Ijtihad: Its Meaning, Sources, Beginnings and the Practice of Ra'y

`ijtihad' in the Utterances of the Prophet (s)

The word ijtihad also occurs in the statements of the Prophet (S) in the same literal sense. Some examples may be cited here:

Pronounce benedictions over me and be diligent in prayer. [^17] As to the prostration, be diligent (or insistent) in prayer, for that makes it worthy of acceptance. [^18] The `alim (scholar) is superior to the mujtahid by a hundred degrees. [^19] In this tradition mujtahid is used in the sense of `abid (devotee), one who is diligent in `ibadah (worship).

`Ijtihad' In the Utterances of Some Sahabah

‘A'ishah is reported to have said:

During the last decade of his life the Apostle of God worked harder than in any period. [^20] Talhah ibn `Ubayd Allah is reported to a stated:

(There were) two men in the days of the Prophet (S), one of whom surpassed the other in his ijtihad (diligence in worship). The `diligent one' participated in war and was martyred. [^21] Abu Said al-Khudri is reported as having said:

Whenever the Apostle of God took an oath (to do something), he would take pains to fulfil the oath. [^22] The following is reported about `Abd Allah ibn Ubayy in relation to the campaign of Banu al-Mustalaq:

He insisted on his oath that he had not done that. [^23]

Umm Harithah is reported to have stated in a question she asked the Prophet (S): I shall bear with patience if my son is in Paradise, but if that isn't the case, I shall mourn for him to the limit of my strength. [^24] ‘Ijtihad in the Utterances of the Imams (A)

In the utterances of the Imams (A) of the Prophet's Ahl al-Bayt, too, the word ijtihad is used in its literal sense. Following are three examples: In Nahj al-balaghah, Imam 'Ali (A) states:

It is for you to make effort and to strive, to, prepare yourselves and to supply yourselves with in this stage of provision (i.e. this world). [^25] Al-'Imam al-Baqir (A) is reported to have said to a group of Shi`is:

By God, I love your fragrance and (the purity of) your souls. So strengthen them by means of piety and endeavour (ijtihad). You should know that you will not approach our wilayah except by deeds and through endeavour. [^26] Al-'Imam al-Sadiq (A) is reported to have said to Said ibn Hilal al-Thaqafi:

I advise you to fear God, to be pious, and to be diligent (in fulfilling your duties). [^27]

Ijtihad as a Technical Term

There is no consensus of opinion among scholars belonging to different Islamic schools regarding the literal meaning of the term ijtihad. A section of Sunni `ulama' believes that ijtihad means making effort and endeavour in order to achieve presumption (zann) regarding a hukm (law) of the Shari'ah. The same definition is also found in the writings of some Shi'i `ulama'. But this interpretation was first proposed by a group of Sunni `ulama'. In any case, it would be appropriate to cite some of the views held by Shi'i and the Sunni `ulama' in this regard:

(a) The great `Allamah Sayf al-Din al-'Amidi al-Shafi`i (d.631/1234) says: Ijtihad means putting in of effort and endeavour in order to reach presumption (zann) regarding one of the ahkam of the Shari'ah in such a manner that one feels that he can do nothing more. [^28] (b) Al-`Allamah Ibn Hajib Abu `Amr `Uthman ibn `Umar ibn Abi Baler al-Kurdi al-Maliki (c. 570 - 646/1174 - 1248) writes in his Mukhtasar al-‘usul: Ijtihad means making effort to arrive at presumption or conjecture regarding a hukm of the Shari'ah.

(c) Qadi `Abd al-Rahman ibn Ahmad ibn `Abd al-Ghaffar al-Shafi`i al-Adudi (d. 756/1355) , in his book Sharh Mukhtasar usul Ibn Hajib, writes: Ijtihad is employing one's effort and capacity in the way of arriving at a presumption regarding some hukm of the Shari'ah. (d) Abu Hamid Muhammad al-Ghazali al-Shafi`i (460-505/10681111) quotes the writer of Fawatih al-rahamut to the effect that: Ijtihad is the effort made on the part of the faqih to derive a presumed hukm of the Shari`ah. [^29] (e) Muhammad Ma`ruf al-Dawalibi writes: Ijtihad means the exercise of ray which is not acceptable to all the `ulama', for if it is accepted by all it would be called ijma` (consensus), not ijtihad. Therefore, ijtihad is on a lower standing than ijma’. [^30]

(f) The great mujtahid al-`Allamah al-Hilli (648-726/1250-1325), in his work al Nihayah on usul al-fiqh, writes: Ijtihad means employment of effort for arriving at presumption with regard to a hukm of the Shari ah, in a way that is not blameworthy on account of negligence or omission.

(g) Al-`Allamah al Turayhi says: Ijtihad is to employ one's effort and endeavour in pursuit of some difficult task and for arriving at presumption with regard to a hukm of the Shari`ah. [^31] (h) The Usuli mujtahid al-`Amili al-Jiba`i says: Ijtihad is the effort and endeavour of a faqih in order to arrive at presumption in regard to a hukm of the Shari`ah. [^32]

(i) Al-Shaykh al-Baha i in his Zubdah quotes al-Hajibi to the effect that: By ijtihad is meant the exhaustive efforts of a faqih for arriving at presumption in regard to a hukm of the Shari’ah. Al-`Allamah al-Hilli agrees with this definition in his book Tahdhib al-‘usul.

(j) Al `Allamah Taj al-Din al-Subuki, in his book Jam` al jawami`, writes: Ijtihad as a technical term means the utmost efforts made by a faqih for arriving at presumption in regard to a hukm (of the Shari'ah).

Critique of the Above Definitions

The above-mentioned definitions of ijtihad do not appear to be correct; for if these are meant for determining the logical and technical limits of ijtihad, these definitions fail to do so. However, if only an explanation and clarification of the term ijtihad is meant, they are not objectionable. Beyond that purpose, they have no scientific value. Here we shall briefly point out the defects in the said definitions. According to the science of logic, a definition should be inclusive of all the members of the set and exclude all alien elements; the said definitions are not such. For , if by `presumption' (zann) they mean something based on the Shari'ah or reason, they are not inclusive of all their concerned instances. Because, an argument (dalil) related to a hukm and derived from the Shari'ah or reason belongs to one of the following three kinds:

The argument creates presumption.
The argument creates certainty.
The argument creates neither presumption nor certainty.

The said definitions deal with the first kind alone, and leave out the two remaining kinds; whereas a definition of ijtihad should include these two as well.

The exclusion of the second kind in the definitions cited - that is that the argument should create certainty - is due to the fact that certainty is different from presumption and the word `presumption' does not include it. As to the exclusion of the third - in which an argument does not produce either presumption or certainty - the reason is that the argument may not create presumption. For instance, if the validity (hujjiyyah) of al-shuhrat al-fatwa’iyyah or khabar al-wahid or al-'ijma` al-manqul is presupposed in such a way that despite not causing presumption they should still be regarded as hujjah, then, according to this hypothesis, the derivation of ahkam of the Shari'ah by means of al-shuhrat al-fatwa’iyyah, khabar al-wahid and al-ijma'al-manqul would not be ijtihad - since we have supposed that they do not create presumption - and in the light of the said definitions ijtihad means attainment of presumption.

If, in the above-mentioned definitions, should `presumption' be taken to include both trustworthy and untrustworthy presumptions - as it obviously does - the definition will include untrustworthy presumption also, while the attainment of presumption regarding a hukm of the Shari’ah by means of untrustworthy presumptions is not considered as ijtihad; because, it is certain that unreliable presumption cannot be a source of legislation. Accordingly, the definitions cited fail to exclude alien elements.

In addition they suffer from another fault - especially those definitions which mention the faqih - as they fail to avoid a vicious circle. In the definitions cited, the definition of `ijtihad' rests upon the definition of `faqih' and vice versa, for `faqih', in the technical sense, cannot be imagined without the technical qualification defined as `ijtihad', and all scholars and thinkers unanimously agree on the invalidity of the vicious circle.

Regarding this vicious circle, al-Muhaqqiq al-Qummi writes: The faqih is a scholar who knows the Divine ahkam through the means of reliable (mu'tabar) proofs (adillah) and sources (manabi`). This ability does not materialize without ijtihad, and without it no faqih can exist. Accordingly, the definition of `faqih' rests upon defining ijtihad, and vice versa.

Regarding the solution of the problem of the vicious circle, certain Usulis have said: "According to these definitions, faqih is a person who is acquainted with and is well-versed in fiqh; as opposed to one who has no knowledge of fiqh whatsoever. It does not mean someone who has the knowledge of all the ahkam. It is clear that in this sense the meaning of `faqih' does not rest on that of ijtihad; this avoids the vicious circle, because whereas the definition of ijtihad is dependent upon that of `faqih', the definition of `faqih' is not dependent upon that of ijtihad ."

But al-Muhaqqiq. al-Qummi objects to this statement and says: Firstly, such a sense imputed to `faqih' is figurative', as it literally means one who knows all the ahkam, not one who knows only a few of them or some of those things that are related to the ahkam. Secondly, the effort made by one who is a `faqih' in this sense does not give rise to the quality of ijtihad; for, one who knows the outlines of the issues of ijtihad and has read a few books on argumentative fiqh but lacks the faculty that enables him to revert the furu to the usul, would not be considered a faqih.

Then, in an effort to remove the vicious circle, al-Muhaqqiq al Qummi says: The `faqih' is a person possessing such capacity as would lead to the knowledge of far`i ahkam of the Shari'ah. Thus, the definition of ijtihad is made dependent on that of the faqih, whereas the vice versa is not essential. For, the knowledge of the ahkam of the Shari'ah exists in a faqih as a (potential) capability, and in ijtihad it exists as an actuality.

This view of the Muhaqqiq is objectionable, since faqih as a term is applied to one who actually knows the far'i ahkam of the Shari'ah through a command of its sources, not one who possesses merely the faculty and capacity of doing so; as mere capacity and faculty do not qualify one for this appallation, though the appallation of `mujtahid' may fit him. Therefore, the vicious circle still remains; as it is quite clear that the definition of `faqih' in the above sense is dependent upon that of `ijtihad', and vice versa.

Moreover, the apparent meaning of this definition is unacceptable not only in the Shi’i view of ijtihad but is also incomplete and objectionable according to the Sunni viewpoint; because legal grounds (adillah Shar’iyyah) are not confined to presumption and conjecture alone according to Sunnis and include other things besides.

In any case, the definitions cited are too restrictive in some respects, and in some others they do not exclude what is alien to ijtihad. Such definitions are not sound according to the science of logic, and it may be concluded that they are unacceptable to both the Muslim sects. Many a time such incorrect definitions of ijtihad have been responsible for giving rise to negative views about ijtihad, and made persons like Mirza Muhammad Amin al-'Astarabadi, the founder of the Akhbari school, to negate ijtihad outrightly. As a consequence of it ijtihad had been declared as one of the innovations (bid`at) and impermissible activities (this will be discussed in detail while dealing with the Akhbari revolt against ijtihad).

In fact, if ijtihad means exactly what it has been described to be in the definitions, its rejection is justified: for, to claim something as a hukm of the Shari'ah on the basis of presumptive and unreliable grounds (dala'il) and to act according to them is not permissible in Islamic law. Verses of the Quran expressly forbid reliance on presumption and conjecture. God Almighty has stated in the Quran:

O ye who believe, shun much suspicion (al-zann) .... (49:12)

In another place He says:

Most of them follow naught but conjecture. Assuredly conjecture can by no means take the place of the truth ....(10:36) For positing a hukm of the Shari'ah only certainty, or such argument or methods as have been validated by the Shari'ah, may be relied upon. Such trustworthy grounds as khabar al-wahid and the Practical Principles (al-'usul al-`amaliyyah) of the Shari'ah (Bara'ah, Ihtiyat, etc), though they do not lead to certainty as to the real hukm (al-hukm al-waqi’i) - for they may be suspect regarding their chain of transmission, or meaning, or authenticity of source - but the certainty of their validity and reliability justifies reliance upon them and action in accordance with them and provides security from Divine chastisement.

Anyhow, the Usulis do not conceive ijtihad in the above sense. By ijtihad' they mean the knowledge of the ahkam of the Shari'ah from sources and grounds whose validity has been affirmed by the Shari'ah, and it is by using such sources, principles and dicta that the mujtahid is able to meet the needs of contingent issues and events of life.

Accordingly, the result of ijtihad in the context of deduction of ahkam of the Shari'ah is to refer new furu` to the fundamental usul (which are the general precepts of the Book and the Sunnah) and to apply the usul to their corresponding instances. It is by means of ijtihad that sufficient evidence or hujjah regarding a hukm of the Shari'ah is secured for answers to emergent and contingent issues. Ijtihad is not meant for providing presumption or conjecture. It is this sound meaning of ijtihad that the Usulis have accepted, and whosoever has faith in Islam and believes in its eternal and immortal character is bound to accept it in accordance with the precepts of the Shari'ah and the dictates of reason. Because, it is not possible to posit the ahkam of the Shari`ah for issues for which there is no specific express test without sufficient evidence and valid grounds, and this is a conception which Muhammad Amin al-'Astarabadi also accepts.

It is by means of such ijtihad that valid grounds and basic and general ahkam are employed for deriving a hukm of the Shari'ah on a contingent issue. Such ijtihad is approved by the Akhbaris too, though they do not call it ijtihad'.

Thus, the incorrect conception of ijtihad - i.e., the attainment of presumption on a hukm of the Shari'ah - which incited the Akhbari opposition, is one which the Usuli also do not accept and one which they have never approved of. The `presumption' which al-`Allamah al-Hilli, the author of Ma`alim al-'asul, and some other Shi`i scholars mention in their definitions of ijtihad, is not presumption in its general sense, but one which is trustworthy and supported by some specific dalil..

Therefore, it does not include such presumption as is not supported by a dalil; for such presumption has been forbidden by verses of the Quran and ahadith. Hence, it cannot be said that the `presumption' mentioned in the definitions includes this (untrustworthy) kind of presumption. Accordingly, the ijtihad approved by the Usulis means procurement of sufficient evidence (hujjah) regarding a hukm of the Shari'ah - a conception which the Akhbaris also do not reject.

On this basis, it can be said that the dispute between the Usulis and the Akhbaris is merely a verbal one, not one which is essential or substantial, for both of them approve of securing sufficient evidence for a hukm shar’i, with the difference that the Usulis call it ijtihad whereas the Akhbaris do not name it so.

In reality, the only objection that theAkhbaris raise regarding ijtihad relates to the definition of ijtihad and not to the Usulis or the mujtahidun as such; for the Akhbaris themselves never act on presumption unless it is validated by a reliable Shar'i proof (dalil). Thus, if the word `presumption' (zann) is replaced with the term hujjah (evidence) in the said definition and it is said: "Ijtihad means employment of one's powers to secure sufficient evidence (hujjah) in regard to a hukm of the Shari'ah", there is no doubt that this controversy can be completely avoided and a synthesis of the views of the Akhbaris and the Usulis can be achieved.