I Swear Its Waajb To Follow A Marji

[Rohani]

Secondly brother mualam not wanting to pray sounds more like desire not even possible logical. Unless you are deriving it from one of our text as asking one who provides to us is intellectually wajib and necessary.

[IbnSohan]

First I'm a girl

 

Second I don't read Arabic

 

Third  I never called the Imam stupid

 

Fourth, as I said up there^ it's important to follow a marjaa, however to claim something is wajib means it is haram not to do so. Meaning you are sinning if you don't do said thing. And that's something we can't fully implement in this situation.

You can simply combine rulings of fatwas given by Sistani, Khamenei, Khomeini, Fadlallah and whatever other marjaa and still not be sinning. 

 

It is NOT obligatory to follow ONE marjaa so it is not a sin if you do not follow one.

 A number of scholar delegations came to Imam Jawad to ask him questions, when he answered them they told him that his uncle told them something diffrenet, Imam Jawad turned to his uncle who sat near him and said " O uncle, fear Allah , fear Allah. Do not issue a fatwa while there is in this Ummah who is more knowledgeable than you"

 

If you are to issue a fatwa by yourself without referring back to Ahlulbayt teachings, then you will be acting upon opinion which is haram and your deed is void. Let's say that you are having obstacle with insurance money, that it may be riba, interest, and then you acted upon your opinion, then you earned haram money, bought food with this haram money and built flesh by this haram money, you prayed with cloths brought by haram money....

dose it really worth it?

Why will you not simply consult someone who knows how to overcome that obstacle and earn money that is halal?

Do you consider yourself to be more knowledgeable than every single shia on this planet?

[monad]

 

Intellect means something the intellectual society can agree upon not your possible logic which is opinion or possible results.

I suggest you rethink this statement of yours. Define the intellectual society?. I recall tribes had the shaman* who was smarter then everyone else, which then made him the head of the village. Only to be found out later he was a conman. Yet in his time period the Society ( village) considered him intellectual. Therefore the notion of intellectualism could be defined by how many retards assume or agree what intellectualism is in a particular period.

 

*In point of fact magicians appear to have often developed into chiefs and kings.

So far as their tribes can be said to have a political constitution, it is a democracy or rather an oligarchy of old and influential men, who meet in council and decide on all measures of importance to the practical exclusion of the younger men. Their deliberative assembly answers to the senate of later times: if we had to coin a word for such a government of elders we might call it a gerontocracy.

 

  Again, among the tribes of the Upper Nile the medicine-men are generally the chiefs. Their authority rests above all upon their supposed power of making rain, for “rain is the one thing which matters to the people in those districts, as if it does not come down at the right time it means untold hardships for the community. It is therefore small wonder that men more cunning than their fellows should arrogate to themselves the power of producing it, or that having gained such a reputation, they should trade on the credulity of their simpler neighbours.” Hence “most of the chiefs of these tribes are rain-makers, and enjoy a popularity in proportion to their powers to give rain to their people at the proper season… . Rain-making chiefs always build their villages on the slopes of a fairly high hill, as they no doubt know that the hills attract the clouds, and that they are, therefore, fairly safe in their weather forecasts.”

 

Since when does someones logic need affirmation of another being for it to stand corrected?.'Only when two logical conclusions are shown and the stronger argument possess the higher authority.

 

Connexions of ideas are true, if they are in accordance with those relations in the matter of ideas, which are the same for consciousness, and not the the mere occurrence and juxtaposition of impressions, which are different for each individuals consciousness."

Edited November 4, 2013 by D3v1L

[Hajji87]

 A number of scholar delegations came to Imam Jawad to ask him questions, when he answered them they told him that his uncle told them something diffrenet, Imam Jawad turned to his uncle who sat near him and said " O uncle, fear Allah , fear Allah. Do not issue a fatwa while there is in this Ummah who is more knowledgeable than you"

 

If you are to issue a fatwa by yourself without referring back to Ahlulbayt teachings, then you will be acting upon opinion which is haram and your deed is void. Let's say that you are having obstacle with insurance money, that it may be riba, interest, and then you acted upon your opinion, then you earned haram money, bought food with this haram money and built flesh by this haram money, you prayed with cloths brought by haram money....

dose it really worth it?

Why will you not simply consult someone who knows how to overcome that obstacle and earn money that is halal?

Do you consider yourself to be more knowledgeable than every single shia on this planet?

See that's difficult to determine since every marjaa swears they are the most knowledgeable. 

 

Lets solve that riddle. 

[IbnSohan]

Relativism is nonsense. In matters of religion.

 

You need grounds to stand on when talking about religion, intellect or better, aqil, is highly regarded in hadiths of Ahlulbayt, since ahlulbayt hadiths are absolute truths, then there should be some stable grounds that one should stand upon to see these truths correctly.

See that's difficult to determine since every marjaa swears they are the most knowledgeable. 

 

Lets solve that riddle. 

that's your responsibility, according to the taqlid system.

[Hajji87]

Relativism is nonsense. In matters of religion.

 

You need grounds to stand on when talking about religion, intellect or better, aqil, is highly regarded in hadiths of Ahlulbayt, since ahlulbayt hadiths are absolute truths, then there should be some stable grounds that one should stand upon to see these truths correctly.

that's your responsibility, according to the taqlid system.

What if I don't find any most knowledgeable? 

 

Again, saying it is wajib to follow ONE marjaa is false.

 

What if I think they're all the most knowledgeable? Or one is more knowledgeable in one aspect while the other in a different aspect?

 

And the circle goes on. 

[IbnSohan]

What if I don't find any most knowledgeable? 

 

Again, saying it is wajib to follow ONE marjaa is false.

 

What if I think they're all the most knowledgeable? Or one is more knowledgeable in one aspect while the other in a different aspect?

 

And the circle goes on. 

I'll not claim that I'll give a better answer than Imam Sadiq, In the hadiths, Imam Sadiq was asked about who he should refer to if he needed a judge, Imam Sadiq directed him to the hadith narrators and said"The one who has narrated our hadiths, knew our halal and haram, knew our ahkam" Imam Sadiq added " that this man I've made him a judge upon you, If he judge by our hadiths but his judgment was not accepted, then those who rejected his judgment are belittling the judgment of Allah and argued with us, those who argue with us are arguing with Allah and this is the line of polytheism"

 

The hadith goes on, the man asked Imam Sadiq "what if there were 2 hadith narrators, both are good men and know your hadiths" Imam said " follow the best faqih , the most knowledgeable"

 

But you are not seeking knowledge, your example is the example of bani Israel

So they slaughtered her, but they could hardly do it. (71)

[Hajji87]

I'll not claim that I'll give a better answer than Imam Sadiq, In the hadiths, Imam Sadiq was asked about who he should refer to if he needed a judge, Imam Sadiq directed him to the hadith narrators and said"The one who has narrated our hadiths, knew our halal and haram, knew our ahkam" Imam Sadiq added " that this man I've made him a judge upon you, If he judge by our hadiths but his judgment was not accepted, then those who rejected his judgment are belittling the judgment of Allah and argued with us, those who argue with us are arguing with Allah and this is the line of polytheism"

 

The hadith goes on, the man asked Imam Sadiq "what if there were 2 hadith narrators, both are good men and know your hadiths" Imam said " follow the best faqih , the most knowledgeable"

 

But you are not seeking knowledge, your example is the example of bani Israel

So they slaughtered her, but they could hardly do it. (71)

 

Did you just compare me to Bani Israel? 

 

How do you know what I'm seeking? Do you know if I read or don't read? Do you know what knowledge I have or don't have? Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì created each individual with a different brain. Is that correct or am I mistaken?

 

Your hadith proved my point, not yours. 

 

("what if there were 2 hadith narrators, both are good men and know your hadiths" Imam said " follow the best faqih , the most knowledgeable")

 

I told you. What if there isn't one that I find more knowledgeable? What if one is more knowledgeable in one aspect and the other in a different aspect?

 

Again I say following one is not wajib when you aren't convinced one is more knowledgeable. 

 

Try not to insult brother. That isn't the akhlaq of Ahlul Bayt (as)

Edited November 4, 2013 by lebsyeda87

[Rohani]

I suggest you rethink this statement of yours. Define the intellectual society?. I recall tribes had the shaman* who was smarter then everyone else, which then made him the head of the village. Only to be found out later he was a conman. Yet in his time period the Society ( village) considered him intellectual. Therefore the notion of intellectualism could be defined by how many retards assume or agree what intellectualism is in a particular period.

*In point of fact magicians appear to have often developed into chiefs and kings.

So far as their tribes can be said to have a political constitution, it is a democracy or rather an oligarchy of old and influential men, who meet in council and decide on all measures of importance to the practical exclusion of the younger men. Their deliberative assembly answers to the senate of later times: if we had to coin a word for such a government of elders we might call it a gerontocracy.

Again, among the tribes of the Upper Nile the medicine-men are generally the chiefs. Their authority rests above all upon their supposed power of making rain, for “rain is the one thing which matters to the people in those districts, as if it does not come down at the right time it means untold hardships for the community. It is therefore small wonder that men more cunning than their fellows should arrogate to themselves the power of producing it, or that having gained such a reputation, they should trade on the credulity of their simpler neighbours.” Hence “most of the chiefs of these tribes are rain-makers, and enjoy a popularity in proportion to their powers to give rain to their people at the proper season… . Rain-making chiefs always build their villages on the slopes of a fairly high hill, as they no doubt know that the hills attract the clouds, and that they are, therefore, fairly safe in their weather forecasts.”

Since when does someones logic need affirmation of another being for it to stand corrected?.'Only when two logical conclusions are shown and the stronger argument possess the higher authority.

Connexions of ideas are true, if they are in accordance with those relations in the matter of ideas, which are the same for consciousness, and not the the mere occurrence and juxtaposition of impressions, which are different for each individuals consciousness."

intellectual society for one believes in the existence of a God and just because someone claims to be intellectual dose not mean anything. Intellect is something proved by way of accent. Possible logic gives a route to prove or disprove yet people make error by saying possible logic is the accent. As example everyone can imagine a mountain of gold in their drive way but proving it is there requires accent. Anyhow intellectual society are those who reached accent without bias and confused artificial sophism. That being said again to brother mualam praying one time over five is not appreciated intellectually as asking one who gives and likes to be asked requires asking more. Asking in general is wajib intellectualy.

[Abdul Qaim]

 

that's your responsibility, according to the taqlid system.

 

I promised myself that I wouldn't get involved, but I can't control myself. Now, how is one to determine who is the a'lam Marja' ? Surely one must be well versed in fiqh to be able to make such a determination in the first place? Even amongst lower-ranking scholars there is ikhtilaaf on which 'aalim is the most knowledgeable.

 

We currently have scores of Maraja'. Each one considers themselves al-a'lam, otherwise they would logically not accept the position. They would simply practice ijtihaad for themselves and leave other 'ulama of greater knowledge with the heavy burden which comes with becoming a focus of emulation by muqallideen. The fact that there is no unanimity whatsoever - in fact, quite the opposite - among our brightest and most knowledgeable scholars may indicate to a person who reflects on the logic of such a system, that it is indeed flawed.

 

Nobody is saying that one should not seek the counsel of our greatest scholars, but rather that it may be wise for some to seek the advice of multiple scholars on certain issues.

[Inquisitor]

I promised myself that I wouldn't get involved, but I can't control myself. Now, how is one to determine who is the a'lam Marja' ? Surely one must be well versed in fiqh to be able to make such a determination in the first place? Even amongst lower-ranking scholars there is ikhtilaaf on which 'aalim is the most knowledgeable.

 

We currently have scores of Maraja'. Each one considers themselves al-a'lam, otherwise they would logically not accept the position. They would simply practice ijtihaad for themselves and leave other 'ulama of greater knowledge with the heavy burden which comes with becoming a focus of emulation by muqallideen. The fact that there is no unanimity whatsoever - in fact, quite the opposite - among our brightest and most knowledgeable scholars may indicate to a person who reflects on the logic of such a system, that it is indeed flawed.

 

Nobody is saying that one should not seek the counsel of our greatest scholars, but rather that it may be wise for some to seek the advice of multiple scholars on certain issues.

 

That's well put and I second that. Tabeedh makes a lot more sense than following one scholar who people claim is the most knowledgeable by some vague means that cannot be backed up evidentially.

 

I thought of posting two references that should provide a bit of help in our case here:

 

1. After mentioning the opinion of al-Mohaqeq al-Karki (the opinion that ‘all Shias believe in the theory of al-Alam’), Sayyed al-Khoei said: And that is wrong because such kind of ijma is not a proof, besides the issue cannot have ijma on - how can there be ijma while we know there are lots of scholars who don’t believe in al-Alam?

Reference: al-Ijtehad wal Taqleed by Sayyed al-Khoei, Page 143

 

Also, the issue of al-Alam seems to be a recent one as suggested by Sayyed al-Khoei when speaking of it:

 

Sayyed al-Khoei was speaking about tabeedh and mentioned what one should do if scholars are found to be equal? He said: You are allowed to follow anybody who you want.

 

He then started giving few proofs that other scholars relied on; the third ‘proof’ he mentioned is ‘ijma’. Sayyed al-Khoei however denied this proof and mentioned it has no value and further said: How did we generate ijma in this issue when we know that our old scholars never spoke about the issue of al- Alam?

Reference: al-Ijtehad wal Taqleed by Sayyed al-Khoei, Page 168

[PenOfTruth]

First I'm a girl

 

Second I don't read Arabic

 

Third  I never called the Imam stupid

 

Fourth, as I said up there^ it's important to follow a marjaa, however to claim something is wajib means it is haram not to do so. Meaning you are sinning if you don't do said thing. And that's something we can't fully implement in this situation.

You can simply combine rulings of fatwas given by Sistani, Khamenei, Khomeini, Fadlallah and whatever other marjaa and still not be sinning. 

 

It is NOT obligatory to follow ONE marjaa so it is not a sin if you do not follow one.

 

you can follow a marji to every issue. for example following alkahmanei for Tahara and salah in sayed sistanni. but only if your marji allows it.

 

its not haram but all your doings ate batil meaning returned back to you.

Edited November 5, 2013 by PenOfTruth

[Hajji87]

you can follow a marji to every issue. for example following alkahmanei for Tahara and salah in sayed sistanni. but only if your marji allows it.

 

its not haram but all your doings ate batil meaning returned back to you.

 

And the circle goes on. 

 

 

I promised myself that I wouldn't get involved, but I can't control myself. Now, how is one to determine who is the a'lam Marja' ? Surely one must be well versed in fiqh to be able to make such a determination in the first place? Even amongst lower-ranking scholars there is ikhtilaaf on which 'aalim is the most knowledgeable.

 

We currently have scores of Maraja'. Each one considers themselves al-a'lam, otherwise they would logically not accept the position. They would simply practice ijtihaad for themselves and leave other 'ulama of greater knowledge with the heavy burden which comes with becoming a focus of emulation by muqallideen. The fact that there is no unanimity whatsoever - in fact, quite the opposite - among our brightest and most knowledgeable scholars may indicate to a person who reflects on the logic of such a system, that it is indeed flawed.

 

Nobody is saying that one should not seek the counsel of our greatest scholars, but rather that it may be wise for some to seek the advice of multiple scholars on certain issues.

 

Very well put. I bet no one will get it :) 

[Sajjad_786]

Just to add... From Al-Quran:

 

"Question the people of remembrance if you do not know." (21:7)

 

"But why should not a party from every section of them (the believers) go forth to become learned in the religion, and to warn their people when they return to them, that they may beware?" (9:124)

9:124] And whenever a chapter is revealed, there are some of them who say: Which of you has it strengthened in faith? Then as for those who believe, it strengthens them in faith and they rejoice.

This is the real verse brother

[PenOfTruth]

And the circle goes on.

Very well put. I bet no one will get it :)

Thankyou for agreeing :)

[guest102317]

(bismillah)

 

(salam)

 

This thread is losing its way. The OP is not about following a single or multiple marājiʿ. It is about the principle of following some marjaʿ.

 

(wasalam)