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

Following (Taqlid) The Religious Maraja (Mujtahid)

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Following (Taqlid) the Religious Maraja (Mujtahid)

Question: There are among us such people also who do not think that doing Taqlid in Islamic law is obligatory. They argue that it is incumbent on all to derive the laws of the Shariah from the Holy Quran and other sources. Because:

 

1.      The Holy Quran is opposed to any kind of following (Taqlid) and it is absolutely against blindly following anyone.

 

2.      Taqlid is to follow without question, and reason and wisdom do not like this type of following.

 

3.      Taqlid is the cause of disunity among the Muslims because there are usually more than one Maraja and their legal rulings are not the same.

 

Answer: We think that the source of all these objections is one. It is that there are two meanings of the word ‘Taqlid’. One of them is a general meaning which is the usual connotation. It has another literary meaning with which discussions are initiated in the books of Jurisprudence and principles. The previous and the present objections are regarding the first meaning while there is no connection between the first meaning and the second meaning.

 

The explanation of this is usually Taqlid is used for improper actions in everyday life which people usually do by initiation without any proper thought or justification. To imitate foolish people is certainly a greater foolishness. It is neither sanctioned by reason nor by Islamic law. And no sane person is ready to follow any other person blindly.

 

It is the same Taqlid with which the idolaters used to justify their idolatry. They used to say that their ancestors used to follow that custom and they were not prepared to forgo the customs of their ancestors.

 

The Holy Quran has mentioned their argument in the following verses:

 

Surely we found our fathers on a course, and surely we are followers of their footsteps.[113]

 

They used to justify their foolish custom (of worshipping wooden and stone idols) by saying that their ancestors also did that. They used to blindly follow their customs. It is that same type of Taqlid that is responsible for the spread of social evils like racing, fashion and sexual perversion.

 

Maulana Rumi has indicated this same type of Taqlid: “Their foolish Taqlid has destroyed the people”.

 

As mentioned above most of the objection with regard to Taqlid are there due considering the first meaning of Taqlid which is used in general sense. However, the second meaning of Taqlid, used in religious terminology is completely different. It can be expressed in one sentence: “Following the specialists by non-specialists people in some matters.”

 

That is, those who are not having the knowledge of religious problems, which require specialization and years of study they have to compulsorily follow the religious Mujtahid and act upon their rulings. In this sense is the meaning applicable for Taqlid—that is the following of a learned person by a less learned person. It is the basis of human life in all the fields, be they agriculture, manufacturing or medicine.

 

If at any time this is taken out from human life, that is a patient does not visit a doctor, or people do not consult lawyers for legal advice, one does not consult the engineers and architects, one does not use the services of artisans, mechanics and experts of other fields, the social structure of the world would be endangered and every field will become extinct.

 

The religious problems are not exempted from this system. Without any doubts, in the principles of faith like Tauheed, Adl, Nubuwwat, Imamat and Qiyamat, everyone has to do proper research themselves and their justification is nothing difficult and complicated also. Every person can do this according to his or her understanding capacity. However, for the Islamic practical laws: Worship acts, business transactions and politics like Prayer, fasting, holy war, penalties and punishments, relations and blood money marriage and divorce and thousands of other day-to-day matters. Everyone cannot obtain the knowledge of all these laws individually. Neither can they derive any benefit from the sources of Islamic law, like the Holy Quran, traditions, Reason and Consensus.

 

Therefore people have no option but to follow the religious scholar for these problems. The scholars who have put in years of study and have gained deep knowledge of the book of Allah, the practice of the Prophet, and the sayings and writings of the Imams of Ahle Bayt (‘a).

 

From this discussion we conclude that following a Mujtahid is not blind following without justification. This Taqlid has the logical and reasonable proof as follows:

 

The view of a scholar, a wise man and specialist and that also that it is harmless; it is usually nearest to the truth and generally it is not away from the truth.

 

And even if there is a mistake in it the error is limited while a non-learned person tries to act on his own he will do most of things in a wrong way.

 

For example when a sick person goes to a doctor he usually takes a prescription and it is possible that the doctor might commit an error in it. However, his error will not have very serious repercussions in the prescription. (Here doctor denotes a knowledge and learned person).

 

However, if man stops following the advice of doctors and whenever he is sick he takes whichever medicine he likes, then indeed he would be performing a risky thing. He has put his life into danger.

 

The result of this discussion is that the layman following a specialist is logical and reasonable proposition.

 

This is also established that this type of following and seeking benefits is not a sign of helplessness of man, it is rather a proof of his capability. Because we know that the sphere of knowledge is so vast that every field has hundreds of specialized branches and even if a person has the age of Nuh (‘a) and the brain of Avicenna he cannot even specialize in 1/100 of the sciences. Thus there is no other option but that he follows the specialists in the fields in which he himself is not an expert.

 

For example if an engineer falls sick, he goes to a doctor and when a doctor wants to construct a house he goes to his favorite architect so that he may construct a plan for him. And when these two have some problem with their cars they go to an automobile mechanic. Also, those who are not specialists in Islamic law they follow the Mujtahids.

 

Now the point remains that when people refer to the religious scholars and one dispensed appropriate advice why are they not allowed to ask questions?

 

It is like saying that: What is the problem in the patient asking for explanation and justification of all the medicines that the doctor has prescribed for him. Is it possible for the doctor to explain all the prescriptions to his patients? Even if we presume that the doctor agrees to do so, but what use would it be for a person who is neither an expert in biology nor pharmacology and how would he accept all this to be true?

 

Those who utter such things are indeed ignorant of the vastness of Islamic sciences. They don’t know that to understand the Holy Quran and hundreds of thousands of traditional writings is not a job of a layman. Years of study is required to understand the verses of Holy Quran, the traditions, the narrators of traditions and the system of knowing whether a particular tradition is correct or not; the interpretation of the sayings of the Prophets. All this requires specialization.

 

Sometimes it also happens that to find the solution to a problem related to marriage, divorce or rearing of children one has to see many verses of Quran and refer to tens of traditions. Then one has to closely study the accounts of tens of narrators of traditions in the books of Ilme Rijal. Can everyone really have this much expertise? Does it not mean that everybody should leave their work and get busy in studying religious law? While we do not even know if all the people have the ability to reach to the level of Ijtehad or not. Whether they have the capacity to derive the laws of the Shariah or not. It is possible that in most of the people have different abilities.

 

And to say that following different Mujtahids causes disunity, is indeed a strange allegation!

 

1.      In every period there is only one or a few Maraja who are well known to all. But if all the Muslims express their views regarding the Islamic law there would be chaos in the community.

 

2.      There is difference of opinion among the scholars in only the third or fourth level problems. There is no controversy regarding the basic laws and principles. That is why you see people who follow different Mujtahids standing together in the same row during congregational prayers. The partial difference in laws does not prevent their coming together of Jamat Prayers. All of them go for Hajj in the same days and perform the Hajj rituals and the difference in religious decree (Fatwa) does not inconvenience a single man of the caravan.

 

All these things indicate that the differences in religious decree are only in the matters that do not affect Communal unity.

 

Notes:

 

[113] Surah Zukhruf 43:23

 

http://www.al-islam.org/falsafa/103.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a terrible, incompetent presentation of the issues. The three items listed don't represent the actual sources of the objections. It's setting up a fake, imaginary opponent to knock down. This was a waste of readers time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a terrible, incompetent presentation of the issues. The three items listed don't represent the actual sources of the objections. It's setting up a fake, imaginary opponent to knock down. This was a waste of readers time.

 

Sorry mujtahid Kadim r.a, ill make sure to let them know. Please, lets not be ignorant here. Those three are truly part of why people like you despise the taqlid system.

Edited by PureEthics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry mujtahid Kadim r.a, ill make sure to let them know. Please, lets not be ignorant here. Those three are truly part of why people like you despise the taqlid system.

 

Wow, it's easy to declare victory when you can arbitrarily define your opponents regardless of actual facts, isn't it?

I'll remind that lying invalidates the fast.

 

If one wants 3 arguments against modern taqleed, they would probably be:

1. Taqleed, as it is overall understood as a system today, does not have a basis in the traditions

2. Ijtihad as understood today seems to be explicitly forbidden by the traditions

3. And this one is an indirect consequence, but taqleed in the modern sense tends to alienate the believers from the actual recorded words of their imams.

 

I'll note too that your basic premise above, namely "They argue that it is incumbent on all to derive the laws of the Shariah from the Holy Quran and other sources" is also a distortion. (again, the reminder about lying or misrepresenting while fasting)

The real argument I think, and the author touches on this when he points out that there is unanimity on the core of the law, is that for the core of items that touch people's lives, there is no "derivation" required, because the imams did their job of explaining it, and people centuries past did their job of writing down what they said. For the core things one can simply read what they said. There are special collections of ahadith organized so that you can do that, look up the issue and read off the answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, it's easy to declare victory when you can arbitrarily define your opponents regardless of actual facts, isn't it?

I'll remind that lying invalidates the fast.

 

If one wants 3 arguments against modern taqleed, they would probably be:

1. Taqleed, as it is overall understood as a system today, does not have a basis in the traditions

2. Ijtihad as understood today seems to be explicitly forbidden by the traditions

3. And this one is an indirect consequence, but taqleed in the modern sense tends to alienate the believers from the actual recorded words of their imams.

 

I'll note too that your basic premise above, namely "They argue that it is incumbent on all to derive the laws of the Shariah from the Holy Quran and other sources" is also a distortion. (again, the reminder about lying or misrepresenting while fasting)

The real argument I think, and the author touches on this when he points out that there is unanimity on the core of the law, is that for the core of items that touch people's lives, there is no "derivation" required, because the imams did their job of explaining it, and people centuries past did their job of writing down what they said. For the core things one can simply read what they said. There are special collections of ahadith organized so that you can do that, look up the issue and read off the answer.

 

Thanks for hinting that im lying...

 

1. Baseless assumption

2. Baseless assumption

3. Not even a plausible argument, because if you actually read their excerpts on taqlid, they say you must know the basic fiq, not blind following.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Well, I mean, if you're not being purposefully deceitful, then you simply don't understand what you're talking about, which is another problem.

 

1. Really? You want to provide some ahadith that justify the following beliefs about taqleed?

-A person has an obligation to follow an opinion, even when it doesn't come from a clear hadith, when it is based on personal reasoning and derivation?

-A person has an obligation to seek out and follow only one individual?

-That a person's deeds are null if he doesn't follow taqleed?

-That a person is not responsible for following wrong advice?

Truth is, the narrations advise one to ask advice, when confused, from those who know the traditions, so that you can see what the traditions say. That's it. That much is legit. But taqleed claims a lot more than that, and you're not going to find any support for the rest of it.

 

2. Friend, there are clear narrations about this. One of the imams was asked about the case where a narrator of hadith was asked about something, and there was no clear hadith about it, and he reasoned out an answer on it based on what he did have. The imam condemned this behavior.

 

3. There is nothing in the manuals of fiqh telling people they need to understand where the fatwas are coming from, just that people have to follow them.

This alienation from the traditions is clear today. Just yesterday I saw someone online asking for hadith references for the ruling on some basic issue. Someone just linked to a Sistani fatwa, and when he insisted that he wanted to see the ahadith, most people got downright hostile. So, arguably, it's worse than I said. There is not only an alienation from the imams' words, there is a hostility towards knowing their legalistic hadith, out of fear of "questioning/undermining the maraja."

Edited by kadhim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

^You forgot to mention the part that when the hadith was provided to the person asking for the ruling, he wasn't even able to understand it because he didn't know Arabic. Showed his own incompetence and reliance on translated material.

Wassalam

Edited by Aal-e-Imran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Yeah, I'm doing a bit more than hinting.

 

1. Really? You want to provide some ahadith that justify the following beliefs about taqleed?

-A person has an obligation to follow an opinion, even when it doesn't come from a clear hadith, when it is based on personal reasoning and derivation?

-A person has an obligation to seek out and follow only one individual?

-That a person's deeds are null if he doesn't follow taqleed?

-That a person is not responsible for following wrong advice?

 

2. Friend, there are clear narrations about this. One of the imams was asked about the case where a narrator of hadith was asked about something, and there was no clear hadith about it, and he reasoned out an answer on it based on what he did have. The imam condemned this behavior.

 

3. There is nothing in the manuals of fiqh telling people they need to understand where the fatwas are coming from, just that people have to follow them.

This alienation from the traditions is clear today. Just yesterday I saw someone online asking for hadith references for the ruling on some basic issue. Someone just linked to a Sistani fatwa, and when he insisted that he wanted to see the ahadith, most people got downright hostile. So, arguably, it's worse than I said. There is not only an alienation from the imams' words, there is a hostility towards knowing their legalistic hadith, out of fear of "questioning/undermining the maraja."

 

Seems like you have a few misunderstandings.

 

Okay lets say im intellectually limited, limited communication wise, have family and children, a 24/7 job. You expect me to find every single hadith? Look into sources that i cant access or cant read due to language barrier? You expect people to reach ijtihad levels? What if their are contradictory hadiths? You cannot just become an expert by reading one book. It doesnt work like that. So how can you depend on yourself to derive religious rulings?  We are not all Sheik Mufeed's. Some cant even become a scholar and you expect us all to become mujtahids? Come on!  What happens is everyone starts issuing their own fatwas without any basis. At least we know our marjas, truly understand what they are talking about, and have valid reasons. Not only that but they dedicated their lives to it. It is simply rational. Your an ignorant person getting help from a learned person. Plus, lets say you are smart and qualified. You have to do your own ijtihad, meaning everything becomes precautionary, otherwise, by whose authority have you reached ijtihad? Following one marja makes sense other wise your just playing with fatwas and its unacceptable.

 

Trust me everything comes from quran and hadiths, there is no opinion.

 

You can follow multiple marjas on separate issues, but you cannot have two marjas who think differently on the same issue as i explained above.

 

Who said your deeds are null if you dont follow a marja, thats utter nonsense! But the fact is, your putting yourself liable, on judgement day you will be questioned for the rulings you sought. If you say, oh Allah i didnt know any better, then Allah will say why not follow someone who did!

 

You are relying on your marjas ijtihad, meaning once you follow everything they say, then you are not held liable, they are.

 

  • Zakariyyah ibn Adam al-Qummi and Yunus bin `Abduí r-Rahman, for example, were named by Imam `Ali ar-Rida' to solve disputes in their own districts.2
  • In a famous hadith, `Umar ibn Hanzalah asked Imam Ja`far as-Sadiq, peace be upon him, about the legality of two Shi'ahs seeking a verdict from an illegitimate ruler in a dispute over a debt or a legacy. The Imam's answer was that it was absolutely forbidden to do so. Then Ibn Hanzalah asked what the two should do, and the Imam replied: "They must seek out one of you who narrates our traditions, who is versed in what is permissible and what is forbidden, who is well-acquainted with our laws and ordinances, and accept him as judge and arbiter, for I appoint him as judge over you. If the ruling which he based on our laws is rejected, this rejection will be tantamount to ignoring the order of Allah and rejecting us is the same as rejecting Allah, and this is the same as polytheism."3
  • In another tradition from Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq, this time narrated by Imam Hasan al-`Askari, peace be upon them, he says, "...but if there is anyone among the fuqaha' who is in control over his own self, protects his religion, suppresses his evil desires and is obedient to the commands of his Master, then the people should follow him."4
  • A third hadith is from the Present Imam, Muhammad al-Mahdi, peace be upon him, who said 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."5 We can understand two things from these verses of the Qur'an and the ahadith of the Imams: 1) there must always be a group of fuqaha' in every Muslim society; 2) those who are not qualified as fuqaha' or mujtahids, must follow one, and that to go against his instruction in religious matters is tantamount to polytheism.

 

Some accept the concept of Taqlid, however they question the obligation to follow only one particular marja, how can this be proven through hadiths?

http://islamquest.net/en/archive/question/fa3004

Edited by PureEthics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kadhim you do raise some good points. Hamza sodagar says here that taqleed is not waajib & clears this misconception up:

http://m.youtube.com/#/results?q=taqleed%20hamza%20sodagar&oq=&gs_l=

In our current time, taqleed is the best option we have, but that doesn't mean to say we shouldn't do our own research in what we can. Tabeed is another option we have if you don't want to limit yourself to one marja (no where does it say we must follow one only). For some, this is the way forward which is perfectly fine.

The criteria for being 'alam is jumbled up too otherwise we would all be following the same marja.

What baffles me the most is when people try to prove taqleed, they use the verse of Ahlul dhikr, which they actually believe was revealed for a marja all those 1400 years ago!

Even the hadith of Imam Askari (as) where tells us to follow the faqih with certain qualities is cut off from the rest of the hadith, which also mentions there will be deviant fuqaha as well, yet nowadays it seems we love engaging in scholar personality cult. Yes we must respect those righteous fuqaha but not go so overboard like some do. In addition it doesn't say for us to not investigate for ourselves at the same time whilst following a marja because unfortunately you'll find some people who are willing to question the hadith of a ma'soom (as) but not the hadith of a marja. How convenient!

Edited by Labbayk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like you have a few misunderstandings.

 

 

I don't, no.

 

In a famous hadith, `Umar ibn Hanzalah asked Imam Ja`far as-Sadiq, peace be upon him, about the legality of two Shi'ahs seeking a verdict from an illegitimate ruler in a dispute over a debt or a legacy. The Imam's answer was that it was absolutely forbidden to do so. Then Ibn Hanzalah asked what the two should do, and the Imam replied: "They must seek out one of you who narrates our traditions, who is versed in what is permissible and what is forbidden, who is well-acquainted with our laws and ordinances, and accept him as judge and arbiter, for I appoint him as judge over you. If the ruling which he based on our laws is rejected, this rejection will be tantamount to ignoring the order of Allah and rejecting us is the same as rejecting Allah, and this is the same as polytheism."3

 

You're kind of making my arguments for me here. Yes, if you ask someone for advice about a legal question, and there are clear unambiguous authentic narrations about this, and the person gives you the clear conclusion of what these ahadith say, and can back it up with the narations if asked, then yes, you have a duty to follow, because the person is reporting the essence of what the imam clearly had to say on that issue, and you have a duty to the imam. Taqleed to this extent is acceptable, though it's a stretch honestly to call it taqleed.

 

The big problem is that the maraja claim that the same duty is there when it comes to derived, "ijtihadi" rulings. And that's not true.

(salam)

^You forgot to mention the part that when the hadith was provided to the person asking for the ruling, he wasn't even able to understand it because he didn't know Arabic. Showed his own incompetence and reliance on translated material.

Wassalam

 

That's kind of beside the point though. If someone asks to see ahadith from the aimmah about some question, he shouldn't get some snarky, sarcastic third degree about his level of expertise in Arabic vocabulary and grammar and in whatever else. Just point him to the information if you have it. If not, don't muddy the discussion.

Seems simple enough.

 

And as for relying on translations, it's all the same, isn't it? If someone doesn't know Arabic, he is just as dependent on translations for fatawa as he is for ahadith. It's a big crime actually that with all the resources of the ulema from khums that serious effort hasn't been made to spread the words of the aimmah in major world languages. There's really no reason for it. In terms of translating ahadith, the net result of decades is a few books of the usool section of al-Kafi. Seriously?

Edited by kadhim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't, no.

 

 

You're kind of making my arguments for me here. Yes, if you ask someone for advice about a legal question, and there are clear unambiguous authentic narrations about this, and the person gives you the clear conclusion of what these ahadith say, and can back it up with the narations if asked, then yes, you have a duty to follow, because the person is reporting the essence of what the imam clearly had to say on that issue, and you have a duty to the imam. Taqleed to this extent is acceptable, though it's a stretch honestly to call it taqleed.

 

The big problem is that the maraja claim that the same duty is there when it comes to derived, "ijtihadi" rulings. And that's not true.

 

That's kind of beside the point though. If someone asks to see ahadith from the aimmah about some question, he shouldn't get some snarky, sarcastic third degree about his level of expertise in Arabic vocabulary and grammar and in whatever else. Just point him to the information if you have it. If not, don't muddy the discussion.

Seems simple enough.

 

And as for relying on translations, it's all the same, isn't it? If someone doesn't know Arabic, he is just as dependent on translations for fatawa as he is for ahadith. It's a big crime actually that with all the resources of the ulema from khums that serious effort hasn't been made to spread the words of the aimmah in major world languages. There's really no reason for it. In terms of translating ahadith, the net result of decades is a few books of the usool section of al-Kafi. Seriously?

 

Have you translated any books? Why not?  How about you start translating all the books please. Bro do you eve know what the money goes into? Their goal isnt only to translate books! How many institutions have they made? What about the bills for the institutions? Have you seen how our marjas live? How many teachers are teaching at howzaz? How many scholars are there? What about the websites and cd's? What about the needy and poor? That is more important then translating a few books, although they are doing it as we speak. I have a friend in the howza.

Edited by PureEthics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That's kind of beside the point though. If someone asks to see ahadith from the aimmah about some question, he shouldn't get some snarky, sarcastic third degree about his level of expertise in Arabic vocabulary and grammar and in whatever else. Just point him to the information if you have it. If not, don't muddy the discussion.

Seems simple enough.

 

Bro you understand how many emails and calls they receive. The marja cant respond to them all, its the marjas representatives. They are not a marja, nor do they know from which hadiths the marja got, and usually it isnt simple as a book and a page number. None the less they try their best to answer the questions. The rest of your comments are false conjectures, cause i have not seen a third degree answer for what ever the issue is.

http://www.islamic-laws.com/taqlid.htm Was not Ijtihad forbidden in the Early Shi’ah Sources?

 

There are some sayings of the Shi'ah Imams (a.s.), some writings of their companions and that of our early 'ulama which severely condemn the use of ijtihad. This has created confusion among non-specialist readers and has given rise to the question whether or not ijtihad was permitted in Shi'ah Islam.

 

This confusion can be easily sorted out by studying the changes undergone by the word "ijtihad". The word ijtihad was used for the first time by a Sunni school of fiqh in the meaning of ra'iy: Ra'iy means "a subjective opinion, an opinion based on one's personal judgement as opposed to that of the Qur'an and the hadith." In this sense, "ijtihad" was by itself an independent source of the shari'ah laws besides the Qur'an and the sunnah. Abu Hanifah, the founder of the Sunni Hanafi school of fiqh, was the main proponent of this system of ijtihad.[21] The termijtihad continued to be used exclusively in the meaning of ra'iyup until the early seventh Islamic century.

 

In the seventh Islamic century, some of the Shi'ah 'ulama' started using the term ijtihad in a different and new meaning. They used the term “ijtihad” for "the process of deriving the laws of the shari'ah from its sources". In the first meaning, "ijtihad" stands alongside the Qur' an and the sunnah as an independent source of the shari'ah laws; in its new meaning, "ijtihad" is a process of deriving the shari' ah laws from the Qur' an and the sunnah. The first Shi'ah scholar to use the term "ijtihad" in its new meaning was Muhaqqiq al-Hilli (d. 676 A.H.) in his al-Ma’arij. Al-Hilli says, "ijtihad means to strive for deriving the shari'ah laws from their sources."[22]

 

The change through which the meaning of "ijtihad" has undergone clears the confusion about the legality of ijtihad: some of the sayings of the Imams (a.s.), the writings of their companions and the early Shi'ah ulama condemn ijtihad in its pre-7th century meaning of "ra'iy"; they are not opposing the ijtihad in the post-7th century meaning of "the process of deriving the shari'ah laws from their sources". The condemned ijtihad is a source of the shari'ah laws, while the recommended ijtihad is only the process of deriving the shari'ah laws from their sources. The permissibility of ijtihad in its post-7th century meaning is beyond any doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

 

 

That's kind of beside the point though. If someone asks to see ahadith from the aimmah about some question, he shouldn't get some snarky, sarcastic third degree about his level of expertise in Arabic vocabulary and grammar and in whatever else. Just point him to the information if you have it. If not, don't muddy the discussion.

Seems simple enough.

 

And as for relying on translations, it's all the same, isn't it? If someone doesn't know Arabic, he is just as dependent on translations for fatawa as he is for ahadith. It's a big crime actually that with all the resources of the ulema from khums that serious effort hasn't been made to spread the words of the aimmah in major world languages. There's really no reason for it. In terms of translating ahadith, the net result of decades is a few books of the usool section of al-Kafi. Seriously?

 

How is it beside the point? He claimed to not be an "Usooli" and wanted to see a narration regarding the situation he was asking about and then act on it; and when he was given the narration he didn't even know enough Arabic to be able to understand the hadith.

 

And the points you mentioned about books not being translated into English and other major languages; if all those are indeed major issues, there is more of a reason for a person for the time being to resort to taqleed, because he/she has no other choice.

 

If you feel you are competent enough and have all the time in the world to use whatever material you have at your disposal at the moment then go ahead, but stop spreading this egoistic and arrogant approach against taqleed, creating doubt in people's minds and bringing down the status of the fuqaha, because majority of the people don't have such resources, nor the time to sit there all day and analyze some rinsed down translated book of "hadith sorted by topics". Of course if someone does have so much time (I am assuming you do, since you are so so adamant on this revised system) then you might as well start learning Arabic, and then pick up a copy of Man La Yahduruhul Faqih and start combing through it. It will be a better investment of your time and life and people might consider you and your rulings just a tad bit serious as well. 

 

You make it sound like all the ahadith are so trivial in nature. Oh just collect a bunch of authentic narrations (which are themself debatable), put them in a book and give them off, for everyone to read and derive their own rulings off of. The whole point is to spend some dedicated time to learn and get familiar with the language of the narrations, the words of the Imams, the history behind them, the narrators, the Qur'an it self, in their original language and you want to melt it down to some collection of translated narrations that will suffice.

 

And that is a gross comparison between depending on translation of fatwas versus hadith. Most of what an average person needs is readily available and translated already in the tawdhee.

 

Wassalam

Edited by Aal-e-Imran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The change through which the meaning of "ijtihad" has undergone clears the confusion about the legality of ijtihad: some of the sayings of the Imams (a.s.), the writings of their companions and the early Shi'ah ulama condemn ijtihad in its pre-7th century meaning of "ra'iy"; they are not opposing the ijtihad in the post-7th century meaning of "the process of deriving the shari'ah laws from their sources". The condemned ijtihad is a source of the shari'ah laws, while the recommended ijtihad is only the process of deriving the shari'ah laws from their sources. The permissibility of ijtihad in its post-7th century meaning is beyond any doubt.

 

The proof of this from the sources is ... what, though?

Like I pointed out earlier, the narrations seem to condemn any sort of extrapolation beyond what is explicitly made clear in the narrations.

 

You make it sound like all the ahadith are so trivial in nature. Oh just collect a bunch of authentic narrations (which are themself debatable), put them in a book and give them off, for everyone to read and derive their own rulings off of. The whole point is to spend some dedicated time to learn and get familiar with the language of the narrations, the words of the Imams, the history behind them, the narrators, the Qur'an it self, in their original language and you want to melt it down to some collection of translated narrations that will suffice.

 

Well, I think the imams did their job. People asked questions and they gave clear answers. These are recorded. Most of what I have seen has been remarkably unambiguous and self-evident. Are you saying they didn't do their job?

 

All of these books - the ahadith collections, the rijal collections, should be translated and published widely in parallel formats in both decent translations and original.

This should be one of the highest priorities of expenditure of khums monies. It's a sin it hasn't been done. And then as well the scholars can publish summarized volumes of question and answer - but strictly for those issues which are unambiguous from the traditions -  as a quick reference. Then you have references for all people at all levels.

One big problem with these justifications/rationalizations for not bothering to translate the ahadith collections is that the same argument could be raised against translating the Quran. "Oh, it's best in Arabic, if someone really wants to learn about it, they can become an expert in Arabic. Other than that, they should just be happy with what "the experts" explain to them of it in summary. We don't entertain these arguments against Quran translations anymore; we shouldn't entertain them about the ahadith either.

Edited by kadhim

Share this post


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...