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
Sign in to follow this  
mohammad nadeem

How can we prove taqleed to akhbaari?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, haideriam said:

Bro being truthful and then having an opinion are 2 different things. Truth is truth but an opinion could be wrong.

You keep answering yourself but go back to the same question again and again. Of course not understanding and or not being in agreement is your fundamental right even when everyone else has also been correcting you continuously on this. 

Eg. show me a hadith which says Shaykh Tusi's jurisprudence has to be followed. 

From an Akhbari perspective, show me a hadith which says Tusi's hadith collection is good, reliable and should be a key books for all shias and specifically for Akhbaris.

I get that hadith collection and jurisprudence are separate. That was never an issue.

The issue still goes back to how Akhbaris can trust a book by a pro-Usuli compiler knowing fully well that he may have included pro-Usuli hadith only.

Bukhari is not hujjah upon us because he was pro-sunni and anti-shia so his hadith collection reflects this.
Similarly, how are Akhbaris sure that the Tusi collection is not pro-Usuli only.

Akhbaris have no answer to this and neither do you. Feel free to respond to the original question which to date you have completely avoided.

1 hour ago, haideriam said:

Also in answering my second question you answered yourself and then repeat the Akhbari mantra of Akhbaris do as if the Akhbaris follow your scholars. They have no need bro. 

Tell me why.?

Errrr, I answered for myself because you asked me. I answered for Akhbaris because that is the topic at hand.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shiaman14 said:

From an Akhbari perspective, show me a hadith which says Tusi's hadith collection is good, reliable and should be a key books for all shias and specifically for Akhbaris.

I get that hadith collection and jurisprudence are separate. That was never an issue.

The issue still goes back to how Akhbaris can trust a book by a pro-Usuli compiler knowing fully well that he may have included pro-Usuli hadith only.

 

Bukhari is not hujjah upon us because he was pro-sunni and anti-shia so his hadith collection reflects this.
Similarly, how are Akhbaris sure that the Tusi collection is not pro-Usuli only.

 

Akhbaris have no answer to this and neither do you. Feel free to respond to the original question which to date you have completely avoided.

 

Errrr, I answered for myself because you asked me. I answered for Akhbaris because that is the topic at hand.

 

1. Problem is you don't bro, for if you did, then not just me but others have said as well, that the 2 are separate. Just like you do not deny the truthfulness of a marja you do not follow.  It does not matter what Shaykh Tusi collected in favour of , what matters is were those Hadith truthful and reliable. Please understand they do not deny his truthfulness but do not agree with the conclusion of his opinions.  That is not such a big deal. Do you now understand.

2. You keep baffling me again and again...Bukhari is not Hujjah upon us but a truthful Hadith in their will become a hujjah upon us.  Shia scholars have narrated traditions from Bukhari not just for polemics but also to support their research. 

3. What I was asking was that the Akhbari brothers do not follow your scholars, do you know why?

Bro AbdusSibtayn has presented a great point there , did you miss that!!!

Edited by haideriam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, haideriam said:

1. Problem is you don't bro, for if you did, then not just me but others have said as well, that the 2 are separate. Just like you do not deny the truthfulness of a marja you do not follow.  It does not matter what Shaykh Tusi collected in favour of , what matters is were those Hadith truthful and reliable. Please understand they do not deny his truthfulness but do not agree with the conclusion of his opinions.  That is not such a big deal. Do you now understand.

2. You keep baffling me again and again...Bukhari is not Hujjah upon us but a truthful Hadith in their will become a hujjah upon us.  Shia scholars have narrated traditions from Bukhari not just for polemics but also to support their research. 

3. What I was asking was that the Akhbari brothers do not follow your scholars, do you know why?

Bro AbdusSibtayn has presented a great point there , did you miss that!!!

1) The other brothers and you thought I was speaking generally when I was very specifically talking about Sheikh Tusi. To you, it is not a big deal. Perhaps being an Akhbari is not a big deal to you either. But it was to Sheikh Tusi who was outspoken against their movement and pro-Usuli. You still haven't answered a simple question - is there a chance that Sheikh Tusi collected only those hadith that were pro-Usuli?

2) Its like I am talking about day and you keep telling me there is night. Bukhari OVERALL is not hujjah upon us, individual hadith may be.

3) Simple answer is Akhbaris do not follow my scholars because my scholars follow the principles of jurisprudence whereas they don't believe in it. They claim to be under the taqleed of Imam-e-Zamana (as). Now, I am sure you will re-phrase my statement but still say the same thing.

Still waiting for you to answer the question, "How do we prove taqleed to an Akhbari?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

1) The other brothers and you thought I was speaking generally when I was very specifically talking about Sheikh Tusi. To you, it is not a big deal. Perhaps being an Akhbari is not a big deal to you either. But it was to Sheikh Tusi who was outspoken against their movement and pro-Usuli. You still haven't answered a simple question - is there a chance that Sheikh Tusi collected only those hadith that were pro-Usuli?

2) Its like I am talking about day and you keep telling me there is night. Bukhari OVERALL is not hujjah upon us, individual hadith may be.

3) Simple answer is Akhbaris do not follow my scholars because my scholars follow the principles of jurisprudence whereas they don't believe in it. They claim to be under the taqleed of Imam-e-Zamana (as). Now, I am sure you will re-phrase my statement but still say the same thing.

Still waiting for you to answer the question, "How do we prove taqleed to an Akhbari?"

1. You should be able to see that I made special mention of Shaykh Tusi in my post bro. So many trying to correct you should give you a hint bro.  So what if Shaykh Tusi only collected as you say pro usuli hadith, what matters is that they were Ahadith from the companions of the Imams{as} all trusted. Being outspoken against the Akhbari movement has nothing to do with the hadith collection. It is like you being truthful in your narration of an incident which I will not doubt if you are a truthful person but I have all the right to disagree with an opinion you express. There is no problem there. Also please remember the work of hadith collection. It is not like one plucks them out of thin air. There are records which corroborate and similarities are found in other books for cross referencing. When you have understood that a hadith is not a personal opinion which I think you are having difficulty with then you will begin to understand the rest. 

2. Am glad you understood the second point and corrected/qualified your stance. Well done bro

3. If the scholars had collected hadith like the elders then they would again accept them in spite of being against the opinions and or scholars you make reference to. 

Brother it is simple, either one does not understand and or one does not want to understand. That intention only your Lord knows but we can only guess at where the direction points us to.    Wallhu Alim. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, haideriam said:

1. You should be able to see that I made special mention of Shaykh Tusi in my post bro. So many trying to correct you should give you a hint bro.  So what if Shaykh Tusi only collected as you say pro usuli hadith, what matters is that they were Ahadith from the companions of the Imams{as} all trusted. Being outspoken against the Akhbari movement has nothing to do with the hadith collection. It is like you being truthful in your narration of an incident which I will not doubt if you are a truthful person but I have all the right to disagree with an opinion you express. There is no problem there. Also please remember the work of hadith collection. It is not like one plucks them out of thin air. There are records which corroborate and similarities are found in other books for cross referencing. When you have understood that a hadith is not a personal opinion which I think you are having difficulty with then you will begin to understand the rest. 

1) I have been talking about Shekih Tusi for 3 pages. You have barely mentioned this pious and great scholar. The only confusion is on your part where you constant assume things which make you seem 'slower and slower' if you know what I mean. I will say it again that hadith collection and jurisprudence are different. The only reason I have to spell it out is because you are utterly confused.  The other brothers who corrected me thought i was writing 'in general' when I was specifically talking about Sheikh Tusi and mentioned it on page 1. The problem here is that you are trying to convince me that it is okay for Akhbaris to reject Sheikh Tusi's stance on jurisprudence but accept his hadith collection. And you say "what if Shaykh Tusi only collected as you say pro usuli hadith". It matters because it would show Sheikh Tusi had a clear bias and was not sincere in his hadith collection. If such was the case, then he would not be trustworthy. Now let's say he was sincere in his collection and thus deemed trustworthy, then why not trust his stance on jurisprudence? Why trust the stance of another layman or less scholar who says no to jurisprudence? Based on what qualifications do they take the word of an individual to reject jurisprudence over the word of Tusi to accept jurispudence?

I fully realize you don't have answer, just confusion.

26 minutes ago, haideriam said:

2. Am glad you understood the second point and corrected/qualified your stance. Well done bro

Lol. Go through all my posts on SC and you will see me quoting Bukhari a lot more than you. Unfortunately when it comes to you, everything has to be spelled out. Now you will say that SM14 hinks Bukhari is hujjah upon him - go ahead and write it, I know you are thinking it.

28 minutes ago, haideriam said:

3. If the scholars had collected hadith like the elders then they would again accept them in spite of being against the opinions and or scholars you make reference to. 

Like I said, you rehash everything I say trying to seem smart.

29 minutes ago, haideriam said:

Brother it is simple, either one does not understand and or one does not want to understand. That intention only your Lord knows but we can only guess at where the direction points us to.    Wallhu Alim. 

So you answer is one doesnt explain taqleed to an Akhbari. So why are you on this thread then? I guess to correct me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

1) I have been talking about Shekih Tusi for 3 pages. You have barely mentioned this pious and great scholar. The only confusion is on your part where you constant assume things which make you seem 'slower and slower' if you know what I mean. I will say it again that hadith collection and jurisprudence are different. The only reason I have to spell it out is because you are utterly confused.  The other brothers who corrected me thought i was writing 'in general' when I was specifically talking about Sheikh Tusi and mentioned it on page 1. The problem here is that you are trying to convince me that it is okay for Akhbaris to reject Sheikh Tusi's stance on jurisprudence but accept his hadith collection. And you say "what if Shaykh Tusi only collected as you say pro usuli hadith". It matters because it would show Sheikh Tusi had a clear bias and was not sincere in his hadith collection. If such was the case, then he would not be trustworthy. Now let's say he was sincere in his collection and thus deemed trustworthy, then why not trust his stance on jurisprudence? Why trust the stance of another layman or less scholar who says no to jurisprudence? Based on what qualifications do they take the word of an individual to reject jurisprudence over the word of Tusi to accept jurispudence?

I fully realize you don't have answer, just confusion.

Lol. Go through all my posts on SC and you will see me quoting Bukhari a lot more than you. Unfortunately when it comes to you, everything has to be spelled out. Now you will say that SM14 hinks Bukhari is hujjah upon him - go ahead and write it, I know you are thinking it.

Like I said, you rehash everything I say trying to seem smart.

So you answer is one doesnt explain taqleed to an Akhbari. So why are you on this thread then? I guess to correct me.

Lol, with so many attacks it seems like my bro is on a losing wicket.  Rest in other post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

1) I have been talking about Shekih Tusi for 3 pages. You have barely mentioned this pious and great scholar. The only confusion is on your part where you constant assume things which make you seem 'slower and slower' if you know what I mean. I will say it again that hadith collection and jurisprudence are different. The only reason I have to spell it out is because you are utterly confused.  The other brothers who corrected me thought i was writing 'in general' when I was specifically talking about Sheikh Tusi and mentioned it on page 1. The problem here is that you are trying to convince me that it is okay for Akhbaris to reject Sheikh Tusi's stance on jurisprudence but accept his hadith collection. And you say "what if Shaykh Tusi only collected as you say pro usuli hadith". It matters because it would show Sheikh Tusi had a clear bias and was not sincere in his hadith collection. If such was the case, then he would not be trustworthy. Now let's say he was sincere in his collection and thus deemed trustworthy, then why not trust his stance on jurisprudence? Why trust the stance of another layman or less scholar who says no to jurisprudence? Based on what qualifications do they take the word of an individual to reject jurisprudence over the word of Tusi to accept jurispudence?

I fully realize you don't have answer, just confusion.

Lol. Go through all my posts on SC and you will see me quoting Bukhari a lot more than you. Unfortunately when it comes to you, everything has to be spelled out. Now you will say that SM14 hinks Bukhari is hujjah upon him - go ahead and write it, I know you are thinking it.

Like I said, you rehash everything I say trying to seem smart.

So you answer is one doesnt explain taqleed to an Akhbari. So why are you on this thread then? I guess to correct me.

In your defence you have quoted below that you quote Bukhari a lot more than me. Should explain things to you bro that being against Bukhari is not the same as not accepting his correct as per us  Hadith. 

Being trustworthy  and as I explained in last post about science of hadith collection. These hadith do not belong to Shaykh Tusi but his opinion on jurisprudence is his own. So one cannot not accept the hadith but the interpretation and opinion one has the choice not to accept. 

We are not the talibs that all have to agree on our opinions. 

Are we on the same page now and do keep asking your questions if there are any further confusions. 

BTW are you aware of Ayatullah Khoei's stance on Taqleed with regards to sources and that probably sums up for all others' as well.

Edited by haideriam

Share this post


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

Lol, with so many attacks it seems like my bro is on a losing wicket.  Rest in other post.

Losing wicket??? Based on your hiatus, I had forgotten how much everything had to be spelled out for you or else you jump to unwarranted and wasteful conclusions. If I must be more verbose with you, then so be it.

1 hour ago, haideriam said:

In your defence you have quoted below that you quote Bukhari a lot more than me. Should explain things to you bro that being against Bukhari is not the same as not accepting his correct as per us  Hadith. 

I take selective hadith from Bukhari but reject him overall. Akhbaris take Tusi's entire collection of hadith but partially reject him. I know you can't tell the difference but it is the exact opposite.

1 hour ago, haideriam said:

Being trustworthy  and as I explained in last post about science of hadith collection. These hadith do not belong to Shaykh Tusi but his opinion on jurisprudence is his own. So one cannot not accept the hadith but the interpretation and opinion one has the choice not to accept. 

I am surprised you haven't claimed to teach me the alphabet yet. Your cursory explanation was useless since the discussion is not about the science of hadith collection. It seems like you want to defend the akhbari position but are hesitant to do so you are side tracking in hadith sciences, etc. 

Since you seem to be ever so knowledgeable on this topic and so ready to impart wisdom onto me, give me a detailed explanation of what Tahdhib Al-Ahkam and Al-Istibsar are about. How are they similar to Bukhari and how do they differ?

1 hour ago, haideriam said:

Are we on the same page now and do keep asking your questions if there are any further confusions. 

Well, I am still confused about how do you prove taqleed to an Akhbari - the topic at hand. You have done a great job at explaining things which I already knew. In some areas, you even repeated what I said pretending to further explain. Its all good though since repetitions is a form of learning.  

Since you seem to be ever so knowledgeable on this topic and so ready to impart wisdom onto me, give me a detailed explanation of what Tahdhib Al-Ahkam and Al-Istibsar are about. How are they similar to Bukhari and how do they differ?

1 hour ago, haideriam said:

BTW are you aware of Ayatullah Khoei's stance on Taqleed with regards to sources and that probably sums up for all others' as well.

Even though I know his exact stance , please enlighten me again with your wisdom?

Edited by shiaman14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

 

I take selective hadith from Bukhari but reject him overall. Akhbaris take Tusi's entire collection of hadith but partially reject him.

 

Since you seem to be ever so knowledgeable on this topic and so ready to impart wisdom onto me, give me a detailed explanation of what Tahdhib Al-Ahkam and Al-Istibsar are about. How are they similar to Bukhari and how do they differ?

 

Even though I know his exact stance , please enlighten me again with your wisdom?

1. Can you see bro where you are heading by making reference to Bukhari. Him you do not trust yet take hadith from him. Does this tell you that the hadith no matter how collected is different from the person and his opinion or not as in his case. Luckily in the case of Shaykh  Tusi you trust him and take the hadith but not his opinion as that opinion is his own and is subjective to his interpretation. The opinions are not the words of the hadith but only the opinions are the words of the scholar. The Akhbari brothers might have serious disagreement with our present scholars but when that scholar narrates a hadith from the books they will not reject it. 

2. Look up google and especially wikishia please for that will save space for staying on topic.

3. If you know then I do not need to repeat it, and so does his stance make it any clearer that hadith and opinions are separate.

Thanks bro and if there is anything further please do not hesitate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, haideriam said:

1. Can you see bro where you are heading by making reference to Bukhari. Him you do not trust yet take hadith from him. Does this tell you that the hadith no matter how collected is different from the person and his opinion or not as in his case. Luckily in the case of Shaykh  Tusi you trust him and take the hadith but not his opinion as that opinion is his own and is subjective to his interpretation. The opinions are not the words of the hadith but only the opinions are the words of the scholar. The Akhbari brothers might have serious disagreement with our present scholars but when that scholar narrates a hadith from the books they will not reject it. 

Wow, there you go knowledgifying me again. So hadith and opinion are different? I think if you say it one more time, I will definitely get it.

 

3 hours ago, haideriam said:

2. Look up google and especially wikishia please for that will save space for staying on topic.

You are my wikishia. You tell me. ShiaChat has enough space.

3 hours ago, haideriam said:

3. If you know then I do not need to repeat it, and so does his stance make it any clearer that hadith and opinions are separate.

But everything I know seems to be incorrect according to you so please enlighten me.

3 hours ago, haideriam said:

Thanks bro and if there is anything further please do not hesitate.

Yes, #2 and #3 above please. You are so kind. Thanks for imparting knowledge onto me. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/29/2017 at 9:07 PM, haideriam said:

Excellent point brother.  Just have to remember and keep in mind that the Quran is one of the two weighty things as well. 

Thanks brother. Jazakallah khairan. 
I think their disagreement is not with the Qur'an bit. They diverge from us in approaching the Ahlul bayt [as]. Qur'an, no doubt, is one of the Thaqalayn, but the key to unlock its secrets are the Ahlul Bayt [as], and our Ulama and Maraja[Allah (swt)'s mercy and blessings upon them all] are the custodians of the Ahlul bayt (as)'s heritage.
Each of the two weighty things is incomplete without the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[S.V. Mir Ahmad Ali  2:2]  This is the book; there is no doubt in it, {it is} a guidance to those who safeguard themselves with full awareness of divine laws.

I think the bold above is a beautiful translation of the word 'muttaqin' and like different signs are sufficient for different people this suffices for me in that in order to ensure, or let us for arguments sake say closer to, the requirement of getting as close to the divine order with the maximum certainty, one definitely has to refer to one who is more knowledgeable for without that one is lost. This is especially valid in these times of life being easy and yet not easy because of information overload and false information. 

I know they have their own arguments for this also but on the flip side life is made so much safer and easier by just consulting the risala of your marja on the net in English and that is that.

They might say that we act on differing fatwas but the same applies to them for they act on differing hadith and that is what we entrust the marja to do. The marja does not sit in a room sorting this stuff out but rather he presents his 'paper' to his seniors and peers and students and it is after that scrutiny only does he form an opinion/get the approval on just one fatwa.  The difference of a knowledgeable man is progression whereas the difference of an ignorant person is 'fitnah' And this is where the 1 reward for a wrong ijtehad and 2 for a right one comes in. Allahسُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى loves striving in his cause and for his sake as per the prescribed route and methodology for otherwise your rebellious nature is coming through. 

May Allahسُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى save us all. 

 

Share this post


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

[S.V. Mir Ahmad Ali  2:2]  This is the book; there is no doubt in it, {it is} a guidance to those who safeguard themselves with full awareness of divine laws.

I think the bold above is a beautiful translation of the word 'muttaqin' and like different signs are sufficient for different people this suffices for me in that in order to ensure, or let us for arguments sake say closer to, the requirement of getting as close to the divine order with the maximum certainty, one definitely has to refer to one who is more knowledgeable for without that one is lost. This is especially valid in these times of life being easy and yet not easy because of information overload and false information. 

I know they have their own arguments for this also but on the flip side life is made so much safer and easier by just consulting the risala of your marja on the net in English and that is that.

They might say that we act on differing fatwas but the same applies to them for they act on differing hadith and that is what we entrust the marja to do. The marja does not sit in a room sorting this stuff out but rather he presents his 'paper' to his seniors and peers and students and it is after that scrutiny only does he form an opinion/get the approval on just one fatwa.  The difference of a knowledgeable man is progression whereas the difference of an ignorant person is 'fitnah' And this is where the 1 reward for a wrong ijtehad and 2 for a right one comes in. Allahسُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى loves striving in his cause and for his sake as per the prescribed route and methodology for otherwise your rebellious nature is coming through. 

May Allahسُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى save us all. 

 

This is fantastically insightful. Can you please provide the same insight into the 2 books by Sheikh Tusi that make part of the Kitab Al-Arbah and of course insight into Ayatollah Al-Khoei's treatise on taqleed.

Happy New Year.

Edited by shiaman14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

How can we prove taqleed to akhbaari?

You can't wake up a person pretending to be asleep. Just wait till the reappearance of the Imam and if they are around by then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/1/2018 at 3:58 AM, haideriam said:

Happy New Year to you my brother and to all brothers and sisters

Can you please provide the same insight into the 2 books by Sheikh Tusi that make part of the Kitab Al-Arbah and of course insight into Ayatollah Al-Khoei's treatise on taqleed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple - The starting point of discussing Taqleed with an Akhbari is ask him to produce a hadith which explicitly argues against Taqleed.

They will invatiable quote the Hadoith from Imam Jaffar Sadiq where he talks about peolple following the wrong type of Scholars.

Then simply telll them to read the rest of the hadith, which talks about the SColars you should do Taqleed of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam brother Asghar

Well said.

Can you please explain to us what blind taqleed is?

And how does it differ from the taqleed of a mujtahid practiced by the vast majority of shias?

Thanks.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/30/2018 at 10:46 AM, Ali 786110 said:

Simple - The starting point of discussing Taqleed with an Akhbari is ask him to produce a hadith which explicitly argues against Taqleed.

They will invatiable quote the Hadoith from Imam Jaffar Sadiq where he talks about peolple following the wrong type of Scholars.

Then simply telll them to read the rest of the hadith, which talks about the SColars you should do Taqleed of.

Which hadith brother? All ahadith that speak of taqleed pretty much condemn it, that is the Taqleed of a non-ma'soom. To blindly follow someone without reference to the two weighty thigs. See for example:

 The Holy Imam Ja’far Al Sadiq (عليه السلام) said: ‘Beware of taqleed! Whosoever adorns 
this in religion is destroyed! Surely Allah has Said: ‘They took their Rabbis and Monks as their Lords besides Allah (9:31). No, by Allah They did no pray nor fast but they made permissible which was forbidden to them and made the forbidden permissible. They did their taqleed (emulated them) in this and obeyed 
them, and they did not realise.

Source: Tashih al-I'tiqad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do usooli 12er insist Akhbari do taqleed. They follow all the same usool but use hadith/ multiple scholars as there point if reference for fiqh. Since marja have only minor differences in there rulings shouldnt there be a tolerance for those choosing not to shift responsibility to another.

Edited by Warilla

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Warilla said:

Why do usooli 12er insist Akhbari do taqleed. They follow all the same usool but use hadith/ multiple scholars as there point if reference for fiqh. Since marja have only minor differences in there rulings shouldnt there be a tolerance for those choosing not to shift responsibility to another.

Salam it's order of Imam Mahdi (aj) in time of major occultation to refer to narrators of Hadith that they must be well educated in this way like as Marjas but Akhbaris take all hadiths & leave this particular hadith althought the intention from advent of akhbaris was to preserve hadiths intact during his occultation that was based on preserving of this order but now they reject the hadith that was source of motivation for forming Akhbaris

10 hours ago, Al-Hussayni said:

Which hadith brother? All ahadith that speak of taqleed pretty much condemn it, that is the Taqleed of a non-ma'soom. To blindly follow someone without reference to the two weighty thigs. See for example:

 The Holy Imam Ja’far Al Sadiq (عليه السلام) said: ‘Beware of taqleed! Whosoever adorns 
this in religion is destroyed! Surely Allah has Said: ‘They took their Rabbis and Monks as their Lords besides Allah (9:31). No, by Allah They did no pray nor fast but they made permissible which was forbidden to them and made the forbidden permissible. They did their taqleed (emulated them) in this and obeyed 
them, and they did not realise.

Source: Tashih al-I'tiqad

Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام) forbids Taleed in principle not way of doing things you write the hadith but it seems you don't understand it the hadith says about forbidding changing principles & changing Halal to Haram and Haram to Halal not for example how you take ghusl & do wudu & etc that needs flexibility with our changing world that needs we refer to an expert in religion .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام) forbids Taleed in principle not way of doing things you write the hadith but it seems you don't understand it the hadith says about forbidding changing principles & changing Halal to Haram and Haram to Halal not for example how you take ghusl & do wudu & etc that needs flexibility with our changing world that needs we refer to an expert in religion .

Not sure what you mean. The hadith clearly refers to taqleed (I.e blindly following a scholar) being haram. There are examples of marajas fatwas which contradict the narrations of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) and even matters of halal/haram..

That being said I'm not against referring to scholars, but all the rulings that are there in regards to taqlid have no basis in the Qur'an and Sunnah. I do tab'eed and try to look at a few marjas opinion on issues. By all means use their scholarly advice to guide you to the moral light and to aid your own study, but it's also important to do our own research into the Qur'an & Sunnah too.

Edited by Al-Hussayni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Al-Hussayni said:

but all the rulings that are there in regards to taqlid have no basis in the Qur'an and Sunnah.

the marjas must bring the ruling from Qur'an and Sunnah that's a basic fact that everyone knows that they study whole of their life in order to able to make conclusion based on Qur'an & Sunnah not their opinion 

 

56 minutes ago, Al-Hussayni said:

but it's also important to do our own research into the Qur'an & Sunnah too.

I totaly agree with you but without a good mentor it just make you more confuse than before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

the marjas must bring the ruling from Qur'an and Sunnah that's a basic fact that everyone knows that they study whole of their life in order to able to make conclusion based on Qur'an & Sunnah not their opinion 

Yes but then they should reference the Qur'an and Sunnah when making rulings so we know the origin of their rulings. Please read the following:

Regarding the verse from Holy Qur'an: “And who is more erring than he who follows his low desires without any guidance from Allah?” (Holy Qur'an 28:50), Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام) said “It means the one who takes his religion by his own opinion without the guidance from the guiding Imams (as)”. [Source: Basair Ul Darajat Chapter 8]

What do you think scholars are doing when you ask them such questions that don't have an explicit answer from the ahadith?

 

45 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

I totaly agree with you but without a good mentor it just make you more confuse than before.

No brother, on the contrary, Hadith is noor and a guiding light. If you read the Qur'an and narrations of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), you will find that the ahadith itself will guide a reader on how to filter them.

Edited by Al-Hussayni

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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...