikr would be the Holy Ahl Ul Bayt (a.s.) and not himself or Ibn Abbas or Ibn Mas’ud etc. It would be another matter if they consider themselves and these persons to be part of the Ahl Ul Bayt (a.s.).
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 him has been based on his own analogy which has actually ended up falsifying the Holy Infallibles (a.s.).
And so the first proof of Allamah Haeri has hereby been refuted.
2nd PROOF
Allamah Haeri then presents his second proof of Taqleed based on a Hadeeth. When the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) designated Sa’ad Bin Muadh Bin Jabal as a judge in Yemen he (s.a.w.) asked him: ‘O Sa’ad! How will you pass judgement among these people?’ He replied: ‘From the Book of Allah (s.w.t.)’. He (s.a.w.) asked:’ And if you cannot find it in the Book of Allah (s.w.t.)?’ He said: ‘From your statements’. He (s.a.w.) then asked: ‘And if you cannot find it there either then how will you pass judgment?’ He then replied: ‘I shall do Ijtihad with my own opinion’. The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) then performed a prostration of thanking Allah (s.w.t.) that He (s.w.t.) has endowed his (s.a.w.) companion with that which is beloved to Allah (s.w.t.) and also liked by His prophet (s.a.w.).
By presenting this proof Allamah Haeri has broken all limits. He also forgot the well known Hadeeth that even children are aware of that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) said: ‘If my Hadeeth is according to the Holy Quran then accept it otherwise fling it at the wall’. The Hadeeth that he has presented not only contradicts one but many a verse in the Holy Quran.
إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَا التَّوْرَاةَ فِيهَا هُدًى وَنُورٌ يَحْكُمُ بِهَا النَّبِيُّونَ الَّذِينَ أَسْلَمُواْ لِلَّذِينَ هَادُواْ وَالرَّبَّانِيُّونَ وَالأَحْبَارُ بِمَا اسْتُحْفِظُواْ مِن كِتَابِ اللّهِ وَكَانُواْ عَلَيْهِ شُهَدَاء فَلاَ تَخْشَوُاْ النَّاسَ وَاخْشَوْنِ وَلاَ تَشْتَرُواْ بِآيَاتِي ثَمَنًا قَلِيلاً وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ
[Shakir 5:44] Surely We revealed the Taurat in which was guidance and light; with it the prophets who submitted themselves (to Allah) judged (matters) for those who were Jews, and the masters of Divine knowledge and the doctors, because they were required to guard (part) of the Book of Allah, and they were witnesses thereof; therefore fear not the people and fear Me, and do not take a small price for My communications; and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers.
وَكَتَبْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ فِيهَا أَنَّ النَّفْسَ بِالنَّفْسِ وَالْعَيْنَ بِالْعَيْنِ وَالأَنفَ بِالأَنفِ وَالأُذُنَ بِالأُذُنِ وَالسِّنَّ بِالسِّنِّ وَالْجُرُوحَ قِصَاصٌ فَمَن تَصَدَّقَ بِهِ فَهُوَ كَفَّارَةٌ لَّهُ وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ
[Shakir 5:45] And We prescribed to them in it that life is for life, and eye for eye, and nose for nose, and ear for ear, and tooth for tooth, and (that there is) reprisal in wounds; but he who foregoes it, it shall be an expiation for him; and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust
وَلْيَحْكُمْ أَهْلُ الإِنجِيلِ بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فِيهِ وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ
[Shakir 5:47] And the followers of the Injeel should have judged by what Allah revealed in it; and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the transgressors.
وَمِنَ الإِبْلِ اثْنَيْنِ وَمِنَ الْبَقَرِ اثْنَيْنِ قُلْ آلذَّكَرَيْنِ حَرَّمَ أَمِ الأُنثَيَيْنِ أَمَّا اشْتَمَلَتْ عَلَيْهِ أَرْحَامُ الأُنثَيَيْنِ أَمْ كُنتُمْ شُهَدَاء إِذْ وَصَّاكُمُ اللّهُ بِهَـذَا فَمَنْ أَظْلَمُ مِمَّنِ افْتَرَى عَلَى اللّهِ كَذِبًا لِيُضِلَّ النَّاسَ بِغَيْرِ عِلْمٍ إِنَّ اللّهَ لاَ يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ
[Shakir 6:144] And two of camels and two of cows. Say: Has He forbidden the two males or the two females or that which the wombs of the two females contain? Or were you witnesses when Allah enjoined you this? 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 verse one who does not judge according to what Allah (s.w.t.) has revealed is a transgressor, unjust and an unbeliever. And if I were to rely on the hadeeth that has been presented by Allamah Haeri then it would mean that (God forbid) Allah (s.w.t.) and the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) regard the transgressors, the unjust and the unbelievers to be beloved.
Now what do you say? Shall we accept this hadeeth? Now that this false tradition has been made the basis of Taqleed, then not only is proof invalid but the 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, but it contradicts the Hadeeth whereby the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) told Sa’ad Bin Muadh to write to him (s.a.w.) for an explanation of things he does not know about and he shall receive a written reply.
3rd PROOF
Allamah Haeri then presents his third proof of Taqleed based on the Hadeeth that all of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) said that: ‘It is upon us to give you the principles of the Commandments of Allah (s.w.t.) and its exposition is upon you’.
Well, first of all there has never been any traditionist who lived among all the holy infallibles (a.s.) to be able to make this statement. This is sufficient as a proof of its invalidity.
Secondly, this Hadeeth neither contains the words ‘Ijtihad’, or ‘istambaat’ or ‘Taqleed’, and so how can this be a proof of all these?
Thirdly, there is nothing in this Hadeeth to suggest that the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) have addressed only the Mujtahids. This Hadeeth is addressed to one and all.
Fourthly, if they are saying that it was the responsibility of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) to give the principles to the Mujtahids only then did they do it or not? If so, when and to which ones and to which Mujtahid? And what are those principles?
What is more ridiculous that they have taken the principles of jurisprudence from the enemies and based the whole of Ijtihad on this and on the other hand they are claiming to have taken these from the Holy Infallibles (a.s.). They are therefore forging lies against them (a.s.).
Fifthly, there is no time limit indicated in this hadeeth that for how long will the Holy Imam (a.s.) give us the principles and from when will they stop. There is also no indication to suggest what will happen to this during the occultation period as it is not necessary for the Holy Imam (a.s.) be present in front of us to give us these principles. This can also be given to us into our hearts if we were to incline our hearts to the Holy Imam (a.s.). How is it possible for these to be inspired into the hearts which contain the principles of the enemies of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.)? Therefore, if on the basis of this Hadeeth, these principles are being given, then on whom are they being given. What method isbeing 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 Holy Infallible (a.s.) would inspire one thing to one Mujtahid and an opposite thing to another Mujtahid. Neither is a Holy Infallible part of their differences nor is his (a.s.) purpose to create conflicts.
Sixthly, if the Holy Imams (a.s.) can inspire principles they can also explain them. Was it lack of time that stopped them? They were present among us for over three hundred years. Is this not sufficient 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 forged Hadeeth is a falsification of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.).
4th PROOF
For his fourth proof Allamah Haeri presents this Hadeeth narrated from Imam Muhammad Baqir (a.s.) that: ‘O Aban Bin Taghlub! You should sit in the Mosque of the Prophet (s.a.w.) and issue fatwas as I like it that the world should see a Shiite Mufti like you’.
The time of Imam Muhammad Baqir (a.s.) was a period of taqayyah as the rule was of the Banu Umayyah. This is why I cannot understand how a Shiite Mufti can sit in the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.)’s mosque (Which was in governmental control and was the centre of their affairs) and openly issue fatwas in such a repressive time. But, even then, neither Taqleed can be proven from this nor can Ijtihad. The concept that someone can issue fatwas based on his own opinion in the presence of a Holy Imam (a.s.) is no more than 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 analogies nor invite people to do his Taqleed towards his opinion. This is what I am saying that if a Mujtahid was to issue a fatwa based on a hadeeth then it is acceptable otherwise anything based on analogy is to be refuted. This Hadeeth, instead of proving Taqleed, is actually proving my point.
5th PROOF
Allamah Haeri presented his fifth proof based on an incomplete Hadeeth.
The Holy imam (a.s.) said: ‘I forbid you to give fatwas to the people on matters which you know not’.
But 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 Ja’far Husayn when he said that a mujtahid’s fatwa is based on analogy and conjecture and that consensus and analogy are two important pillars of Ijtihad. Imam Ali (a.s.) has said about this: ‘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’. And so this hadeeth has no bearing whatsoever on Taqleed and the whole foundation of Ijtihad crumbles based on this.
I have no idea why he has used this hadeeth for his proof, or was it divine providence 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.
6th PROOF
For his sixth proof he presents the hadeeth of the Holy Imam (a.s.): ‘I hereby forbid you to issue fatwas based on your opinion and 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 the Holy prophet (s.a.w.) congratulated Sa’ad Bin Muadh for using his opinions and fell into prostration to thank Allah (s.w.t.). You can see for yourself the state of their proofs.
7th 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.
8th PROOF
For his eighth proof he presents the Hadeeth: ‘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 the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) ever made a claim to know all these various verse of the Holy Quran?
Now let us look at their high claims and the extent of their knowledge.
Remember that in order to become a mujtahid, his course does not contain any more than five hundred Verses of the Holy Quran from the abrogated and the unabrogated, the clear and the allegorical Verses. The other verses are outside his course. 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 the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.). In this it 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 of 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 gains from the understanding of the Holy Quran. The whole of the Holy Quran is not necessary for this; only five hundred of its verses need be know which are related to commands. 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, except those that do not complete all this.
Did you see that the claims are that the mujtahid should:
1.Be aware of Divine Pleasure.
2.Know the Intentions of Allah (s.w.t.).
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?
9th 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 utilise 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 mortgage your vision and intellect to others and use your own thinking. This will lead you to conclude that since your intellects are deficient, therefore it is necessary to seek refuge in an Infallible Imam (a.s.) to remove any possibility of stumbling. This will give us conviction in our actions to be correct whereas if we refer to people of deficient intellect then we will end up spending all our lives in doubt and confusion. But Allamah Haeri is using these very Verses to prove Taqleed which are against it. What can I say now? Everything is allowable for him now, I suppose, 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 (a.s.).
10th PROOF
He uses the Hadeeth of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.): ‘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.
I have already dealt with this hadeeth in the chapter on CLAIMS before and there is no need to repeat the discussion again here. Just as a reminder, please note that this hadeeth is not to be found in Shiite books, but it has been taken from the books of the Sunnis and also that by them as well this hadeeth 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.
11th PROOF
And for his eleventh proof of Taqleed he uses the tradition of Umar Ibn Hunzala from Imam Ja’far Al Sadiq (a.s.) which is accepted by all as being correct. Only part of the tradition is quoted here:
‘They must look for one among you who has narrated our Hadith and has studied what is lawful and 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 considering things equal to Allah.’
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? But this Hadeeth is entitling him to be a pagan and a 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 their (a.s.) teachings and not base them on his own conjectures and 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 lawful and unlawful.
4.The judge knows the teachings of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.). If the Mujtahids knew these then they would not have taken principles of jurisprudence from the enemies and start Ijtihad.
5.The only judge acceptable is one who judges according to the teachings of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) and not on his own opinion.
6.Not accepting the orders of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) is to degrade the commands of Allah (s.w.t.)
7.Whosoever rejects the commands of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) is actually rejecting the commands of Allah (s.w.t.).
8.The crime of rejecting the statements of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) is so great that it amounts to polytheism. Allah (s.w.t.) has already given the verdict on this that He (s.w.t.) will never forgive this crime.
And so Allamah Haeri, instead of planting the flag of Taqleed should try and save his skin.
12th PROOF
For his twelfth proof Allamah Haeri uses Hadeeth: ‘Imam Ja’far (a.s.) 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 among you one person who understands what we have made lawful and unlawful, 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.
13th PROOF
For this he has quoted a hadeeth from Al Ihtijaj Tabarsi of Imam Hasan Al Askari (a.s.) that: ‘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 (a.s.) 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. I have explained before in the chapter of IJTIHAD that this word has never been used in the Holy Quran or by the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) for the purposes of ‘Furoo’, but that this version is the invention of the offices of the Mujtahids. The Holy Imam Husayn (a.s.)’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 Ja’far AL Sadiq (a.s.) 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 Hadeeth No. 22.
Imam Ja’far Al Sadiq (a.s.) said: Know the position of our Shiites 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).
It is clear that at the time of Imam Ja’far Al Sadiq (a.s.) 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 analogies were in full swing. In this context, the hadeeth above assumes even more importance that a faqih is not someone who issues fatwas based on his opinion but one who narrates traditions. 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 traditions not those for whom the hadeeth takes second place and their whole business is being run on opinions and analogies. 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 the Holy Imam (a.s.) has placed certain conditions on them. And so we have certain points from this discussion so far about this hadeeth.
1.The term faqih denotes a Muhaddith 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 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 who 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 (a.s.)). This condition is so clear that there is no need for further explanation. I would like you to refer to the chapter on the OPPOSITION TO THE HOLY INFALLIBLES (A.S.) for this context. The opponent as well as his follower, both are criminals here.
6.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 fact be the Taqleed of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) as only their (a.s.) orders 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 associate the Mujtahids to be the ones to be followed is to deceive one self. There is nothing of Ijtihad in this hadeeth here, nor is there anything to accept the Taqleed of one who, instead of the hadeeth of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.), makes people follow his own fatwas.
Allmah Haeri’s proofs are now complete. However, a book was published by the ‘Jamiat Ta’alimaat Islami of Karachi’, run under the supervision of Mujtahid Agha Al Khoie, named ‘Ijtihad and Taqleed’. In this book they not only gave Allamah Haeri’s arguments discussed above, but some more as well. I would now like to go through those so that no point does not remain unresolved. I shall now present two proofs of theirs and then discuss them, as they are both similar.
14th PROOF
Sheykh Muhammad Bin Hassan Amili in Wasaail Us Shia has a Hadeeth that Imam Ja’far Al Sadiq (a.s.) said to Muadh: ‘O Muadh! I have hear 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 Shiites and your friends’. He (a.s.) replied: ‘Keep doing that’.
15th PROOF
In Wasail Us Shia there is a narration that one day a man called Abdul Aziz came to Imam Al Ridha (a.s.) and told him that he lives far away and cannot come to him (a.s.) to solve any problems, and so will he allow him to ask Yunus Ibn Abdul Rahman? The Imam (a.s.) 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 of the Holy Imam (a.s.).
2.Both of them are deriving the ordinances from the Holy Imams (a.s.).
3.Both of them are narrators of hadeeth and not mujtahids.
4.Both of them consider personal opinions and anlogies to be prohibited.
5.Both of them are under the Wilayah of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.). 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.
16th PROOF
Tradition from Imam Al-Mahdi (a.s.) 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." - Shaykh at-Tabarsi, al-Ihtijaj, vo. 2, Najaf 1966, p. 283
The institution that presented this proof translated it correctly into urdu, 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 Shiites should refer to the Mujtahids for the answers to their problems’.
Now, the hadeeth above neither mentions neither Ijtihad nor Mujtahid. Everyone is not ignorant that they would all fall into this trap. The reference is clearly to the narrators of hadeeth and not to Mujtahids. This is because the basis of the Fatwa of the Mujtahid is on opinion and analogy, whereas the Muhaddith simply relates the Holy Imam (a.s.)’s words exactly as they are. Fatwa has been defined as the ‘Personal opinion of the Mujtahid after the performance of Istambaat’.
17th PROOF
‘We hereby present to you the statement of the great scholar, narrator and special representative of our Imam (a.s.), 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 the Holy Imam (a.s.).’’
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:
1.The sect of the Mujtahids is completely opposite to the sect of Ahl Ul Bayt (a.s.).
2.The Mujtahids have taken all the tools of Ijtihad from the Sunnis, which have nothing to do with the Holy Infallibles (a.s.).
3.The Mujtahids have established a worldly and religious order against the Holy Infallibles (a.s.). They have made obedience to themselves obligatory upon the Shiites and do not permit them to ask whether their Fatwas are according to the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) or not.
4.The Mujtahids have made claims of Imamate and Wilayah and their slogan is ‘Death to the opponents of Wilayat of Faqih’ (marg bar munkire wilayate Faqih).
5.The Mujtahids have usurped the titles and positions of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) and allocated it for themselves.
6.The beliefs of the Mujtahids are in contradiction to the beliefs of the Shiites and the Holy Infallibles (a.s.). They even reject those virtues of the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) which they (a.s.) themselves have related to us, and those that believe in these are termed as extremists (Ghali).
7.They consider themselves to be replacements of the Prophets (a.s.) and the Holy Imams (a.s.).
8.The Mujtahids in their oppositions to the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) do not refrain from even insulting them (a.s.).
9.The Mujtahids in their enmity to the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) leave no stone unturned as has explained by Imam Hasan Al Askari (a.s.).
10.The Mujtahids do and make others to do certain acts that entitle them and their followers to be cursed by the Holy Imams (a.s.).
11.The Mujtahids, instead of getting people to follow the Holy Imams (a.s.) make them follow a non infallible (Mujtahid), according to the statement of the Holy Imam (a.s.) are outside of their Wilayah.
12.The leadership of the Mujtahids based on analogy and errors has been condemned by the Holy Quran.
13.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.
14.The verses and the hadeeth that the Mujtahids have used to prove their Ijtihad and Taqleed in actual fact are condemning 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 (s.w.t.) has said about these types of people:
وَسَوَاء عَلَيْهِمْ أَأَنذَرْتَهُمْ أَمْ لَمْ تُنذِرْهُمْ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ
[Shakir 36:10] And it is alike to them whether you warn them or warn them not: they do not believe.
Lastly I would like to clarify two weapons that they use to lead people astray away from the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) and towards themselves by claiming that obedience to them is the obedience to the Holy Infallibles (a.s.).
The first weapon they use is the occultation period. This has given them ample time to usurp all the titles and assume all the responsibilities of the Holy Imam (a.s.).
The second weapon they have used is that they have mixed up the two terms ‘Muhaddith’ and ‘Mujtahid’. They then endowed themselves with those Hadeeth that was for the Muhaddith (Narrators of Hadeeth) only.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A MUHADDITH AND A MUJTAHID
If you understand the difference between the two terms then God willing you will neither get confused nor will you get trapped with a noose round your neck.
A narrator is one who narrates a Hadeeth word for word exactly, and says that these are not his words but from the Holy Infallibles (a.s.).
A Mujtahid is one who uses the four tools of Ijtihad and does istinbaat with it and establishes his opinion based on that by giving his fatwa.
The conditions that the Holy Infallibles (a.s.) have set are for the narrators of Hadeeth. The Mujtahids have nothing to do with these conditions.
If these people can show me Ijtihad, and the Taqleed of a Mujtahid from the Verses of the Holy Quran and the Hadeeth, then I will not only abrogate this book of mine, but I will beg for forgiveness from them.
And if they cannot do this, then I will not say anything to them as it is to do with their stomachs. I will say this much to you though, that do not reject the truth after having seen it and recognised it as such otherwise you will get into trouble. Otherwise your worldly life may pass in happiness but in the hereafter, you know very well what will happen to the one who reject the truth after having seen it.
0%
Author: Syed Baqir Nisar Zaidi
