Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
ShiaChat.com
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Taqleed Forbidden Acc. To Ali And Jafar Al-sadiq

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I agree 100%, and I think most "Ayatollahs" as you refer to them, agree as well. I mean, what is the technical name of these "Ayatollahs"? Is it not "Maraji'"? Ergo, it is all about Rajoo', as you put

/\ The Earth is round. If you agree with me, are you now doing taqlid to me?

Does anyone know why marjas dont explain their rulings? Its very frustrating and in this day and age, when they have easy access websites i dont understand why they cant give references and explain at

  • Veteran Member

islam says "X" is allowed

scholar a says it is not allowed.

is the scholar right, even tho he is wrong?

In some cases, to say "islam says "X" is allowed" is not a simple job. There could be some deep level of interpretation on the scholar's view about Islam that you may not understand.

Edited by аli
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Thank you for trying to chrystalize my points for the opposition, MAK. Notice how he avoided responding to the the key point in your post, which is the issue i'm trying to address. Anyway, thanks for your support. Those who are ready to see, see. Those who wish to stay blind, will stay so.

Is all Ijma' wrong? Yes and no.

If i'm using logic and reason to decipher which fatwa is closer to the truth, then doesn't logic state that, at the same time, I am also discovering and determining which fatwa is incorrect on the same issue?

The alim has his own reasonings as to why stoning adulterers to death is not legislated in Islam. Again, do all maraja have a consensus in this matter or do some differ? If they differ, then the alim has every right to share his individual verdict on the matter, as he is also knowledgable. As I said, ijma' can also be erroneous, but not on all matters.

I've pretty much explained this.

Yes, I did say that. You showed me that they do provide details and I responded with "Well, that's great. At least i can now choose which ruling makes more sense to me in a more coherent manner."

Well, I explain everything step by step to answer in order to your case specific questions. As the discussion goes on, the more you get a better grasp on my viewpoint, more ideas are revealed when tackling your new questions. It just happens.

I'll try to simplify this. Maraja vary in opinion and differ in their method of understanding issues. Using my intellect to discern which ruling is rational and strong on a specific issue, this is not called blind following but free thinking.

Taqleed has barred people from free thinking and they have invented nonsensical implementations on how taqleed should be approached.

Regarding MKA's post, if you feel I dodged a main point feel free to point me to it and I will happily respond to it.

Also, you did not answer my question regarding whether intellect can discover ijma is wrong since it can decide between fatawa. All you responded with was a question to me about what you are doing when you reason your way between two fatawa (which is for you to answer, not me, as you are the one promoting its validity)

But anyways, let's move on. I want to address this idea that reason can decide which fatwa is closer to the truth. Firstly, you do believe this, yes? Secondly, please give me a case in which two or more maraja differ on an issue and explain how reason has the ability to decipher which one is closer to the truth.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Banned

In some cases, to say "islam says "X" is allowed" is not a simple job. There could be some deep level of interpretation on the scholar's view about Islam that you may not understand.

ok let me put this another way.

scholar A says something is allowed

scholar B says the same thing is not allowed.

are both correct?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

ok let me put this another way.

scholar A says something is allowed

scholar B says the same thing is not allowed.

are both correct?

But this problem would exist even if you were doing your own personal ejtehad. When things are very clear cut, you will have the exact same ruling because the confidence level is high.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

But this problem would exist even if you were doing your own personal ejtehad. When things are very clear cut, you will have the exact same ruling because the confidence level is high.

Salam sister,

If someone knows and follows the principles set by aimma a.s in understanding ahadees this problem will not occur and there will be no need for applying ijtehad on qiyas and ijma. The ahadees are pretty clear.

Lets say MDM reads a hadees which says x is allowed.

and

Let's say I read a hadees that x is not allowed.

If both have the intention to follow the imams asws and we aren't able to assess which hadees is suspended and which is applicable we can follow any one of the two without considering one over the other however the it is not difficult to assess the suspended command: just look at the later imam a.S's hadees and you will know the previous one is suspended. And evenafter that one is doubtful then one has the option to choose either of the two.

We don't believe imams asws differed among each other and it is kufr for us to believe as such. It is always our incapability. Even after that if someone is still doubtful he suspends action.

But in any scenario MDM or me can't go beyond the text and quran and covert it to something not mentioned in the text.

For e.g., chess halal fatwa has no precedence in hadees and such ijtehad is against quran and sunna

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

ok let me put this another way.

scholar A says something is allowed

scholar B says the same thing is not allowed.

are both correct?

So what? We are not going to hell because of it, unless it was fundamental aspect of religion (should be no taqleed over it).

The world is not that black and white.

Edited by аli
Link to post
Share on other sites

Comrade

He gets to select which one is right....

The marjs just give you different anwers but you pick what you think is right ,even if it goes againts what they say.

What we "think" is right? What kind of religion is that? Who even needs messengers at all, we should just believe what we "think" is the truth?

it's more of what our desires feel is right. Let's not play semantics. That's what drives people like MDM to the core, hence his bizarre insanity.

Thank you for comparing taqleed with buying laundry detergent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Salam sister,

If someone knows and follows the principles set by aimma a.s in understanding ahadees this problem will not occur and there will be no need for applying ijtehad on qiyas and ijma. The ahadees are pretty clear.

Lets say MDM reads a hadees which says x is allowed.

and

Let's say I read a hadees that x is not allowed.

If both have the intention to follow the imams asws and we aren't able to assess which hadees is suspended and which is applicable we can follow any one of the two without considering one over the other however the it is not difficult to assess the suspended command: just look at the later imam a.S's hadees and you will know the previous one is suspended. And evenafter that one is doubtful then one has the option to choose either of the two.

What about on things that are not mention in hadiths? How do you decide then?

Feel free to pick any example that you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But anyways, let's move on. I want to address this idea that reason can decide which fatwa is closer to the truth. Firstly, you do believe this, yes? Secondly, please give me a case in which two or more maraja differ on an issue and explain how reason has the ability to decipher which one is closer to the truth.

We discussed the same thing in my taqleed thread.

Well, let's put this muta situation into context, pose a scenario and then i can approach reason.

Scholar A says fathers permission is necessary out of obligatory precaution.

Scholar B says that it is not necessary.

Now, i want to do Muta with a virgin girl for one hour. Ok, so, logically and realistically speaking, if i were to approach the girls father and say "i wish to perform temporary marriage with your daughter for an hour, can i have your permission?" 99.9% we all know that the answer would be a resounding NO. There is no way in hell the father would consent to it, because he wouldn't understand. This would not be an islamically sound reason to prevent this marriage from taking place. So it is "Impossible" to approach the father in this circumstance. I really like this girl and she loves me. Scholar B makes more sense.

Furthermore, i wouldn't be doing anything wrong because:- (read below)

ok let me put this another way.

scholar A says something is allowed

scholar B says the same thing is not allowed.

are both correct?

Why would it be ok for the followers of scholar B to follow his specific ruling on temporary marriage, whilst the followers of scholar A cannot, even if they want to? This is just double standards.

Whether i choose to apply the ruling of scholar A or B, it shouldn't make a difference because these rulings have already been approved by qualified marja.

Edited by Çåá ÇáÈíÊ
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

We discussed the same thing in my taqleed thread.

Well, let's put this muta situation into context, pose a scenario and then i can approach reason.

Scholar A says fathers permission is necessary out of obligatory precaution.

Scholar B says that it is not necessary.

Now, i want to do Muta with a virgin girl for one hour. Ok, so, logically and realistically speaking, if i were to approach the girls father and say "i wish to perform temporary marriage with your daughter for an hour, can i have your permission?" 99.9% we all know that the answer would be a resounding NO. There is no way in hell the father would consent to it, because he wouldn't understand. This would not be an islamically sound reason to prevent this marriage from taking place. So it is "Impossible" to approach the father in this circumstance. I really like this girl and she loves me. Scholar B makes more sense.

1) Firstly, you yourself said it is out of obligatory precaution that they issue this ruling. With obl. precaution, you can refer to another marja. According to some, the chain of ihtiyat eventually does reach a marja who allows muta without father's permission, but that marja does state that the girl has to be mature and able to make heavy decisions like that of muta, which can result in heavy responsibilities and consequences if not taken approached properly. Also, I know there are some maraja who may say that the father's "unreason" can lead to removal of the condition of his permission if the young man and/or woman seriously feel that they will fall into sin without mutah. (check with your own marja(s) on this). So this ruling in reality is not as black and white as you are presenting it.

2) Let us, however, assume that it is that black and white. You have not provided reasons why the fatwa of not requiring father's permission is closer to truth. What you have done is explained that it is in accordance with desire. In order to show that it is closer to truth, you will need to prove, through reason alone, how a virgin woman who has never lost her virginity through marriage is capable of making such a decision without the harm outweighing the benefit, and that there is not a greater benefit in her needing to consult her more learned, experienced, less emotional father (remember, at least 90% of the applicable cases here involve girls in their late teens/early 20s, a time in which it is very common for people to act upon raging hormones and later seriously regret what they have done. I myself right now know an 18 year old who got a girl pregnant in muta-he is literally stuck with this situation for the rest of his life because he was not thinking clearly-he is not even close to ready to be a father). All you have said so far is that because her dad is not reasonable, and you want to be with her, scholar B makes more "sense." But in reality, you are not speaking of what is rational and can be proven through reason, you are talking about picking whichever fatwa is in accordance with your desires.

3) I think you really need to reflect on what you have said regarding mutah for just one hour. What father, understanding or not, would allow this? That is lust, not love. I personally know people who have done mutah with the father's permission, but for the sake of actually pursuing a permanent marriage. If it is presented in that context, the father is much more likely to be accepting or at least consider it. But one hour? If I truly love a sister and want to pursue marriage, one hour is not going to even begin to satisfy me, because love is far deeper than that. A one hour scenario is used to satisfy lust.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

A one hour scenario is used to satisfy lust.

This is exactly the purpose of Mutah Marriage.

متعة : pleasure,enjoyment,treat,entertainment,delight,gratification,relish,amenities,lustiness

Why today some Shias are trying to diminish the original purpose of Mutah Marriage ?

If Mutah Marriage is not for sex, then its original purpose has been diverted to show the non muslim a very polished picture of something that is quite similar than prostitution framed with some rules, but basically it's prostitution.

BTW, every where on Google you will see Mutah Marriage = Temporary Marriage however this is hypocrisy, as Mutah Marriage = Lustiness Marriage

Edited by halwahalwa_1.1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

This is exactly the purpose of Mutah Marriage.

متعة : pleasure,enjoyment,treat,entertainment,delight,gratification,relish,amenities,lustiness

Why today some Shias are trying to diminish the original purpose of Mutah Marriage ?

If Mutah Marriage is not for sex, then its original purpose has been diverted to show the non muslim a very polished picture of something that is quite similar than prostitution framed with some rules, but basically it's prostitution.

BTW, every where on Google you will see Mutah Marriage = Temporary Marriage however this is hypocrisy, as Mutah Marriage = Lustiness Marriage

First of all, my criticism of his one-hour scenario was in part based on his words

" I really like this girl and she loves me."

Those are words of affection, not lust.

Secondly, some ulema disagree that it is "Lustiness Marriage" as you say. I asked Ayatullah Nasir Makarem a question about mutah and his response was:

temporary marriage is not for enjoyment of the capricious people. It has a clear philosophy, like satisfaction of those men who are not able to marry for some reasons, or those who have patient wives and cannot fulfill their needs normally with permanent marriage. For more details refer to “Tafsir-Nemoone”, vol.3, following the 24th verse of Nisa’.

So even though there is satisfaction or pleasure, it is not the satisfaction of any and every desire. It is the satisfaction of desire and achieving pleasure, but only under certain conditions. It's not meant for us to become womanizers and people obsessed with mere physical pleasures like you are making it out to be.

Edited by cc_30
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

1) Firstly, you yourself said it is out of obligatory precaution that they issue this ruling. With obl. precaution, you can refer to another marja. According to some, the chain of ihtiyat eventually does reach a marja who allows muta without father's permission, but that marja does state that the girl has to be mature and able to make heavy decisions like that of muta, which can result in heavy responsibilities and consequences if not taken approached properly. Also, I know there are some maraja who may say that the father's "unreason" can lead to removal of the condition of his permission if the young man and/or woman seriously feel that they will fall into sin without mutah. (check with your own marja(s) on this). So this ruling in reality is not as black and white as you are presenting it.

2) Let us, however, assume that it is that black and white. You have not provided reasons why the fatwa of not requiring father's permission is closer to truth. What you have done is explained that it is in accordance with desire. In order to show that it is closer to truth, you will need to prove, through reason alone, how a virgin woman who has never lost her virginity through marriage is capable of making such a decision without the harm outweighing the benefit, and that there is not a greater benefit in her needing to consult her more learned, experienced, less emotional father (remember, at least 90% of the applicable cases here involve girls in their late teens/early 20s, a time in which it is very common for people to act upon raging hormones and later seriously regret what they have done. I myself right now know an 18 year old who got a girl pregnant in muta-he is literally stuck with this situation for the rest of his life because he was not thinking clearly-he is not even close to ready to be a father). All you have said so far is that because her dad is not reasonable, and you want to be with her, scholar B makes more "sense." But in reality, you are not speaking of what is rational and can be proven through reason, you are talking about picking whichever fatwa is in accordance with your desires.

3) I think you really need to reflect on what you have said regarding mutah for just one hour. What father, understanding or not, would allow this? That is lust, not love. I personally know people who have done mutah with the father's permission, but for the sake of actually pursuing a permanent marriage. If it is presented in that context, the father is much more likely to be accepting or at least consider it. But one hour? If I truly love a sister and want to pursue marriage, one hour is not going to even begin to satisfy me, because love is far deeper than that. A one hour scenario is used to satisfy lust.

@2, I think you're missing a fundamental point brother cc_30. A fatwa from a marja' is by definition not haram to follow. There is no absolute "truth". Had there been, then both scholars would've been in agreement. It is, as you put it in point 1, a matter of context. If YOU honestly feel that you're not READY for the responsibilities and that the girl is not ready, then, based on obl.pre, you abstain. However, if you're confident that the girl knows what she's doing, and you're ready to take on that responsibility, then you proceed, as per scholar Bs fatwa. But nowhere do YOU have to prove that one fatwa is "closer to the truth", as there is no absolute truth, BOTH are fatwas, rendering them halal to follow by definition(Given that you have been true to yourself, as opposed to lying to yourself just to quench some sort of desire).

This is exactly the purpose of Mutah Marriage.

متعة : pleasure,enjoyment,treat,entertainment,delight,gratification,relish,amenities,lustiness

Why today some Shias are trying to diminish the original purpose of Mutah Marriage ?

If Mutah Marriage is not for sex, then its original purpose has been diverted to show the non muslim a very polished picture of something that is quite similar than prostitution framed with some rules, but basically it's prostitution.

BTW, every where on Google you will see Mutah Marriage = Temporary Marriage however this is hypocrisy, as Mutah Marriage = Lustiness Marriage

Please provide a definition of "prostitution" before making ignorant claims. By your logic, marriage is prostitution framed with some rules as well. Anyway, I'm sure there are other threads for mutaa. I'm not trying to minimod, but I'd rather posts in this discussion stay on-topic.

Edited by MAK
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

@2, I think you're missing a fundamental point brother cc_30. A fatwa from a marja' is by definition not haram to follow. There is no absolute "truth". Had there been, then both scholars would've been in agreement. It is, as you put it in point 1, a matter of context. If YOU honestly feel that you're not READY for the responsibilities and that the girl is not ready, then, based on obl.pre, you abstain. However, if you're confident that the girl knows what she's doing, and you're ready to take on that responsibility, then you proceed, as per scholar Bs fatwa. But nowhere do YOU have to prove that one fatwa is "closer to the truth", as there is no absolute truth, BOTH are fatwas, rendering them halal to follow by definition(Given that you have been true to yourself, as opposed to lying to yourself just to quench some sort of desire).

1) In the 'Absurdity with Taqleed' thread, I posted my views on which fatawa we can follow. Basically, I stated that we have to at least attempt to determine who is 'alam by asking scholars who we trust, etc. If there is still confusion, then I do believe we can follow one of our choice, or even multiple maraja, as long as we can safely say they are qualified for their positions and we determine that they are all around the same level of learnedness. But this is all in accordance with the best of our ability. In your example, I believe that one must first research scholars A and B, see what the scholars we trust say about their level of knowledge, and then proceed from there.

2) Everything I posted was in regards to Ahlul-Bayt's statement that we can use our reason to select which is closer to the truth. I am trying to understand how he thinks the human intellect is capable of doing this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Leta say x said raping your wife is fine , then y says its not recommended , here you have to options but they both dont go with what you morally think is right. What do you do then? You select what right which is not raping at all. Why did god give us a aqeel? So we blindly follow and then blame the marja3 ? You allows have two options and you select whats right, majority of humans know whats morally right and wrong or at least have a sense if it ( excluding rapist,murders etc).

Thank you for comparing taqleed with buying laundry detergent.

Maybe your "untamed desires" led you to this out come ^^^^...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

o hai gaiz

Thanks to brothers InshAllah, cc_30, MAFHJ, and comrade for some insightful posts. (Sorry if I left anyone out; I read this thread while I was in the brig, so my memory is not fresh).

Ultimately, there are two points here. Anyone who rejects these points, are simply being unreasonable.

1) Differences in rulings are due to differences in the scholars' approaches to fiqh and usul. You cannot take individual different rulings and set them apart from the general paradigm which the maraji have created.

2) When there are two conflicting rulings, yes, logic dictates that at least one of them must be untrue. However, this overlooks the point that either ruling is far more likely to be true, than an idea that you just draw from your head based on your own whims!

And if you argue against this, you're arguing against reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

o hai gaiz

Thanks to brothers InshAllah, cc_30, MAFHJ, and comrade for some insightful posts. (Sorry if I left anyone out; I read this thread while I was in the brig, so my memory is not fresh).

Ultimately, there are two points here. Anyone who rejects these points, are simply being unreasonable.

1) Differences in rulings are due to differences in the scholars' approaches to fiqh and usul. You cannot take individual different rulings and set them apart from the general paradigm which the maraji have created.

2) When there are two conflicting rulings, yes, logic dictates that at least one of them must be untrue. However, this overlooks the point that either ruling is far more likely to be true, than an idea that you just draw from your head based on your own whims!

And if you argue against this, you're arguing against reason.

2) When there are two conflicting rulings, yes, logic dictates that at least one of them must be untrue. However, this overlooks the point that either ruling is far more likely to be true, than an idea that you just draw from your head based on your own whims!

And if you argue against this, you're arguing against reason.

I wasn't arguing that we make up our own ruling, I'm saying that we should have the right to exercise our intellectual freedom by choosing amongst the already approved rulings on a certain issue.

I've reiterated this so many times, I haven't a clue why some people have a difficulty understanding this.

Edited by Çåá ÇáÈíÊ
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

I wasn't arguing that we make up our own ruling, I'm saying that we should have the right to exercise our intellectual freedom by choosing amongst the already approved rulings on a certain issue.

That's a thing. It's called tab'id. It is haraam according to most scholars. To the best of my knowledge, there are three -- Ayatollah Khamenei, Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi, and Ayatollah Haydari -- maraji who rule tab'id as permissible.

In any case... you are saying that following just one marja's ruling is illogical, when in fact this is not the case as per point #1 in my above post, which was espoused in more detail (and with more eloquence), by other respected brothers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a thing. It's called tab'id. It is haraam according to most scholars. To the best of my knowledge, there are three -- Ayatollah Khamenei, Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi, and Ayatollah Haydari -- maraji who rule tab'id as permissible.

In any case... you are saying that following just one marja's ruling is illogical, when in fact this is not the case as per point #1 in my above post, which was espoused in more detail (and with more eloquence), by other respected brothers.

*tab'idh.

Tab'id would mean something completely different unless the person knew what you're talking about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother Ahlul-Bayt: I am still awaiting your response to post #84, if you are still interested in discussing?

We use our intellect and reason to discern which ruling is closer to the truth in the same way that we use our intellect and reasoning to find out which scholar is most knowledgable.

At the end of the day, whether I choose to pick rulings according to desire or not, it's totally irrelevant. These rulings are approved. They are not haram to follow. It's just double standards if you say that the followers of a certain scholar are allowed to adopt the ruling on not needing to ask permission for Muta under any circumstances, but for me it would be choosing 'according to desire'. It's really stupid.

Anyhow, it's not unlawful and that's the point.

Edited by Çåá ÇáÈíÊ
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

We use our intellect and reason to discern which ruling is closer to the truth in the same way that we use our intellect and reasoning to find out which scholar is most knowledgable.

At the end of the day, whether I choose to pick rulings according to desire or not, it's totally irrelevant. These rulings are approved. They are not haram to follow. It's just double standards if you say that the followers of a certain scholar are allowed to adopt the ruling on not needing to ask permission for Muta under any circumstances, but for me it would be choosing 'according to desire'. It's really stupid.

Anyhow, it's not unlawful and that's the point.

1) You have criticized the notion of 'alamiyya (identifying the most learned) several times in this thread. But now you are equating its method with how to rationalize between two rulings?

2) I am not interested in discussing whether you "can" follow either one, or the halal/haram of it. Throughout this thread, you have been attacking "blind following" and advocating that we use our reason to decide which fatwa is closer to the truth. I want to see you explain how this is possible. If you believe it doing it, there must be a valid way of proving that it is possible, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1) You have criticized the notion of 'alamiyya (identifying the most learned) several times in this thread. But now you are equating its method with how to rationalize between two rulings?

2) I am not interested in discussing whether you "can" follow either one, or the halal/haram of it. Throughout this thread, you have been attacking "blind following" and advocating that we use our reason to decide which fatwa is closer to the truth. I want to see you explain how this is possible. If you believe it doing it, there must be a valid way of proving that it is possible, right?

I just proved it.

I've already refuted the fact that identifying 'the most learned' is illogical, in one of my previous posts, but I'm using this as proof that we can use reason to discern which ruling is closer to the truth. Why? Because you agree that we can use 'reason' to discern which scholar is closer to the truth or, in other words, most knowledgable. It's practically the same thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

I just proved it.

I've already refuted the fact that identifying 'the most learned' is illogical, in one of my previous posts, but I'm using this as proof that we can use reason to discern which ruling is closer to the truth. Why? Because you agree that we can use 'reason' to discern which scholar is closer to the truth or, in other words, most knowledgable. It's practically the same thing.

Brother, your argument is dependent upon your claim that I believe we can use reason to find the most knowledgeable scholar. However, this is not what I believe and I have not said this. My exact words were:

we have to at least attempt to determine who is 'alam by asking scholars who we trust, etc.

Asking ahlul-khibra who is 'alam is not using reason to come to a conclusion; it is referring to an expert. There is a huge difference.

Let us, however, assume you are right and that I believe we can use reason to find the alam. This still would not relieve you of the responsibility to provide evidence for your beliefs. You do not believe reason can find the alam, so you must, by definition, have other reasons for your belief. Throwing it on me and claiming that I am saying the same thing in reality is nothing more than that. You still have not fulfilled your side by showing us the evidence for your claims.

So, again, you have said that reason can be used to choose which fatwa is closer to the truth. This means you believe that reason can function with the content of fatawa, yes? I am very curious to see how you do this.

I would like to remind myself and everyone of the story of Khidr (as) and Musa (as), in which even one of the highest anbiya to walk the face of the earth was completely perplexed at the wisdom behind the ahkam of Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you offer evidence for its validity or not?

Please, either offer proof if you have it or be honest and admit that you do not.

If I find evidence, then I can offer proof. If I don't find evidence, I can't offer proof. Either way, it doesn't make a difference. The fact that the ruling has already been issued and approved, then seeking for its validity has no relevance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

taqlid is prohibited in usool aldeen ( aqeeda) and is required in foroo3 aldeen (details)

usool addeen are required from every individual

foroo3 are complicated and not all individuals reach te knolwedge therefore one individual takes guidance from another in different things

Read this thread properly to see where the contention actually lies.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

If I find evidence, then I can offer proof. If I don't find evidence, I can't offer proof. Either way, it doesn't make a difference. The fact that the ruling has already been issued and approved, then seeking for its validity has no relevance.

That is your choice, as long as you understand that it is a practice which has no basis in Islam, and for which we can find no recommendation or support. Since you are arguing so passionately for it, I would expect for there to be at least some basis for it in our religion.

What we do have support for, however, is doing ihtiyat when we come across a situation in which doubt arises:

"Your religion is your brother so take precaution with your religion however much you can." -Imam Ali (as)

"It is upon you to be resolute and precautious with your religion." -Imam Sadiq (as)

"Be precautious with all things that you have the ability to carry out." -Imam Sadiq (as)

(Source: Mizan al-Hikmah, section on 'Ihtiyat')

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is your choice, as long as you understand that it is a practice which has no basis in Islam, and for which we can find no recommendation or support. Since you are arguing so passionately for it, I would expect for there to be at least some basis for it in our religion.

What we do have support for, however, is doing ihtiyat when we come across a situation in which doubt arises:

"Your religion is your brother so take precaution with your religion however much you can." -Imam Ali (as)

"It is upon you to be resolute and precautious with your religion." -Imam Sadiq (as)

"Be precautious with all things that you have the ability to carry out." -Imam Sadiq (as)

(Source: Mizan al-Hikmah, section on 'Ihtiyat')

And what basis does the current system have in Islam? Nada.

Of course, Ihtiyat is important and reasoning will guide you as to where precaution should be implemented in the right context.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...