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

Arguments against 'Taqleed' from Quran, Ahadith, and reason.

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

Salam

I want a sincere honest discussion about this issue.

I will be presenting proofs against it from what I understand of Quran, ahadith and reasoning.

I believe we are suppose to learn religion from people who know more then us about it and I believe the ahadith taught the latter was suppose to be the structure of society. Moreover there is an explicit verse that shows this. This is not the same however as Taqleed.

I also believe judges are suppose to be Fuqaha and so is the top government.  Government is not an authority on people however. This is also not the same as Wilayatal Faqih which asserts a person has that authority of Imams as far social and political issues go and people ought to submit to it. This is not true. This is somewhat a matter of semantics but the perspective does a huge difference and also changes the duty of people when they realize that there is no power or authority but it's rather a trust given to people by people worthy of it by the people to judge between people by justice. And this trust is given to the hands of people and believers all participate in this manner.

I will get into details first by reason, then ahadith, then verses in Quran about this issue.

 

 

 

Edited by StrugglingForTheLight
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 501
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

@LinkZelda @StrugglingForTheLight @Link @MysticKnight  This is a new booklet (8 pages) at al-islam.org. These are some of the chapters that show that Logic, Qur'an and Hadith support Taqleed:

After all these years on this site, this infallibility/fallibility issue is still plaguing people. Remember these points: These are describing levels of knowledge and spirituality far beyond our

I will stop believing in taqleed and marja if you stop believing in doctors. All doctors do is spend their lives studying medicine and all marja do is spend their lives studying religion. Ju

  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, StrugglingForTheLight said:

Salam

I want a sincere honest discussion about this issue.

I will be presenting proofs against it from what I understand of Quran, ahadith and reasoning.

I believe we are suppose to learn religion from people who know more then us about it and I believe the ahadith taught the latter was suppose to be the structure of society. Moreover there is an explicit verse that shows this. This is not the same however as Taqleed.

I also believe judges are suppose to be Fuqaha and so is the top government.  Government is not an authority on people however. This is also not the same as Wilayatal Faqih which asserts a person has that authority of Imams as far social and political issues go and people ought to submit to it. This is not true. This is somewhat a matter of semantics but the perspective does a huge difference and also changes the duty of people when they realize that there is no power or authority but it's rather a trust given to people by people worthy of it by the people to judge between people by justice. And this trust is given to the hands of people and believers all participate in this manner.

I will get into details first by reason, then ahadith, then verses in Quran about this issue.

 

 

 

Is this because of my video I sent on another post? About morality and right and wrong being determined by culture?

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

The divine religion is the only religion of its kind in the world. It is guided and protected by Allah though his representatives, the infallible imams. In the absence of the imams, they have prescribed their own representatives upon us among the just scholars, as Imam Mahdi has said that they are hujat upon us as he is hujat upon them. Hence, accepting their welayat, is the same as accepting the welayat of the infallibles.

Welayat is a matter of trust. Marjayat and taqleed is the matter of increasing out understanding and faith to recognize the one that hold the welayat based on the principle of the divine faith and put our trust in them. In turn, they will guide us in the path of preparation for the return of our infallible imam. This is at both individual and social level.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
2 hours ago, shiaman14 said:

I will stop believing in taqleed and marja if you stop believing in doctors.

All doctors do is spend their lives studying medicine and all marja do is spend their lives studying religion.

Just as much as reading a couple of biology books does not make you a doctor, reading a few religious books does not make you a religious expert.

I hear this doctor analogy all the time. The big difference is if you doubt the judgement of your doctor or if your doctor gives you life changing orders, you go get a second and even third opinion. With taqlid, you can check a variety of rulings, but as I understand it, you must follow one scholar. Some people say you must follow without question. I have a problem with blind following of a fallible person, even if they are expert.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
21 minutes ago, notme said:

I hear this doctor analogy all the time. The big difference is if you doubt the judgement of your doctor or if your doctor gives you life changing orders, you go get a second and even third opinion. With taqlid, you can check a variety of rulings, but as I understand it, you must follow one scholar. Some people say you must follow without question. I have a problem with blind following of a fallible person, even if they are expert.

Sure you can select what doctor to follow but no patient follows 2 or multiple courses of treatment plan.

The doctor example can be replaced with a number of other examples - car mechanic, hair dresser, house builder.

Nothing in Islam is to be followed without question. Everything should be understood.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam

I will post reasoning first then I will go in details of ahadith and Quran.

Argument from negation of authority in presence of Prophets.

When a Prophet comes, all authority besides his authority is negated and manifestly so. That is political authorities are not to be obeyed if they tell you not to believe in the Prophet or try to force you not to, the same is true of looking towards religious clergy to see if such a Prophet is true. The same is true of "wisdom" leaders, or people who society saw as wise and of knowledge. 

This thought experiment shows in fact, it cannot be the case that there is obligation to follow them. If they was ever obligation to follow them, there would be obligation to follow them during a Prophet time to determine whether or not the Prophet is true.

And this type of thinking, this belief, that people looked towards if the leaders of their society would accept, often kept people from accepting the Prophets.

Now this thought experiment is not just true of fake religions but of religions that were based on true Prophets and testified to them as well. For example the people of the book were not to look towards what their leaders have to say.

This shows people were obligated to see the message on it's own. Not simply look to what their religious clergy had to say. Now the question then if their clergy didn't have authority before....how were people suppose to be guided of the people between Jesus and Mohammad?

Argument from fallibility in understanding revelation correctly.

It is possible you understand something clearly from revelation, but the official scholars don't. Of course in the institution of scholarship, it maybe if you manifest this clear thing you understand, you will never be considered a scholar. That is because you must pass their test and be declared a scholar by scholars. In this regard, if you know something clearly from revelation verified by reason as well, then you cannot be obligated to follow a scholar. Neither are you obligated to affirm a system of learning that is prone to mistakes. 

This possibility being real, whether is the case or not, is beside the point. Scholars are fallible, and when people know they are allowing or commanding towards something God forbid his book or is manifestly wrong and evil, they ought to follow what they know from God. 

This being the case of what happened to scholars in the past nations, it's not impossible to happen in this nation. Therefore it's obligatory that people put a check on scholars and don't give them authority to decide things unchecked.

They should have the power to disagree even if they are not studied the degree these scholars have had. A person come in his youths but very well understands something from revelation of God or reason, but the scholars are teaching wrong things, cannot be forced to submission to scholars, if scholars are prone to possibility of such mistakes.  

Argument in no one is to declare their purity, but rather it's upon God to do so.

If people can decide who is pure, there would be no need of Prophets. We simply know this person is perfectly good, virtuous, pure, and has wisdom, and so we can all follow without a sign from God. Now not saying you are pure yourself, but stating you are most learned, and having followers of yours all declare you such or have people declare you as one of the most pious, is problematic. As much as a person can appear enlightened and goodness shine from him, they cannot declare they are free from Satanic snares. This is true even they themselves are 100% sure they are pure. This is because having such recognition requires you to have proof, the proof cannot be simply by what people praise of a person. And as we don't know a person who is not God's proof to be pure unless God's proof tells us, we cannot be certain they would not teach some serious corrupt or evil things. 

Argument in looking through many but ignoring the direct sources in looking for guidance

The issue is if we are going to search out all fallible people and their teachings to find out if we should follow them, there is obvious a large amount of possible people in the world to make such claims.  Anyone can claim guidance and ability to guide others. Why spend time study people from a popularity contest when we can go straight to revelation of God and the words of the appointed teachers by God who are the criteria to judge who is most learned in the first place? Please don't tell me ask ahlul-khibra who is most guided, there is many opinions, and even if they all agreed, it would not be sufficient proof. In this case, guidance lies somewhere, but instead of drinking guidance in certainty we are limiting ourselves to fallible guidance, for who all we know, are people who are not guided, as they are not guided unless God guides them.

Argument from obligation to have tranquility in guidance.

As long as we are trusting a scholar, we will not have tranquility in that which we are following is the true guidance. We are not certain. While risking taking a medicine you can always sue in this world or change medicines or ask second opinions....or if you get your Car fixed but it still doesn't work, you get your money back....or if you get a bad house for a bad deal it's not the end of the world....etc etc.... the next world is not to be risked. Guidance is something we have to follow. We have to be upon guidance, the true guidance from God. We have to have tranquility in that. And that is not possible by trusting a leader who you have no certainty is not leading you astray regarding essential morals.

This is why the analogy of doctor or follow experts fails really.

Argument from certain sight and knowledge society is better then ignorance and blind trust in "few" holders of knowledge.

It's obviously better if society in general become enlightened about the religion, and have insight. The knowledge thus becoming widespread should be a goal. This cannot happen when people are told trust person regarding moral guidance rather then knowing the truth of the matter themselves. It seems it's more beneficial if society learns the guidance, knowledge, insights, and way of knowing, then simply putting their trust in people they can't be certain are teaching them the truth. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by StrugglingForTheLight
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, StrugglingForTheLight said:

Salam

I will post reasoning first then I will go in details of ahadith and Quran.

Argument from negation of authority in presence of Prophets.

When a Prophet comes, all authority besides his authority is negated and manifestly so. That is political authorities are not to be obeyed if they tell you not to believe in the Prophet or try to force you not to, the same is true of looking towards religious clergy to see if such a Prophet is true. The same is true of "wisdom" leaders, or people who society saw as wise and of knowledge. 

This thought experiment shows in fact, it cannot be the case that there is obligation to follow them. If they was ever obligation to follow them, there would be obligation to follow them during a Prophet time to determine whether or not the Prophet is true.

And this type of thinking, this belief, that people looked towards if the leaders of their society would accept, often kept people from accepting the Prophets.

Now this thought experiment is not just true of fake religions but of religions that were based on true Prophets and testified to them as well. For example the people of the book were not to look towards what their leaders have to say.

This shows people were obligated to see the message on it's own. Not simply look to what their religious clergy had to say. Now the question then if their clergy didn't have authority before....how were people suppose to be guided of the people between Jesus and Mohammad?

Argument from fallibility in understanding revelation correctly.

It is possible you understand something clearly from revelation, but the official scholars don't. Of course in the institution of scholarship, it maybe if you manifest this clear thing you understand, you will never be considered a scholar. That is because you must pass their test and be declared a scholar by scholars. In this regard, if you know something clearly from revelation verified by reason as well, then you cannot be obligated to follow a scholar. Neither are you obligated to affirm a system of learning that is prone to mistakes. 

This possibility being real, whether is the case or not, is beside the point. Scholars are fallible, and when people know they are allowing or commanding towards something God forbid his book or is manifestly wrong and evil, they ought to follow what they know from God. 

This being the case of what happened to scholars in the past nations, it's not impossible to happen in this nation. Therefore it's obligatory that people put a check on scholars and don't give them authority to decide things unchecked.

They should have the power to disagree even if they are not studied the degree these scholars have had. A person come in his youths but very well understands something from revelation of God or reason, but the scholars are teaching wrong things, cannot be forced to submission to scholars, if scholars are prone to possibility of such mistakes.  

Argument in no one is to declare their purity, but rather it's upon God to do so.

If people can decide who is pure, there would be no need of Prophets. We simply know this person is perfectly good, virtuous, pure, and has wisdom, and so we can all follow without a sign from God. Now not saying you are pure yourself, but stating you are most learned, and having followers of yours all declare you such or have people declare you as one of the most pious, is problematic. As much as a person can appear enlightened and goodness shine from him, they cannot declare they are free from Satanic snares. This is true even they themselves are 100% sure they are pure. This is because having such recognition requires you to have proof, the proof cannot be simply by what people praise of a person. And as we don't know a person who is not God's proof to be pure unless God's proof tells us, we cannot be certain they would not teach some serious corrupt or evil things. 

Argument in looking through many but ignoring the direct sources in looking for guidance

The issue is if we are going to search out all fallible people and their teachings to find out if we should follow them, there is obvious a large amount of possible people in the world to make such claims.  Anyone can claim guidance and ability to guide others. Why spend time study people from a popularity contest when we can go straight to revelation of God and the words of the appointed teachers by God who are the criteria to judge who is most learned in the first place? Please don't tell me ask ahlul-khibra who is most guided, there is many opinions, and even if they all agreed, it would not be sufficient proof. In this case, guidance lies somewhere, but instead of drinking guidance in certainty we are limiting ourselves to fallible guidance, for who all we know, are people who are not guided, as they are not guided unless God guides them.

Argument from obligation to have tranquility in guidance.

As long as we are trusting a scholar, we will not have tranquility in that which we are following is the true guidance. We are not certain. While risking taking a medicine you can always sue in this world or change medicines or ask second opinions....or if you get your Car fixed but it still doesn't work, you get your money back....or if you get a bad house for a bad deal it's not the end of the world....etc etc.... the next world is not to be risked. Guidance is something we have to follow. We have to be upon guidance, the true guidance from God. We have to have tranquility in that. And that is not possible by trusting a leader who you have no certainty is not leading you astray regarding essential morals.

This is why the analogy of doctor or follow experts fails really.

Argument from certain sight and knowledge society is better then ignorance and blind trust in "few" holders of knowledge.

It's obviously better if society in general become enlightened about the religion, and have insight. The knowledge thus becoming widespread should be a goal. This cannot happen when people are told trust person regarding moral guidance rather then knowing the truth of the matter themselves. It seems it's more beneficial if society learns the guidance, knowledge, insights, and way of knowing, then simply putting their trust in people they can't be certain are teaching them the truth. 

 

 

 

 

Salam brother,

These points don't necessarily negate the positions of scholars in Islam. They simply refer to the fact that the process for scholarship is not perfect that doesn't necessarily run contrary to the Islamic position or invalidate the need for scholars.

WS

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Salam brother,

Also, brother, from examining your argument it seems to fall under the logical fallacy of argument from perfection.

For instance, this solution isn't perfect so we should reject any alternative solutions i.e. scholars aren't perfect so we should reject scholars. Do you see what I am getting at?

 

Nirvana fallacy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 

The nirvana fallacy is a name given to the informal fallacy of comparing actual things with unrealistic, idealized alternatives.[1] It can also refer to the tendency to assume that there is a perfect solution to a particular problem. A closely related concept is the perfect solution fallacy.

By creating a false dichotomy that presents one option which is obviously advantageous—while at the same time being completely implausible—a person using the nirvana fallacy can attack any opposing idea because it is imperfect. Under this fallacy, the choice is not between real world solutions; it is, rather, a choice between one realistic achievable possibility and another unrealistic solution that could in some way be "better".

 

Link/sourcehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy

 

WS

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

@StrugglingForTheLight

Salam.

before we get into the discussion let's have no idea whether or not the concept of Taqleed is true. if you look at your posts you see that you took for granted that the concept of Taqleed is not true before you put forth the proofs needed in this regard.

 

2 hours ago, StrugglingForTheLight said:

This shows people were obligated to see the message on it's own. Not simply look to what their religious clergy had to say. Now the question then if their clergy didn't have authority before....how were people suppose to be guided of the people between Jesus and Mohammad?

ok,

how this argument indicates that the concept of Taqleed is void in Shia school of thought?

all might be proven through what you said is that there was no one to guide people during the time between prophet Jesus and prophet Muhammad what is clearly against what Quran says in different Ayat:

Indeed We have sent you with the truth as a bearer of good news and as a warner; and there is not a nation but a warner has passed in it.(35: 24 )

 

3 hours ago, StrugglingForTheLight said:

Argument from fallibility in understanding revelation correctly.

yes, but if such fallibility is considered by God and Imams yet they said it is justified. of course there are some observations.

3 hours ago, StrugglingForTheLight said:

Argument in looking through many but ignoring the direct sources in looking for guidance

no one ignores this rather it is of great recommendation in Islam for every Muslim to look in Quran and Hadith on his own and find out what to do in different situation but since it is difficult for all to gain specialty in Islamic stuff religion has made it easy by permitting believers to follow expert ones in this regard.

 

3 hours ago, StrugglingForTheLight said:

Argument from obligation to have tranquility in guidance.

Rather I would like to say that will give you more tranquility!

the analogy of Doctor for this point may go wrong because it has nothing to do with reality. this the matter of being justified or not.

imagine you dad said as long as you follow you senior brother you would be justified and I wont question you. but if you want to figure out what to do what not to do I will be asking you a good explanation for every single works you have done.

so now, what seems to give more tranquility?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
8 hours ago, notme said:

I hear this doctor analogy all the time. The big difference is if you doubt the judgement of your doctor or if your doctor gives you life changing orders, you go get a second and even third opinion. With taqlid, you can check a variety of rulings, but as I understand it, you must follow one scholar. Some people say you must follow without question. I have a problem with blind following of a fallible person, even if they are expert.

I think  some leniency does exist, that if you are familiar with all the ruling of the eminent maraje (which is easier said than done), than you follow the stricter one out of ihtiyat (known as 'ilm tashkhisi bil mukhalafa, apparently). I believe that is the main alternative to simple taqleed.

Edited by Patience101
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators

Arguments for 'Taqleed ' from Hadith:

From my post earlier this week:

1.     Tawqi‘ ash-Sharif [noble signed decree]

 

"The reply to the letter of Ishaq ibn Ya‘qub written by Haḍrat Wali al-‘Asr, the Imam of the Age (‘a). In the said letter Ishaq ibn Ya‘qub posed questions to the Imam (‘a) one of which is: “What do we have to do in case of occurring social problems [al-hawadith al-waqi‘ah] during the period of occultation?” In reply to this question, the Imam (‘a) said:

 

وَ أَمَّا ٱلْحَوَادِثُ ٱلْوَاقِعَةِ فَارْجِعُوا فِيهَا إِلىٰ رُوَاةِ حَدِيثُنَا فَإِنَّهُمْ حُجَّتِي عَلَيكُمْ وَ أَنَا حُجَّةُ اللهِ عَلَيهِمْ.

 

“In case of occurring social problems, refer for guidance to those who relate from us, for they are my argument [hujjah] against you, and I am Allah’s argument against them.” ”

 

[Ikmāl ad-Dīn wa Itmām an-Ni‘mah by Shaykh aṣ-Ṣadūq , vol. 1, p. 483; al-Shaykh al-Ansari, al-Makasib; al-Tusi, Kitab al-Qayba, p. 290; Shaikh Muhammad Hassan in Jawaher al-Kalam, Volume 15, p. 422; Shaikh Morteza Ansari in al-Aada wa al-Shahadat, p. 46; Shaikh Morteza Haeri in Salat al-Jum’a, p. 154; Kashif al-Qeta in al- Ferdus al-A’la, p. 54]

 

 

 

2.     Maqbulah of ‘Umar ibn Hanzalah

 

“Imam as-Sadiq (‘a) says:

 

مَنْ كَانَ مِنْكُمْ قَدْ رَوىٰ حَدِيثُنَا وَ نَظَرَ في حَلاَلِنَا وَ حَرَامِنَا وَ عَرَفَ أَحْكَامَنَا فَلْيَرْضُوا بِهِ حَكَمًا فَإِنّي قَدْ جَعَلْتُهُ عَلَيْكُمْ حَاكِمًا فَإِذَا حَكَمَ بِحُكْمِنَا فَلَمْ يَقْبَلْهُ مِنْهُ فَإِنَّمَا إِسْتَخَفَّ بِحُكْمِ اللهِ وَ عَلَيْنَا رَدَّ وَ الرَّادُّ عَلَيْنَا كَالرَّادَّ عَلىٰ حَدِّ الشِّرْكِ بِاللهِ.

 

“If there is a person among you who narrates from us, is versed in the lawful and the unlawful, and is well acquainted with our laws and ordinances, accept him as judge and arbiter, for I have appointed him as a ruler over you. So, if he rules according to our law and you reject his ruling, you will belittle Allah’s law and oppose us, and to oppose us means to oppose Allah, and opposing Him is tantamount to associating partners with Him.” ”

 

[Usūl al-Kāfī, vol. 1, p. 67; Wasā’il ash-Shī‘ah, vol. 18, 98; Al-Tusi, Tahzib al- Ahkam , Kitab al-Qada, Volume 6, p. 218, Hadith 514; Shaykh al-Ansari, Kitab al-Qada wa al-Shahadat, p. 48]

 

 

3.     The Tradition of Abu Khadija

 

“Abu Khadija said:

 

I was commanded by the Imam [Ja'far as-Sadiq (pbuh)] to convey the following message to our friends [Shi’a]: 'when enmity and dispute arise among you, or you disagree concerning the receipt or payment of a sum of money, be sure not to refer the matter to one of these malefactors for judgment. Designate as judge and arbiter someone amongst you who is acquainted with our junctions concerning what is permitted and what is prohibited, for I appoint such a man as judge over you. Let none of you take your complaint against another of you to the tyrannical ruling power.’ ”

 

[Al-Kolayni, Al-Foru’ men al-Kafi, Kitab al-Qada, Volume 7, p. 412; Al-Tusi, Al-Tahzib, Kitab al-Qada, Volume 6, p. 303; Shaikh al-Saduq, Man la Yahzoruhu al-Faqih, Volume 3, p. 2; al-Khomeini; Shaykh Muhammad Hassan, Jawaher al-Kalam, Volume 21, p. 395 and Volume 40, p. 17]

 

 

4.      

 

“Ali bin Ibrahim, from his father, from Hamad bin Eisa from Qadah (Abd al-Allah bin Maimun) from Imam Sadiq (pbuh), who narrated the Prophet (pbuh) as saying:

 

‘The superiority of the learned man over the mere worshipper is like that of the full moon over the stars. Truly the ulema (scholars) are the heirs of the Prophet (pbuh); the prophets bequeathed not gold (dinar) and silver (dirham) instead they bequeathed knowledge, and whoever acquires it has indeed acquired a generous portion of their legacy.’ ”

 

[Shaikh al-Kolayni, Al-Kafi, The Book of Virtue of Knowledge, Volume 1, p. 34]

 

 

5.      

 

Shaykh Saduq in several of his many books mentions the following hadith:

 

Imam Ali narrated the Prophet (pbuh) saying: “O God! Have mercy on those that succeed me” [Kholaphayi]. He repeated this twice and was then asked: “O Messenger of Allah, who are these that succeed you?” He replied: “They are those that come after me, transmit my traditions and practice and teach them to the people after me.” ”

 

[Uyun al-Akhbar al-Reda, volume 2, chapter, 31, p. 37 also Ma‘ani al- Akhbar, p. 374 also Man la Yahzurohu al-Faqih, Volume 4, p. 420]

 

 

6.      

 

“Shaykh Kolayni mentions the following hadith from the Prophet (pbuh):

 

‘The fuqaha are the trustees of the Prophets, as long as they do not concern themselves with the world (dunya).’ The Prophet was asked: ‘what is the sign with their concern to this world?’ He replied: ‘By seeing whether they follow Kings (sultans). If they do that, then fear for your religion.’ “

 

[Kolayni, al-Kafi, Volume 1, p. 46]

 

 

7.      

 

“Amody transmits a tradition from the Commander of the faithful, Ali (pbuh):

 

‘The ulema [scholars] are the rulers [hakim] over people.’ ”

 

[Amodi, Qorar al-Hekam, Volume 1, p. 137, 506]

 

 

8.       

 

“Shaykh Kolayni mentions the tradition from Imam Kazim (pbuh):

 

‘Believers who are fuqaha are the fortresses of Islam, like the encircling walls that protect a city.’ ”

 

[Al-Kolayni, Al-Kafi, Volume 1, p. 38]

 

 

9.    

 

“Imam al-Hussain said:

 

“The administration of all affairs of the society is in the hands of men of Divine knowledge, who are faithful custodians of His commandments and instructions about lawful and unlawful matters (Halal) and what is (Haram).” ”

 

[Tuhaf al-‘Uqal, Harrani Iibn Shobeh, Volume 1, p.238.]

 

 

10.   

 

“al-Shaykh al-‘Ansari records the following ahadith:

 

“The Muslim scholars are trustees of the prophets.”
“The scholars of my Ummah are like the prophets of Bani Israel.” ”

 

[al-Makasib, Chapter on Wilayat al-Faqih]

 

 

http://www.al-islam.org/shia-political-thought-ahmed-vaezi/why-wilayat-al-faqih#traditional-evidences-wilayat-al-faqih
http://www.al-islam.org/al-tawhid/vol-3-n-1/wilayat-al-faqih-meaning-scope-ayatullah-ali-mishkini/wilayat-al-faqih#some-textual-evidence
http://www.shiavault.com/books/a-cursory-glance-at-the-theory-of-wilayat-al-faqih/chapters/6-chapter-4-arguments-for-wilayat-al-faqih
http://www.al-islam.org/cursory-glance-theory-wilayat-al-faqih-misbah-yazdi/chapter-4-arguments-wilayat-al-faqih#transmitted-proofs

Edited by Patience101
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators

 

11.      

“Mu'adh Ibn Jabal states that when the Prophet (saws) sent him to Yemen, he asked: "On what will you rely for resolving the differences?" To this he replied: "On the Book of Allah, the Qur'an." The Prophet said: "What if nothing specific is found in the Book of Allah?" He replied: "On the basis of the judgements of the Prophet of Allah, for I have observed your judgements in different matters and I have committed them to memory. If there presents a matter which is similar to one in which you have given judgement, I shall make use of it and give judgement accordingly". The Prophet again asked: "What course will you adopt when a problem crops up about which there is nothing specific in the Book of Allah or in my judgements?" He replied: "In such cases I shall resort to ijtihad and give a decision on the basis of the Holy Qur'an and your traditions with equity and justice". The Prophet then said: "Thanked be Allah that He has enabled His Prophet to choose for the administration of justice a person whose actions are commensurate with His Will." ”

[Tabaqat Ibn Sa'ad, vol 2, p 347]

 

12.      

“Narrates Al-Askari, from his grandfather Al-Sadiq, peace be upon them both: "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." ”

[Al-Ihtijaj, Al-Tabrasi, vol 2, p 263]

 

13.      

“Concerning the four great fuqaha: Abul Hasan Zurarah Ibn A'yan, Abu Ja'far Muhammad Ibn Muslim, Abu Basir Layth Ibn Al-Bakhtari and Abul Qasim Barid Ibn Mu'awiyah, who were among his students, Imam Al-Sadiq (S) said: "They are the trustees of Allah for the administration of the permissible and forbidden in religion." ”

[The Development of Shi'i Islamic Jurisprudence on Death and Dying from the Fourth/Tenth to the Eighth/Fourteenth Centuries, Hasnain Kassamali]

 

14.      

“The tenth Imam, Ali Al-Hadi (S) said: "After the occultation of your Qa'im a group of the 'ulemah will call upon people to believe in al-Qa'im's imamah and defend his religion by using proofs sent by Allah, so that they might save the weak minded faithful from either the deceptions of Shaitan or the deceptions of those opposed to Ali." ”

[Al-Ihtijaj, Al-Tabrasi, vol 2, p 260]

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
10 hours ago, notme said:

I hear this doctor analogy all the time. The big difference is if you doubt the judgement of your doctor or if your doctor gives you life changing orders, you go get a second and even third opinion. With taqlid, you can check a variety of rulings, but as I understand it, you must follow one scholar. Some people say you must follow without question. I have a problem with blind following of a fallible person, even if they are expert.

the difference being if your doctor was the recognised best doctor, then you ignored their advice and took the advice of a lesser doctor, would that be logical?

Of course not. So with taqleed we seek the most knowledgeable, as that is the best we can do, and then that opinion is binding on us, as accepting less than that is irrational. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, iraqi_shia said:

the difference being if your doctor was the recognised best doctor, then you ignored their advice and took the advice of a lesser doctor, would that be logical?

Of course not. So with taqleed we seek the most knowledgeable, as that is the best we can do, and then that opinion is binding on us, as accepting less than that is irrational. 

when the doctor makes a mistake, there are lawyers, governing bodies and an entire infrastructure around punishing the doctors, and compensating the affected individual. medical negligence is a massive issue. 

what similar analogy would one use for marjas? for example one says music is halal, one says it is haram. one of them has to be wrong surely? or maybe if one says its halal for a man to allow another mans sperm to impregnate his wife. who can the muqallid refer to if following this ruling ruins their life and their akhirah?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
3 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

when the doctor makes a mistake, there are lawyers, governing bodies and an entire infrastructure around punishing the doctors, and compensating the affected individual. medical negligence is a massive issue. 

what similar analogy would one use for marjas? for example one says music is halal, one says it is haram. one of them has to be wrong surely? or maybe if one says its halal for a man to allow another mans sperm to impregnate his wife. who can the muqallid refer to if following this ruling ruins their life and their akhirah?

 

Sure, in the instance of the lay person, can God punish him for trying his best? Asking the most knowledgeable? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, iraqi_shia said:

Sure, in the instance of the lay person, can God punish him for trying his best? Asking the most knowledgeable? 

doesnt the quran clearly state that no soul shall bear the burden of another on qiyamat?

isn't that literally the exact opposite of this modern day form of taqlid where if the marja makes a mistake, only he is responsible and his muqallids are free from punishment?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators

The Quran also condemns blind following. I believe in taking guidance, but definitely question the rulings and if it seems wrong to you, don't do it. 

Just like medical treatment and car repair, we should consult an expert where we lack knowledge, but we ought to know a bit about things that are important to us, so we can judge when our doctor or mechanic makes a mistake.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, notme said:

 

The Quran also condemns blind following. I believe in taking guidance, but definitely question the rulings and if it seems wrong to you, don't do it. 

 

this is the entirety of the argument. the quran also curses the jews who made their priests into their lords. 

if you actually read the hadith posted, they all say "refer" to scholars etc. I am yet to see one that says "follow one blindly for the majority of his/ your life without question". 

you guys realise that the word taqleed means "fixed at the throat" like a leash around cattle yeah? you are proud of being cattle?

finally this modern manifestation of taqlid that most shia seem to do seems to have started from ayatollah naraqi a few hundred years ago who decided that "if you do not do taqleed then your amaal are not accepted". nice of him to decide that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
2 hours ago, DigitalUmmah said:

doesnt the quran clearly state that no soul shall bear the burden of another on qiyamat?

isn't that literally the exact opposite of this modern day form of taqlid where if the marja makes a mistake, only he is responsible and his muqallids are free from punishment?

 

Yes, in terms of beliefs. We are talking in terms of practical law.

There is no taqleed in aqeeda. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, notme said:

The Quran also condemns blind following. I believe in taking guidance, but definitely question the rulings and if it seems wrong to you, don't do it. 

Just like medical treatment and car repair, we should consult an expert where we lack knowledge, but we ought to know a bit about things that are important to us, so we can judge when our doctor or mechanic makes a mistake.

Blind following? 

What is best, following the best opinion or following a lesser opinion? 

If we seek the best opinion, the one who is recognised as the most knowledgeable, how can that be blind following?

Blind following is when we ignore what we know is better, and follow what is worse, often our own ignorant opinions. 

In your specific example about the doctor, lets imagine you go to the best doctor on the planet, and he still screws up, what more could you realistically have done? 

However if you went to the best doctor in the world and ignored his advice and instead said, "I dont understand your advice, it doesn't make sense to me", so you took your little knowledge as better than the great amount of knowledge of the doctor and didnt follow the treatment plan. Then you die. Could you have done more?

 

Ultimately we are bound to the truth, and taqleed of the most knowledgeable is simply the best way of getting to that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, iraqi_shia said:

Yes, in terms of beliefs. We are talking in terms of practical law.

nope. 

[6.164] Say: What! shall I seek a Lord other than Allah? And He is the Lord of all things; and no soul earns (evil) but against itself, and no bearer of burden shall bear the burden of another; then to your Lord is your return, so He will inform you of that in which you differed.

tafsir from pooya/ ali states:

In Islam every individual is answerable for his faith and deeds when he returns to Allah on the day of reckoning. The faithful who have done good and followed the teachings of Allah and his Prophet shall be rewarded and the disbelievers and the sinners will be punished. Those believers who made mistakes but sincerely repented and amended their conduct shall receive His mercy and forgiveness. This system of accountability creates a viable discipline in the human society.

The tradition attributed to the Holy Prophet that the dead will be punished if his friends and relatives weep and mourn over his death is disapproved by this verse.

Aqa Mahdi Puya says:

The Christians have a misconceived idea that the intercessor bears the burden of the sins of the person whom he has saved from punishment. They also say that all the prophets were sinners except Isa who alone will bear the sins of the sinners. But intercession does not mean bearing the burden of the sinner, therefore, all the prophets are able to intercede on behalf of the sinners for obtaining Allah's forgiveness, because no prophet had ever committed a sin.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, iraqi_shia said:

In your specific example about the doctor, lets imagine you go to the best doctor on the planet, and he still screws up, what more could you realistically have done? 

However if you went to the best doctor in the world and ignored his advice and instead said, "I dont understand your advice, it doesn't make sense to me", so you took your little knowledge as better than the great amount of knowledge of the doctor and didnt follow the treatment plan. Then you die. Could you have done more?

if the best doctor on the planet messed up, then he should be as equally as accountable as the worst doctor on the planet. thats the entire point. if he messes up that seriously, then he should have his license taken away. 

does this analogy work with marjas? if one says something which is clearly haram, is halal, do you believe that you accepting it as halal will mean you wont be questioned on the day of judgement for doing a sin?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
4 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

if the best doctor on the planet messed up, then he should be as equally as accountable as the worst doctor on the planet. thats the entire point. if he messes up that seriously, then he should have his license taken away. 

does this analogy work with marjas? if one says something which is clearly haram, is halal, do you believe that you accepting it as halal will mean you wont be questioned on the day of judgement for doing a sin?

 

 

If he intentionally, or negligently screwed up, then of course. However if everyone meant well, and tried their best then where is the sin?

Even in western law, a surgery can have a poor outcome and it can be no ones fault. 

I think I misunderstood your criticism, so your basically saying there should be a system in place regulating fatawa and ensuring there is a "minimum" standard of quality etc?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, iraqi_shia said:

 

If he intentionally, or negligently screwed up, then of course. However if everyone meant well, and tried their best then where is the sin?

Even in western law, a surgery can have a poor outcome and it can be no ones fault. 

I think I misunderstood your criticism, so your basically saying there should be a system in place regulating fatawa and ensuring there is a "minimum" standard of quality etc?

I suggest you better understand how medical negligence works. in medicine, there is close to a zero tolerance policy when it comes to mistakes, especially since it is so easy to sue. the whole point of studying 6+ years and then constantly while working is that you do not make mistakes. 

no - I am saying that shia who think its ok to perform sins that their marjas have made halal are going to be losers on the day of judgement. people like me believe that we are responsible for our own deeds, so refuse to be "bound by a leash" to a marjas fatwas. we are not sheep. you all can be sheep. I'm a Lion, from a line of lions, who all love the lion of god. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam

The following is evidence from ahadith (we will look at Quran later):

 

حمد بن إسماعيل، عن الفضل بن شاذان، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن جميل بن دراج، عن أبان بن تغلب، عن أبي عبدالله (عليه السلام) قال: لوددت أن أصحابي ضربت رؤوسهم بالسياط حتى يتفقهوا.

 

8 – Muhammad b. Isma`il from al-Fadl b. Shadhan from Ibn Abi `Umayr from Jamil b. Darraj from Aban b. Taghlab from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام.  He said: I would like to strike the heads of my companions with lashes in order for them to apply themselves to learning (yatafaqqahu). (majhool but in the strength of sahih due to Muhammad b. Isma`il being from mashayakh of ijaza)

 

The hadith shows that the Imam didn't simply want the person to memorize the shariah although doing so he would know it was right receiving it from the Imam, but Imam wanted his companions to understand the Shariah and learning and comprehending it.

From the Du'a to recite aftre ziyarat Auli-Yaseen

"And regarding your religion the light of insights from you"

Imam Mahdi taught us to pray regarding the religion to get insights regarding it.

This no doubt requires help from people who are learned more then us, but there is difference between being settled for following the shariah blindly.

Muhammad b. Yahya the perfumist from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. `Isa from al-Hasan b. Mahbub from Mu`awiya b. Wahb.  He said: I heard Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام saying: Seek knowledge and adorn with it by forbearance and dignity.  And be humble to the one to whom you teach knowledge and be humble to the one from whom you seek knowledge.  And do not be arrogant `ulama lest your falsehood destroy your truth. (sahih)

The model of society that Imams strove for is that they wanted people to seek knowledge, learn from those who had it, and teach it. In other words, the knowledge as not to be held and then said you follow me due to the knowledge I have but shared and spread to others.

Muhammad from Ahmad from Ibn Faddal from Ibn Bukayr from Hamza b. at-Tayyar that he presented to Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام some of the sermons of his father until when he reached a place from it he said to him: Refrain and be silent.  Then he said: You cannot but refrain from regarding what befalls you of what you do not know, while the verification and rejection is up to the Imams of guidance in order that they convey you upon the meaning in it, clarify from you the blindness in it, and make known to you the truth in it.  Allah said “So ask the people of the remembrance if you do not know”. (hasan or muwaththaq)

 

In other words, here we see Imam says you are in fact to learns the meaning of it, clarification from blindness of it, and know the truth of it through the family of the reminder (Ahlul-Thikr). This shows people ought to teach the ahadith of the Imams which are a light and make people understand the religion. Conveying the proper understanding is allowed. However that is not to say, you simply convey without ahadith.

To follow up with that is this hadith which shows the Uluma of the time in Imams, would teach ahadith and make people understand them:

al-Husayn b. Muhammad from Ahmad b. Ishaq from Sa`dan b. Muslim from Mu`awiya b. `Ammar.  He said: I said to Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام: A man who is a narrator of your hadith, spreading that amongst the people and strengthening it in the hearts of your Shi`a, and perhaps a worshipper from your Shi`a who does not have this narration, which of them is better?  He said: The narrator of our hadith strengthening the hearts of our Shi`a by it is better than a thousand worshipers. (majhool `ala ‘l-mashhoor, hasan)

Another hadith emphasizing to search knowledge from those who hold it:

Muhammad b. Yahya from Ahmad b. Muhammad from al-Hasan b. Mahbub from Jamil b. Salih from Muhammad b. Muslim from Abu Ja`far عليه السلام.  He said: Verily the one from you who teaches knowledge has the like of the reward of the learner (al-muta`allim) and he has virtue over him.  So learn knowledge from the bearers of knowledge and teach it to your brethren as the learned (al-`ulama) have taught you. (sahih)

The following hadith shows people valued their scholars on a level on par with God when they allowed them to dictate halal and haram even when it contradicted the truth of the matter.

A number of our companions from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Khalid from `Abdullah b. Yahya from Ibn Muskan from Abu Basir from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام.  He said: I said to him: “They took their rabbis and their monks as lords apart from Allah”. (9:31) So he said: Indeed by Allah, they did not call them to worship themselves, rather they allowed (i.e. made halal) for them (something) forbidden (haram) and forbade (i.e. made haram) upon them something allowed (halal).  So they worshiped them wherefrom they did not perceive. (hasan)

These ahadith were translated by Qaim.

Edited by StrugglingForTheLight
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
3 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

I suggest you better understand how medical negligence works. in medicine, there is close to a zero tolerance policy when it comes to mistakes, especially since it is so easy to sue. the whole point of studying 6+ years and then constantly while working is that you do not make mistakes. 

no - I am saying that shia who think its ok to perform sins that their marjas have made halal are going to be losers on the day of judgement. people like me believe that we are responsible for our own deeds, so refuse to be "bound by a leash" to a marjas fatwas. we are not sheep. you all can be sheep. I'm a Lion, from a line of lions, who all love the lion of god. 

 

Bro, unfortunately your extremely wrong about this. 

If your opinion is that every surgery should have a good outcome and if it doesn't, then there must be negligence? Is that what you think?

So where do you get your rulings from? How are you different from the Rabbis that make haram halal and vice versa? You are using a very limited knowledge to make decisions. Even in the matter of medical issues you were wrong.  Part of my day job is regulating health care in the UK and writing reports for the CQC.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, iraqi_shia said:

Bro, unfortunately your extremely wrong about this. 

If your opinion is that every surgery should have a good outcome and if it doesn't, then there must be negligence? Is that what you think?

So where do you get your rulings from? How are you different from the Rabbis that make haram halal and vice versa? You are using a very limited knowledge to make decisions. Even in the matter of medical issues you were wrong.  Part of my day job is regulating health care in the UK and writing reports for the CQC.

 

 

 

The case is that Quran and ahadith both order everyone who receives the message  to become a Faqih or Rabbaniyoon so to spread it to others.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
8 minutes ago, iraqi_shia said:

Bro, unfortunately your extremely wrong about this. 

If your opinion is that every surgery should have a good outcome and if it doesn't, then there must be negligence? Is that what you think?

So where do you get your rulings from? How are you different from the Rabbis that make haram halal and vice versa? You are using a very limited knowledge to make decisions. Even in the matter of medical issues you were wrong.  Part of my day job is regulating health care in the UK and writing reports for the CQC.

 

 

 

Salam,

This doesn't necessarily invalidate the scholars role and place it merely means you have to follow wise and knowledgeable scholars.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
2 minutes ago, StrugglingForTheLight said:

The case is that Quran and ahadith both order everyone who receives the message  to become a Faqih or Rabbaniyoon so to spread it to others.

 

And yet the Imams AS would teach individuals they choose and set them as fuqaha and then encourage the people to ask those fuqaha, even when the Imam AS was present! 

The marja system was set up by the Imams AS so we could apply the principles of Islam to any and all situations and avoid the calamity that the sunnis fell into.

 

The sunnis say , there is no marja system, lets all have a go and just follow what we want. Look at how thats worked for them....

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, iraqi_shia said:

And yet the Imams AS would teach individuals they choose and set them as fuqaha and then encourage the people to ask those fuqaha, even when the Imam AS was present! 

The marja system was set up by the Imams AS so we could apply the principles of Islam to any and all situations and avoid the calamity that the sunnis fell into.

 

The sunnis say , there is no marja system, lets all have a go and just follow what we want. Look at how thats worked for them....

 

 

Salam

I will post more about this from Quran, but the rope of God (Quran and Ahlulbayt) was not suppose to a matter of dispute between people, but a matter of way for them to be united. The Quran shows the only possible means is for everyone to become learned regarding the truth and insights of Quran and Sunnah, that axis has to be the Quran and words of the Imams, taught by those who are humble enough to teach and for humble enough to learn.

The biggest problem of the Taghut our Imams faced, were the likes of Abu Hanifa and what not, claiming this mantle of leadership and axis of society to learn from.

No one has that position but the Imams. No one is an axis but Quran and Ahlulbayt.

I will get into more details of this when dicussing Quranic verses regarding this subject.

Today because everyone wants people to follow their group and every group is lead a by a leader that wants to be followed, we have no unity, and Quran and Ahlulbayt which is suppose to be a source of unity for humanity and rope to connect to sight power from God has become a source of disunity.

We are disunited, because as Quran says "this is because they are a people who do not understand". In other words the rope of God was to make us understand and we were to be united by the truth of it from sight of it.

 

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...