Search the Community

If you click on any of the five choices, you are pretty unique! Congratulations! PLEASE NOTE: "Unique" has NO basis in fiqh. It is NOT a valid way of making taqlid. I am simply curious. I am weird, and this type of stuff interests me.

Full article at: https://ahlulbaytmission.org/2016/09/18/fallacy-of-ilm-al-rijal/ Abstract: Ilm-al-Rijal literally means 'Knowledge of Men' and is more commonly understood as the Science of Narration. This science is one of the most important founding pillars of Ijtihad (and thus the system of Taqlid and Marjaiyat). The purpose of this science is to distinguish between reliable and unreliable hadith by evaluating the biographies of the narrators instead of examining the actual text and contents of the hadith. This science was first invented by Ahmad ibn Hanbal (founder of the Hanbali Sunni School) who also wrote the book Kitab al-`Ilal wa Ma‘rifat al-Rijal: "The Book of Narrations Containing Hidden Flaws and of Knowledge of the Men (of Hadeeth)". In this article, we will prove unequivocally that this subject is in fact diametrically opposed to the teachings of the Masumeen (as). When this subject is proved to be false, the system of Ijtihad (and thus Taqlid of fallibles) also collapses. This subject is taught in the Hawza (Shia Islamic Seminary) and a working knowledge of this subject is generally expected from every scholar who reaches the level of being a Jurisprudent (mujtahid) and has the ability to give legal edicts and injunctions. There is not a single hadith or ayah of Quran that promote or even mention this subject. On the other hand, there are numerous hadith from Masumeen (as) which are opposed to the concept of Ilm-al-Rijal. Why are these hadith hidden from the public and never mentioned? Because Ilm-al-Rijal is a convenient and powerful tool and this very tool is used to reject hadith which speak against it. It is an evil tool and a horrible weapon used to establish rule and control over the masses. [ ... ] Continue reading full article at: https://ahlulbaytmission.org/2016/09/18/fallacy-of-ilm-al-rijal/

As-Salam 'Alaikum, Most Shi'ah who have discussed the crimes of some Sahabah with Sunnis have come across their threadbare "ijtihad" defence card. For instance, when evidence is presented that a certain Sahabi committed murder, you hear the Sunni saying: "He did ijtihad, and will be given one good reward for his effort." So, his crime becomes a source of good rewards, due to the ijtihad card. Sunnis play this card always, whenever any of their Sahabah becomes vulnerable. So, I consider it appropriate to investigate the source of this wonderful ijtihad card. Its source is this hadith from Sahih al-Bukhari: حدثنا عبد الله بن يزيد المقرئ المكي حدثنا حيوة بن شريح حدثني يزيد بن عبد الله بن الهاد عن محمد بن إبراهيم بن الحارث عن بسر بن سعيد عن أبي قيس مولى عمرو بن العاص عن عمرو بن العاص : أنه سمع رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم يقول إذا حكم الحاكم فاجتهد ثم أصاب فله أجران وإذا حكم فاجتهد ثم أخطأ فله أجر Narrated 'Amr b. al-'As: I heard the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, saying: "When a judge gives a judgment, and he strives. Then, he is correct. He will have two rewards. And when he gives a judgment, and strives. Then, he made an error. He has one reward. As it is obvious, the hadith speaks only about judges when they are giving their judgments in judicial proceedings. However, Sunnis have extended it to cover all Sahabah indiscriminately - including all of those among them who were never judges. For instance, Mu'awiyah and his gangs were collectively responsible for the murder of our beloved master, 'Ammar b. Yasir, may Allah be pleased with him. If you put the point to a Sunni, he will answer: "Mu'awiyah did ijtihad. He will have one reward. 'Ammar also did ijtihad. He will have two rewards." One then wonders: was Mu'awiyah a judge at the time of the murder? Was he also striving to give judgment in a judicial case? How then is the above hadith possibly applicable in his case?!

The video dose not answer the question but it is a question to seek answer to.

The Quranic meaning of ‘fiqh’ The Shia School prides itself in opening the door for ijtihad from the first days of Islam, but I will not dwell on its importance here and the evidence for its need to keep up with the changing times, since there is no disagreement on this aspect (although there are different views in defining ijtihad [1]). Shaheed Al Sadr says: ‘Ijtihad allows the muslims to apply islamic theory to daily life, since pracitcal application cannot happen until ijtihad defines the theory and its details.’ [2] The differences in opinion arose with differing views on the role of the mujtahid and the extent of his responsibilities (although the responsibilites are clearly stated in the Quran and narrations as we’ll see below..). Imam Khomeini’s view on Ijtihad: ‘We have limited ourselves to a small part of juristic laws, and left many aspects untouched and therefore many aspects of ijtihad remain strange to us.’ [3] He saw that the ijtihad being performed at the religious seminaries was not enough to tackle all the issues faced by the muslim nations, due to the wrong understanding of ijtihad and intellectual standstill due to the focus on the individual and not the society as a whole. The solution he proposed was: ‘Islam deals with all aspects of life, and gave corresponding laws for each (aspect).’ This is where the correct understanding of fiqh becomes critical in understanding the correct purpose of ijtihad and the correct role of the mujtahid. And, as always, to establish the correct meaning of any religious concept, we must go to the Quran: وَمَا كَانَ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ لِيَنفِرُ‌وا كَافَّةً ۚ فَلَوْلَا نَفَرَ‌ مِن كُلِّ فِرْ‌قَةٍ مِّنْهُمْ طَائِفَةٌ لِّيَتَفَقَّهُوا فِي الدِّينِ وَلِيُنذِرُ‌وا قَوْمَهُمْ إِذَا رَ‌جَعُوا إِلَيْهِمْ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَحْذَرُ‌ونَ ‘And it does not beseem the believers that they should go forth all together; why should not then a company from every party from among them go forth that they may apply themselves to obtain understanding in religion, and that they may warn their people when they come back to them that they may be cautious?’ [4] Before talking about the meaning of the word ‘fiqh’ or ‘tafaquh’ in this verse, another important phrase is ‘why should not’ (فَلَوْلَا), which is used as an exhortation to do a certain thing, in this case: ‘to obtain understanding in religion’, i.e. it is obligatory (for all or some) to obtain religious knowledge. The verse then defines the role of those who obtained religious knowledge to be ‘that they may warn their people when they come back to them’, correlating understanding in religion with warning, deeming knowledge on its own to be insufficient without spreading it to those who lack it. But what does ‘when they come back to them’ mean? They must have gone somewhere to return to their people. It is evident, then, that migration of those tasked with obtaining knowledge and then returning to their people, having gathered all necessary information and experience, is fundamental to ‘warning’ them and providing themselves and others with the tools to counter any (intellectual) threat they might face. Allamah al-Tabatabai’s view on the verse: ‘Hence it is clear that the intended meaning of ‘becoming learned’ (tafaquh) is to gain an understanding of all religious sciences, whether the roots of the religion or its branches, and not just the practical laws, which is the formal meaning of fiqh amongst religious people. The proof for this is first, ‘to become learned in religion’ and second, ‘and to warn their people…’ because they can only warn their people if they have an understanding of all aspects of the religion, including that which will occasion divine reward or punishment in the Hereafter.’ [5] Knowledge in religion (tafaquh) in narrations The narrations dealing with the importance of knowledge and the obligation of its acquisition are numerous, I will mention just one relevant to our discussion above: Imam al-Sadiq (as) said: ‘Become learned in religion, for those who do not are desert dwellers (i.e. ignorant and lacking knowledge)’ [6] The term ‘desert dwellers’ should not be taken as an insult, as the Quran has given a clear definition for this group in society: قَالَتِ الْأَعْرَ‌ابُ آمَنَّا ۖ قُل لَّمْ تُؤْمِنُوا وَلَـٰكِن قُولُوا أَسْلَمْنَا وَلَمَّا يَدْخُلِ الْإِيمَانُ فِي قُلُوبِكُمْ ‘The dwellers of the desert say: We believe. Say: You do not believe but say, We submit; and faith has not yet entered into your hearts..’ [7] The desert dwellers are far removed from the centres of knowledge and culture, which will have an effect on their spiritual and behavioural conduct. ——————————————————————————————- [1] See: ‘Ijtihad: its meaning, sources, beginning and practice of ra’y’ [2] Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr: ‘Future directions of the Ijtihad movement’, Al Ghadeer magazine, Dec 1980. [3] Imam Ruhollah Khomeini, ‘Islamic Government’, pg65. [4] Al Tawbah:122 [5] Allamah Tabataba’i, Tafsir Al Mizan, Vol9, pg337. [6] Usul al Kafi, Vol1, pg31, H6. [7] Al Hujurat:14

Hello everyone, This is my first post on this forum, so please go easy on me if I say something out of place. I apologise in advance if I offend anyone, that's not my intention at all. Just looking for a little advice! Despite flirting with atheism for a few years, I was born into a Muslim family and have nominally considered myself such for the past few years. Recently however, I've become more serious about my faith and looking into both Sunni and Shia doctrines, I've decided to follow the latter. This has led to a problem I can't seem to get around; who to choose as a marja? I'm looking for someone who's both a qualified religious scholar, and who is informed on current affairs and the precarious socio-political position Shias have found themselves in since 2003. I suppose my beliefs inhabit the middle road between Akhbari and Usooli, so I should probably clarify that it doesn't seem to me that taghleed is a fundamental tenant of the faith; as to mean that non- adherence to the principle would invalidate a person's actions. Personally however, I find it to be the only logical conclusion for someone like me who isn't versed on matters of fiqh, Although I have huge respect for Ayatollah Khamenei, I'm as yet undecided on how I feel about the concept of Wilayat-e-Faqigh and clerical governance in general, so that rules out him and pretty much most of the clerics within Iran. Again to clarify, I by no means adhere to the idea of religous apoliticism and am a staunch supporter of the 1979 Islamic revolution, despite not liking where its heading. From what I understand so far however, religious political activism should be more focused on promoting Islamic ideals such as education, social justice, opposition to tyranny and inequality etc. rather than institutionalising Islamic law. To give an idea of the kind of mojtahed I'm looking for, I interviewed Ayatollahs Sane'i and Montazeri in 2007; I was extremely put off by the former, but developed a deep respect and admiration for the latter, despite disagreeing with him on certain issues regarding the 2009 protests in Iran. If he were alive I'd probably follow him. So now I'm leaning towards Ayatollah Sistani, but I'm conflicted about his stance against US hegemony and neo-imperialism. On the on hand I wish he would speak out against it while maintaning his pacifist stance, on the other its become clear that the way he's dealt with the Americans in Iraq have made him a force to be reckoned with, and one that the US daren't cross. So his actions may have a wisdom that I've failed to grasp, hot-headed revolutionary that I am (which is highly probable). Within the framework I've outlined, is he my best bet or does anyone have any other suggestions I can look into? I'd really appreciate any input on this, I'm pretty stumped! Thank you in advance. Ari